Farmers

Dicamba use could be shelved for farmers in 2024

by George Jared (gjared@talkbusiness.net)

Farmers may not be able to use the dicamba herbicide during the 2024 growing season. A federal court in Arizona on Tuesday (Feb. 6) blocked the use of three dicamba products – XtendiMax, Engenia and Tavium.

It’s not certain if or when the decision will be appealed and its unknown what the timeline for when the products will be removed, said Harrison Pittman, the director of the National Agricultural Law Center. Pittman told attendees at the Arkansas State University Agribusiness Conference on Wednesday (Feb. 7) morning he was surprised how quickly the court ruled.

“When I woke up yesterday, I would have told you that you are a long way off on a decision,” he said. “When I got off my flight they had issued a decision. It stunned me. They ruled that the EPA didn’t properly register the products. They are ordering it to be vacated from the market.”

Dicamba use could be shelved for farmers in 2024

Arkansas farmers expected to produce record soybean yields

by George Jared (gjared@talkbusiness.net)

It’s expected that Arkansas soybean yields could set a new record, with each acre yielding an estimated 53 bushels on average, said Jeremy Ross, soybean extension agronomist for the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture.

The increase is expected despite drought-like conditions throughout the Mississippi Delta Region in 2023. Better growing practices, including proactive irrigation, along with better plant genetics, early planting and favorable conditions for many of the state’s soybean farmers were other factors for improved yields, Ross said.

“We won’t have the final numbers until February, but there is potential for the yield average to be higher,” Ross said. “South Arkansas took it on the chin this spring with heavy rains and some very cold conditions after planting, in addition to several hailstorms in other parts of the state, but overall, it was a good year.”

Arkansas farmers expected to produce record soybean yields

YEAREND: Fertilizer prices ease, commodity prices fall from pre-season predictions

By Mary Hightower
U of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture

LITTLE ROCK — The prices farmers receive for their crops is never determined in a vacuum — with war, weather and whatever else is going on with the global economy all having an effect. 

Those were the factors at work as corn, rice and soybeans all fell short of pre-season predictions. Prices for each of the commodities evolved with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s “Prospective Plantings Report” in March, and then its “Acreage Report” in June.

One decline that was welcome in 2023 was the cost of fertilizer, essential to agriculture. On the flip side, the one increase that the Federal Reserve was hoping would stop, was inflation.

INFLATION

“There's the rockets and feathers effect,” said Ryan Loy, extension economist for the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture. “When prices go up, they go up like a rocket, but when prices fall, what we see as consumers, they fall like a feather. It takes forever to actually come back down.”

Federal Reserve Chairman Jeremy Powell speaking to reporters following the Federal Market Open Committee's Dec. 13, 2023, meeting. (Screenshot from Federal Reserve feed)

What seemed like “forever” — or at least since March 2022 — the Fed has inched up interest rates 11 times to try to slow inflation.

In its final action of the year, “the Fed has decided to hold interest rates at 5.25 to 5.50 percent for the third straight meeting of Federal Open Market Committee,” Loy said.

While that wasn’t a surprise, the Fed’s signaling for just three interest rate cuts of 0.25 percent each in the coming year, was.

“The markets were expecting six rate cuts in 2024 and that stocks and bonds would rally on that expectation,” Loy said. “While it hasn't happened yet, fewer cuts could mean the exact opposite, with stocks and bonds declining because of more expensive borrowing at the higher rates.”

Despite fears of a recession in early 2024, “I don't believe that anybody in the Fed or in the banking world thinks that we're going to be in a recession in at least the first quarter of 2024,” Loy said. “We're still going to have a pretty strong consumption and a strong economy.”

Looking ahead, Federal Reserve Chair Jeremy Powell said Fed will not be influenced on its rate decisions during the presidential election year. 

“We don’t think about politics, we think about what’s the right thing for the economy,” he told reporters during a livestream following the Dec. 13 meeting.

“We believe we are likely at or near the peak rate for this cycle,” Powell said. “We’re seeing inflation making real process. No one is declaring victory. That is premature.”

FERTILIZER

The global economy settled in the year since the shock brought on by the Russia-Ukraine conflict, helping drop fertilizer prices.

“Overall, fertilizer prices across North America fell about 34 percent between January and July according to Bloomberg Green Markets,” said Hunter Biram, extension economist for the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture. “This is because it was a relatively warmer year than 2023 compared to 2022 which eased demand pressure on natural gas, a key input in the production of nitrogenous and phosphorous fertilizers.”

In the south-central U.S. — Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee — urea fell 31 percent year-over-year to 20 cents per pound of fertilizer. Diammonium phosphate, or DAP, fell 40 percent, year-over-year to 26 cents per pound of fertilizer. Potash fell 41 percent year-over-year to 23 cents per pound of fertilizer.

The conflict was no small shock for the global economy. Russia ranks first, second, and third in nitrogen, phosphorus and potash fertilizer exports while Ukraine accounts for a much smaller market share. Ukraine was third globally for corn exports and seventh for wheat. Russia is the world’s top wheat exporter.

CORN

“We were looking at almost a $6 futures price at the start of the season, and it fell to about $4.84 which is about 82 percent of the projected price,” Biram said.

“Corn came in at 2.1 million acres greater than what was projected in the ‘Prospective Plantings’ report,” he said. “That's a big deal. More supply driven by more corn production, generally translates into higher stocks on hand at the end of the growing season.”

In addition to more domestic production, Biram said weak exports were a driving force behind the price drop in corn.

“Total exports for the 2022/2023 marketing year came in at 26 percent less than the five-year-average and 34 percent less than the 2021/2022 marketing year,” he said. “Brazil and China entered into a bilateral trade agreement in the summer of 2023 which resulted in total exports to China for the 2022/2023 marketing year being slashed in half.”  

“On the flip side, things were less favorable for soybeans compared to corn,” Biram said.

Soybeans started the season at $13.65 versus the $5.94 for corn, but many growers opted to grow corn instead.

“You have to look at the production per acre. With corn, we're looking at about 175 bushels per acre, with soybeans, more like 50 bushels per acre,” Biram said. “The driving question behind the shift in acreage is ‘What do per-acre returns look like? The answer came in the form of increased planted acreage for corn and decreased acreage for soybeans.”

COTTON
Cotton was the only commodity that didn’t end the season with a lower price than the pre-season prediction, starting and ending at 85 cents a pound.

“Margins were not favorable by most yields across the state. Farmers had to make 1,200 pounds per acre or more, but the 2022 state average yield was closer to 1,100 pounds per acre,” Biram said. “Acreage was down as a result. High stocks and sluggish demand from millers resulted in depressed prices compared to 2022.”

“The outlook on demand for cotton lint is more favorable moving into 2024, but it may not be enough to raise the price up above 90 cents per pound,” he said.

RICE
In 2023, the world was eating more rice. The projected price for rice was $16.90 per hundredweight and $16.10 at harvest. Rice started strong because “consumption outpaced production in the global rice market,” Biram said.

And while U.S. harvested acres increased by 680,000 acres in 2023 compared to 2022 following two straight years of decline in harvested acreage, global production remained flat at 25.11 billion bushels.

“Global consumption increased 270 million bushels to 25.5 billion bushels,” Biram said. “This left global ending stocks mostly unchanged which left rough rice futures to remain above $16 per hundredweight, leaving the price at a level not seen since July 2013.”

SOYBEANS
Headed into the 2023 growing season, soybeans were projected at $13.65 a bushel, at harvest, the number fell to $12.84.

Biram said margins were less favorable for soybeans compared to corn and acreage dropped from expectations. The Prospective Plantings report pegged U.S. soybeans at 87.5 million acres. The Acreage Report found 83.5 million acres.

A significant factor was Brazil’s record soybean production of 5.88 billion bushels.

“This is a 23 percent increase over the 2021/2022 marketing year,” Biram said. “Brazil accounted for 43 percent of global production in the 2022/2023 marketing year while the U.S. accounted for 31 percent of global production.”

INSURANCE
Biram said one positive outcome from the 2023 growing season, “was that we saw much fewer losses compared to 2022, despite more acres being enrolled in crop insurance for corn and rice.”

According to the USDA, total losses in 2023 were $114 million across the U.S., compared with $345 million the previous year. The breakdown:

  • Corn: $28 million, which was about $27 million less than 2022 on 14,000 more insured acres.

  • Soybeans: $20.4 million, which was about $47 million less than 2022 on 159,000 fewer acres

  • Cotton: $2.5 million, a little more than $67 million less than 2022 on 100,000 fewer acres

  • Rice: $55.5 million, which was $92 million less than 2022 on 122,000 more acres.

To learn about extension programs in Arkansas, contact your local Cooperative Extension Service agent or visit www.uaex.uada.edu. Follow us on X and Instagram at @AR_Extension. To learn more about Division of Agriculture research, visit the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station website: https://aaes.uada.edu. Follow on X at @ArkAgResearch. To learn more about the Division of Agriculture, visit https://uada.edu/. Follow us on X at @AgInArk.

PARP offers opportunity for additional relief to underserved farms with pandemic-related losses

By Mary Hightower
U of A System Division of Agriculture  

LITTLE ROCK — Underserved farmers who suffered pandemic-related losses have until July 14 to apply for funds from the Pandemic Assistance Relief Program, or PARP.

PARP was created to expand the existing pandemic relief programs and to target overall revenue loss rather than just price losses, said Ryan Loy, extension economist with the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture.

Extension agronomist Ryan Loy says there's a limit to the time to apply and the amount of funding available through PARP. (U of A System Division of Agriculture photo by Kerry Rodtnick)

PARP is a lesser-known program that follows on the heels of other pandemic-relief programs including the Coronavirus Food Assistance Programs, known as CFAP 1 and 2, the Pandemic Livestock Indemnity Program Spot Market Hog Pandemic, and the 2020 Emergency Relief Program. The program is part of the Consolidated Appropriation Act of 2021.

“It’s mainly the fact that the federal government had leftover funds,” Loy said. The U.S. Department of Agriculture “said ‘Let’s try to reach producers that we weren’t able to reach before with CFAP and ERP and programs along those lines’.

“The goal with PARP is to actually focus on underserved producers,” he said. “There’s kind of a laundry list of eligibility. I would suggest to any producer who is interested, to either go to farmers.gov — it’s right there on the front page — or call your local Farm Service Agency office. If you come to the FSA office with your 2016-2020 tax returns, they’ll basically do it all for you.”

Who’s eligible?

Loy said eligibility extends to any producer or entity that participated in agricultural production during the 2020 calendar year.

“PARP is also written to include cattle feeder operations that were previously denied assistance under CFAP 1 and 2,” Loy said. “The producer must have suffered at least a 15 percent decrease in allowable gross revenue for 2020 as compared to either 2018 or 2019 calendar year.

Deadline approaching

The clock is ticking both on the time and funding available, Loy said.

“There are two weeks left, however, it’s first-come, first-served,” he said. “A producer is eligible for up to $125,000. That’s the most they’ll pay, but it is subject to available funds. So, let’s say you put in your application in January, there is a pretty good likelihood that you’ll get paid relatively sooner than someone who applies a little later.”

Taxable payment

“This is a direct payment. It’s not a loan, you don’t have to pay it back,” Loy said. “Something that is important to know is that this is taxable income because it is a direct payment to you.”

PARP targets whole-farm allowable gross revenue losses in 2020 compared to the producer’s allowable gross revenue in 2018 or 2019. A producer can choose to elect losses on either year as their benchmark or based on their expected gross revenue in 2020 if they did not farm in either 2018 or 2019.

Gross revenue is the aggregation of the value of a producer’s crops. The allowable gross revenue is based on the net farming loss or profit from Schedule F, minus any pandemic-related aid already received by the producer.

For more information, please visit farmers.gov or contact your local FSA office.

To learn about extension programs in Arkansas, contact your local Cooperative Extension Service agent or visit www.uaex.uada.edu. Follow us on Twitter and Instagram at @AR_Extension. To learn more about Division of Agriculture research, visit the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station website: https://aaes.uada.du/. Follow us on Twitter at @ArkAgResearch. To learn more about the Division of Agriculture, visit https://uada.edu/. Follow us on Twitter at @AgInArk.

Beginning farmers, ranchers increase as total farm numbers decrease

By John Lovett
University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture
Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. —  An economic analysis of agricultural credit usage and census data conducted by the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture can’t tell the whole story of the changing landscape of America’s farms, but a few things stand out.

ON THE FARM — Ashley Appel of Appel Farms is among a growing number of female farmers across the nation. She and her husband, Travis, operate the farm near Elm Springs, Arkansas. (U of A Division of Agriculture photo by Fred Miller)

More minorities and women became primary operators of farms and ranches in the past decade as the total number of farms and ranches across the nation decreased by about 3 percent. Meanwhile, the number of white male-operated farms decreased by nearly 15 percent between 2012 and 2017, and proportionately fewer non-Hispanic white males are starting farms and ranches.

White male-operated farms remained the largest demographic segment of established and beginning farmers, and largest user of agricultural credit.

The Division of Agriculture’s study looked at interest paid on agricultural loans and USDA Census of Agriculture data from 2012 and 2017. Researchers also used USDA’s Census of Agriculture, Agricultural Resource Management Survey and Farm Service Agency data to gauge lender success and potential gaps in serving beginning farmers/ranchers. The USDA Census of Agriculture is taken every five years, and 2022 data will be released in 2024.

“A large share of Farm Service Agency funds is going out to beginning farmers,” said Bruce Ahrendsen, the study’s lead author and professor of agricultural economics and agribusiness for the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, the research arm of the Division of Agriculture. “Part of it is targeted funds required by Congress, but the FSA is exceeding those targets in most years for direct loans and serving an important role for U.S. agriculture.”

Beginning mid-sized family farms with annual sales between $350,000 and $1 million had the largest share of farms using Farm Service Agency loans.

“About one in four mid-size beginning family farm operations have either a direct or a guaranteed loan from the Farm Service Agency,” Ahrendsen said. “So, FSA loans are being used much more than expected. FSA is an important source of credit, particularly for beginning farmers.”

In 20 states, more than 50 percent of indebted minority beginning farmers and ranchers were Farm Service Agency borrowers over the course of the study period. So, federal credit programs appeared to have had some success in increasing socially disadvantaged farmer and rancher access to credit, allowing for easier entry into farming. Still, the programs “may not be as effective at correcting historical inequities,” the study added.

Data collected for the study consistently showed that greater shares of socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers were “beginning” operations compared with non-Hispanic white men.

Getting a hand up

Published in 2022, the Division of Agriculture study titled “Beginning farmer and rancher credit usage by socially disadvantaged status” was conducted to examine credit usage, or interest paid, by beginning farmers and ranchers and assist in developing or adjusting policies amid the shifting demographics of beginning farmers and ranchers, especially as it relates to “socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers.”

The USDA defines a “beginning farmer or rancher” as someone with no more than 10 cumulative years of experience as an operator on any farm. “Socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers” include women; individuals with Hispanic, Latino or Spanish origin; and individuals who identify as American Indian or Alaskan Native, Black or African American, Asian, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander. “Non-socially disadvantaged farmers/ranchers” are defined in the study as non-Hispanic white males.

While the share of farms using agricultural credit had a slight drop, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency federal loan programs “appeared to be crucial in enabling beginning farmers and ranchers, and especially beginning socially disadvantaged farmer and rancher groups, to access loans,” the study states.

The nation’s total number of farm operations decreased 3.2 percent between 2012 and 2017, but the Division of Agriculture study showed the number of “socially disadvantaged beginning farmers/ranchers” counted as “primary producers” went up by 10.7 percent. Average farm size did not increase as much as might be expected, Ahrendsen said, since some farmland went for use for other purposes, such as urban development. The average farm size increased 1.8 percent from 433 acres in 2012 to 441 acres in 2017, while the total land in farms decreased 1.6 percent.

The study concluded that the United States might be making some progress toward the goal of making it easier for farmers to get started, especially among historically underserved groups. Without the federal credit sources, beginning farmers and ranchers could be restricted in growing their operations, the study added.

The Farm Service Agency’s 2023 budget included an increase of $5.5 million for outreach to historically underserved producers in support of a presidential priority to promote racial and economic equity. The budget also includes $1.6 million for the Urban Agriculture Initiative, which would support county committees to facilitate urban agricultural production and help address climate change, the USDA budget summary states.

FSA loan programs

MICROLOANS — The USDA's Farm Service Agency distributed more Direct Farm Operating Microloans in regions with larger shares of beginning farmers, women and minorities. (Chart courtesy USDA)

The Farm Service Agency offers several loan programs intended to be temporary in nature to help farm operations expand, sustain or recover from a natural disaster.

“Guaranteed” loans are made and served by commercial lenders, such as banks, the Farm Credit System, or credit unions. The Farm Service Agency guarantees the lender’s loan against loss up to 95 percent and is responsible for approving all eligible loan guarantees and providing oversight of the lenders’ activities. “Direct” loans are made and served by the Farm Service Agency using government money.

A USDA fact sheet states the Farm Service Agency, “provides credit to agricultural producers who are unable to receive private, commercial credit, including special emphasis on beginning, minority and women farmers and ranchers, and purchases and delivers commodities for use in international humanitarian food programs.”

Federal law requires the USDA to reserve portions of their “direct” and “guaranteed” loans for use by beginning farmers and socially disadvantaged farmers/ranchers. Over the past 20 years, targeting has resulted in a large share of direct and guaranteed lending going to beginning farmers and ranchers and “socially disadvantaged” groups, the study noted.

Most socially disadvantaged farmer and rancher borrowers using “direct” Farm Service Agency loans were “beginning farmers/ranchers.” And about half of socially disadvantaged farmer and rancher borrowers from the “guaranteed” loan program were “beginning farmers/ranchers.”

Evolving American farms

A 2020 Agricultural & Applied Economics Association article that served as a source in the experiment station study explains the complicated nature of comparing 2012 and 2017 statistics. The 2017 census allowed demographic data to be collected on up to four persons instead of three, as in the 2012 census. However, the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association article noted the method used to determine the “primary producer” for the 2017 Census is comparable to the determination of the “principal operator” in the 2012 Census, and the experiment station economists took that approach.

Based on the USDA’s 2017 Census of Agriculture alone, however, women make up a significant portion — about 30 percent — of beginning farmers or ranchers. Relatively large shares of farms where women were the “primary producer” of a beginning farm or ranch are in Southern states. However, among female “beginning farmers/ranchers” the highest shares of farms reporting interest paid are in the Midwest and Northern Plains, along with Arkansas, Kentucky, Oklahoma and Nevada.

The largest increase between 2012 and 2017 in beginning farms or ranches among minority “primary producers” was with Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders at a 44.7 percent increase to 933 farms. Total farms operated by the group increased from 2,190 to 2,921 over that time.

American Indian and Native Alaskan “beginning” farms and ranches increased by 22 percent to 11,704. Total farms in that group increased by about 5 percent to 48,507 in 2017.

Hispanic-operated “beginning” farms and ranches were up by 9.3 percent to 21,969 in 2017. But total Hispanic farm numbers were down 0.4 percent, to 66,727, in 2017.

Asian-operated “beginning” farms and ranches were down 6.8 percent, dropping to 4,969 from 5,333 with a total number of 13,693 Asian-operated farms in 2017.

“Beginning” farms and ranches operated by who identified as Black or African American were up 12.8 percent, from 7,518 in 2012 to 8,483 farms in 2017. But total farms in this group were down 4.3 percent to 33,088 in 2017.

Access, trust key for socially disadvantaged producers

Ron Rainey, assistant vice president for the Division of Agriculture and a professor and extension economist, co-authored the division’s study. In a 2022 presentation to the U.S. House of Representatives Agriculture Committee, Rainey said the Census of Agriculture reveals that, on average, most socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers operate relatively smaller farms and leverage smaller operating loans to produce their crops each year.

Historically, equity and access issues have “played a role in limiting opportunities for socially disadvantaged beginning farmers to gain economies of scale — increasing farm size and investing in innovative or new machinery and technology,” Rainey said.

Another issue among socially disadvantaged beginning farmers and ranchers, Rainey said, is “real and perceived trust issues.”

“There are a number of producers who refuse to enter a USDA office even in 2022 because of fear, based on experiences, of disparate treatment, losing their land or being foreclosed on a loan under less than fair conditions,” Rainey said. “Therefore, the ability to build and restore trust and relationships is a critical hurdle to effectively reach marginalized producers and their communities with USDA programs and resources.”

In 2017, nearly three-fourths of all socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers did not use credit, which raised the question of whether those farmers may still be underserved, the economic study stated.

“Interest-paid is an indicator of who is using agricultural credit,” Ahrendsen said. “It’s difficult to know access. We don’t know who is being denied credit. But we are seeing that non-Hispanic white males have the highest share of beginning operations with interest paid, followed by Asian farmers. The least likely to be reporting interest paid are Black or African American farmers.”

Closer examination of why debt use varies across the country and why non-socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers utilize more than socially disadvantaged farmers/ranchers is an important topic for future research, the study stated.

The study was supported, in part, by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Hatch/Multistate project, and The Farm Credit Council. Opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the USDA, the Farm Credit Council or the University of Arkansas System.

To learn more about Division of Agriculture research, visit the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station website: https://aaes.uada.edu. Follow on Twitter at @ArkAgResearch. To learn more about the Division of Agriculture, visit https://uada.edu/. Follow us on Twitter at @AgInArk. To learn about extension programs in Arkansas, contact your local Cooperative Extension Service agent or visit www.uaex.uada.edu.

Congress urged to strengthen price, revenue supports, crop insurance programs at Farm Bill listening session

By Mary Hightower
U of A System Division of Agriculture

MONTICELLO, Ark. — Farmers urged Congress strengthen price and revenue support programs, take a new look at crop insurance and streamline the way for migrant labor during a Farm Bill listening session held Tuesday at the University of Arkansas at Monticello.

Sen. John Boozman responds to a comment from the audience at a Farm Bill listening session Feb. 21, 2023 at the University of Arkansas at Monticello. To Boozman's right are Jim Whitaker, Wes Kirkpatrick and Jason Felton. (U of A System Division of Agriculture photo by Mary Hightower)

The listening session, one of two held this week by U.S. Sen. John Boozman, ranking member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, drew a standing-room-only crowd to UAM’s agriculture building. On Monday, Boozman held a hearing at the University of Arkansas at Fort Smith and said later there would be sessions in all four of Arkansas’ Congressional districts.

The listening sessions are important because “the solutions to the problems seem to come from our producers and the people directly related” to agriculture, Boozman said. “We’re working really hard to hear from them so we can come up with a good process.”

Tuesday’s session featured a panel that represented row crop farmers, the timber industry, insurance, banking and community issues. Sharing the front table with Boozman and the panelists was U.S. Rep. Bruce Westerman.

Jim Whitaker, a rice grower from McGehee, said “Americans are realizing that food security is national security” and supporting the rice industry “is a worthy investment.”

“The Farm Bill, specifically Price Loss Coverage, is really our true safety net,” Whitaker said, adding that PLC levels the playing field among highly subsidized global competitors. “U.S. farm families cannot compete in such a distorted market.”

PLC provides payments if a commodity price falls below a reference price set in the Farm Bill. ARC, or Agriculture Risk Coverage, provides payments if crop revenue falls below a guaranteed level.  While both can help farmers when the markets don’t run in their favor, they are not crop insurance programs.

“With ARC and PLC, you don’t pay a premium,” said Hunter Biram, extension economist for the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture. “Insurance is a risk transfer. For example, when you and I buy car insurance, we’re paying a company to take on the risk, so we don’t incur the full loss of not having a car.

“With crop insurance, a farmer is going to pay a premium to transfer the risk,” Biram said.

Wes Kirkpatrick, a soy, cotton and corn farmer from Desha County, also urged continued support of PLC and ARC.

“Those programs should also be continued, but I also think the reference prices used in those may need to be re-evaluated because of the increases in input costs — drastic increases,” Kirkpatrick said.

Biram said only Congress can change the reference prices.

Conservation programs

Whitaker and Kirkpatrick also sought more support for conservation programs for farmers. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, through its Natural Resources Conservation Service, works with farmers to improve conservation efforts on their working lands through programs such as EQIP, or the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, and CSP, the Conservation Stewardship Program.

Because of the expense of implementing conservation efforts on farms, “we believe Congress should prioritize working lands like CSP, EQIP or set-aside programs,” Whitaker said.

Kirkpatrick said not only would he like to see continued funding, but also “we’d really like to see increases.”

Crop insurance

“The crop insurance component of the Farm Bill is where I think most of the work needs to be focused on … so that we have a crop insurance program that works for everybody,” Kirkpatrick said.

The multi-peril insurance plan he purchased provided no help following two floods in 2021. His farm did get help through a replant policy, which was an additional expense. To make things worse, disaster relief payments from those floods were tied to crop insurance settlements, which Kirkpatrick did not get.

“We probably could’ve bought an insurance policy that would have covered us during the flood event, but it likely would’ve been more expensive than what we could afford,” he said.

Kirkpatrick cited an example of the differences between crop insurance prices in the South vs. the Midwest.

“For the same policy, the premium per acre is 5.5 times higher in Desha County than it is in McLean County, Illinois. I think that is where we need to have conversation about some crop insurance,” he said.

“What we do know is that premium rates are calculated based on county-level loss history," Biram said. “Based on this fact, the reason the premium rates are higher in Arkansas and the Mississippi Delta region is because there are more losses in this area relative to the Midwest. The real question is what drives the losses, and can we do anything about it?”

Timber needs new markets

Grant Pace, who represented the timber industry said, “The most important thing is that we need new markets. With 95 percent of our current consumers outside the U.S., I think the new Farm Bill presents a great opportunity for us to fund more research on how our industry can expand current markets.

“We are growing about 23 million more tons a year than we’re harvesting. Without new markets, we’re kind of dead in the water,” Pace said.

Several people said farmers struggled to get labor to their farms and noted that the H2A visa process is becoming more difficult.

“Unfortunately, it is very difficult for our farmers and our loggers to find help,” said Mark Tiner of Union Bank, which works closely with agricultural interests.

“We need immigration reform to make it easier for people who are coming to the country to work,” he said.

Not a one-size-fits all Farm Bill

“Farm Bills aren’t about Republicans and Democrats. It’s all about different regions of the country and different commodities,” Boozman said. “I think the important thing is to make sure that it's not a one-size-fits-all. It just doesn't work that way.

“The good news is that I think Congress really wants to get a Farm Bill. I think they realize how important it is to rural America,” he said.

“The idea that we are dealing with a very, very different situation than we have in the past Farm Bills, with the nature of inflation, these high input rates, which never seem to go down, but commodity prices probably will and so, as a result, it’s just trying to put that all together,” Boozman said.

To learn about extension programs in Arkansas, contact your local Cooperative Extension Service agent or visit www.uaex.uada.edu. Follow us on Twitter and Instagram at @AR_Extension. To learn more about Division of Agriculture research, visit the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station website: https://aaes.uada.edu/. Follow on Twitter at @ArkAgResearch. To learn more about the Division of Agriculture, visit https://uada.edu/. Follow us on Twitter at @AgInArk.

Estimate: Flood Damage To Arkansas Crops More Than $200 Million

By RYAN MCGEENEY/ UA DIVISION OF AGRICULTURE

Farmers in five counties in southeastern Arkansas suffered more than $200 million in direct losses to major crops after the major flooding and storm event in early June, according to a preliminary estimate by experts with the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture.

John Anderson, economist with the Division of Agriculture and the Dale Bumpers College of Agricultural, Food and Life Sciences, delivered the initial estimate during a flood recovery meeting held Monday evening at the Dumas Community Center. He was one of about a dozen experts with the Division of Agriculture presenting crop-specific information and answering questions from the approximately 175 in-person and virtual attendees.

The town of Dumas, and the nearby Division of Agriculture research station at Rohwer, are at the emotional — if not quite geographical — center of the flooding event, during which more than 19 inches of rainfall was recorded in a 48-hour period. The five counties included in the damage estimate include Desha, home to both Dumas and Rohwer, Lonoke, Prairie, Jefferson and Drew counties. The estimate did not include Chicot County, the southeasternmost county in the state, although it will likely be impacted as floodwaters continue to drain southward from Desha County on their way to the Mississippi River.

https://www.ualrpublicradio.org/post/estimate-flood-damage-arkansas-crops-more-200-million

Growers at a meeting Monday evening where officials estimated that flooding earlier this month in southeast Arkansas caused more than $200 million in damage to crops.CREDIT UA DIVISION OF AGRICULTURE

Growers at a meeting Monday evening where officials estimated that flooding earlier this month in southeast Arkansas caused more than $200 million in damage to crops.

CREDIT UA DIVISION OF AGRICULTURE

USDA Disagrees With Court Order Halting Minority Loan Forgiveness Program

By CHRISTINE JONES

Approximately 16,000 socially disadvantaged farmers, otherwise known as minority farmers, were set to begin receiving about $4 billion in federal debt payment relief as part of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. The funds were to help pay off approximately 20,000 farm loans that had been granted by the U.S. Agriculture Department or private firms to Black, Indigenous, Latino, and other minority farmers. However, those payments were placed on hold just days before they were set to begin going out.

In a lawsuit filed by the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty representing 12 white farmers from nine states who are ineligible for the program, U.S. District Court Judge William C. Griesbach, ordered the U.S. Department of Agriculture to cease and desist forgiving loans based solely on the premise of race last on June 10.

https://www.ualrpublicradio.org/post/usda-disagrees-court-order-halting-minority-loan-forgiveness-program

A court order this month has halted a loan forgiveness program for minority farmers.CREDIT CREATIVE COMMONS

A court order this month has halted a loan forgiveness program for minority farmers.

CREDIT CREATIVE COMMONS

Pandemic Assistance Promised for Arkansas Poultry Growers, Other Farmers

The U.S. Department of Agriculture said Tuesday (June 15) it plans to provide roughly $6 billion in additional aid to farmers, ranchers and others who make their living in the agriculture industry.

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said there is $6 billion in available funds through the Pandemic Assistance Program to support a number of new initiatives or to modify existing efforts. He said the funds will be doled out over the next 60 days in an effort to fill the gaps in the previous round of assistance aimed at helping small and medium-size farmers who need the most support. The  Coronavirus Food Assistance Program (CFAP) payments will provide aid to producers and businesses left behind.

The release did allocate some of the funds toward the following agri sectors.
• $200 million: Small, family-owned timber harvesting and hauling businesses
• $700 million: Biofuels producers
• Support for dairy farmers and processors to include $400 million for a new Dairy Donation Program to address food insecurity and mitigate food waste and loss, additional pandemic payments targeted to dairy farmers who have demonstrated losses that have not been covered by previous pandemic assistance, and approximately $580 million for supplemental Dairy Margin Coverage for small and medium farms.
• Assistance for poultry and livestock producers left out of previous rounds of pandemic assistance to include contract growers of poultry and livestock and poultry producers forced to euthanize animals during the pandemic (March 1, 2020 through Dec. 26, 2020).
• $700 million: Pandemic Response and Safety Grants for PPE and other protective measures to help specialty crop growers, meat packers and processors, seafood industry workers, among others
• Up to $20 million: Additional organic cost share assistance, including for producers who are transitioning to organic

https://talkbusiness.net/2021/06/pandemic-assistance-promised-for-arkansas-poultry-growers-other-farmers/