Your Spot for Futures Trading, Commodities Info, Ag News, Successful Farming Tips & More

Saturday, November 21, 2009

REINVENT
SWEEPSTAKES

DEKALB

PLANT HEALTH

News

AgWeb Home > Articles

Agriculture Markets

Futures	MO	Last	Chg
Corn	December	391'0	-4'0
Soybeans	January	1046'0	7'0
Wheat	December	559'6	-2'6
Milk	November	14.06	0.00
Feeder Cattle	January	92.675	0.850
Live Cattle	December	83.950	0.275
Lean Hogs	December	57.600	1.625
Cotton	December	70.41	0.00

Enter Zip Code below for LIVE local results.

Cash Bids

LDP Quotes

Charts & Quotes

Perspective

8/3/2007
By John Phipps
I wandered through dry corn fields early in June and stumbled across a disaster in progress. Rootworm damage had suddenly become apparent in one partial field of conventional corn after corn, even with a full rate of insecticide.

Meanwhile, right beside it, RW corn stood unfazed by the predator—a perfect commercial for GM corn. The ravaged corn was my refuge and a voice in my mind said, “Whoa—I’ll never do this again.”

I am not alone. As sprayers transited to soybean fields, refuge rows were observed that could not be seen by diligent pickup-truck crop scouting. And it was not pretty.

It hurts. In most circumstances the advantages of RW corn are significant—farmers don’t pay big bucks because we’re stupid, after all. But with my set of conditions this year (heavy rootworm pressure, early drought, less rotation) the economics can be stark.

As a result, I was not surprised when two seed salesmen told me refuge corn would be a hard sell next year. Frankly, many of us were fudging already in my area, which has intense rootworm pressure.

Alarm bells should be ringing in the seed industry. RW corn could be compromised by resistant insects simply because those responsible for creating defenses refuse to consider behavioral economics and common sense.

The risk of refuge corn yielding 40 bu. to 80 bu. less than RW corn approaches the ethical threshold for many producers. Harrumph all you want about obeying contracts, and then take a look at the agony of our illegal immigration problem. All the screaming in the world about law breaking doesn’t help employers desperate for labor comply. Entomologists might invite producers and economists to help draft labels. Government-by-edict is problematic.

You and what army? America works because people obey laws, not because a police state coerces us into submission. (So far, at least.) If the prevailing response to a regulation is “Or else what?”, the odds are stacked against it.

Such enforcement would be laughable and we know it. I have been told the EPA views the idea of “refuge police” as abhorrent, even
if they had budget for it. Seed companies are placed in the ludicrous position of sternly admonishing farmers NOT to buy the much more expensive (read: profitable) RW seed or else they will have to buy from a competitor. I don’t think so.

Caveat #1: It could be the seed industry has product in the pipeline to eliminate the need for refuge—similar to cotton. If so, they would be foolish to make refuges easier to comply with. In fact, the more unworkable rules are, the more they can charge for new technology.

So does all this “wink, wink” regulation observance really hurt anybody? I think so. To begin with, we may be selecting for a pest that could be an ethanol annihilator. But because costs are in the future and the benefits of non-compliance are right now—and enormous—this is a major persuasion problem.

Caveat #2: It could be bug scientists are just blowing 20% smoke and resistance is less likely than advertised. Unwillingness to modify could imply the “pretend” refuge solution will suffice.

Perhaps more importantly, inviting contempt for compliance by refusing to adapt refuge rules to reality corrodes respect for other—and especially future—rules. Hypocrisy diminishes professional standards.

Meet me halfway. I suggest the following:

•Lower requirement. If a 20% requirement only yields 12% actual refuge, take a hint. Besides, 20% wasn’t printed on the back of the Ten Commandments.

•Look at the machines. We don’t plant in units of 10! A better refuge requirement would be 2 rows out of 12, for example.

•Lose the boundary. I grow lots of non-GM specialty corn. Those acres are sufficient refuge for several neighbors. Why must refuge be on your own farm? Can the rootworms tell? Farmers can work out deals to enable compliance and a free market in refuge encourage cooperation.

•Lighten up location requirements. I plant 500 acres of non-RW out of 1,200 total. Get off my back.

Make the right answer the easy answer. Stirring calls to responsible behavior ignore economic research and demonstrate virtually all decisions have cost/benefit calculations behind them. If we’re serious about refuges, we should be serious about finding workable ways to make them happen.

John Phipps, johnwphipps@gmail.com, is a sixth-generation farmer from Chrisman, Ill. He is the TV host of “U.S. Farm Report.” For local station listings, log on to www.AgWeb.com.

Printer-friendly version

Email Article to a Friend

Your Email:
Your Friend's Email:
Message to add to the body:

© 2009 AgWeb.com - The Homepage of Agriculture
AgWeb.com is a Division of Farm Journal Media, Inc.
Quotes by eSignal delayed 15 minutes