USDA figures

[Wifezilla]

"Each December, the Wisconsin Ag Statistics Service issues a final crop report highlighting the trends of the past growing season. On Tuesday, the agency noted that the 2009 season was definitely a difficult year for farmers, as they experienced some extreme conditions.

The season began with below normal temperatures in early April result-ing in delayed planting and other fieldwork as frost could still be found on the ground. Planting finally got under way after warmer temperatures and needed rains came towards the end of April. Moisture throughout the first half of May limited fieldwork, while cool temperatures slowed the growth of hay and emerging crops. June also began cooler than normal, but warm temperatures and humidity finally arose in the second half of the month. This needed change in weather allowed large strides in crop growth. The second coldest July on re-cord slowed corn maturity, and high winds and hail damage at the end of the month destroyed some crops.

In southwest Wisconsin, several fields were declared a disaster due to hail damage and drought. August brought a little more warmth and humidity that allowed crops to green up. Farmers were grateful for a late frost, but a cool and rainy fall continued to delay corn harvest into December. Finally, a large snow storm and subzero temperatures in early December brought most of the leftover harvest to a standstill. Statewide temperatures from June to September were 1.3 de-grees below normal in 2009, making this the first growing season with below normal temperatures in the last five years. Temperatures in April, May, June, and August were all slightly below normal, while July was 5.4 degrees below nor-mal and September was 3.4 degrees above normal.

Precipitation and soil moisture varied greatly across the state with total precipitation for April through September at 17.12 inches. This was 6.07 inches below the total for 2008 and 5.21 inches below normal. Total precipitation in the northern third of the state was 7.08 inches below normal for April through September, the central third of the state was 4.21 inches below normal, and the southern third of the state had 2.14 inches below normal precipitation.

Looking at specific crops during the growing season:

Corn: At the end of May, corn planting was reported at 94 percent complete with emergence at 71 percent. The cooler tempera-tures throughout the beginning of June hindered progress, but as temperatures warmed by the end of the month corn growth and color began to improve. Lack of moisture throughout the month of July stressed crops, but the unseasonably cool tem-peratures helped moderate the stress. By August, corn fields were very uneven in maturity due to a lack of heat, and grow-ers reported corn progressed slowly through the month, as much as two weeks behind schedule. Starting in September, corn harvested for silage was well below the five-year average, and remained there for the rest of the season. By mid-October, growers started harvesting corn for grain despite the cool, wet weather. By November 1st corn harvested for grain was 13 percent complete, 28 percentage points below 2008 and 38 percentage points below the five-year average. Through-out November, corn harvest progressed slowly as moisture levels remained too high. A large snow storm and sub-zero temperatures in the beginning of December brought grain harvest to a standstill, with 85 percent complete.

Soybeans: As of May 10th soybeans planted were 8 percent complete, below the five-year average for that time of year but slightly ahead of 2008. By the end of May, growers had caught up with the average planting rate, remaining slightly above the five-year average for the rest of the season. Overall, emergence went well through June, and warmer temperatures helped soybeans put on some sizeable growth. Cooler, dry tempera-tures in July slowed soybean development, but the percentage of soybeans setting pods caught up to the five-year average by the end of August. Many cool, overcast days led to the preva-lence of white mold, a problem for many farmers around the state. Harvest began significantly later this year with only 25 percent complete by October 25th, 48 percentage points be-hind the five-year average. November weather was conducive to finishing soybean harvest which wrapped up by the end of the month.

Small Grains: The season began with favorable conditions for planting oats. Growers were off to a very good start this year with numbers being reported above the five-year average throughout the month of April. By May 10th, planting was at 89 percent complete with 58 percent emerged. This was well above 2008's average of 45 percent complete and 19 percent emerged. By June 14th, oat condition was reported as 78 percent Good to Excellent and some farmers had begun harvesting oats for forage. Both oats and winter wheat were rated mostly good to excellent through-out the season and into early August. Oats harvested for grain wrapped up by the beginning of September with above average yields commonly reported.

Winter wheat had many reports of winter kill, and the lack of moisture and warm temperatures throughout April and May delayed growth. An abnormally cool July caused moisture levels to remain high, leading to a delay in the start of harvest. By July 26th only 6 percent of winter wheat was harvested, 35 percentage points below the five-year average. Toward the end of August winter wheat harvest had neared completion state-wide with comments indicating yields were Good to Very good.

Hay & Pastures: Winter freeze damage to alfalfa was reported as 86 percent none to light. First crop hay received adequate rainfall for the most part, and by the end of May first cutting hay was 19 per-cent complete. While reports varied, many reported favorable yields for first crop hay. Second crop hay was shorter for some due to lack of moisture. Generally, progress of first and second hay cuttings ran slightly ahead of the five-year averages. Through August and September, completion rates for third and fourth cuttings were close to their five-year averages. Over-all, yields across the state varied depending upon whether they received timely rainfalls.

Pastures were productive heading into July, with 72 percent rated good to excellent at the end of June. Throughout July, conditions declined due to a lack of moisture, and only 29 percent were rated Good to Excellent at the end of the month. Moisture in mid-August perked up pastures heading into Sep-tember. Conditions varied throughout the season as Wiscon-sin saw extended periods of both wet and dry weather."
http://www.wisconsinagconnection.com/story-state.php?Id=1526&yr=2009

 

[Wifezilla]

I haven't "processed" all this stuff but I wanted to get it out there.

It sure doesn't sound like we should be having big crops

 

[Wifezilla]

"The U.S. Department of Agriculture has designated the Big Island of Hawaii as a Primary Natural Disaster Area due to losses caused by drought, only weeks after the federal government declared the same island a disaster area thanks to volcanic emissions.

"President Obama and I understand these conditions caused severe damage to these areas and serious harm to farms in Hawaii and we want to help," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, in a statement nearly identical to the vog disaster announcement. "This action will provide help to hundreds of farmers who suffered significant production losses to warm season grasses."

Governor Linda Lingle submitted a request for the designation in October. Although the governor listed all four counties in Hawaii on her request, only the Big Island and Maui were given the primary disaster designation.

"We were unable to confirm that sufficient production losses occurred in Honolulu and Kauai Counties," responded Vilsack in a letter to the governor. "There were no production losses due to drought in those counties. Therefore, I am unable to approve your request for the designation of Honolulu and Kauai Counties, Hawaii, as primary natural disaster areas."

Kalawao County was also named as a contiguous disaster county, according to Vilsack. The under-the-radar fifth county is on the Kalaupapa Peninsula, on the north coast of the island of Molokai.

Media reports are placing possible blame for the drought on El Nino, a weather phenomenon in the equatorial Pacific where unusually warm sea surface temperatures affect climate worldwide. The rainy season in Hawaii, from mid-December to April, are therefore drier than normal. Reports say that as of November, the South Kohala district had the sixth consecutive month of extreme drought, and while the lush, windward side has received plenty of rain, the leeward side got far less than needed. For example, according to the Star-Bulletin, Kahuku Ranch in Kau District had only 1.17 inches of rain. Honaunau in South Kona had only 1.03 inches, and Kealakekua reportedly received only 0.76 inches.

Meanwhile, the "vog" that has blanketed the southwestern end of the Big Island has nearly wiped out a once thriving protea industry in South Kona and Ka`u. The separate Primary Natural Disaster Area designation because of the volcanic smog, made November 30, is the second such declaration in less than 18 months. Sulfur dioxide emissions from two Kilauea volcano vents - one in Halema`uma`u and the other on the east rift zone - remain elevated, releasing thousands of tonnes of SO2 per day.

The Farm Service Agency says "qualified" farm operators in the designated areas will be eligible for low interest emergency, or EM, loans from the USDA, as long as eligibility requirements are met. Farmers will have eight months from the date of the declaration - December 9, 2009 - to apply for loans to help cover part of their actual losses. FSA says it will consider each loan application on its own merits, taking into account the extent of losses, security available and repayment ability. FSA has variety of programs, in addition to the EM loan program, to help eligible farmers recover from adversity. "
http://www.bigislandvideonews.com/2009/12december/20091214disaster.htm

 

[Wifezilla]

"Feds OK disaster loans for central, eastern Montana
BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) -- Farmers and ranchers in central and eastern Montana will be eligible for emergency loans from the federal government after suffering a series of weather disasters this year.
At the request of Gov. Brian Schweitzer, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack on Wednesday issued disaster declarations Wednesday for Fergus, Judith Basin and Petroleum counties.
That makes those communities -- and 10 surrounding counties -- eligible for low-cost loans and disaster reimbursements.
The region suffered a variety of severe weather in 2009, including drought, extreme heat, hailstorms and insect damage.
Department of Agriculture spokesman Jonathan Groveman said farmers and ranchers reported losses to hay, forage, pasture land, barley, corn oats and wheat. He said the total amount of damage was still being assessed.
U.S. Senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester said the declaration would help lessen the economic pain for the state's biggest industry.
Still pending is a request for disaster assistance to 12 counties where sugar beet growers suffered an estimated $5 million in losses due to an October freeze.
That request was submitted Nov. 17.
Copyright 2009 The AP.


http://www.capitalpress.com/newest/AP-Montana-ag-disaster-121609

 

[Wifezilla]

" Dairy

Californias dairy industry had one of its most devastating years in 2009 as economic woes continued domestically and abroad as U.S. exports dropped.

California has seen year-over-year production declines in 13 out of the last 14 months. Decline in demand for dairy products because of the weak world economy is seen as the largest factor contributing to declines in producer prices.

Compounding the problem of low prices for milk is record high production costs. A dramatic increase in feed prices was fostered largely by demand for corn in ethanol production. Between February 2008 and October 2009, dairy producers remained in the red by as much as $8.67 each month.

California may lose over 10 percent of its dairies this year about 185 enterprises. As dairy goes, so do a number of allied operations. The crisis impacts industries such as truckers, feed companies, dairy equipment suppliers and seed and fertilizer companies.

The slowdown also sent shockwaves through the alfalfa industry, which has been plagued by dismal prices. And some say a slow recovery in milk prices will mean a slowed recovery for hay prices as well.

The milking herd has been reduced by voluntary culling and through the Cooperatives Working Together program. The U.S. Department of Agriculture says milk cow numbers are expected to decline by 253,000 head from 2009 levels. The agency expects a recovery in prices is unlikely until 2010 when the decline in milk production, forecast for both this year and next, impacts the market.

Meanwhile cheese and butter inventories remain high. Nonfat dry milk inventories have dropped, giving some recent strength to powder prices."
http://westernfarmpress.com/news/commodity-outlook-1224/

 

[me&thegals]

OK this is waaay outside my field, but some one told me the usda reports on crop yields was not kosher.

It was a reasonably reliable person, some one I know not an internet troll. SO I decided to look, but I cannot really make heads nor tails out of their numbers.

The guy said the counties all reporting severe emergencies due to weather were listing huge crops. He said one side is showing huge crop losses while they are reporting officially that the crops are big as ever if not bigger!

Can anyone tell me if there is any veracity to this?

What I can say here in WI is that although record (or near) yields are reported, a LOT of the crop is moldy, underdeveloped or still standing in the field due to snow.

 

[k0xxx]

Calif. Farmers Sell Water Instead Of Growing Crops

In a state where water has become an increasingly scarce commodity, a growing number of farmers are betting they can make more money selling their water supplies to thirsty cities and farms to the south than by growing crops.

 

[HannaLee]

^^^This is my neck of the woods. I can attest that this is happening and there are many fields laying desolate.

 

[Wifezilla]

"As Arkansas producers near 100 percent completion of their harvest, the estimated losses from this years rain remains at $309.3 million, according to a report issued by the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture economists.

The figure represents a 9.6 percent loss from estimated total gross receipts for corn, cotton, cottonseed, grass hay, rice, sorghum and soybeans. On a per-acre basis, the average loss for the crops is $43. The $309.3 million figure was part of a Nov. 13 estimate.

A final estimate for the 2009 crop year will be issued in January.

The latest report reflects harvesting progress. As of Dec. 7, rice, corn and sorghum harvest has been completed, while cotton and soybeans were 98 percent harvested, said Eric Wailes, professor of agricultural economics and agribusiness for the UA Division of Agriculture.

Every week, more and more soybean producers are parking their combines for the season, Jeremy Ross, Arkansas Extension soybean specialist. Of the small percentage remaining, there are probably still a few good fields of soybean, but all of the harvestable soybean fields are probably out.

Tom Barber, Arkansas Extension cotton specialist, said he saw a couple of fields that were not harvested because the lower ends were still under water.

Hopefully they will be able to harvest these fields before Christmas, but it will depend on weather. These fields wont be the best yielding but cotton has a pretty good ability to hang on in the field as long as there are no flooding rains.

The crop loss estimate report was created by Wailes, Wayne Miller, professor of agricultural economics, Scott Stiles, instructor of agricultural economics; Brad Watkins, associate professor of agricultural economics; and Jeffrey Hignight, a program associate at the Rice Research and Extension Center in Stuttgart.

The report is available online at http://division.uaex.edu/."
http://deltafarmpress.com/corn/arkansas-crop-loss-1215/

 

[Wifezilla]

"Californias 2009 processing tomato crop will long be remembered as a bin buster that could have been even larger.

It ended at a record 13.3 million tons harvested from 308,000 planted acres with a record average yield of 43.2 tons per acre. It could have reached the 13.5 million tons that the USDA forecast in the fall, had California not been drenched from a mid-October Pacific storm that ended the tomato harvest instantly.

The euphoria of documented field yields of 70, 80 and even one Kings County growers 93 tons per acre were tempered by the crush on processors who jumped from field to field gathering contracted tonnage leaving behind unharvested, uncontracted tonnage.

Some of that was sold to processors for as little as $21 per ton, almost $60 per ton less than the contract price. Other above-contract tomatoes were disked under. Even with the record tonnage, however, growers in Northern California were hurt economically when the October downpour ruined their crops.

Mike Montna, president of the California Tomato Growers Association, noted the irony of the huge crop in the midst of Californias three-year drought.

We had ideal, dry spring weather for planting followed by an ideal growing season, he pointed out. We desperately need rain in California with the water issues we are facing.

However, rain and tomato planting do not necessarily go hand in hand. In fact when the spring is dry, the processing tomato crop gets bigger, Montna pointed out. Tomato planting begins in February.

Disease, soil compaction and the inability to get soils ready for planting are the unwanted byproducts of rain. We did not have that in 2009, he said.

California produces more than 90 percent of the nations processed tomatoes and nearly half the worlds total processed tomato tonnage.

It was obvious early that the crop was going to be huge. Montna was getting calls in mid to late August not long after the harvest began asking about homes for over-contract tomatoes.

It is hard to say how much went unharvested. We do not keep track of it, he says. It was over the board; short fields, long fields. Some people sold all their tons and some had tomatoes left over.

He did comment that those growers looking for a home in August did not call back. Larger growers with several different fields who had unharvested tomatoes in overage fields harvested later when other fields came up short of contract tonnage.

Although processors may contract for early fields on a per acre basis, most grower-processor contracts are drawn on a tonnage per field basis. When fields yield contracted tonnage, harvesting stops. Contracts specify delivery dates to keep plants running.

Tomatoes can be held in fields for a few weeks beyond optimum harvest dates, but the crop can be reduced in size and quality if held too long.

Another irony of the 2009 record crop was that it was produced in the third year of a natural and judicial/regulatory drought that has left growers on the West Side of the San Joaquin Valley short of water. This area is a major processing tomato growing area. With less acreage available due to a lack of water, processors moved to other areas where water was available to growers to get the 13.3 million tons they said they wanted in 2009.

This resulted in many new tomato growers, as well as expanded acreages for existing growers, both of whom had access to water. Montna said processing tomato acreage increased sharply in two primary areas. One was San Joaquin County where it went from 28,800 acres in 2008 to 44,000 last year. Acreage went from 13,000 in Kern County in 2008 to 25,000 last season.

In addition, acreage switched from the West Side of Kings and Fresno counties to the eastern part of those two counties, where tomatoes have not been grown in the past. Much of the acreage on the East Side of the Valley is in trees and vines with open fields relatively small in size, compared with large West Side fields.

While a year like 2009 makes for great coffee shop and e-mail bantering, reality sets in quickly when it is over as growers and processors jockey on price, acreage and tonnage for the year after the record 2009.

One would believe that an industry which achieves the desired amount of raw product that it contracted for would be happy with the inventory in the warehouse. Unfortunately, based on responses from each of the processors, this does not seem to be case, according to Montna.

CTGA and its members understand that this years crop of 13.3 million tons may have increased inventories to a higher level than the industry would like to see and an adjustment will need to be made in 2010. However, Montna said growers cannot afford to lose money to compensate for that adjustment.

CTGA has opened the bidding for the 2009 tomato contract at $75 per ton, down $5 from last years agreed upon price.

This is based on CTGA member estimates that growing costs will range from $2,650 to $3,050 for a 40 ton per acreage crop in 2010, the average over the past five years. This is down from last years cost of $2,800 to $3,200 per acre.

Montna said a $75 per ton price will represent a 5.2 percent return on investment next year. Montna considers this return low based on the risks that a grower is taking, but we realize that the current situation warrants some concessions and the growers are willing to do their part for this year.

Four processors have countered with offers in the $60 to $61 per ton range. Another offer was for a multi-year deal with a fluctuating price with a base of $62.50.

Obviously, the CTGA believes these offers to be too low for a grower to maintain profitability for next year, Montna said.

Montna emphasizes that water remains a major issue. The state recently released its early season estimate of just 5 percent of contracted water from the State Water Project. This is the lowest in history.

Every region of the state has an issue with water, said Montna.

While many growers have access to well water, the quality of that water is inferior to surface deliveries. There are salinity issues with well water. Even in the north state, there are issues with water deliveries.

Growers are being forced to blend well water with available surface water to improve quality. There is also a growing concern that salt build-up in the soils from well water may reduce or limit production, unless surface water is used to leach out salts."
http://westernfarmpress.com/vegetables/tomato-outlook-1222/