Farmers gathered at the CUTC in St. Louis this week (June 4, 5, 6) to learn about future uses for the nation’s number one commodity crop.
The Corn Utilization and Technology Conference is organized by NCGA or the National Corn Growers Association. It happens every two years and is dedicated to exploring future uses of corn. Vijay Singh is a regular. He works for the agricultural college at the University of Illinois and specializes in engineering ethanol processing plants. Singh sees them expanding to include biochemical production in the near future, “That’s the big thing right now and for that, we need large amounts of sugar. The U.S. is at a major advantage in terms of producing sugars from corn and that comes from the corn processing industry.”
The corn processing industry has long focused on creating food products, high fructose corn syrup, ethanol and some other co-products. However, now that sugar, rather than crude oil, has become the preferred feedstock for producing high-value biochemicals that are used to create consumer products, things like polymers, there is a place for corn in that pipeline.
The U of I engineer says because it is economically feasible dry-grind ethanol plants are starting to produce sugar along with producing ethanol. Those sugars can then be used to produce biochemicals. The biochemicals made from a renewable source, corn, are taking the place of petrochemicals.
by Aaron Hager, Extension Weed Scientist
University of Illinois
The labels of most post-emergence corn herbicides allow applications at various crop growth stages, but almost all product labels indicate a maximum growth stage beyond which broadcast applications should not be made, and a few even state a minimum growth stage before which applications should not be made.
INSERT ifr180601–140 or use embed code
Herbicide application restrictions based on corn height and growth stage with University of Illinois Extension Weed Scientist Aaron Hager @UIWeedSci. pic.twitter.com/YnZkWpYLDM
These growth stages are usually indicated as a particular plant height or leaf stage; sometimes both of these are listed. For product labels that indicate a specific corn height and growth state, be sure to follow the more restrictive of the two. Application restrictions exist for several reasons, but of particular importance is the increased likelihood of crop injury if applications are made outside a specified growth stage or range. The following table lists the maximum corn growth stage for broadcast application of several post-emergence corn herbicides. Be sure to consult the respective product label for additional precautions or restrictions.
When farmers want to know how well an insecticide works they turn to their Land Grant University for unbiased information. Todd Gleason has more from the western corn rootworm trials on the Urbana-Champaign campus.
This little four-row planter is outfitted with some pretty high tech stuff. All of which must be calibrated before it goes to the field where it will be used to plant a western corn rootworm trial. A trial that will assess how well twelve different current in-furrow liquid and granular insecticides work. Well, at least some of them are current products, others are experimentals says University of Illinois Extension Entomologist Nick Seiter, “We like to evaluate all the different options that are out there. There is always potential that we could lose control tactics that we are using currently.”
So, researchers at Illinois want to make sure to evaluate everything available just in case something becomes ineffective. This we there are good answers on what to try next. It is important evaluate efficacy for today’s products and those in the pipeline. Illinois has long done research to test how well different control methods work on the western corn rootworm. Naturally, these include the Bt corn hybrids, too. As for the insect, it is really nimble and quite capable of adapting to all sorts of ways farmers use to control it, says Seiter, “It is an insect that is very good at developing resistance to multiple different control tactics. Out of all the insects we deal with it is the one growers are most interest in in terms of efficacy. In terms of what products, what hybrids, what control tactics are going to give them the best control.”
On that account, Nick Seiter from ILLINOIS, and his counterparts at Land Grants across the nation are working hard to stay up with the ever-changing western corn rootworm and the products used to control it.
The President has been tweeting about agriculture. He says the potential deal with China will result in “massive” export increases for farm commodities. Most have taken this to mean, at a minimum, that the flow of soybeans will be increased. University of Illinois agricultural economist Todd Hubbs has been pondering the implications and the deal.
Todd Hubbs specializes is row crop commodity marketing at the University of Illinois. You may read his thoughts on marketing soybeans in today’s (this week’s) post to the farmdocDaily website.
May 20, 2018
University of Illinois Extension | WILLAg.org
Projected Cutting Dates for Black Cutworm in Corn
China, NAFTA, and Trade Deals
Commodity Week
USDA Weekly Crop Progress
Market Outlook for Corn and Soybeans
U.S. House Fails to Pass 2018 Farm Bill
Projected Cutting Dates for Black Cutworm in Corn
Farmers should be on the lookout for black cutworm in their corn fields.
The earliest projected cutting dates were late last week in Montgomery County. University of Illinois Extension Entomologist Nick Seiter says fields, especially at risk to having plants cut by the black cutworm, include those with later planted corn and those sown into grassy weeds or a late terminated cover crop. Seiter explains, “What you are going to want to do is to scout your field. Look for plants lying on the ground that appears to have been cut with scissors. This is different looking than damage from a bird digging up the plant looking for the seed. These corn plants will be cut off. When you start finding that, scrape around in the residue looking for the larvae. The black cutworm larva is dark colored, with a greasy appearance. It is not slimy, but it looks like it has been coated with Crisco. If you find the worms and about three percent of the plants have been cut throughout the field it is the time to initiate a treatment.”
Seiter says there are several pyrethroid insecticides that can be successfully used as a rescue treatment. He offers these black cutworm management pain on the University of Illinois the Bulletin website.
Infestations are more likely in later planted corn, as delayed planting means larger cutworm larvae are present at earlier stages of corn development.
Black cutworm moths prefer to lay their eggs on grasses, not bare ground. Therefore, fields with grassy weeds present at or shortly before planting are more likely to experience damaging populations. Similarly, monitor fields closely if a grass cover crop (e.g., cereal rye) is terminated while corn is susceptible to cutworm damage (emergence to ~V5).
The economic threshold for black cutworm is 3% of plants cut with black cutworms still present in the field. Look for plants that look like they have been cut roughly with scissors close to the base; plants with intact roots were most likely dug up by birds and do not represent cutworm damage. Remember, larvae do their feeding at night and hide in residue or just below the soil surface during the day, so you will have to do a little bit of digging near the base of the plant to find them.
Several Bt corn trait packages offer suppression of black cutworm, but these might be less effective under heavy infestations or against later stage larvae. Most pyrethroid insecticides labeled for use in corn will do an excellent job of controlling larvae as a rescue treatment; just remember that they only pay off when an economic threshold has been reached.
Kelly Estes at the Illinois Natural History Survey coordinates an insect trapping network throughout the state and those results, including the black cutworm cutting dates, are posted online at The Bulletin website - that’s bulletin.ipm.illinois.edu and on Twitter using the handles @ILPestBulletin or @ILPestSurvey.
China, NAFTA, and Trade Deals
Let’s cut to the chase. There have been no trade deals announced. However, trade tensions with China have eased. NAFTA issues remain unresolved, and some in the Trump Administration say it may have to wait until next year.
Here’s a selection of quotes from the Sunday Morning News shows. Thanks to Kieth Good from farmpolicynews.illinois.edu & @farmpolicy for curating the list.
NEC Dir. Larry Kudlow tells @gstephanopoulos following trade talks with China: "There's no agreement for a deal, we never anticipated one, there's a communique between the two great countries. That's all." #ThisWeekpic.twitter.com/oj6goENJFA
Mnuchin on $200 billion China-deal figure: "Chris, we have specific targets. I am not going to publicly disclose what they are. They go industry by industry" pic.twitter.com/cO8Js0e31l
— Trade News Analysis (@TradeNewsCentre) May 20, 2018
In an exclusive interview, @stevenmnuchin1 tells Chris: "We're putting the trade war on hold, so right now we have agreed to put the tariffs on hold while we try to execute the framework." pic.twitter.com/fJXKozKxK5
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin says efforts to renegotiate a trade agreement with Canada and Mexico could spill into next year: https://t.co/kM3JdClgGr
Panelists
- Curt Kimmel, Bates Commodities
- Chip Nellinger, Blue Reef Agri-Marketing
- Wayne Nelson, L&M Commodities
- Jacquie Voeks, Stewart Peterson
Last Week | USDA Weekly Crop Progress
Each Monday during the growing season USDA releases a Weekly Crop Progress and Conditions Report. In the early 1990’s I began calling statisticians in the three “I” states to record audio commentary from them individually. The idea was to provide a more granular look at how corn and soybeans were fairing in Iowa, Illinois, and Indiana. The audio releases have continued ever since, but now USDA posts them to the state NASS websites. Not every state produces an audio version of the report, but four of the five top corn-producing states in the nation do. Each Tuesday afternoon they are aired during the WILLAg.org Closing Market Report. More often than not there is a tidbit in them that gives you something to really consider. For instance, in last week’s release, the Iowa audio report detailed the lag in the north-central part of the state. Do take a listen, and then tune each Tuesday to hear more from USDA. The reports are compiled as of each Sunday, released at 3pm each Monday, and aired on WILLAg.org each Tuesday.
USDA’s May 13, 2018, Weekly Crop Progress report showed 62% of the nation’s corn crop has been planted, just 1 percentage point behind last year. 28% of the corn has emerged. 35% of the soybean crop has been sown nine-points ahead of the average. 10% of soybeans have emerged. 45% of winter wheat has headed. Just 36% is in good to excellent condition. Last year that combined number was 51%. Here are the reports from Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, and Indiana.
Market Outlook for Corn and Soybeans
Farmers, as we enter the last half of May, are nearing the end of the spring planting season and they are turning their attention again to the marketplace. Todd Gleason has more on how one agricultural economist sees prices playing out for the year.
We’ll start with the last numbers USDA publishes in the Supply and Demand tables for each commodity, the season’s average price. For corn, that number - at the midpoint - is $3.80. University of Illinois Agricultural Economist Todd Hubbs is a bit more optimistic. He has it at $4.05. His soybean price, however, is less than USDA’s. The agency has it at $10.00 a bushel. Hubbs puts it at $9.45. The difference in viewpoint says Hubbs lands squarely on soybean exports, “When we look forward to 18/19 the 2.29 billion bushel USDA projection seems a bit high especially when you consider the size of the Brazilian soybean crop and China’s aspiration to increase domestic soybean production while cutting back on imports for the first time in over a decade. It is unclear if China can pull this off, but I’ve got exports at 2.20 billion bushels in 18/19 and that may be generous considering whats going on currently in the market.”
So, Todd Hubbs soybean export figure is 90 million bushels lower than USDA’s for the coming marketing season. It’s lower for the current marketing year, too. All-in-all his soybean supply & demand table puts the new crop ending stocks at 562 million bushels. That’s a far cry from the much more optimistic USDA 415 million bushels projection and the reason his price projection is 55 cents a bushel lower than USDA’s. Again USDA is $10.00, Hubbs is at $9.45. His corn number swings in the opposite direction.
USDA, in the May reports, projected the price of new crop corn at $3.80. Hubbs is at $4.05. The reason why is pretty simple. Hubbs says he uses a lower yield trend line yield, "The main difference between my projections and USDA is the trend yield number. We sit at 171.4 whereas USDA has it at 174 bushels to the acre and the final yield makes a big difference in the consumption pattern and the final price.
Again, USDA is at 174 bushels to the acre and Todd Hubbs is using 171.4. Both numbers are calculated from the same USDA yield data set. USDA uses a smaller subset starting at about the time Bt corn was introduced. Hubbs’ set goes back a couple more decades, and consequently, his yield number is lower. The resulting price difference in the supply & demand tables for new crop corn is $3.80 for USDA and $4.05 for Hubbs.
U.S. House Fails to Pass 2018 Farm Bill
Friday, May 18, 2018, the United States House of Representatives voted on and failed to pass legislation to create the 2018 version of the Farm Bill. Fourteen members of the Republican Party’s Freedom Caucus, 16 moderate Republicans, and the Democrats cast no votes. It sets up a complex path forward for the bill.
Friday, May 18, 2018, the United States House of Representatives voted on and failed to pass legislation to create the 2018 version of the Farm Bill. Fourteen members of the Republican Party’s Freedom Caucus, 16 moderate Republicans, and the Democrats cast no votes. It sets up a complex path forward for the bill.
Farmers should be on the lookout for black cutworm in their corn fields.
The earliest projected cutting dates were late last week in Montgomery County. University of Illinois Extension Entomologist Nick Seiter says fields especially at risk to having plants cut by the black cut worm include those with later planted corn and those sown into grassy weeds or a late terminated cover crop. Seiter explains, “What you are going to want to do is to scout your field. Look for plants lying on the ground that appear to have been cut with scissors. This is different looking than damage from a bird digging up the plant looking for the seed. These corn plants will be cut off. When you start finding that, scrape around in the residue looking for the larvae. The black cut worm larva is dark colored, with a greasy appearance. It is not slimy, but it looks like it has been coated with Crisco. If you find the worms and about three percent of the plants have been cut throughout the field it is the time to initiate a treatment.”
Seiter says there are several pyrethroid insecticides that can be successfully used as a rescue treatment. He offers these black cutworm management pain on the University of Illinois the Bulletin website.
Infestations are more likely in later planted corn, as delayed planting means larger cutworm larvae are present at earlier stages of corn development.
Black cutworm moths prefer to lay their eggs on grasses, not bare ground. Therefore, fields with grassy weeds present at or shortly before planting are more likely to experience damaging populations. Similarly, monitor fields closely if a grass cover crop (e.g., cereal rye) is terminated while corn is susceptible to cutworm damage (emergence to ~V5).
The economic threshold for black cutworm is 3% of plants cut with black cutworms still present in the field. Look for plants that look like they have been cut roughly with scissors close to the base; plants with intact roots were most likely dug up by birds and do not represent cutworm damage. Remember, larvae do their feeding at night and hide in residue or just below the soil surface during the day, so you will have to do a little bit of digging near the base of the plant to find them.
Several Bt corn trait packages offer suppression of black cutworm, but these might be less effective under heavy infestations or against later stage larvae. Most pyrethroid insecticides labeled for use in corn will do an excellent job of controlling larvae as a rescue treatment; just remember that they only pay off when an economic threshold has been reached.
Kelly Estes at the Illinois Natural History Survey coordinates an insect trapping network throughout the state and those results, including the black cut worm cutting dates, are posted online at The Bulletin website - that’s bulletin.ipm.illinois.edu and on twitter using the handles @ILPestBulletin or @ILPestSurvey.
Farmers, as we enter the last half of May, are nearing the end of the spring planting season and they are turning their attention again to the marketplace. Todd Gleason has more on how one agricultural economist sees prices playing out for the year.
We’ll start with the last numbers USDA publishes in the Supply and Demand tables for each commodity, the season’s average price. For corn, that number - at the midpoint - is $3.80. University of Illinois Agricultural Economist Todd Hubbs is a bit more optimistic. He has it at $4.05. His soybean price, however, is less than USDA’s. The agency has it at $10.00 a bushel. Hubbs puts it at $9.45. The difference in viewpoint says Hubbs lands squarely on soybean exports, “When we look forward to 18/19 the 2.29 billion bushel USDA projection seems a bit high especially when you consider the size of the Brazilian soybean crop and China’s aspiration to increase domestic soybean production while cutting back on imports for the first time in over a decade. It is unclear if China can pull this off, but I’ve got exports at 2.20 billion bushels in 18/19 and that may be generous considering whats going on currently in the market.”
So, Todd Hubbs soybean export figure is 90 million bushels lower than USDA’s for the coming marketing season. It’s lower for the current marketing year, too. All-in-all his soybean supply & demand table puts the new crop ending stocks at 562 million bushels. That’s a far cry from the much more optimistic USDA 415 million bushels projection and the reason his price projection is 55 cents a bushel lower than USDA’s. Again USDA is $10.00, Hubbs is at $9.45. His corn number swings in the opposite direction.
USDA, in the May reports, projected the price of new crop corn at $3.80. Hubbs is at $4.05. The reason why is pretty simple. Hubbs says he uses a lower yield trend line yield, "The main difference between my projections and USDA is the trend yield number. We sit at 171.4 whereas USDA has it a 174 bushels to the acre and the final yield makes a big difference in the consumption pattern and the final price.
Again, USDA is at 174 bushels to the acre and Todd Hubbs is using 171.4. Both numbers are calculated from the same USDA yield data set. USDA uses a smaller subset starting at about the time Bt corn was introduced. Hubbs’ set goes back a couple more decades, and consequently, his yield number is lower. The resulting price difference in the supply & demand tables for new crop corn is $3.80 for USDA and $4.05 for Hubbs.
The monthly WASDE report for May 2018 introduced the first look at the new crop corn and soybean supply & demand tables. Todd Gleason has more with University of Illinois commodity markets specialist Todd Hubbs.
Soybean crush levels picked up substantially over the last few months due to strong crush margins. Driven by production issues in Argentina, the increase in crush margin recently is attributed to rapid growth in soybean meal prices. For the 2017–08 marketing year, the USDA currently projects the domestic crush at 1.97 billion bushels, up 3.6 percent from last marketing year. Soybean meal use needs to build on recent progress to meet or exceed the current crush projection.
Soybean crush during the first half of the marketing year from September 2017 through February 2018 equaled 1010.6 million bushels, 3.5 percent greater than the total of the previous year. The USDA’s current projection indicates a 3.6 percent increase for the year and implies that the crush during the last half of the year will be 3.7 percent larger than the crush during the previous marketing year. The Census Bureau estimated the March 2018 crush level at 182.2 million bushels, 13 percent larger than the crush during March 2017. The March estimate implies that the crush during the last five months of the year must total 776.8 million bushels, 1.7 percent higher than the crush of a year ago, to reach the USDA projection of 1.97 billion bushels.
The pace of domestic crush accelerated in February and March on a substantial uptick in crush margin. The strengthening of the crush margin coincided with changing expectations regarding Argentinian soybean production. Current forecasts of Argentine production reflect the poor growing season and sit at 1.47 billion bushels for the 2018 crop year, down 654 million bushels from last year’s production. The potential for an additional 80 million bushel decline in production is a distinct possibility. Soybean crush projections for Argentina fell 1.95 million tons to 45.4 million tons and continued issues associated with soybean crushing in the region may lower this number over the next few months.
The growth in soybean meal prices associated with potential shortfalls saw crush margins in Decatur move from an average of $1.63 during September through February 7 to the current level of $2.63. Soybean meal prices in Decatur expanded from $327 per ton in early February to an average of $390 per ton over the last month. Soybean oil prices continue to show weakness with soy oil stocks growing to 2.44 billion pounds in March, up 0.8 percent from last year. Lower projections in the April WASDE report for biodiesel use of soybean oil and the growth in production increased marketing year ending stock projections. Soybean oil prices declined from 31.6 cents per pound in early February to an average of 29.5 cents per pound over the last month in Decatur. The continuation of crush strength in 2018 is dependent on solid soybean meal markets.
The April WASDE report increased domestic consumption of soybean meal by 250 thousand tons and expanded exports by 100 thousand tons. Total use is forecast at 47.05 million tons in April, up 4.5 percent from last year.
Domestically, large livestock supply indicates continued consumption of soybean meal throughout the spring and summer as beef, pork, and broiler production look to expand over last year’s levels on recent positive feeder and packer margins. Red meat and poultry production came in 2 percent higher during the first quarter of 2018. USDA projections set second quarter production increases at 4.4 percent. Despite the recent rise in soybean meal price, a continuation of strong domestic consumption appears feasible for 2018.
While domestic consumption of soybean meal gives added weight to continued strong crush margins, soybean meal export markets need to provide support as well. Through the first half of the soybean meal marketing year (October 2017 – March 2018), soybean meal exports increased 3.2 percent over last year, to 6.92 million short tons. The USDA’s current projection indicates a 7.8 percent increase for the year and implies that the exports during the last half of the year will be 14 percent larger than second half exports during the previous marketing year. Census Bureau estimated the March 2018 export level at 1.414 million short tons, 3 percent lower than during March 2017. Soybean meal exports during the last six months of the year must total 5.577 million tons to reach USDA projections.
While soybean exports continue to disappoint, soybean crush levels maintain a pace to set record levels of use associated with crush this marketing year. Domestic use of soybean meal appears set to maintain support for strong crush margins. The progression of soybean meal exports through the remainder of the spring and summer will provide insight into the potential for crush levels as we move into next marketing year and merit monitoring.
Over the next few years, companies will release new and updated ways to use seed treatments to control soil-borne diseases in corn and soybeans. Researchers at the University of Illinois are looking to assess how well each of these might work.
One of the first steps in the scientific process is to lay out the trials. In this case that means intentionally inoculating the area with a disease says University of Illinois Extension Plant Pathologist Nathan Kleczewski, “We are putting in some different soybean and corn trials today looking at different seed treatments for controlling seed-borne diseases. So, we have some pythium trials, some SDS trials, and some rhizoctonia trials. We’re getting those in the ground.”
Kleczewski is testing how well both old and new seed-treatment products work. He’s wants to see how efficacious they are at controlling corn and soybean plant diseases, “We are also trying some existing products utilizing different mechanisms of application to see if they might be more or less effective than current ways we are applying them.”
The extension based research done on the Univeristy of Illinois farms will guide future recommendations the Land Grant makes as it relates to the use of seed-treatments.
The price of soybeans and bean meal jumped Friday as news continues to filter in from the April 24 grain terminal port accident in Argentina. The Chinese flagged Ocean Treasure, a bulk agricultural commodities carrier, struck and heavily damaged a pier at Puerto General San MartÃn north of Rosario on the Paraná River.
Ocean Treasure was preparing to load up to 24,000 tons of corn and a total of 27,000 tons of soymeal, according to shipping agency data.
The incident occurred at the north dock of Terminal 6. It is grain and liquid bulk facility on the Paraná River. Video of the incident shows the collapse of a fixed conveyor belt and loading equipment after impact. Guillermo Wade, the manager of Argentina’s Chamber of Port and Maritime Activity, told Reuters that one worker suffered minor injuries. He reported that T6’s north dock sustained serious damage, but the south dock remains operational.
Bunge Grain Terminal Puerto General San MartÃn
Terminal 6 S.A., a joint venture of AGD and Bunge, loads out over 10 million tons of grains, protein meal, vegetable oil and biodiesel per year.
It is unclear how long repairs will take, but estimates range up to a full year.
President Donald Trump made a speech Saturday in Washington, Michigan. Thirty-seven minutes into the speech he talked about farmers, trade with China & Japan, the guest worker immigration program, cattle, wheat, and NAFTA. You may watch the whole speech here. It is set to start at the 37-minute mark with the trade and farm issues.
The lateness of the planting season coupled with smaller acreage has put a fundamental lift into the corn market. Todd Gleason talks with the University of Illinois commodity markets specialist about what it might mean for prices.
The lateness of the planting season coupled with smaller acreage has put a fundamental lift into the corn market. Todd Gleason talks with the University of Illinois commodity markets specialist about what it might mean for prices.
The late spring has many worried. Others are confident farmers can plant a corn crop in 5 working days. University of Illinois agricultural economists have gone through the USDA data to see if this is true and what impact a late planting season might have on corn yields.
The grand prairie of Illinois is still lying dormant. Its soils are just beginning to reach that magical 50-degree mark. That’s when the corn planters begin to roll. It’s a late start to the season this year, and despite the increased size of the machinery University of Illinois Agricultural Economist Scott Irwin says it’ll still take about as much time to plant the corn crop this season as it did nearly 30 years ago, “If we are operating at our maximum capacity, it takes about fourteen days and when we say days we mean field days not calendar days, to get the job done”.
The reason is simple. There are fewer farmers using bigger machines. So, it is pretty likely it will take a while to get the corn crop in the ground says Irwin, and that has some serious implications, “Our optimum window clearly closes May 1st based on the agronomic trials we have access to and by May 10th we are definitely into the late planting time frame and it is hard to see, unless we get extraordinarily lucky with a planting window opening up, that we are not going to have above average late planted acres. Certainly in Illinois, and I am 100 percent confident of that as you go north where they are still melting the snow.”
ILLINOIS analysis suggests the number of late planted corn acres could 5 to 10% more than usual. If so, the impact on the nation wide corn yield could be between a bushel and quarter to two-and-half bushels to the acre lost.
The late start to the growing season in the corn belt and the northern plains has farmers and traders worried. But, as a commodity marketing class at the University of Illinois found out there is much more to be learned from the data.
This 400 level agricultural college class taught by Scott Irwin includes guest lectures by Illinois alum involved in price discovery. In this case, Mike Tannura from T-storm Weather in Chicago is teaching them about how the weather and the markets work together. Right now he tells them is a good example of a weather market.
The cold, the snow storms, the damp air hasn’t allowed farmers from Ohio to North Dakota to really begin the planting season says Tannura, “In an ideal world, you would plant all your corn and all your soybeans in a very timely manner. It would all be wrapped up by sometime in the middle of May. Given where we are today, if it turns out to be wet in the first week or two of May, then everybody is going to fall behind”.
The trick is to find and use the weather data which might help determine what the whole of this growing season could be like. Tannura says this April will be one of the three coldest on record in the U.S. Corn Belt. There have been seven similar years since 1960, or the modern corn-growing era. Corn yields fell short in six of the seven.
The detrended yield for 2018 is about 171 bushels per acre. Most of those years had yields between 166 and 170. One of the worst years was 1983. That was an outlier though. We don’t think that is the one to focus on. It was much lower in the 140’s. - Mike Tannura, T-storm Weather
Those are detrended yields, which puts them on an even footing with today. The point is that this crop season is cold, wet, and late. If it stays that way, and the odds now favor late, then chances are very good that corn yield will be below the trend line.
The price of corn and soybeans has been swinging on trade threats and changing acreage mixes in the United States. However, those price movements have yet to change the relative profitability between corn and soybeans writes Gary Schnitkey on the farmdocDaily website this week.
Soybeans remain more profitable than corn in the University of Illinois agricultural economist’s crop budgets, but the difference between them has narrowed. Schnitkey says the risks of significant price declines have increased, particularly for soybeans and that hedging a large percentage of 2018 expected soybean production seems prudent.
Current prices are higher than earlier in the winter. The central Illinois fall delivery bids on April 6, 2018 were $3.80 for corn and $10.00 per bushel for soybeans. Budgets based on these fall delivery bids are shown in Table 1.
Panel A shows budget for high productivity farmland in central Illinois. The operator and land return for corn is $256 per acre for corn-after-soybeans and $295 per acre for soybeans-after-corn, indicating that soybeans are projected to be $39 per acre more profitable than corn. Corn-after-soybeans is projected to be roughly the same profitability as soybean-after-soybeans ($256 per acre for corn-after-soybeans and $260 per acre for soybeans-after-soybeans).
In lower productive areas, soybeans dominate corn. In southern Illinois, corn-after-soybeans has an $84 per acre return at a $3.80 price compared to $141 per acre for soybeans-after-corn at a $10.00 per bushel price (see Panel B of Table 1). Soybeans-after-soybeans has a $101 per acre return, higher than the $84 per acre returns for corn-after-soybeans. These returns comparisons suggest having more soybeans than corn in southern Illinois. In recent years, southern Illinois farmers have been planting more soybean than corn. Recent price moves increased the profitability of corn relative to soybeans, but not enough for a budget to suggest switching to more corn.
Price changes have increased corn profitability relative to soybean profitability, but have not suggested shifts in acres.
Higher risks suggest a prudent risk management strategy is to forward price more of the 2018 expected soybean production. However, pricing more production introduces the possibility of hedging losses if prices increase. If farmers have purchased an insurance product with a guarantee increase such as Revenue Protection (RP), offsetting payments will be received in cases when prices rise and yields are below guarantee levels.
Farmers who purchased revenue crop insurance policies will have downside price production. Given the $10.21 projected price and yields at guaranteed levels, the harvest price must fall below the following levels for different coverage levels to trigger payments on revenue policies (e.g., Revenue Protection (RP) and RP with harvest price exclusion):
$8.67 at an 85% coverage level ($10.21 x .85)
$8.17 at an 80% coverage level ($10.21 x .80)
$7.65 at a 75% coverage level ($10.21 x .75)
While these revenue products will offer downside risk protection, most farmers will face loss situations if prices fall enough to trigger insurance payments.
Low prices could also result in commodity title payments under Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC). ARC is a revenue program that makes payments based on county yields and market year average prices. Given yields near guarantee levels, ARC at the county level would begin to make payments around $8.70 per bushel for the 2018 production year. PLC has a reference price of $8.40. As a result, PLC will not make payments until MYA prices fall below $8.40 per bushel. The 2018 payments under ARC and PLC would both be made in the fall of 2019, a considerable distance into the future.
It is important to remember that ARC and PLC are based on base acres and not planted acres. As a result, planting decisions in 2018 will not impact ARC and PLC payments. Therefore, the size of ARC/PLC payments should not influence planting decisions.
Both crop insurance and ARC/PLC offer downside price protection if prices fall dramatically as the result of some event such as enactment of soybean tariff writes Gary Schnitkey. Still, he says, hedging a high percentage of production seems prudent, particularly given that a late planting season appears more likely now. The current cold and wet conditions could lead to later planting, and perhaps shifts to soybean acres. This switch could lead to further downward price pressures.
President Trump has asked the Secretary of Agriculture to protect U.S. farmers from the trade dispute with China. However, there aren’t many options for Sonny Perdue.
Last week Sonny Perdue was on the road for his second RV tour of farm country. His first tour was last summer. That’s when he told producers he would be their salesman to the world. Now he’s being asked to be their protector in the face of trade restrictions, some in place others proposed, as President Trump sets about rectifying what he sees as unfair trade with China. However, Perdue isn’t saying what he’ll do for farmers and there may be a good reason that’s the case says University of Illnois Ag Policy Specialist Jonathan Coppess, “There are not a lot options for the Secretary when it comes to the covered commodities.”
Typically USDA lawyers will explain there is flexibility in the original CCC charter act and the general powers to improve prices. Yet, because Congress has stepped in and directed spending for commodities via programs like ARC and PLC, the Secretary’s administrative powers are limited.
Most of the heavy lifting to protect farmers from any trade war blowback then, says Coppess, would need to be done by congress.
