Soil moisture also is a key factor for SDS to infect soybean roots and develop leaf symptoms – so years with abundant rainfall throughout the season will be most favorable for SD. The unknown factor is how wet the remaining season will be. If the Iowa State Meteorologist is correct and the summer will be dry – she says the risk of SDS will be low. But if the soybean plants get into the reproductive stages and good rainfalls occur – SDS might show up.

The important thing growers need to know is while the weather each year cannot be predicted – they can take measures to reduce the impact of SDS if it shows up. The most important measure is to plant SDS-resistant soybean varieties. In addition to using resistant varieties – growers can use an integrated approach of other disease management practices to minimize yield losses. For SDS – Dr. Leandro says that would include reducing soil compaction, avoiding planting in cool, wet soils, and improving drainage.  It’s also important to use good farming practices that maintain a healthy soil with good fertility levels, good structure and good biological activity because a healthy soil helps plants develop vigorous root systems – therefore having better defenses against pathogens.

Dr. Leandro participates in various SDS research – mostly funded by the Iowa Soybean Checkoff. In her research at Iowa State – she focuses on finding soybean resistance to SDS, obtaining a better understanding of the root infection process and also testing how cultural practices – like planting date and crop rotations – affect SDS development. She says all of this information helps researchers and growers understand the disease better to develop more effective management strategies for SDS.

Source: Iowa Soybean Association

“This forum offered an exceptional opportunity to bring the real stories of America’s farmers into public conversation in a meaningful way,” said Johnson. “America’s farmers are doing excellent work every day, meeting the world’s need for food, feed, fuel and fiber while leaving the land better than we found it. By joining in discussions on food and farming, we open a dialogue with consumers, who may be many generations removed from the farm, which leads to understanding and appreciation.”

Other speakers on the panel included Representative Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio) who criticized proposals that would make steep cuts to nutrition assistance programs in the Farm Bill. The program concluded with remarks from U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack laying out a long term vision for rural America that will entice young people to return to the farm.

The 2013 forum brought leading experts together for a discussion about expanding a healthy, sustainable food system. Topics covered ranged from technological innovations, making food more affordable and nutritious, reducing packaging and waste, private-public partnerships and the sustainability movement.

An annual event, the Washington Post Live forum also highlighted the latest trends in food and nutrition.

National Corn Growers Association President Pam Johnson says the group was disappointed with the passage of the Durbin-Coburn amendment to reduce premium support for crop insurance participants through an Adjusted Gross Income means test. As the Senate moves forward – Johnson says NCGA is opposed to proposed amendments that would cut crop insurance programs and damage the farm safety net that supports the nation’s family farmers when facing adversity. Johnson also urges the Senate to continue moving the bill along in a swift and thoughtful manner upon return from the Memorial Day recess.  National Association of Wheat Growers also expressed their disappointment with the passage of this amendment.

Two other amendments were also voted on yesterday afternoon but failed to pass.  A measure to drop crop insurance subsidies for tobacco was defeated in a close 44 to 52 vote.  Another amendment that would have given states clear authority to require labels on food and beverages containing GMO ingredients was defeated by a 27-71 margin.  It has been reported that as many as 200 amendments for the farm bill are up for consideration.  The senate will reconvene on June 3rd.

“We are deeply disappointed with this short-sighted action by the USDA. Our largest trading partners have already said that these provisions will not bring the United States into compliance with our WTO obligations and will result in increased discrimination against imported products and in turn retaliatory tariffs or other authorized trade sanctions. As we said in comments submitted to USDA, ‘any retaliation against U.S. beef would be devastating for our producers.’ While trying to make an untenable mandate fit with our international trade obligations, USDA chose to set up U.S. cattle producers for financial losses. Moreover, this rule will place a greater record-keeping burden on producers, feeders and processors through the born, raised and harvested label.”

“As cattlemen and women, we do not oppose voluntary labeling as a marketing tool to distinguish product and add value. However, USDA is not the entity that we want marketing beef, and on its face, a label that says ‘harvested’ is unappealing to both consumers and cattle producers.”

The American Sugar Alliance released this statement following the vote:

“This amendment would have stripped the USDA  of the tools it needs to operate sugar policy in a way that limits taxpayer  cost.  It would have led to chronic  oversupplies of sugar on the U.S. market, jeopardizing jobs and economic  activity in rural America.  It would  have given heavily subsidized foreign sugar producers an unfair competitive  advantage over Americans and left us more dependent on foreign suppliers for a  food staple.  And, it would not  advance a free market for global sugar trade. 

“In short, this amendment represented bad  policy for the United States, which is why it was defeated once  again.

“America’s sugar producers thank Chairwoman  Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and Ranking Member Thad Cochran (R-MS) for their  continued support.  Senators who  helped reject this amendment should be applauded for defeating a scheme designed  to benefit only a handful of multinational foodcompanies and heavily subsidized  foreign interests.  Taxpayers and  hardworking farm families are winners today, and we will work hard to keep sugar  policy strong as the Farm Bill works its way through the U.S. House of  Representatives.”

Country of Origin Labeling became mandatory in the U.S. in 2008 and was designed as a marketing tool to provide consumers information on the source of the beef they purchase.  It was not intended as a food safety measure but competeing countries have complained to the WTO that the labeling is inheritantly unfair and treated foreign products less favorably than domestic products.  The World Trade Organizaiton issued a split decision in November of 2011 on the complaint by Mexico and Canada, affirming the right of the U.S. to label products in order to inform consumer but at the same time finding the method that it was done to be discriminatory.  After a series of appeals by the U.S. Trade Office and the Obama Administration, USDA must restructure the labeling process.  USDA has issued a revised three-tier system, a system the Office of Management and Budget expects to have a $100 million impact on the industry.  This system has not yet been adopted.

If this system is not adopted by today, Mexico and Canada are open to taking measures necessary to ensure compliance, including the use of retaliatory tariffs among other actions.  The Canadian Trade Minister Ed Fast and the Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz are reported to be working toward having the Canadian Government publish a list of possible U.S. Products that could be a target of tariffs should the U.S. fails to become compliant.  The cost of these retaliatory tarriffs from Canada are expected to run up to around $1.1 billion.  Mexico is expected to be considering similar measures.

Senator Hoeven spoke first, saying “The  problem is that dismantling existing sugar policy in our country would not, by any stretch, result in a free market for sugar for one very compelling reason:  the world sugar market right now is totally distorted by foreign subsidies and  tariffs,”  The remarks continued, with Hoeven underscoring the fact that U.S. Sugar programs actually level the playing field of U.S. sugar producers on the world market.

“World  market prices are actually higher than U.S. sugar prices and the percentage of  sugar in most processed foods is small, just 2 percent of a Hershey chocolate  bar, for example. Hoeven said foreign governments heavily protect and subsidize  their sugar producers. Countries like Brazil spend between $2 billion and $3  billion per year to subsidize growers. Mexico literally owns one-fifth of its  industry and subsidizes the rest. And sugar prices are not only higher in Brazil  and Mexico – they are higher worldwide. ”

“Dismantling our  current sugar policy would accomplish nothing, but it would subject our  producers, consumers, and industries more ruthlessly to that distorted market  than they are today,” he said. “If we do away with  sugar policy altogether and subject producers strictly to a distorted global  market, what we will see is – not lower prices – but extreme volatility in the  global sugar market. ”

U.S. Senator Heidi Heitkamp took to the floor next, and continued to staunchly defend North Dakota sugar producers against special interests who are trying to gut the Sugar Program, further explaining that the sugar program is not just a regional issue although it does have strong ties to both North Dakota and Minnesota. Heitkamp, a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, discussed the jobs in North Dakota and around the country that are supported by sugar and noted that many would end up overseas if the special interests prevail.

“U.S. sugar policy defends more than 142,000 jobs in 22 states by defending our producers from unfair foreign competition,” said Heitkamp. “We grow and process a lot of sugar beets in the Red River Valley. Like many rural communities, sugar is the lynchpin of the local economy. If we bend to the proposed amendments, we will lose our domestic sugar industry. We can’t compete when the playing field is not level.”

Both Hoeven and Heitkamp are member of the U.S. Senate Ag Committee, making North Dakota and Iowa the only states to have both Senators serving.

“We understand that producers are busy planting this spring, but they can’t forget to visit their county office and sign up for DCP or ACRE,” said Schaunaman. “Just as farmers and ranchers plan their spring plantings, producers should plan to schedule an appointment to visit their USDA Service Center at the earliest possible time. It’s best to set up an appointment now rather than wait until the day before the deadline,” advised Schaunaman.

The sign-up for both programs began Feb. 19, 2013. The deadline to sign up for ACRE is June 3, 2013. The DCP sign up period ends Aug. 2, 2013.

The 2013 DCP and ACRE program provisions are unchanged from 2012, except that all eligible participants in 2013 may choose to enroll in either DCP or ACRE for the 2013 crop year. This means that eligible producers who were enrolled in ACRE in 2012 may elect to enroll in DCP in 2013, or may re-enroll in ACRE in 2013 (and vice versa).

Winter wheat conditions are rated 31 percent very  poor, 28 percent poor,  33 percent fair, 8 percent good, and 0 percent excellent. Winter wheat jointed was at 9 percent. Winter wheat headed was 1 percent,behind 35 percent last year and 7 percent average.

Spring wheat seeding rated 91 percent complete, behind last year’s 100 percent but near 94 percent average. Spring wheat emerged was 53 percent complete, also behind last year at 99 percent and 74 percent average.

Corn planting rated 75 percent complete, behind last year at 91 percent but ahead of 69 percent average. Sixteen percent of corn has emerged, behind last year at 60 percent and 24 percent average.

Soybean planting rated 28 percent  complete, behind last year at 60 percent and  equal to 28 percent average. Soybeans were 1 percent emerged, behind last year at 18 percent and 5 percent average.

According to reports, the amount of precipitation received ranged anywhere from 1 to 6 inches with most reports being in the 1 to 4 inch range.  Even though the moisture has been a detriment to planting progress, it has been beneficial to livestock.  The rains have helped pasture growth and produced runoff into stock dams.

Temperatures across most of the state last week ranged from 6 to 10 degrees above normal.

Progress of the various crops is listed below:

Spring wheat seeding was 50 percent complete, behind last year at 98 percent and 67 percent average. Spring wheat was  10 percent emerged, behind last year at 87 percent and 42 percent.

Durum wheat seeding was 35 percent complete, behind 91 percent for 2012 and 52 percent average. Durum wheat was 5 percent emerged, behind last year at 69 percent and 28 percent average.

Canola seeding was 28 percent complete, behind last year at 94 percent and 57 percent for the average. Canola was 4 percent emerged, behind last year at 55 percent and 23 percent average.

Sugarbeet planting  was 84 percent  complete, behind last year at 100 percent and 82 percent average.  Emergence was 1 percent, behind 79 percent a year ago and 40 percent average.

Corn planting advanced 43 percentage points with 61 percent complete, behind 92 percent last year and 62 percent average. Corn emerged was 3 percent, behind 61 percent last year and 22 percent average.

Soybean planting was 19 percent complete, behind last year at 79 percent and 36 percent average.

Potato planting was 25 percent complete, behind last year at 88 percent and 52 percent average.

Dry edible bean planting was 2 percent complete, behind last year at 54 percent and 20 percent average.

Sunflower planting was 9 percent complete, behind last year at 33 percent and 15 percent average.