Wednesday December 15 Ag News

 Nebraska Farm Bureau Welcomes New Hires in Governmental Relations and Regional Managers

Nebraska Farm Bureau’s Governmental Relations Department has hired Andrew Dunkley as director of state governmental relations. Kelly Duryea has also been hired as the North Central regional manager.

Dunkley is a York County Farm Bureau member. He grew up in northern New York and Colorado and is a graduate of the University of Northern Colorado with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Communication Studies and a minor in Journalism and Mass Communications. He has worked as a regional field director for the Colorado Republican Committee, served as a legislative aide for the Colorado General Assembly, and was a regional director for U.S. Senator Cory Gardner of Colorado. Recently, Dunkley served as a senior external affairs manager for government affairs consulting firms Pac/West in Denver and Strategic Elements remotely. He and his wife moved to Bradshaw in April in search of a better, rural quality of life for their 3-year-old daughter Elliot, 2-year-old son Fletcher, and 6-month-old daughter Sloane.

“Andrew has reliable government and external affairs experience. He will help us continue to grow the scope of our department as we look to better serve our members in an ever-changing political and policy landscape that requires greater engagement by our organization and our membership. We are excited to work with Andrew at Nebraska Farm Bureau,” said Bruce Rieker, vice president of governmental relations.

Duryea lives on a ranch with her husband, Chad, near Merna and has three sons. She is a Custer County Farm Bureau member. She has served as a claims representative for Farm Bureau Financial Services and has worked in various capacities for Becton Dickenson in Broken Bow. She has worked at Adams Land & Cattle, LLC in Broken Bow, and was the village clerk of Merna.

“We are very happy to have Kelly represent the North Central region for Nebraska Farm Bureau. She will bring a fresh perspective to that region, and we are excited to have Kelly on our Farm Bureau team,” said Adam Peterson, senior regional manager.

As regional manager, Duryea will serve 15 counties in the North Central region, which include Blaine, Boyd, Brown, Cherry, Custer, Garfield, Holt, Hooker, Keya Paha, Logan, Loup, McPherson, Rock, Thomas, and Wheeler.



EMERY NAMED DIRECTOR OF RURAL PROSPERITY NEBRASKA

The University of Nebraska–Lincoln’s Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources has named Mary Emery as the inaugural director of Rural Prosperity Nebraska. She will begin her appointment Feb. 15.

Emery currently serves as a professor of psychology, sociology and rural studies at South Dakota State University, where her primary scholarship and research interests include community and economic development; community change; program planning; and diversity, inclusion and equity in higher education. She was selected to lead Rural Prosperity Nebraska through a national search and was one of three finalists who interviewed on campus earlier this fall. In addition, Emery will serve as a professor in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communication.

“We are very excited to have Dr. Emery join us,” said Mark Balschweid, head of ALEC and chair of the search advisory committee. “The caliber of the candidates who applied for this position was astounding, and yet Mary stood out among her peers in her capacity to understand the challenges rural communities face and how to help those communities turn their struggles into opportunities for growth.”

Before joining South Dakota State in 2011, Emery worked as a faculty chair for the GPIDEA Interdisciplinary Master’s Degree program in community development, associate director for the North Central Regional Center for Rural Development at Iowa State University, and senior associate for the Heartland Center for Leadership Development in Lincoln. She holds a Bachelor of Arts, Master of Science and doctoral degree in sociology from Rutgers University.

“The success of both our state and our university is closely tied to the strength and vitality of Nebraska’s rural communities,” said Mike Boehm, NU Vice President and Harlan Vice Chancellor for the Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources. “I am thrilled that Dr. Emery, an experienced scholar with a nuanced understanding of many of the issues rural communities face, will lead Rural Prosperity Nebraska.”

Launched in 2020, Rural Prosperity Nebraska combines the scholarship of University of Nebraska professors and researchers with the on-the-ground expertise of extension educators to strengthen activity and quality of life in Nebraska’s rural communities. In his five-year strategic plan announced in 2020, University of Nebraska President Ted Carter named rural community vitality as one of five areas in which NU will focus its efforts to cultivate partnerships and grow its impact.

The university is not alone in focusing on rural prosperity. By working with community leaders on community-identified projects, Rural Prosperity Nebraska sees collaboration as the driving force behind its recent successes in an array of fields. Communities such as Plainview have revitalized their downtowns. More than 268 new Latino-owned businesses have opened across the state. Legislative Bill 396, the Nebraska Farm-to-School Program Act, was passed. The Rural Fellowship program has organized immersive internships for students to live and work in rural communities. These and other successes emerge when Rural Prosperity Nebraska educators and local leaders team up to help communities strengthen their culture and achieve their own version of prosperity.

The search for a Rural Prosperity Nebraska program leader is still underway. While the director and program leader will work closely together, the latter will be stationed at the West Central Research, Extension and Education Center in North Platte. To view the application information, visit https://go.unl.edu/socf.

For more information on Rural Prosperity Nebraska, visit https://ruralprosperityne.unl.edu.



Iowa Farmland Values Up 29%

After several years of modest gains and losses, the average value of an acre of Iowa farmland skyrocketed 29% in 2021. The nominal value of an acre of farmland is now higher than at any point since Iowa State University began surveying values in 1941, and is 12% higher than the previous peak in 2013; although the current value in inflation-adjusted terms is still lower than that for 2012 and 2013.

The last time farmland values increased more than 25% was in 2011, when values rose 32.5%. “Surging ethanol demand and high commodity prices were two of the significant factors driving the increase in 2011,” said Wendong Zhang, an associate professor of economics at Iowa State’s Center for Agricultural and Rural Development. “The increase this year is in part due to much stronger commodity prices thanks to higher exports, stronger than expected crop yields, and strong ad hoc COVID-19 related government payments,” Zhang said.

Zhang leads Iowa State’s annual Land Value Survey, which found that the average statewide value of an acre of farmland is $9,751, an increase of 29%, or $2,193, since 2020. The $9,751 per acre estimate, and 29% increase in value, represents a statewide average of low-, medium-, and high-quality farmland.

Zhang said that favorable interest rates also contributed to the increases in 2011 and this year; however, he noted that inflation was a very important factor behind the value increase this year as well. Last week, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the U.S. inflation rate rose 6.8% over the last year, which was the largest increase since 1982.

“Inflation is driving some investors to consider farmland as an alternative investment asset because farmland value tends to rise with higher inflation. The inflation-adjusted average value rose 21% but the nominal value rose 29%, which shows the effect of inflation,” Zhang said.

As for U.S. net farm income, Zhang said it is forecasted to grow $22.0 billion (23.2%) from 2020 levels to $116.8 billion in 2021, which is the highest level since 2013. “The increase in 2021 farm income is largely driven by the rises in commodity prices and the resulting crop and livestock receipts, as opposed to almost solely ad hoc federal government payments as in 2020,” he said.

After the large increase in 2011, farmland prices jumped another 23.7% in 2012, though Zhang said that while 80% of respondents had optimistic views about what the farmland market would look like one year from now, most reported that they expect values to increase less than 10% in 2022.

Looking five years ahead, Zhang said that the number of respondents expecting a decline in farmland values nearly doubled, but over 80% of respondents predicted that farmland values would rise another 10% to 20% over 2021 values.

Land Values by County
All 99 of Iowa’s counties showed an increase in land values. For the ninth consecutive year, Scott and Decatur Counties reported the highest and lowest values, respectively. Land values in Scott County increased 30%, or $3,193 per acre, to $13,852. Land values in Decatur County increased 31.5%, or $1,213 per acre, to $5,062.

Clayton and Allamakee Counties reported the largest percentage increase, 36.4%, while Scott County saw the largest dollar increase, $3,193 per acre. The smallest percentage increase, 23.2%, was reported in Keokuk County, while Taylor County saw the smallest dollar increase, $1,199 per acre.

Other counties of interest....
Crawford - 10,835 - +31.3%
Harrison - 9,560 - +29.6%
Manona - 9,033 - +32.9%
Pottawattamie - 10,019 - +26.7%
Plymouth - 12,416 - +31.4%
Shelby - 10,237 - +30%
Woodbury - 9,318 - +32.8%

Land Values by District
Land values across all crop reporting districts increased. The Northwest district reported the highest overall value, $12,164 per acre, while the North Central district reported the largest percentage increase, 34.5%, and the largest dollar increase, $2,737 per acre.

West Central District
Overall Average - 10,461 - +33.1%
High Quality land - 12,289
Medium quality land - 9,700
Low quality land - 7,044

The South Central district reported the lowest values, $6,035 per acre, and the lowest dollar change, $1,377 per acre, while the Southeast district saw the smallest percentage increase, 21.9%.

Land Values by Quality
Statewide, low-quality land now averages $6,397 per acre, an increase of 26% or $1,319 per acre. Medium-quality land now averages $9,071 per acre, an increase of 27.4% or $1,953 per acre. High-quality land now averages $11,834 per acre, an increase of 30.5% or $2,766 per acre.

The Northwest district reported the highest values for low-, medium-, and high-quality land at $8,088, $11,042, and $13,997 per acre, respectively. The South Central district reported the lowest values for low-, medium-, and high-quality land at $4,058, $6,094, and $8,194 per acre, respectively.

Low-quality land in all crop reporting districts, less the Southeast district, saw increases of more than 23%. The North Central district saw the largest percentage increase, 32%, and the largest dollar increase, $1,695 per acre. The Southeast district showed the smallest percentage increase, 14.5%, and the smallest dollar increase, $600 per acre.

Medium-quality land saw increases of more than 30% in the North Central, Northeast, West Central, and South Central districts. The South Central district saw the largest percentage increase, 33.6%, while the North Central district showed the largest dollar increase, $2,291 per acre. The Southwest district reported both the smallest percentage increase, 22.3%, and the smallest dollar increase, $1,302 per acre, in medium-quality land.

High-quality land in the North Central, Northeast, West Central, and East Central districts all saw increases of more than 30%, with the North Central district reporting the highest percentage increase, 35.7%. The East Central district reported the largest dollar increase in high-quality land at $3,304 per acre. The Southeast district reported the smallest percent change in high-quality land, 25%, and the South Central district reported the smallest dollar increase, $1,786 per acre.

Factors Influencing the Land Market
The most frequently mentioned positive factor influencing the land market was higher commodity prices. Favorable interest rates and strong yields were the second- and third-most frequently mentioned factors. Other frequently mentioned factors included limited land supply, strong demand, COVID-related government payments, and a good farm economy.

The most frequently mentioned negative factor affecting land values was higher input costs. Other noted factors included concerns about the sustainability of high land prices, possible changes in interest rates, political uncertainty related to policies, such as tax law changes, and uncertainty related to COVID-19.

Land values were determined by the 2021 Iowa State University Land Value Survey, conducted in November by the Center for Agricultural and Rural Development at Iowa State 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 U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The Iowa State Land Value Survey is based on reports by agricultural professionals knowledgeable of land market conditions, such as appraisers, farm managers, agricultural lenders, and actual land sales, and is intended to provide information on general land value trends, geographical land price relationships, and factors influencing the Iowa land market. The 2021 survey is based on 645 usable responses from 455 agricultural professionals. Seventy-five percent of the 455 respondents answered the survey online.

The Iowa State Land Value Survey was initiated in 1941, the first in the nation, and is sponsored annually by Iowa State. The survey is typically conducted every November and the results are released mid-December. Only the state average and the district averages are based directly on the Iowa State survey data. County estimates are derived using a procedure that combines the Iowa State survey results with data from the U.S. Census of Agriculture.



SHIC Receives Pork Checkoff Funding for Program Extension to 2027

The National Pork Board announced an additional $15 million investment of Pork Checkoff funds in the Swine Health Information Center (SHIC), extending funding for the center through 2027. Launched with Checkoff funds in 2015, SHIC works to protect and enhance the health of the United States swine herd through coordinated global disease monitoring, targeted research investments that minimize the impact of future disease threats and analysis of swine health data.

“SHIC provides value to the entire pork industry through targeted disease research programs,” says Gene Noem, National Pork Board president and SHIC board member. “Specifically, SHIC is able to conduct and source research for emerging health issues from a network of academia, veterinary service and diagnostic labs and researchers across the globe.”

Several essential programs to keeping the US swine herd safe from emerging global diseases have been developed by SHIC, including:
    Near real-time domestic and global swine disease reports
    Viral and bacterial swine disease matrices, providing a prioritized list of endemic and foreign swine pathogens
    Diagnostic fee assistance to help identify newly introduced or emerging diseases
    Rapid Response Program to investigate transboundary or newly emerging swine diseases with the Rapid Response Corps, a team of experts to analyze the patterns, causes and effects of health and disease conditions in affected herds

“In the very short time we’ve been in existence, we have come to play such a vital role in helping defend the health of our industry. Since receiving initial funding from the National Pork Board, we have filled a void and been very successful. We’re committed to protecting the US pig population,” remarked Daryl Olsen, DVM, AMVC, Audubon, Iowa, SHIC board chair.

SHIC has also been involved in foreign animal disease (FAD) work, including a Biosecurity Risk Assessment. Released in September 2021 and conducted by EpiX Analytics, LLC, this report looked at eight potential pathways, and found no major areas have been overlooked to prevent the introduction of African swine fever (ASF) to the US. Other vulnerabilities, such as feed ingredients being imported from ASF-positive countries and illegal or out-of-regulatory-compliance garbage feeding, were also identified by the study as areas for the pork industry to continue working to address.

For feed risk to be approached with sound science, SHIC has pursued a breadth of research and information. These projects include viral survivability in feed ingredient research, half-life estimates for ASF and foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) leading to holding time information, supporting laboratory extraction research for PCRs, documenting sources and quantities of imported feed ingredients and continuing to gather information that can help fill gaps in risk assessments.

SHIC is governed by a Board of Directors and functions with two Working Groups. These swine disease experts include practitioners, diagnosticians, academicians, producers, and other industry experts. SHIC Executive Director Paul Sundberg, DVM, PhD, DACVPM, guides the Center’s work, which is informed by an annual Plan of Work. SHIC is focused on domestic and global emerging swine disease. Due to the Center’s organization, it can move quickly on needed research, diagnostics and response.

SHIC, launched by the National Pork Board in 2015 solely with Pork Checkoff funding, continues to focus efforts on prevention, preparedness, and response to novel and emerging swine disease for the benefit of US swine health. As a conduit of information and research, SHIC encourages sharing of its publications and research. Forward, reprint, and quote SHIC material freely. SHIC is funded by America’s pork producers to fulfill its mission to protect and enhance the health of the US swine herd. For more information, visit https://www.swinehealth.org.  



Nitrogen Fertilizer Prices Continue to Push Higher

Average retail prices for most fertilizers continued to climb the first full week of December 2021, with nitrogen fertilizers again leading the way, according to sellers surveyed by DTN.  Five of the eight major fertilizers recorded a sizable move higher from last month. DTN designates a substantial move as anything 5% or more.

Leading the way higher was UAN28, which was up 20% from a month prior. The nitrogen fertilizer's average price was at $577 per ton, which continues to be an all-time high in the DTN data set.

Anhydrous was 18% more expensive compared to last month. The average price was at $1,372/ton, which is also an all-time high.

UAN32 was 8% higher looking back to last month. The liquid nitrogen fertilizer had an average price of $661/ton, also an all-time high.

Urea was 7% more expensive compared to last month. The nitrogen fertilizer had an average price of $887/ton, an all-time high.

10-34-0 was 5% more expensive looking back to last month. The starter fertilizer had an average price of $756/ton.

Three fertilizers had just a slight price increase compared to the prior month. DAP had an average price of $840/ton, MAP $919/ton and potash $778/ton.

On a price per pound of nitrogen basis, the average urea price was at $0.96/lb.N, anhydrous $0.84/lb.N, UAN28 $1.03/lb.N and UAN32 $1.03/lb.N.

Retail fertilizer prices compared to a year ago show all fertilizers have increased significantly, with prices for several fertilizers increasing well over 100%. 10-34-0 is now 63% more expensive, MAP is 80% higher, DAP is 84% more expensive, potash is 124% higher, urea is 146% more expensive, UAN32 is 162% higher, UAN28 175% is more expensive and anhydrous is 220% higher compared to last year.



Weekly Ethanol Production for 12/10/2021

According to EIA data analyzed by the Renewable Fuels Association for the week ending December 10, ethanol production eased by 3,000 barrels per day (b/d), or 0.3%, to 1.087 million b/d, equivalent to 45.65 million gallons daily. Production was 13.6% above the same week last year, which was affected by the pandemic, and 2.2% more than the same week in 2019. The four-week average ethanol production volume increased 0.7% to 1.073 million b/d, equivalent to an annualized rate of 16.45 billion gallons (bg).

Ethanol stocks expanded 2.0% to a 15-week high of 20.9 million barrels. Stocks were 9.0% below the year-ago level and 4.2% less than the same week in 2019. Inventories built across all regions except the West Coast (PADD 5).
                                                                                                              
The volume of gasoline supplied to the U.S. market, a measure of implied demand, jumped 5.7% to 9.47 million b/d (145.21 bg annualized). Gasoline demand was 18.8% above a year ago and 0.6% more than the same week in 2019.

Refiner/blender net inputs of ethanol scaled up 2.0% to 879,000 b/d, equivalent to 13.48 bg annualized. Net inputs were 9.6% more than a year ago but 3.6% below the same week in 2019.

There were zero imports of ethanol recorded for the seventh consecutive week. (Weekly export data for ethanol is not reported simultaneously; the latest export data is as of October 2021.)



RFA Analyses of 2022 Automobile Models: More E15 Approvals, but Fewer FFVs

Environmentally conscious and budget-savvy consumers who are in the market for a new car, SUV, or pickup will find both good news and bad news as they peruse auto dealer lots and showrooms this holiday season.
 
The good news? According to a new analysis of model-year 2022 vehicle owners’ manuals and warranty statements by the Renewable Fuels Association, nearly all new automobiles are explicitly approved by the manufacturer to use lower-carbon, lower-cost gasoline blends containing 15 percent ethanol (E15).
 
And now for the bad news. With each passing year, automakers are offering fewer flex-fuel vehicles (FFVs) capable of running on fuel blends containing up to 85 percent ethanol (E85). Flex fuels like E85 are the lowest-carbon liquid fuels available in the marketplace today and are often sold at a discount to regular gasoline.
 
Based on current market share data, nearly 95 percent of new MY 2022 vehicles sold will carry the manufacturer’s unequivocal approval to use E15. For the 11th year straight, General Motors approves the use of E15 in all of its makes and models, while Ford is entering its 10th straight year of universal E15 approval. BMW, Honda, Hyundai, Nissan, Stellantis, Subaru, Tata Motors, and Volkswagen also approve or recommend the use of E15. Notably, BMW and Mini go a step further by approving the use of gasoline containing up to 25% ethanol (E25) in their 2022 models. Only Daimler (Mercedes-Benz), Mazda, Mitsubishi, and Volvo do not include E15 as a recommended fuel in their owners’ manual. However, E15 is legally approved by EPA for use in all vehicles built since 2001, covering almost 97 percent of all vehicles on the road today.
 
The news is not as positive for FFVs. According to a new brochure from RFA, only Ford and GM will offer FFVs for sale in MY 2022, and GM’s models are available only to fleet purchasers. The two manufacturers will offer just 11 models as FFVs in 2022. That’s down from more than 80 different models from eight manufacturers being available to consumers as recently as MY 2015. RFA continues to strongly advocate for the production of more FFVs and fairness in how alternative fuel vehicles are incentivized under fuel economy and greenhouse gas regulations.
 
“We’re pleased to see automakers continuing to embrace E15, but we are very disappointed to see continued backsliding in the production of FFVs,” said RFA President and CEO Geoff Cooper. “Today’s ethanol reduces GHG emissions by roughly 50 percent compared to gasoline, and our member companies have pledged to achieve a net-zero carbon emissions footprint for ethanol by 2050 or sooner. Ethanol-based fuels can provide the same—or better—GHG performance as most battery electric vehicles, but only if given the opportunity to compete for a larger share of the fuel tank. E15 is a positive step forward on the path toward decarbonization, but the Biden administration and automakers should recommit to increased FFV production as a critical component of the strategy to reach carbon neutrality by mid-century.”
 
Cooper noted that as a member of the U.S. Senate, President Biden once said, “We need to make sure we’re all driving good cars by increasing fuel efficiency and requiring that every car sold in the United States is a flexible fuel vehicle, or FFV, that can run on alternative fuel like E85.” RFA called on President Biden to rekindle that support, enthusiasm, and vision for FFVs.
 
At present, there are more than 5,200 gas stations selling E85 and other flex fuels, and over 2,400 selling E15.



Corn Yield Contest Reflects Resilience of Corn and Farmers Who Grow It

Corn growers showed the amazing possibilities open to agriculture with the use of modern seed varieties, advanced production techniques and innovative growing practices this year as David Hula topped the 600 bushel-per-acre mark again this year in NCGA’s National Corn Yield Contest.  Hula, of Charles City, Virginia, repeated his accomplishment and produced the highest yield in the contest with 602.1694 bushels per acre. These great yields, which have been achieved nationwide despite many challenges, reflect farmers' resilience and deep dedication to continuous improvement.

The National Corn Yield Contest is now in its 57th year and remains NCGA’s most popular program for members.

“This contest offers farmers a chance to come together both for good-natured competition and to help innovate the future of our industry,” said Lowell Neitzel, chair of NCGA’s Member and Consumer Engagement Action Team. “These contestants grow to be leaders in many other ways as well. For many, the contest may be their first interaction with NCGA. As they learn more, the true value of the work that we do to build a better tomorrow inspires greater achievement. Whether getting involved in advocacy, leadership or sustainability efforts, the contest breeds champions for corn farmers in many arenas.”

The 27 national winners in 9 production categories had verified yields averaging more than 376.7593 bushels per acre, compared to the projected national average of 177 bushels per acre nationwide. While there is no overall contest winner, yields from first, second and third place farmers overall production categories averaged 285.5971 bushels per acre.

For more than half a century, NCGA’s National Corn Yield Contest has provided corn growers with the opportunity to compete with their colleagues to grow the most corn per acre, helping feed and fuel the world. This has given participants not only the recognition they deserved but the opportunity to learn from their peers.

Winners receive national recognition in publications such as the NCYC Corn Yield Guide, as well as trips or other awards from participating sponsoring seed, chemical and crop protection companies. Winners will be honored in March of 2022 during Commodity Classic in New Orleans, Louisiana.



A New Way to Predict Grazing Cattle Weight Gain on Rangelands From Satellite Imagery

USDA's Agricultural Research Service (ARS) developed a unique approach to using satellite imagery to predict cattle weight gain on rangelands. By fusing multiple images over a period of time, scientists were able to monitor how forage quality changes over space and time in rangelands within the shortgrass steppe, and how this relates to the weight gain of free-ranging cattle throughout the summer grazing season.

Managing the grazing season in rangelands can be challenging due to high variability in temperature and rainfall over time. From a manager's perspective, it is essential to know when and where forage production and quality are changing to optimize free-range livestock weight gain and meet other environmental objectives. This is not just about chasing forage quantity (total amount of vegetation biomass); it is also about looking for the highest-quality forage throughout the season.

"This study is probably the first-time high-quality datasets have been used to predict cattle weight gain directly from satellite imagery," said Sean Kearney, Post Doc Research Associate in Fort Collins, CO.

In the study published in Ecological Applications, scientists used the satellite images, along with field observations from 40 different pastures grazed over a period of 10 years, to predict the performance of cattle grazing in Eastern Colorado throughout the summer season.  The study site, the Central Plains Experimental Range, is a Long-Term Agroecosystem Research (LTAR) network location.

The cattle performance predictions – specifically, weight gain – were made from satellite-derived estimates of both forage quantity and quality. The satellite-based predictions of forage quality were a first for the region, and they proved to be especially important. Most notably, weight gain was affected by the timing of forage green-up and senescence (browning down).

We observed that in years when satellite images showed forage greening up earlier, before cattle began to graze, the quality of the diet declined more rapidly and cattle weight gain was lower, especially toward the end of the grazing season," said Kearney. "In some years, plenty of biomass was still available late in the season, but a large portion of the high-quality forage was missed because it peaked (reached top quality) so early in the season. This resulted in cattle feeding on lower-quality grass, which reduced their performance.

With recent climate patterns of earlier spring green-up, higher temperatures and drier weather during the summer months, it is critical to determine the right time to start and stop grazing cattle, in order to match up grazing timing with high quality forage.

We knew forage quality mattered, but we didn't know to what extent," said Lauren Porensky, Research Ecologist. "Now we can estimate diet quality across space and time and have a better idea of what is causing changes in diet quality throughout the season.

What is next? Scientists are linking these new diet quality and vegetation maps with GPS collar data to better understand what drives cattle foraging behavior, as well as working on a new model to predict diet quality in near-real-time to support adaptive management efforts of ranchers and other rangeland managers.



COMPARING BEEF WITH PLANT-BASED ALTERNATIVE PROTEINS: WHAT ARE THE FACTS?
Norman Voyles, Jr., 2021 Vice Chair, Cattlemen's Beef Board

In mid-November, I traveled from my farming and beef cattle operation to Kansas City for an ag media event called “Trade Talk.” Hosted by the National Association of Farm Broadcasters (NAFB), this annual event offers ag industry broadcast personalities the opportunity to interview representatives from various organizations and companies, all of whom serve this country’s farmers and ranchers in some capacity. As the vice chair of the Cattlemen’s Beef Board this year, I did several interviews, and was quite frankly surprised by how many broadcasters wanted to hear what this guy from Martinsville, Indiana had to say.

They asked me all kinds of questions about the national Beef Checkoff, including many I’ve been asked before – how it works, what kinds of programs it funds, what impact are those programs having on beef demand and so on. However, one new question came up again and again:
What’s the Checkoff doing to address the threat that plant-based alternative proteins pose to the beef industry?

Honestly, this question wasn’t surprising. Like everyone else, I’ve observed news anchors and market watchers bring up plant-based alternative proteins consistently over the past few years. Some even referred to these products and others as “revolutionary” and “game-changing.” However, that’s not how some beef industry stakeholders view these protein alternatives. I’ve been involved in discussions that took me back a few decades when consumer concerns about beef’s role in a healthy diet weren’t considered all that important.

The fact is, we could have done more back in the ‘70s and ‘80s, because we’re still working to share the real facts about beef’s nutritional profile. That’s why we need to take protein alternatives more seriously today – and we are. In 2020, the Beef Checkoff commissioned a research study to understand plant-based alternative proteins and their potential impact on beef demand to determine exactly what we’re up against. Now, we’re using this information to determine the best way to encourage consumers to choose beef.

The study, “Impacts of New Plant-Based Protein Alternatives on U.S. Beef Demand,” authored by Glynn T. Tonsor, Jayson L. Lusk and Ted C. Schroeder, reflects the attitudes and opinions of more than 3,000 U.S. residents surveyed in September 2020. One of the biggest takeaways from the study was that, while plant-based alternative proteins may be getting a lot of media exposure, consumers still love and choose beef. Here are significant findings from that study:

    Beef has a good image. Consumers by and large say that beef’s taste, appearance, price, and natural goodness greatly exceeds that of plant-based proteins.

    Regular meat consumers (68% of the study’s full sample) are much more likely to select beef even when a plant-based item is available.

    Changes in beef prices have a much larger impact on consumer decisions to buy beef than the impact of changes in the prices of plant-based offerings. This means plant-based burgers are relatively weak substitutes for beef.

There’s also new research that delves into beef’s protein quality versus plant-based alternatives. A recent study from the University of Illinois and Colorado State University and funded by the Beef Checkoff and Pork Checkoff used the DIAAS (digestible indispensable amino acid score) system to compare protein quality in beef and pork burgers and plant-based burgers. The study, “Digestible indispensable amino acid score (DIAAS) is greater in animal-based burgers than in plant-based burgers if determined in pigs,” was authored by Natalia Fanelli, Hannah Bailey, Tyler Thompson, Robert Delmore, Mahesh Narayanan Nair and Hans Stein. As in the past, researchers found that animal proteins have greater DIAAS values than plant-based proteins.

All in all, the research shows us that plant-based protein alternatives are a relatively minor concern to the beef industry right now. However, that doesn’t mean we can just sit back and relax. As Beef Checkoff contractors develop new plans and promotional campaigns, they’re considering this study's findings along with other factors that could impact beef demand, both now and in the future. Consumer preferences continue to evolve, and we need to stay on top of those changes if we’re going to effectively promote beef over competing proteins. I can assure you that my fellow CBB members will continue investing Checkoff dollars wisely to keep beef at the center of dinner plates everywhere.



WTO Dispute Panel Rules India's Sugar Subsidies Out-of-Bounds

India's sugar subsidy regime violates its obligations under a multilateral World Trade Organization agreement, according to the international trade body.

A WTO dispute panel initiated by Australia, Brazil and Guatemala in early 2019 investigated India's massive sugar subsidy regime and found it was not compatible with New Delhi's WTO commitments. The panel released its findings in a December 14 report.

India is one of the largest sugar producers in the world, producing more than 30 million tons of milled sugar in most years with the support of government production subsidies. India has also used export subsidies in recent years to help dump 6 to 7 million metric tons of sugar onto an already distorted and depressed world market, helping to drive world prices below the global cost of production.

The panel found that India's provision of domestic support to its sugarcane producers vastly exceeds the level permitted under the terms of relevant provisions of the Agreement on Agriculture. The panel also found that New Delhi's prolific use of export subsidies violates relevant provisions of both the Agreement on Agriculture and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.

"India has not been playing by the rules for years to the detriment of other sugar producers," said Dr. Rob Johansson, Director of Economics and Policy Analysis at the American Sugar Alliance (ASA). "This case focused on domestic sugar and export subsidies provided by India since 2014 and illustrates how much time these actions currently require to play out. We can now anticipate that India will use every procedural tool at its disposal in Geneva to drag the case out even longer."

The world sugar market is widely considered to be the most distorted and volatile commodity market in the world, with billions in foreign subsidies encouraging over production. That surplus gets dumped on global markets – depressing prices. Unlike other countries, U.S. sugar farmers and workers produce a reliable supply of sugar under some of the world's highest safety, labor and environmental standards and at zero cost to taxpayers.

"Our industry has long advocated for the verified elimination of all global sugar subsidies," said Luther Markwart, Chairman of the ASA. "The panel's finding in the India case serves as a stark reminder of just how far we have to go in achieving that objective."