Monday March 7 Ag News

Winners (& Losers) in Battle with SCN
John Wilson, Extension Educator
Loren Giesler, Extension Plant Pathologist

Eleven years ago the Nebraska Soybean Board started what has become an extremely successful program to provide free soil analysis for soybean cyst nematodes (SCN) in Nebraska. SCN is the most devastating pest to US soybean growers. Last year SCN cost Nebraska farmers about $40 million and nationally over $1.5 billion in lost yields.

It started slowly, but has grown to more than 7,650 samples being processed by the UNL Plant Pathology department, almost one-third of which were positive for SCN.

For the third consecutive year, over 1,000 soil samples were processed from Nebraska growers.

In the 19 years prior to the sampling program SCN had been identified in only 27 counties. Since then it has been identified in another 31 counties. In many cases farmers had not suspected SCN prior to submitting soil samples.

This illustrates why it’s so important to test fields for SCN. This program more than doubled the rate at which SCN was confirmed across the state.

SCN losses can be reduced if a farmer knows it’s in a field, but that's the catch! Farmers can have yield losses of 20%-30% with no visible symptoms on the plant. Often the first indication of an SCN infestation is when soybean yields plateau or even start to drop off, while corn yields continue to increase in that field.

Nebraska Soybean Board Sponsored SCN Soil Tests
The best way to determine if SCN is in a field is to take a soil test. We are pleased to have the Nebraska Soybean Board as our partner. They recognized what a serious problem SCN was to soybean growers and have funded a project with the University of Nebraska-Lincoln to encourage farmers to sample their fields for SCN.

Their support covers the cost of analyzing soil samples for SCN, normally a $20/sample expense. Without the Nebraska Soybean Board's support, we would not have been able to reach this many Nebraska farmers.

SCN Soil Test Winners
Based on the last year’s SCN soil tests results, we are announcing the 7th Annual 'Tode Award winners.

In the category of Most Samples Submitted:
    Winner: Buffalo County (187)
    Honorable Mentions: Boone (64); Kearney (53); Phelps (50)

In the category of Most Samples Positive for SCN:
    Winner:  Buffalo County (46)                
    Honorable Mention: Antelope (25); Madison (17); Seward (16)

In the category of Highest Percentage of Samples Positive for SCN: (must have submitted at least five samples)
    Winner: Rock County (71%)
    Honorable Mention: Antelope County (64.1%); Seward (64.0%); Richardson (60%)

In the category of Sample with Highest Egg Count: (number of eggs/100 ccs of soil)
    Winner: Antelope County (75,960)
    Honorable Mention: Wheeler (36,240); Kearney (31,520); Pierce (21,200)

And finally, in the category of Counties with First SCN Detection the winner is Brown.

Some might argue that the county in the last category is a loser, not a winner. However, now farmers in Brown County know SCN has been found in area fields so they can sample for it and start managing it if found.

Although it often goes undetected, SCN is here and it is reducing profitability for Nebraska soybean producers. To learn more about SCN or to pick up bags to submit soil samples, contact your local Nebraska Extension office.



IBACH ENCOURAGES COMMUNICATION BETWEEN PESTICIDE APPLICATORS, SPECIALTY CROP PRODUCERS

As trees and plants green up and soil temperatures rise across the state, farm operations of all sizes and types are getting set to begin another planting season.

Nebraska Department of Agriculture (NDA) Director Greg Ibach is encouraging anyone who will be applying pesticide products during the busy spring season to be mindful of best management practices and use good communication with their neighbors. Pesticides include all categories of control applications such as herbicides, insecticides and fungicides.

“It’s important for our commodity crop farmers and our growing sector of specialty crop farmers to work together so everyone can be successful,” Ibach said. “Herbicide applications are critical for corn and soybean production, but there are a number of specialty crops, such as grape vines, that are sensitive to these products.”

One way farmers can open the door of communication is through DriftWatch™. This website is a free, voluntary service that allows those with pesticide sensitive crops, organic crops and beehives to report their field locations. Pesticide applicators can review the website to gain an understanding of the locations of specialty crops in their area.

“For example, Nebraska’s vineyards will soon begin ‘bud break,’ or the official start of the vines’ annual growth cycle, and these plants are extremely vulnerable during this time period,” Ibach said. “It’s also time for our commodity crop growers to ready their fields for planting, including herbicide applications. Communication between all parties is important to ensure successful crop production for everyone.”

Applicators also can register on the DriftWatch™ website, facilitating email notifications to the applicators when a new sensitive crop site is registered in their local area.

The DriftWatch™ website can be found online at http://www.fieldwatch.com. The Nebraska Department of Agriculture monitors the DriftWatch™ site for the state. For questions about it, contact Craig Romary with NDA at (402) 471-2351.



NRCS LOCAL WORKING GROUP MEETINGS PLANNED

            Local Working Groups that provide advice on the priorities for many U.S. Department of Agriculture conservation programs will be holding meetings across the state over the next several weeks. A list of scheduled meetings is available on the Nebraska Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) website at http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/ne/technical/stc/, or by contacting your local NRCS field office.

            The public is encouraged to attend and express their natural resource concerns. Ideas generated from the public will help the U.S. Department of Agriculture tailor their natural resource programs to meet local needs.

            There is a Local Working Group in each Natural Resources District (NRD). Membership on the Local Working Group includes Federal, State, county, Tribal or local government representatives according to Nebraska State Conservationist Craig Derickson with NRCS, whose agency guides the Local Working Groups. These work groups allows local input into how Federal dollars are spent, he said.

           “The Local Working Group recommends to the NRCS State Conservationist how conservation programs like the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), or the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP) would be used most effectively in their area. Recommendations can include special target areas, cost share rates on conservation programs, which conservation practices should have cost assistance, or how many dollars could be needed,” said Derickson.

            Typically, Nebraska NRCS obligates anywhere between $45 million to over $75 million dollars to farmers and ranchers statewide through NRCS conservation programs. These programs helped landowners and operators make natural resource improvements to their land, water, or wildlife. This funding was allocated according to the priorities set by the Local Working Group.

Lewis & Clark NRD - USDA Service Center - Hartington, NE - March 9 - 9 AM
Lower Platte South NRD - USDA Service Center - Lincoln, NE - March 9 - 1 PM
Lower Elkhorn NRD - Lower Elkhorn NRD board room, Norfolk, NE - March 10 - 5:00-6:30 PM
Lower Platte North NRD - Lower Platte North NRD Office - Wahoo, NE - March 23 - 9am - noon
Papio - Missouri River NRD - TBA
Upper Big Blue NRD - TBA

            For more information about the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the programs and services they provide, visit your local USDA Service Center or www.ne.nrcs.usda.gov.



Upper Big Blue NRD Will Temporarily Close Current Office to Move to New Headquarters

The Upper Big Blue NRD will be temporarily closing while making the transition to its new headquarters during March 24-29.  The NRD will resume normal business working hours beginning at 8:00a.m. on Wednesday, March 30, at its new address at 319 East 25th Street (York).  The public will still be able to reach the NRD by phone at (402) 362-6601, throughout the moving process.  This phone number will remain the same at the new headquarters as well.  The Upper Big Blue NRD Board of Directors and staff extend our thanks for your patience as the NRD staff transitions into the new headquarters facility.



PVC Monthly Meeting March 21st
Marcus Urban, President, Platte Valley Cattlemen

The month of March means something different for each Beef Producer. Some producers are in the middle of calving, others might be weaning their fall calves, and the cattle feeders are filling pens for hopeful positive returns. It’s safe to say a vacation is foreign to a Beef Producer this time of the year.

Our March meeting will be on Monday, March 21st at Wunderlich’s Catering in Columbus. The topic for the evening will be presented by Dr. Kent Tjardes with Purina. He will speak on feedlot animal nutrition and starting and growing calves in the feedlot.

Social hour will begin at 6:00 p.m. and is being sponsored by Settje Agri-Services & Engineering, Inc. The meal will be at 7:00 p.m. and sponsored by Kit Held Trucking/Mycogen Seed. See you Monday, March 21st, for drinks, steak, and great discussion.



DORMANT SPRAY FOR ALFALFA WEEDS
Bruce Anderson, NE Extension Forage Specialist

               Recent warm weather soon will green up your alfalfa.  Before that happens, though, maybe you should do a little weed control.

               Weeds like pennycress, downy brome, mustards, cheatgrass, and shepherd's purse are common in first cut alfalfa.  They lower yields, reduce quality, lessen palatability, and slow hay drydown.  If you walk over your fields during the next few weeks when snow is gone you should be able to see their small, green, over-wintering growth.

               If your alfalfa variety is Roundup Ready, you can spray almost anytime without hurting your alfalfa.  Once conventional alfalfa starts growing, though, you can't control these weeds very well without also hurting your alfalfa.  However, if you treat your alfalfa as soon as possible during this spring-like weather, you can have cleaner, healthier alfalfa at first cutting.

               Before spraying these weeds, be sure they are causing economic damage to your alfalfa.  Spraying will give you more pure alfalfa but may cost some in total tonnage.

               Several herbicides can help control winter annual grasses and weeds in conventional alfalfa.  They include metribuzin, Velpar, Sinbar, Pursuit, Raptor, and Karmex.  They all control mustards and pennycress but Karmex and Pursuit do not control downy brome very well.

               To be most successful, you must apply most of these herbicides before alfalfa shoots green-up this spring to avoid much injury to your alfalfa.  If alfalfa shoots are green when you spray, its growth might be set back a couple weeks.  If it does get late, use either Raptor or Pursuit because they tend to cause less injury to your alfalfa.

               Timing is crucial when controlling winter annual weeds in alfalfa.  Get ready now, in the next couple of weeks before alfalfa greens up, to take advantage of nice weather when you get it.



New Farm Poll Examines Farmers’ Perspective on their Land

Healthy soil can lead to better crop yields, reduce the need for chemical inputs and have positive impacts on water quality. Farmers’ perspectives on soil health is a focus of the 2015 Iowa Farm and Rural Life Poll.

Interest in the topic of soil health has been on the rise in Iowa and the Corn Belt region in recent years, but little was previously known about farmers’ familiarity with the concept. The 2015 Iowa Farm and Rural Life Poll was designed to gauge farmers’ beliefs about potential benefits of soil health, their soil health knowledge and management capacity and their assessments of landlords’ knowledge about soil health practices.

“Research efforts to understand what makes soil healthy are have increased in recent years, and conservation groups like the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service have made soil health a central part of their programs for farmers,” said J. Gordon Arbuckle Jr., associate professor of sociology and extension sociologist for Iowa State University Extension and Outreach. “Understanding what farmers know and think about soil health can help guide the development of research and extension programs on the topic.”

Farmers were presented a series of survey items about the potential benefits of soil health, their knowledge of soil health and capacity to manage for improved soil health, and the amount of attention the press and fellow farmers were paying to soil health. They were asked to rate their level of agreement or disagreement with each item on a five-point scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).

Not surprisingly, most farmers viewed healthy soils as beneficial; 93 percent agreed that healthy soil can lead to increased crop yields, 77 percent agreed that healthy soils can reduce vulnerability to drought conditions and 75 percent agreed that healthy soils can reduce crop input needs.

Farmers also expressed some concerns about the impacts of production practices on soil health. Eighty-four percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they were concerned about the impact of compaction on soil health and 70 percent had concerns about the impact of pesticides on soil health.

The survey also gauged farmers’ knowledge of soil health and their confidence in their capacity to improve the health of the soils they farm. Most respondents - 72 percent - indicated they had given more thought to soil health in recent years, and 76 percent reported that they had taken steps to improve the quality of their soil. While about 70 percent felt that they have a good understanding of the concept of soil health, and two-thirds agreed that they know how to manage for improved soil health, only 54 percent indicated that they have an effective soil health management plan.

“Iowa farmers are paying more attention to soil health, and report that they are taking steps to improve it,” Arbuckle said. “That said, most farmers would like to learn more about how to manage for soil health, and there was a lot of uncertainty about the effectiveness of current management. I think there’s a demand for more research-based information on soil health.”

Most respondents indicated that they have noticed more discussion of soil health in the farm press, with 80 percent noticing a spike in information on the topic. Despite this jump in attention to the subject in the press, only 46 percent of farmers noticed more discussion among fellow farmers.

Because more than half of Iowa farmland is rented, the survey also asked farmers to assess their landlords’ awareness and knowledge of soil health. The reviews were mixed, with 28 percent agreeing that landlords know what farming practices can improve soil health while 27 percent disagreed. Twenty-two percent of respondents agreed that landlords have a good understanding of soil health while 29 percent disagreed.

“Almost half of farmers selected ‘uncertain’ when asked whether their landlords know about the concept of soil health and how to improve it,” said Arbuckle. “Those results suggest that a lot of farmers haven’t talked about soil health with their landlords.” 



January Meat Export Volumes up from Last Year, but Value Remains Lower

January exports of U.S. beef and pork were modestly higher than a year ago, but export value slipped for both products, according to data released by USDA and compiled by the U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF).

Beef exports increased 3 percent from a year ago to 82,301 metric tons (mt), but value was down 13 percent to $438.1 million. Exports to most Asian markets, which were impacted early last year by the West Coast port labor impasse, increased in January, but these gains were largely offset by lower volumes shipped to Western Hemisphere markets and the Middle East. January exports accounted for 12 percent of total beef production and 9 percent for muscle cuts only (steady with January 2015). Export value per head of fed slaughter was $239.88, down 11 percent from a year ago.

Pork exports increased 4 percent from a year ago to 167,010 mt, but value fell 11 percent to $404.7 million. Exports to China were up significantly from last year’s low volumes, reflecting recent reinstatement of several U.S. plants and continued strong demand for imported pork in China. Volumes also increased for Central and South America, the Caribbean and Oceania. January exports accounted for 22 percent of total pork production and 19 percent for muscle cuts only (up from 21 and 17 percent, respectively, last year). Export value per head slaughtered was $41.53, down 11 percent from a year ago.

Beef exports shows signs of rebound in Japan; Korea, Taiwan remain strong
Beef exports to Japan were the largest in six months at 16,762 mt, up 21 percent from a year ago, while export value edged 2 percent higher to $93.2 million. Exports to South Korea and Taiwan, which were bright spots for U.S. beef in 2015, were also above year-ago levels. Korea took 11,263 mt (+59 percent) valued at $67.2 million (+17 percent). Export volume to Taiwan was 2,890 mt (+35 percent) valued at $24.1 million (+3 percent). Led by a strong month in the Philippines, Vietnam and Indonesia, exports to the ASEAN region increased 71 percent in volume (1,638 mt) and 9 percent in value ($9.7 million). Exports to Hong Kong were up 19 percent (10,254 mt), although value declined 16 percent ($58.4 million).

“Although it is encouraging to see beef exports to the Asian markets performing above year-ago levels, these results are a reminder of how disruptive the West Coast situation was for our industry,” said USMEF President and CEO Philip Seng. “While we still face a tariff gap in Japan compared to Australian beef, Australia’s recent slowdown in production presents an opportunity to reclaim market share – an opportunity the U.S. industry is pursuing very aggressively. U.S. beef is also capitalizing on the tight domestic supplies in Korea, making strides in both the retail and foodservice sectors.”

Beef exports to Mexico were severely challenged in recent months by the weakening peso, and January exports were the lowest since May 2013 at 15,247 mt (-25 percent). Export value dropped 35 percent to $68.8 million. Exports were also significantly lower to Canada (9,144 mt, -11 percent, valued at $54.8 million, -26 percent). Central and South America were the bright spots in the Western Hemisphere, driven by growth to Chile (913 mt, +30 percent) and Guatemala (404 mt, +13 percent). Exports to Egypt fell 11 percent in volume to 7,367 mt and 23 percent in value to $9.9 million.

Pork highlights include China, Honduras, Dominican Republic
U.S. pork exports to China/Hong Kong maintained the stronger pace established in October, with January volume up 84 percent from a year ago to 32,609 mt and value increasing 50 percent to $64.2 million.

“Having more pork plants and more product eligible for China is absolutely critical,” Seng explained. “Last year China, Korea and Mexico were the major destinations with an increased need for imported pork. The U.S. industry capitalized on two of those situations, but the EU reaped most of the benefits in China. It’s important that U.S. pork competes more vigorously in China in 2016.”

Led by strong exports to Honduras and Guatemala, January pork exports to Central and South America increased 6 percent from a year ago in volume (8,970 mt) but fell 13 percent in value ($20.9 million). Exports to Honduras performed especially well, reaching 1,966 mt (+73 percent) valued at $3.5 million (+35 percent). This helped offset lower exports to Colombia.

Following a record year in 2015, pork exports to the Dominican Republic continued to shine in January, increasing 51 percent in volume (2,210 mt) and 26 percent in value ($4.5 million).

The recent rebound continued for pork exports to Oceania, with volumes to both Australia and New Zealand up sharply from the low totals posted in January 2015. Exports to the region more than doubled in volume (5,764 mt, +105 percent) and increased 36 percent in value to $15.2 million.

January exports slowed to leading markets Mexico and Japan. Following a record month in December and the fourth consecutive record year for Mexico, January volume was down 7 percent to 55,042 mt, while value fell 24 percent to $85.8 million. In leading value destination Japan, volume was down 14 percent to 29,835 mt and value declined 13 percent to $113.5 million.

Pork exports to Korea performed very well in 2015, but slowed in the second half. That trend continued in January, as exports fell 20 percent in volume (12,192 mt) and 41 percent in value ($30.5 million).

Lamb export value down despite sharp jump in volume
January exports of U.S. lamb were 35 percent above last year’s low level at 971 mt, though value declined 13 percent to just over $1.5 million. Exports increased to Mexico and Canada, while Bermuda – once a top destination for U.S. lamb – also took its first significant volume in some time.



NPPC Elects New Officers, Board Members

The National Pork Producers Council Saturday elected new officers and members to its board of directors at its annual business meeting – the National Pork Industry Forum – held here.

Elected as president of the organization was John Weber, a pork producer from Dysart, Iowa. In addition to raising hogs that are processed by JBS, he manages with his son Valley Lane Farms Inc., a grain and livestock operation. Weber has served on several NPPC committees, including the Strategic Investment Program Marketing Committee, the Environmental Policy Committee and the Farm Bill Policy Task Force. Weber also serves on the Iowa Pork Producers Association board of directors as well as on its Public Policy Committee. He’s a member of the board of directors of Iowa Pork Promotions Inc. and is active in his local farm bureau. Weber holds a bachelor’s degree in animal science from Iowa State University.

Ken Maschhoff, a pork producer from Carlyle, Ill., was elevated to president-elect. Maschhoff is chairman of Maschhoff Family Foods and co-owner and chairman of The Maschhoffs, the third-largest pork producer in the United States. A fifth-generation pork producers, Maschhoff serves as a member of the board of directors of Midland States Bank and Midland States Bancorp Inc. and has served on numerous state and national boards on behalf of the pork industry.

Board member Jim Heimerl, of Johnstown, Ohio, was chosen as vice president. Heimerl and his wife Kathy, along with three sons and a daughter-in-law, run three farrow-to-finish farms in Ohio and 80 contract finishing farms in several states. Heimerl Farms LTD also consists of crops and cattle, as well as a trucking division and feed mill. Heimerl is president of the Ohio Pork Producers Council and a board member of the Ohio Soybean Association.

Re-elected to the board for another three-year term were Jim Compart, of Nicollet, Minn., Maschhoff and AV Roth, of Wauzeka, Wis. Board member Kent Bang was re-elected to a two-year term for the Allied Industry Council seat. Jen Sorensen, of Ankeny, Iowa, with Iowa Select Farms, was elected as a new member of the board for a three-year term.

They join current directors Cory Bollum, with Hormel Foods Corp. in Austin, Minn. – who is the Packer Processor Industry Council representative – Phil Borgic, of Nokomis, Ill., David Herring, of Lillington, N.C., Bill Kessler, of Mexico, Mo., Dale Reicks, of New Hampton, Iowa, Kraig Westerbeek, of Warsaw, N.C., and Terry Wolters, of Pipestone, Minn.

Re-elected to the NPPC Nominating Committee, which vets candidates for the board, was Duane Stateler, a producer from Ohio. Joe Baldwin, a producer from Indiana, also was elected to the committee.

“In John, Ken, and Jim we have great leadership at the helm of NPPC, and the pork industry has some thoughtful leaders and innovators,” said NPPC CEO Neil Dierks. “And the addition of Jen to the NPPC board gives us a good young leader who will help take the industry into the future.”



CWT Assists with 3.9 Million Pounds of Cheese and Butter Export Sales

Cooperatives Working Together (CWT) has accepted 6 requests for export assistance from Dairy Farmers of America, Land O’Lakes, Maryland-Virginia Milk Producers Association and Northwest Dairy Association (Darigold) who have contracts to sell 1.581 million pounds (717 metric tons) of Cheddar and Monterey Jack cheese, and 2.315 million pounds (1,050 metric tons) of butter (82% milkfat) to customers in Asia, North Africa, the Middle East and Central America. The product has been contracted for delivery in the period from March through September 2016.

So far this year, CWT has assisted member cooperatives who have contracts to sell 9.815 million pounds of cheese, 7.716 million pounds of butter and 6.848 million pounds of whole milk powder to thirteen countries on five continents. The sales are the equivalent of 314.194 million pounds of milk on a milkfat basis.

Assisting CWT members through the Export Assistance program, in the long-term, helps member cooperatives gain and maintain market share, thus expanding the demand for U.S. dairy products and the U.S. farm milk that produces them. This, in turn, positively impacts all U.S. dairy farmers by strengthening and maintaining the value of dairy products that directly impact their milk price.



 
Some technical improvement but fundamental caution
Stephen R. Koontz, Professor
Department of Agricultural Economics, Colorado State University

Cattle futures markets have provided some cautious optimism over the past several weeks.  The volatility has persisted but lower beef prices are doing what they are supposed to do: increase product moment and consumption.

So what do the technicals say?  Down trends were established with the market turn last summer and into the fall.  It's the first time we've had down trends on cattle charts in a number of years and trends were in place for contracts in the live cattle and feeder cattle markets.  Those trends have been broken so further sustained pushes downward are unlikely until the seasonally larger slaughter shows up later this summer.  Prior to the down trends being broken, support has been established in all the spring and early summer contracts, then tested twice and have held.  Live cattle attract a lot of buying interest at $114-118 and feeder cattle at $145-150.  While the down trends have been broken and support established, suggesting a firming up of market prices, resistance is also in place to limit up moves.  Live cattle attract a lot of selling interest at $128-130 and feeder cattle at $160-165.  And that's where we are.  I think we'll have reasons to trade higher in that range - with greening spring grass - and reasons to trade lower in that range - with demand issues and seasonal increases in supply come summer - and we'll trade that range until the underlying fundamentals change.

So what about those fundamentals?  In the short term, the cash-market-only red ink associated with cattle feeding has begun to moderate.  We have retreated from the record large losses that are a hair's breadth from $500 per head to a modest loss of $270 per head.  These figures are historically $50-100 per head and do not account for hedging.  Feedlots have marketed their way through the most expensive feeder cattle and this improved cash position will strengthen current feeder markets.  Showlists also appear to be somewhat cleaned up.  It's hard to tell from the data as the number of cattle on feed over 120 days display historically large seasonal increases in February and March.  The increases are there but it is not as large as last year or the typical seasonal increase.  Thus, there is continued news that the number of long-fed cattle are being whittled down.  But marketings refuse to show strength.  This cattle market wreck was managed in the fashion that can happen, with the industry placing its way out of excess market-ready cattle.  Of course that takes months.  And winter weather has brought slaughter weights down sharply.  All in time for spring.

But I am not counting on a strong seasonal spring rally.  The beef demand index, updated with fourth quarter consumption data, showed its first softening in six years.  Domestic consumers appear tired of record high retail beef prices.  Beef demand has shown strong growth over the past several years, especially in the fourth quarter of 2014 and first quarter of 2015.  This demand kick added strength to already high prices reflecting tight supplies and herd building.  Domestic demand will be worth watching through 2016, as will be the beef trade numbers.  Beef exports rebounded and imports were reduced in the fourth quarter.  This appears to be in response to lower wholesale beef prices.  But there is no reason for the US dollar to remain anything but strong.  It appears to me that demand news has a higher chance of being bad news through 2016.  Again, caution.

So it appears the cattle market wreck is over.  But, unlike our immediate prior years, that does not suggest higher prices are imminent.  Slaughter weights remain heavy and fed cattle marketings remain sluggish.  Many market analysts have forecasted higher beef production commensurate with herd expansion through the remainder of the year.  We have not seen that in terms of placement yet.  The fundamentals continue to suggest caution while technicals provide some limited optimism.



NASS Suspends Summer Cattle Reports

The USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service is suspending the July Cattle report which was slated for release on July 22 and the U.S. and Canadian Cattle report scheduled for Aug. 23.

The Cattle report issued in July contains inventory numbers of all cattle and calves in the United States. The U.S. and Canadian Cattle report is a joint effort of Statistics Canada and NASS to report the number of cattle and calves by class and calf crop for both countries within one publication.

"Before deciding to suspend these reports, we reviewed our estimating programs against mission- and user-based criteria as well as the amount of time remaining in the fiscal year to meet our budget and program requirements while maintaining the strongest data in service to U.S. agriculture. The decision to suspend this report was not made lightly, but was necessary, given our available fiscal and program resources. We will continue to review our federal agricultural statistical programs using the same criteria to ensure we provide timely, accurate and useful statistics," NASS officials said in a release.

NASS published the January Cattle report on Jan. 29 and will publish the U.S. and Canadian Cattle report, which uses data from the January Cattle report, on March 8.



USDA Secretary Discusses Diversification, Conservation and Trade at NFU Convention

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who is also a National Farmers Union (NFU) member, addressed the organization’s 114th Anniversary Convention this morning, where he celebrated U.S. agriculture’s uniqueness, called on Congress to act on food labeling, and advocated for increased trade with Cuba.

“It is important to focus, not just solely on large-scale production agriculture, but it is important to continue to focus on diversifying opportunities for all sizes of operations,” he said, receiving thunderous applause from NFU’s diverse membership.

Prices for major commodities have fallen in recent years, but Vilsack believes investments made by the U.S. Department of Agriculture will equip rural America to weather the difficult times. Among the items he listed: renewable fuels initiatives, new and beginning farmer education programs, crop insurance, rural development grants and conservation.

Vilsack also called on lawmakers to act on labeling issues currently facing the country.

He explained that it would be “chaotic” to have state-by-state rules surrounding the labeling of food derived from genetically modified crops.  This could lead to consumer confusion, higher food prices, and even access issues, Vilsack said, noting, “Congress needs to address this, and they need to address it now.” 

The secretary added that it is possible to have a mandatory process that uses a “smart label” to balance a consumer’s right to know without punishing farmers or conveying the wrong impression about food safety.

“If Congress is unwilling to make these tough decisions…then delegate the responsibility to the Department of Agriculture,” Vilsack said. “We’ll be happy to make the tough decision.”

Vilsack told the group that Congress needs to act on another tough issue, too, by removing the Cuba trade embargo. The United States “should absolutely own that market,” he said of Cuba.

The secretary’s remarks were well received by the crowd and echoed many of the organization’s top priorities outlined the previous evening by NFU President Roger Johnson.  Of Vilsack, Johnson explained, “He is the best Secretary of Agriculture we’ve had in my lifetime.”



 Military Hero Rallies Farmers to Fight for Renewable Energy

“You’re not just farmers. You’re in the national security business, and we need you out there on the front lines protecting America’s economic future.” That was the call-to-action issued today by retired U.S. Army General Wesley Clak at the National Farmers Union 114th Anniversary Convention.

Clark, a West Point valedictorian who also served as the NATO Supreme Allied Commander, explained that oil dependence has dominated America’s foreign and military policy for too long and that renewable energy is key to breaking the cycle.

“How many more U.S. troops do we need to send abroad before the nation wakes up and says, ‘you can’t run foreign policy based on the price of a barrel of oil,’” Clark asked the group.

“Energy policy is national security policy,” he added, calling the Renewable Fuel Standard one of the most important pieces of energy policy ever passed because it boosts production of homegrown alternative energy sources.

“We need your support to keep the Renewable Fuel Standard in place,” Clark told the gathering of more than 500 farmers and ranchers from across the country.

But it won’t be easy and rural America will meet stiff resistance from Big Oil.  The oil industry is “the most powerful industry in the history of mankind,” he said, and it will use its money and political power to maintain a stranglehold on America and the energy market.

Calling ethanol “greener, cleaner, cheaper and better,” Clark said U.S. farmers have a positive story of success to share while fighting for America’s energy future.

“If we can stay with the Renewable Fuels Standard, we will beat the Saudis, the Russians, the Iranians or anybody else who tries to manipulate this country…we’ll put our own energy policy in place,” he concluded.  “I don’t want my grandchildren going out there to fight for someone else’s oil, and neither do you.”



USDA Celebrates 50 Years of School Breakfast, Offers $6.8 Million in Grants to Support Healthy School Meals

As schools around the county take part in School Breakfast Week celebrations this week, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) commemorates the 50th anniversary of its School Breakfast Program by shining a light on the positive impacts of school breakfast. Over the course of this administration, participation in school breakfast programs has increased by almost 27 percent; over 14 million students are now eating school breakfast each day. To help support the ongoing success of the School Breakfast Program and other child nutrition programs, Agriculture Undersecretary Kevin Concannon announced today that USDA will award up to $6.8 million in competitive Team Nutrition Training Grants to help schools and child care sites sustain the successful implementation of the healthier meals made possible by the bipartisan Healthy Hunger-free Kids Act of 2010.

"As we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the School Breakfast Program, we reflect on the great strides the program has made in strengthening the health and nutrition of children in America. The School Breakfast Program allows millions of students to start their day with a well-balanced breakfast, which, in turn, is linked to better performance in the classroom, better attendance, and better health," said Concannon.

Research using USDA data found that students with access to school breakfast tend to have a better overall diet and a lower body mass index (BMI) than did nonparticipants. Other research has shown that students who consume breakfast make greater strides on standardized tests, pay attention and behave better in class, and are less frequently tardy, absent or visiting the nurse's office. School breakfast is especially important for teens, who are less likely to eat breakfast than other age groups, and lower income students who may be at risk of food insecurity.

USDA has been committed to ensuring that students around the country can enjoy the benefits of school breakfast by helping schools implement and enhance their school breakfast programs. USDA has also worked with schools to encourage the use of the Community Eligibility Provision, a cost-sharing agreement that allows high-poverty schools to serve both breakfast and lunch each school day at no cost to the student. Subsequently, the reach of the School Breakfast Program has rapidly increased over the past seven years. More than 14 million children participated in school breakfast during the last school year, an increase of nearly 3 million, since the beginning of the administration. In fact, last year over 2.3 billion breakfasts were served by more than 90,000 schools and child care sites.

School Breakfast Week is celebrated in the midst of National Nutrition Month, commemorated each March. Throughout the month, USDA is highlighting the results of our efforts to improve access to safe, healthy food for all Americans and supporting the health of our next generation. For example, since the updated school nutrition standards were implemented in school year 2013-14, school breakfasts are healthier than ever before, including a serving of fruit, whole-grain-rich grains, and low fat or fat free milk.

The Team Nutrition grants announced today aim to continue the advancement of the child nutrition programs, including the School Breakfast Program. "The $6.8 million in grant funds USDA is offering to support school breakfast and other child nutrition programs demonstrates our commitment to providing schools and child care sites the resources and support they need to help kids start their day off right and continue strong all day long," said Concannon.

USDA's Team Nutrition initiative provides technical assistance, training, and nutrition education resources for schools and child care providers participating in USDA's child nutrition programs. Grants through this program are intended to conduct and evaluate training, nutrition education, and technical assistance activities to support the implementation of USDA nutrition standards for snacks and meals, like school breakfast. For more information on the request for grant applications as well as summaries of activities conducted by previous grantees, visit http://www.fns.usda.gov/tn/team-nutrition-training-grants.



AgriBank Reports Fourth-Quarter 2015 and Year-End Financial Results

Today St. Paul-based AgriBank announced financial results for the fourth-quarter and full-year 2015 with strong net income and credit quality, and robust liquidity and capital.

Highlights: 
-    Stable net interest income: Although net interest income from the core lending business remained relatively stable, net income decreased $89.6 million, or 15.7 percent, to $480.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. The decrease was primarily driven by lower mineral income due to continued low oil prices.
    
-    Strong credit quality: Loan portfolio credit quality remained strong, as acceptable loans stood at 99.7 percent.
    
-    Robust liquidity and capital: Cash and investments totaled $16.2 billion at year-end, compared to $16.4 billion at the end of 2014. End-of-the-year liquidity was 136 days, well above the regulatory requirement. Capital also remained well above the regulatory minimum and company targets.

“AgriBank continued to achieve strong financial results as we faced a more challenging operating environment,” said Bill York, AgriBank CEO. “We are well-positioned to maintain financial strength and stability with adequate earnings and robust capital. From this foundation, we will continue to provide reliable, consistent funding to affiliated Associations as they begin a second century of supporting rural communities and agriculture.”

Year-End 2015 Results of Operations
Net income decreased $89.6 million, or 15.7 percent, to $480.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2015.

Net interest income decreased slightly to $520.0 million, compared to $525.0 million for 2014. The decrease in net interest income was primarily attributable to increased interest expense on Farm Credit System-wide debt securities and, to a lesser extent, lower interest rates earned on AgriBank’s retail loan portfolio due to increased competitive pressures. These impacts on net interest income were substantially offset by growth in loan volume year-over-year.

Provision for loan losses was $7.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, as compared to $3.5 million for the same period in 2014.

Non-interest income decreased to $91.9 million, compared to $159.9 million for 2014. This decrease was primarily driven by lower mineral income due to continued low oil prices and a decrease in non-recurring net gains on sales of available-for-sale investment securities during 2015.
 
Fourth-Quarter 2015 Results of Operations
Fourth-quarter 2015 net income was $117.2 million, compared to $147.3 million for the same period of 2014. The decrease was primarily due to the decrease in mineral income and non-recurring net gains on sales of available-for-sale securities.

Loan Portfolio
Total loans increased 6.8 percent year-over-year to $82.8 billion, primarily due to increases in wholesale loans to affiliated Associations. The AgriBank retail loan portfolio grew during 2015 due to increased loan participation interests in retail equipment financing originating from the AgDirect program, significantly offset by normal borrower repayments on purchased real estate mortgage loan participations.

The solid liquidity and equity positions of many retail borrowers are reflected in the strong credit quality of the AgriBank portfolio at 99.7 percent acceptable loans at year-end. Acceptable loans represent the highest quality assets. Credit quality has been steadily improving since 2009 and remains consistent with the position as of December 31, 2014; however, these historically strong positions are expected to decline to more normal levels over time. The credit quality of our retail loan portfolio (excluding wholesale loans to affiliated Associations) declined slightly to 97.3 percent acceptable at year-end, compared to 97.6 percent acceptable as of December 31, 2014. Nonaccrual loans at year-end remained low at $43.4 million in 2015 and $37.8 million in 2014.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Economic Research Service (USDA-ERS) projected U.S. aggregate net farm income (NFI) to decline from $90.5 billion in 2014 to $56.4 billion in 2015. The overall decline in 2015 NFI is driven by continued low commodity prices and lower livestock prices resulting in a decline in receipts for both crops and livestock. This overall decline is projected to be partially offset by lower expenses driven primarily by lower energy and feed costs. Despite the significant decline in 2015 farm income, the U.S. farm economy entered 2015 in perhaps its strongest financial condition in over 50 years. Over the course of the next few years, this strong financial condition is expected to experience some limited deterioration primarily due to small declines in farm asset values and a small increase in projected aggregate farm debt.

USDA-ERS projects similar economic conditions during 2016, resulting in a slight decline in NFI to $54.8 billion. Relative to recent history, the outlook for most crop producers is expected to be challenging. Prices for corn, soybean and wheat are expected to stay at or near break-even levels due to increased inventories of each commodity as a result of continued strong yields coupled with a projected reduction in exports as a result of the appreciation of the U.S. dollar. The realization of cost efficiencies, along with the use of farm programs and timely application of market risk management strategies, should mitigate some of the negative impact of continued low crop prices.
 
Capital Resources and Liquidity
Total capital remains very strong, increasing $258.1 million during the period to $5.2 billion, driven primarily by net income, partially offset by patronage and dividends.

Cash and investments totaled $16.2 billion at year-end, compared to $16.4 billion at the end of 2014. The Bank’s end-of-the-period liquidity position represented 136 days coverage of maturing debt obligations which supports AgriBank’s operational demands and is well above the 90-day minimum established by AgriBank’s regulator.
 
About AgriBank
AgriBank is one of the largest banks within the national Farm Credit System, with nearly $100 billion in total assets. Under the Farm Credit System’s cooperative structure, AgriBank is primarily owned by 17 affiliated Farm Credit Associations. The AgriBank District covers America’s Midwest, a 15-state area stretching from Wyoming to Ohio and Minnesota to Arkansas. With about half of the nation’s cropland located in the AgriBank District and nearly 100 years of experience, the Bank and its Association owners have significant expertise in providing financial products and services for rural communities and agriculture. For more information, please visit www.AgriBank.com.



Branded products offer benefits generics don’t

In an era of lower commodity prices and tighter margins, growers are looking for ways to cut costs. But supply-chain experts advise them to remember the important value branded products offer when considering generic alternatives.

Research and development is one area where this value is reflected, said Jamie Eichorn, head of technical services at Syngenta. It can take more than 10 years and $100 million to bring a branded product to market. Each year, Syngenta invests almost $1.4 billion in R&D and employs nearly 5,000 scientists around the globe to provide new, improved technologies for growers. In 2016 alone, Syngenta will bring 16 new products to the U.S. marketplace.

“This is a dynamic, exciting time when you consider the number of new products we are bringing to market,” said Jamie Eichorn, head of technical services at Syngenta. “This is a clear benefit Syngenta provides, and it’s not easily matched.”

Active ingredients aren’t the only components that can affect a crop input’s performance, noted Tim Danberry, an agronomist with Crystal Valley Coop in Janesville, Minnesota. Inert ingredients and other co-formulants are also important.

“The biggest risk with a generic is that you have no clue what inactive ingredients the product contains,” said Danberry “That means you have no idea what you’re actually putting on your fields.”

Generic products also often require users to measure and mix additional products, but branded crop protection products offer complete solutions in one container.

“Growers like simple and easy,” Danberry said. “Generics aren’t always easy, and they can create too much room for error. I like Syngenta because all the work has been done for you, plus you don’t have to worry about compatibility issues.”

Unlike generics, branded products have strong networks of support standing behind them. For example, Syngenta has local sales representatives, field agronomists and a knowledgeable technical support team to work with growers when they need help and advice. And for immediate assistance, the Syngenta Customer Service Center is just a phone call {1-866-SYNGENT(A)} or click away.

“If you need help with a Syngenta product right away, you’ve got a whole support system to help,” said Robert Templeton, a sales consultant with Crop Production Services in Sikeston, Missouri. “With generics, you’re on your own.”

Additionally, branded product suppliers offer careful forecasting and extensive distribution networks to make sure the right product gets to the right place at the right time. This proven reliability is more important than ever, considering that the whole U.S. corn and soybean crop can be planted in 10 to 14 days, weather permitting.

The value of branded products makes good sense from a return-on-investment perspective, according to Templeton. “Saving on the front end can easily cost you more in the long run,” he said. “This is a clear benefit that branded products provide over generics, and it’s not easily matched.”