High diesel prices raise the cost of tillage, fertilizer application, cultivation, spraying, hauling, and nearly every trip across the field. The goal is not simply to do less. It is to identify which field operations create agronomic value, which can be combined or eliminated, and how to reduce fuel use without compromising crop performance.
Author: The Organic Agronomist
Agronomic review: Tim Stemwedel, Founder & CCA
Published by: California Organic Fertilizers, Inc.
Executive Summary
When diesel prices rise, every field pass becomes more expensive.
Tillage, fertilizer application, incorporation, spraying, cultivation, hauling, and irrigation pumping can all add to fuel cost.
The answer is not simply to eliminate field operations.
The better approach is to identify which operations:
directly support yield or quality,
can be combined,
can be reduced,
can be timed more efficiently,
or can be eliminated without creating another agronomic problem.
The most useful comparison is not just:
“How much diesel does this tractor burn per hour?”
It is:
“What does this operation cost per acre, and what value does it create?”
That means evaluating:
gallons of fuel used per acre,
labor,
equipment wear,
fertilizer or pesticide cost,
field capacity,
and crop response.
A field pass that costs more per hour may still be economical if it covers acres quickly.
A cheaper-looking operation may become expensive if it requires a second pass, causes compaction, or creates a fertility problem that must be corrected later.
The biggest opportunities often come from:
reducing unnecessary tillage,
combining compatible operations,
improving fertilizer placement,
avoiding unnecessary incorporation,
matching tractor size to the job,
reducing idle time,
maintaining correct tire pressure and ballast,
and timing field work when soil conditions reduce draft and compaction.
The goal is simple:
Do not cut operations that protect the crop. Cut operations that do not earn their cost.
Start by Calculating the Cost of Every Field Pass
Before trying to reduce diesel use, calculate what each field operation actually costs.
A simple starting point is:
Fuel cost per acre = gallons used per acre × diesel price
If an operation uses 1.5 gallons per acre and diesel costs $8.50 per gallon:
1.5 × $8.50 = $12.75 per acre in fuel
Across 500 acres, that one pass costs:
$6,375 in fuel alone
That does not include:
labor,
tractor depreciation,
implement wear,
repairs,
tires,
or the cost of moving equipment between fields.
Measure cost per acre, not just gallons per hour
A tractor that burns more fuel per hour may still be cheaper per acre if it completes the job faster.
That is why gallons per hour can be misleading.
A better comparison is:
total operating cost ÷ acres completed
Useful numbers to record include:
gallons of diesel used,
acres covered,
hours required,
labor cost,
equipment cost,
and whether another pass was required afterward.
Put every operation on the list
Include:
primary tillage,
secondary tillage,
bed preparation,
fertilizer spreading,
fertilizer incorporation,
spraying,
cultivation,
mowing,
harvest operations,
hauling,
and diesel-powered irrigation where applicable.
Once the numbers are visible, the expensive operations usually become obvious.
Then ask the question that drives the rest of the article:
What agronomic value does this pass create, and is there another way to accomplish the same job for less?
You cannot manage field-operation cost until you know which operations are actually costing the most per acre.
Eliminate Passes That Do Not Create Agronomic Value
The cheapest field pass is the one you do not need to make.
That does not mean skipping essential work.
It means questioning operations that have become routine simply because they have always been part of the program.
For every pass, ask:
What problem is this operation solving?
Does it improve yield, quality, stand establishment, nutrient availability, weed control, or harvestability?
Is that benefit still necessary under current field conditions?
Could another planned operation accomplish the same thing?
Look closely at repeated tillage
Many systems use several tillage passes before planting.
Depending on soil condition, crop, residue, and equipment, some of those passes may be essential.
Others may be performing nearly the same job twice.
Opportunities may include:
reducing the number of secondary tillage passes,
using shallower tillage where deep tillage is unnecessary,
combining tillage and bed preparation,
or moving toward reduced-tillage systems where agronomically appropriate.
The objective is not to minimize tillage at any cost.
It is to avoid spending fuel on soil disturbance that does not improve the crop.
Question “just because” applications
The same principle applies to fertilizer and crop-protection passes.
A field should not receive an application simply because:
the equipment is already nearby,
the operation is traditional,
or the material was included in last year's program.
If testing, crop demand, pest pressure, or field history do not support the application, the pass may be adding cost without adding value.
Be careful about false savings
Eliminating the wrong pass can increase total cost.
For example, skipping an operation that leads to:
poor seedbed preparation,
greater weed pressure,
reduced fertilizer effectiveness,
compaction,
or a later corrective pass
may save fuel initially and cost more later.
The goal is not fewer passes for the sake of fewer passes. It is fewer passes that accomplish the same agronomic result.
Combine Operations When One Trip Can Do Two Jobs
If two necessary operations can be completed in one field pass without compromising performance, the fuel savings are immediate.
Possible examples include:
applying fertilizer during planting,
combining compatible nutrient applications,
incorporating fertilizer during a tillage pass that was already necessary,
combining cultivation with another field operation,
or using equipment that prepares beds and applies inputs in the same trip.
The value comes from eliminating:
tractor hours,
fuel use,
labor,
equipment wear,
and travel between fields.
But combine only when the agronomy still works
Two operations should not be combined simply because it saves a trip.
Ask whether combining them changes:
application timing,
placement,
depth,
product compatibility,
crop safety,
or effectiveness.
For fertilizer, timing can matter more than convenience.
A nutrient should not be applied weeks too early merely because the applicator is already in the field.
Likewise, a product should not be tank-mixed or incorporated in a way that reduces its effectiveness just to save diesel.
Look for planned overlaps
The best opportunities often occur where two operations are already scheduled close together.
For example:
tillage + fertilizer incorporation
or
planting + starter fertilizer placement
may be more efficient than separate passes if the crop and product allow it.
Calculate the actual savings
If combining two operations eliminates a pass using 1 gallon of diesel per acre, then at $8.50 diesel the direct fuel savings are:
$8.50 per acre
Across 500 acres:
$4,250 in fuel
And that still does not include labor or equipment wear.
Combining operations can reduce cost quickly, but only when the combined pass still does both jobs correctly.
Question Whether Fertilizer Really Needs a Separate Incorporation Pass
Dry fertilizer application can become expensive when it requires both:
spread
and then
incorporate
as separate operations.
That may be agronomically justified.
But it should not be automatic.
Before scheduling a separate incorporation pass, ask:
Does this fertilizer actually need incorporation?
Does placement affect nutrient availability?
Is incorporation required to reduce loss?
Could the fertilizer be applied during a tillage pass that is already planned?
Could banding or another placement method reduce the need for full-field incorporation?
Incorporation can be important
Some fertilizer materials perform better when they are placed into the active root zone rather than left on the soil surface.
Incorporation may also be important when:
volatilization risk is a concern,
material needs soil contact,
fertilizer placement affects crop access,
or residue and surface conditions limit effectiveness.
In those cases, the pass may be justified.
But a separate pass is not always necessary
If tillage is already planned, fertilizer may sometimes be incorporated during that operation.
If the crop can be fertilized through another application method, the additional tractor trip may be avoidable.
The key is to separate two questions:
Does the fertilizer need incorporation?
and
Does incorporation require its own dedicated field pass?
Those are not always the same thing.
Look at the total cost of the fertilizer program
A lower-cost fertilizer can become more expensive if it requires:
spreading,
incorporation,
additional labor,
and another tractor pass.
The better comparison is:
material cost + application cost + incorporation cost + fuel + labor + expected crop response
That gives a much more realistic picture of what the fertility program actually costs per acre.
Do not eliminate incorporation when the agronomy requires it. Eliminate the unnecessary separate trip when another planned operation can accomplish the same job.
Use Fertilizer Placement to Reduce Both Material and Application Cost
Where fertilizer is placed can affect both agronomic efficiency and field-operation cost.
A full-field broadcast application may be appropriate in some situations.
But in others, placing nutrients closer to the active root zone can reduce the amount of material that needs to be moved across the entire field.
Possible approaches include:
banding,
starter placement,
sidedress application,
fertigation,
or other targeted placement methods appropriate to the crop and production system.
Placement can improve efficiency
If nutrients are concentrated where roots can access them, the crop may be able to use a greater share of the applied fertilizer.
That can sometimes reduce:
total material required,
unnecessary nutrient placement between rows,
and the need for later corrective applications.
Placement can also change equipment requirements
A fertilizer program that depends on:
broadcast + incorporation
may require more field passes than one that places nutrients during:
planting,
cultivation,
irrigation,
or another operation already scheduled.
That does not make targeted placement automatically cheaper.
Specialized equipment, slower application speed, or additional setup can add cost.
The correct comparison is still the full system:
fertilizer cost + application cost + fuel + labor + equipment + expected nutrient-use efficiency
Avoid overconcentrating nutrients
Targeted placement also has limits.
High concentrations of fertilizer too close to seed or roots can cause:
salt injury,
ammonia injury,
or localized nutrient imbalance,
depending on the material, rate, soil moisture, and crop.
Placement should improve access without creating a new crop-safety problem.
The practical question
Instead of asking only:
“What fertilizer is cheapest per ton or gallon?”
ask:
“What does it cost to place an effective amount of nutrient where the crop can actually use it?”
Better placement can reduce both wasted fertilizer and unnecessary field operations, but only when the placement method fits the crop and the fertilizer source.
Split Applications Only When the Extra Pass Pays for Itself
Split fertilizer applications can improve nutrient timing and reduce the risk of applying too much before the crop needs it.
But every additional application also has a cost.
That cost can include:
diesel,
labor,
equipment wear,
application fees,
field access,
and time.
So the right question is not simply:
“Are split applications better agronomically?”
It is:
“Does the gain in nutrient efficiency or crop response justify the extra trip?”
When splitting can make sense
Split applications may be especially useful when:
crop demand changes sharply through the season,
early-season losses are likely,
fertilizer availability is difficult to predict,
leaching risk is high,
the crop has a long feeding period,
or later applications can be made through an operation already planned.
If an in-season application can be made during irrigation, cultivation, or another scheduled pass, the added fuel cost may be small.
When splitting can become expensive
If every split requires a separate tractor trip, the economics can change quickly.
For example, if each additional application uses 0.8 gallon of diesel per acre and diesel costs $8.50 per gallon:
0.8 × $8.50 = $6.80 per acre in fuel
Across 500 acres, that is:
$3,400 in fuel for one additional pass
before labor and equipment costs.
Compare the saved nutrient with the added operation
A split application earns its cost when it helps:
reduce nutrient loss,
improve crop uptake,
avoid overapplication,
protect yield,
or reduce the total fertilizer rate enough to offset the added application cost.
If it does none of those things, the extra pass may simply add expense.
Use existing application windows
One of the best ways to preserve the agronomic advantage of splitting while reducing fuel cost is to attach the nutrient application to something already happening.
That might include:
irrigation,
cultivation,
planting,
or another compatible field operation.
Split applications are valuable when timing improves nutrient use enough to justify the added field cost. The goal is better timing, not simply more trips.
Match Tractor Size and Setup to the Job
Fuel efficiency is not just about the tractor.
It is about whether the tractor is properly matched to the implement and operated efficiently.
An oversized tractor doing a light job may burn more fuel than necessary.
An undersized tractor can also be inefficient if it has to operate at high load, low field speed, or with excessive wheel slip.
Match horsepower to the operation
Use enough tractor to perform the job efficiently, but not substantially more than the implement requires.
The goal is to keep the tractor working in an efficient load range rather than:
idling through a light job,
lugging under excessive load,
or pulling an implement too large for the machine.
Check tire pressure and ballast
Incorrect tire pressure and ballast can increase rolling resistance and wheel slip.
That wastes fuel and can also increase soil compaction.
Before major field operations, check:
tire inflation,
axle load,
ballast,
wheel slip,
and implement setup.
Small improvements here can reduce fuel use across many acres.
Use the right gear and engine speed
Many tractors can perform the same operation at different combinations of gear and engine speed.
When the job does not require full PTO speed or maximum hydraulic output, a higher gear and lower engine speed may reduce fuel use while maintaining field speed.
The tractor should still operate smoothly and within the manufacturer's recommended range.
Reduce unnecessary idling
Idling still burns fuel.
It may seem minor, but time spent idling during:
loading,
adjustments,
field changes,
breaks,
or waiting for another machine
can add up over a season.
Maintain the machine
Basic maintenance matters more when fuel is expensive.
Keep:
air filters clean,
fuel systems maintained,
injectors operating properly,
cooling systems functioning,
and tires in good condition.
A poorly maintained tractor may consume more fuel while doing the same work.
The goal is not simply to use the smallest tractor. It is to match tractor, implement, tires, ballast, and operating speed so each acre requires as little unnecessary energy as possible.
Work the Soil When It Costs the Least Energy
Soil condition has a direct effect on how much power it takes to till.
Working soil when it is too wet can increase:
wheel slip,
compaction,
smearing,
rutting,
and the need for corrective tillage later.
Working soil when it is extremely dry can also increase draft and fuel use, especially during deeper tillage.
The most efficient window is when the soil is dry enough to carry equipment but moist enough to break and flow without excessive resistance.
Avoid tilling just because the calendar says it is time
Field timing should be based on soil condition, not only schedule.
Before entering the field, check:
surface moisture,
subsurface moisture,
traction,
compaction risk,
and whether the implement will actually perform the intended job.
If one pass through poor conditions creates clods, compaction, or ruts that require another pass to repair, the original operation was not cheap.
Watch wheel slip
Excessive wheel slip is a sign that tractor power is being lost instead of converted into useful field work.
That increases fuel consumption and can damage soil structure.
Correcting:
ballast,
tire pressure,
implement depth,
or timing
may reduce both fuel use and soil damage.
Do not till deeper than necessary
Deeper tillage usually requires more power and more fuel.
Deep tillage can be justified when there is a real compaction layer or rooting restriction.
But deep tillage without a diagnosed problem can become an expensive routine.
Before scheduling it, ask:
Where is the restriction?
How deep is it?
Does it actually limit the crop?
If the problem is shallow, the correction should not automatically be deep.
Consider the next operation
Good timing can also improve the performance of later passes.
A well-timed first tillage operation may leave the soil in condition for planting or bed preparation with fewer additional trips.
A badly timed operation may create clods or compaction that require several more.
The cheapest tillage pass is not necessarily the one performed fastest. It is the one that accomplishes the job without creating another pass later.
Reduce Idle Time, Travel, and Unproductive Acres
Not all fuel use happens while the implement is doing productive work.
A surprising amount can be lost to:
idling,
turning,
overlapping passes,
moving between fields,
waiting for loading,
and traveling empty.
Those minutes add up across a season.
Reduce overlap
Overlap wastes:
fuel,
labor,
fertilizer,
seed,
and crop-protection products.
Where possible, use:
accurate guidance,
properly calibrated equipment,
consistent swath width,
and clear field patterns
to reduce unnecessary double coverage.
Plan field order
If several fields require the same operation, group them where practical.
That can reduce:
road travel,
transport time,
repeated setup,
loading delays,
and equipment movement.
The same principle applies within a field.
A good traffic pattern can reduce turning and nonproductive travel.
Keep support operations moving
A tractor sitting with the engine running while waiting for fertilizer, seed, water, or another machine is still burning fuel.
Look at the whole operation.
Ask whether:
tender trucks arrive on time,
fertilizer is staged efficiently,
refueling is organized,
and equipment adjustments can be made without long delays.
Shut down when waiting becomes extended
Short waits may not justify repeated engine starts.
Long waits often do.
Follow manufacturer guidance, but avoid treating extended idling as free time.
Measure productive acres per hour
One useful metric is:
acres completed ÷ total engine hours
That captures inefficiency that gallons per acre alone may miss.
If two crews use similar equipment but one completes substantially more acres per engine hour, the difference may be:
field layout,
loading,
travel,
overlap,
or organization rather than tractor efficiency.
Fuel efficiency is not only about what happens while the implement is in the ground. It is also about reducing the time the engine runs without producing useful acres.
Think in Total Cost per Acre, Not Just Fuel Cost
Diesel is only one part of the cost of a field operation.
A pass that looks inexpensive because it uses little fuel can still be costly if it requires:
more labor,
more machine hours,
more repairs,
more equipment wear,
or another pass later.
The better question is:
What does this operation cost per acre from start to finish?
A useful field-pass calculation includes:
fuel,
labor,
machinery ownership,
repairs and maintenance,
application cost,
and any added input cost associated with that pass.
Compare alternatives on the same basis
For example, compare:
broadcast dry fertilizer + incorporation
with
targeted placement during another planned operation
The fertilizer itself may be cheaper in the first system.
But if it requires two separate field passes, the total cost may be higher.
Likewise, a more expensive fertilizer source may still be competitive if it reduces:
application cost,
field traffic,
or the need for a corrective pass.
Include the cost of mistakes
A poorly timed or poorly executed operation can create hidden costs.
Examples include:
compaction that requires remediation,
nutrient loss that requires replacement,
poor weed control that requires another spray,
or a rough seedbed that requires another tillage pass.
Those costs belong in the comparison.
Use a simple decision rule
For every operation, ask:
What does it cost per acre?
What agronomic value does it create?
What happens if we eliminate it?
What happens if we combine it with something else?
What is the least-cost way to achieve the same crop result?
When diesel is expensive, the cheapest program is not the one with the lowest fuel bill. It is the one that produces the required crop result at the lowest total cost per acre.
A Field-Pass Cost Checklist
Before scheduling a field operation, run through a short checklist.
What is the job?
What problem is this pass solving?
Is the operation necessary for yield, quality, establishment, weed control, fertility, or harvestability?
Is the job being done because it is needed, or because it is routine?
What does it cost?
Calculate:
gallons of diesel per acre,
diesel cost per acre,
labor,
equipment wear,
repairs,
application fees,
and total cost per acre.
Can the pass be eliminated?
Ask:
Is another planned operation already doing the same job?
Is the benefit measurable?
Would eliminating the pass create a larger problem later?
Can it be combined with another operation?
Look for opportunities to combine:
fertilizer application and planting,
fertilizer incorporation and tillage,
cultivation and nutrient application,
or other compatible field operations.
Can the operation be made shallower or lighter?
For tillage, ask:
Is this depth actually necessary?
Is there a diagnosed compaction layer?
Could a shallower pass accomplish the same result?
Is the tractor matched to the implement?
Check:
tractor size,
ballast,
tire pressure,
wheel slip,
engine speed,
and implement setup.
Is the timing efficient?
Before entering the field, ask:
Is the soil too wet?
Is it excessively dry?
Will this pass create clods, rutting, or compaction?
Could waiting for better conditions reduce draft and avoid another pass?
Is there unnecessary overlap?
Check:
swath width,
guidance,
turn patterns,
application overlap,
and field layout.
Is the engine running without producing acres?
Look for:
idling,
waiting,
loading delays,
unnecessary road travel,
and repeated setup.
Does the fertilizer program add avoidable trips?
Ask:
Does the material need a separate incorporation pass?
Can it be applied during another operation?
Would targeted placement reduce the need for full-field application?
Does a split application improve nutrient use enough to justify another trip?
What is the least-cost way to get the same agronomic result?
That is the final question.
Not:
“How do we use less diesel?”
But:
“How do we produce the same or better crop result with fewer unnecessary operating costs?”
Every field pass should have a clear agronomic purpose and a cost that can be justified.
Conclusion
High diesel prices make inefficient field operations more expensive, but the answer is not simply to cut field work.
The better approach is to identify which operations create real agronomic value and which can be:
eliminated,
combined,
timed better,
performed more efficiently,
or replaced with a lower-cost method that achieves the same result.
The most useful way to evaluate a field operation is not by gallons per hour alone.
It is by asking:
What does this operation cost per acre, and what does it contribute to crop performance?
That means looking at the entire system:
fuel,
labor,
equipment,
fertilizer or pesticide cost,
field capacity,
soil condition,
and the risk of creating another corrective pass later.
Some of the best opportunities for savings come from simple changes:
eliminating unnecessary tillage,
combining compatible operations,
improving fertilizer placement,
avoiding unnecessary incorporation,
matching tractor size to the job,
reducing wheel slip and idle time,
and working fields under better soil conditions.
Fertilizer programs also deserve a closer look.
A material that appears inexpensive may become costly if it requires multiple application and incorporation passes.
A more expensive input may sometimes be competitive if it reduces field traffic or improves placement and timing.
The correct comparison is always total cost per acre relative to the agronomic result.
The goal is not to use less diesel at any cost. It is to stop spending diesel on operations that do not earn their keep.
Key Takeaways
Calculate fuel and total operating cost for every major field pass.
Use cost per acre, not just gallons per hour.
Eliminate operations that do not create measurable agronomic value.
Combine compatible operations when one trip can do two jobs.
Do not schedule a separate fertilizer incorporation pass unless it is actually needed.
Use fertilizer placement to improve efficiency and reduce unnecessary full-field applications where appropriate.
Split fertilizer applications only when the agronomic benefit justifies the extra trip.
Match tractor size, ballast, tire pressure, and engine speed to the job.
Avoid working soil when conditions increase draft, compaction, or the need for corrective tillage.
Reduce overlap, idling, waiting, and unnecessary travel.
Compare fertilizer programs using material cost plus application, incorporation, fuel, labor, and crop response.
Include the cost of mistakes and corrective passes.
Ask whether each field pass can be eliminated, combined, lightened, or better timed.
The cheapest system is the one that produces the required crop result at the lowest total cost per acre.
References
AAA. (2026). California Average Gas Prices. California diesel averaged $8.386 per gallon on October 30, 2026; AAA lists the statewide record average of $8.5123 per gallon on October 18, 2026.
https://gasprices.aaa.com/?state=CARosentrater, K. A., & Hanna, M. (2026). Fuel Required for Field Operations. Iowa State University Extension and Outreach, Ag Decision Maker.
https://www.extension.iastate.edu/AGDM/crops/html/a3-27.htmlHanna, M. Spring Farm Fuel Savings. Iowa State University Extension and Outreach, Integrated Crop Management.
https://crops.extension.iastate.edu/encyclopedia/spring-farm-fuel-savingsIowa State University Extension and Outreach. Limiting Field Operations. Farm Energy Conservation and Efficiency Educational Initiative.
https://store.extension.iastate.edu/product/Limiting-Field-Operations-Farm-Energy-PDFHanna, M. Improving Diesel Fuel Efficiency for Spring Field Operations. Iowa State University Extension and Outreach, Integrated Crop Management.
https://crops.extension.iastate.edu/cropnews/2012/03/improving-diesel-fuel-efficiency-spring-field-operationsCovington, B., & Bergman, R. W. (2020). Are You Getting the Most Out of Your Tractor? Iowa State University Extension and Outreach, Integrated Crop Management.
https://crops.extension.iastate.edu/post/are-you-getting-most-out-your-tractorUniversity of Minnesota Extension. Economics of Tillage.
https://extension.umn.edu/natural-resources/conservation/agricultural-soil-and-water/economics-of-tillageUniversity of Minnesota Extension. How Tillage on Farms Affects Soil, Yields, and Costs.
https://extension.umn.edu/natural-resources/conservation/agricultural-soil-and-water/how-tillage-on-farms-affects-soil-yields-and-costsUniversity of Minnesota Extension. Soil Compaction.
https://extension.umn.edu/natural-resources/conservation/agricultural-soil-and-water/soil-compactionUniversity of Minnesota Extension. Reducing Tillage Intensity in Vegetable Crops.
https://extension.umn.edu/agriculture/specialty-crops/vegetable-farming/reducing-tillage-intensity-in-vegetable-cropsUniversity of Minnesota Extension. Using Banded Fertilizer for Corn Production.
https://extension.umn.edu/agriculture/crop-production/nutrient-management-for-minnesota-crops/using-banded-fertilizer-for-corn-productionUniversity of Minnesota Extension. Fertilizing Corn in Minnesota.
https://extension.umn.edu/nutrient-management/fertilizing-corn-minnesotaPenn State Extension. Managing Machinery and Equipment.
https://extension.psu.edu/managing-machinery-and-equipmentPenn State Extension. (2026). Pennsylvania Fuels and Fertilizers Update - Q3 2026.
https://extension.psu.edu/pennsylvania-fuels-and-fertilizers-update-q3-2026Penn State Extension. Ownership or Custom Hire - Costs to Consider.
https://extension.psu.edu/ownership-or-custom-hire-costs-to-considerCasady, W. W. Tractor Tire and Ballast Management. University of Missouri Extension.
https://extension.missouri.edu/sites/default/files/legacy_media/wysiwyg/Extensiondata/Pub/pdf/agguides/agengin/g01235.pdf
Suggested Citation
The Organic Agronomist. (2026). When Diesel Is Expensive: How to Reduce Field-Operation Costs Without Sacrificing the Crop. California Organic Fertilizers, Inc. Agronomic review by Tim Stemwedel, Founder & CCA.
Permission to Use
© 2026 California Organic Fertilizers, Inc. All rights reserved. Readers may download, save, and print this publication for personal, educational, or internal business use. Brief excerpts may be quoted with attribution to The Organic Agronomist and a link to the original article. This publication may not be republished, altered, sold, distributed commercially, or presented as another party’s work without prior written permission from California Organic Fertilizers, Inc.
Need help saving a PDF? Click here for instructions.
To save a copy to your computer:
- Right-click the yellow PDF button above.
- Choose Save link as... from the menu.
- Choose where to save the file, such as Downloads.
- Click Save.
Already opened the PDF? Click the printer icon, select Save as PDF as the printer or destination, then click Save.