Tuesday March 31 Ag News

(FYI:  USDA Prospective Plantings and Grain Stocks reports are one blog-post down)


Corn and Soybean Herbicide Options for Planting Cover Crops as Forage in the Fall
Larry Howard, UNL Extension Educator, Cuming County

When growers add cover crops, it's important to select and manage the crop according to the primary objective for the crop. Cover crops usually are planted to benefit the soil and are not harvested. Some cover crops may be suitable for grazing or haying though, which means they MUST be selected and managed as forage crops when making herbicide choices.

As growers plan to buy seed and herbicides, it is important to know which herbicides should be applied in corn and soybean if they are planning to plant cover crops and use them as forage (also known as "forage double crop"). Most corn and soybean herbicide labels categorize several cover crop species as "other rotational crops," meaning that plant-back restrictions will usually be 18 months or more.

Cover crops that are NOT harvested can be planted after any herbicide application in summer crops, but growers assume the risk of crop failure, if the cover crop species are not listed on the herbicide label. However, for growers who use their cover crops as forage or feed, this off-label herbicide activity constitutes breaking the law. An EPA registered herbicide label is a legal document and the instructions must be followed to avoid violating federal law.

It can be difficult to find information on which herbicide(s) to use or avoid for certain cover crops, especially when planning to use the cover crop for forage or feed (forage double crop).   A recent article in the March 2015 University of Nebraska Lincoln BeefWatch online newsletter discusses the herbicides that can be applied in corn or soybean crops along with the required intervals that must be met and the specific forage double crops that can be planted in the fall after corn or soybean harvest.  The article is located at http://newsroom.unl.edu/announce/beef/4050/23047.  It is important that producers plan ahead to determine the use of the Cover crops that are planted so the meet all of the required restrictions.

For more information on cover crop termination methods and crop insurance, see the Frequently Asked Questions on this USDA Risk Management Agency (RMA) website (http://www.rma.usda.gov/help/faq/covercrops2015.html).



UNL Extension Tractor Safety Courses Offered Across Nebraska

Nebraska Extension Tractor Safety/Hazardous Occupations Courses will be offered at seven locations in Nebraska during May and June.  Any 14 or 15-year-old teen who plans to work on a farm other than his/her parents’ should plan to attend.

Federal law prohibits youth under 16 years of age from working on a farm for anyone other than their parents or guardian.   Certification through the course grants an exemption to the law allowing 14- and 15-year-olds to drive a tractor and to do field work with mechanized equipment.

The most common cause of death in agriculture accidents in Nebraska is overturn from tractors and all-terrain-vehicles (ATVs), said Sharry Nielsen, Nebraska Extension Educator.  Tractor and ATV overturn prevention are featured in the class work.

"Instilling an attitude of ‘safety first’ is a primary goal of the course,” Nielsen said. "where youth have the chance to learn respect for agricultural jobs and the tools involved." 

Classes consist of two days of instruction plus homework assignments. Classes are from 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. each day. Dates and locations include:
    -- May 27-28, Fairgrounds, Kearney
    -- June 1-2, Fairgrounds, Valentine
    -- June 5-6, Event Center, Lincoln
    -- June 8-9, Farm and Ranch Museum, Gering
    -- June 11-12, West Central Research and Extension Center, North Platte
    -- June 15-16, Fairgrounds, Wayne
    -- June 17-18, College Park, Grand Island

Pre-registration is strongly encouraged at least one week before a location's start date to the Extension Office at the course site. Cost is $60, which includes educational materials, testing, supplies, lunches and breaks.  For more information, contact the Extension Office or Sharry Nielsen at (308) 832-0645, snielsen1@unl.edu.

The first day of class will consist of intensive classroom instruction with hands-on demonstrations, concluding with a written test that must be completed satisfactorily before students may continue driving tests the next day.   Classroom instruction will cover the required elements of the National Safe Tractor and Machinery Operation Program.  Homework will be assigned to turn in the next day.    The second day will include testing, driving and operating machinery.  Students must demonstrate competence in hitching equipment and driving a tractor and trailer through a standardized course as well as hitching PTO and hydraulic systems.



GRAZE OR SPRAY TO CONTROL EARLY SPRING WEEDS IN NATIVE GRASS
Bruce Anderson, Extension Forage Specialist, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

               Cheatgrass, wild oats, downy brome.  It seems everyone has problems with early spring weeds in native grasses.  But you can limit their damage.

               How do you get rid of weeds like wild bromes in native grass? Herbicides and grazing are options in the right situation.

               First you must realize that seed of these grasses lasts about 3 years in the soil, so the problem may repeat itself for several years.  In grasslands dominated by warm-season grasses, one option is to spray 1 pint per acre of glyphosate, like Roundup, early this spring after the weedy bromes green up but before warm-season grasses start growing.  This should solve the problem for this year and knock out other early weeds like bluegrass without harming your warm-season grasses.  Another option is to use 4 to 6 ounces of Plateau herbicide or its generics and get similar results.  And with Plateau, residual herbicide activity also will control some later emerging weeds as well.

               If herbicides are not desired the job is tougher.  You need to limit seed production with grazing.  Begin grazing as soon as these bromes green up this spring, which could be any day now with our warming weather.  Using these pastures for calving might be a good option.  Graze very hard to keep seedheads from developing as long as possible.  Eventually these grasses will form heads just an inch or two above the soil surface and grazing no longer will help.

               Now comes the tough part.  You must remove your animals from this area for six weeks or longer to let the desired grass grow and regain some vigor.  Feed hay if necessary.  Repeat this hard early grazing for a couple springs and you should start seeing results.

               You have the tools to control these weeds; just use them right.



USDA: Retail Food Prices Rose in Late 2014

Grocery store food prices in the fourth quarter of 2014 were 3.5 percent higher than a year earlier. The USDA reports that at-home food price inflation over the last 20 years has averaged around 2.6 percent per year, indicating that 2014 ended the year with higher than average food price inflation.

Beef and veal prices saw the largest increase, rising 18.2 percent from the fourth quarter of 2013, the result of historically low U.S. herd sizes and steady consumer demand.

Pork prices were up 9.3 percent, as Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea virus (PEDv) in the United States affected the supply of hogs available for market.

However, some food categories saw price increases over the same time period that were lower than average. Retail prices for cereals and bakery products rose just 0.4 percent, and fats and oils rose 1.5 percent.

The relatively low rate of inflation for these two categories was predominantly due to large supplies of soybeans and wheat from strong U.S. production.



Biodiesel Industry Seeks to Reverse Argentina Import Decision

The National Biodiesel Board (NBB) is calling for the EPA to stay its recent decision to streamline Argentinian biodiesel imports to the U.S. under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), pending public review and comment.

In a petition filed Monday with EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, NBB cited the lack of public comment on the EPA decision and little transparency regarding the plans Argentinian producers can use to demonstrate compliance with the RFS. NBB’s petition for reconsideration and request for administrative stay can be found here on NBB’s website.

“We have serious questions about how Argentinian producers will certify that their product meets the sustainability requirements under this new approach and whether U.S. producers will be operating under more strict regulations,” said NBB Vice President of Federal Affairs Anne Steckel. “As a result, we have asked the EPA to hold and reconsider its approval to allow a more open process with public comment and discussion.”

“Given the circumstances, we think this is a very reasonable request,” Steckel added. “The U.S. biodiesel industry is in a state of crisis right now as a result of EPA’s continued delays in finalizing RFS volumes. An influx of Argentinian biodiesel will only exacerbate the domestic industry’s troubles at the worst possible time.”

The EPA initially approved the application from Argentina’s biofuels association, CARBIO, on Jan. 27.

Typically under the RFS, foreign producers must map and track each batch of feedstock used to produce imported renewable fuels to ensure that it was grown on land that was cleared or cultivated prior to Dec. 19, 2007 – when the RFS was established.

The EPA’s January decision allows Argentinian biodiesel producers to instead rely on a survey plan being implemented by a third party to show their feedstocks comply with the regulations. The goal of the survey program is to ease the current map and track requirements applicable to planted crops and crop residues grown outside of the United States and Canada, resulting in a program that seems far less stringent and more difficult to verify.

Because the EPA did not provide an open process when it considered the application, the limited information provided in EPA’s approval document raises significant questions about whether soybean-oil biodiesel being imported from Argentina meets the renewable biomass requirement under the regulation. Many of the soybeans processed into soybean oil in Argentina come from Uruguay, Peru, Brazil, and other countries. Given the complex international trade involved and the apparent gaps in the program as outlined in EPA’s approval document, the EPA will have little ability to verify the survey plans proposed by Argentinian producers, even with the third-party surveyor’s limited reviews. Argentina would be the first country to use a survey approach under the RFS. Canada and the U.S. operate under an aggregate approach in which feedstock is approved so long as the aggregate amount of agricultural land in each country does not grow.

NBB estimates that up to 600 million gallons of Argentinian biodiesel could enter the U.S. next year as a result of the change, particularly after the European Union blocked Argentinian biodiesel in 2013 after the country exported some 450 million gallons to the EU in 2012.

In 2014, the entire U.S. biodiesel market was about 1.75 billion gallons. In addition to the new U.S. survey rules, Argentina supports its domestic biodiesel program with a cost-distorting “Differential Export Tax” program that allows Argentinian biodiesel to undercut domestic prices.



10-34-0 Streaks Higher Again

Retail fertilizer prices are continuing fairly steady with one major exception, according to retailers tracked by DTN for the fourth week of March 2015.

As has been the case in March, 10-34-0 starter fertilizer is seeing much higher retail fertilizer prices because of issues surrounding an acid shortage used to manufacture the nutrient. 10-34-0 jumped 7% compared to a month earlier and has an average price of $639 per ton.

Six other major fertilizers were higher compared to a month earlier, but none of the six was up significantly. DAP averaged $570/ton, MAP $598/ton, potash $490/ton, anhydrous $706/ton, UAN28 $333/ton and UAN32 $371/ton.

Only one fertilizer slipped lower compared to the previous month. Urea was down just slightly during this time. The nitrogen fertilizer had an average price of $467 per ton.

On a price per pound of nitrogen basis, the average urea price was at $0.51/lb.N, anhydrous $0.43/lb.N, UAN28 $0.59/lb.N and UAN32 $0.58/lb.N.

Two of the eight major fertilizers are now double digits higher in price compared to March 2014, all while commodity prices are significantly lower from a year ago. 10-34-0 is 24% higher while anhydrous is 12% more expensive compared to a year earlier.

Potash is 3% higher while MAP is 1% more expensive compared to a year earlier.

Four nutrients are now lower compared to retail prices from a year ago. DAP is 1% lower, UAN28 is down 5%, UAN32 is now 6% less expensive and urea is 14% cheaper.



Weekly Mandatory Price Reporting
Matthew A. Diersen, Professor, Department of Economics, South Dakota State University

Back when there was a little more snow on the ground, I came across a notice that the Mandatory Price Reporting Act of 2010 has a sunset clause in it dated September 30, 2015. That inspired me to reexamine the content of the various reports for cattle, lest anything be taken for granted. The focus here is mainly on the weekly reports at the national level. Recall that mandatory reporting is covered by the USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) and it pertains to animals marketed directly to larger packers. The reports referenced below are available at: http://www.ams.usda.gov.

Cattle that have been set for marketing are documented in the committed and delivered report (LM_CT142 or just 142), which provides a breakdown of volumes by pricing mechanism (negotiated, negotiated grid, formula and forward contract), weight determination (live or dressed) and pen make-up (e.g., steers, heifers or mixed). From there, the reports tend to capture behavior at the time of purchase or of slaughter. For example, a feedlot may forward contract months in advance of the animal being ready for market (purchase point). After the animal is delivered to a plant the final characteristics and value are fully known (slaughter point). The negotiated purchases report (154) is a weekly summary of the cattle bought the prior week. Most the volume in this report is for negotiated cash purchases, providing prices most closely related to auction prices. Also included are negotiated grids, where only the base level is given. The final grid price is determined after slaughter and given in the formula and forward report (151) with final formula and forward prices. The various net prices across mechanisms show the variability from realized versus expected quality.

Missing from the price summaries are the packer owned cattle (153). Carcass characteristics and volume can be monitored to see if packers own cattle that differ from average cattle. That report also summarizes the forward contract volume and different basis metrics. Differences among the various prices can be partially explained by considering the premiums and discounts (155). A separate report, cows and bulls (168), is helpful for gaining regional insights into what is being sold. Only a couple reports are aggregated further, the monthly committed and delivered report (143) and the 5-Area series (annually in 170 and monthly in 180). Knowing the volume delivered on a monthly level seems to make more sense than on a weekly level, especially for regional breakdowns. The aggregations also distinguish between aberrations and trends.

Before mandatory reporting, there was looming concern that the shrinking percentage of spot market trades was leaving too much uncertainty in the market. Mandatory reporting gives clear insight into packer-owned and formula-purchased cattle that would be hard to replicate or imagine in a voluntary setting. The forward contract information is unique under mandatory reporting because it is comprehensive. Over time the various reports have added more distribution information to the series, which also relies on the comprehensive nature of mandatory reporting.



USDA to Provide $332 Million to Protect and Restore Agricultural Working Lands, Grasslands and Wetlands

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack today announced that U.S. Department of Agriculture is making available $332 million in financial and technical assistance through the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP). USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) will accept ACEP applications to help productive farm and ranch lands remain in agriculture and to protect the nation's critical wetlands and grasslands, home to diverse wildlife and plant species.

"USDA helps farmers, ranchers, private forest landowners and partners to achieve their conservation goals using our technical expertise, Farm Bill funding and sound conservation planning," Vilsack said. "Conservation easements are an important tool to help these landowners and partners voluntarily provide long-term protection of our nation's farmland, ranchland, wetlands and grasslands for future generations."

The 2014 Farm Bill consolidated three previous conservation easement programs into ACEP to make it easier for diverse agricultural landowners to fully benefit from conservation initiatives. NRCS easement programs have been a critical tool in recent years for advancing landscape-scale private lands conservation. In FY 2014, NRCS used $328 million in ACEP funding to enroll an estimated 145,000 acres of farmland, grassland, and wetlands through 485 new easements.

The Nebraska Land Trust plans to use ACEP to enroll more than 1,400 acres of native grazing lands that also include grasslands and woodlands that provide critical habitat for Nebraska's bighorn sheep and elk.

ACEP's agricultural land easements not only protect the long-term viability of the nation's food supply by preventing conversion of productive working lands to non-agricultural uses, but they also support environmental quality, historic preservation, wildlife habitat and protection of open space. American Indian tribes, state and local governments and non-governmental organizations that have farmland or grassland protection programs are eligible to partner with NRCS to purchase conservation easements. A key change under the new agricultural land easement component is the new "grasslands of special environmental significance" that will protect high-quality grasslands that are under threat of conversion to cropping, urban development and other non-grazing uses.

Wetland reserve easements allow landowners to successfully enhance and protect habitat for wildlife on their lands, reduce impacts from flooding, recharge groundwater and provide outdoor recreational and educational opportunities. NRCS provides technical and financial assistance directly to private and tribal landowners to restore, protect and enhance wetlands through the purchase of these easements, and Eligible landowners can choose to enroll in a permanent or 30-year easement; tribal landowners also have the option of enrolling in 30-year contracts.

ACEP applications may be submitted at any time to NRCS; however, applications for the current funding round must be submitted on or before May 15, 2015.