Dear User, Welcome to the EMAP Agricultural Lands 1994-1995 Fall Questionnaire Datasets. The following material describes the variables from the main dataset, including certain extra identifier variables and certain derived indices. Warnings to users: Sample numbers (SAMPNO) started again from 1 in 1995, so they represent a different set of fields in the two years. To get a unique field identifier, you can use SAMPLE which is a combination of QYEAR and SAMPNO. The organization of this dataset is such that you are guaranteed of misusing the data if you do not carefully read these metadata first. It was not designed that way, but it is a fact. Cautions to users: (1) Problems arising due to the merging of data from different years. First of all, note that the target sample size was different between the two years, 150 in 1994 and 200 in 1995. Also, the state of North Carolina was sampled in 1995 but not in 1994. When calculating statistics, be sure to use the variable E, the expansion factor. This is the number of acres represented in the MAIA region by each sample unit. The two different years are to be considered an extended sample of the same resource. They should not be used to try to analyze year-to-year change. The NASS sampling scheme, described completely in Cotter and Nealon (1987) is a stratified, two-stage sample. Cotter, J. and J. Nealon. 1987. Area Frame Design for Agricultural Surveys. USDA, NASS, Research and Applications Division, Area Frame Section, Washington, DC. Many variables represent things for the "current" or past years. These are all relative to the year in which the survey was done. For example, if QYEAR=1994, then LTCROP1-LTCROP4 refer to crops in the field during the 1994 crop year (i.e. everything from after the last harvest of 1993 through the last harvest of 1994). On the other hand, if QYEAR=1995, these same variables refer to the 1995 crop year. Some definitions differed between the two years. A major change was that in 1994, a field was considered to be mulch-tilled if residue was managed up until the seeding operation. This was corrected in 1995 to only include situations where residue was managed through the seeding operation (and beyond). Further, the codes for manure types are completely different between the two years. Use the appropriate format as described below. (2) Problems arising due to the structure of the data There are many instances where a zero represents missing data. Before including an observation in any analysis, be sure that the completion code for its section (and for the questionnaire as a whole) indicates valid data. This needs to be done with great care, as some data are only meaningful if a previous question was answered a certain way. E.g. the year of last tillage is only meaningful if the field was not tilled (or no-till or strip till) during the current year. Furthermore, there are variables where a zero might have more than one meaning. For example, a yield (and harvested acreage) of zero might represent crop failure, or it might mean that harvest was yet to be done when the enumerator arrived. (3) Discrepancies in what is considered out-of-scope Pasture and idle land were not supposed to be eligible for sampling in the Fall survey, but for various reasons some samples do consist partly or entirely of one of these other resources. Soil samples sometimes were and sometimes were not taken in those situations, so be sure to use the crop and land use data in conjunction with the soil data. (4) Users are responsible for outlier checks. Some outliers were excluded from the calculation of the derived indices, such as observed/expected yields, but the raw data were not deleted from the dataset. It is the responsibility of the user to check for and exclude any data point that he or she deems to be an outlier. Notes to users: Unless otherwise specified, a variable refers to the crop year in which the questionnaire was completed. A crop year begins after the last harvest of the previous calendar year and ends with the last harvest of the current calendar year. Unless otherwise specified, the answers to yes/no questions are coded as 0=no 1=yes. For other variables containing coded responses, there are three possible places where the codes may be described: in this metadata file, in the format statements provided with these metadata (which formats apply to which variables are listed below), and in the coding sheets that came along with the NASS documentation. The coding sheets are under documentation\94\codesheets (or \95\ for for 1995). The files are named sec6_94.wpd or sec6_95.wpd and are in WordPerfect format. You should only need to rely on the code sheets in the case of the pesticide product and active ingredient codes, and the target pest codes. For dates expressed as MMDDYY when the month is between January and September, the leading zero is omitted. Thus 92194 means September 21, 1994. There are some inconsistencies in how missing data are coded. A period (.) always indicates a missing value, but a zero (0) can also indicate missing data. Often the latter was used in the original dataset as received by NASS, and the former was used when correcting the data, in case some value had to be set to missing. The SAS variable .M is also used in the original data to indicate a missing datum. In the pesticide data, a .U is used to indicate a missing value for the concentration of active ingredient in a product (Used for preparations of Bacillus thuringiensis.) The main dataset includes everything except for applications of commercial fertilizers and pesticides. These are found in separate datasets (FERT9495 and PEST9495). There are separate documentation files for those datasets (below), so be sure to read them carefully, especially since the structure of those datasets is different than for the main data. A key difference is that in the main dataset there is exactly one observation for each intended sample field. In the FERT and PEST datasets, there will be no observation for fields that received no fertilizer or pesticide, respectively, and there will be more than one observation per sample field if there was more than one application to the sample field. ---------------------- HEADER ------------------------ Dataset: 1994/1995 Fall Survey "MAIN" Dataset File Name: main9495.csv Date Created: 29 July 1998 #Variables: 178 #Observations: 350 Missing value symbol: . or 0 or .M (see warnings above) QYEAR Survey year (YYYY) SAMPLE coded sample number with year as first two digits, sampno as middle three digits, and last digit 0; use SAMPLE to link to other datasets SAMPNO Sequential sample number, within year STATE State code (format statname.) SEGCODE NASS SEGMENT identifier (scrambled) - use to link to JES data E Expansion factor to be used when combining data across the two QYEARs. ------------------- FP - Face Page -------------------- FPRC Face Page Response Code 3=accepted interview ---> see footnote 8=refused interview (no data) 9=grower inaccessible (no data) ------------ FI - Field Identification Section ----------- FINUMAC Number of acres in field FICROPAC Number of cropland acres in field (NASS definition) FIOWN Own or rent field 1=owned 2=rented, leased, or used rent-free --------- LT - Cropping and Tillage History Section --------- LTCROP1 Crop or land use, current crop year (format cropname.) LTCROP2 Crop or land use, current crop year (format cropname.) LTCROP3 Crop or land use, current crop year (format cropname.) LTCROP4 Crop or land use, current crop year (format cropname.) LTCROP5 Crop or land use, previous crop year (format cropname.) LTCROP6 Crop or land use, previous crop year (format cropname.) LTCROP7 Crop or land use, previous crop year (format cropname.) LTCROP8 Crop or land use, previous crop year (format cropname.) LTCROP9 Crop or land use, two crop years ago (format cropname.) LTCROP10 Crop or land use, two crop years ago (format cropname.) LTCROP11 Crop or land use, two crop years ago (format cropname.) LTCROP12 Crop or land use, two crop years ago (format cropname.) LTPLT1 Acres planted, current crop year LTPLT2 Acres planted, current crop year LTPLT3 Acres planted, current crop year LTPLT4 Acres planted, current crop year LTPLT5 Acres planted, previous crop year LTPLT6 Acres planted, previous crop year LTPLT7 Acres planted, previous crop year LTPLT8 Acres planted, previous crop year LTPLT9 Acres planted, two crop years ago LTPLT10 Acres planted, two crop years ago LTPLT11 Acres planted, two crop years ago LTPLT12 Acres planted, two crop years ago LTHRVT1 Acres of LTCROP1 harvested LTHRVT2 Acres of LTCROP2 harvested LTHRVT3 Acres of LTCROP3 harvested LTHRVT4 Acres of LTCROP4 harvested LTYPA1 Average yield per acre of LTCROP1 LTYPA2 Average yield per acre of LTCROP2 LTYPA3 Average yield per acre of LTCROP3 LTYPA4 Average yield per acre of LTCROP4 LTWGT1 Unit weight of LTYPA1 (pounds) LTWGT2 Unit weight of LTYPA2 (pounds) LTWGT3 Unit weight of LTYPA3 (pounds) LTWGT4 Unit weight of LTYPA4 (pounds) LTDATE1 Planting date for LTCROP1 (MMDDYY) LTDATE2 Planting date for LTCROP2 (MMDDYY) LTDATE3 Planting date for LTCROP3 (MMDDYY) LTDATE4 Planting date for LTCROP4 (MMDDYY) LTDATEH1 Harvest date for LTCROP1 (MMDDYY) LTDATEH2 Harvest date for LTCROP2 (MMDDYY) LTDATEH3 Harvest date for LTCROP3 (MMDDYY) LTDATEH4 Harvest date for LTCROP4 (MMDDYY) LTECMA1 First erosion control method for LTCROP1 (format econtrol.) LTECMB1 Second erosion control method for LTCROP1 (format econtrol.) LTECMC1 Third erosion control method for LTCROP1 (format econtrol.) LTECMA2 First erosion control method for LTCROP2 (format econtrol.) LTECMB2 Second erosion control method for LTCROP2 (format econtrol.) LTECMC2 Third erosion control method for LTCROP2 (format econtrol.) LTECMA3 First erosion control method for LTCROP3 (format econtrol.) LTECMB3 Second erosion control method for LTCROP3 (format econtrol.) LTECMC3 Third erosion control method for LTCROP3 (format econtrol.) LTECMA4 First erosion control method for LTCROP4 (format econtrol.) LTECMB4 Second erosion control method for LTCROP4 (format econtrol.) LTECMC4 Third erosion control method for LTCROP4 (format econtrol.) LTTCROP1 Crop or land use for tillage, current crop year (format cropname.) LTTCROP2 Crop or land use for tillage, current crop year (format cropname.) LTTCROP3 Crop or land use for tillage, current crop year (format cropname.) LTTCROP4 Crop or land use for tillage, current crop year (format cropname.) LTTTYPE1 Type of tillage used on LTTCROP1 (format tillname.) LTTTYPE2 Type of tillage used on LTTCROP2 (format tillname.) LTTTYPE3 Type of tillage used on LTTCROP3 (format tillname.) LTTTYPE4 Type of tillage used on LTTCROP4 (format tillname.) NEWTILL Corrected type of tillage for the survey year (format tillname.) The NEWTILL for 1995 is sometimes just a guess, but sometimes is an improvement over the errors that were in the dataset but that were not corrected to the original LTTTYPE1-LTTTYPE4 variables. Besides, NEWTILL applies to the field overall. Note that a field which was SRM for the first crop will be rated SRM overall, even though the second crop might have been no-tilled. LTTLSTP1 Year the field was last plowed, harrowed, disked, or chiseled (YYYY) LTTLSTP2 Year the field was last plowed, harrowed, disked, or chiseled (YYYY) LTTLSTP3 Year the field was last plowed, harrowed, disked, or chiseled (YYYY) LTTLSTP4 Year the field was last plowed, harrowed, disked, or chiseled (YYYY) Note: the variable NEWLTILL represents an improvement over the four variables LTTLSTP1-LTTLSTP4 NEWLTILL Corrected last year of tillage (YYYY), if NEWTILL=1 or 2 LTEVAL Has the NRCS evaluated this field since 1985? (0=no, 1=yes) LTHIEROD Has the NRCS classified this field as "Highly Erodible"? (0=no, 1=yes) LTDCOC1 Double/cover code for LTCROP1 (format dccode.) LTDCOC2 Double/cover code for LTCROP2 (format dccode.) LTDCOC3 Double/cover code for LTCROP3 (format dccode.) LTDCOC4 Double/cover code for LTCROP4 (format dccode.) NEWDCOC1 Corrected LTDCOC1 (format dccode.) NEWDCOC2 Corrected LTDCOC2 (format dccode.) NEWDCOC3 Corrected LTDCOC3 (format dccode.) NEWDCOC4 Corrected LTDCOC4 (format dccode.) ---------------- FU - Fertilizer Usage History Section ------------------ FUCC Fertilizer usage section completion code 0=useable data 1=nonuseable data, refused 3=useable data, no fertilizers applied FULG Was any lime or gypsum used on this field for any crop? FUCROPL Crop to which lime was applied (format cropname.) FUCROPG Crop to which gypsum was applied (format cropname.) FUTONL Tons of lime applied FUTONG Tons of gypsum applied FUACREL Acres treated with lime FUACREG Acres treated with gypsum FUDATEL Date treated with lime (MMDDYY) FUDATEG Date treated with gypsum (MMDDYY) FUMANURE Was any manure or municipal sludge applied to this field? FUCROP1 Crop to which manure or sludge was applied (format cropname.) FUCROP2 Crop to which manure or sludge was applied (format cropname.) FUCROP3 Crop to which manure or sludge was applied (format cropname.) FUTYPE1 Type of munure applied for FUCROP1 (format manutype. for 1994, format manurnew. for 1995) FUTYPE2 Type of munure applied for FUCROP2 (format manutype. for 1994, format manurnew. for 1995) FUTYPE3 Type of munure applied for FUCROP3 (format manutype. for 1994, format manurnew. for 1995) FURATE1 Manure rate applied per acre for FUCROP1 FURATE2 Manure rate applied per acre for FUCROP2 FURATE3 Manure rate applied per acre for FUCROP3 FUUNIT1 Units for FURATE1 (1=pound, 2=hundred weight, 3=ton) FUUNIT2 Units for FURATE2 (1=pound, 2=hundred weight, 3=ton) FUUNIT3 Units for FURATE3 (1=pound, 2=hundred weight, 3=ton) FUACTRT1 Acres treated with manure for FUCROP1 FUACTRT2 Acres treated with manure for FUCROP2 FUACTRT3 Acres treated with manure for FUCROP3 FUDATE1 Date manure applied (MMDDYY) FUDATE2 Date manure applied (MMDDYY) FUDATE3 Date manure applied (MMDDYY) FUSLURR1 Form of manure (1=slurry, 2=solid) FUSLURR2 Form of manure (1=slurry, 2=solid) FUSLURR3 Form of manure (1=slurry, 2=solid) FUCOMMFT Were commercial fertilizers applied to this field? (If yes, see the FERT dataset for that particular year) ------------------ PM - Pest Management Section ------------------ PMCC Pest management section completion code 0=useable data 1=nonuseable data, refused PMPACC Were any pesticides (such as herbicides, fungicides, nematicides, fumigants, defoliants or growth regulators) applied to this field? PMIPM Are you currently using Integrated Pest Management (IPM) for insect or mite control in this field? (1=yes, 2=no, 3=don't know) PMMONITR Were insects, mites, or thier damage monitored in this field? PMWHO Who did the majority of pest/damage monitoring? 1=self or family member 2=employee 3=extension agents 4=chemical dealer 5=commercial scouting service 6=someone else PMWHAT What was the primary method used to monitor pests/damage in this field? 1=crop damage observed 2=field insect counts collected 3=insect traps 4=extension reports 5=other PMANYRES [If insecticides used in field] Did you experience a pest control failure due to insects or mites showing resistance to pesticides in this field? (This question 1995 only) 1=yes 2=no 3=don't know PMPESTRS What was the primary pest that showed resistance? (This question 1995 only) 901=stink bugs 902=boll worms (Note, in the PEST datset they are coded as 888, OTHER, assuming that these were the primary target pests. The use of these nonstandard codes is just for this question). PMPSTCDE What pesticide was the pest resistant to? (1995 only. See separate table of pesticide codes.) PMANYDIF Different pesticide applied to control resistant pest. (1995 only. See separate table of pesticide codes.) PMROTATE Do you currently have a crop rotation plan for this field? PMROTYR What is the length, in years, of your crop rotation on this field? This variable is as received. Don't use it. PMROTYRF The variable PMROTYR had to be fixed in 1994, because there were values of 1, which don't make sense. Use this instead of PMROTYR ------------- ID - Irrigation and Drainage Section ------------------ IDCC Irrigation and drainage section completion code 0=useable data 1=nonuseable data, refused 3=useable data, no irrigation and no drainage IDIRRIG Was field irrigated? IDCROP1 Crop irrigated (format cropname.) IDCROP2 Crop irrigated (format cropname.) IDCROP3 Crop irrigated (format cropname.) IDACRE1 Acres of IDCROP1 irrigated IDACRE2 Acres of IDCROP2 irrigated IDACRE3 Acres of IDCROP3 irrigated IDSRC1 Water source for IDCROP1 1=purchased water 2=wells 3=ponds 4=lakes, rivers, canals 5=other IDSRC2 Water source for IDCROP2 (see codes for IDSRC1) IDSRC3 Water source for IDCROP3 (see codes for IDSRC1) IDTILE Number of acres of field drained by subsurface drains. --------------------- FH - Field History Section ---------------------- FHLIME1 Was lime applied to the field in the crop year prior to the current year? FHLIME2 Was lime applied to the field two crop years ago? FHNEM1 Was nematicide applied to the field in the crop year prior to the current year? FHNEM2 Was nematicide applied to the field two crop years ago? FHHERB1 Was herbicide applied to the field in the crop year prior to the current year? FHHERB2 Was herbicide applied to the field two crop years ago? FHFUNG1 Was fungicide applied to the field in the crop year prior to the current year? FHFUNG2 Was fungicide applied to the field two crop years ago? FHFUM1 Was a fumigant applied to the field in the crop year prior to the current year? FHFUM2 Was a fumigant applied to the field two crop years ago? FHSLUDGE Was municipal sludge applied to this field in any of the four crop seasons before the current year? -------- PH - Postharvest Section (between harvest and interview) ------- PHCC Postharvest Section Completion Code 0=useable data PHTONL Tons of lime applied postharvest PHACREL Acres treated with lime postharvest PHDATEL Date lime applied postharvest (MMDDYY) PHTONG Tons of gypsum applied postharvest PHACREG Acres treated with gypsum postharvest PHDATEG Date gypsum applied postharvest (MMDDYY) FUTYPE4 Type of manure applied postharvest, 1995 only (format manurnew.) FURATE4 Rate of FUTYPE4 applied per acre, 1995 only FUUNIT4 Units for FUTYPE4 (1=pounds, 2=hundred weight, 3=tons), 1995 only FUACTRT4 Acres treated with FUTYPE4, 1995 only FUDATE4 Date manure FUTYPE4 was applied (MMDDYY), 1995 only FUSLURR4 Form of manure FUTYPE4 (1=slurry, 2=solid), 1995 only PHANYTIL Was this field tilled after harvest? (1=yes 2=no), 1995 only PHTILDT If PHANYTIL=1, when was the field last tilled (MMDDYY) In 1994, there was no PHANYTIL, so a missing value for PHTILDT means that it had been tilled after harvest, but the date was not known. There are some uncorrected problems with PHTILDT, e.g. dates in improper format, or misinterpretations where the tillage referred-to is in a prior year. PHPARTIC Would you be willing to participate again in a similar study? (1=yes, 2=no), 1995 only ------------------------ BP - Back Page --------------------------- BPRESP Who was the respondent? (1=operator/manager, 2=spouse, 3=other) BPRECORD Were farm records used to report the majority of the data? BPDATE Date interview ended (MMDDYY) ------------------ SS - Soil Sample Record Keeping ------------------ SSDATE Date sample taken (MMDDYY) ------------- Further notes on certain variables: ------------------- FPRC If FPRC is not equal to three, the only variables that have meaningful data are the identifiers (e.g. QYEAR, SAMPNO, STATE) and the soil sample recordkeeping variables SSCC and SSDATE. NEWTILL Because of internal inconsistencies in the data, and with the idea that it would be better to just assign one value to the tillage used on the field that year, this variable should be used instead of the LTTTYPE1-LTTTYPE4 series from the original questionnaire data. NEWLTILL Because sometimes years were coded as YY instead of YYYY, and because it would be better to have only one variable representing the last year of tillage in those situations where NEWTILL indicates no tillage or no-till, this variable should be used instead of the LTTLSTP1-LTTLSTP4 series from the original questionnaire data. NEWDCOC1-NEWDCOC4 There were a lot of bad data for the LTDCOC1-LTDCOC4 variables. Based on the crops reported, their acreages in the field, and their planting dates, these were reevaluated and assigned NEWDCOC1-NEWDCOC4, where 0=single crop on field or on part of the field that year 1=double crop (two crops in succession that year) or interseeded crops 2=cover crop (a crop that was planted but never intended for harvest) These codes are set to missing if there is no corresponding LTCROP. Full definitions of the tillage types, from the 1995 Interviewers Manual: (which in turn were based on information from the 1994 NRCS National Handbook of Conservation Practices and the Conservation Technology Information Center's 1994 National Corp Residue Management Study). NONE: These include perennial hay and idle croplant, but NOT any system where seed was sown for the 1995 crop year. NO-TILL: Managing the amount, orientation and distribution of crop and other plant residues on the soil surface year-round, while growing crops in narrow slots in previously untilled soil and residue. STRIP TILL: Managing the amount, orientation and distribution of crop and other plant residues on the soil surface year-round, while growing crops in narrow tilled strips (no more than one-fourth of the row width) in previously untilled soil and residue. RIDGE TILL: Managing the amount, orientation and distribution of crop and other plant residues on the soil surface year-round, while growing crops on preformed ridges alternated with furrows protected by crop residue. MULCH TILL: Managing the amount, orientation and distribution of crop and other plant residues on the soil surface year-round, while growing crops where the entire field surface is tilled prior to planting. Residue must be managed through the seeding operation. Tillage operation shall be limited to methods that leave residue on the surface. SEASONAL RESIDUE MANAGMENT: Managing the amount, orientation and distribution of crop and plant residues on the soil surface during part of the year, while growing crops in a clean tilled seedbed. This category includes conventional tillage practices such as moldboard plowing. These definitions were modified from information from the NRCS National Handbook of Conservation Practices: Notice #114 450-VI, June 1994, along with information from the Executive Summary of the 1994 National Crop Residue Management Survey done by the Conservation Technology Information Center. The 1994 definitions were essentially the same, except that mulch-till was incorrectly defined as managing residue _up to_ the seeding operation, rather than _through_ the seeding operation. This was taken into consideration when the values of NEWTILL were assigned. ----------- comments on special cases for certain fields --------------- These provide examples of how knowledge of individual fields may affect use and interpretation of the data. MCOMMENT refers to the main survey dataset and PCOMMENT the pesticide dataset. MCOMMENT ... 1994 Fall Data 1 11:42 Wednesday, May 3, 1995 OBS SAMPNO 1 24 2 101 3 111 4 120 5 123 6 134 7 136 OBS (see above for 1994 SAMPNO corresponding) 1 THE FIELD FOR SAMPLE NO. 4197 WAS INCORRECTLY CHOSEN. 1 IN JUNE, REPORTED FIELD WAS 17 ACRES OF HAY. ENUM. CHOSE 1 PASTURE FIELD. 2 NO CHEMICALS WERE APPLIED BY OPERATOR SINCE THIS FIELD IS 2 SO SUSCEPTIBLE TO RUNOFF FROM NEIGHBOR'S FIELDS. NOTE ALSO 2 CATTLE BEING PASTURED IN FIELD WHEN SAMPLED. 3 THIS FIELD WAS DISKED ON SEPT. 20 AND 22ND, THEN PLANTED TO 3 BARLEY ON SEPT 25, 1994. 3 4 THIS FIELD WAS DISKED ON OCT 15 AND 17 AND WAS THEN PLANTED 4 TO OATS ON OCT 17 1994 4 5 SOIL SAMPLE TAKEN ON 11/03/94 AFTER FIELD WAS DISKED AND 5 DRILLED FOR WHEAT ON OCT 15. 5 6 THIS FIELD WAS DISKED AND PLANTED TO WHEAT ON SEP 25, 1994. 6 6 7 THIS FIELD HAD CHICKEN MANURE APPLIED ON OCT 4 1994. THE 7 MANURE WAS APPLIED FOR THE 1995 BARLEY CROP AT 2 TONS PER 7 ACRE, SOLID. THE BARLEY WAS PLANTED ON OCT 5. PCOMMENT ... 1994 Fall Data 1 11:42 Wednesday, May 3, 1995 S S A T T L M A O A I P B B T N N L C C C S E E O E 1 2 3 1 51 3 123 2 ENUMERATOR VERIFIED THAT RESPONDENT REPORTED THAT BUTENONE WAS USED ON THE OPERATOR'S CORN ACRES. ---------------------- HEADER ------------------------ Dataset: 1994/1995 Fall Survey "FERT" Dataset File Name: fert9495.csv Date Created: 31 July 1998 #Variables: 16 #Observations: 295 Missing value symbol: . or 0 or .M (see warnings above) This dataset contains information on applications of commercial fertilizer to the sample field. Note that not every field is represented in this dataset and that there may be more than one observation (fertilizer application) per field. Be sure to check the variable FUCC in the MAIN dataset to be sure that these questions were answered. Note: in 1995 we encouraged the explicit reporting of 0 fertilizer applied to second crops within a field that had more than one crop, to indicate that it truly had no fertilizer applied, as opposed to being forgotten. DATEF, METHODF, and ACRETRTF are also set to 0 in those situations. QYEAR Survey year (YYYY) SEGCODE NASS SEGMENT identifier (scrambled) - use to link to JES data SAMPLE coded sample number with year as first two digits, sampno as middle three digits, and last digit 0; use SAMPLE to link to other datasets SAMPNO Sequential sample number, within year STATE State code (format statname.) TABLE Table on the questionnaire from which response came. 1=from the main questionnaire 3=from the post-harvest applications supplement LINE Line number (in the questionnaire table) for applications to that particular field. The first listed fertilizer application to a field is assigned line 1, and so on. CROPF Crop fertilized at this application (format cropname.) ACRETRTF Number of acres in the field which were fertilized DATEF Date on which the fertilizer was applied (mmddyy) METHODF How was it applied? 1=aerial 2=broadcast (ground) 3=foliar application 4=irrigation water 5=band in/over rows 6=alternate rows 7=directed spray 8=chiseled/knifed in 9=in furrow 10=spot treatment OTRFLDF Was this applied in tandem with another field operation? (1994 only) CUSTOMF Was this a custom application? (1994 only) NLBS Total pounds of nitrogen (as N) applied this line PLBS Total pounds of potassium (as P205) applied this line KLBS Total pounds of potash (as K2O) applied this line Note: NLBS, PLBS, and KLBS were generated by NASS from other questionniare data, some of which was not included in this dataset. ---------------------- HEADER ------------------------ Dataset: 1994/1995 Fall Survey "PEST" Dataset File Name: pest9495.csv Date Created: 31 July 1998 #Variables: 25 #Observations: 445 Missing value symbol: . or 0 or .M (see warnings above) This dataset contains information on applications of pesticides to the sample field. Note that not every field is represented in this dataset and that there may be more than one observation (pesticide application) per field. Be sure to check the variable PUCC in the MAIN dataset to be sure that these questions were answered. Note: in a couple of instances in 1995 a CROPP was explicitly listed even with no pesticide applied if it was not the only crop in the field that year, to show that there really DATEP, METHODP, ACRETRTP, PEST, PRODCODE, and REASON are also set to 0 in those situations, and the generated variables (see below) have missing values. QYEAR Survey year (YYYY) SEGCODE NASS SEGMENT identifier (scrambled) - use to link to JES data SAMPLE coded sample number with year as first two digits, sampno as middle three digits, and last digit 0; use SAMPLE to link to other datasets SAMPNO Sequential sample number, within year STATE State code (format statname.) TABLE Table on the questionnaire from which response came. 2=from the main questionnaire 4=from the post-harvest applications supplement LINE Line number (in the questionnaire table) for applications to that particular field. The first listed pesticide application to a field is assigned line 1, and so on. CROPP Crop to or for which pesticide was applied (format cropname.) ACRETRTP Number of acres in the field which were treated DATEP Date on which the pesticide was applied (mmddyy) METHODP How was it applied? 1=aerial 2=broadcast (ground) 3=foliar application 4=irrigation water 5=band in/over rows 6=alternate rows 7=directed spray 8=chiseled/knifed in 9=in furrow 10=spot treatment PRODCODE Product code (see coding sheets) FORM Form of product (1=dry 2=liquid) REASON Primary reason for application 1=routine or preventative schedule 2=extension recommendation 3=scouting or observation in field 4=weather 5=field history 6=computer prediction 7=contract requirement 8=other PEST Primary target pest (if insecticide) (see coding sheets) ASTDRATE Adjusted standard rate of product (units of lbs/ac for dry products and gal/ac for liquid products) CLASS Class code of pesticide product 1=insecticide 4=herbicide 7=fungicide 91=misc., defoliants/desiccants 92=misc., soil fumigants 93=misc., growth regulators 95=misc., others AICODE1 | Active ingredient codes (see coding sheets). Up to 3 active AICODE2 | ingredient codes are allowed for each product. This is the AICODE3 | Primary Chemical (PC) code, formerly known as the Shaughnessey Code. AIAMT1 | Concentration of each AI (corresponding to AICODEx) AIAMT2 | Units are lbs-of-AI/lb of dry product, lbs-of-AI/gal of liquid product AIAMT3 | Exceptions: if PC Code=6401 (Bacillus thuringiensis) then amount is | missing (coded as .U). OTRFLDF Was this applied in tandem with another field operation? (1994 only) CUSTOMF Was this a custom application? (1994 only) Note: ASTDRATE, CLASS, FORM, AICODE1-AICODE3, and AIAMT1-AIAMT3 were generated by NASS, and not directly on the questionnaire. ------------- Variable/value Formats and SAS code ------------------- Use the following SAS program to prepare a library of SAS formats which can be used to assign words to the codes used for many of the variables in the survey dataset. Which format to use is indicated in the list of metadata for the individual variables (in this file, above). To invoke the variables in a later program, include the same library statement at the top of the program, and then for example to format the variables for the crop and land uses on a field, you would include the following statement in the data step: format ltcrop1-ltcrop12 cropname.; NOTICE: Grain Hay was coded as 656 in the 1994 questionnaire but accidentally miscoded as 646 in the 1995 data. There are two different formats for manure type. One is for use with 1994 data and one for use with 1995 data. *************************************************************; options ls=82 ps=65; libname library '/pub/emap/95pilot/mstrdata/formats'; proc format library=library; value statname 10='DELAWARE ' 24='MARYLAND ' 37='NORTH_CAROLINA' 42='PENNSYLVANIA ' 51='VIRGINIA ' 54='WEST VIRGINIA '; value cropname 0='(0) ' 1='Alfalfa_Hay_(1) ' 2='Barley_(2) ' 5='Corn_for_Silage_(5) ' 6='Field_Corn_(6) ' 8='Cotton_(8) ' 11='Hay_(excl._alfalfa)_(11)' 15='Oats_(15) ' 16='Peanuts_(16) ' 20='Irish Potatoes_(20) ' 22='Rye_(22) ' 23='Other_Silage_(23) ' 24='Sorghum_for_Silage_(24) ' 25='Sorghum_for_Grain_(25) ' 26='Soybeans_(26) ' 31='Sweetpotatoes_(31) ' 32='Tobacco_(32) ' 33='Watermelons_(33) ' 34='Wheat_(all)_(34) ' 110='Sweet_Corn_(110) ' 116='Greens_(116) ' 125='Cowpeas_(125) ' 301='Pasture_(301) ' 302='CRP_(302) ' 304='Idle_Cropland_(304) ' 306='Non-Ag_(306) ' 310='Clover_(310) ' 2106='Cabbage_Fresh_Mkt_(2106)' 2111='Cucumbers_(fresh)_(2111)' 2131='Snap_beans_(2131) '; value shrtcrop 0='(0) ' 1='Alfalfa' 2='Barley ' 5='CornSil' 6='FldCorn' 8='Cotton ' 11='Hay non' 15='Oats ' 16='Peanuts' 20='Potato ' 22='Rye ' 23='OthrSil' 24='SorgSil' 25='Sorghum' 26='Soybean' 31='Sweetpo' 32='Tobacco' 33='Waterme' 34='Wheat ' 110='SwtCorn' 116='Greens ' 125='Cowpeas' 301='Pasture' 302='CRP ' 304='Idle ' 306='Non-Ag ' 310='Clover ' 2106='Cabbage' 2111='Cukes ' 2131='Snapbea'; /* shrtcrop takes less space than cropname */ value dccode 0 = 'single crop' 1 = 'double crop' 2 = 'cover crop'; value tillname 1 = 'None ' 2 = 'No-Till ' 3 = 'Strip Till ' 4 = 'Ridge-Till ' 5 = 'Mulch-Till ' 6 = 'S.R.M. (Conventional)'; /*S.R.M. means Seasonal Residue Managment */ value econtrol 1 = 'None ' 2 = 'Terracing ' 3 = 'Contour Crop/Plow' 4 = 'Strip Cropping ' 5 = 'Grassed Waterway ' 6 = 'Other '; value manutype 1 = 'Cattle ' 2 = 'Hogs ' 3 = 'Sheep ' 4 = 'Goats ' 5 = 'Chickens ' 6 = 'Turkeys ' 7 = 'Horses ' 8 = 'Other Manure ' 9 = 'Municipal sludge'; /*use manutype for QYEAR=1994*/ value manurnew 31 = 'Hogs ' 32 = 'Sheep ' 33 = 'Chickens w/bed ' 34 = 'Chickens w/o bed' 35 = 'Turkeys ' 36 = 'Horses ' 37 = 'Beef Cattle ' 38 = 'Dairy Cattle ' 39 = 'Other Manure ' 40 = 'Municipal sludge'; /*use manurnew for QYEAR=1995*/ value manuunit 1 = 'lbs' 2 = 'cwt' 3 = 'ton'; value pestclas 1='insecticide ' 4='herbicide ' 7='fungicide ' 91='defoliant/dessicant' 92='soil fumigant ' 93='growth regulator ' 99='other '; run; *************************************************************; ------------------------ Derived Indices ---------------------------- ---------------------- HEADER ------------------------ Dataset: 1994/1995 Fall Survey derived indices dataset Date Created: 29 July 1998 #Variables: 14 #Observations: 350 Missing value symbol: . or 0 or .M (see warnings below and in metadata.main) Note: these derived indices are based on data in main9495.csv and fert9495.csv File Name: derived9495.csv These are the variables that will be of interest to the average user of the dataset. They are "value added" data in that they represent what the EMAP-Agricultural Lands group used as indicators. They also went through a greater degree of quality assurance than the original questionnaire data. See individual metadata files that describe some of these indices. OE1 Observed/expected index for LTCROP1 (ratio of observed yield to the 1980-1989 county average as available from NASS) OE2 Observed/expected index for LTCROP2 ALLHAY Indicating whether the field had hay in each of the last three years (1=yes) A value of 1 indicates that there was hay or a combinatino of hay and pasture for the questionniare year and two previous crop years. HOWLONG Number of years since the current crop last appeared in the field HOWMANY Number of distinct crops in the field during the last three years PMROTYRF Also described above. Number of years in the rotation plan, corrected. NEFFSEED Nitrogen efficiency index for seed crops. NEFFHAY Nitrogen efficiency index for hay crops. NEFFOTHR Nitrogen efficiency index for other crops. Important: these are expressed in pounds of commercial nitrogen per pound of harvested crop, so smaller index values indicate greater efficiency. See the separate metadata file for these indices. ********************************************************************************** ------- Nitrogen use efficiency ----------- To quantify the amount of commercial nitrogen being applied to produce crops in the mid-Atlantic region, a simple index was calculated. It consists of the ratio of the weight of applied commercial nitrogen to the weight of harvested crop. Amounts were determined from the fall questionnaire data. Because very different types of plant materials are harvested (seeds, whole shoots, fruits), the index was divided into three variables, to avoid accidental and inappropriate comparisons. NEFFSEED Nitrogen efficiency index for seed crops. This is the ratio of weight of applied commercial nitrogen to the weight of harvested seed (adjusted to 0% moisture assuming the following moisture contents of the grain: field corn 15.5%, barley 14.5%, oats 14%, wheat 13.5%, and soybeans 12.5%. NEFFHAY Nitrogen efficiency index for hay crops. This is the ratio of the weight of applied commercial nitrogen to the weight of harvested hay (no adjustment for moisture content). NEFFOTHR Nitrogen efficiency index for other crops. This is the ratio of the weight of applied commercial nitrogen to the weight of harvested product for nonseed, nonhay crops like cotton and tobacco (no adjustment for moisture content). Care should be taken when interpreting these indices. A larger index value means less efficient use of nitrogen, because the harvested amount is in the denominator. This was necessary because there are many cases where no nitrogen was applied yet a harvest was obtained, especially for hay. If the ratio were calculated with the amount of nitrogen in the denominator, the index would be undefined in those instances, whereas this formula yields a value of 0. Because there were sometimes more than one crop in the field, it may have been necessary to combine the applied nitrogen and the weight of harvested material for an overall index reading. This was only done if all harvested crops (i.e. not just used for cover) on that field fit into the same category (seed crop, hay crop, or other). The index is incomplete in the sense that it does not take into consideration the nitrogen content of applied manure, for example, but is still useful in that the efficiency of commercially-produced nitrogen fertilizer may be of interest from a sustainability perspective. ------- Observed/expected index ----------- In order to be able to assess the productivity of crops in the mid-Atlantic in such a way that data from diverse crop species could be combined, the observed/expected index was calculated. The reported yield for the sample field, converted to standard units (e.g. standard 56lb. bushes for field corn) was considered the observed value. The expected values are the averages of the 1980-1989 yield for that crop in the county in which the sample field was located. These county averages were obtained from NASS. Expected yields sometimes had to be calculated with as few as 7 years out of the 10, or sometimes had to be based on a district rather than a county when there was insufficient information for a county calculation. EXPECTED VALUES ARE NOT INCLUDED WITH THIS DATASET. OE1 is the index value for LTCROP1 OE2 is the index value for LTCROP2 ------- Crop rotation indices ----------- To express the amount of crop rotation being planned and practiced in the mid-Atlantic region, three indices were devised and calculated. *************************** "HOW LONG'S IT BEEN?" INDEX *************************** The variable HOWLONG is an index of how long the field has been allowed to be free of this year's harvested (or intended-to-be-harvested) crop, in other words, did the 1995 crop last appear in 1994? in 1993? or beyond the window of our questionnaire? ************************************************************************* * Interpretation: * * * * HOWLONG=. out of scope or insufficient data to calculate * * HOWLONG=1 this year's crop appeared in the field last year * * HOWLONG=2 this year's crop was last planted two years ago * * HOWLONG=3 this year's crop was not planted in either of the last * * two years in this field * *************************************************************************; Two uses of the same crop are considered the same crop, e.g. if it was field corn in 1995 and corn for silage in 1994, then HOWLONG=1. The index is conservative, in that if any part of the current field had the same crop in a previous year, that counts against the rotation. The index is also indiscriminate, in the sense that repetition of a crop is scored the same regardless of whether it might be good or bad for soil tilth or erosion, for example. To aid in the interpretation of HOWLONG, the ALLHAY variable is provided, which takes on the following values: ALLHAY=. out of scope (e.g. idle land or pasture land in current year) ALLHAY=0 something other than hay occurred in one or more of the 3 years ALLHAY=1 the only land use in 3 years was alfalfa hay, other hay, or both (or in combination with pastureland in previous year(s)) Other rules for multiple crop situations: Cover crops were disregarded when when figuring the current year's crop, but if e.g. rye was harvested this year and was used as a cover crop two years ago, then that counts as having had the crop two years ago. The problem here is that cover crops may be underreported in years past because they won't stand out in the minds of the respondents as much as the harvested crops. If the field was split between two crops in the current year, consider the larger acreage to be the one of interest. If it was also split in a previous year, discard the observation. If there was a replant after crop failure in the current year, only count the second crop, regardless of how much time the first crop spent in the ground. Failed crops in a previous year will count just as a cover crop would, if this occurred at all. True double crops in the current year were handled as follows. Since the index is only for integers, the more conservative of the two possible numbers was assigned, i.e. according the crop with the shorter time since its last appearance in the field. If LTCROP1 is out of scope (pasture, rangeland, or idle land), that observation was excluded from the calculation (HOWLONG=.). If no crops are reported for either or both of the previous years, the observation was excluded. ******************************************************** "HOW MANY DIFFERENT THINGS YOU BEEN GROWIN' HERE?" INDEX ******************************************************** Interpretation: HOWMANY = the number of crops or land uses on the field during the last three crop years Rules: 1) yes, cover crops count toward the total, even though they may be underreported in previous years 2) side-by-side multiple crops: rather than trying to calculate the index based on the crop taking up larger portion of field, the existing field boundary was used, and the crops counted. 3) one-after-the-other multiple crop rules: a) each memeber of a double crop is counted separately b) crop failure and replant, only count the crop that was actually harvested. 4) multiple uses are not considered separate crops, so for example sweet corn, field corn, and corn for silage would only be considered one crop. 5) idle land and fallow were considered separate. IMPORTANT: This index will have missing values if there is insufficient data (e.g. no crop or land use given for an earlier year), but it IS calculated when the current year's land use would officially be out of scope for our survey (e.g. idle land), as long as there was an annually harvested herbaceous crop reported in one or more of the previous years. These cases should be discarded when comparing the HOWLONG index with the HOWMANY index, since the former excludes all fields which were out-of-scope for the current survey year. Notice the differences between this index and the first one. This one is much more liberal in the sense that it freely assigns large numbers to the index even if they are cover crops or idle land, etc. The HOWLONG index is more conservative, e.g. if one of several previous year's crops is the same as the current crop, that counts as "stopping the clock". ******************************************* "WHAT'S THE FARMER'S ROTATION PLAN?" INDEX ******************************************* Interpretation: PMROTYRF summarizes the answers to two of the questions from the fall survey, which were more or less: "Did you have a rotation plan for this field?" and "What is the length of the rotation, in years?" Actually it uses the response to the latter, PMROTYR is the name of the variable, which is always 0 if there was no rotation plan for the field. Values of the index, other than 0's, range from 1 to 15 in 1994, and 2 to 10 for 1995. Since a one-year rotation does not make sense, those values were changed to either 2 or missing (.) whichever seemed more reasonable. THUS YOU SHOULD ALWAYS USE PMROTYRF (the F meaning "fixed") IN YOUR ANALYSES. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *