Friday November 25 Ag News

Repairing Flood-Damaged Fields
Shawn Shouse, Iowa State University Extension Ag Engineer

Extreme flooding events like the 2011 Missouri River flood can leave farm fields scarred by erosion, layered with thick sand deposits, and littered with flood debris. Repairing these fields for future crop production can be expensive and time-consuming, and demands thoughtful planning.

Safety First
Erosion from flood waters and excavation or deep tillage during repair may endanger underground utilities. Before any repair work is begun, contact your state underground utility location and marking service to have underground lines located. In Iowa, call (800) 292-8989, in Nebraska (800) 331-5666, and in Missouri (800) 344-7483.

Evaluation
Inspecting and documenting the amount of damage will help you develop a plan of action. Marking severe erosion locations, sand deposits, and debris accumulations on an aerial photo or map makes it easier to plan where to move, stockpile, or borrow materials during repair efforts. Using a tile probe or other rod may help you determine the depth of sand deposits.

Debris Removal
Any potentially hazardous materials such as fuel tanks, pesticide containers, or unmarked containers should be documented and moved with care. Contact your state department of environmental quality or natural resources for specific instructions on handling hazardous wastes.

It may be permissible to burn trees, brush, plant residues, and wood on the field site. Ask your local environmental quality or natural resources department about any restrictions. Keep fire safety in mind if any burning is done. Ash disposal may require special measures in some states.

Thin layers (less than 4 inches) of plant residues free from other trash often can be successfully tilled back into the soil. Pushing debris back into the river is prohibited.

Sand
Sand deposits less than 8 inches deep may be incorporated into the soil. Depth of the sand and underlying soil properties will determine how deep and aggressive the tillage should be. Deeper sand deposits may need to be spread to a thinner layer before incorporation. Excessively deep sand may have to be moved to a stockpile or disposal area either within the field or along a field border. Use caution when filling eroded areas with sand. Wetland determinations may be required and finished soil properties may be unsuitable. Pushing sand back into the river is prohibited.

Erosion Repair
Areas subject to moving flood waters may have sustained severe erosion. Erosion no deeper than plow depth may be repairable with tillage. Deeper erosion may require earth-moving equipment for repair.

When filling deeper eroded areas, check first to see if wetland determinations are required. Contact your Natural Resources Conservation Service representative. Remember that fill sand may not provide adequate moisture-holding capacity as a topsoil layer. Flood irrigation or traveling sprinkler irrigation may dictate the degree to which land leveling and erosion repair is required.

In extreme cases, earth moving repair may be cost prohibitive. Selective abandonment or alternate land uses of some areas may be justified.

Compaction
Even in areas where severe erosion or sand deposition did not occur, prolonged inundation with flood waters can destroy soil structure and leave a layer of dense consolidated silt. While this is not technically soil compaction, the effect of this dense layer is similar. Tillage sufficient to break up this dense layer is recommended after the layer has dried.

Documentation
In cases where insurance or other financial assistance is potentially available, be sure to document all your repair actions and costs, keeping all receipts.  For more information on flooded field repair, refer to Flood Recovery for Cropland: Repairing Flood-Damaged Farm Fields at http://flood.unl.edu/crops or at http://www.extension.iastate.edu/topic/recovering-disasters.  



CME to Transfer MF Global Cash Friday
Transfer Covers $520M, or 60% of Cash, in Approximately 15,000 Accounts

CME Group Inc. said it will begin transferring roughly $520 million of cash that has been frozen in accounts of former customers of MF Global Holdings Ltd. to new firms starting Friday.

The transfer covers just a narrow spectrum of former MF Global customers -- those who owned cash-only accounts as of Oct. 31, the date of the firm's bankruptcy filing. But the transfer is expected to provide some measure of relief for those customers, whose funds have been completely frozen since then.

The transfer affects approximately 15,000 customers, and the funds being transferred represent 60% of the cash in their accounts, CME said in a note to traders. The transfer is part of an order approved last week by the New York bankruptcy judge overseeing the unwinding of the firm.

Customers whose accounts are affected should be able to resume trading starting Dec. 1, CME said.

The funds in accounts owned by former MF Global customers have been largely frozen since the firm's bankruptcy filing because a portion of customer funds has been found to be missing. The trustee overseeing the firm's wind-down has sought the transfer of customer funds piece by piece as it combs through the company's books and tries to account for the missing funds.

The first transfer, approved in early November, allowed for the shifting of open positions plus 60% of the collateral backing them, to new firms. But it left frozen accounts that contained only cash. Those customers will get 60% of their cash under a second transfer approved last week.

The trustee plans to seek approval next month for a third transfer of cash for customers who have received only open positions and collateral.

On Monday, the bankruptcy trustee said about $1.2 billion in customer cash remains unaccounted for. The figure is nearly double a previous estimate, and has raised questions about whether enough cash is available to replenish 100% of the assets in customers' accounts.

CME on Tuesday disputed the $1.2 billion figure, saying it is confident that the shortfall is smaller.




NCGA Defends Public Funding for Corn Research

The National Corn Growers Association actively defended the importance of publicly funded research into corn last week to a panel of industry stakeholders tasked with discussing the future of federally funded agricultural research programs. Noting that corn is not only the largest crop in the United States but also a major export product, NCGA staff defended against calls to kill public funding for corn research, stressing the importance of public research that generates ideas, encourages collaboration and confirms the internal findings of private companies.

"Corn is too valuable of an asset to our country for publicly funded research to cease," said NCGA Director of Research and New Uses Dr. Richard Vierling. "Halting this important, unbiased source of data would be disastrous for the future of the industry and deeply injurious to the future of the country. Right now, we still have an advantage in production agriculture. It is an edge we cannot afford to lose in the way we have already lost so many others."

Vierling participated in this panel discussion during the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service National Project 301 on Plant Genetics Resources stakeholder meeting. Held every five years, stakeholders involved with NP 301, the largest national program in ARS, explored effects budgetary constraints might have upon the program.

In 2010, National Project 302 Microbial Genetic Resources was rolled into NP 301, thus making the project even larger. Now, USDA ARS expect funding levels to decrease by $53 million in the coming year. In response, the agency will close ten research locations.

Following the panel discussion, attendees participated in breakout sessions focusing on areas in which the USDA needs to improve. Groups suggested the agency should improve in a number of areas including: fostering greater innovation; improving the nutritional value of crops; improving germplasm; increasing access to high-throughput genotyping and phenotyping; increasing inter-agency collaboration; increasing engagement with the industry; more vigorously pursuing the translational utilization of genomic information; improving data base management, particularly for minor crops; amplifying communications and outreach efforts; providing better training for plant breeders; and, beginning to look for resistant strains of crop for diseases not yet in the United States.



EIA says Ethanol "Blend Wall" Reached at National Level

The United States may have already reached what has long been dubbed the ethanol "blend wall," according to a report by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, which refers to a 10% concentration of ethanol mixed into gasoline.

The term "blend wall" describes the situation in the ethanol market as it nears the saturation point at the 10% content level due to the limited ability to distribute or use additional ethanol. It doesn't include the use of higher ethanol blends, such as 85% or E85, because that's a small market, with E85 only allowed in flex-fuel vehicles.

The EIA, in its "This Week in Petroleum" review, said the share of ethanol volume in blended gasoline at the pump has been rising in recent years, and reached 10% market share in June. That's the maximum allowable share of ethanol blend in U.S. gasoline, and ethanol has been near that level since late 2010, the report added.

The report said the "blend wall" has been reached because gasoline demand has stayed flat during the past two years while fuel ethanol consumption has been rising. Moreover, U.S. ethanol exports rose in 2010 and this year while imports are falling, all of which signal the domestic market is saturated, or that the "blend wall" has been reached.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency acted in late 2010 and early this year to approve the use of 15% ethanol blend or E15 in light-duty vehicles sold since the 2001 model year. However, E15 still faces several regulatory and market hurdles.

"Until E15 and/or E85 is made more available and widely adopted, additional ethanol volumes beyond the 10% share of gasoline are being sold to foreign markets," said the report.

Average U.S. ethanol exports rose by almost 800,000 bbl per month in 2010, with a strong trend upward in the latter half of the year. The trend continued in early 2011, as exports climbed from just under 1.5 million bbl of total ethanol exports for both January and February to more than 3.0 million bbl of exports in July.

The report says reaching a "blend wall" shows just how far the ethanol market has grown, which has been driven by the federal biofuels mandate under the Renewable Fuel Standard.

There's a caveat however. Although total ethanol use in all gasoline is at roughly a 10% concentration level nationally, data also suggests the "blend wall" has not been reached in every region of the country. Some smaller regions appear to still not be saturated, said the EIA, highlighting the Rocky Mountains region that had an ethanol blend rate below 8% as of July.



FFA Members Make Their Voices Heard in Washington
Group Promotes Native Voices, Rural and Tribal Issues with Government Officials

A group of 15 current and former FFA members and FFA advisors from five states recently attended a week-long event in Washington, meeting with various leaders within the United States Department of Agriculture and other agencies from Nov. 14-18, 2011. The event was designed to raise awareness of rural issues and engage in advocacy for Native American youth in agricultural education.

By special invitation from USDA and through the generous support of the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians and Farm Credit Serivces as a special project of the National FFA Foundation, the group united as a voice in the national dialogue on identifying barriers and opportunities in agricultural education that lead to both continuing higher education attainment and career success in native communities. They also met to recognize opportunities for support and mentorship for agricultural education students in native communities.

Among the administrators meeting with the group were Kathleen Merrigan, USDA Deputy Secretary; Bruce Nelson, Administrator of USDA’s Farm Service Agency; Keith Moore, Director of the Bureau of Indian Education; and Brian Drapeaux, Chief of Staff of the Bureau of Indian Education.