Posts

Market Mitigation Signup | an interview with Gary Schnitkey

Sign up for the trade and tariff compensation package from the United State Department of Agriculture is open. Todd Gleason has more on how and when farmers and landlords should fill out the paperwork.

Marketing Corn & Soybeans this Fall


The dramatic fall in the price of corn and soybeans earlier in the year has put farmers in a unique marketing position. They must decide how much of the drop is due to the expected bumper crop size of the harvest and how much comes from the Trump Administration trade policies. University of Illinois Agricultural Economist Todd Hubbs says determining when those disputes might be settled is key to making good marketing decisions.

Great Corn Grind, but Ethanol Stocks are Building

Dan O’Brien from Kansas State University discusses the state of ethanol production and stocks. While grind has been tremendous, stocks are building, and plant profitability looks to be near breakeven.

2018 Cash Rents were up $5/acre in Illinois


University of Illinois Agricultural Economist Gary Schnitkey discusses the surprise $5 an acre cash rent increase seen in the state wide 2018 survey numbers and how farm economics look going into the 2019 growing season.

by USDA NASS
see the 2018 USDA Land Values Survey

Agricultural Land Values Highlights

The United States farm real estate value, a measurement of the value of all land and buildings on farms, averaged $3,140 per acre for 2018, up $60 per acre (1.9 percent) from 2017 values.


Regional changes in the average value of farm real estate ranged from an 8.3 percent increase in the Southern Plains region to 1.4 percent decrease in the Northern Plains region. The highest farm real estate values were in the Corn Belt region at $6,430 per acre. The Mountain region had the lowest farm real estate value at $1,140 per acre.


The United States cropland value averaged $4,130 per acre, an increase of $40 per acre from the previous year. In the Southern Plains region, the average cropland value increased 4.7 percent from the previous year, while in the Lake region, cropland values decreased by 0.6 percent.
The United States pasture value increased by $40 per acre (3.0 percent) from 2017 values. The Southern Plains region had the highest increase from 2017 at 5.6 percent. The Pacific region remained unchanged at $1,650 per acre.


Cropland value: The value of land used to grow field crops, vegetables, or land harvested for hay. Land that switches back and forth between cropland and pasture should be valued as cropland. Hay land, idle cropland, and cropland enrolled in government conservation programs should be valued as cropland.

AirScout Precision Agriculture Startup

A startup on the south end of the University of Illinois campus is using thermal imaging to help precision agriculture become prescription agriculture. Todd Gleason has more on how AirScout is helping farmers take advantage of their precision-guided equipment.

The Trump Administration, Ethanol, & the RFS

During a U.S. Senate hearing, Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler answered questions about ethanol, biofuels, the RFS, and small refinery waivers. He appears to be holding the same line Scott Pruitt took during his time at the helm of the agency with some notable differences.

Breeding Barley to Make Budweiser


You might think of Anheuser Busch as a beverage company producing great American beers like Budweiser. However, as Todd Gleason reports from Idaho Falls, Idaho, it is a highly integrated agricultural company.

Trade Tariff Farmer Compensation Package

The Trump Administration’s has a $12 billion dollar plan to compensate farmers for damages done so far by the trade dispute with China and other nations. Here’s what’s known, so far, about how the plan will work.

The largest part of that money will be paid out to soybean producers, though direct payments will also be made for other commodities including corn, wheat, sorghum, cotton, dairy, and pork. USDA Chief Economist Rob Johansson told reporters on the line the initial damage calculation has already been made, “We’ve calculated what the damage is to producers facing these illegal tariff actions. We are working out the specific details and will be working it out as a rule making action in a couple of weeks and that will have our estimated rates. As the Secretary mentioned, this will be playing out over time and we do look to allowing for the Administration to successfully negotiate a deal here with our trading partners. And so, the program will be flexible to allow that.”

Again, Johansson says the financial damage part has already been calculated, though he also says specific details have yet to be published and or worked out. Should the trade disputes be settled the program is meant to flexible.

This was not said, but it makes sense that a farmer who harvests and sells soybeans prior to the settlement would get a payment, one who sells after the settlement may not.

Assistant Deputy Administrator for Farm Programs, Brad Karmen says FSA, the Farm Service Agency, will be responsible for the sign up, “So we are going to allow producers, we are talking about a September sign-up, and it will probably go for many months. So, producers will have time to visit there FSA count y office. And in order to run this program we need producers to harvest their crop. So, producers that harvest their crop, like wheat for example which in on the list and many of those producers have harvested already. They may be able to get their payment earlier than somebody like corn or soybeans that doesn’t harvest until October. But we need producers to harvest so that we know their production in order to calculate a payment.”

Recapping then… the the bulk of the $12 billion dollars is intended to compensate soybean farmers for damages to their market. The initial calculation has, it appears, already been made but may be tweaked. Sign-up will be done at local FSA offices. Payments will begin once producers provide actual production figures to the FSA. And, the program may change or end prior to payments being made should the Administration settle trade disputes.

As of July 12th, U.S. farmers were expected to produce 4.3 billion bushels of soybeans this season.

A R C vs P L C | #farmbill18

The farmdocDaily team has written an article projecting future farm safety-net payments. Unless the conference committee members change ARC-Co (ark-county) dramatically, most corn farmers will choose P-L-C this time around.



excepts from the farmdocDaily article
by Gary Schnitkey, Jonathan Coppess, Nick Paulson, & Carl Zulauf

The House and Senate have respectively passed their versions of a 2018 Farm Bill. Now a conference committee will attempt to work out the differences. Both include the Agricultural Risk Coverage at the County Level (ARC-CO) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC) farm safety net programs first made available in the 2014 bill. The House version eliminates a third program— ARC at the individual farm level (ARC-IC) — while the Senate leaves it in.

ARC-CO pays when county revenue (county yield x marketing year average price) is below a revenue guarantee. The revenue guarantee equals .86 times a benchmark yield times a benchmark price. Benchmark yields and benchmark prices are Olympic averages of the five previous prices (eliminate the high and low equals). When county revenue is below the ARC guarantee, a shortfall is calculated that equals the guarantee minus harvest revenue. The shortfall cannot exceed 10% of the benchmark price times the benchmark yield. The ARC payment equals 85% times the shortfall. In each year since the 2014 Farm Bill has been implemented, payments have been reduced by a 6.8% sequester amount. Prices since 2014 have been below $4.00, and the benchmark price has declined. The benchmark price will be $3.70 in 2018, compared with a high of $5.29 in 2014. The benchmark price cannot go below $3.70 since the $3.70 reference price is a floor on the benchmark price.

Price Loss Coverage (PLC) is a price program. It makes payments when prices are below the reference price ($3.70 for corn). Each FSA farm has a PLC yield. The yield used in calculating payments is the average county yield, as reported by the Farm Service Agency. A per bushel shortfall is calculated when the MYA price is below the reference price equal to the reference price minus the higher of the MYA price or loan rate ($1.95 for corn). For example, the MYA price was $3.36 in 2016. Per bushel shortfall was $.34 ($3.70 reference price – $3.36 MYA Price), which is multiplied by the PLC yield and the payment acre factor of 0.85 and the sequester factor of (1 – 0.068).

The Senate ARC-CO version modifies the 2014 ARC-CO version in two ways; the benchmark yield will be trend adjusted; and an actual yield below 75% of the t-yield will be replaced by 75% of the t-yield. Both of these modifications have potential to raise benchmark yields, benchmark guarantees, and ARC payments.

The Senate PLC program is exactly the same as the 2014 PLC program.

The House PLC version uses an effective reference price in calculating per bushel shortfalls. The effective reference price equals .85 times the Olympic, five-year average of MYA prices as long as that average is between the current reference price ($3.70 for corn) up to 1.15 times the reference price ($4.26 for corn). If the average is below the $3.70 reference price, the $3.70 reference price is used. If the average is above $4.26, the $4.26 price is used. The House PLC program always has an effective price that is at least as great as the Senate PLC program.



The projection made in its April 2018 baseline allows calculation of CBO’s projections of per acre ARC-CO and PLC payments. On a national per base acre basis, ARC-CO is expected to make payments of $11 per acre for corn produced in the 2019 marketing year (see Table 2). For the 2019 marketing year, PLC is projected to pay $38 per corn base acre. In each year of the projected life of the 2018 Farm Bill, PLC is projected to pay more than ARC-CO. Over the 2019 to 2023 period, PLC is projected to pay an average of $29 per corn base acre compared to $9 per corn base acre for ARC-CO.

The Senate version of ARC-CO would result in higher payments for ARC-CO than those shown in Table 2 because the use of trend-adjusted yields and floors of 75% of t-yields will result in higher yield benchmarks and ARC guarantees. CBO’s estimate of program outlay changes for the Senate version suggests modest increases in spending of an average $20.5 million per year for marketing years from 2019 to 2023 (see Congressional Budget Office, Cost Estimates of S. 3042). The $20.5 million is applicable to all program crops. However, even if all the $20.5 million were applied to corn, expected payments would increase by $1.35 per corn base acre. This increase would leave expected payments for ARC-CO near $12 per base acre, still well below those for PLC. It is unlikely this increase would change any decisions by farmers as to which program to elect.

Turning to PLC, the House alternative will have at least as high of payments as shown in Table 2 for the Senate version because the House version has the potential escalator provision for reference prices. CBO estimates the impacts of the effective reference price mechanism to be minor for corn, with PLC payments for corn increasing $5 million for the ten fiscal years from 2019 to 2028 (CBO, https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/115th-congress–2017–2018/costestimate/hr2.pdf). This $5 million total increase would work out to be less than an increase of $1 per corn base acre. The reason for this low estimate is that MYA prices are not expected to get high enough to cause the effective reference price to exceed the reference price.

Given the choices in the House and Senate versions, most farmers and land owners would choose PLC over ARC-CO for use on corn base acre. This assumes that prices remain at levels currently forecast. It also assumes that farmers and land owners make choices based on highest expected payments from the program.

Jul 23 | USDA Weekly Crop Progress Reports

Around the nation, USDA reports 81% of the corn crop is silking. The rolling 5yr-avg is 62%. 18% of the crop has entered the dough stage, the 5yr-avg is 8%. The corn crop is in slightly better condition than last week as is the soybean crop. It now stands at 70% good or excellent with 44% of the crop setting pods. The 5yr-avg is about half that amount. Winter wheat harvest is 80% complete.

A Commodity Markets Interview with Todd Hubbs

The commodity markets seemed to have found a bottom for the moment. Todd Gleason has more on what may be next with University of Illinois Agricultural Economist Todd Hubbs.

July WASDE to Reflect Tariffs

This Thursday’s USDA’s monthly supply and demand estimates will include the impact of the Trump Administration’s tariffs. Gary Crawford talks with the chair of the World Agricultural Outlook Board Seth Meyer about the July WASDE. The report is scheduled for release at 11 a.m. central time Thursday, July 12, 2018.

When Farmers Should Spray for Japanese Beetles

Japanese beetles are showing up in corn and soybean fields. These can do enough damage to cause yield losses, but it is fairly unlikely. The University of Illinois has published thresholds for when farmers should spray crops to protect them from the Japanese beetle.

Nick Seiter says there needs to be a lot of beetles and a whole lot damage done before a producer should spend money on a rescue treatment, “Most of the reports that I am getting, as you would expect and as is typical, are below the treatment thresholds. These are 25 percent defoliation after bloom and 35 percent before bloom for soybean and the threshold for silk clipping in corn is consistent clipping to half-an-inch or less regularly throughout the field. I had a question yesterday about what to do when you have both Japanese beetles and corn rootworm clipping silks in the field. The answer is the same, the clipping has to be down to half-an-inch or less consistently through the field while pollination is still ongoing.”

ILLINOIS Extension Entomologist Nick Seiter says farmers have no need to apply a rescue treatment for Japanese beetles until defoliation reaches at least 25 percent after bloom for soybean and silk clipping during pollination is down to half-an-inch or less for corn.

China Tells Farmers To Grow More Soybeans

U.S. House Passes Farm Bill Legislation

The U.S. House of Representatives passed farm bill legislation late Thursday, June 21, 2018. Before its passage, I asked @ACESIllinois Jonathan Coppess how the vote might go, what the bill contains, and how it compares to the Senate’s version of the legislation.

Nothing to do about Seedling Diseases in Soybean

Soybean seed treatments aren’t working at the moment and there’s nothing a farmer can do.



If you drive around much you’ll have noted some drown out areas in soybean fields, probably across the whole of the corn belt. Those are pretty easy to spot, but there are some areas that look like they’ve not been underwater - at least not for very long, if at all. They’re wilted back and showing signs of seedling diseases says University of Illinois Extension Plant Pathologist Nathan Kleczewski, "You must remember these soybeans have been in the ground for 30 or 40 days and seed treatments are going to only give us two to three weeks of protection.

Under perfect conditions your are going to see about three weeks of protection says the researcher, and we’re well past that point now. Kleczewski says while it is unusual at this point in the season, the Plant Clinic at the University of Illinois has been getting in samples of treated soybeans that are clearly suffering from seedling diseases, “f you think about the environment we had and the conditions we had immediately after planting. So, when we planted it was really warm and wet there for a while. So, you can imagine that initially this plant would have germinated from the seed and started to throw off roots. And then from here we are seeing from those initial roots, see how they are very white and stiff, this is because the outer cortex sloughed off. This is usually a sign of pythium infection and maybe there was also some rhizoctonia infection. So this canker you see here would be indicative of rhizoctonia.”

There is nothing to do at this point says Kleczewski. Spraying a fungicide on won’t do any good. If things dry out the plants may recover. Still there will be some stand loss, but not likely much yield impact.

Episode 01 | Nutrient Loss Reduction Podcast

Replacing Petrochemicals with Biochemicals made from Corn


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.

Corn Growth Stage and Post-Emergence Herbicides

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

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.

Western Corn Rootworm Research Trials

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.