SOIL, FERTILIZER, AND MANAGEMENT RELATIONSHIPS AFFECTING ECONOMIC CHOICES DF CORN SILAGE AND ALFALFA 0N DAIRY FARMS Thesis for the Degree of M. S. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY GERALD D. SCHWAB 1969 fl III muomc av “‘ II me & SUNS' I L anux mm ms. ' f l LIBRARY IINDERS ‘ I . H1»mrop.mcmg . \\- _ f- v w VJ ABSTRACT SOIL, FERTILIZER, AND MANAGEMENT RELATIONSHIPS AFFECTING ECONOMIC CHOICES OF CORN SILAGE AND ALFALFA ON DAIRY FARMS BY Gerald D. Schwab The purpose of this study was to determine the most economical forage ration for a lZO-cow Holstein dairy herd. Within each of three soil management groups con- sidered, management and fertilizer inputs were varied. In this manner, the effect on costs of the various management and fertilizer combinations could be shown. The partial budgeting procedure was used to evalu- ate each of the problem settings. Input data was gained almost entirely from Michigan State University sources. The alfalfa yields and associated fertilization require- ments were based on research and field data reported in a Michigan State University extension bulletin. The average dairy herd milk production level was assumed to be approximately 13,000 pounds of 3.5% butterfat adjusted milk. The associated rations were built and based on standard feeding references for feedstuff values and for Gerald D. Schwab production and maintenance requirements. The milk production per cow was assumed equivalent regardless of forage ration fed provided that the ration was nutrition- ally balanced. This was based on consultation with and research completed by the Michigan State University Dairy Department. Once the crop yield levels and total feedstuff requirements were established, total crop acreage require- ments were determined. The value and annual charge on this land was based on judgement values by professional agricul— tural economists. The production, harvesting, and storage costs were based almost entirely on research results at Michigan State University. Two levels of management were compared for each crop and fertilization level within each soil management group. In all instances the superior level of management resulted in a lower per unit production cost than did the good level of management. A specific description of these management practices and associated yields is presented in the Appendices. Before proceeding with the corn-alfalfa inter- enterprise comparisons, it was necessary to ascertain the most economical fertilization level on each crop. This problem was limited to determination of the alfalfa fertilization as the best available expected corn yield data listed only one yield and fertilization level. Three Gerald D. Schwab levels of potassium fertilization were analyzed on the alfalfa crop with the phosphorus being maintained at a sufficient "bank" level so as not to be the limiting input. For each soil management group the medium level of potas- sium fertilization (100# K O/acre) provided the lowest 2 production cost per unit of alfalfa produced. It should be mentioned that the dairy herds Were assumed homogeneous and prices constant. In this manner the gross revenue from each herd in the separate soil management groups was equivalent. The optimal production method then becomes that which provides the lowest cost for the required feedstuffs. On the highly productive land, soil management group I (SMG I), the all corn silage forage ration grown with superior management provided the lowest cost ration. However, the cost differential between the all corn silage and the 75% corn silage and 25% haylage was quite small. With a slight variation in cost and yield figures used in the budget, this cost advantage could be reversed. On the productive land, soil management group II, the all corn silage ration grown with superior management was also the lowest cost ration. The array of production, harvesting and storage costs in SMG II is quite similar to that in SMG I. As with SMG I, the cost differential between the two lowest cost rations was quite small with this cost Gerald D. Schwab situation capable of being reversed if the yields were slightly altered. With the moderately productive land, soil manage- ment group III, the 50% corn silage, 50% alfalfa ration grown with superior management became the lowest cost ration. The cost and yield relationships in this soil management group are quite different from the previous two groups. The inclusion of alfalfa in the crop rotation is not only economically advantageous but may in fact be agronomically dictated due to the inherent soil conditions and topography. In soil management group III at least 4.8 tons of 90% dry matter alfalfa per 100 bushels corn grain are necessary to make production of alfalfa economical. How- ever, in soil management groups I and II, approximately 5.2 tons of 90% dry matter alfalfa per 100 bushels corn grain was necessary before alfalfa was competitive in the crop rotation. SOIL, FERTILIZER, AND MANAGEMENT RELATIONSHIPS AFFECTING ECONOMIC CHOICES OF CORN SILAGE AND ALFALFA ON DAIRY FARMS BY Gerald D. Schwab A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Agricultural Economics 1969 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to thank all those who provided advice and assistance for this study. Special thanks to Professor C. R. Hoglund for his generous assistance, comments, and guidance in the development of the study and the thesis. The aid provided by several members of the Departments of Agricultural Economics, Crop Science, Soil Science, and Animal Husbandry is also greatly appre- ciated. Additional appreciation is rendered to the county extension agents and farmers who were contacted during the course of the study. Without the professional advice rendered by these faculty members and the information provided by farmers, this study would not have been possible. A grateful thank you is offered to Dr. L. L. Boger for the provision of a graduate research assistantship received by the author during the course of study. Also a sincere thank you to my parents and relatives for their continued concern and encouragement. ii ATV _ ff“- TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Research and Development of Production Response Models . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Cropping Trends in Michigan . . . . . . . ll Orientation of the Problem . . . . . . . . l4 Purpose and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . 16 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 II. TECHNICAL AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES AND THE PROBLEM SETTING O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O 2 0 Developments in Crop Production Applicable to Southern Michigan Dairy Farms . . . . 20 Soil Groupings and Characteristics of Each . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Type of Agriculture in the Three S lecte Soil Management Groups . . . . . . . . . 25 Forage Management for Optimum Yields With Respect to Both Quantity and Quality . . 27 I A. Alfalfa O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 28 B. corn 0 O O O O 0 O O O O I O I I I O 31 Reasons for Silage Making . . . . . . . . 35 Principles of Fertilizer Use and Application 0 O O O O O O O O O O I O O 36 III. METHODS OF STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Farm Analysis Methods and Concepts . . . . 40 Alternative Methods of Analysis . . . . . 40 Gross Margin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Linear Programming . . . . . . . . . . . 41 iii CHAPTER Functional Analysis . Simulation . . . . . Comparative Analysis Budgeting . . . . . . Method of Study . . . . . . . . . Problem Structure and Assumptions IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA . . . . . . . Highly Productive Cropland (SMG I) Productive Cropland (SMG II) . . Moderately Productive Cropland (SMG III) 0 o o o o o o o o o 0 V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . Limitations of Study an Need for Further Research . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O O O O O O I O O O O O 0 APPENDIX A. MANAGERIAL PRACTICES . . . . . . . B O TABLES O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 iv Page 43 44 46 46 47 50 52 56 68 77 87 87 89 92 95 99 101 TABLE 1. 2. 10. 11. LIST OF TABLES Michigan Cropping Trends . . . . . . . . . Present and Future Plans for Feeding and Storage Practices . . . . . . . . . . . Annual Forage and Grain Requirements Per Cow and Total for lZO-Cows and Replace- ments, Three Forage Rations, and Two Levels of Management . . . . . . . . . . Acres of Forage Required for Three Forage Alternatives and Two Levels of Management (SMG I) . . . . . . . . . . . Summarization of Total Cost of Feed for 120-Cow Operation, Three Forage Alterna- tives, and Two Levels of Management (SMG I) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 50% Corn Silage--50% Alfalfa Haylage (SMG I) . . . . . . . . . . . . Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 75% Corn Silage--25% Alfalfa Haylage (SMG I) . . . . . . . . . . . . Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 100% Corn Silage (SMG I) . . . Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 50% Corn Silage--50% Alfalfa Haylage (SMG I) . . . . . . . . . . . . Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 75% Corn Silage--25% Alfalfa HaYIage (SMG I ) O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Acres of Forage Required for Three Forage Alternatives and Two Levels of Manage- ment (SMG II) I I O I O O O O O O O O I Page 12 13 53 57 57 63 64 65 66 67 69 TABLE Page 12. Summarization of Total Cost of Feed for 120-Cow Operation, Three Forage Alternatives, and Two Levels of Management (SMG II) . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 13. Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 50% Corn Silage--50% Alfalfa Haylage (SMG II) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 14. Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 75% Corn Silage--25% Alfalfa HaYlage (SMG II) o o o o o o o o o o o o o 73 15. Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 100% Corn Silage (SMG II) . . . . 74 16. Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 50% Corn Silage--50% Alfalfa Haylage (SMG II) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 17. Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 75% Corn Silage--25% Alfalfa Haylage (SMG II) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 18. Acres of Forage Required for Three Forage Alternatives and Two Levels of Manage- ment (SMG III) 0 O O O I I O O O O O O O O 78 19. Summarization of Total Cost of Feed for 120-Cow Operation, Three Forage Alternatives, and Two Levels of Manage- ment (SMG III) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 20. Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 50% Corn Silage--50% Alfalfa Haylage (SMG III) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 21. Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 75% Corn Silage--25% Alfalfa Haylage (SMG III) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 22. Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 100% Corn Silage (SMG III) . . . 84 23. Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 50% Corn Silage--50% Alfalfa Haylage (SMG III) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 vi TABLE Page 24. Summation of Total Feed Costs for Forage Ration of 75% Corn Silage--25% Alfalfa Haylage (SMG III) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 25. Production Yields and Relationships . . . . 91 Bl. Summation of Yields and Production Costs for Corn Silage and Grain . . . . . . . . . 101 B2. Quantities of Lime and Fertilizer Applied to Corn Silage and Grain . . . . . . . . . 103 B3. Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Corn Silage and Grain in Rotation With Alfalfa (1:1 ration) (SMG I) . . . . . . . 105 B4. Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Corn Silage and Grain in Rotation With Alfalfa (3:1 ration) (SMG I) . . . . . . . 107 BS. Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Corn Silage and Grain (1:0 ration) (SMG I) . . . 109 B6. Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Corn Silage and Grain in Rotation With Alfalfa (1:1 ration) (SMG II) . . . . . . . 111 B7. Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Corn Silage and Grain in Rotation With Alfalfa (3:1 ration) (SMG II) . . . . . . . 113 B8. Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Corn Silage and Grain in Rotation With Alfalfa (1:0 ration) (SMG II) . . . . . . . 115 B9. Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Corn Silage and Grain in Rotation With Alfalfa (1:1 ration) (SMG III) . . . . . . 117 B10. Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Corn Silage and Grain in Rotation With Alfalfa (3:1 ration) (SMG III) . . . . . . 119 Bll. Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Corn Silage and Grain (1:0 ration) (SMG III) . . 121 312. Summation of Yields, Production, and Costs for Alfalfa Hay I O O O O O O O O O O O O O 123 vii TABLE B13. B14. 815. B16. B17. B18. 319. B20. B21. B22. B23. B24. B25. 326. Lime and Fertilizer Amounts With Resultant Oat and Alfalfa Yields . . . . . . . . . Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Alfalfa Haylage (1:1 ration) (SMG I) . . Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Alfalfa Haylage (3:1 ration) (SMG I) . . Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Alfalfa Haylage (1:1 ration) (SMG II) Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Alfalfa Haylage (3:1 ration) (SMG II) . Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Alfalfa Haylage (1:1 ration) (SMG III) . Total Costs of Growing and Harvesting Alfalfa Haylage (3:1 ration) (SMG III) . 50% Corn Silage--50% Alfalfa Forage Ration (1:1) for 120-Cow Herd Plus Replacements 75% Corn Silage--25% Alfalfa Forage Ration (3:1) for 120-Cow Herd Plus Replacements All Corn Silage Forage Ration (1:0) for 120-Cow Herd Plus Replacements . . . . . Digestible Protein and Energy Levels of Feed Ingredients . . . . . . . . . . . . Distribution of Fixed Cost of Machinery . Estimated Michigan Prices . . . . . . . . Fertilizer Prices . . . . . . . . . . . . viii Page 125 127 129 131 133 135 137 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE Page 1. Location of Soil Management Groups . . . . . 24 ix CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Dairy products have constituted Michigan's largest single agricultural enterprise in terms of cash receipts. In 1967, dairy products accounted for 27.8% of Michigan's cash receipts from farm marketings.l The structure of this dairying sector is changing. The total number of milk cows is decreasing with a concurrent increase in dairy cows per farm and an increase in pounds of milk per cow annually. During the period 1961 to 1967 the number of milk cows on Michigan farms decreased from 639,000 to 495,000 while the average milk production per cow increased from 8,290 to 9,480 pounds per year.2 The dairy enterprise is becoming more specialized and capital intensive. Obtaining and keeping reliable labor has been and will continue to be a problem on dairy farms. New technology 1United States Department of Agriculture, Farm Income State Estimates, 1949- 1967, F18 211 Supplement (washington, D. C.: Economic Research Service, August, 1968), p. 96. 2Michigan Department of Agriculture, Michigan Sgricultural Statistics (Lansing, Michigan: Ju y, 68), in feeding, handling, and milking systems has reduced the amount of labor required per cow. At the same time the volume of milk output per farm must be increased to justify capital investment in these newer technologies. The result has been fewer but much larger and more highly specialized dairy farms. Because of the increasing input costs and rela- tively constant milk prices, the dairy farmer is caught in the familiar cost-price squeeze. As the farmer presently has little influence on prices received, attempts must be made to reduce costs. The forage input in dairying accounts for 25 to 30% of total milk production costs.3 These forage costs can be reduced by increasing both the quantity and quality of these crops produced per acre. Combining new technology, good cultural practices and wise management can greatly aid in attaining these objectives. Corn silage has benefited from the development of minimum tillage, narrow row spacing, higher plant population, increased fertilizer rates, chemical weed control and iJuproved harvesting and storage systems plus the use of feed grade urea to provide a relatively cheap protein source. The quantity and quality of alfalfa production 3C. R. Hoglund, "Minimizing Cost of Forage in Tomorrow's Dairy Ration (paper presented at the 1968 joint meeting of the American Dairy Science Association and American Grassland Council Symposium, Columbus, Ohio, June, 1968). has been increased by new varieties, improved seeding practices, chemical weed control, increased fertilizer rates, more frequent harvesting scheduled and improved harvesting and storage methods. Of the crop production cultural practices afore- mentioned, the concern of this thesis is with the ferti— lizer aspect and the overall management of production, harvesting, and storage processes. Higher crop yields offer a good opportunity for reducing per unit production costs. One of the highest returning and most profitable investments to be made by a farmer lies with lime and fertilizer expenditures. June 1968 farm cost index figures show that fertilizer was the only listed input category which had not risen in price since 1957-59.4 Similar figures for other time periods give evidence that ferti- lizer is one of the better buys. Fertilizer has been applied at much higher levels on row crops as compared to that applied on other grass and legume acreages. It has been stated that three taillion tons of fertilizer are used on the entire forage (acreage in the United States compared to eight million . 4United States Department of Agriculture, .Agracultural Prices (Washington, D.C.: Crop Reporting Board, Statistical Reporting Service, July 30, 1968). tons of fertilizer on a much smaller corn acreage.5 It is estimated that 1 1/2 billion acres of hay and pasture lands are fertilizer responsive. Only 3% of this acreage gets fertilized and this land receives an average of 10-12 pounds per acre while corn receives an average of 175 pounds per acre. In Michigan in 1964 it was reported that 93% of the corn acreage received some fertilizer while only 12% of the hay and cropland pasture (not including permanent pasture) received fertilizer.6 The average poundage of fertilizer elements applied per acre of corn was 101 whereas the average on the hay and cropland pasture was only 6 pounds of fertilizer elements per acre. Most farmers are aware of the profitability of some fertilizer application. However very little specific information is known of the fertilizer production response surface for the varying soil and climatic conditions. Only limited information is available on marginal 5W. K. Griffith, "Improving Forage Yields by Lime, Fertilizer and Management (paper presented at the American :Fomage and Grassland Council meetings entitled "Forages of 'the Future," January, 1968). 6Richard D. Duvick, Trends in the Use of Major :Fertilizer Nutrients on Michigan Cropland andiPasture, .Agricultural Economics Report #88, December, 1967 (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics), pp. 5-8. 0" rod 5" I‘- 1T: M I'- -42 'transformation rates, that is, the additional crop yield per additional fertilizer unit. Information is also limited on substitution coefficients, that is, the economic not biologic substitution rate for nutrients producing the same yield. This type of information is needed for more exact recommendations on the economically optimum use of fertilizer given the set of production resources. Research and Development of Production Response Models Hypotheses have been proposed and models con- structed with regard to crop yield response as a function of mineral nutrients. Such a relationship is depicted as Y = f(X) where Y is the crop yield and X is the plant nutrient input. Agronomists and economists have used empirical data in an attempt to develop a production surface given the mineral inputs, soil and climatic situa- tions. Some of the earliest work in this area was by VOn Liebig who prOposed the "Law of the Minimum" stating that crop yields increase in direct proportion to additions (If the nutrient which is limiting plant growth. Imitscherlich related growth to the supply of the plant nutmients as follows dY/dx = (A.- Y)C where Y and X are <:rop yield and quantity of plant nutrients, respectively. "A” is the maximum possible yield and C is a proportion- ality constant which depends on the nature of the growth factor. It is noted that Mitscherlich recognized that plant growth, as a function of nutrient inputs, is loga- rithmic and generally follows a pattern of diminishing increases.7 W. J. Spillman stated this growth relationship as Y = M(l - Rx) where M is the maximum yield possible and R is a constant. It has been shown that Mitscherlich's and Spillman's equations reduce to Y -CX) log (A — Y) A(1 - 10 log A - 0.301(x) where 0.301 replaces the constant C when yields are ex- pressed on a relative basis of A = 100.8 O. W. Wilcox proposed that the yield of a crop is inversely proportional to its nitrogen content. This relationship depicted as Y = K/n where K is a constant representing the maximum amount of N that can be absorbed in one season by an annual crop growing on an acre of land and n is the percent N in the crop.9 Bray's Nutrient Mobility Concept states that "as the mobility of a nutrient in the soil decreased, the 7Samuel L. Tisdale and Werner L. Nelson, Soil Fertility and Fertilizers (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1966), p. 23. 8 Ibid. 9Ibid., p. 27. all“ day: “AI w». L. J. amount of that nutrient needed in the soil to produce a maximum yield (the soil nutrient requirement) increased from a variable net value, determined principally by the magnitude of the yield and the optimum percentage composi- tion of the crop, to an amount whose value tends to be a constant." This concept is expressed as log (A - Y) = log A - Clb - Cx where C1 is a constant representing the efficiency of b for yields in which b represents the amount of an immobile but available form of nutrient as P or K as measured by soil test. C represents the efficiency factor for x which is the added fertilizer form of nutrient b.10 The Cobb-Douglas production function has also been used in an attempt to explain and predict production responses. It is of the form b1x b2 X bn 1 2 O O O n where Y is the predicted production, a is a constant-~the Y = aX production without any variable inputs, Xi are the variable inputs and bi are the elasticity of output with respect to the Xi. This function is one of the easiest curvilinear :functions to fit via use of logarithms. Marginal value products, iso-product contours, and high profit points of production can easily be determined on the line of least loIbid., p. 29. VI: A“ I! '1 0“ cost combination given the inputs, prices and production coefficients. However it has the disadvantage of not being able to fit actual production data in Stage II when the summation of the bi's is less than one which is the usual case showing the effect of the law of diminishing returns. This shortcoming along with others has shown the Cobb- Douglas function to not be the ultimate in prediction of production response. Heady of Iowa State has done a great amount of research in the field of production economics. His methods have involved SOphisticated statistical and mathematical models in an attempt to construct a model capable of pre- dicting yields given a set of inputs. Results of one such attempt using yield time-series data were published in 1967.11 One objective of this project was to estimate annual production functions for various crops and locations and compare these with the average production functions estimated from several years of data. Also desired was an estimate of the generalized production function to iJaclude weather, soil nutrients, locations, and soils so :33 to incorporate these variables into the production 11John T. Pesek, Jr., Earl O. Heady, and Eduardo ‘Venezian, Fertilizer Production Functions in Relation to Efieather, Location, Soil and Croprariables, Research Bulletin 554 (Ames,iowa: Iowa State University, August , 1967) . function with the intention of improving decision making as related to fertilizer applications under variable weather conditions. Analysis of variance showed weather to be responsible for at least 50% of the crop yield variance. Phosphorus and potassium were the only soil nutrients applied. The selected algebraic production function was a quadratic equation of the form C = bO + blP + bZK + b3P + b4K + bSPK with C being the crop yield. The b1 and b2 refer to linear terms for P and K respectively, and b3 and b4 refer to square roots of these same two nutrient quantities. The b5 term refers to the interaction coefficient PK. Coefficients for the various crops and locations were determined. The coefficients of determination were in many instances relatively high being greater than 0.90 with all of the regression coefficients for corn being significant at the 0.01 level of probability. In the mid-1950's a joint project between the Departments of Agricultural Economics and Soil Science of Michigan State University was initiated in an attempt to derive fertilizer input-crop output relationships. 'Theses by W. F. Sundquist and J. L. Knetsch under the direction of Dr. G. L. Johnson were written on this empirical data. Continuous functional analysis of the Carter-Halter type 10 12 This production function was used to analyze the data. function is of the form 1 2 2C2x2 and can show all three stages of production. Partial derivatives and simultaneous equations were used to derive the economically optimum production points. The empirical field tests were subjected to many uncontrolled variables-- among these was a drought which seriously affected yields. The result was that the coefficients of multiple determina- tion were all generally quite low. No economic yield response was achieved for P and K applications and only moderate N applications were occasionally justified depend- ing on the crop grown. Thus even though the economic benefits of some fertilizer have been substantiated in the field by farmers, it can not be said that this project solved the subject problem of determining a production 12For a more detailed explanation and analysis of the referenced data, see W. B. Sundquist, "An Economic Analysis of Some Controlled Fertilizer Input-Output Experiments in Michigan" (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Michigan State University, 1957); Jack L. Knetch, "Methodological Procedures and Applications for Incorporating Economic Consideration into Fertilizer Recommendations" (unpublished M. S. thesis, Michigan State University, 1956); and Bernard R. Hoffnar and Glenn L. Johnson, Summary and Eyaluation of the Cooperative Agronomic-Economic Experimentation at Michigan State Universityf—l955-63, Research Bulletin 11 (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Agricultural Experiment Station, 1966). 11 surface and the most economical point of production on this surface. Cropping Trends in Michigan The general cropping trend in Michigan is towards more acres for corn silage but fewer acres for corn grain, alfalfa, and alfalfa-mixtures. (See Table 1.) These acreages, particularly for corn grain, have been modified by implementation of Federal Crop acreage control and grain price support programs. Concurrent with these acreage changes has been an increase in the average yields per acre for corn grain and silage whereas the alfalfa yields have remained relatively constant. As corn silage acreages and yields have been increased, the tonnage of corn silage being fed by dairy- men has been increasing. (See Table 2.) Also as the percent of dairy farms feeding corn silage has increased, the tonnage of corn silage fed per animal and per farm has increased. Further, the quantity of haylage being fed and to be fed in the future is increasing. These developments have greatly increased the mechanization of both the harvesting and feeding operations. .amwma .Masn can mmma .masn "somasoaz .mcamcmav moaumaumum amasuanoaawd camanoaz .musuazoaum< mo pcmfiuammmo cmmanoaz "monsom 12 m.m mama o.aa omm o.am mmma mama m.m mmma m.oa mmm o.me mama mama m.m mmma m.oa mmm o.mm mova mama o.m mmma o.m «om o.am amaa mama m.m omma m.oa aem o.om mama amma o.m aama m.oa mmm o.qo mmaa mema o.m mmma m.oa mmm o.mm mmma moma o.m mama m.aa mmm o.mo mmaa amma o.m mmma m.m mom o.am mmma omma o.m aama m.m mmm o.mm amma mama moma m.m amm o.mm mmaa mmma mama o.m mmm o.om mmaa mmma mama m.m mmm o.am mama omma m.m omm o.mv mmma mmma oa\a aooov 64\e aooov o<\sm accov pamaw mmuoé pamaw mound mama» mmuoé mmuzuxaz MHHMHH< can mmamuad omMHHm caou sauna :Hou ”mmm mazmMB UZHmmOMU Z¢UHmUHZ H mqm<8 13 .ahmma .aaumd .moasocoom amusuasoaumd mo ucmEuammmo .muamum>aca mumum cmmanmmz ”snowsoaz .mcmmcma yummy mmm uaommm moafiocoom amaduHsoaam¢ .mEumm human cmmaaoaz camauzom co mcaapcmm paw scauospoam mmmuom Ca mmmcmnu .Ussamom .m .0 "moasom .mwaamamucm maamp on» occaucoomap o» pmuommxm mcoaumuomo mcamsoznmmooa on» no HUGH 0cm muoumawmo Gama GOaaocmum on» no m>am3em we we moaam whoa Uaacm em ma mm m caoo enzymaoa swan comm mm am mm mm mm; 666m mm mm mm om ommamma omwm mm mm mm am mmmaam CHOU comm "unwoawm wen mm mm an manna mo Hmnadz musuzm moma mmm» mucusm mmma mmm» mEmummm mammdomnmmooa mfimummm chum cowsocmum EmuH mmUHavdmm mwflmoaw 924 OZHQmmh mom mz¢nm mMDBDm 92¢ BZWmHMh N mnmdfi 14 Orientation of the Problem This study will be principally concerned with the economic evaluation of yield response levels of corn and alfalfa subjected to varied fertilizer applications and management levels for three separate soil management areas in Southern Michigan. To minimize harvest and storage losses, it is assumed that the alfalfa crop will be har— vested at dry matter percentages ranging from 35 to 60 but adjusted to a 50% dry matter yield. Corn silage is assumed to average 32% dry matter (DM). The optimum range in dry matter for yield and feeding value would be between 30 and 40% DM. The various methods of harvesting alfalfa have little effect on milk production if the forage is harvested 13 The under similar conditions of growth and climate. choice of harvesting alfalfa as low-moisture silage was made for reasons other than a possible differential in milk production. The choice of corn silage versus alfalfa does not appear to hinge on the differential milk production rate between these two forages. Experimental evidence indicates that milk production can be maintained at the same level 13Donald Hillman, John T. Huber, and William J. Thomas, Balanced Rations for Dairy Cattle, D-l90 (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Dairy Department). 15 over a wide range of forages varying from all hay to 100% of the forage dry matter fed as silage providing the silage is of high quality and requiring grass silage to be low in moisture (40—65% moisture) which encourages high dry matter intake.14 Michigan State studies show that cows fed only corn silage as the total forage input produced as well as those fed variable quantities of hay.15 Similar studies at other locations have also shown this same phenomena. It is important that the various forage rations be properly supplemented with grain, protein, minerals, and vitamins. The selection of a forage crop or crops to grow depends on which provides the most economical feeding ration. Inherent in this decision must be the considera- tion of crop yields, costs of production, nutrient composi- tion of each crop, price relationships of the crops and the supplements which must be purchased for each to provide a balanced ration. Further, this cropping decision will be modified by soil erosion control requirements, climato- logical considerations and personal preferences. 14C. R. Hoglund, "Economic Production of Meat and .Milk with Forages" (paper presented at the Grassland Proceedings meeting, Hershey, Pennsylvania, August, 1962). 15L. D. Brown, J. W. Thomas and R. S. Emery, WEffect of Feeding Various Levels of Corn Silage and Hay with High Levels of Grain," Journal of Dairy Science, \hol. 48 (1965), 816. 16 Purpose and Objectives There is not complete agreement among the feeding experts, agronomists and agricultural economists as to what constitutes the most nutritious feeding ration and the most economical feed in terms of an input-output analysis. It shall be the purpose of this study to deter- mine, given a set of soil and cost conditions subject to variable fertilizer applications, the forage or combination of forages which provide the most economical feed for a predetermined sized dairy herd. Three separate soil management groups will be considered. Within each management group, an lZO-cow dairy herd plus replacement stock will be subjected to analysis. This herd size is felt to be of sufficient size to justify investment in silage harvesting and storage equipment. In addition, this herd size may quite possibly be a common- sized dairy unit in future years. It is desired that the best of the evaluated forage alternatives and associated practices will be revealed for each given situation. Procedure With the objective declared, a physical setting was needed in which to make the study. Three soil manage- ment groups were determined and are as described and pictured in Chapter II. Identical dairy herds of 17 120 homogeneous cows plus replacements were assumed to exist on separate farms in each of the three soil manage- ment groups. An adjusted 305-day milking period was assumed to produce approximately 13,150 pounds of 3.5% fat- corrected milk from each 1300 pound cow. Ration require- ments were calculated for the dairy herd. This calculation was based on maintenance and production requirements as given by Morrison in Feeds and Feeding. Various ration combinations were calculated and are as given in Appendix B, Tables 320, 321, and 822. Birth and survival rates of new-born calves was assumed to be 90%. A binomial distribution approximation was assumed for the sex of the new-born calves. The heifer replacement stock was assumed to decrease in each year a uniform 5% of the total potential young stock. Now that the total feedstuff requirements were calculated, it was necessary to determine probable crop yield levels for the various soil management groups in order to calculate required crop acreages. The alfalfa yields herein are based on experimental work completed by Tesar of the Crop Science Department, Michigan State. Yields were determined for various cutting treatments and fertilizer levels. These empirical results were then incorporated into this thesis. By examining the Yield differential between cutting treatments, a management 18 factor of 25% was assumed to exist. This means that the corn grain and alfalfa yields are 25% greater than with good management. The average alfalfa yields do not show a complete 25% yield increase as the oat silage and establishment year alfalfa yields were not assumed to differ between the good and superior levels of management. A more complete account of this management factor and the accompanying yield for the different management and ferti- lizer levels is given in Appendix A and B. Corn and oat yields for the three soil management groups are adjusted from those given in Extension Bulletin E-550. Yield adjustments and calculated fertilizer require- ments were completed after consultation with Robertson and Shickluna of the Soil Science Department, Michigan State. Specific yield figures and determinants of such are given in Appendix B, Tables Bl-B19. After the yield levels were determined and feed- stuff requirements calculated, it was necessary for cost accounting purposes to determine cropland acreages and the machinery and equipment complement necessary to grow these crops. For comparative purposes, it was decided that the required crop acres in each soil management group would be calculated for a forage ration of 50% alfalfa haylage-— 50% corn silage and would be determined for production levels under superior management and medium fertilization. 19 Thus for each farm organization at this management and fertilization level, the total crop acreage assumed would be just sufficient to grow all grain and roughage require- ments. Then for other rations and production levels, adjustments would be made via buying or selling of the grain with all the forage being produced on the farm. Now that the input procedure has been schematized, a method of analysis is needed for determination of the best alternative. To analyze the situation herein, the partial budgeting procedure was used. A description of this process and other analytic methods is contained in Chapter III. CHAPTER II TECHNICAL AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES AND THE PROBLEM SETTING Developments in Crop_Production Applicable to Southern Michigan Dairy Farms Technological inventions and innovations have greatly changed--almost revolutionized--the agricultural production sector within the past two decades. Corn hybrids have been developed to the extent that there are now several varieties particularly adapted for specific areas. These hybrids are higher yielding than those evident in the past. Lime and fertilizer use has increased and continues to be a profitable investment. Nitrogen fertilizer production industries have instituted new manu- facturing processes resulting in a relatively inexpensive, high returning crop input. Cultural practices have also changed. A minimum of conventional tillage or minimum tillage itself may now be advocated depending upon soil conditions. Plant pOpulation per acre has increased via higher density of plants within 'the row and by way of narrower rows. Some continuous row cropping is practiced in areas of the state in which soil 20 21 erosion is not a serious problem. Chemical weed and insect control measures are now used with various degrees of effectiveness. Harvesting practices have developed from hand picking and mechanical corn pickers to picker-shellers, picker-grinders and forage choppers. Various practices are available to increase alfalfa yields. New Flemish type varieties have been tested and found to be higher yielding than those used in the past. Selection techniques have resulted in varieties possessing wilt-resistance, rapid recovery following cutting, and winter-hardiness. Alfalfa cultural practices have also changed. Recommendations for establishment of the alfalfa seeding vary among authorities but range from spring seed- ing with oats to spring and fall establishment with no companion crOp. Cutting the alfalfa at late bud stage is recommended for higher total digestible nutrient and protein levels. This earlier and more frequent cutting schedule encourages the harvesting of the forage as silage in order to avoid the climatic wetness of late May-early- June evident in Southern Michigan. More information is now available regarding pH requirements and fertilizer response than was so ten years ago. The result has been that liming and fertilizing of alfalfa are now practiced on a more scientific basis. Chemical insect control has been devel- Oped for many alfalfa pests and will be especially important in the control of the alfalfa weevil. 22 In addition to these developments in the growing and harvesting of the crop have been advancements in the storage and feeding of these crops. Methods of preserva- tion have been developed whereby a higher quality product can now be preserved for feeding. Silage blowers have been improved to provide for faster filling of the tower silos. This aids in the reduction of air contamination. Improve- ments in silos range from the gas tight towers to the more conventional tight concrete silos using a weighted plastic cover over the top to help insure a good seal. The use of a silage distributor increases the holding capacity of the silo and helps impede the movement of oxygen therefore improving silage preservation and reducing losses in storage. Any and all of these developments are available for use on Southern Michigan dairy farms. Soil Groupings and Characteristics of Each For purposes of this thesis, several soil associa- tion areas in Southern Michigan have been collected into *what are termed "soil management groups." A soil manage- xnent group (SMG) may be considered as a group of soils ‘vith similar physical and chemical properties, similar Inanagement requirements and similar production potentials 23 assuming the same production practices.1 The general location of these groups is shown in Figure 1. These soil management groups have been classified as moderately productive, productive, and highly productive. The moderately productive group includes the Fox, McHenry, Spinks, Oshtemo, Warsaw and Hillsdale soils. Generally, these soils occur on nearly level to rolling land. The soil surface texture ranges between the sandy loam and silt loam. Excepting some imperfectly drained low—lying areas, this grouping is well drained. The chief production limitations are acidity, relatively low fertility, erosion hazards on the more sloping areas, low content of organic matter and low moisture supplying capacity.2 The productive group consists of the Miami-Dodge- Conover soil association area. This area occurs in a nearly level to gently rolling landscape. This soil is predominately silt loam with some sandy loam included. The Miami and Dodge soils are well drained with the Conover being imperfectly drained. For high production levels; 1J. C. Shickluna, "The Relationship of pH, Available Phosphorus, Potassium, and Magnesium to Soil .Management Groups," Quarterly Bulletin, Vol. 45, No. 13 (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station, August, 1962), p. 136. 2University of Wisconsin, Soils of the North Central Region of the United States, North Central Regional PublicatIon No. 76, Bulletin 544 (Madison, Wisconsin: Agricultural Experiment Station, June, 1960), p. 90. 24 I Highly Productive Soil Management Group II Productive Soil Management Group III Moderately Productive Soil Management Group FIGURE 1 LOCATION OF SOIL MANAGEMENT GROUPS 25 drainage, acidity, and erosion control appear to be the most limiting factors with respect to the natural condi- tions of the soil.3 The highly productive group consists of the Sims- Kawkawlin-Capac, the Hoytville-Nappanee-Wauseon, and the Brookston-Blount-Hoytvil1e soil association areas. The area occupied by these soils is nearly level to undulating. The soil surface varies from a silty clay loam to a loam. These soils are poorly to imperfectly drained. This drainage.problem plus the difficulty of maintaining good soil tilth are the chief production limitations.4 Type of Agriculture in the Three Selected SOil Management Groups As with farms throughout the United States, Michigan's full-time commercial farmers are becoming larger and more specialized. It is projected that by 1980 Michigan's commercial farms will have an average acreage of 275 acres with an estimated capital investment 5 of $150,000. Relative to the year 1959 this represents 31bid., pp. 92-93. 4Ibid., p. 111. 5K. T. Wright, Prqject '80--Economic Prospects 0f Farmers (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service). 26 increases of 54% and 206%, respectively. Actual land under cultivation will decrease but total production levels will increase due to influence of scientific advances in the agricultural sector. The area groupings worked with in this study will be subject to these same influences. Thus, any presenta- tion of today's agricultural enterprise situation will be subjected to continual pressures for change. Within the farming area having moderately productive soils, livestock operations are more apparent than in the area with highly productive soils. Dairying is one of the principal enter- prises in this area with corn, wheat and soybeans being the major cash crops. The area listed as productive is also typified by general farming and dairying. Corn is a more important crOp acreage-wise in the moderately produc- tive Southern Michigan area, but the yield per acre is higher in the South Central Michigan area with the Miami- Dodge-Conover soils.6 Much of the feed grains in both of these two areas are marketed through livestock with wheat and corn being the major cash crops. In the highly productive area, dairying is once again a major agricultural enterprise but is generally practiced on farms with less productive and more rolling 6Michigan Department of Agriculture, op. cit., p. 11. 27 land. The level, highly productive and well-drained areas have cash cropping where dry field beans, wheat, corn, and sugar beets are the major cash crops.7 Soybeans are also quite important in Southeastern Michigan in the counties of Lenawee, Monroe, and Wayne. As the southern portion of this area is in the proximity of a large industrial area, there are many part-time farmers. These farms tend to be smaller in size with some truck-farms producing fruits and vegetables. Forage Management for Optimum Yields WithiRespect to Both Quantity and'Quality The term management is frequently used but with a variety of meanings among users. Management is concerned with the administration of scarce resources for the ful- fillment of human goals in a world characterized by risk and uncertainty. There has been a conflict as to whether management is or is not an input. For purposes of this thesis, management will be regarded as an intangible part of the production process involved in the arrangement and timely use-of the factors of production. Its presence is evidenced by the results of many decisions. Management 7K. T. Wright and D. A. Caul, Michigan's Agri- culture, Extension Bulletin 582 (East Lansing, Michigan: Cooperative Extension Service, August, 1967), pp. 16, 20, 26, and 32. 28 is involved in determining what is produced, the quantities produced and how it is produced, harvested and marketed. Following are the forage practices advocated for use and assumed used in this problem structure. A. Alfalfa 1. Variety: Use a recommended variety that is adapted to the geographic location. For a 2-4 year stand, Saranac and the Flemish varieties are recommended for Southern Michigan.8 For longer-lived stands, Vernal and other wilt resistant varieties are best. The high yielding Flemish varieties are assumed used with the superior management whereas the longer-lived varieties are used with the good level of management. 2. Establishment: Although there appears to be some disagreement regarding this item, the alfalfa in this problem will be assumed established in the spring with oats as a companion crop. The oats will be harvested as silage when the oat grain reaches the early to medium dough stage. Removing the companion crop early encourages a more vigorous growth of the legume. 8M. B. Tesar and R. L. Janes, Five to Seven Tons of Alfalfa--with Weevil Control (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Departments of Crop Science and Entomology, January, 1969). 29 The land will be plowed, disked once, lime and fertilizer applied according to soil test, and the seeding done with a drill or brillion seeder to insure good soil- seed contact. A pH of no less than 6.5 is desired. Attainment and maintenance of a high soil fertility level is necessary to insure high yields. 3. Maintenance: An establishment year plus two years of alfalfa will be assumed. In the seeding year, the oats will be harvested in the medium dough stage as oat silage. In addition, it is assumed that one cutting of alfalfa will be harvested in early September. The alfalfa will be top- dressed in the Autumn or in the Spring after the first cutting. Phosphorus and potassium fertilizer amounts will be determined according to soil test, yield desired and the economics of these items as evaluated in a benefit—cost manner. For this problem, two limestone levels and thus two pH levels will be used in each soil management group. Spraying for the alfalfa weevil has been incor- rated in the problem structure. This pest is a relatively recent occurrence but its effect can be quite serious. To simplify-the comparative situations, all alfalfa in this problem has been sprayed. However in actual situations, the weevil should be sprayed only when 25-50% of the leaf tips show pest feeding damage. 4. Harvesting: A 3-cut system is recommended for Southern Michigan. The first cutting should be at late 30 bud to 1/10 bloom stage with the remaining cuttings at early flower to 1/10 bloom. Cutting intervals will be approximately 40 days. As long as the plant starts to bloom in each cutting, it will have stored enough food in the roots So it can be cut in the fall without injuring the stand or reducing next year's yields.9 Cutting the alfalfa in its early flower stage may alleviate the necessity of a weevil spray on the first cutting. By harvesting early in the flowering stage, a higher protein-- lower fiber forage is made available thus encouraging higher dry matter intake and more milk produced per acre. It is recommended that the alfalfa be harvested as haylage with a moisture content ranging 40-65%. A hay crusher or crimper should be used in conjunction with this system. Curing and harvesting losses, and labor require- ments are minimized when this harvesting method is used. Also, such a method aids in better scheduling of harvest Operations. I 5. Storage: In accordance with some research completed at Michigan State University,10 tower concrete silos are 9M. B. Tesar, A New Look at Fall Cutting, File: 22.331 (East Lansing, MiEhigan: MiChigan State University, Department of Crop Science, December, 1968). 10C. R. Hoglund, Economig_Considerations in Select- ing Silage Storage and_Feeding Systems, Agricuitural Economics Report #84 (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics, September, 1967). 31 felt to be the best storage system alternative available for the particular sized operation being studied. Storage losses will be approximately 11% compared to 4% with the sealed storage but investment per ton storage capacity will be 50% that of the sealed storage. Storage losses will be minimized if the haylage is chopped at moisture levels not below 50% or above 65% with a theoretical l/4-3/8 inch cut, the silo is filled quickly, a silage distributor is used, the silo has no openings or cracks in the walls and the top is capped with a plastic cover. B. Corn 1. Variety: A corn variety should be selected accord- ing to yield, lodging resistance, maturity length, and intended use of crop. It is advisable that more than one hybrid be planted with some small differences in maturity. This spreads the harvest load over a longer period and gives greater flexibility. For corn silage, a later variety should be used relative to that for corn grain. It is desired that the variety for corn silage have a high grain yielding ability, but by using a later variety, more dry matter is produced per acre. 2. Establishment: Some soil tillage is necessary in order to attain good soil tilth. This structural condition is necessary for good soil-seed contact and for soil 32 erosion control. The amount of tillage required will vary with the type and condition of the soil. To simplify the comparison herein, a minimum of conventional tillage will be used on all soil management groups. With this tillage system, the soil will be plowed and disked-harrowed prior to planting then harrowed after planting. It is desired that the soil be left with a granular structure suitable for seeding but coarse enough to allow penetration of air, water, and roots. With regard to plant pOpulation and row spacing, 20,000 seeds will be planted with an expected plant popula- tion per acre of approximately 18,000. Row width of 28 inches is assumed. However for actual on farm situa- tions, the complete switching over to these narrower rows is not recommended until the present machinery and equip- ment requires replacement. The average percentage yield increase for narrow rows is approximately 6%.11 Thus unless one is now using optimum production practices with the wide rows, there are less expensive ways of increasing yield. It is recommended that the corn be planted during the first ten days of May. The early planted corn usually 118. C. Hildebrand, E. C. Rossman, and L. S. ;Robertson, Hybrid Selection and Cultural Practices, "Extension Bulletin 436'7East Lansing, MiChigan: Michigan State University, Departments of Crop Science and Soil Science, September, 1964). 33 yields more as it has passed the critical stage of pollination by the time of the mid-summer dry period. Lime and potassium fertilizer will be plowed down, anhydrous ammonia will be knifed into the soil and a row fertilizer will be applied with the planter. The amounts, grades and analysis of these mineral elements will be determined by soil testing and by the prices of the various elements. 3. Maintenance: The principal concerns here are weed and insect control. Insect problems vary between years and will not be studied herein. For weed control, a herbicide (atrazine) application at planting time has been used. At 2 pounds application of atrazine per acre, oats and alfalfa may be safely planted the following year.12 When corn is grown continuously for periods longer than two years, the last year of corn prior to the crop rotation should receive a treatment as 2 4-D in lieu of the atrazine. In addition, one rotary hoeing and one cultivation have been incorporated in order to control between row weeds. The rotary hoe is especially beneficial if it does not rain within two weeks after the atrazine application. 12William F. Meggitt, Weed Control in Field Crops, Extension Bulletin 434 (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Crop Science, February, 969). 34 Additional benefits as aeration and water penetration have been suggested for cultivation. 4. Harvesting: For this problem, sufficient corn silage will be harvested to provide the livestock with the needed quantities of forage. The acreage of corn silage harvested will differ between soil management groups, between rations, and between management and fertilizer levels. The crop will be harvested at an average 32% dry matter. Such a dry matter level will be reached when the grain is at the hard dent stage. At this level, maximum total digestible nutrients are obtained, and proper ensiling is insured.13 It is assumed that the corn grain will be harvested as ear corn with harvesting of the grain commencing when its moisture-content is approximately 22%. 5. Storage: As with the alfalfa haylage, the corn silage and grain will be stored in concrete tower silos. Again much attention must be devoted to the provision of anaerobic conditions to give a good fermentation process thus insuring good silage preservation. The ear corn will be ground as it goes into storage. 13J. Clayton Herman and Leon E. Thompson, eds., Silage Production and Use, Pamphelt 417 (Ames, Iowa: Iowa State UniVersity, Cooperative Extension Service, February, 1968), p. 14. 35 Reasons for Silage Making Silage-making, especially corn silage, has greatly increased in the past ten years. In Michigan from 1959 to 1967, corn silage acreage increased by 92,000 acres while the corn grain acreage decreased by 314,000 acres.14 An important factor in the increased production of silage crops is the substitution of year—round storage feeding for part or all of the pasture. Michigan studies show that with dairy herds of 40 or more cows it generally becomes more profitable to harvest rather than graze the forage crops.15 The most profitable crop or combination of forage crops to grow and feed to dairy and beef cattle will depend on such factors as the relative yield of the crops on a particular farm, the performance of livestock when fed various forage crops, carcass desirability, prices of vegetable protein and urea, and the scale of operations. The first and the last items are perhaps the most important in determining the individual crop or crops to grow and the form in which it pays to harvest and process it. 14Michigan Department of Agriculture, op. cit., p. 16. 15C. R. Hoglund, "The Present Contribution of Silage to America's Livestock Industry" (paper presented to the National Silo Association, Buffalo, New York, December 5, 1966). 36 Some specific reasons for advocating silage-making are: l. Crops made into silage yield more total digestible nutrients (TDN) and energy per acre than when harvested by other methods. Harvesting losses are lower as compared to conventional baled hay and conventional grain harvest. 2. Silage-making mechanizes the handling of the crop from the field to the feed bunk. 3. Capital investment can replace labor investment. Also silages can be harvested over a range of moisture contents allowing a more even distribu- tion of labor requirements. 4. Harvesting and curing losses due to the weather are minimized. 5. The possibility of using fermentation to make a feed better suited to the needs of the livestock. The nature of the fermentation is determined by moisture content, packing in the silo and the quantity and type of carbohydrates available. It is desired to get the carbohydrates converted to 16 acetic and lactic acid for preservation purposes. Principles of Fertilizer Use and Application Recommendations concerning fertilizer use must be made with an awareness of the agronomic and economic con— siderations. A wide range in fertilizer application can be expected in the optimal fertilizer treatment for a given crop on a given soil because of changes that occur in fertilizer and crop prices and the possibility of 16M. E. McCullough, "The Old and New of Silage," Silo News (Winter, 1967). 37 interaction between the fertilizer elements. The optimum application of any fertilizer nutrient occurs when the value of the marginal product from the last unit of ferti- lizer is equal to the additional cost of that last unit of fertilizer. Theoretically, this is a simple concept; how- ever, the accurate estimation of marginal productivities attributed to any one input can be a difficult task. Determination of the fertilizer amounts to be applied will be discussed in Chapter III. Major factors affecting the rate and placement of fertilizer are the crOp and its rooting habits, the soil type and its fertility, and the nature of the particular fertilizer element. Early in the season, corn depends heavily on phosphorus near the roots.17 However, from the knee-high stage on, corn develops an extensive fibrous root system. It then has a great capacity for utilizing nutrients distributed through a large soil zone. On soils low in phosphorus (P) and potassium (K), it is difficult to produce t0p corn yields with fertilizer applied in rows only. It is necessary to build up the fertility level of the soil by broadcasting the needed amount of fertilizer. The fertilizer is then incorporated into the soil to 17Samuel L. Tisdale and Werner L. Nelson, Soil Fertility_and Fertilizers (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1966), Chapters 13, 14, and 15. 38 encourage deep rooting of the crop. Additional starter fertilizer can be applied at planting time. The band application at planting time is important in providing a rapid start for the corn plant. This band should be placed one inch to the side and one inch below the seed. The various forms of nitrogen (N) can be applied separately with some N being applied in a mixed fertilizer with P and K. In general the nearer the time of application to peak N demand, the more efficient the N is utilized. Alfalfa requires high levels of lime, phosphorus. and potassium. It has a tap root system. Due to its being a perennial crop, the ground is not tilled annually and thus the fertilizer cannot be mechanically placed in the root zone. Topdressing of potassium and phosphorus is usually relied on. The potassium is somewhat mobile in the soil but phosphorus is not. However topdressed phosphorusv for maintenance purposes is generally considered to be an efficient method of fertilizer placement. Some of this phosphorus is absorbed by the crowns of the plant as well as by very shallow roots. It should be mentioned that for the most efficient use of the fertilizer elements, much importance should be given to the pH of the soil. Generally speaking, nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium are most available in the pH range of 6.0 to 7.5. A pH lower than 6.0 greatly decreases 39 the availability of N, P, and K and increases the availability of some of the micro-elements to the point where they may become toxic. The acidity of a soil can be and should be decreased by the application of lime. The time of fertilizer application depends on the soil, climate, nutrients, and crop. However as higher rates of fertilizer are used and soil fertility increases, the problem of application time becomes less important. There are many chemical forms in which the macro-fertilizer elements (N, P, K) can be purchased. However generally speaking, one fertilizer form is as good as another. The important consideration is cost per pound of fertilizer element. CHAPTER III METHODS OF STUDY Farm Analysis Methods and Concepts Management of any business including a farm Operation requires continual decision-making. To make the best decision in a world characterized by risk and uncertainty an organizational framework is essential. Goals must be declared, problems defined with decisions and resultant actions based on the analysis and evaluation Of the observations. The concern of this chapter is with the analyzation step in the decision-making process. It should be recognized that the validity and the applica- bility of any decision is directly related to the availa- bility and accuracy of the input data and the conditions assumed. Alternative Methods of Analysis Gross Margin By definition gross margin is the contribution of the enterprise toward covering the fixed costs and 40 41 producing a return for risk and management.1 Gross margin equals the difference between total revenue and variable cash costs. The assumed objective is usually that of maximizing the summed gross margins for all farm enter- prises on a farm. The return over all costs is determined by subtracting the fixed costs from the gross margin. Main advantages of gross margin analysis are that it is easily understood, the contribution of each enterprise in a farm organization can be easily determined, and the economic effect of changing inputs in an enterprise is clearly shown. Linear Prpgramming Programming is concerned with the determination .of the optimal solutions to production problems. It is essentially a mathematical technique describing what ought to be--given the objectives, constraints, and alterna- tives.2 Objectives are usually that of maximizing net revenue or minimizing production costs. Precise specifica- tions on input availabilities and their production 1L. J. Connor, et al., Michigan Farm Management Handbook, Agricultural Economics Report #36 (East LanEing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics, October, 1967). 2William J. Baumol, Economic Theopy and Operations Anal sis (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc., 65), Chapter 5. 42 coefficients are required to determine solutions to the optimization problem. Assumptions made for this program— ming are divisibility of enterprise levels, finiteness of activities to be considered, linear production relation- ships, perfect complementarity of inputs used in production of a product, constant product and resource prices, single- value production expectations for an input, and additivity of production. Matrix columns in addition to those for enterprises or products may be used to incorporate salvage and acquisition activities for the resources. Credit restraints are used to insure that a solution will be determined. Programming then is the mathematical method for the analysis and computation of optimum decisions which do not violate the limitations of the imposed side- conditions or constraints. Thus linear programming is designed to determine the most profitable farm organization with resources on hand, the crops and livestock to be produced and in what amounts, the most economical way to produce and the opportunity cost for selecting a plan other than the-Optimum.3 3R. Barker, Use of Linear Programmingin Making Farm Management Decisions, Cornell Bulletin 993 TIthaCa, New York: 1964). 43 Functional Analysis This method appears to be quite objective in its determination of input and output levels using mathematical solutions. Input-output data are usually observed under a prescribed amount of controlled environmental conditions. Statistical estimating procedures are used to determine parameters which are then assumed valid over the entire range of observations on the production surface. Produc- tion functions which best fit the data are determined. These functions may show increasing, constant, or decreas— ing returns to size and scale depending on the nature of the production response in the range of observations. Two of-the best known production functions are the Cobb- Douglas and various forms of quadratic functions. Once the functions are determined, marginal analysis is used to determine the optimum production level. This procedure consists of taking partial derivatives of the profit estimates with respect to each input being analyzed. Then by equating each input's marginal value product to its marginal factor cost, the optimum level of use is determined for that input. This determination is normally accomplished by setting each partial derivative of profit with respect to change of an input equal to zero and then solving the equations simultaneously. This entire procedure assumes homogeneity of inputs, unlimited capital, 44 constant input and output prices, and a desire to maximize profits. It requires continuous production functions in order to use the mathematical differential technique. This procedure is widely used and is valid for limited ranges of observations. However any one production func- tion and accompanying coefficients cannot be used for general application over a wide geographic area. The major difficulties encountered in this procedure are those of Specifying the correct form of the functional relationships, and acquiring a sufficient number of strategically located observations to permit reliable estimation of the param— eters . 4 Simulation Simulation is a numerical technique for conducting experiments involving certain types of mathematical and logical models that describe the behavior of an economic system or business over extended periods of time.5 Essentially a model is set up to resemble a real situation and then experiments are performed on the model. This 4W. B. Sundquist, "An Economic Analysis of Some Controlled Fertilizer Input-Output Experiments in Michigan" (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Michigan State University, 1957), p. 24. 5Thomas N. Naylor, et al., Compute; Simulation Techniques (New York: John WiIey & Sons, Inc., 1968), p. 3. 45 model should include most of the important aspects of the system, however it should not be so complex as to be impossible to manipulate. The simulation model is suffi- ciently flexible to handle non-linearities, discontinuities, time-lags, irreversibilities, probabilities, interactions, qualitative factors, and can optimize a subroutine or block within the total model. In addition, simulation has the advantage of allowing several benefit and cost dimen- sions to be simultaneously considered but not maximized. Simulation remains in the developmental stage with respect to its application in agriculture. Models are being built for use in developing economies. With regard to the individual farm, develoPmental work on SIMFARM is continuing at Michigan State University. SIMFARM I, currently being used as a teaching device, uses probability theory to simulate risk and uncertainty in dealing with resource acquisition, crop and livestock production levels, and product prices. Interrelationships of the variables are provided as are off-farm investment possibilities. Simulation models have been used in analyz- ing alternative methods of forage production, harvesting, and utilization; for analyzing beef feeding operations, and for dairy farms. 46 Comparative Analysis Comparative analysis is that method in which standards of farm management are developed by observing 6 The determined individual farms or groups of farms. standards of production are usually averages over arbitrary classes of farms. Although this method remains in use at the grass-roots level, it is not considered sufficiently rigorous for use in research work. Main reasons for its rejection are that average measures do not aid in deter- mining optimal solutions to production problems and it compares what has been done rather than what can or should be accomplished in the future. Budgeting Budgeting is a systematic and orderly approach to planning. Farm budgeting uses the farm budget which is a physical and financial plan for the operation of the farm for some period of time.7 Basically there are two types of budgeting--total or complete and partial. Complete farm budgeting is used when organizing an entire farm 6Warren H. Vincent and Larry J. Connor, An Orienta— tion for Futuge Farm Plannin and Information Systems, Agricfiltural Economic Misc. I968-5 (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics), p. l. 7Emery N. Castle and Manning H. Becker, Farm Business Mana ement (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967), p. II7. 47 business. It would compare the profitability of the various organizational alternatives. Partial farm budget- ing is used to evaluate particular projected changes. Partial budgeting compares only those returns and costs of the alternatives which are different between the operations. Budgeting is a conceptually simple procedure. Essentially it compares via organized arithmetic the costs, returns, and profits for the various alternatives being considered. Advantages of the budgeting procedure are that it is forward-looking, is applicable to individual farms and is readily understood. Shortcomings of budgeting are that it does not explicitly incorporate economic theory princi- ples, it assumes single-value expectations for prices and technical relationships, and there is a limit to the number of enterprises and restrictions which can be feasibly considered.8 Method of Study Partial budgeting has been chosen for this analysis. This procedure is applicable when the proposed change will not affect the entire farm organization. This thesis problem assumes the continuance of the dairy operation for each situation. Its concern is with various dairy forage rations and methods of producing these feedstuffs. Thus 8Vincent, op. cit., p. 3. 48 the problem is to identify and estimate those costs and returns which change among the various alternatives. It is assumed that the gross returns from the milk enterprise are constant. In this manner the problem becomes that of determining the minimum cost method of securing the dairy ration. In a partial budgeting exercise, it is necessary to first establish the goals, and then estimate the effect of an organizational change on the costs and returns of the present system. Thus it is necessary to determine enter- prise resource requirements, establish product and resource prices, estimate receipts and costs, compare net incomes between alternatives and then determine that alternative which provides the highest net income. The partial budget- ing schematic is: A. Additional Receipts + reduced costs = total credits or additional income due to change in production method; B. Additional costs + reduced receipts = total debits or loss in income due to change in production method; and C. Total credits - total debits = change in net income. .Assuming that the objective is to maximize the increase in net income, then the alternative chosen would be that one which results in the largest increase in this measure. The partial budgeting procedure is one that is commonly used by farm managers. The type and amount of 49 information required, and the linearity assumption are the same as in linear programming. However for most micro- economic on-farm situations, the budgeting process would be much cheaper than with linear programming. Programming makes possible the consideration of a larger number of alternatives than is feasible with budgeting. Thus with budgeting, it is possible that some important alternatives may be overlooked. Another criticism of budgeting is that it fails to explicitly incorporate economic principles into the analysis. However, implicitly budgeting does take into account, for example, the marginality concept, the sub— stitution ratio, and the opportunity cost principle. Production processes will not be changed if added cost is greater than added returns. A factor of production will be substituted for another as long as its cost is less than that of the first input--assuming equal production. If a manager discovers that more money can be made via an alternative enterprise or production process, it is proba- ble that a change will be instituted--assuming that profit maximization is a desired goal. Thus it is seen that the budgeting procedure does in fact incorporate many of the basic economic principles. It is felt that budgeting has been and will continue to be utilized by farm managers. It is a practical concept well based in economic theory. 50 Problem Structure and Assumptions To reiterate, the problem is to determine the most economical method of securing feedstuffs for a 120-cow dairy herd plus replacements. All forage is to be grown but grain may be grown, purchased or sold depending on the situation. The problem setting is in three locations previously described in Chapter II. In an economic analysis, there are several assump- tions-~some implicit and some explicit. The following is an enumeration of the structural and economic assumptions incorporated in this analysis. 1. Homogeneous dairy cows with regard to physical size, milk production, feed consumption and conversion efficiency, and reproduction. 2. No milk yield differential with change in forage ration provided ration is adequate and balanced. 3. Soils within a soil management group are homoge- eous with regard to production and management considerations. 4. Production relationships are linear. 5. Crop and livestock production practices used provide the highest economic yield. These practices are based on agronomic considerations. 6. The production levels used for crops and livestock are S-year averages. 7. Corn silage and alfalfa haylage provide more energy per acre than any other harvested form of corn and alfalfa. 8. Dry-lot feeding of dairy herd makes the most efficient use of forage acres. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 51 All prices and price relationships are constant for period of study. (Land charge is 7% of market value which was assumed to be $600, 450, and 300 for soil management groups I, II, and III respec- tively.) Straight-line depreciation used on all investment items. - Capital and credit are sufficient for 120-cow dairy herd. Machinery custom hire is assumed available at prices given. Labor quality is homogeneous. All labor required is available at $2/hour. The crop rotation is corn-corn-corn-oats-alfalfa- alfalfa for the 50% corn silage ration. With the 75% corn silage ration, the corn acreage will necessarily be increased requiring more years of continuous corn. The oats-alfalfa will continue on a three year program. It should be noted that the alfalfa program could be lengthened to three or four years. Assuming that the alfalfa yield relationships would remain linear over this longer production period, the cost per unit of alfalfa produced would decrease. Although such a system was not analyzed in this problem, it is believed that such an arrangement would decrease the farm net revenue due to lessening Of the corn acreage. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE DATA Production and cost figures for each of the three soil management groups are presented in this chapter. Three different dairy forage rations were analyzed. These rations varied according to type and amount of forage fed. The type of forage varies between corn silage and alfalfa haylage and within the haylage category are two forage quality levels. The three forage rations fed were as follows: 50% of forage energy from corn silage--50% of forage energy from alfalfa haylage--a 1:1 ration 75% of forage energy from corn silage--25% of forage energy from alfalfa haylage--a 3:1 ration 100% of forage energy from corn silage--a 1:0 ration. The rations calculated are presented in Appendix B, Tables B20, B21, and 822. A summation of the total and per unit feedstuff requirements for each ration is pre- sented in Table 3. lEstimated net energy (ENE) measured in therms was used in lieu of total digestible nutrients (TDN). From a conversation with Dr. Hillman of the MSU Dairy Department, ENE was felt to be a more accurate measure of the forage value. 52 53 .pasm cmmaamaosae oops» mo Acapum moa ooa\oa ac ma ao coaoaopp opoaooa cm a .mammn ucoam>asco has on omuam>coum vmh.~ mom.m o.mm .. .. mm.mm .umz poapooom mom.m o.mm .. .. amm.m mm.mm .umz oooo ommaam anoo mooa mom.m o.mm pma mm.m amm.a ma.ma .umz uoauoasm mom.m m.mm mmm mo.m oop.a mm.ma .omz oooo ommaam ouoo mmm mom.m o.mm cap mo.m mao.a «m.m .omz poaaoosm amm.m «.mm mmm ma.m omo.a mm.m .umz pooo ompaam :poo mom aouoo upm maoamomv also mom moose Asa mmm moose amuoa 300 mmm amuoa 300 now HouOB 300 mmm ncamuo caou magmas: muamuad mooaam CHOU coaumm ezmzmoazaz mo mam>ma oze oza .mzoasam summon mamas .mezmzmoaammm oza mSOU CNH mom HflBOB 92¢ 300 mmm mBZmSWmHDOMM ZH¢MU 924 mwfimom AdDZZd m mnm48 54 For the production of both corn and alfalfa, two levels of management were studied. Production practices used in each management level are presented in Appendix A. Fertilizer recommendations for corn grain and corn silage differed because of the greater nutrient removal from the soil with corn silage. These fertilizer and lime recom- mendations were also varied among soil management groups (SMG) and management levels. These recommendations were based on judgment values of present soil nutrient test values2 and on crop nutrient requirements as listed in EB-550, Fertilizer Recommendations for Michigan Vegetables and Field Crops. The natural soil fertility and fertilizer applications for corn on each SMG are presented in Appendix B, Table B2. The alfalfa crop was also studied under two manage- ment levels over the three different soil management groups. Lime and fertilizer applied were varied with management levels and with the different soils. Within each soil management group, three potassium fertilization levels were studied with the most profitable level used for the inter-enterprise comparison with corn silage. The fertilizer applied and resultant yields were based on experimental plot work by Dr. Tesar, Crop Science 2From conversation with Dr. J. C. Shickluna, Soil Science Department, Michigan State University. 55 Department, Michigan State University. The cost of lime was averaged over the three year period that oats and alfalfa were grown. It should be noted that with all the soil management groups, the medium level of fertilization was found to be the most profitable. The cost and returns of the medium level of fertilization were then used for the inter-enterprise comparison with corn silage. The actual input-output figures for these various alfalfa production combinations are shown in Appendix B, Tables 312-319. The machinery complement is listed in Appendix B, Table 324. This machinery line was assumed adequate for all production operations except harvesting where custom corn picking and some forage harvesting were provided. The fixed costs for machinery were divided between corn and alfalfa on the basis of use and are as shown in this same table. Machinery ownership costs, machinery and man hours required per acre, machinery capacity and cost of machines per hour of use were based on Michigan State publications. The grain and soybean oil meal prices used herein were weighted average Michigan prices over the five year period--1963-1967. The fertilizers and lime charges were average Michigan prices for the year 1966. As the ferti- lizer price index has been quite constant, these prices quite well represent the current fertilizer prices. The 56 charge for labor was arbitrarily set at $2.00 per hour. The prices used in calculating costs of grain and ferti- lizer are given in Appendix B, Tables 325 and B26. Highly Productive Cropland (SMG I) The soil series included in this management group are Sims, Kawkawlin, Capac, Hoytville, Nappanee and Wauseon. Their general location is in northeastern Michigan, the "thumb," and down along the eastern border of Michigan. Counties included are Huron, Sanilac, St. Clair, Macomb, Wayne, Monroe, and Lenawee. The calculated cropland requirement for a 50% corn silage forage ration grown under superior management is 230 acres. The forage acreage requirements for the various rations and levels of management are shown in Table 4. The difference between the 230 acres and that required to produce forage cr0ps would be used for corn grain. The average yield figures under the two management levels are as follows. Good Mgt. Superior Mgt. Alfalfa--medium fertiliza- tion (Tons 90% DM) 4.6 5.3 Corn Grain (bushels) 104. 130. Corn Silage (Tons 32% DM) 18.9 21.7 The net calculated costs of feed for the various rations and management levels are presented in Table 5. The production components and further breakdown of these 57 mm.~mm.mm om.mw~.¢m me.vhm.¢m @000 @009 mm.aom.mm mm.mam.am mm.aam.mm oooo poauoosm mm.mmm.mm mm.mmm.mm ma.oma.mm poauooom_ oooo mm.aom.mmm mm.ama.mmm mm.mmm.mmm uoaaooom Hoauooom ooa mm on paapaaa ouoo mmmaam caou anm mucmaaunz ommaom unmoumm usefiwmocmz mo ao>ma Bzmzmw¢2¢2 mo mnm>mq 039 92¢ .mm>HE¢zmmBA¢ mw¢mOh 99229 .20HB¢mmmO BOUIONH mom 9999 90 9900 H¢BOB ho 20HB¢NHM¢SZDm m mam¢a ova aha mm em mma hm mma OOOO ooow moa mm am mma ma mma pooo uoauoasm moa mm om ama mm aaa uoapoosm pooo mma mma mm om mpa ma aaa soaaoosm uoauooom mmmaam mmmaam mmmammm mmmaam mmmamom GHOU aouoa GHOO smammad amuoa GHOU mmaoma¢ mmammam cuoo ooa mm on mmmaam GHOU Scum mucmaausz mmmuom unmoumm mam>wa ucmfimmmcoz 929290¢2¢S mo mnm>mn 039 92¢ mm>HB¢29999¢ mm¢mom 99928 909 9HMH9092 90¢mom mo mmmu¢ e M99¢B 58 costs are presented in Appendix B, Tables Bl, B3, B4, BS, 812, B14, and 815. To briefly interpret these tables, the best alternative method of production is the one which minimizes the cost of the ration. As gross output is assumed con- stant, the lowest cost production alternative results in highest net return. Costs and net returns are directly affected by the management level practiced. A particular level of management can be applied on any combination of crops. It is advisable to apply managerial talents to that crop enterprise which is most responsive to the environ- mental growth conditions. On this soil management group, the actual net production costs were lowest for the 100% corn silage forage ration grown under superior management; that is, growing continuous corn. These annual costs were only slightly higher--$4l6--for the 75% corn silage ration but $1,574 higher for the 50% corn silage ration. (See Table 5.) These costs were calculated by taking the total production harvesting and storage costs plus or minus the respective grain buying or selling activities plus the cost of protein supplement. However it should be noted that an overall farm production decision must be based on more than a partial analysis of separate enterprises, resources, or production possibilities. With this 59 consideration for crop production and ration selection, one than takes into account the labor distribution and machinery bottlenecks requiring for example some custom hire of forage harvesting. These considerations all entail a cost to the farm operator. When growing only one crop such as corn, there are associated advantages and dis- . 3 advantages. Some advantages of contInuous corn are: 1. 2. Costs and risks of establishing seedings are eliminated. Most weeds are more easily controlled in corn than on other crops. There is more flexibility in planning and adjust- ing the cropping program. The soil fertility program can be more efficiently fitted to the crop being grown. The crOp can be fitted to the soil best suited for it. Low-income crops can be eliminated. Disadvantages of continuous corn in addition to labor and machinery distribution are: 1. Soil erosion will be more serious unless land is carefully selected and control measures are used where needed. The problem of soil structure maintenance is not fully resolved and may become unfavorable on some soils. 3E. R. Duncan and F. W. Schaller, "Continuous Corn," Plant Food Review, Vol. 8, No. 4 (Winter, 1962). 60 3. It may include greater risks. Capital inputs may be greater and there is an increased need for skilled management. 4. Special herbicides may be needed for some weed problems. 5. Some crop diseases may become more serious or difficult to control. 6. Crop and soil insect control will require more attention and increased costs. Corn silage provides the cheapest source of equiva- lent dry matter pounds. Its protein content is lower than that of alfalfa but can be substantially increased by adding urea (42% nitrogen) at the rate of 10 pounds urea per 2000 pounds corn silage. This increases the crude protein by approximately 1.4 percentage points. The digestible protein percentage is then approximately 2.7%. Assuming no nitrogen losses during ensiling, this addition of urea plus extra soybean oil meal in the grain ration increases the protein level of the corn silage ration so that it competes with alfalfa haylage in meeting the nutritional requirements for milk, maintenance and growth. Given a lower level of management on both crops, the order arrangement of cost figures is the same as for the superior management. However the cost differential of approximately $680 between the 75% and 100% corn silage rations is much wider than it is with the higher level of management. It would appear that at the lower levels of management, the adverse production effect on corn is less 61 than that for alfalfa. This management level and even lower levels are probably quite representative of the average management practiced. This factor may partially explain why corn silage is more predominant in the dairy ration. With a change in the combination of management levels assumed for corn and alfalfa, a different ration becomes the least costly. For example, with good manage- ment assumed for corn and superior management for alfalfa, the 100% corn silage ration was the most expensive. There was little difference in costs between the 50% and 75% corn silage rations. When superior management was assumed for corn and good management for alfalfa, the 100% corn silage ration was $2,500 to $3,600 lower in costs than the ratiOns including alfalfa. In essence, these figures relate that the crOp to be grown is that one in which a particular affinity or adeptness is shown in its produc- tion. It is suggested that some farmers appear to have better managerial capability in growing a particular crop. This skill is usually directly related to the production and management practices employed as tempered by ones subjective preferences. Thus it appears that if a dairy- man is better at producing corn than alfalfa or vice versa, a substantial portion of the forage ration should be provided by that crop. Given the linear production 62 relationships within each soil management group, this advice holds true over all the soil management groups. It seems evident for this situation that for alfalfa to be competitive with corn, similar levels of technology and management must be practiced on both crops. It should be recognized that all areas and soils are not capable of supporting continuous row crops. The reasons for this are varied but in such instances, the cropping alternatives are usually limited to some type of crop rotation. In particular, this limitation will be noted for soil manage- ment group III (SMG III). 63 .Ahmma .HOQEmumom .moaaocoom amasuasoaumd mo usefiuamnmo .muamum>aco mumum somwnoaz “savanna: .mcmmcoa ummmv em¢ uaomom homeosoom Hmasuasoaamd .mEoummm msaooom pom ommaoum empaam mam auooamm Ga chauMHMOachO Oamosoom .ocsamom .m .0 Sony pennanom umoo Oaamn .ucofiomocofi mo mam>oa 03» How :Oauosooam mzoAm :Omaammsoum mm.mmm.mmw ma.amm.amm mucosoooaoou pap one: souloma How Goauoa 90 noon #02 so mm mo.am .oampm mm.mm mmooxo aaom mo.omo.p so mmmm oo\ma.am a ouoo apooaoapoo mom mmumhmnbhm thhhhhmnm ap.paa ozo oa.aoa mm.ome uso mm.moa u3o\amuupouo am.mam am.mam o3o\aa.mm a nap mm.mm app: aao opoomom «m.maa. am.eaa onxomo a so mam mupo oo.mmm. oo.mmm oaam ouonocoo .oo x .om a ouoo mmm ocoouo ma.mao.a ma.mao.a oaam ooouoooo .oo x .om a ompaam ouoo ma.mao.a ma.mao.a oaam ououoooo .op x .om a ompampm paaoaaa amumou ommaoum mm.mam, mo.ooo.a o3o\omauuoappm on» moaopapo mm.mom so mpmm om.maa on mmmm =o\omuuoapuo on» moaaopm mm.onm.mm mm.mpw.mm mumoo coauosooum amuoe mo.mmm.p am.omo.m capno ouoo mm.mva.o mm.mmm.m omoaam cuoo pa.m¢m.aam aa.mom.mam manamom paapaaa unmemmsaoz Hoauomsm usefimumcmz OOOU EmuH MNU¢AN¢2 ¢hfl¢mfl¢ momllmU¢AHm 2200 wow 90 20HB¢m 90¢mom mom mBmOU 9999 A¢BOB mo 20HB¢229m m mAm¢B 64 .ucmfiwmmcmfi mo mam>wa 03» How coauOsooam mzonm cowaammfioom mucofimomamwu poo mm.eam.mmw mo.aoo.ama who: souloma How coauma mo umOO 902 so mama mo.aw .oaaum mm.mom.a mmooxo aaom am.aam.a so mmmm ooxma.am a opoo apooaoaoop mom a. . mm .mmwnmmnnm» «m.mmo oso aa.mma oo.map pap mo.ooa u3o\amuupouo mm.mma oa.mmo usoxa¢.mm a nap mm.oma apps aao opoomom am.qaa ozo ma.am am.aaa asp mm.oma oo\omo o no mam mono om.mmm oo.mmm oaam ooopoooo .oo x .om a ouoo mom oaoouo pa.mmm.a oa.mmm.a oaam ouopoqoo .om x .am m ompaam ouoo mm.mmm mm.mmm oaam ououoooo .om x .mm a panama: pmaoaaa mumoo ommaoum mm.mam mo.mmm o3o\omauupapum on» moaooauo mm.mom so mpmm ma.mma so aomm oo\omnuoapum on» moaaomm whhbhhhmw .HmPMDNANN mumoo coauosooum aouoe mm.mam.m mm.mvm.e capao ouoo ma.mpa.m mm.mam.oa omnaam ouoo mm.pmm.m m ao.mmm.m m oapamma unapaaa usoEmmmcmz HOaaomsm usefimumcmz OOOO Eoua M9O¢AN¢9 ¢9A¢9A¢ meII9U¢AHm 2900 mmm 90 20HB¢9 9U¢909 909 mBmOU 9999 Q¢BOB 90 20HB¢2299 h 999¢B 65 .ucosommsme mo mao>oa o3u How sOmvosooum m 30£m acmaHMQEOOM hm.von.mNm on mmov mo.am .oaoo mm.omm.a mmooxo aaom NH.me.mmm wm.moa.a #30 mm.mbm ¢H.va.a vm.v¢H. om.mmm mm.amh.m mm.mHm mm.mw~ an mmbm m .m . mw.mao.m mm.mmh.mam mm.mwm.mmw musmEmomamma can one: zoOIONa Hom.coauma mo umoo umz am.am no mm oo\ma.am o oaoo apooaoaopp mom .mmvmwmnmmm om.moa.a uzo «m.msm uso\¢muupoao aa.mma.a osoxaa.mm o 03o mm.aom app: aao opoomom am.vaa so\omo a so mam mono oo.mmm. oaam ououoqoo .om x .om a auoo mom pasouo mm.amm.m oaam moopoooo .om x .mm m ompaam ouoo mumou mmmaoum ~m.mam . uzo\omallsamam on» msaocaaw mo.mom so ommm on\omuuoapam on» moaaopm mm.me.mm mumoo cOauooooum amuoe mm.m«o.m camuo ouoo ma.~ah.mam mmmaam GHOU ucmsmmmcmz Hoaammsm useEmowcmZ @000 EmuH M90¢9Hm 2900 «OOH 90 20HB¢9 90¢909 909 mBmOU 9999 H¢BOB 90 20HB¢229m m 999¢B 66 .chaumcanfioo ucmEomscme 039 How mmammam pom snoo mo coauozooam m3onm GOmaHmmEOOm ma.oma.mmw mm.aam.mmm muoosoooaoou pop . pawn 3OOIoma Mom :Oauma mo umOO “Oz am.mma.m so mmpm op.moo.a so aaam so\ma.am a gamma apooaoaoop mom ao.amm.amm m .m . mm mm.oma uso mm.moa ao.paa ozo oa.aoa ozoxawuupoao am.mam am.mam o3o\a¢.mm o 03o mm.mm app: aao opoomom am.ava am.aaa oo\omp a so mam mono oo.mmm oo.mmm oaam ououoooo .op x .om a ouoo ape ocoouo ma.mao.a ma.mao.a oaam ououopoo .oo x .om a ommaam ouoo ma.m¢o.a ma.mao.a oaam ooouoooo .oo x .om a ompamom paapaaa mumou momaoum mm.opm mm.opm o3o\oma-uoampm was moaooaao mo.ama so omap om.mma on oaao po\omnucapum on» moaaopm wb.mmw.~n pm.nbw.mn mumoo coauooooam aouoa mo.moe.m m¢.aeb.e sauna saoo mm.mmm.m mm.maa.o ompaam cuoo pa.mam.aam aa.mom.maw panama: oaamaaa anoo pmapmaa so unmfimmscmz @000 so usmEmmocoz OOOO unmouad so cuou so unmammmssz Hoaammsm uswfimmmcoz Hoaammom Emua O90¢99¢9 ¢9Q¢9A¢ momll90¢9Hm 2900 mom 90 20HB¢9 90¢909 909 mBmOU 9999 Q¢BOB 90 20HB¢229m m 999¢B 67 .msOaumsaAEOO usefiomocmfi 03¢ mom omamwam can cuoo mo soauozooam m3onm comaummEOUm am.mmm.mmw mm.mam.amm mucosoopaoou pop cums 300uoma Mom coauma mo umoo umz mm.mmm.m so moom mm.omm.a on mmoa so\ma.am o opoo amaoaoapop mom «m.map uzo op.ooa ap.mmo ozo aa.mma usoxvmunpouo pm.mma 03o ma.am oa.mmp o3o\av.mm 9 ago mm.oma app: aao omoomom am.aaa am.aaa so\omp o no mam mono op.mmm op.mmm oaam ooouocoo .oo x .om a ouoo ppm ppsouo oa.mmm.a oa.mmm.a oaam ouopocoo .om x .am m oomaam coco mm.mmm mm.mmm oaam ououocoo .om x .am a ompammm «mapoaa mumoo omnuoum ma.oam ma.pam ozo\omauuoamum opp moapcauo om.mom so some om.mam so omam sn\omuuoapum on» moaaoom mm.mom.m~ ww.mov.em mumoo :Oauooooam amuoe ma.pmm.m am.ooo.p capuo ouoo mm.mam.oa ma.moa.m oopaam ouoo mm.pmm.m m ao.mmm.m a omoampm «Hammad opoo . paaooaa co usefiomocmz ooou so usefimoocmz UOOO smammdd so choc so usmfiommsoz Hoaummsm ucoEOmmcmz Hoaummsm EouH M90¢AN¢9 ¢9A¢9A¢ meII90¢AHm 2900 wmb 90 20HB¢9 90¢909 909 mBmOU 9999 A¢BOB 90 20HB¢229m 0H 999¢B 68 Productive Cropland (SMG II) The soil series included in this management group are Miami, Dodge, and Conover. Their general location is south-central Michigan in the counties of Ingham, Ionia, Shiawassie, Eaton, Clinton, and Livingston. The calculated cropland requirement for a 50% corn silage forage ration grown under superior management was 257 acres. The forage acreage requirements under the various rations and levels of management are shown in Table 11. In each instance the remainder of acreage was used for corn grain. The average-yield figures under the two management levels are as follows. Good Mgt. Superior Mgt. A1falfa--medium fertiliza- tion (Tons 90% DM) 4.2 4.8 Corn Grain (bushels) 92. 115. Corn Silage (Tons 32% DM) 16.7 19.2 The net calculated costs of feed for the various rations and management levels are given in Table 12. The production components and further breakdown of these costs are presented in Appendix B, Tables B1, B6, B7, BB, B12, B16, and B17. An evaluation of the ration cost summary tables_ for soil management group II reveals that the 100% corn silage forage produced under superior management had the 69 m¢.mhm.mm ma.mm~.¢m No.va.vm 0000 0000 mm.ome.mm mo.mho.Hm N¢.hHN.Nm 0000 Howummsm mv.whm.Nm mh.va.Nm HH.©HH.NM HOHHOQfim 0000 mw.mm¢.me mm.ooo.mmw mm.mvm.mmw MOHummfim HOfluwmfim OOH m9 om . MMHMMH¢ GHOU mosaam saoo 50am mucmaausz ommuom usmoamm usmfimmocmz mo am>ma 929290¢2¢E 90 999>99 039 92¢ .m9>H9¢29999¢ 90¢909 99999 .20H9¢9990 300IONH 909 9999 90 9900 A¢909 90 20H9¢NH9¢ZEDm NH 99949 mma. aom mm moa eam em oma ooow oOOO mma mm moa mom mm oma oooo uoauoosm «ma mm mm oma as oma soauooom pooo aaa, oma mm mm ama mm oma uoanoaom uoauoaom mmmaam ommaam ommahmm ommaam sumammm ouoo apuoe ouoo mmapmaa annoy auoo oaapmaa mmammaa auoo ooa mm om mooaam :HOU EOHh musmanpsz mmmaom ucooaom mam>ma usaEmomsmz 929290¢2¢Z 90 mfl9>99 039 92¢ m9>H9¢2999A¢ 90¢909 99999 909 999HDO99 90¢909 90 m990¢ HH 999¢9 70 lowest net cost of the rations considered. This was the same solution as in soil management group I. Similar to the previous situation, the cost differential between the 100% and 75% corn silage ration was only $500. This repre- sents a small percent of the total and under slightly altered production or cost figures the cost advantage could be reversed. Assuming no machinery and labor bottle- necks, the factor which encourages some growth of alfalfa is that this crop enables the storage capacity to be more fully utilized. At the lower level of management, the all corn silage forage ration remains the least costly. As was the situation in soil management group I, the cost advantage of the 100% corn silage ration is increased when lower management levels are used. It appears that the crop with the cost advantage under the highest level of management increases this advantage under the lower levels of manage- ment. This suggests that for a crop such as alfalfa to be competitive with a crOp as corn and both crops grown on the expensive productive land, at least as high a technology and management level must be applied on the alfalfa as on the corn crop. 4 With the various management combinations on corn and alfalfa, the decision as to which is to predominate in the forage ration again seems to be related to the one which a farmer is best at producing. When the technology 71 and management is favorably biased towards a particular crop, it is that crOp which should be grown. However it is best to evaluate all forages under the same high level of management. Production is then limited only by bio- logical and environmental conditions rather than by a low level of management. Inter-regional comparison indicates that under the assumed production and cost conditions soil management groups I and II are quite competitive for milk production. With the cost figures presented herein, soil management group II appears to-be a generally lower cost production area relative to soil management group I. However the cost differential is quite a small percent of the overall costs and could be reversed by slight alteration in land prices or production relationships. There is nothing absolute about the land prices or yield and cost relation- ships used in this thesis. Land prices used herein are based on judgment values with the annual charge for taxes and interest being 7% of this land value. The actual dollar figures used are presented in Appendix B. It can be seen that the land charges are a substantial proportion of total annual production costs. By varying either the basic land value or the usage charge, this cost relation- ship could be altered. In conclusion, it can only be said that these two areas are quite competitive for production of forages and milk. 72 .usmEOmmcmE mo mamboa 03» How composooum ozonm cowaummeoum mm.wvm.mmw mm.mm thMHMhMmm pm.ama am.mam am.aaa oo.mmm mH.h¢o.H ma-h¢o.a «m.mam o~.NmN “Mommwsnm bh.mwm~9 Nm.NmH.9 v9.99ommdw mo.m~v.¢mm 59 mm Nm.mmw.m o9.mom.mmw #30 vv.moa mN.mN¢ Hm.mHm em.v¢a om.mmm mH.h¢o.H ma.h¢o.a No.ooo.H 59 owhm mw.mHH mnemesmm co.mmm.m mm.m~o.b w~.mam.~Hw musmaoomamma can one: 3oouoma How coapmu mo umoo #02 on mmmm sn\ma.aw w cHOO ascoauaoom ham ozo mo.moa ozo\awnupous u3o\aa.mm a 03o mm.mm app: aao opoomom oo\omo a so mam mono Oaam OHOHOGOO .ow x .om a GHOU Ham ocsonw oaam opouoooo .op x .om a oomaam auoo oaam opopoooo .oo x .om a ommampe oaapaaa mumou omnaoum ozo\oma--oampm on» moapoapo so pmmm oo\omuucapum oao moaaopm mumoo coauosooum aspoa datum choc empaam GHOU ompampm «mapaaa usuammmssz HOaaomsm I“ (1" usefimumsmz ooow EOHH 1|"! I“ " m90¢99¢9 ¢9A¢9A¢ womll90¢AH9 2900 won 90 20H9¢9 90¢909 909 99900 9999 A¢909 90 20H9¢2299 ma 999¢9 73 .psmsommome mo mam>ma 03» How soauosooam m3oom :Omauomaoom mo.ooo.mmm ma.mmm.amm mooosoopaooo poo pawn 3OOIoma H09 coausu mo umoo umz so sama mo.aw .GHOO oo.mom.a moooxo aaom mo.mmm.a so aaaa soxma.am o sooo amsoasassp msm mo.mom.omw mo. . m om.mmo ozo ma.mma «m.map sso ap.ooa s3o\smuupoos mm.mma sso ma.am oa.mmp o3o\aa.mm o sap mm.oma apps aao spoomom am.asa am.asa soxomp a so mam mono oo.mmm op.mmm oaam osoooooo .oo x .om a sooo ops sssooo ps.mmm.a oa.msm.a oaam osooosoo .sm x .am a ompaam sooo mm.mmm mm.mmm oaam osooosoo .om x .am a ospasps poapaao mumoo mmmuoum mm.mam mo.mmm osoxomauusapom moo soapsaoo mm.mom so moms pm.ama so mmam soxomuusapum moo msaaspm mw.mmm.nm ”m.mmm.mm mumoo sOauosooam amuoa aa.mma.m sm.mms.v oaoao coco mm.sma.m mo.mmm.oa oopaam sooo mm.ooo.m a sm.ooo.m m omsamps soasoao acosommsmz acauwmom usefimumsmz oOOO _ EmuH m90¢99¢9 ¢9A¢9A¢ meII90¢AH9 2900 995 90 20H9¢9 90¢909 909 99900 9999 A¢909 90 20H9¢2999 vH 999¢9 74 .uCoEmmMCmE mo mam>ma 03» How COHHOCOOHQ m3OCm COmaHomsoom me.om¢.mmm mv.omm.mmm muCoEmomame was OHOC 3oouoma Hom COHHMH mo pmoo umz so ommv mo.am .sooo om.aqv.v mmmoxm aaow ma.mmm on aom Cn\ma.am @ CHOO HMCOHuHoom 95m MHhmehMMW mhhmHMhmmm om.voa.a #30 mo.wb~ wa.voa.a H30 eo.wh~ H30\qm||m0HD aa.mma.a aa.mmq.a o3o\aa.mm a sap mm.som asp: aao spoomom am.aaa am.aaa soxomo a so mam mono om.mmm om.mmm Oaam OHOHOCOO .om x .om a CHOU Hmm OCCOHO mm.amm.m mm.amm.m 0aam ouoHOCoo .om x .mm m omoaam CHoo mumou omMHOHm mm.mam «m.mam H3O\omaluCasHm OCH mCaOCHHo mm.mom so moms mm.mmm so «was so\omuusapom moo osaasss mn.omw.mm pm.mmm.mm mumoo COaHOCOOHm amuoe ow.mam.m mm.mma.m CaoHO CHOO mo.mmm.pam «m.mma.mam ossaam sooo uCOEOOMsz HOaHomCm quEwooCoz ooow EOHH m90¢9H9 2900 weed 90 20H9¢9 90¢909 909 99900 9999 A¢909 90 20H9¢2299 9H 999¢9 75 .mCOHHMCanEOO chfiOUMCME 03» How mmaomam oCm CHOO mo COHHOCUOHQ mzoCm COmHHmmEOUm aa.maa.mmm Ne.ham.mmm mHCOEmOMHQOH UCM UHOC 3OOIoma How COHumH mo Hmoo Hmz ma.mmo.m so aoom pm.mam.a so «mmm so\ma.am m sooo assoauassm asp mm.omo.mmw mo.opp.mmw mm.mms oso mo.moa pm.ama oso «m.moa o3o\amuupoos am.mam am.mam o3o\aa.mm a pep mm.mm apoz aao spoomom am.aaa sm.sea soxomp s so mam mono op.mmm op.mmm oaam ooooosoo .oo x .om a sooo ppm ossooo ma.mao.a ma.mao.a oaam osooosoo .oo x .om a omoaam sooo ma.mao.a ma.mso.a oaam ooouosoo .oo x .om a ompampm poapoaa mumOU OmMHoum mm.oom mm.opm o3o\omauusapos moo osassaoo ma.ama so soap oa.mma so ommm so\omuusapom moo msaasps “H.9mm.nn .MhhpMHHNN mumoo COHHOCUOHQ HMHOB om.omm.m ha.mvm.v CHsHU CHOU mm.mmo.m mm.mma.o ospaam sooo sm.moo.mam pm.mao.mam ospampm maapmaa CHOU MMHMMH¢ CO qufiowMCMS @000 CO quEOmMCsz OOOU «mammad CO CHOU CO HCQEOmMCMS HOaHmmCm HCOEmmMCoz HOHHmmsm EOHH m90¢99¢9 ¢9A¢9A¢ momll9w¢AH9 2900 $09 90 20H9¢9 90¢909 909 99900 9999 A¢909 90 20H9¢2299 9H 999¢9 .mCOausCaCEOO HCosomoCmE O3» How mmamuam OCo CHOU no COHHOCOOHQ m3OCm COmHHMQEOUm 76 mb.mvv.~mm mo.mno.amw mHCOEOOMHQOH UCm UHOC 300|o~a How COHHMH 90 noon uoz am.mma.m so maom ms.msa.a so mama so\ma.am a sooo assoaoasop msm mm.soo.omm thMMMhpms as.msp ago ap.ooa om.mmo oso ma.mma o3o\muupoos om.mma oso ma.am oa.mmo ozo\aa.mm a sac mm.oma aooz aao sooomom am.vaa am.saa so\omo a so mam mono oo.mmm op.mmm oaam osooosoo .oo x .om a sooo ops sssooo ov.mmm.a os.mmm.a oaam ouooosoo .om x .am m ompaam ssoo mm.mmm mm.mmm oaam osooosoo .om x .am a ospamsm soamoaa mumOU omMHouw me.o¢m ms.mvm ozo\omauucamam moo msaosauo ma.aom om.asm so omom soxomnusapom moo msaasps oo.mam.sm ma.moa.am moooo soaoossooo assoa mm.moh.m am.aom.m CHMHU CHOU oo.mmm.oa mm.¢ma.m ompaam sooo mm.ooo.m w am.poo.m » ompamps poapaaa GHOU MMHMMH¢ CO uCoEomoCsz @000 CO HCOeOmMsz UOOU mmaomam CO CHOU CO HCOEOmoCoz HOHHomom HCmEmmosz HOaHmmsm EOUH M90¢99¢9 ¢9A¢9A¢ meII90¢9H9 2900 $99 90 20H9¢9 90¢909 909 99900 9999 A¢909 90 20H9¢2299 9H 999¢9 77 Moderately Productive Cropland (SMG III) The soil series included in this management group are Fox, McHenry, Spinks, Oshtemo, and Warsaw. Their general location is in far south-central Michigan in the counties of Hillsdale, Branch, St. Joseph, Jackson, Kalamazoo, and Calhoun. The calculated cropland requirement for a 50% corn silage forage ration grown under superior management is 313 acres. The forage acreage requirements under the various rations and levels of management are shown in Table 18. In each instance the remainder of acreage would be used for corn grain. The average yield figures under the two management levels are as follows. Good Mgt. Superior Mgt. Alfalfa--medium fertiliza- tion (Tons 90% DM) 3.7 4.3 Corn Grain (bushels) 68. 85. Corn Silage (Tons 32% DM) 12.4 15.4 The net calculated costs of feed for the various rations and management levels are presented in Table 19. The production components and further breakdown of these Obsts are presented in Appendix B, Tables Bl, B9, B10, 811, 312, B18, and B19. For soil management group III, the 50% corn silage forage ration grown with superior management was the lowest 78 ma.mpm.mm mm.pop.mm mm.mmm.mm sooo oooo mo.oma.mm mo.mmm.sm pm.amo.sm sooo ooaooosm ma.mpm.mm mo.pom.mm am.mmm.mm ooaooosm sooo mo.oma.mmm mo.amm.mmm mm.mom.mmm Hoaooosm ooauoosm ooa mm om Myanmad CHOU mosaam CHOU EOH9 mHCmaHuCz OOMHom HCOOHom HCOEOOMsz mo am>ma 929290¢2¢2 90 999>99 039 92¢ .99>H9¢2999A¢ 90¢909 99999 .20H9¢9990 300l0NH 909 9999 90 9900 9¢909 90 20H9¢NH9¢2299 ma mamas mmm mam oma maa mmm mm moa oooo sooo omm moa maa mmm mo moa oooo ooaooosm omm oma ooa mmm mm maa ooaooosm sooo mma mom moa ooa cam mo maa soaooosm ooaooosm mmmaam mmmaam mmmahmm manawm mmmahmm sooo apooe sooo soapoaa amooe sooo poapaaa maaoaaa sooo ooa mm om monaam CHOU EOH9 mquaHHCz omMHom HCOOHOA 1‘1“!) 9H 999¢9 929290¢2¢2 90 999>99 039 92¢ 99>H9¢2999A¢ 90¢909 99999 909 999HDO99 90¢909 90 mam>oa HCOEOmMsz 9990¢ 79 cost alternative. This is a shift from the lowest cost ration of the previous two soil groups. This shift in lowest cost rations reflects the consistently lower ratio of corn to alfalfa yield as compared to the other soil management groups. Corn yield in SMG III is limited be- cause of the soil capability--especially its lack of- moisture retention. This soil factor further emphasizes the effect of the mid-summer dry period. As alfalfa is much.more drought-tolerant, the adverse effect on its yield is less than with corn. When the lower level of management is applied to both crops, the cost advantage still remains with the 50% corn silage forage ration. Corn silage produces a pound of dry matter more cheaply than does alfalfa, however these dry matter pounds are not comparable due to the higher protein composition in alfalfa. For this situation, the ration's lowest net production cost was for the alfalfa crop. An additional factor for consideration is storage costs. The storage cost advantage is with that ration which most fully utilizes the storage capacity. This storage cost advantage has continually been with the program having 50% of the forage as alfalfa haylage. This storage cost factor remains one of great importance and in this particular situation gives an added advantage to the 50% corn silage forage ration. 80 Under the various management combinations, production emphasis should be placed on that crop towards which one is predisposed. Under the alternatives presented, this crop may be either corn or alfalfa. As has been shown, it is to the farmer's advantage that he remain flexible and not committed to any particular crop. The crop costs and returns should be objectively evaluated under the same levels of technology and management. In general, it appears that continuous row-cropping in SMG's I and II is a very real feasible alternative given the linear production assumptions over time. This advan- tage of continuous corn could disappear if relative produc- tion costs increase or yields decrease. In SMG III, continuous cropping does not appear economically advanta- geous. Also from an agronomic view, continuous row cropping may be an inappropriate choice on soil which has a rolling topography. Due to soil erosion, it is not practical from either an agronomic or economic viewpoint to continuously grow corn in soil management group III. This erosion factor would be directly related to future yield potentials which in turn affect the dollar returns and thus the economic considerations. For an inter—regional comparison using the given yield and price relationships, SMG III is at a comparative disadvantage relative to SMG's I and II. The basic land 81 value is much lower in the SMG III area. However, the commercial fertilizer and lime requirement is greater than that in the other soil groups. Further, the yield response to the commercial fertilizer is lower in SMG III resulting in a higher cost per equivalent pound of forage dry matter. Thus given the assumption of constant net milk prices, the comparative advantage for dairymen is with soil management groups I and II. To allow SMG III land to produce feed- stuffs at competitive cost with SMG's I and II, given ceteria parabus requires an additional land price spread of $75 per acre for alfalfa growth and $150 per acre for corn grain production. 82 .HCOEOmmCmE mo mam>ma 03¢ HOm COHHOCCOHQ m3OCm COmaHmmEOUm 9N.Nom.mmw om.HH 59 0H mm. mm.mmm em.omv H30 wo.moa Hm.mHm em.vva 09.9mm 9H.hvo.H mH.h¢o.H N9.9Hm mmpmmm 59 9999 ”Mobmm9 “m ¢H.¢mm.h mo.th.b 9H.mmh.NH9 hm.mbh.hmw NH.HN9.9 mthMbhHMm ~H.¢m¢ Hm.mam em.v¢H om.mmm ma.heo.a mH.hvo.H No.ooo.H m~.wHH DH. “stwm Hm.moa.¢ em.omo.m mo.mmm.mam mHCOEmOMHQOH oCm UHOC 3oonoma How COHHMH mo umoo umz so mapm soxma.am a sooo assoaoassp msm ozo mm. moa o3o\smuupoos ozoxas.mm a sap mm.mm app: aao smoomom so\omo a so mam mono Oaam OHOHOCOO .om x .om H CHOU Hum OCCOHU oaam ououocoo .oo x .om a ommaam suoo oaam osooosoo .op x .om a omsampm maaomaa mumOU omMHoum s3o\omauusapoo oou usassaoo so pmmm so\om-usapom mos msaasps mHmOO COHHOCUOHQ aouoa CHMHO CHOU omoaam CHOU musahmm mmammad HCOEOmmsz HOaHmmCm HCOEOmMsz UOOU EmuH m90¢99¢9 ¢9A¢9A¢ momll90¢9H9 2900 «cm 90 20H9¢9 90¢909 909 99900 9999 H¢909 90 20H9¢2299 ON 999¢9 83 .uCoEomMCME mo mam>ma 03» How COHHOCUOHQ m3OCm COmaHmmEOUo mo.¢mh.mmw so omo mo.am .saoom om.mo9 mwmoxo Hamm mm. . m om.omo sap ma.am 99.9me vm.¢qd om.mm9 9v.hmm.a m9.mmh Nm.mdm mm.NmN 59 9999 “m.mmHsmm ow.maa.m eh.mmmAOH hm.bhfl.m m mm.mom.mmm 9H.mwh.m N9.va ca.mmm em.¢¢H ow.mmm 9v.hmm.a Mb.mmh Nm.me om.~ma ”nomNN9nm mm.wmm.v Nv.mmm.MH m9.Nm¢.m w mquEoomammH OCm OHOC 3OOuoNa Hom CoaumH mo pmoo #02 59 meme pro mo.ooa s3o\aa.mm Oaam OHOHOCOO Oaam OHOHOCOO Oaam ouOHOCOO C9 omee so\ma.am o sooo assoaoaspp msm H3O\¢mIIMOHD a ozo mm.oma app: aao spoomom so\omo a so mam sumo .op x .om a sooo ops ossouo .om x .am m ompaam sooo .om x .sm a omsamps poasaao mumOU omMHOHm oso\omauusapoo mos osassaoo so\om:usapom moo msaasss mumOO COHHOCOOHQ amuoe CHMHU CHOU mosaam CHOU womahmm ouasuad HCQEOmosz HOHHOQCm H uCofiovamS UOOU EUHH m90¢99¢9 ¢99¢9A¢ meII90¢AH9 2900 «99 90 20H9¢9 90¢909 909 99900 9999 A¢909 90 20H9¢2299 HN 999¢9 84 .HCOEOOMCCE mo mam>oa 03» H09 COHuOCOOHm m3OCm COmaHCQEOUm mo.oms.mmm ma.mom.mmm mssosoopaooo sop UHOC 3001o~a How COHHMH mo umoo umz so oamm mo.am .ssoo om.mvm.m mmooxo aaom mm.maa.m so msom so\ma.aw so sooo assoasaosm msm mm.mmm. mm .mmermHMMW so.ooa.a sso ao.mmm mm.moa.a s36 mp.mmm s3o\smuuooos aa.mma.a sa.mma.a o3o\as.mm o szo mm.spm apoz aao spoomom sm.asa sm.aaa so\omo a so mam mspo op.mmm oo.mmm oaam ouooosoo .op x .om a osoo sou ossouo mm.amm.m mm.amm.m oaam osooosoo .om x .mm m ommaam ssoo mumOU mmmHoum mm.mam mm.mam ozo\omauusapum ooo moaosaoo mm.mom so moms oo.mma so omap so\om-usamsm mos usaasps om.aaa.mm mm.oam.mm msmoo soasospooo assoe sm.amm.m om.omm.p sapoo ssoo os.omm.mam mm.mmm.mmm ompaam ssoo quEomMsz HOHHOCCm uCoEomoCoz OOOU EOHH smoaaam zmoo wooa so zoaeam moamom moo mamoo ammo aasoe Co zOHHazzsm NN 999¢9 85 .mCOaHMCaCEOO HCmEOmMCoE 03H H09 smasmam UCM CHOO 90 COHHOCOOHQ mzoCm COmHHmmEOUo am.mmm.mmm pm.amo.amw musosoopaoos pop 0H0: 300no~a H09 COHHMH 90 noon Hmz ao.mmo.m so mmom oa.oap.m so «pom so\ma.am o ssoo assoasassp msm “HOHNM\NMW DHommmhbmw ma.oma ozo mm.moa am.oma s30 po.moa sso\amuuposs am.mam am.mam s3o\aa.mm o szo mm.mm apps aao ssoomom am.saa am.asa so\omp a so mam mono op.mmm oo.mmm oaam osooosoo .oo x .om a ssoo use sssooo ma.mao.a ma.mao.a oaam osooosoo .oo x .om a omoaam ssoo ma.mao.a ma.mao.a oaam ouososoo .op x .om a ompaasm oaapoaa mumOU omMHOHm mm.oom mm.oom sso\omauusapsm mos soapsaoo om.ama so mama om.mma so some so\omnusapss mos msaasms ”m.mnm.nn HMthhhMm mumoo COHHOCOOHC amuoa mm.emm.m ma.mom.m passe sooo am.omo.m mo.mmm.m oopaam ssoo ma.mmm.maw mo.mmm.mam ompamos suapoaa paapaaa C0 HC0E0uMCm2 UOOU C0 HCOEOmosz 0000 undamad C0 CHOU C0 HCmeomsCoz HOHHOCCm HCOEOvMsz HOaHOCCm EOHH m90¢99¢9 ¢9A¢9A¢ momll90¢AH9 2900 won 90 20H9¢9 90¢909 909 99900 9999 A¢909 90 20H9¢2999 MN 999¢9 86 .mCOHHMCHCEOO uCoammmCmE 03H H09 omammam OCm CHOO mo COHHOCUOHQ m30Cm COmaHmmEOUm mo.oom.smw mp.mmm.smm mssosoopaoos pop UHOC 300no~a H09 COHHMH 90 soon #02 mm.mam.m so amam mo.oao.a so mama so\ma.am o sooo assoaoaspo ass thmomnmmm unhamphMMA mm.mso s36 mo.oma om.omp s30 mm.mma s3o\smuupoos pm.mma ma.am oa.mmp s3o\aa.mm a pep mm.oma apoz aao ssoomom am.¢aa am.aaa so\omo a so mam mspo op.mmm oo.mmm oaam moososoo .oo x .om a sooo ops sssooo pv.mmm.a oa.mmm.a oaam ouooosoo .om x .sm m ompaam sooo mm.mmm mm.mmm oaam osooosoo .om x .am a ommampm poapaaa mumOU mmMHoum ma.pam ma.oam ssoxomauusapsm moo msassaso mm.mpa ma.mmm so moms so\om-usaosm mos msaasps pa.mmm.mm mm.mwn.nm mumoo COHHOCOOHQ amuos aa.eom.m om.¢am.o sapso sooo ma.mmm.ma om.mmm.oa omoaam sooo mm.mma.m a mp.mms.m m panama: smapoaa CHOU MHHUMH¢ C0 HCOEOmMCoz 0000 C0 HCOEOOCCMS 0000 Myanmad C0 CHOU C0 HCOEOmMCms HOHHOQCm HCOEOmMsz HOHHOQCm EOHH M90¢99¢9 ¢99¢9A¢ mell90¢AH9 2900 $99 90 20H9¢9 90¢909 909 99900 9999 A¢909 90 20H9¢2299 «N 999¢9 CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Summary Partial budgeting was used to evaluate three alternative forage rations produced on farms within three separate soil management groups. Three basic dairy rations with two forage quality levels in each category were com- pared. Based on research conducted by the Michigan State University dairy department and by other institutions, milk production per cow was assumed equal for each forage ration tested. This assumption is based on the provision that each ration is properly supplemented to provide a nutri- tional balance. By assuming homogeneous dairy cows in the 120-cow dairy herd and constant prices, the milk and calves produced for sale would give a constant gross return for all alternatives studied. The thesis problem then became one of determining the minimum cost ration. Three soil management groups were delineated within the Southern Michigan area. Each group was defined to include soils having similar management requirements and jproduction potentials. Corn and alfalfa yields were 87 88 determined as were the input requirements necessary to attain these yields. The alfalfa, corn grain and silage yields were based upon published and unpublished research, and judgment values provided by agronomists and soil scientists at Michigan State University. These yield figures do not necessarily represent the average expected yield for any particular farm or farmer. Rather these yields are average expectations given the soil management groups, fertilization and management practices as specified herein. The cost of inputs for the budgets were based upon published information and on judgment estimates from personnel in the Michigan State University Department of Agricultural Economics and upon Crop and Livestock Report— ing Service prices for farm products. Feedstuff requirements were then calculated for the three forage rations. Cropland acres were established for each soil management group. Forage acres were deter- mined for each situation with the residual acres allocated to production of corn grain. Production, harvesting, and storage costs were then calculated for each of the combinations of forage grown under the various fertilizer and management levels. ‘Feed storage costs, commercial protein procurement, grain buying and selling activities were then incorporated to give the total ration cost. The feed cost summation for each soil 89 management group shows cost figures for ten separate alternatives. The lowest cost figure represents the most favorable alternative. Conclusions The medium level of fertilization on alfalfa (see Appendix B, Table 312) was found to be the least costly per ton of 90% dry matter material. It appears that the high level of fertilization pushes the production into the latter portion of Stage II production. At the lower fertilization level, the yield response is apparently not as great as that of the medium fertilization level. Having established the least costly of the fertilization alternatives for the production of alfalfa, this fertiliza- tion and production level was used for an inter-enterprise comparison with corn silage. Given the yield and cost relationships associated with superior management, the growing and feeding of an all corn silage forage ration was the lowest cost for soil management groups I and II, the highly productive and productive soils. The advisability of continuing this practice rests on the validity of assuming linear corn and lnilk production relationships over time. It should be noted that the cost differential between rations was a small percentage of the total cost. Thus if the yield 90 relationships were altered in favor of more alfalfa per unit corn, the lowest cost ration could switch to that favoring the production of some alfalfa. The corn silage program provides a lower cost for each pound of dry matter produced. However, corn silage dry matter is not comparable to alfalfa dry matter until the corn silage protein level is increased with commercial nitrogen and protein sources. 3y supplementing the corn silage with urea and feeding extra soybean oil meal, the corn silage dry matter is nutritionally comparable to that of alfalfa. This procure- ment of commercial protein will raise the cost of the corn silage enabling the alfalfa to become more competitive. In SMG's I and II, inclusion of an alfalfa program was not recommended until approximately 5.2 tons of alfalfa were produced per one hundred bushels of corn. This yield relationship for each soil management group and level of management is shown in the section for SMG I and SMG II, Table 25. Dairy ration costs were quite comparable for soil management groups I and II. Their corn-alfalfa yield relationships were quite similar. For the yields and price relationships herein, SMG II is a slightly lower cost production area with both groups having a cost advantage over soil management group III. It should be noted that the cost differential between SMG's I and II is quite small. 91 m.ma m.m m.m m.¢ v.~a mm 939 @000 o.mm m.v ¢.¢ m.m e.ma mm 0000 9:9 «.ma ¢.m v.m m.m «.ma mm 0000 0000 m.ma m.m a.m m.v v.ma mm 999 9:9 HHH 029 m.ma m.m m.m m.e m.ma mm 959 0000 v.9m m.e m.m m.v m.ma maa 0000 9:9 m.a~ o.¢ m.v m.v m.ma mm 0000 0000 o.em .o.v m.¢ m.¢ m.ma maa 999 999 HH 02m m.ma m.m a.m m.m m.ma «ca 959 0000 m.mm >.e m.m m.¢ b.am oma 0000 9:9 m.mm a.v v.v m.v m.ma voa 0000 0000 m.¢m a.v a.v m.m oh.am oma mow mom H 099 sooo 12o mmm so aso. smasmaa e omamaam 9 so ooa azo mom so ompaam Capos pmapmaa ssoo \CHOU Cm \ommaam CHOU 9 \Mmammam 9 smaomam CHOU CHOU am>mq 909 99H9920H9¢A99 92¢ 9999H9 20H9099099 9N 999¢9 92 The cost advantage for SMG II could easily be reversed if land price relationships were to change. On SMG III the cost and yield relationships were such that the 50% corn silage forage ration grown with superior management was the least costly. The production relationships in SMG III are quite different from the previous two groups. When approximately 4.8 tons of alfalfa are produced per 100 bushels corn, the 50% corn silage forage ration has a cost advantage over the all corn silage ration. Inclusion of an alfalfa enterprise provides for a more even distribution of labOr and machin- ery requirements and provides fuller utilization of the storage units. In this study the problem of high labor peaks was assumed non-existent. The cost of machinery and storage were included in the problem structure. On SMG's I and II, these cost aspeCts did not indicate advocacy of alfalfa production until 5.2 tons of alfalfa were harvested per 100 bushels of corn grain. However on SMG III, the moderately productive soil, the growing and feeding of alfalfa is profitable at a lower alfalfa-corn ratio. Limitatigps of Sppdy and Need for Further Research This study was limited by the lack of adequate technical production coefficients for the various soil management groups. Much agronomic research has been 93 conducted determining yields produced under various empirical conditions including that of variable fertiliza- tion levels. However, there is a great need for additional determination of yield levels and production potentials as affected by the many various cultural practices. It is desirable that this research be conducted on several differ- ent soil types. In attempting research of the type herein, it is evident that there is a great need for primary agronomic and economic data on forage production--for both corn silage and alfalfa. A simulation analysis would be more realistic than the budgeting analysis used herein. Budgeting is limited by the number of variables and alternatives which can be easily handled and analyzed. In using budgeting, many simplifying assumptions are incorporated. Availability of land, labor, and credit were all assumed adequate at the levels required for the various alternatives studied. Via a simulation procedure these constraint variables (land, labor, and credit) could be brought into play. Economies and diseconomies of size could also be included. The price relationships used were assumed constant for the period of the study. For the implications of the study to be of future use, these price relationships must be valid through future periods of time. This points out the need for continued updating of present published data regarding 94 cost of buying, owning, and operating farm machinery and equipment. Included in this analysis should be the effect of changes in interest rates and technology. The concept of management should be clarified. To be desired is a standardized understanding of what manage- ment is, where it enters the production processes, and its effect on the production levels. BIBLIOGRAPHY Barker, Baumol, BIBLIOGRAPHY R. Use of Linear Programming in Makin Farm Management Decisions. Cornell 3uIIetin 993. Ithaca, New York: 1964. William J. Economic Theory and Operations Anal sis. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965. Brown, L. D.; Thomas, J. W.; and Emery, R. S. "Effect of Castle, Connor, Duncan, Duvick, Feeding Various Levels of Corn Silage and Hay with High Levels of Grain." Journal of Dairy Science, Vol. 48 (1965), 816. Emery N., and Becker, Manning H. Farm Business Mana ement. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967. L. J., et a1. Michigan Farm Management Handbook. Agricultural Economic Report #36. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department Of Agricultural Economics, October, 1967. E. R., and Schaller, F. W. "Continuous Corn." Plant Food Review, Vol. 8, No. 4 (Winter, 1962). Richard D. Trends in the Use of Majpr Fertilizer Nutrients on Michigan Cropland and Pasture. Agricultural Economic Report #88. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics, December, 1967. Griffith, W. K. "Improving Forage Yields by Lime, Ferti- Herman, lizer and Management." Paper presented at the American Forage and Grassland Council meetings entitled "Forages of the Future, January, 1968. J. Clayton, and Thompson, Leon E., eds. Silage Production and Use. Pamphlet 417. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University, COOperative Extension Service, February, 1968. 95 96 Hildebrand, S. C.; Rossman, E. C.; and Robertson, L. S. Hybrid Selectigp and Cultural Practices. Extension Bulletin 436. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Departments of Crop Science and Soil Science, September, 1964. Hillman, Donald,; Huber, John T.; and Thomas, William J. Balanged Rations for Dairy Cattle. D-l90. East Lansing, MiChigan: Michigan State University, Dairy Department. Hoglund, C. R. Changes in Forage Ppoduction and Handling gn Southern Michigan Dai£y_Farms. Agficultural Economics Report #78. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Agri- cultural Economics, April, 1967. Hoglund, C. R. Econgmic Coneiderations in SelectingSilage Storage andiFeedin Systems. Agricultural Economics Report # 4. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics, September, 1967. Hoglund, C. R. "Economic Production of Meat and Milk with Forages." Paper presented at the Grassland Proceedings meeting, Hershey, Pennsylvania, August, 1962. Hoglund, C. R. "Minimizing Cost of Forage in Tomorrow's Dairy Ration." Paper presented at the 1968 joint meeting of the American Dairy Science Association and American Grassland Council Symposium, Columbus, Ohio, June, 1968. Hoglund, C. R. "The Present Contribution of Silage to America's Livestock Industry." Paper presented at the National Silo Association Annual Meeting, Buffalo, New York, December 5, 1966. Knetch, Jack L. "Methodological Procedures and Applica- tions for Incorporating Economic Consideration into Fertilizer Recommendations." Unpublished M. S. thesis, Michigan State University, 1957. McCullough, M. E. "The Old and New of Silage." Silo News (Winter, 1967). :Meggit, William F. Weed Control in Field Crops. Extension Bulletin 434. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Crop Science, February, 1969. 97 Michigan Department of Agriculture. Michigan Agricultural Statistics. Lansing, Michigan: July 1962 and July 1968. Morrison, Frank 3. Feeds apd Feeding. 22nd edition. Ithaca, New York: The Morrison Publishing Company, 1957. Naylor, Thomas N., et al. Computer Simulation Techniques. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1968. Pesek, John T.; Heady, Earl O., and Venezian, Eduardo. Fertilizer Production Functions in Relation to Weather,£ocation, Soil and Crop Variables. Research Bulletin 554. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University, August, 1967. Shickluna, J. C. "The Relationship of pH, Available Phosphorus, Potassium, and Magnesium to Soil Management Groups." Quarterly Bulletin, Vol. 45, N0. 13. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station, August, 1962. Sundquist, Wesley Burton. "An Economic Analysis of Some Controlled Fertilizer Input-Output Experiments in Michigan." Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Michigan State University, 1957. Tesar, M. 3. A New Look at Fall Cutting. File: 22.331. East Lansing, MiChigan: Michigan State University, Department of Crop Science, December, 1968. Tesar, M. 3., and Janes, R. L. Five to Seven Tons of Alfalfa--with Weevil_ControI. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Departments of Crop Science and Entomology, January, 1969. Tisdale, Samuel L., and Nelson, Werner L. Soil Fertility and Fertilizers. New York: The Macmillan Company, I966. United States Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Prices. Washington, D.C.: Statistical Reporting Service, April 28, 1967 and July 30, 1968. United States Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Prices, Annual Summary. Washington, D.C.: StatiEtical Reporting Service, June 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967, and 1968. 98 United States Department of Agriculture. Farm Income State Estimates, 1949-1967. FIS ZII SuppIement. Washington, D.C.: Economic Research Service, August, 1968. University of Wisconsin. Soils of the Northgentral Region pf the United States. NorthiCentral Regional Pfiblication, Number 76, Bulletin 544. Madison: June, 1960. Vincent, Warren H., and Connor, Larry J. An Orientation for Future Fapm Planning and Informatlgn Systems. Agricultural Economic Misc. 1968-5. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics. Wright, K. T. Project '80--Egpnomic Prospects of Farmers. Research Report 47. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service. wright, K. T., and Caul, D. A. Mlchigen's Agriculture. Extension Bulletin 582. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Cooperative Extension Service, August, 1967. APPENDICES APPENDIX A MANAGERIAL PRACTICES 99 MANAGERIAL PRACTICES Levels of Manegerial Practices for Alfalfa Good Management Maintain pH at 6.0 to 6.5. Alfalfa is established with oats which are fertilized. Oats are harvested as oat silage at early to medium dough stage (12-l3% CP, no more than 70% moisture). In seedling year, alfalfa is harvested once as haylage. Alfalfa is harvested as haylage on a 2-cutting system--cut at 1/10-1/2 bloom. (Harvest losses no more than 10%). Alfalfa is tOpdressed in Spring after first cutting or in the Autumn. Long-lived winter hardy, wilt resistant varieties are used. Such a variety is Vernal. Alfalfa weevil is sprayed. This treatment will also control other insects as the leafhopper. Superior Management Maintain pH at 6.8 to 7.0 Alfalfa is established with oats which are fertilized. Oats are harvested as oat silage at early to medium dough stage (12-13% CP, no more than 70% moisture). In seedling year, alfalfa harvested once as haylage. Alfalfa is harvested as haylage on a 3-cutting system—-cut at late bud to the early flower stage of maturity. Forage ch0pper is to be used so as to keep harvest losses at no more than 10% of potential harvest. Alfalfa is topdressed in Spring after first cutting or in the Autumn. Flemish varieties are used. These varieties possess moderate winterhardiness and are wilt resistant. Examples of such varieties are Saranac, Warrior and Glacier. Alfalfa weevil is sprayed. This treatment will also control other insects as the leafhopper. In essence, the main differences between the management levels as defined is with regard to the chemical 100 reaction (pH) of the soil, variable levels of fertilizer use, timing, and number of harvests and alfalfa varieties used. Level of Managerial Practices for Corn Good Management Maintain pH at 6.0 to 6.3. Minimum tillage practices are used but fails to be in field at most optimum time and soil moisture level to avoid soil packing. Corn is drilled in 28-30" rows, 20,000 seeds/acre. The one best variety with regard to soil and climatic considerations is planted. The planter-fertilizer attachment is adjusted to place the starter—row fertilizer below the seed. weed control is not as effective as superior level either due to inferior seed-bed preparation or to lack of proper cultivation with respect to time of such or adjustment of cultivator. Good insect control is provided. Silage harvesting starts at 70% moisture and continues through to 58-60% moisture. Superior Management Maintain pH at 6.4 to 6.8. Minimum tillage practices are used at proper time and moisture levels to avoid soil packing and destruction of good soil structure. Corn is drilled in 28-30" rows, 20,000 seeds/acre with desire to approach an equidistant plant spacing. The planter-fertilizer attachment is adjusted to place fertilizer 1" to side and 1" below corn seed. The best varieties with regard to soil and climatic considerations are planted but planting is staggered according to plant maturity levels in order to harvest most of corn at hard—dent state. Good weed control is provided. Good insect control is provided. Majority of silage is harvested at about 65% moisture to insure proper ensiling and to minimize seepage. APPENDIX B TABLES 101 TABLE B1 SUMMATION OF YIELDS AND PRODUCTION COSTS FOR CORN SILAGE AND GRAIN Level of Management Good Superior Good Superior Silage Grain Soil Management Group I Yields/Acre For 1:1 ration Cost/unit Silage--32% Silage--90% Grain For 3:1 ration Cost/unit Silage--32% Silage--90% Grain For 1:0 ration Cost/unit Silage--32% Silage--90% Grain Soil Management 18.9T DM $ 6.72 DM $18.90 DM $ 6.67 DM $18.76 DM $19.07 Group II Yields/Acre For 1:1 ration Cost/unit Silage--32% Silage--90% Grain For 3:1 ration Cost/unit Silage--32% Silage--90% Grain For 1:0 ration Cost/unit Silage--32% Silage--90% Grain DM 5 6.56 DM $18.45 DM $ 6.47 DM $18.20 DM $ 6.58 DM 18.51 21.7T $ 5.96 $16.76 $ 5.97 $16.79 $ 6.08 $17.10 $ 5.87 $16.51 $ 5.85 $16.45 $ 5.99 16.85 104 bu 91.9¢ 89.6¢ 87.6¢ 88.9¢ 86.9¢ 84.9¢ 130 bu 73.8¢ 72.1¢ 71.8¢ 72.8¢ 71.9¢ 70.9¢ 102 TABLE 31--Continued Level of Management Good Superior Good Superior Silage Grain Soil Manegement Group III Yields/Acre 12.36T 15.45T 68 bu 85 bu For 1:1 ration Cost/unit Silage--32% DM $ 8.40 $ 6.93 Silage--90% DM $23.62 $19.49 Grain $1.06 86.7¢ For 3:1 ration Cost/unit Silage--32% DM $ 8.34 $ 6.91 Silage--90% DM $23.46 $19.43 Grain $1.04 86¢ For 1:0 ration Cost/unit Silage--32% DM $ 8.44 $ 7.04 Silage--90% DM $23.73 $19.80 Grain $1.02 85.2¢ 103 HCOEomosz HOHHomsm Cua3 mHo09 m\9 m.a HCoEomosz ooow cuaz COB onlosaa mm msoosmooa moa oaa eoa msoosmosa moa com me ma oumelma mna ooa mm mm cloelma mna mea om owuono mna mm mmm omnono moa mew HomaaapHom HemaaauHom om om maa mmm so oma m.m oosasoom ao>oa oma mm .. m.m oaosaamsa masoomooo HHXWCOHU uCoEQmMsz aaom HCoEOmMsz HOHHmmom CHH3 mHoom m\9 a 0CoeommCoz 0000 Cuaz COB onuoEHA moa mCOHomCCC mna mma mma mCOHo>CC¢ moa mmm mm mm onmenma mom moa me am onweuma mna ooa mm mm ma emnemuw moa amm om owlolo moa mm mmm omlouo moa mmm HemaaauHom HemaaauHom oma mm mma mmm mm mam .p pooasoom aosoo oma mm .. .o mossoo ca manoaam>¢ mauComOHm H meHU uCosommsz aaom omx mOmo z oms momo z so CamHU CHOU omoaam CHOU 2H¢90 92¢ 90¢9H9 2900 09 99H999¢ 99NH9H9999 92¢ 92H9 90 99H9H92¢DO N9 999¢9 104 HCmfiomoCoz HOHHOQCm CHH3 mHMOM m\9 mN.e HCoemmoCoz 0000 CHH3 mHoom m\9 mulofiaa om msosomosa moa oaa mea msooomosa moa oma mm oa oumeuma moa em em em m emnemuo moa oea mm opuouo moa mma oem opuouo moa com HomaaauHom HowaaauHom mm mm mm mmm mm mma m.m sooasoom ao>oa oma me u- m.m oaopaamso Hassomoso HHH 950H0 uCoeomoCoz aaom oms momo z oms momo z so CHoH0 CHOU omoaam CHOU UUQCMHCOUIINm 999¢9 105 9N.o won 9HMHO9 e~.a COHup>HHaCU ma.m CHOU 0009 mm.a 9pH99 0Cp .omaaasuom .sopao ee.o 3OHHpCImpHQ am.o 30HHMCImeQ mm.a 30am om.o m0aoauommCH mm.m 00HOHnHom e~.m~ w em.om m mm.me w mo.oe w mama 0Cp HemaaauHom oo.mem omopoo papa HOMHomom 0000 HOaHmmom 0000 CHpH0 empaam 0Ho<\HE< EOHH HmOU uCofiompsz 90 Ho>09 H 9:0H0 uCosompsz awom asoaspo anal ¢99¢9A¢ 99H3 20H9¢909 2H 2H¢90 92¢ 90¢9H9 2900 02H999>9¢9 92¢ 02H3090 90 99900 A¢909 m9 999¢9 106 ow.mn 99 cemm m0.hhmww H0.¢mw e0.mHmm Nh.mNmm Nm.mmmdw mo mN.mN m 00.9 00.90 on Nmmm em.0m0m 00.0He eh.mHNm No.00HN Nb.MNOH mm em.mN CHOU Hpm 00.9 m w m soap 09.09 m mm.m w 90.He0H hm.meflwm mm.hme e0.HHhm Nm.m99N NH.bman me mH.H0 m 90.0 eH.e om. ma w Nh.0 9 9m. mm. .wmqmmml me. mmammmm me.mmwa um 09. mm. 9909 Mbth 99mm QQHO¢ 5m 9 mb.hmw h eH.e ass mom up ompaamc HHCC\umOU 12o mmm up oopaamc HaCC\un0U GOHHOQUOHQ H9908 mumOU apuoa osmoo poxam mHmOU maanHp> apuoa mapvoa 19\ooec mmmaam mCHanm oCammonU 107 cuoo Hum 00.0 00.0 xowm hN.0 mos mumuom «N.H coflum>wuaso ma.m cuou 0mmm N0.H mmumm 0cm .ouflafluumm .pcmam «0.0 3ouumnummu0 Hm.0 3ouumnlxmaa mm.H 30am 00.0 mowowuommnH m~.0 mvaownumm v~.m~ m «0.0m w mm.0v m 00.00 0 mafia 0cm uwNflHHuumm oo.~¢m mmumno can; uowummum 0000 Howuomam 0000 cwwuw +|I MNWaam \I muo¢\ufid EmuH umoo usmfimmmcmz mo Hm>mq H msouw ucmfimwmcmz Hwom .Acofiumu Humv dmnflmfld mBH3 ZOHB¢80m ZH ZHdmw 92d mwdflHm szU UZHBmm>M¢m 92¢ UZHBOMU ho mBmOU A4909 vm mAMdB 108 0H.N5 an 0HO0H an 00H 00.0HN50 ~0.5Hm H0.H050w 00.0000 0¢.HmNNw 55 @N.0N m 00.00 m an «000 an «0H 50.00500 05.0N0 0N.Hmm¢w 0N.5v0m 00.050Hw Hm v0.0N m 05.0H 0 50.0 m EH.¢00H B5.HN N¢.N0¢0m 00.005 00.00500 00.00 00.00N Hm.m0m0m 50.0HNv «0.00va 05 00.50 m 50.0 05. 0H m 50.0 0 Em. B0. mm. IllmwMI Hm. .mmqlll. mo. N0. 00. 0H.NHOv 00.00000 00 «0. 00. 000A 0H 0H50Hm 05000 N5 5N0 H5v0m mmhnud mm m 5 05.500 Asa mom um mmmaflmv uHas\umoo A20 wmm um mmmaflmv aw:5\umou aofluoswoum Hmuoa muo¢\camflw mumou cowuosvoum Hmuoe mumoo umxflm mumoo manmwum> Hmuoa Umumm>umn Ecumso mmnom #:0800500 :30 auflz mmuom mcwmmono mamuoa Aa\oo«0 mmmaflm maflflsmm 109 CHOU HMW 00.0 00.0 xoam 50.0 «on mumuom ¢~.H coaum>wuaao ma.m :uoo comm ~0.H hmumm can .muwawuumm .ucmam «0.0 30HH0£|00H0 Hm.0 30Humslxmwa mm.a 30am 00.0 mcwowuommcH 00.0 wvwownumm «0.00 0 v0.00 m 00.00 m 00.00 0 mean 0:0 Honwafluumm oo.~vm mmumno camg uofiummam 0000 Howummum 0000 Gamma mmwuwm 0Ho¢\uE< EmuH umov 0002000002 00 H0>0A H msouw 900800000: H000 0:000.“ cuav ZHfimw Oz¢ mwdflHm ZMOU OZH9mm>M¢m 02¢ UZHzomU m0 m9wOU A4909 mm mam49 110 00.H5 an 0000A an 00H 00.0H000 00.000 00.00000 50.0000 N5.HH000 00H 00.00 0 00.50 an 0050 an 00H 00.00050 00.H00 00.5HH50 00.0000 00.NONNO 00 00.00 0 0H.5H 00.0 90.0050 95.HN 00.0050H0 00.00HH 00.0000H0 00.000 00.000 00.0005 00.00050 5NH 00.50 0 50.0 ho.¢a m Asa mom um mmmaflmv uflcs\umoo 05.0 m Asa mmm um mmmaflmv 0005\0000 90.0050 00000000H0 H0009 90.0H muo Hmuoa mmJMNMII AOH00\NHOV 00um0>u00 500000 00H00 00.5mm A0u00\0a.00v 000500500 :30 £003 m0u00 00000000 00.5000 00.H0050 00H m0u0¢ 00.00 0 05.500 mamvoa mm.> Aa\oo¢v 000me unwasmm 111 :uoo umm oo.m oo.m xofim 0H.0 0H.0 mcflmmosu 0~.H Godum>wuaao 0H.m Chen 0000 ~0.a amumm can .muflaflpumm .uamam 00.0 souumslmmun H0.0 souumnnxman 00.H 30am 00.0 mGHOfluommcH 00.0 mvfloflnumm 00.0w 0 H0.5a 0 00.00 0 0H.00 0 mafia can Hmuwawuumm mm.mmm mmumnu ocmq Hemummsm 0000 uomummmm 000w cwmuw m0MH00 mno¢\u84 EmuH umoo usmfimmmcmz mo am>mq HH msouu unmfimmmcmz H000 l 1 Acoflumu away dhqdhfld EBHZ ZOHBdBOfi 2H ZHdmw 92¢ flwdflHm szU UZHBmm>M¢m 924 UZH3OMU m0 mBmOU AdBOB 0m mnm¢a 112 00.05 an 000 55.00000 50.000 00.0050 00.5050 00.00000 05 $0.00 0 00.00 an 00 00.00000 00.000 00.0000 05.0000 00.00000 00 00900 0 00.00 0 50.0 0 950.00 00.00000 50.000 00.0000 00.5000 05.00000 00 00.00 0 50.5 00.00 0 A20 000 um 0000000 u0cs\umoo om.w m Azo wmm um mmma0mv u0aa\umoo 905.00 0H0<\0000M 00.00050 00000 000uosvoum 00006 a 3.8 3.": 00.0000 mumoo 00300H0> 00009 0012.0... 00.00000 00 00uo< 00.00 0 00.000 000009 00.0 Aaxoo0v 000000 000050: 50.0 00: humuom 113 cuou mmm 00.0 00.0 #000 00.0 G00fim>0u030 00.0 cuoo 0mmm 00.0 00000 0:0 00000uumm .ucw0m 00.0 souumnlmwuo 00.0 3ouumnlxm00 00.0 3000 00.0 $0000uom020 00.0 mc0o0numm 00.00 0 00.50 0 00.00 0 00.00 0 m800 0cm 000000uumm m~.mmm mmumno gang H00uwmsm comm 000ummsm 000M . c0muo 000000 wuo<\pe¢ Emu0 umov ucmfiommcmz mo 00>m0 00 macaw unmammmnmz 0000 E Aaoflumu Humv dmfléhfld mBH3 ZOHBdBOM ZH ZHdmw D24 mwdnHm ZMOU wZHEmm>M¢m 02¢ UZHBCMU no 08000 04908 5m mnmdfi é 114 00.05 5a 00000 5n 000 00.00050 00.000 00.00000 0090000 00.00000 50 00.00 0 00.00 an 0000 an 00 00.55000 05.000 00.50000 00.0050 00.00000 00 00.00 0 00.00 0 00.0 0 900.0500 950.00 5m.00000 mm.~00 mo.~0mmw 00400:: 00.000 00.0000 00.00000 00 00.00 0 50.5 o~.00 m “20 «cm um mmmHHmv 00c5\umoo 00.0 0 Age wmm um mmmaflmv 00:5\umoo 9 0.0000 c00uoscoum 00008 805.00 0000\00000 .00.000000 mumou :00posooum 00009 ..00.000 mumoo Omx0m 00.00000 00000 m0nm0um> 0muoa 00.00 A0HOM\00.0000 cmumw>ums 500050 mmnom o0.~bm Amuom\00.0m. unman0svm :30 £903 mouom mc0mmono 00.5050 00.00000 00 mmuod 00 m0 0 00 000 000000 3.0 .1! ~a\oo0v 000000 0:00:00 50.0 00: thuom 115 CHOU H0m 00.0 00.0 0000 00.0 :00u0>0p050 00.0 cuoo 0000 00.0 .00000 0:0 .ma000uumm .00000 00.0 3ouu05|00uo 00.0 3ouu0slxm00 00.0 3000 00.0 00000u00000 00.0 00000n000 00.00 0 00.50 0 00.00 0 00.00 0 0800 000 umn000uumm m~.mmw 000000 0000 000ummsm comm 00000050 00mm c00uw 000000 0H0¢\ua¢ 5000 0000 uc05000c0z mo 0m>00 00 @5000 uc03000c0z 0000 000000“ cud. 4m0¢m04 mBH3 ZOHB¢BOM 2H ZHdmw 92¢ mwdflHm ZMOU GZHBmm>m an mmmNH an mHH om.hHwa om.ovm ch.mhmmw Nm.H¢mm ma.mmomm MHH mm.w~ m om.vm SQ vo¢m an mm mm.omabw mv.HNm o¢.mwwww mo.HHmv Nh.mmHNw mm H¢.mm m mm.oH mm.m Bm¢.omhm aha.ma N©.Nmmmd ou.moma «m.mmmmH om.mmm N¢.NNM w>.awon ¢w.¢¢mhm wwd Hm.om m hm.h m Hm.mH w m mm.m w Bm¢.omhm Enh.mH m «m.mmamaw «mqmmmml w o¢.m~moam oo.mmh oo.th ow.a¢om o~.onmhw mma mmuo¢ mm.m¢ m wo.m¢w mm.m hm.o Asa mom um mmmaflmv ua:s\umoo Asa wmm um ommaflmv uflcsxumou cowuoswoum Hmuoa wuo<\UHowM mumou :oHuoaooum Hmuoa mumoo wmxwm mumoo mHQMflHM> Hmuoa Amuom\cm.Ova Omumm>umn Eoumao mwuom Awuom\va.qmv unmemwavm :30 nuw3 mmnom mcwmmono mamuoa Aa\ocvv mmmaflm unwadmm mos humuom 117 CHOU Hum oo.m oo.w xowm va.¢ va.¢ Ocflmmono >~.o mos mumuom «N.H coaum>auadu mH.m :uoo umom mm.a hmumm cam muflaapuom .ucmam «v.o 3ouumsummua Hm.o 3ouum£|xmwo mm.a 3oam om.o mvwowuommcH m~.w mcwownumm vm.¢m m bo.- m nm.mm m oo.om w mafia can HwNflprnmm oo.a~m moumno wean uoflummsm @000 Howummsm @000 cwmuo |l Immmaflm \II muom\uam EmuH umoo unmfimmmcmz mo Hm>wq HHH macho acmammmcmz HHom Acofiumu Andy dhfldmnd SBHS ZOHBdBOM ZH ZHdmw 924 mwégHm ZMOU UZHBmm>m¢m 02¢ GZH3OMU m0 mBmOU AdBOB mm mnm¢8 118 0h.wm an mmhm on ma «H.¢mmhm mm.hHo md.mbmow hm.mmhm mm.wmamm mcH vm.om m mo.H w an whmm an mm Hm.moa¢m m¢.mo¢ no.5momw no.5mom mm.mmmdw hm ho.mN m m¢.ma w mm.w m Bw.omoa Bmv.ma mo.hhmhm mm.whv «m.mmhwm Nh.HomN Nm.wmmwm aw ¢H.mw w mH.w No.mm m o¢.m w BNm.mhoa Bmm.NH vm.omomm mm.mmm mw.ovmmw mn.oomm mm.mmamm hm mo.mm m #m.v mmuod mh.omw Asa yam um mmmaflmv “Haa\umoo Asa mmm um mmmawmv uw:9\umou cowuosvoum Hmuoa. wuo¢xo~mflu mumou cwxwm mumoo manmwum> amvoa manpoa Aa\oo¢v mmmaflm mnwasmm 119 CHOU Hflm oo.m oo.w xOfim >~.o mos wumuom v~.H coaum>fiuaao ma.m cuou mem mm.a mmumm van .mnaafluumm .ucmHm v¢.o souumnlmmua Hm.o Bouumnuxmfia mm.a 30am om.o mvaowuommcH mm.o mnaownnmm «m.vm w no.- m hm.mm m oo.om m mafia can Hmuaawpumm oo.a~m omumgo wean HoflumWMMW‘ mmmm Howummsm wonw sauna mmmaam muo<\ue« amuH umou uswfimmmqmz mo Hm>mq HHH macaw usufiwmmcmz Hwom Aaofiumu Humv dhfldhfld EBHZ ZOHBdEQm ZH ZHm¢m 02¢ GZHSOMU m0 mEmOU AdBOB cam mnm<9 120 Dom an mmvm an mm on.maamw hm.mmm mo.mamhm mm.mmo¢ vm.ememw HHH #m.om m anxvo.a w an o~e¢ an we mm.mmmvw mn.owm om.mHN¢w mm.amm~ mm.¢NmHm mm hc.mN w B\Hm.m mv.aa w acm.mhma Bm¢.mH ch.mmmoam mo.mhm Ho.oNNOHm mmmmmwul. mm.Hov mm.~mhm oa.m~omw Nod mo.mm w mH.m wv.mm w m a\vm.m w Bm.woma me.NH N¢.m¢mmam mw.omm mh.momNHm mm.wh vm.oom on.~wbv ON.N¢Hhm oma mwuod «m.vm m mh.wmm vm.v Aza wom um mmmaflmv uwcs\umou 12o wmm um mmmaflmv uwcn\umou cofiuoacoum Hmuoa muo«\camfl» mHMOU fiOflUOflUOHm HmHOH. mumou Umxwm mumoo manmwnm> Hmuoe AmHOM\mm.mwv woumm>umn ecumao mmuom AmHUM\¢H.vwv unoemwavm :30 Auw3 muuom mcwmmoau mamuos AB\oovv mmmawm mawadmm 121 CHOU Hum oo.m oo.m xOHm hm.o mo: humuom vm.a cowum>fluaso ma.m cuoo ommm mm.a wanna can .mNflHHuumm .uamam vv.o 3ouumnnmmuo Hm.o zouumauxmwa mm.H 3oam om.o mcflOfluowmcH mm.w meOflnumm em.v~ w no.- w hm.~m w oo.om m mafia can umNfiHHuumm oo.H~m mmumno camq Homummsm @000 Howummsm moow gamma omeHm muo¢\uem amuH umoo unmEmmmcmz mo H0>mn HHH macaw usmfimmmamz Hwom Aaoflumu ouav ZHdmw 924 mwdflHm ZMOU UZHBmm>M4m 92¢ UZH30mG m0 meOU A4908 Ham mnmda 122 0N.mm an mthH 5n mm vm.ahhmm mh.hmm mm.m¢Hmm no.0mmv oa.mhdww mma vm.om m No.H m an oNHm an we om.mmmmw om.mH¢ ov.hmmmw OH.HHmm om.mNmNm om no.mN m om.mH m v0.5 w BH.oth Bmv.mH ww.ohmmam Hm.mHNH mm.mmHme mm.~mo mm.Hov mm.m¢mw o¢.OHmon mud mo.mm w mH.m mh.m~ w A29 mom um wwmawmv uflcn\umoo «v.m m Asa wmm um mmmaflmv uflc5\umoo Bm.mmb~ cowuoavonm Hmuoa amm.~H wuo¢\vawwm mm.mm~m~w mumoo acauoauoum Hmuoe oH.vaH mumou Umxwm mn.m~ma~m mumoo manmwum> Hmuoa oo.~>m AmHOM\mm.mwv Umum0>umn Ecumso.mmuom wm.oom AmHOM\¢H.vwv unmemwnvm :30 suw3 mmuom mcwmmonu na.¢o~m Nw.ammmam mwm mmuod vm.vm w m>.mmm mamuos vm.v Aa\oo¢v mmmfiwm mcflflsmm 123 m~.o~| m mq.o~ w nm.ma m >~.om m ~o.om m m¢.o~ w so yea a\umoo m.mNmH m.mwwa o.NNmH n.5mma m.mmma m.HmmH wamflh Hmmhlm No.vHHbmm m¢.~m~mmm «m.momwmw mh.m¢mhmw hm.vmmwmw mo.avommw mumoo HM$hIW2m HH oo.om m m¢.o~ w «m.ma m m¢.oN w hh.ma m mm.o~ w ED wo¢ B\umoo m.mama N.meH m.mmma o.mmma w.HNmH mm.mwma Gama» Hmmhlm m¢.Hmmmmw ma.ammmmw mv.mmmmmm mm.boammw mm.maommw m¢.¢ommmm mumoo Hmmhlm H GZm cowumu and mom in mom mQOB ma.¢ mm.m mm.v mm.m H¢.¢ mh.m oaofl» m>m ummmum HHH 02m 20 mom mGOB mm.q mo.v ~m.v ma.¢ mm.q m~.¢ oamflm m>m unmaum HH 02m :9 wom mace «H.m ov.¢ «m.m om.¢ b¢.m hm.v camflm m>m ummmum H 02m Howumanm @000 noflummsm coco Haauomsm U000 umuflawuumm 30A nmnwawuumm Eswomz Hmuwaauumm swam EmuH Hm>mq pamEmmmcmz Hm>mn pamEmmmqmz am>oq usufiwmmamz M43 dhfldmfld mom mEmOU D24 .ZOHBUDQOMA .mDAmHM ho ZOHBdZZDm Nam mnmdfi 124 mm.HN w mm.NmNH. mm.mbbhmw Ha.om w NH.thH 0H.mo¢mmw o¢.o~ w ww.mhma hm.MHHmNm mN.HN w N.ommH mH.mmmmmm ¢o.NN w m.mmNH v¢.bmwmmm mm.o~ m mv.~oma wm.NmHth mm.HN m m.woma hm.mmmbmm mw.HN m mh.mmmH mm.momovm V¢.HN w o.vaH ~5.Nmmbmm mm.o~ w mv.NhNH mm.ommm~w mo.o~ m m.HmNH Nb.mowmmw «c.a~ m m.m«ma mm.hmmmmm hb.HN w Nh.Noma mo.mmmmmm hm.om w mm.homa NN.o~onNm hm.om w N.thH mm.mammmw mm.HN m wh.mwma ma.mvmmmm mm.HN m Hm.mmNH mm.¢mmbmm m¢.o~ w H.55NH om.mmom~w wH.om m mm.mhma ca.¢~mm~m mH.HN m h.mNmH «m.mmmmmm HN.NN w o.moma wa.mmmm~w mm.o~ w mm.moma oo.thh~w m~.HN w m.~oma mH.mwthm om.a~ m m.mwma mo.mahoma unoEommcmE can umuwawuumm cw :oflumaucmummmav 02V so.~ HHH 02m amm.~ HH 02m am.~ H 02m Asa womv oaofl» «mamma« ummauumufim am.n Amuom\sn chv HHH wzm a¢¢.m AmmoM\nn may HH me aoa AmuUM\sn oav H 02m .zo momv camflw mmmacoa umo Am.uzm Ham :0 Umflammm unseen mammv NHINHINH *omm mumo no umnaafluumm EmuH mQAmHN dhndmfld 92¢ 8&0 BZwA qw.aaw mm.mm Nh.vm muom mmm umoo umnwawuumm Amway com Ammv ooa Am.aqv om «canon a“ “£505 HmNHHHUHmh Amwv om ANNV om Ammv on any mewm usuosmmonm 30a ssflvmz swam «mammam co umuflafiuumm N “My 0 M Hm>wq cowumNHHHunmm Edwmmmuom 127 m H HvH #HH mma HHH MMH mmnod hm.~am mumoo wanmflum> om.H mmmahmm mcflaamm mp.h mcwmmono hw.a mcwcowuwGGOOImawzoz mmm» mafiaommm cw madama¢ oo.q mmmaflm umo mcflaamm m>.h mmmawm umo umm>nmm oo.H mmmucmoa HmNHkuHmm m~.~H name no Hmuwawuumm ¢o.m an mom om.hmw w cmmm undamafi mu.a mafiaafiua m~.m an mmm mh.Hw w mumo cmmm Hm.o mcflxmfla mm.a maflsoam oo.~vm moumso ccmq nodummsm @000 nodummsm ooow HOflummnm coco Hmnwawuumm 30A Hmuaawuumm Esawmz Hmnwafluumm no“: EmuH umou ucmfimmmcmz mo Hm>oq H maouw unmEmmmnmz awom a E AGOHuMH Huav mwdflwdm qudhfld UZHBmm>m¢m 02¢ 02H3020 mo mBmOU AdBOB van mqmda mummy mmuna mumoo cowuosooum Hmuos m¢.Hmmmmw MH.Hmmmmm m¢.mmmmmw mm.hoammw mm.~aommw mm.¢ommmm Ammumno onwEHH mscHE umoo mmm» cam mm madmv umoo mmm» cum mumoo ummw can dance mm.mthHw o¢.mmmmaw Nm.mhmHHw mm.o¢N~Hm mm.meHHm av.HmoNHw mh.mnmmam ov.mmmmaw Nm.wm¢~Hw mN.ovNNHw mH.mmwNHw H¢.Hmmmam 128 m~.obaa m~.osaa w~.onHH m~.onfla m~.ohHH o~.ohaa umoo nmxflm «m.mowaau.va.mamaam m~.ommaam oo.o~oaam ~m.~amaam ma.aamaam mumoo manmflum> mmm» cam mHH H¢H «AH mma HHH mma mmuom ¢m.wm «m.mn mo.ma oo.~m -.moa mm.om «m.m ~o.m mo.« «m.m ma.v Hm.m mmmammm maflaamm ma.m~ m¢.ma ma.m~ m¢.ma mH.m~ mq.mfl mcflmmoau Ho.m «m.m Ho.m «m.m Ho.m «m.m mcflcowuflucoo-mcflzoz oo.oH oo.oa oo.oa oo.oa oo.oa oo.oa Hfl>moz you moflofluommcH oo.a oo.H oo.H co.H oo.a oo.H mcflmmmuomoa umufiafluumm ~p.q ~5.¢ mm.w mm.m «¢.HH «q.HH umufiafluumm cm.» I- om.m .. om.m .. Ammo» and :« @mflammm hHHmsuowv mafia oo.~¢ oo.~e oo.~¢ oc.~¢ oo.~¢ oo.~¢ «mango wean QHMOU 800% USN NH.mmomam mm.omH¢Hm «o.mmwaam H>.o~omam MN.NH¢HHm hH.N¢vmam mumou Ham» uma Hmuoa m~.o~HH m~.o~HH m~.onaa m~.onaa o~.ohaa m~.onaa mm.smmoam no.oaomaw mn.mamoam m¢.mwv~aw um.av~oaw Hm.ahmmam mumou Umxflh mumoo mHnMHHM> Hmuoa 129 mm mm om wm mm mm mmnod h~.~mw mumoo mH30me> om.H mmmahmm mcwasmm m>.b mcwmmono hw.a ocwcowuflo:00|mcw3oz Hmmw mafiaommm cw MMHMMH4 oo.q mmmafim umo mcflasmm m>.h mmmawm umo pmm>umm oo.H mmmuomoe Hmuwawuumm m~.~H mumo co Hmnwawuuwm vo.m an Ham om.hmw w cmmm «manuam oh.a mafiaaflua m~.m an umm m>.Hm w mumo mmmm Hm.o maflxmfla mm.a mafl3oam oo.~ew mmmmau yawn moanmasm voow Modummzm @000 Hownmmsm @000 uoNfikuumm son umuflafluumm esfiumz umuflaflunmm no“: smuH umou ucmEmmmamz mo Hm>mq H macaw ucmfimmmcmz HHom Acoflumu Humv mwdflwdm dmfldmfld 02H8m2>2¢2 92¢ 02H3OMU ho mBmOU AdBOB mam mnmda 130 hw.maammm hm.mmmhmw Nh.mwmmmw oa.mho>mw om.¢~mmmw ma.mmwbmw mummy mmuna mumou :owuosconm Hmuoa mw.m¢¢m ou.mmmm ¢¢.owmm mm.waom w eh.mmmm m ww.~mmw m «m.mmm v~.m¢m ¢N.mmm NH.HNom w mv.vhmh m om.hmmh m mm mm om fiw.mm vm.mh me.mm mm.m No.m mo.v mH.mm w¢.mH mH.mm Ho.m vm.m Ho.m oo.oH oo.oa oo.oa oo.H oo.H oo.H Nh.¢ Nb.¢ ma.w o¢.m II om.m oo.m¢ oo.~v oo.~v mo.mmwm w hm¢mNHch «m.mhmm w «m.mmm vN.mmm vN.mmm dq.mmmn m mh.vmaa m oo.ammn m mm.mhom m mo.nman m aa.ammm m «m.mopm om.n¢mm mm.¢¢om Ammumno mafiafla mscwe umoo mmm» can mm mawmv umou mmm» cum «m.monm m ov.mmom m mm.¢¢om m mumoo ummw can Hmuoe «m.mam ¢~.m¢m «m.mmm “moo omxflm oo.mon> u oa.omom m ma.m¢om » mumou mHnMflum> mmm» cam «m an mm mmuod oo.~m ~5.moa mm.mm «m.m mH.¢ Hm.m mmmammm mafiasum m¢.ma ma.m~ mv.ma mcfimmoso ¢m.m Ho.m «m.m maacowuwQGOOImcw3oz oo.oH oc.oa oo.oa Hfl>mmz mom mcwofluommcH oo.H co.H oo.H maflmmmucmos uoNflHfluuom om.m v¢.HH ¢¢.HH nouflawuumm II om.m ll Aumma umH Ga Umwammm adamauomv mafia oo.~¢ co.~q oo.~¢ mmumno mama mumoo Ham» cam «m.mmmm m om.~aam » mm.mhmm m mumou “new uma Hmuoe ¢~.m¢m ¢~.mmm v~.m¢m mumoo omxflm mumoo manmflum> Hmuoa 131 NMH mmH mNH omH MNH qu mwuod NH.mmm mumou mHQMflHM> mm.a ommammm onwasmm mb.h mcammono hm.a mcflcofluflcGOOImaH3oz Hum» maflacmom cw amammad m>.m mmmaflm “no mafiasmm mh.h momaflm umo umm>umm oo.H mmmnvmoa HmNHHHuHmm m~.ma mumo co Hmuwawuumm ¢o.m an mom om.hmm w cmmm undamam mn.a mcflaaflua m~.m an umm mh.am w mumo cmmm Hm.o mcflxmflo mm.H mcflzoam m~.mmw mmumsu can; HOflHmmsm @000 HoHHmmnm coco Howummsm coow umuwawuumm 3oq Hmnwawuumm Edflvmz Hmuwawuumm now: EmuH umoo ucmsmmmcmz mo Ho>mq HH macho usmfimmmcmz Haom Aaofiumu Huflv mwdflwmm dhqdhfld UZHBmm>M¢2 22¢ 02H3OMU mo mBmOU 44809 mam Manda 132 mo.vadhmw mw.~m~wmm «m.mommmm mh.mvmhmw hm.¢wmmmm mo.a¢ommm Hmwamoma «m.mNmHH mo.mmama mh.m0HNH mh.m¢maa Hm.movma mo.monHw Hm.mmomam «m.mmmmam mh.moamam om.HNNMHm H~.moqmam mm.ohHH wN.onHH om.onHH mN.osHH wN.ObHH mN.o>HH om.mmmaaw mo.m~moaw mm.mohHHw om.hmmoam wm.amo~aw mm.mmmaaw NMH mmH mNH omH mNH mva om.om Hm.o> mm.mm mm.Nh mm.hm Hm.hb mm.m ¢h.N om.m mm.m ¢h.m No.m mH.mm m¢.mH. mH.MN m¢.mH ma.m~ mv.mH Ho.m vm.m Ho.m «m.m Ho.m «m.m oc.oa oo.oH 00.0H oc.oa oo.oa oo.oa oo.H co.a oo.H co.H oo.H oo.H Nb.¢ Nh.v mm.w wm.m wv.aa vv.HH mm.oa II mm.0H II mm.0H II mm.mm mm.mm mN.mm mm.mm mm.mm mm.mm 0H.NVHNHM mm.mmovam mm.mvaHm mw.mmmmam No.wmmaam mw.NNNme oN.o>HH mN.chHH mN.onHH 0N.ohaa mN.OFHH m~.ohHH «m.anaoam om.mmm~am ~H.mpvcam oo.mme~aw on.m-oam o¢.~momflw mHM®W 00H£B HON mgmou GOHDUDQOHQ HMfiOB Ammumno mcflEwH mange umoo mmm» cam mm Mammy umoo Hum» cum mumoo mama cam Hmuoa mumoo umxflm mumoo mHnMfium> Hmmw GGN m0HO¢ mmmammm mafianmm mawmmono anacowuflvcoonoaw3oz HH>mm3 Ham mvwowuommcH mcwmmmuwmoe Hmnwawvumm Honaafluumm Aummh and a“ omwammm adamsuomv QEHA omumno camq mumoo Mum» cam mumoo Hmww and Hayes mumoo wmxwm mumou mannaum> Hmuoa 133 Nm moa mm moa mm Noa mmhod NH.mmm mumoo manmwum> mm.a «madam: maaasmm mn.> maflmmonu hw.a mcwcowuflvnooumaw3oz mmm» maflaummm a“ undama« m>.m «madam umo mafianmm m>.> mmmHflm umo umm>umm oo.H mmmuomoa Hmuflafluumm m~.~H mumo co “mafiafluumm «o.m an umm om.hmw w 000m madamad o~.H mafiaafluo mm.m an umm mb.am g mumo 000m Hm.o maflxmfla mm.H maflsoam m~.mmm mmumno cqmq Howuomsm 0000 Howuwmnw 0000 Hoaummam 0000 umuadauumm 30A Houwawuumm enwomz Hmuaaapumm sown EmuH umou 000E0mmcmz m0 H0>mq HH macho unmfimmmcmz Hwow Acoflumu Humv mw¢qu¢m 4mg¢mq4 ozHamm>m«m azm oszomu mo mamou gases ham Manda 134 ma.mowmmw vw.~mahmm mm.o~mmmw NN.omo>Nw om.mmoomw co.whmbmw «m.movm NM.OHmm ma.oomm mm.m¢mm N¢.Hmmm mm.aomm eo.mmmm m Nm.onm w Nm.oamm m mm.mvwm m Nm.HNvm m mN.Homm m v~.mmm «N.mmm vm.mmm vm.mma «m.mmm «m.mmm om.mmmm m mo.mamh w mm.ma~m m m¢.m¢wh w mN.wNvm w mo.momh m Na moa mm moH mm NOH om.om Hm.Oh wm.mm mm.Nh mm.hm Hm.hh mm.m ¢F.N om.m mm.~ vb.m No.m ma.m~ mv.mH0. mH.MN mv.ma ma.m~ m¢.ma Ho.m «m.m Ho.m vm.m Ho.m «m.m oo.oa oo.oa oo.oa oo.oa oo.oa oo.oa oo.H co.H co.H oo.H oo.H oo.H «5.0 Nh.v ma.w m¢.w vv.HH v¢.aa mm.oa II mm.oa II mm.oa II mN.mm m~.mm mN.mm m~.mm mm.mm mN.mm mN.N¢mm w 0N.thm m omwmomm m vm.Nth m mm.mvam m mv.mnvm m «m.mmm . vu.mm¢ «m.mmm «m.mmm em.mmm «m.mmm vo.hvmh m w¢.mbmm m wm.¢HMh m ow.bmhm m mm.m¢ah m «m.mhqm m 0900M mmusa How 00000 cowuoavoum H0u09 Ammu0n0 mcwfifla mange 0000 M00» can 00 0&0mv 0000 H00» cum mumou H00» cam H0009 mumou 00x00 mumou 0Hn0flu0> H00w cam mmuod 000am0m mafian0m wnwmmoau m0H00Huwccoonmcw302 aw>003 How mowowuommcH mcwmmmuvmoa nouaafluuom Hmufiawuumm Au0mm 90H 0H cmwamm0 haa0auo0v mafia 0mu0nu 000A 00000 H00» cam mumoo H00» 90H H0009 mumou 00x00 mumou magmaum> Hayes 13S 00H mud ~00 00H mma 000 0000< mo.ohm 00000 0000000> ¢¢.H 0m0am0m mcwan0m mh.h 00000000 00.0 @00000000000|m:0302 000» 00000000 00 0000000 «0.0 000000 000 0000000 mh.n 000000 000 000>u0m oo.a 00000009 H0NHHH0H00 m~.~0 0000 00 0000000000 0o.m :0 00m om.>mw 0 000m 0ma0ma< 00.0 mcflaawna m~.m an 002 mn.am w 0000 0000 Hm.o mcflxmwa mm.H @0030Hm 00.000 000000 0000 Howu0msm 0000 00000msm 0000 00000mnm 0000 0000000002 30A 00NHH00H00 850002 H000H00H0m swam E00H 0000 0008000002 00 H0>0A HHH 05000 0005000002 0000 Aco0umu 0u0v 0000040 0000004 020000>m0m 024 0203000 mo 00000 00009 mam Manda 136 mH.mmmmmm mm.momo¢m mm.hmmmmm 0H.mvmmmm Nm.mmmmmw No.mHho¢m mv.thHH m~.hNMHH oo.hhHHH «N.HmMHH mo.vmmHH 00.0mmHH mm.omNme Hm.mmmmHm oo.mhome mm.~m¢mH0 mo.mmNme «m.mmmmHm mm.o>HH m~.onHH 0N.OBHH 0N.ohHH mh.omomaw mm.mmm¢Hw vb.mom¢Hm mm.NmN¢Hw th th NwH moH mm.NOH mH.Nm hm.¢OH hm.vm 5H.m Nm.N Hm.m 00.N mH.mm mv.mH mH.m~ mv.mH Ho.m «m.m Ho.m «m.m 00.0H oo.OH oo.0H oo.OH oo.H oo.H oo.H oo.H Nh.v Nb.¢ 00.0 0m.m om.vm mH.¢N om.¢m mH.¢N oo.HN oo.HN oo.H~ oo.H~ hw.vovHHO Hm.mN¢MHm Nm.¢HHHHw mm.mOOMHm 0N.ohHH 0N.ohHH mN.OhHH 0N.onHH 0N.OhHH 0N.o>HH om.vNHme wm.mmh¢Hw mMH 00H oo.m0H MH.mm wv.m 0b.N mH.mm ov.mH Ho.m «m.m oc.oH oo.oH co.H oo.H «v.HH vv.HH om.¢m mH.vN oo.HN oo.HN ov.¢mmcHw «m.mthHw m~.ohHH w~.o0HH Hv.¢m~0Hw mN.mmNNHw 0N.v¢mm w ho.mmmHHm vH.¢0mm w mm.¢mmHHw 0000» 00009 000 00000 :0H0000000 H0009 A0mu0no mcHEHH 000HE 0000 000» 00m 00 08000 00000 000» 00m 00000 000» can H0009 00000 00xHh 00000 0H00Hu0> 0000 cam 00004 00000 0H00Hu0> 0m0Hh0m mcHHs0m 00000000 mcH00H0H00001000302 H0>003 000 0000000000H mcH00000009 H0NHH00000 H000HH000m 2000» 00H 0H 00HHmm0 MHH050000 0EHA 000000 0000 00000 000» cam 00000 000» 00H H0009 00000 00me 00000 0H00000> H0009 137 MOH NNH 00H 000 00 mHH 00000 00.000 000cc 0000000> ¢¢.H 000Hh0m 000H00m m0.0 00000000 00.H 000000000000I000302 000» 000H0000 00 00H00H0 ~0.m 000000 000 0000000 m0.0 000H00 00o 000>00m oo.H 00000009 00N0H00000 m~.NH 0000 00 00N0H00000 «0.0 :0 000 om.0m0 w 0000 00H00H0 00.0 00000000 00.0 00 000 00.H0 w 0000 0000 0m.o 0000000 00.0 0003o00 00.000 000000 0000 00000000 0000 00000000 0000 00000000 0000 0000H00000 300 00N0H00000 E00002 00N0H00000 000m 8000 0000 0008000002 00 H0>00 HHH 00000 0000000002 H000 0000000 0000 0000000 «000000 0200000000 000 0000000 00 00000 00000 00m mnmdfi 138 00.0000N0 00.0mmmmm N0.Nmth0 mo.mmmm~0 mm.vmth0 00.0000N0 Hm.moom NH.0hom 0N.N¢om 00.0NHO Ho.NmmHHO Nv.~NOHHO «m.mmvHHw om.vhmoH0 «m.mmm «m.mmm 0N.mmm vm.mmm 00.0000H0 00.0NooH0 00.0000H0 0N.0000 0 MOH NNH 00H mHH 0m.NoH 0H.Nm 00.000 00.00 0H.m «m.m Hm.m 00.N 0H.mm 00.0H 0H.m~ 00.0H Ho.m «m.m Ho.m vm.m oo.OH oo.OH oo.0H oo.OH oo.H oo.H oo.H oo.H «0.0 «0.0 00.0 00.0 om.¢m 00.0N om.0m 0H.vN oo.H~ oo.HN oo.HN oo.H~ mm.0omm 0 o0.mmmm 0 «m.mmmb 0 00.00am 0 vm.mmm vm.mmm «m.mmm «m.mmm «m.mhmm N0.Nmmm v0.0NOHHO mm.vaHHO «m.m00 0N.000 0N.Hmon0 mo.0mmo00 >0 0HH o0.00H MH.0m 0¢.m 00.N 00.mm mv.mH Ho.m «m.m oo.oH oo.oH oo.H oo.H 00.0H 0v.HH om.vm mH.¢N oo.HN oo.0~ mH.mmbh 0 N0.0H00 0 «m.mmm «m.mmm mo.MH~h 0 00.m¢mm 0 oo.mooh 0 «m.mwwm 0 H0.N000 0 mv.mNHm 0 00000 00009 000 00000 0000000000 H0009 0000000 000E0H 00000 0000 0000 00m 00 00000 00000 0000 00m 00000 0000 00m H0009 00000 00x00 00000 0H00000> 0000 00m 00000 000H000 000H000 00000000 000000000000u000302 H0>003 000 00000000000 00000000009 00N0H00000 0000H00000 A0000 00H 00 000H000 0HH00000V 0800 000000 0000 00000 0000 00m 00000 0000 00H H0009 00000 00000 00000 0000000> 000o0 139 :0 0.00 900.0 900.0 00.000 00: 0000 :00: an 0.00 000.0 900.0 00.000 00: 00000000 :00: 0000003 0000 000 00000000000000 000000000 000 000000 000E000n0< 000000 0000\000080000000.0000 0000:300 000.000 000.000 «00.000 000.000.0 000009 000 0000--03 0>< 0000 on 0~0.00 000.00 00.00 00.00 «00.0 0.0 000.00 00.00 000 00 000005 00-00 . 000000: 0000100000 on 000 oomuuu: 0>0 0000 one .. 000.00 .. 0o.0 000.000 00.00 I. -u 000 00 000002 00-0 000000000 «0 000 oov--03 0>< 0000 000 000.00 000.00 00.. 00.0 000.00 0.0 000.00 0.00 000 00 000005 0-0 00>000 00000: 0. 000 000--02 0>0 0.0000 000 0000000 000 «no.0 000 0000 000 «00.0 00000000 0000 000000 0000000I0000 00:9. 0000 cm 000.0 000.0 00.0 00.0 n: u- .. nu 00>000 00000: 00 4- «00.0 u- 00.0 000.000 00.00 000.000 00.00 0000 00 “000000000 000 00000000002 “0300 o«0 000.000 «00.000 00.0 00.00 «00.000 00.00 000.000 00.00 0000 000 0000\0000 . 000 on “0300 000 000.000 000.000 00.00 00.00 o00.0¢0 00.00 000.000 00.00 0000 000 0000\0005 000 00 .0300 000 000.000 ooo.o¢~ 00.00 00.00 000.000 00.00 000.000 «0.00 0000 000 0000\0002 000 00 .0300 000 .20 000. 00: 0:0 002 0000 00: 0:0 000.0000 0000000 000 000 000000 0000 000\000000 2000 0000 00m 000 00006 N00\0000 000 000 000 00009 0000000 and 000 00008 0000 000 cum mandfi m82fi2flu¢flmm¢ mafia Gmfll 300IONA MO& 00000 chfidx NU‘MOM dhddhflfl vomllm0¢AHm 2000 «cm 140 an m.h> amw.m 9mm.MH mm.n- um: coco nu“: an H.nh amm.n 9~H.ma .o.m- no: nowuoasm an“: monuuut vomu can mmaocmwuwuuocw cOwumwmwv new uouomm u:0Eum:nU< mamuom uso>\mu:oeuuwavuu awaa MHMUIDOU Naa.m «no.~a mhm.nao mmn.ovo coc.~mw Hom.aam.~ uaouoa . and ooaanluz o>< nauv on omm.va owo.ma mh.ma mm.na mm~.v hm.m Hmw.mm Ho.vm can no unucoe mmnvu «Manama wanunumuwm on and oomnuuz o>¢ name omv .. vmo.o~ .. wo.a omv.hmm m.o~ .-- n- can no unucoe muua noawuumo> «v nag oovntuz o>¢ mama oma ooo.>~ owh.h~ mn.m mm.n umm.wa . an.~ mma.~va vn.m~ was no «space muv mo>uuo uuuaum av nna omannuz o>< A.Huoa cuonaoa and uno.m can uuuo and voo.w nousaocw onus acauau Houunuuluano nwzav mama on «m.mm ~m.mm mom.m mom.m mh.a ms.a II . In In nu ao>amu uwuam: vm .. u- -u coo.~ .. ov.c wpa.mm no.» ohm.»av mc.am axon co «mucmcmoum can monocoumqmz “u3ou ONH .. u- omn..na vn..onfl ou.cH am.ca .na.mo m¢.m www.mmm Ha.hv axon no“ “unu\xdfie mna on «@300 ewe u: 1: oov.ama ooo.~m~ n.ma co.wH oum.oh Ha.m ooo.sco an.om mamv cod “>6v\x«wa and vv «u3oo cud om~.~ ovN.o ooo.ov~ omh.nv~ oo.o~ am.o~ owm.mh m~.w oom.~vm mm.mm uwmc ooa “>n0\xnwe mnH on “9:00 owa .xo «am. am: mam um: coco you mam mmm mmm” «Manned mun Hon mauaam cuoo uao\0mdaam EwuH roam Hauoa cuoo am» can Houoa on\:uoo man can and anuoa nuanuat and nag sauce cuoo can mBZMIN04AAMl mDAQ Dun! IOUIONH MOh Adunv ZOHF¢¢ HQ‘flOh 4 mamo on omo.va mh.n4 7 u- .. www.mo m.m. «mm «o nausea mauv~ . mu«uw«: «amuuumuwm o~ and aomnuuz «>4 «moo omw .. u- I- .. ovm.>oa.a «.mm «mm «o «canoe mmum mmcwaummw Ne and oovunuz «>4 «>«o oma ooo.n~ mh.n II In owm.mma n.0u «an no unucos mnv ««>H«o u«u««= m4 «n4 omau-«z «>4 A.Huua ago coonhoa ~no.m can undo mna vom.w novSHocu Oman :Owunu uouumuuluaoo «“29. «>40 om mom.m m>.H ~mm.m o~.fi an In mo>anu umuwo: vm .. I- u- .. «44.noo oa.~m «ace co u35:33 «c« mucmcmpcwmz “usou QNH o~m.vna h.oH In nu whh.omh mh.~w mama moH “amv\xawe and on u«Sou o~a oov.moa h.ma ow~.m mv.o owa.mom nv.hw mama ooa “mwv\xawe «na 44 “mzoo ona ooo.ov~ oo.o~ ooq.ma «~.4 co¢.>m> mv.o« «>«o ooa “amnxxage and on “maou oma :uoo ham 20mm and omnawm auoo h¢o\omdawm «an Huuoa aaoxnuoo «on and «an Houoa aonxzoam «an Hauoa cuou «n4 soua mBZMZflU€Amfl¢ mafia can! BOUIONH MOE gaudy ZOHB¢¢ NU‘ZOM ”Utdnm ZKOU Add NNm Ndmdfi 142 m.mb o.mv Ham: Hwo amwnwom H.o4 ~.oa «:«e«m«:«z «cow u«oao «mamma4 m.mv m.ma ucmEmmmnmz Hownmmdm HmUGD mmammad m.mH >.~ A«mmaflm coa\««us «n4 oav «umm mm. «« ««us now: «mmaflm anoo m.ma m.H ««na «sonuflz «madam cuoo H.om >.m cflmuw auoo A«3«\msu«nav va mmnmcm umz cmumEHUmm :wwuonm manwummmfln EmuH E I fl 1‘“ mEZHHQmmUZH Qmmh ho mqm>mn HUMMZM 92¢ ZHmfiomm manBmmeQ mmm mfimfla 143 OOM'FN 0mm sou-Ho omo son pm .Hoccoo .h .Am 0mmaflm cuoo Eoum cowumm mmmuom mo unmonmm om.¢¢maw mm.ahmam 4N.mmmm «m.mmoam m~.o>aam umoo Umxwm Hmuoa oo.mmm «o.m~a mm.mmm «m.mw ma.mam mmm 3OHIN ummmonu mmmuom II II oo.mm~ II oo.mm~ mmm .h “macau IwUQOOIHosoz II II oo.m~a II oo.mma mma =5 .mH Hawua cwmuw oo.mma oo.wma II oo.mma II mma 3ounv Hmucmam oo.HHa oo.HHH II oo.HHH II AHA 30HI¢ Houm>wuaso oc.om oo.om II co.ow II om .wH mom anauom oo.¢m oo.vm II oo.¢m II «n .4mII3ouumm oo.mva. mm.v~H mm.mm oo.HHH oo.>m m¢a .mHIIxmwo oo.omd om.mma o¢.om om.~¢H om.b¢ UmucnoEIwEmm o¢a gmHImIIson om.nnh ov.awm m om.mmmm oo.~m¢ w om.m¢m w Hmmmwo mm 45 «mm» Houomue :uoo :uoo undamad anou mmammafi cod m5 om EmuH mumoo magnumcao Hmscnd MfiflZHflUflZ ho BmOU QMNHm m0 ZOHBDmHmBmHQ #Nm mqmda i1 ”.Amwma can thH .mmma .mmma .wmma «can .«ofl>u«m mnfluuom«m Hmofiumflumum ”.o.a .coumcanmmzv «maesm Hmncad .mmoflnm Hausuasowumd .musuasowumd mo unmeuummmo mmumum Umpacom 144 d¢.m mo mo.a mmmnm>m Umunmwm3 HumaIm mm.m an hm.o mm.o nwma mm.m $9 mN.H -.H wmma mH.m mm mm.o mm.o mmma no.m Nm wo.H mm.o ¢oma oapm mm mo.H oo.a mama Aan\mv Au30\wv A5n\ov HmAEoomo amnem>oz mmm» 20mm mumo om>wmomm moflum auou mmflUHmm zmemUHZ QMBdSHBmm mmm mqmda .AnomH .mm Hmum4 .««H>u«m mcflunom«m Hmofiumflumum ".u.a .coumnflsmmzv mmOflHm Hmunuaso«um« .mnnuanoflnm4 mo pameuhmmmn mmumum vmuficbm 145 umou newsman mucmswam mucsom :09\w ommuo>¢ mmmUHmm mmNHQHBmmm mmm mnmdfi om.m mcoummfiwq om.mv oo.¢m Awomv ammuom mo mudgunz m.mm om.m oo.m4 Awomv «umnmmonmu«msm H.HH oo.m¢ oo.ooa «who o.> oo.~m oo.mHH «440224 «souomac4 «.44 m.mm oo.m> moz4mz «.ma om.o~ oo.mm MHGOEE< mo mummasm v.4a vm.mm oo.oHH oIvamH m.ma ¢~.>m oo.oh NHINHINH o.ma mm.mm oo.~m wHINmIm ~.va 4m.om oo.mm vHImNIn 5.HH av.mm oo.mm ¢~I¢~Im H.4H «m.mw oo.mh NAIwmIm o.~H v.om oo.m> omIomIm m.ma «.mm oo.mm oNIomIo on ucsom Hmm and cod uwm ammwnOflz aw momma umaaawuumm L:_ 66 s E RH “I" 8!” LM Y'H nW Sm a” IIIIIIILI/ZII 69 55 3 1293 I'M/III!