Monday April 18 Crop Progress & Ag News

NEBRASKA CROP PROGRESS AND CONDITION

For the week ending April 17, 2016, temperatures averaged four to six degrees above normal with widespread precipitation across the State, according to the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service. Rainfall amounts of three or more inches were common across south central and southwestern Nebraska, while eastern border counties remained mostly dry. Snow was recorded late in the week across portions of the Panhandle. Corn planting started during the week but was halted as rain crossed the State.  Windy conditions were experienced during much of the week. There were 5.7 days suitable for fieldwork.  Topsoil moisture supplies rated 6 percent very short, 24 short, 64 adequate, and 6 surplus. Subsoil moisture supplies rated 3 percent very short, 17 short, 77 adequate, and 3 surplus.

Field Crops Report:
Corn planted was at 7 percent, near 3 for both last year and the five-year average.

Winter wheat condition rated 0 percent very poor, 3 poor, 40 fair, 48 good, and 9 excellent. Winter wheat jointed was at 18 percent, ahead of 4 last year and 12 average.

Oats planted was at 71 percent, behind 80 last year, but ahead of 66 average. Emerged was at 23 percent, behind 36 last year, but near 21 average.

Livestock Report:
Cattle and calf conditions rated 0 percent very poor, 0 poor, 10 fair, 75 good, and 15 excellent. Calving was 85 percent complete, near 82 last year and 84 average. Cattle and calf death loss rated 1 percent heavy, 67 average, and 32 light.

Sheep and lamb conditions rated 0 percent very poor, 0 poor, 10 fair, 84 good, and 6 excellent. Sheep and lamb death loss rated 0 percent heavy, 76 average, and 24 light.

Hay and roughage supplies rated 0 percent very short, 5 short, 92 adequate, and 3 surplus.
Stock water supplies rated 1 percent very short, 5 short, 93 adequate, and 1 surplus.



Access the National publication for Crop Progress and Condition tables at: http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/nass/CropProg/2010s/2016/CropProg-04-18-2016.pdf.

Access the High Plains Region Climate Center for Temperature and Precipitation Maps at: http://www.hprcc.unl.edu/maps.php?map=ACISClimateMaps.

Access the U.S. Drought Monitor at:
http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/Home/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?NE.  




IOWA CROP PROGRESS & CONDITION REPORT

 Iowa farmers had ample opportunities for fieldwork with 6.2 days suitable for fieldwork statewide during the week ending April 17, 2016, according to the USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service. In addition to oat planting, corn planting began in earnest in most areas with scattered reports of soybean planting. Other field activities included tillage as well as anhydrous and fertilizer applications.

Topsoil moisture levels rated 1 percent very short, 10 percent short, 84 percent adequate and 5 percent surplus. Subsoil moisture levels rated 0 percent very short, 3 percent short, 91 percent adequate and 6 percent surplus.

Thirteen percent of the State’s expected corn acreage has been planted, over one week ahead of both last year and the 5-year average. Seventy-eight percent of the oat crop has been planted, almost two weeks ahead of average, with 15 percent emerged. Iowa farmers were able to plant almost half the State’s expected oat acreage during the week ending April 17, 2016.

Pasture condition rated 2 percent very poor, 6 percent poor, 38 percent fair, 48 percent good and 6 percent excellent. Pastures have started to green. Livestock conditions were described as good, with the dry weather beneficial for calving. Some cows and calves have been turned out to pastures.



IOWA PRELIMINARY WEATHER SUMMARY
Provided by Harry J. Hillaker, State Climatologist
Iowa Department of Agriculture & Land Stewardship

It was a very dry week across Iowa. The only precipitation was a few sprinkles reported across far northern Iowa on Tuesday (12th) night. Very light rain did finally move into far western Iowa late Sunday (17th) night but occurred too late to be reflected in this week’s statistics. Typical weekly precipitation for this part of April is 0.82 inches. Meanwhile, the reporting week began with unseasonably cold weather on Monday (11th) and Tuesday (12th). A hard freeze occurred over most of Iowa on Tuesday morning with temperatures falling as low as 16 degrees at Sheldon, Spencer, and Webster City. However, with only a few exceptions, Tuesday morning temperatures were not as cold as were reported with the freeze back on Saturday, April 9. A rapid warm-up commenced across western Iowa on Wednesday (13th) with temperatures above normal statewide by Thursday. Temperatures were well above normal everywhere during the weekend. Daytime highs reached 80 degrees at Little Sioux and Sioux City on Wednesday while sunny skies allowed readings to climb even higher across eastern Iowa over the weekend when Davenport reached 84 degrees on both Saturday and Sunday. Temperatures for the week as a whole averaged from two degrees above normal over far southeast Iowa to nine degrees above normal over the far northwest with a statewide average of 5.6 degrees above normal. Soil temperatures at the four inch depth were averaging in the mid to upper fifties statewide as of Sunday (17th).



USDA Weekly Crop Progress

Corn and spring wheat planting moved well ahead of the five-year average in the week ended April 17, according to USDA's latest weekly Crop Progress report. 

Corn was 13% planted, compared to 4% last week, 7% last year and an 8% average. 

Spring wheat planting was 27% complete, compared to 13% last week, 31% last year and 19% on average. "Monday's report is bearish for spring wheat," Hultman said.

Winter wheat, on the other hand, is slightly behind average in heading at 12%, compared to 4% last week, 13% last year and a 15% average. Winter wheat condition improved slightly at 57% good to excellent compared to 56% last week.

Cotton is 7% planted, compared to 5% last week, 7% last year and a 10% average. Rice is 48% planted and 19% emerged, compared to 32% and 12% last week, 30% and 14% last year, and 36% and 19% on average.

Sorghum is 16% planted compared to 15% last week, 18% last year and a 21% average. Oats are 56% planted and 30% emerged, compared to 38% and 26% last week, 54% and 31% last year and 50% and 35% averages. Barley is 33% planted, compared to 19% last week, 38% last year, and a 26% average.



Brazil's Soy Harvest Reaches 90% Complete

Brazil's soybean harvest is reaching its final stages with fieldwork concentrated in the south and the northeast.

Rain hampered the harvest in the south last week but it still progressed to 90% complete across Brazil, slightly behind the 91% registered at the same point last year, according to AgRural, a local farm consultancy.

Despite the precipitation, the harvest in the southernmost state of Rio Grande do Sul moved forward 16 percentage points to 72% complete last week with farms in the key producing district of Erechim yields 49 bushels per acre.

In the northeast, harvesting is further delayed with farmers continuing to register poor yields because of the dry weather during their summer.

In Maranhao, the harvest was 70% compete, compared to 80% last year. In Tocantins, fieldwork was 90% complete compared with 80% at the same point in 2015. In Bahia, some 85% had been harvested, up from 50% last year. The harvest is so advanced because in many cases the dry weather shortened the soybeans' cycle.

----------------------------------------

PRE-SEASON ALFALFA IRRIGATION
Bruce Anderson, NE Extension Forage Specialist

               Attention growers of irrigated alfalfa.  Have you ever irrigated before first cutting?  If you’ve received little spring precipitation, now might be a good time to start.

               Seems silly to irrigate alfalfa before first cutting, doesn't it.  But look at your soil moisture profile.  If it's dry, as is common in some areas, you may need to.  In fact, early spring often is the best time to irrigate alfalfa.  After all, it's about the only time you can actually build a reserve water source for summer use.

               Alfalfa can develop roots more than eight feet deep.  But it will only do this when surface moisture does not meet crop needs and moisture is available all the way down to those depths.  Deep roots that have access to deep moisture will make your summer irrigating much easier by providing extra moisture when plants use as much as half an inch per day.  Unfortunately, typical shallow watering during summer encourages only shallow rooting.

               The biggest advantage of reserve deep water comes after each summer cutting.  Alfalfa roots need oxygen in the soil if plants are to regrow rapidly.  Irrigating right after cutting suffocates roots, slowing down regrowth.  Immediate watering also stimulates shallow rooted or sprouting weeds, especially at a time when alfalfa plants are not very competitive.  Both problems are reduced when water is available for deep alfalfa roots while the top several inches of soil remain dry.  After alfalfa regrows several inches it will out-compete most weeds so irrigation then can begin again.

               Improve your alfalfa irrigation by watering early, with a goal of having six to eight feet of soil at field capacity at first cutting.



Economist Working to Better Assess Costs of Climate Change

The cost of a 5-degree increase in the Earth's overall temperature would be significantly different for a developing country near the equator compared to a developed country in the Northern Hemisphere. But for either country, that cost is highly uncertain and that's a problem, said Ivan Rudik, an Iowa State University economist.

"We don't have a strong grasp on the economic costs of climate change," Rudik said. "We have a good idea of how climatic and physical systems will change in response to greenhouse gases, but we need a better understanding of the costs to society to inform policymakers as to what the best policies are to combat the problem."

Rudik is using climate and economic models to better capture the uncertainty of damages from emissions and how that uncertainty influences the social cost of carbon dioxide. He says a lot of the factors and estimates used for policymaking decisions today are based on decades-old studies. In an article published in the journal Science, Rudik and a team of researchers outlined the need to better understand the link between economics and climate.

"Climate change impacts everything and linking it all together is very difficult," Rudik said. "Because there are a lot of uncertainties, we don't have a great way of knowing what the economic costs of 2 to 3 degrees of warming will be. We're making a lot of assumptions, and so I try to figure out ways to design policy to guard against potential errors in our models of the climate-economy system."

In the paper, Rudik and his colleagues identified three needed areas of research: refining the social cost of carbon, an estimate often used in developing climate policies; determining the consequences of particular policies; and understanding the economic impacts and policy choices in developing countries. The challenge for economists is valuing things that have no real market. Rudik says it's fairly easy to determine agricultural impact damages because there are market prices for crops and land, but it's harder to value something like pristine shorelines.

Rudik used the example of increased conflict due to warmer temperatures. If there are more conflicts, what is the cost? And how does that affect the economy? Rudik says estimating some kinds of climate damages is similar to calculating damage estimates for disasters like the Exxon Valdez or Deepwater Horizon oil spills. Quantifying the value of peace or a clean shoreline is necessary in order to better design policy.

"It's not just the cleanup of the shore, but the cost to people who are no longer vacationing there because of the spill and are missing out on the experience. There's also the impact on the local community because people may have been afraid to go to the Gulf because of the oil spill. Without some market value it's hard to determine how big these costs are," Rudik said.

Who pays to fix the problem?
Most economists agree that a carbon tax is the most effective way to reduce emissions and address climate change. Rudik says it's simple -- if you make something more expensive, people will use less of it. Not only will consumers respond by using less electricity or driving more fuel-efficient cars, but firms will move to create cleaner products. However, Rudik says strong political resistance to a carbon tax makes it an unlikely solution.

State and federal governments have implemented other policies in response, including renewable portfolio standards (intended to increase use of wind, solar and biomass energy) and clean power plants. Rudik says such efforts are not as effective as a tax because they do not correctly incentivize people. If the goal is to reduce emissions, it's most efficient to simply make carbon more expensive and let people decide how to respond to the tax, instead of using a policy to push them toward particular technologies.

These other policies are far more widely used than carbon taxes. Even though economists like carbon taxes, they need to be realistic and start evaluating policies that are actually being implemented in the real world, Rudik said. Economists need to gain a deeper understanding of how effective they are and their impacts on the world, he added.

Equity is another factor to consider -- how much does climate change or policy harm one group and benefit another? Developed countries are largely responsible for the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, Rudik said. The dilemma is determining who should bear the burden for mitigation efforts, while guaranteeing that climate policy does not limit economic productivity of developing countries. The same must be applied to the burden for low-income households. Rudik says these challenges and questions underscore the need for better economic analysis.

"There's a lot more work to be done. It's only recently that we've developed the tools for assessing economic and climate risks," Rudik said. "The proliferation of large amounts of data has really helped because now, for example, we have all this weather and crop information spanning large portions of the earth. We need to use this data to advance our understanding of all sectors of the economy and how they'll be affected as the climate changes."



Cuban Officials, Importers Visit United States As Part of USGC Trade Team

A delegation of grain importers and officials from Cuba is traveling in the United States this week to see firsthand the advantages of purchasing U.S. coarse grains and co-products.

Cuba has purchased corn from the United States since the early 2000s, with market share varying widely from as high as 100 percent to just 15 percent more recently. In addition, the country has also purchased U.S. distiller’s dried grains with solubles (DDGS).

However, sales have been stymied in both Cuba and the rest of the region by competition from other sources and the ongoing embargo. If Cuba purchased all of its imported corn from the United States, it would be the 10th largest overseas market for the product.

“We are continuing to assess how to best serve Cuba’s needs as its economy shifts and restrictions begin to fall,” said U.S. Grains Council Chairman Alan Tiemann, who farms in Nebraska. “The team’s visits this week will help establish relationships and provide them basic information about the U.S. grain buying system that is essential to enhance U.S. competitiveness.”

While in the Washington area, the team members will visit with staff at the Council, U.S. grower organizations, agribusinesses and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service (USDA FAS). They will also take a farm tour on the Eastern Shore of Maryland.

The team will then travel to St. Louis and New Orleans to meet with additional agriculture organizations and companies and see the breadth and depth of the U.S. marketing, handling, transportation and export systems.

“These face-to-face interactions with key contacts will help to highlight that the United States is able to be the reliable long-term supplier they need and establish a strong foundation for future dealings,” Tiemann said.

Following the Obama Administration’s announcement in late 2014 that it would seek to dismantle the 50-year-old restrictions on how companies and individuals interact with Cuba, the Council has reassessed the Cuban market and is working to help mitigate ongoing barriers to grain sales there.

This week’s team is a direct outgrowth of that work, which revealed that critical staff in Cuba’s food importer, Alimport, had changed over time and that officials want more information about U.S. grain production, management, buying and exports.

“While the politics with financing and ending the embargo must be dealt with by the U.S. Congress, we are closely monitoring this market and committed to helping our Cuban partners develop the expertise and connections that will lead to future sales,” Tiemann said.



Agriculture is better off thanks to ethanol
Geoff Cooper Sr. VP, Renewable Fuels Association

Alan Guebert’s recent column (“The ethanol trap”) asks, “Where would the nation, its farmers, livestock growers, and rural America be today had ethanol not been given ... a role in U.S. farm and energy policy during the last 25 years?”

This is indeed an important question to consider, as farmers enter the planting season facing gloomy projections for farm income and decade-low commodity prices. Unfortunately, Mr. Guebert gets the answer all wrong.

He bemoans that federal policies have “encouraged farmers to produce first, then figure out what to do with the market-splattering surplus.” But this is exactly the hopeless market dynamic that ethanol and programs like the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) have reversed over the past decade.

Between 1990 and 2006, producing corn was a losing proposition. In all but one of those 17 years, the average farmer’s cost of producing a bushel of corn was higher than the returns earned from selling that bushel. As a result, U.S. farmers became increasingly reliant on government payments as a source of income — and as a means of survival.

Fortunately, the emergence of the ethanol industry over the past decade helped transform the corn market from a state of demand stagnancy, giant surpluses, and growing reliance on the taxpayer to a state of healthy demand expansion, higher value, and plunging government payments.

And that rising tide has lifted all boats. The value of U.S. crop and livestock production in 1990 was $83 billion and $90 billion, respectively, and net farm income totaled $46 billion. By 2013, values for U.S. crops, livestock, and net farm income hit record levels of $233 billion, $182 billion, and $123 billion, respectively.

Mr. Guebert also laments that, as the ethanol industry expanded, farmers “redirected American acres toward corn ... and away from other crops like cotton, wheat, and oats.” Apparently, he believes acreage for these other crops would have increased or remained at pre-1990 levels had it not been for the emergence of corn ethanol.

Of course, this argument ignores the multitude of other factors that influence commodity markets and annual planting decisions. Chief among them is the inexorable march of technology and productivity, changing consumer preferences, and basic supply-demand fundamentals.

Since 1990, the average yields per acre of wheat, barley, oats, sorghum, and cotton have increased 20-25 percent. Productivity increases for these crops have generally outpaced demand, which in many cases has slowed in response to evolving consumer preferences. Thus, considerably fewer planted acres of these crops are needed to satisfy demand. Meanwhile, the average corn yield per acre has grown 42 percent since 1990.

Given these productivity gains, farmers were faced with two choices: Significantly reduce planted acres, or build new markets for the additional production. Fortunately, they chose the latter route and invested in the build-out of the ethanol industry, which not only added value to their corn but also brought stable, high-paying jobs to rural communities across the country.

It is not an exaggeration to say that because of ethanol, there is a considerable amount of productive farm ground engaged in crop production today that might have otherwise been sold off long ago to residential and commercial real estate developers. And that means a generation of farmers has been able to stay on the land.

So, where would agriculture be without ethanol and the RFS? Probably in the same place it was before ethanol’s major emergence a decade ago — stagnant demand, huge commodity surpluses, crop prices below the cost of production, rising reliance on taxpayer-funded farm payments, a faltering farm economy, and a continued exodus of young people from rural America.

Yes, the 2016 outlook for row crop agriculture is not pretty as planters start rolling across the Corn Belt. Increasing surpluses and lower commodity prices are reason to be concerned. But just imagine how much worse things would be if America’s farmers hadn’t had the vision and fortitude 25 years ago to build the ethanol industry from the ground up. Now is not the time to reverse course on what has been an extraordinary success story for U.S. agriculture and rural America.



More Cows, More Milk Output at U.S. Farms in '15

The number of milk cows in the United States was up slightly in 2015, reaching 9.3 million, about equal to the number in 2008.

According to the USDA, the size of the U.S. dairy herd reached an historic low of just over 9 million cows in 2004, following a long-term decline of more than 2 million head since 1983.

Over the past decade, the herd size has grown slightly, by an average of 0.3 percent per year.

Improving technology and genetics have allowed milk output per cow to rise steadily, increasing by 88 percent since 1980 and reaching a record-high annual average of 22,393 pounds of milk per cow in 2015.

The result has been strong growth in U.S. milk production over the period, which corresponds to growing domestic and international markets for dairy products-particularly for cheese and various dairy-based food ingredients.



CWT Assists with 756,186 Pounds of Cheese and Whole Milk Powder Export Sales

Cooperatives Working Together (CWT) has accepted 8 requests for export assistance from Dairy Farmers of America, Northwest Dairy Association (Darigold) and Tillamook County Creamery Association who have contracts to sell 668,001 pounds (303 metric tons) of Cheddar, Monterey Jack cheese and 88,185 pounds (40 metric tons) of whole milk powder to customers in Asia, the Middle East and Central America. The product has been contracted for delivery in the period from April through October 2016.

So far this year, CWT has assisted member cooperatives who have contracts to sell 14.643 million pounds of American-type cheeses, 7.716 million pounds of butter (82% milkfat) and 14.897 million pounds of whole milk powder to fourteen countries on five continents. The sales are the equivalent of 417.516 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.



DuPont Pioneer Announces Intentions to Commercialize First CRISPR-Cas Product

DuPont Pioneer today announced waxy corn hybrids as its first commercial agricultural product developed through the application of CRISPR-Cas enabled advanced breeding technology. This next generation of elite waxy corn hybrids is expected to be available to U.S. growers within five years, pending field trails and regulatory reviews.

“We’re applying our 90 years of knowledge of corn biology to develop the next generation of high-quality waxy corn hybrids for the benefit of the entire value chain from growers to processors and end users,” said Neal Gutterson, vice president, research and development for DuPont Pioneer. “Starting with an identity-preserved product as our initial CRISPR-Cas offering allows us to lay a solid foundation for success of future larger volume products from this plant breeding innovation.”

Pioneer is the leading supplier of waxy corn hybrids globally. In the United States, about a half-million acres of waxy corn are grown each year; however, they traditionally yield less than non-waxy corn hybrids. Waxy corn produces a high amylopectin starch content, which is milled for a number of everyday consumer food and non-food uses including processed foods, adhesives and high-gloss paper. Waxy corn is typically grown on contract through a closed-loop production system commonly referred to as “identity-preserved”.

“The next generation of waxy hybrids developed with CRISPR-Cas will represent a step-change in how efficiently we bring elite genetic platforms of high-yielding waxy corn to our customers,” Gutterson said.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) recently published its response to Pioneer’s “Regulated Article Letter of Inquiry” stating that it does not consider next-generation waxy corn developed with CRISPR-Cas enabled advanced breeding technology as regulated by USDA Biotechnology Regulatory Services.

“DuPont Pioneer believes that CRISPR-Cas as an advanced plant breeding tool holds great promise for maintaining the world’s ability to produce an abundant and healthy food supply. The USDA’s confirmation is an important first step toward clarifying the U.S. regulatory landscape and the development of seed products with CRISPR-Cas technology,” said Gutterson. “We continue to consult with global regulatory bodies and government agencies in order to understand the potential regulations around the world.”

Pioneer is establishing a CRISPR-Cas enabled advanced breeding platform to develop seed products for greater environmental resiliency with characteristics like disease resistance and drought tolerance, in addition to advancing the development of improved hybrid systems. The technology has applicability for all Pioneer crops of interest.

“This is just the beginning: We believe the true value of this important innovation in plant breeding will be achieved through active engagement with customers, academia, governments, NGOs and public research institutes to develop new solutions to the toughest agricultural challenges,” added Gutterson. “Pioneer has a long history of collaboration and broadly advancing science and is open to entering further collaborations which would contribute to developing CRISPR-Cas technology across all crops and geographies for the greater good.”

Pioneer previously announced strategic agreements for research collaborations and intellectual property (IP) licenses with Vilnius University and with Caribou Biosciences. These are combined with DuPont’s own IP, technology capabilities, infrastructure and scientific expertise that are being applied in order to advance CRISPR-Cas.