xt7crj48r121 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7crj48r121/data/mets.xml   Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station.  journals kaes_circulars_004_596 English Lexington : The Service, 1913-1958. Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Circular (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n. 596 text Circular (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n. 596  2014 true xt7crj48r121 section xt7crj48r121     I hree - Hopper I ruck
O O
A Ertl IZ6I' pI"€G €I"S···
A E ' E I f °
ew . ‘—=‘ W — n
 *   `j§T§'i?·a,, » .,,.   .%,( . ~ *   By
    } We ‘ , A T JOE E FUQUA
  r' —` ' »     4 I)¢·yu1rm1w11l 4m/
      {iv _ T _ r"» ‘   · - .,__ .·\;4ri¢·nIIuruI ICmmn1ni42\
V   “> l     J   {T ·‘ "_ E. __ l Unir4·r.x·iIy uf Kwrntrwky
T *" ` ~¢: fb; "?"j¥··-—-· ‘ .,_~,, ' T '-,..
. A V   \   and
.· .~   ~'`  r,, —  ·      HAROLD G, wAn_•<1_n>
j{  I?}    j_, ` 2 r `  J   €;bj:Q`  A[.I7`i('ll1rlU°IlI I‘:('lHlUlHit'.\’ Hfrlllfh
  AL _ .»__2_...7:¤‘ ··  `-     .4Q.{4;§?}_¤_x_._ Trn111·.vxz·r* Vullry .·\ullmrirg;
‘ ‘“   fz "¤ ‘   ;¤; -‘; . A,T~·‘T, ,·· {vs ·.r-··-;g¢5*-,:; _
  e ·— p -     ~      
" " — \:"*·‘   _ .... J ·   ,.~*'Lj*”».*" `1`.’:... .3*** ` ’ 1 — .
. . .. .»`~:·v··  own ·—»•»··   .19** x E -:‘ T ~*f'·\1•
 ’” hk" ’·   - iL—•·:- =¤‘— ¤., isn. . .i  .~
    -"·i ’‘V‘ L Q l:’.fi·  ·*¤»»·T’m »=;*¤.=‘;l*·4;
· .Pi;;.;_;E&—       V; \‘·- ~ A .   yr
  » _._,`T,_,.V2 1 _ __‘__ N _E·.·;-¢__,,•,¤A__/lv  J_.yg_.; ’v¤__,  
*~»·’;·. ¤t\.~· —·~»1¢>     —n»··»a¢·‘;s¤~*<’.
.*5* > ~··2;;g·;¤r "*"L <:·».~r—· > Q~¢·$T;? A ·;·=t"’f*23
,_· ,,.3   —=.,.,_~~L_._g5_,g:v_  ,§·—~·;»__.,q
I CIRCULAR 596 (Filing Code 7)
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY M, STATION ___'_ LEXINGTON

  

   C O N T E N T S
A PAcE
SUMMARY .............................................................................................. 4 _
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................,... 5
THREE—I·IOPPER TRUCK FERTILIZER SPREADERS .................... 6
( Description ....................................................................,................... 6
C Performance ...................................................................................... 6
COSTS AND RETURNS OF OWNING AND OPERATING A
THREE—HOPPER TRUCK SPREADER .......................................... G
» Purchase Prices .................................................,.............................. 6
Overhead Costs ................................................................................ 6
Operating Costs ................................................................................ 7
Cost Per Acre .................................................................................... 7
Custom Charges ....................................,........................................,.. 7
Break—even Points for Dealers ....................,................................... 8
` COSTS OF FERTILIZING WITH THE THREE-HOPPER TRUCK
SPREADER AND THE FARMEPCS SPREADER COMPARED .... 8
Costs of a Farmer—owned Spreader ................................................ 8
Comparison of Total Costs .............................................................. 9
~ ECONOMICS OF USING THE THREE-HOPPER TRUCK
- SPREADER ON THE VVHOLE FARM ............................................ 9
Avcrage—sizc Farm ............................................................................ 1()
Fertilizer Materials Required ...................,...................................... l()
Comparison of Costs ........,.............................................................,, 10
FARMERS, OPINIONS OF TIIE THREE-HOPPER TRUCK
SPREADING SERVICE ......................................................,............. 11
Advantages ........r.. . .........................................,.................................. 11
Disadvantages .................................,................................................ 12
Additional Information Related to Farmers) Acceptance ..r.......,. 12
OPPORTUNITIES FOR FUTURE USE OF THE THREE-HOPPER
TRUCK SPREADER AS A CUSTOM SERVICE ............................ 13
Market Potential ..................................,........................................... 13
Eflect on Mixed Fertilizer Sales and Other Business ................i... 13
Truck Operator—The Key To Success ......4.........................4........... 13
Educational Program ................................................................,....... 13

 /
SUMMARY
Custom service using a three-hopper truck fertilizer spreader gen-
erally provides a convenient method of fertilizer application; reduces
the need for farm labor, machinery, and capital investment; and
results in lower cost for fertilizer applications. ‘
Results of the survey reported in this publication show that
the cost per acre of owning and operating a three-hopper truck
spreader decreased as more acres were fertilized annually. For A »
example, when 1,000 acres were fertilized, the cost per acre was
$2.30; however, when 4,000 acres were fertilized, the cost per acre
was reduced to $0.96.
The most usual custom rate charged in 1960 for use of the three-
hopper truck spreader was $1.50 per acre. A dealer making that charge
needed to fcrtilize about 1,800 acres annually to pay all costs.
Equivalent amounts of primary plant nutrients (nitrogen, phos- ‘
phorus, and potassium) were usually purchased by farmers for less
in straight materials than in mixtures in 1960. The savings ranged
from $7.20 to $12.60 per ton for the three most popular grades used
in Kentucky.
If the average—size farm of 132 acres in the 12-county study area V
had been fertilized at recommended rates in 1960, the 94.1 acres of ‘
cropland could have been fertilized with a three-hopper truck spreader
using straight materials for $167.25 less per year than with a farmer’s
spreader using mixed fertilizer-a saving of $1.78 per acre.
"Lower cost of applying fertilizer,” "saves labor,” and “saves time”
were advantages most frequently mentioned by farmers who had used
the three-hopper truck spreader service. Disadvantages most fre-
quently mentioned were “diiHculty in spreading on wet gI`Oll11(.1,”
"truck packs grouud," and “obtaining service at the desired time.”
Thirty percent of the farmers saw, however, no disadvantage in using
the service.
4

 I
O O
Three-Hopper Truck Ferhlizer
 
Spread:-:rs—An Economic
E I ` ‘
va ucition
By JOE E. FUQUA and HAROLD G. WALKUPl
New fertilizer materials, higher application rates, and the need
_ for labor efficiency have encouraged the development of new methods
of fertilizer application. The three-hopper truck fertilizer spreader is
one of the new methods. These spreaders simultaneously apply up
to three straight fertilizer materials in any combination of primary
plant nutrient ratios.
A forerunner of the three—hopper truck spreader, a pull—type three-
hopper spreader introduced in Kentucky in 1950, was used mainly
by fertilizer dealers and custom operators and by some farmers with
large acreages.2
Three-hopper truck spreaders were introduced in Kentucky in
_ 1958. Cost and capacity usually limit ownership to fertilizer dealers
for custom operation.
Economic evaluation of three-hopper truck fertilizer spreaders,
the subject of this report, was begun in Kentucky in 1961. Objectives
were to determine: (1) cost to dealers of owning and operating a
three-hopper truck as a custom service, (2) cost to farmers of using
the custom service in relation to other methods of spreading fertilizer,
and   farmers’ opinions of the three-hopper truck spreading ser-
viee.’*
1ASS1StilI1t PI`l)fCSS()I`, DCI72ITtH]CHt of AgI`1C1111lll"tl1 E('()I1()]1]1CS, 1,lIl1\`(‘I`S1ty U1.
Kentucky; and Agricultural Economist, Agricultural Economics Branch, Division
of Agricultural Development, Tennessee Valley Authority, respectively.
The authors acknowledge the assistance of the following in the conduct oi
this study: B. \V. “Cap” Edmonds, former manager of Valley Counties of Ken-
tucky Cooperative; Maurice \\`i11iams, \Vayne Posey and Kenneth Littrell, regional
l1`l{\1`1iIg0l'S 1-()1` plllllt f()()(1 St11(‘S f()I` 111C SO11t11(‘I`1"1 $111105 C()()])(‘TLl11\'C; 2l1I(1 1lI(’lI` (`U1-
leagues in the Department of Agricultural Economies, University of Kentucky,
and the Tennessee Valley Authority.
Zllarold C. \Va1kup. "Tliree-Ilopper Fertilizer Spread<·rs~Ecrmoiuic Con-
siderations of Their Used) Tennessee Valley Authority Report T($9»l AE, 1959;
llarold C. \Valkup and ]oe E. Fuqua, Cos! of Operating llie l’i1ll—Type Tliree-
Ilopper Fertilizer Spremler. Ky. Coop. Ext. Service Circ. 564 (1959).
il FOI` il l11()1”(' (1('1ll11(‘(1 (1(’SCI`1l`)11()H l1l'1(1 2l1`Hl1}`S1S of 11](‘ S1II(1}' 5(‘(‘Z _l()(‘   lslltilltl
and llarold C. \\`alkup, Bulk Fertilizer Spremling I’ruefiee.s· in KeriI11r·l‘§‘ .'·· .'* `
S A F E A S A M E R I C A :Q:Q;§:Q:Q:Q1}1Q;§1QQ:Q;}:§:Q:Q;§:§:§:§:{cf:§§:Q:§;ifi·]§:§;€:§:§§:§:f:2§:§:§j;§:§:§:§:i%:§3€Q:§:?$:f§"<>$§.f$
.. . , , .·:-:·‘-··:·;··-:4:-1-:-·-···-·r-··:#·:·:-:·:··<·:·¢><»€:-:»F;-:·:#·:4:-:<·.·:·:·zyiz-5·-:»:-:-:-··:··¢:·:$5":-.-3;:-*
F'./Z4?iz9:7:?.»>zi:-:·2*':?:i:¥:i;¥zizi1T:Z:¢:15:i:¢:?:?:¥:i:?:?:¥:?:izi:izT:T:iz?:·;·:-:2:§:Tzi:Z1·2;:;:;:;:§:Qc;:·;?:-:-;;:;:§:§:§:§5·'· .;:;:;:·2·:·:·:;:··;:5;:;:;;;5:·:;:;:····;:·;;:».;:·:;;·i:-:;:;:;$:;§:·:5{$f:;:_.;:§
&/·Z-Fi·1-i·ij¤Z·Z-wif-2-2-I·I-Z·Z·i-Z·54I-2-1·Z·I·l·Z-?-Z·i-1·Z·Z·1-I·I-2-2-2·i-2-1-Z·Z·,·2;Z·2·Z-.-.·.·.;.;.;.;Z;igZ·ig.·.~.·.·   >;{.;.-.;.;
 :0:;:;:;4;:;:;:5;:5;:;:;ry:5;:;;;:;:;;;:;:;1;:;1;:;:;t;:;1;:;Z;Z;i;1;1;1;1gi;i;2;Z;¥:¢;-:$:i:i;¥;i;¥:-:·:-·-·· ' ». .-C-Z·Z·A·}'{1:Z:Z€:Z·$Z·Z-ZA:1·Z-Z·.’§·£·.·Z€‘·C·Z¤Z·Z-Z·Z·Z·Z-1+2-2.  
/Z'?//C".’ 2-2·2·'-1-2-2-'·1-Z-Z·Z·Z·5-2·i·Z·2·i·1·Z-I-14·2-2·I·I·l·Z·i~Qi·Z-1-1-Z-1·Z-2+Z·I·Z·Z·Z·2·Z;2;Z·Z·" ‘_ ji;2-Z·Z;2;Zfj;2;Z;Z;1·Z·Z;Zg1·{;;g1;Z;Z;1·'g2i;>QZ;§;Zg;;I;>_QZ;Z;;)§f_1_' ;Z_.j>_,
 /2%ErE:h£E=£=E¢E$¤i=E=ErE¢E=E:E¢E¤i=i=i;i;=E=E=E=E=E;2;Egigiri=E:E¤E¢E;E;E;E;E5E=€¢*"‘ .   i=iEEi£=E;E=5¤E¢Zkiiéwiiririi=§¤$i¤?¥£=E=£=* '·’=E=3€=E=5jé=*·Z.··  
fx   v‘·’·’·’······· =-Z·¤·=·>·=<==:=:=:¢:==¢=<=z:s¤a:z:2 ·  .   ·    
    · ‘ ‘ Z·Z·i·'-1-2-2-1-I·Z·Z·Z-I-. ,·Z·Z·Z·1~2-2-Z-Z-i·Z-Z- *.· Z-Z-I-'·   -'    
    .i ’‘‘‘‘‘‘‘ · ··‘·‘·‘-‘··-····‘···’- =<  
. »xiii;=E=3i=E¢*=&:E:i=E=E=.   ‘ 2   _  
*-%ZJ?;E¢2=’r§bE=E¤E¤E¤£:E¢;-.   . can  
/  ·  ”   gy'.   .
_.<;;é:;:;2:;:i:i$:2:i:¤:2:E=E=E¤2¤i=E¤ir~ KV V  ~(-rv ;·' ..  ;-:2:;;1:=;=:=;=;¤;¤:¤;¤;=;=;=-=-i¢:;;<;j»§fs»g¢·
  ·‘·‘  ‘_é . .. __,   ’  x   ..;:  
    _ 3  » §z§2§2§z§z§z§z§ai2§z5=* .¤=2:2525;:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:z¤z:2¤e=2:222:2:22:z=2:z¤z:2:;=2:=·;s=ag
_.·_. ;-.-4.;.;.;.;.;. · ~_ 3 i-Z#l·Z·2-i·Z-J#2·'  J  
_ _. -·.y,· /· ·Z·1-Z·Z~Z·Z-L·1  .-2 j.;
  · . · JZ   ¢E=E¤E=E2E;$*· .;¤i¤E= . u•s• :=:
 ,3*Q ·   ·· " 1 V x .  .§:§;Q:§·`·  _.;:§:§:Q:§ *3:
  _  _____ _,£;;;;g;g;gg;g;2=.  / »  i;2;°·`   _ 2§2§;§2§2§;z   ;.§
_. ._... ; a* i£;i§a§;§z§;§;§;§2§e%=*=*·" —  _ M 2  » .;z;;;z;z;;;2§s;2; ;§
    `/" ./ / ‘·%==E;E;E;$E;i;E;    2
=5<¥:i- =;·*=*$E-?‘·T` // , { ,.. *7  ` "=-fri  L,
E5*‘ -  /   Q  .· §wHsn:v0uw0ru