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.

Grain & ingredient cash market comparisons, 9/23/2020

Major feed ingredients

Sept. 23

Sept. 16

6 mos. ago

Year ago

Corn No. 2, Chicago, bu., processor bid*

3.68A

3.7375

3.51A

4.04A

Corn No. 2, Chicago, bu., terminal bid*

3.385A

3.4175

3.31A

3.805A

Milo, Kansas City, cwt.

NA

NA

NA

NA

Soybeans, Chicago, bu., processor bid

10.12A

10.1425

8.65A

8.64A

Soybean meal, 48% Decatur bid

337.60A

318.80

323.20A

295.70A

Cottonseed meal, Memphis, ton

NA

NA

NA

NA

Canola meal, Minneapolis, ton

292.10

285.70

262.10

NA

Linseed meal, solvent, Minneapolis

265.00

NA

285.00

235.00

Meat and bone meal, Chicago, ton

250.00

240.00

275.00

250.00

Fish meal, menhaden, Atlanta, ton

NA

NA

NA

NA

Corn gluten meal, 60%, Chicago, ton

433.00

460.00

545.00

423.00

Distillers dried grains, Chicago, ton

163.00

160.00

175.00

143.00

17% dehy. alfalfa pellets, Kansas City, ton

307.50

307.50

328.00

315.00

Millfeeds, midds, Minneapolis, ton

NA

NA

NA

NA

Molasses, cane, Houston, ton

162.50A

162.50A

156.25

140.00

Dried citrus pulp, Atlanta, ton

NA

NA

NA

NA

Whey, whole, Chicago, cwt.

31.00

31.00

35.00

36.00

Rolled oats, Minneapolis, ton

517.00

517.00

545.00

535.00

Barley, Los Angeles, cwt.

10.60

10.60

11.40

10.95

Feeding wheat, Kansas City, bu.

5.08

5.11

5.25

4.45

*Chicago corn and soybean prices for latest and previous week are the middle of the range of to-arrive bids; soybean meal prices are midrange of processor quotes. Chicago corn and soybean prices provided by USDA Market News. Six months, year ago comparisons are all spot cash. Based on prices reported by Feedstuffs' market reporters.

A: average

NA: not available

Ingredient market prices, 9/23/2020

market

The following prices, which include delivery, were obtained Sept. 23 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. U.S. short tons, 2,000 lb. N-Nominal. N/A-Price not available. Click to download.

OILSEED PRODUCTS

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Soybean meal

 

 

(high-protein)

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Boston

N/A

-

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

347.00

23.00

Delmarva

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

380.60

14.90

Kansas City

338.00

21.80

Los Angeles

391.00

222.00

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

318.70

4.00

Okeechobee

N/A

-

Portland

390.50

21.85

San Francisco

391.00

222.00

Twin Falls

407.00

14.00

Soybean meal

 

 

(low-protein)

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Boston

N/A

-

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

335.00

23.00

Delmarva

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

Los Angeles

369.00

223.00

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Okeechobee

N/A

-

Portland

N/A

-

San Francisco

369.00

223.00

Soybean hulls

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Buffalo*

N/A

-

Chicago

152.00

24.00

Fayetteville, NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth*

90.00

5.00

Los Angeles

186.00

1.00

Minneapolis

115.00

-

Okeechobee

N/A

-

San Francisco

186.00

1.00

Twin Falls

180.00

-

* unpelleted

 

 

Whole cottonseed

 

 

Atlanta

195.00

-

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

240.00

-

Delmarva

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Los Angeles

323.00

22.00

Lubbock

N/A

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Okeechobee

N/A

-

Portland

340.00

-

San Francisco

323.00

22.00

Twin Falls

330.00

10.00

Cottonseed meal

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Chicago

305.00

-

Delmarva

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Kansas City

300.00

15.00

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Lubbock

N/A

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Okeechobee

N/A

-

San Francisco

297.00

5.00

Cottonseed hulls

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Chicago

150.00

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Okeechobee

N/A

-

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Lubbock

N/A

-

San Francisco

N/A

-

Canola meal

 

 

Buffalo

N/A

-

Minneapolis

292.10

6.40

Los Angeles

323.00

1.00

Montreal

300.00

19.00

Portland

303.00

12.75

San Francisco

323.00

1.00

Twin Falls

352.00

17.00

Vancouver

N/A

-

Sunflower seed meal

 

 

Fargo

180.00

-

Minneapolis

245.00

-

Linseed  meal

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Chicago

310.00

-

Fargo

225.00

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

261.00

-

Kansas City

298.00

3.00

Minneapolis

265.00

-

Safflower meal

 

 

Los Angeles

N/A

-

San Francisco

170.00

-8.00

ANIMAL BYPRODUCTS

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Meat and bone meal

 

 

(ruminant)

 

 

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

250.00

10.00

Delmarva

335.00

20.00

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Kansas City

228.53

8.53

Los Angeles

225.00

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Portland

195.00

-

San Francisco

225.00

-

Meat and bone meal

 

 

(porcine)

 

 

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Los Angeles

264.00

3.00

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Flash-dried blood meal

 

 

(ruminant)

 

 

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Los Angeles

750.00

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Flash-dried blood meal

 

 

(porcine)

 

 

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Poultry byproduct meal

 

 

(feed grade)

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

245.00

5.00

Kansas City

N/A

-

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Poultry byproduct meal

 

 

(pet food grade)

 

 

Memphis

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Hydrolized feather meal

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Delmarva

280.00

15.00

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

295.00

5.00

Kansas City

348.00

3.00

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Menhaden fish meal

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

1510.00

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

1400.00

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

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

28.50

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Los Angeles

27.88

-

San Francisco

23.75

-

Yellow grease

 

 

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

22.00

-

Delmarva

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

22.50

1.50

Kansas City

28.00

0.75

Los Angeles

26.88

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

San Francisco

22.75

-

Choice white grease

 

 

Chicago

24.50

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Bleachable fancy tallow

 

 

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

29.50

-

Ft. Worth

32.00

-

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

San Francisco

N/A

-

Vegetable-animal blend

 

 

Ft. Worth

22.75

1.25

Los Angeles

23.38

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

San Francisco

23.38

-

Poultry grease

 

 

(feed grade)

 

 

Delmarva

24.00

0.50

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Poultry grease

 

 

(pet food grade)

 

 

Memphis

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

GLUTEN, HOMINY

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Corn gluten meal

 

 

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

433.00

-27.00

Kansas City

N/A

-

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Corn gluten feed

 

 

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

128.00

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Kansas City

187.50

7.50

Okeechobee

N/A

-

Twin Falls

235.00

12.00

Wahpeton

N/A

-

Hominy feed

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Boston

165.00

-

Buffalo

135.00

-

Chicago

103.00

4.00

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

Los Angeles

180.00

5.00

Okeechobee

N/A

-

San Francisco

180.00

5.00

Twin Falls

N/A

-

BREWERS, DISTILLERS

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Brewers dried grains

 

 

Chicago

N/A

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

Malt Sprouts

 

 

Chicago

135.00

-

Milwaukee

N/A

-

Winona, Minn

N/A

-

Distillers dried grains

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Boston

190.00

-

Buffalo

160.00

-

Chicago

163.00

3.00

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

Los Angeles

220.00

10.00

Minneapolis

160.00

10.00

Okeechobee

N/A

-

Portland

216.50

6.50

San Francisco

220.00

10.00

Twin Falls

240.00

10.00

Brewers yeast

 

 

(dollars per pound, sacked)

 

 

Chicago

0.70

-

Milwaukee

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

ALFALFA

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Dehydrated pellets

 

 

(17% protein)

 

 

Central Neb.

N/A

-

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

290.00

-

Kansas City

307.50

-

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Toledo

N/A

-

San Francisco

N/A

-

Suncured pellets

 

 

(15% protein)

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Kansas City

234.50

-

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Portland

320.00

-

San Francisco

N/A

-

WHEAT MILLFEEDS

 

 

Shorts

 

 

Chicago

90.00

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Los Angeles

161.00

-10.00

Millrun

 

 

Los Angeles

153.00

-9.00

Portland

190.00

-

San Francisco

139.00

-

Twin Falls

140.00

-

Bran

 

 

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

120.00

-

Los Angeles

156.00

-10.00

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Middlings

 

 

Buffalo

90.00

10.00

Chicago

90.00

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Kansas City

100.00

2.50

Los Angeles

159.00

-10.00

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Okeechobee

N/A

-

DAIRY BYPRODUCTS

 

 

(dollars per hundredweight)

 

 

Dried skim milk

 

 

Ft. Worth

118.00

1.62

Minneapolis

104.50

1.50

Dried buttermilk

 

 

Ft. Worth

94.00

-1.00

Minneapolis

96.75

-0.75

Whole whey

 

 

Chicago

31.00

-

Ft. Worth

34.00

-

Kansas City

30.25

0.75

Minneapolis

32.00

1.75

Whey protein concentrate

 

 

Ft. Worth

84.75

-

Milwaukee

84.75

-

Lactose

 

 

Ft. Worth

50.50

-

Minneapolis

50.50

-

OATS, RICE PRODUCTS

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Rolled oats

 

 

Chicago

465.00

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

Minneapolis

517.00

-

Crimped oats

 

 

Chicago

395.00

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

Minneapolis

428.00

-

Pulverized oats

 

 

Chicago

140.00

-

Minneapolis

143.00

-

Reground oat feed

 

 

Chicago

85.00

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

Minneapolis

77.00

-

Oats

 

 

(dollars per bushel)

 

 

Buffalo

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Portland*

N/A

-

(*per ton)

 

 

Rice bran

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

185.00

-

Freeport

117.50

-

Kansas City

175.00

10.00

Memphis

N/A

-

San Francisco

140.00

1.00

Stuttgart, Ark.

85.00

-

Rice millfeeds

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

90.00

-

Freeport

40.00

-

Kansas City

130.00

3.00

Memphis

N/A

-

Stuttgart, Ark.

N/A

-

Rice hulls

 

 

Ft. Worth

70.00

-

Kansas City

90.00

7.00

DRIED PULP

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Citrus pulp pellets

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Okeechobee

N/A

-

Los Angeles*

N/A

-

*(sold wet)

 

 

Beet pulp pellets

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Boise

N/A

-

Chicago

220.00

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

Minneapolis

200.00

-

Portland

210.00

-

Saginaw

200.00

-

Beet pulp shreds

 

 

Mpls (sacked)

300.00

-

Los Angeles*

N/A

-

San Francisco

N/A

-

Twin Falls

N/A

-

*bulk, wet

 

 

GRAINS

 

 

Barley feed

 

 

Kansas City (bu.)

N/A

-

Los Angeles (cwt)

10.60

-

Portland (ton)

188.00

3.00

San Francisco (cwt)

10.60

-

Feed wheat

 

 

Atlanta (bu.)

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC (bu.)

N/A

-

Kansas City (bu)

5.08

-0.03

Los Angeles (cwt)

N/A

-

San Francisco (cwt)

N/A

-

Corn

 

 

(dollars per bushel)

 

 

Atlanta

4.53

0.10

Boston

N/A

-

Buffalo

N/A

-

Chicago

3.64

-0.14

Delmarva

3.96

-0.03

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Kansas City

125.61

-8.66

Los Angeles*

9.32

0.07

San Fran (rail)*

9.32

0.07

San Fran (truck)*

N/A

-

Memphis

3.84

-0.06

Minneapolis

3.29

-0.14

Okeechobee

N/A

-

Portland (per ton)

N/A

-

(*per cwt)

 

 

Milo

 

 

(dollars per bushel)

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

Los Angeles*

10.71

0.07

Memphis

4.04

-0.10

*(per cwt.)

 

 

Ground grain screenings

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Ft.  Worth

N/A

-

Kansas City

N/A

-

OTHER

 

 

(dollars per ton)

 

 

Almond hulls

 

 

Los Angeles

117.00

-3.00

San Francisco

98.00

-1.00

Bakery feed

 

 

Atlanta

N/A

-

Buffalo

N/A

-

Fayetteville NC

N/A

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

173.00

-

Feed urea

 

 

Buffalo

N/A

-

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Minneapolis

N/A

-

Salt

 

 

Kansas City

N/A

-

Los Angeles

50.00

-

Cane molasses

 

 

Ft. Worth

N/A

-

Houston (range)

150-175

-

Kansas City

202.00

-

Los Angeles

N/A

-

Memphis

N/A

-

Minneapolis

212.00

-

New Orleans

155.00

-

San Francisco

N/A

-

9-23-2020 Ingredient Market

Click "Download" button for a PDF.

Reducing DDGS particle size affects digestibility of swine diets

National Pork Board finishing pigs inside production facility

Ethanol co-products used as feed ingredients are ground materials because grinding is the first step in ethanol production, but the mean particle size can be highly variable among sources, which has led researchers to investigate whether additional processing could improve diet digestibility when these ingredients are used in swine diets.

Decreasing feed particle size has been shown to improve feeding value by creating greater surface area for digestive enzymes to work as well as creating greater diet homogeneity, researchers Jesus Acosta, Amy Petry, Stacie Gould and John Patience with Iowa State University, Cassandra Jones and Charles Stark with Kansas State University and Adam Fahrenholz with North Carolina State University explained in an accepted manuscript published in Translational Animal Science.

Acosta et al. conducted a study to determine the effects of reducing the mean particle size of corn dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) with either a hammermill or a roller mill on the apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of dry matter, gross energy, nitrogen, acid hydrolyzed ether extract (AEE) and fiber components in growing and finishing pigs.

The researchers randomly assigned 24 growing barrows housed in individual pens to a 3 x 2 factorial design that consisted of three grinding methods -- (1) corn DDGS ground with a hammermill to a particle size of 450 microns (2) corn DDGS ground with a roller mill to a particle size of 450 microns and (3) corn DDGS with a particle size of 670 microns that was not further ground -- and two bodyweight periods that included (1) growing pigs with an average initial bodyweight of 54.7 kg and (2) finishing pigs with an average initial bodyweight of 107.8 kg.

Fecal samples were collected for each bodyweight period in the last three days of an 11-day feeding period, Acosta et al. said. Titanium dioxide was used as an indigestible marker.

According to the researchers, finishing pigs tended to have better ATTD of dry matter than growing pigs (P = 0.09) and had increased ATTD of gross energy and nitrogen than growing pigs (P = 0.03 and P < 0.01, respectively).

On the other hand, Acosta et al. said growing pigs had better ATTD of AEE than finishing pigs (P = 0.01). Pig bodyweight period did not affect the ATTD of neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF) or hemicellulose, they noted.

Reducing the mean particle size of corn DDGS with either a hammermill or roller mill (from 670 to 450 microns) improved the ATTD of dry matter and gross energy (P < 0.01 and P < 0.01), tended to improve the ATTD of nitrogen (P = 0.08) and improved the ATTD of AEE (P < 0.01), Acosta et al. reported.

They added that they did not observe any effects of reducing particle size on the ATTD of NDF, ADF or hemicellulose. There also were no differences between the use of a hammermill or a roller mill in any of the ATTD variables tested.

Acosta et al. concluded that reducing particle size of corn DDGS from 670 to 450 microns either with a hammermill or with a roller mill improved the digestibility of dry matter, gross energy and AEE and modestly improved the digestibility of nitrogen in growing and finishing pigs. However, reducing the particle size of corn DDGS did not affect the digestibility of fiber components.

Inside Washington

Ag groups recognize need for WTO

WTO WTO DG Candidate .jpg
The WTO leader selection process for 2020 includes director-general candidate Dr. Liam Fox of the United Kingdom.

For months, the World Trade Organization has been in a tailspin as the U.S. and others blocked appellate judge nominations, and in recent months, the director-general stepped down a year early. Now, agricultural groups are calling on U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to support a new WTO director-general who can reinvigorate and facilitate needed reforms.

In a forum earlier this summer, Joe Glauber, senior research fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute and former chief economist at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, said the U.S. refusal to appoint new appellate members has rendered the WTO appellate board useless. The appeals process, which has so far worked very well for agriculture in confirming 80% of cases brought against U.S. agriculture, can’t function without an appellate board.

The Trump Administration’s frustrations -- and even some starting during the Obama Administration -- focused on the ability of WTO rulings to supersede national laws at the expense of WTO regulations.  However, the appeals process allows for the proper checks and balances to determine if each country plays “fair.”

John Clarke, European Commission director for international relations, said “WTO is in crisis” but added “don’t throw out the baby with the bath water” in trying to make the needed changes. Clarke argued that it doesn’t need fundamental changes, just improvements.

Agricultural groups are now speaking up, too, about the importance of the WTO multilateral system to manage disputes between countries.

In WTO’s first two decades, overall trade in goods has nearly quadrupled, while WTO members’ import tariffs have declined by an average of 15%. More than half of world trade is now tariff free. WTO affords U.S. agricultural producers and exporters most favored nation (MFN) treatment in 163 countries, representing more than 80% of the global economy.

“The WTO provides rules to guard against arbitrary use of technical regulations or standards to block imports, such as actions associated with sanitary and phytosanitary measures that lack a clear basis in science and are protectionist in intent,” the agricultural groups said in the letter.

The letter was sent to Lighthizer as well as leaders of the Senate Finance Committee, House Ways & Means Committee and Senate and House Agriculture committees. It calls for effective WTO reform that would enhance the ability of American agriculture to access foreign markets and maintain transparency and accountability critical to future export growth that supports American jobs. It also identifies characteristics desired in the next WTO director-general.

"While the WTO has been beneficial for U.S. agriculture, its rules have not kept pace with changes in the global economy, and improvement is needed to hold members accountable and improve the organization’s governance,” the organizations said in the letter. “Continued U.S. membership and active participation will help ensure that necessary reforms are undertaken and that the WTO will continue to play an important and effective role in economic development of the United States and its trading partners."

The letter noted that a transition in WTO leadership presents the opportunity to successfully implement reform and reinvigorate its negotiating function, which is necessary to achieve progress on a wide variety of international agricultural trade reforms. The letter identifies desired characteristics of the next WTO director-general, including:

  • Proactive leadership of WTO and advocating for a rules-based trading system;
  • A vision for WTO reform and resiliency in the future;
  • Adept at navigating across disparate member country positions and a demonstrated ability to build coalitions;
  • Ability to balance political and management experience and acumen;
  • Ability to explore creative solutions and flexible thinking, and
  • An appreciation of the complexities of agriculture and food trade structures and global supply chains.

American Farm Bureau Federation president Zippy Duvall said, “Farmers and ranchers across the U.S. depend upon the WTO’s international system of trade rules to facilitate growth in agricultural trade. We may not always appreciate WTO delays or decisions, but it is critical for the U.S. to remain engaged with the WTO in a leadership role. Exports are fundamental to the success of U.S. agriculture, and the WTO helps to create a level playing field for trade.”

John Bode, Corn Refiners Assn. president and chief executive officer, added, “As long as exports are important to U.S. agriculture, WTO membership will be essential. This is critical to the one-fifth of the U.S. economy that is agriculture related.”

In 2019, U.S. animal feed and pet food manufacturers exported roughly $12.5 billion in products, including $10.8 billion in feed and feed ingredients and $1.7 billion in pet food products. These exports have supported U.S. agriculture’s $16 billion trade surplus and are vital to the industry’s success, the American Feed Industry Assn. (AFIA) noted.

“The WTO provides the foundation for rules-based trading and a vehicle to enforce them,” AFIA president and CEO Constance Cullman said. “Without this system, the U.S. animal food industry would not be able to compete fairly in the global market.”

National Association of State Departments of Agriculture CEO Dr. Barb Glenn said, “Departure from the World Trade Organization would be determinantal to the success of the very industry that feeds our families and 20% of the U.S. economy.”

“It is imperative that we maintain a rules-based system of trade. International trade is the lifeblood of American agriculture,” said Brian Keuhl, co-executive director of Farmers for Free Trade. “The WTO has been critical to our success. An effective, functioning WTO is essential to U.S. agriculture.”

Association of Equipment Manufacturers president Dennis Slater said, “A WTO that reinforces rules-based trade is vital to solve the diversity of complex challenges currently unfolding across the globe. Reform within the WTO will make American farmers more competitive in the global marketplace and create more demand for agricultural equipment. Without a strong commitment to uphold the rules of the WTO or capability to reform the institution, the next WTO director-general will be unable to hold members accountable or negotiate new initiatives benefiting global trade and investment.”

Signatories of the letter include: American Farm Bureau Federation, American Soybean Assn., National Corn Growers Assn., National Milk Producers Federation, Corn Refiners Assn., United Fresh Produce Assn., National Association of State Departments of Agriculture and other industry groups.

SaskTel, USask collaborate on 'smart farm' concept for livestock

Photo: Danielle Baron USask lfce-sasktel-1080.jpg
From left: David Ekstrand, SaskTel vice president of business sales and solutions; Angela Bedard-Haughn, dean of USask College of Agriculture & Bioresources; Terry Fonstad, associate dean research and partnerships with the USask College of Engineering, and Mike Stefaniuk, SaskTel director of business development.

The University of Saskatchewan (USask) and SaskTel will partner to launch a “living laboratory” at the university’s Livestock & Forage Centre of Excellence (LFCE) to test, develop and demonstrate world-class agricultural technologies.

Through a memorandum of understanding (MOU), SaskTel and USask will focus on “smart farming” research and innovation to accelerate transformation in Saskatchewan’s agriculture industry. Smart farming involves collecting and analyzing “big data” so producers can make informed and sustainable farm management decisions that improve productivity, the announcement said.

This initiative — driven by engineering, agricultural and computer science researchers — will focus on conducting research, improving education around smart farming and testing and validating new agricultural technology (ag tech) ideas and solutions.

LFCE would be the first research smart farm in Canada focused on maximizing efficiency in livestock operations through the latest “Internet of Things”-based technology in an interconnected wireless environment, USask said.

“We are excited to partner with SaskTel to help producers advance livestock farming to the next level through use of some of the world’s best digital agricultural technologies — from drones equipped with software to sensors that can monitor herds and their health,” USask vice president research Karen Chad said. “This cutting-edge research will help meet the world’s increasing food demands while enhancing training of our students in the latest high-tech farming techniques.”

Terry Fonstad, associate dean of research and partnerships with the USask College of Engineering, said the MOU underscores the commitment LFCE has made to livestock producer groups to serve as a "powerhouse for innovative research and teaching" that will improve livestock production around the world.

“The MOU brings together new knowledge and applied research at USask in areas of strength in engineering, agriculture and computer science with the infrastructure and expertise at SaskTel to advance agriculture,” Fonstad said.

SaskTel and USask will invite key stakeholders in the agriculture industry, including ag tech startups, to identify challenges, propose solutions and initiate projects to test and validate these solutions at LFCE, the announcement said.

“With modern agricultural technology improving and evolving at an ever-increasing rate, the opportunity [for USask and SaskTel] to work together will support decision-making and drive innovation into the foreseeable future,” SaskTel president and chief executive officer Doug Burnett said.

SaskTel is the leading information and communications technology provider in Saskatchewan.

LFCE is a world-class complex of field and science laboratories that brings together every link of the livestock production chain under one roof. Modeling all aspects of raising livestock on the Canadian prairies, it encompasses everything from forage development, grazing management and environmental sustainability to cattle reproduction, cow/calf management and feedlot health, growth and productivity. In addition to beef cattle research and education, LFCE is a center for bison reproductive work, vaccine development and disease control and nutrition.

Weekly Export Sales – Corn, soybeans jump higher

steverts/iStock/GettyImages Cropduster flying over the corn and soybean field.

USDA’s latest batch of export sales data, out Thursday morning and covering the week through September 17, showed mixed but mostly bullish results. Corn and soybean sales jumped higher week-over-week and exceeded analyst expectations, while wheat turned in much less impressive results.

Corn export sales came in strong at 84.2 million bushels, anchored by a big turnout to China (22.3 million bushels). That was above all trade estimates, which ranged between 41.3 million and 70.9 million bushels. Cumulative totals for the 2020/21 marketing year are trending moderately above last year’s pace so far.

Corn export shipments were for 33.3 million bushels. China was the No. 1 destination, taking nearly a quarter of the total with 8.0 million bushels. Mexico, Colombia, Peru and South Korea rounded out the top five.

Sorghum export sales were solid last week, with 7.6 million bushels. China accounted for the entire sum, which was partially offset by reductions from unknown destinations. Cumulative totals for the 2020/21 marketing year are off to a faster pace compared to the same time last year.

Soybean export sales climbed to 117.4 million bushels last week, with China accounting for 59% of that total. Analyst estimates fell below that mark, with trade guesses ranging between 73.5 million and 110.2 million bushels. Cumulative totals for the 2020/21 marketing year are outmatching last year’s pace so far.

Soybean export shipments were also robust, with another 47.1 million bushels last week. China accounted for more than half of that total, with 28.3 million bushels. Indonesia, Pakistan, the Netherlands and Italy filled out the top five.

Wheat export sales were less impressive last week, sliding 34% below the prior four-week average to 12.9 million bushels. Analysts were generally expecting a more robust tally, with trade guesses ranging between 9.2 million and 22.0 million bushels. South Korea was the top buyer, with 4.1 million bushels. Cumulative totals for the 2020/21 marketing year are still maintaining a slim lead over last year’s pace, with 299.2 million bushels.

Wheat export shipments were also 21% below the prior four-week average, with 17.2 million bushels. Japan was the No. 1 destination, with 3.5 million bushels. Brazil, Mexico, Thailand and China rounded out the top five.

Click here to see more highlights from the latest USDA export report, which covers September 11 through September 17.

Congress seeks Lower Missouri River navigability improvements

DarcyMaulsby /iStock/Thinkstock. grain barge river elevator
This barge on the Mississippi River in eastern Iowa is taking on a load of grain, either corn or soybeans, from area farms.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was urged to provide additional funding for projects that will improve safety and navigation on the Lower Missouri River in a letter from Sens. Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa) and Roy Blunt (R., Mo.), Rep. Sam Graves (R., Mo.) and seven additional members of Congress.

The letter was co-signed by Sens. Josh Hawley (R., Mo.), Deb Fischer (R., Neb.) and Jerry Moran (R., Kan.), along with Reps. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R., Mo.), Vicky Hartzler (R., Mo.), Jason Smith (R., Mo.) and Ann Wagner (R., Mo.).

Many farmers, industries and small businesses in the Midwest rely on the Missouri River to transport goods. High water levels and record flooding in 2019 have prevented the Corps from completing repairs on water infrastructure projects, which has led to dangerous accidents that have significantly disrupted commerce on the river.

“Currently, there is a critically dire situation related to navigation challenges in several areas along the Missouri River where serious barge traffic accidents have occurred and commercial activity has nearly come to an abrupt halt as we enter harvest season in the Midwest,” the lawmakers wrote.

“We understand that the Kansas City District has received $20 million in emergency supplemental funds to conduct necessary work on the navigation channel. However, we understand that the need for resources between the Kansas City District and the Omaha District to fully address all the repairs is an estimated $200 million to ensure that the Lower Missouri River is fully navigable. As this situation evolves, we request the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers utilize administrative flexibilities and direct additional resources to address these challenges along the Missouri River,” they concluded.

Senate committee hears testimony on ESA modernization

U.S. Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service photo. (Public domain.) The greater sage grouse thrives in the sagebrush landscape of the West.
The greater sage grouse thrives in the sagebrush landscape of the West.

Florida rancher Liesa Priddy testified before the Senate Environment & Public Works (EPW) Committee on Wednesday on behalf of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Assn. (NCBA) and the Public Lands Council (PLC) to support to S. 4589, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) Amendments of 2020, and to highlight why this bill is desperately needed to modernize ESA.

The hearing also featured testimony from Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon and Defenders of Wildlife president and chief executive officer Jamie Rappaport Clark. The legislative hearing focused on legislation introduced by Senate EPW Committee chairman John Barrasso (R., Wyo) to reauthorize the ESA for the first time since 1992, to elevate the role of states and to increase transparency in the implementation of the ESA. It also prioritizes resources to help meet conservation goals while providing regulatory certainty to promote recovery activities.

“Since the Endangered Species Act was signed into law, fewer than 3% of listed species have been recovered and delisted. This is failure, not success,” Barrasso said in his opening statement. “We must do more than just list species and leave them on life support. We need to see them recovered and delisted. The Endangered Species Act Amendments of 2020 will go a long way to achieving this goal.”

"We are all concerned about what would happen if the ESA weren’t effective, but I think – in large part – we’re already there," Priddy said. "The ESA has achieved some significant and popular recovery efforts – the bald eagle and the manatee are just two examples – but thousands more species have languished on the list due to lack of attention and a system that just hasn’t worked for them."

Priddy backed the legislation introduced by Barrasso that empowers states to lead recovery efforts and gives stakeholders, like ranchers, who make significant investments in voluntary conservation, a more meaningful seat at the table in recovery discussions.

"I fully support your proposal to allow states to lead recovery teams during the ESA process," she said. "States have primacy over wildlife management, meaning they bear sole responsibility for ensuring laws, science and partnerships are in place to have robust populations. In cases where a species needs additional assistance, states’ knowledge, authorities and partnerships are still valuable. Allowing states to demonstrate that leadership recognizes their broad capacity to manage and provides certainty to ranchers like me who have invested in conservation activities long before an ESA listing was contemplated."

Priddy thanked Barrasso for his work to provide a clear path to recovery by improving the information available to the agencies, providing a clear framework to achieve recovery goals and supporting a delisting decision once recovery goals have been met.

"By supporting other key functions of the act, like the five-year post-delisting monitoring period, the bill also recognizes that delisting is a key recovery objective," Priddy said. "Through the recovery process, states and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service make ongoing investments that plan for the future. Those plans are developed by experts and are implemented by experts. Like you, I have confidence that states have the capacity and expertise to manage recovered species, and the integrity of those management plans should be supported. ... I believe this bill will be better for ranchers, better for states, better for the federal authorities and better for the species.”

Gordon detailed the importance of allowing states and tribes to play a large role in wildlife management, noting, “The work states and tribes carry out every day across our country for imperiled species conservation is a vital component to the discussion of recovery efforts. Despite the fact that little to no federal funding exists to support state’s efforts nor that no specific mandates require states to take certain actions in the ESA, they do it anyway. Critics of amending the act seem to insinuate that states do not want to conserve at risk species or that states lack the capacity and expertise. Nothing could be further from the truth.

“The public trust doctrine outlined in the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation is the bedrock for wildlife conservation in our country," he added. "Most wildlife in our country are managed, and managed quite well, by state and tribal governments in trust for their citizens. I am proud of the significant achievements state wildlife managers in my state and others across the nation have accomplished. Wildlife continues to be abundant and diverse, and this is due in large part to the efforts of states and tribes.”

Gordon also discussed the wildlife management and species conservation specifically in Wyoming, using examples of grizzly bears, gray wolves, the black-footed ferret, the greater sage-grouse, the Wyoming toad and the Canada lynx. “Wyoming is proud to be a leader in managing at-risk species and recovering those species listed under the act. We have also taken a proactive role to address challenges before a need arises to list species under the act. Wyoming has many notable examples of contributions. Some demonstrate ESA successes, and some demonstrate areas where ESA improvement is warranted,” Gordon said.

Business owners plead guilty to selling misbranded beef

Getty Images New Jersey Judge Rules to Close Keegan Landfill

Two former Brooklyn, N.Y., business owners have pleaded guilty in federal court to conspiracy to commit wire fraud by using counterfeit U.S. Department of Agriculture stamps to sell misbranded, lower-quality beef at inflated prices to consumers. Howard Mora of New York and Alan Buxbaum of New Jersey each face up to 20 years in prison and criminal forfeiture of $250,000.

Seth DuCharme, acting U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, and Bethanne Dinkins, special agent-in-charge at USDA's Office of Inspector General, announced the guilty pleas.

“Mora and Buxbaum rang up hundreds of thousands of dollars in fraudulent profits by charging customers more than the defendants’ products were worth, and now they will pay a price for their avarice,” DuCharme stated.

Between September 2011 and October 2014, the defendants were co-owners of A. Stein Meat Products Inc., a wholesale meat processing and distribution business located in Brooklyn. During this period, the defendants purchased beef products that had been graded Choice quality by graders at USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service but directed their employees to carve off the “Choice” markings and re-stamp them as “Prime” using counterfeit stamps. The meat was then sold at inflated prices to customers in the New York City metropolitan area.

The government’s case is being handled by the Office’s Public Integrity Section. Assistant U.S. attorneys Ryan Harris and Turner Buford are in charge of the prosecution.