Newly Elected Nebraska Soybean Board Officers and Committee Member Appointments
The Nebraska Soybean Board held its first board meeting for Fiscal Year 2017 on November 21-22, 2016 in Lincoln. Restructuring of the board and the committees took place for the new fiscal year. The following officers were elected by the board to serve a one year term:
- Tony Johanson of Oakland – Chairman;
- Eugene Goering of Columbus – Vice Chairman;
- Terry Horky of Sargent – Secretary; and
- Daryl Obermeyer of Brownville – Treasurer
Johanson, Horky and Obermeyer were re-elected to serve as officers of the board for another one-year term. This is Horky’s fourth term, Johanson’s third term and Obermeyer’s second term, Goering will begin his first term as an officer of the board.
Committee chairmen and members were also appointed as follows:
Research Committee: Chairman: Larry Tonniges of Utica; and committee members: Eugene Goering; Anne Meis of Elgin; and Ron Pavelka of Glenvil.
Domestic Marketing Committee: Chairman: Richard Bartek of Ithaca; and committee members: Greg Anderson of Newman Grove; Eugene Goering; and Larry Tonniges.
International Marketing Committee:
Chairman: Greg Anderson; and committee members: Richard Bartek; Terry Horky; Tony Johanson; and Daryl Obermeyer.
Producer Education/Communications Committee:
Chairman: Anne Meis; and committee members: Terry Horky; Tony Johanson; Daryl Obermeyer; and Ron Pavelka.
“These officers and committee members will be working hard on behalf of Nebraska’s soybean farmers. In the coming year, they will continue to make decisions to effectively invest and leverage soybean checkoff resources to maximize profit opportunities in research, domestic, international markets and producer education,” said Victor Bohuslavsky, NSB executive director.
NE Corn Board to Meet
The Nebraska Corn Board will hold its next meeting on Monday, December 19, 2016 at the Cornhusker Hotel, located at 333 South 13th Street in Lincoln, Nebraska. The Board will finalize the strategic plan and address regular board business. The meeting is open to the public, providing the opportunity for public comment. A copy of the agenda is available by calling either 402/471-2676 or 800-NECORN1 or by emailing
FEEDING ALFALFA AS A PROTEIN SUPPLEMENT
Bruce Anderson, NE Extension Forage Specialist
Feeding more protein than cattle need can get expensive. Alfalfa may be an inexpensive protein source, especially if you feed just enough alfalfa to provide the protein your animals need.
Cattle often need extra protein when their winter diet is based on corn stalks, prairie hay, straw, or winter range. The protein supplement you chose is important, both in its effectiveness and its cost. Many cheap protein sources contain mostly urea and other forms of non-protein nitrogen. These supplements may not be used very effectively when cattle are eating mostly low energy winter forages.
Supplements containing mostly all-natural protein may be better. All-natural protein feeds the microbes in the rumen so they can digest more fiber from your forage. And many times the cheapest natural source of protein is alfalfa, especially now when hay price is reasonable.
Keep costs down by determining how much extra protein your cows actually need. Both a forage test for protein and a close estimate of how much your cows are actually eating are needed to be accurate. Then you can work with a local extension educator, a nutritionist, or use your own skills to calculate how much more protein is needed.
Many winter forage diets need between one-half and one pound of extra protein per day. Since the forage test of your alfalfa will tell you how much protein it contains, you can calculate how much alfalfa to feed each day, or every other day, to keep cows healthy and productive. This could come from as little 2 pounds of hay when feeding high protein alfalfa to cows needing just a little extra protein to as much as 8 to 10 pounds when using low quality alfalfa for cows on a low protein diet.
It may not sound like a big difference, but when you feed just two or three pounds each day per cow, the savings add up fast.
Nutrient Value of Annual Forages Left Standing Through the Winter
Karla Jenkins, UNL Cow/Calf - Range Management Specialist
Beef cattle producers are often interested in planting annual forages in the summer for later use in the winter. The question often surfaces about whether to bale the forage, or let the cattle graze the forage later in the year.
Producers interested in grazing the mature standing forage want to avoid the expense of baling and moving the forage, but producers may have concerns about the loss of forage quality if the forage isn’t baled right away.
To address these concerns, research was conducted at the High Plains Ag Lab near Sidney, NE in a two year study. Forages were planted after irrigated wheat was harvested, and some additional water was applied to the forage crop. Therefore, the total tonnage and the quality produced would likely vary if the forage was planted earlier in the summer and on dryland acres.
However, the interesting result about these forages was how minimal the quality changed over the winter (Table 1 http://go.unl.edu/h7g7). While some nutrient loss did occur, all forages studied in both years maintained enough quality to support rumen function without additional protein. The available nutrients would also support about 1-1.5 lb/d gain on weaned calves if quantity was adequate.
The first year of the study was a severe drought and nitrate levels were above the recommended 1600 ppm for safe grazing when harvested just prior to frost. However, the nitrate levels had dissipated over the winter to safe levels by March.
Producers should always sample forages for nutrient content prior to grazing to know if it will be adequate for the targeted cattle performance. University of Nebraska Extension beef personnel can assist with ration balancing for optimal performance.
23 Students Named to the Iowa Corn Collegiate Advisory Team
Iowa Corn proudly announces today the 23 Iowa college students who will make up the seventh Iowa Corn Collegiate Advisory Team (CAT). Comprised of Iowa students pursuing degrees in agriculture, CAT will assist the Iowa Corn Growers Association (ICGA) and the Iowa Corn Promotion Board (ICPB) in developing targeted programs to enhance the organizations’ relationships with individuals pursuing careers in agriculture production and allied industries. CAT achieves this by fostering the knowledge and skills of these future leaders and providing them the tools to advocate for Iowa Corn and other commodity organizations’ role in the success of Iowa agriculture.
“Iowa corn farmers’ future depends our ability to offer relevant programming, advocacy and services to new professionals entering Iowa’s agricultural sector, “said Iowa Corn Promotion Board Director Larry Buss, a farmer from Logan who chairs the committee overseeing the team. “We are excited to work with these 23 bright students on ways we can cultivate and promote our organization and the corn industry.”
The team includes one representative from each state college and university, and five students from Iowa State University. In addition, two additional positions on the team are for students in non-ag disciplines at any accredited Iowa college or university. The 2016/2017 participants:
Name Hometown College Attending
Michael Barr Kellogg Iowa State University
Michaella Beckman Mediapolis Southeastern Community College
Victoria Butt Iowa Falls Ellsworth Community College
John Dieter Sioux City Morningside College
Benjamin Dirks Monticello Iowa State University
Erin Dolecheck Kellerton Graceland University
Abby Galm Spencer Iowa Lake Community College
Madison Hoch Algona Ellsworth Community College
Evann Farrens Lenox Southwestern Community College
Anthony Furlin Numa Indian Hills Community College
Austin Fariss Batavia Muscatine Community College
Katey-Jayne Dennis Mitchellville Des Moines Area Community College
Bryce Lidtka Grinnell Dordt College
Tessa Meyer Waterloo Hawkeye Community College
Luke Pelzer West Liberty Muscatine Community College
Joe Roberts Belmond Iowa State University
Katie Schmith Orange City Northwestern College
Sami Searle Joice North Iowa Area Community College
Kelsi Sieren Keota Iowa State University
Kayla Smith Marengo Iowa State University
Christopher Thurm Readlyn Hawkeye Community College
Clayton Taylor Lohrville Iowa Central Community College
Ellen Westhoff Mount Vernon Kirkwood Community College
Farmers: Dig into Soil Health on World Soil Day
The Soil Health Partnership commemorates World Soil Day on Dec. 5 by encouraging farmers to reflect on steps they can take to make their land healthier. World Soil Day celebrates the importance of soil as one of our most vital resources.
To mark the occasion, the SHP has released an educational and fun white board video, “Farmers to the Rescue: How Healthy Soil Can Save the Planet.”
“Soil health is the next frontier in agricultural sustainability,” said Nick Goeser, SHP director. “Restoring organic matter through practices like growing cover crops will help soil sequester more carbon while making it more resistant to drought, and more resilient to floods. These are important goals worldwide as the population grows.”
With more than 65 farm sites already enrolled in nine Midwestern states, the SHP is the leader in field-scale testing and measuring of management practices that improve soil health. These practices include:
- Growing cover crops to prevent erosion and nutrient losses,
- Implementing conservation tillage like no-till or strip-till, and
- Using advanced, science-based nutrient management techniques to reduce nutrient loss.
The program’s goal is to quantify the benefits of these practices from an economic standpoint, in addition to positive environmental benefits they provide, like protecting water resources.
“By changing some practices, farmers hold the power to rebuild organic matter in their soil,” the white board video says. “This helps the planet by improving crops and removing excess carbon from the atmosphere….More organic matter in the soil means better soils for farming, healthy crops, and protecting the environment.”
The World Soil Day campaign aims to connect people with soils and raise awareness on their critical importance in our lives. In 2002, the International Union of Soil Sciences made a resolution proposing the 5th of December as World Soil Day to celebrate the importance of soil as a critical component of the natural system and as a vital contributor to human wellbeing.
Export Exchange Results in $460 Million In Grain And Co-Product Sales
The Export Exchange conference hosted this fall by the U.S. Grains Council (USGC) and Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) is already paying dividends, according to new surveys of overseas grain buyers who attended – to the tune of nearly a half billion dollars’ worth of grain and ethanol co-product sales.
Buyers and end-users were asked after the conference if they made purchase agreements with sellers and how much volume was purchased. In total, attendees reported sales of approximately 2.6 million metric tons of grains and co-products worth $460 million traded either at the conference or immediately before or after.
The top grain traded during the two-day conference was corn, with 924,500 metric tons collectively exchanged, followed by distiller’s dried grains with solubles (DDGS), with 875,000 metric tons exchanged. This means buyers at the conference struck deals to purchase an amount of DDGS equivalent to roughly 8 percent of last year’s total U.S. DDGS exports.
Export Exchange 2016 offered attendees a unique opportunity to meet and build relationships with domestic suppliers of corn, DDGS, sorghum, barley and other commodities. More than 200 international buyers and end-users of coarse grains and co-products from more than 35 countries were in Detroit for the conference, held Oct. 24 to 26, and for related tours of U.S. farms, ethanol plans and export infrastructure as part of Council trade teams.
“Trade is absolutely critical to U.S. farmers right now, and these sales show that buyers attending Export Exchange 2016 took the buying opportunities very seriously,” said Tom Sleight, president and CEO of the Council. “Putting buyers and sellers together, building and sustaining relationships with our top global grain buyers have been hallmarks of Council activities worldwide. We are thrilled to see how much actual trade was done at the show and in association with it.”
“This conference and these tremendous sales figures show how much of an appetite there is globally for U.S.-produced feed grains and co-products. It’s no surprise that the top two commodities traded during the conference were corn and DDGS, a co-product of U.S. ethanol production. With a record corn supply anticipated for the 2016/2017 marketing year, exports will continue to be essential as we move forward in a global market,” said RFA President and CEO Bob Dinneen.
Other grains traded at Export Exchange included:
- Corn Gluten—25,200 metric tons;
- Sorghum—428,000 metric tons; and
- Barley—5,000 metric tons.
The Export Exchange conference provides an ideal forum for continued relationship building among trading partners. The conference is held every two years and will next be held in 2018. More information about the recent event is online at www.exportexchange.org.
ORGANIC STANDARDS RULE NOW AT OMB
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices rule now is pending at the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the last step in the rulemaking process before it becomes final. The National Pork Producers Council is urging USDA to withdraw the rule, or if it’s approved before Jan. 20, 2017, the Trump USDA to repeal it. In comments in opposition to the rule submitted in July, NPPC said the regulation’s new animal welfare standards for the National Organic Program, if enacted, would be the first time such criteria are codified in federal law and would present serious challenges to livestock producers.
According to NPPPC, there are a number of problems with the proposed welfare rules, NPPC pointed out in its comments, including:
· Animal handling practices are not a defining characteristic of organic agriculture and are not germane to the National Organic Program as authorized by Congress.
· The livestock practices will be costly (if even practicable) to implement for current organic producers and serve as a barrier to new producers entering organic production, without making the resulting products substantively more organic.
· Consumer misconception about the intent of the National Organic Program and the meaning of its label is not a valid rationale for expanding the program to encompass animal welfare.
· Animal welfare is complex and dynamic; decisions about animal care need to be science based and carefully considered by each producer.
· The proposed livestock and poultry practices present significant challenges to the maintenance and promotion of public and animal health.
NPPC requested that USDA reconsider the proposed animal welfare standards, arguing that, because animal welfare is not germane under the Organic Foods Production Act, USDA does not have clear authority to promulgate such rules. It also pointed out that the regulation would have a negative effect on the cost and availability of organic livestock and poultry products, cannot be justified by claims that it will clarify public expectations about organic labels or address an unfair competitive disadvantage facing organic producers, are not science based and present real challenges to protecting animal and public health.
NPPC PARTICIPATES IN CODEX MEETING ON ANTIMICROBIAL RESISTANCE
The Physical Working Group on Antimicrobial Resistance of the U.N.’s Codex Alimentarius Commission, the international food-safety standards-setting body, this week met in London to develop proposal documents laying out the purpose and scope for two projects of interest to the U.S. livestock industry. National Pork Producers Council's Chief Veterinarian Dr. Liz Wagstrom attended as an expert, participating through the observer status of the International Meat Secretariat, a non-profit association that brings together meat and livestock organizations.
One project aims to update the Codex Code of Practice to Minimize and Contain Antimicrobial Resistance, while the second will develop Guidance on Integrated Surveillance of Antimicrobial Resistance. In July, the proposals will be considered for advancement by the Codex Commission.
NPPC works closely with the U.S. government to provide technical support for Codex issues affecting the U.S. pork industry. The pork industry supports studies and research on the epidemiology of antimicrobial resistance, as well as research on identifying alternative products or practices that will help minimize the need for antibiotics in pork production.
CLA Petitions EPA to Stop Using Studies That Are Not Backed
On Tuesday, November 29, CropLife America (CLA) petitioned the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to halt regulatory decisions that are highly influenced and/or determined by the results of epidemiological studies that do not meet well-defined data quality standards and that are not integrated into the human health risk assessment of crop protection products in a transparent, well-defined manner. The petition requested that EPA cease regulatory decision-making with respect to any organophosphate (OP) pesticide where 1) that decision making is based primarily on results from epidemiological studies that do not meet well-defined data quality standards and 2) where the public has no means of knowing how EPA is determining the data quality of such studies or how they are being integrated into the risk assessment.
The petition follows what has been the ongoing process of registration review of various OPs, which has included multiple scientific advisory panels (SAPs) that have found that the epidemiological studies being used are of questionable value and lack the quality data needed to inform regulatory decisions. EPA’s human health pesticide risk assessment process has traditionally relied on validated toxicological studies using laboratory assessments and study data to estimate the potential exposure to the pesticide chemical based on the proposed use of the pesticide product. Epidemiological studies have not been uniformly or consistently incorporated into a quantitative risk assessment, due to the observational nature of epidemiological research. Often epidemiological studies cannot speak to causality due to questions related to study design, population studied, and lack of clear evidence of the magnitude and duration of exposure during critical phases of development.
“The process EPA is pursuing regarding OPs is concerning to the agriculture community,” stated Jay Vroom, president and CEO of CLA. “If EPA continues to rely on epidemiological studies that do not meet well-defined data quality standards, we could see catastrophic results, with farmers across the world unable to access important tools to fight crop threats.”
“CLA recognizes that epidemiological studies can provide important data for risk assessment, but this does not mean that such studies are equally relevant or reliable,” said Dr. Janet E. Collins, executive vice president for science and regulatory affairs at CLA. “EPA should cease further action on regulatory decision-making that finds epidemiological study results to be determinative until the Agency can establish data quality criteria against which such study results can be evaluated, and EPA can clearly articulate how it will determine the value of the study outcomes to the weight of evidence in a human health risk assessment in the context of the traditional empirical data.”
CLA requested a response to the petition within 45 days.
Welcome to the KTIC Agriculture Information blog!!! Check back here for the latest in ag news and information, from local events to international happenings and government reports that affect your operation. Please email with suggestions! -Chad Moyer, Farm Director, KTIC Radio
No comments:
Post a Comment