Wednesday December 11 Ag News

Stanton High Schools Students to Hear Why Farmers Need Science & Technology to Grow Healthier Food

How are farmers using science and technology to grow healthier food? What’s the impact on our food, animal care and the environment?  Students at Stanton High School will get those questions answered on Thursday, Dec. 19. Michael Luckey of Luckey Farms near Columbus, Neb., will address ag students starting at 8:00 a.m. and continuing through 2:45 p.m. at the high school located at 1007 Kingwood St. in Stanton.

Titled “Modern Animal Agriculture & Pork Production” the speech by Luckey will highlight how ongoing advancements in agricultural science are helping farmers raise better food while using fewer natural resources than ever before. “Farmers who raise pigs have been able to make great progress in animal health, food safety and protecting the environment,” said Luckey. “And farmers know they must always keep learning and working to get better at what they do.” Farmers now use 41-percent less water and 78-percent less land to raise pigs than they did 50 years ago.

“Modern barns, a focus on nutrition and animal care mean pigs live healthier lives than ever before,” said Luckey. “And, healthy pigs mean healthy food. For example, pork tenderloin today is as lean as a skinless chicken breast and is certified by the American Heart Association as a heart-healthy food. I’d like to thank Stanton High School for giving me an opportunity to share with these students what farmers are doing to make sure safe and healthy food gets to their dinner table today and in the future.”

There are 68,000 pork producers in the United States. The industry generates more than a half million jobs and produces more than $21 billion in personal income each year.



Post-Harvest Market Signals, Basis and Carrying Charges
Jessica Johnson, Tim Lemmons, and Allan Vyhnalek, UNL Extension Educators

Once the combines have finished their work, it is time to implement post-harvest marketing plans. Cash prices are important to watch, but other factors — particularly basis and carrying charges — can provide market insight for sell or store decisions.

Basis
Basis is the difference between the local cash price and the nearby futures contract. It is a measure of the transportation costs associated with moving a commodity from the local elevator to a specified delivery point. However, it is also impacted by local demand, availability of storage, and interest rates.

Basis is usually described as “stronger” or “weaker.” A stronger basis means there is a smaller difference between the local cash market price and the futures market price. A stronger basis implies that local grain elevators are seeking the commodity and are willing to pay more for the product now, rather than later. Conversely, a weaker basis signals to grain producers that local demand is low and to consider holding the commodity for a future date.

Carrying Charges
A “carrying charge” is the difference between current futures contracts, a future contract month and a near-term contract month. Carrying charges represent a local elevator’s estimate of costs associated with storage and conditioning, but are influenced by local demand, transportation, and interest rates. For example:

Assume that on Nov. 20, the closing price of the December 2013 corn contract was $4.17 per bushel, and the closing for the March 2014 corn contract was $4.25 per bushel. The carrying charge from December to March was $0.08 per bushel:

Dec 2013 Contract Futures Price — $4.17
March 2014 Contract Futures Price — $4.25
$4.25 - $4.17 = $0.08 or an 8¢ estimate of storage and conditioning costs

The market is willing to offer the producer 8¢ per bushel to store the crop until a later date.

If the carrying charge is negative, the future contract price is lower than the near-term price. This is an indication that the commodity is in demand locally and should not be stored. If the carrying charge is positive, the future contract price is higher than the near-term contract. This indicates that the commodity is not in demand locally, and if the carrying charge is large enough to cover the producer’s costs of storage, the market is telling the seller to hold that commodity until that future month.

The cost of storage is different for each producer and should be calculated individually.

It is important to track carry-cost charges on a daily basis as demand may swing future prices from a positive (in-the-money) position to a negative (out-of-the-money) position. It is also important to accurately estimate the cost of grain conditioning. During storage, grain condition won't improve and can decline.

The largest gamble with stored grain is an expectation of future demand and the movement of future month-contracts relative to the current contract. Carry-costs on stored grain have the capacity to move negative in one day, then swing positive the next. Carefully consider the grain outlook and local demand when making decisions regarding grain storage.

Making Grain Marketing Decisions
Basis and carrying can be evaluated together to make marketing decisions.

If the basis is weak and the carrying charge is large or above storage costs, current market demand for the commodity is low. This is an indication to store the grain to be marketed at a later date.

If the market carry is low or negative and the basis is strong, current market demand is high. This is an indication that the market is willing to pay for commodity delivery now, rather than later.

In western Nebraska, for example, corn basis has ranged from –0.06 to –0.09 under in November, well above the five-year average for November of –0.32. The table shows that even though the carry is positive, it is not larger than the example storage costs.

Wheat basis has ranged from –0.37 to –0.31 in November, above the five-year November average of –0.96. The carrying charge is not large enough to cover the example storage cost and even becomes negative in July.

With a strong basis and low or negative carrying charges, the market is signaling that there is demand for a commodity to be sold now, rather than stored to a future market date. Just as prices change on a daily basis, so do basis and carrying charge. Watching the markets and evaluating these market signals can help producers make sound marketing decisions for their operations.



Nebraska Farm Bureau Delegates Take Positions on Tax Reform, Water Funding, Farm Data; Elect New Leaders
Nebraska Farm Bureau’s voting delegates reinforced the need for property tax relief adopting a handful of resolutions targeted to lessening the property tax burden on Nebraska farm and ranch families as part of the organization’s 96th Annual Convention held Dec. 8-10 in Kearney.

“Tax reform and relief is still squarely on the minds of our members as we head into the 2014 legislative session, and that was reflected in the delegate’s discussions at our Annual Convention,” said Nebraska Farm Bureau President Steve Nelson.

Delegates adopted resolutions calling for any new sales taxes collected on the final consumption of goods or services to be used to provide property tax relief. Resolutions to modify the state aid to schools formula to provide a per-student base level of funding for all schools also passed the delegate body. The resolution stemmed from concerns that numerous rural schools do not currently receive any state equalization aid. The lack of state support leaves local property taxes to carry the full burden of local school funding and farm and ranch families carry a large portion of that property tax load in rural districts.

Outside of tax discussions, delegates reiterated their support for the state’s Livestock Friendly County program and backed other policy resolutions that would help create opportunities to bring the next generation of farmers back to the farm using livestock as an entry point.

Funding for statewide water projects and programs was also a central topic of delegate discussion.

“Management of Nebraska’s water resources is a statewide issue, and we continue to support funding for programs and projects related to water resource development, integrated management, cost-share for conservation programs, research, infrastructure and other water management activities,” said Nelson.

Delegates reiterated their belief that funding for the water programs should come from a local/state mix and funding for programs should come from broad-based sources of funding.

The protection of propriety farm data was also discussed by delegates in the context of the evolution of on-farm technology and farm data collected through the use of that technology.

“Our members believe farmers should continue to have the right to maintain ownership of data collected on their farms or ranches with the ability to share that data as they so choose,” said Nelson.

Delegates also adopted policy encouraging the state of Nebraska to seek agreements with bordering states to help ensure that Nebraska’s farm truck regulations would be recognized by neighboring states to avoid problems for farmers carrying farm commodities across state lines.

Delegates noted their opposition to a little known provision in the federal Affordable Health Care Act that prevents small business owners from receiving a federal health insurance tax credit for family workers covered under the businesses health care coverage.

The house of delegates also conducted elections for positions on Nebraska Farm Bureau’s board of directors. Delegates elected Todd Reed of Lincoln to the position of youth at-large and David Grimes of Raymond to the at-large position. Leslie Boswell of Shickley was elected to represent district 4 which covers Butler, Clay, Fillmore, Hamilton, Jefferson, Nuckolls, Polk, Saline, Seward, Thayer and York counties.

Delegates also re-elected Tanya Storer of Whitman and Scott Moore of Bartley to the state board. Storer will continue to represent district 6 which covers Blaine, Boyd, Brown, Cherry, Custer, Garfield, Grant, Holt, Hooker, Keya Paha, Logan, Loup, McPherson, Rock, Thomas and Wheeler counties. Moore will continue to represent district 7 which covers Chase, Dawson, Dundy, Frontier, Furnas, Gosper, Harlan, Hayes, Hitchcock, Lincoln and Red Willow counties.



Survey of Farmers and Ranchers Demonstrates That Congress Needs To Pass The Farm Bill

A recent survey of farmers and ranchers by American Farmland Trust and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln shows the need for Congress to pass the Farm Bill, according to Andrew McElwaine, President and CEO of AFT.  AFT and the University surveyed farmers and ranchers who have benefitted from the bill's Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program.

"The Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program is one of many critical agriculture programs threatened by Congress' inability to pass a five-year Farm Bill," noted McElwaine.  "It is vital the Senate-House conference committee finish its work and pass a new Farm Bill that fully funds farm conservation programs."

The Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program (FRPP) provides federal matching funds to protect farmland by purchasing easements. These in turn keep productive farm and ranch land from being developed and instead keep it in agricultural use.

The survey shows 96 percent of farmers and ranchers who permanently protected their land under the Farm and Ranchland Protection Program kept the land in agricultural production and the majority re-invested to improve the environment and economic performance of their operations.

"Our survey asked a critical question -- is the federal Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program really delivering on its promise to protect farmland and encourage conservation practices," said McElwaine.  "The overwhelming answer we received was Yes!"

For the survey, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln interviewed 506 landowners participating in the program to determine if they were achieving its stated purposes.

"Ninety-six percent of those receiving help through the program are continuing agricultural production on some or all of the land protected and 70 percent kept at least three-quarters in production," said McElwaine.  "More than 68 percent of the owner-operators implemented new management practices to prevent soil erosion and/or to protect water quality. By comparison, only 23 percent of the Nation's operators overall said they used conservation methods to achieve comparable outcomes."

The survey also found 84 percent of landowners who sold easements reinvested the proceeds to improve their farms by building structures, buying equipment, purchasing land, or installing conservation practices.

"Farmers tend to be land rich and cash poor," explained Julia Freedgood, AFT's managing director of Farmland and Community Initiatives. "FRPP provides liquid capital for farmers to improve the economic viability and environmental performance of working farms and ranches. Just as important, FRPP dollars tend to be spent locally, supporting local businesses and growing rural economies."

"This Program delivers tremendous value to farmers and taxpayers not only keeping farm and ranch land in production, but also attracting $2 in landowner, private or state and local matching funds for every $1 invested by the federal government," said McElwaine."Congress needs to continue it – and to do that they must pass the Farm Bill."

A copy of the study can be found at: http://www.farmlandinfo.org/FRPPImpacts.



NE's Holzfaster Brings Farmer Perspective to Senate Hearing on Renewable Fuels

National Corn Growers Association Corn Board Member Jon Holzfaster represented the interests of American farmers today during a Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works Committee and Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety oversight hearing on domestic renewable fuels. The two panel session included testimony from government officials and industry leaders on the environmental and economic impacts of the Renewable Fuel Standard and increased use of domestically produced biofuels such as corn ethanol.

In his testimony, Holzfaster stressed the importance of the RFS in supporting jobs, reducing dependence on foreign oil, lowering fuel prices for consumers and improving the environmental footprint of our nation's transportation fuels.

Additionally, he attested to the important role distillers dried grains have come to play in the beef, dairy, swine and poultry industries thus further negating arguments against increased ethanol use based in the false dichotomy constructed by anti-ethanol advocates of the food versus fuel argument.

In his testimony, Holzfaster spoke from both his personal experience as a cattle feeder and as a corn farmer who markets grain to the ethanol industry. From this position, he provided credible testimony on the importance of ethanol to American agriculture while also advocating for its environmental benefits.

Holzfaster directly addressed recent criticism of corn ethanol and the RFS based in the idea that corn production for ethanol has forced land out of the Conservation Reserve Program. Granting that CRP sign-up acreage has decreased, he pointed out that continuous sign-ups have increased and still target the most environmentally sensitive land leaving the environmentally sound acres to return to production.

Finally, he stressed the importance of maintaining the integrity of the RFS. Explaining that the uncertainty created by the Environmental Protection Agency's proposed changes to renewable volume obligations in 2014 negatively impacts farmers reliant upon the RFS for assurance of a viable commodity market, he strongly urged the Committee and Subcommittee to consider the perspective of America's farmers who already have made planting decisions based upon the rule.

"This recent decline in the price of corn is the largest drop in prices in six decades," Holzfaster explained. "Combined with increased input costs and lower crop prices, it will no longer be viable for farmers to continue to provide the resources they do. Any uncertainty regarding the RFS erodes confidence, undermines potential investment and generally stifles the robust growth we have seen in America's heartland."

Holzfaster participated in the second of these two panels along with Growth Energy Co-chairman General Wesley Clark, DuPont Senior Vice President of Industrial Biosciences, Performance Polymers and Packaging and Industrial Polymers Jim Collins Jr., American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers President Charles Drevna, Advanced Ethanol Council Executive Director Brooke Coleman and Environmental Working Group Vice President of Government Affairs Scott Faber.

The first panel included testimony from EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality Director Chris Grundler and Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Power Deputy Assistant Secretary for Renewable Power Steven Chalk.



Farmland Value Reaches Historic $8,716 Statewide Average

Average Iowa farmland value is estimated to be $8,716 per acre, an increase of 5.1 percent from 2012, according to results of the Iowa Land Value Survey conducted in November. Values increased in 2013 for the fourth year in a row and achieved historic peaks. The increase is similar to results of other recent Iowa farmland value surveys, including the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago and the Iowa Chapter of the Realtors Land Institute surveys.

Scott County, with an estimated $12,413 average value for all farmland, saw the highest average county values in the Iowa State survey. Scott County also had the highest percentage increase and highest increase in value, 12.45 percent and $1,374 respectively, of the 99 Iowa counties. The Northwest Crop Reporting District reported the highest land values at $10,960, which was a decrease of $445 (3.9 percent) from 2012. O’Brien County showed the highest dollar decrease in 2013 of $478. Osceola, Dickinson and Lyon counties along with O’Brien County all shared the greatest percentage decrease in 2013, with 3.72 percent.

“The 2013 land value survey shows a market in flux, with strong and weak price sales occurring at the same time,” said Michael Duffy, Iowa State economics professor and extension farm management economist who conducts the survey.  “The key question is if this shows the market is going to settle, if it is just pausing before another takeoff in values, or if the market has peaked and due for a correction.”

Have Iowa land values peaked?
Duffy said examining some causes for the current increase in farmland values and the reactions is helpful in assessing the situation. Farmland values are highly correlated with gross farm income. A majority of the survey respondents were concerned about income. Over three-fourths, 76 percent, of the respondents cited lower commodity prices as a negative factor affecting the land markets. Data show the rate of increase in land values slowed and commodity prices started dropping after June 2013.

Iowa corn and soybean price movements are good indicators of gross farm income movement. There was a 33 percent drop in the Iowa average corn price from October 2012 to October 2013 and there was an 11 percent drop in soybean prices over the same time period. The November estimated price for Iowa corn was 39 percent lower than the November 2012 price. Soybean prices were 11 percent lower.

There are many competing forces that will influence prices over the coming years. The Iowa State economist goes on to say, for now it appears there are more factors that will lead to lower prices as opposed to returning to levels of the past few years.

“Farm income is a strong indicator for the direction land values will go, but there are other factors as well,” Duffy said. “Interest rates remain low, but the percent of respondents who reported less sales than in 2012 was the highest it’s been since 1985.

The odds are against a major collapse in land values. But, if projections of a new lower level for commodity prices hold, then Duffy believes we should expect land values to drop. The economist said many respondents commented that the current situation might be a plateau.

Overview of 2013 Iowa land values
While the highest county land values were reported in Scott County, Decatur County remained the lowest reported land value, $3,628 per acre. O’Brien County, which showed the highest county average value and greatest dollar increase in 2012, showed the highest dollar decrease in 2013 of $478. Osceola, Dickinson and Lyon counties along with O’Brien County all shared the highest percentage increase in 2012 and the greatest percentage decrease in 2013, with 3.72 percent.

Low grade land in the state averaged $5,298 per acre and showed a 3.5 percent increase or $179 per acre, while medium grade land averaged $8,047 per acre; high grade land averaged $10,828 per acre. The lowest land value was estimated in the South Central Crop Reporting District, $4,791, while the lowest percentage decrease was in the Northwest Crop Reporting District with a 3.9 percent decrease. The Southeast Crop Reporting District reported a 13.3 percent increase, the highest district percentage reported. Maps showing 2013 values, percentage change and comparisons to 2012 data and additional information from Duffy are available at www.extension.iastate.edu/topic/landvalue.

The Iowa Land Value Survey was initiated in 1941 and is sponsored by the Iowa Agriculture and Home Economics Experiment Station, Iowa State University. Only the state average and the district averages are based directly on the Iowa State survey data. The county estimates are derived using a procedure that combines survey results with data from the U.S. Census of Agriculture.

The survey is based on reports by licensed real estate brokers and selected individuals considered knowledgeable of land market conditions. The 2013 survey is based on 476 usable responses providing 674 county land value estimates. The survey is intended to provide information on general land value trends, geographical land price relationships and factors influencing the Iowa land market. It is not intended to provide an estimate for any particular piece of property.



Beef Cow Longevity Series Set for Early 2014
Many factors affect beef herd profitability, but one specific factor, keeping young cows in the herd, is a huge challenge for cattle producers. Producers are searching for ways to keep young females in the cow herd longer for several reasons. Fifteen percent of all culled cows leave the heard before five years of age and an additional 33 percent are culled because they do not become pregnant, according the 2007-08 National Animal Health Monitoring System. Based on current production prices, a female must produce five calves for the cost of the replacement female to be recouped.

The Iowa Beef Center in partnership with the Iowa Cattlemen’s Association is offering the series “Heifer Development 2: Maintaining Your Investment” to specifically focus on management practices to keep young cows in the herd to improve longterm profitability. This series is a follow-up to the 2012 series on yearling heifers, “Heifer Development: Rebuilding our Future.”

The goal of the upcoming series is to pick up where the initial series ended and cover the topics of nutrition, health, calving and reproductive management of bred heifers through their second breeding season.

Dates and locations for the “Heifer Development 2: Maintaining Your Investment” series are
-    Jan.16, Maquoketa
-    Jan. 21, Nashua
-    Jan. 21, Postville
-    Jan. 23, Anita
-    Jan. 28, Spencer
-    Jan. 29, Holstein
-    Feb. 4, Humboldt
-    Feb. 5, Mount Pleasant
-    Feb. 5, Albia
-    Feb. 6, Winterset
-    Feb. 6, Osceola
-    Feb. 19, Ames

Registration for any location is $20 if preregistered by phone or email two days prior to the specific event, and guarantees a meal. Registration onsite at any of the locations is $25 per person with no guarantee of meal. For more information, contact your Iowa State University Extension and Outreach beef program specialist or IBC at www.iowabeefcenter.org. 



Weekly Ethanol Production for 12/06/2013

According to EIA data, ethanol production averaged 944,000 barrels per day (b/d)—or 39.65 million gallons daily. That is up 31,000 b/d from the week before and the highest of the year. In fact, last week’s output was the highest since the first week of 2012. The four-week average for ethanol production stood at 922,000 b/d for an annualized rate of 14.13 billion gallons. That’s up more than 16% from the four-week average covering January 2013.

Stocks of ethanol rebounded to 15.4 million barrels—a 7-week high. That is a 2.1% increase from last week.

For the 10th straight week, no barrels of ethanol were imported.

Gasoline demand for the week averaged 350.6 million gallons daily.

Expressed as a percentage of daily gasoline demand, daily ethanol production was 11.31%. That is the highest rate of the year and highest since February 2012.

On the co-products side, ethanol producers were using 14.313 million bushels of corn to produce ethanol and 105,353 metric tons of livestock feed, 93,923 metric tons of which were distillers grains. The rest is comprised of corn gluten feed and corn gluten meal. Additionally, ethanol producers were providing 4.92 million pounds of corn oil daily.



Agriculture, Navy Secretaries Promote U.S. Military Energy Independence with 'Farm-to-Fleet'

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus today announced the U.S. Departments of Agriculture (USDA) and Navy's joint "Farm-to-Fleet" venture will now make biofuel blends part of regular, operational fuel purchase and use by the military. The announcement incorporates the acquisition of biofuel blends into regular Department of Defense (DOD) domestic solicitations for jet engine and marine diesel fuels. The Navy will seek to purchase JP-5 and F-76 advanced drop-in biofuels blended from 10 to 50 percent with conventional fuels. Funds from USDA's Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) will assist the effort.

"The Navy's intensifying efforts to use advanced, homegrown fuels to power our military benefits both America's national security and our rural communities," said Vilsack. "Not only will production of these fuels create jobs in rural America, they're cost effective for our military, which is the biggest consumer of petroleum in the nation. America's Navy shouldn't have to depend on oil supplies from foreign nations to ensure our national defense, and rural America stands ready to provide clean, homegrown energy that increases our military's energy independence and puts Americans to work."

Farm-to-Fleet builds on the USDA / U.S. Navy partnership inaugurated in 2010, when President Barack Obama challenged his Secretaries of Agriculture, Energy and Navy to investigate how they could work together to speed the development of domestic, competitively-priced "drop-in" diesel and jet fuel substitutes.

"A secure, domestically-produced energy source is very important to our national security," said Navy Secretary Mabus. "Energy is how our naval forces are able to provide presence around the world. Energy is what gets them there and keeps them there. The Farm-to-Fleet initiative we are announcing today is important to advancing a commercial market for advanced biofuel, which will give us an alternative fuel source and help lessen our dependence on foreign oil."

Today's announcement marks the first time alternative fuels such as advanced drop-in biofuels will be available for purchase through regular procurement practices. It lowers barriers for alternative domestic fuel suppliers to do business with DOD. Preliminary indications from the Defense Production Act Title III Advanced Drop-in Biofuels Production Project are that drop-in biofuels will be available for less than $4 per gallon by 2016, making them competitive with traditional sources of fuel.

The program gets underway with a bulk fuels solicitation in 2014, with deliveries expected in mid-2015. USDA and Navy also are collaborating on an Industry Day, Jan. 30, 2014, where stakeholders can learn more about Farm-to-Fleet.



COALITION TO PROMOTE U.S. AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS

Members of the Coalition to Promote U.S. Agricultural Exports are encouraged by recent progress in farm bill conference committee negotiations to finalize this critical, overdue legislation. The Coalition also urges leaders to maintain authorization for critical U.S. Department of Agriculture export market development programs in the new legislation or in a short extension of the current farm bill, if that becomes necessary.

The Coalition members call specifically for maintaining mandatory funding of the Market Access Program (MAP) at no less than $200 million annually and the Foreign Market Development (FMD) program at no less than $34.5 million, the same funding levels as in the current farm bill.

“At a time when foreign competitors are planning huge increases in agricultural export promotion, U.S. agriculture cannot afford less support from MAP and FMD to help sustain their livelihoods.” said Coalition chairman Mike Wootton with Sunkist Growers cooperative. “Thousands of family farms and small businesses invest their own money to ensure these export programs continue to help sustain their livelihoods. But matching funds cannot be obtained for fiscal year 2014 if Congress fails to include MAP and FMD in a new farm bill or a temporary extension.”

Wootton said the European Parliament recently announced a plan to increase total agricultural export promotion spending by 75 percent in the next six years. He cited a recent statement by the European Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development that the Parliament will soon consider increasing just one of several EU agricultural export promotion programs progressively from $82.5 million in the 2013 budget to $270.5 million in 2020. A detailed study conducted by Agralytica, Inc., of competitive investment and programs pegged total agricultural export promotion spending by the EU government (including the program proposed to increase) at $360 million in 2011.  In addition, Wootton said, China and other countries’ governments are heavily subsidizing their agricultural productions to generate exports in competition with the U.S.

“With a documented 35-to-one return to the U.S. economy from MAP and FMD, sensible observers have to see them as successful public-private programs that deserve to continue in the next farm bill,” Wootton said. “More than 1.1 million Americans have jobs that depend on agricultural exports and we strongly support the Administration’s commendable goal through the National Export initiative of doubling U.S. exports. For U.S. agriculture, MAP and FMD are key tools in making this a successful effort.”



U.S. Tractor, Combine Sales Up in November

According to the Association of Equipment Manufacturer's monthly "Flash Report," the sale of all tractors in the U.S. for November 2013, were up 6% compared to the same month last year.  For the month, two-wheel drive smaller tractors (under 40 HP) were up 11% from last year, while 40 & under 100 HP were down 3%. Sales of 2-wheel drive 100+ HP were up 9%, while 4-wheel drive tractors were up 7%.  Combine sales were up 26% for the month.

For the ten months in 2013, a total of 183,846 tractors were sold which compares to 167,431 sold thru November 2012, representing an 10% increase year to date, reports Agri Marketing magazine.  For the ten months, two-wheel drive smaller tractors (under 40 HP) are up 11% over last year, while 40 & under 100 HP are up 5%. Sales of 2-wheel drive 100+ HP are up 18%, while 4-wheel drive tractors are down 2%.  Sales of combines for the first ten months totaled 9,487, an increase of 7% over the same period in 2012.



AVMA lauds FDA for new regulation of antibiotics in livestock feed
The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) applauds the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) changes to veterinary feed directive (VFD) regulations that will require veterinary oversight of antimicrobial use in livestock. The FDA’s Final Guidance 213 establishes a three-year timeframe for phasing out growth-promotion uses of antibiotics important in human medicine and the phasing in of veterinary oversight. The changes were announced today in Washington D.C.

“The AVMA has long advocated that greater veterinary oversight of the use of antimicrobials on the farm is a benefit to human and animal health,” said AVMA President Dr. Clark Fobian.

The new rules require that medically important antibiotics currently sold over the counter will now require a VFD, the veterinary equivalent of a prescription, from a veterinarian.  Even with the VFD, any deviation in use from what is stated on the product label is illegal.

The AVMA Steering Committee for FDA Policy on Veterinary Oversight of Antimicrobials has been engaged in discussions with the FDA Center for Veterinary Medicine related to veterinary oversight of antimicrobials in feed.

The AVMA is pleased that its recommendations were thoughtfully considered and that many of them are reflected in the final guidance.

Fobian said the FDA demonstrated insight and due diligence by ensuring the VFD orders:
-    Are limited to use under the professional supervision of a licensed veterinarian in the course of the veterinarian’s professional practice, and in compliance with veterinary licensing and practice requirements
-    Allow for greater flexibility by deferring to the profession and individual states for specific criteria on professional conduct related to veterinary supervision or oversight
-    Meet animal-health needs by removing the requirement for amount of feed and instead including approximate number of animals, duration and level of drug in feed
-    Afford veterinarians professional discretion in considering additional information, such as housing type, and animal age and weight, to specifically identify the animals to be treated with antimicrobials.

“The AVMA is ready to assist the USDA and the FDA in their outreach and communication efforts with stakeholders as we transition from the long history of these additives being available over the counter to the new VFD program,” Fobian said.

While the new rules provide an important first step, the AVMA has offered to assist USDA and FDA in educating veterinarians, producers and feed suppliers as they transition to comply with the new guidance over the next three years.



Kansas State University to lead a multimillion-dollar global food security program on reducing postharvest loss
Kansas State University is receiving an initial five-year, $8.5 million award from the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, to establish the federal government's new Feed the Future Innovation Lab for the Reduction of Post-Harvest Loss.

It is the third Feed the Future Innovation Lab established at Kansas State University in the last five months, bringing more than $27.2 million to the university.

"Kansas State University is proud to lead this effort to improve our global food system," said John Floros, dean of the College of Agriculture and director of K-State Research and Extension. "As much as a third to half of the world's harvest is lost every year for a variety of reasons. Through this innovation lab, we will work toward solutions that reduce postharvest losses and help preserve greater quantity and better quality food for the world's growing population. By doing so, we will also help reduce the waste of the precious natural resources used to produce our food."

The Innovation Lab for the Reduction of Post-Harvest Loss is part of the U.S. government's global hunger and food security initiative, called Feed the Future. This newest lab will focus initially on helping the countries of Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Ghana and Guatemala reduce their postharvest losses and food waste for grain and oil seed crops, tuberous root crops, and peanut and legume crops.

The lab will expand its research focus to other Feed the Future countries over time.

"A tremendous amount of time and effort is being put into improving crop yields in the developing parts of the world, but then 20-30 percent of those crops are lost soon after harvest and before they reach the consumer," said Dirk Maier, professor and head of the grain science and industry department and director of the university's international grains program. "We will research what can be done in an effective manner to decrease these unacceptably large losses, especially among smallholder and subsistence farmers, and use appropriate technologies and knowledge to increase the supply of safe and nutritious food in these and other Feed the Future focus countries."

As a way to prevent postharvest losses, researchers will investigate prevention of stored product insect pests and mycotoxins as well as improved measurement, drying and storage techniques. They also will use innovative communication, training and education approaches and look at incorporating micronutrients in grain foods to help improve nutrition.

Maier will co-lead the innovation lab, which will be housed in the university's International Grains Program Institute.

Partners include the ADM Institute for the Prevention of Postharvest Loss at the University of Illinois; Oklahoma State University; University of Nebraska-Lincoln; South Carolina State University; University of Kentucky; Fort Valley State University; the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Manhattan-based Center for Grain and Animal Health Research; Archer Daniels Midland Co.; Romer Labs; Vestergaard Frandsen; and John Deere; as well as various universities and nongovernmental organizations in the initial four countries.

"I think we have a powerhouse alliance, and USAID affirmed that by selecting Kansas State University as the leader," Maier said. "It's a great honor and responsibility. I think it will spotlight the state and the expertise and capabilities of Kansas State University's faculty and students as well as those of our collaborators."

While the lab's focus will be abroad, Maier said its results will benefit Kansas and the U.S.

"If you have countries with stronger economies, they will have higher demands for grains," he said. "History has proven that with China and India. To feed 9 billion people by 2050, more grain will need to be produced, preserved and sold for food and not rely on food aid to meet needs."

The university's other two Feed the Future Innovation Labs -- the Sorghum and Millet Innovation Lab and the Applied Wheat Genomics Innovation Lab -- focus on developing climate-resilient sorghum, millet and wheat.