The issue contained several photos from the Threshermen’s Reunion at Austin. Encouraged by another excellent turnout, the directors were considering expansion and were hopeful that expansion to the facilities could be carried out as a centennial project for 1967.

U.S. farm leaders meeting in Washington were reportedly pleased with a report from the National Academy of Sciences recommending that the concepts of “no residue” and “zero tolerance” be dropped for pesticide registration. It proposed the terms “negligible” and “permissable” residue instead.

Aphids were appearing on late barley in the province and provincial entomologists recommended not spraying unless damage was serious. If so, the recommended treatment was 50 per cent malathion at 1-1/2 to two pints per acre, at a cost of about $2.

At the annual meeting of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association in Winnipeg, president Gerald Guichon expressed concern about high taxes and land prices putting a squeeze on beef producers.

Another photo in the issue showed Manitoba Agriculture Minister George Hutton and other officials officially opening the new kitchen and dining hall at Camp Wannakumback.

The post Alloway straw cutter makes combines run smoother appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“Reduced rainfall means less water from run-off into stock dams,” says John Dhuyvetter, area extension livestock specialist at the North Central Research Extension Center near Minot. “Stock ponds at lower water levels indicate a possible increase in total dissolved solids in the water.”

In spite of a lack of run-off from winter snowmelt or spring rains, most pastures have surface water from the past several years of a wet cycle. But without dilution from additional water, mineral content and salts may have started to concentrate from evaporation and ground salt migration.

“Good cattle production and health depend on the livestock having an adequate and safe water supply,” says Karl Hoppe, area extension livestock specialist at the Carrington Research Extension Center. “While quantity or shortage may be obvious, using a lab to analyze the water will help determine if the quality is acceptable.”

A number of factors can be analyzed to determine if water is suitable for cattle. One of the primary factors is total dissolved solids (TDS), or all of the dissolved minerals in the water. Mature cattle probably can tolerate TDS up to 15,000 parts per million (ppm) for a limited time, but continued use of water with TDS that high can affect their health and cause death, Dhuyvetter says. The National Academy of Sciences considers up to 3,000 ppm of TDS acceptable for cattle.

Sulphates are one of the dissolved solids that may affect livestock. Sulphates can cause a laxative effect, electrolyte imbalance and mineral tie-up. The acceptable limit is 500 ppm.

Nitrates are another dissolved solid of concern with cattle. Watersheds supplying water to ponds that have been fertilized heavily or are high in nitrogen might contribute to elevated nitrate concentrations and the potential for toxicity.

Salinity also could be a problem for cattle. With the lack of rain, groundwater evaporation is causing white saline areas to expand this spring. This is an indicator that livestock water supplies may be increasing in salt concentration.

High salt content may impact cattle’s water consumption, according to livestock environmental stewardship specialist Miranda Meehan.

Cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) poisoning may be a concern as well if drought persists into the summer. Algae blooms commonly occur on small, stagnant ponds that have high nutrient levels and warm water.

The post Test your water before sending cattle out to pasture appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Reducing phosphorus (P) fertilizer applications in some regions and increasing them in others would create an adequate balance for everyone, according to a recently published paper by a McGill University scientist.

That would help meet the world’s growing demand for food by increasing crop yields where they’re most needed, says the paper published Jan. 31 in the online version of the peer-reviewed journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

“There’s enough phosphorus to go around,” said Graham MacDonald, the paper’s author.

Recent studies suggest the world is nearing a point of “peak phosphorus” in which the ability to produce P, an essential plant nutrient, from phosphate rock reserves is declining.

But the real problem is not availability. It’s distribution, said MacDonald, a PhD candidate in natural resource sciences at McGill.

GLOBAL MAP

His study includes a detailed global map showing imbalances in the way P is used around the world.

The map shows “hot spots” where P is in surplus, as well as areas with P deficits.

Some results are surprising. For example, eastern China and southern Brazil have surplus P from intensive fertilizer use by farmers. Among other things, this creates water quality problems in which surplus P in run-off may pollute water supplies.

Meanwhile, according to the map, Argentina and Ukraine, both prime agricultural regions, are P deficient.

That situation is repeated throughout the world, with too much P used in some places and not enough in others.

The obvious solution would be to redistribute P so that all places received the right amount. MacDonald said that could work.

According to his paper, reducing P use in the world’s excessively surplus areas by 21 per cent would lower surpluses by 13 per cent and increase phosphorus-use efficiency by 14 per cent across those locations.

DIFFERENT SOURCES

The paper considered both fertilizer and livestock manure as sources of P.

Of course, physically moving P from one corner of the world to another would be difficult, if not impossible.

But what his research suggests is that recycling P from manure, crop residue and other sources is a viable alternative to just pouring on the fertilizer, MacDonald said in a telephone interview from Montreal.

“What it really shows is that this is an area that we should focus on more, particularly with the potential dwindling phosphate rock reserves.”

Distributing P more equally by using less in surplus areas and more in deficient ones can be achieved through farm management – precision agriculture, soil testing and targeting P to where it’s most needed, MacDonald said.

Don Flaten, a University of Manitoba soil scientist, said of MacDonald’s research that “the overall concept is sound.”

The issue of P surpluses and deficits isn’t just a global one. It applies to individual farms and even specific fields, Flaten said.

EXCEPTIONS

For example, most areas in Manitoba have either enough soil P or are low in it. But there are two exceptions: the southeastern rural municipalities of Hanover and La Broquerie. Those RMs are home to many intensive livestock operations where manure rich in P is constantly applied on fields.

It’s difficult and inefficient to haul manure long distances to avoid P buildup in the soil, Flaten said.

But the problem could be alleviated if a research project headed by the Manitoba Livestock Manure Management Initiative works out, he said.

The project is examining ways of processing manure to remove P and package it for use elsewhere. ron@fbcpublishing.com

———

“There’senough phosphorusto goaround.”

– GRAHAM MACDONALD

The post Redistributing Phosphorus Would Eliminate Feared Shortages: Study appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

And they threatened further court action against the U. S. Department of Agriculture if the agency does not start examining the environmental and economic harm potentially associated with such crops.

“It’s a very strong decision and I think it really raises the ante for the Department of Agriculture,” said Charles Benbrook, chief scientist at The Organic Center and former executive director of the agriculture board of the National Academy of Sciences.

“The department has never done a rigorous, sound analysis of the impacts of a herbicide- tolerant technology… they will now have to do that,” said Benbrook.

BAN IMPOSED

U. S. District Judge Jeffrey White Aug. 13 imposed a ban on genetically modified sugar beets engineered by Monsanto Co. to tolerate Monsanto’s glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup, after earlier ruling USDA had not done a thorough enough environmental review of the biotech beets.

The ban is to remain in place until USDA completes a thorough impact analysis of the crop.

The ruling is the latest in a string of adverse actions against USDA for failing to properly evaluate biotech crops. It also follows internal government reports critical of the agency’s actions with biotech crops.

And conversely the ruling comes as the U. S. Department of Agriculture is being pushed by the biotech industry to speed up its biotech crop approval process. Litigation just slows the process further, biotech crop supporters said Aug. 16.

REAL HARM

USDA would not comment on the sugar beet ruling or the larger implications, though spokesman Caleb Weaver said USDA was “reviewing the decision to determine the appropriate next steps.”

But the judge in the case in his ruling criticized USDA and its Animal, Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) for not taking the situation seriously.

“APHIS’s apparent position that it is merely a matter of time before they reinstate the same deregulation decision… causes some concern that defendants are not taking this process seriously,” the judge wrote in his decision.

Plaintiffs in the sugar beet case charged that the “Roundup Ready” sugar beets are harmful because they contaminate conventional and organic supplies and contribute to a rapid rise of herbicide- resistant weeds, and they alleged the USDA failed to follow the law and conduct a thorough evaluation of the crop before approving it for commercial sale.

A separate Federal Court ruling has similarly banned Monsanto’s Roundup Ready alfalfa. And in July an alliance of conservation organizations sued USDA over approval of GMO eucalyptus trees, similarly arguing the approvals ignored expert warnings about potential environmental harm.

The post Sugar Beet Ruling Pressures USDA GMO Oversight – for Sep. 9, 2010 appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“We need to get in front of this,” Monsanto chairman Hugh Grant said in a conference call with analysts.

Grant acknowledged that weed resistance was a problem for U. S. cotton farmers, and was emerging as a bigger problem for soybean farmers. But he said the issue was not yet a big problem for corn farmers.

Monsanto is the world’s leading seed company and purveyor of the popular Roundup herbicide.

The company’s development of glyphosate-tolerant biotech soybeans, corn and cotton and its push for farmers to use its glyphosate-based Roundup with those crops has accelerated herbicide usage and consequently weed resistance to an environmentally dangerous level, critics have charged.

Experts estimate glyphosateresistant weeds have infested close to 11 million acres so far. More than 130 types of weeds have developed levels of herbicide resistance in more than 40 U. S. states, more resistant weeds than found in any other country, according to weed scientists.

“It is too bad it has taken this long for Monsanto to get serious about addressing this problem,” said Charles Benbrook, chief scientist at The Organic Center and former executive director of the agriculture board of the National Academy of Sciences.

“If solid glyphosate resistance management plans had been put in place three or four years ago, the worst of the problem could have been prevented,” he said.

Grant said Monsanto would create a new product offering that would combine Roundup with complementary chemicals for a new weed control regimen at a lower cost than farmers are paying today.

Monsanto officials said currently a southern U. S. cotton farmer is paying $40 to $60 an acre in weed control measures, up from $20 to $25 an acre a few years ago.

“There’s good news for farmers in all of this. We’re going to bring simplicity to weed management,” Grant said in a statement. “Weed resistance is real, but managing it doesn’t have to be complex.”

Weed resistance to glyphosate has been mounting across the United States in recent years as Monsanto’s genetically modified “Roundup Ready” corn, soybeans and other crops that withstand dousings of the herbicide have gained popularity with farmers.

The vast majority of U. S. acreage devoted to those crops is now planted with Roundup Ready varieties.

Monsanto introduced the genetically altered crops as efficiency enhancements for farmers.

But environmentalists and other critics claim with the Roundup Ready crops, herbicide usage has risen to such a level that weeds have developed resistance levels that make it difficult to kill them, which in turn leads farmers to boost use of other types of herbicides.

Last year, a report by the Organic Center (TOC), the Union for Concerned Scientists (UCS) and the Center for Food Safety (CFS) said that weed resistance was directly tied to the rapid increase of herbicide use, which grew by 383 million pounds from 1996 to 2008, with 46 per cent of the total increase occurring in 2007 and 2008.

“The problem is already threatening the economic viability of the cotton industry in the southeast,” Benbrook said. “Farmers in the Midwest better really pay attention and deal with it if they want to escape further problems.”

Monsanto’s shares slid sharply May 26 as the company also said it was adjusting its profit outlook downward as it trims back its herbicide business overall.

Monsanto shares are down more than 40 per cent from a year ago.

The post Monsanto Acknowledges Role In “Super Weeds” appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“We have pushed the Bay-Delta system to the brink of collapse and saving it – and the jobs that depend on it – is going to require increased co-operation among all interests.”

Federal limits on water that can be pumped out of a major river delta for California farmers are scientifically justified, a much-anticipated report said March 19, a finding hailed by environmentalists in the state’s epic water wars.

But the National Academy of Sciences stopped short of handing a decisive victory to environmental interests over agricultural interests. The academy said further study was required and that threats to Chinook salmon, delta smelt and other endangered fish were not entirely caused by the pumping.

“The Academy of Sciences report clearly validates the biological opinions,” Ann Hayden, a senior water resource analyst for the Environmental Defense Fund, said of regulations devised under court order by federal wildlife biologists and issued in late 2008.

“It’s time to stop pitting the economic interests of farmers against fishermen and move forward to find solutions,” Hayden said. “We have pushed the Bay-Delta system to the brink of collapse and saving it – and the jobs that depend on it – is going to require increased cooperation among all interests.”

A spokesman for the California Farm Bureau Federation said the report showed the need for “better justification of water restrictions” and that there were flaws in the Endangered Species Act.

THREE-YEAR DROUGHT

“We believe the government must do a better job of managing the delta pumps, to make more water available for people while still protecting the fish,” said Paul Wenger, president of the California Farm Bureau Federation.

Wenger also singled out the study’s conclusion that a number of factors, including sewage treatment plants and non-native fish, represented a threat to the protected species.

The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is at the centre of California’s long-running tug of war over water, which has become increasingly testy during a three-year drought that

led to rationing, higher charges for water and mandatory conservation measures across the state.

Dramatic cutbacks in water deliveries by the U. S. Bureau of Reclamation and state Water Resources Department have idled thousands of farm workers and large swaths of farmland. The crisis prompted U. S. Senator Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, to propose easing the environmental restrictions to allow the pumping of more water for growers.

Feinstein came under fire from environmental activists, fishing groups and even members of her own party. She dropped the plan

after state and federal agencies, citing a series of strong winter storms that may signal the end of the drought, announced they would supply farms considerably more water this year than last.

Lawmakers have said they would await the National Academy of Sciences report, which was ordered by the Obama administration, before making further policy decisions.

On Tuesday, U. S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said irrigation districts south of the delta, which represent farmers on the west side of the state’s fertile Central Valley, will get 25 per cent of their contracted water allotment from the Bureau of Reclamation, up from just five per cent in February.

The increase was issued ahead of schedule and comes at a critical time for the Central Valley, one of the country’s most bountiful agricultural regions. California, the No. 1 farm state, produces more than half the fruits, vegetables and nuts grown in the United States.

The state water agency also boosted its allocation for all users to 15 per cent, up from five per cent last year.

The state supplies more than 25 million people and more than 750,000 acres (300,000 hectares) of farmland with water from the delta.

The post Science Justifies California Water Limits — Report appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.