advertisement

John's World
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
 
Comments on context...

Farmers have long been fed a constant stream of data without reference points for making comparisons.

For example, a few farmers can remember the value of all US ag exports (Choose one)
  1. $38B
  2. $69B
  3. $147B
  4. $23B
The correct answer is #2 (2006). For bonus points: What was the ag trade balance in 2006? (answer below)

But I have never - in 15 years of asking this question - gotten any answer to this question:

What is the value of all US exports? (Choose one)
  1. $1.4T
  2. $8.7T
  3. $232B
  4. $678B
[Answer below]

The reason farmers focus on exports and not imports, and certainly not total exports, is because we are taught to believe America is all about farming. When the numbers don't support that conclusion, we just don't mention them. As a result, we have a lot of producers who believe agriculture is actually important in our trade picture, when it is actually just a small contributor.

Ag exports contribute about 5% of US exports. And with a trade balance of just +$4B really don't affect our overall trade balance significantly.

I have also noted when I mention these facts, some producers get upset. I'm not sure if they think they are secret, and I am spoiling the illusion or what. But these are the numbers - and they are not made up.

What is our problem with reality and with seeing ourselves as a small part of a larger economy?

Why does the spotlight have to be on farmers?

2006 Ag trade balance = $4B
2006 Total exports (goods and services) = $1.4T

Labels:

 
 
I feel safer already...

You see a sign on a building in a national capital and it looks like this:
Welcome to the Irish Department of Defense.

But my favorite is the
new Japanese symbol.


Who needs an angry bird with pointy sticks?

Labels:

 
 
How to pass a farm bill...

In order to get Dems to sign off on the farm bill, Speaker Pelosi and her allies threw in quite a handful of goodies - one of which may come back to haunt the farmers who like the current subsidy scheme.

Democratic leaders did it by playing Santa Claus. To representatives from California and other states that don't grow the types of crops that traditionally get federal handouts, they doled out $1.6 billion for specialty crops such as vegetables and nuts. To the Congressional Black Caucus, they handed at least $100 million to help settle discrimination lawsuits by minority farmers. To urban liberals, they gave a needed expansion of the food stamp program. And to Democrats in farm states, they presented a bill that keeps in place all of the trade-distorting subsidies that made the 2002 farm bill a shameful violation of international agreements. [More]
But the real eyebrow-raiser was this bone for labor unions:
The bill is flush with subsidies to produce ethanol, the corn-based alternative fuel that still can't compete on a free-market basis. More ethanol requires more biorefineries. Democrats plan to mandate Davis-Bacon wages for workers building those refineries. With nonunion builders unable to compete on price, each new refinery could cost as much as 35% more. In many rural areas with little or no union activity, this artificially high labor cost could even make the prospect of building an ethanol plant a net loss. [More]
This is no problem if your ethanol plant is already up and running, but bad news for expansion plans.

We seem to be risking a lot for a $25 DCP.

Labels: ,

 
Monday, July 30, 2007
 
Something good from Katrina...

Lowes is selling "Katrina cottages" for what looks like pretty reasonable prices. Sure, by the time you add in the "not included" stuff it will be more expensive, but they are not bad looking little houses.


Good place for the in-laws when they visit, f'rinstance. And a darn sight more economical than the infamous Katrina trailers.

Labels: , ,

 
 
I dunno - it was just cool...


Watch the guy with the paint roller.

Labels:

 
 
Another reason used corn heads will be hard to find...

Margy Fischer, Farm Journal's Machinery editor, discovered this summer used corn heads are hot items in farm country as southern farmers gear up for corn instead of rice and cotton.(Read more about it in this summer's issue)

Looks like that market won't be cooling off soon. The WTO has issued a temporary ruling that could hardly be called unexpected.
The World Trade Organization largely ruled against the United States in an interim decision that it has failed to scrap a series of what the trade body says is illegal subsidies paid out to American cotton growers, U.S. and Brazilian trade officials said Friday.

The interim ruling was handed out confidentially to the parties late Friday. A final verdict, expected in September, could open the door for billions of dollars worth of Brazilian trade sanctions against the United States.

WTO panels rarely change their findings between preliminary and final rulings, and the apparent result is a major victory for Brazil's cotton industry and West African countries that have claimed to have been harmed by the American payments. [More]
I would guess the prevailing sentiment in cotton country in suppressed panic, but the House vote on the new farm bill preserves much of the disputed payment scheme supported by the cotton industry. Still with the massive shift in acres, one has to wonder if deep in their hearts cotton growers are not reading some handwriting on some wall somewhere.

The ruling offers another justification for a farm bill veto, something now slightly more thinkable. Certainly many non-farm sectors are dismayed by the adoption of what are now clearly trade obstacles.

The decision of most farmers to ignore possible WTO ramifications implies a growing ambivalence to export markets, especially for corn farmers - the largest single group. Heck - we'll just turn it all into ethanol, a seemingly endless demand source.

But corn is the only commodity with that luxury, and as nations retaliate legally, our choices of what we grow will dwindle to one. And once that happens, there will be few ways to adjust to rising input costs. By focusing on only one customer, we could discover what thousands of WalMart suppliers have: we have forfeited the control of our own business.

Labels: ,

 
Sunday, July 29, 2007
 
What do these foods have in common?










They are all what 120 calories look like.

Labels: ,

 
 
I only look 58...

Take this "real age" test. I found it to be a real encouragement for a healthy lifestyle (and moderate drinking - yippee!)

In fact, I going to have a beer to celebrate.

[via Presurfer]

Labels: ,

 
 
The New Transparency...

Along with pictures of Britney Spears and reports of drunken astronauts, the proliferation of video equipment and Internet sites has crossbred into a information monster that touches even agriculture.

Oddly enough, privacy is assaulted from both sides, as the left seeks to uncover corruption (EWG) and the right conspiracy (warrantless wiretaps). It's just so easy to do these days. No wonder libertarians are enjoying an unaccustomed moment in the sun.

How fast the sense of surprise wears off is anyone's guess, but there may be lasting effects we cannot fully appreciate right now. Consider this documentary, Slaughterhouse done very matter-of-factly by The Beeb. The graphic, albeit accurate depiction of meat processing is difficult to watch, but compelling at the same time.

Is is possible that, like the workers themselves, viewers will gradually react less to such footage as it becomes more available? I think that could be the case, rather than a groundswell against meat-eating. Perversely, groups promoting such depictions could be desensitizing rather than awareness-raising.

Carnage certainly has not grossed out movie-goers or game players, why should they react any differently to the food industry?

Labels: ,

 
 
Still time for us...

In an act of extraordinary courage, author David Shenk returns to a book he wrote all the way back in 1997 - almost the Dawn of Time - to critique his predictions about the Internet.
Rereading the book 10 years later has been gratifying and humbling. A number of its ideas are, I think, more relevant than ever, while other passages come off as exaggerated or shortsighted. The premise still holds, and thankfully no longer requires much convincing: In our work, home, and social lives, we are saturated with data and stimulus. While our grandparents were limited by access to information and speed of communication, we are restricted largely by our ability to wade through it all. As with calories, we must work constantly to whittle down, prioritize, and pick out the choice nutritional bits. If we don't monitor our information diets carefully, our cerebral lives quickly become bloated. Attention gets diverted (sometimes dangerously so); conversations and trains-of-thought interrupted; skepticism short-circuited; stillness and silence all but eliminated. Probably the greatest overall threat is that so many potentially meaningful experiences can easily be supplanted by merely thrilling experiences. [More]
Aside from being a thoughtful exception to the rare appearance of accountability, Shenk's words can be still be in time to be useful for many of us in agriculture.

For technical, economic and social reasons, many trends and gadgets that take our culture by storm often require another few years (5-6 b my rough estimate) to become part of our rural lives. For example, think about when your family and friends were using cell phones, and when you finally slapped one on.

Likewise, the constant connectivity Shenk describes is still relatively rare in the country.

It will come soon, I believe. And if we choose to do so we can benefit from this adoption lag in several ways. First, the gadgets will be cheaper. We will have a wider choice. The bug will largely have been frustratingly worked out be the pioneers.

But most of all, we can make better choices about how to allow the gadget to change our lives and values. By observing change effects in other lives, we can at least pause on the brink and jump with a little more aim and purpose.

Labels: ,

 
Saturday, July 28, 2007
 
But will they vote?...

An interesting poll conducted on young people (18-29) and some stark results.
The problems with the Republican brand among young people run deeper than Bush.
Young people are often cynical about politics, but believe in government. By a 68 – 28 percent
margin, voters would rather have a bigger government providing more services over a smaller
government providing fewer services. Even Republican young people prefer a larger, more
generous government (57 – 40 percent for bigger government with more services).
Young people adopt views diametrically opposed from the Republican Party on issues
as diverse as the war, global warming, gay marriage and, to some extent, illegal immigration as well. In fact, there is not a single issue in this survey where younger voters line up with the
Republican Party. [More]
Perhaps those of us who believe in smaller government are the dinosaurs of our time.

[via Daily Dish]

Labels: ,

 
Thursday, July 26, 2007
 
This could be the biggest farm story today...

Hats off to the hog industry in North Carolina. Legislation there will phase-out open hog manure lagoons. While this will be expensive, by sitting down together, hog producers will be able to get up to 90% of the cost picked up by government, and one of the biggest impediments to maintaining our hog industry will be diminished.
In 2000, pork butchers Smithfield Foods Inc. and Premium Standard Farms Inc. agreed to pay $17.3 million for research on new ways to handle the waste. Last year, researchers at North Carolina State University offered five alternatives that did reduce ammonia and pathogen emissions but were up to five times more expensive than a lagoon system.

The new legislation creates a cost-sharing program for farms that agree to convert to the new technologies. For the next five years, the state will cover 90 percent of the cost, or up to $500,000 for each applicant. The state share drops to 80 percent in 2012 and to 75 percent in 2017.

The hope is that the cost will drop as the systems are improved and demand for them grows.

Justice said she has fielded numerous calls already from farmers interested in the program and companies that believe they can develop still more systems that will meet the new standards.

"The market is wide open," she said. "(Farmers) are ready to go." [More]

If other states don't use this as a template, I will be very surprised.

Well done, indeed. Our current methods of manure handling border on indefensible.

Labels: , ,

 
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
 
Tell me about it...

Maybe the weather is screwy for a reason.
More rain and snow is falling in Canada, Britain and northern Europe, two-thirds of which is attributable to human activities. Britain is suffering one of its wettest summers ever, with severe flooding in England. More rain is also falling in areas immediately south of the equator including Brazil, southern Africa, Indonesia and Australia. Nearly all of this is caused by mankind. But countries immediately north of the equator, in Africa, India and parts of China, are getting less water. [More]
(Be sure to follow the link to a helpful map)


Meanwhile, the sun is quiet. A little too quiet...
While sidewalks crackle in the summer heat, NASA scientists are keeping a close eye on the sun. It is almost spotless, a sign that the Sun may have reached solar minimum. Scientists are now watching for the first spot of the new solar cycle to appear. The 11 year long solar cycle is marked by two extremes, solar minimum and solar maximum. Solar minimum is the period of least solar activity in the solar cycle of the sun. During this time sunspot and solar flare activity diminishes, and often does not occur for days at a time. [More]
And if you've been wondering like me, where are all the forecasted hurricanes?
Though hurricane season begins on June 1, the stormiest months tend to be August and September, when conditions in the Atlantic basin are most ripe for a hurricane to develop. During these months, ocean temperatures are warmer and there is typically less wind in the upper atmosphere to shear the tops off of developing storms.

Some seasons have seen unusually late starts. The 1992 season, for example, didn’t start up until August. And boy did it start with a bang: Hurricane Andrew decimated South Florida. [More]
Could it be weather guys enjoy the media coverage so much, they are taking a page from the Homeland Security Dept. who seem to be making ORANGE as low as we'll ever see? Try to imagine who would have the guts to lower it to green, for example.

All I want to know is why we can't get as similar 5-day forecast on Friday as we get Sunday. These weekend price plunges are bumming me out.

Labels: ,

 
 
Master of the House...

Jan and I have been huge fans of Hugh Laurie for years. In fact, we were astonished when he began the role of House - we had never seen him in a drama. But if you want to see what he can do with pure comedy, check out this.
The rest is hysteria. In time, this would mean Jeeves and Wooster, with twitchy Laurie as the twit and Fry as the heroic valet, but the purest expression of Fry-&-Laurieness is now available for your ravenous consumption in the form of A Bit of Fry & Laurie—The Complete Collection ... Every Bit!, which gathers every superlatively clever, terrifically asinine, and absolutely inexplicable moment from the four seasons of their BBC sketch show. Its 13 hours are a monument to the comedians' moment of love at first sight—of discovering someone else who took silliness very seriously. Just look at the facial hair they glued on to inhabit their hundreds of clowns over the years. [More]
For my money some of his best work was with Rowan Atkinson in Blackadder. Also we recommend Jeeves and Wooster. The man is a genius on the stage.

Labels: ,

 
 
Don't forget where you parked...



[via Presurfer]

Labels:

 
 
When local is worse...

Part of the new intuitive, agrarian approach to food may fail the test of simple mathematics. The local food movement derives legitimacy in large part from the seemingly obvious merit of food traveling fewer miles. Except it likely travels those miles very inefficiently.
But a gathering body of evidence suggests that local food can sometimes consume more energy -- and produce more greenhouse gases -- than food imported from great distances. Moving food by train or ship is quite efficient, pound for pound, and transportation can often be a relatively small part of the total energy "footprint" of food compared with growing, packaging, or, for that matter, cooking it. A head of lettuce grown in Vermont may have less of an energy impact than one shipped up from Chile. But grow that Vermont lettuce late in the season in a heated greenhouse and its energy impact leapfrogs the imported option. So while local food may have its benefits, helping with climate change is not always one of them. [More]
Local food of course has other valuable attributes: freshness, taste, uniqueness, etc. And the market can value them with consumer input. But claims of greenhouse gas emission reduction need some real numbers.

[via Free Exchange]

Labels: ,

 
 
Redecorating made easy...


Just do the light switch plates.

[via MeFi]

Labels:

 
 
Looks like history to me...

The unfolding farm bill drama ratcheted up significantly today as Republicans suddenly showed up and Sec. Johanns issued a mid-level veto threat. The trigger appears to be a poorly disguised tax built into the legislation to fund the general Santa-Claus economics of the House Ag Committee version.
A proposal from Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett would help pay for $4 billion in nutrition and food stamps by taxing U.S. plants of companies owned by firms located overseas. Republicans charge the increase would endanger tax treaties and raise the cost of doing business in the United States. [More]
Well, hush my mouth - Congressional conservatives are trembling on the brink of fiscal prudence and slightly smaller government. Will wonders never cease? Some conservatives are even pushing the Kind-Flake alternative (my choice, as well - the true Kiss of Death).
The conservative Club for Growth interest group is planning to include the vote on the Fairness in Farm and Food Policy amendment in the group's 2007 congressional score card. The Club for Growth calls the bill supported by House Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi "disastrous." The club will distribute the score card to other members of Congress and the public. [More]
As we learned with former Speakers, control of the gavel counts for about 150 votes on its own. Regardless, this looks like a campaign issue for conservatives either way it goes, if they bother to take a stand. The real wild card is the veto threat. After the vote count on the Kind-Flake amendment, we might know if Pres. Bush has any leverage.

Great - I'm on the road during this whole kerfuffle. I'll be at the Commodity Classic in Maryland tomorrow.

Labels: ,

 
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
 
Listen to the music...

As a father, I have struggled to comprehend the differences between my sons' views of Life and my own (the correct one, of course). Perhaps theirs is a result of heeding the words of Alan Watts.



[via DailyDish]

Labels: ,

 
 
Payment limits in IL...

Two outstanding articles (here) (here) in the Springfield (IL) Journal-Register regarding payment limits.

A sample:
Nowhere in their Internet biographies do Vorreyer or Thoma say they are farmers. But they both have collected hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal farm subsidies, money that isn't supposed to go to anyone who isn't farming.

Since 2000, taxpayers have given Vorreyer more than $1.4 million in subsidies, according to federal databases. Thoma has collected more than $655,000 since 2000.

The law says subsidies aren't supposed to go to anyone who isn't "actively engaged" in farming, and that means more than buying fertilizer and hiring folks to do the work.

Taxpayer money has flowed to Thoma and Vorreyer largely through corporations called MV Inc., which has Vorreyer as its sole shareholder, and A&M Inc., which is owned equally by the sisters, federal records show. The sisters also collected nearly $600,000 between 2000 and 2005 via J.C. Dowson Inc., a corporation they own with their brother, John.

You get the drift - another story of gaming the farm program. The reason I noted this was the comments section. Many were outraged at the idea of rich people getting government checks meant for deserving farmers.

Also present were strongly defensive comebacks by (presumably) farmers. Their arguments in favor of continued subsidies fell into predictable categories.
  • Farmers have to work harder than other people and have no control over their economic circumstances.
To all you who say end all subsidies, have you ever tried to operate a business where all of your inputs are purchased on the retail market and sold on the wholesale market? If you have then you have farmed. If you haven't then you don't know what it is like to pay $200+ for a bag of seed corn, or $550 for a ton of fertilizer and pray that the bottom doesn't fall out of the market so that you can make all your operating and land loan payments. When you have done that then you have farmed. The big boys may be getting a little bit extra, but they have simply found a way to work the system, and anyone in business knows that if you can work the system better than your competitor then you are going to make more money, ina world where money is king.
  • Farm subsidies make food cheap. (AKA - "without us you'd starve")
To those of you who think that farm subsidies should be ended, remember what you wished for when over 25% of your income goes toward feeding your family. There should be a limit on payments, but this country has a cheap food policy for a reason, and that is to keep the 95% of you folks that couldn't grow a blade of grass from starving to death. A strong agriculture economy is the backbone to our country's survival.
  • Oh yeah, well you can go #$%&*##$
Yesterday's farm story had its comments disabled because the bulk of the comments we were receiving violated the decency guidelines we have in place.
I mention this because the power of the first two arguments - which are totally without substance - grips many in agriculture. This used to bother me until I realized those who embraced them most fervently usually were unlikely candidates for long-term professional survival.

Maintaining beliefs that do not correspond to reality requires immense effort, and eventually falls short (hence, I believe the anger). We have done a great disservice to such people by allowing their fatuous disengagement with truth to go unchallenged in the name of comity.

[Thanks, Chris]

Labels: ,

 
 
Wait 'til Ken hears this...

When we were shooting the video segments of the Farm Journal Corn Navigator series, agronomist Ken Ferrie was trying to convince me that earthworms drag surface residues into little "condominiums".

I am not making this up - ask him! Or watch the video when we post it.

Anyway, between Ken and Jan I have been thoroughly indoctrinated into deep reverence for earthworms. Only to read this sad science report from Germany:
"We have concentrated on getting waste out of landfill and into worm composting systems but they can actually produce more greenhouse gases than landfill sites produce," Frederickson told Materials Recycling Week, a leading publication for the recycling and waste-management industry. [More]
It seems the slimy dudes produce nitrous oxide - which is a tremendously powerful greenhouse gas.
"The emissions that come from these worms can actually be 290 times more potent than carbon dioxide and 20 times more potent than methane. In all environmental systems you get good points and bad points."

This is because worms used in composting emit nitrous oxide - a greenhouse gas 296 times more powerful, molecule for molecule, than carbon dioxide.

Just great - now earthworms are killing the planet.

Those Germans just love to break bad news I think.

Labels: ,

 
 
Great poetry for sensitive farmers...

I have noted before that one difference between farmers and cowboys is our literary tastes. Cowboys write poetry; farmers recite limericks.
The Raven

There once was a girl named Lenore
And a bird and a bust and a door
And a guy with depression
And a whole lot of questions
And the bird always says "Nevermore."
[More]
[via MeFi]

Labels:

 
 
Only in Japan...

You might know an act of vandalism begun by drunken Brits smashing wheat down with poles has been turned into a
precision art form by the Japanese. The pictures are created by "growing a little purple and yellow-leafed kodaimai rice along with their local green-leafed tsugaru-roman variety".


[More] [More]

[via Boingboing]

Labels:

 
Monday, July 23, 2007
 
Lose the outrage and get real...

How conveeeenient - a GAO report on payments to dead farmers smack in the middle the farm bill debate.
The Agriculture Department sent $1.1 billion in farm payments to more than 170,000 dead people over a seven-year period, congressional investigators say. [More of a rather formulaic story]
Some good questions to ask when you see articles like this.
  1. How much total money did the FSA hand out during this period? If we do a rough estimate of $20B per year, then the dead guys got about 0.7%. In other words, 99.3% of these funds were NOT dispersed to dead people.
  2. How does the above compare to other welfare programs of government (SS, Homeland Security, etc.)?
  3. How much are we willing to spend in staff, auditors, investigators, etc. to recover that $1.1B?
  4. Have you ever tried to close an estate in 2 years? I have and it's like trying to kill a zombie.
Of course, the obvious answer to this outrage: don't pay dead people; don't pay live people.

Labels:

 
 
But wait, there is more...

The arch-nemesis of lovable farmers who just want a few billion on subsidies to tide them over - Big Business - has stirred from its loathsome stupor. (I get all carried away with metaphors after a little caffeine).
In the hubbub surrounding the markup, few noticed some important news: The U.S. business community came out for reduced agricultural subsidies.

In a letter to House and Senate leaders, it called on Congress to “enact long-needed reforms” in farm policy that will “create a dynamic opportunity for U.S. trade negotiators to increase the pressure on our trading partners to offer substantial new market access opportunities that would benefit American farmers, manufacturers and services providers.”

It was signed by several of the biggest guns in corporate America, including the Business Roundtable (representing Fortune 500 giants), U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Retail Federation, National Association of Manufacturers and Information Technology Industry Council. [More]

And even worse those despicable number-cruncher/publishers at EWG have had the nerve to point out the proposed payment limits would only affect about, ummm 27 recipients or so.

Could it be that Karl Rove once again has a better political sense of the nation than Speaker Pelosi? Like others, I think "farm states" will not be politically decided by the farm bill.
In 2005, a Kellogg Foundation-sponsored poll conducted in Iowa, Kansas and Minnesota found clear preferences for a strict $250,000 cap on farm program payments, which is the proposed cap in the Dorgan-Grassley bill reintroduced two weeks ago. All three states are considered farm states, and both farmers and non-farmers were surveyed. You can find the poll here. A quote from the poll summary:

[By] more than a two-to-one margin (67 percent to 31 percent) voters in these states support limiting direct payments to single farms to no more than $250,000. Interestingly, support is higher among farm income households and Republicans than among voters as a whole.

Since farm income households certainly understand farm programs and their impact, one might assume that their higher support for strict subsidy limits is significant. Not only do voters in these states support strict payment limits, they are willing to take that policy preference into the voting booth:

a majority of voters in each state describe themselves as more likely to support a member who supports limiting direct payments to single farms to no more than $250,000 and at least a third describe themselves as "much more likely" to support such a member. [More]

Lost in all this entertaining excitement is the ground truth that farms like mine are almost past caring. Industrial agriculture will shrug if our $25/A DCP payment shrinks or disappears. And if our "safety net" suddenly looks no bigger than our non-farming neighbor's, maybe we will be slightly more sympathetic to solutions for all of us.

One thing is sure, with all this hoo-hah, negotiating cash rents for 2008 and beyond has become NASCAR-like exciting.

More on that growing silliness anon.

Labels: ,

 
 
Would he?...

Might President Bush veto a farm bill if it looks like the likely House version?
The Bush administration is signaling that it is prepared to veto the $300 billion farm bill that will probably come before the House of Representatives this week. Bush signed similar legislation in 2002, when his Republicans controlled the House, and he will face pressure to do so again with elections approaching next year. [More]

Hokey smokes, earthlings! While I sorta wistfully imagined him doing the right thing, the reality of it is stunning. Whether the threat can sway anybody is another guess.

Should he follow through, it would signal the cannon is well and truly loose about the deck for the next year and a half, and anything could happen, since he no longer cares about his own party members' political future, especially with them bailing out on Iraq.

Labels: , ,

 
Sunday, July 22, 2007
 
American supremacy...

It would seem I'm letting our team down on my TV viewing.

Hand me the remote, wouldja.

Labels: , ,

 
 
Saved by the edge of the political knife...

What looks like the likely farm bill output for the House has received Speaker Pelosi's blessing. This is not endearing her to her district, but like all Speakers, she knows nobody is going to vote out a Speaker from their own district.

My guess is Rep. Pelosi would throw her own Maltese under a bus to maintain the Democratic majority, and the handful of Democrat freshman in rural districts were not expendable. If you stop and think about it, the only real effort at reform came when Republicans had a large edge in Congress. Stalemate has been very, very good for subsidy fans.

Still, Speaker Pelosi's approach is a clear indication of the one-dimensional image of agriculture. Do farmers vote solely on the basis of how much money we get in the farm bill? (I have never seen evidence of a "farm bloc" vote) Does Iraq not matter to us ? Or health care? Or gay marriage? Or immigration? Would we vote for Lord Voldemort if he came through with doubled loan rates?

Maybe farmers are content to be seen as self-centered simpletons with little interest in affairs beyond the farmgate. That picture does not correlate well with producers I know, but when I think of it, neither do they seem troubled to be viewed that way. Perhaps Ms. Pelosi's cynical arithmetic is right.

As usual, the gold standard coverage of this development is in Jim Wiesemeyer's column at ProFarmer (for which you have to pay - and should) but I'll risk stealing this one nugget that gave me pause.
Payment limitation changes are by far the biggest farm bill achievement in the House farm bill. While farm bill reformists say the alterations did not go far enough and deep enough, changes in payment eligibility (not only for farm program payments, but also for conservation payments), along with the end of triple-entity and a move to direct attribution clearly give this farm bill a reformist label.
Jim and I have a quantum difference on the meaning of the word "reform" but the more I ponder it, eliminating the three-entity rule at least opens the door for future ratcheting down of payment limits. While a very small step, if it is retained by the Senate - which I think very possible - it will force some innovative work-arounds at least by some large operations. [Hint: expect to see more 5 year-olds "materially participating"]

The Senate will have to pass different legislation of course, in order to be seen as contributors, so it may be this proposed legislation is the upper boundary for traditional subsidy recipients.


Labels: ,

 
Friday, July 20, 2007
 
Taking things seriously...

One of our most infuriating habits as Americans - in the eyes of the rest of the world - is our blasé attitude about events that represent a huge investment of national energy and pride for other nations. I think one current example is playing out in the food fight were are having with China.
A simmering spat over food quality is fast replacing the cheap Chinese yuan as the focus of trade disputes between the U.S. and China. [More]
The 2008 Olympics is not just another ho-hum event for the 1,300,000,000 citizens of the PRC. It is an international spotlight, and by Mao, EVERYTHING WILL GO RIGHT! So any hint of a food problem today bleeding over into '08 is unthinkable.
Politicians on both sides also need to keep their calm. There have been hawkish voices coming out of Washington demanding the US government pursue serious trade sanctions against China after the meat import bans.

Meanwhile, lawmakers in China have accused the Western media of stoking the fears over food safety in China. With next year’s Beijing Olympics fast approaching, there is a danger that China will over-react in cracking down on food safety in a ham-fisted attempt to demonstrate to the world that it treats food safety with paramount importance, punishing undeserving businesses.

Food safety and protecting the health of consumers should be a central concern of all governments. However, politicians should not lose sight of the importance of trade to economic health. Food safety issues must be looked at with a calm head – not with the patriotic zeal currently on display in some quarters of Beijing and Washington. [More]
We can titter with condescension but let's all recall the glory that was the Atlanta Olympics.
The games had a profound impact on the city of Atlanta and many in the Atlanta metro area consider the games to be instrumental in transforming Atlanta into the more modern city it has become since. Examples of this are the mid-rise dormitories built for the Olympic village. One of these complexes became the first residential housing for Georgia State University, and has recently been transferred for use by the Georgia Institute of Technology. Other examples include Turner Field, which was a modification of the original Centennial Olympic Stadium, and where the Atlanta Braves baseball team now makes its home. Centennial Olympic Park was also built for the events and is still in use. Atlanta used no public money to finance the games, which cost US$1.8 billion to host. It was the first city in Olympic history to use ticket sales, commercial endorsements, advertising, and private money alone to fund the hosting of the Olympics. The consequence of this, however, was that many felt that the games in Atlanta were over-commercialized and were less exciting than previous games.[2] [More]
And remember, getting the Olympics right could lead to high rewards.

Labels: , ,

 
 
It's all about opportunity, maybe...

I have puzzled over inequality of assets and income in the US, leaning often to the widening gap in both as a major cause for discontent in a nation that seems to be generating wealth by the ton. And we are not alone.

This OpEd piece from the WSJ is mercifully on their free page and also well thought out.

The data do tell us that economic mobility -- not equality -- is associated with happiness. The GSS asked respondents, "The way things are in America, people like me and my family have a good chance of improving our standard of living -- do you agree or disagree?" The two-thirds of the population who agreed were 44% more likely than the others to say they were "very happy," 40% less likely to say that they felt "no good at all" at times, and 20% less likely to say that they felt like failures. In other words, those who don't believe in economic mobility -- for themselves or for others -- are not as happy as those who do.

Perhaps in a world where there is no opportunity for advancement, an important concern is how one's income measures up to others. In the real world where people believe there is opportunity, however, one's own income potential matters a great deal more than what others are earning. Some studies even find that the happiness of workers rises as the incomes of others climb relative to their own, because they see the incomes of others as evidence of what they themselves can achieve. [More]

This rings true. Gamblers flocking to Las Vegas don't resent winners, they celebrate with them - and it may be because they figure (wrongly, of course) they can duplicate their good luck. But the same guy may be angry about the perception he will never make group leader or sales manager and earn the big bucks. In fact, as more Americans are constantly admonished to shape up or see their job outsourced, mobility for many looks mostly downward.

Tied to this is the much shakier ground many of us feel we have to build futures on. To be fair, it may be a generational affliction. While my sons seem confident that disconnected "employment episodes" can constitute a career, I wonder if their attitude will change as they wander into that fun period called Middle Age.

Loss of a sense of security can be an issue for farmers as well. I will be writing about some ideas to address this in Top Producer this fall.*

*BSP - Blatant Self-Promotion

Labels: ,

 
 
Whoa - never saw a dog like that!...

What if biotech - like computers - became ubiquitous and accessible?
These facts raise an interesting question. Will the domestication of high technology, which we have seen marching from triumph to triumph with the advent of personal computers and GPS receivers and digital cameras, soon be extended from physical technology to biotechnology? I believe that the answer to this question is yes. Here I am bold enough to make a definite prediction. I predict that the domestication of biotechnology will dominate our lives during the next fifty years at least as much as the domestication of computers has dominated our lives during the previous fifty years.

What might this idea look like in practice?
Domesticated biotechnology, once it gets into the hands of housewives and children, will give us an explosion of diversity of new living creatures, rather than the monoculture crops that the big corporations prefer. New lineages will proliferate to replace those that monoculture farming and deforestation have destroyed. Designing genomes will be a personal thing, a new art form as creative as painting or sculpture. [More of a very provocative essay]

I think I have ignored this admittedly wild idea because I can grasp electronics, but struggled (like many Americans) with biology. While I have read science fiction stories about advanced cultures based on biotech vs. computers, they always seemed pretty far-fetched.

Until now.

Labels: , ,

 
 
Can you name all the Presidents?

I got 39.

[via Neatorama]

Labels: ,

 
Thursday, July 19, 2007
 
Unfortunate ad placement...


[More]

[via Metafilter]

Labels:

 
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
 
The new Farmer Market...

I used to get upset when I read articles like this one from sober university professors about how I should analyze risk in the cash rent market.
Farm Management Specialist Gary Schnitkey at the University of Illinois has completed a thorough study of how to quantify those market risks, to guide farmers and landowners toward the type of lease that will be fair to both owner and operator and allow both sides to share in the premium prices offered by the market. In his latest newsletter Schnitkey says today’s high commodity prices will be offset by higher production costs and lower government support payments. As a result, farmers will have to find a way to retain a larger share of the revenue stream to protect against the risks of the marketplace and the higher cash rent agreements that will have to be paid out. [More]
Now I simply chuckle. Take a look at the spreadsheet. Note there are no entries for factors like:
  • the farm is also your home
  • Moody Farms is bidding on it
  • you farm on 2 (or 3 or 4) sides of the property, making one larger efficient tract
  • it represents 18% of your farm income
  • without it you will have to leave farming
  • you have farmed it for 40 years
  • your mailbox sits on it
  • you compete by blind sealed bid without negotiation
  • your operating time frame is generations, not years
  • landowners who don't know or care what is "fair"
While thoughtful and certainly well-meaning, dispassionate academic number crunching by disinterested economists only goes so far. Economists might be surprised by how much of this type of work many of us already do. We know we are adding risk and pushing the envelope, but unlike advisers we also know first-hand the consequences of winning - and especially losing - the land.

The analysis is also constrained by the data source. FBFM data may not be representative of industrial ag, since very few large operations use the service and share their numbers. In short, economists could be pooling their ignorance.

In some sense, these types of models are therefore simply incomplete - dealing data that is easily accessible and manipulable. Truly useful economic analyses would find ways to quantify the above factors, and indeed that is where cutting edge economic work is going.

I have an idea that might help. Let's eliminate tenure and pay ag economists by the classroom hour or research paper. They would bid for their classes every 2-3 years against all comers, including foreign grad students willing to work for much less and competitors from other colleges.

Then let's see how much risk they accept as reasonable. While this seems caustic, what all these clever spreadsheets ignore is how our brain reacts to risks. Research indicates it is not simply controlled by our rational prefrontal cortex. In fact, we decide it with our emotions and justify it later. And unless the risk is actually real for you, it is unlikely you will understand how such decisions are really made - and more importantly, made to work.

Such analyses are not useless of course, but they only represent the first step in deciding. It has also been my experience that those who focus on the current numbers don't hang around long in the cash rent market. They may have been correct in economists' eyes, but they aren't farming.

Industrial agriculture is outgrowing many ag economics texts, I believe, for the same reason it is commanding the bulk of farm assets and outputs. The practitioners have devised ways to address factors like these and blow careful conventional thinkers out of the water.

[via Farmgate]

Labels: ,

 
 
Who's for Sousa?...

Interesting little piece of trivia:
In other words, the Department of Defense is about 210 times larger than USAID and State combined—there are substantially more people employed as musicians in Defense bands than in the entire foreign service. [More]

This could explain the current passport debacle.

BTW, if you're planning a Mexican/Canadian getaway or business trip in the future, better get in line now.

[via DailyDish]

Labels: , ,

 
 
At least I'm consistent...

The one idea for farm bill reform I had thought least likely to survive seems to be the one most in play. Given my keen political instincts and personal record (0-for-4 in contested elections), I should have seen this not coming. Or something like that.

Anyhoo, the idea of real payment limits suddenly has leapt to the forefront as "proof" of sincere reform.

Some specifics:
  • The limit for DCP's would be umm... raised to $60,000 (What the heck?)
  • The limit for CCP's would stay at $65,000
  • The limit in MLG's would be ...eliminated. (OK - I get the joke)
This is tightening payment limits? Am I missing something here? [Read for yourself]

Oh, we are going to take stern action with a handful of millionaires.

All seriousness aside, the idea of any payment limitation language at all is a surprise to me, and perhaps an open invitation for floor amendments - they wouldn't have to change the language, just tweak the numbers. Meanwhile the Senate may have some ideas of their own.
Grassley has been working with Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., on an effort to institute payment limitations in farm commodity programs.
"We believe that if the House would include the Grassley-Dorgan payment limit language in their version of the farm bill, it would save close to $700 million," said Grassley. "With the Senate and House trying to find offsets this year, this seems to be a very good step in the right direction, considering the need to find offsets for spending. Our payment limit legislation would not only help find extra money, but it is real reform in the farm program as well." [More]
It cannot be easy trying to make foolproof plans to provide for every little problem on my farm all the way from Washington. It's amazing how much effort they are putting into it. And how little it may matter in the long run.

Labels: , , ,

 
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
 
$#@%&*!...

Where did they come from?

An octothorp??

[via Presurfer]

Labels:

 
 
800 million heroes...

Years ago I read "Alive in a Bitter Sea" by Fox Butterworth, an account of the Great Leap Forward and the horror that followed in China.
The Great Leap Forward is now widely seen, both within China and outside, as a major economic disaster, effectively being a "Great Leap Backward" that would affect China in the years to come. As inflated statistics reached planning authorities, orders were given to divert human resources into industry rather than agriculture. The official toll of excess deaths recorded in China for the years of the GLF is 14 million. Western writers using demographic assumptions and other manipulations have estimated the number of famine victims to be between 20 and 43 million.[4] The three years between 1959 and 1962 were known as the "Three Bitter Years" and the Three Years of Natural Disasters. Many local officials were tried and publicly executed for giving out misinformation[5]. [More]

The book left me pulling for the long-suffering peasants of China, and colors my thinking about the nation still. Chinese farmers still have a long way to go, but perhaps at least some hope is on the horizon.
Second, the Chinese people, especially the peasant farmers, deserve a huge amount of credit. Here's a couple of paragraphs I wrote recently:

The Great Leap Forward was a great leap backward - agricultural land was less productive in 1978 than it had been in 1949 when the communists took over. In 1978, however, farmers in the village of Xiaogang held a secret meeting. The farmers agreed to divide the communal land and assign it to individuals – each farmer had to produce a quota for the government but anything he or she produced in excess of the quota they would keep. The agreement violated government policy and as a result the farmers also pledged that if any of them were to be jailed the others would raise their children.

The change from collective property rights to something closer to private property rights had an immediate effect, investment, work effort and productivity increased. “You can’t be lazy when you work for your family and yourself,” said one of the farmers.

Word of the secret agreement leaked out and local bureaucrats cut off Xiaogang from fertilizer, seeds and pesticides. But amazingly, before Xiaogang could be stopped, farmers in other villages also began to abandon collective property.

Deng and others in the central leadership are to be credited with recognizing a good thing when they saw it but it was the farmers in villages like Xiaogang that began China's second revolution. [More]
It is difficult to face the reality of lives like theirs and then sanctimoniously demand my government protect me from these fellow humans via trade barriers. It also makes one wonder at the persistent US craving for more government involvement in agriculture.

Labels: , ,

 
Monday, July 16, 2007
 
Honeybee update...

When last we left our plucky pollinators, the situation was grim. CCD (colony collapse disorder) was decimating honeybee populations and furrowing the brows of agricultural officials. What happens if honeybees lose this battle?

Maybe not much.
But is CCD such a tragedy? The honeybee may be the only insect ever extended charismatic megafauna status, but it's already gone from the wild (and it wasn't even native to North America to begin with). Sure, it makes honey, but we already get most of that from overseas. What about the $14.6 billion in "free labor"? It's more expensive than ever: In the last three years, the cost to rent a hive during the California almond bloom has tripled, from $50 to $150.

Good thing the honeybee isn't the only insect that can pollinate our crops. In the last decade, research labs have gotten serious about cultivating other insects for mass pollination. They aren't at the point yet where they can provide all of the country's pollination needs, but they're getting there. This year the California Almond Board two-timed the honeybee with osmia ligneria—the blue-orchard bee: Despite CCD, they had a record harvest. [More]
This entire episode has caused me to rethink what I think I know about this corner of food production. Like many, I found myself sucked in by some pretty wild predictions, when most consumers may not notice much more than higher prices on specific foods. Which right now can get lost in the general food inflation.

Still, this mysterious malady (current most likely cause: miticide buildup in the comb) is crippling an important ag industry, and deserves serious efforts by the government to correct.

Maybe beekeepers should get an LDP. That's how we solve things in ag.

Labels: ,

 
Sunday, July 15, 2007
 
They are already too late...

Good heavens, the journalism world has their collective undergarments in twirl over Rupert Murdoch - the Lord Voldemort of News - buying the Wall Street Journal.
That's a good point. But where Fine fails is in believing that Murdoch wouldn't buy the Journal just to destroy it. He fails to recognize that rotten old bastard won't be able to keep himself from defiling the paper. It's in his nature to contaminate his own wells. As experienced Journal reporters and editors leave or are driven out, their replacements will owe their allegiance to Murdoch and Murdoch's people. Will they bring to news coverage the impartiality we've come to expect from the Journal? Or will they pull and duck punches on his behalf? Will they skew stories about Viacom and Condé Nast and China to please the well-known views of their master? You betcha. I can't recall any News Corp. employee who got a raise or a promotion after undermining the Murdoch empire's interests with an honest, accurate story. [More]
They may be right, but I have been struck by the apocalyptic nature of the opinions. My experiences (and they are few) with real journalists have been few but I did have a chance to visit at length with an impressively credentialed reporter for the WaPo, and his remarks were eye-opening.

Newspapers have been outflanked by electronic media and many journalists simply cannot embrace writing for something like - well, a blog. The professional pride was actually attached to a physical paper, I think. Nor can they be bothered to ponder deeply the problems over on the publishing (sales) side of the business. And those guys have long been looking into the Gates of Financial Heck. Given a choice of adapt or die, many journalists are rather romantically throwing themselves on the pyres. If anybody bothers, it will make a heroic historical study.

But the takeover at WSJ is simply the fall of one last castles, and hardly the unique event they make it out to be. Looks to me like this war was actually lost about 4 years ago. Newspapers are not the future it seems. Personally, I stopped paying for the WSJ since I could not link to it for you guys.

What they also discount is the market value of truth. People will pay for credible information, but is has to be faster and deeper and also do part of the the analysis for them, blending opinion and fact - an unthinkable breech of journalistic standards. Maybe standards should never be changed, but that business plan is failing.

The deeper fear and grief is for that economic system, perhaps. Because unless I miss my guess, Murdoch will lower the subscription firewall on the WSJ. Others agree.

The world will not end, and power will rise to confront power. And in the meantime, people will discover the importance of voices who can be trusted.

Labels:

 
 
It's easier to believe than gravitational forces, I guess...



[More]

[via Neatorama]

Labels: ,

 
 
This is class...

I've always been a big fan of Greg Maddux - one of the truly great players and classy professionals. My friend here in Georgia relayed a story from last week's Atlanta Journal-Constitution (sorry - no link I can find).

On a trip to the plate to exchange balls, Maddux quietly told the umpire (who was miked), "I'm not very good. I don't think I can throw four strikes."

The ump didn't get it.

Labels:

 
 
Farm policy reform panic time...

Farm policy reform advocates are sensing the battle has been lost, I think - or at least going badly. The varied pleas for change are taking on a note of desperation.
The House Agriculture Committee recommendations for Title I commodity subsidies extend the outdated, broken system of the past - moving policy in the wrong direction and making it worse. Congress cannot accurately forecast prices and loan rates for the life of the next farm bill. [More
George Will weighs in (somewhat wistfully, I think):
Agriculture policy -- another manifestation of the welfare state, another contributor to another faction's entitlement mentality -- involves a perennial conundrum of welfare, corporate as well as individual: How do you break an addiction to government without breaking the addicted? If Lugar and like-minded legislators can accomplish their aims, their achievement will be comparable to the welfare reform of 1996 -- the fecund year of the short-lived Freedom to Farm Act. As Lugar again puts his hand to the plow, attempting to plow under a New Deal remnant, wish him well. [More]
Note this stunning statistic that Big 8 growers ignore when arguing for farm policy status quo.
The specialty-crops industry accounts for nearly half of all the cash-crop receipts in agriculture. With 119 members of Congress supporting our initiative, we believe that congressional leaders and members of the House Agriculture Committee should roll up their sleeves and enact policy geared toward the 21st century. [More]

If there is any positive sign for reform, it could be with Speaker Pelosi and payment limits.
A spokesman for Pelosi said the two have spoken about payment limits, which she believes is necessary to reform the farm bill. Peterson met Pelosi on Thursday and was scheduled to meet her again on Friday. [More]
Still, it looks to me like simply by foot-dragging, proponents of the status quo can force extension of our current policy.

Just like immigration.

Labels: , ,

 
 
How embarrassing...

I did not know he was running. Is McCain still in? How about Hunter? (See you didn't know, either)

Trying hard to stay current.

Labels:

 
Friday, July 13, 2007
 
The excuse they have been waiting for...

Since the OK by shareholders, real-world plans for merging the CBOT and CME are gathering momentum. Although it has seemed obvious to many besides me, this event offers the perfect opportunity to allow open-outcry to dwindle to a spectator curiosity.
The Merc's purchase of the CBOT marks a transition from pit to electronic trading, said Caitlin Zaloom, an assistant professor at New York University and author of ``Out of the Pits: Traders and Technology from Chicago to London'' (University of Chicago Press, 238 pages, $29).

Zaloom said moving the Merc's pits to the CBOT building preserves traditional face-to-face trading, which many traders still prefer. Eventually, though, she expects trading floors to become obsolete as electronic trading takes over. [More]

Brokers who appear on the show have been remarking for months how floor traders spend much of their time watching the screens during side-by-side trade, and how volume is shifting to e-trade. The success of e-CBOT trading demonstrates that institutional investors especially like this method, and as they go, so goes the bulk of trades.

Farmers have always had a love-hate relationship with traders, associating (unfairly, it turns out) the human element of open outcry with the possibility of human manipulation. Still, producers are equally suspicious of computer transactions too.

Labels: ,

 
 
The Dawn of Cyber-time...

There was a day, children, when we didn't have computers on our desks, and life was not easy.
The ingredients were the basic four of any word-processing system. First was the computer itself, the Processor Technology SOL-20. Its detailed specifications—its 48K of random access memory, its Intel 8080 microprocessing chip—are now of antiquarian interest, since Processor Technology went out of business several months after I bought my computer.

The second element in my system was the monitor, a twelve-inch TV screen. Some monitors are like black-and-white TVs; mine—which, oddly enough, was produced by the same company, Ball Corporation, that makes home-canning supplies, displays light-green letters against a background of dark green and is supposed to be easier on the eyes. Third was the external storage device—the equipment that saves the documents you've written when the computer is turned off. The equipment I chose, two small tape recorders, was such a complete disaster that I must discuss it separately later on. Fourth was the printer, a ponderous machine, built like a battleship, which had been an IBM Selectric typewriter before it was converted to accept printing instructions from a computer.

These four machines, and the yards and yards of multi-strand cable that connected them, were the hardware of my system. The software consisted of a program called The Electric Pencil, with a manual explaining the mysteries of "block move," "home cursor," and "global search and replace."

I skip past the day during which I thought the computer didn't work at all (missing fuse) and the week or two it took me to understand all the moves The Electric Pencil could make. From that point on, I knew there was a heaven. [More]

My experiences began much later, of course, but not much more cheaply. Kinda like childbirth for females, I think time softens the memories of earlier technology unpleasantness for us geeks. Still - only 25 years since this revolution began!

What will it be like for my grandson?

Labels: ,

 
Thursday, July 12, 2007
 
Eat Chinese dust, Germany!...

China is about to pass Germany as the world's third largest economy. This is earlier than forecast and supported by statistics of questionable accuracy, but still not unbelievable.
The National Bureau of Statistics raised its estimate of China's 2006 growth rate from 10.7 percent to 11.1 percent. It nudged up its estimate of total output by 146.4 billion yuan ($18.8 billion) to 21.1 trillion yuan ($2.705 trillion).

The revision brought China closer to Germany, the world's third-largest economy after the United States and Japan. Germany's 2006 output was $3 trillion but its 2.5 percent growth rate was well below China's. [More]
In another surprise ranking, author J. K. Rowling just passed Belgium.

Labels: , ,

 
 
I think the humidity increased...

Important shopping hints for your next aqueous arsenal addition:


Stream Machine Double-Barrel Water Launcher, $17.95
Also a syringe-style water cannon, this Stream Machine's twin-barrel design (they also come in single-barrel models) doubles the volume of your assault. We drenched our live target and sent him reeling. It still has the problem of using up too much of its 20-ounce ammo supply too quickly, however, so it's good for only five shots per barrel.

As with the Aquablaster, drawing water into the Stream Machine's tubes without spilling is harder than it would seem. And it's common for one barrel to fill with more than the other, so you end up shooting uneven streams. But the two gunlike grips make handling the Stream Machine simple and enable you to put some muscle into the compression, giving it gravity-defying range. We launched a 40-foot stream, farther than with any other model.

Strength: 10
Ease of use: 6
Fun: 4
Total: 20
[More]

Squirt guns don't saturate people, people saturate people.

Labels:

 
 
Who ya gonna believe...

Me - or your own arithmetic skills? In one of the most astonishing displays of illogic I have read, a Missouri Congress member doubles back on the thread of cause and effect.
Thanks to well-thought-out Farm Bill support programs, our farmers persevere, and American consumers benefit. In developed nations around the world, most families have not earned enough money to buy food for the year until April or May, but the average American family has done so in just five weeks.

[Translation: Subsidizing corn makes the price lower, and hence food cheaper]

Our nation has chosen a wise strategic and economic course of ethanol and biofuel development. This goal increases corn prices, but it has a negligible effect on the price of food in America. It's worth remembering that the box part of a box of cornflakes costs consumers more than the corn does. [More]

[Translation: The price of corn doesn't affect food prices] [My Comments]
As I have said before those claims would be more convincing coming from the livestock industry. But wait, they have made a comment or two about ethanol and meat prices.
Thus, it is no surprise that the price of corn has doubled in the past year — from $2 to $4 per bushel. We are already seeing upward pressure on food prices as the demand for ethanol boosts the demand for corn: Nationally, food prices were up 3.9 percent in April, compared to the same month a year earlier. Until the recent ethanol boom, more than 60 percent of the annual U.S. corn harvest was fed domestically to cattle, hogs and chickens, or used in food or beverages. Thousands of food items contain corn or corn byproducts. A spokesman for one of California's largest cattle ranches and feedlots noted that since the end of 2005, the company has experienced a 36 percent increase in the cost of feed, "which translates to an additional expense of $101 per head raised." Reflecting these trends, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association has demanded an end both to government subsidies for ethanol and to the import tariff on foreign ethanol.

The poultry industry is also squawking. The National Chicken Council is demanding remedies from senators who represent the big southern poultry states, and the National Turkey Federation estimates that its feed costs have gone up nearly $600 million annually. [More]
Anyway, we may be on track to find out. Judging from the long-range forecast and our own Crop Comments, the food v. fuel debate could be about to heat up.

[Thanks, Chris]

Labels: ,

 
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
 
This can only get me in trouble...

I thought it was just my imagination, but as a choir director, I notice people's voices. And lately the young women I listen to sound younger than ever.

Yeah-yeah - I'm just getting older. That occurred to me as well. But it may not be just my perception.
Neither of the Corffs was willing to say there was a palpable upsurge in baby-voiced women, just a never-ending supply of them. And although Claire Corff mentioned that some of her students developed high-pitched voices in reaction to the more aggressive cadence of their feminist mothers, I wonder if what's really going on here is more Pavlovian than political. In contemporary American culture, women seem to be rewarded not for being grown-ups but for assuming the qualities of little girls. Whether it's erasing the lines off our faces or wearing the same size jeans we wore in high school, what we want most is to hear how little we've changed. [More]
My observation is that as women take up smoking at a rate similar to men, there will always be some low altos around.

Labels: ,

 
 
Up until now...

I thought I knew how to grow corn.

I spent this morning in a corn field with FJ agronomist Ken Ferrie taping segments for our upcoming "Corn Navigator" series. To my astonishment he kept casually mentioning things I had never heard about growing corn- - especially corn-after-corn (after-corn-after-corn, etc.)

Either I need to read more than my own articles in Farm Journal, or this business has changed while I've been stuck in my professional rut. Anyhoo, I'm changing how I will be doing some things on my farm.

I'd calculate a probability of 78% you will find something you don't know in this new series.

Even if you went to Purdue.

Labels:

 
 
We've all been there...



Boy, if I had a nickel for every time this happened to me...

BTW, have our lives been reduced to simply hoping for a "YouTube" moment?

[via Arbroath]

Labels:

 
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
 
The blood test will make connections tough...

Just in case we haven't taken absolutely all the pleasure out of flying, there are plenty of fearmongers to help us see the folly of our unconcern.
Respiratory illnesses typically spread via airborne and droplet routes. Airborne transmission involves tiny particles containing pathogens that can remain suspended in the air for prolonged periods of time. Tuberculosis typically spreads by this method. Droplet spread involves larger particles that quickly settle out of the air. Some diseases (SARS and influenza among them) can spread by both routes.

Some pathogens (the influenza virus, for example) can also exist on nonporous surfaces for hours. Theoretically, people don't even need to sit near an infected individual to be exposed. Touching contaminated surfaces such as door handles, window covers, and faucets and then later touching a mucous membrane (eyes, etc.), can lead to inadvertent exposure. This is why quarantine during an influenza pandemic won't work. Quarantine involves separating out healthy people who have been potentially exposed to the illness. For influenza, people can be exposed and not know it. [More hysteria]
And the solution?
People flying with upper respiratory tract infections who cough and sneeze could be offered face masks out of courtesy to fellow passengers. Aircraft could keep a supply of them on board for this purpose. I used to keep a little bottle of 60 percent alcohol-based hand gel in my purse for flights until a crack down on security prohibited carrying bottles of liquids and gels on board. I would squirt a glob into my hand and rub my hands together vigorously after touching bathroom door handles or window shades. Airlines could offer such gels to passengers--especially since not everyone washes their hands regularly.

At a national level, nations have an obligation to make sure that their citizens don't spread disease. International travelers should be required to show proof of vaccination against diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, and pertussis, and proof of a negative tuberculosis skin test (or documentation of noninfectiousness in the event of a positive skin test) when applying for passports. People who travel frequently to high-risk areas should be required to document yearly tuberculosis skin tests before flying.

And if that isn't far enough over the top, maybe we should reconsider the disease risk outrage known as the "handshake".
My proposed substitute is the "virtual handshake." I explain that I'm sick, and suggest that we pretend to shake hands from two feet away. Sound good?

It does to other economists, confirming my view that we are models of good sense and common decency. But the rest of the world reacts poorly - so poorly that I've given up offering them my virtual hand in friendship. [More]

Of course, there is another less obvious solution: if you can't take the germs, don't board the plane. Take the time to travel in your hermetically sealed SUV or whatever. Sounds harsh, but I fly through O'Hare and I'm ready to weed out the weak.

Labels: ,

 
 
Wait for it...



In fairness, it took me a couple of seconds to get it.

[via Presurfer]

Labels: , ,

 
 
No, really - I'm listening, honey...

Yawning may be misunderstood. You're not bored, you're cooling your brain.
These results clearly suggest that yawning regulates the temperature inside your head, and that perhaps we yawn to cool our brains. What we don't have here is any biochemical cause-and-effect, but this is an incredibly interesting theory all the same.

The findings, if valid, draw a few unexpected conclusions about yawning. First of all, rather than stimulating sleep, a good yawn should fend off falling asleep. And secondly, far from being an indicator of boredom, yawning would appear to be a mechanism for maintaining attention.

So be sure and remember this for your next staff meeting -- it's an excellent excuse, and possibly even a valid one! [More]

Right - and dozing off is a way of concentrating your thoughts.

[via Daily Dish]

Labels: , ,

 
 
Another consequence of transparency...

The world of espionage is becoming more mundane, thanks to ubiquitous technology like Google Earth. With enough time (and it seems there are people who have it in abundance - these lucky dogs!) you can sort through images and see amazing things.


Photos of China's new second-generation nuclear submarine, believed to be equipped with 12 intercontinental ballistic missile launch tubes, have been published on Google Earth, according to reports. Nuclear weapons analyst Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists discovered the images of China's top secret submarine while searching photos of China's northeastern naval ports. One image clearly depicts China's next-generation Jin-class nuclear powered submarine, according to Kristensen, who has republished the image on his Strategic Security Blog at www.fas.org. The satellite image, believed to have been taken during late 2006 by the commercial Quickbird satellite, shows the submarine alongside a pier at the Xiaopingdao Submarine Base south of the city of Dalian. Kristensen said the images show a vessel about 35 feet (10 meters) longer than the earlier-generation Xia-class nuclear submarine. The U.S. reportedly believes China has been conducting sea tests on the Jin-class submarine since 2004 and then later carried out additional tests on its missile system. The U.S. reportedly believes the submarine and its missile system will be ready for deployment before 2010 [More]

This photo of a super-secret next generation Chinese sub would likely have a Top Secret label on it had this been 20 years ago. Instead, I'm putting a link to it on a farmer blog.

More examples to remind you somebody is watching, just about all the time. Note this information came from commercial satellites.
Commercial satellite imagery shows Iran is building a new tunnel complex inside a mountain near a major nuclear site — a possible attempt to protect sensitive uranium enrichment activity from aerial attack, nuclear analysts said Monday.

The pictures taken on June 11 were obtained from DigitalGlobe, a commercial satellite imagery firm, by the Institute for Science and International Security, whose president is David Albright, a physicist and former United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq. [More]
Now add in the plummeting price of closed circuit TV (CCTV) cameras, digital storage (priced a 4GB flash drive lately?), recognition software, and maybe we should all invest in better curtains.

Recent events in London have attracted more support for CCTV here in the US, despite growing reservations about both privacy (remember that?) and efficacy.
Still, in the perennial tug of war between security and privacy, security appears to be winning. The next wave in CCTV, experts say, is to marry traditional surveillance with computer software to make cameras better at detecting suspicious behavior that can be the precursor to a crime.

The police are believed to have used a rudimentary form of such technology to make the first arrest in this plot — Mohammed Asha, a Palestinian of Jordanian descent, who was captured on a motorway after his license plate was recognized by roadside cameras. [More]
I don't think it's much of a leap to assume this kind of technology is being deployed discreetly on our fields and the results being analyzed with improving accuracy. As we have seen in recent months grain markets are a constant source of surprise to farmers and traders alike, and technology-driven transparency is likely one reason. It's really hard to keep any kind of secret.

The non-intuitive part for farmers is remembering that we are being watched from the sky - and it's not only God.

Labels:

 
Monday, July 09, 2007
 
Farm bill opinions...

Since I seem to have fallen into a periodic summary of what's being written written about the farm bill debate, here is this week's contribution.

There are some clear themes emerging, such as maldistribution of payments.
For decades, the answer to that question has ranged from a tepid "not really" to a resounding "no." Understandably. In the past, rural interests -- diverse as they are -- have spoken with disjointed, and at times competing, voices. They have also been dominated by agriculture with a capital A -- not the small family farms that most of us care about and yet which receive little help, but the big commodity growers that grab the lion's share of federal farm assistance. [More]
and budget concerns
In an effort to cut back, some lawmakers want to reduce or eliminate direct payments, subsidies that are not based on current crop production or prices. The chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa, has supported this approach and encouraged spending more money on conservation programs. [More]
and the fruits-and-vegetable omission
Yet a promising drive to shift subsidies away from the largest and more profitable grain and cotton farms to smaller fruit and vegetable outlets, as well as to conservation programs to help farmers keep fertilizer out of the Chesapeake Bay, is faltering badly. [More]
and the wrong-food subsidy angle
Due in part to this imbalance, we are paying more than $100 billion a year in obesity-related medical costs. If our farm bills had also been healthy food bills, we would have distributed government support more equitably to make nutritious foods more accessible and more consistent with US Department of Agriculture dietary guidance, which encourages us to eat more fruits and vegetables. [More]
and a new one - good politics for freshmen Congresspeople

The answer, in a report to be released at noon today, is that farmers in 36 of 55 districts represented by freshmen members would receive a fairer share of federal farm spending if Congress shifted direct payments to share the cost of clean water or wildlife habitat. Farmers in 12 districts would see little or no change. Many of these districts are located in California, Florida, Pennsylvania, New York and Ohio — large farm states that currently receive little support from USDA. [More]
The level of activity in op-ed pages seems pretty high for a farm bill and metro papers. Still, this is the first farm bill with on-line monitoring, so what do we have to compare it to?

Stay tuned.

Labels:

 
Sunday, July 08, 2007
 
Ethanol and organic...

Despite claims to the contrary, rising corn prices - which have been loudly ascribed to ethanol production - do raise food prices eventually. Ask the meat industry. Or dairy. [And stop trotting out the corn flakes.]
The rising food costs fueled by ethanol demand are also affecting U.S. consumers. "All things that use corn are going to have higher prices and higher cost, to some extent, that will be passed on to consumers," says Wally Tyner, professor of agriculture economics at Purdue University. The impact of this is being felt first in animal feed, particularly poultry and pork. Poultry feed is about two-thirds corn; as a result, the cost to produce poultry--both meat and eggs--has already risen about 15 percent due to corn prices, says Tyner. Also expect corn syrup--used in soft drinks--to get more expensive, he says. [More]

So, what will food inflation mean for the nascent agrarian (organic, local, free-range, etc.) food industry and the premiums they need for profitability?
One speaker in particular championed this concept, suggesting that the opportunities for premiumisation were almost limitless. Now don't get me wrong, I am well aware that the likes of Whole Foods and Tesco and brands like Rachel’s Organic and Green & Black’s have successfully travelled down this road in recent years. But something about his unqualified optimism didn't sit well.

I realised it was my own shopping habits that were causing my doubts. Increased inflation and rising interest rates here in the UK have without doubt blunted my own personal spending power, causing me to think twice before I drop the premium sausages into the basket, or reach for organic salad, rather than standard products.

The question must be asked then, how does this theory of unlimited premiumisation sit if we enter a sustained period of economic recession? In the UK and US, this question has been largely academic in recent years. [More]
As Dean Best points out, the answer depends on how the economy fares, or at least the personal economies of those who are likely to favor agrarian food - i.e. the well-to-do.

So far that group is doing very well, thank you. But their numbers may have trouble growing, since the bulk of income growth in the US seems to wind up with the already wealthy. And should recession loom, that tiny group of consumers won't be swelling, I'd bet.

Agrarian producers have more at stake in the fiscal decisions of the government than the farm bill, I think. I mean, it's not like they are getting much government help now, and agrarian production is growing. What this sector has to fear is 1) continued income gain concentration and 2) slow or negative GDP growth.

Labels: , , ,

 
 
Next: the Vulcan Death-Grip*...

The medical tricorder from Star Trek is no longer just a nerd dream. Like much of the science-fiction we all laughed at, reality and time fleshes out dreams.
Two recent scientific discoveries mark the latest steps toward the ultimate medical-diagnosis technology: the tricorder.

Bones McCoy made Star Trek's portable black box famous by using it to diagnose ailments without ever touching a patient. Now, studies show that the tricorder is closer to becoming reality, because of new medical-imaging technology and a new state of matter. [More]

While I make jokes about my own adolescent (under 60) fascination with Star Trek, there are worse things to occupy idle imaginations than the belief in a hopeful future and man's ability to manage his actions and environment rationally.

*(Snort) Of course, as all Trekkies know, there is no Vulcan Death Grip.

Labels: ,

 
 
Figures - I like the Moody Blues...

Old songs won't attract chicks. No, really.
The 20 males that heard Derryberry's two recordings reacted much more aggressively to the new tunes, ready to defend their territory against the crooning interloper. And the chicks? They responded by becoming more open to sexual advances when the new music was played. The oldies didn't turn them on at all. [More]
Actually, this explains a lot. I spent my high school and college years singing barbershop. I had lots of time to kill back then.

Labels: , ,

 
Saturday, July 07, 2007
 
Then he goes back for the ducks...

You know those old brain teasers about the man with a fox and a goat and some ducks and getting them across a river?


Actually the real story is even better:
One of those bridges, the one closest to Passu, was the scene for one of the funniest moments of the entire trip, when a Pakistani man attempted to cross the bridge with his goat. The wooden planks were too far apart for the goat to negotiate the bridge on his own, so the man had to carry it. I thought he would take it in his arms as he would a baby, but that was not the case. Instead, he used ropes to tie the goat’s legs together, much to my bemusement. Eventually he hoisted the goat up and, with Wendy’s help, put it on his back and wore it as a backpack; both of the goat’s front legs were tied to the equivalent back leg, creating two open circles into which he could slot his arms. The man slowly crossed the flimsy bridge in this fashion, and the screams of the tormented goat echoed all over the valley. [More]

[via Neatorama]

Labels: ,

 
 
Result!...


Jan got me an iPhone so I'd stop whining. Now I want the next Big Thing.

[via DailyDish]

Labels:

 
 
My potent manliness is such a curse...

I have long struggled to comprehend if I am so smart, why I'm not rich. At last science has found a plausible excuse, er, reason: I make "irrational" economic decisions (case in point - my 2006 marketing plan) because my testosterone levels are too high.
Dr Burnham's research budget ran to a bunch of $40 games. When there are many rounds in the ultimatum game, players learn to split the money more or less equally. But Dr Burnham was interested in a game of only one round. In this game, which the players knew in advance was final and could thus not affect future outcomes, proposers could choose only between offering the other player $25 (ie, more than half the total) or $5. Responders could accept or reject the offer as usual. Those results recorded, Dr Burnham took saliva samples from all the students and compared the testosterone levels assessed from those samples with decisions made in the one-round game.

As he describes in the Proceedings of the Royal Society, the responders who rejected a low final offer had an average testosterone level more than 50% higher than the average of those who accepted. Five of the seven men with the highest testosterone levels in the study rejected a $5 ultimate offer but only one of the 19 others made the same decision.

What Dr Burnham's result supports is a much deeper rejection of the tenets of classical economics than one based on a slight mis-evolution of negotiating skills. It backs the idea that what people really strive for is relative rather than absolute prosperity. They would rather accept less themselves than see a rival get ahead. That is likely to be particularly true in individuals with high testosterone levels, since that hormone is correlated with social dominance in many species.

Economists often refer to this sort of behaviour as irrational. In fact, it is not. It is simply, as it were, differently rational. The things that money can buy are merely means to an end—social status—that brings desirable reproductive opportunities. If another route brings that status more directly, money is irrelevant. [More]
Makes sense to my outrageously masculine brain.

Labels: , ,

 
 
Reach your own conclusions....

Or maybe any conclusion at all, it seems. Efforts by the Indiana State Department of Agriculture to increase hog production in Jay and Randolph counties are "buttressed" by a study performed by Ball State.
Livestock farms contribute more than $4 billion to Indiana’s economy each year, and that amount is growing by more than 5 percent annually. The prospects for long-term growth in livestock farms are very strong. Ball State University’s Office of Building Better Communities recently completed an analysis for two rural Indiana counties which showed that growth in the hog sector will contribute more than $100 million in total output to those local economies and contribute more than 2,300 jobs. [More]
[Long time readers will note I have not linked to the actual report - I can't find it, and everybody who refers to it fails to link it too. This is not only frustrating, it raises caution flags for me.]

Oddly enough, the same report offers ammunition for opponents as well.
An opponent of big livestock farms says a Ball State University study of the hog industry in two Indiana counties offers proof that the sprawling farms bring very little economic impact to surrounding areas.

Bill Weida, an economist for GRACE Family Farm Project, said Ball State's analysis of hog farms in Jay and Randolph counties shows that the pork industry in those counties "is creating so little economic activity that it's almost irrelevant." [More]
Not that industrial ag opponents are much better, mind you. They like to point out how much more wonderfully inefficient small operations are adding more jobs per unit of output, as if this was a good thing.

Let me try to light a candle here. State ag departments are habitual cheerleaders for anything agricultural and in my opinion write some of the the most one-sided news releases of any government branch.


An illustration of my point:
Fact: Agriculture is the driving force in most of Indiana’s rural economies. For every $1
of property taxes paid by agricultural land/farms, $0.40 is used in local services
(American Farmland Trust). Also, a survey by the Indiana Soybean Alliance found that
an 8,000 head swine facility generates $17,000 annually in property taxes and will
produce $40,000 in valuable organic crop nutrients. [More]
Citing such numbers without context implies an importance that cannot be verified. It is poor journalism, since readers cannot decide for themselves if this is the best of choices. In the above citation, for example, why not list what some other economic entities pay in taxes, like a motel, or factory, or housing development. Is it more? Less? By how much?

Most ag administrators seem unfamiliar with commerce departments since they apparently don't care about other forms of business. This is a shame, since the bean counters do numbers for a living.

Consider the opening remark: "Agriculture is the driving force..." What exactly does that mean? Given these numbers from the people who are in charge of counting the dollars in the economy - US Dept Of Commerce (DOC) - this strikes me as an incredible stretch. The real numbers for IN:
2006 State Gross Domestic Product (value of all economic activity) $249B
2006 Contribution by Ag (farms, forests, fish, hunting) $ 2B
Source: BEA
The difference in the figures from the ISDA and DOC has to do with value added, not simply gross sales, which can be very misleading. If ag can use gross receipts then other industries can inflate their numbers as well. Economists prefer value-added to describe how much wealth is really contributed to the economy.

OK, maybe in "rural counties" ag is the big force. Let's check Jay and Randolph - the counties in question:
[Note: 2005 is the latest data on a county level]
Total local income Jay $525M Randolph $681M
Ag income $15M $11M

Some driving force. Psychologists have long know the power vision has over reason. The more visible something is the more important we believe it to be. Thus farms, which cover states like IN seem to be what the state is all about - when in the counties listed above the most important sources (by far) of economic activity are manufacturing and transfer payments (SS, Medicare, federal pensions).

This is one reason more economists are questioning the power of farm payments to make much difference in local economies, especially compared to other choices for development. In fact, real numbers have led me to conclude the most important economic legislation for rural America is a solution to Social Security.

Labels: ,

 
Friday, July 06, 2007
 
Is weirder even possible?...

Can CNN.com get any loopier with their headlines?

My fave from today: Man accused of biting off 3-year-old's lip, ear

What a great time to get into computer "journalism" - the standards could hardly be lower.

Labels: ,

 
Thursday, July 05, 2007
 
Name the richest person in the world...

Nope.

[via Metafilter]

Labels:

 
 
Photo of the Day...



[More]

Labels:

 
Wednesday, July 04, 2007
 
Are the locks worth it?...

While this idea is as close to blasphemy as a corn grower can get, I think we should seriously rethink spending $2,200,000,000 to upgrade the Mississippi locks. I'm not alone in wondering where the payback will be.
When the economists fed the information into their computer model, there were some signification predictions that resulted:
• World trade in grain would increase from the current 264 mmt up to 561 mmt in 2060, however US export volumes would grow from the current 101 mmt to 122 mmt in 2010 and then decline.
• The shift is for increased corn from Argentina and Eastern Europe, soybeans from Brazil and Argentina, increased wheat from Australia and Canada; and reduced wheat from Argentina and the United States,
• US exports initially increase as a result of increased planted acreage and availability of grain to export, as well as a decline of Chinese exports. The subsequent decline in US exports results from increasing competitiveness from other exporting countries and domestic use of corn for ethanol. Wheat exports drop and soybean exports increase.

The economists studied the impact of what would happen if the lock and dam infrastructure on the Mississippi between Cairo and Davenport and the Illinois River were upgraded by 2020 to handle greater volumes of barge traffic. “The results indicate a change in barge shipments by about +4 mmt by 2020, nearly all of which would be for corn and soybean in equal amounts. Thereafter, the change in barge shipments would be about +1 mmt to +2.5 mmt, with most of it being soybeans.”
They also found that when volumes of grain increase because of reduced delays and costs on the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers, total barge shipments decrease on the Ohio River. [More of a great summary from Farmgate]
Note the costs of delays mentioned later in the report: 1-3 cents per bushel.
Delay costs, in aggregate, are comprised of the lower delay costs that would occur at
current capacity, plus the volume effect. The impact of expansions on delay costs are in the area of $61 million, inclusive of both direct effects. Most of this is accrued on Reach 4, followed by Reach 2 and 1. Expansion results in an increase in barge costs due to the increase in volume, a decrease in rail shipping costs, and a slight increase in ocean shipping costs. In total, the impact of expanding locks is a decrease in costs by about $52 million. [More]
How long to payback billions at that rate? $52M won't make the interest payment on $2.2B. If farmers had to fund this from the ag budget it would be forgotten pronto, but as long as it simply goes on our tab for the next generation(s) to pick up, we'll keep fighting for those tax dollars long after the market has moved the grain elsewhere.

The big problem perhaps is how to stop lobbying for something without risking looking foolish. Instead we just keep firing the same bullet points long after the target has moved. Given the conservative assumptions of this study, we could fix the locks and see less use.

This is a time to realize ethanol has changed all the spreadsheets and courageously whisper, "Never mind".

Labels: ,

 
 
The Stars and Stripes. And Stars. And Stripes. Forever...

For men.

For a choir with one honkin' great soprano.

For girls on tromobones.

For guitar.

For organ.

For piano. (Nobody messes with Horowitz. Un-freakin'-believable!) [Update - I've listened to this several times now. The only possible explanation is he grows an extra hand halfway through]

Happy Independence Day!

Labels:

 
 
It could happen on my watch...

We have all been watching the emergence of China as a world power economically. But if you haven't thought about how fast they are emerging, take a look at this:



This military expansion is made possible by startling economic growth. China's GDP now surpasses that of Britain or France. According to Goldman Sachs, China will overtake America around 2027 and become by far the world's biggest economy by 2050 (see chart 3). Even now, it is helping to prop up the weak American dollar by buying large chunks of American debt. China is pushing America aside as the world's biggest exporter, and last year it produced more cars than the United States. Europe, too, poses challenges to America: London is vying to replace New York as the most important financial centre, and the euro has displaced the dollar as the main currency of the international bond market. [More]
We don't do well accepting a role as #2. And while I could imagine China overtaking America, I thought it would be much farther into the future.

Still, what does that mean for those who follow? I think it implies a different approach to business and policy both. To grow that fast China will have to invest more in China and less in the US. Our debt will be our problem. Consider the last sentence in that quote. America could become another nation among nations - not the dominant superpower.

We'll adjust, I think.

I have learned much from m friends in Denmark, but the best lesson has been you don't have to be the king to live well and wisely.

Labels: ,

 
 
How did I miss this?...

Earlier this month, Ronald Bailey, writing in Reason, took on food-faddists brilliantly.
Reading Kingsolver, one could also conclude that pesticides were created by giant chemical companies whose sole aim was to cause cancer. But even the American Cancer Society agrees that there is "no evidence that residues of pesticides and herbicides at the low doses found in foods increase the risk of cancer." Studies also show that eliminating pesticides could cut corn yields by 30 percent, rice by 57 percent, soybeans by 37 percent, and wheat by 24 percent. Again, that would mean that a lot more of nature would have to be plowed up to maintain the food supply at current levels.

Family farms are not declining because of some conspiracy by industrial ag giants. Actually, what happened is that farmers became so productive that we needed fewer of them. In 1950, 15 percent of Americans lived on farms. Today only 1 percent of us live on farms. The meantime, the output of staples like wheat and corn nearly tripled, while vegetables nearly quadrupled. And the amount of land devoted to crops fell slightly. This dramatically increased agricultural productivity liberated many like me from farm labor so that we could do other work.
He also raises another point that I believe is crucial to maintaining a civil debate on food-growing.
I have nothing against farmers markets. In fact, I take it that the country is becoming so wealthy that people can now make a decent living from labor-intensive activities like organic farming. But this kind of farming is essentially an artisanal activity much like basket weaving, potting, and wood working. My wife and I go every week to the local farmers market off Water Street in Charlottesville, VA, or if we're out of town, we go to the one at Dupont Circle in Washington, DC. I am very glad that people want to spend their lives raising tasty Mortgage Lifter tomatoes and Albemarle Pippin apples. And I am also very glad that I don't have to.
The growing recognition of market-defined sectors in agriculture allows producers and consumers alike to not criticize apples for being unlike oranges. The agrarian sector described above serves the market that demands products and process. Farmers like me - whom I label "industrial" - grow products using the most effective methods I can while meeting all safety and responsibility rules mandated.

There is no need for friction between these sectors. Agrarians cannot begin to supply my customers and vice-versa. The specialization trajectories we are tracking allows all of us to deliver to the market values we are good at supplying. I bring large amounts of energy from the fields to be converted into food via animals or fuel via ethanol. Agrarians bring pedigreed foodstuffs, raised in ways some consumers appreciate and pay for.

Neither of us has to be wrong. And the market for land will allocate that fundamental resource efficiently if we let it. So let "foodists"pursue their passion and discover why we grow stuff the way we do. Indeed, they may find ways we can add value to our industrial output, or more likely, find that industrial techniques can be adopted even for process-sensitive products.

Regardless, the future for both sectors is promising. Internecine squabbling only wastes time and effort better spent satisfying our customers.

Labels: ,

 
 
Bridle that enthusiasm...

Has recent corn market action got you down? Well, have I got a scholarly report for you!
"Bioenergies have become a key factor in the functioning of agriculture markets," Loek Boonekamp, a senior OECD official, told reporters after the release of the study.

"In the medium term we believe that they could lead to prices on international markets rising quite considerably, at higher levels than what we had predicted in former outlooks and above the average of the last 10 years," he added.

Boonekamp said that farm prices, mainly grains, would likely rise by 20 to 50 percent over the next decade. [More happy economic talk]
There is a reluctance to embrace the idea of a looooong run of good times here on the farm. I suspect the nature of this commodity price boom - mandated, not market-inspired - is confusing our economic instincts.

The largest risk may be loss of political support for mandates - something I think is very, very remote. Every plant that opens and FFV that's sold adds to the ethanol constituency. Hence those "fools" bidding too much for land and rent could look like geniuses a couple of decades from now.

Labels:

 
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
 
Pardon this...

My goodness - the blogosphere is abuzz with the Scooter Libby commutation. (Would this guy be news if his nickname was "Stinky"?)

Like his veto pen, the power to commute and pardon has long lay unused in the White House. Too bad. I agree with David Boaz at the Cato Institute that more deserving pardons could have been issued.
President Bush has pushed the envelope of every aspect of executive power, except for two that might ease the burden of government, the veto and the pardon. Now he’s threatening to protect the taxpayers with his veto pen, and he’s just discovered his power to pardon or commute the sentences of people convicted of crimes. Whether Scooter Libby was an appropriate recipient of a commutation is subject to much debate. [More]
Given that 60% of individuals polled disagreed with the action, the President seems to be even more disconnected from the people he leads - depending on an internal compass to guide his decisions as even conservatives distance themselves from him.

This has strong implications for agriculture and the farm bill, I think. The loyalty he rewarded in the Libby case could be similar to the loyalty shown by Sec. of Ag Johanns, a true foot soldier who has tireless repeated the administration demands for a new form of farm policy.

This White House has nothing to lose and a legacy to gain. It looks to me like the President may side with fiscal conservatives and veto any bill that ignores reform.

Labels: ,

 
 
To protect and serve...





Sometimes a guy needs some help.

Are they giving out math homework at preschool now?

[via Arbroath]

Labels:

 
 
Where we come from...


Extremely cool interactive map of how humans populated the globe.

[via Presurfer]

Labels:

 
 
Eating for health...

I have frankly been unconvinced by different campaigns to link a specific food to the battle against a specific disease. But there exists a popular impression that nature provides its own pharmaceuticals. We just need to match them up with our ailments.

Partly this is due to technology alienation. Modern drug chemistry - let alone medicine itself - is way past intuitive. Natural remedies seem understandable at least, which can actually change our rational thinking process, making them seem like the logical decision.

And once a dreaded disease is diagnosed, the "what harm could it do?" mindset often helps victims turn to natural remedies. As frequently is the case, the truth likely lies somewhere between folk medicine and high science. Unfortunately, when you make that statement the inference is drawn that the it lies halfway between. I think it rests very close to the "science end" myself.

Perversely enough the best way to prove natural remedies are effective is the same way we prove any other physical fact: the scientific method, with double-blind studies, for example. And those results have not been supportive of many food-based therapies.

For all of you men over 40, this good summary of what we know about food and prostate cancer might be helpful. One popular food supplement is the pomegranate.
Drinking an eight ounce glass of pomegranate juice daily increased by nearly four times the period during which PSA levels in men treated for prostate cancer remained stable, a three-year UCLA study has found. The study involved 50 men who had undergone surgery or radiation but quickly experienced increases in prostate-specific antigen or PSA, a biomarker that indicates the presence of cancer. UCLA researchers measured "doubling time," how long it takes for PSA levels to double, a signal that the cancer is progressing, said Dr. Allan Pantuck, an associate professor of urology, a Jonsson Cancer Center researcher and lead author of the study. [More]

Note the size of the studies in these examples. They are way too small to reliably base conclusions upon. Indeed, my largest complaint with the almost daily announcements is they imply a level of efficacy that is simply not there. Despite adroit wording the public is left with a strong belief that we can eat our way to cures.

Worse still for our industry, the reverse is also embraced: our ills are caused by what we eat (or fail to). This is the atmosphere in which our products are judged, and unless agriculture remains firmly committed to the scientific method - even when it shows us to be in the wrong - we could see our business plans rewritten by a handful of activists.

Our own choices as medical consumers have impact as well. Observable hypocrisy, such as applying insecticides and opposing power lines due to disproven health scares hardly is a reassuring example for food customers.

Labels:

 
Monday, July 02, 2007
 
It's about acres...

Farming is receiving moderate coverage in the popular press, due to the impending farm bill and the ethanol boom. While I am reading with an overly-critical eye, I am still surprised when reporters who cover business can't use the same logic when reporting about farms.

Consider this passage from Forbes.com:
Within the next decade those older farmers will be looking for someone to take over their operations and selling millions of acres of land.

Much of that land will be merged into bigger farms with fewer people working on them. Rural communities will lose even more young people, and a few will struggle for survival. Some stores that sell tractors and fertilizer will suffer.

"You lose a farmer here or a farmer there, you lose your customer base," said Burtchin, 60, who sits on the board that runs the local grain elevator. [More] [My emphasis]
Whoa- back up the logic express! Losing people doesn't change the number of acres needing fertilizer or tractors. In fact, losing people could mean we are employing more tractors, or at least bigger ones. Meanwhile, unless the planted acreage decreases, won't whoever is farming need similar fertilizer amounts? For that matter, grain production is booming, so why are elevators whining about losing producers.

From a retailer's point of view a few large farmers is preferable to many small farmers in some ways. And if large farmers threaten dealer margins, then how much value are they actually delivering?

We all have to earn our place in the value chain. Not even farmers should be guaranteed "tenure" for their career. To do so would elevate them to an even more privileged status.

Farms are consolidating because the labor input is dropping thanks to technology. Jan and I are "poster geezers" for this trend. I never thought we'd be able to cover 1700 acres by ourselves, especially with me gone so much. But like thousands of other farmers, we figured it out.

I suppose by making these leaps of efficiency, we have "squeezed out" other farmers in some eyes. But my problem was how do we choose which producers who should be protected from competition? Experience tells me the fairest way is to let the market select.

The market cares about acres, not operators. Our business is no different in that regard from most others in the world. Equating losing farmers to losing farms is as widespread as it is illogical. As farmers and their advocates allow the confusion to continue, they risk provoking some bizarre policy decisions.

Labels: , ,

 
US Farm Report host John Phipps surfs the Web so you don't have to...

My Photo
Name: John Phipps
Location: Chrisman, Illinois, United States

Jan and I farm 1700 acres near Chrisman, IL. I have also written humor and commentary for Farm Journal and Top Producer for 13 years. Please visit my website (www.johnwphipps.com) to learn about my speaking services for your group's next meeting.

ARCHIVES
April 2006 / May 2006 / June 2006 / July 2006 / August 2006 / September 2006 / October 2006 / November 2006 / December 2006 / January 2007 / February 2007 / March 2007 / April 2007 / May 2007 / June 2007 / July 2007 / August 2007 / September 2007 / October 2007 /


advertisement

MORE FROM JOHN
On the Coffee Table

Farm JournalTop ProducerBeef TodayDairy TodayAgDay
U.S. Farm ReportPro FarmerPro Farmer Members

AgWeb Professional - Subscription InformationAdd AgWeb.com to your Favorites

FAQContact UsPrivacy PolicyAdvertise on AgWeb.com

Quotes by eSignal • Quotes delayed at least 10 min

© Copyright 2006 AgWeb.com a division of Farm Journal, Inc.

Home    |    Agriculture News    |    Weather    |    Money & Markets    |    Ag Discussions    |    Site Map