Eastern Nebraska 2017 Beef Profit Tips Workshops
During the winter of 2017 Nebraska Extension will host 15 Beef Profitability Workshops to help beef producers evaluate their operations to make them more profitable through the latest research information. The combination of low commodity prices and high input costs has left cattle producers struggling to reach breakeven levels.
Example of topics that may be presented at specific locations are:
Harvesting Crop Residues- Does It Affect future crop yields
Balancing the ranch or farm for Protein
Mineral Nutrition
Composting Livestock Mortality Carcasses
Windrow Grazing
Forage Testing and What the Numbers Mean
EPDs and Bull Selection
Economics in the Beef Industry and Beef Outlook
Fencing and Watering Options on Crop Residue
Managing Risk on the Average Sized Cow-Calf Operation
Evaluating and Valuing Cull Beef Cows and their Carcasses
Cow Depreciation – (2nd largest cost)
Hay and Land Grazing Rental Rates
Global Market Landscape
Livestock Outlook
Grass Production
Cover Crop Production
A team of UNL Extension Educators, including Steve Pritchard, Larry Howard, Dennis Bauer, Gary Stauffer, Jim Jansen, Michael Rethwisch and Steve Niemeyer along with local Extension Educators will present information as well as practical approaches for the beef producer.
These workshops have been held across Nebraska for the past thirteen years.
Workshops are sponsored by Nebraska Extension. The cost is $15.00 but may vary from location depending on local sponsorship. Pre-Register by calling the local Extension Office in the host county at least three days before the workshop to ensure there are enough handouts and refreshments.
For more information or assistance, please call Steve Niemeyer, UNL Extension Educator in Garfield, Loup and Wheeler Counties at 308-346- 4200 or sniemeyer1@unl.edu
2017 LOCATION SITES ARE AS FOLLOWS: (NO MEAL UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED)
JANUARY 4- Stanton Community Room at 1:00 p.m. @Stanton, NE. contact Larry Howard 402-372-6006
JANUARY 5- Knox County Extension Office at 1:00 p.m. @ Center, NE contact Ruth Vonderohe 402-288-5611
JANUARY 5- Martinsburg Fire Hall at 6:30 p.m. @Martinsburg, NE contact Larry Howard at 402-372-6006
FEBRUARY 7 – Boyd County Courthouse at 1:00 p.m. @Butte, NE Contact Gary Stauffer 402-336-2760
FEBRUARY 7 – Holt County Extension Office at 7:00 p.m. @O’Neill, NE Contact Gary Stauffer 402-336-2760
FEBRUARY 9- Basset Methodist Church at 1:00 p.m. @ Bassett, NE contact Dennis Bauer at 402-387-2213
FEBRUARY 9- Springview Community Center at 7:00 p.m. @ Springview, NE contact Dennis Bauer at 402-387-2213
FEBRUARY 15 – Ericson Methodist Church at 7:00 p.m. @ Ericson, NE Contact Steve Niemeyer 308-346-4200
FEBRUARY 15 – Loup County Fair Building at 1:00 p.m. @ Taylor, NE Contact Steve Niemeyer 308-346-4200
FEBRUARY 28- Polk County Fairgrounds at 10:00 a.m. @ Osceola, NE contact Michael Rethwisch at 402-367-7410
MARCH 1 – Otoe County Extension Office at 1:00 p.m. @Syracuse, NE contact Sarah Purcell at 402-269-2301
MARCH 2 – Cass County Extension Office at 1:00 p.m. @ Weeping Water, NE contact Ashley Benes at 402-267-2205
MARCH 2 – Richardson County Fairgrounds at 7:00 p.m. @ Humboldt, NE contact Kaytlyn Kennedy at 402-245-4324
MARCH 7 – Lutheran Church Fellowship Hall 204 School Street at 1:00 p.m. @ Wilber NE. contact Randy Pryor at 402-821-2151
TBA- Albion Contact Steve Pritchard 402-395-2158
Fremont Corn Expo on Jan. 5 Scouts Ag Horizon and Offers Answers
Positioning your farm to be resilient and successful despite the current downturn will be among the timely topics to be presented at the Fremont Corn Expo Jan. 5.
“Choosing Your Row Ahead” is the theme of this year’s program. The theme keys off of the common phrase, “the road ahead.” Nebraska corn producers have a whole series of decisions they make during a growing season. Choosing the “row” ahead or best series of decisions is what the Fremont Crop Expo is about. To accomplish this speakers will address:
· applying ag technology;
· improving economic viability;
· increasing resilience to extreme weather, and
· enhancing soil and water resources.
Speakers will include University and Ag agency experts as well as business and industry leaders from the Nebraska Corn Growers Association, Nebraska Corn Board, and Colfax-Dodge County Corn Growers.
The event, sponsored by Nebraska Extension, Fremont Chamber, Nebraska Farm Bureau, the Nebraska Corn Board, the Nebraska Corn Growers Association, and many local Ag business, will be from 7:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the Christensen Field Main Arena, 1730 W. 16th St. Forty-eight agribusinesses will be exhibiting at the expo throughout the day.
“The Expo is a one-stop shop for local corn growers to get the critical information they need to effectively manage locally-relevant corn production issues.” said Nathan Mueller, Nebraska Extension Cropping Systems Educator, planning coordinator, and host for the Fremont Corn Expo. “The topics at this year’s expo were driven by over 100 attendee responses in a survey mailed out after last year’s expo. This is a local corn grower guided event.”
Presentations will include:
· Multi-Hybrid Planting Preparation with Joe Luck, Nebraska Extension precision agriculture engineer. If you’ve been seeing in-field variation of your corn crop, multi-hybrid planting may be one way to mitigate yield risk. Learn what researchers found when conducting multi-hybrid planting research on five fields in eastern Nebraska in 2016. Yield impacts, observations, and profit analysis by zone will be presented for discussion of hybrid and zone delineation accuracy.
· Economic Outlook for US Agriculture with Brent Gloy, agricultural economist at Purdue University. While there’s no glass ball to perfectly forecast economic trends in agriculture, a closer look at several key factors can help you better position your operation. Learn what factors are driving the profit squeeze and what you can expect in 2017 and upcoming years.
· With Phosphorus, You Have Choices! with Charles Shapiro, Nebraska Extension soil science and crop nutrient specialist. Decisions on when and where to apply phosphorus often are based on longer term economics as well as agronomic need. Is it best to apply a large load at once or spread the application across several years? Learn how to assess the factors pertinent to your farm when determining when to apply P.
· Tools to Help Weather the Storms Ahead with Brian Smith, National Weather Service Meteorologist at Omaha/Valley. Severe weather, including hail, tornadoes, high winds and flooding, cause billions of dollars of damage annually to agriculture. Learn how to better weather these challenges. Learn about cloud features that accompany severe storms and how to interpret them as well as options for getting warnings.
In addition, a panel will look at what lies ahead for farm finances. Panelists will include:
· Tina Barrett, executive director, Nebraska Farm Business Inc.,
· Marty Krohn, ag lender, First National Bank, Fremont,
· Al Vyhnalek, Nebraska Extension educator on cash rent and leases,
· Charles Shapiro, Nebraska Extension soil science and crop nutrient specialist, and
· Brent Gloy, economist, Purdue University.
Winter Hay Considerations
Larry Howard, Extension Educator, Cuming County
Hay Waste
Hay feeding time has started and feeding big round bales sure makes the job easier. Large bale feeding systems are designed to minimize labor but not waste. Most producers feed hay in some kind of feeder, but did you know the type of feeder can affect how much hay is wasted?
Feeding hay in a rack or a round bale feeder limits the opportunity animals have to trample or soil hay, and reduces waste substantially. Minimal feeding losses occur where hay is fed with a rack or bale feeder that forces the animal to turn its head when backing away from the feeder. When animals can back straight out of a feeder, they can pull out large chunks of hay that drop on the ground and are lost as feed.
Research at the University of Nebraska and Michigan State University has shown feed waste of:
▪3.3% (cone),
▪5.9% (ring feeder with skirt),
▪9% (racks),
▪11.1% (trailer), and
▪14.2% (cradle feeders).
Cone feeders are more expensive but when you figure the amount and value of the hay that is saved, cone feeders may be worth the extra cost, especially if your feeders have no skirts.
Hay loss and waste can also be reduced by how often we feed. Daily feeding will force cattle to eat hay they might otherwise refuse, over-consume, trample and waste. Cattle waste less hay when the amount fed is limited to what is needed each day. Twenty-five percent more hay is needed when a four-day supply is fed with free access. Cows will over consume, if hay is fed free choice.
Long feeders are less effective than round or square feeders because boss animals will push others back by walking down the long feeder, interrupting other cows feeding and reducing their intake.
While some losses will always occur, keeping losses to a minimum can reduce feed costs, resulting in more efficient use of forages and increasing the profitability of the cow herd enterprise. The Noble Foundation has an easy to use spreadsheet to help you calculate hay wastage: http://www.noble.org/ag/tools/livestock/hay-ring/
Hay Wrap Concerns
North Dakota State University has studied the potential for digestive problems in cattle that consume net wrap, plastic twine, biodegradable twine and sisal twine. Their research shows that after 14 days net wrap and biodegradable twine are not broken down in the rumen. Seventy percent of sisal twine breaks down in the rumen. A little twine or net wrap in the rumen may not be damaging but as the cow accumulates it over time problems could arise. Might pay to take a little more time and remove all the net wrap or twine.
Testing for Nutrients
Finally, do you know the nutrient content of your hay or forages? Testing forages lets you determine their best and most economical use in a ration. Forage testing helps you to allocate higher quality forage to high producing livestock, and poorer quality forages to animals at lower levels of nutritional needs. Nebraska Extension has a NebGuide (G331) on “Sampling Feeds for Analyses” (http://go.unl.edu/jtzm).
Nebraska Corn Growers Association Elects Officers at Annual Meeting
Members of the Nebraska Corn Growers Association gathered at Nebraska Innovation Campus in Lincoln on Thursday, December 1, 2016, for their annual meeting. During the meeting, NeCGA elected officers and recognized a past executive director of the association for his committed service.
Scott Merritt, President of Capitol Management Group, was honored with NeCGA’s Golden Ear award, which recognizes outstanding service to Nebraska’s corn industry. Merritt served as the executive director of the Nebraska Corn Growers Association (NeCGA) for over 18 years – leading the association in becoming the premier legislative and membership advocate for Nebraska’s corn growers.
NeCGA President Larry Mussack presented the award commenting, “We truly appreciate the years of dedication that Scott gave to the association which set a solid foundation for our association’s future growth.”
Following the annual meeting, the election of officers was held. Dan Wesely of Morse Bluff was elected as the new President of NeCGA. Other officers elected include: Dan Nerud of Dorchester, Vice President; Andy Jobman of Gothenburg, Secretary; and Chuck Emanuel of North Bend, Treasurer. Larry Mussack of Decatur will move to Chairman of the Board after serving two years as President of the association. NeCGA is thankful for Larry’s commitment to the organization during his term.
“We are very grateful for the volunteer efforts that our grower leadership and officers give on an annual basis,” said Kelly Brunkhorst, executive director of NeCGA. “As we finish up our new strategic plan, I look forward to working alongside our leadership in increasing opportunities for our membership.”
Iowa Farmland Values Show Historic Third Year of Decline
Average Iowa farmland value has shown a decline for the third year in a row — the first time this has happened since the 1980s farm crisis — and is now estimated to be $7,183 per acre. The statewide per acre value declined $449, or 5.9 percent, since November 2015. Farmland values hit a historic high in 2013, but have steadily declined since then. The statewide average value for an acre of farmland is now about 17.5 percent lower than 2013 values.
Land values were determined by the 2016 Iowa State University Land Value Survey, which was conducted in November by the Center for Agricultural and Rural Development at Iowa State University and Iowa State University Extension and Outreach. Results from the survey are consistent with results by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, the Realtors Land Institute and the US Department of Agriculture. Wendong Zhang, assistant professor of economics at Iowa State University, led the annual survey.
The $7,183 per acre, and 5.9 percent drop in value, represents a statewide average of low, medium and high quality farmland. The survey does also report values for each land quality type, crop reporting district (district hereafter) and all 99 counties individually.
Average farmland values hit a historic peak of $8,716 per acre in 2013, but declined 8.9 percent in 2014, 3.9 percent in 2015 and have now fallen an additional 5.9 percent.
“The golden era of phenomenal, yet abnormal growth in farm income and land values, as we saw from 2006 to 2013, is already behind us. The land market is going through an orderly adjustment while the U.S. agricultural sector, a competitive industry, is trying to adjust to the old normal of zero industry-wise net profits,” said Zhang. “For a pessimist, there are reasons to worry, especially for landowners and/or producers who are over-leveraged. For an optimist, this decline is still modest, and the probability of a replay of the 1980s farm crisis is low.”
Zhang said the likelihood of another farm crisis is low due to steady farm income accumulation before the downturn, a stronger government safety net and an overall lower debt level in the agriculture sector.
Starting in 2004, several factors, including the ethanol boom and historically low interest rates, drove five consecutive years of double-digit growth in average farmland values. By 2008, average values were almost 70 percent higher than 2004, and by 2013, average values were over 230 percent higher than 2004 values. While they have declined three years in a row now, average values are still 173 percent higher than 2004.
The decline didn’t come as a surprise for some — in November 2015, over 75 percent of ISU Land Value Survey respondents thought land values in their territory would continue to decline in 2016. The majority predicted the decline would be either less than 5 percent or between 5 and 10 percent, which is consistent with the 5.9 percent decrease reported by the 2016 ISU survey.
“Looking ahead, land values might continue to adjust downwards in the next year or two,” said Zhang. “This is consistent with the stagnant corn and soybean futures prices and potential rise in interest rates; however, many respondents to the ISU survey are hoping for the market to rebound in three or four years.”
Land Values by County
All 99 counties reported a drop in average land values this year. For the fourth year in a row, Scott and Decatur counties reported the highest and lowest farmland values, respectively. Decatur County reported a value per acre of $3,443, a loss of $71, or about 2 percent, from last year’s report. Scott County reported a value of $10,335, a decrease of $583 per acre, or about 5.3 percent, close to the statewide average decline of 5.9 percent.
Plymouth and Sioux counties reported the largest dollar decrease in values, $747 per acre, and Monona County reported the largest percent decline in values, 8.4 percent. Decatur County reported the smallest dollar decrease, $70 per acre, and Decatur, Appanoose, Wayne, and Lucas counties all reported the smallest percent decrease in average values, at 2 percent.
Land Values by District
All nine districts reported a loss in average land values in 2016. The highest average land values were reported in the Northwest district, at $9,243 per acre. The lowest average values were reported in the South Central district, at $4,241 per acre.
The largest district-wide decrease in value was in West Central Iowa, which reported a drop of 8.7 percent, bringing farmland values there down to $7,358 per acre. The smallest decrease was reported in the Southeast district, 2.6 percent, bringing values there to $6716 per acre.
Values by Land Quality
Low-quality land in the Southwest and South Central districts were the only areas to show an increase in average values, reporting gains of 2.9 and 5.2 percent, respectively. Zhang says that the increase is due to strong recreational demand and high Conservation Reserve Program payments.
Statewide, low quality land declined the least, $169 per acre, or 3.5 percent. Medium quality land declined $422 per acre, or 5.9 percent. High quality land statewide declined the most per acre, losing $606, or 6.5 percent, of its value. The statewide averages per acre for low, medium and high quality land are now $4,665, $6,705 and $8,758, respectively.
Factors Influencing Land Values
The most common positive factors influencing land prices noted by survey respondents were low interest rates, strong crop yields, limited land supply and strong demand. The most commonly cited negative influences were lower commodity prices, high input prices, livestock losses, weak cash rental rates and a weakening global economy and stock market returns.
The ISU Land Value Survey was initiated in 1941, the first in the nation, and is sponsored annually by Iowa State University. The survey is typically conducted every November while the results are released every mid-December. Only the state average and the district averages are based directly on the ISU survey data. The county estimates are derived using a procedure that combines the ISU survey results with data from the U.S. Census of Agriculture.
The ISU Land Value Survey is based on reports by agricultural professionals knowledgeable of land market conditions such as appraisers, farm managers and agricultural lenders, and actual land sales. It is intended to provide information on general land value trends, geographical land price relationships, and factors influencing the Iowa land market. The 2016 survey is based on 518 usable responses providing 711 county land values estimates. Forty-eight percent of respondents answered the survey online.
BEEF CHECKOFF REFERENDUM RESULTS CERTIFIED BY IOWA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND LAND STEWARDSHIP
The Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship today certified the results from the referendum held November 30th to reinstate the $.50 per head Iowa beef checkoff. Collection of the checkoff will begin March 1, 2017.
The certified results show the referendum passed with 56 percent of the more than 1700 producers that voted favoring the reinstatement of the assessment. A simple majority was needed to pass the referendum.
The Iowa beef checkoff will be mandatory, but refunds will be available to interested producers. The federal beef checkoff of $1 per head remains in place and would not be affected by the Iowa vote.
Iowa State University and Aptimmune Join Forces to Improve PRRSV Isolation
The Iowa State University Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory is teaming up with Aptimmune Biologics Inc. to develop innovative solutions to fight costly viral diseases of swine.
The agreement enables Iowa State to use Aptimmune’s patented ZMAC cell line to isolate PRRSV (Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus) from diagnostic samples. The ZMAC cell line is derived from porcine alveolar macrophages, the cell naturally targeted by PRRSV and is especially sensitive to PRRSV infection. ISU’s access to this technology will provide greater success of PRRSV isolation from diagnostic samples. Improvements in the PRRSV isolation rate will allow veterinarians and producers to include the most relevant field-based PRRSV strains in autogenous vaccines.
"Our partnership with Aptimmune offers producers and veterinarians the combined resources of leading university researchers and a groundbreaking private company," said Phillip Gauger, DVM, Ph.D., at Iowa State. "We have begun work with the ZMAC cell line and very soon they will be utilized at the ISU-VDL for routine diagnostic use.” PRRSV costs the US swine industry more than $1 billion annually, so the long-term impact of our collaboration can be significant."
The agreement grows out of an ongoing relationship in which Aptimmune has used the highly respected diagnostic services offered by Iowa State. "Our businesses strategy has always been producer-focused and results-driven," said Aaron Gilbertie, chief executive officer of Aptimmune. "This collaboration with Iowa State is a big step forward in developing effective new vaccines that will help veterinarians and producers maintain herd health and boost profitability." Based on revolutionary technology and after years of development, Aptimmune is launching the industry’s first mucosal vaccines for swine beginning January 2017.
Transitioning to Organic Course Begins January 2017
Demand remains high for organic corn and soybean food and feed grains, as organic production presents a viable economic opportunity for row crop farmers in the United States. Additionally, demand for local and organic fruits and vegetables is growing throughout Iowa and the Midwest.
A course called “Transitioning into Organic Production” will be held each Tuesday from Jan. 10 through May 2, 2017, from 6-9 p.m., broadcast through Adobe Connect™ from the Iowa State University Brenton Center for Agricultural Instruction and Technology. This will allow participants to take the course from on and off-campus locations. Kathleen Delate, professor and extension organic specialist with Iowa State University, will serve as lead instructor for the course.
“Transitioning to organic production requires rapid acquisition of production, marketing and financial management skills,” said Delate. “This course will help producers understand the process of transitioning to organic agriculture.”
Fees are $50 for the complete 16-week course or $10 per session. The course can be taken for three Iowa State undergraduate or graduate credits as AGRON 484/584. Attendance at all 16 sessions will not be required unless the individual wishes to take it for ISU credit.
Please contact Delate at kdelate@iastate.edu for additional information or with any questions.
USDA Announces Farmer Fair Practices Rules - Clarifications for Industry & Protections for Farmers
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) today announced updated regulations to protect the rights of farmers. The Farmer Fair Practices Rules target the most harmful practices hurting farmers and clearly outlines common sense protections to restore fairness and reduce the burden for farmers seeking justice under the Packers and Stockyards Act. This is the most recent action in the Obama's Administration's efforts to level the playing field for all Americans.
"For years, American farmers have been calling for protections against the most damaging unfair and deceptive practices confronting family farms across the country," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. "Poultry growers in particular are vulnerable to market risks and concentration in the processor market. All too often, processors and packers wield the power, and farmers carry the risk. Today, USDA is taking a big step toward providing the protections that farmers deserve and need."
The four largest processors in the poultry sector in this country control 51% of the broiler market and 57% of the turkey market. In part due to this concentration, poultry growers often have limited options for processors available in their local communities to contract with. 52% of growers have only one or two processors in their state or region to whom they can provide grower services. That means processors can often wield market power over the growers, treating them unfairly, suppressing how much they are paid, or pitting them against each other.
The new rules would level the playing field for farmers by proposing protections against the most egregious retaliatory practices harming chicken growers. The Farmer Fair Practices Rules are comprised of an interim final rule and two proposed rules GIPSA today sent to be published in the Federal Register. The interim final rule will affirmatively establish the Department's long time position that it is not necessary to demonstrate that an unfair practice harms the entire market in order to prove a violation of the Packers and Stockyards Act. Such overly broad interpretations have put family farmers at a disadvantage for decades when pursuing their rights under the Act.
The proposed rule regarding unfair practices would clarify what GIPSA views as practices that clearly violate the Act and would establish criteria to protect the legal rights of farmers. The third proposal would establish criteria that GIPSA would consider in determining whether a live poultry dealer has engaged in a pattern or practice to use a poultry grower ranking system unfairly.
As an example of retaliatory practices, if a chicken grower attempts to organize other chicken growers to bargain for better pay or publicly expresses unhappiness with the way they are treated by a processor, processors could require growers to make investments that are not economically justifiable for the grower, or can terminate contracts with little notice. And because in contract growing, the processors own the birds and provide inputs like feed, they can choose to provide poultry growers with bad feed or sickly birds that have a higher mortality rate, which cuts deeply into a grower's opportunity to earn income on those birds.
In hearings held in 2010, USDA heard from chicken growers who were promised a long-term business relationship but were soon bullied into signing narrower and narrower contracts until their business was unsustainable, who felt extorted into making expensive upgrades under threat of not being provided chickens to grow, and who tried to explore opportunities with other processors but were met with intimidation and discrimination.
The Farmer Fair Practices Rules reflect feedback received in over 60,000 comments and rigorous economic analysis conducted by GIPSA in collaboration with the USDA Office of the Chief Economist. GIPSA is providing opportunity for additional comment on all of the rules, to ensure that the public has a robust opportunity to engage in the regulatory process.
Three USDA Actions to Help Farmers Get a Fair Shake, Explained
CHARLIE ANDERSON, White House Press Office
Today, USDA announced three actions to protect family farmers from unfair treatment by big processors. Here’s what that means.
Today, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is taking some major steps forward to protect farmers – including swine, beef cattle, and especially poultry growers – from unfair treatment by the often much larger processors who purchase their fully grown hogs, cattle, and chickens. These three rules are another step forward in response to the President’s Competition Initiative announced in April, which has the goal of enhancing competition to help consumers, workers, and small businesses get a fair shake in the economy.
What’s the problem being addressed?
The poultry, pork, and beef industries include growers who raise chickens, turkeys, hogs, and cattle, and processors who buy the full-grown animals from the growers, package up the meat, and ship it to your local butcher, supermarket, or restaurant. In recent years, similar to what has been occurring across a number of other industries, processing has become increasingly concentrated, with fewer companies controlling a larger share of the market. This has inhibited farmers’ ability to get a fair deal from the processors.
For example, the four largest poultry processors control 51 percent of the broiler market and 57 percent of the turkey market. In part due to this concentration, poultry growers often have limited options for processors available in their local communities: 52 percent of growers have only one or two processors in their state or region to whom they can sell. That means processors can often wield market power over the growers, treating them unfairly, suppressing how much they are paid, or pitting them against each other.
For example, if a chicken grower attempts to organize other chicken growers to bargain for better pay or publicly expresses unhappiness with the way they are treated by a processor, they can suffer retaliation. Processors can require growers to make investments that are not economically justifiable for the grower or can terminate contracts with little notice. In contract growing (which has governed an increasing share of the market in recent years), the processors own the birds and provide inputs like feed, so they can choose to provide poultry growers with bad feed or sickly birds that have a higher mortality rate, which cuts deeply into a grower’s opportunity to earn income on those birds. Without much of a choice for where to sell their birds, poultry growers often have to either put up with the unfair behavior, take a pay cut, or take their case to court.
What do the rules do?
USDA is releasing three rules – collectively known as the Farmer Fair Practices Rules – to empower farmers so they get fair treatment by the processors or get their day in court:
1. Rule #1 – the “scope” rule – means that poultry growers will no longer have to meet an impossibly high standard to get compensated when they are treated unfairly. The interim final “scope” rule makes clear to the courts – as has long been USDA’s interpretation – that farmers don’t have to demonstrate that an unfair practice by processors harms the entire industry in order to prove a violation of the Packers and Stockyards Act. This impossibly high standard had previously put small farmers at a disadvantage for decades when pursuing their rights under the law. With this new rule in place, if a farmer is being treated unfairly, they’ll now have their day in court and be able to win.
2. Rule #2 enumerates some of the specific unfair practices that violate the law. To make the rules more clear for processors and growers alike – and to help courts understand where to draw the line – the second rule being proposed today clearly outlines unfair practices for which growers can receive compensation. These practices include inaccurate or false weighing of birds, the abuse of arbitration procedures, the abrupt suspension of delivery of birds to a grower or termination of a contract without an opportunity for the farmer to get back into compliance. All of these types of activities would qualify as an unfair practice that would be compensated through a court proceeding. Processors can only treat growers differently if they have a legitimate business justification, not for arbitrary reasons. This protection is especially important to poultry growers who today often find it difficult to win in court even when they are treated unfairly.
3. Rule #3 reforms the poultry growing tournament system to make it more of a level playing field and avoid processors aiding and disadvantaging certain growers relative to others. Many poultry growers through the contract system are paid out based on a tournament how they perform against their peers; the bigger and better their birds turn out relative to other growers, the more money they make. However, because the processors own the birds, the feed, and other inputs, they can unfairly disadvantage or preference one grower over another as a way of forcing the growers to do things against their will or shut down dissent. The third rule, also proposed, will establish criteria to judge whether the processor is operating the ranking system in a manner that is fair to all growers. It will push back against the unequal bargaining power between poultry purchasers and poultry growers.
These rules respond to the directive USDA was given in the 2008 farm bill but were only allowed to move forward with implementing this year, once an unnecessary and harmful rider that had been in place for years was defeated in this year’s appropriations bill. By continuing to move forward with finalizing these rules, USDA will make important progress in ensuring that farmers get a fair shake and can push back on inappropriate and unfair treatment by the processors. These are a meaningful step forward to make sure that rural Americans are getting paid what they deserve for supplying the high-quality chickens, turkeys, hogs, and beef that Americans enjoy around their dinner tables and at their local restaurants every single day.
Nebraska Farmers Union NeFU Hails USDA Fair Practices Rules As Progress
Nebraska Farmers Union (NeFU) hailed today’s USDA Fair Practices Rules as progress in the long overdue struggle to correct blatant marketplace abuses. The USDA announcement included an interim final rule on competitive injury, a proposed rule on unfair practices and unreasonable preference, and a proposed rule on the tournament system and poultry. “All three rules represent substantial progress in long overdue ag market reforms. This ag market reform process was initiated in the 2008 Farm Bill, and has been delayed for eight years because of the political and economic power of the meat packing industry has with Congress,” NeFU President John Hansen said. “Thankfully, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack is moving forward.”
The interim final rule on competitive injury is necessary because the “harm to competition” legal standard required for livestock producers to meet to sue packers for unfair and discriminatory practices is an impossible standard to meet. As a result, packers are effectively shielded from legal recourse by producers who were damaged by unfair and discriminatory marketing practices.
The USDA proposed rule on unfair practices and unreasonable preference would discourage the practice of preferential pricing where the packer pays “sweetheart” prices to certain producers at the expense of other producers that grow comparable quality livestock. “This practice is often used to reward large producers for expanding the packers’ use of “captive supply”, which means they can directly manage the supply of livestock, and depress cash market prices rather than bid up prices to encourage livestock producers to sell. The more concentrated the market place is, the more toxic “captive supply” is to prices. Preferential pricing leads to lower cash market prices for a majority of livestock producers,” Hansen said.
The second USDA proposed rule deals with the poultry industry practice of using tournament systems as part of their take it or leave it contracts with poultry growers. The tournament pricing system pits one producer against other producers. Money is taken away from some producers and used to pay other producers. The proposed rule sets requirements for companies to determine growers’ payment. Hansen said, “Tournament pricing is an extremely regressive system and needs to be eliminated.”
“NeFU has fought for more fairness and competition in agricultural markets for over 50 years,” Hansen concluded. “America’s farmers deserve markets that are fair, accessible, competitive and transparent. When markets function as they should, they provide price discovery and distribute value for products in the marketplace. In the absence of appropriate governmental oversight and regulation, powerful special interest players use their economic and political muscle to control and manipulate the marketplace to their financial advantage at the expense of our nation’s hardworking family farmers and ranchers.”
White House Issues ‘Midnight’ GIPSA Rule
In an apparent attack on rural America for its role in helping elect Donald Trump as president, the Obama administration today issued a regulation that could restrict the buying and selling of livestock, lead to consolidation of the livestock industry – putting farmers out of business – and increase consumer prices for meat. The National Pork Producers Council will work with the Trump administration and the new Congress to repeal the “unnecessary, destructive and illegitimate midnight rule.”
Written by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), the “interim final” rule broadens the scope of the Packers and Stockyards Act (PSA) of 1921 related to the use of “unfair, unjustly discriminatory or deceptive practices” and “undue or unreasonable preferences or advantages.” Specifically, the regulation would deem such actions per se violations of federal law even if they didn’t harm competition or cause competitive injury, prerequisites for winning PSA cases. (Such actions currently are state court matters.)
“I can’t imagine a more devastating regulation on an industry,” said NPPC CEO Neil Dierks. “The rule, which creates legal uncertainty, will destroy opportunities for many in the U.S. pork industry, with no positive effect on competition, the regulation’s supposed goal.”
USDA in 2010 proposed a number of PSA provisions – collectively known as the GIPSA Rule – which Congress mandated in the 2008 Farm Bill. But the agency was blocked by lawmakers through amendments to annual agricultural spending legislation from implementing a regulation that would eliminate the need to prove a competitive injury to win a PSA lawsuit. In fact, Congress considered and rejected such a “no competitive injury” provision during debate on the 2008 Farm Bill. Additionally, eight federal appeals courts have held that harm to competition must be proved for an action to be a violation of the PSA.
When a rider wasn’t included in the fiscal 2016 agricultural funding bill, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack vowed his agency would move forward with the blocked regulation.
“The rule will be a boon to trial lawyers and a weapon activist groups will use to attack segments of the livestock industry,” Dierks said. “The inevitable costs of the regulation could lead to further vertical integration of the pork industry, driving packers to produce more of their own hogs. That will reduce innovation, quality and competition, with no benefit to consumers. Coupled with the current strong headwinds buffeting pork producers, the net effect of this destructive, unnecessary and illegitimate midnight rule would be a crushing blow to hog farmers of all sizes and to America’s rural economies.”
A recent update of a study conducted by Informa Economics of the proposed 2010 GIPSA Rule found that today it would cost the pork industry more than $420 million annually, with the majority of the costs related to PSA lawsuits brought under a “no competitive injury” provision.
“The bottom line,” said Dierks, “is that the White House picked trial lawyers and activists over farmers in forcing this regulation on rural America. We need to kill this illegitimate midnight rule.”
The PSA regulation – and two related proposed rules – will be subject to a 60-day public comment period, which extends the rulemaking process into the Trump administration. NPPC, as it did following issuance of the proposed 2010 GIPSA Rule, will urge America’s 68,000 pork producers to submit comments in opposition to the new regulation. Thousands of producers weighed in against the 2010 rule.
Administration Releases Destructive GIPSA Rules
Jeopardizing U.S. livestock producers, USDA released their final rulemaking on the 2010 Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Act. Tracy Brunner, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association president said these provisions are very similar to the 2010 proposed rules that industry groups have consistently voiced concern over. He also pointed out that Congress has repeatedly defunded the rules due to the staggering harm they would cause industry.
“The GIPSA rules are especially troubling to the cattle industry,” said Brunner. “As we have consistently stated, if adopted, this rulemaking will drastically limit the way our producers can market cattle and open the floodgates to baseless litigation. In a time of down cattle markets, the last thing USDA needs to do is limit opportunity. The fact of the matter is, we don’t trust the government to meddle in the marketplace.”
USDA has announced the new GIPSA regulations include an interim final rule on competitive injury and two proposed rules to address undue preference and the poultry grower ranking system. While USDA has provided a 60-day comment period, the interim final rule will take effect 60 days from the date of publication.
“USDA is going well beyond their statutory limitations, limiting marketing options for a product that America is demanding,” said Brunner.” If USDA was interested in real solutions rather than increased government regulations, they wouldn’t have rushed these rules out the door at the very close of the Administration’s term, bypassing any input from industry. Cattlemen and women don’t appreciate Secretary Vilsack throwing a grenade in the building as he abandons it.”
NCBA will be working staunchly with the new Administration and new Congress to prevent these irresponsible regulations from harming our nation’s farmers and ranchers.
Statement by Zippy Duvall, President, American Farm Bureau Federation, Regarding USDA’s GIPSA Rule Proposals
“The Agriculture Department’s Farmer Fair Practices Rules take an important step toward leveling the playing field in the poultry industry by ensuring companies follow the law and treat farmers fairly, without disrupting beef and pork markets.
“Farm Bureau has long advocated for changes in the Grain Inspection, Packers & Stockyards Administration’s rules. We have asked for changes to stop harmful business practices and protect chicken farmers. A one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t work here, and that’s why we have also worked to preserve the contract arrangements and marketing practices that make the beef and pork industries competitive.
“These proposed rules will strengthen GIPSA’s ability to evaluate business practices in the poultry industry and better protect individual farmers from discriminatory treatment. America’s chicken farmers have long called for greater transparency and a level playing field in our industry, and we appreciate USDA’s efforts to hold companies accountable and give farmers a voice.”
Increase in U.S. Beef Production Leads to Lower Beef Prices at the Meat Case
As consumers shop at the meat case this holiday season and into the new year, they'll see lower retail prices on beef, including popular holiday cuts like the tenderloin and rib roast.
November 2016 was the largest beef production month since 2010, prompting the U.S. Department of Agriculture to raise its beef production forecast for 2016 in its World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE), released December 9. As a result, industry experts at CattleFax, a beef industry analyst firm here, reported today beef prices are down more than 10 percent from the highs of late 2014.
Beef production is currently on an upward trend, with production projected to rise 6 percent in 2016 and another 4 percent in 2017, according to CattleFax.
"As beef production has increased and demand remains exceptionally strong, better prices will be passed on to consumers," said Lance Zimmerman, market analyst, CattleFax. "This holiday season, it means consumers can expect to see lower pricing reflected in retail advertising, better promotions on beef and more limited-time offers on menu items."
Putting Beef Deals in Consumers' Hands
The nation's cattle farmers and ranchers contribute marketing dollars collected through the Beef Checkoff Program to promote beef sales. For example, farmers and ranchers are working with Ibotta, a smartphone app that offers rebates on groceries and other items. Consumers who download the Ibotta app can browse the Grocery category for rebates on fresh ground beef, steaks and roasts, unlock the rebates, and then buy these items at more than 80 retailers to get cash back through Ibotta.
"With more beef available, it's an ideal opportunity for consumers to take advantage of lower prices at the meat case," said Tracy Brunner, a beef producer from Ramona, Kan., and current president of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, a contractor to the Beef Checkoff. "We're helping consumers do exactly that with valuable promotions and tips for easily incorporating beef into their meal planning during the holidays and into the new year."
In addition to favorite holiday cuts, consumers will also find good deals on lean beef cuts, such as top sirloin and strip steak – good news for consumers who are looking to curb their craving heading into the holidays and the new year.
"Research shows that lean sources of protein like beef can support a healthy weight by helping you feel fuller, longer, making high-calorie snacks and desserts less tempting," said Dr. Shalene McNeill, Ph.D., R.D., executive director of human nutrition at the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, a contractor to the Beef Checkoff.
A "Your Guide to Holiday Entertaining" infographic with recipes including beef – from party appetizers to holiday roasts – can be found at http://www.beefitswhatsfordinner.com/holiday.
Beef Technicals Turn from Bearish to Neutral
Stephen R Koontz, Agricultural and Resource Economics, Colorado State University
Fed cattle prices are now five-to-six weeks into a rally off the lows set in early October. The rally is feeder cattle is less steadily strong but is still decidedly off seasonal lows. Is there fundamental news to support this strength? So far the main bullish fundamentals news appears to be that that low prices do what they are supposed to do. We don't like them on the receiving end they are an indicator of a functioning market. In that light, we continue to see strong volumes of fed cattle marketed and strong Saturday kills at beef packing plants. Retail prices continue to soften but there is as of yet little weakening of the retail margin. Further, packer margins have weakened but remain rather healthy. So the news appears to be that fundamentals are not changing such that market conditions will continue to get bearish.
I receive questions regularly from producers and reporters about imports. There is no news here. Either last week or really the last 5-6 months. Changes in exports and imports of cattle and beef during 2016 are clearly being driven by cattle and beef prices and not the reverse. To be clear, imports and exports are not driving cattle and beef prices. Beef imports are following the typical seasonal pattern and are weaker this fall - about 18% -- than the past summer. Further, beef imports are substantially weaker - 25-30% - than summer or fall of 2015. And are forecast to be weaker yet in 2017. October beef exports were slightly higher than an average of the prior five years during that month and are substantially above exports the third and fourth quarter months of 2015 -- about 12-25% depending on the month. Further, the export volume above the average of the prior five years for that month is a notable event. With years of shrinking numbers and supplies it has not been possible to see strong export volume. And now the strength of the U.S. dollar is working against exports. It is the lower prices that are making exports happen. Finally, fed cattle imports from Canada are almost exactly the same through the last half of 2016 as for 2015 with the exception of a sharp drop in imports in July. Prices drive imports/exports and not the reverse.
So what to the technicals say? Down trends in the daily charts that have persisted all of 2016 and that were set up in 2015 appear to be broken or, for certain, have been pressured. This is seen for nearby and deferred 2017 daily charts on live cattle and feeder cattle contracts. These technicals have turned from overwhelmingly bearish to neutral. And markets have rallied off the substantial lows of late October and early November. Further, there appears to be head and shoulders bottoming patterns that have been completed in live and feeder cattle markets. Both markets broke the left should support in September through October and moved lower forming the head in mid-October. Then in early-November support held, forming the right shoulder and the market has rallied strong for the following 5-going-into-6 weeks. I have doubts the market has completely turned and will strengthen. Forecasts for 2017 are for expanded production - and without increased exports - prices will be lower. And along those lines the weekly charts remain clearly bearish. On the weekly charts, the long-term downtrend that was established in early 2015 is still in place. But the daily charts are shaping up to communicate the route is over. So - in the daily charts - the down trend pressured or broken, support has held, and bottoming patter in place. That's the most bullish news we've had in a while and the next several weeks will be informative.
EIA: Ethanol Stocks, Production Surge
Total ethanol stockpiles, plant production and blending demand all increased during the week-ended Dec. 9, the Energy Information Administration reported on Wednesday.
The EIA's Weekly Petroleum Status Report showed domestic fuel ethanol inventories increased roughly 600,000 barrels (bbl), or 2.9%, to 19.1 million bbl. Despite the second straight week with a build, supply is 1.2 million bbl, or 6.1%, below a year ago. On Nov. 25, domestic ethanol supply fell to a 13-month low of 18.4 million bbl.
Plant production increased 17,000 barrels per day (bpd), or 1.7%, to a 1.040 million bpd record high for the week-ended Dec. 9, up 40,000 bpd or 4% versus a year earlier. For the four weeks ended last week, domestic ethanol production averaged 1.022 million bpd, up 33,000 bpd, or 3.3%.
Net refiner and blender inputs of ethanol, a gauge for demand, rose 22,000 bpd, or 2.5%, to 894,000 bpd during the week-ended Dec. 9. Year over year, refiner and blender inputs are up 4,000 bpd, or 0.4%, with the four-week average through Dec. 9 up 24,000 bpd, or 2.7%, at 897,000 bpd.
ACE Urges Senators to get ethanol support from EPA nominee Pruitt during confirmation process
The American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) issued a call-to-action to its grassroots membership today, urging ethanol supporters to contact their U.S. Senators about the nomination of Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt to lead the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Mr. Pruitt needs a majority vote of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and if so, 51 votes in the full U.S. Senate to earn confirmation as the next EPA Administrator. As is Senate custom, Pruitt is beginning individual meetings with Senators about his confirmation.
“We encourage you to contact your Senators and urge them to secure commitments from Mr. Pruitt to remove regulatory restrictions on the use of E15 and flex fuels and to publicly agree with President-elect Trump’s position in support of the U.S. ethanol industry and the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) before agreeing to cast affirmative votes for Pruitt during the confirmation process,” ACE said in the call-to-action.
While President-elect Trump enthusiastically campaigned in support of ethanol, as the Oklahoma Attorney General, Mr. Pruitt filed a “friend of the court” brief in support of a lawsuit by the American Petroleum Institute and Grocery Manufacturers Association to overturn EPA’s approval of E15 for 2001 model-year and newer vehicles. Moreover, Mr. Pruitt has called the RFS “unworkable.”
“Given the role EPA has in clearing regulatory roadblocks for ethanol to compete in the marketplace, it is critically important for ACE members and ethanol advocates from all walks-of-life to encourage their U.S. Senators to ensure Mr. Pruitt will keep the RFS on track and remove government restrictions on the use of higher blends of ethanol before they vote to confirm him to lead EPA,” according to ACE.
Most Fertilizer Prices Slightly Higher
Retail fertilizer prices continued to split in direction the first week of December 2016, with some higher from a month earlier and some lower, according to retailers tracked by DTN. However, for the first time, a majority of fertilizers inched higher rather than lower.
Five of the eight major fertilizers trended higher, although none by significant amounts. The five higher are DAP with an average price of $434 per ton, potash $318/ton, urea $333/ton, UAN28 $219/ton and UAN32 $257/ton.
The remaining three fertilizer slipped slightly lower. MAP averaged $443/ton, 10-34-0 $445/ton and anhydrous $463/ton.
On a price per pound of nitrogen basis, the average urea price was at $0.36/lb.N, anhydrous $0.28/lb.N, UAN28 $0.39/lb.N and UAN32 $0.40/lb.N.
Retail fertilizers are lower compared to a year earlier. All fertilizers are now double digits lower.
Urea is now down 16%, DAP is 19% less expensive, MAP is 20% lower and UAN32 is 22% less expensive. Both 10-34-0 and UAN28 are 23% lower, potash is 25% less expensive and anhydrous is 26% lower compared to a year prior.
Newly Funded Research Continues Efforts to Stamp Out Aflatoxin
Corn farmers' ongoing quest to manage and mitigate the fungus aflatoxin received a boost this week with the announcement that the Aflatoxin Mitigation Center for Excellence has approved seven new research projects for 2017.
AMCOE's mission is to investigate biological controls, aflatoxin resistance via transgenic and traditional breeding, best management strategies for harvest, handling and storage and improved testing procedures. AMCOE, managed by the National Corn Growers Association, is now in its sixth year supporting aflatoxin research.
"Aflatoxin is a critical issue for corn growers who want to provide consumers with the best quality and safest product possible," said Charles Ring AMCOE Committee Chairman of Sinton, Texas. "AMCOE is committed to making continued progress toward solving this problem and helping southern corn farmers remain profitable."
Aflatoxin in corn can be at dangerously high levels especially during periods of drought. The toxin, a byproduct of the Aspergillus fungi, is endemic in cornfields around the world.
"U.S. producers do all they can to eliminate the contaminants to meet strict standards. Through collaborative research at southern universities we have made significant progress related to both management and control," Ring said. "We are confident this newly funded round of research will continue this positive momentum."
A total of seven research projects will be funded in 2017 at Mississippi State University, Purdue University, Texas A & M, Louisiana State University and USDA Agricultural Research Service in Georgia.
AMCOE is funding multiple research approaches to solve farmers' struggles with mycotoxins. Funding a portfolio of approaches increases the probability of success. AMCOE is supporting genomic/genetic research to identify the genes that contribute to mycotoxin resistance, which is an important first step in their incorporation into new hybrids. AMCOE supports several breeding efforts that will have direct benefit to farmers. Breeding is not the only strategy the committee supports. AMCOE also is supporting both transgenic and biocontrol strategies to control both fungal growth and mycotoxin production.
NGFA leader says industry needs to engage with consumers
Members of the National Grain and Feed Association (NGFA) and other agricultural groups need to partner to increase their communications with consumers and the public on food- and agriculture-related issues, said NGFA Chairman John Heck, senior vice president of The Scoular Company, at the 45th annual Country Elevator Conference and Trade Show.
The 2016 Country Elevator Conference and Trade Show, conducted Dec. 11 - 13 at the Chicago Marriott Downtown Magnificent Mile, is the single largest gathering of country elevator personnel and this year's meeting attracted more than 700 members of the grain, feed, processing and export industry.
During his keynote comments Monday morning, Heck outlined several potential themes emerging in the NGFA's new long-range plan, currently under development. Among several priorities, the new plan likely will emphasize the importance of communication on food and agricultural issues with consumers, noting the impact on the supply chain.
"The facts we have access to aren't always known by, and sometimes don't resonate with consumers...[but] it's the facts that have to be communicated," he said.
Mitch Dawson, chairman of the NGFA's Country Elevator Committee and director of grain operations at MFA Inc., Columbia, Mo., echoed Heck's sentiments in comments during the conference.
"The internet and social media have made it difficult for consumers to know what is truth and what is fiction when it comes to our food," Dawson said, noting that each person in agriculture has a responsibility to convey the benefits of commercial agricultural production and marketing to the public.
"Agriculture is our job, our careers...and it better be your passion. If not, you're probably in the wrong career field," he said. "We need involvement from each of you."
When it comes to other priorities for 2017, Heck noted that NGFA is working to provide extensive input to President-elect Donald Trump on legislative and regulatory issues, particularly regulatory excesses that should be rolled back during the early months of the new administration. Trade will also be a high priority for the NGFA with the incoming administration.
"One of our early priorities also is to begin a constructive dialogue with the Trump team on ways to improve and modernize trade agreements - starting with the North American Free Trade Agreement - in a way that reinforces the importance of two-way trade and preserves the many positive aspects of trade agreements for ag," Heck said.
In addition, the NGFA chairman highlighted the challenges for the industry when it comes to the commercialization of agricultural biotechnology traits. While very supportive of the technology and the benefits and efficiencies it brings to modern production agriculture, the NGFA continues to urge technology owners to obtain foreign market approvals before new traits are planted on a commercial scale so as to avoid trade disruptions.
"Frankly, one of our hurdles has been to convince farm and commodity groups that appear willing to accept the short-term risk of prematurely planting biotech traits before they are approved in world markets," Heck said. "We need to do a better job of informing those growers of that risk."
Regarding new gene-editing technologies that are making their way into the market, Heck said obtaining some international regulatory coherence with other countries on how and whether these traits will be regulated is imperative.
"We simply can't allow the same kind of disparate regulatory treatment to occur with these new gene-editing techniques as happened with transgenics," he said. "The market disruption could be catastrophic."
Finally, Heck reminded attendees that the NGFA will continue in its mission to provide proactive safety education and training outreach to the industry. Regional Grain Handling Safety Seminars in partnership with State and Regional Grain and Feed Associations will continue in 2017 to further disseminate a strong safety message. In addition, the NGFA will continue its partnership with State and Regional Grain and Feed Associations and state feed regulatory agencies to conduct training for the industry on compliance with the Food Safety Modernization Act.
The 2016 Country Elevator Conference features expert insights into biotechnology, the agricultural economy, and generational differences in the workforce, as well as a variety of educational sessions geared toward facility operations, merchandising and management.
DuPont Pioneer Introduces Highest Yielding Line of Soybeans in its History
Pioneer Launching 24 New A-Series Soybeans for the West and Southwest
DuPont Pioneer announced today the introduction of Pioneer® brand A-Series soybean varieties, the highest yielding line of soybeans in its history. These new soybean varieties are the result of innovative soybean research programs and the DuPont Pioneer proprietary Accelerated Yield Technology 4.0 (AYT 4.0).
Available for 2017 planting, Pioneer is launching 54 new A-Series soybean varieties from maturity Groups 000 to 7 across North America. In 2016 on-farm Pioneer IMPACT™ plot tests, these varieties produced an average yield advantage of 2.3 bu/acre against 10,000 comparisons of elite competitors at 400 locations.
“This is a historic milestone for Pioneer,” said Steve Reno, vice president, business director – U.S. and Canada. “This new soybean line is producing unprecedented step-change improvements in yields. A-Series will help soybean growers achieve higher yields no matter what their yield goal.”
The Pioneer brand A-Series lineup has a broad range of trait options to fit each grower’s unique needs. The North America soybean line consists of more than 30 varieties with Roundup Ready 2 Xtend® technology, 11 Glyphosate Tolerant varieties, a Pioneer brand Plenish® high oleic soybean variety plus conventional, LibertyLink® and DuPont™ STS® varieties. The letter “A” will be part of the Pioneer brand soybean variety names to help growers easily identify the new high-yielding lines.
Pioneer brand A-Series soybeans are developed by the industry’s most extensive localized soybean breeding and testing network that is focused on developing high yielding varieties for local environments. Since 2011, Pioneer has increased its local research center network across North America by 30 percent to develop and rigorously test its experimental products in the areas where they will be grown.
Pioneer announced in July 2016 it had deployed a new breeding technology called AYT 4.0 across its entire soybean breeding program. The technology has more than doubled the rate of genetic gain of its soybean pipeline and cut the time it takes to bring new products to market. The majority of the A-Series soybean varieties were developed with AYT 4.0.
“The investments we have been making in research centers, soybean disease nurseries, innovative technologies and top-notch talent are paying off for growers in A-Series soybeans,” said Reno. “These varieties and new experimental products are being developed and rigorously tested right where they are to be grown by our customers so they have the traits and defensive characteristics needed for local conditions.”
DuPont Pioneer Advances Unrivaled Class of Pioneer® Brand Corn Products for 2017
DuPont Pioneer announced today that it will offer North American growers 53 new top-yielding corn products as part of its expanded lineup for 2017 spring planting. The products range from 72 to 118 comparative relative maturity (CRM) and feature 29 new genetic platforms, all cultivated from the DuPont Pioneer global germplasm collection.
“Investments in advanced breeding and research technologies, combined with multiple years of rigorous local testing, have enabled this exciting new class of Pioneer® brand corn products,” said Steve Reno, DuPont Pioneer vice president, business director — U.S. and Canada. “This class is unrivaled in the number of new products, yield potential, and overall agronomic performance. It’s elevating our already strong corn portfolio and expanding options for growers.”
New product highlights include:
- A robust set of new Pioneer® brand Optimum® AQUAmax® products, thoroughly tested in targeted environments to perform rain or shine
- Expanded end-use options for yellow food corn, white corn, and conventional (non-GMO) markets
- High-performance brown midrib (BMR) and silage corn products that deliver tonnage, starch, and high digestibility, along with strong agronomics
“Adding these new advancements to the existing commercial lineup of Pioneer brand products means we now offer one of the broadest, most genetically diverse, and high-yielding corn lineups in our history,” said Matt Smalley, DuPont Pioneer research director, North America Maize Product Development.
As part of the research and development process, Pioneer conducted nearly 1,100 corn IMPACT™ (Intensively Managed Product Advancement, Characterization and Testing) plot trials during the 2016 growing season to understand the right fit for new products across a wide range of geographies and growing conditions.
“I’m proud that we develop our own inbreds and hybrids from elite Pioneer germplasm,” said Smalley. “Our research and agronomy teams know our products from the start of research and development through commercialization, and they ensure the products are fully tested to perform in variable local environments.”
Maximizing Productivity
“We don’t just invest in research to develop new products,” said Reno. “Our Pioneer GrowingPoint® agronomy teams help growers maximize the productivity of their seed investment, while our Encirca℠ services group uses the latest data and technology to holistically manage a variety of crop inputs, including variable rate seeding, nitrogen and fertility.
Tractor Sales Rose in November, Combines Were Down
The Association of Equipment Manufacturer's monthly "Flash Report" noted that the sale of all tractors in the U.S. in November 2016, were up 8% compared to the same month last year.
For the eleven months in 2016, a total of 194,178 tractors were sold which compares to 189,024 sold thru November 2015 representing a 3% increase year to date.
For the month, two-wheel drive smaller tractors (under 40 HP) were up 23% from last year, while 40 & under 100 HP were down 5%. Sales of 2-wheel drive 100+ HP were down 27%, while 4-wheel drive tractors were down 4%.
For the eleven months, two-wheel drive smaller tractors (under 40 HP) are up 12% over last year, while 40 & under 100 HP are down 4%. Sales of 2-wheel drive 100+ HP are down 23%, while 4-wheel drive tractors are down 23%.
Combine sales were down 30% for the month. Sales of combines for the first eleven months totaled 3,385, a decrease of 26% over the same period in 2015.
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