Agriculture News From the Georgia Farm Radio Network Newsroom
last updated Thursday, March 11, 2010 at 3:23 pm
AGRICULTURE WEEK SPOTLIGHTS CONTRIBUTIONS FARMING MAKES TO GEORGIA
Georgia farmers not only grow our food and clothes but they also make a significant contribution to the state’s economy. According to the USDA, there are almost 48,000 farms in Georgia that produce annual sales of more than $1,000 with an average farm size of 212 acres. Georgia has 10.5 million acres of farmland.
To celebrate the industry, Gov. Sonny Perdue has designated March 14-20 as Georgia Agriculture Week and has designated March 16 as Georgia Ag Awareness Day, when his Agricultural Advisory Committee will host an Ag Awareness Celebration at the Georgia Freight Depot in Atlanta. Georgia’s weeklong celebration coincides with National Agriculture Week. National Agriculture Day is March 20.
“By celebrating Agriculture Week and Ag Day, we hope to help Georgians understand that their food is being grown by farmers, like myself, who take pride in caring for our animals and protecting the soil, water and air on our farms that’s necessary to grow nutritious, safe food for our public consumers,” said Georgia Farm Bureau President Zippy Duvall, who is a member of Gov. Perdue’s Agricultural Advisory Committee.
Representatives from every segment of Georgia agriculture will participate in the statewide ag celebration that starts at 11 a.m. with food, music and exhibits highlighting the many facets of the industry. Farm equipment and a live milking demonstration will be displayed outside the depot.
The five district winners of the Governor’s Agricultural Environmental Stewardship Award will be recognized during a program beginning at 12:30 p.m., when a state winner will be named. This award honors farmers who have adopted farming practices that protect the soil, water and air on their farms. The district winners are Early D. Barrs of Bleckley County, Stanley Corbett of Echols County, Jamie Jordan of Floyd County, Wayne McKinnon of Coffee County and Keith Nichols of Stephens County. Gov. Perdue will also announce winners of the Flavor of Georgia Food Contest, which recognizes food products made with Georgia-grown ingredients.
Georgia agriculture makes a significant contribution to the state’s economy. Food and fiber production and related businesses represent the largest or second largest segment of all goods and services produced in two-thirds of Georgia’s counties, a report released by the University of Georgia Center for Agribusiness and Economic Development (CAED) shows.
“Agriculture not only produces food and clothes, but it also provides jobs, which is very important in our current economic situation,” Duvall added. “Without farmers, Georgia can’t grow!”
According to the University of Georgia Center for Agribusiness and Economic Development (CAED), the most recent statistics show that in 2008, Georgia agriculture had a total economic impact of $65 billion on the state economy and created more than 351,000 jobs.
Georgia ranks first in the nation in the production of broiler chickens, peanuts, pecans, rye and spring onions according to the USDA Agricultural Statistics Service. Nationwide, Georgia is also a leading producer of cotton, cucumbers, snap beans, cantaloupes, sweet corn, bell peppers, blueberries, peaches, watermelons, cabbage and squash.
The top 10 agricultural commodities grown in Georgia, based on their 2008 farm gate value, are: broilers, eggs, cotton, peanuts, timber, horses, beef, dairy, greenhouse horticulture products and corn. The farm gate value of these commodities, the value of the commodities farmers sell, are collected and ranked by the UGA CAED.
“Most people don’t have direct contact with farms, so there are a lot of misconceptions about agriculture out there these days,” Duvall said. “This week gives consumers a chance to learn the truth about agriculture and how their food is grown.”
For example, it’s a common misconception that large corporate farms produce half of the food Americans consume. USDA statistics show non-family corporations produce only six percent of the food grown in the U.S. Family partnerships or family-owned corporations produce the remaining 94 percent of American-grown food. Farm families often form partnerships or corporations for legal and business reasons, but they’re still family farms, not factory farms. Non-family corporations only own one percent of U.S. farms.
The average farmer produces enough food and fiber for 155 people in the United States and abroad. This is a good thing because less land is devoted to farming than it was a generation ago and the number of farmers continues to decline. Farms that specialize in selling locally grown food directly to consumers are a great asset for communities, but there is still a need for farms that efficiently produce large quantities of food to feed our growing population.
USDA CONSIDERING ELIGIBILITY PETITIONS FOR TRADE ASSISTANCE
Farmers and fishermen who think their commodity has suffered due to competition from imports may want to pursue having their commodity certified as eligible for the USDA Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers (TAAF) Program.
The TAAF program is for producers and fishermen who had more than a 15 percent decrease in national average price, quantity of production, value of production or in cash receipts compared to the average of the three preceding years where it is determined that an increase in imports was a significant factor.
The Farm Service Agency (FSA) will administer the program, however, USDA’s Foreign Agriculture Service (FAS) will determine if a commodity is eligible for the program. Three or more producers or a commodity organization may request, on behalf of producers in their state or group of states, that a commodity be certified as eligible by submitting form FAS-930, Petition for Certification. FAS will review commodity petitions through April 14. This form is available online at http://www.fas.usda.gov/itp/taa/taaforms.asp .
Once a commodity is certified as eligible, producers of the commodity may apply for benefits under the TAAF Program by submitting a written application (FSA-229-1) to their local FSA Service Center. For more information visit this website, call (202) 720-0638 or (202) 690-0633, or e-mail tradeadjustment@fas.usda.gov.
GRASSROOTS OPPOSITION TO CAP-AND-TRADE REACHES CAPITOL HILL
The American Farm Bureau Federation’s successful, six-month campaign to oppose cap-and-trade climate change legislation, “Don’t CAP Our Future,” culminated Wednesday when farmer and rancher members from across the country presented key lawmakers some of the 100,000 grassroots calls-to-action gathered in opposition to the issue.
“Cap-and-trade provisions would create an energy shortage and ultimately reduce food production. That was the driving force behind the ‘Don’t CAP Our Future’ campaign,” AFBF President Bob Stallman said at an event on Capitol Hill.
Stallman, members of the AFBF Board and additional state Farm Bureau presidents and members, warmly thanked senators attending the event who have shown outstanding leadership in the battle against cap-and-trade legislation.
“On behalf of the American Farm Bureau Federation board of directors, please accept my sincere appreciation,” Stallman said. “Thank you for your support of America’s farmers and ranchers and for your recognition of both the challenges that they face and their important contributions to our nation.”
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) was recognized by Stallman for “leading the charge” against cap-and-trade legislation in the Senate. Stallman and other Farm Bureau leaders also expressed appreciation to other strong supporters of the effort, including Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), ranking member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, and Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), Sen. Kit Bond (R-Mo.), Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Sen. Robert Bennett (R-Utah).
A comprehensive approach was used for the campaign, including e-mails, online petitions, signed postcards from farmer and rancher members and social media outreach.
Earlier this week, AFBF and several dozen other organizations sent a letter to the full Senate urging support for S.J. Res. 26, a resolution to disapprove the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposal to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. Senators from “both sides of the aisle” have said throughout the climate change debate that this issue should be decided by Congress rather than EPA, the letter noted. Last week, AFBF sent a letter of support for a companion House measure.
STALLMAN UGRES CONGRESS TO EASE CUBA TRADE RESTRICTIONS
In testimony before the House Agriculture Committee, American Farm Bureau Federation President Bob Stallman called on congressional members to support the Travel Reform and Export Enhancement Act, or H.R. 4645, which would lift some key U.S.-imposed restrictions on trade with Cuba.
Because of the great market potential, the American Farm Bureau Federation has been an advocate for easing restrictions on exports to Cuba and is a supporter of H.R. 4645, sponsored by House Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) and Rep. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.). The bill would reverse the restrictions on “payment of cash in advance,” eliminate the third country bank requirement and lift the ban on travel. According to AFBF, passage of the legislation would make agriculture a strong player in the Cuban market and increase U.S. agricultural exports.
“We have seen the promise the market holds,” said Stallman. “Unfortunately, because of restrictions on U.S exports to Cuba, U.S. farmers have not been able to benefit from the full potential of the market.”
U.S. agriculture has seen significant growth, but has also experienced significant setbacks, since being allowed to trade with Cuba in 2000. On average the United States has exported roughly $320 million in agricultural products per year since 2000, reaching a high of almost $700 million in 2008. But, said Stallman, the United States is not viewed by Cuba as a reliable supplier due to our sales restrictions and the ability of the U.S. government to “alter those restrictions at a whim.”
“Our competitors do not have the same obstacles in trading with Cuba we face,” said Stallman. “Eliminating these restrictions will decrease the advantages the United States has given our competitors and restore the advantage to U.S. farmers. These actions will make it easier for Cuba to purchase U.S. commodities and, most importantly, will reduce the cost of purchasing our commodities.”
The United States exports a variety of commodities to Cuba. Of those, grain and feed has consistently topped sales, reaching $369 million and making up more than half of agriculture’s total exports to the country in 2008. The U.S. also exports a wide range of other commodities to Cuba including oilseeds, meats and dairy.
“U.S. agriculture is not requesting the embargo be lifted, but rather for Congress to take the small step of lifting key restrictions that will increase U.S. agriculture’s competitiveness in the market,” said Stallman. “Now is the time for Congress to take action to ease some of the current trade restrictions.”
USDA DESIGNATES GEORGIA COUNTIES AS DISASTER AREAS
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has designated 98 counties in Georgia as primary natural disaster areas due to excessive rainfall that occurred from September 2009, and continuing.
The counties are: Atkinson, Decatur, Heard, Monroe, Tattnall, Bacon, Dodge, Henry, Montgomery, Taylor, Baker, Dooly, Houston, Muscogee, Telfair, Baldwin, Dougherty, Irwin, Newton, Thomas, Banks, Early, Jackson, Oglethorpe, Toombs, Ben Hill, Echols, Jeff Davis, Peach, Towns, Bibb, Effingham, Jefferson, Pickens, Treutlen, Bleckley, Elbert, Jenkins, Pierce, Troup, Brantley, Emanuel, Johnson, Pike, Turner, Bryan, Evans, Jones, Polk, Twiggs, Bulloch, Fannin, Lamar, Pulaski, Union, Burke, Floyd, Lanier, Putnam, Upson, Calhoun, Franklin, Laurens, Schley, Ware, Chatham, Fulton, Lee, Screven, Washington, Chattahoochee, Gilmer, Lowndes, Seminole, Wayne, Clinch, Glascock, Macon, Spalding, Webster, Colquitt, Grady, Madison, Stewart, Wheeler, Coweta, Haralson, Marion, Sumter, Wilkinson, Crisp, Harris, Meriwether, Talbot, Worth, Dade, Hart and Mitchell.
"President Obama and I understand these conditions caused severe damage to the area and serious harm to farms in Georgia and we want to help,” said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. “This action will provide help to hundreds of farmers who suffered significant production losses to a wide variety of crops.”
Farmers in the 98 Georgia counties suffered losses due to excessive rainfall that has occurred from September 2009 to the present. There were losses to field crops such as corn, cotton, millet, peanuts, sorghum, soybeans, pasture and forage, as well as fruit, vegetable, and nut crops, such as beans, collard and turnip greens, cowpeas, pecans, peppers, pumpkins, squash, strawberries, tomatoes, and nursery crops.
Farmers in the following counties in Georgia also qualify for natural disaster assistance because their counties are contiguous: Appling, Clarke, Glynn, McDuffie, Rockdale, Barrow, Clay, Gordon, McIntosh, Stephens, Bartow, Clayton, Greene, Miller, Taliaferro, Berrien, Cobb, Gwinnett, Morgan, Terrell, Brooks, Coffee, Habersham, Murray, Tift, Butts, Cook, Hall, Oconee, Walker, Camden, Crawford, Hancock, Paulding, Walton, Candler, Dawson, Jasper, Quitman, Warren, Carroll, De Kalb, Liberty, Rabun, White, Charlton, Douglas, Lincoln, Randolph, Wilcox, Chattooga, Fayette, Long, Richmond, Wilkes, Cherokee, Forsyth and Lumpkin.
All counties listed above were designated natural disaster areas March 2, 2010, making all qualified farm operators in the designated areas eligible for low interest emergency (EM) loans from USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA), provided eligibility requirements are met. Farmers in eligible counties have eight months from the date of the declaration to apply for loans to help cover part of their actual losses. FSA will consider each loan application on its own merits, taking into account the extent of losses, security available and repayment ability. FSA has a variety of programs, in addition to the EM loan program, to help eligible farmers recover from adversity.
USDA also has made other programs available to assist farmers and ranchers, including the Supplemental Revenue Assistance Program (SURE), which was approved as part of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008; the Emergency Conservation Program; Federal Crop Insurance; and the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program. Interested farmers may contact their local USDA Service Centers for further information on eligibility requirements and application procedures for these and other programs. Additional information is also available online at disaster.fsa.usda.gov.
U.S. BIOFUELS INDUSTRY HURT IF TAX CREDITS EXPIRE
U.S. fuel ethanol and biodiesel production would be cut by 10 percent if Congress allows biofuel tax credits to expire this year, and corn and soybean prices would fall by 15 cents a bushel, predicts the University of Missouri-based Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI).
One-third of the corn crop is used to make fuel ethanol and about 11 percent of U.S. soybean oil is used for biodiesel. Fuel ethanol producers such as Archer Daniels Midland Co (ADM.N), POET and Valero Renewable Fuels (VLO.N) -- the three largest distillers -- would be affected too.
The ethanol tax credit of 45 cents a gallon and a tariff of 54 cents a gallon on ethanol imports are scheduled to expire at the end of this year. The $1-a-gallon biodiesel tax credit died at the start of the year but would be revived for 2010 in a bill pending in the Senate. Without the tax breaks, said FAPRI, ethanol and biodiesel production will track the usage levels mandated by a 2007 energy law. It guarantees annual use of 15 billion gallons of corn-based ethanol beginning in 2015 and 1 billion gallons of biodiesel starting in 2012.
FAPRI said ethanol production would fall by 1.5 billion gallons a year lower, a 10 percent drop, without the tax breaks. Imports also would surge. Biodiesel production would run roughly 10 percent lower without the tax breaks, or about 100 million gallons a year in 2012 to 2014, said FAPRI.
For each fuel, said the think tank, there would be less incentive to produce more than the volume guaranteed for use.
"We will be looking for a long-term extension so that investors can invest in the industry (all feedstocks included) with some confidence," said Matt Hartwig of the Renewable Fuels Association, a trade group. Hartwig said smaller U.S. production would mean "a loss of jobs, a loss of tax revenue and increase reliance on imports."
A spokesman for Growth Energy, an ethanol trade group, said the tax credit "provides value to the consumer in the form of lower gas prices" and should be extended. Biofuels are popular in farm country as a home-grown fuel and an additional source of income. Environmental groups say biofuels encourage overuse of farm chemicals and drive up food prices.
LINCOLN - CHAMBLISS RESPONSE TO BRAZIL COTTON RETALIATION EFFORTS
U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Chairman Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), and Ranking Member Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), have expressed disappointment after Brazil announced it is moving forward on retaliation for injuries due to the U.S. cotton program and the export credit guarantee program (GSM-102). The retaliation list totals 102 products including both agricultural and industrial goods. Brazil is expected to follow up this action with an additional announcement of “cross retaliation” action against U.S. intellectual property later this month.
“It is unfortunate Brazil is moving forward with retaliation without first engaging in meaningful discussions towards resolving the dispute,” said Lincoln and Chambliss. “The U.S. government continues to express its willingness to have a substantive dialogue and negotiators from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and U.S. Department of Agriculture are waiting for Brazil to start the process. We cannot negotiate with a partner that is unwilling to voice what it wants. To be clear, we have been assured by the administration that U.S. officials attending the upcoming U.S.-Brazil CEO Forum are not carrying a proposal. We believe that doing so would only encourage a process where we end up negotiating with ourselves. Changes to both the cotton and GSM programs can only be done by Congress with the support of the House and Senate Agriculture Committees.”
The Congress has made changes to both the GSM and cotton programs as a result of the case. In 2005, the Congress eliminated the Step 2 program and lowered the counter cyclical program target price and loan program in the 2008 farm bill. Although Brazil’s original motivation for filing the case was to attack U.S. cotton programs, the arbitration panel’s decision placed the bulk of the retaliatory award on the operation of the GSM program. Retaliation authority granted for the cotton component of the case is only $147 million.
The Senators said, “We believe that resolving the dispute will require earnest discussions and a recognition regarding the relative roles of the GSM and cotton programs and the state of the international cotton market. U.S. cotton programs are not having a significant impact on world cotton prices.”
There has been a 40 percent decline in U.S. cotton acreage since 2005 and a 45 percent decline in cotton production. There has been an 8 percentage-point decrease in world cotton market share attributable to the U.S., the lowest since 1983.
“While Brazil has chosen to exercise its rights, its future actions will determine the degree to which the administration and the Congress are willing to move forward together in resolving the dispute and others in the World Trade Organization,” said Lincoln and Chambliss. “This case is an opportunity for Brazil to demonstrate its newly embraced role in the international arena consistent with its emergence as an advanced developing economy. Additionally, Brazil’s actions in the case will be a unique and helpful indicator whether it is time to reconsider benefits it receives from U.S. trade preference programs.”
CHINA MAY SOON REOPEN DOOR TO U.S. PORK
China may soon reopen to US pork, exporters believe, a concession which would represent a second breakthrough for America's recovering meat sector, according to a report at agrimoney.com.
Beijing officials are poised to meet a US Department of Agriculture delegation to discuss the smallprint of resuming trade, which has been banned since April over fears of the spread of H1N1 virus, or so-called "swine flu".
"There's a delegation of USDA folks that will be in China and we're expecting this [clearance] to come very soon," Phil Seng, chief executive of the US Meat Export Federation, said. "We're looking at the USDA being there in the next week."
The comments follow Russia's agreement to reopen to US pork imports, which were again blocked by H1N1 concerns, although supplies will have to come from plants which meet new criteria on antibiotic residues.
"Reopening the market with Russia is excellent news for American hog producers," Tom Vilsack, US agriculture secretary, said. "Exports are extremely important to the US pork industry."
Russia has historically been the fourth-biggest US pork export market, with China, including Hong Kong, ranked second equal with Mexico, according to the US Meat Export Federation.
Hopes for a deal have helped maintain a revival in pork belly prices, which have more than doubled in Chicago since August, including a rise of more than 15% over the last month. Prices of lean hogs have also staged a revival, adding 9% in the last month amid growing hopes for both domestic and export demand.
For the latest futures prices on hogs, and other livestock and food crops, visit our Market News Website.
AG SECRETARY: BUILDING ARICULTURAL TRADE BUILDS RURAL AMERICA
Agricultural trade is a success story; we have a $22.5 billion surplus, says Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsackaccording to Corn And Soybean Digest website.
“It is a vital tool, not only to restore the American economy, but also to revitalize rural communities,” he says. Speaking at the 2010 Commodity Classic meeting in Anaheim, CA, he adds, “It is extremely important for the entire country to understand why trade agreements are important, why the renewable fuel industry is important and why farm programs are important.
“It’s no longer an issue of just knocking down trade barriers. It depends on which country we’re talking about and where they lie on the market continuum.
“One size doesn’t fit all in developing agricultural trade with various countries,” Vilsack says. He divides potential trade partners into categories reflecting their level of development and infrastructure, rate of economic growth, openness to biotechnology and maturity of market. For example, a mature market requires technical expertise to overcome resistance to issues like biotechnology or sanitary issues “not aligned with science, so that we have a fair and open system,” he explains.
A mature, very competitive market such as Japan “calls for funding our cooperator program to help create confidence in the American brand. Add to that a refocus on biotechnology, using additional resources and advocacy to obtain an overall effort consistent with the president’s export initiative, which we think will break down barriers and build trade,” says Vilsack.
Opening doors to biotech will require “articulating more forcefully for the benefits of biotech,” he says. “Science and biotech are an answer to meeting the food and resource demands of a growing population.
“We need to build relationships with international organizations. For example, a biotech initiative with Canada and Mexico will promote a consistent strategy, along with scientific exchanges, farmer-to-farmer programs that encourage others to give this technology a try and see the benefits for themselves.”
Building exports was just one reference to Vilsack’s broader theme of rebuilding rural America. Other revitalization tools – broad-based support for biofuels across many geographies and many feedstocks and broadband access in smaller communities – “are just a few of the tools that will not only build rural communities, but preserve the values of our country that are rooted in these communities,” Vilsack says.
PROPOSED UGA BUDGET CUTS HIT 4-H, EXTENSION & AG RESEARCH HARD
All Georgia 4-H programs would be eliminated and half of the Cooperative Extension county offices would be closed under a Board of Regents proposal to cut an additional $300 million from the University System of Georgia’s FY 2011 budget as requested by state legislators.
The plan also calls for closing the C.M. Stripling Irrigation Research Park in Camilla, closing the Vidalia Onion and Vegetable Research Center in Reidsville, closing the Attapulgus Research Farm, closing the Georgia Mountain Research Center in Blairsville, closing all 4-H facilities across the state and reducing state support for the UGA Veterinary teaching hospital. The cuts would eliminate116 4-H staff positions and 169 Extension staff positions.
“Georgia Farm Bureau’s policy supports full funding of the University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service, the Agricultural Research Stations and the College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences,” GFB President Zippy Duvall said. “We’re alarmed by the possibility of these cuts and are talking with officials at the College of Agriculture and state legislators to address preventing these cuts.”
During a joint meeting of the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Higher Education Feb. 24, legislators asked the Georgia Board of Regents to cut an additional $300 million from the University System of Georgia’s FY 2011 budget beyond the $245 million Gov. Perdue cut in his proposed budget. University System of Georgia Chancellor Erroll Davis asked the 35 presidents in the University System to produce a list of budget cuts to meet the request. UGA’s portion of the cuts totals $58.9 million, including $11.66 million in cuts to Extension programs and $816,00 in cuts to the CAES research budget. Proposed cuts to the CAES budget total $14.4 million. Visit this link to see the entire proposed budget cut document.
“We’ve got to make some cuts, but the proposal by the chancellor and the president of the University of Georgia on some of the cuts they’ve proposed are just outrageous,” Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman John Bulloch said. “ It may be that the University System has to look at increasing tuition costs because of the cuts we may have to impose on them, but all of those things are still on table. We won’t be eliminating 4-H. We won’t be eliminating the Cooperative Extension Service or the research stations.”
CAES Dean Scott Angle also voiced concern for the proposed cuts saying, “I hope these proposed reductions can either be restricted or eliminated. Agriculture is Georgia’s largest industry and the college has played a vital role in the success of this great industry.”
Click here to watch video from the Georgia Farm Monitor
