Thursday October 26 Ag News

Ricketts Congratulates Greg Ibach on USDA Confirmation

Today, Governor Pete Ricketts congratulated Greg Ibach as the United States Senate confirmed him as the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs at the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).

“Congratulations to Greg on his confirmation as the USDA’s next Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs. Greg’s experience growing Nebraska will be a great asset to President Trump’s team.  We look forward to partnering with him in his new role as we work to expand access to international markets for Nebraska’s quality agricultural and manufactured products and other goods.”

Ibach is expected to be sworn-in in the coming days.



Fischer Statement on Confirmation of Gregory Ibach

Today, the Senate unanimously confirmed Nebraska Director of Agriculture Gregory Ibach to serve as Under Secretary of Marketing and Regulatory Programs at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Earlier this month, Fischer introduced Greg Ibach at his nomination hearing before the Senate Agriculture Committee.

“I am thrilled to hear my friend and fellow Nebraskan, Greg Ibach, was just confirmed to serve as Under Secretary of Marketing and Regulatory Programs at USDA,” said Senator Fischer. “Greg’s deep knowledge, vast experience, and strong passion for agriculture, will serve America’s farmers and ranchers well. I know he will make Nebraskans proud, and I look forward to working with him to provide more certainty for the producers in this country who feed a hungry world.”

President Trump nominated Ibach to serve as Under Secretary of Marketing and Regulatory Programs at the USDA last month. Senator Fischer recommended Greg Ibach to the president.

Ibach has served as the Director of the Nebraska Department of Agriculture for the past 12 years.



Perdue Statement on Confirmation of Greg Ibach Key USDA Post

Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue today applauded the Senate’s confirmation of Greg Ibach, who was nominated by President Donald J. Trump to serve as Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

Perdue issued the following statement:
“Greg Ibach will bring experience and integrity to his new role at USDA, and carries with him the knowledge he’s gained in the dozen years he has served as Nebraska’s Director of Agriculture. His expertise in a wide cross-section of agricultural issues will be invaluable to our customers: the farmers, ranchers, foresters, and producers of America. I look forward to working with Greg and urge the Senate to continue to act on other nominees who are awaiting confirmation.”




USDA Offers Targeted Farm Loan Funding for Underserved Groups, Beginning Farmers

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Nebraska Farm Service Agency (FSA) Acting State Executive Director (SED) Mike Eller reminds producers FSA offers specially targeted farm ownership and farm operating loans to underserved applicants, as well as beginning farmers and ranchers.

“Each year, a portion of FSA’s loan funds are set aside to lend to targeted underserved and beginning farmers and ranchers,” said Eller. “Farming and ranching is a capital intensive business, and FSA is committed to helping producers start and maintain their agricultural operations.”

During fiscal year 2017 (Oct. 1, 2016, through Sept. 30, 2017), Nebraska FSA obligated $180.8 million in loans to underserved borrowers and beginning farmers and ranchers.

USDA defines underserved applicants as a group whose members have been subjected to racial, ethnic or gender prejudice because of their identity as members of the group without regard to their individual qualities. For farm loan program purposes, underserved groups are women, African Americans, American Indians and Alaskan Natives, Hispanics and Asians and Pacific Islanders.

In order to qualify as a beginning farmer, the individual or entity must meet the eligibility requirements outlined for direct or guaranteed loans. Additionally, individuals and all entity members must have operated a farm for less than 10 years. Applicants must materially or substantially participate in the operation. For farm ownership purposes, the applicant must not own a farm greater than 30 percent of the average size farm in the county at the time of application. All direct farm ownership applicants must have participated in the business operations of a farm for at least three years out of the last 10 years prior to the date the application is submitted. If the applicant is an entity, all members must be related by blood or marriage and all entity members must be eligible beginning farmers.

Underserved or beginning farmers and ranchers who cannot obtain commercial credit from a bank can apply for either FSA direct loans or guaranteed loans. Direct loans are made to applicants by FSA. Guaranteed loans are made by lending institutions who arrange for FSA to guarantee the loan. FSA can guarantee up to 95 percent of the loss of principal and interest on a loan. The FSA guarantee allows lenders to make agricultural credit available to producers who do not meet the lender’s normal underwriting criteria.

The direct and guaranteed loan program offers two types of loans: farm ownership loans and farm operating loans.

Farm ownership loan funds may be used to purchase or enlarge a farm or ranch, purchase easements or rights of way needed in the farm’s operation, build or improve buildings such as a dwelling or barn, promote soil and water conservation and development and pay closing costs.

Farm operating loan funds may be used to purchase livestock, poultry, farm equipment, fertilizer and other materials necessary to operate a successful farm. Operating loan funds can also be used for family living expenses, refinancing debts under certain conditions, paying salaries for hired farm laborers, installing or improving water systems for home, livestock or irrigation use and other similar improvements.

Repayment terms for direct operating loans depend on the collateral securing the loan and usually run from one to seven years. Financing for direct farm ownership loans cannot exceed 40 years. Interest rates for direct loans are set periodically according to the government’s cost of borrowing. Guaranteed loan terms and interest rates are set by the lender.

For more information on FSA’s farm loan programs and underserved and beginning farmer guidelines, please contact your local FSA office. To find your local FSA office, visit http://offices.usda.gov.



EPA Releases Guidance on Reporting Air Emissions of Hazardous Substances from Animal Waste at Farms

Today, EPA is releasing guidance to assist farmers in reporting air releases of hazardous substances from animal waste at farms.  EPA is making this information available to provide time for farmers to review and prepare for the reporting deadline, currently set for November 15, 2017

“EPA is working diligently to address undue regulatory burden on American farmers,” said Administrator Scott Pruitt. “While we continue to examine our options for reporting requirements for emissions from animal waste, EPA’s guidance is designed to help farmers comply with the current requirements.”

On December 18, 2008, EPA published a final rule that exempted farms from reporting air releases of hazardous substances from animal waste.  On April 11, 2017, the DC Circuit Court vacated this final rule.  In response to a request from EPA, the DC Circuit Court extended the date by which farms must begin reporting these releases to November 15, 2017.  Unless the court further delays this date, all farms (including those previously exempted) that have releases of hazardous substances to air from animal wastes equal to or greater than the reportable quantities for those hazardous substances within any 24-hour period must provide notification of such releases.

The EPA guidance information includes links to resources that farmers can use to calculate emissions tailored to specific species of livestock.  To view EPA’s guidance and Frequently Asked Questions on reporting air emissions from animal waste:  https://www.epa.gov/epcra/cercla-and-epcra-reporting-requirements-air-releases-hazardous-substances-animal-waste-farms.

EPA will revise this guidance, as necessary, to reflect additional information to assist farm owners and operators to meet reporting obligations.  Interested parties may submit comments or suggestions by November 24, 2017.



Complete Your NASS Survey; It Impacts Your Bottom Line

The National Corn Growers Association urges growers to respond to surveys distributed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Statistics Service. Responses to recent surveys from USDA have reached historical lows, and this can impact farmers' bottom lines.

"There seem to be county-to-county differences that are unaccounted for and, when you look at it, some counties did not have enough information from responses to the National Agricultural Statistics Service for them to publish data," explained NCGA Risk Management Action Team Chair Steve Ebke, who farms in Nebraska. "Farm Service Agency uses that data to calculate ARC payments. So, if NASS does not have the data, they will have to look elsewhere for it.

"This has resulted in a great deal of concern in the countryside. We urge everyone to complete their NASS surveys so that each county has a sufficient amount of data for FSA to calculate the payments based upon what actually happened in that county."

Farmers can either complete the survey manually with the booklet that they receive and mail that back in, or they can complete it online. Most of the information in the survey is information farmers have readily available.

"One thing that we want to emphasize is that your data is confidential," said Ebke. "Your individual data is confidential and never individually presented somewhere. Your data is aggregated and only presented in that format. The confidentiality of your individual data submitted on the NASS survey is protected by federal law."

Failing to complete the survey puts farmer's personal operations at risk of receiving ARC payments that do not reflect actual production in their county.

"I just want to urge everyone to go ahead and complete this as it is very important to your bottom line," Ebke concluded. "We have additional information on our website and even a direct link to USDA's site, where you can complete your survey."



State Beef Council Staffs Come Together to Gain Checkoff Program Knowledge, Share Ideas

Representatives of 28 state beef councils gathered near Denver Oct. 16-18 to learn more about national 2018 Beef Checkoff Program efforts and share their thoughts on how those programs could be expanded or extended through their states. The Partnerships in Action Conference was held near Denver in the offices of the NCBA, a contractor to the Beef Checkoff Program. The checkoff 2018 fiscal year began Oct. 1.

                Among items of discussion was the relaunch of the “Beef. It’s What’s For Dinner” brand and website, with a “Rethink the Ranch” approach and new videos and promotion on social media platforms. The program went live Oct. 9 and showcases the people who raise beef, celebrates the nutritional benefits of beef for active lifestyles, and provides culinary inspiration and recipes.

                “This annual Federation of State Beef Councils event is a collaborative effort to kick off the checkoff program of work with enthusiasm,” according to Todd Johnson, NCBA senior vice president, Federation Services. “Our state team members and their boards of directors have come to appreciate the ways our partnership can enhance the value of the beef checkoff to those who pay into the program.”

                According to George Quackenbush, executive director of the Michigan Beef Industry Commission, the conference helps communicate a seamless, coordinated state and national plan that can most effectively reach consumers with the same message in repeated ways. “The reason we put such value on this meeting as a state council is because this is where we learn what programs will be taking place at the national level, when we can expect those things to roll out and how we can extend those programs in our state,” he says. “We can really be the army that takes these programs to the audience on the local and state levels.”

                Erin Beasley, executive vice president of the Alabama Cattlemen’s Association, agrees, saying the timing from their state perspective is perfect. “We’re actually about to get into our planning mode, so this gives us an opportunity to meet with the staff, bring all of those ideas back, then meet with our Checkoff Task Force Committee to start our planning and budgeting for the 2018 year,” she says. “The timing of this meeting, with the content and the involvement of the national staff, is absolutely integral to what we do at the state level.”

                Another benefit of the conference, according to Jean O’Toole, executive director of the New York Beef Council, is the sharing that goes on between states. “You learn so much from other states and what they do,” she says. “We sometimes joke that we rip off and repurpose, but we have no hidden secrets between our councils. It’s share and collaborate based on your budgets and what you can do. It also gives you different insights. We’re all creative and have a variety of talents.”

                Because she is from a state with a higher population and lower cattle numbers, O’Toole values different types of input. “Sometimes you get support financially, sometimes you just get support through information, but either way you can’t beat it,” she says. “I haven’t seen an organization like this in all my years, and it’s phenomenal fun.”

                “It’s great to see that we’re all singing from the same songbook,” says Chris Freland, executive director of the Iowa Beef Industry Council. “When you’re united you’re so much stronger than if you’re separated and going in your own direction. It also validates that you’re doing the right thing within your state, as well as making sure your state board and farmers and ranchers are represented nationally. In addition, it provides our state staff an opportunity to collaborate with those in other states who are serving in the same roles.”

                According to Ann Wittmann, executive director of the Wyoming Beef Council, states with low populations and small staffs value the kind of teamwork the conference provides. “The state and national coordination is what makes the beef industry so special, and so workable, especially from the perspective of a small staff state,” she says. “We have programs of our own. But what we don’t have is the beautiful imagery, the fantastic story-telling, the video images, the larger-than-life programs, and programs that reach out beyond what we can do as a small state. It’s the best investment that we can make so that we all work together as a team.”

                Wittmann says bonding together through an event like the Partnerships in Action Conference makes the program stronger. “The partnership between the Federation of State Beef Councils, the Federation staff and the individual beef councils is powerful and incredibly efficient,” she says.



Meat Institute Releases MyMeatUp 2.0 App

The North American Meat Institute today unveiled an updated version of its popular MyMeatUp app, the first-of-its-kind free mobile app aimed at helping shoppers, particularly millennials — individuals between ages 18 and 35 — become informed, confident purchasers of meat and poultry.

MyMeatUp 2.0 includes a new “Where does my meat come from?” feature, which allows users to search the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) establishment database for information about where the product was produced.

“People are increasingly interested in knowing where their food comes from, and that concern is transforming shopping habits and driving purchasing decisions,” said Meat Institute President and CEO Barry Carpenter. “The MyMeatUp app’s new ‘Where does my meat come from?’ feature responds to calls for increased transparency and empowers consumers to choose meat and poultry products that fit their preferences.”

The new feature, which can be accessed from the home screen, provides an explanation about how to find establishment numbers on meat packages and includes a function that allows users to search plant numbers.  Searches can be done using full and partial numbers, or users can choose to view the complete list of establishments.  They are then directed to a page with information from USDA about the establishment.

The updated app also includes several new images and more than 160 recipes.

“The changes released in this version of the app will enhance its value with shoppers, who are already using it in large numbers to navigate the abundance of choices offered in the meat case,” Carpenter added.  “Consumers will now be better equipped to conveniently plan their meat and poultry product selections from the comfort of their home and to confidently make on-the-spot purchasing decisions when shopping in the grocery store.”

New Version Preserves Original App’s Key Features, Capabilities
Meanwhile, the app retained the popular features included in the original version, most notably the unique cuts of meat guide, which visually displays the most common retail beef, veal, pork and lamb cuts.  By selecting a specific part of an animal, consumers can view images of common retail cuts, along with corresponding explanations, creative recipe ideas and proper cooking methods.  Shoppers can also use the app’s search function to quickly find information about cuts with which they are unfamiliar.

Furthermore, people interested in learning more about claims made on meat and poultry product labels can continue to use the app’s searchable glossary of common terms.  The glossary presents definitions for “natural,” “grass-fed,” “antibiotic-free” and “no hormones added,” among others.  In addition, consumers will recognize the app’s industry topics section that addresses antibiotic use in animal agriculture, animal welfare practices, environmental concerns and nutrition facts in succinct list formats.

“This dynamic, interactive app is a must-have resource for anyone who shops for, prepares and cooks meat and poultry products,” said Carpenter.  “The app’s in-depth content and creative recipes can help meat novices and experts alike build a weekly grocery list, select items for a last-minute dinner, or plan the menu for a special occasion.  It has never been easier to incorporate nutritious, high-quality meat and poultry products in your diet.”

The app has been downloaded more than 13,000 times and is available to both iPhone and Android users.  To download the iPhone version, click here.  The Android version is available here. For users who have already downloaded the app, the update will automatically appear in their phone’s app store.



U.S. Corn, DDGS Compete In Canada For Feed Grains Market Share

A short hour north of the Montana border, the U.S. Grains Council (USGC) is exploring the geographic advantage of unit trains carrying U.S. corn and distiller’s dried grains with solubles (DDGS) to Canadian feedlots around Lethbridge, Alberta.

A trade mission in October criss-crossed the region, visiting with cattle feedlots, feed manufacturers and rail facilities to find the best opportunities to expand inclusion of U.S. feed grains and co-products in local rations. The Canadian livestock feed demand is highly competitive with many alternative energy and protein feed ingredients available for producers, but the United States is well-positioned to meet this need due to close proximity to northern U.S. ethanol plants as well as the efficiency of transportation by unit train.

“There was a great buzz related to corn availability created during the trade mission,” said Neil Campbell, general manager of Gowans Feed Consulting, who works as a USGC consultant in Canada. “The timing is excellent to promote U.S. corn and DDGS in feedlot diets. The more corn that comes in, the more it will help the supply demand balance on feed grain.”

The first unit train of corn sold in the 2017/2018 marketing year was delivered into Lethbridge the week before the recent mission. Thanks to continued market development work by the Council and its Canadian consultants, more U.S. corn and DDGS will head north in the year to come.

Canada imported 670,000 metric tons (26.4 million bushels) of U.S. corn in 2016/2017 as well as 735,000 tons of U.S. DDGS, a 13 percent increase year-over-year. While these sales made Canada the sixth largest market for U.S. DDGS, Canada has the potential to utilize more than four million tons of DDGS annually, which the Council is working to capture.

In the Lethbridge area, U.S. corn can be railed directly into the region on unit trains. Favorable pricing combined with these logistical opportunities promote inclusion into local feed rations. The Council is working with other Alberta feedlots to support the development of additional trans-loading facilities in the region to further provide opportunities for rail shipments from the United States.

The Council and Gowans Feed Consulting also developed a relative value calculator that demonstrates the continued advantages of including corn and DDGS into livestock rations, which will further encourage local feedlots to evaluate the competitiveness of U.S. feed grains and co-products. This effort directly supports sales by increasing awareness of when buying opportunities arise.



Senate FY18 Budget Resolution Passes House; Next Steps Tax Reform

Today, the House took final action on the FY 2018 Budget Resolution. With this action, NAWG CEO Chandler Goule made the following statements about the importance of a strong Farm Bill and effective tax reform.

“While NAWG appreciates that no reconciliation instructions were included for agriculture, the final version does include caps for agriculture that are lower than the baseline,” stated NAWG CEO Chandler Goule. “With prices the lowest they have been in decades, we strongly urge Congressional leadership to not only not allow cuts to the Farm Bill but provide more resources. The Ag Committees need sufficient resources to write an effective bill that meets growers needs and that ensures farmers continue to have access to a viable safety net and other important Farm Bill programs.”

The FY18 Budget Resolution enables a tax reform process to move forward by providing reconciliation instructions to the Senate Finance Committee and House Ways and Means Committee for $1.5 trillion in revenue reductions for the purpose of comprehensive tax reform.

“Now that Congress has completed action the budget resolution, we need to get a farm bill with sufficient funding to provide a strong safety net as well as tax reform that recognizes the needs of agriculture,” continued Goule. “NAWG will continue to work with Congress to ensure unique needs of agriculture are being met during tax reform.”



Bill Includes Fix for Farmer Bankruptcy Reform

The supplemental appropriations bill passed by the Senate today includes the Family Farmer Bankruptcy Clarification Act of 2017, sponsored by Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Al Franken, D-Minn.

The measure would rectify a 2012 Supreme Court ruling on a previous bankruptcy reform law that ignored Congress' express goal of helping family farmers, Grassley said.

"Family farmers face obstacles that others don't when dealing with bankruptcy. Their assets are largely tied up in farmland, which creates significant challenges for these family operations when reorganizing debt. Years ago, Congress took specific steps to address these disadvantages, but the Supreme Court failed to recognize Congress' intent when evaluating the law," Grassley said. "Thankfully, Congress has now approved a fix for this problem, and family farmers facing hard times can breathe a sigh of relief. I look forward to the president signing this bill into law."

Franken adds that the bill is a commonsense fix to ensure that the law functions as intended and protects family farmers. He hopes the measure becomes law to help ensure farmers going through bankruptcy get a fair shake and are able to repay the debts they owe without sacrificing their families' futures.



Contrary to oil industry claims, RIN values drive fuel prices lower

Following a recent announcement that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would reject petitions to move the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) point of obligation and not allow Renewable Identification Number credits (RINs) for exported ethanol, RINs are trading higher and ethanol opponents have renewed efforts to characterize RINs as driving fuel prices higher. Meanwhile, some ethanol producers and marketers are taking advantage of the higher RIN values to offer denatured ethanol as low as 30 cents per gallon and E85 at 55 cents per gallon (plus tax and freight) this week.

American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) Senior Vice President Ron Lamberty says, in fact, RINs do exactly the opposite of what critics claim, and the proof is higher ethanol-blended fuels at lower prices at the pump in real-world stations across the U.S. A RIN credit is a reward for RFS compliance. Companies complying with the RFS or blending more ethanol than required are able to use the additional RINs to discount prices of ethanol-blended fuels.

This week, ACE member Glacial Lakes Energy (GLE) announced it was making “RINless” denatured ethanol available to retailers for just 30 cents per gallon, and ACE member Absolute Energy was offering “RINless” E85 for just 55 cents. RINless means the RIN is retained by the seller, and its value is subtracted leaving a low net fuel price.

“There are a growing number of retailers buying RINless ethanol directly from producers like Absolute Energy and GLE,” Lamberty said. “The idea that small, independent station owners can’t benefit from RINs just isn’t true. Owners of single stores and small chains are the primary buyers of this RINless ethanol and E85.”

“After taxes and freight, the wholesale cost of E85 is under a dollar for many Midwest markets,” Lamberty added. “And pricing that reflects the discount earned from the extra RINs in higher ethanol blends is available in other markets, too. We’re constantly looking to match E15 and flex fuel retailers with ethanol suppliers who will sell them competitively priced fuels.”



Study: Consumers See 'Organic' and 'Non-GM' as Synonymous

Consumers are confused between foods labeled as "organic" and "non-genetically modified," according to a new study led by a University of Florida professor. In fact, researchers found that some consumers view the two labels as synonymous.

When Congress approved the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard in June 2016, lawmakers allowed companies two years -- until June 2018 -- to label their genetically modified (GM) food by text, symbol or an electronic digital link such as a QR code. The QR code is a machine-readable optical label that displays information when scanned.

Besides QR codes, companies can label GM foods by adding words like: "contains genetically modified ingredients" in plain text on the packages, said Brandon McFadden, a UF/IFAS assistant professor of food and resource economics, and lead author of the study.

McFadden and Purdue University agricultural economics professor Jayson Lusk conducted their research to find the best ways to communicate whether a food has GM ingredients. This research has implications for which foods consumers will buy, McFadden said.

To gauge consumers' willingness to pay for food labeled as GM vs. non-GM, researchers conducted a national survey of 1,132 respondents.

Specifically, researchers wanted to know how much consumers were willing to spend on food labeled as "USDA Organic" vs. that labeled "Non-GMO Project Verified." Genetically modified material is not allowed in food labeled "USDA Organic," while "Non-GMO Project" means the food has no more than 0.9 percent GM characteristics, according to the study.

Researchers measured respondents' willingness to pay for a box of 12 granola bars and a pound of apples. Granola bars represent a manufactured food commonly differentiated by its absence of GM material, while apples are a fresh fruit that requires companies to tell if they contain GM material, the study said.

In this study, when consumers looked at packages of Granola bars labeled "non-GMO Project," they were willing to spend 35 cents more than for the boxes that had text that read, "contains genetically engineered ingredients." With the "USDA Organic" label, consumers were willing to pay 9 cents more.

With apples, respondents were willing to pay 35 cents more for those labeled "non-GMO Project" and 40 cents more for those labeled "USDA Organic."

Participants' responses led McFadden to conclude that consumers don't distinguish definitions of the two food labels.

"For example, it's possible that a product labeled, 'Non-GMO Project Verified' more clearly communicates the absence of GM ingredients than a product labeled 'USDA Organic,'" said McFadden.

In addition to willingness to pay for GM- and non-GM foods, researchers wanted to know how QR codes impact choices for foods labeled as containing GM ingredients. They also wanted to know how much consumers were willing to pay for food labeled as GM if that information came from a Quick Response -- or QR -- code. Study results showed consumers are willing to pay more for genetically modified food if the information is provided by a QR code.

"This finding indicates that many of the study respondents did not scan the QR code," McFadden said.

That's because if all respondents scanned the QR code, there would not be a significant difference in their willingness to pay, he said. Since there is a significant difference, one can assume that many respondents did not scan the QR code, McFadden said.

"However, it is important to remember that this study is really a snapshot, and it is possible that over time, consumers will become more familiar with QR codes and be more likely to scan them," he said.

The new study is published in the journal Applied Economics: Perspectives and Policy.