Tuesday May 23 Ag News

NePPA Hosts Webinar June 13th at Noon on Biosecurity

Nebraska Pork Producers Association is hosting a one-hour online webinar on Tuesday, June 13th, beginning at noon. The webinar will focus on the different types and the importance of biosecurity on and off the farm. It is a great review for pig farmers who have been in the industry and for new pig farmers to learn more about the importance and different areas of biosecurity. There is no fee to participate in the webinar.

Registration for the webinar can be accessed by visiting www.nepork.org/producer-education. Participants are encouraged to register for the webinar, several days in advance and will receive an email with the direct link for the webinar.

 Dr. Benny Mote, Assistant Professor; Swine Extension Specialist will speak about the importance of biosecurity through different avenues on the farm from:
 ·    New animal entry into the barn
 ·    Downtime before farm entry
 ·    Trucking biosecurity issues and protocol
 ·    New barn siting separation from other pig farms

“Farmers’ priority of keeping their pigs healthy is an issue of biosecurity. Pig farmers have made great changes in their biosecurity practices over the years, but there are still areas for improvement,” said Dr. Benny Mote.

Nebraska Pork Producers Association will be hosting a webinar on the second Tuesday of every month from noon to one o’clock. The July webinar will cover heat stress on hogs in farrow-to-wean barns. For additional information on webinar topics and speakers go to www.nepork.org/producer-education.



Fischer Reintroduces Bill to Lift Burdens for NE Producers

U.S. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW), today reintroduced legislation to provide regulatory relief for Nebraska farmers and ranchers. The bill, known as the Farmers Undertake Environmental Land Stewardship (FUELS) Act, builds on her past efforts to modify costly EPA regulations that could negatively affect ag producers with on-farm fuel storage.

Across Nebraska and our nation, ag producers store fuel in aboveground tanks on their property. Often, this is because they live miles from the towns where they can refuel. A regulation intended for major oil refineries, known as the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) rule, would affect the amount of fuel producers can store on their land. It would force families to make costly upgrades to fuel storage tanks and would also impose heavy fines if these tanks go over the on-farm fuel limit exemption mandated by the federal government.

“The FUELS Act is common-sense legislation that would provide Nebraska farmers and ranchers with relief from a burdensome federal rule that’s meant for oil refineries. In the past, we have been successful in providing limited exemptions to this rule, but there’s more work to do. Through the bill I’m reintroducing today, Congress can cut red tape for our ag producers so they can continue do their jobs and support their families,” said Fischer.

The FUELS Act would:
·         Provide an exemption for farms with 10,000 gallons or less of aggregate aboveground oil storage capacity.
·         Allow farms with an aggregate above ground storage of 10,001 to 42,000 gallons and/or no history of spills to maintain a self-certified spill plan to respond to any potential spills.
·         Maintain full rule compliance, including certification from a professional engineer for farms with:
     o   An individual tank with an above ground storage capacity greater than 10,000 gallons and/or,
     o   An aggregate above ground storage capacity greater than 42,000 gallons and/or,
     o   A reported discharge history
·         Amend the threshold for individual tank and aggregate capacity on separate land parcels by
     o   Increasing the individual tank capacity from 1,000 gallons to 1,320 gallons
     o   Increasing the aggregate capacity from 2,000 gallons to 3,000 gallons

Senator Fischer has been successful in her past efforts to modify the SPCC rule. Last year, Fischer negotiated a bipartisan provision, which was signed into law as part of the WIIN Act. The language fully exempts animal feed tanks from the SPCC rule. It also provides greater flexibility for producers with on-farm fuel storage by exempting up to 2,500 gallons of capacity on remote or separate parcels of land (as long as these tanks are not larger than 1,000 gallons each).



Statement by Steve Nelson, President, Regarding the Introduction of the FUELS Act by NE Sen. Deb Fischer

“Today U.S. Sen. Deb Fischer (R-NE) again demonstrated her ongoing commitment to representing the interests of Nebraska’s farm and ranch families by introducing legislation that would bring a much needed, common sense approach to regulations governing on-farm oil and fuel storage.”

“As introduced by Sen. Fischer, the ‘Farmers Undertake Environmental Land Stewardship Act’ or ‘FUELS Act’ would exempt the vast majority of Nebraska’s farms and ranches from having to comply with the EPA’s ‘Spill Prevention Containment and Control (SPCC) regulations which were established to prevent spills from large scale fuel storage facilities, such as oil refineries.”

“As farmers and ranchers who rely on the land for their livelihood, we understand there is a time and place for environmental protections. However, when it comes to on-farm oil and fuel storage, there is no significant history of petroleum spills from agriculture operations that justify the expansive and widespread regulatory scheme EPA has sought to push on farm and ranch families. This is clearly a case of EPA trying to use regulations to solve a problem that simply does not exist.”

“If enacted, Sen. Fischer’s FUELS Act could save Nebraska farm and ranch families thousands of dollars in unneeded facility upgrades and potentially thousands more in regulatory paperwork requirements.”

“We thank Sen. Fischer for her efforts to help lessen the regulatory burden on Nebraskans and look forward to working with her to secure passage of the FUELS Act.”



Statement from Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue on the Proposed FY 2018 Budget

Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue today issued the following statement on the proposed FY 2018 budget:

“President Trump promised he would realign government spending, attempt to eliminate duplication or redundancy, and see that all government agencies are efficiently delivering services to the taxpayers of America.  And that’s exactly what we are going to do at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

“Having been the governor of Georgia from 2003 to 2011 – not during the best economic times – we did what it took to get the job done, just like the people involved in every aspect of American agriculture do every single day.  While the President’s budget fully funds nutrition programs, wildland fire suppression and food safety, and includes several new initiatives and increases for Rural Development, whatever form the final budget takes, it is my job as Secretary of Agriculture to manage and implement that plan, while still fulfilling the core mission of USDA,” said Secretary Perdue.



Statement by Steve Nelson, President, Regarding Cuts to Crop Insurance in the Federal Budget

“Today President Trump’s administration proposed dramatic cuts to the farm safety net in the administration’s FY2018 budget request being delivered to Capitol Hill. Crop insurance today serves as the main agricultural safety net that exists for Nebraska farmers and ranchers who have seen a 50 percent decline in farm revenue since 2013. We have opposed cuts to crop insurance in the past, and we continue to oppose them today.”

“Crop insurance helps to reduce taxpayer risk and has come in under budget since the 2014 Farm Bill was passed. Farmers have collectively spent $50 billion out of their own pockets on crop insurance since 2000, which clearly demonstrates our willingness to help fund our own safety nets.”

“Our congressional leaders recognize the importance of maintaining a strong farm safety net. We fully expect that to be the case again this year, and we are hopeful to engage in meaningful dialogue about how to support America’s hardworking farmers and ranchers in difficult times.”



NCGA Statement on President’s Proposed FY18 Budget

The White House today released its detailed proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2018. The budget proposal includes the following:
-    Cutting the federal crop insurance program by $28.56 billion over the 2018-2027 period
-    Eliminating funding for the Market Access Program (MAP) ($200 million/year) and Foreign Market Development (FMD) program ($34.5 million/year)
-    Reducing conservation program funding by $5.8 billion over the 2018-2027 period

The following is a statement from the National Corn Growers Association:
“The time and place to debate farm bill programs is during the farm bill reauthorization, not the annual budget process. The farm bill represents a 5-year commitment to America’s farmers and ranchers, which Congress made in 2014. We are counting on Congress to honor that commitment, and reject cuts that would be harmful for rural America. These proposed budget cuts would hurt farmers’ ability to manage risk, grow their revenues, and farm more sustainably.

“Targeting the federal crop insurance program is extremely shortsighted. It is especially harmful during an extended period of low commodity prices. NCGA members consistently tell us that crop insurance is their most important risk management tool. This public-private partnership helps farmers manage their risk, and it saves taxpayers money in the long run by reducing reliance on ad hoc disaster assistance.

“MAP and FMD are successful programs that build global demand for U.S. farm products, and increase income and jobs in our communities. MAP and FMD create an average return on investment of $28 for every $1 spent, and account for 15 percent of all U.S. ag export revenue—making them a solid investment. At a time when the farm economy is struggling, we should be investing more in these programs, not less.

“Finally, the budget calls for streamlining conservation programs, which includes eliminating any new enrollment into the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP). Voluntary conservation programs such as CSP help farmers to be good environmental stewards, which benefits everyone. NCGA is committed to continuous improvements and helping our farms become even more sustainable.”

“We urge Congress to honor the commitment they made to rural America when they reauthorized the farm bill in 2014. We hope to engage in a meaningful dialogue about how we can support America’s farmers, ranchers, and rural communities through these challenging economic times.”



Soy Growers Oppose White House Budget

The American Soybean Association (ASA) signaled strong opposition to proposed cuts in the FY-2018 budget released by the White House this morning.

“By shredding our farm safety net, slashing critical agricultural research and conservation initiatives, and hobbling our access to foreign markets, this budget is a blueprint for how to make already difficult times in rural America even worse,” said Ron Moore, ASA president and a soybean farmer from Roseville, Ill.

The budget would cut the federal crop insurance program by $28.5 billion—or roughly 36 percent—by capping the premium subsidy and eliminating the harvest price option. The crop insurance program is widely used by soybean farmers, and the harvest price option was selected in 99.4 percent of soybean revenue insurance policies sold in 2016. The White House’s proposed budget also would cut nearly $9 billion from Title I commodity supports, including the Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC) programs, by reducing the adjusted gross income (AGI) eligibility cap from $900,000 to $500,000.

“Thirty six percent is the most extreme proposed cut to crop insurance I’ve seen in my 40 years on the farm,” Moore said. “This is a program that exists to sustain farmers who suffer catastrophic losses. Coupled with the arbitrary caps the budget would impose on premium subsidies, it’s clear that this budget was written without input from farmers who would be severely affected.”

The budget also poses an existential threat to export promotion and foreign food assistance programs. It eliminates funding for the two hallmark USDA programs for the expansion of foreign markets: the Market Access Program (MAP) and the Foreign Market Development program (FMD). MAP and FMD leverage matching funds from industry to establish and grow markets for U.S. agricultural products abroad, and ASA recently requested that funding for them be doubled in the coming farm bill. The budget would also zero out the McGovern Dole Food for Education Program, as well as the Food for Peace program (P.L. 480), both of which provide funding for the food security programs that ASA undertakes in the developing world through its World Initiative for Soy in Human Health (WISHH) program.

“Elimination of MAP and FMD completely ignores the global nature of our industry,” Moore said. “Those programs are key to the work that soybeans and so many other crops conduct overseas to boost trade and trigger a multiplier effect that creates jobs and increased economic activity well beyond agriculture.”

The budget would cut nearly $6 billion from conservation programs, including the elimination of the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), which is USDA’s largest conservation program with more than 70 million acres enrolled, and the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP).

“Beyond our concern that these programs were already cut by more than $6 billion just three years ago as part of the 2014 Farm Bill, their elimination will significantly hamper on-farm progress toward healthier water, soil and air,” Moore said.

A positive note in the budget welcomed by Moore was progress on regulatory reform and infrastructure investment. “We are encouraged by the promise of reducing burdensome regulations and permitting processes, as well as the recognition of the need for infrastructure investments, including inland waterways and ports,” he said.

“This exercise is not a new one,” Moore added. “We’re aware that Congress—not the president—passes the budget, and agriculture has rebuffed attacks on farm and food programs for years. The danger is that the extreme and ill-informed cuts in this document will embolden those in Congress who lack any understanding of how these programs combine to protect the food and farm supply chain for all Americans.”



Proposed Ag Budget Fails Farmers, Ranchers
American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall:

“The American Farm Bureau Federation and its members are concerned about the federal budget deficit. However, we also know that agriculture has done its fair share to help reduce the deficit. Going back to the early 1980s, agriculture often has been targeted to generate budget savings, from the reconciliation bills in the late 1980s and 1990s to farm bill reforms as recently as 2014. At the time of passage, the 2014 farm bill was estimated to contribute $23 billion to deficit reduction over 10 years. The farm bill was the only reauthorization bill that voluntarily offered savings during the 113th Congress. It is difficult to think of another sector of the economy that has contributed so much, so consistently, over the last several decades.

“The administration’s budget proposal fails to recognize agriculture’s current financial challenges or its historical contribution to deficit reduction. It would gut federal crop insurance, one of the nation’s most important farm safety-net programs. It would drastically reshape important voluntary conservation programs and negatively impact consumer confidence in critical meat and poultry inspection. This proposal would hamper the viability of plant and animal security programs at our borders and undermine the nation’s grain quality and market information systems. It would stunt rural America’s economic growth by eliminating important utility programs and other rural development programs.

“Clearly, this budget fails agriculture and rural America.

“Farm income is down substantially since Congress passed the last farm bill. USDA cuts of this magnitude in the current economic cycle would be unwarranted and unwise. AFBF will work with the House and Senate Agriculture, Appropriations and Budget committees to protect programs that are critical in managing risks inherent to production agriculture, and maintain programs that are vital to rural communities.”



Crop Insurers Comment on President's Proposed Budget

The White House today released details of its FY2018 proposed budget, which included steep cuts to crop insurance and other farm policies.

The American Association of Crop Insurers, Crop Insurance and Reinsurance Bureau, Crop Insurance Professionals Association, Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of America, National Association of Professional Insurance Agents, and National Crop Insurance Services released the following joint statement in response:

"Weakening crop insurance and making it more difficult for farmers to bounce back during tough times will jeopardize rural jobs and will find little support in rural America or on Capitol Hill. The rural economy is already suffering through a period of low prices and a multitude of spring weather disasters. Yet, the Administration's budget proposal targets the primary tool farmers use to handle these risks.

"Lawmakers favor crop insurance because it reduces taxpayer risk exposure and has come in under budget since the 2014 Farm Bill was passed. Farmers are willing to help fund their own safety nets – collectively spending $50 billion out of their own pockets on crop insurance since 2000 – because they know private-sector efficiency will speed aid when it is needed most.

"Destructive cuts to crop insurance have been proposed by past Administrations and soundly rejected by Congressional leaders, who recognize the importance of maintaining a strong farm safety net. We fully expect that to be the case again this year, and we are hopeful to engage in meaningful dialogue about how to support America's hardworking farmers and ranchers in difficult times like these."

How does crop insurance benefit taxpayers?
Crop insurance is an effective taxpayer investment that helps ensure the stability of America's food, feed, fiber and fuel producers and promotes rural economic growth.

Absent crop insurance, the cost of natural disasters that cripple America's farmers would fall directly on the laps of taxpayers, which happened repeatedly before the widespread use and availability of crop insurance. In fact, 42 emergency disaster bills in agriculture cost taxpayers $70 billion from 1989 to 2012, according to the Congressional Research Service.

The 2014 Farm Bill cemented crop insurance as the cornerstone of farm policy.  Under this policy, farmers shoulder a portion of the risk along with private-sector crop insurance companies.  Farmers must first purchase crop insurance before being protected, and must shoulder a portion of the losses through deductibles before receiving an indemnity for the verifiable loss. On average, a farmer in the United States must lose at least 25 percent of the value of their crop before a crop insurance policy kicks in. This ensures that farmers are active participants in risk management and that taxpayers are not being asked to bear all the burden of natural disasters in farming.



President Trump’s Budget is an Assault on the Farm Safety Net and Rural Communities, NFU Says

President Donald J. Trump issued a detailed fiscal year 2018 federal budget proposal today, recommending drastic cuts to agricultural and rural related agencies and programs. The proposal would cut Farm Bill programs by nearly $230 billion and slash the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) annual budget by 21 percent.

In response to the proposal, National Farmers Union President Roger Johnson issued the following statement:

“The President’s proposed budget is an assault on the programs and personnel that provide vital services, research, and a safety net to America’s family farmers, rural residents and consumers. It is deeply disappointing that the President would propose such cuts, especially in the midst of a farm crisis that has family farmers and ranchers enduring a drastic, four-year slide in farm prices and a 50 percent drop in net farm income.

“The proposal slashes crop insurance by $29 billion, conservation programs by $6 billion, and SNAP by $191 billion, in addition to $3 billion in cuts to other farm programs. Such cuts would leave farmers, ranchers, and consumers without an effective safety net, and would make passing a new Farm Bill almost certainly impossible.

“The proposal also continues the $4.7 billion cut to USDA that was proposed by the Administration in March. This huge cut to discretionary spending would put rural development, conservation and research programs on the chopping block.

“In addition to cuts to farm and rural programs, the president’s proposal stands to worsen access to healthcare for rural residents. The proposed $800 billion cut to Medicaid would disproportionately impact rural residents who enroll in the program at a higher rate than their urban counterparts.

“NFU calls on Congress to reject these budget cuts and adopt funding levels that ensure the success and vibrancy of farming communities and rural America.”




NAWG Opposes Cuts to Crop Insurance in the Administration’s FY 2018 Budget Proposal

Today, the Administration released its full budget request for fiscal year 2018. The request calls for significant cuts to Farm Bill safety net and risk management programs at a time when net farm income is nearly half what it was just three years ago.

NAWG President David Schemm made the following statement:

“NAWG understands the administration is facing pressure to reduce spending and lower the national debt. However, proposing cuts to crop insurance and weakening the Farm Bill is not the right approach.  Proposing significant restrictions on crop insurance, commodity, conservation, trade, nutrition, and economic development programs is short-sighted and ignores the needs of rural America.

“The 2014 Farm Bill is estimated to reduced spending by $23 billion over ten years, at the time of passage. Further, the Congressional Budget Office’s 2017 baseline estimates that the 2014 Farm Bill costs far less than projected and is going to save the federal government $100 billion.

“The Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC) programs offer a safety net to producers when there is a substantial drop in prices or revenues. Recent events such as the late season blizzard in the Midwest, proves that these programs are working and need to be upheld in the 2018 Farm Bill.

“Any reduction in the discount for crop insurance will increase the cost of crop insurance to farmers. As commodity prices decline and farmers’ budgets tighten, an increase in the cost of crop insurance is only more likely to result in less participation and higher premiums for all farmers.

“In the trade title, the Market Access Program (MAP) and Foreign Market Development (FMD) are two government programs that have proven to have tremendous return on investment and yet funding for these programs has eroded. MAP and FMD strengthen export market development, meriting an increase in federal funding, not elimination as proposed in this budget request. 

“The rural vote was a key factor in the last election. Budget proposals should support rural America and U.S. farmers but this current budget misses that mark. NAWG will actively work to make sure these proposals aren’t enacted by Congress.”



USW Dismayed by Budget Proposal to Eliminate Trade Development Programs

U.S. Wheat Associates is very disappointed that the Administration’s proposed FY 2018 budget eliminates funding for the USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service Market Access Program (MAP) and Foreign Market Development (FMD) program and severely cuts funding for food aid programs. These cuts and other proposed cuts to the farm safety net would be devastating to wheat farmers who are already facing severely challenging economic conditions.

“These are the wrong proposals at the wrong time for the wheat farmers we represent,” said USW President Alan Tracy. “Agriculture is truly a global industry and export demand determines the prices U.S. wheat farmers receive. Without funding from MAP and FMD, we would not be able to continue the training, technical assistance and service that is needed to promote this incredibly complex food crop. Our competitors would swoop in to take those markets and the potential effect on wheat prices is obvious.”

In addition, a major econometric study led by Texas A&M agricultural economists in 2016 on the effectiveness of MAP and FMD showed that eliminating these programs would result in an annual average loss of $14.7 billion in export value, which would hurt almost every farmer in the country.

“It is very short-sighted to cut out programs that are vital to the health of the entire U.S. agricultural economy,” said Jason Scott, USW Chairman and a wheat farmer from Easton, Md. “Farmers, livestock producers, small businesses and the U.S. government have seen an amazing return on the investment in these highly successful programs. Our farmer leaders agree with the National Association of Wheat Growers President David Schemm who believes MAP and FMD merit an increase in federal funding, not elimination as proposed in this budget.” 

In addition, time-honored U.S. food aid programs have been engines of peace, food security and local economic development in countless countries around the world. Wheat makes up 40 percent of of all in-kind food aid and because almost all food aid recipients are wheat-import dependent, particularly in Africa, wheat donations do not distort local markets. It is not a good time to diminish our ability to promote better lives around the world.”

For more information about MAP, FMD and the essential role they play in building a more productive agricultural economy, please visit www.AgExportsCount.org.

USW’s mission is to “develop, maintain, and expand international markets to enhance the profitability of U.S. wheat producers and their customers.” USW activities in more than 100 countries are made possible through producer checkoff dollars managed by 18 state wheat commissions and cost-share funding provided by USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service. For more information, visit our website at www.uswheat.org.



Opportunity for Iowa Youth to Learn Agronomy, Scouting Basics

The Integrated Pest Management program with Iowa State University Extension and Outreach will host the seventh annual Crop Scouting Competition for Iowa Youth on July 31 at the Field Extension Education Laboratory in Boone, Iowa at 1928 240th St.

High school students (those completing grades 9-12) from Iowa are invited to put their crop scouting skills to the test, competing against other Iowa youth teams across the state. In addition to team competition, the goal of the event is to bring awareness to Iowa agriculture and learn more about integrated pest management basics through hands-on learning and teamwork.

Joe and Suzanne Shirbroun of Clayton County have been team leaders at the Crop Scouting Competition for the past six years. Joe Shirbroun says he's witnessed the competition make a big impact on the participating youth.

"The competition is a great way to connect education to the industry," he said. "Over the last six years, we've had several students on our team realize this is something they have a passion for and decide to pursue it in college."

Teams' crop knowledge will be tested at topic-specific field stations and with a written exam. Several field stations will be run by ISU Extension and Outreach faculty and staff, giving students the opportunity to work next to and learn from Iowa State experts. Potential topics will include: crop diseases, insects, disorders, weed identification, herbicide injury, crop growth stages, degree day computation and sprayer calibration and sprayer issues.

"I like to bring my FFA students to this competition because it enables them to learn from ISU Extension and Outreach faculty and staff," said James Abbas, AGWSR FFA advisor in Ackley, Iowa. "The experts working the competition are able to provide instant feedback to the teams, and they do so in a respectful, positive manner. They are always willing to help the kids and work with them."

The top four teams, based on points accrued from the field stations and exam, are eligible to win cash prizes, and all participants will receive a free event t-shirt. The top two teams will be invited to the regional competition held in Indiana on Aug. 28.

ISU Extension and Outreach has various resources such as field guides, publications and presentations to help each team prepare for the event. For more information on where to obtain these materials, visit ipm.iastate.edu.

Visit www.ipm.iastate.edu/cropscouting for more details, registration and a list of resources for team preparation. The registration form is due by July 1, 2017. View the 2016 competition online by reading about the winners and watching a recap from last year's event.

The event is sponsored by the following: DuPont Pioneer, Iowa Soybean Association, Iowa Independent Crop Consultants Association, ScoutPro, Iowa Certified Crop Advisors and Environmental Tillage Systems.

For questions, please contact Adam Sisson at ajsission@iastate.edu or Daren Mueller at dsmuelle@iastate.edu.



Grain Barge Movement in Good Shape with High Water Levels

Grain barge movements have recovered from the previous week, as high water gradually receded in the Upper Mississippi River. For the week ending May 13, downbound grain barge tonnages was 0.8 million tons at Mississippi River Locks 27, the southern-most lock on the Mississippi river, a 61 percent increase from the previous week.

Total corn and soybean shipments were 0.71 million tons and 0.25 million tons, up 213 percent and 240 percent from the previous week, respectively.

However, the barge industry has reported potential pick-up and transit delays in parts of the Lower Mississippi, Ohio, Illinois, and Arkansas Rivers.

On May 17, most navigation on the Arkansas River was limited or stopped, due to high water and flood conditions.

The National Weather Service Weather Forecast Office forecasts that the Lower Mississippi River will crest near Baton Rouge, Donaldsonville, and New Orleans later next week.



AFBF Asks Administration to Withdraw Proposed Changes to Estate Tax Discount Valuation

As the Treasury Department reviews all the significant tax regulations issued on or after Jan. 1, 2016, farmers and ranchers are calling on the administration to withdraw proposed changes that would limit the use of discount valuation for estate tax purposes.

The proposed changes “would significantly endanger the future of family farms in America. They wrongly set forth more restrictive rules for using valuation discounts that would make it more difficult for our nation’s family-owned farms and ranches to survive intergenerational transfers,” American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall said in a letter to Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and Agriculture Secretary Sonny Purdue.

 Valuation discounting has proven to be a very effective strategy for transferring business assets to subsequent generations, particularly when it comes to the transfer of small family businesses and farming and ranching operations, according to Farm Bureau.

We urge swift action to withdraw this unwarranted and harmful proposal to promote the transfer of agricultural businesses to the next generation of farmers and ranchers who will grow and produce our nation’s food, fiber and energy.
—  AFBF President Zippy Duvall
In the letter, Duvall also urged that a recommendation to withdraw the valuation-related changes be made by the Promoting Agricultural and Rural Prosperity in America task force, under its charge to promote the preservation of family farms and other agribusiness operations as they are passed from one generation to the next. President Donald Trump created the task force with an executive order issued on April 25.



Dr. Cropp Thinks Milk Prices May Have Bottomed Out

Despite higher production and increased stock levels, dairy product prices are beginning to strengthened as we moved into the summer months. But Dr. Bob Cropp from the University of Wisconsin-Extension says the level of U.S. milk output over the next several months will determine just how much those milk prices will rise.

In his monthly Dairy Situation and Outlook report, the professor emeritus said April was likely the low-point for milk prices after the Class III price fell from $16.77 in January to $15.22 in April. However, the May price could swing back up to around $15.60.

"Milk prices should continue to improve form here out," Cropp said. "Domestic sales appear to be favorable for butter and cheese. Dairy exports are also expected to continue above year ago levels."

His monthly summary said cheese and butter prices have responded to a slower growth in milk production and improved dairy exports. In addition, first quarter dairy exports were up 14-percent by volume compared to a year ago--resulting in the best first quarter since 2014.

"These higher product prices explain the higher May Class III price," he said. "If the Class III price ends up near $15.60, it will average about $2.50 higher during the January to May period than last year. Last year the May Class III dropped to a low of $12.76."

Cropp predicts that as world supply and demand tightens, world dairy product prices will increase. And that could result in U.S. dairy product prices becoming more competitive.

"Milk production among major dairy exporters has been below year ago levels for the EU-28, New Zealand, Australia and Argentina. U.S. has been the exception with higher milk production," Cropp pointed out. "However, milk production by the other four exporters, particularly the EU-28 and New Zealand is expected to start running above year ago levels during the second half of the year. But, stronger buying by China and others will help to keep a tighter world supply-demand situation."

Looking ahead, he says Class III futures have turned more optimistic about milk prices than at the beginning of May. With continued good domestic sales and improved dairy exports, the dairy marketing expert says a Class III price in the higher $17s by October is very possible.