Wednesday October 22 Ag News

Farmers and Ranchers, Ag Leaders Support Hassebrook

Chuck Hassebrook is setting the record straight on his positions on agriculture and environment.

“My opponent’s ads are flatly untrue. The truth is this: I’ve spent my whole life fighting for family farms and ranches, small businesses, and small town and rural Nebraska. I oppose and have spoken out vigorously against the EPA’s proposed Waters of the U.S. rule, and my record shows that I have helped many farmers and ranchers overcome burdensome regulations.

“I support lowering ag land valuation to reduce property tax burdens, but I am being criticized by a group funded by an Indiana oil baron for saying state property tax credits should benefit family farmers and ranchers, rather than big investors like him and Ted Turner.

“I support and have always supported agriculture exports and opposed export restrictions. I have a long track record as an advocate for hardworking farmers and ranchers, small business, and growing the economy of small town and rural Nebraska.

“The only person who has something to prove here is Pete Ricketts, who knows next to nothing about agriculture. He spent his career at his billionaire father’s Wall Street firm, not on the Main Streets of our communities,” said Hassebrook.

Much of Ricketts so called “plan for agriculture” simply states his support for existing programs that Hassebrook initiated, including the University of Nebraska’s Rural Futures Institute, Nebraska Value-Added Agriculture Program and tax incentives for beginners like the Nebraska Advantage Microenterprise Tax Credit and the Beginning Farmer Tax Credit.

Nebraska farmers, ranchers, and agricultural leaders are quick to defend Hassebrook. More than 130 of them, many of whom are Republicans, are part of the “Farmers and Ranchers for Hassebrook” group that has been an integral part of Hassebrook’s campaign.



Nebraska Farmers Union PAC Says Farm Boy Chuck Hassebrook is the Best Choice for Agriculture and Nebraska

NEBFARMPAC, the political action committee of the Nebraska Farmers Union, Nebraska’s second largest general farm organization with over 6,000 farm and ranch families announced its unanimous and enthusiastic endorsement of Chuck Hassebrook for Governor in the general election.

The NEBFARMPAC Board of Directors issued the following statement:

"Chuck Hassebrook is a farm boy who was born and raised on a farm in Platte County.  His brother Rod farms the family farm.  He understands that agriculture is a high risk low margin business that is directly impacted by adverse weather, world production issues, and violent price swings.

Chuck has been working successfully with heavily Republican rural community leaders across the state for 40 years on ways to help build their rural communities.  He is an expert on rural economic development, micro-enterprise, rural infrastructure needs, and the importance of new profitable renewable energy based markets and opportunities.  Chuck understands that the kinds of economic development strategies that work in urban communities are very different from what works in rural communities.  Chuck Hassebrook understands what it takes to make small business successful.

We think Chuck Hassebrook as Governor will be the pragmatic, hands on problem solver he has always been who is not afraid to tackle the tough problems we face today while keeping his eye on the future.”

Gale Lush of Wilcox, NEBFARMPAC President said, "Chuck Hassebrook has been a member of Nebraska Farmers Union for over 30 years.  Over that time Chuck Hassebrook has been a champion on family farm agriculture, rural development, and renewable energy issues.  His distinguished service as University of Nebraska Regent for the past 18 years, and his decades of service at the Center for Rural Affairs give him a solid track record on our issues.”

John Hansen, NEBFARMPAC Secretary said, “This fall, grain commodity prices have plunged to well below the cost of production.  With today’s cost of production at all-time highs, the financial risk to produce crops has never been greater.  When times are tough, agriculture needs someone who sits in the Governor’s chair who understands our states family farmers and ranchers, and is willing to stand up for them and with them when the going gets rough.  Chuck Hassebrook is the person who knows and understands agriculture.  He has our back.  Given the many challenges rural Nebraskans face in the days ahead, our state needs a champion for our state’s largest single industry, production agriculture. We need someone who will champion the interests of new profitable renewable energy markets for ethanol and wind energy development.”



IA Ag Chemical Dealer Meetings Provide Crop Pest and Nutrient Updates

Updates to the latest crop production products and recommendations are the focus of upcoming meetings sponsored by Iowa State University Extension and Outreach. The meetings will be held Nov. 25 in Iowa City and Dec. 10 in Ames.

The meetings give agricultural input providers an opportunity to meet with ISU Extension and Outreach specialists and review current research, discuss new products and learn of new recommendations.

Both locations will feature presentations on weed, insect and crop disease management as well as soil nutrient management. Meetings are approved for 6.5 Certified Crop Adviser (CCA) credits. The meetings also offer Iowa Commercial Pesticide Applicator recertification in categories 1A, 1B, 1C and 10. Recertification is included in meeting registration. Attendance at the entire meeting is required for recertification.

Early registration is $70 if received by midnight Nov. 19 for the Iowa City meeting and midnight Dec. 4 for the Ames meeting. Late or on-site registration is $85. Visit www.aep.iastate.edu/acu for program details or to register online. For additional information contact an ISU Extension and Outreach field agronomist hosting the meeting.

   - Iowa City – Nov.25. Clarion Highlander Hotel and Conference Center, I-80 Exit 246 - Virgil Schmitt, vschmitt@iastate.edu or (563) 263-5701
    
    - Ames – Dec.10. Quality Inn and Suites Starlite Village, Dayton Avenue and 13th Street - Mark Johnson, markjohn@iastate.edu, (515) 382-6551 or Angie Rieck-Hinz, amrieck@iastate.edu, (515) 532-3453

The Ag Chemical Dealer Updates are hosted by Iowa State University Extension and Outreach, the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and the departments of Agronomy, Entomology, and Plant Pathology and Microbiology.



Buyer Interest Strong, Competition Intense at SIAL Food Show in Paris

Billed as one of the largest international food shows in the world, SIAL 2014 in Paris is an outstanding venue for showcasing U.S. beef and pork. The U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) participates in SIAL through support from the USDA Market Access Program (MAP).

About 150,000 participants from more than 100 countries are in attendance at the five-day event. A majority of those attending are from the European Union, but SIAL also attracts a large number of buyers and other food industry professionals from Russia, the Middle East and many Asian countries including Japan and China.

“U.S. beef and pork are strongly represented at SIAL,” said Dan Halstrom, USMEF senior vice president of marketing and communications. “We have NHTC-approved suppliers here on the beef side, but we also have several pork packers in attendance and a large number of traders and purveyors as well. SIAL is an excellent opportunity for them, as the event provides access to many prospective buyers.”

These sentiments were echoed by Steve Isaf, president of Interra International and past chairman of USMEF.

“The European meat trade is going through a volatile and somewhat difficult period,” Isaf said. “Yet interest from buyers has been very strong this week. Despite a number of trade issues that make this a challenging region in which to do business, it can still deliver very solid returns for exporters.”

As USMEF has reported in recent months, U.S. beef exports to the Europe have been growing under the EU’s duty-free high-quality beef (HQB) quota. But heavy utilization of the quota by other beef-exporting countries – especially Australia and Uruguay – have both suppliers and importers concerned that the HQB quota no longer has enough capacity to accommodate current demand.

“Without question, this is a major concern here at SIAL,” said John Brook, USMEF regional director for Europe, Russia and the Middle East. “For July through September, the quarterly allocation of the HQB quota was nearly fully utilized, causing some importers to delay shipments into October. Import activity has been very heavy since the new quarter began, putting us on a pace that could cause capacity concerns to resurface as early as November.”

Europe always has a high degree of self-sufficiency in pork production, and Russia’s current ban on pork imports from the EU (in place since January, due to African swine fever) has significantly depressed the European pork market – making it an even tougher environment for imports. But Halstrom says it is important to view the market from a long-term standpoint.

“Europe is a customer of ours, but also an important competitor – especially on the pork side,” he explained. “Right now we’re seeing a lot of inexpensive European pork in both the international marketplace and within the domestic EU market, but prices and market conditions are going to normalize over time. When that time comes, it’s important for U.S. suppliers to be well-positioned to capitalize on new opportunities.”

In addition to the EU-Russia pork impasse that has now lasted nearly nine months, Russia has also been closed to most pork and beef products from the EU, the United States and Canada since early August. This week Russia also imposed a ban on beef offal and all animal fat from the EU, dampening hopes that trade relations will improve anytime soon. This is a prime topic of discussion at SIAL, because the impact extends well beyond Russia’s borders.

“Russian buyers are still very interested in U.S. pork and beef, and it’s unfortunate that we are presently unable to serve them,” Brook said. “But USMEF remains active in the Greater Russia region, where we certainly see opportunities emerging in the markets that are still open to U.S. products. Some of those countries are now exporting more meat to Russia, which can open new doors for U.S. suppliers.”

Tuesday’s activities at SIAL were highlighted by a visit to the USMEF booth by Uzra Zeya, chargé d'affaires at the U.S. Embassy in Paris. She visited with exporters about opportunities to grow their business in France and other destinations in the region, and sampled a number of U.S. beef and pork products on display at SIAL.

Buyers from the Middle East are typically well-represented at SIAL, and Halstrom noted that this year is no exception.

“All of the major Middle Eastern destinations are represented,” he said. “Egypt has a large number of buyers present, along with the United Arab Emirates, Jordan and Qatar. These are excellent growth markets for U.S. beef, but also exceptionally competitive – so SIAL provides a great opportunity to connect with prospective customers from that region.”

With more than 6,300 exhibitors participating in SIAL, competition for buyers’ attention has never been more intense. In addition to the strong showing of vendors from North and South America, Europe and Australia, Asian suppliers also have a growing presence at SIAL. For example, Japan’s Agriculture and Livestock Industries Corporation (ALIC) is exhibiting for the first time this year.

“This is part of Japan’s new focus on exporting high-value products, such as wagyu beef, to customers in Europe and other international markets,” Brook explained. “SIAL has a strong reputation for generating new business, which captures the attention of suppliers from across the world.”

Note: “NHTC-approved” refers to beef from non-hormone treated cattle, approved for export to the European Union.



USDA Cold Storage Highlights

Total red meat supplies in freezers were up 3 percent from the previous month but down 8 percent from last year. Total pounds of beef in freezers were up 8 percent from the previous month but down 16 percent from last year. Frozen pork supplies were up slightly from the previous month but down 4 percent from last year. Stocks of pork bellies were down 26 percent from last month but up 44 percent from last year.

Total frozen poultry supplies on September 30, 2014 were down 2 percent from the previous month and down 10 percent from a year ago. Total stocks of chicken were down 2 percent from the previous month and down 9 percent from last year. Total pounds of turkey in freezers were down 2 percent from last month and down 10 percent from September 30, 2013.

Total natural cheese stocks in refrigerated warehouses on September 30, 2014 were down 3 percent from the previous month and down 5 percent from September 30, 2013.   Butter stocks were down 11 percent from last month and down 37 percent from a year ago.

Total frozen fruit stocks were down 2 percent from last month but up 1 percent from a year ago.   Total frozen vegetable stocks were up 15 percent from last month and up 6 percent from a year ago.



Survey Shows Big Data Use Increasing

A survey by the American Farm Bureau Federation shows more farmers are reaping the benefits of the latest agricultural technologies, but most remain wary of risks involved with big data collection. Fully 77.5 percent of farmers surveyed said they feared regulators and other government officials might gain access to their private information without their knowledge or permission. Nearly 76 percent of respondents said they were concerned others could use their information for commodity market speculation without their consent.

"We want to be sure that farmers' and ranchers' data are protected, and we're asking the hard questions to make sure that happens," AFBF President Bob Stallman said. "Farmers should know who owns their data and how they plan to use it. It's up to companies that collect the data to make all that clear." Farmers overwhelmingly agree: More than 81 percent believe they retain ownership of their farm data, according to Farm Bureau.

Farmers say they are getting positive results from using precision technologies that collect weather data, track seed varieties, analyze nutrient applications and map crop yields. Those surveyed indicated the use of precision technology has reduced the cost of seed, fertilizer and pesticides by an average of 15 percent, and increased crop yields by an average of 13 percent. More than half of the survey respondents who are actively farming indicated that they plan to invest in new or additional precision and data technology in the next year or two.

The survey was conducted from late July to early September. Reponses were received from 3,380 farmers.



COOL's Last Stand?
John D. Anderson, Deputy Chief Economist, American Farm Bureau Federation

On Monday, the World Trade Organization (WTO) released the report of the compliance panel reviewing the Canada/Mexico complaint against the U.S. over Country of Origin Labeling (COOL).  Given that this process has been grinding through the wheels of WTO justice for so long, a brief recapitulation of the issue is probably in order.[1]  

As a domestic policy issue, COOL originated in the 2002 Farm Bill.  Due to a lack of any kind of consensus on how COOL should be designed, though, implementation on beef and pork was delayed until revisions were made to the policy in the 2008 Farm Bill.  A COOL interim final rule was published by USDA in July 2008.  By December 2008, Canada had begun the WTO dispute settlement process by requesting a consultation with the U.S. on the issue through the WTO.  This process continued over most of the next year, with other countries - notably Mexico - formally joining the process.  In October 2009, Canada requested and was granted the establishment of a formal dispute settlement panel.  The panel was appointed by the Director-General in May 2010.  The dispute was heard over several months, and it was not until November 2011 that a report was issued.

The first dispute panel report was unfavorable to the U.S. position on COOL, finding that the rule was inconsistent with U.S. obligations under the WTO: specifically that it afforded less favorable treatment to imported livestock than to domestic and that it failed to "fulfil [sic] its legitimate objective of providing consumers with information on origin...".  On March 23, 2012 - that latest possible date at which it could do so - USDA filed a formal appeal of the panel finding.   This appeal was contested over several weeks, with an Appellate Body report issued at the end of June 2012.  The Appellate Body upheld the original panel's findings but differed significantly in their rationale for doing so.  They agreed that the COOL rule constituted a disincentive to use imported livestock due to recordkeeping and verification requirements.  However, they argued that the detrimental impact on foreign producers could be justified if it stemmed "exclusively from a legitimate regulatory distinction...".  From the Appellate Body's position, origin labeling can be a legitimate requirement.  The problem with COOL was that so little of the information collected and maintained was actually passed on to consumers; the disproportionate burden associated with imported products was not justified by the limited information conveyed.

The Appellate Body ruling at least kept the door cracked for a COOL fix; and USDA requested a "reasonable period of time" to implement such a fix.  That reasonable period was to extend to May 23, 2013.  On that date, USDA implemented a revised final rule in an attempt to address the deficiencies identified by the WTO Appellate Body. The main feature of the revision is that it would expand the COOL label to include more of the information being collected under the COOL program (the born, raised, slaughtered feature of the new labels).  It is this new final rule that has been under review by the WTO compliance panel; and it is this compliance panel's report that was issued on Monday.

The compliance panel has determined that even though the amended COOL program results in better consumer information, it imposes a "disproportionate" burden on importers as compared to domestic suppliers; therefore the amended COOL measure accords less favorable treatment to imported livestock than to US-origin products and as a result is still in violation of U.S. obligations under WTO.  Specifically, the panel found that the revised COOL rule actually increased the detrimental impact on imported livestock (as Canada alleged) because it increased the degree of segregation and the level of recordkeeping that would be required for compliance.  They further found, addressing the Appellate Body's concerns, that this detrimental impact did not rest exclusively on legitimate regulatory distinctions.  This is largely due to the fact that a large proportion of relevant meat products (e.g., anything sold through the food service trade) is exempt from COOL anyway. 

So what happens now?  Is this the end of the long and winding road for COOL?  Maybe; but probably not.  For now, the WTO compliance panel recommends that the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) request the U.S. to bring the inconsistent measure "into conformity with its obligations."  The next step in the WTO process would be adoption of the compliance panel's report at a DSB meeting.  Adoption of the report - subject to delay by a U.S. appeal - would trigger Canada and Mexico's rights to compensation or retaliation. If the U.S. files an appeal and loses once again, Canada and Mexico would be authorized to slap retaliatory tariffs on U.S. exports.

Basically, then, two more important decision points remain.  First, the U.S. must decide whether or not to appeal the compliance panel's ruling.  This decision should come within the next 60 days.  An appeal will likely last the better part of a year.  If the U.S. appeals and wins, COOL stands.  If the U.S. appeals and loses (which must be considered likely in light of previous experience with the process) the U.S. will face the second decision point.  At this decision point, there are three options: 1) let COOL stand as a non-compliant program and endure whatever retaliatory measures are permitted to Canada and Mexico by the WTO, 2) repeal COOL - at least on beef and pork, or 3) replace COOL with a new labeling law that is compliant (or that will start the whole review process over again).  The first option is not likely.  Retaliatory measures can be quite broad and will therefore awaken powerful domestic constituencies to oppose COOL; this is what such measures are designed to do.  The second option is the cleanest but will obviously not appeal to those who have invested well over a decade in COOL.  It may not be easy to stand down on the issue at this point.  That leaves the third option.  But a new COOL law won't necessarily be easy to design.  COOL has always been an attempt to thread the needle between what WTO requires of compliant labeling programs and what domestic producers (and other industry stakeholders) are willing to implement in their own operations.  It is not clear that the eye of that needle has gotten any bigger in the last twelve years.  



Showers Restart Soy Planting in Brazil's Mato Grosso, Center-West

Light showers over the last four days across Mato Grosso and the rest of Brazil's Center-West has put a spring in the step of farmers, who have seen soybean planting substantially delayed over the last month amid unseasonably dry weather.

Rain started falling across the state, as well as across neighboring Goias and Mato Grosso do Sul states, on Saturday and extended into Tuesday in some areas.

The showers were light and sporadic, leaving some Mato Grosso farms dry, but precipitation of between 2/5 of an inch to 1 1/2 inches were reported elsewhere.

The atmospheric block that stopped cold fronts bringing rain to the Center-West for most of October has now been broken down and regular rainfall can be expected over the region from now on, said Marco Antonio dos Santos, meteorologist at Somar, a local weather service.

Over the weekend, more uniform rains are expected across Mato Grosso and surrounding areas, said the meteorologist.



US Ethanol Supply at 6-Week Low

Ethanol inventories in the United States fell last week for the third straight week, down to a six-week low despite a rise in plant production and a decline in demand, according to data released Wednesday by the Energy Information Administration.

Total ethanol stocks were drawn down about 400,000 barrels (bbl) to 17.9 million bbl during the week-ended Oct. 17, the lowest level of supply since the week-ended Aug. 29 when stocks totaled 17.673 million bbl.

Stocks have been drawn down since they hit an 18-month high of 18.828 bbl during the week-ended Sept. 26, but remain 2.4 million, or 15.7%, above a year ago.

Plant production increased 11,000 barrels per day (bpd), or 1.4%, last week to 896,000 bpd while largely unchanged year-over-year. Four-week average output through Oct. 17 is 1.6% higher than during the comparable year-ago period.

Blender inputs, a proxy for ethanol demand, eased 9,000 bpd, or 1.0%, to 876,000 bpd last week, while up 2.9% year-over-year. Inputs over the four weeks through Oct. 17 averaged 1.8% higher against the same four weeks year prior.



Court Tosses E15 Labeling Lawsuit

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia tossed a lawsuit filed by industry trade groups seeking to repeal the Environmental Protection Agency labeling regulations for retail pumps for the sale of gasoline containing 15% ethanol known as E15.

The court ruled on Tuesday, Oct. 21, in a judgment that the groups, including the American Petroleum Institute and Engine Products Group, failed to establish standing because "they cannot show their members have suffered or are threatened with suffering an injury in fact that is traceable to the regulation," the court said.

The petitioners argued that the E15 labeling rule fails to satisfy the Clean Air Act, and that certain aspects are "arbitrary and capricious or an abuse of discretion."

EPG also challenged EPA's denial of its petition asking EPA to mandate the continued sale of gasoline containing 10% or less ethanol referred to as E10 in order to prevent improper fueling. EPG said E15 will damage products sold by its members for whom "E10 is suitable but E15 is not."

Sales of E15 consistent with the regulation would "therefore expose EPG members to warranty claims, product liability lawsuits, recalls and reputational injury," EPG argued.

The court said like API, EPG "failed to offer evidence connecting sales of E15 under the regulation to injuries that EPG members are sufficiently likely to suffer so as to afford it standing."

The court added in its published judgment that it "has accorded the issues full consideration and has determined that they do not warrant a published opinion."



CREW Sues EPA For Documents Regarding 2014 Renewable Fuel Standards

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) today sued the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for failing to provide documents regarding oil industry efforts to influence the 2014 Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS).

Last May, following a Reuters article describing how the Carlyle Group and Delta Airlines had lobbied members of Congress and the administration to reduce the amount of renewable fuel required to be blended into transportation fuel, CREW asked for an investigation by the EPA’s Office of Inspector General and filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records. It took months for the EPA to release even the documents the agency already had provided to Reuters, and it has yet to hand over all relevant documents.

Based on a follow-up Reuters article, CREW also has concerns that oil companies leveraged high-level political connections to convince the White House and the EPA to insert special waivers into the RFS that could potentially allow oil companies to refuse to sell biofuels.

“It certainly seems as if the administration has backtracked on its commitment to renewable fuels. The question is why. Was there a back room deal orchestrated by big oil and high ranking officials in the Obama administration?” asked CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan. “Even though it is nearly 2015, the renewable fuel standards for 2014 still haven’t been released. Is this to avoid potential political fallout in the mid-terms for siding with the oil industry over the biofuel industry?”

Each year, the EPA sets the RFS for how much renewable fuel must be blended into transportation fuel supplies. The most recent standards were proposed in November 2013 and were expected to be finalized last summer. For the first time since the RFS was created, the EPA proposed lowering the renewable fuel amounts. Also, earlier this month, Senators Ed Markey (D-MA) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) sent a letter to the White House expressing their concerns about EPA potentially inserting a waiver into the RFS, which would allow oil companies to refuse to distribute renewable fuel. Carlyle and Delta lobbied heavily for both of these modifications to the program and would benefit financially from the change. As Reuters revealed, they persuaded Reps. Robert Brady (D-PA) and Patrick Meehan (R-PA) to lobby administration officials, including Vice President Joe Biden, White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, National Economic Council Director Ronald Minsk, and former National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling to weaken the RFS.

“Is the EPA slow-walking its release of these documents because it does not want the public to learn how political the RFS has become? The RFS should be based on sound energy policy, not politics. CREW’s lawsuit will shed light on what really went on at the EPA,” Ms. Sloan said.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is a non-profit legal watchdog group dedicated to holding public officials accountable for their actions. For more information, please visit www.citizensforethics.org.   




Cropp: Milk Price Slide Beginning to Happen

It's been a great run, but those record high milk prices paid to farmers this year are starting to come back down. That's what Bob Cropp with the University of Wisconsin-Extension said in his monthly Dairy Situation and Outlook report. The professor emeritus says milk production has been going up and dairy exports have slowed down in recent weeks, which will trickle down to the producers' pay checks.

"Milk cow numbers only increased 2,000 head from August and were 0.6 percent higher than a year ago, but milk per cow was much higher at 3.4 percent above September a year ago," he noted in his latest assessment.

And as more product goes on the market, less of it is being shipped to customers in other countries.

"The latest dairy export report was for August showed that compared to a year ago, exports were 59 percent lower for butter, 10 percent lower for nonfat dry milk, 20 percent lower for dry whey, 36 percent lower for whey protein concentrate and 11 percent lower for lactose," Cropp said. "But, cheese was still 11 percent higher. Due to increase in world milk production and China's much lower dairy imports than earlier in the year world dairy product prices have declined substantially and are considerably lower than U.S. prices lowering U.S. exports."

As he said in recent months, Cropp explains that world dairy product prices are lower than U.S. prices, making it hard to compete against other producers in countries like New Zealand.

Looking at trends for the rest of the year, Cropp says the Class III milk price--which was $24.60 for September--will be near $23.95 for October and then falls to around $19.50 by December.

"The year will finish with cow numbers averaging about 0.4 percent higher than a year ago and milk per cow 2.1 percent higher resulting in total milk production near 206.3 billion pounds," he said. "The higher milk prices experienced and much lower feed costs than a year ago has resulted in very favorable margins for dairy producers."

For 2015, Cropp predicts that the Class III price could be around $18.25 by January and then falling into the $17s most of the year with the possibility of even being below $17 mid-summer before some strength in the fall.



Soy Growers: APH Provision a "Lifeline" for Farmers Impacted by Weather, Disasters

A new provision included in the 2014 Farm Bill has the potential to be a "lifeline" for farmers following crop losses due to severe weather events and natural disasters, according to the American Soybean Association. The Actual Production History Yield Exclusion, or APH, allows farmers to exclude yields from exceptionally bad years, such as those brought on by severe weather or natural disasters from their production history when calculating yields used to establish their crop insurance coverage.

"The rollout of the APH program is a lifesaver for soybean farmers in so many parts of the country. It quite literally means the difference between continuing to farm following disastrous years, and being forced out of business," said ASA First Vice President Wade Cowan, who farms in Brownfield, Texas, and has experienced significant drought in each of the last four growing seasons. "Weather is the single biggest external factor in soybean farming. We have no control over its effects, but with the APH program, we can better respond to its impacts."

The APH program is significant given the formula used to calculate crop insurance coverage. Producers are able to purchase coverage based on that farmer's average recent yields. Formerly, a year of bad yields due to severe weather would reduce the yield coverage levels available in future years. Under the APH program included in the Farm Bill and announced yesterday by USDA, yields can be excluded from farm actual production history when the county average yield for that crop year is at least 50 percent below the 10 previous consecutive crop years' average yield. By excluding exceptionally unusual years, a farmer's overall yield average avoids a disproportionate reduction.

The APH exclusion, according to Cowan, takes on additional significance this year, given the decline in prices for many commodities. "Without the APH program, producers who have suffered severe weather would face the double-whammy of low prices and low yield protection," Cowan said.

According to USDA, spring crops eligible for APH Yield Exclusion include corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, grain sorghum, rice, barley, canola, sunflowers, peanuts, and popcorn. Nearly three-fourths of all acres and liability in the federal crop insurance program will be covered under APH Yield Exclusion.

"Much credit should be given to the Agriculture Committees for including this provision in the Farm Bill, and then to Agriculture Secretary Vilsack and the team at USDA for rolling out this program for 2015 spring plantings," added Cowan. "The positive effects it will have for farmers, not only in the Southwest but nationwide, will be great evidence of its success."



NAWG Applauds Implementation of APH
The National Association of Wheat Growers is pleased that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) intends to move forward with the implementation of the Actual Production History (APH) adjustment for the 2015 spring-planted crops.

"On behalf of NAWG and the 22 states we represent, I thank Secretary Vilsack for working with his team to implement the APH provision for 2015 spring crops,” said Paul Penner, NAWG president and wheat grower from Hillsboro, Kan. “This provision will be another tool for wheat growers across the country to strengthen their safety net, particularly for growers who have experienced multi-year disasters. We are hopeful that USDA will continue to work on implementing this provision for our winter wheat growers this year."



Johnson Represents NCGA at White House Event on Women in Ag

National Corn Growers Association Past President Pam Johnson joined U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Deputy Secretary Krysta Harden at the White House Monday for the Dialogue on Women Leaders in Agriculture. More than thirty participants representing ag associations, businesses and higher education participated in the event, including the first women to lead each of the commodity organizations.

"You're the first generation of women ag leaders, but you're not the last." said Deputy Secretary Harden. "My challenge to you is to identify what you will do to bring the next generation of women along this path and beyond."

"We have a responsibility to recruit, inspire and empower current and next-generation women leaders," said Johnson. "It was such an honor to be at the White House, in the center of a very important discussion."

Attendees discussed common barriers women in the ag industry face, and shared best practices for recruitment and leadership development.

"Women play an increasingly important role on family farms, as both operators and landowners," said Johnson. "It makes good business sense to involve women of all ages in this process."

The event was sponsored by the White House Rural Council, established by President Obama in 2011 to address challenges in rural America.



Xanthion™ In-furrow fungicide from BASF receives registration

Xanthion™ In-furrow fungicide from BASF has recently received Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) registration for use on corn. Xanthion In-furrow fungicide will provide corn growers with an additional tool to protect their seed investment and maximize yield potential in the 2015 season.

“Xanthion In-furrow fungicide is a new tool to help growers start their season off strong,” says Justin Clark, Technical Market Specialist, BASF. “Different than other early season crop management treatments, Xanthion In-furrow fungicide provides extended residual control by forming a protective sheath around the roots. This can lead to healthier plants later in the season.”

Field research trials show Xanthion In-furrow fungicide provides more rapid emergence, extended residual control and improved seedling health than untreated crops. In research trials, corn plants treated with Xanthion In-furrow fungicide increased emergence by 5.2 percent compared to the untreated check.

Xanthion In-furrow fungicide is the first fungicide on the market to combine a chemical fungicide and a biofungicide. This combination fungicide, which contains the same active ingredients as in Headline® fungicide and Integral® biofungicide, provides two modes of action to protect growers’ seed investment by improving seedling health.

Xanthion In-furrow fungicide works by providing early, rapid and more uniform emergence and better root structure. In addition, Xanthion In-furrow fungicide helps control soilborne diseases and provides improved cold tolerance, promoting seedling health. Improved seedling health allows for increased nutrient and water uptake, maximizing yield potential.