Tuesday, November 7, 2017

Tuesday November 7 Ag News

USDA Chief Scientist Statement on WHO Guidelines on Antibiotics
The World Health Organization (WHO) has released recommendations regarding the use of antibiotics in agriculture. Dr. Chavonda Jacobs-Young, USDA Acting Chief Scientist, today issued the following statement:

“The WHO guidelines are not in alignment with U.S. policy and are not supported by sound science. The recommendations erroneously conflate disease prevention with growth promotion in animals."

“The WHO previously requested that the standards for on-farm antibiotic use in animals be updated through a transparent, consensus, science-based process of CODEX. However, before the first meeting of the CODEX was held, the WHO released these guidelines, which according to language in the guidelines are based on ‘low-quality evidence,’ and in some cases, ‘very low-quality evidence.'"

“Under current Food and Drug Administration (FDA) policy, medically important antibiotics should not be used for growth promotion in animals. In the U.S., the FDA allows for the use of antimicrobial drugs in treating, controlling, and preventing disease in food-producing animals under the professional oversight of licensed veterinarians. While the WHO guidelines acknowledge the role of veterinarians, they would also impose unnecessary and unrealistic constraints on their professional judgement."

“USDA agrees that we need more data to assess progress on antimicrobial use and resistance, and we need to continue to develop alternative therapies for the treatment, control, and prevention of disease in animals. We remain committed to addressing antimicrobial resistance in people and animals. We will continue to work with the WHO, World Organization for Animal Health, and Food and Agriculture Organization to promote antibiotic stewardship to avoid the further emergence and spread of antibiotic resistance.”

NPPC Statement On WHO Call For Ban On Prevention Uses Of Antibiotics

A ban on disease prevention uses of antibiotics in food-animal production being advocated by the World Health Organization would be ill-advised and wrong. Denying pigs, cows and chickens necessary antibiotics would be unethical and immoral, leading to animal suffering and possibly death, and could compromise the nation’s food system.

America’s pork farmers share the WHO’s concern about the rise in antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which is why they have taken steps over the past 30 years to ensure they’re using antibiotics strategically and responsibly to keep animals healthy and to produce safe food. They are complying with an FDA directive that prohibits the use of antibiotics important to human medicine for promoting animal growth and that requires feed and water uses of those same antibiotics to be under a veterinary prescription. They also participate in pork industry-developed programs that include responsible antibiotics use and support federal efforts to track antibiotic resistance in foodborne bacteria from humans, retail meats and food animals.

Prevention uses of antibiotics involve administering antimicrobial drugs to animals that aren’t exhibiting clinical signs of disease but that likely will get disease if a drug isn’t administered. Veterinary involvement in the decision-making process associated with the use of medically important antimicrobial drugs not only is an important aspect of ensuring appropriate use, but for feed and water uses it’s the law. Additionally, using antibiotics to prevent disease, in most cases, supplants the need to use more potent medically important antibiotics to treat disease.

The U.S. pork industry’s goal is to reduce the need for antibiotics, and it has devoted time and resources to that end, including adopting good antibiotic stewardship practices and studying alternatives to antibiotics. Simply reducing on-farm uses of antibiotics, as the WHO suggests, however, likely would have no effect on public health and would jeopardize animal health. Its call for stopping the use of antibiotics that are critically important in human medicine for treating infected animals is antithetical to pork farmers’ and veterinarians’ moral obligation to care for their pigs.

Applied Reproductive Strategies in Beef Cattle

Rick Funston, NE Extension Beef Cattle Reproductive Physiologist

Cattlemen, academia and allied industry interested in improving reproductive strategies in beef cattle gathered in Manhattan, Kansas, Aug. 29-30 for the 2017 Applied Reproductive Strategies in Beef Cattle (ARSBC) symposium.

Considered the premier national event in beef cattle reproductive management, the meeting has a long history of providing the latest information on the application of reproductive technologies and includes a range of topics related to cow herd reproduction — such as nutritional interactions, management, and male fertility.

Cow-calf producers know that reproduction is the most economically important trait and this meeting brings together some of the most practical and knowledgeable individuals in the industry to discuss reproductive management.

The Beef Reproduction Task Force, which includes reproductive physiologists from land-grant universities work together on reproductive management education. The program is a joint effort of the Task Force and K-State Research and Extension.

Proceedings from this and past meetings plus other valuable resources can be found at http://beefrepro.info.

Meeting the Nutrient Demands of Cows Grazing Cornstalks

Karla Jenkins, NE Extension Cow/calf Specialist

As fall harvest comes to a close many cows will be turned out on cornstalks to graze the crop residue left after harvest for the winter. This can be an economical forage resource for many producers. Keeping feed costs low while maintaining production is an important part of profitability. Knowing the nutrient needs of cows is key to knowing what supplementation strategy is necessary.

One of the first things producers need to do is to estimate the amount of residue available in a field for the cattle to graze. The amount of residue is proportional to the grain yield from the field and a simple formula will give producers a starting point in estimating the days of grazing they would have available.

Cattle prefer to pick up dropped ears of corn, husks, and leaves and will not eat the stalks unless forced to. There is about 16 pounds of dry matter of leaves and husks for each bushel of grain produced. However, only about 8 pounds of dry matter are available to the cattle because of trampling loss. So for example, a field that produced 200 bushels per acre would have 1600 pounds of residue available for grazing. If it is assumed that a pregnant, non-lactating 1200 pound cow eats 26 pounds of dry forage each day then one acre would likely last about two months (1600/26).

Research from the University of Nebraska showed pregnant dry cows given protein supplement gained body condition while non-supplemented cows did not. However, subsequent birth weight and pregnancy rates were similar suggesting the added cost of protein supplement to the spring calving cow over the winter when residue was adequate for grazing was not beneficial https://beef.unl.edu/4f986585-d3f1-4e00-ad3b-9945992c0af7.pdf.

Late summer or fall calving cows grazing cornstalk residue with their nursing calves have a much higher nutrient requirement than their dry counterparts. For example, a pregnant dry 1200 pound cow only requires 8-10 pounds of total digestible nutrients (TDN) per day during mid-gestation, whereas that same cow requires 14-16 pounds of TDN during lactation. This does not account for the needs of the calf who will begin grazing within the first month of life. If the cow ate 26 pounds of residue and the residue was 50% TDN then she would only be consuming 13 pounds of TDN and could not meet her requirements. In a study utilizing residue grazing pairs, approximately 5 pounds of dried distillers grains was supplemented daily. The cows lost a little over half a body condition score but had acceptable breeding rates. The calves gained just under 2 pounds per day in this study conducted from November to April (https://go.unl.edu/7do2). If producers choose to place pairs on residue rather than wean the calves, the goals for calf gain and cow body condition score must be determined and supplement planned accordingly. However, the cost of gain must be carefully weighed against the value of the calf. University extension personnel are willing to assist with ration formulation.

Some producers choose to run pregnant dry cows on cornstalk residue all winter and then calve on the residue in the spring, particularly in western Nebraska. This system works well and the residue fields are a good place to hold the new pairs until green grass is available. Producers need to remember the energy needs double once lactation starts and supplemental protein will be needed at that point as well. Cows in peak lactation will also increase dry matter intake by about 20% and residue fields in spring are likely becoming short on available residue and quality. However, supplemental diets can be developed to meet her needs and prevent her from losing body condition prior to rebreeding.

Cornstalk residue can be a great winter feed resource for cows. Visit with extension personnel to determine supplement needs and estimated returns.

Iowa Pork Center Rolls Out Euthanasia Workshop

Pork producers are committed to making sure their pigs receive proper humane animal care. But despite their best efforts, not every pig will make it to market. A new euthanasia workshop created by Dr. Anna Johnson, associate professor of animal science; Dr. Suzanne Millman, professor, veterinary diagnostic and production animal medicine and biomedical science; and the Iowa Pork Industry Center at Iowa State University will address this important issue.

"We developed the workshop in response to concerns from pork producers about this critical swine welfare issue," J. Erik Potter, IPIC swine specialist, said. "Participants will leave the workshop confident in their ability to recognize compromised pigs and will feel comfortable talking through the euthanasia process."

The workshop is structured in a modular fashion to allow customization based on the type of American Veterinarian Medical Association-approved euthanasia methods used by each pork producer.

"The goal of this workshop is not to push one type of euthanasia over another," Johnson said. "Pork producers already are comfortable with the methods they use. The workshop is designed to review and refresh producers on the euthanasia process. We also provide them with opportunity to learn about alternate methods they may wish to consider using on their farms."

In addition, the workshop will provide producers with a way to help prepare them for a third-party Common Swine Industry Audit.

"Euthanasia is a sensitive topic and speaking openly about it can be a stumbling point while being interviewed by an auditor," Potter said.

Topics in the two-hour workshop include:
- Review of Pork Quality Assurance Plus and CSIA euthanasia materials
- Euthanasia introduction
- Insensibility signs
- How to determine death
- Review of pigs that meet euthanasia criteria per PQA Plus and the CSIA
- Approved swine euthanasia method(s) based on what the producer is using

For questions or to schedule a workshop, contact Potter at jepotter@iastate.edu or your local Iowa State Extension and Outreach swine specialist.

New NASS analysis shows Iowa farmers continue to efficiently raise livestock and grain despite market challenges

A comprehensive analysis of Iowa agriculture is detailed in a new book released by the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation (IFBF), compiled by the Iowa office of the National Agricultural Statistics Services (NASS). This 119-page book provides statewide and county specific stats that offer a glimpse of what agriculture in Iowa looks like today.

According to the latest statistics, the size of family farms has remained virtually unchanged since 1998, hovering around the 350-acre mark. Despite this unchanging trend, farms have continued to increase in efficiency, and Iowa farmers are the envy of the globe for their innovation. Iowa continues to lead the nation in corn production, and last year conditions were ideal for a record corn crop of 203 bushels per acre, up from 137 bushes in 2012 and above the 2016 United States average of 174.6 bushels per acre.

Iowa’s farmers continue to work closely with their veterinarians to improve animal health, and the statistics reflect these efforts. Today’s cows are producing 23,634 pounds of milk, up 3 percent from just a year ago and nearly 860 more pounds than the U.S. average. Iowa continues to lead in pork production, and with improvements have seen an increase in pig litters from 9.85 pigs ten years ago to 10.9 pigs per litter today. Iowa is also a top egg producer, averaging 276 eggs per layer in 2016, an increase of 10 eggs from 2007.

“We continue to see farmers in Iowa adapt to new technologies and adopt the latest animal welfare and handling practices thanks to research being done at Iowa State University and through the close relationships farmers have with their local veterinarians,” said Craig Hill, IFBF president. “Iowa remains a powerhouse in U.S. agriculture, and it is not only due to our rich soil or geographical conditions but the resilience and innovation of our state’s farming men and women and the abundance of careers in Iowa that lend to our increasing productivity and support of agriculture.”

Cost of production continues to come down but grain prices also continue to stay low, squeezing profits margins for many Iowa farmers. In 2013, to raise corn following soybeans had a price tag of $4.31 per bushel to raise a bushel, and in 2017 that lowered to $3.51. However, the 2015-16 marketing year had the average corn price as $3.35 per bushel. Soybeans following corn had a production price of $9.66 per bushel while the average price received by farmers in 2015-16 was $9.40 per bushel. Cash rent continues to be a top expenditure in farm operations, second to feed for animals on livestock farms. New livestock processing plants popping up in the state have greatly increased the amount of red meat, including beef, veal, pork and mutton, in Iowa. Slaughter plants in Iowa produced 7.06 billion pounds of red meat (beef, veal, pork, and mutton) during 2016, increasing 86.2 million pounds from 2015.

But, despite the efficiency, all is not good news on the Iowa farm front.  “The data shows that the Iowa farm economy continues to suffer from a multi-year decline with gross farm receipts down 8% in 2016 compared to a year earlier and 22% below the peak seen in 2012.  Net farm income in Iowa fell sharply, down 24% in 2016 from the prior year and down a staggering 56% since 2012.  Financial stress on farm families is accelerating and reverberating throughout the Iowa economy,” says IFBF Director of Research and Commodity Services Dave Miller.  “This is why Iowa Farm Bureau continues to offer members access to free marketing, tax and economic webinars and support to help Iowa farmers find efficiencies and keep sustainable during this continued economic downturn.”

The stats book can be ordered, for a cost of $12, from the Marketing and Communications Division, Iowa Farm Bureau, 5400 University Avenue, West Des Moines, Iowa 50266.  Checks should be made payable to the Iowa Farm Bureau.

New Study Shows Grain Exports Offered $55.5 Billion In Economic Output

Exports of U.S. feed grains and related products provide critical support across the U.S. economy, offering billions in economic direct and indirect economic benefits to farmers, rural communities and the nation as a whole.

New research commissioned by the U.S. Grains Council (USGC) and the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) quantified these benefits, showing that U.S. feed grain and grain products exports were worth $18.9 billion in 2015 and supported $55.5 billion in economic output. These exports were linked directly or indirectly to nearly 262,000 jobs.

Furthermore, if exports were halted, the analysis indicated that more than 46,000 jobs and $2.6 billion in GDP would be adversely impacted at the farm, ethanol production and meat production levels before accounting for losses in linked industries.

“International markets represent demand that would not exist elsewhere,” said Deb Keller, USGC chairman and a farmer from Iowa. “This research highlights the important economic benefits of exports that our U.S. economy depends upon to subsist.”

Informa Economics conducted the study, which examined the economic contributions to each state and 52 congressional districts from exports of corn, barley, sorghum, ethanol, distiller’s dried grains with solubles (DDGS), corn gluten feed and meal as well as the corn equivalent of meat on the U.S. economy.

The study extended analysis to determine the importance of exports across the broader U.S. economy. Total impact of grain and grain products exported in 2015 indirectly supported more than 261,000 jobs across the United States and $21 billion in gross domestic product (GDP).

Breaking down the numbers, these results showed every $1 of grain exports generated supported an additional $2.19 in business sales. And every job directly created by the export of grain and grain products supported an additional 4.7 jobs in the United States.

These indirect and induced business activities extend well beyond the agricultural industry, including to the wholesale trade, real estate, oil and natural gas extraction to service sectors including restaurants, hospitals and employment services industries.

“The value of exports to the U.S. economy extends far beyond our fields and farms,” said NCGA President and North Dakota farmer Kevin Skunes. “By analyzing the impacts to individual states and congressional districts, constituents and legislators alike can better understand how their local communities benefit from and depend on exports.”

Ag Banks: Farm Profitability Still Down But Improving

Even with current commodity prices, ag lenders are slightly more optimistic this year than last. About 82% of agricultural lenders reported a decline in farm profitability in the last 12 months, according to a joint survey by the American Bankers Association and the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation. Despite the continued decline, the survey of more than 580 agricultural lenders revealed that the agricultural loan approval rate is 84%.

"We were encouraged to see that lenders remain ready to assist farmers and fulfill their credit needs despite the drag in the agricultural economy," said Brittany Kleinpaste, director of economic policy and research at ABA. "Overall, the data showed that agricultural lenders are a little more optimistic about what's ahead for their customers than they were in December of 2016."

While a high percentage of ag lenders continue to report a decline in farm profitability, 7 percent fewer reported a decline compared to the December 2016 ABA/Farmer Mac survey. However, the drivers of industry stress remain the same. Ninety-three percent of lenders indicated commodity prices are a top concern. Grain and dairy remained the sectors that lenders are most concerned about, while lenders reported less concern for the cattle and hog sectors than in the previous survey. Other top concerns are liquidity (87 percent), farm income (85 percent), farm leverage (77 percent) and weather (56 percent).

On average, survey respondents exhibited more confidence in stable land values than in the December 2016 survey. Fifty-seven percent of respondents reported stable values in the first half of 2017, and 51 percent expected no major changes in the second half of 2017. Lenders reported that a high percentage of average quality land (41 percent) and cash rents (32 percent) are above fair market value in their area.

Cattle Feeding Returns Improving

Jim Mintert, Purdue University
Cattle feeding profitability has been on a roller coaster ride the last couple of years. Estimated cattle feeding returns calculated each month by Iowa State Extension provide insight into the situation Corn Belt feeders face. According to the Iowa State data, which assumes that cattle are placed on feed each month with inputs purchased and fed cattle sold in the cash market without any risk management, cattle feeders suffered horrific losses in both 2015 and 2016. Losses continued throughout 2016 and still averaged a loss of $117 per head for a typical yearling feeding program, and a loss of $216 per head for a typical calf feeding program, during 2016's October-December quarter.

The situation changed dramatically in 2017. Relying again on the Iowa State estimates, during the first nine months of 2017, feeding returns for yearlings averaged +$198 per head and +$191 for calves. The turnaround was even more dramatic when the monthly returns are examined as monthly yearling returns actually reached +$415 and calf feeding returns climbed over $500 per head during May 2017. The return for feeding calves during May was a new record in the Iowa State data going back to 1981 and the yearling feeding return was the highest value since 2003. The increase in feeding returns during 2003 occurred primarily as a result of a surge in fed cattle prices during the brief time window when Canada was locked out of the export markets because of BSE in Canada and before the U.S. had its first BSE case. The increase in feeding returns in spring 2017 was the result of cattle feeders' breakevens declining from $117 per cwt. at the beginning of the year to the upper $90's per cwt., for calf programs, and the low $100's per cwt., for yearling programs, by spring, combined with a strengthening fed cattle market. Sale prices for fed cattle climbed roughly $20 per cwt. from the beginning of 2017 to mid-spring, pushing the revenue per head up by approximately $250 per head.

Although cattle feeding was profitable during most of 2017, Corn Belt feeding returns did turn negative in September 2017, relying on Iowa State's calculations. Yearling returns in September were -$41 per head and calf feeding returns were -$26 per head. The shift from profitability to negative returns begs the question, what lies ahead for cattle feeders?

Answering that questions requires a better understanding of what was behind the large losses in 2015 and 2016. The losses that occurred in 2015 and 2016 were mostly attributable to two factors: 1) cattle feeders bid up feeder cattle prices to record levels, which in turn, pushed the fed cattle prices needed to breakeven up dramatically and 2) contrary to expectations, prices for fed cattle dropped sharply. The combination of high costs and weak fed cattle prices proved devastating, leading to record losses for cattle feeders.

What's happened so far in 2017? Total costs per head have climbed since the peak in profitability last spring, but the increase to date has been modest. Total costs per head for a yearling program rose from $1,388 for cattle marketed during May to $1,420 per head for cattle marketed in September. The big shift occurred in the value of fed cattle marketed. The total sales value per head dropped from a peak of $1,815 to just $1,388 in September as the fed cattle sales price decline from a monthly average near $140 last May to less than $107 in September. To date, it appears that cattle feeders have not repeated the mistakes of 2015 and 2016 with both calf and yearling values trading at more manageable price levels, helping to hold down feeders' breakeven prices. The real key to profitability will be the direction that fed cattle prices follow the rest of the fall and into early winter.

Cash prices for slaughter cattle bottomed in early September, trading near $105 per cwt. in the Southern Plains. Prices have strengthened since then, climbing above $124 last week after trading near $118 a week earlier. The turnaround in fed cattle prices has pushed cattle feeding returns back into positive territory. Given the moderation in feeder cattle prices this year, unlike 2015 and 2016, prospects for cattle feeders to operate profitably the rest of the fall and early winter look good.

Commodity Classic Registration & Housing Opens

Registration and housing for the 2018 Commodity Classic, February 27-March 1 in Anaheim, Cal., will officially open at 10:00 a.m. Central Time on Tuesday, November 14, 2017.

The 2018 Commodity Classic will be held at the Anaheim Convention Center. The schedule includes a robust line-up of educational sessions on a wide range of current and relevant topics and issues.  Commodity Classic also boasts a huge trade show, the latest in agricultural innovation and technology, inspiring speakers, an evening of entertainment and the opportunity to network with farmers from across the United States.

A detailed schedule of events is available at www.commodityclassic.com. This year’s Commodity Classic will be held on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday—providing an opportunity for families to come in early or stay late to enjoy a weekend in the Anaheim area.

Registration and housing reservations should be made online at www.commodityclassic.com.  Experient is the official registration and housing provider for Commodity Classic.  In order to stay at an official Commodity Classic hotel, reservations must be made only through Experient to ensure favorable rates, reasonable terms and confirmed hotel rooms.

Exhibitors at the 2018 Commodity Classic will receive a link directly from Experient to register and make housing reservations.

Established in 1996, Commodity Classic is America's largest farmer-led, farmer-focused convention and trade show, produced by the National Corn Growers Association, American Soybean Association, National Association of Wheat Growers, National Sorghum Producers and Association of Equipment Manufacturers.

Farm Groups Urge President Trump to Implement Farmer Fair Practices Rules

National Farmers Union joined a coalition of 82 farm, rural and consumers groups today in sending a letter to President Donald Trump urging him to implement the Farmer Fair Practices Rules via executive order. The rules would provide the most basic of protections to American family farmers and ranchers who are enduring unfair and abusive practices as a result of extremely consolidated agricultural marketplaces.

Massive consolidation in the meatpacking industry over the past forty years placed just four companies in control of 85 percent of the beef market, 74 percent of the pork market and more than half of the poultry market. In that time, 90 percent of hog farmers and 41 percent of cattle producers have gone out of business, and 71 percent of poultry growers now live below the federal poverty level.

“Family farmers and ranchers, simply put, have virtually no market power any more,” said NFU President Roger Johnson. “Multinational and foreign meatpackers control our market prices and are dictating much of what happens on our farms and ranches. We’re urging the President to take the first step in addressing the most abusive and unfair practices that happen as a result of our highly concentrated markets. He can do that by implementing the Farmer Fair Practices Rules.”

Last month, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) withdrew two of the three Farmer Fair Practices rules, effectively siding with multinational meatpackers in their market dominance over family farmers. In their request to President Trump, the farm groups offered the administration an avenue to reverse this action.

“You, Mr. President, have the opportunity to make the difference in the future of rural America and preserve America’s family farmers and ranchers,” the groups wrote.

The Farmer Fair Practices Rules are a necessary clarification of the Packers and Stockyards Act, which was passed to ensure competition and integrity in livestock and poultry markets. The rules were first proposed in 2016, but they are the product of law written into the 2008 Farm Bill, hundreds of field hearings conducted by the USDA, and six years of rulemaking.

The groups contend in their letter to the President that the USDA erred in its assertion that the purpose of the Packers and Stockyards Act does not include protecting individual farmers from unfair, predatory and retaliatory practices. “The original intent of the P&S Act of 1921 was to protect individual producers against the heavy hand of large corporations,” they wrote.

The groups also note that the USDA decision ignores all previous administrations’ interpretation of the intent and purpose of P&S Act and that it releases “the abusive market power of foreign corporations and foreign countries onto family farmers and consumers alike.”

“We call on you, by executive order, to do what others have failed to do and are unwilling to do: return justice to the marketplace,” the groups wrote to Trump. “We remain hopeful you and your administration can take these rules across the finish line on behalf of America’s family farmers, our rural communities and consumers.”

Alltech 37+® test now identifies five extra mycotoxins that can threaten animal health and producer profitability

Mycotoxins threaten animal health and producer profitability, so identifying and addressing these hidden challenges is very important for farmers. Alltech is a world leader in mycotoxin management and now has the ability to test for over 40 different mycotoxins in animal feed samples. With this new analytical capability, Alltech is able to not only detect these new mycotoxins, but can also begin to understand how they can impact animal performance and health.

The Alltech 37+® mycotoxin analysis test is the cornerstone of the Alltech® Mycotoxin Management program, as it tests for more than 37 types of mycotoxins. When samples are submitted for testing, farmers will now see an additional five mycotoxins that have recently gained attention in scientific research for becoming important to the agriculture industry. These additional mycotoxins and toxicity symptoms are:
-        Citrinin:
     o   Kidney damage, oxidative stress, gut health challenges, diarrhea/loose manure
-        Beauvericin:
     o   Oxidative stress, antimicrobial activity, contamination of milk/meat
-        Moniliformin:
     o   Heart damage, immune suppression, loss of performance
-        Citreoviridin:
     o   Vitamin B1 deficiency, immune suppression, oxidative stress, poor reproductive performance, reduced weight gain
-        Cyclopiazonic acid:
     o   GIT damage, oxidative stress, immune suppression, loss of performance

Alltech 37+ test results provide a realistic picture of feed contaminants in feed ingredients or total mixed rations to speed up the process of diagnosis, suggest effective remediation and help move toward an effective mycotoxin control plan. Between Alltech’s 37+ mycotoxin analytical services laboratories in Lexington, Kentucky, and Dunboyne, Ireland, they have run nearly 20,000 samples, each searching for over 37 mycotoxins in animal feed.

To learn more, visit www.knowmycotoxins.com.

New ImpactZ™ Herbicide from AMVAC Receives Federal Registration for Corn

AMVAC Chemical Corporation today announced its new broad spectrum, low use rate corn herbicide, ImpactZ, has received federal registration from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ImpactZ herbicide will give growers a new safe and flexible solution for control of tough broadleaf and grass weeds - including glyphosate resistant species - in corn.

ImpactZ herbicide is registered for use in field corn, seed corn, popcorn and sweetcorn, with no restrictions on soil type, tank mix partners or insecticides. ImpactZ herbicide contains both Impact® and Atrazine for highly effective control of grass and broadleaf weeds in corn.

"Impact herbicide has long provided value to corn growers as an excellent tool for weed resistance management," said Jim Lappin, AMVAC crop marketing manager, corn and soybeans. "ImpactZ herbicide provides safe, effective broad spectrum control in corn."
ImpactZ herbicide provides excellent control of tough grass weeds, including barnyardgrass, crabgrass and foxtails. It also controls a broad spectrum of broadleaf weeds, including waterhemp, palmer amaranth, lambsquarters and velvetleaf.

Corn growers will have flexibility to apply ImpactZ herbicide from weed emergence until corn reaches 12-inches in height as a sequential, early post or total post emergence program.

"AMVAC recognizes the challenges that corn growers face, and we work to deliver products that offer superior performance, crop safety and flexibility," said Lappin. "ImpactZ herbicide is an excellent tool to take on key grasses and broadleaf weeds that challenge yield potential in corn"

Individual state registrations for ImpactZ herbicide are pending. For more information on ImpactZ herbicide or additional AMVAC products and crop protection technologies, visit www.amvac-chemical.com.

No comments:

Post a Comment