Some people will take classes at the local college. Others may use the internet to search for information or YouTube to learn how to do something. Some may actually read magazine articles.

Winter or those slow times between crop production cycles brings another option for learning: conferences, shows, and expositions.

As a precision ag instructor and director at West Hills College, I get the opportunity to attend, seemingly weekly, conferences and meetings. With the World Ag Expo in Tulare, California, coming up shortly, now seems like a good time for an article about the value of these events from two different perspectives: that of the attendees and that of the speaker or an exhibitor.

The exhibit hall, in the case of a large show, may take more than one day to go through and see every single exhibitor. These shows offer the opportunity to collect a year’s worth of pens and pencils, notepads, yardsticks, hats and other promotional goodies. At times I am amazed at the variety (and sometimes the usefulness) of the new gadgets that companies give away.

I recently picked up something that I couldn’t tell what it was — no instructions or pictures. After a few minutes I had figured out it to be a car air freshener. Now every time I get in my car, I see the name of that company.

However, the main reason you are attending a conference hopefully isn’t to pick up a car air freshener.

The opportunity to see the latest technology would be a good reason to attend a conference. Even quickly walking through an exhibit hall, a person can pick up a variety of technologies and their amazing functions. And if you attend the same conference year after year, a person can see trends within a specific industry.

One specific conference I regularly attend focuses on precision agriculture. It originally focused on GPS devices, but after a few years, the predominant type of exhibits dealt with hardware. Within a few more years you could see the switch to software. Just last year the majority of exhibitors’ big focus was on artificial intelligence and analytics. This trend analysis of scanning exhibits is interesting, but there is more.

The real educational value of conferences is the chance to talk with the exhibitors.

Just walking by grabbing the latest flyer or goodie and looking at the display provides awareness but not learning. Talking with the exhibitor is when you actually find out how something works or if it has some value for you. After all, that is exactly why the exhibitor is there — to talk with people and make sure they know about their product or service.

From my perspective as an exhibitor, I’ll always wonder why so many attendees walk by my booth and don’t at least ask a few questions. I’ve seen them walk in the middle of the aisle looking straight ahead, only glancing at a booth so as not to make eye contact. Maybe they are afraid that they are going to get a hard sale and get pressured to buy something. Or maybe they are afraid of asking a dumb question.

The exhibitor is trying to attract your attention with a bright display and giveaways. However, very few are there to sell you something. Most are there to meet people and gain name recognition.

I’ve also had the opportunity to be a speaker at conferences. It is hard to appeal to the broad audience that attends some expos and shows. I have no idea what their motivation is for being there. Maybe they are tired of walking around the exhibits or they need a place to finish their needlepoint (actual case).

Usually I try to provide basic information for the beginner, while including some advanced pieces of information for the advanced user.

This is important to note here because what I enjoy most as a speaker is when people from the audience ask questions after the presentation. In this way, I don’t have to worry about how broad or detailed I am in speaking because if people feel open to talking afterward, that is when I can provide detail that I couldn’t in the speech. I’ve finished with a talk and ended up with a group of people in a discussion that I also learned from.

The point here is to encourage you to take an active role in the next conference or farm show that you attend. Interact with the exhibitors, track down that speaker and ask the dumb questions. Precision doesn’t happen until you learn how.

Most of these are professional and proper affairs in which people sit quietly to listen, applaud the speaker politely, and ask thoughtful questions afterward.

However, at one memorable conference at which there were people representing drones, manned aerial systems and satellite systems, it wasn’t so polite or professional.

I was on a panel made up of people representing each imagery platform. Each panelist gave a presentation on the advantages and use of their chosen imagery platform.

I spoke specifically about the use of drones in agriculture. During my presentation, there were comments from several people in the audience that could be best called heckling.

As an experienced teacher, good-natured heckling from students is common and easy to deal with. But this was the first and only time I had ever been heckled as a speaker at a conference.

I continued and ignored the comments, mainly out of surprise. The next speaker, who also talked about drones, was not so surprised nor as quiet.

Escalation of comments between the hecklers and the speaker led to full-blown arguments; not something I had ever seen at a conference or seen since.

People are passionate about their imagery. I understand that all of these people’s livelihoods depend on their chosen technology and therefore they are defending it.

I still meet people on a regular basis that believe their technology is the best and are not afraid to defend it.

One gentleman that I work with believes that satellites are the best way to capture imagery for ag producers. He is literally a rocket scientist, spending much of his working life at NASA.

He has worked with imagery satellites for years and has developed a software for analyzing satellite imagery that will estimate nutrient needs and irrigation problems.

He believes that the large area that satellites cover and the number of satellites that are available are making satellite imagery cheaper than anything else available.

A new satellite constellation is being placed into orbit that will provide daily images in a wide range of visible and invisible light wavelengths. According to him, satellite imagery is what all growers should use.

Another gentleman owns a manned aerial imagery service and has been working with multispectral sensors and cameras for years. He defends the use of manned flights over unmanned flights or satellites.

He believes he can provide imagery cheaper than drones and faster than satellites. He sees no need for the higher resolution that drones provide, saying his imagery is as detailed as the grower needs. Imagery from manned aerial flights is what growers should be using.

A third gentleman has a company that sells and flies rotor drones. He has been providing imagery services, but also uses drones for application of crop protection products.

He believes that drones give his customers the flexibility and immediacy needed by some growers. If they want an image now or need to spray a crop product now, the drone can be up in the air within a few minutes.

The high resolution of one inch ground sampling distance is valuable for plant populations, specific locations of stressed plants or assessment of irrigation lines. Imagery from drones is what growers should be using, he maintains.

Since I speak and teach about drones, it seems to people that I am a proponent of drones. Yes, that is correct, but I am also a proponent of satellite imagery and manned flights as well.

Actually, I am a proponent of imagery. The imagery, whether it is infrared, NIR, LIDAR or thermal, is the important part of any system regardless of the platform. The platform should be considered when a grower has specific needs for resolution, availability and cost.

Each system has its specific advantages and the grower should consider all three as tools when making a choice. The thing to remember is that the imagery is the important part and not to be tethered to any one system.

You have a choice to make precision happen.

For example, the first time I heard the word “cover” used to refer to an old song redone by a different artist, I was confused. We used to call it a “remake,” which I think is very descriptive. I don’t get how the term “cover” can be used as a verb or noun to describe a redone song.

One of the latest examples is “disruptive,” which means “shaking it up.” However, the word also has a negative connotation to it, such as breaking or turning over.

I can maybe see how a few technologies could be considered disruptive, but come on, a new type smartphone is “disruptive?”

The term is very much overused and seems to be applied to any new technology.

A previous technology buzzword, “enabling,” is much more positive and descriptive of a new technology’s impact on the industry to which it is applied.

Another buzzword that gets used a lot these days is “internet of things,” also shortened to IoT.

When I first heard this phrase, I thought it was like the first two examples: a word used mainly for its value to differentiate and create a buzz.

However, as it turns out, it is actually a very appropriate term and is used properly.

The internet is a massive computer network that includes things such as the worldwide web, email and file transfer protocol. Most people don’t realize that the web is only one part of the internet.

Computers and servers all over the world use various lines, cables, routers, modems and access points to allow people to connect to the web, which allows people to share information, demonstrate concepts and show other people their ideas using websites.

Email allows people to send messages through the internet and communicate.

FTP allows people to send files to other people through the internet. We could actually call the internet more properly the “Internet of People.”

So what is the Internet of Things?

The same massive computer network that is used for websites and replying to email is now also being used by sensors, controllers and other “things.”

There are people setting this all up and people are also part of the network, but the function is to let the “things” communicate with each other.

A relatively simple example is a wireless sensor/control irrigation network that is being set up at West Hills College in the Farm of the Future’s pistachio orchard.

A variety of sensors will be placed throughout the orchard, including soil moisture, salinity, trunk diameter, sap flow, irrigation flow rate, and waterline pressure.

These sensors are connected through a wired connection to a node substation, which collects information from each of the sensors. A radio transmitter sends all of the sensor data to a mother node, which is also collecting data from other node substations.

The mother node includes a cellular internet gateway, which is a device that has the ability to open up the internet and serve information through the cellular network system.

If you have a smartphone or tablet that can access a cellular signal and has a data plan associated with it, you have access to the data on that mother node.

West Hills’ system will move the data through the cellular network to a third party website. This will allow any computer that has wi-fi or the internet’s websites to access these “things.”

There are also control things in the pistachio orchard. They are mounted to a set of valves and use the same network, but instead of sending out data, they are waiting for data. When a data signal comes in, it will adjust the valves to control the amount of water being applied to the trees.

A good part of the system is that it allows people to view and communicate with the things out in the field. Our farm technician is already looking forward to using the systems to check pressures instead of making a 10 p.m. or 5 a.m. check on the system.

The best part of the system is that it allows the things to communicate with each other. Yes, people can see what is going on, but with the website and proper programming, people don’t have to be involved.

It is possible for the sensors to collect the data, the software to process the information to form a solution and communicate the solution to the controllers, and the controllers to make the adjustments to the valves.

This is basically a closed loop system that is feeding data to itself and making corrections. It is still dependent on humans setting it up correctly, but it has the potential to save water while making sure irrigation needs are being met.

Adding a couple of sensors to the power supply and well pump provides more information that could also help with pump efficiency and save on energy.

The Internet of Things is making the Farm of the Future a buzzing community of things that make precision happen.

Since this is a column about precision farming, it will get there in a roundabout way.

A couple of news items in the past few years have made me wonder how society values talent.

A national beauty pageant was held a few years ago in which a contestant gave a soliloquy on her career as a nurse for her talent com-ponent. It was a compelling, passionate and thoughtful speech, but it did not win.

She was criticized by one talk show, which comprises a group of women talking and drinking coffee, as not having a talent.

I realize it was an opinion, but they were disparaging this woman by saying nursing was not a talent.

I have also watched the TV show America’s Got Talent. In one particular performance a gentleman would swallow coins: quarters, nickels, and dimes. He would then ask somebody to request an amount of change, such as 35 cents. He then regurgitated the coins to provide the correct change requested by the person.

Is this really a talent?

Related to this topic are award shows: the Emmys, the Oscars, Grammys, the list could go on.

There are talented actors who provide an entertainment value, but do we really need to have award shows to recognize them?

I believe that the nurse in the beauty pageant is the real talent.

I will go even further and say that thousands of talented teachers, plumbers, auto mechanics and police officers go unnoticed every day and they are the people who deserve the award shows, acclamation and recognition instead of a guy that can regurgitate a quarter.

These people are technicians, possibly with a one-year degree or maybe an advanced professional degree, and they help our countries function. They know their jobs and do them with skill; sometimes with an artistry that is unnoticed.

There are millions of other people who are talented in their jobs and yet there are few award shows to recognize these people.

So it pains me to hear a group of women who earn a healthy salary — I’m not guessing how much, but I’m pretty sure it’s more than I get paid for writing this column — sit around a table and talk critically about whether a nurse’s career is a talent.

Nursing care is most definitely a talent and more so than being able to talk and drink coffee at the same time.

In precision farming, technicians are key and we need more talented ones. The agricultural industry is looking for technicians who enjoy what they do, are knowledgeable about their jobs and are doing something of value. Or, in other words, are talented.

The key to talent, whether it involves acting, talking and drinking coffee or regurgitating quarters, is passion. Passion for one’s career means not only being excited about it but understanding the importance of it.

My advice for managers looking for good precision farming technicians is to seek out young people who are passionate about agriculture and technology.

You may find them in high schools, technical colleges or coming into one of your retail locations as a customer.

My advice for high school students looking for a career is to figure out what you enjoy. Be honest with yourself as far as what gets you excited and not just superficial video games and sports. Know what your skills are and build those skills to form your passion.

Find something that you have a passion for and you too can be considered talented. Just don’t wait for a nationally televised award show.

One of the fields at Kirkwood Community College, where I taught for 15 years, was known as the Beef field. I’m not sure why, but that’s what it had always been called.

It was close to campus and therefore was easy for students to participate in field activities, such as soil sampling or yield mapping.

It was in a corn-soybean rotation with a variety of chemical and nutrient trials and demonstrations.

The best part of this field was that it had been in consistent use for many years, which meant more than five years of yield maps.

Too often the college would buy farmland for use in its farm and within three years the boundary would change as the college built a new horse arena or hotel or sell it to the local school district for a new middle school.

<img class="size-full wp-image-185197" align="alignnone" "] Mistakes in agriculture come in many forms. In precision agriculture there are more opportunities to goof up, but often they aren’t ones the neighbours will see. | File photo

This meant that we did not have many fields with a consistent boundary for more than three years of yield data.

But the Beef field, with five years of yield data and good variability, made an excellent field for demonstrating analytical techniques. It had a distinctive rectangular shape that made it easier to recognize for students and supposedly by me, the instructor.

One fall after all the fields had been harvested, I was responsible for the initial yield data processing. This included exporting the yield map file from the combine display and processing it in the desktop software.

The software worked well and allowed me to process one field at a time. Most systems allow the field entry of a field name, operator and other pertinent information, but in this case the raw data did not have a field name associated with it, so it was up to me to identify the field.

When I got to one specific field, the characteristic rectangular shape told me automatically that it was the Beef field. I did a review of the yield data, deleted some outliers, checked the statistics and classified the data to a legend based on our local yield standards.

The problem occurred when I added the Beef field yield layer to the farm map. It was on the wrong side of the road.

The Beef field is directly north of a main paved road, so not only was it easy to identify by its shape, but also by its location.

However, the newly processed field was directly south of the road, about 30 metres south of its “correct” location.

In these early days of GIS and mapping, there was something known as datum shift.

This occurred when the wrong datum was assigned to a data layer.

This sometimes expressed itself when a road incorrectly positioned itself running through a field or two field boundaries did not line up.

The most common datum shift was usually an error of about 30 metres.

Knowing that this was possible, I made the assumption that this was the problem. How else could the Beef field end up on the wrong side of the road?

My first task was to call software support to ask how this could have happened. In talking with the tech support, the gentleman assured me that it was not possible. The software automatically assigned a correct datum to all data layers.

His only response was, “maybe it’s the wrong field.” Well, that couldn’t be, since I recognized the Beef field, and the field on the south side of the road was not even owned by the college.

I actually edited all yield points for the entire field so it fit where I thought it should be.

The field in question happened to be on my way home from work. I looked that night and noticed that the field to the south was about the same size and shape of Beef and it was a cornfield. The next day I mentioned the situation to the agronomy instructor.

“Oh, sorry,” was his response.

He had forgot to mention that we had indeed harvested that field to the south.

The neighbouring farmer wanted a yield map so we helped out by harvesting his field.

After reprocessing the raw data, I left the yield where it was supposed to be on the south side of the road. I also found the raw data for the real Beef field and processed it to the north side of the road.

I always wondered about calling that tech support person up and explaining but never did. This was a case that precision happens … in spite of me.

That is normal procedure in the business world. The chief executive officer and corporate management receive reports and data filtered through various levels of management to provide a distilled version, which provides clear choices on which to base a decision.

But if a grower is to rely on somebody else to do this analysis and interpretation of data, where are these people?

The question could apply to all types of precision technology. Who is the manager to rely on to troubleshoot a control device that is not working? Is the owner going to download imagery from a drone to process it?

As an instructor at West Hills College in California developing a precision agriculture curriculum, I see these as a perfect example of the relationship between decision makers and technicians, and the difference between a four-year and a two-year degree.

I am a proponent of technical or community colleges and two-year technical degrees.

I have bachelor and masters degrees in science, so I know the value of advanced degrees. But sometimes people tell me that a four-year degree is a requirement for everybody. I’ve talked to parents who are disappointed that their child wants to go to get only a technical education.

I have also seen enough TV shows that belittle community colleges so I feel the need to defend the value of a two-year degree.

Not everyone needs a four-year degree and I believe that a two-year degree gives a person a practical entry into agriculture and technology. In comparing managerial and technician jobs, they must work together, but differ in their tasks and their knowledge and skills.

Concerning the decision-making process, the manager must know what questions to ask. The technician needs to know the data and the analytical processes to answer the question. The technician needs to know enough about management and agronomy to understand the question. The manager needs to know enough about the technology to trust it.

I believe that this difference is reflected between four-year and two-year degrees. To me, it seems many four-year programs teach about the technology, while technical colleges teach the use and operation of the technology.

This is related to how these individuals will use the technology in the workforce.

I’m not going to address the specific course work at universities, but after teaching 30-plus years at community colleges, I can speak well on the skills gained by technical school graduates.

I have spent almost my entire teaching career at the community college level, maybe because no university would hire me, but more because I enjoy teaching these students who will become the boots on the ground for precision farming.

I’ve always thought that these students really drove the advancement of precision farming, providing the technology services that growers needed.

That means repairing wiring harnesses that broke under continual use; using a field GPS data logger to collect soil or tissue samples; or interpolating, reclassifying, and calculating raster data to answer questions from the grower.

University graduates may work these jobs also, but they are more likely in management and professional positions.

Universities may teach the breadth of technology, but are too busy teaching agronomic and professional skills to get the depth of technology that can be taught at community colleges.

When the auto guidance system stops working, the owner, agronomist, or manager’s time is too valuable for troubleshooting and fixing the problem.

That’s when the technician with a two-year degree with course work that concentrated on telemetry, setting up the RTK base station, and construction of wiring and connectors will check and repair the problem.

When software, sensors, and various data loggers are creating layer upon layer of data, it will be the technician that has specific skills in data management, programming, and analysis that will provide the owners and managers with the interpretative maps that distill the data into useful information.

As colleges such as West Hills College develop and expand the precision agriculture curriculum, technicians with these skills will assist owners, allowing the managers to manage and the growers to grow.

When people see the continuum of educational opportunities from two-year to four-year and beyond, and they can see the value of technicians working with professionals, precision can happen.

As a precision ag instructor, I try to talk with producers to learn more about their business and technology needs. I’ll ask about how they use precision technology, what’s most valuable for them and what they think about new technology.

Unmanned aerial vehicles, better known as drones, are a good example of a typical conversation. I’ll talk to producers about what they like and what they don’t.

Most are excited about it and agree that it is a cool technology but aren’t exactly sure of its value. Most will also admit that they’re not sure what to do with the imagery data once they have it.

Another example is a sensor network in which a lot of data is collected and transmitted to the home office.

Again, the grower sees how valuable the technology is and agrees that the whole idea is good but is hesitant to get any more data.

This conversation has lately taken place about software. Most of the farm management information systems that are available result in additional data. So again, the main problem I hear is, “I don’t want more data; I have too much already.”

Growers see much of the software that is being marketed to them as analysis software, which creates additional data and no answers.

These growers do see a valuable end result and a lot of tools, but with the mountain of data, there is no path to get there. How do we avoid being inundated with all of the data?

I am going to offer a different perspective.

The problem isn’t too much data or that the software is useless. The problem is who is doing it and that the data isn’t being interpreted for the decision maker.

If the grower is looking at the mountain of data and being overwhelmed by it, then he needs somebody who can analyze and interpret it for him.

The decision maker shouldn’t be tasked with that; the precision farming technician or mapping specialist should be doing it for the grower.

First of all, data should be the basis for a decision in precision farming. If the data is incomplete, then the decision is difficult or incomplete.

We should not turn down data from being collected just because there is too much of it.

As well, we can’t attempt to look at all that data at once to make sense of it.

Analysis summarizes and organizes the data. It may actually increase the amount of data, such as when zones are created or when sensor or sampled data is interpolated to create raster surfaces for pests, nutrients or tissue. Analysis should prepare the data for an explanation, which means interpretation.

Also, interpretation needs to select data applicable to a specific question and put it into context. The grower should ask the questions.

The technician needs to identify the data that applies to the question, and then create an interpretative map that answers the question. Interpretive maps should offer the grower a “no-brainer” view of the decision that needs to be made.

One small example of this process is the assessment of a crop product.

Rather than trying to look at 50 layers of data for some enlightenment, we need a specific question: did this product increase yield and was it economically justified?

For this we need a yield map to determine differences in yield attributable to the product and to calculate income and an as-applied map to determine actual application of the product to various areas of a farm.

Completing a query of yield points from treated areas and control areas of the field and applying a test of significance, such as a T-test, tells us if there was a real and repeatable difference and an increase in yield.

A net profit map uses that difference and the break-even income to show those field areas in which the product paid for itself.

When creating a map such as this, the technician doesn’t just provide more data. Instead, he provides an answer to the grower’s question and a no-brainer decision.

What I hear regularly is that decision makers really want answers rather than just more data.

Just collecting more data isn’t going to do it. Buying another software may not do it and analyzing the snot out of all the data isn’t going to do it.

A systematic approach, in which the decision maker asks focused questions, data is available to answer the questions, software analyzes and creates an interpretative map and a specialist who knows how to do this is hired, will make precision agriculture happen.

Growing up in Iowa, corn, soybeans, oats, alfalfa and pastureland were pretty much the extent of my experience in crops. There is corn as far as the eye can see in some parts of Iowa, broken only by occasional tree lines, farmstead buildings and towns.

I was ready for a change, so when West Hills College in the Central California Valley had an opening for a precision ag instructor, I jumped at it.

Now on my drive in to work I pass almond, pistachio, orange, cherry, and lemon orchards. The view includes oil rigs, irrigation pumps and mountains. Things are definitely different in California.

It’s the same with precision farming: a common phrase I’ve heard in talks with west coast growers is, “it’s different here; that precision ag stuff that you do in Midwest isn’t going to work here.”

This is partly a correct assessment. Much of the precision farming software is focused on corn and soybeans. Yield monitoring, a staple of Midwest or prairie precision ag, is limited here.

West coast growers don’t trust the rest of the country, and especially the Midwest, to understand the issues that California growers face in irrigation, salinity, and permeability. So I’ll admit there are differences with precision farming in California.

However, a favourite quote of mine is, “there is always a better way of doing something: find it.” So yes, precision farming will be different than the Midwest or Great Plains, but that isn’t a reason it can’t be done.

Many people may have a narrow definition of precision farming, which limits possibilities on how it is used.

Technology can be applied to problems in many different ways for economic and environmental benefit. So for this column, I’ve decided to reach back into my Introduction to Precision Farming class and review basic categories of how precision farming technology can be used.

This is the most basic and simplest of precision applications and is often overlooked.

The difference between regular recordkeeping and precision farming recordkeeping is that determining yield on a whole field basis, it is done on a subfield basis. Instead of determining nutrient availability on a whole field, it is done on a subfield basis. Costs, income, labour or anything that is recorded for a whole field can be recorded on a subfield basis.

The size of the subfield can vary: it could be a large grid, it could be a soil type or it could be an individual tree. No matter the size of the subfield, keeping records is necessary for detailed and objective decision making. That is applicable to the west coast as much as the Prairies or Midwest.

The face of precision farming are the sexy and high visibility things like autonomous drones, robotic tractors and hyperspectral imagery.

These toys often get the press but justifiably need to be evaluated carefully for their economic returns. They need to be applied carefully and judiciously to do more than cover their costs.

However, there can be an economic return for those growers willing to put in the time and energy. Application of sensor and control technology will be different for west coast crops, but I believe that it can be applicable and valuable in some way for any production system or crop.

The current trend in precision farming is big data, which includes data management, data mining and all things measurable.

This is the analysis and interpretation of data that has been collected from various sensors or collected from record keeping. It is about making an objective decision from data, which is a concept that is as applicable to west coast agriculture as it is anywhere.

I greatly enjoy most of my time here in California and am gaining a very different perspective of how precision farming can be applied to different crops. It’s a learning process and I’m relying on locals to learn about almonds and pistachios. Yes it is different here, but precision can happen here, too.

Terry A. Brase is an educational consultant, a precision agriculture educator and author. BrASE LLC. Contact him at precision.happens@producer.com

What is missing is how to actually set it up to operate.

Most of the time it sounds easier than it actually is. The good news is that precision ag companies have integrated systems that do most of the setup for you.

Telemetry refers to wireless transfer of data, though precision agriculture has focused on the transfer of field data to and between the field, office and vehicles.

Walkie talkies and CB radios are wireless devices. They are set up by merely tuning each of the transmitting and receiving devices to the same channel or radio frequency.

Another example is the data transfer between RTK mobile base stations and field rovers.

An RTK base station requires a radio that is configured as a transmitter, as well as other settings such as a specific frequency, type of signal, an ID code and possibly the baud rate, which is the rate at which electrical signals are transferred. Most of the time, manuals provide recommended settings.

The rover GPS must also have a radio but be configured as a receiver with all the same settings. If the settings are different, the transmitter and receiver don’t “talk” and no data is transferred. Most mobile RTK bases work on a similar basis: a transmitter for output of data and a receiver for input of data using radio signals.

The growth of telematics in recent years is largely due to the increased use of cellular signals, which is where telematics gets more complicated.

Cellular signals are used by cellphones and include a nationwide network. The modem is the basic part of a cellphone, which transfers voice and data to a wireless signal. A gateway modem is a device that connects the cellular signal directly to the internet, or possibly other networks.

I have a dumb phone, which is to say a phone that provides only voice service and not data service. I have an iPad that provides data service but not voice service.

Most of you have a smartphone that receives both voice and data service.

As a result, you contract with a carrier for a voice plan and a data plan that is paid monthly. In precision agriculture, most companies rely on a modem and cellular data service to transfer data between devices and thus require a monthly data plan fee.

So how does a precision agriculture telemetry system work with cellular data?

As an example, I’ll use the transfer of sensor data from the field to a user’s smartphone or tablet.

A field sensor may be an ET (evapotranspiration) sensor in an orchard, a temperature gauge in a grain bin or a fill level sensor in a storage tank. This would be data that can be sent to the office or smartphone on a regular interval instead of a person travelling to every location to collect the data on a USB stick or manual transfer.

First, there needs to be a transmitter at each sensor.

If there is only one sensor, it might be directly connected to a modem, which moves the data into a cellular signal.

If there are multiple sensors, such as a set of ET sensors, then there is likely something known as a “sink” with a gateway modem. All of the ET sensors are using a radio frequency to transmit data to the sink, which collects them. The gateway modem them sends them out as a cellular signal.

So where is the data being sent?

In most cases it is being sent to the Internet of Things (IoT).

If you haven’t heard of the IoT, it’s the same old internet with which you are familiar, but IoT is the part that connects all those other “things,” such as sensors in precision agriculture.

Data can go a lot of places once it’s in the internet. Most likely it goes to a computer server to be stored and becomes part of a database.

From there it may be displayed on a website, which people can go to and look at the sensor information.

It could be made available directly to a cellphone in the form of a text message.

Or it might just be available to a few people, who can access the computer server for their own use.

Each system will be different, but if you are a user of a wireless network, you will likely have a user name and password that provides you access to all the data in one or more ways.

Another major use of telemetry is transferring data between vehicles or implements in the field.

Each vehicle will share guidance lines, harvest data or coverage maps to identify what the other machines have done. Allowing a fleet of vehicles or implements to communicate in this way requires a modem in each vehicle and a data plan to carry the data through a cellular network.

The home office would also have the same modem, which allows all data out in the field to be shared at the office. This is real time as the data is being collected, viewed and stored.

Terry A. Brase is an educational consultant, former precision agriculture educator and author. BrASE LLC. Contact him at precision.happens@producer.com

Before discussing how to use telemetry in agriculture, here’s a simplified look to appreciate how it works.

Wireless transmission of data is carried on electrical signals of different frequencies. Electrical signals are actually waves or pulses; frequencies are the speed of a wavelength in the electrical signal.

Each frequency has different characteristics, such as how far it will carry, if it goes through objects, if it is absorbed by objects; or if it bounces off objects. These characteristics make certain frequencies useful for specific applications.

Using a nonagricultural example, AM radio stations use a specific range of electrical frequencies that provide long distance transmissions of their signals for music. This range of frequencies is what you see on your radio dial. Country 1600 is actually transmitting their signal on a 1600 khz wavelength.

FM radio stations use a shorter wavelength, which does not travel as far, but is more stable and has fewer interference problems. Most electrical devices use a specific wavelength to transmit data or signals.

You can download a larger version of the frequencies chart here, in PDF format.

It is also important to understand that if a person or company were to use whatever frequency they wanted, there would be a lot of interference. Many signals would likely be blocked or corrupted by interfering signals.

You may have heard of the FCC or Federal Communications Commission in the United States keeping track of radio DJ’s that use inappropriate language. Actually the FCC’s main task is segmenting telecommunication wavelengths frequencies. The commission has a chart that provides an order and standardization for companies and organizations that design, build, and use communication devices.

For example, FCC has reserved a large block of frequencies from 535 to 1705 kHz for AM radio. FM radio stations have a block of frequencies from 88 to 108 Mhz.

Segmented frequency blocks organizes how they are used and helps ensure that signals from one type of device don’t interfere with other devices. If a manufacturer builds a device that uses a signal in the AM or FM frequency zones, the use of that device would interfere with a radio station or visa versa.

Any new device that uses electrical transmission must be registered with the FCC. Look on any device for a FCC number; if it has one it is transmitting some type of signal. Registering with the FCC assures that the signal is compatible with the chart of frequencies and that the device will not interfere with other devices. The good news is that usually the manufacturer does a good job of assuring appropriate signals.

These examples cover all sorts of wireless communications from radios to cellphones. Walkie-talkies, CB radios, and ham radio operators all use available wireless frequencies to transmit communications.

Telemetry is a little different. The way telemetry is defined is the transfer of data, not just voice for communication. In agriculture, there is a lot of data being transmitted through wireless means. But as usage increases, FCC’s chart of available frequencies keeps getting more crowded.

As an example of crowding, we can use GPS NAVSTAR satellites, which transmit navigation data. For awhile there was a conflict between GPS signals and an organization called LightSquared. FCC had sold (yes, segments of frequencies can be sold, though there are not many blocks left and are not affordable for the average person) a segment of frequencies right next to the GPS frequencies.

LightSquared was going to use the frequencies to provide worldwide internet service from a space-based satellite. A good idea, except that after testing, it was found that Lightsquared signals were interfering with GPS accuracy (or actually vice versa). Even though the signals were next to each other, some “bleeding” of signals between the two segments caused interference.

This is where I stop explaining and just say that the distinction between segments is “fuzzy”. The end result is court cases that are still trying to figure it out.

Considering the amount of data that agriculture generates, telemetry can be valuable to growers.

Next week I will examine recent and future uses of telemetry to make precision happen.

Terry A. Brase is an educational consultant, former precision agriculture educator and author. BrASE LLC. Contact him at precision.happens@producer.com