|
.NEW COURSES OFFERED THROUGH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ONLINE
High-quality economic development courses from leading universities are
now available at your desktop from Economic Development Online, coordinated by the University of Minnesota Extension Service.
Local leaders and small business owners in small towns can take the courses online and save money, time and travel. For example, a certified festival
management course costs over $800 (counting travel) for the face-to-face class. But the online version is $395.
"We selected courses that had already been thoroughly field- tested," says George Morse, U of M economist and project coordinator. Morse says the
initial offerings focus on economic development strategies likely to have the greatest bang for the buck: business retention and expansion, tourism, e-commerce, community economic analysis and socioeconomic impact
assessment.
Classes currently running include Business Retention and Expansion Research Reports, Certified Festival Management Level 1, and Socioeconomic Impact Assessment.
More will be added later. Check them out at www.edo.umn.edu
Sources: Neil Anderson (612) 625-4261
George Morse (612) 625-9769
Writer: Jack Sperbeck (612) 625-1794,
jsperbeck@extension.umn.edu
STUDY FOUND POLLEN FROM GENETICALLY MODIFIED CORN COULD BE A THREAT TO BUTTERFLIES
Greenpeace was at odds with a group
of U.S. corn growers resulting from a study that found pollen from genetically modified corn could be deadly to Monarch butterflies.
Iowa State University researchers said Monarch butterfly caterpillars were seven times more likely to die when they ate milkweed plants carrying pollen from Bt
corn, which contain a pest-fighting gene, compared with conventional varieties. Bt is short for bacillus thuringiensis, a naturally occurring soil bacterium that acts as a pesticide. This gene is used to repel
bollworms, European corn borer and other pests.
Greenpeace stated that the findings indicated further testing of GM crops were needed.
"The scientific findings are nothing new," said NCGA chairman Roger Pine. He said the NCGA supports continued evaluation of all agricultural
technologies but "we won't stop dead in our tracks when a single study draws faulty conclusions from unrelated scientific findings".
OPTIMIZING YIELD WITH LATE-SEASON DROUGHT
Late-season drought is the primary limiting factor for corn and soybeans in the High
Plains.
Drought during flowering decreases flower and then seed number per unit area. Corn reacts by a delay in silk emergence relative to pollen shed and an increase in seed abortion. Soybeans will increase pod abortion.
Drought sensitivity decreases as seeds mature; however, drought during seed filling in both crops can shorten the duration of seed filling resulting in the
potential for less yield and smaller seed. In corn, the shorter filling period is caused by premature water loss from the seed. At the twelfth-leaf to dough stage in corn, the management allowable soil
water depletion (MAD) in the root zone should not exceed 50% and from dough to maturity the MAD should not exceed 60-70% or yield can be reduced by up to 11.5 bushel per acre-inch in water deficit.
In soybeans, growth stages from first flower to first pod should maintain a MAD below 60-65% and during first pod through to maturity the MAD should be below 60-70% or a yield reduction can occur.
Drought stresses in later pod-filling stages in soybean result in a decrease in maximum seed volume.
Ideally, soybeans flourish at temperatures of 86F (and corn up to this temperature or to a little lower at 84F). Temperatures at 95F with low humidity and
the onset of droughty soil conditions can limit yields in fields. Drought symptoms in either crop show leaf wilting and darkening (or leaf rolling before mid-morning in corn) and reduced plant growth.
Soybeans grown in dry soils can reduce nodule formation, development and later nitrogen-fixation early in plant growth and these symptoms can also appear later
when soil temperatures reach greater than 90F for several days.
Yield loss in either corn or soybeans will ultimately depend on original planting date (good, early growth can push crops through drought spells better), the
maturity group "fit" for the region and how long the drought persists.
In corn, selecting hybrids with rapid ear growth, tolerance to high population densities and prolific hybrids can improve performance under drought
conditions. In soybeans, varieties that show tolerance to very high (or very low) soil pH, tolerance to nematodes in areas where cyst nematodes exist, and tolerance to any commonly occurring pests allow the
crop to withstand drought effects.
Also, less environmental stress from restricted root growth due to poor drainage, nutrient imbalances and soil compaction (hardpan) will help the plants combat
drought.
During the soybean stages R6 to R8 (full size beans up to maturity), the plants are accumulating dry matter in the seeds.
The dry matter is accumulated at a rate of about 1 to 1.5 bushels per day during R6 to R8.
Thus, stress during seed filling in soybeans can affect yields up to that 1.5 bushel per day, depending on how the temperature and drought ultimately affect the
rate and the length of time dry matter accumulation can occur.
Check fields now for your most productive hybrids and varieties and keep in mind that the best fields should be those that: have the most productive
soils; are fields where crop rotation is practiced; utilize deep tillage if compaction was a concern; use disease-resistant varieties; are planted with water-conservation practices in mind; may have been drilled, in
the case of soybeans; were planted for optimum population for the field; have varieties selected within the range of maturities for the region; use integrated pest management systems; and, practice sound insect and
weed management.
Dr. Denise A. McWilliams
Extension Crop Production Specialist-NDSU/UM
North Dakota State University, Fargo
cell phone: 701-793-5820
telephone: 701-231-8160
fax: 701-231-8474
E-mail: dmcwilli@ndsuext.nodak.edu
Web pages: http://www.ag.ndsu.nodak.edu/aginfo/rowcrops/index.html
THE NEW McDONALD'S FARM: AGRICULTURE AND FARMING NOT THE SAME THING
Opinion-by Richard A. Levins, Extension economist, University
of Minnesota
The most venerable of American farms is that owned and operated by a man known only as Old MacDonald. Dressed in overalls and straw hat, he attends to a moo,
moo here and an oink, oink there.
But he won't be around much longer with the way things are going. Millions of farms like his have disappeared, and the rest are being absorbed into what might
be called New McDonald's Farms.
Old MacDonald and his kin are being replaced by a new farm, one that more resembles a fast food franchise than an independent family farm. The idea made the
cover of "Forbes" a few years ago. In 1997, Murphy Family Farms was raising over six million pigs on 125 sites scattered throughout North Carolina and the Midwest. Its founder and principal owner, Wendell
Murphy, was honored as "the Ray Kroc of pigsties." Murphy realized that the genius of McDonald's founding father was in enticing others to use their money to build restaurants to sell his hamburgers. Then
he persuaded farmers to build expensive metal buildings and raise his hogs.
Arrangements of the type Murphy used to gain a place among the nation's billionaires are called "contract farming." Farmers who raised Murphy's hogs,
like those who own McDonald's franchises or work in the restaurants, have little to say about operating policies. On the New McDonald's farm, decision-making stays with distant corporations, and the size of those
corporations keeps growing. Since the "Forbes" story was written, Murphy has become a takeover target of Smithfield, an even larger pork producer.
It 's hard to tell how much of the nation's food is produced under contracts. In 1997, the United States Department of Agriculture estimated the amount to be
about $60 billion, almost one-third of all farm crop and livestock sales. The USDA numbers did not include any biotech seed agreements, a fast-growing area of contracting, nor did they include fallout from the 1998
hog price debacle that forced many independent farmers out of business and even more into contracting.
Even though there is disagreement on exactly how many farms are contracting, virtually everyone sees this as the wave of the future. USDA recently completed a
study of contracting in poultry production, an industry they said "models the type of business organization that may characterize much of U. S. farming in the future." Chickens were raised on millions of
farms throughout much of the twentieth century. Today, the opportunity for diversified, smaller farms to supplement their living with small flocks has been all but eliminated by wholesale industrialization.
Since contract farmers have little flexibility in production or marketing, they turn to financial matters. The USDA survey found that contract farmers turn
first to bankers for outside advice. When the subject turns to chickens rather than interest rates, the contractors call on the corporations that hold their contracts, not to universities or independent advisors.
Who makes major management decisions such as what to produce and where to market those products? The USDA surveyors seemed surprised by how many contractors simply responded with "Not Applicable."
What can we do? First, we must recognize that none of our farm policies, from farm income support to environmental regulation, will work with New McDonald's
farms. Those policies were all designed with one fundamental thing in common-the farmer is the principal decision maker in the food producing system. Clearly, that is not the case in franchise farming.
A much better model for modern agricultural policy is a fast food restaurant, not an independent farm like Old MacDonald once presided over.
With such a model, we easily see how laughable our current policies are.
Suppose, for example, we want those who work at McDonald's to make more money. Do we raise the price of cheeseburgers, the way we did for corn and wheat? Our
environmental policies are similarly inappropriate. If we have a problem with McDonald's not recycling its packaging, do we shout our objections through the drive-up window? As ridiculous as this approach seems, we
routinely blame farmers for environmental problems of chemicals and nutrients while the "home office" that manufactures and promotes harmful products gets off the hook.
The New McDonald's Farm requires that we deal directly with the global corporations that bring us Franchise World. One avenue is to effectively use anti-trust
laws to limit their power; another is to regulate them as a public utilities. These options address the problem: agriculture and farming are not the same thing.
To save farmers, we must look at the entire food system and the agribusiness giants that control it.
ESTIMATING SOYBEAN YIELDS PRIOR TO HARVEST
Remember that soybean yields are best estimated only three weeks prior to harvest.
1. Determine the number of feet of row needed to make 1/1000 of an acre.
Row Width Length of Row for 1/1000 acre
(inches) (in feet and inches)
6" 87' 1"
7 74 8
8 65 4
10 52 3
15 34 10
20 26 2
28 18 8
30 17 5
32 16 4
36 14 6
38 13 9
40 13 1
2. Count the number of plants in ten different, randomly selected sample areas (for example if you had 20" rows, count the number of plants down a row for 26'
2" at ten different locations in the field). Calculate the average of these counts.
Average=_____=A
3. Next, count the number of pods per plant on ten, randomly selected plants from each sample area. Calculate the average.
Average=_____=B
4. Now, calculate the pods per acre by multiplying plant population by pods per plant.
A*B=_____=C
5. Calculate the seeds per acre by multiplying the pods per acre by an estimate of 2.5 seeds per pod (or determine the common pod load within your field).
2.5*C=_____=D
6. Calculate the pounds per acre by dividing the seeds per acre by an estimate of 2500 seeds per pound (or figure the average number of seeds per pound based on
the average for the variety you are growing).
D/2500=_____=E
7. Estimate yield by dividing the pounds per acre by 60 pounds per bushel (the common average seed weight for soybeans).
E/60=_____=Yield
Dr. Denise A. McWilliams
Extension Crop Production Specialist-NDSU/UM
North Dakota State University, Fargo
cell phone: 701-793-5820
telephone: 701-231-8160
fax: 701-231-8474
E-mail: dmcwilli@ndsuext.nodak.edu
Web Pages: http://www.ag.ndsu.nodak.edu/aginfo/rowcrops/index.html
JULY ISSUE OF GMPRC
The July Issue of "Research Kernels" published by the Grain Marketing and Production Research Center can be
read at :http://www.usgmrl.ksu.edu/kernels/
WEATHER REPORTS FROM WORLD WHEAT PRODUCING REGIONS
U.S. crop watchers indicate hot, dry weather in the southern Great Plains over
the past few weeks has depleted soil moisture and stressed unirrigated summer crops.
Some sources anticipate the situation has reduced yield potentials and stressed livestock. This kind of scenario near the end of August, now has some local producers concerned about the prospects of dryland wheat seeding which begins next month. Winter wheat seeding "normally" begins in the High Plains region during early to mid-September, but most planting occurs in late September and early October. Weather service sources suggest there is plenty of time available for improved rainfall to arrive before winter wheat prospects are dimmed. At this time, crop watchers suggest the first few weeks of winter wheat planting will be slower than usual in the drier areas, and seed germination may be slow and uneven at first because of continued dry and warm weather.
Weather service sources indicate Monday rains in Argentina, more specifically Buenos Aires and southern Entre Rios, were considered highly beneficial for the
winter wheat crop, although some of the heaviest amounts of rain fell in more minor growing areas.
Crop watchers suggest subsoil moisture remains largely adequate for winter wheat, but topsoil moisture was short in most of Buenos Aires and La Pampa and Cordoba. Moreover, additional rain is still needed in these areas as well in order to beneficially support spring growth. Generally speaking, sources indicate most winter crops in Argentina are in "good" condition for this time of the season.
For the third time, Russia's federal weather center has revised its grain production forecast for the 2000-01 marketing year downward to 63-67 MMT.
Its previous estimate was at 63.5-68.5 MMT. Sources report unfavorable harvesting conditions during the first half of August led to the lower revision. Despite the harvesting problems, the average yields will be higher this year, resulting in a harvest considerably higher than the 54.7 MMT output seen in 1999-00
Local grain specialists in France indicate approximately 40% of the 2000-01 French wheat crop will be "export-quality" milling wheat, around 30% will
be "lower-quality" milling wheat and the remaining 30% will drop into the feed wheat category. Moreover, the crop specialists defined "exportable" milling wheat as having test weights of 76
kg/hl (59 lb/bu) or above and Hagberg falling numbers of 200 or above, "lower quality" milling wheat as having test weights of 74-75 kg/hl (57.50-58.28 lb/bu) and Hagberg falling number of around 170-200,
while "feed quality" wheat is defined as having test weights of around 70-72 kg/hl (54.40-55.94 lb/bu) and Hagberg falling number down to 100. Meanwhile, newswire sources suggest the French wheat
crop is virtually all harvested, but it will be at least another week or so before enough new-crop samples are tested to produce firm percentages.
WEEKLY HARVEST REPORTS
Hard Red Winter
The hard red winter harvest is now complete and all samples have been collected
with the addition of Montana this week. Montana shows high average test weight at 61.4 lb/bu (80.8 kg/hl), average protein content of 13.3% with an average falling number of 413 seconds (3% of samples below 300
seconds). Montana wheat is also very dry, with an average moisture content of 9.6%. A final summary of the 2000 HRW crop will be included in a future report.
Soft Red Winter
The SRW survey is now completed. Test weights are running from 52.5 to 60.7 lb/bu (69.3 to 79.8 kg/hl). Protein content
averages range from 9.7% to 12.1%. Falling numbers range from 156 up to 377 seconds, with about 39% of the Illinois falling numbers below 300 seconds, thus caution should be exercised if purchasing wheat from this
region.
Flour quality data indicate flour yield is averaging about 69.8% at .429% ash and 8.5% flour protein content. Wet gluten average is about 23.0%; farinograph absorption is about 52% at 1.7 minute peak and
3.3 minute tolerance. Alveograph "W" value average is 91 with "P" value of 30 and "L" value of 129. Eighty-two percent of kernels are retained on a 7-wire sieve, thus, indicating a very
high percent of large, plump kernels.
Hard Red Spring
Rains this past week have slowed the hard red spring harvest somewhat but, overall, harvest is still well ahead of the
five-year average. In South Dakota, the harvest is virtually finished with 97% completed, compared to 66% in Minnesota, 65% in Montana and 57% in North Dakota. The crop on average is 29% ahead of last year and 24%
ahead of the five-year average. This week's average data show a slight decrease in test weight from 60.5 lb/bu (79.6 kg/hl) to 60.2 lb/bu (79.2 kg/hl). The five-year average test weight is 60.1 lb/bu (79.1 kg/hl).
There is a slight increase in wheat protein content this week to 14.3%. The long term wheat protein average is 14.1%. The falling number average is still good at 395 seconds. The average grade for the region is 1NS.
The average grade for the 1999 crop was also 1NS. Total defects (1.4%) is lower than last year (1.8%) and also lower than the five-year average of 2.6%. Vitreous kernel average is 73% which is higher than last
year's average of 61%.
As harvest has progressed north into the central part of the region, yields have fallen and lower overall quality has been noted compared to the more southern harvest. The recent rains
across parts of North Dakota that have stalled harvest may have caused weather damage in isolated areas.
Soft White Wheat
Soft white wheat harvest is moving at the same pace as noted last week, about one week ahead in Idaho and Washington, and one
week behind in Oregon, compared to the 1999 harvest progress. Of the 61 SW samples received in the past week, almost 40% were from East Central Washington and 27% were from Southeast Washington. Test weight
increased 0.3 to 61.6, dockage rose 0.1 to 0.6%, shrunken & broken decreased 0.2 to 0.5%, and protein fell 0.1 to 8.9% compared to last week. The more significant changes were moisture which fell 0.8 to 8.1% and
foreign material which rose 0.5 to 0.6%. Overall, the 2000 soft white crop continues to show lower moisture and protein contents compared to the 1999 crop.
|
