September 2008

        

    Upfront


    Time to sign up for ALOT

    Check on checkoff

    When you sell beef, you pay into the beef checkoff, so why not have a look at what your investment is up to. Stop by www.MyBeefCheckoff.com, the new Cattlemen’s Beef Board Web site, to find out how national beef checkoff dollars are invested and the results of those investments.

    There you will find easy access to CBB members, staff and state beef council information and access. You can also sign up for a monthly e-newsletter, have a look at producer profiles from across the country or dig deeper through links to all checkoff-funded consumer and industry sites.


    Missouri’s agriculture leadership program is accepting applications

    Agriculture Leadership of Tomorrow is accepting applications for its next class. ALOT’s mission is to provide leadership experiences that will make a positive difference to the future of agriculture. The 2-year leadership program is geared for participants from across the state, representing rural and urban areas, full-time farmers and agribusiness, media, financial representatives and others.

    The program consists of nine 3-day sessions strategically located throughout Missouri. During these sessions, class participants interact with community leaders representing not just agriculture, but government, education, law enforcement, philanthropy, health care and other aspects of our state community. The goal is to provide a unique understanding of the food and fiber industry’s place in society.

    In addition to the nine in-state sessions, participants travel to Washington, D.C., to meet our leaders at the national level. The final phase for an ALOT class is an international trip designed to experience the global impact of Missouri agriculture. To learn more or get an application, visit www.alotmissouri.com. Applications are due by Sept. 15.


    ACRE calculator available
    Get an idea of what this new farm program means for your farm

    ACRE, short for Average Crop Revenue Election, is a new commodity program included in the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008—the 2008 farm bill. This new commodity program presents farmers with a choice for covering their eligible crops over the period of the new legislation, 2009 through 2012.

    Farmers can continue to enroll in traditional commodity programs or they can participate in ACRE. Analysis by researchers at the Center for Agricultural and Rural Development suggests that most U.S. farmers will find ACRE much more attractive than current commodity programs.

    The CARD researchers have created tools to show farmers how they would fare under new and old programs using different price and yield scenarios. Three calculators are offered for three crops: corn, soybeans and wheat. The calculators are embedded in Microsoft Excel spreadsheets, posted on the CARD Web site at www.card.iastate.edu/ag_risk_tools for downloading .

    Users of the calculators are instructed to enter specific data about their state, expected commodity price for the 2009/10 marketing year, 2008 marketing year price and 2008 average yield per planted acre. They can also enter program yields used to calculate direct and countercyclical payments.

    The calculator then provides the 2009 ACRE price, ACRE yield, and ACRE revenue guarantee. Further results show users the estimated payments they will receive under ACRE and under older farm programs given their calculator inputs.

    A “what if” option allows users to check results of different combinations of expected prices and yield outcomes. According to CARD director Bruce Babcock, almost all price scenarios favor enrollment in ACRE. “ACRE payments will be double the level of traditional programs even if commodity prices drop back to levels last seen in 2005.” Traditional commodity programs generate slightly more payments only if market prices in 2009 through 2012 remain above 2007 and 2008 average levels.


    Who can afford corn?
    Tight corn supplies and weak dollar pressure biofuel

    the answer to that question depends on the day’s market. Some pressure was off the market at press time, but traders remain skittish about what the weather has done and might do to the domestic crop this year. If the 2008 crop stumbles, Purdue ag economist Chris Hurt says tight supply will rattle the ethanol and livestock sectors.

    According to Hurt, “The ethanol industry is struggling to pay for corn that has reached the $7 a bushel level. So the ethanol industry may also experience losses and might not be able to bid the price. That will depend on what oil prices and, therefore, ethanol prices, are.”

    “Everybody is trying to evaluate how many bushels of corn we have lost because of weather-related damage, what the implications are for prices and who can pay these high prices,” Hurt said. “The answer today is that hardly anyone can pay these kinds of prices and still have positive margins.”

    For starters, the U.S. ethanol industry needs 4 billion bushels of corn this year—or 1 billion bushels more than 2007—to meet anticipated production, Hurt said. Also, livestock producers used 6.15 billion bushels and foreign buyers 2.45 billion bushels of U.S. corn in 2007, and both could buy at least that much corn this year if it were available and more favorably priced.

    Usage will have to come down, likely in the livestock and foreign sectors. “The USDA has said that if the ethanol industry gets 1 billion more bushels of corn it means that the domestic livestock industry will have to cut back 16 percent in feeding corn,” he said.

    “And then our foreign buyers will have to cut back 18 percent.”

    Adding to the supply shortage and, ultimately, higher corn prices is the ongoing devaluation of the U.S. dollar.

    “Another important part in who is going to be able to pay the price for corn is the exchange rate of the dollar,” Hurt said. “When their currencies are strong, the foreign sector’s currency goes a long way in the United States. If we should see our dollar weaken more, the foreign buyer is going to be able to stay in and pay these prices. That says that the domestic livestock feeder might have to bear even more of the consequences.”


    Naming names
    USDA will include retailer names in meat recalls in a move to tighten recalls

    In a move to tighten recall procedures, increase consumer safety and boost confidence in the supply, USDA has announced it will include the names of retail vendors in meat recalls. The agency planned to start the more detailed process this summer. Retailers will be named just in Class I recalls—those of the most serious concern to public health.

    USDA’s Food Safety Inspection Service will post on its Web site a list of retail stores that receive products subject to Class I recalls. A Class I recall is one that involves a reasonable probability of serious health consequences or death for those with weakened immune systems. Retail stores include supermarkets or other grocery stores, convenience stores, meat markets, wholesale clubs and supercenters.

    FSIS will not identify distribution centers, institutions or restaurants, since they prepare food for immediate consumption without packaging that is identifiable or available to consumers.

    The list of retail stores and locations compiled by FSIS personnel during this process will be posted on the FSIS Web site www.fsis.usda.gov and shared with state and local public health officials where the retail stores are located.

    While recall announcements already include the name of the establishment recalling the meat or poultry, the reason for the recall, a description of the recalled product and product codes, the additional information will improve the consumers’ ability to identify recalled products they may have purchased by checking the list of stores and locations.

    100 years of Today’s Farmer—Pasture conversion
    A unique no-till corn approach only stunted fescue

    This year, as grain prices pulled more acreage into production, there was concentrated coverage in the ag press about bringing pasture and CRP into grain production. But even through the increased coverage, we haven’t heard of anyone using this method of pasture conversion first covered in Today’s Farmer in March 1970. It describes planting corn into fescue sod by only temporarily stopping fescue growth.

    In the fall of 1969, Today’s Farmer managing editor David Bryant stopped at the James Gillespie farm in Gentry County, Mo., to have a look at his no-till plan. Gillespie had been watching MU trials on the new concept of no-till farming, and figured he could use the practice on some of his grazing land. He had sliced open 28 acres of fescue sod that spring and grew 133-bushel corn. What’s interesting in retrospect was how he did it. Bryant wrote:

    Grass was about 3 inches tall on May 3 when Gillespie pulled into the field with a six-row, no-till planter. Cattle had been removed from the 10-year-old stand of fescue the previous day.

    Following soil test recommendations, Gillespie knifed in 200 pounds of actual nitrogen per acre in the form of anhydrous ammonia. He also applied 200 pounds of 8-32-16 per acre, banded as starter fertilizer.

    Typical, so far. Bryant also mentioned that aldrin was put in furrow to knock out insects. And, 3 days later came a quart of paraquat and 2 pounds of atrazine. It’s the fact that the paraquat and atrazine only stunted the fescue for the corn-growing season that makes the story unique. By fall, Gillespie’s fescue stand greened up and he turned the cattle onto a fescue-and-cornstalk pasture. It was a wet year, with Gentry County receiving 42.5 inches of rain compared to a normal of about 29.

    From the Today’s Farmer story:

    During the fall, the fescue stand recovered to about 50 percent of normal. This, with the corn stocks, provided good ground cover during the fall and winter, preventing erosion. It also provided low-cost winter feed for Gillespie’s herd of 125 beef cows.

    Also worth historical mention was the cost figured for a no-till planting. That paraquat and atrazine combination totaled $11.50 per acre versus an estimate of $4 per acre to run the moldboard plow. Aside from prices, that’s where the story shows its age, as Bryant wrote:

    Despite encouraging results with no-till planting, nobody is yet suggesting that you ditch your moldboard plow. Some big questions remain unanswered.

    Clean tillage has long been recognized as the first line of defense against certain insects such as the corn borer—and against certain corn diseases. What effect will no-till planting over a period of years have on insect and disease problems?

    The demonstrated ability of fescue to recover in the fall following paraquat/atrazine treatment in the spring suggests an exciting possibility for farmers with steeply sloping land. Maybe no-till planting will enable you to take an occasional corn crop from land too steep to be planted to corn with conventional planting and tillage.

    Maybe so. And maybe it will be $7 corn that dusts off that old theory. But for the most part, time has indeed committed the moldboard plow to the ditch.

    Click here to respond to this article 

    © 2006 MFA Incorporated.
    All rights reserved.