Home

E-Mail

Back

Prairie Grains is the
official publication of
the Minnesota
Association of
Wheat Growers,
North Dakota Grain
Growers Association,
South Dakota Wheat,
Inc., and the
Minnesota Barley
Growers Association.

Mark Gage • Page, ND

NDGGA President

I think most of us have two sides to us when it comes to issues: part passivist, part activist. I know both sides. One side of me wishes only to farm my land and be rewarded for my hard work by receiving a fair price for the crops I grow. The other side of me wants to get involved and instead of merely wishing or complaining, to do something about it.

I guess I can thank that latter side for getting involved in the North Dakota Grain Growers Association, serving now as the group’s president. Yeah, it takes time and effort. But there’s also a certain satisfaction in working to make and find solutions to the problems that affect our livelihood. With the Grain Growers, I have an opportunity to actually voice my concerns and get something done about them. These two sides are not only a characteristic of mine, but also that of all active members, and it is what makes the Grain Growers so effective as a producer organization.

The NDGGA works to make policy issues, like the current farm relief bill, become reality. We start off by bringing the concerns of ND farmers to the attention of lawmakers and key officials. We don’t stop with awareness, though. If there is a bill that may become reality, that addresses producer concerns, we make suggestions through lobbying visits, and follow through to make sure enactment of the bill is what we really asked for.

The benefits of NDGGA and NAWG have never been more evident than in the last six months. Making sure crop protectants like Folicur were available during the growing season. Fighting with Congress to get financial aid to farmers. Bringing the chief of the NRCS to ND see firsthand wetland problems that are affecting ND farmers. Working for equitable distribution of the $875 million disaster relief package passed by Congress.

In addition to working on legislative issues, the NDGGA also coordinates information and education, such as risk management workshops, that can help producers help themselves, because when it comes right down to it, we want to farm our land and not the government.

Let the side of you that wants to get something done to improve agriculture join the NDGGA. This winter, take $95 from the federal economic relief package and invest in your future- the NDGGA.

1998 average wheat price
takes a turn for the better

Tim Dufault • Crookston, MN

MAWG President

Maybe I’m too much of an optimist (like the kid that can find the pony in a room full of manure) or maybe it was the two inches of rain this fall that gave me some time to do a little math as it relates to the $6 billion farm economic relief package approved by Congress this fall. Bear with me, I’m no economist, but using USDA figures, I roughed out an estimate of what my wheat will do this year with the loan deficiency payment and the extra federal farm payment on base wheat bushels mixed in:

That’s not too shabby. Everyone’s situation will be different, plus or minus that. But factor in the 1998 $.65 bu. transition payment and some futures pricing, and when all is said and done a lot of guys are going to end up well into the $4.00 range. That’s not counting, for those who qualify, additional federal assistance for crop disasters.

Now then, these are just some observations. Does this mean I’m satisfied with current price levels? Heck no! But things are better than they were two months ago. Farm income still isn’t where we’d like, but this is going to go along way to help many of us hang in there.

Not to sound like a commercial, but I do think our state wheat grower groups working along with the National Association of Wheat Growers had an impact on how things turned out. From bringing awareness to the problems (effects of scab, stagnant trade and price) to aiding with legislation strategy, we’ve definitely made a difference. No one can say otherwise. Definitely worth the cost of MAWG membership!

Where do your research dollars go? It’s more than production

Bruce Hamnes • Stephen, MN

MN Wheat Council Chairman

Production takes up a good portion of research funded by the Minnesota wheat checkoff, from developing better varieties, tillage and rotational practices to better control of yield and quality-robbing pests, including weeds, insects, and disease.

However, research is more than just production; among other things, it’s also economic studies to learn more about and improve the trading, transporting, and marketing of wheat, as well as research to find new uses and add value to wheat.

It’s important to note too that the research effort supported by the wheat checkoff is more than just funding. Behind successful research projects are meetings, discussions, time, travel (decisions are made by people, and sometimes there is a need to meet with decision makers one-on-one), organizing, facilitating, planning, prioritizing, committees- you get the picture. It’s all the steps in setting the stage to get things done.

Of course, scab research has been the major focus of Minnesota wheat checkoff investments in the 1990s. Research by its very nature is expensive: the best minds in crop science, the technology and research equipment they use, and the repeatability often needed in the research process to verify results (case-in-point: varietal yield data is more accurate over several locations and several years of testing, as opposed to one year of measuring yield at one location) does not come cheap.

That’s why we try to leverage producer checkoff dollars allocated to research with state and federal dollars. We have been successful to that end. Every $1 invested by producers has leveraged $7 in public research funding. The $3 million in scab research funding at the state level and another $3.5 million for scab research at the federal level were obtained in part because it could be proven that producers were supporting scab research in their own right, through the wheat checkoff.

Minnesota producers’ commitment to research has also helped develop a strong spring wheat research program at the University of Minnesota, including, to name a few, the outreach efforts of small grains specialist Dr. Jochum Wiersma, molecular genetics research through Dr. Gary Muehlbauer, and the new addition to our state spring wheat breeding program, Dr. Jim Anderson. It cannot be understated that the wheat checkoff has helped secure a public wheat breeding program unique to Minnesota’s production environment for years to come.

This research team and many others are working for the betterment of Minnesota’s wheat production sector. Successful research results rarely occur overnight, but rather progressively and sequentially. The U of M is making gains in developing more scab-tolerant varieties; researchers are still developing varieties that are resistant to scab but in the meantime have developed transition varieties that are more tolerant of scab than many of the varieties available now. The Minnesota Wheat Research and Promotion Council is currently working to accelerate the release of one of these lines so that it is in the hands of producers two years ahead of schedule.

One of the most important responsibilities of the Minnesota wheat checkoff is communicating research results. To that end, on Dec. 7 from 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. at the Doublewood Inn in Fargo, the MWRPC is hosting its annual Research Reporting Session. Researchers whose work is supported by the wheat checkoff will give updates on their projects. I encourage producers to attend, ask questions, learn, and give feedback as to what they want their wheat checkoff dollars to support in the area of research.

Despite trade surplus, imports generate heat

Davis Helberg • Exec. Director

Seaway port Authority of Duluth

If the Port of Duluth-Superior somehow happened to be a nation unto itself, it would (A) qualify as one of the tiniest countries on the planet and (B) sport a trade surplus suggesting an embarrassment of riches.

Outbound domestic and foreign-bound cargoes generally make up about 90 percent of all Duluth-Superior tonnage (89.4 percent in 1997). If you eliminate domestic trade and isolate the international business, exports represent more than 90 percent (91.2 percent last year).

But no, Duluth-Superior does not rival, let’s say, Kuwait as a self-contained generator of commercial activity. Instead, we boast big outbound tonnages because of our proximity to the Iron Range, the Powder River Basin and the Red River Valley. The ore, coal and grain that funnel through here make this primarily a transit port, or in today’s intermodal terms, a "transshipment port."

Our cargoes are not captive – for the most part, they originate somewhere else, change modes of transportation here and then go somewhere else. Preciously little port commerce (less than two percent) originates here or is consumed here.

Nonetheless, we like to toss around our trade surplus statistics because, well, it sounds almost patriotic. If things were the other way around, however, would we be crowing about our imports?

Tough call. In the U.S. – and particularly, it seems, in this area – there is often this thing about foreign products.

Never mind that in today’s interdependent world, we rely on imports for everything from clothes we wear (check the labels) to the food we eat ("Florida orange juice is nearly always blended with foreign concentrates) to the games we play (you don’t have a Sony Playstation?) to the cars we drive (every U.S. car requires imported components).

Except for the news media and protectionist politicians, nobody really likes to talk much about imports. Ask any federal or state trade office for international business statistics and I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts (or, as the case may be drachmas to dolmades) you will get export data only.

Despite all the harsh historic lessons about isolationism - starting with the Great Depression of the 1930s – imports are still red meat for someone seeking an easy public relations kill. Sweeping generalizations about the evils of imports play well in the press.

A recent illustration involved a forest products company that imported some Canadian pulpwood by vessel. A local news story made it sound like the company was importing for the first time – despite the fact that the company has been buying Canadian pulpwood for several years and receiving it with less visibility by rail.

The reporters were told in advance the company was merely comparing time and delivery costs between rail and water, but why let facts interfere when you have some provocative quotes?

So the story got prominent play. And we got calls, some from people charging the Canadians with "dumping" practices. The charges were vacuous but, by association, the Port was somehow to blame.

We do not, however, apologize for imports. Our position is – and must be – that cargo is cargo. Going in either direction, it creates jobs and economic impact. If it doesn’t move through Duluth-Superior, it will simply move through another port or by other means, providing jobs and economic impact elsewhere instead.

Notwithstanding our policy, I still must confess to one concession during the pulpwood flap: We decided it was not a prudent time to announce that steel imports are up. In fact, the Port had just received its largest single inbound steel cargo – most of which was eventually transshipped to...Canada.