Feedstuffs is part of the Informa Markets Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Sitemap


Articles from 2015 In February


Switchgrass removes PCBs in soil

Switchgrass removes PCBs in soil

UNIVERSITY of Iowa researchers have found that a type of grass that was once a staple of the American prairie can remove soil laden with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), toxic chemicals once used for cooling and other industrial purposes.

The researchers reported that switchgrass successfully removed up to 40% of the PCBs from contaminated soils in lab experiments. When boosted by a PCB-oxidizing microorganism, the removal rate reached 47%.

The finding may lead to a natural, environmentally friendly approach to reducing PCBs, which were banned for use by Congress in 1979 but still permeate U.S. soils, waterways and living organisms.

The researchers investigated how adding an aerobic, PCB-oxidizing microorganism could enhance the oxidation of certain PCB congeners (PCB 52, PCB 77 and PCB 153).

"It seems to have worked for at least one of the congeners studied," said Tim Mattes, associate professor of civil and environmental engineering and corresponding author on the paper, which was published in the journal Ecological Engineering.

"One surprising finding was that the presence of the switchgrass seemed to promote the survival and the activity of the added (aerobic, PCB-oxidizing microorganism) LB400 bacteria," Mattes added.

For the current study, the researchers spiked soil with a mixture of PCBs at concentrations commonly found in soils and sediments — levels that pose a potential risk to human and environmental health. The contaminated soil was aged for two months at 25 degrees C (77 degrees F) in sealed tubs to allow the PCBs to fully leach into the soil and, thereby, better represent real-life conditions.

Plastic containers, each filled with about 5.5 lb. of soil, were planted with switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) seeds. An unplanted reactor and a switchgrass-planted reactor filled with clean soil were used as controls. Soil samples were analyzed at 12 weeks and 24 weeks.

Researchers found that after 24 weeks, about 40% of the total PCB mass had been removed by the switchgrass-treated soil, significantly more than the 30% removed from untreated soil. Soil applied with a PCB-oxidizing microorganism (Burkholderia strain LB400) was found to remove about 47% of one of the PCBs tested. Also, the presence of switchgrass appeared to facilitate the microorganism's survival in the soil.

"Normally, we think that if we can get plants to grow in degraded lands (so-called brownfields), the proper 'bugs' will grow in the root zone to degrade the contaminants," said Jerry Schnoor, civil and environmental engineering professor and a report co-author. "What's new in this story is that we can actually help the process along by adding the proper bugs (LB400) to the root zone at the time of planting and beyond."

Mattes added, "The possibility of synergistic interactions between the switchgrass and the bio-augmented PCB-degrading bacteria suggests that employing both plants and bacteria in PCB remediation strategies holds promise for enhanced removal of these recalcitrant compounds from contaminated sites."

He noted that he currently is studying which microbes work in the root zone of the plant to transform PCBs by a process called reductive dechlorination.

Volume:87 Issue:08

Renderers help curb food waste

Renderers help curb food waste

DECREASING food loss and food waste has become a hot topic as people seek to improve the efficiency of the global food system.

One industry in particular has been years ahead of this concept of resourcefulness. Often referred to as "the invisible industry," rendering industry stakeholders are currently in the process of rebranding themselves as the "original recyclers" because they are just that.

The role the industry plays often goes unappreciated, but without it, excess byproducts — secondary products created during the manufacture of a principal commodity — equivalent to 1.4 million semi-trucks would fill the current landfill space available in four years, explained Dr. Jessica Meisinger, director of scientific education and communication for the National Renderers Assn. (NRA).

However, the industry's purpose isn't just about figuring out how to dispose of excess product.

Studies commissioned by the U.N. Food & Agriculture Organization have estimated yearly global food loss and waste, by quantity, at roughly 30% of cereals, 40-50% of root crops, fruits and vegetables, 20% of oilseeds, meat and dairy products and 35% of fish.

Historically, people have eaten more of the total animal than they currently do, according to Meisinger, but right now, the average American uses only about 50% of each animal. Something has to be done with the other 50%, or it will just end up in a landfill, which she said is a complete waste of the valuable carbon, vitamins and minerals that are in the extra pieces.

In the past, there was a lack of interest in rendering, but with today's sustainability movement, Meisinger said people care more about the total life cycle of a product. "All of a sudden, rendering is getting more attention," she said.

Rendering is a process both physical and chemical that essentially cooks byproducts — from slaughterhouses and meat processing plants, fryer grease from restaurants, waste from supermarkets like day-old rotisserie chickens and expired meat, trimmings from the local butcher shop and recalled products — separates the fat from the protein and dries out the protein.

Animal byproducts include hides, skins, hair, feathers, hooves, horns, feet, heads, bones, toe nails, blood, organs, glands, intestines, muscle and fat tissues, shells and whole carcasses. People historically recognized the value of rendering inedible (not for human consumption) animal byproducts for various purposes, whether for making lamp oil, soap or candles.

Meisinger said tallow (beef fat) is still used in soap today, particularly high-end soaps, but the modern rendering industry started after the advent of boxed beef because there were a lot of leftover pieces of the animal.

The North American rendering industry, with approximately 300 rendering facilities, annually recycles approximately 56 billion lb. of raw material generated by the livestock and poultry, meat/poultry processing, food processing, supermarket and restaurant industries, turning the material into ingredients for various soaps, paints and varnishes, cosmetics, explosives, toothpaste, pharmaceuticals, leather, textiles and lubricants.

In the U.S., more than 150 million head of cattle, calves, hogs and sheep and more than 55 billion lb. of poultry are slaughtered for food annually. NRA pointed out that, on a liveweight basis, approximately 49% of cattle, 44% of pigs, 37% of broilers and 57% of most fish species are considered "inedible" by Americans. However, rendering gives these products a new purpose.

For example, meat and bone meal, meat meal, poultry meal, hydrolyzed feather meal, blood meal, fish meal and animal fats are the primary end products from rendering animal byproducts. According to NRA, these are valuable as feed ingredients for livestock, poultry, aquaculture and pet food.

Feeding animal byproduct ingredients to livestock has been a source of debate, but Dr. David Meeker, NRA vice president of scientific services, said there are volumes of scientific references validating the nutritional qualities of these products, and there are no scientific reasons for altering the practice of feeding rendered products to animals.

Furthermore, government agencies regulate food and feed processing, and the rendering industry is scrutinized often, he noted. However, the future of using rendered products for animal feeds will depend on regulation and the market.

In addition, restaurants dispose of around 4.7 billion lb. of used cooking grease each year. Meisinger said rendering companies collect used cooking grease and oil to process into both a livestock feed ingredient and an oil source for biodiesel production.

While other technologies are available, rendering is the most logical approach, NRA said. It is more efficient at capturing and recycling energy than anaerobic digestion, which is slow and produces greenhouse gases (GHGs). Also, rendering can recycle products on the same day they are received into feed ingredients or biofuels.

If these byproducts were allowed to decompose in landfills or compost piles or were buried and the carbon in these byproducts was released as carbon dioxide, NRA said the impact would be the same as adding 3.2 million cars to the nation's roads (using Environmental Protection Agency estimates).

GHGs are reduced when an animal is rendered because it pulls carbon out of the environment rather than putting it in, Meisinger said. "It's pretty vital to the entire life-cycle analysis in the whole chain."

Efficient renderers today are mainly concentrated in North America, where they process nearly 25 million tons of raw materials per year and generate roughly $5.5 billion annually. However, NRA said the European Union processes about 15 million tons per year, and Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Uruguay and New Zealand process about 10 million tons per year. The value of products sold by the worldwide rendering industry is estimated to be in the range of $6-8 billion per year.

 

Biodiesel study

A recent study by the Institute for Energy & Environmental Research (IFEU) in Heidelberg, Germany, found that biodiesel made from animal fat reduces GHG emissions by 85% compared to fossil fuels.

EU institutions have recognized that biodiesel made from animal fat is highly sustainable and offers significant potential for reducing GHG emissions. Accordingly, the EU's Renewable Energy Directive rates this type of biodiesel as particularly worthy of support.

The latest calculations carried out in the context of the ISCC sustainability certification process reveal that producing biodiesel from animal fat achieves an 85% savings in GHG emissions compared to fossil diesel fuel.

IFEU examined the methodology underlying this calculation as part of a study commissioned by the European Fat Processors & Renderers Assn. (EFPRA). It specifically looked at how GHG emissions resulting from animal byproduct processing should be allocated.

The study confirmed the accuracy of the calculation methods used. Public health restrictions mean that animal byproducts are subject to special disposal regulations and, as a consequence, have a negative market value. Therefore, according to IFEU, all emissions relating to treatment necessary for compliance with public health requirements in sterilized preliminary products should not count towards the total amount of GHG emissions generated during production of the associated biofuel.

"Biodiesel made from animal fat not only conserves resources; it also achieves very high savings in terms of GHG emissions. That means we already have access to an advanced biofuel," EFPRA president Niels Leth Nielsen said.

Volume:87 Issue:09

Sorting out frozen meat backlog

Sorting out frozen meat backlog

PACKERS are having a difficult time moving product in the domestic and international markets as extreme weather blanketed heavily populated areas — slowing down foodservice traffic — and compounded the West Coast port troubles.

As a result, packers have been forced to ask dramatically lower prices just to retain loyal customers, Steve Meyer and Len Steiner explained in the "Daily Livestock Report."

Eventually, the snow will melt, spring will arrive and the export channels will clear following the recent resolution to the West Coast port labor dispute.

However, in the aftermath, the U.S. meat and poultry industries are now shoveling out from the backlog of products while also doing damage control in an effort to hold onto international customers after shipping delays tarnished America's reputation for delivering quality animal protein on time.

For now, the U.S. has a large trade surplus for pork, whereas beef trade has found an equilibrium.

As a large net exporter of pork, the U.S. relies heavily on West Coast ports to ship products, with approximately 30% of exported pork shipped from there last year.

While no one will argue that pork production needed to increase, the recent growth spurt — which went beyond estimates in the latest "Hogs & Pigs" report — has come at a rather inconvenient time.

Looking at the last six weeks, weekly hog slaughter totals have averaged 5.6% above a year ago.

The increased pork production for the short term will further pressure prices lower, with hams, loins and bellies showing the largest declines recently. Since Jan. 1, loins have dropped $11.38, hams have declined $8.43 and bellies are down $24.42.

Moreover, poultry slaughter is also on the rise, with the U.S. Department of Agriculture reporting, in its "Poultry Slaughter" report, a 5% jump in January. This follows 9% growth in poultry production in December 2014.

Ready-to-cook weight for poultry last month penciled at 3.87 billion lb. In addition, the total liveweight in January was 5.13 billion lb., up 5% from a year ago.

Meanwhile, the anticipated decline in beef production has penciled out, with overall production in 2015 expected to be down 1%, following a 6% decline in 2014.

For U.S. beef, the strong U.S. dollar has yielded weaker export markets. Consequently, domestic demand is critical for the U.S. beef industry.

As pork and poultry supplies grow, beef faces an uphill battle this year. Falling wholesale pork cutout values have widened the beef-to-pork wholesale price ratio further, which is limiting the ability of beef prices to advance, Oklahoma State University Extension livestock specialist Derrell Peel wrote in his weekly cow/calf newsletter.

 

Cold storage

The latest USDA "Cold Storage" report confirmed a large supply of red meat and poultry in freezers on Jan. 31, totaling 21.435 million lb., up 4.2% from January 2014 (Figure).

The amount of red meat in frozen storage is up 14% from the previous month and 5% higher than last year.

USDA reported total boneless beef in freezers at 445.1 million lb., 14.4% higher than last year. Frozen pork in storage, on the other hand, was down 3.6% from the previous year to 596.5 million lb.

Similarly, total frozen poultry supplies on Jan. 31 increased 11% from December and rose 5% from a year ago.

Total stocks of chicken were up 6% from last year to 730.1 million lb. Total turkey in freezers, at 279.9 million lb., was up 45% from last month and up 1% from Jan. 31, 2014.

Sorting out frozen meat backlog

 

Market roundup

Elsewhere in the livestock markets, wholesale pork cutout values reached a new low, while stronger beef cutout values lifted cattle futures last week.

In the hog market, packers bid more aggressively but quickly filled orders, which translated into a mixed tone.

Cash hog prices improved all of last week, with USDA reporting live sales last Wednesday at $62.60/cwt. for hogs delivered to the eastern Corn Belt and $66.24/cwt. for hogs delivered to the western Corn Belt.

Wholesale pork cutout values were on a slippery slope last week and fell to $68.13/cwt. Loins dropped to $80.00/cwt., while hams and bellies also finished lower at $54.55/cwt. and $72.79/cwt., respectively.

Last week, hog futures climbed to a four-week high of $69.325/cwt. at the close of markets Wednesday due to strong demand and winter storms that hindered livestock transportation. However, last Thursday, April lean hog futures fell to $67.15/cwt.

As for the cattle market, USDA reported that cash fed cattle were inactive on light trading last week in all feeding regions, with a few sales reported $1-4 lower.

Wholesale beef cutout values climbed all of last week, with the Choice cutout finishing at $247.00/cwt. last Thursday, up $6.72 for the week, and the Select cutout at $244.90/cwt., up $7.11.

After reaching their lowest level in 2.5 weeks last Tuesday, cattle futures rallied for the next two days, with February live futures closing at $161.125/cwt. and March feeder cattle futures ending at $200.30/cwt.

USDA, in its February "Cattle on Feed" report, noted that feedlot inventories were virtually unchanged from a year ago due to delayed feedlot marketings.

A total of 10.711 million cattle were in large feedlots on Feb. 1, up only 0.3% from the previous year (Table). January placements totaled 1.787 million head, down 11% from January 2014. Similarly, January marketings were 9% below last year, at 1.625 million head.

 

Feedlot inventory, million head

 

 

 

2015 as %

Category

2014

2015

of 2014

Feb. 1 inventory

10.678

10.711

100

Jan. marketings

1.788

1.625

91

Jan. placements

2.014

1.787

89

Jan. 1 inventory

10.523

10.626

101

Source: USDA.

 

Volume:87 Issue:09

Global food trade a tangled web

Global food trade a tangled web

WORLDWIDE, agriculture has the important job of growing sufficient safe, nutritious food, and global trade plays an essential role in ensuring that the food reaches everyone.

While the global trade value of food commodities is often measured in economic terms, a team of researchers from the University of Minnesota's Institute on the Environment (IonE) conducted a more all-inclusive evaluation of the drivers and implications of trade by comparing nutritional value and resource consumption, in addition to the conventional methods.

"Trade is usually described in terms of the value or weight of the goods being exchanged, but these don't necessarily capture other important aspects of food production and distribution," said study lead Graham MacDonald, a postdoctoral research scholar with IonE's Global Landscapes Initiative. "Accounting for food's nutritional value and the land and water resources needed to produce exports offers a more holistic view of how trade affects global food security and the environment. Our study uniquely juxtaposes these perspectives."

The study, "Rethinking Agricultural Trade Relationships in an Era of Globalization," which was recently published in the journal BioScience, suggests that future trade policy needs to consider more than monetary value.

"Economic, nutritional and environmental metrics all tell different stories of the geography of global trade, so it's important to include a range of metrics to get a complete picture," said co-author Paul West, co-director of the IonE Global Landscapes Initiative. "Our food system is increasingly globalized. The patterns we uncovered can help to assess how current and future policies affect the complex links between food and the environment."

Utilizing millions of U.N. Food & Agriculture Organization global food trade statistics from 2000 to 2009, the researchers traced back traded goods — crops and animal products — to the original nation in which they were grown and analyzed them by four metrics: money, calories, land use and irrigation water use.

According to the study's results, more than 70% of global trade based on all metrics is concentrated in only 20 exporting and 33 importing countries, with the global value of food commodity exports calculated at $522 billion per year throughout the 10-year span.

The majority of the monetary value of food trade includes trade in the European Union; however, these trade relationships are often produced by land use in other regions where the crops behind those products are grown. The EU's "re-exports" required more than 22.23 million acres of cropland in other regions.

Moreover, more than one-fifth of the calories grown in farm fields are eventually traded, which require about 20% of the world's cropland.

Exported animal products consisted of one-quarter of the global food trade value but only 5% of the calories traded and at least 8% of the global agriculture land base.

Nevertheless, the researchers did uncover distinct patterns that shape global food trade by calculating the monetary value, calories, land use and irrigation water consumption associated with 390 traded food commodities.

Interestingly, traded wheat, soybeans and corn contain the most calories, use the most cropland and strongly influence irrigation water consumption.

On the other hand, traded animal products have a disproportionate influence according to value-based and embodied pasture metrics, according to the study.

MacDonald concluded that the study's findings underscore the importance of choosing the right benchmark when analyzing the global trade network and that perhaps broader metrics should be used to evaluate the international supply chain and interdependencies among countries in terms of food and resources.

Volume:87 Issue:08

FDA releases biannual progress report on judicious use

The U.S. Food & Drug Administration announced Feb. 26 its second progress report on its strategy to promote the judicious use of antimicrobials in food-producing animals.

In December 2013, the agency took a significant step forward in addressing antimicrobial resistance by publishing Guidance #213 (GFI #213), which calls on animal drug sponsors of approved medically important antimicrobials administered through medicated feed or water to remove from their product labels indications for use related to growth promotion, and bring the remaining therapeutic uses of these products under the oversight of a veterinarian by December 2016.

In March 2014, 283 applications were identified as being affected by GFI #213. Since that time, 11 new generic and combination approvals were added to the list of affected applications; by law, the agency has no basis for refusing to approve these applications as long as they meet regulatory standards for approval.

Some affected drug sponsors have already started implementing the recommended changes to their affected antimicrobial products: three applications have been converted from over-the-counter to prescription dispensing status; production indications have been withdrawn from one application, and 32 affected applications have been completely withdrawn, FDA reported.

FDA said sponsors of all of the affected applications, including the additions, remain committed to participating in the strategy. One drug sponsor who was not previously affected by GFI #213, Pharmgate LLC, acquired all of the affected applications of Pennfield Oil Co. and ADM Alliance Nutrition Inc. Pharmgate has notified the agency in writing of its intent to engage in the judicious use strategy as outlined in GFI #213.

FDA noted that it continues to work closely with affected drug sponsors to help ensure that the changes they agreed to make as described in GFI #213 are completed in an orderly manner by the end of December 2016. FDA also said it intends to use a variety of metrics to assess the effect of these changes over time, including existing data on drug sales and resistance as well as additional on-farm data.

The agency is working closely with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Centers for Disease Control to hold a joint public meeting in the spring of 2015 to discuss ways to collect and use on-farm use data. Details of the public meeting will be released closer to the meeting date.

Ingredient market prices, 3/2/15

Ingredient market prices, 3/2/15

The following prices, which include delivery, were obtained Feb. 25 from feed and grain vendors in the U.S. and Canada. The prices represent current trading values but are not guaranteed. Second column shows the amount of change since the previous week. Prices of certain products can vary depending on the processing method used. N-Nominal. N/A-Price not available.

OILSEED PRODUCTS

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Soybean meal

 

 

(high-protein)

 

 

Atlanta

437.00

-

Boston

N/A

-

Buffalo

417.00

12.00

Chicago

386.00

12.00

Delmarva

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

447.00

-

Ft. Worth

410.00

1.00

Kansas City

370.00

15.00

Los Angeles

409.00

-3.00

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

355.00

1.50

Okeechobee

467.00

-

Portland

421.95

12.30

San Francisco

409.00

-3.00

Twin Falls

430.00

4.00

Soybean meal

 

 

(low-protein)

 

 

Atlanta

427.00

-

Boston

N/A

-

Buffalo

413.00

12.00

Chicago

374.00

12.00

Delmarva

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

437.00

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Kansas City

370.00

15.00

Los Angeles

385.00

-4.00

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Okeechobee

457.00

-

Portland

N/A

-

San Francisco

385.00

-4.00

Soybean hulls

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Buffalo*

185.00

-

Chicago

148.00

-

Fayetteville, NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth*

185.00

-

Los Angeles

173.00

-9.00

Minneapolis

110.00

-

Okeechobee

N/A

-

San Francisco

173.00

-9.00

Twin Falls

175.00

5.00

* unpelleted

 

 

Whole cottonseed

 

 

Atlanta

260.00

-

Buffalo

312.00

2.00

Chicago

307.00

11.00

Delmarva

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

260.00

-

Ft. Worth

290.00

-

Los Angeles

381.00

6.00

Lubbock

270.00

-5.00

Memphis

280.00

10.00

Okeechobee

297.00

-

Portland

382.50

-

San Francisco

381.00

6.00

Twin Falls

380.00

10.00

Cottonseed meal

 

 

Atlanta

315.00

-

Chicago

345.00

-

Delmarva

315.00

-

Fayetteville NC

315.00

-

Ft. Worth

360.00

20.00

Kansas City

355.00

15.00

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Lubbock

330.00

20.00

Memphis

310.00

5.00

Okeechobee

349.00

-

San Francisco

303.00

-7.00

Cottonseed hulls

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Chicago

210.00

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

155.00

-10.00

Okeechobee

N/A

-

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Lubbock

120.00

-15.00

San Francisco

N/A

-

Canola meal

 

 

Buffalo

323.00

7.00

Minneapolis

270.50

2.10

Los Angeles

310.00

4.00

Montreal

305.00

-

Portland

305.45

12.30

San Francisco

310.00

4.00

Twin Falls

306.00

8.00

Vancouver

245.00

-

Sunflower seed meal

 

 

Fargo

210.00

-15.00

Minneapolis

205.00

-10.00

Linseed  meal

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Chicago

255.00

-

Fargo

230.00

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

266.00

-

Kansas City

304.00

-1.00

Minneapolis

230.00

-

Safflower meal

 

 

Los Angeles

N/A

-

San Francisco

190.00

-

ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Meat and bone meal

 

 

(ruminant)

 

 

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

390.00

-5.00

Delmarva

455.00

-20.00

Fayetteville NC

430.00

-

Ft. Worth

380.00

-

Kansas City

365.00

-

Los Angeles

330.00

-10.00

Memphis

430.00

-

Minneapolis

390.00

-

Portland

317.50

-10.00

San Francisco

330.00

-10.00

Meat and bone meal

 

 

(porcine)

 

 

Fayetteville NC

440.00

-20.00

Los Angeles

473.20

89.60

Memphis

430.00

-20.00

Minneapolis

390.00

15.00

Flash-dried blood meal

 

 

(ruminant)

 

 

Fayetteville NC

875.00

-50.00

Los Angeles

950.00

25.00

Memphis

850.00

-50.00

Minneapolis

850.00

-25.00

Flash-dried blood meal

 

 

(porcine)

 

 

Fayetteville NC

925.00

-50.00

Memphis

900.00

-50.00

Minneapolis

850.00

-25.00

Poultry byproduct meal

 

 

(feed grade)

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

450.00

-

Ft. Worth

375.00

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

Los Angeles

453.00

48.00

Memphis

450.00

-

Poultry byproduct meal

 

 

(pet food grade)

 

 

Memphis

650.00

-

Fayetteville NC

650.00

-

Hydrolized feather meal

 

 

Atlanta

420.00

-

Delmarva

475.00

25.00

Fayetteville NC

420.00

-

Ft. Worth

550.00

30.00

Kansas City

535.00

5.00

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Memphis

420.00

-

Minneapolis

525.00

-

Menhaden fish meal

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

1900.00

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

Memphis

1900.00

-

Minneapolis

1955.00

-

Twin Falls

N/A

-

Blended tuna meal

 

 

Los Angeles

N/A

-

San Francisco

N/A

-

Anchovy  meal

 

 

Los Angeles

N/A

-

San Francisco

N/A

-

ANIMAL FAT, GREASE

 

 

(cents per pound)

 

 

Prime Tallow

 

 

Chicago

28.00

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Los Angeles

26.75

-

San Francisco

26.25

0.25

Yellow grease

 

 

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

28.00

-

Delmarva

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

29.00

1.00

Ft. Worth

26.50

-

Kansas City

34.25

-

Los Angeles

25.75

-

Memphis

29.00

1.00

Minneapolis

24.50

0.50

San Francisco

25.25

0.25

Choice white grease

 

 

Chicago

26.00

-

Minneapolis

27.50

0.50

Bleachable fancy tallow

 

 

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

29.50

-

Ft. Worth

29.00

-

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Minneapolis

29.00

1.00

San Francisco

N/A

-

Vegetable-animal blend

 

 

Ft. Worth

27.00

-

Los Angeles

25.25

-

Minneapolis

24.50

-

San Francisco

25.25

-

Poultry grease

 

 

(feed grade)

 

 

Delmarva

24.00

-

Fayetteville NC

28.00

1.00

Memphis

28.00

1.00

Poultry grease

 

 

(pet food grade)

 

 

Memphis

34.00

1.00

Fayetteville NC

34.00

1.00

GLUTEN, HOMINY

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Corn gluten meal

 

 

Buffalo

673.00

-

Chicago

655.00

-

Kansas City

720.00

10.00

Los Angeles

690.00

-

Corn gluten feed

 

 

Buffalo

153.00

-9.00

Chicago

122.00

2.00

Fayetteville NC

180.00

-

Kansas City

160.00

-

Okeechobee

200.00

-

Twin Falls

200.00

10.00

Wahpeton

N/A

-

Hominy feed

 

 

Atlanta

150.00

-

Boston

N/A

-

Buffalo

163.00

-2.00

Chicago

101.00

3.00

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Kansas City

105.00

-

Los Angeles

179.00

-

Okeechobee

N/A

-

San Francisco

179.00

-

Twin Falls

188.00

-4.00

BREWERS, DISTILLERS

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Brewers dried grains

 

 

Chicago

N/A

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

Malt Sprouts

 

 

Chicago

175.00

-

Milwaukee

160.00

-

Winona, Minn

160.00

-

Distillers dried grains

 

 

Atlanta

235.00

-

Boston

N/A

-

Buffalo

205.00

15.00

Chicago

182.00

-3.00

Fayetteville NC

235.00

-

Kansas City

125.00

5.00

Los Angeles

240.00

-10.00

Minneapolis

160.00

-

Okeechobee

245.00

-

Portland

241.50

-2.50

San Francisco

240.00

-10.00

Twin Falls

253.00

-2.00

Brewers yeast

 

 

(dollars per pound, sacked)

 

 

Chicago

0.75

-

Milwaukee

0.75

-

Minneapolis

0.75

-

ALFALFA

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Dehydrated pellets

 

 

(17% protein)

 

 

Alfalfa Center

275.00

-

Buffalo

375.00

-

Chicago

355.00

-

Kansas City

295.00

-5.00

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Minneapolis

265.00

-

Toledo

385.00

-

San Francisco

N/A

-

Suncured pellets

 

 

(15% protein)

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

230.00

-5.00

Kansas City

245.00

-5.00

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Portland

305.00

-

San Francisco

N/A

-

WHEAT MILLFEEDS

 

 

Shorts

 

 

Chicago

160.00

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Los Angeles

209.00

10.00

Millrun

 

 

Los Angeles

198.00

8.00

Portland

185.00

-

San Francisco

N/A

-

Twin Falls

N/A

-

Bran

 

 

Buffalo

175.00

15.00

Chicago

175.00

-

Los Angeles

204.00

20.00

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Middlings

 

 

Buffalo

145.00

15.00

Chicago

150.00

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

180.00

-

Kansas City

125.00

-5.00

Los Angeles

207.00

10.00

Memphis

165.00

-5.00

Minneapolis

112.00

-8.00

Okeechobee

N/A

-

DAIRY BYPRODUCTS

 

 

(dollars per hundredweight)

 

 

Dried skim milk

 

 

Ft. Worth

114.13

4.13

Minneapolis

114.13

-

Dried buttermilk

 

 

Ft. Worth

95.50

8.50

Minneapolis

95.50

8.50

Whole whey

 

 

Chicago

46.50

-1.50

Ft. Worth

45.50

-1.00

Kansas City

54.00

-

Minneapolis

45.50

-1.00

Whey protein concentrate

 

 

Ft. Worth

106.88

-1.88

Milwaukee

106.88

-1.88

Lactose

 

 

Ft. Worth

26.88

-0.88

Minneapolis

26.88

-0.88

OATS, RICE PRODUCTS

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Rolled oats

 

 

Chicago

510.00

-

Kansas City

480.00

-

Minneapolis

497.00

-

Crimped oats

 

 

Chicago

430.00

-

Kansas City

350.00

-

Minneapolis

432.00

-

Pulverized oats

 

 

Chicago

150.00

-

Minneapolis

138.00

-

Reground oat feed

 

 

Chicago

87.00

-

Kansas City

65.00

-

Minneapolis

72.00

-

Oats

 

 

(dollars per bushel)

 

 

Buffalo

4.50

-

Minneapolis

3.25

-

Portland*

270.00

-

(*per ton)

 

 

Rice bran

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

135.00

-5.00

Freeport

N/A

-

Kansas City

135.00

-

Memphis

N/A

-

San Francisco

163.00

-7.00

Stuttgart, Ark.

N/A

-

Rice millfeeds

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

90.00

-

Freeport

N/A

-

Kansas City

100.00

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Stuttgart, Ark.

N/A

-

Rice hulls

 

 

Ft. Worth

60.00

-2.00

Kansas City

70.00

-

DRIED PULP

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Citrus pulp pellets

 

 

Atlanta

205.00

-

Fayetteville NC

215.00

-

Okeechobee

190.00

-

Los Angeles*

N/A

-

*(sold wet)

 

 

Beet pulp pellets

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Boise

N/A

-

Chicago

220.00

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Kansas City

470.00

-

Minneapolis

160.00

-

Portland

230.00

-5.00

Saginaw

175.00

-

Beet pulp shreds

 

 

Mpls (sacked)

340.00

-

Los Angeles*

205.00

-

San Francisco

N/A

-

Twin Falls

N/A

-

*bulk, wet

 

 

GRAINS

 

 

Barley feed

 

 

Kansas City (bu.)

5.35

0.05

Los Angeles (cwt)

9.05

-0.07

Portland (ton)

201.00

-

San Francisco (cwt)

9.05

-0.07

Feed wheat

 

 

Atlanta (bu.)

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC (bu.)

N/A

-

Kansas City (bu)

4.90

-0.12

Los Angeles (cwt)

N/A

-

San Francisco (cwt)

N/A

-

Corn

 

 

(dollars per bushel)

 

 

Atlanta

6.26

-

Boston

N/A

-

Buffalo (per ton)

158.00

-2.00

Chicago

3.83

-0.08

Delmarva

4.08

-0.08

Fayetteville NC

5.44

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Kansas City

3.76

-

Los Angeles*

9.71

-0.16

San Fran (rail)*

9.71

-0.16

San Fran (truck)*

N/A

-

Memphis

4.09

-0.10

Minneapolis

3.57

-

Okeechobee

5.67

-

Portland (per ton)

176.25

-4.38

(*per cwt)

 

 

Milo

 

 

(dollars per bushel)

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Kansas City

3.83

-

Los Angeles*

11.24

-0.18

Memphis

4.75

-0.09

*(per cwt.)

 

 

Ground grain screenings

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Ft.  Worth

146.00

1.00

Kansas City

70.00

-

OTHER

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Almond hulls

 

 

Los Angeles

175.00

-5.00

San Francisco

155.00

-15.00

Bakery feed

 

 

Atlanta

175.00

-1.00

Buffalo

167.00

-5.00

Fayetteville NC

180.00

-

Memphis

170.00

-

Minneapolis

172.00

-3.00

Feed urea

 

 

Buffalo

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Salt

 

 

Kansas City

58.00

-

Los Angeles

50.00

-

Cane molasses

 

 

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Houston

152.50

-

Kansas City

190.00

-

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

197.50

-

New Orleans

152.50

-

San Francisco

N/A

-

 

Volume:87 Issue:09

Trade Promotion Authority push picks up

House and Senate negotiators are working to strike a difficult balance as they negotiate the final intricacies of the so-called fast-track bill, which would give the president Trade Promotion Authority (TPA).

TPA has been given to all previous presidents since Gerald Ford, with similar authority granted to all presidents since Franklin Delano Roosevelt. In recent weeks the White House has began a significant push on getting Congress to pass TPA and Congress could take up a package as soon as this spring.

A bipartisan group of former U.S. agricultural secretaries sent a letter to Congress calling for support of TPA, saying it “ensures that the U.S. has the credibility to conclude the best deal possible at the negotiating table.”

TPA allows Congress to set negotiating priorities for the administration and provide input, while ensuring a deal struck overseas would get a congressional up-or-down vote on trade deals without amendments or procedural delays. TPA is critical in assuring trading partners they will not be asked for deeper concessions on Capitol Hill after negotiations are complete.

The legislation comes as the Obama administration is seeking to conclude negotiations on a 12-nation Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal.

TPA is popular with Republicans but many Democrats, labor unions, and environmental groups oppose the legislation, saying it is a way for the administration to push a deal with unacceptable provisions through Congress. But, including too many provisions friendly to Democrats could alienate Republicans and the business community, or even potentially put TPP at risk when it comes up for a final vote.

The United States, Japan, and 10 other Pacific Rim countries are hoping to agree to the final terms of the TPP in the coming months.

In a newsletter from the National Chicken Council, it was reported that the TPA bill’s authors-Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) - are now fighting over a crucial remaining issue of how much leverage to give lawmakers to remove any coming trade deals from fast-track protection. Complications on that issue or others could still delay or unravel any agreement, those close to the negotiations said.

Generally, Republicans do not want to insert a mechanism that makes it easier to defeat trade agreements. Republicans say too many levers in Congress could derail a deal or make trading partners such as Japan nervous about putting their best offers on the table. Democrats want more openness and say the current policy prevents Congress from serving as a watchdog over trade deals.

Hatch called a hearing Feb. 26 of the Senate Finance Committee which he chairs to discuss trade policy and potentially the new bill. But his ranking member Wyden, the top Democrat on the panel, said a hearing was “premature” because a final deal had not been struck yet. The hearing ended up being postponed, without a new date set.

NCC said observers say the legislation has a fair chance of getting through the House. Even if 40 Republicans voted against the bill, the measure could still pass with just a dozen Democratic votes. In the Senate, the 60-vote threshold could be met if Wyden and other crucial Democrats came on board.

Democratic opposition blocked a fast-track bill last year, and some critics of the administration’s policy say the latest bill probably will not change the level of support in President Obama’s party.

Free trade agreements have proved to reduce barriers to U.S. exports and expand market opportunities. In 2014, 47% of U.S. goods exports went to countries the U.S. currently have FTAs with, and exports to FTA partners are up 64% since 2009 whereas exports to the rest of the world have gone up just 45%.

For a graphical look at the impact of U.S. trade relationships, view this Benefits of Trade Agreements document put together by the International Trade Administration.

USDA extends deadline on base acre, yield allocation

USDA granted a one-month extension for producers making decisions on updating yield history and reallocating base acres, the first in a multiple-step process to sign up for Price Loss Coverage (PLC) or Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC), new commodity programs established in the 2014 Farm Bill.

The initial deadline was February 27. The new deadline is March 31, the same deadline for making the one-time election to enroll in PLC or ARC for crop years 2014-2018. If no changes are made to yield history or base acres by March 31, 2015, the farm's current yield and base will be used.

“This is an important decision for producers, because these programs provide financial protection against unexpected changes in the marketplace. Producers are working to make the best decision they can. And we’re working to ensure that they’ve got the time, the information, and the opportunities to have those final conversations, review their data, and to visit the Farm Service Agency to make those decisions,” said Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack.

USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) has been working through implementation challenges in several states related to cover crops, software, yield history and other issues. Earlier in the week during a Senate Agriculture Committee hearing, Vilsack shared that about 60% of eligible producers had made the decision on the yield and base acre reallocations.

A program choice of ARC or PLC coverage also must be made by March 31, 2015, or there will be no 2014 payments for the farm and the farm will default to PLC coverage through the 2018 crop year.

“These are complex decisions which is why we launched a strong education and outreach campaign back in September. Now we’re providing a one-time extension of an additional month so that every producer is fully prepared to enroll in this program,” said Vilsack.

Vilsack stopped short of saying USDA would offer a signup extension for the March 31 deadline due to concerns that it would lead to procrastination. "That would be like telling your kids they've got another week to do their homework," he joked at the Commodity Classic.

At a press conference Vilsack said about 30% of farmers had already made their ARC/PLC elections.

"We still have a ways to go, but we've seen remarkable uptick in just the past few weeks."

If a program enrollment decision is not made by March 31, then no payment will be made for the 2014 crop year, and the farm's enrollment will default to the PLC program for the 2015 through 2018 crop years.

The online tools, available at www.fsa.usda.gov/arc-plc, allow producers to explore projections on how ARC or PLC coverage will affect their operation under possible future scenarios.

Pork safety remains industry's top goal

pork chop

 

When surveyed, U.S. consumers consistently rank food safety as the top concern when it comes to keeping their families healthy. What they may not realize, however, is that pork is very safe when making a protein choice for daily meals, according to a new report issued by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and including the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

“According to the CDC report, pork is the safest meat choice a consumer can make,” said Dr. Steve Larsen, Pork Checkoff’s director of pork safety. “Our industry has an ongoing commitment to improving food safety from farm to fork. The procedures in place at the farm level, such as Pork Quality Assurance Plus production practices, help to ensure farmers are working with their veterinarians to keep pigs healthy as they enter the food chain.”

In the new report, issued jointly with the CDC, USDA and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, four main food pathogens were reviewed and modeled for their impact on food safety. These included Salmonella, E. Coli (O157), Campylobacter and Listeria monocytogenes. Of these, Salmonella had the highest number of related foodborne illnesses in the past five years at 45 percent. Pork had the lowest incidence of Salmonella-related illness among all meat or vegetable choices at only 8%.

“This report is based on the best and most recent data available,” Larsen said. “It clearly shows the strong overall safety profile pork has among all other food choices consumers have today, including vegetable-based meals. However, we’re committed to reducing foodborne pathogens even further through our dedication to continuous improvement.”

Livestock & poultry cash market comparisons, 3/2/15

Livestock & poultry cash market comparisons, 3/2/15

Livestock and meat ($)

Feb. 25

Feb. 18

6 months ago

Year ago

Steers, Choice, carcass, 550-700 lb., cwt., Omaha

246.49

239.78

247.41

218.95

Steers, Choice, 1,050-1,200 lb., cwt. Southern Plains

160.00

162.00

152.00

144.50A

Feeder Steers, 600-700 lb., cwt., Oklahoma City

205.00A

236.75A

237.25A

178.50A

Lean Hogs, Carcass, Iowa-Minn. 167-187 lb.(1)

63.60

60.57

95.68

91.37

Feeder Pigs, 40 lb. National Direct Delivered(2)

72.66

67.68

81.00

108.26

SEW Pigs, 10 lb., National direct delivered (per head)

47.60

36.57

51.77

82.31

Choice Beef, cutout, cwt.

247.03

239.92

246.89

221.41

Pork Loin, 185 lb. 51-52% lean, cutout, cwt.(3)

80.00

82.32

112.68

112.04

Hog Corn Ratio

17.59

15.58

41.80

22.49

Steer Corn Ratio

42.50

42.63

24.73

30.98

Poultry and eggs (cents)

 

 

 

 

Chickens, Grade A, Fresh lb. Chicago

89.14a

86.58a

96.75a

88.31a

Hen Turkeys, Grade A, Frozen, lb., Chicago

99.50Aa

99.50Aa

110.50Aa

101.00Aa

Young Tom Turkeys, Grade A. Frozen lb. Chicago

99.50Aa

99.00Aa

110.50Aa

100.50Aa

Eggs, Grade A, Large, doz., Chicago

126.50

133.50

111.50

152.50

N/A: not available

A: average

 

 

 

(1) Replaces live hogs; live hogs are 0.755 of quote.
(2) Replaces Sioux Falls, 50-60 lbs. (2/26/07)
(3) National FOB plant, replaces national daily carlot.
Livestock, meat, poultry and egg prices from USDA.

 

Volume:87 Issue:09