Oh we hate Monsanto.  Spring is coming, and we're writing the checks for our 2014 seed.  Seed companies have done a great job of separating the seed cost, from the tech fee, giving us a chance to see exactly how much we are paying for Monsanto's technology.  And we grumble and write the check for the seed, all the time thinking "Oh I hate Monsanto."

It's the same thing all consumers do each time they pay a bill.  Think of your cell phone bill, and the cost of your cell phone.  You do not need a $500 smart phone, or a huge data plan just so you can stream Pandora, check Facebook, and tweet the results of your kids basketball game.  And yet you do it, and think "Oh I hate AT&T" every time you write the check.  

Technology brings convenience, and as consumers we are willing to pay for the convenience, but it's usually with a chip on our shoulder and a grumble as we write the check.  Using Genetically Modified seed and paying a tech fee is similar, but it does offer farmers more than just convenience.  It can mean fewer passes over the field, less chemicals, ability to use no-till, and many other benefits.  At the end of the growing season, we realize the value in the paying the technology fee, instead of the cost. 

As much as I hate paying a tech fee, I will gladly pay more tech fees if they become available.  I have a long list of genetic modifications I would like to see in other seeds, but the technology isn't available just yet.  We struggle with diseases in wheat, and if we could find some seed resistance to those diseases, I would gladly pay for that technology.  

An environmental group is petitioning to stop spraying potato pesticides in Minnesota, so just imagine what a resistance gene could do for the farmers and environmentalists!  Both sides could be winners.  (Potatoes are disease and bug magnets, as you may know if you have a garden).  Read both these links and see if we have a potential solution to the problem.  

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-26189722

http://www.grandforksherald.com/content/toxic-taters-coalition-seeks-changes-potato-producers

Just like everyone, I'll keep grumbling as I pay my cell phone bill, and don't even get me started on DirectTV, where half the stations are infomercials.    We pay for technology, and we complain about it, but once you separate the value from the cost, it makes the check a little easier to write.   Perhaps I shouldn't say that farmers hate Monsanto, but that they have a love/hate relationship with Monsanto.  We love the technology, but grumble when we pay for it.   We're only human.  

I'm not much of a corn grower.  It's a minor crop on our farm, but I was furious with an Associated Press article claiming that corn and ethanol are destroying acres and acres of grassland.  It was clear the authors of the article have no farming background, and yet they pretended to create a "balanced" article.  For those who understand agricultural policy and economics, the article was laughable. 

I should start by giving my opinion of CRP.  It is a great program, mostly.  The government is "renting" land from landowners, and paying those landowners to keep it out of production.  It makes great habitat for wildlife.  It holds water during our spring melts.  It keeps snow from blowing during our brutal winters.  It really is a great asset in my area. 

BUT, my county was maxed out at 25% CRP.  Let me repeat that.  25% of the farmland in my county was in CRP, and our FSA office sent out a survey asking farmers if we would like that percentage raised to allow more acres to be enrolled in CRP.   This was several year ago, when profits in farming were elusive, and farming was about minimizing losses instead of maximizing profits.  

I sent back the survey with a firm "NO".   If a landowner enrolls in CRP, it often means they have no need to live here, and continue to farm.   I'm a fan of CRP, but there has to be limits.  I want neighbors.  I want farmland available to rent.  There has to be a balance between CRP landowners, and actively farming landowners.  

When the AP article spoke of grassland and CRP being used for corn production, I was reminded of the balance of land use.  Currently those acres are needed for corn production.  In a few years, those acres may end up back in grass, pasture or CRP.  This is the cycle in agriculture.  It has happened before, and the cycle will just repeated over, and over, and over again. 

I also struggled with the AP article tying high corn prices to ethanol.  Ethanol is a factor in corn supply and demand, but it's not the only factor.  There has been price appreciation in nearly all commodities, from oil, to gold, to cocoa.  Most commodity prices, especially corn, are off their highs, but there was a good rally in commodities.  If you are going to blame one factor for high corn prices, then you'll have to find similar silver bullet reasons for gold, oil, cotton, and all other commodities.  They don't exist.  

As I begin working on 2013 analysis, and 2014 cash flows, it is obvious that profits in farming are once again becoming elusive.  The cycle continues.  I still have a powerpoint presentation I gave in 2003 titled "Can we afford to farm."  I may have to bring that one out again for 2014.  

Even though I'm not much of a corn grower, I still support ethanol.  Alternative fuels deserve our support.  I pay over $250 a year for a "wind energy surcharge" on my electric bill.  That's just the one alternative energy subsidy I can easily calculate.  I just keep reminding myself it's part of a bigger picture energy policy.  There will always be short term adjustments, but they have to fit in the long term picture.    

My baby girl is no longer a baby, but an opinionated toddler.  Tell her it's bed time and she goes screaming and running out of the bedroom.  I see visions of the future terrible two's and I give a little shiver.  No amount of logic or reasoning can calm an emotional toddler, and all a parent can do is just wait it out. 

It is incredibly difficult to win a battle when you have the facts, but the opposition has emotion, even when the battle is with yourself.  The more I try to eliminate emotion from my decision making, the more I fail.  You can throw every fact, figure, graphic, and scientific study, but it is very difficult to beat emotion when it comes to decision making.  Going with your gut is the easiest, even if it isn't correct.

Just think of the "social battles" that are being fought right now, and ask yourself which side has the most emotion.

1. ObamaCare versus "Death Panels":  I don't know if ObamaCare is good or bad, but I know whoever thought of the term "Death Panel" was pulling an emotional trigger.  
2. Genetically modified foods vs Frankenfoods: Despite the overwhelming scientific evidence that genetic modification is safe and beneficial for food production, consumers still fear something they perceive to be "unnatural".  It's so very easy to be critical of food production when you've never been hungry a day in your life, and have no understanding of plant breeding and genetics. 
   
3. Vaccines vs autism:  Your child has autism, and there must be something to blame.  I will admit I do not have the background to say vaccines don't cause autism, but I know NOT vaccinating is causing large hot spots of preventable diseases.   

I could keep going on, and on, and on with the list of facts versus emotion.  Just watch some talking heads on cable news, and see how often they use facts, and how often they use emotion.  Something in our brains is wired to side with emotion, and if you understand and accept that, decision making can becoming easier. 

Think of your farm, and the decisions you make.  Are they based on emotion, or reason?   The biggest problem you have is likely crop marketing.  That is almost always an emotional decision.  We all know the crop is worth a buck or two more than the market is offering, and it's hard to let it go when you know it is much more valuable.  

I don't have a secret weapon to fight battles with emotion, but I think if you recognize the problem, you can find ways to fix it.  The odds are against logic and reason, but you can find ways to beat the battle with emotion.  Good luck!

In the past two weeks, I have attended two field days.  One was hosted by the University of Minnesota and the other by North Dakota State University.  At one demonstation, we needed jackets.  At the other, I morphed into EMT-mode, looking at some of the farmers for signs of heat related health problems.  We were slightly roasted after the morning tour, and well done after the 3 hour afternoon tour.  


As farmers, our hands have always been active in food production.  We've been in continual search of how to produce more food safer, cheaper, and more efficiently.  We spend hours in the hot sun listening to researchers describe a better method of fertilization, or tillage, or how to manage weeds, disease and insects. There is always something new to learn.  I keep attending these field days hoping to hear the newest wheat variety is high yielding and high protein, but so far, it's always a tradeoff between yield and protein.  Maybe next year.  

I am beginning to see how food production has come full circle for so many people.   A few generations ago it was common to produce nearly everything you ate.  Every farm had a few pigs, cows, chickens and sheep, and a large garden full of vegetables.   It became a status symbol to buy food grown elsewhere, and pretty soon people found it was easier to go grocery shopping, than weed a garden daily.  

Now the reverse is happening.  Playing in the dirt is the new status symbol.  It's no longer enough to have a McMansion in the suburbs, but you need to own a few acres outside town with some backyard chickens.   The full circle of food production is coming around.  

My hope is that the new group of "foodies" will begin to realize how much work is involved in food production.  Yesterday's crop tour at the NDSU Carrington Research Center also included an orchard tour of 13 fruit crops.  Those lucky participants got to be indoors out of the heat in the afternoon, where they learned about apple tree diseases and management.   

Food production requires more than just buying a book on backyard chickens, or an apple tree, and the more people that realize that, the more appreciative people will be for farmers.  Raising food isn't the latest fad for us, and it never has been. 

It was a rough spring.  We knew things would be a little late with the long winter, but I'm not sure anyone anticipated how late it would be.  And I don't think anyone anticipated how much ground would not be planted this year.  

We have a little bit of prevented planting on our farm.  Although we didn't get everything planted, I feel we are one of the lucky ones.  Farmers west of us, and into Eastern North Dakota were much wetter, and had to leave much more ground bare.  

The decision on when to stop planting is a personal one.  Federal crop insurance gives you "final planting dates".  If you plant after those dates, your crop insurance coverage declines, but if Mother Nature cooperates during the summer, you could still get a good crop.  The final planting date for soybeans in my area was June 10, but many farmers were planting on June 16, if the ground was ready.  Some of the fields are still very wet and muddy. 

What has me a little depressed is that we are starting the year collecting crop insurance, and whenever you collect crop insurance it means things are below average.   Crop insurance is making headlines as Congress debates the validity of the program.  If I believed everything I read, I'd be convinced that crop insurance is guaranteeing huge profits for wealthy farmers.  It's probably time for a reality check. 

Most farmers buy crop insurance at 65-70%.  You can purchase up to 85% coverage, but it's very expensive. So farmers are buying insurance to guarantee themselves 70% of their revenue.   Each farmer has a personal revenue number based on their historic yields, and the prices are set each year.   

If you get a paycheck, imagine cutting it 30% this year.  After dipping into your savings account and cutting some expenses, you could probably make it through the year.  That is what farmers do during bad years.  Crop insurance is not designed to bring farmers back to 100% revenue, but help cushion the blow of a bad crop, and give them a guarantee minimal income.  

In farm management, it is advised to have 30% of your gross revenue as cash.  For example, if a farm grosses $100,000, it should have $30,000 in cash.  One of the reasons for that recommendation is crop insurance.  Between your crop insurance guarantee, and your savings account, farmers should be able to make it through a bad year.  Now if it happens two years in a row, the farm will have some major problems. 

The fact that my farm will collect crop insurance in 2013 just isn't how I hoped to start the year.  Just imagine collecting a paycheck, and in January you got a 30% cut.  You still hope for a pay raise later in the year, and it's possible, but there's that nagging voice in the back of your mind that keeps remembering the first paycheck.  That's how I feel.  There's always hope, but things have not started off well in 2013.  

Activist groups are a sore subject with me.  Just what are their goals, and what do they do with donations?  I appreciate action more than talk, and activist groups don't always fit that profile.  You've probably heard of LiveStrong, the Lance Armstrong foundation.  Did you know the purpose of LiveStrong is cancer awareness and education?  The purpose was never to find a cure for cancer, and the foundation was quite clear about that.  Every time you bought a yellow bracelet or shirt, you are helping to raise money for cancer education and awareness, but not a cure.  Their website is quite upfront with that information, but I was still surprised when I found out.  Assisting cancer patients and educating the public is a good cause, but I want a cure.  

The Humane Society of the United States may sound like the local shelter where we just got our new puppy, and their website includes "pets and shelters" and "animal rescue and care" on their list of 4 areas of work, but they spend over twice as much money on advocacy and public policy than they do on cruelty prevention programs.  Their website and annual report are full of pictures of cute puppies and kitties, but the majority of their budget goes towards lawyers and lobbyists in suits.  If you want to save a dog or cat, send your money to your local animal shelter.  If you want to save a lobbyist in a suit, send your donation to HSUS.  They are an organization of talk, not of action.      

So I was reassured when I started looking into The Nature Conservancy.  I have admired The Nature Conservancy from afar, impressed with their work on the Glacial Ridge project in Northwest Minnesota.  They bought more than 24,000 acres, some of it farmland, and have converted it to native prairie.  It was somewhat controversial among farmers in Northwest Minnesota, but I think nearly everyone has grown to appreciate their work.  If you donate to the Nature Conservancy, the money is going directly to conservation activities and land purchases and easements.  It's an organization of actions, not words.  That impresses me.  

I became even more impressed when I read an editorial given by the President and CEO of the Nature Conservancy, Mark Tercek.  He's a vegan, and head of one of the largest conservation organizations in the U.S., but I was so impressed with his common sense approach.  I don't want to paraphrase his article, but I do think it's a worthwhile read for every farmer, and actually anyone who eats.

Farmers are the original environmentalists.  We've been working to take care of the land, even before it was mainstream.  I am happy to have found an environmentalist that is working to better the world, and not just create hype and hysteria.  I guess I appreciate it because farmers are people of action.  We don't spend our days on news networks trying to scare people over potential food shortages.  Instead, we spend our days working in the fields, trying to make sure those shortages never occur.  

Last winter while attending an extension seminar on soybean production, I took a look at the room full of farmers, probably 200 of them, and realized how much work farmers do trying to produce more with less.  This group of farmers was spending their entire day listening to the latest research on disease, fertilization, row spacing, all areas of soybean production.  How can we get one more bushel from our fields, and how can we do it with fewer inputs?  Tomorrow it's a wheat production meeting, or corn, but the education, and improvements in production, never end.  If you want to keep eating, we'll keep feeding you.  

Take a few minutes and read the article from Mark Tercek.  I think you'll enjoy it. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-tercek/a-new-diet-for-the-planet_b_3189719.html?utm_hp_ref=tw?show_comment_id=249768954#comment_249768954

Yesterday I asked people to fill in the blink:  In winter wheat country it is said "Plant in the dust, your bins will bust."  In spring wheat country we could say "Plant in the snow...

1.  Your cheeks will glow
2.  into debt you'll go
3.  nothing will grow
4.  hope they'll grow
5.  your farm will go

Even if you're not in spring wheat country, wet weather is keeping most farmers out of the fields.  Moisture is good news to relieve the drought, but early planting is a critical yield factor for corn, spring wheat, and sugarbeets. 

At least we're all in this together.  Last fall we had a horrible sugarbeet harvest.  In a normal year, harvest begins October 1, and ideally lasts for 2 weeks, maybe 3.  Last year we attempted to harvest all the way up to Thanksgiving, and then we still left sugarbeets in the field.  We found out a sugarbeet harvester can't tell the difference between a sugarbeet, and a frozen mud chunk.  

But last fall it was a relatively small area that could not harvest.  It was a tough harvest for nearly all sugarbeet farmers in the Red River Valley, but it was an impossible harvest for just a few of us in the Northern RRV.  It was a very isolating experience.  

This spring we are all in the same boat, and there is a sense of safety in numbers.  Delayed plantings aren't just my problem, they are your problem too.  Minnesota still has widespread snow (some schools were canceled today, April 19!) and North Dakota is digging out from a record April snowfall.  Corn Belt farmers are waiting for sunshine after heavy, heavy rains and even flooding.  This week's crop progress report should be renamed the "Lack of Progress Report."

Many Northern Plains farmers are already changing their corn acres.  Most of us are not "corn farmers" but "farmers who grow corn" (we don't have dryers or a corn header, have limited storage, and not enough hopper bottom trailers) so don't blame us for being a little nervous.  We're still dipping our toe in the corn acres, nervous about how to handle the bushels, dry them, store them, and when to harvest.  The snow is still deep, the forecast is cold, and there is no imminent sign of when planting will begin.  It is easier to turn back to the safety of wheat, and maybe barley.

We took a little drive last night to see if there are any signs of life in the fields.  I did manage to find a group of swans 2 miles east of me.  I see geese and ducks all the time, but swans are unusual.  They were a little camera shy, but it made me think that maybe this Ugly Duckling of a spring may have a beautiful ending.  When I showed my 10 year old the picture, she said "Mom, where did you find a field with dirt?"  Come on you Ugly Duckling Planting season, surprise me and become a beautiful swan in a few months.  

It is April 17, and it is snowing.  I know for most people that is depressing, but for farmers, those falling snowflakes mean falling profits as well.  I am trying to remain optimistic, but the odds of a good wheat, corn and sugarbeet crop decline with every day our equipment sits in our yard.

I keep reminding myself that spring weather is just ONE determinant of final yield, not the only determinant.  Last year we had very dry conditions, but with early planting and great temperatures, the crop was much better than expected.  Maybe we can be lucky two years in a row.

So to my other fellow farmers in the Northern Plains, keep your chin up, and remain optimistic.  I have decided to stop watching the USDA Crop Progress reports because that will just add to my frustration.  Perhaps this late planting will help give prices a bit of a boost, and I can make some 2013 sales, and wrap up my remaining 2012 sales.  There is still plenty of work to be done, even if it isn't fieldwork.