Even though Iowa State University has conducted research on various aspects of precision agriculture through the years, most potential clients are not aware of our expertise and experience with these technologies. The Precision Agriculture Demonstration Project at Nashua has changed that perception. The two crops specialists that have worked closely with this demonstration have gained practical, hands-on experience with these systems; have determined what can and cannot be done with this technology; and have gained the confidence to share their observations, concerns, and recommendations with producers and agribusinesses trying to implement the new technologies as well as those marketing the equipment and services.

As a follow-up on the impact of the project, a questionnaire was sent to the 80 participants of the 1998 Precision Agriculture Field Day.

Thirty-nine responses were received. Based on the questionnaire summaries, the following conclusions were reached.

1. This project is unique and has attracted a different audience than the regular field days at the Northeast Research Farm. Participants came from across the state as well as from Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Indiana (Purdue University).
2. The respondents attending field days have experience with many of the new technologies: 87 percent have home computers, 77 percent have access to e-mail, 67 percent have experience with grid sampling*, 64 percent use a weigh wagon or scale to determine crop yields, 59 percent have experience* with global positioning system-geographic information system (GPS-GIS) technologies, 56 percent have experience* with combine monitors,54 percent have experience* with variable-rate application, and 44 percent use professional crop consultants and scouting.
3. Ninety-five percent of the respondents use soil tests to determine fertilization programs, 44 percent have experience* with the late spring nitrate test, and 41 percent have experience* with the fall stalk nitrate test.
4. Producers adopting this technology have many of the same observations as the demonstration coordinators--such as the variations in soil fertility and pH, the occasional variation in weights between the combine monitor and weigh scales, the lack of correlation between a particular factor and yield, and justification of the additional expense of GPS-GIS technologies. Respondents appreciated the information about applicator accuracy as an explanation for variation in soil test results.
5. Agriculture professionals marketing GPS-GIS equipment or services tend to be more defensive in explaining the variation observed, in understanding the accuracy and reliability of the procedures, and in justifying the producer investment in precision agriculture technologies.
6. Respondents cited these benefits of precision agriculture: better records and information for decision making; quantification of the effects of weeds, wheel tracks, and poor drainage on yields; variety selection based on strip test results; and identification of variation within a field.
7. Many of the benefits credited to precision agriculture are easily credited to adoption of integrated crop management strategies (e.g., crop scouting, manure nutrient management, identification of high pH areas, and fine-tuning of fertilizer applications).

*experience of at least 1 year