1. The Fertiliser Action Plan
using best practice fertiliser management
for
industry and environmental benefits
Supported by WA Government,
Western Dairy, WA Farmers, PGA,
Fertiliser Industry Association, and …

2. What is Fertiliser Action Plan (FAP)?
• FAP then:
– phase out of highly water soluble P fertilisers
• FAP now:
1. regulated phosphorus content in domestic use
fertilisers;
2. ‘best practice’ management of commercial use
fertilisers;
• fostering economic benefits for farmers through
improved nutrient management and achieving
environmental benefits
• based on industry self regulation around best
practice and reduction in bureaucracy
2. enhanced uptake of soil amendments.

3. Providing the best advice for
individual situations
• Fertiliser users will get best advice from
Fertcare accredited advisers (major
company reps accredited)
• Aim is to apply phosphorus where
profitable
– reduce use where it is not profitable
– Farmers will use P more efficiently

4. Current soil test P
Environmental soil test P
Agronomic optimum soil test P
95%
90%
85%
80%
HighPstatus
reduced soil P
reduced offsite risk
reduced fertiliser costs
reduced soil P
reduced offsite risk
reduced fertiliser costs
reduced soil P
reduced offsite risk
reduced fertiliser costs
reduced soil P
reduced offsite risk
reduced fertiliser costs
environmental cost of production
other practices
environmental cost of production
other practices

5. 95% maximum production
Bicarbonate P (mg kg-1
)
PBI
Low Medium High
<5
<7 7-10 >10
≥5-10
<10 10-15 >15
≥10-15
<15 15-20 >20
≥15-35
<20 20-25 >25
≥35-70
<25 25-29 >29
≥70-140
<29 29-34 >34
≥140-280
<34 34-40 >40
≥280-840
<40 40-55 >55
Providing the best advice for
individual situations

6. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
ColwellsoiltestP(mg/kg)
73
62
52 48
Soil test P
mg/kg
Critical soil
test value
~35 mg/kg
No pasture DM response
obtained to applied P
4.9 9.3 12.3 9.6 11.2
t pasture DM/ha consumed per year
No P applied since 2000
(Rodwell farm, Boyanup)

7. Influence of pH on nutrient
availability

8. Soil acidity

9. Potassium and Sulphur deficiency
$ wasted on P
based
fertilisers
when it could
be spent on
other deficient
elements
45% also
require lime

10. Fertilised independently of soil test
56% have high
P status
Soil test
results ignored
$ wasted
LowHigh Plant response

11. Fertcare - Built in QA
• Fertiliser Industry Federation of Australia
has Fertcare program.
• Fertcare involves rigorous training and
accreditation system
• Fertcare Accredited Advisers are
independently assessed and audited.
• Fertcare advisers bound by rules defining
critical P and P retention levels

12. • Advice must fit with best management
guidelines
• Guidelines developed by industry
(fertiliser companies and farmer bodies)
on the basis of good science and years of
WA trial work
• Advice can only be given on the basis of
soil/tissue tests

13. Broad support
New FAP direction backed by:
• local and national science (X years trials
on Coastal Plain in WA)
• Industry (fertiliser companies and farmer
industry bodies ie Western Dairy)
• Government – Dept. Agriculture and Food,
Dept Environment and Dept. Water

14. Firsthand experience: Ken
MacLeay, Blackrock Angus

15. Blackrock Angus
Located at Vasse
380ha
300 breeders 80 bulls
Traditional application of fertilizer after soil testing of approx
200kg/ha in autumn
Spring supplement to hay paddocks to 200kg/ha
Lime application 2.5t/ha every seven years
Fertilizer expense represented our biggest direct cost after
labour/drawings

16. Blackrock Angus
Invited to participate in Fertilizer Management Plan (Nutrient
Management Systems) 08/09
One of the best programs we have been involved in.
Why?
Gave me a better understanding of my fertiliser practise
including the latest recommendations for P relative to PRI ,
and saved $$$$$.

17. Blackrock Angus
Spreadsheet Table of Complete Data Set for Extensive Nutrient Analysis - Ken MacLeay
pH 1 5 pH 1 5
EC_1_5
_H20
dS
Organfc
_
carbon_
Walkley
Slack
Nltrate_
nitrogen
KCI mg
Ammon
i
um_nitr
ogen
KC
Phosph
o
rus_Col
well
mg
Phosph
o
rus_Buff
er
Index
Potassiu
m_Colw
ell mg
Sulfur_K
Cl 40
m
ExchCa_
BaCI2_N
H4CI m
PADDOCK_num
P a d d o c k D e s c rip
t lo n
C o m m
e n t Analyte _ C a C I2 _H20 m prcnt kg Lmgkg _kg _PBI kg 6kg eqlOOg
ExchMg
_BaCI2_
NH4CI_
meqlOO
g
ExchK_
B
aCI2_N
H
4CI_me
q lOOg
ExchNa
_
BaCI2_
N
H4CI_m
eqlOOg
ExchAI.
BaCI2_N
H4CI_m
eqlOOg
ECEC_m
eqlOOg
ExchMg
_prcnt
ExchNa
_ prcnt
Calcium
_magne
sium_ra
t io
Copper
_
DTPA_
m
gkg
Z ln c _ D T
P A .m g k
g
M a n g a n
e se _ D T
P
A _ m g k g
lron_DT
PAjngk
g
Boron_h
otCaCI2
_mgj<g
Chlorlde
_
H2O_mg
k
I
Aluminlu
m_CaCI2
_mgkg
8 8 845-846 A S.2 5.8 0.717 3.76 47 14 119 46.3 276 91 7.47 181 0.74 1.98 0.06 12.06 15.01 16.42 4.13 1.12 2.81 2.12 173.16 0.9 4 2
Hay Shed 7 HAYSHED 843-844 A 5.2 5.9 0.101 3.05 12 10 78 45.3 117 6 4.78 0.49 0.27 0.19 0.11 5.84 8.39 3.25 9.76 0.71 3.97 3.22 94.89 0.5 4 1.7
Centra! 3 CENTRAL 834 835 A 5 5.9 0.211 2.43 12 14 34 55.2 113 17.5 4.2 0.64 0.28 0.54 0.22 5.88 10.88 9.18 6.56 0.45 1.14 ',.1! 85.28 0.5 4 4.2
Lanewsy 6 LANEWAY 840-841-842 A 5.1 6 0.241 3.11 15 9 43 72.2 103 22.6 7.01 0.91 0.23 0.49 0.09 8.73 10.42 5.61 7.7 0.52 2.42 4.38 123.74 0.6 3 1.7
Jindong 2 JINDONG 832-833 A 4.7 5.4 0.479 3.74 12 14 59 89.2 96 82.1 4.37 1.11 0.22 1.63 0.23 7.56 14.68 21.56 3.94 0.63 1.68 5.22 231.6 0.6 5 3.3
Bully 2 11 BULLY 852-853 A 4.6 5.5 01,66 3.3 10 24 73 63.4 92 54.1 4.56 1.42 0.22 2.11 0.13 8.44 16.82 25 3.21 0.58 2.47 5.28 235.59 0.5 5 2.5
Marybrook 16 MONYBROOK 863-864 A 4.5 5.5 0.237 3.36 13 10 69 60.5 87 27.9 4.03 0.99 0.29 0.58 0.24 6.13 16.15 9.46 4.07 0.53 1.85 12.08 239.21 0.5 4 4
Calf 9CALF-847-848 A 4.2 5.2 0.189 3.41 7 12 91 56.4 86 13.7 347 0.36 0.22 0.43 0.44 4.92 7.32 8.74 9.64 1.07 2.67 2.06 163.08 0.5 3 9.7
Paper Bark Central 13PAPERBARKCENTRAL856- A 4.8 5.7 0.228 3.1 15 12 45 55.9 80 14.7 6.13 0.86 0.2 0.56 0.16 7.91 10.87 7.08 7.13 0.71 2.5 8.88 138.17 0.6 4 2.1
New House 72 NEW HOUSE 8/7-87R A ' 4.6 5.6 0.079 3 8 6 )2 894 80 5.1 3.71 0.58 0.18 0.22 0.29 4.98 1165 4.47 6.4 0.31 1.2 938 73.76 0.4 5 3.7
Paper Bark North 15PAPERBARKNORTH860-81 A 4.7 5.5 0.58 2.29 9 7 45 76.4 75 59.6 3.54 1.29 0.18 1.77 0.17 6.95 18.56 75.47 2.74 0.38 0.95 3.74 257.44 0.5 5 2.1
Potato 1 25 POTATO 1 883-884 A 4.3 5.3 0.099 2.73 5 11 33 50.2 73 5.6 4.28 0.74 0.2 0.28 0.32 5.82 12.71 4.81 5.78 0.39 0.86 4.6 74.01 0.4 3 4
House 1 HOUSE 830-831 A 4.7 5.5 0.209 3.3 18 13 75 64.4 72 16.8 5.06 0.61 0.18 0.47 0.22 6.54 9.33 7.19 8.3 0.71 1.34 5.85 219 0.4 4 3.9
Windmill 19 WINDMILL 871-872 A 4.6 5.4 0.365 3 7 10 39 31.8 72 129 4.38 0.75 0.21 0.75 0.17 6.26 11.98 11.98 5.84 0.68 1.64 4.68 155.96 0.4 3 2.2
Armstrong 20 ARMSTRONG 3 873-874 A 4.3 5.3 0.229 2.53 15 17 28 59.6 72 22.3 2.45 0.38 0.17 0.53 0.31 3.84 9.9 13.8 6.45 0.46 1.2 2.29 166.93 0.3 4 6.6
Pine Tree 21 PINE TREE875-876 A 4.6 5.6 0087 2.41 3 7 42 57.4 70 6.8 3.43 0.61 0.15 0.27 0.19 4.65 13.12 5.81 5.62 0.41 1.83 9.96 66.74 0.3 3 2.9
20 Acre 12 20AC 854-855 A 4.5 5.5 0.327 2.7 6 13 37 57.4 70 40.9 3.15 1.18 0.16 1.24 0.24 5.97 19.77 20.77 2.67 0.77 1.84 4.95 2059 0.5 4 4
Ward! 23 WARDS 879-880 A 4.6 5.6 0.057 2.14 4 6 34 55.2 70 3.3 3.14 0.41 0.16 0.13 0.28 4.12 9.95 3.16 7.66 0.33 1.38 5.63 47.57 0.3 4 4.5
Dawsons Hay 18 HAY DAWSON 869-870 A 4.9 5.7 0.277 3.76 21 11 46 53.6 69 42.6 7.1 0.7 0.12 0.62 0.11 8.65 8.09 7.17 10.14 0.67 2.61 7.92 177.04 0.5 3 0.8
Roses 17 ROSES 865-866 A 5.2 6 0.274 3.04 11 11 38 71.5 69 34.2 6.22 0.82 0.17 0.72 0.09 8.02 10.22 8.98 7.59 0.51 2.06 4.01 129.31 0.5 4 1.1
Paper Bark South 14PAPERBARK
SOU
TH858-
8S
A 4.7 5.4 0.645 3.54 8 12 42 68.6 66 54.3 4.64 1.77 0.15 1.57 0.16 8.29 21.35 18.94 2.62 0.62 1.42 6.77 247.31 0.6 3 2.1
Yard 24 YARD881-882 A 4.4 5.4 0.072 2.56 8 10 24 47.8 66 4.5 4.42 0.63 0.15 0.18 0.31 5.69 11.07 3.16 7.02 0.34 0.88 12.67 90.83 0.3 5 4.1
Bully 1 10 BULLY 850-851 A 4.8 5.5 0.443 2.74 6 9 65 64.6 61 47 4.06 0.85 0.15 1.37 0.15 6.58 12.92 20.82 4.78 0.6 1.18 2.12 238.19 0.4 4 2.4
H a y l 4 HAY 836-838 A 4.7 5.4 0.301 3.61 16 8 27 70.1 50 52.8 5.44 0.65 0.1 0.59 0.18 6.96 9.34 8.48 8.37 0.55 1.99 4.56 100.7 0.6 2 4.1
Spreadsheet also supplied to grower containing data and recommendations based on critical limits.

18. Blackrock Angus

19. Blackrock Angus
For the last two seasons 09 and 10 fertilizer applications have
been reduced dramatically.
Current recommendations suggest application rates from zero
to 70kg/ha are adequate.
The savings have more than compensated for doubling annual
lime application to 300t.
This has resulted in big savings with no loss of production.

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

21. Soil testing 2010

22. 2010 program overview
• 835 samples from 31 farms
• Average of 27 samples per farm
• Range from 3 to 89 samples per farm
• As of today, we have results back for 785
samples

25. High P status and other
deficiencies

26. See Neroli for a SPANA

27. Summary
• 835 samples from 31 farms
– Beef in Peel Harvey, Dairy in Geographe
• 87% have pH<5.5
• 65% have low to marginal K, 20% low K
• 61% have high P status95
– increases to 91% high P status at 80% production
– most high P for higher PBI soils
– 52% have high P and low pH
– 31% have high P and low K
– 28% have high P, low K and low pH
• Maps are a big hit

29. Are you interested?
• Is your farm located on the
Swan Coastal or Scott River
Plain?
• Do you graze cattle for Beef?
• Please contact us to lodge your
Expression Of Interest for the
2011 soil sampling program.
• Tilwin Westrup 9780 6165 (Swan
Coastal South)
• Peta Richards 9777 0144 (Scott River)
• Heidi Blackburn 9733 7713(Swan
Coastal North)