With further price spikes and potential scarcity ahead, might it be time to try reducing costs and input requirements with variable rate application?

It might be – although a true reduction in required fertilizer volumes though a variable rate approach is unlikely.

WHY IT MATTERS: Refining how we use fertilizer supports crop quality and uniformity.

Variable-rate fertilizer application is an approach intended to match fertility treatments with the specific needs in different parts of a field, so knowing fertility levels in those different parts of the field is critical, says Chris Snip, an independent agronomist from Essex County.

Grid or zone soil sampling are both viable options, as are soil scanning technologies like SoilOptix and SWAT Maps. Indeed, Snip says “they all have their place.”

His experience suggests 2.5-acre grid sampling is an accessible and effective method for most of his clients, although SoilOptix can be valuable in fields with highly variable soils. He also points to cost-share programs, such as those offered through Ontario’s conservation Authorities, as valuable initiatives in reducing the cost of soil sampling and analysis work.

While urea is one of the products most impacted by current trade disruptions, it’s not necessarily one that can be effectively managed through variable rate application.

“I don’t have a lot of confidence with what’s out there today. I still think there’s a lot of stuff we don’t know about nitrogen and a lot of that variable rate stuff is how do we dial that it,” says Snip. Instead, he believes phosphorus and potassium are the primary nutrients to look at.

“Then you have to deal with someone to analyze the data and make it useful information. I like sitting down and having a conversation with the farmer about what makes sense. Down here in Essex, we tend to have a lot of legacy phosphorus – where an old farmyard used to be or areas that used to have vegetable production – that’s where you really get a benefit in changing the rate.”

Locally, Snip adds research from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Harrow points to an optimal range of 20 to 30 ppm for phosphorus. Beyond 30, and the amount of dissolved reactive phosphorus leaving the soil goes up significantly.

“Our approach is to build, maintain and drawdown. I always refer to nutrients in the soil as a bank account. We’re either putting money into that account or taking it out,” he says.

Equipment needs

If you’ve soil sampled, engaged an agronomist to analyze the data, and made a plan – then can your equipment do anything with it?

Variable-rate prescriptions require tractors and application equipment that can change rates to match a prescription. Ian McDonald, crop innovations specialist with the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Agribusiness, says the capability of modern equipment to vary rates on-the-go is “quite amazing” today, but tends to be very large.

“Big equipment may not be able to vary across the toolbar, or the reaction time may not be what you want,” he says, adding “you have to have variation in the landscape to take advantage of variable rate.

“Variation isn’t always about changing soil type or elevation in terms of difference in crop response to fertility level.”

Managing smaller, more refined areas might remain a challenge, although Y-drop systems for repeated in-season applications have changed the equation for urea and UAN over the last decade. Looking ahead, McDonald anticipates advances in robotics will unlock the ability to apply nutrients in smaller quantities and on a smaller scale throughout the growing seas – something which could help alleviate nutrient tie-up in soil.

Snip adds the right equipment can open up new avenues of precision – fertilizer banding and strip till applications, for example. If a grower doesn’t have the necessarily capability themselves, custom applicators probably do. Neighbours might also be willing to lend a hand.

“Most people play nice together in the sandbox,” says Snip.

Misconceptions

The hard truth of variable rate, however, is growers should not expect to use significantly less fertilizer overall. The practice of redistributing more fertility to areas where it’s needed, and reducing fertility where it’s not, tends to balance out.

“We really saw an increase in more consistent yields from that variable rate…It’s not necessarily saving money, but putting it to better use,” Snip says. “It’s more about the right place when it comes to variable rate fertilizer.”

McDonald adds a variable rate approach can even increase the total amount of fertilizer applied, although that fertilizer is more strategically placed. Regarding nitrogen, he says another misconception is the economic range of nitrogen is narrow. In reality, the most economic range for nitrogen is around 25 pounds, with weather and moisture playing a key role in nitrogen availability.

“There’s an idea that if input rates are set to predicted yield potential of 200 bushels. But if everything lines up it could be 220 bushels. So you put on extra, a little insurance nitrogen,” McDonald says. That extra nitrogen, however, is not where an actual yield boost may come from.

“I don’t think that pays off … Your insurance was already built into the system through nitrogen mineralization.”

If a grower does want to experiment with different fertilizer rates, they have to know whether the experimental rate is actually responsible for the end result. McDonald continues encouraging growers to try their own on-farm rate trials with a zero-control check to identify actual fertilizer impact. Even small block checks, he says, can provide the necessary data to confidently “play with your rates.”

He adds data management remains an ongoing challenge, requiring growers to engage advisors to clean and interpret data before drawing impact conclusions. It can still be a worthwhile process, though.

“Farmers should find what they do best, and find the right people to optimize their system,” McDonald says.

The post How to start variable-rate fertilizer application appeared first on Farmtario.

After a small pilot program in 2025, Farmers for Climate Solutions is now offering the Profit Warranty to Optimize Nitrogen Rates program.

WHY IT MATTERS: Splitting nitrogen, rather than front loading fertilizer application in the spring, has been sold to farmers as a way to both limit nitrogen loss and to hedge risk if suddenly the profit outlook for that crop dips.

Unlike traditional cost-share funding models, the program features a profit warranty in case participants incur losses in adopting split application — losses being determined through comparison to their business-as-usual profitability in the same field or similar fields.

The idea is to improve fertilizer efficiency and reduce business risk.

How the warranty program works

Participants sign up to put crop in the ground with 30 pounds of nitrogen. They then base their in-season application rate on agronomist recommendations, informed by the results of a pre-sidedress nitrate test (PSNT).

The profit warranty guarantees income if the field does not perform. Participants also get up to $500 in agronomist services for project support, including nutrient management recommendations, full reimbursement for the required nitrate test and a $1,000 honorarium for their time.

“Our goal is to assess if a profit warranty can be a helpful new tool to optimize nitrogen use,” said James Cober, strategic initiatives manager for Farmers for Climate Solutions. “This program is novel in terms of what’s being offered in Canada. The program addresses the risks involved in trying something new — by offering to protect that profit loss, we’re able to cover that risk.”

$40 per acre savings

Matthew Wagenaar, a grain and livestock farmer from Lambton County, participated in the pilot project with a 12-acre corn test plot in 2025.

“What enticed me is the fact that I get to try this without the fear of lost income,” Wagenaar said, adding he was already actively learning about new approaches to split-nitrogen application.

Despite doing his homework, Wagenaar still “wanted that backup.”

Wagenaar’s family typically applies 100 pounds of nitrogen at planting, then another 100 pounds side-dressed when crops reach around the V6 stage.

Under the warranty program, he was limited to that 30-pound cap at planting, though it was recommended 130 pounds be applied in side-dress. The result was significant cost savings, and a good crop.

“The worry was if you got into a really wet spring and you couldn’t get that side dress on in time, would you still see that return,” Wagenaar said. “It was pretty much saving a good $40 an acre almost.”

Applicants wanted

As of March 24, Cober said his organization is still looking for warranty program participants. He does not anticipate imposing an application closing date before corn planting begins in earnest.

“We have some great cost share funding programs like [the On Farm Climate Action Fund] and its nitrogen programming category.… Again, the novelty of the profit warranty program is there’s nothing like it that’s been done in Ontario,” he said.

Similar programs have been tried in other jurisdictions, however, including best management practices challenges in the United States and profit insurance initiatives in Australia.

“It’s open to anyone who is curious about nitrogen management, which is especially timely right now,” Cober noted.

Cober also encouraged growers to consult Farmers for Climate Solution’s FaRM Resilience Mentorship resources to learn about other nitrogen management strategies which might apply to their individual farms.

Those interest in the profit warranty program can apply through the Farmers for Climate Solutions website.

The post Ontario profit warranty program to eat split nitrogen risk for corn appeared first on Farmtario.

Financial pain can bring technologies and practices that were peripheral for many into sharp focus.

The rapid rise in fertilizer costs has been marked and could be the difference between profit and loss for some farmers this summer.

I’m curious to see if it will drive changes on farms.

Farmers don’t want to skimp on nitrogen as it is a major driver of yields, so they will err on the side of applying more than less.

A significant amount of money has been spent on fertilizer innovation, particularly in the area of nitrogen, over the past decade. Most of those solutions have a place, but aren’t mainstream.

This edition (April 7) features a couple of stories that address nitrogen options and a program to support the transition to split application. See them on pages 14 and 15.

The easiest way to manage fertilizer is to soil test. I’ve heard recent stats that less than 40 per cent of farmers soil test. You can’t manage what you can’t measure.

Variable-rate fertilizer is a technology that isn’t new, but it’s likely to gain more usage this year, as farmers think carefully about how better to manage the expensive input. This is a technology that won’t likely save you a lot in fertilizer costs, but it could help bump yield to pay for it.

Encapsulated fertilizer is another option to improve nitrogen use efficiency. Coating urea keeps it in place longer, hopefully so it’s there when the corn plant roots need it. The value is that the nitrogen is released slower and therefore doesn’t leach away and more of it is used by the crop.

Another practice that’s received mixed reviews is the split application of nitrogen. Instead of applying a full season of nutrients at planting, with a spreader and/or planter, 30 to 50 per cent might be applied at planting, then multiple other applications can be made, such as a sidedress at the V4 to V6 stage of corn. Wheat can also be sidedressed. Other farmers leave some of the nutrients to be added, if needed, up until pre-tassel, using high clearance sprayers with tubes that drop the nutrients at the soil level.

This practice is valuable for saving nitrogen, as the corn is usually tissue tested to ensure that the extra fertilizer is actually needed. Some years it will be, and there won’t be savings, but some years there will be.

There are programs to help with experimentation with nitrogen usage.

Farmers for Climate Solutions is administering an interesting program that helps guarantee a profit if you take the risk of using a second nitrogen application.

With today’s urea price, it’s likely worth the risk of a second N application, later in the season, but a program like this can make experimentation worthwhile.

How are you managing the high cost of nitrogen this year? Are you standing pat, or trying something new?

The post High fertilizer prices could drive innovation in application appeared first on Farmtario.

Guelph-based Linamar announced Wednesday it has an agreement in place worth $260 million to buy 100 per cent of the equity in Salford, which makes fertilizer application and tillage equipment at three plants in Canada and two in the U.S.

Linamar said it expects to finance the deal through its existing credit lines and close the purchase during the second quarter of this year, subject to the usual conditions and regulatory approvals.

Salford will “continue to leverage its established manufacturing and distribution network” and sell its products under the Salford brand, Linamar said.

Salford Group president Geof Gray said combining Linamar’s resources and brand strengths with Salford’s “will enable Salford to compete and innovate at a higher level with greater market coverage, delivering even more value to dealers and farmers.”

Linamar CEO Linda Hasenfratz said the crop nutrition application and tillage segments where Salford operates are “areas we had identified in our agriculture growth strategy as highly attractive segments for future product diversification.”

“Through MacDon, we already have an established market-leading position in the harvesting segment,” Linamar chief operating officer Jim Jarrell said in the same release. “Tillage and crop nutrition are a natural complement to that product portfolio, which will allow us to accelerate sales of all products.”

Salford, founded in 1978 at Salford, Ont., about 35 km east of London, today has manufacturing plants at Salford and nearby Norwich, Ont., as well as sites at Elie, Man., about 35 km west of Winnipeg; Osceola, Iowa, about 80 km south of Des Moines; and Cornelia, Georgia, about 100 km northeast of Atlanta.

The company’s product lines today include tillage equipment, pneumatic and spinner-type fertilizer spreaders and cover crop seeders under the Salford, AerWay and Valmar brands. It’s billed as the only company in North America carrying full lines of surface and sub-surface granular applicators.

Linamar, meanwhile, is no stranger to agriculture, having owned and operated White Farm Equipment and Western Combine in the 1980s. It later shed both those businesses but bought Harvestec in 2015, then took up Winnipeg-based MacDon for about $1.2 billion in 2018. Harvestec corn harvesting header lines have since been rebranded under the MacDon name.

Jarrell said the ag and food sectors are a “key element of our Linamar 2100 strategic roadmap,” which the company laid out following the MacDon takeover. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post MacDon owner Linamar to buy Salford appeared first on Farmtario.

With soil temperatures not yet at the freezing point, the province announced Monday it would extend its deadline for spreading of phosphorus and/or nitrogen, including synthetic fertilizers and/or manure, to Nov. 14 from Nov. 10 (Tuesday).

The province’s standard ban on winter nutrient application usually runs from Nov. 10 to April 10, but it can grant variances depending on actual soil temperatures, the presence of snow cover and the long-term weather forecast.

The province set up the ban in 2008 to prevent nutrients from being applied when the ground is frozen, to reduce nutrient loading in waterways through field runoff.

Nutrient runoff in waterways contributes directly to algal blooms in Lake Winnipeg and elsewhere, the province said.

Farmers applying nutrients or fertilizers in the province this week still must meet “certain conditions,” the province said Monday. The complete list of rules is available online.

For example, nutrients may only be surface-applied if they’re immediately incorporated. Also, nutrients shouldn’t be applied in cases where the weather outlook is “unfavourable” — say, if snow or an “appreciable amount of rainfall” is expected that would result in runoff. — AGCanada.com Network

The post Manitoba extends fertilizing deadline to Saturday appeared first on Farmtario.

Wet conditions in many parts of the province are making it tough for farmers to get their machines onto fields, according to Dan Mazier, president of Keystone Agricultural Producers.

“We just drove from Winnipeg to Dauphin on the Yellowhead (Highway 16) and there were lots of fertilizer tanks parked on fields sitting there just too wet to complete,” he said Friday.

Producers in the province’s southwest had a good start to laying down fertilizer, but north of Winnipeg, many producers were delayed due to late-season hail.

“They were behind the eight-ball because in late October, early November, they were still harvesting,” said Mazier, who farms in the southwest at Justice, Man.

The delay is noteworthy as the province’s deadline for fertilizer applications is Tuesday.

From Nov. 10 to April 10, farmers are forbidden under the Water Protection Act from laying down nitrogen or phosphorous during that period, due to concerns over runoff.

“Mother Nature makes the ultimate decision, though,” said John Heard, a provincial soil fertility extension specialist at Carman, Man.

Last year, producers ran into similar problems with moisture, so the province issued an extension, to give them time to hit the fields.

However, Heard said, it snowed just a few days after the original deadline had expired, which effectively closed the door on applications altogether.

Ideally, he said, you want the same moisture as you would have for planting conditions, when applying fertilizer into the soil, “in order to do a good job with that machinery and those forms of fertilizer.”

Another factor to consider, he said, is how many producers are inclined to fertilize given present market conditions.

“Talking to some dealers, there seems to be a lack of desire to spend money on fertilizer with collapsing commodity prices and maybe not a lot of crop sales yet,” he said.

Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship is expected to announce Monday whether it will grant another extension.

— Dave Sims writes for Commodity News Service Canada, a Winnipeg company specializing in grain and commodity market reporting.

The post Crunch time for Manitoba producers to fertilize appeared first on Farmtario.

Fertilizer prices are being driven by crop prices and the global market, and both those factors are keeping prices steady, said David Asbridge, president at NPK Fertilizer Advisory Service.

“Farmers are going to have to look and decide if they can afford their fertilizers this year, how much they want to buy, how much they want to apply this fall, and anticipation of what they’re going to plant next spring,” he said.

Canadian and U.S. fertilizer prices are tracked together based on local conditions, he said.

Indications of crop improvement and a good-sized wheat harvest will likely increase fertilizer use in Canada, despite lower wheat prices, he said.

But if crop prices continue to fall, crop budgets tighten, which leads to less fertilizer use.

Globally, Asbridge said, market watchers are keeping an eye on China and Brazil, but he doesn’t anticipate the market will make any dramatic swings soon.

China has been exporting a lot of urea, which has kept a cap on that market. If prices sink lower China may stop exporting which would strengthen prices.

Brazilian traders have been holding off on buying potash and phosphate due to a fall in the value of the real.

Moving into the fall, Asbridge said he doesn’t see much on the horizon to move fertilizer prices higher. Traders are watching imports into the U.S. and the weather as driving factors for the market.

“If the new corn crop turns out to be big, or if we have any type of issues with weather getting the crop out that limits the time that farmers have to put fertilizer down this fall.”

— Jade Markus writes for Commodity News Service Canada, a Winnipeg company specializing in grain and commodity market reporting.

The post Fertilizer prices steady as farmers gauge fall use appeared first on Farmtario.

Soil temperatures across the province have risen to the point that the restriction — otherwise in effect each year between Nov. 10 and the following April 10 inclusive — is lifted effective immediately, Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship said Wednesday.

The annual ban specifically applies to nutrient sources containing nitrogen and/or phosphorus — including synthetic fertilizers as well as livestock manure.

The annual winter restrictions were set up due to increased risk of runoff from nutrients applied on frozen or snow-covered soils. Such runoff into waterways “contributes directly to algal blooms in Lake Winnipeg and elsewhere,” the province has said.

Though the ban is lifted, the province said Wednesday, any farmer applying fertilizer between now and April 11 “is obliged to assess current weather conditions and periodically check weather forecasts.”

If the weather outlook is “unfavourable” — say, if snow or an “appreciable amount of rainfall” that could cause runoff is in the forecast — nutrients should not be applied, the province warned Wednesday.

All other requirements under the province’s Nutrient Management Regulation and the Livestock Manure and Mortalities Management Regulation remain in effect, the province said.

Those include setback requirements for winter spreading of livestock manure. Nutrients still can’t be applied to “sensitive lands” along waterways, nor to lands classified as Nutrient Management Zone N4.

N4 land is considered “environmentally sensitive;” the majority of such land in Manitoba isn’t in crops, the province said. N4 landscapes have features such as steep slopes, stable and/or active sand dunes, marshes, bogs and fens. — AGCanada.com Network

The post Manitoba lifts fertilizing ban early appeared first on Farmtario.