Wednesday's Headlines

“NAFTA Battle Begins”

When Congress passed and the President signed the spending bill last week it nixed a program that permitted U.S. and Mexico truckers to operate over the border. Safety concerns and other issues prompted the move. Now, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs is quoted as saying the administration wants to work with Congress to restore that program.

According to AP, the Mexican Economy Department argues the U.S. Congress's decision to do away with the program violates the North American Free Trade Agreement, and will affect some 2.4 billion dollars in trade with 40 U.S. states. Mexico has already placed tariffs on 90 U.S. products.
***************************************************************

“Pork Producers Do No Support Antibiotics Measure”

The National Pork Producers Council says the Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act of 2009 - introduced in the U.S. House Tuesday - would be detrimental to the health and well-being of pigs - would increase production costs and the price consumers pay for pork - and could jeopardize public health. NPPC President Don Butler called the legislation irresponsible - and said producers need access to a range of animal health products to keep pigs healthy and produce safe food products.

New York Congresswoman Louise Slaughter is the bill’s sponsor. In a teleconference Tuesday morning - she said the misuse of antibiotics in industrial farming has been directly linked to the growing number of antibiotic-resistant infections in people. But NPPC says a survey of human health experts in 2000 found that 96-percent of antibiotic resistance in humans is a result of human use of antibiotics. Slaughter also stated that 70-percent of the antibiotics produced in the U.S. go to animals that aren’t sick. NPPC - citing the Animal Health Institute - says less than five-percent of animal antibiotics are used simply for nutritional efficiency.

Dr. Jennifer Greiner - NPPC Director of Science and Technology - says pork producers have a moral obligation to use antibiotics responsibly to protect human health and provide safe food. But Greiner says producers also have an ethical obligation to maintain the health of their pigs. Programs like Pork Quality Assurance Plus and Take Care: Use Antibiotics Responsibly are in place and include principles and guidelines on antibiotic use that help protect animal and public health and animal well-being.
***************************************************************

“Farmer Mac Reports Losses”

The Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation or Farmer Mac reports an annual loss during 2008 of 154.1 million dollars, or 15.40 per diluted common share. During the quarter, ending December 31st, the net loss was 61.1 million or 6.03 per diluted share. These results primarily reflected fourth quarter losses on financial derivatives and provisions for losses principally related to certain of its credits in the ethanol sector and the previously announced third quarter losses on certain investments. As a result, Famer Mac’s board reduced the common stock dividend to five cents per share from its previous level of ten cents.

Farmer Mac says loans underlying the Corporation's guarantees and commitments grew to a record 10.1 billion dollars at year end and, with the exception of ethanol loans, continued to perform well during 2008. Delinquencies on non-ethanol loans have remained at near historically low levels consistent with the strength of the U.S. agricultural economy through the end of the year. Farmer Mac's 90day delinquencies, including ethanol loans, were 67.1 million and represented 1.35 percent of the portfolio, as of December 31, 2008.

Farmer Mac’s newly appointed President and chief Executive Officer, Michael Gerber, says - we have taken actions to address the difficult market dynamics that have emerged and seem likely to prevail in the time ahead. We have adjusted our funding strategies to reduce the reliance on financial derivatives that have adversely affected our capital position.
*************************************************************

“Disaster Waiver Extended”

USDA is extending until May 18th, 2009, the buy-in waiver for farmers impacted by natural disasters. The recently approved American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 allows producers to become eligible for 2008 disaster assistance even if they did not previously obtain otherwise statutorily required crop insurance from the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation or Non-insured Crop Disaster Assistance Program coverage for 2008.

Paying such a buy-in fee does not provide the producer with crop insurance or NAP for the 2008 crop year; it merely permits the producer to become eligible for the 2008-crop disaster assistance programs. Producers who meet the definition of "Socially Disadvantaged, Limited Resource," or "Beginning Farmer or Rancher," are not required to pay the buy-in fee.

And, producers who have not already taken the necessary steps to become eligible for the Supplemental Revenue Assistance Program, Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees, and Farm-Raised Fish, and the Tree Assistance program may now become eligible for such programs by May 18, 2009.
*************************************************************

“Coalition Wants Health Insurance Tax Eliminated”

The Coalition Supporting Equity for Our Nation’s Self-Employed is throwing its support behind H.R. 1470 – the Equity for Our Nation’s Self-Employed Act of 2009. If enacted, this bill would eliminate a requirement in the tax code that millions of self-employed individuals pay additional taxes on the cost of their health insurance. Organizations such as the American Farm Bureau Federation are interested in this bill as it would correct a significant error in the tax code that penalizes self-employed individuals – including farmers.

Currently, corporations can deduct the cost of health insurance premiums as a business expense and forego all payroll taxes on these expenses. The self-employed are prohibited from taking this deduction, resulting in an additional 15.3 percent tax on their health insurance premiums. Supporters of the bill say eliminating this tax would reduce the average cost of health care for the self-employed by more than 1,850 dollars annually.
***************************************************************

“NPPC On HBO Documentary”

The National Pork Producers Council points out that HBO’s documentary “Death on a Factory Farm” shows actions at a hog farm that are not condoned and, in fact, abhorred by responsible pork producers. NPPC publicly condemned the mistreatment when it originally occurred in 2006. The Council says, - for the documentary’s producers to imply the situation shown in the film is in any way typical of swine husbandry in this country is grossly unfair to the farm families who work daily to feed this country and much of the world.

During NPPC’s recent annual meeting, pork producers reaffirmed the industry’s strong support for the well-being of its animals in a statement that states, in part: The U.S. pork industry recognizes its moral and ethical obligation to provide for the responsible treatment of animals. Any willful mistreatment or neglect of animals is unacceptable. The U.S. pork industry affirms its obligation to act swiftly to end any mistreatment and to take immediate corrective actions to fully restore proper and responsible animal care.

Pork industry programs that are at the forefront include. . the Pork Quality Assurance program developed in 1989. Since then the Transport Quality Assurance, Swine Welfare Assurance, Pork Quality Assurance Plus and the We Care programs are providing producers with knowledge of animal care. The “We Care” initiative demonstrates that our responsible pork producers are dedicated to the production of safe, wholesome food while following acceptable animal well-being practices and safeguarding our natural resources.
**************************************************************

“Texas Researchers Have Advice for EPA”

A group of Texas-based researchers has provided answers for the nation’s cattle feeding industry after it was given a very short window by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to begin reporting ammonia and hydrogen sulfide emissions. What the researchers know is that no single number is adequate to represent a basis for an emission factor, because emissions vary with what the cattle are fed, with the season, and even with the time of day and where you are standing in the feedlot.

The findings were established on research already underway called “Air Quality: Reducing Emissions from Cattle Feedlots and Dairies,” a federally funded project headed by Dr. John Sweeten, director of the Texas AgriLife Research and Extension Center at Amarillo. According to Sweeten, - researchers found that both ammonia and hydrogen sulfide represent exceedingly low concentrations over relatively large emitting surfaces and long time scales. The annual emission numbers can add up to the low threshold values of reporting that EPA just set, but they do not reach levels of general public concern.

According to researcher Dr. Rick Todd, - Texas Panhandle feeding operations with more than one-thousand cattle could exceed the 100 pound/day reporting requirement. But the negative environmental effects of ammonia that EPA is concerned about are most likely where ammonia mixes with urban air pollution, or when ammonia is removed from the atmosphere in rain and over-fertilizes sensitive ecosystems.
*************************************************************

“No-Till Benefits Cotton Production”

The costs and benefits of using conservation tillage in cotton production can now be calculated a bit more precisely, thanks to the teamwork of an Agricultural Research Service scientist and his research partner. The findings of agricultural engineer James Hanks at the ARS Application and Production Technology Research Unit in Stoneville, Mississippi, and Mississippi State University agricultural economist Steve Martin, suggest farmers could realize the highest economic return from cotton production using no-till production.

On 2.471 acres in the Mississippi Delta, no-till averaged a net return of 1,202 dollars per acre. It had the lowest production costs because fewer trips were needed across each field for tillage or cover crop plantings. The study considered five different management systems - conventional, no-till, low-till sub-soiling, no-till with a winter wheat cover crop, and low-till subsoiling with a winter wheat cover crop.

The low-till subsoiling with a winter wheat cover crop system had the lowest net returns of any of the treatments because of lower yields relative to the other treatments. In addition, the use of cover crops and the added tillage increased production expenses. Producers who want to reduce soil erosion might also want to consider using a no-till cover crop management system. This system had the highest mean net return of the two cover crop systems in the study.
*************************************************************