http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/ee/index.php en editor@TheRochesterDemocrat.com Copyright 2009 2009-08-06T12:53:40-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/renewable_fuels_are_regions_strength/ {summary} Green Energy

By Fritz Busch
New Ulm Journal
August 5, 2009


GILFILLAN -Renewable fuels, honed by new technology, are the strength of Southern Minnesota agriculture, according to the founder and president of an economics consulting and research firm.

Speaking at a Farmfest 2009 Feature Forum Wednesday, Tom Scott talked about the agriculture market.

"It's not a static environment. You can't rest of your laurels," he added. "There will be tremendous market change. The rest of the agriculture industry will fall in behind it."

New technology will drive down the cost curve and make producers more cost competitive," he said.

"Organic and sustainable agriculture will be consumer-driven...The future of agriculture is as exciting as it's ever been," said Scott.

Minnesota Farm Bureau President Kevin Paap said all agriculture must work together to weather the market crisis.

"We need to connect better with rural and urban consumers about what kind of food they want," said Paap.

Minnesota Farmers Union President Doug Peterson said a first-generation renewable fuel is needed to get to a second generation and develop greater efficiencies.

Peterson urged producers to fight to keep big corporations from owning seed and livestock genetics.

Minnesota Rural Policy Executive Director Brad Finstad said collaborative projects like the Hormel Institute's research with the University of Minnesota and Mayo Clinic on finding pharmaceutical uses for soybeans are things to look forward to.

Minnesota Future Farmers of America President Kirby Schmidt of Marshall asked about global commodity markets.

"There are a lot of hungry people in the world. Most of them don't live in the United States," said Finstad.

Minnesota Agriculture Commissioner Gene Hugoson said he recently visited Vietnam and said the country is becoming more market oriented.

"We'll compete with the European Union, Canada and Brazil, but if Africa ever stops having civil wars, there's another opportunity," Hugoson added.

Paap said American food producers need more international markets, since we grow more than the country needs.

Finstad brought attention to a recent edition of Rural Minnesota Journal, which is published by the Center for Rural Policy an Development.

The publication identifies China as the fastest-growing market in the 21st century. In 2004, its population was 1.3 billion with a $1.65 trillion gross domestic product.

The Minnesota-China Partnership creates new economic opportunities for both countries with annual trade missions, international business development programs, strengthening existing relationships with Chinese government and business leaders and promoting greater understanding of U.S.-Chinese relations.

Taiwan was described as an ideal market for small and medium-sized firms with a very friendly climate for international visitors and firms well-versed in the import process.

Taiwan partnerships were described as great opportunities to branch into Mainland China.

Cuba and Vietnam have emerging biofuels export opportunities, according to the book. Vietnam has the second-fastest growing economy in Asia, the publication stated.


Ed. NoteFarmfest showed some unusual shapes suitable for urban use and these may be seen by clicking HERE.



]]> 2009-08-06T12:53:40-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/notable_guests_at_farmfest/ {summary} Farm Economy, Farm Policy Congressional members, governor expected to attend



By Mark Fischenich
Mankato Free Press


GILFILLAN — It’s not an election year, but Farmfest will have an impressive line-up of politicians nonetheless for the three-day agricultural exposition starting Aug. 4.

There’s a likely Republican presidential candidate, the chairman of the House Agriculture Committee and two other ag committee members from the House and Senate. Recruiting those key political figures is helped by the fact that they’re all from Minnesota, including House Ag Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, whose district includes the rural Morgan farm site which hosts Farmfest.

“It’s kind of handy when the chair of the Agriculture Committee represents the district where Farmfest is held,” said Kent Thiesse of Lake Crystal, who coordinates the policy forums at Farmfest each year.

The likely presidential candidate is Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a regular participant at the annual event since his first run for governor in 2002. Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Rep. Tim Walz of Mankato are the ag committee members.

“Some really key people (for agriculture),” Thiesse said.

And because it’s an off-year politically, the forums will allow more time for southern Minnesotans to ask questions of the lawmakers, governor and other forum participants.

“There’s a lot of chance for audience interaction — probably more-so than the (campaign) forums,” Thiesse said.

The members of Congress will be the primary draw on the opening day forum on Aug. 4. Entitled “Beyond the New Farm Bill — Shaping the Future of Rural America”, the forum begins at 10:30 a.m. on Aug. 4.

And the ag committee members will be joined by Minnesota’s newest elected official — Sen. Al Franken. Earlier this summer, Farmfest organizers were wondering if Minnesota would have a second senator to invite as the protracted U.S. Senate race dragged on into July, Thiesse said. But Franken has committed to being there, assuming the Senate completes its summer work on schedule.

The afternoon forum on Aug. 4 is “Climate Change — Challenges and Opportunities for Agriculture.” The 1:15 p.m. forum features National Farmers Union President Roger Johnson, along with a meteorologist, a carbon-trading specialist and representatives of Agribank, the Farm Bureau and the Minnesota Corn Growers.

At 10:30 a.m. on Aug. 5, Tom Scott of Informa Economics will release results of a poll commissioned by the University of Minnesota addressing the status of agriculture in Minnesota and anticipated future trends. A panel discussion on the topic will include state Ag Commissioner Gene Hugoson, Rural Policy Center Director Brad Finstad, state Farm Bureau President Kevin Paap, and state Farmers Union President Doug Peterson.

The afternoon session at 1:15 on Aug. 5 is focused on the struggling livestock industry in the state and maintaining its status as a cornerstone of Minnesota’s economy.

The final forum, featuring Gov. Tim Pawlenty, is at 10:30 a.m. Aug. 6 and is entitled “Making Minnesota Strong for the Next Decade and Beyond.”

While it’s not an election year, Thiesse expects Farmfest attendees to run into some campaigning by several of the numerous politicians who are running — or considering runs — to replace Pawlenty as governor.

Farmfest is held at the Gilfillan Estate on Highway 67 between Morgan and Redwood Falls.

]]> 2009-07-20T14:16:47-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/farm_fest_forum_events/ {summary} Farm Economy, Farm Policy


Join us each day in the Forum Tent for educational topics that will help you strengthen your operation. The Farmfest® Forums are coordinated by Kent Thiesse and supported by the Linder Farm Network.

Forum schedules will be updated closer to the show dates. Check back frequently for updated information.

August 4, 2009
9:00 AM Weather Patterns and Market Trends... Finding the Balance

• Bryce Anderson, DTN Senior Agriculture Meteorologist
• Darin Newsome, DTN Senior Marketing Analyst

9:30 AM Music by "The Great Pretenders"
Sponsored by United FCS

10:30 AM Beyond the New Farm Bill... Shaping the Future of Rural America

Panel Members:

• Senator Amy Klobuchar, Member of the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee (Invited)
• Senator Al Franken (Invited)
• Congressman Collin Peterson, Chair of the U.S. House Agriculture Committee
• Congressman Tim Walz, Member of the U.S. House Agriculture Committee

12:00 PM Linder Farm Network Noontime Ag Jamboree
With Lynn Ketelsen of Linder Farm Network
Entertainment by "The Great Pretenders"
Sponsored by United FCS

1:15 PM Climate Change... Challenges and Opportunities for Agriculture

Panel Members:

• Roger Johnson, National Farmers Union President
• David Ladd, Manager of Government Services, AgriBank
• Bryce Anderson, DTN Senior Agriculture Meteorologist
• Charles Souhle, Country Hedging Carbon Credit Trading Analyst
• Staci Bohlen, National Issues Specialist, Minnesota Farm Bureau
• Doug Albin, Clarkfield, MN, President of the MN Corn Growers Assn.

3:00 PM FarmersOnly.Com Event Live "On-Stage"

August 5, 2009

8:00 AM Minnesota Farm Bureau Pancake Breakfast
Entertainment by "The Great Pretenders"
Sponsored by United FCS

9:30 AM Music by "The Great Pretenders"
Sponsored by United FCS


10:30 AM The Minnesota Ag Industry... Where Are We At and Where Are We Going?

Keynote Address: Tom Scott, Informa Economics President

Response Panel Members:

• Gene Hugoson, Minnesota Commissioner of Agriculture
• Brad Finstad , Director of MN Rural Policy Center
• Kevin Paap, Minnesota Farm Bureau President
• Doug Peterson, Minnesota Farmers Union President

12:00 PM Linder Farm Network Noontime Ag Jamboree
With Lynn Ketelsen of Linder Farm Network
Entertainment by "The Great Pretenders"
Sponsored by United FCS


1:15 PM Keeping the Livestock Industry as a Cornerstone of Minnesota’s Economy

Panel Members:

• Mark Greenwood, Vice President of Agri-Business Capital, AgStar
• Steve Meyer, Livestock Economist for Paragon Economics
• Randy Spronk, Edgerton, MN, National Pork Producers Assn. Board
• Ed Welch, CEO, AMPI, New Ulm, MN
• National Cattleman’s Assn. Representative(Invited)
• Bruce Schmoll, MN Soybean Growers Assn. Secretary

2:45 PM Music by "The Great Pretenders"
Sponsored by United FCS


3:00 PM 2nd Annual Farmfest Auctioneering Championship


Hosted by Lynn Ketelsen, Farm Director, Linder Farm Network
Featuring music by “The Great Pretenders”

August 6, 2009
9:00 AM Grain Marketing Decisions in Volatile Times

• Al Kluis, Marketing Analyst, Kluis Commodities

9:30 AM Music by "The Great Pretenders"
Sponsored by United FCS


10:30 AM Making Minnesota Strong for the Next Decade and Beyond

Keynote Address: Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (Invited)

Panel Members: • Carol Molnau, Minnesota Lieutenant Governor

• Colleen Landkamer, Incoming USDA Rural Development State Director (Invited)
• Linda Hennen, Incoming State Farm Service Agency Director
• Bev Durgan, Dean and Director of the University of Minnesota Extension Service
• Jim Mulder, Executive Director, Association of Minnesota Counties

1:30 PM “Farm Family of the Year” Recognition Program
Sponsored by the University of Minnesota,
Farmfest, and the Minnesota Farm Network


*** Program will include several Special Guests ***


* Schedule subject to change.
]]> 2009-07-20T14:09:26-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/eight_reasons_why_farmers_should_support_cap_and_trade_legislation/ {summary} Farm Economy

Posted by: J. Drake Hamilton in Renewable Energy Standard, legislation, global warming, federal issues, energy efficiency, energy conservation, economic development, clean energy, carbon regulation, agriculture on Jun 11, 2009

Source: Fresh Energy


Many members of Congress represent districts where farming is a critical part of the economy. That's why our elected leaders need to talk about how passing climate and energy legislation will benefit producers in their regions.

I quote at length below from an assessment written by Jake Caldwell and Alexandra Kougentakis of the Center for American Progress.

"Agriculture, energy, and global warming are inextricably linked, which is why America's farmers must be a part of the solution to global warming. Today the U.S. House Committee on Agriculture conducts a hearing on the American Clean Energy and Security Act, H.R. 2454. A close review of the legislation reveals that it provides a significant opportunity for U.S. farmers to increase their income while safeguarding their livelihoods and the nation's food and energy supplies.

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack called reductions of carbon dioxide a "new income source [that could] change the old ways of supporting farms." He has urged farmers to seize the economic opportunities from reducing greenhouse gas pollution and "not to be fearful of this future." H.R. 2454 recognizes and rewards the benefits farmers can provide to the United States and the world in ending our dependence on fossil fuels and confronting climate change.

H.R. 2454 offers an opportunity for farmers to diversify their sources of income and cut costs by increasing energy efficiency. With modest improvements, ACESA can designate a more explicit role for agriculture in the carbon offset market without jeopardizing the gains for farmers already included in the overall legislation. ACESA rewards good practices and provides the tools to ensure that American farmers can benefit from solutions to global warming.

Here are eight reasons why farmers should support this bill:

1. Farms and forests can reduce global warming pollution.

U.S. agricultural and forest lands sequester 246 million metric tons of carbon annually, absorbing 13 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. With the appropriate incentives these lands could ultimately absorb 50 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. H.R. 2454 promotes U.S. agricultural lands as a carbon sink by encouraging low tillage practices, tree and perennial planting, erosion prevention, rotational grazing, agricultural carbon offsets, and a market for carbon sequestration.

2. Farmers can grow dollars by selling carbon offsets.

H.R. 2454 establishes a carbon offsets market that would allow farmers to create and sell carbon offsets to polluting entities in lieu of reductions by polluters. This would reduce the cost of emissions reductions for polluters. Farmers would be paid for their longstanding carbon sequestration and land stewardship efforts. By increasing carbon sequestration and reducing emissions from greenhouse gases such as methane and nitrous oxide on the farm, farmers can qualify for carbon offsets that would generate increased farm revenue. The Energy Information Administration has estimated the value of agricultural offsets to be close to $24 billion annually.

U.S. agriculture produces 413 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year, while generating two-thirds of all nitrous oxide emissions and significant methane emissions. These two gases are more potent greenhouse gases than carbon dioxide. Overall, the agricultural sector is responsible for 6 percent of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. U.S. agriculture must take the lead in reducing these on-farm greenhouse gas emissions. There are many opportunities for farmers to make reductions and reap profits.

The offsets program can be improved by involving the U.S. Department of Agriculture in the Environmental Protection Agency's process to develop the offsets rules and market operation. USDA's expertise and presence in nearly every state should assist in the development of measurement methodologies to enable ACESA's Offsets Integrity Advisory Board to determine scientifically rigorous high-quality offsets.

3. Farmers can earn new income by leasing their land for wind turbines while continuing to farm.

The renewable electricity standard in H.R. 2454 requires utilities to generate 15 percent of their electricity from renewable resources by 2020 (see Title I, Sect. 101). Farmers can help utility companies meet this goal by installing wind turbines, solar panels, and other renewable energy technologies on their land and buildings. Leasing land for a single utility-scale wind turbine could provide a farmer with about $3,000 a year in income. The Department of Energy estimates that if 5 percent of the nation's energy comes from wind power by 2020, rural America could see $60 billion in capital investment. Farmers and rural landowners would derive $1.2 billion in new income, and 80,000 new jobs would be created over the next two decades.

4. Farms will produce the cleaner fuels of the future.

The current renewable fuels standard establishes ambitious targets and strives to produce advanced biofuels that deliver measurable lifecycle greenhouse gas reductions, minimize the use of food-based feed stocks, and adhere to certifiable environmental and land use safeguards. H.R. 2454 works with the RFS to promote advanced biofuels grown and produced in rural America.

The RFS has a production target of 21 billion gallons of advanced biofuels by 2022. It provides appropriate flexibility to allow producers to meet the RFS mandate with significant contributions from third generation biofuels without dictating a specific type of biofuel product or technology. The approximately 15 billion gallons of existing and future conventional ethanol production capacity would be exempt from greenhouse gas reduction targets.

5. A safety net to protect rural families from higher energy prices.

H.R. 2454 provides for a monthly cash energy refund for rural consumers experiencing a loss in purchasing power due to energy costs. (Title IV, Section 432).

6. Energy efficiency measures would reduce farmers' electricity bills.

The energy efficiency standard in H.R. 2454 provides farmers with the opportunity to make significant energy efficiency upgrades. Farmers are eligible for federal tax credits for energy-efficient appliances to help them reduce energy use. Dairy farms, which use more energy than most farms due to the energy-intensive nature of milk production, could in particular benefit from the savings from using energy more efficiently. Installation of energy-efficient lighting, ventilation fans, and milking systems could save a farmer hundreds of dollars a year.

Energy expenditures represent 6 percent of total national farm production costs, costing farmers over $10 billion per year. Recent increases in oil prices and volatility will make energy costs even more of a burden for farmers.

The American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy estimates that the potential for energy and cost savings in agriculture is over 98 trillion British Thermal Units and $1 billion annually. The potential efficiency savings for agricultural producers is 5.8 percent compared to the 2002 consumption total of 1.7 quadrillion BTUs.

7. Scientific review would help identify future threats.

The evidence of harms from global warming are mounting at an alarming rate. To ensure that farmers and agriculture can identify and respond to climate changes, the bill establishes an interagency National Climate Change Adaptation Council that would assess the impacts of climate change on agriculture and other sectors. A fund is also established to provide money for state and local adaptation projects, including on farms. (See Title IV, Sect. 462).

8. The American Clean Energy and Security Act protects farmers from stormy forecasts.

Inaction on global warming represents ongoing adherence to today's status quo of volatile energy prices, extreme weather events, and increasing dependence on disaster assistance. Agriculture is particularly vulnerable to the increased water shortages, widespread drought and floods, and lower crop yields that would result from global warming. H.R. 2454 makes the reductions in greenhouse gas pollution scientists urge to prevent the worst impacts of global warming."


]]> 2009-06-12T11:34:58-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/report_hot_dry_weather_helps_minn_farmers_plant/ {summary} Farm Economy



St. Paul, Minn. (AP) — The hot, dry weather last week let farmers stay in the fields to nearly complete planting the Minnesota corn crop, but topsoil moisture is drying up.

That's from the weekly crop weather report put out Tuesday by the Minnesota field office the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The report says high winds last week eroded soils and damaged newly emerged crops in some areas. Farmers need rain for the crops to keep growing, especially soybeans recently planted in dry ground.

Topsoil moisture supplies rated 11 percent very short, 27 percent short, 53 percent adequate and 9 percent surplus across the state. There were more than six days suitable for field work.

Corn planting is 96 percent complete. Seventy-one percent of the corn acres have emerged compared with, 30 percent last year and a five-year average of 63 percent.


]]> 2009-05-27T11:25:35-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/cow_genome_to_transform_farming/ {summary} Animal Genetics



By Victoria Gill
Science reporter,
BBC News
April 23, 2009


The genome of a female Hereford cow has been sequenced, which could be a starting point for major improvements in the agricultural industry.

Analysing this blueprint of DNA code for the chemical building blocks of the animal is revealing the unique role that many of the genes play.

The information is likely to have a major impact on livestock breeding.

The study, published in the journal Science, was a six-year effort by more than 300 scientists in 25 countries.

Cattle now join an elite group of animals to have had their genome sequenced - a group that includes humans, other primates and rodents.

"We chose to study the cow genome because these animals are of such immense importance to humans," explained Richard Gibbs from Baylor College of Medicine's Human Genome Sequencing Center, a leading contributor to the project.

By comparing the results to other sequenced genomes, including that of humans, the researchers discovered how cows could help inform research into human health and disease.

"We found that cows are much more similar to us than rodents are," said Professor Gibbs.

"This is because rodents are evolving much faster. And it tells us aspects of human biology that we could actually study in cows."

Unique breed

Of the 22,000 genes in the cow genome, 14,000 are common to all mammalian species.

"These 14,000 are the common engine room of mammals," said Ross Tellam, a scientist from the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) in Australia and one of the authors of the Science paper.

"The remaining genes are unique to each species."

The double-stranded DNA molecule - wound in a helix - is held together by four chemical components called bases

Adenine (A) bonds with thymine (T); cytosine(C) bonds with guanine (G)

Groupings of these "letters" form the "code of life"; a code that is very nearly universal to all Earth's organisms
Written in the DNA are genes which cells use as starting templates to make proteins; these sophisticated molecules build and maintain our bodies

And many of the genetic features that make cattle unique are what make them so important to us.

"If we can see precisely what genes cause the differences between each animal, there is an opportunity to enhance selective breeding," he explained.

"We can use natural methods - simply selecting the best animals - to produce livestock that make more meat or more milk."

This comparison between individual animals has already begun in a related study published in the same issue of Science.

An associated scientific team has produced a map charting the key DNA differences, also known as haplotypes, between varieties of cattle.

They compared the Hereford genome sequence with those of six other breeds.

Using this bovine "HapMap", researchers can track the differences between the breeds that affect the quality of meat and milk yields.

"[This map] will transform how dairy and beef cattle are bred," said Richard Gibbs.



"Genetic tools are already being developed and proving useful to the dairy industry, and we predict they will be applied to improve the beef industry.

"We hope the information will also be used to come up with innovative ways to reduce the environmental impact of cattle, such as greenhouse gases released by herds."

Microbe attack

The study has also identified new genes involved in the cows' immunity.

These are linked to the animals' digestive system.

Cattle are ruminants, which means they have a four-chambered stomach that contains a multitude of resident bacteria, allowing them to digest plant material, such as grass, that is very tough to break down.

"We think these genes evolved in response to how vulnerable cattle are to microbial attack," said Dr Tellam.

"Because of all the microbes that live in their rumen, and because the animals live in such large herds, they are very vulnerable to disease."

]]> 2009-04-24T00:00:52-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/the_growing_lust_for_agricultural_lands/ {summary} World Hunger



by: Marie-Béatrice Baudet and Laetitia Clavreul
Le Monde - France
Published at Truthout.com on Tuesday 14 April 2009


Not a day goes by without new acreage being signed over. "For Sale" ads for agricultural property are now featured in the international financial press. And there's no dearth of clients. "At the end of 2008," Jean-Yves Carfantan, author of "Choc alimentaire mondial, ce qui nous attend demain" ["Global Food Shock: What's in Store for Us Tomorrow"] (Albin Michel, 2009), observes, "five countries stood out for the extent of their foreign arable land acquisitions: China, South Korea, the United Arab Emirates, Japan, and Saudi Arabia. Together, they control over 7.6 million cultivable hectares outside their national territory, or the equivalent of 5.6 times the utilizable agricultural surface of Belgium." The phenomenon of land grabs is certainly not new, as it goes back to the first colonizations. However, in the opinion of many observers, economists and NGOs, it is now accelerating.

The explosion of agricultural commodity prices in 2007 and 2008, following the example of the same phenomenon in the 1970's, made many investors decide to turn to land. The fall in prices has not made them run away. As GRAIN - an international NGO which seeks to promote agricultural biodiversity - notes in a report published in October 2008 and entitled, "Seized: The 2008 landgrab for food and financial security," given the present financial debacle, all kinds of actors from the financial and agribusiness sectors - pension funds, hedge funds, etc. - have abandoned derivative markets and consider that agricultural land has become a new strategic asset."

They are not alone. Many countries have made the same analysis, not to find sources of surplus value, but for reasons of food security. "The objective is clearly to parry the consequences of stagnation in their domestic production, induced by unrestrained urbanization and the reduction of water resources," Mr. Carfantan explains. Arable land is becoming ever more rare in the Middle East, for example. So, the petro-monarchies have been investing the last three years in the creation of extraterritorial annexes. Qatar controls lands in Indonesia; Bahrain in the Philippines; Kuwait in Burma, etc.

"Agricultural Outsourcing"

It's not at all surprising that the Chinese government should, for its part, make a policy of agricultural land acquisition abroad one of its priorities: the country represents 40 percent of the global active agricultural population, but possesses only nine percent of Earth's arable land, Mr. Carfantan remarks. As for Japan and South Korea, they already import 60 percent of their food from abroad.

The canvassing of Southern countries' political officials is intensifying. At the end of 2008, Moammar Kaddafi, Libya's head of state, came to the Ukraine to propose an exchange of oil and gas for (local) fertile land. The business is about to be concluded. Thursday, April 16, a Jordanian delegation will go to Sudan to strengthen its agricultural presence there somewhat - a presence initiated already ten years ago. But the movement also concerns Europe. According to the weekly, La France agricole [Agricultural France], 15 percent of the total surface of Romania - or over 15 million hectares - is in the hands of owners from other European countries.

This strategy of "agricultural outsourcing" is not without consequences. What about local populations directly threatened by this commoditization of the land they live from? Today, the planet contains 2.8 billion farmers (out of a population of 6.7 billion people) and three-quarters of those who are hungry live in the countryside. Land registries are often nonexistent. How are and how will those who till and live from the land be indemnified if they have no property titles?

"Producers' organizations are alerting us more all the time about the question of land concentration and about conflicts between small peasants and agribusiness that cultivates for export," explains Benjamin Peyrot des Gachons, from the NGO, Peuples solidaires, which has chosen to organize an international forum on land access (in Montreuil, April 18 and 19) to celebrate the World Day for Peasant Struggle April 17. Farmers from India, Ecuador, Brazil, Burkina Faso and the Philippines will come to bear witness.

The NGO militates for the development of usage rights - with land remaining in the government's hands - not for property rights, which the World Bank favors. Although the attribution of property titles may allow the coexistence of family agriculture and the presence of foreign investors to occur, Peuples solidaires "deems that peasants will not have the means to acquire land." And even if land is attributed to them, "they will rapidly be forced to sell it, should they get in trouble." According to the NGO, property rights will consequently benefit big operators, whether foreign or not.

Another problem provoked by this race for arable land: cohabitation between investing countries and the local population. "Look at what happened in Madagascar after the announcement of the rental of 1.3 million hectares to the South Korean Daewoo Group," resumes Mr. Carfantan. "It was an explosion. I believe tensions will be inevitable wherever this occurs, making foreign agricultural enclaves veritable besieged fortresses." Unless, he argues, harvest sharing and technology transfers are organized so that all may bank on the long term.

A Million Chinese Peasants in Africa by 2010

In 2006, Beijing signed agricultural cooperation agreements with several African countries that allowed the installation of 14 experimental farms in Zambia, Zimbabwe, Uganda and Tanzania. "We believe that between now and 2010, a million Chinese peasants could be installed on these lands," explains economist and agricultural consultant to Brazil, Jean-Yves Carfantan. Candidates for expatriation are found among the peasants affected by the present crisis.

The Official Objective: to help the receiving countries increase their production, thanks to Chinese technologies: "The hybrid rice varieties created by Beijing allow improvements in yield of 60 percent compared to the global average," Mr. Carfantan notes. However, also according to him, it's clear that a good part of the harvests will be exported to China, in order to guarantee that market's long-term supplies.

--------

This article is the first of a series on the rush for arable land, which has led Le Monde to investigate in Mali, the Maldives, Saudi Arabia and Kazakhstan.

Translation: Truthout French language editor Leslie Thatcher.

]]> 2009-04-20T03:43:00-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/i_robot_and_gardener_mit_droids_tend_plants/ {summary} Farm Technology




CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) - These gardeners would have green thumbs - if they had thumbs.

A class of undergraduates at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has created a set of robots that can water, harvest and pollinate cherry tomato plants.

The small, $3,000 robots, which move through the garden on a base similar to a Roomba vacuum, are networked to the plants. When the plants indicate they need water, the robots can sprinkle them from a water pump. When the plants have a ripe tomato, the machines use their arms to pluck the fruit.

Even though robots have made few inroads into agriculture, these robots' creators hope their technology eventually could be used by farmers to reduce the natural resources and the difficult labor needed to tend crops.

Last spring, Daniela Rus, a professor who runs the Distributed Robotics Lab at MIT, began a two-part course. In the first semester, the students learned the basics of creating and using robots.

By the fall, the students were ready to have robots tackle a real-world problem. Rus and Nikolaus Correll, a postdoctoral assistant in Rus' lab, challenged the students to create a "distributed robotic garden" by the end of the semester.

The 12 students broke into groups, each tasked with solving a different problem, such as creating the mechanical arm needed to harvest the tomatoes or perfecting the network that let the plants and robots share information.

By the end of the fall term, the "garden" inside Rus' lab was green and growing.

Now there are four cherry tomato plants nestled into a plywood base covered in fake grass. Next to each pot is a gray docking station for the robots.

Each plant and robot is connected to a computer network. The plants, through sensors in their soil, can tell the network when they need water or fertilizer, while the robots use a camera to inventory the plants' fruit. The robots also are programmed with a rudimentary growth model of the cherry tomato plants, which tells them roughly when a tomato will be ripe enough to be picked.

But the students quickly encountered challenges, both robotic and biologic.

Huan Liu, a 21-year-old computer science major, said designing the robot to pick the delicate tomatoes was made more difficult because the fruit would grow in unreachable places, such as behind stems or above where the robot's arm could reach.

"The tomatoes, they come out of nowhere, or just in weird places," Liu said.

Robots have made factory assembly lines more efficient and are being developed for in-home purposes, such as serving as health care aides. Yet there hasn't been much use for robotics in agriculture, partly because of the challenge of getting machines to work in unpredictable environments.

There have been attempts to get robots to replace humans at farm tasks, from thinning apple trees to picking asparagus, but none of the machines "have sufficient capacity to compete with human beings," said Tony Grift, an associate professor in the Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at the University of Illinois.

Even when technology has proven to be useful in agriculture, such as on tractors equipped with satellite imagery of fields, it often is prohibitively expensive.

Rus and Correll hope to conquer those kinds of challenges and get robots to work in farms.

"Agriculture contributes a lot of damage to the land, the soil, the water and the environment," Rus said. "So if we can figure out a way of using robots and automation to deliver nutrients to plants - pesticides, fertilizers, water when it's needed - instead of sort of mass spreading them, then we hope we would have an impact on the environment."]]> 2009-04-11T21:26:45-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/cattle_respond_to_magnetic_fields_from_power_lines/ {summary} Animal Health




WASHINGTON (AP) - High-voltage power lines mess with animal magnetism. Researchers, who reported last year that most cows and deer tend to orient themselves in a north-south alignment, have now found that power lines can disorient the animals.

When the power lines run east-west, that's the way grazing cattle tend to line up, researchers led by Hynek Burda and Sabine Begall of the faculty of biology at the University of Duisburg-Essen in Germany report in Tuesday's edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

They also found that cows and deer grazing under northeast-southwest or northwest-southeast power lines faced in random directions.

The research team studied cows and deer using satellite and aerial images.

In their report last August, Burda and colleagues suggested the north-south orientation was in response to the Earth's magnetic field.

The new study adds weight to the animals responding to magnetic effects, since power lines also produce a magnetic field. And the effect was most noticeable close to the power lines, declining as the magnetic field of the electric lines was reduced by distance.

Wind and weather can also affect which ways cows choose to face, but without such factors about two-thirds of them tended to align north-south when away from power lines.

The Earth's magnetic field is thought to be a factor in how birds navigate, and other animals also are believed to respond to it.

In addition to Burda and Begall, the research team included Julia Neef of the University of Duisburg-Essen, Jaroslav Cerveny of the Czech University of Life Sciences and Pavel Nemec of Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic.

The research was supported by the Czech Science Foundation and the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport of the Czech Republic.

---

On the Net:

PNAS: http://www.pnas.org


]]> 2009-03-16T21:51:42-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/new_for_cows_a_vaccine_for_e_coli/ {summary} Animal Health



by Steve Karnowski,
Associated Press
March 12, 2009


St. Paul, Minn. — (AP) - A Minnesota company has won federal approval to become the first in the U.S. to market an E. coli vaccine for cattle, a new weapon against a foodborne disease that can cause serious illness and even death in people.

Epitopix LLC was given a conditional license from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to sell its vaccine.

Nayyera Haq, a USDA spokeswoman, called it "an important step toward improving food safety in this country," and a major beef group agreed.

"It really is a major milestone for our industry," Michelle Rossman, director of beef safety research for the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, said Thursday.

Most E. coli bacteria are harmless but one kind, known as O157, sickens an estimated 70,000 people in the U.S. every year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Most recover in a few days, but some get serious complications such as kidney failure. Contaminated beef is a common source and has led to several big recalls in recent years.

James Sandstrom, general manger of Epitopix, said the vaccine works by preventing E. coli O157 in cows' intestines from absorbing iron.

The company's technology takes the proteins that the bacteria use to absorb iron from the host animal, and injects them back into cattle to generate an immune response against those proteins. The bacteria can't live without the iron.

With fewer bacteria in the intestines, the risk is reduced that they will contaminate the carcass at slaughter.

Sandstrom said the vaccine will enter commercial use this month, but it will be several months before it's widely available. He said some major packers and producers will be the first to use it, but declined to name them, saying they don't want their names associated with E. coli even for research.

It's not clear yet how widely the industry will embrace the vaccine.

"That's the $64 million question," Sandstrom said.

E. coli O157 doesn't make cattle sick, so producers who already face slim profit margins may need incentives. Sandstrom said privately owned Epitopix hasn't set a price for the vaccine yet, but is hoping incentives will come from packers and retailers who would profit from safer beef.

A Canadian company that makes an E. coli vaccine for cattle sells it there for $7 U.S. ($9 Canadian) per cow.

Two of the nation's largest meat processors, Cargill Meat Solutions and Tyson Foods, didn't immediately respond to calls Thursday for comment.

Rossman said the support is likely to be there. She said the industry has already spent millions of dollars on technologies to fight E. coli in packing houses, and is anxious for strategies that work before slaughter. Her group helped fund research at West Texas A&M University that led the USDA to grant the conditional license.

Similar work was also done at Kansas State University.

Guy Loneragan, who led the research at West Texas A&M, said he did his study at a commercial feedlot to see how the vaccine worked in "real world" conditions.

Among the cattle that got it, he said, there was an 85 percent reduction in animals shedding O157. Among those that still did, there were 98 percent fewer cells of it in their feces. He said that logically should mean fewer E. coli illnesses in people.

The conditional license allows Epitopix to market the vaccine immediately, but the company must continue conducting potency and efficacy studies to get full licensure.

Another E. coli vaccine for cattle, developed by Bioniche Life Sciences Inc. of Canada, received full approval there last October and Bioniche is seeking USDA approval to sell it here.

Haq declined to say how close that might be, but Rick Culbert, president of Bioniche's food safety division, said the main thing left is lining up manufacturing facilities in the U.S., as the USDA requires. A Colorado company, GeneThera Inc., is also working on a vaccine, but it's further away from approval.


]]> 2009-03-12T22:41:08-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/obama_plan_could_cost_minnesota_farms_millions_by_mark_steil_minnesota_publ/ {summary} Farm Policy



by Mark Steil,
Minnesota Public Radio
February 27, 2009


Audio player:

Thousands of Minnesota farmers will see a major portion of their income disappear if Congress passes President Obama's farm proposal. Hundreds of millions of dollars could be at stake in the state. But congressional farm leaders, including Minnesota's Collin Peterson, are lining up against the plan.


St. Paul, Minn. — The Obama budget calls for ending direct subsidy payments to any farmer who sells more than $500,000 in grain and livestock a year. The size of those payments is based on the number of acres and what crop they're producing.

Southwest Minnesota farmer Fred Dauer likes the president's plan.

"If you gross over $500,000 you don't need to get any help from the federal government," Dauer said, who farms about 700 acres.

He receives some payments from the federal government, but many of his crops, sweet corn, peas and alfalfa, do not qualify for the subsidy program.

"I try to raise enough gross revenue that I can justify being out here on my own," Dauer said. "And these big boys -- they just farm the federal government."
A soybean farm with $500,000 in sales is only going to end up netting about $36,000.
- Tara Smith, American Farm Bureau Federation

Dauer said large operations use the subsidy money to buy up land and squeeze their smaller neighbors out of business.

Whether that's true, there's a lot of money at stake for Minnesota.

According to the U.S. Census of Agriculture released earlier this month, there are about 6,700 farms in Minnesota that sell more $500,000 of grain, livestock and other products each year.

They represent less than one-tenth of all the farms in the state. But they generate almost two-thirds of the agricultural sales in Minnesota, some $8 billion.

Minnesota Congressman and House Agriculture Committee Chair Collin Peterson has indicated he's leaning against the Obama plan. Peterson told the Washington Times newspaper, "we just finished the farm bill last year and I don't think we'll open it up."

Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., told the newspaper it is "premature to make any sweeping changes" to the farm bill.

Most major agricultural organizations also oppose the president's farm budget. Tara Smith with the American Farm Bureau Federation said the subsidies are needed to help farmers pay the increasing costs of planting a crop.

"A soybean farm with $500,000 in sales is only going to end up netting about $36,000," Smith said. "Farmers see a lot of money go through their fingers in a given year."

$36,000 is well below the U.S. median household income for 2007.

In his budget plan, President Obama said large farmers can replace the subsidy payments in part with what he calls "environmental services."

That includes renewable energy production like wind turbines. Farmers could also generate income by sequestering carbon on the land.

The president said he wants to maintain a strong safety net for farm families and beginning farmers. His plan will likely gain support from groups who favor small farms and more rigorous conservation practices on agricultural land.

However, it looks like the plan will face opposition from the representatives and senators who decide farm legislation in congress.


]]> 2009-02-27T13:32:15-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/milk_prices_slashed_in_half_for_minnesota_farmers/ {summary} Farm Economy




February 7, 2009

New London, Minn. (AP) — Milk prices paid to farmers have fallen by half since last fall. And that means some Minnesota farmers will struggle to break even this year.

Last fall, milk prices peaked at $20 a hundredweight.

There are several reasons for the quick price drop, including overproduction and under-consumption - both domestically and internationally.

European subsidies were also increased, which decreased the demand for American milk products.

Steve Combs and his wife Amy own a 100-head Holstein dairy herd west of New London.

Steve Combs says he expects to be working at a loss for much of the year.


]]> 2009-02-08T00:04:13-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/farm_bill_101_a_quick_and_easy_guide_to_understanding_the_farm_bill/ {summary} Farm Legislation

The Farm Bill is a law renewed every five years that governs our federal farm, food, and conservation policy. It is very broad legislation, affecting the availability of food stamps for low-income families; the research agenda for public agricultural research; investments in food safety; economic development in rural areas; efforts to conserve our soil, rivers, and forests; and government support to the people who grow and harvest our food.

Though titled a “Farm” Bill, it actually affects the lives of every American, whether they live in a rural community or big city.

This tutorial, written in 2007 to help understand legislative actions is still the best overall tutorial that I have seen for people who are interested in an orientation to the subject.

Farm Bill 101 (pages: 16)


]]> 2009-02-05T11:58:09-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/ag_census_shows_number_of_minn_farms_holds_stable/ {summary} Farm Economy


by Mark Steil,
Minnesota Public Radio
February 4, 2009

The traditional family farm is getting more scarce and large farms are producing more and more of our food. That's one of the findings of the 2007 Census of Agriculture, released today by the U.S. Agriculture Department. But the census also indicates there's still hope for smaller operations.


St. Paul, Minn. — The census is a snapshot of U.S. agriculture that comes out every five years. Minnesota Agriculture Commissioner Gene Hugoson said it's a measuring stick of the industry.

"Minnesota still remains a dominate force in agriculture on the national picture," said Hugoson. "We're ranking number seven among all the states and I think that's fairly significant."

Hugoson says Minnesota's farm income rose sharply during the years the census covered. He says the farm income figures are some of the most significant in the census. Average net income per farm roughly doubled between 2002 and 2007. But Hugoson says while income rose, the cost of farming went up almost as rapidly.

"Particularly in the areas of energy, I think there was something like about a 90 percent increase for fuel, fertilizer, those things that are derived from oil," said Hugoson.

Overall, the census said the number of farms in Minnesota actually increased slightly, to just under 81,000. Nearly all the growth occurred in the very smallest operations, hobby farms, and in the largest farms. The number of farms with annual sales of over a half-million dollars a year increased 77 percent in Minnesota over the last five years.

High costs for supplies, land and equipment continue to favor large operations. The bigger size allows them to produce more crops at a lower cost. Middle-sized operations, the traditional family farm, continued to shrink in number. The number of farms with annual sales between $50,000 and $99,000 fell by almost one-fifth in the last five years.

However, not all categories of family farms declined. At least one showed rapid growth. For the first time, the census of agriculture includes information on organic farms. According to the census, in 2007 there were 718 Minnesota farms producing organic crops. That's a 66 percent gain from the best previous estimate, a 2005 state report. Jim Riddle runs an organic farm outreach program for the University of Minnesota and he said organic food should be a growth area for years to come.

"It's still a supply and demand driven market and there's just a very strong demand for organic products," said Riddle.

Organic food sales have grown at an annual rate of 15 percent or better for the past decade in the U.S. The census of agriculture puts the value of Minnesota organic production in 2007 at about $40 million. Riddle said one thing that attracts farmers to organic production are the generally higher prices they're paid compared to conventional agriculture. Right now, he said organic corn brings over $9 a bushel compared to about $3.50 on the conventional market.

"The organic market has remained strong and stable," said Riddle. "And farmers want stability in demand and prices and that's something that the organic market has delivered."

Organic production is not the only thing changing in Minnesota agriculture; some minority groups have increased their presence as well. The number of ethnic Asian farmers almost quadrupled between 2002 and 2007, though it's still a relatively small number, about 148 farmers. The number of Latino farmers though fell sharply in the latest census.

The census numbers were released at a time of increasing uncertainty about the future of agriculture compared to the last few years. The expense of farming continues to rise, but the sale price of crops and livestock are falling. Those changing economic conditions will influence what the next census says about the state of agricultural.

]]> 2009-02-04T23:48:11-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/agriculture_obama_vs_mccain/ {summary} Farm Policy What's At Stake: Agriculture


by Jerry Hagstrom
(National Journal Magazine - 10/3/2008)
http://www.smallgrains.org/article.aspx?id=7618


The war in Iraq aside, there may be no other issue on which McCain and Obama differ so starkly as they do on agricultural policy. McCain has opposed farm bill after farm bill; following Bush's veto of the 2008 version of the five-year legislation, McCain said he also would have vetoed it. Obama supported the bill, which Congress passed over Bush's veto with more than 300 votes in the House and 82 votes in the Senate.

Obama says that proper implementation of the new farm bill would be a high priority for his administration, and that's where the biggest differences come into play. Most of the law went into effect on Wednesday at the beginning of fiscal 2009, but it's unclear whether the Bush administration will finish writing the regulations on several new programs or whether those regulations will satisfy Congress. The bill includes an optional new program called "average crop revenue election," or ACRE, that would make payments to farmers if the revenue from a crop declines. Congressional leaders and the Bush administration have been sparring over which years the government should use as the revenue basis for starting the program. The bill also included new aid to farmers who have experienced weather-related disasters; administration officials say they are not sure whether they will complete the regulations for that program by January 20.

Obama would probably implement the farm bill in a generous fashion, given his history as a Democratic senator from Illinois and his backing during the primaries and caucuses from former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., and other senators from the Plains states.

McCain's top economics adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, has said that the Arizonan would target farm subsidies as a key part of reducing the federal deficit. High commodity prices in recent years, however, have already cut farm subsidy payments to less than half the $20 billion that was common in the late 1990s. If the high prices continue, the only way that McCain could save much money from agriculture spending would be to cut nutrition programs, which now account for 65 to 70 percent of the Agriculture Department's budget. That would be hard to pull off, particularly since the 2008 legislation took several steps to boost nutrition programs.

The first agriculture battle of the next administration will be over the reauthorization of the child nutrition programs, due next year. Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee Chairman Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, has signaled that he wants school lunch and breakfast programs, as well as other USDA spending to emphasize healthy foods; that portends a battle in Congress over what foods are healthy. Harkin and Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., may also try to restrict food advertising to children. Obama might be more sympathetic to Harkin and Durbin's arguments than would McCain.

In his statements to farm groups, McCain says he will support agriculture by opening up markets in foreign countries. Obama says he would promote trade, but he also expresses concern about current trade negotiations, which have not gone well. Leaders of farm groups fear that McCain's opposition to government assistance to ethanol programs might translate into a decline in corn and other commodity prices. On the other hand, they expect that a McCain administration would be friendlier to farmers on such issues as the regulation of "confined animal feeding operations," or CAFOs.

The big battle will come in 2012, when the next farm bill is due. One Republican lobbyist said that the congressional override of Bush's veto set a precedent and that farmers could comfortably vote for McCain with the knowledge that Congress could deliver the next bill over a veto. But Democrats say that 2012 is too far off to count on a repeat of that phenomenon.


]]> 2008-10-13T14:36:04-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/iowa_agriculture_secretary_discusses_a_trying_year/ {summary} Farm Economy




DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) - Like any farmer, Iowa Agriculture Secretary Bill Northey is eager to put the pains - and the rains - of 2008 behind him.

By any measure, Northey said, it has been a trying year for Iowa farmers - record rain fall, record flooding, fitful weather throughout. The irony is that 2008 was a year that started with great expectations: Inputs, the costs that go into farming, were higher than ever but prices for corn and soybeans lingered near record highs.

"When you go into a year like this one, you look at it and you think, 'This is one of those years when you're going to have a good enough year to help yourself through the next 10 years,' to some extent," Northey said in an interview with The Associated Press.

Most Iowa farmers still have a good chance of finishing with a good year, but the state's first-term agriculture secretary lamented that it still was, "one of those years." One where everything and everyone, led by Mother Nature, seemed to be conspire against farmers.

Northey said the final verdict has yet to be rendered for Iowa farmers. The weather has clearly wreaked havoc, particularly in northeastern and southern Iowa, he said, though the first frost has held off, giving farmers a needed reprieve.

"Of course you thought, with the year we've had, that of course we'd get an early frost," he said. "But so far that hasn't happened, and that's helping."

Northey said what he's seen this year has sharpened his focus as an agriculture secretary. There are only so many ways farmers can protect against a deluge, he said, but finding better flood protections would be one of his primary goals going forward.

"We've made great strides," he said. "But we need to do more."

On another front important to farmers, Northey said he has been pleased with the state's efforts to pursue renewable energy, including initiatives led by Democratic Gov. Chet Culver.

Last month, Northey spoke out publicly about his disappointment that his party had included a plank in the Republican platform calling for the end of the renewable fuel standard. Northey said any curtailment of the ethanol industry would have a drastic effect on Iowa and the rest of the Corn Belt.

"If we didn't have the market ethanol provided, we might be looking at some pretty bad times," he said. "It would look a lot like the '80s. They were piling corn in the streets and we were producing more than we needed."

Northey said he believes export markets have improved for farmers since the 1980s farm crisis, but they're no match for the demand from ethanol plants.

"It's such an important market," Northey said. "It'd be pretty hard to find a market on the fly for a billion bushels of corn. I'm pretty sure an export market could not fill that."

---

YAKIMA, Wash. (AP) - The overall value of Washington state's agricultural production last year increased 23 percent to a record $8.51 billion, up from $6.9 billion in 2006, according to the National Agricultural Statistics Service.

Four of the top five crops - apples, milk, wheat and potatoes - experienced record gains in 2007, as did a number of other foods.

Agriculture continues to be the cornerstone of Washington's economy, particularly when compared to recent downturns in other economic sectors, said Bob Gore, acting director of the state Department of Agriculture.

Apples again topped the list at $1.75 billion, compared with the previous high of $1.41 billion in 2006. Washington is the nation's top apple producer, growing about half the U.S. crop.

Milk, the second crop on the list, for the first time topped $1 billion after declining nearly 18 percent a year before. Rounding out the top five crops were: wheat at $975 million, surpassing the previous record of $756 million set in 1996; potatoes at $685 million, ahead of the previous high of $562 million in 2006; and cattle and calves at $581 million.


]]> 2008-10-07T09:56:50-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/farmers_embrace_genetically_modified_beets/ {summary} Farm Economy The sugar beet harvest is starting in the Red River Valley. It's the first harvest of genetically modified sugar beets. GMO crops often generated controversy over the past couple of decades. Some farmers refused to grow them and some consumers fought to keep them out of the food supply. Most farmers are apparently happy with the Roundup Ready beets, but there are some lingering concerns.


by Dan Gunderson,
Minnesota Public Radio
September 12, 2008


Moorhead, Minn. — American Crystal Sugar company director of agriculture Dan Bernhardson guides his SUV down a narrow gravel road, into a muddy sugar beet field east of Moorhead.

Kirk Watt is starting to prepare this field for harvest. He didn't plant the genetically modified Roundup Ready beets this year, but wishes he had.

"We had non-Roundup here and the guy over there has Roundup and I tell you, his look better," says Watt ruefully. "It's not so much now, but boy, in June it was just night and day difference."

This field has large areas where a thick crop of pigweed dwarfs the sugar beets. The weeds are more than a nuisance, they lower crop yield and cost the farmer thousands of dollars.

"I'm sure those spots that are thick with pigweed you'll probably have two, three, four ton less per acre," says Watt.

It's hard to control weeds in sugar beets. Traditionally, the chemicals that kill weeds would also kill the beets.

So farmers applied carefully timed, very low doses of herbicide several times a year to control the weeds without killing the beets. They used migrant farm labor to remove the weeds that escaped the herbicide.

This year, rain kept Kirk Watt out of the field when the weeds were small. By the time he could spray, the weeds were too big to be killed by the low dose of herbicide, and it was too costly to hire laborers to hoe the weeds. So the weeds rise about the beets in thick clumps.

But in his neighbors field of Roundup Ready beets, there's not a weed to be seen. That's because the beets are genetically modified to be immune to the broad spectrum weed killer Roundup. So farmers can easily kill weeds any time without worrying about damaging the beet plants.

American Crystal Sugar Director of Agriculture Dan Bernhardson, says just over half of the sugar beets planted this year were the Roundup Ready variety created by Monsanto. He says farmers who planted the modified sugar beets have a clear advantage in weed control.

"The other advantage we see is less cultivation of the field, less passes across the field. Also, the number of times you have to spray. Most conventional varieties have four applications of spray where roundup varieties we expect two applications. So, less trips across the field, less diesel fuel being burned," says Bernhardson.

So the farmer saves money on labor and fuel. But that doesn't mean the GMO beets are cheaper to grow.

Monsanto charges a technology fee for the seeds, about $60 per acre, which offsets much of the savings. Tests this year show the GMO beets overall don't produce higher yields than traditional varieties. That's expected to change as the GMO seed is improved over the next couple of years. Kirk Watt has weighed all the costs and variables and says he's almost certain to plant all GMO beets next year. "One of the variables is increased yield. They say it might be a two-ton increased yield. If that's that case it will definitely make it more profitable," says Watt. "Hopefully the tech fee doesn't keep increasing every year. Because once we have Roundup, that's all we have. We might be limited to that seed. That part concerns me a little bit."

Next year American Crystal expects about 90 percent of sugar beets to be the Roundup Ready variety.

That means seed companies will quickly stop producing traditional seed varieties. So within two or three years, Roundup Ready will be the only choice.

Red River Valley Sugar Beet Growers Association Executive Director Nick Sinner, says people are concerned about that because farmers don't want Monsanto, the creator of the Roundup brand, holding all the cards when it comes to buying seed. "We want to have a good working relationship with Monsanto because they hold the rights to that technology," says Sinner. "We also think competition is a great thing, so if there are other technologies that come along that will work for weed control and keeps everybody honest in the long run, that can be a good thing."

Farmers are also concerned about a pending lawsuit challenging the government's decision to allow the use of GMO sugar beets.

It's unclear how that case could affect next year's planting, since the seed for next year has already been produced.

But despite lingering questions, it appears the benefits of the herbicide-resistant sugar beet plants have farmers ready to embrace the change.

]]> 2008-09-12T08:45:00-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/hot_dry_weather_worries_michigan_vegetable_farmers_michigan/ {summary} Farm Markets


Michigan Ag Connection - 09/03/2008


Seven days were suitable for fieldwork during the week ending Sunday, according to the USDA, NASS, Michigan Field Office.

Through Labor Day, precipitation varied from 0.02 inches in the northwestern Lower Peninsula to 0.26 inches in the central Lower Peninsula. Average temperatures ranged from 3 degrees below normal in the east central Lower Peninsula to 1 degree above normal in the western and eastern Upper Peninsula and the northwestern Lower Peninsula. Abnormally dry conditions remained in most areas as very little rain fell in the past seven days.

A farmer in the west central noted, "In the last week we have had only a trace of rain and for the month of August we have had 0.95 inches of rain. Corn, soybeans, and hay are being hurt due to the dry weather." Crops were suffering from lack of moisture, but some normal ripening was taking place. "In many cases, when viewing the fields, it is difficult to determine if much of the change in the fields is due to 'true maturing' or 'premature maturing' being caused by the extremely extended dry period throughout the area," a grower in the south central reported.

The majority of the corn crop was in the dough stage and a good deal was in the dent stage. The crop continued to dry, causing some growers to chop their corn for silage. Soybeans have set pods and leaves were turning. Alfalfa harvest continued with a second cutting nearing completion and some growers getting a third cutting. There were reports of a short third cutting, as regrowth has been slow. Dry bean leaves were turning and some were shedding leaves. Harvest of early varieties was just beginning in some fields. Winter wheat growers continued to prepare their fields for planting. Sugarbeet growers were anticipating a very good crop and were looking forward to harvest. Harvest of oats was essentially finished.

The harvest of early season apples wound down, and picking of Galas will begin this week. Elliot and other late season blueberry varieties harvests continued. Anthracnose rot has been a problem. Concord grape vineyards that were damaged by frost still had a lot of green berries, but veraison was otherwise finished in the southwest. Spraying occurred for protection from downy mildew. Peach harvest continued; fruit size of late season varieties was reduced by the dryness. Bartlett pear harvest began, and plum picking continued. Fall raspberry harvest was underway.

High temperatures and lack of rainfall have kept vegetable producers worried about crop conditions and decreased production, especially in the southern and western parts of the State. Celery harvest continued on schedule in the southwest part of the State. Crop experts reported that celery quality was good but most growers were irrigating due to the very dry soil conditions.

Tomato harvest continued, with some producers reporting a disappointing crop.

Harvest continued this week for potatoes, onions, leeks, carrots, peppers, sweet corn and snap beans. Pumpkins and winter squash continued to develop in the fields, while harvest for fall cabbage and other cold crops began in some areas.

]]> 2008-09-03T13:05:03-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/a_minnesota_farmer_checks_his_fields/ {summary} Farm Economy

by Dan Gunderson,
Minnesota Public Radio
July 21, 2008



The most recent crop report shows most Minnesota crops are above average. Crop prices are high, but so are costs like fuel and fertilizer. We last talked with farmer Jeff Mortenson in February, when he was making plans for the growing season and was nervous about rising costs. He's still nervous about the increasing costs of farming, but anticipating a good harvest.

Kennedy, Minn. — Here in the northwestern corner of Minnesota, waist-high wheat and barley ripples in the wind, the soybeans and sugar beets are lush and green.

As Jeff Mortenson wades into a wheat field, he plucks one of the long stalks that are just starting to form kernels.

"Looks like a pretty good wheat crop coming," Mortenson said. "I mean look, nice long heads, seems to be no disease pressure. Knock on wood we don't get a hail storm. But the row crops are behind. Our beans are way behind last year."

The cooler-than-usual summer has been good for wheat, but soybeans and sugar beets need more hot summer days. Mortenson's soybeans are only half as tall as they were at this time last year.

Still, it's been one of those summers when rains come at just the right time.

"It's probably been a month ago just here I got an inch and 3/10 in 35 minutes. Just a mile south of here the road was dry. It just started right here, you know, and that's farming."

But despite the potential for above average harvest and record prices, Jeff Mortenson says he's not turning cartwheels on the front lawn.

Sitting on the front porch of the farmhouse that's been home to four generations of his family, Mortenson pulls out a calculator and lists of numbers.

He's been nervously adding up the increased cost of fertilizer and fuel.

In two years nitrogen fertilizer has tripled. An increase of $410 per ton. That's about $35 dollars extra for each acre of wheat.

"If we have roughly 2,000 acres of wheat an extra $35 in fertilizer, that's another $70,000 we didn't spend two years ago." Mortenson said. "It's frustrating, but there's not a darn thing you can do about it. You need fertilizer. So, that and the fuel. You never really used to think about the fuel price. But now when you fill up a tractor there's $521 for a few days."

And those costs keep going up. Mortenson says this spring he waited to fill his diesel tank, hoping fuel prices would drop. Instead, they went up. That decision cost him $10,000.

Jeff Mortenson is also wrestling with the other side of the farm equation; when to sell the crop.

He's already sold part of the wheat crop, and hopes he didn't sell when prices were too low.

That's what happened last year. Like most farmers he sold his wheat before prices shot up to $20 a bushel.

"When it hit $5.00 I sold a big chunk," he said. "When it hit $6.00 I sold the rest. But when Joe Public sees on the front page of the paper wheat hits $20.00 they think every farmer has got 100% of their bushels sitting on the farm and they're instant millionaires. That isn't the case."

Still, last year brought a healthy profit, and it looks like Mortenson's bottom line will be strong again this year.

He doesn't want to miss an opportunity to catch up after years of losses. Mortenson scans the news every day for clues to the markets.

Did it rain in Brazil? Is China buying more soybeans? Should he lock in a price now, or wait and hope it's higher at harvest?

In a volatile world market, those decisions can mean the difference between a good year and a great year.

Mortenson says he's not counting his bushels before they're in the bin.

"It looks like we could have a decent crop with our wheat this year and hopefully the beets and beans come around," he said. "But there's so much out of your control. You feel like you're going to jinx yourself. It sounds dumb, but that's the case. You don't want to start spouting off and say, 'Oh, this is great,' and then something will come and bite you."

The day after we walked through his fields one was destroyed by a hail storm.

He's still hoping for a better than average year, but harvest is still a month away. Until then, Jeff Mortenson will spend a lot of time punching numbers into his calculator and nervously watching the sky.

]]> 2008-07-21T11:51:00-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/food_safety_worries_change_buying_habits/ {summary} Food Safety


WASHINGTON (AP) - Troubled by the tainted tomato scare, nearly half of Americans are concerned they may get sick from eating contaminated food and are avoiding items they normally would buy, an Associated Press-Ipsos poll has found.

Although three in four remain confident about the overall safety of foods, the poll found that consumers overwhelmingly support setting up a tracing system for produce in the wake of the salmonella outbreak first linked to tomatoes and, now, hot peppers.

Eighty-six percent said produce should be labeled so it can be tracked through layers of processors, packers and shippers, all the way back to the farm. The lack of such a system frustrated disease detectives working on the salmonella outbreak. Although federal officials lifted the tomato warning Thursday, the cause of the outbreak remains unknown.

The poll found that 80 percent of Americans said they would support new federal standards for fresh produce. Meat and poultry have long been subject to enforceable federal safeguards, but fruits and vegetables are not, although produce increasingly is being implicated in outbreaks.

Christy Taylor, a first-grade teacher from Sacramento, Calif., said she has all but given up on supermarket produce and is buying most of her fresh fruits and vegetables at the local farmers' market instead.

"I see the same farmers every single week," said Taylor, 30, the mother of 2-year-old twin girls. "You meet the people and you see where the (produce) is coming from."

Her twins love tomatoes, she said, and chomp on them as if they were apples. But until the mystery of the tainted tomatoes is solved, "I feel a little bit more comfortable, a little more safe, doing the local farmers' market," Taylor said.

In addition to the salmonella outbreak, this year has seen the largest ground beef recall in history, raising consumer concerns reflected in the poll.

Forty-six percent said they were worried they might get sick from eating contaminated food and that they have avoided foods because of safety warnings that they normally would have purchased. Twenty-nine percent have thrown out food earlier than usual and 14 percent have returned food to the store.

Such a level of uneasiness among consumers is "very significant," said Michael R. Taylor, a former senior federal food safety official who now teaches at George Washington University.

"When you have almost half the population avoiding certain foods because of safety concerns, that's very significant from the standpoint of economic impact for the people selling the food, and from the standpoint of peace of mind for consumers," said Taylor. Tomato growers say they have lost more than $100 million as a result of the current salmonella outbreak, which has sickened more than 1,200 people in 42 states since April.

The poll also found gender, racial and economic gaps on attitudes about food safety. Women, who do most of the shopping, were more concerned than men. For example, 39 percent of men said they were "very confident" that the food they buy is safe, but only 23 percent of women said they felt that way. However, men and women agreed on the need for better federal oversight.

"We've got to protect our food supply," said Stephan Weiss, 58, of West Linn, Ore., who runs a small engraving and embroidery business. "And if more inspectors are going to prevent people from getting sick and dying, then it's worth it."

People with lower incomes were less confident in food safety, as were minorities. Nearly half of Hispanics had little or no confidence in the safety of the food they buy.

In Congress, a leading advocate of food safety reforms said the industry would do well to listen to consumers on the need for tracing.

"We live in an age of technology where you can bar-code a banana," said Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill. "We've got to work this through with the industry and come up with something that's reasonable. The more confidence consumers have, the more goods they will purchase."

While the produce industry agrees that federal standards for preventing contamination are necessary, there is no consensus on a mandatory tracing system. Cost is a concern, especially for smaller companies.

The poll also found that 56 percent of consumers do not believe the government has enough inspectors to scrutinize food imports. If more are needed for imports and domestic produce, 70 percent said the cost should be covered through fees on industry. That echoes a proposal by Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

The telephone poll of 1,000 adults was conducted July 10-14 and has a sampling error margin of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points for the overall sample.


]]> 2008-07-18T10:05:00-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/durbin_harkin_will_examine_cftc_resources_authority/ {summary} MN Farm Union


Thu. Jun. 12, 2008
by Jerry Hagstrom
MN Farmers Union


Senate Majority Whip Durbin, who chairs the Senate Financial Services Appropriations Subcommittee, and Senate Agriculture Chairman Tom Harkin announced Wednesday they will hold a joint hearing next week on strengthening the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the agency that regulates oil and commodity futures markets.

Durbin and Harkin did not announce a day for the hearing, but indicated they would look at the agency's authorities and staffing level.

"It's time to open the books on the oil futures market," Durbin said in a release. "The agency in charge of regulating oil markets is currently blocked from accessing critical information on trades made on foreign exchanges or on over-the-counter trades. We can't expect the CFTC to properly monitor the market and keep gas prices stable if they don't have the information they need. Congress needs to give CFTC the authority to monitor these trades closely and the staff and IT systems to get the job done."

In recent weeks, CFTC commissioners have testified that while energy and commodity trades have increased dramatically, the number of CFTC staff has dropped, which raises questions about the agency's ability to monitor the markets, enforce laws and investigate possible market manipulations.

Durbin said the number of trades in commodity markets rose from 500 million in 2000 to more than 3 billion in 2007, while the number of full-time employees has dropped from 546 to 437. President Bush requested a 17 percent increase in the CFTC budget for FY09, which would bring it to $130 million.

CFTC commissioners initially said they believed the run-up in oil and agricultural commodity prices was due to market fundamentals but in recent weeks have announced efforts to investigate the role index funds and other institutional investors might play in the price increases.

On Tuesday the CFTC announced the creation of a task force including CFTC staff, the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, Energy and Agriculture departments and the SEC to examine investor practices, fundamental supply and demand factors, and study the role of speculators and index traders in the commodity markets.

CFTC Commissioner Mike Dunn said Wednesday the task force was needed to take a broader look at the run-up in prices because the CFTC has only "a half-dozen economists to serve the whole agency."

Dunn also told the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives Wednesday that the commission is particularly concerned that agricultural futures prices and cash prices are not converging when the contracts expire as they have in the past.

The CFTC is considering requiring that swaps, which are futures contracts between two entities, be settled on exchanges, but there is concern that such a requirement would change the nature of these deals. Dunn said the CFTC Agricultural Advisory Committee is expected to meet around July 29 to examine what the staff has learned in its investigations.


]]> 2008-07-11T19:50:00-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/cutting_out_the_middlemen_shoppers_buy_slices_of_farms/ {summary} Farm Markets



By SUSAN SAULNY
NY Times
Published: July 10, 2008


CAMPTON TOWNSHIP, Ill. — In an environmentally conscious tweak on the typical way of getting food to the table, growing numbers of people are skipping out on grocery stores and even farmers markets and instead going right to the source by buying shares of farms.

On one of the farms, here about 35 miles west of Chicago, Steve Trisko was weeding beets the other day and cutting back a shade tree so baby tomatoes could get sunlight. Mr. Trisko is a retired computer consultant who owns shares in the four-acre Erehwon Farm.

“We decided that it’s in our interest to have a small farm succeed, and have them be able to have a sustainable farm producing good food,” Mr. Trisko said.

Part of a loose but growing network mostly mobilized on the Internet, Erehwon is participating in what is known as community-supported agriculture. About 150 people have bought shares in Erehwon — in essence, hiring personal farmers and turning the old notion of sharecropping on its head.

The concept was imported from Europe and Asia in the 1980s as an alternative marketing and financing arrangement to help combat the often prohibitive costs of small-scale farming. But until recently, it was slow to take root. There were fewer than 100 such farms in the early 1990s, but in the last several years the numbers have grown to close to 1,500, according to academic experts who have followed the trend.

“I think people are becoming more local-minded, and this fits right into that,” said Nichole D. Nazelrod, program coordinator at the Fulton Center for Sustainable Living at Wilson College in Chambersburg, Pa., a national clearinghouse for community-supported farms. “People are seeing ways to come together and work together to make this successful.”

The shareholders of Erehwon Farm have open access to the land and a guaranteed percentage of the season’s harvest of fruit and vegetables for packages that range from about $300 to $900. Arrangements of fresh-cut blossoms twice a month can be included for an extra $120 — or for the deluxe package, $220 will “feed the soul” with weekly bouquets of lilies and sunflowers and other local blooms.

Shareholders are not required to work the fields, but they can if they want, and many do.

Mr. Trisko said his family knows that without his volunteer labor and agreement to share in the financial risk of raising crops, the small organic farm might not survive.

“It’s very hard for them to make ends meet,” he said, “so I decided to go out and help. We harvest, water, pull weeds, whatever they need doing.”

Under the sponsored system, farmers are paid an agreed-upon fee in advance of the growing season, making their survival less dependent on the vicissitudes of the market and the cooperation of the elements. The arrangement involves real farms and real farmers and is distinct from community gardens and other forms of urban farming, where vacant or public land is typically put to agricultural use by residents.

The average share price is $500 to $800 a season across the country, Ms. Nazelrod said, though community-supported agriculture seems most popular on the coasts and around the Great Lakes region. The states with the most farms, she said, include New York, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and California.

“The C.S.A. provides a base that’s certain, and we get the money when we need to spend the money,” said Beth Propst, who farms the fields at Erehwon, using the abbreviation for community-supported agriculture. “Having the money upfront and guaranteed, that gets us through at least the beginning of the season.”

The operations are as diverse as they are numerous.

Erehwon — the word “nowhere” spelled backward — started with two shareholders, reached its goal of 140 last year, and now has raised its target to about 200 members. Another farm in the Chicago area where the community sponsors the crops, Angelic Organics, makes weekly deliveries to more than 1,400 families in Illinois and Wisconsin.

At least 24 vegetable farmers serve an estimated 6,500 members throughout the five boroughs of New York City, said Paula Lukats of Just Food, which connects farmers with residents there. In 2005, there were 37 C.S.A. groups in the city; today, there are 61.

The Golden Earthworm Organic Farm, on 80 acres on the North Fork of Long Island, grew from 10 members in 2000 to about 1,300 this year, according to Matthew Kurek, one of the owners. About half of the members live in Queens, he said, and the farm delivers their weekly shares to six different sites there, mainly churches and community centers, 26 weeks a year. The farm grows arugula, strawberries and sugar snap peas in the spring; watermelon, eggplant and tomatoes in the summer; and broccoli, potatoes and carrots in the fall.

At the Cattleana Ranch in Omro, Wis., Thomas and Susan Wrchota offer grass-fed meat and organic produce through a community-supported arrangement. They have 55 members, and a seven-month meat membership costs $715.

Mr. Wrchota developed a taste for grass-fed beef while working for the Peace Corps in Costa Rica in the 1970s. When he returned home, he said, he was at a loss for that particular flavor and eventually decided to raise animals himself, starting with just one cow.

“We don’t do millions in revenue, but we make a living, which is rare,” he said. “Our goal is to provide a full portfolio of products for folks who want sustainable products. Up until about five years ago, we had to do a tremendous amount of guerrilla marketing. The consumer who is interested now, they’re doing their homework. They know the health and taste benefits.”

Teresa Crisco is one such consumer in Little Rock, Ark. She is a member of the community-supported agriculture program at the Heifer Ranch, an international humanitarian relief organization that is experimenting with how to make such arrangements more popular and profitable for farmers around the world.

“You feel like you’re doing more than one thing: you’re helping the project and you’re helping yourself,” said Ms. Crisco, a document specialist at a mortgage company who heard about the program from a friend. “The whole premise is really neat.”

Here in Illinois, Erehwon sold out of shares last year and had to turn people away.

Tim Fuller, Ms. Propst’s longtime companion and business partner in running the farm, said: “People are coming to us. We do very little marketing except for explaining what we do. It’s amazing.”

With a wry smile, Mr. Fuller said he considers himself both personal farmer and personal trainer, because shareholders under his direction are going to break a sweat.

“There’s always pressure on,” he said. “This is a complicated business, growing so many crops. We do everything by hand for more than 100 different crops.”

The farm expects to gross between $80,000 and $90,000 this year.

Some shareholders said they found the arrangement a bargain compared to grocery shopping, while others considered it a worthwhile indulgence. Most agreed that the urge to buy and spend locally — to avoid the costs and environmental degradation that come with shipping and storage — was behind the decision to join. Shareholders can pick up their goods at the farm or at a store across the street.

“From a ‘going green’ standpoint, it’s an appropriate thing to do,” said Gerard Brill, a musician who bought a share of Erehwon. “Like everything organic, it’s not a bargain, but what price do you put on being healthy? Considering all things, it’s actually a very good deal.”

The downside for people who are used to grocery shopping comes when they want fresh blueberries in January or, as was the case at Erehwon last week, the tomato plants needed more time in the ground because of a cold spring.

“We eat with the seasons, and there’s no guarantee that Mother Nature will cooperate,” Ms. Propst said. “That’s all part of the deal.”


]]> 2008-07-11T10:30:01-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/bee_swarms_in_new_jersey_spur_hope_of_rebound_from_us_die_off/ {summary} Bees

By Joseph Galante
Bloomberg
June 26, 2008


Seth Belson remembers getting a phone call last month asking him to remove a bee swarm the size of a Volkswagen from a man's front yard in Merchantville, New Jersey.

The beekeeper found a mass of bees towering 50 feet (15.2 meters) above the ground. There was nothing he could do but wait for them to move on, he said.

``It was mind blowing,'' Belson said. ``It sounds like a train when 50,000 bees take off within seconds of each other.''

Swarms of wild honeybees have increased in the U.S. mid- Atlantic region this year, according to Belson and other experts. That's a hopeful sign for commercial beekeepers across the country, who have seen their hives devastated in recent years by parasitic mites and a phenomenon termed Colony Collapse Disorder.

Nationally, the commercial honeybee population dropped more than 36 percent last winter, according to a survey by the Apiary Inspectors of America released in May. Commercial bees, which do most of the pollinating for one-third of U.S. crops, have declined over the past two decades to about 2.3 million honey- producing colonies from about 3.5 million.

Belson says he has removed about 40 swarms at elementary schools, golf courses and houses this year, compared with one call to do so the past two years.

`Premature to Say'

``Hopefully it's a sign that bees are coming back, but it's very premature to say that,'' said Belson, who is president of the South Jersey Beekeepers Association. ``If this happens over the next two years we'll call it a trend. At this point it's just a hopeful aberration.''

A resurgence of feral honeybees is important because beekeepers build their farms in part by collecting from the wild. It may also suggest that some bees are building immunity to the varroa mite, a common killer of colonies, said Tim Schuler, New Jersey's chief beekeeper.

Schuler and other experts attribute the new swarms this season to mild weather and abundant rain. Commercial bees add $15 billion annually in value to U.S. crops, according to the Department of Agriculture.

Gary Neil, a beekeeper in Williamstown, New Jersey, said he too has been removing swarms. ``We're doing a lot more than we did last year,'' he said.

There are more of the clusters in Virginia also, said Alan Fiala, former president of the Virginia State Beekeepers' Association who lives in Falls Church. Glenn Davis, a board member in Bates City, Missouri, for the Midwest Beekeepers Association, said he's gotten more calls to remove swarms as well.

The rebound may not have reached California, the nation's biggest beekeeping state. Steve Arnold, who specializes in bee removal around California's San Luis Obispo County, said he hasn't seen any signs of resurgence in wild bees. Swarms typically thrive in mild climates and the weather has been erratic in the region this year, Arnold said.

Congressional Hearing

The plight of bees and their keepers will be taken up by the U.S. Congress today, when the House Subcommittee on Horticulture and Organic Agriculture hears testimony from researchers and farmers on population trends and progress in understanding Colony Collapse Disorder, or CCD.

Pesticides, mites and viruses are the leading suspects behind the sudden, massive disappearance of bees that occurred in 35 states and three continents last year and began in the U.S. as early as 2004.

Wild bees have a tougher time surviving than commercial bees, which are closely monitored by beekeepers, said Maryann Frazier, an apiculturist at Pennsylvania State University. Their resilience may be a sign that some bees are adapting to the diseases and parasites out there, New Jersey's Schuler said.

``There seem to be some blood lines that are more resistant to the mites than others,'' Schuler said.

The resurgence this season may be short-lived, Frazier said. ``We have years like this where we have increases in swarming,'' she said. ``It's pretty much a temporary phenomenon.''


]]> 2008-06-26T13:31:00-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/record_corn_prices_mean_more_expensive_meat_dairy/ {summary} Farm Economy


NEW YORK (AP) - Raging Midwest floodwaters that swallowed crops and sent corn and soybean prices soaring are about to give consumers more grief at the grocery store.

In the latest bout of food inflation, beef, pork, poultry and even eggs, cheese and milk are expected to get more expensive as livestock owners go out of business or are forced to slaughter more cattle, hogs, turkeys and chickens to cope with rocketing costs for corn-based animal feed.

The floods engulfed an estimated 2 million or more acres of corn and soybean fields in Iowa, Indiana, Illinois and other key growing states, sending world grain prices skyward on fears of a substantially smaller corn crop. The government will give a partial idea of how many corn acres were lost before the end of the month, but experts say the trickle-down effect could be more dramatic later this year, affecting everything from Thanksgiving turkeys to Christmas hams.

Rod Brenneman, president and chief executive of Seaboard Foods, a pork supplier in Sawnee Mission, Kan. that produces 4 million hogs a year, said high corn costs were already forcing producers in his industry to cut back on the number of animals they raise.

"There's definitely liquidation of livestock happening," and that will cause meat prices to rise later this year and into 2009, said Brenneman, who is also the vice chairman of the American Meat Institute.

Brenneman's cost for feeding a single hog has shot up $30 in the past year because of record-high prices for corn and soybeans, the main ingredients in animal feed. Passing that increase on to consumers would tack an extra 15 cents per pound onto a pork chop.

It's a similar story for U.S. beef producers, who now spend a whopping 60-70 percent of their production costs on animal feed and are seeing that number rise daily as corn prices hover near an unprecedented $8 a bushel, up from about $4 a year ago.

"This is not sustainable. The cattle industry is going to have to get smaller," said James Herring, president and CEO of Amarillo, Tex.-based Friona Industries, which buys 20 million bushels of corn each year to feed 550,000 cattle.

Corn's prices were already rising before the floods, driven up 80 percent over the past year as developing countries like China and India scramble for grains to feed people and livestock. U.S. production of ethanol, an alternative fuel that can be made with corn, has also pushed prices higher, prompting livestock owners to lobby Washington to roll back ethanol mandates.

Before the floods, corn farmers were enjoying record profits selling the grain to feed animals and for use in cereals and as a sweetener in soda and candy. But a sharply smaller corn crop could wipe out those gains.

In Iowa, the No. 1 U.S. corn grower, floods inundated about 9 percent of corn crops, representing about 1.2 million acres - almost 1.5 percent of the country's anticipated harvest.

In Indiana, another 9 percent of corn and soybean crops were flooded, potentially costing farmers up to $840 million in lost earnings, Indiana Agriculture Director Andy Miller said.

Floodwaters also tossed farm equipment, sprayed cornfields with debris and silt and sucked away large chunks of topsoil. For livestock owners and meat producers, the damage may be felt long after the corn grows back.

Even before the floods, Tyson Foods was complaining that high grain prices would drive up its costs by $600 million this year. The world's largest poultry company has already raised its prices over the past year, and expects to keep raising them, CEO Dick Bond told analysts at a conference in May.

Higher feed prices will eventually filter through to the cost of milk, cheese and yogurt, too, since 65 to 75 percent of a dairy farmers' production costs are for feed, said Chris Galen, a spokesman for the National Milk Producers Federation.

With the cost of animal feed only going higher, many poultry and dairy farmers are starting to look for cheaper alternatives.

Nebraska dairy farmer Dan Rice, who has 1,500 cows, said one alternative is to buy some of the byproducts of cereal or flour production, but they're not nearly as productive compared to corn.

"If we all feed less corn and get less production, then the price at the grocery stores are going to go up," said Rice, who supplies milk to grocery stores in Omaha and around Kansas City.

Without easy ways to cut costs, many livestock producers will have little choice but to slaughter more animals and send them to market.

"We're in survival mode now," said Paul Hill, chairman of West Liberty Foods, a turkey processor based in West Liberty, Iowa. He estimated U.S. turkey producers will reduce their flocks by 10 to 15 percent nationwide, a cutback that will send consumer prices dramatically higher.

"The cost of Thanksgiving and Christmas turkeys will go up this year, and maybe even more next year," said Hill, who is also the chairman of the National Turkey Federation.

If corn were to rise to $10 a bushel, Richard Lobb, spokesman for the National Chicken Council, said recouping costs through higher retail prices may not be possible.

"Can you possibly charge enough for the chicken to recoup that investment?" he said. "That's a question no one can answer yet because it's never been done."

]]> 2008-06-22T23:39:01-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/overlooked_in_the_global_food_crisis_a_problem_with_dirt/ {summary} World Hunger




WASHINGTON (AP) - Science has provided the souped-up seeds to feed the world, through biotechnology and old-fashioned crossbreeding. Now the problem is the dirt they're planted in.

As seeds get better, much of the world's soil is getting worse and people are going hungry. Scientists say if they can get the world out of the economically triggered global food crisis, better dirt will be at the root of the solution.

Soils around the world are deteriorating with about one-fifth of the world's cropland considered degraded in some manner. The poor quality has cut production by about one-sixth, according to a World Resources Institute study. Some scientists consider it a slow-motion disaster.

In sub-Saharan Africa, nearly 1 million square miles of cropland have shown a "consistent significant decline," according to a March 2008 report by a worldwide consortium of agricultural institutions.

The cause of the current global food crisis is mostly based on market forces, speculation and hoarding, experts say. But beyond the economics lie droughts and floods, plant diseases and pests, and all too often, poor soil.

A generation ago, through better types of plants, Earth's food production exploded in what was then called the "green revolution." Some people thought the problem of feeding the world was solved and moved on. However, developing these new "magic seeds" was the easy part. The crucial element, fertile soil, was missing.

"The first thing to do is to have good soil," said Hans Herren, winner of the World Food Prize. "Even the best seeds can't do anything in sand and gravel."

Herren is co-chairman of the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development, a collection of scientists sponsored by the United Nations and World Bank. It produced a 2,500-page report last month which, among other recommendations, emphasized a need to improve the world's soil.

Genetic improvements in corn make it possible to grow up to 9,000 pounds of corn per acre in Africa. But millions of poor African farmers only get about 500 pounds an acre "because over the years, their soils have become very infertile and they can't afford to purchase fertilizers," said Roger Leakey, a co-author of the international report and professor at James Cooke University in Australia.

Soil and water issues "have been taken for granted," said Ohio State University soil scientist Rattan Lal. "It is a problem that is not going to be solved. It's going to get worse before it gets better."

In Africa, farmers are forced to use practices that rob nutrients from the soil, not put it back, said Herren, who heads an Arlington, Va., nonprofit. Fertilizer is a quick, short-term fix, but even that isn't being done, he said.

The current crisis could have been avoided "if we, the world, had promoted fertilizer in Africa and we have known for ages it works," said Pedro Sanchez, Columbia University tropical agricultural director.

In that way, the problem with soil is a prime example of a larger failing of agriculture science, said Sanchez, who has won both the World Food Prize and a MacArthur genius grant. Scientists have the knowledge to feed the world right now, but that is not happening, Sanchez said. "It's very frustrating, especially when you see children dying."

The fruits of biotechnology and the staples of modern agricultural scientific techniques include irrigation, crop rotation, reduced tilling, use of fertilizer and improved seeds. It's a way of farming differently instead of just using better seeds that requires extra money up-front that many African farmers don't have, scientists said.

Fixing soil just isn't "sexy" enough to interest governments or charities, said Robert Zeigler, director general of the International Rice Research Institute in Manila, Philippines.

Zeigler's center last week planted its 133rd crop of rice in the same land since 1963, trying to pinpoint the right combination of nitrogen and fertilizer. Better seeds worked wonders. But finding money for soil health is difficult and because of that, less work is accomplished, he said.

But there are success stories, Sanchez said, pointing to the small African country of Malawi. Three years ago, the country's new president invested 8 percent of Malawi's national budget in a subsidy program to get fertilizer and better seeds to small farmers. Each farmer got two bags of fertilizer and 4 1/2 pounds of seeds at less than half the cost.

Before the program started, one-third of Malawi was on food aid and the country wasn't growing enough food for itself, Sanchez said. It was producing 1.2 million tons of maize in 2005. In 2006, Malawi had more than doubled its production. By 2007 and 2008, the crop was up to 3.4 and 3.3 million tons. Now Malawi is exporting corn.

"In two years, the country has changed from a food aid recipient to a food aid donor and is self-sufficient," Sanchez said. "if Malawi can do it, richer countries like Nigeria, Kenya can do it."

---

On the Net:

International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development: http://www.agassessment.org/index.cfm?PageAbout_IAASTD&ItemID2

Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research:

http://www.cgiar.org/

Tropical Agriculture Program at Columbia University:

http://www.earth.columbia.edu/tropag/

]]> 2008-05-10T00:46:00-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/farmers_brace_for_their_own_economic_bubble/ {summary} Farm Economy



by Greta Cunningham,
Minnesota Public Radio
May 7, 2008


St. Paul, Minn. — A new report released Tuesday is warning Minnesota farmers against taking on too much debt and paying too much for farmland.

The report from the think tank Minnesota 20-20 found that record prices for farm land and crops could be setting up an "economic bubble" for farmers in Minnesota.

Former DFL House Minority Leader and 20-20 Chairman Matt Entenza says over the past six years, Minnesota farm prices have almost doubled. He says the boom cannot be sustained.

"We think that's its crucial first of all that all the folks in the ag sector recognize that debt right now is their enemy. That these prices will burst and if they do wind up in a situation with a lot of debt they could go down," Entenza said.

Entenza said with the state and national economy weakening, it is important to make sure the agricultural economy does not collapse.

State economist Tom Stinson says Minnesota 20-20 could be overplaying the potential for crisis. Stinson says farmers have long memories and will not get themselves into the financial squeeze that led to the farm crisis of the 1980s.

]]> 2008-05-07T12:30:01-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/bush_renews_call_for_congress_to_lower_payments_to_wealthy_farmers/ {summary} Farm Legislation


WASHINGTON (AP) -- House and Senate negotiators late Tuesday scrambled to meet President Bush's demands on a multibillion-dollar farm bill, considering cutting subsidies for wealthy farmers.

Earlier in the day, Bush had renewed his call to reduce such subsidies, saying the "massive, bloated" bill would do little to stem rising food costs. Negotiators met with Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer soon afterward.

That meeting was "sobering," said Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D. He said the Bush administration had a laundry list of demands for the legislation, which lawmakers were hurrying to finish before current farm law expires Friday. The law has been extended several times, and lawmakers have said another one-week extension may be necessary.

Emerging from several hours of meetings, Conrad and Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said negotiators would further limit subsidies and cut other spending in response to the administration's demands.

"We moved considerably," said Harkin, though he declined to share specifics and said all of the bill's negotiators had not yet agreed on the cuts.

Lawmakers reached a tentative agreement last week on how to pay for the massive bill, which would cost almost $300 billion over the next five years, but they have not finished resolving policy issues.

One of the last sticking points is how much would be paid to farmers in a time of record crop prices.

Bush has threatened to veto the legislation and showed no signs of backing off that threat Tuesday.

"The bill Congress is now considering would fail to eliminate subsidy payments to multimillionaire farmers," Bush said. "America's farm economy is thriving. The value of farmland is skyrocketing. And this is the right time to reform our nation's farm policies by reducing unnecessary subsidies."

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., said last week that lawmakers were considering an eventual limit on payments to high-earning "nonfarmers," people who make only a small portion of their income from farming. But that wouldn't impose any income limits on wealthy farmers, Peterson said then.

Conrad said Tuesday that the bill now would have "substantial reform" for farmers and nonfarmers.

The Bush administration has sought limits that would apply to anyone who earned more than an average of $200,000 a year.

Bills passed by the House and Senate last year still would allow many wealthy farmers to collect payments. The Senate bill would eventually ban payments to nonfarmers whose income averages more than $750,000 a year. The bill defines farmers as those who earn more than two-thirds of their income from agriculture. There would be no new income-based limits on what a farmer could collect, though the bill would prohibit some farmers from collecting payments for multiple farm businesses.

The House-passed bill would ban payments to all who earn an average $1 million a year or more. It also would prohibit some farmers from collecting payments for multiple businesses.

The current cap is $2.5 million.

___

On the Net:

House Agriculture Committee: http://agriculture.house.gov/index.shtml

Senate Agriculture Committee: http://agriculture.senate.gov


]]> 2008-04-30T11:51:00-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/food_is_becoming_the_worlds_new_gold/ {summary} World Hunger Food has become the new gold, and the world must cope with the new reality of more expensive prices.


By ANTHONY FAIOLA,
Washington Post
April 26, 2008


The globe's worst food crisis in a generation emerged as a blip on the big boards of America's great grain exchanges. At first, it seemed like little more than a bout of bad weather.

In Chicago, Minneapolis and Kansas City, traders watched from the pits early last summer as wheat prices spiked amid mediocre harvests in the United States and Europe and signs of prolonged drought in Australia. But within a few weeks, the traders discerned an ominous snowball effect -- one that would eventually bring down a prime minister in Haiti, make more children in Mauritania go to bed hungry, even cause Sam's Club to restrict U.S. sales of rice.

As prices rose, major grain producers battling inflation, caused in part by soaring oil bills, were moving to bar exports on a range of crops to control costs at home. It meant less supply on world markets even as global demand entered a fundamentally new phase. Already, corn prices had been climbing for months on the back of booming government-subsidized ethanol programs. Demand for soybeans was surging in China. But as supplies in the pipelines of global trade shrank, prices began shooting through the roof.

At the same time, food was becoming the new gold. Investors fleeing Wall Street's mortgage-related strife plowed hundreds of millions of dollars into grain futures, driving prices up even more. By Christmas, a global panic was building. With fewer places to turn, and tempted by the weaker dollar, nations staged a run on the American wheat harvest.

Foreign buyers, who typically seek to purchase one or two months' supply of wheat at a time, suddenly began to stockpile. This led major domestic U.S. mills to jump into the fray with their own massive orders, fearing that there would soon be no wheat left at any price.

"Japan, the Philippines, [South] Korea, Taiwan -- they all came in with huge orders, and no matter how high prices go, they keep on buying," said Jeff Voge, chairman of the Kansas City Board of Trade. Some traders walked off the floor for weeks at a time, unable to take the stress.

"We have never seen anything like this before," Voge said. "... But no matter the price, there always seems to be a buyer. ... This isn't just any commodity. It is food, and people need to eat."

Consequences: Riots and turmoil

The food price shock now roiling world markets is destabilizing governments, igniting street riots and threatening to send a new wave of hunger rippling through the world's poorest nations.

At least 14 countries have been racked by food-related violence. After hungry mobs and violent riots beset Port-au-Prince, Haitian Prime Minister Jacques-Edouard Alexis was forced to step down earlier this month. At least 14 countries have been racked by food-related violence. In Malaysia, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is struggling for political survival after a March rebuke from voters furious over food prices. In Bangladesh, more than 20,000 factory workers protesting food prices rampaged through the streets two weeks ago.

To quell unrest, countries are digging deep to boost food subsidies. The U.N. World Food Program has warned of an alarming surge in hunger in areas as far-flung as North Korea and West Africa. The crisis, it fears, will plunge more than 100 million of the world's poorest people deeper into poverty, forced to spend more and more of their income on skyrocketing food bills.

"This crisis could result in a cascade of others ... and become a multidimensional problem affecting economic growth, social progress and even political security around the world," U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said.

Coping: No breakfast, little lunch

As farmers rush to plant more wheat now that profit prospects have climbed, analysts predict that prices may come down as much as 30 percent in the coming months. But that would still leave a year-over-year price hike of 45 percent, suggesting that the world must cope with a new reality of more expensive food.


]]> 2008-04-27T11:13:00-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/analysis_congressional_climate_has_become_tougher_for_farm_bill/ {summary} Farm Legislation


WASHINGTON (AP) -- It's not a good year for a farm bill.

Crop prices are sky-high. President Bush, who thinks the nation's farm program is bloated, is leaving office and doesn't need to court voters in rural America. There is less budget money to work with. The leadership in Congress doesn't exactly hail from farm country, and those lawmakers who do also must grapple with bigger election-year problems — such as mounting job losses and a deepening foreclosure crisis.

"When you don't have enough budget the fights become more intense over those precious resources," said Tom Buis, president of the National Farmers Union. "You kind of have this perfect storm, all coming together at the same time, and you add in a lot of new players to the farm bill process, people that just say, 'Oh, farmers are greedy' or 'Farmers don't need this.'"

Things were different in 2002, when the last bill to expand agriculture and nutrition programs was written. Back then, rural America was recovering from hard times and there was more federal money to be spread around.

Bush was never a fan of the bill, but he signed it anyway with lukewarm praise. He still faced a re-election campaign, and his party was eyeing a Senate takeover.

"It's not a perfect bill, I know that," he said then.

This year, as Congress struggles to rewrite a new farm bill, Bush has less to lose. His administration has taken a hard line on multibillion-dollar farm bills passed by the House and Senate that would expand farmer subsidies even as crop prices skyrocket.

Congressional dynamics have also changed since the last farm bill. Tom Daschle, the former Senate Democratic leader from South Dakota who brokered the negotiations six years ago, lost his seat in 2004. Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a Republican, also hailed from a farm state, Texas.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada have not traditionally been involved in farm debates. Reid's home state has little agriculture and Pelosi is from urban San Francisco.

Bush has threatened to veto both the House and Senate bills. That opposition and congressional infighting have stalled the bill, and negotiations are in disarray.

Negotiators face several obstacles. The Democratic chairmen of the House and Senate agriculture committees, Minnesota Rep. Collin Peterson and Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin, have lost control of the legislation as tax packages were added to both bills to help pay for them and win votes.

That has brought into the mix House Ways and Means Committee chairman Charlie Rangel, who represents few farmers in his New York City district. He and Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., are charged with finding an extra $10 billion for the bill but have agreed on very little.

At a farm bill meeting in Rangel's office Thursday, shouting could be heard behind closed doors. Several senators, including Baucus, left angrily.

"Let's just say it wasn't good," Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said afterward.

Members of the House say the farm bill is not the only thing widening the gap between the Baucus and Rangel. Contentious negotiations between the two tax committees on economic stimulus and other issues have left hard feelings on both sides, and the farm bill may bear some of the brunt of that.

"This is not the first time horns have been locked," said Rep. Earl Pomeroy, a North Dakota Democrat who sits on both the Agriculture and Ways and Means committees and is trying to help find a compromise. "I don't think there is any question that the farm bill encountered some of the scarring that occurred in earlier legislative battles."

Both sides traded offers Friday and a deal could still come together by April 25, when the bill is now set to expire after Bush reluctantly agreed to extend current law for a fourth time. If a deal doesn't happen, the law may have to be extended for a year or longer.

Farm-state lawmakers say an extension is not ideal and the new legislation is still needed, even if it isn't needed now. Gas prices are high, hurting farmers and ranchers who use a lot of fuel. And crop prices could always drop.

Farming, like writing a farm bill, is a volatile business.

]]> 2008-04-19T11:55:00-06:00 http://www.therochesterdemocrat.com/index.php/weblog/congress_sends_1_week_farm_law_extension_to_bush_who_has_threatened_veto/ {summary}

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Congress sent President Bush a one-week extension of current farm law Thursday as the House and Senate continued to argue over how to pay for a multibillion-dollar farm bill.

Administration officials have warned that Bush may not sign the extension, which would allow the law to expire April 25. It was passed by the House on Wednesday and the Senate on Thursday.

President Bush has threatened to veto the House and Senate bills, which would cost roughly $280 billion over five years to expand agriculture and nutrition programs. He says they are too expensive and would not sufficiently cut subsidy payments to wealthy farmers in a time of robust farm prices.

Deputy Agriculture Secretary Charles Conner said Wednesday that Bush would only sign the extension if it appeared negotiators had made significant progress on the bill, and the administration had not seen that progress.

Negotiations are in disarray as lawmakers from the House and Senate are squabbling over how to pay for the legislation. House and Senate negotiators have suggested a number of different ways to come up with an extra $10 billion needed for the bill, including some ideas the White House has backed previously. But administration officials have rejected most of their ideas, saying they would rather use the money for other priorities.

House members have also objected to several tax breaks in the Senate bill, including provisions to help owners of race horses, landowners who find endangered species on their property and those involved in litigation over the Exxon Valdez oil spill.

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., have said that many of those tax provisions are not acceptable. The tax package, which also includes a $5 billion program for farmers who lose crops to bad weather, was drawn up by the Senate Finance Committee and helped win 79 votes for the farm bill in that chamber last year.

Private meetings did not produce a deal Thursday, as members from each chamber rejected offers from the other.

"Let's just say it wasn't good," Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said afterward, declining to comment further.

Bush said last month that lawmakers should stop relying on short-term fixes and extend current law for at least a year if it expired without a new law in place. This would be the fourth time the 2002 law, which expires Friday, has been extended.

Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, said on the Senate floor Thursday that he would object to any future extensions, which could bring more urgency to the process. An objection could force a Senate vote instead of easy passage by unanimous consent as the chamber did Thursday.

Peterson said on Wednesday that negotiators might need more time beyond the one additional week.

]]> 2008-04-18T03:02:00-06:00