Progress, But Still Work To Do

Dan Frieberg, president of Premier Crop Systems LLC, can be best described as an advocate for data in agriculture.  They’ve built their business over 14 years on helping growers to understand and unlock the power of the data they collect. And while they’ve got some terrific case studies among their own clients, there are still many growers who haven’t even taken the first step.

I caught up with Dan and chatted with him about their business, the state of data in agriculture, and what might move the needle and get more growers to collect and use data.

We’ve recently passed the 15 year anniversary of the commercialization of the yield monitor and really the beginning of scorecarding how we manage fields. Where are we with collecting and managing data and using it to make better management decisions?

We have customers that are getting terrific traction and their programs are growing, and that’s all great. But, as we work to expand our business we walk into areas all the time where there’s nothing. You swear you just stepped back 10 or 15 years. Even though we are bullish on what we’re doing and we think that we might finally be turning the corner on technology, every so often you go into a market where there is no activity – and it is hard to explain.

We are very confident in the value proposition for the grower, and a big factor is, it’s not a one-size-fits-all solution. There are a lot of differences in what matters agronomically, and it changes field by field and area by area. All agronomy is local – it’s not even regional.

How can you begin to talk to someone about data collection and utilization that is not into it?

Maps are great way to visualize data; they let you visualize it in a different format. But the real power is not in the maps, it is in the data file. Maps are nothing more than a way to see that data file differently – the real power is trying to understand the relationships of the data layers. 

We at Premier Crop are so yield driven, when we talk about data we are talking about using the yield file to measure our success, and whether we are doing the right thing.

How do you ensure that your growers are collecting data accurately?

It takes a conscientious effort all the way up and down the line. It takes a grower who is focused on it –that’s really the most important part of it – and agronomic advisors serve a key role as well

People frequently talk about the inaccuracies of yield data and my argument to them is that once a grower has transitioned to making decisions based on that yield file, it changes their attitude. A grower who would not calibrate before will now calibrate. When they move to an agronomic system that allows them to use that data to make more significant decisions, they focus a tremendous amount of attention on making it perfect. Many growers weigh out every field, and we’re constantly adjusting the yield files to match those on the scale tickets, because they want it to be the same in our system as they measured it. Once they make the transition, it is amazing how much it matters to them.

What other types of data are you collecting?

In this day and age you need a spatial fertility sample. Think about the investment people are making today – compared to the time we started our company 14 years ago, the cost of nutrients is six times higher in some cases, and the reward in crop prices is two and a half times higher. Yet in most cases, the cost of soil sampling and precision ag programs is essentially the same.  

We don’t argue about soil sample type as far as method, but once you do it you discover there are huge variations within fields. We also use government soil information where available, and from there we add on applied fertility. It sounds simple, but applied nitrogen could go on two or three different ways, and at different times. We are also collecting variable rate seeding and seed population data, as well as hybrid and variety information, weather, pest control applications and management practices.

So what’s ultimately limiting growth in data use?

There are tremendous time pressures that advisors are under. Many times they are responsible for seed, crop protection, and fertilizer sales, and they just run out of hours in the day to give it the level of attention it deserves. It’s what tends to fall through the cracks.

The other thing is, from our own business experience, precision service development is a process. Somebody asked me recently why this hasn’t scaled any faster, and I told them that it simply takes time to build a great network of service providers and quality agronomic advisors. Some big companies might be able to throw more money at it and speed up the process some, but mostly it takes time.