Uncertainty still underlies most farm income projections

<a href="mailto:melgares@ksu.edu" target="_blank">By PAT MELGARES </a>K-State Research and Extension news service

In an unusual twist, Kansas State University agricultural economists are reporting divergent paths for net farm income and net cash income in the coming year.

Jenny Ifft, the Flinchbaugh Agricultural Policy Chair at K-State, said it is rare that the two measures of farm revenue move in different directions.

“This is one of those annoying situations where an economist says ‘it depends,’” Ifft said, referring to projected farm profitability this year.

Most areas of the state have recovered from drought in 2022, and other areas are currently experiencing moderate drought. Yet, assuming that crop yields follow normal trends, and the fact that economists project lower prices for fertilizer, fuel and oil, 2024 could be similar to 2023 for some farmers. Ifft said Kansas 2024 crop receipts projections show about 6% growth over 2023 if yields are similar to the historical average.

Joe Parcell, director of the Center for Risk Management Education and Research at K-State, said some areas of the livestock sector — dairy and hogs, for example — are expected to do better this year than in 2023, and the cattle dynamics are “a wildcard in Kansas.” Cattle price forecasts are high, but inventories are also down.

“The big question in the cattle market is how fast can cow-calf producers rebuild the herd that they sold off last year as a result of high prices and the drought,” Parcell said. “The other thing we see is that feed yards have been extremely resilient. Compared to five years ago, (feed yards) are spending $1,000 more per head in costs. If you take $1,000 for every 1,000 animals, that’s $1 million more they are putting through that feed yard.

“We’re still projecting for all cattle receipts to be even year-over-year, and that’s really holding up Kansas farm income right now.”

Ifft said that combining factors weighing on crop and livestock production, “we expect net farm income to increase 21%, but net cash income to decrease by 14%.”

She added that economists often focus on net farm income because that measure reflects the totality of the producer’s income in a given year. Net farm income includes income as well as changes to materials and inventory.

“And so if we’re talking about a return to normal crop yields this year, producers are going to have more crops; they are going to have higher inventories at the end of 2024,” Ifft said.

But, she adds, “you can also look at net cash income, and this is something that lenders like to look at because they’re interested in producers' ability to repay loans. Cash is what you can see easily…what’s in your bank account. And we expect net cash income to be down about 14% in 2024.”

The net cash income forecast puts Kansas closer to what is projected nationally, according to Ifft.

“It looks like we’re moving into a period of tighter profit margins after some years where a lot of producers, though not everybody, did well,” Ifft said “We’re not below historical average farm income yet, but unfortunately, the normal in agriculture is a fairly tight profit margin.”

The Kansas Farm Income Outlook was put together by the Rural and Farm Finance Policy Analysis Center, which has its headquarters at the University of Missouri but publishes the farm income outlook for seven Midwest states. Parcell and Ifft are among the K-State faculty members who contribute to Kansas’ report.

<a href="https://ruralandfarmfinance.com/publications/">The full Kansas Farm Income Outlook is available online</a>. Ongoing analysis and reports about Kansas agriculture also are available&nbsp;<a href="https://agmanager.info/">online from the K-State Department of Agricultural Economics</a>.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/4/1713454999408.jpeg" alt="&nbsp;Kansas 2024 net farm income is projected to increase 21%, but net cash income will decrease by 14%, according to an outlook recently published by the Rural and Farm Policy Analysis Center. Image Courtesy KSRE" />
 <figcaption>&nbsp;Kansas 2024 net farm income is projected to increase 21%, but net cash income will decrease by 14%, according to an outlook recently published by the Rural and Farm Policy Analysis Center. Image Courtesy KSRE</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>Uncertainty still underlies most farm income projections</h2><a href="mailto:melgares@ksu.edu" target="_blank">By PAT MELGARES </a>K-State Research and Extension news serviceIn an unusual twist, Kansas State University agricultural economists are reporting divergent paths for net farm income and net cash income in the coming year.Jenny Ifft, the Flinchbaugh Agricultural Policy Chair at K-State, said it is rare that the two measures of farm revenue move in different directions.“This is one of those annoying situations where an economist says ‘it depends,’” Ifft said, referring to projected farm profitability this year.Most areas of the state have recovered from drought in 2022, and other areas are currently experiencing moderate drought. Yet, assuming that crop yields follow normal trends, and the fact that economists project lower prices for fertilizer, fuel and oil, 2024 could be similar to 2023 for some farmers. Ifft said Kansas 2024 crop receipts projections show about 6% growth over 2023 if yields are similar to the historical average.Joe Parcell, director of the Center for Risk Management Education and Research at K-State, said some areas of the livestock sector — dairy and hogs, for example — are expected to do better this year than in 2023, and the cattle dynamics are “a wildcard in Kansas.” Cattle price forecasts are high, but inventories are also down.“The big question in the cattle market is how fast can cow-calf producers rebuild the herd that they sold off last year as a result of high prices and the drought,” Parcell said. “The other thing we see is that feed yards have been extremely resilient. Compared to five years ago, (feed yards) are spending $1,000 more per head in costs. If you take $1,000 for every 1,000 animals, that’s $1 million more they are putting through that feed yard.“We’re still projecting for all cattle receipts to be even year-over-year, and that’s really holding up Kansas farm income right now.”Ifft said that combining factors weighing on crop and livestock production, “we expect net farm income to increase 21%, but net cash income to decrease by 14%.”She added that economists often focus on net farm income because that measure reflects the totality of the producer’s income in a given year. Net farm income includes income as well as changes to materials and inventory.“And so if we’re talking about a return to normal crop yields this year, producers are going to have more crops; they are going to have higher inventories at the end of 2024,” Ifft said.But, she adds, “you can also look at net cash income, and this is something that lenders like to look at because they’re interested in producers' ability to repay loans. Cash is what you can see easily…what’s in your bank account. And we expect net cash income to be down about 14% in 2024.”The net cash income forecast puts Kansas closer to what is projected nationally, according to Ifft.“It looks like we’re moving into a period of tighter profit margins after some years where a lot of producers, though not everybody, did well,” Ifft said “We’re not below historical average farm income yet, but unfortunately, the normal in agriculture is a fairly tight profit margin.”The Kansas Farm Income Outlook was put together by the Rural and Farm Finance Policy Analysis Center, which has its headquarters at the University of Missouri but publishes the farm income outlook for seven Midwest states. Parcell and Ifft are among the K-State faculty members who contribute to Kansas’ report.<a href="https://ruralandfarmfinance.com/publications/">The full Kansas Farm Income Outlook is available online</a>. Ongoing analysis and reports about Kansas agriculture also are available&nbsp;<a href="https://agmanager.info/">online from the K-State Department of Agricultural Economics</a>.

Report: Kansas Farm Income Outlook comparable to 2023, say K-State economists

KANSAS CITY (AP) —A bird flu outbreak in U.S. dairy cows has grown to affect&nbsp;<a href="https://www.aphis.usda.gov/livestock-poultry-disease/avian/avian-influenza/hpai-detections/livestock">more than two dozen herds</a>&nbsp;in eight states, just weeks after the nation's largest egg producer found&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/bird-flu-texas-mississippi-chickens-dbae49f8786dda586036c1b86b9d0997">the virus</a>&nbsp;in its chickens.

Health officials stress that the risk to the public is low and that the U.S. food supply remains safe and stable.

“At this time, there continues to be no concern that this circumstance poses a risk to consumer health, or that it affects the safety of the interstate commercial milk supply,” the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said in a statement.

Here’s what you need to know about bird flu and food:

WHICH STATES HAVE FOUND BIRD FLU IN DAIRY COWS?

As of Friday, the strain of&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/bird-avian-flu-chickens-eggs-03793b5b1cb7429ce293e8577aef0358">bird flu</a>&nbsp;that has killed millions of wild birds in recent years has been found in at least 26 dairy herds in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.aphis.usda.gov/livestock-poultry-disease/avian/avian-influenza/hpai-detections/livestock">eight U.S. states</a>: Idaho, Kansas, Michigan, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas and South Dakota.

The virus, known as Type A H5N1, has been detected in a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/disease-outbreaks-hong-kong-health-bird-flu-animals-75e5d058e0fda23b5359f66cafb74cdf">range of mammals</a>&nbsp;over the last few years, but this is the first time it has been found in cattle, according to federal health and animal agencies. Genetic analysis of the virus does not show that it has changed to spread more easily in people, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said.

HOW IS BIRD FLU AFFECTING FOOD PRODUCTION?

Agriculture officials in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.avma.org/news/states-begin-restrict-cattle-imports-those-influenza-cases">at least 17 states</a>&nbsp;have restricted imports of dairy cattle from states where the virus has been detected, but, so far, government agencies say it’s had little effect on commercial milk production. Officials believe cows likely have been infected by exposure to wild birds, but said cow-to-cow spread&nbsp;<a href="https://www.aphis.usda.gov/news/agency-announcements/usda-fda-cdc-share-update-hpai-detections-dairy-cattle">“cannot be ruled out."</a>

Farmers are testing cows that show symptoms of infection, including sharply reduced milk supply and lethargy. Animals that show signs or test positive for illness are being separated from other animals on the farms. The animals appear to recover within two weeks.

U.S. egg producers are watching the situation closely after bird flu was&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/bird-avian-flu-chickens-eggs-03793b5b1cb7429ce293e8577aef0358">detected in chickens in Texas and Michigan.</a>&nbsp;Millions of birds have been killed, but the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fda.gov/food/egg-guidance-regulation-and-other-information/questions-and-answers-regarding-safety-eggs-during-highly-pathogenic-avian-influenza-outbreaks">FDA said</a>&nbsp;the risk of affected eggs getting into the retail market or causing infections in humans is low because of federal inspections and other safeguards.

Scientists say there’s no evidence to suggest that people can contract the virus by consuming food that’s been pasteurized, or heat-treated — or properly cooked.

“It’s not a food safety concern,” said Lee-Ann Jaykus, an emeritus food microbiologist and virologist at North Carolina State University.

Two people in U.S. have been infected with bird flu to date.&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/bird-flu-texas-cows-355f1e288e72df8b81b0e2efd8b3ae2f">A Texas dairy worker</a>&nbsp;who was in close contact with an infected cow recently developed a mild eye infection and has recovered. In 2022, a prison inmate in a work program&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-health-environment-colorado-b98906e0a1899bb1f92da30a7b1dbe28">caught it</a>&nbsp;while killing infected birds at a Colorado poultry farm. His only symptom was fatigue, and he recovered.

IS GROCERY STORE MILK SAFE FROM BIRD FLU?

Yes, according to food safety experts and government officials.

U.S. producers are barred from selling milk from sick cows and must divert and destroy it. In addition, milk sold across state lines is required to be pasteurized, or heat-treated using a process that kills bacteria and viruses, including influenza.

“We firmly believe that pasteurization provides a safe milk supply,” Tracey Forfa, director of the FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine told a webinar audience this week.

The FDA and the CDC are less certain about unpasteurized, or raw, milk sold in many states, saying there’s limited information about the possible transmission of the H5N1 virus in such products.

So far, no herds linked to raw milk providers have reported cows infected with bird flu, but the agencies recommend that the industry not make or sell raw milk or raw milk cheese products made with milk from cows that show symptoms — or are exposed to infected cows.

U.S. health officials have long warned against the risk of foodborne illness tied to raw milk, which the CDC said caused more than&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/rawmilk/rawmilk-outbreaks.">200 outbreaks</a>&nbsp;that sickened more than 2,600 people between 1998 and 2018.

Still, raw milk proponents like Mark McAfee, owner of Raw Farm USA in Fresno, Calif., said the outbreak of H5N1 in commercial cows appears to have spurred higher sales of the products, despite federal warnings.

CAN YOU CATCH BIRD FLU FROM EGGS OR MEAT?

Only dairy cows, not beef cattle, have been infected or shown signs of illness to date, agriculture officials said.

The largest egg producer in the U.S. temporarily halted operations on April 2 after finding bird flu in its chickens. Cal-Maine Foods culled about 1.6 million laying hens and another 337,000 pullets, or young hens, after the detection.

The company said there was no risk to eggs in the market and that no eggs had been recalled.

Eggs that are handled properly and cooked thoroughly are safe to eat, said Barbara Kowalcyk, director of the Center for Food Safety and Nutrition Security at George Washington University.

“A lot of people like runny eggs. Personally, if I eat an egg, it’s very well cooked,” she said.

Still, Kowalcyk and others cautioned that the situation could change.

“This is an emerging issue and clearly this pathogen is evolving and there’s a lot that we don’t know,” she said. “I do think that everybody is trying to figure it out as quickly as possible.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/11/1636037846131.jpeg" alt="Photo USDA" />
 <figcaption>Photo USDA</figcaption>
 </figure>KANSAS CITY (AP) —A bird flu outbreak in U.S. dairy cows has grown to affect&nbsp;<a href="https://www.aphis.usda.gov/livestock-poultry-disease/avian/avian-influenza/hpai-detections/livestock">more than two dozen herds</a>&nbsp;in eight states, just weeks after the nation's largest egg producer found&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/bird-flu-texas-mississippi-chickens-dbae49f8786dda586036c1b86b9d0997">the virus</a>&nbsp;in its chickens.Health officials stress that the risk to the public is low and that the U.S. food supply remains safe and stable.“At this time, there continues to be no concern that this circumstance poses a risk to consumer health, or that it affects the safety of the interstate commercial milk supply,” the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said in a statement.Here’s what you need to know about bird flu and food:WHICH STATES HAVE FOUND BIRD FLU IN DAIRY COWS?As of Friday, the strain of&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/bird-avian-flu-chickens-eggs-03793b5b1cb7429ce293e8577aef0358">bird flu</a>&nbsp;that has killed millions of wild birds in recent years has been found in at least 26 dairy herds in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.aphis.usda.gov/livestock-poultry-disease/avian/avian-influenza/hpai-detections/livestock">eight U.S. states</a>: Idaho, Kansas, Michigan, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas and South Dakota.The virus, known as Type A H5N1, has been detected in a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/disease-outbreaks-hong-kong-health-bird-flu-animals-75e5d058e0fda23b5359f66cafb74cdf">range of mammals</a>&nbsp;over the last few years, but this is the first time it has been found in cattle, according to federal health and animal agencies. Genetic analysis of the virus does not show that it has changed to spread more easily in people, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said.HOW IS BIRD FLU AFFECTING FOOD PRODUCTION?Agriculture officials in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.avma.org/news/states-begin-restrict-cattle-imports-those-influenza-cases">at least 17 states</a>&nbsp;have restricted imports of dairy cattle from states where the virus has been detected, but, so far, government agencies say it’s had little effect on commercial milk production. Officials believe cows likely have been infected by exposure to wild birds, but said cow-to-cow spread&nbsp;<a href="https://www.aphis.usda.gov/news/agency-announcements/usda-fda-cdc-share-update-hpai-detections-dairy-cattle">“cannot be ruled out."</a>Farmers are testing cows that show symptoms of infection, including sharply reduced milk supply and lethargy. Animals that show signs or test positive for illness are being separated from other animals on the farms. The animals appear to recover within two weeks.U.S. egg producers are watching the situation closely after bird flu was&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/bird-avian-flu-chickens-eggs-03793b5b1cb7429ce293e8577aef0358">detected in chickens in Texas and Michigan.</a>&nbsp;Millions of birds have been killed, but the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fda.gov/food/egg-guidance-regulation-and-other-information/questions-and-answers-regarding-safety-eggs-during-highly-pathogenic-avian-influenza-outbreaks">FDA said</a>&nbsp;the risk of affected eggs getting into the retail market or causing infections in humans is low because of federal inspections and other safeguards.DOES PASTEURIZATION KILL BIRD FLU?Scientists say there’s no evidence to suggest that people can contract the virus by consuming food that’s been pasteurized, or heat-treated — or properly cooked.“It’s not a food safety concern,” said Lee-Ann Jaykus, an emeritus food microbiologist and virologist at North Carolina State University.Two people in U.S. have been infected with bird flu to date.&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/bird-flu-texas-cows-355f1e288e72df8b81b0e2efd8b3ae2f">A Texas dairy worker</a>&nbsp;who was in close contact with an infected cow recently developed a mild eye infection and has recovered. In 2022, a prison inmate in a work program&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-health-environment-colorado-b98906e0a1899bb1f92da30a7b1dbe28">caught it</a>&nbsp;while killing infected birds at a Colorado poultry farm. His only symptom was fatigue, and he recovered.IS GROCERY STORE MILK SAFE FROM BIRD FLU?Yes, according to food safety experts and government officials.U.S. producers are barred from selling milk from sick cows and must divert and destroy it. In addition, milk sold across state lines is required to be pasteurized, or heat-treated using a process that kills bacteria and viruses, including influenza.“We firmly believe that pasteurization provides a safe milk supply,” Tracey Forfa, director of the FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine told a webinar audience this week.IS RAW MILK SAFE FROM BIRD FLU?The FDA and the CDC are less certain about unpasteurized, or raw, milk sold in many states, saying there’s limited information about the possible transmission of the H5N1 virus in such products.So far, no herds linked to raw milk providers have reported cows infected with bird flu, but the agencies recommend that the industry not make or sell raw milk or raw milk cheese products made with milk from cows that show symptoms — or are exposed to infected cows.U.S. health officials have long warned against the risk of foodborne illness tied to raw milk, which the CDC said caused more than&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/rawmilk/rawmilk-outbreaks.">200 outbreaks</a>&nbsp;that sickened more than 2,600 people between 1998 and 2018.Still, raw milk proponents like Mark McAfee, owner of Raw Farm USA in Fresno, Calif., said the outbreak of H5N1 in commercial cows appears to have spurred higher sales of the products, despite federal warnings.CAN YOU CATCH BIRD FLU FROM EGGS OR MEAT?Only dairy cows, not beef cattle, have been infected or shown signs of illness to date, agriculture officials said.The largest egg producer in the U.S. temporarily halted operations on April 2 after finding bird flu in its chickens. Cal-Maine Foods culled about 1.6 million laying hens and another 337,000 pullets, or young hens, after the detection.The company said there was no risk to eggs in the market and that no eggs had been recalled.Eggs that are handled properly and cooked thoroughly are safe to eat, said Barbara Kowalcyk, director of the Center for Food Safety and Nutrition Security at George Washington University.“A lot of people like runny eggs. Personally, if I eat an egg, it’s very well cooked,” she said.Still, Kowalcyk and others cautioned that the situation could change.“This is an emerging issue and clearly this pathogen is evolving and there’s a lot that we don’t know,” she said. “I do think that everybody is trying to figure it out as quickly as possible.”___

Bird flu is spreading to more farm animals. Are milk and eggs safe?

KANSAS CITY(AP) — A person in Texas has been diagnosed with&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/bird-flu">bird flu</a>, an infection tied to the recent discovery of the virus in dairy cows, health officials said Monday.

The patient is being treated with an antiviral drug and their only reported symptom was eye redness,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dshs.texas.gov/news-alerts/dshs-reports-first-human-case-avian-influenza-texas">Texas health officials said</a>. Health officials say the person had been in contact with cows presumed to be infected, and the risk to the public remains low.

Last week, dairy cows in Kansas and Texas&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/bird-flu-dairy-cattle-usda-kansas-texas-c3040bb31a9a8293717d47362f006902">were reported</a>&nbsp;to be infected with bird flu — and federal agriculture officials later confirmed infections in a Michigan dairy herd that had recently received cows from Texas.

Since 2020, the bird flu virus has been spreading among&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/disease-outbreaks-hong-kong-health-bird-flu-animals-75e5d058e0fda23b5359f66cafb74cdf">more animal species</a>&nbsp;– including dogs, cats, skunks, bears and even&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/seals-bird-flu-deaths-oceans-80184a8793fbcc21fab01b1c90b0d71b">seals</a>&nbsp;and porpoises – in scores of countries. However, the detection is U.S. livestock is an “unexpected and problematic twist,” said Dr. Ali Khan, a former CDC outbreak investigator who is now dean of the University of Nebraska’s public health college.

This bird flu was first identified as a threat to people during a 1997 outbreak in Hong Kong. More than 460 people have died in the past two decades from bird flu infections, according to the World Health Organization.

The vast majority of infected people got it directly from birds, but scientists have been on guard for any sign of spread among people. Their biggest concern is that the virus could mutate to spread easily among humans, something that hasn’t happened yet.

It’s only the second time a person in the United States has been diagnosed with what’s known as Type A H5N1 virus. In 2022, a prison inmate in a work program&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-health-environment-colorado-b98906e0a1899bb1f92da30a7b1dbe28">picked it up</a>&nbsp;while killing infected birds at a poultry farm in Montrose County, Colorado. His only symptom was fatigue, and he recovered.

Texas officials didn’t identify the newly infected person, nor release any details about what brought them in contact with the cows.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/11/1636037846131.jpeg" alt="Photo USDA" />
 <figcaption>Photo USDA</figcaption>
 </figure>KANSAS CITY(AP) — A person in Texas has been diagnosed with&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/bird-flu">bird flu</a>, an infection tied to the recent discovery of the virus in dairy cows, health officials said Monday.The patient is being treated with an antiviral drug and their only reported symptom was eye redness,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dshs.texas.gov/news-alerts/dshs-reports-first-human-case-avian-influenza-texas">Texas health officials said</a>. Health officials say the person had been in contact with cows presumed to be infected, and the risk to the public remains low.Last week, dairy cows in Kansas and Texas&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/bird-flu-dairy-cattle-usda-kansas-texas-c3040bb31a9a8293717d47362f006902">were reported</a>&nbsp;to be infected with bird flu — and federal agriculture officials later confirmed infections in a Michigan dairy herd that had recently received cows from Texas.Since 2020, the bird flu virus has been spreading among&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/disease-outbreaks-hong-kong-health-bird-flu-animals-75e5d058e0fda23b5359f66cafb74cdf">more animal species</a>&nbsp;– including dogs, cats, skunks, bears and even&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/seals-bird-flu-deaths-oceans-80184a8793fbcc21fab01b1c90b0d71b">seals</a>&nbsp;and porpoises – in scores of countries. However, the detection is U.S. livestock is an “unexpected and problematic twist,” said Dr. Ali Khan, a former CDC outbreak investigator who is now dean of the University of Nebraska’s public health college.This bird flu was first identified as a threat to people during a 1997 outbreak in Hong Kong. More than 460 people have died in the past two decades from bird flu infections, according to the World Health Organization.The vast majority of infected people got it directly from birds, but scientists have been on guard for any sign of spread among people. Their biggest concern is that the virus could mutate to spread easily among humans, something that hasn’t happened yet.It’s only the second time a person in the United States has been diagnosed with what’s known as Type A H5N1 virus. In 2022, a prison inmate in a work program&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-health-environment-colorado-b98906e0a1899bb1f92da30a7b1dbe28">picked it up</a>&nbsp;while killing infected birds at a poultry farm in Montrose County, Colorado. His only symptom was fatigue, and he recovered.Texas officials didn’t identify the newly infected person, nor release any details about what brought them in contact with the cows.___

First person diagnosed with bird flu after being in contact with cows

TOPEKA (AP) —Milk from dairy cows in Kansas and in Texas has tested positive for&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/bird-flu-ohio-egg-farm-usda-d873383dd0927f8ebbdd850a6eebb9a5">bird flu</a>, U.S. officials said Monday.

Officials with the Texas Animal Health Commission confirmed the flu virus is the Type A H5N1 strain, known for decades to cause outbreaks in birds and to occasionally infect people. The virus is affecting older dairy cows in those states and in New Mexico, causing decreased lactation and low appetite.

It comes a week after officials in Minnesota announced that goats on a farm where there had been an outbreak of bird flu among poultry were diagnosed with the virus. It's believed to be the first time bird flu — also known as&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/avian-flu-chicken-outbreak-california-poultry-eggs-976f0f82843bf716dbad64f459b4b8be">highly pathogenic avian influenza</a>&nbsp;— was found in U.S. livestock.

The commercial milk supply is safe and risk to people is low, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Dairies are required to only allow milk from healthy animals to enter the food supply, and milk from the sick animals is being diverted or destroyed. Pasteurization also kills viruses and other bacteria, and the process is required for milk sold through interstate commerce, the agency said.

“At this stage, there is no concern about the safety of the commercial milk supply or that this circumstance poses a risk to consumer health,” the USDA said in a statement.

The federal government said its tests in the cattle did not detect any changes to the virus that would make it spread more easily to people.

Dairy farmers in Texas first became concerned three weeks ago when cattle started falling ill with what officials called “mystery dairy cow disease," Texas Department of Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller said. Milk production fell sharply and the cows were lethargic and weren't eating much.

“We hadn't seen anything like it before,” he said. “It was kind of like they had a cold.”

The state's animal health commission began an investigation that included tests for bird flu, spokeswoman Erin Robinson said. Based on findings from Texas, USDA officials think the cows got the virus from infected wild birds.

Experts say livestock appear to recover on their own within seven to 10 days. That's different than bird flu outbreaks in poultry, which necessitate killing flocks to get rid of the virus. Since 2022, outbreaks in have led to the loss of about 80 million birds in U.S. commercial flocks.

So far, the virus appears to be infecting about 10% of lactating dairy cows in the affected herds, said Michael Payne, a food animal veterinarian and and biosecurity expert with the University of California-Davis Western Institute for Food Safety and Security.

“This doesn’t look anything like the high-path influenza in bird flocks,” he said.

Bird flu was detected in unpasteurized, clinical samples of milk from sick cattle collected from two dairy farms in Kansas and one in Texas. The virus was also found in a nose and throat swab from another dairy in Texas.

Officials called it a rapidly evolving situation. The Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are involved, along with officials in the three states. Another dairy-heavy state, Iowa, said it is monitoring the situation.

Dairy industry officials said that producers have started enhanced biosecurity efforts on U.S. farms, including limiting the amount of traffic into and out of properties and restricting visits to employees and essential personnel.

Bird flu previously has been reported in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/seals-bird-flu-deaths-oceans-80184a8793fbcc21fab01b1c90b0d71b">48 different mammal species</a>, Payne noted, adding: “It was probably only a matter of time before avian influenza made its way to ruminants.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/11/1636037846131.jpeg" alt="photo USDA" />
 <figcaption>photo USDA</figcaption>
 </figure>TOPEKA (AP) —Milk from dairy cows in Kansas and in Texas has tested positive for&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/bird-flu-ohio-egg-farm-usda-d873383dd0927f8ebbdd850a6eebb9a5">bird flu</a>, U.S. officials said Monday.Officials with the Texas Animal Health Commission confirmed the flu virus is the Type A H5N1 strain, known for decades to cause outbreaks in birds and to occasionally infect people. The virus is affecting older dairy cows in those states and in New Mexico, causing decreased lactation and low appetite.It comes a week after officials in Minnesota announced that goats on a farm where there had been an outbreak of bird flu among poultry were diagnosed with the virus. It's believed to be the first time bird flu — also known as&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/avian-flu-chicken-outbreak-california-poultry-eggs-976f0f82843bf716dbad64f459b4b8be">highly pathogenic avian influenza</a>&nbsp;— was found in U.S. livestock.The commercial milk supply is safe and risk to people is low, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Dairies are required to only allow milk from healthy animals to enter the food supply, and milk from the sick animals is being diverted or destroyed. Pasteurization also kills viruses and other bacteria, and the process is required for milk sold through interstate commerce, the agency said.“At this stage, there is no concern about the safety of the commercial milk supply or that this circumstance poses a risk to consumer health,” the USDA said in a statement.The federal government said its tests in the cattle did not detect any changes to the virus that would make it spread more easily to people.Dairy farmers in Texas first became concerned three weeks ago when cattle started falling ill with what officials called “mystery dairy cow disease," Texas Department of Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller said. Milk production fell sharply and the cows were lethargic and weren't eating much.“We hadn't seen anything like it before,” he said. “It was kind of like they had a cold.”The state's animal health commission began an investigation that included tests for bird flu, spokeswoman Erin Robinson said. Based on findings from Texas, USDA officials think the cows got the virus from infected wild birds.Experts say livestock appear to recover on their own within seven to 10 days. That's different than bird flu outbreaks in poultry, which necessitate killing flocks to get rid of the virus. Since 2022, outbreaks in have led to the loss of about 80 million birds in U.S. commercial flocks.So far, the virus appears to be infecting about 10% of lactating dairy cows in the affected herds, said Michael Payne, a food animal veterinarian and and biosecurity expert with the University of California-Davis Western Institute for Food Safety and Security.“This doesn’t look anything like the high-path influenza in bird flocks,” he said.Bird flu was detected in unpasteurized, clinical samples of milk from sick cattle collected from two dairy farms in Kansas and one in Texas. The virus was also found in a nose and throat swab from another dairy in Texas.Officials called it a rapidly evolving situation. The Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are involved, along with officials in the three states. Another dairy-heavy state, Iowa, said it is monitoring the situation.Dairy industry officials said that producers have started enhanced biosecurity efforts on U.S. farms, including limiting the amount of traffic into and out of properties and restricting visits to employees and essential personnel.Bird flu previously has been reported in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/seals-bird-flu-deaths-oceans-80184a8793fbcc21fab01b1c90b0d71b">48 different mammal species</a>, Payne noted, adding: “It was probably only a matter of time before avian influenza made its way to ruminants.”___

Dairy cattle in Kansas test positive for bird flu

By RUDI KELLER,&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a>

The annual markets outlook from the Food &amp; Agricultural Policy Research Institute anticipates declining farm income, higher costs for producers

U.S. farm income is falling from record highs as low commodity prices, trade headwinds and higher costs squeeze profits, according to a&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://fapri.missouri.edu/publications/2024-us-agricultural-market-outlook/?utm_campaign=485145_FAPRI%20Baseline%20Report%20%28March%202024%29&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=Child%20account%20for%20The%20Curators%20of%20the%20University%20of%20Missouri&amp;dm_i=7JGU,AEC9,4NFRO6,1HPH8,1">new report from the University of Missouri</a>.

The 2024&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://fapri.missouri.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/2024-Baseline-Outlook.pdf">U.S. Agricultural Market Outlook</a>&nbsp;report released Tuesday by the Food &amp; Agricultural Policy Research Institute, also known as FAPRI, is a 10-year projection of the agriculture economy. It examines production trends and pricing for commodity and specialty crops and livestock and discusses issues like interest rates, consumer prices and biofuel production that impact on farming as a whole.

For producers, the news isn’t especially welcome.

“We got lower commodity prices kind of across the board, except for cattle,” said Pat Westhoff, the agricultural economics professor who serves as the institute’s director.

The annual report is eagerly anticipated in the agriculture industry and its findings have extra significance this year as Congress tries to&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4467907-farm-bill-tensions-conservation-fire-food-aid/">pass a farm bill</a>&nbsp;renewing producer support and food distribution programs.

Net farm income nationally is expected to be about $118.2 billion this year, down from a record of about $162 billion in 2022.

Westhoff said he briefed Congressional staff on the report Tuesday and the reaction was a classic glass half-empty, glass half-full split. Some saw the large decline in farm income as a problem, while others noted that income is expected to remain above the average from 2015 to 2019.

“People were using the same numbers and making the opposite arguments,” Westhoff said.

Missouri is second only to Texas in the number of farms, with 87,887 farms that sold $14.7 billion in agricultural products in 2022, up from $10.5 billion in 2017 according to&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/AgCensus/2022/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_2_US_State_Level/st99_2_001_001.pdf">the Census of Agriculture</a>. Missouri farms also received nearly $1 billion in government payments or other income.

With farm production expenses of $10.7 billion, Missouri farms had net cash income of $5 billion.

The 5,596 largest Missouri farms, with sales of $500,000 or more, sold more than $11.6 billion of products in 2022. The 67,400 Missouri farms with sales of less than $50,000 sold&nbsp;$685 million agricultural products.

Prices for grain and oil crops have fallen dramatically in the past year. Missouri farmers were receiving $14.90 a bushel for soybeans in January 2023, and $6.94 a bushel for corn. According to the monthly agricultural prices report from the National Agricultural Statistics Service, the price received for soybeans in January was $12.90 a bushel and for corn it was $4.79.

The issues facing farmers nationally, Westhoff said, are true in Missouri, where corn, soybeans and wheat are the major cash crops.&nbsp;

The FAPRI report projects the decline in commodity grain prices will slow, but continue.

Missouri farmers get a slightly better price than the national average for corn and soybeans because of proximity to large rivers and industries such as ethanol and biodiesel that buy commodities locally, Westhoff said.

“Where you have crushing facilities for soybeans matters tremendously,” Westhoff said. “Where you have ethanol plants matters as well.”

Missouri produced 264.9 million bushels of soybeans in 2023. A decline of $2 per bushel means the farmers producing those beans received more than $500 million less than they did for the same commodity the previous year.

The sharp decline in market prices for soybeans hasn’t been accompanied by a similar decline in prices for fertilizer, fuel and other supplies, said Casey Wasser, chief operating officer of Missouri Soybeans, the industry lobbying association.

“The input prices have not come down at all with the other prices,” Wasser said. “So that’s where that net farm income is going to hit producers pretty tight.”

Missouri has the nation’s sixth largest cattle herd. It also is home to the sixth largest number of hogs, and its farmers sold the seventh largest number of chickens for meat consumption and had the nation’s 12th largest flock of laying hens.

But Missouri is losing farmers – and farmland – faster than the national average.

The number of farms declined 7.8% since the 2017 farm census while nationally the number fell 6.9%. Nationally, 2.2% of farmland was converted to other uses between the surveys, while in Missouri the acreage in farming declined 2.7%.

The smallest producers are being squeezed the tightest, said Tim Gibbons of the Missouri Rural Crisis Center. In a telephone interview after he spent a day lobbying in Washington for changes in national farm programs, Gibbons said the issues facing farmers go well beyond commodity prices and interest rates.

Control of agriculture continues to be concentrated in large corporations, he said. Farm programs are designed to support cheap commodities and large producers, he said.

“What I’m hearing on the Hill is a joke relative to the situation that is farming in Missouri and in the United States right now,” Gibbons said.

Corporate-backed buyers are&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/01/01/boom-or-bubble-high-missouri-farmland-prices-encourage-investors-concern-farmers/">outbidding local residents</a>&nbsp;for farmland and the concentration in meatpacking means producers become dependent on contracts that can be canceled when profits narrow. The decision by Tyson Foods to&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2024/03/11/tyson-to-close-perry-pork-plant-in-june/">close a plant in Perry, Iowa</a>, that employs 1,300 people will have a ripple effect on the farmers who raise hogs under contract, Gibbons said.

Missouri has lost more than 1,000 cattle producers a year over the past 25 years, a trend that accelerated to about 2,000 per year in the past five years, according to the farm census. The number of farms producing hogs has declined from 12,133 in 1992 to 2,184 in 2022.

“The policies that have been in recent past farm bills have been written by and for these multinational corporations and lobbyists that lobby for them,” Gibbons said. “We need a very different vision and a farm bill.”

The only area where prices are increasing in the past year are for cattle. That’s because the national herd is at its&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/03/19/droughts-complicated-by-climate-change-result-in-us-beef-herd-hitting-historic-low/">lowest number since the 1960s</a>, in large part due to pastureland drying up because of droughts starting in 2020.

“It’s causing liquidation and we’re not seeing rebuilding right now,” Gibbons said. “That connects with interest rates as well.”

Higher interest rates in the United States, which increase costs for farmers as they borrow to finance annual operations or add land and equipment, put farmers at a disadvantage internationally by making the dollar worth more in exchange, Westhoff said.

One indicator of the impact is that the U.S. has become a&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://nebraskapublicmedia.org/en/news/news-articles/the-us-agricultural-trade-deficit-could-reach-record-highs-for-2023-is-there-cause-for-concern/">net importer of food and agricultural products</a>, reversing decades of a surplus in the balance of farm trade.

“We are importing lots of value-added products that might otherwise be produced here and of course that has spillover effects,” Westhoff said.

The FAPRI report section on government aid to farmers notes that the cost of the two main programs intended to shore up prices –&nbsp; agricultural risk coverage, or ARC, and price loss coverage, or PLC fell below $1 billion because of recent high commodity prices.&nbsp;

At the same time, crop insurance payments in 2023 totaled $9.3 billion.

“We need to figure out a system of farmer-owned grain reserves and price floors and price ceilings to stop the volatility of the market, and keep that price floor at the cost of production,” Gibbons said.

Missouri Soybean is pushing for changes in federal farm support programs to reset the protected prices at a higher level, Wasser said. Prices on beans could fall another $2 per bushel and Missouri farmers wouldn’t qualify for payments to make up any of the difference, he said.

“We’re still not even close to a safety net, with inputs and $11 beans it’s tough for any farmer no matter what your size or your leverage to be making any profit on that,” Wasser said..

FAPRI’s job is to provide information, not advise on policy decisions, Westhoff said.

The difficulty of getting changes to the programs is cost, he said.

Some “would like to do some changes that would improve the safety net from the perspective of producers but those changes all cost money,” he said. “And unless you’re going to reduce that spending or reduce spending on conservation programs, there’s not any obvious way to put those pieces together.”

The decline in commodity prices should ease inflation in food costs and even reverse some recent increases, such as for eggs and pork, Westhoff said. Food purchased for consumption at home should not increase any faster than inflation generally, the report indicates.

But consumers shouldn’t expect everything in the supermarket to get cheaper, he said.

“For the most part, the share of those commodity prices that affect consumer food prices is pretty small,” Westhoff said. “Therefore even a significant decline in the farm level price doesn’t translate to any decline, or not a very big decline, in grocery store prices.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/2/1614189270972.jpeg" alt="Photo USDA" />
 <figcaption>Photo USDA</figcaption>
 </figure>By RUDI KELLER,&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a><h2>The annual markets outlook from the Food &amp; Agricultural Policy Research Institute anticipates declining farm income, higher costs for producers</h2>U.S. farm income is falling from record highs as low commodity prices, trade headwinds and higher costs squeeze profits, according to a&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://fapri.missouri.edu/publications/2024-us-agricultural-market-outlook/?utm_campaign=485145_FAPRI%20Baseline%20Report%20%28March%202024%29&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=Child%20account%20for%20The%20Curators%20of%20the%20University%20of%20Missouri&amp;dm_i=7JGU,AEC9,4NFRO6,1HPH8,1">new report from the University of Missouri</a>.The 2024&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://fapri.missouri.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/2024-Baseline-Outlook.pdf">U.S. Agricultural Market Outlook</a>&nbsp;report released Tuesday by the Food &amp; Agricultural Policy Research Institute, also known as FAPRI, is a 10-year projection of the agriculture economy. It examines production trends and pricing for commodity and specialty crops and livestock and discusses issues like interest rates, consumer prices and biofuel production that impact on farming as a whole.For producers, the news isn’t especially welcome.“We got lower commodity prices kind of across the board, except for cattle,” said Pat Westhoff, the agricultural economics professor who serves as the institute’s director.The annual report is eagerly anticipated in the agriculture industry and its findings have extra significance this year as Congress tries to&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4467907-farm-bill-tensions-conservation-fire-food-aid/">pass a farm bill</a>&nbsp;renewing producer support and food distribution programs.Net farm income nationally is expected to be about $118.2 billion this year, down from a record of about $162 billion in 2022.Westhoff said he briefed Congressional staff on the report Tuesday and the reaction was a classic glass half-empty, glass half-full split. Some saw the large decline in farm income as a problem, while others noted that income is expected to remain above the average from 2015 to 2019.“People were using the same numbers and making the opposite arguments,” Westhoff said.Missouri is second only to Texas in the number of farms, with 87,887 farms that sold $14.7 billion in agricultural products in 2022, up from $10.5 billion in 2017 according to&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/AgCensus/2022/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_2_US_State_Level/st99_2_001_001.pdf">the Census of Agriculture</a>. Missouri farms also received nearly $1 billion in government payments or other income.With farm production expenses of $10.7 billion, Missouri farms had net cash income of $5 billion.The 5,596 largest Missouri farms, with sales of $500,000 or more, sold more than $11.6 billion of products in 2022. The 67,400 Missouri farms with sales of less than $50,000 sold&nbsp;$685 million agricultural products.Prices for grain and oil crops have fallen dramatically in the past year. Missouri farmers were receiving $14.90 a bushel for soybeans in January 2023, and $6.94 a bushel for corn. According to the monthly agricultural prices report from the National Agricultural Statistics Service, the price received for soybeans in January was $12.90 a bushel and for corn it was $4.79.The issues facing farmers nationally, Westhoff said, are true in Missouri, where corn, soybeans and wheat are the major cash crops.&nbsp;The FAPRI report projects the decline in commodity grain prices will slow, but continue.Missouri farmers get a slightly better price than the national average for corn and soybeans because of proximity to large rivers and industries such as ethanol and biodiesel that buy commodities locally, Westhoff said.“Where you have crushing facilities for soybeans matters tremendously,” Westhoff said. “Where you have ethanol plants matters as well.”Missouri produced 264.9 million bushels of soybeans in 2023. A decline of $2 per bushel means the farmers producing those beans received more than $500 million less than they did for the same commodity the previous year.The sharp decline in market prices for soybeans hasn’t been accompanied by a similar decline in prices for fertilizer, fuel and other supplies, said Casey Wasser, chief operating officer of Missouri Soybeans, the industry lobbying association.“The input prices have not come down at all with the other prices,” Wasser said. “So that’s where that net farm income is going to hit producers pretty tight.”Missouri has the nation’s sixth largest cattle herd. It also is home to the sixth largest number of hogs, and its farmers sold the seventh largest number of chickens for meat consumption and had the nation’s 12th largest flock of laying hens.But Missouri is losing farmers – and farmland – faster than the national average.The number of farms declined 7.8% since the 2017 farm census while nationally the number fell 6.9%. Nationally, 2.2% of farmland was converted to other uses between the surveys, while in Missouri the acreage in farming declined 2.7%.The smallest producers are being squeezed the tightest, said Tim Gibbons of the Missouri Rural Crisis Center. In a telephone interview after he spent a day lobbying in Washington for changes in national farm programs, Gibbons said the issues facing farmers go well beyond commodity prices and interest rates.Control of agriculture continues to be concentrated in large corporations, he said. Farm programs are designed to support cheap commodities and large producers, he said.“What I’m hearing on the Hill is a joke relative to the situation that is farming in Missouri and in the United States right now,” Gibbons said.Corporate-backed buyers are&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/01/01/boom-or-bubble-high-missouri-farmland-prices-encourage-investors-concern-farmers/">outbidding local residents</a>&nbsp;for farmland and the concentration in meatpacking means producers become dependent on contracts that can be canceled when profits narrow. The decision by Tyson Foods to&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2024/03/11/tyson-to-close-perry-pork-plant-in-june/">close a plant in Perry, Iowa</a>, that employs 1,300 people will have a ripple effect on the farmers who raise hogs under contract, Gibbons said.Missouri has lost more than 1,000 cattle producers a year over the past 25 years, a trend that accelerated to about 2,000 per year in the past five years, according to the farm census. The number of farms producing hogs has declined from 12,133 in 1992 to 2,184 in 2022.“The policies that have been in recent past farm bills have been written by and for these multinational corporations and lobbyists that lobby for them,” Gibbons said. “We need a very different vision and a farm bill.”The only area where prices are increasing in the past year are for cattle. That’s because the national herd is at its&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/03/19/droughts-complicated-by-climate-change-result-in-us-beef-herd-hitting-historic-low/">lowest number since the 1960s</a>, in large part due to pastureland drying up because of droughts starting in 2020.Short supplies are pushing prices up.“It’s causing liquidation and we’re not seeing rebuilding right now,” Gibbons said. “That connects with interest rates as well.”Higher interest rates in the United States, which increase costs for farmers as they borrow to finance annual operations or add land and equipment, put farmers at a disadvantage internationally by making the dollar worth more in exchange, Westhoff said.One indicator of the impact is that the U.S. has become a&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://nebraskapublicmedia.org/en/news/news-articles/the-us-agricultural-trade-deficit-could-reach-record-highs-for-2023-is-there-cause-for-concern/">net importer of food and agricultural products</a>, reversing decades of a surplus in the balance of farm trade.“We are importing lots of value-added products that might otherwise be produced here and of course that has spillover effects,” Westhoff said.The FAPRI report section on government aid to farmers notes that the cost of the two main programs intended to shore up prices –&nbsp; agricultural risk coverage, or ARC, and price loss coverage, or PLC fell below $1 billion because of recent high commodity prices.&nbsp;At the same time, crop insurance payments in 2023 totaled $9.3 billion.“We need to figure out a system of farmer-owned grain reserves and price floors and price ceilings to stop the volatility of the market, and keep that price floor at the cost of production,” Gibbons said.Missouri Soybean is pushing for changes in federal farm support programs to reset the protected prices at a higher level, Wasser said. Prices on beans could fall another $2 per bushel and Missouri farmers wouldn’t qualify for payments to make up any of the difference, he said.“We’re still not even close to a safety net, with inputs and $11 beans it’s tough for any farmer no matter what your size or your leverage to be making any profit on that,” Wasser said..FAPRI’s job is to provide information, not advise on policy decisions, Westhoff said.The difficulty of getting changes to the programs is cost, he said.Some “would like to do some changes that would improve the safety net from the perspective of producers but those changes all cost money,” he said. “And unless you’re going to reduce that spending or reduce spending on conservation programs, there’s not any obvious way to put those pieces together.”The decline in commodity prices should ease inflation in food costs and even reverse some recent increases, such as for eggs and pork, Westhoff said. Food purchased for consumption at home should not increase any faster than inflation generally, the report indicates.But consumers shouldn’t expect everything in the supermarket to get cheaper, he said.“For the most part, the share of those commodity prices that affect consumer food prices is pretty small,” Westhoff said. “Therefore even a significant decline in the farm level price doesn’t translate to any decline, or not a very big decline, in grocery store prices.”

University  report warns falling prices could squeeze farmers

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/tim-carpenter/">TIM CARPENTER</a>&nbsp; &nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/">Kansas Reflector</a>

House-passed bill adds ban against spy drones, aircraft flying below 500 feet

TOPEKA — The Animal Legal Defense Fund filed a lawsuit in 2018 challenging on First Amendment grounds Kansas’ quarter-century-old law thwarting covert investigations into the treatment of animals and workers at feedlots, slaughterhouses and crop production zones.

Ramifications of that legal action continue to vex the animal agriculture industry in Kansas, farm lobbying organizations and rural legislators.

In 2021, the 10th Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals agreed with ALDF’s legal claim and a lower federal court’s decision to strike down provisions of Kansas’ “ag-gag” law — the oldest statute in the United States criminalizing undercover videotaping of alleged abuses.

The appellate court concluded Kansas had embarked on a forthright statutory plan to limit the ability of ALDF and like-mined organizations to slip under the radar in search of proof of the industry’s shortcomings. When signed into law by Republican Gov. Mike Hayden in 1990, he said the legislation was a direct response to damage perpetrated by “radical elements of the animal-rights movement.”

That state law selectively criminalized work of activists critical of Kansas agriculture practices. It didn’t mandate charges against a person who gained access to property without permission with the goal of lauding Kansas animal-handling practices. In other words, Hayden and other Kansas lawmakers interested in squelching dissent were guilty of state-sanctioned discrimination based on viewpoint.

“We reject this approach,” the federal Court of Appeals said. “It elevates form over substance and permits Kansas to do just what the First Amendment prohibits: License one side of a debate to fight freestyle, while requiring the other to follow&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marquess_of_Queensberry_Rules">Marquis of Queensberry rules</a>.”

The U.S. Supreme Court declined in 2022 to review the Court of Appeals’ unraveling of the Farm Animal and Field Crop and Research Facilities Protection Act.

The courthouse outcome was celebrated by the coalition of special-interest groups led by ALDF as a victory for animal rights and free speech. They also could see a path to placing their people — whistleblowers — as employees at targeted facilities to collect insider information for articles and videos about hog, beef and dairy or poultry operations, processing facilities and other agriculture businesses in Kansas.

“The industry works hard to keep its practices secret, knowing consumers won’t accept the intense confinement and other inhumane treatment of animals,” said Stephen Wells, executive director of the Animal Legal Defense Fund.

The Kansas Livestock Association, with more than 5,000 members involved in dairy, swine and beef production along with other farm enterprises, went to work drafting a rebuttal bill. The objective was to refine the state’s protection against trespassers on farm property or people making fraudulent statements on employment applications to gain access to land and facilities.

Results of that effort, wrapped into House Bill 2816, was approved 99-24 this week by the Kansas House after five minutes of floor debate. KLA’s legal product avoided the sticky mess caused by language about “intent to damage” and “effective consent” that helped to undermine the 1990 statute. The package forwarded to the Kansas Senate also clarified criminal penalties and blocked use of drones and aircraft below 500 feet directly above agriculture businesses.

“There are some places that people just shouldn’t go without permission,” said Rep. Lisa Moser, a Wheaton Republican and rancher. “This is tailored language done specifically to address the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision.”

Moser noted the bill resolved the free speech issue by applying sanctions to any unauthorized trespasser on agriculture cropland, farm research facility or animal operation whether those people were engaged in covert investigations or innocent behavior.

None of the likely opponents of the bill, such as the ALDF, the Sierra Club of Kansas or Humane Society of the United States, testified during the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee hearing March 6.

Jackie Garagiola, associate counsel to the Kansas Livestock Association, said the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court not to hear the state’s appeal meant the law had to be revised so “critical protections provided by the act for these facilities remain, but in a manner that does not come into conflict with the First Amendment.”

Under House Bill 2816, Kansas would make it illegal to enter or remain in animal facility or field crop production areas without permission of the owner or to knowingly make false statements on an employment application to gain access to those places. The same standards would apply to agriculture research areas controlled by private, university, federal, state or local government entities.

Garagiola said “effective consent” language in the Kansas law was unconstitutional because it regulated speech as opposed to conduct.

The new bill addressed the federal court’s contention the old Kansas law forbid speech made with the “intent to damage the enterprise conducted at the animal facility.” To clear up constitutional violations, the House-passed bill created the simple prohibition for trespass or use of fraudulent employment applications regardless of intent of the individual.

It would be a class A misdemeanor to enter or remain on these properties without consent and a class B misdemeanor for making bogus statements on job applications to gain access. The penalty for property damage or destruction of an animal or crop facility would be a level 9 nonperson felony for damage ranging from $1,000 to $25,000 and a level 7 nonperson felony for damages of $25,000 or more.

KLA’s approach was endorsed by Kansas Farm Bureau, Kansas Grain &amp; Feed Association, Kansas Agribusiness Retailers Association, Kansas Pork Association and Kansas Dairy Association.

Janet Bailey, CEO of the dairy association, said the fastest growing segment of Kansas agriculture — dairying — needed lawmakers to&nbsp; close the gap left by the Court of Appeals’ decision. In particular, she said, the dairy industry was keen to secure criminal sanctions against people seeking jobs under false pretenses. The threat of prosecution has been an effective deterrent to undercover inquiries in the United States.

“Labor is a top concern among those in the dairy industry,” Bailey said. “As such, it can make our industry even more vulnerable to those who might seek employment with motives other than working in the care of our animals and production of milk. Their motives are clear in their desire to damage our industry and the livelihoods of the industry.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/3/1711230479923.png" alt=" Janet Bailey, CEO of the Kansas Dairy Association, said the fastest growing segment of Kansas agriculture — dairying — needed the Kansas Legislature to respond to a federal court decision by removing unconstitutional provisions of state law and restoring protections against undercover animal-rights organizations and applicants seeking jobs under false pretenses. (Jill Hummels/Kansas Reflector)" />
 <figcaption> Janet Bailey, CEO of the Kansas Dairy Association, said the fastest growing segment of Kansas agriculture — dairying — needed the Kansas Legislature to respond to a federal court decision by removing unconstitutional provisions of state law and restoring protections against undercover animal-rights organizations and applicants seeking jobs under false pretenses. (Jill Hummels/Kansas Reflector)</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/tim-carpenter/">TIM CARPENTER</a>&nbsp; &nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/">Kansas Reflector</a><h2>House-passed bill adds ban against spy drones, aircraft flying below 500 feet</h2>TOPEKA — The Animal Legal Defense Fund filed a lawsuit in 2018 challenging on First Amendment grounds Kansas’ quarter-century-old law thwarting covert investigations into the treatment of animals and workers at feedlots, slaughterhouses and crop production zones.Ramifications of that legal action continue to vex the animal agriculture industry in Kansas, farm lobbying organizations and rural legislators.In 2021, the 10th Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals agreed with ALDF’s legal claim and a lower federal court’s decision to strike down provisions of Kansas’ “ag-gag” law — the oldest statute in the United States criminalizing undercover videotaping of alleged abuses.The appellate court concluded Kansas had embarked on a forthright statutory plan to limit the ability of ALDF and like-mined organizations to slip under the radar in search of proof of the industry’s shortcomings. When signed into law by Republican Gov. Mike Hayden in 1990, he said the legislation was a direct response to damage perpetrated by “radical elements of the animal-rights movement.”That state law selectively criminalized work of activists critical of Kansas agriculture practices. It didn’t mandate charges against a person who gained access to property without permission with the goal of lauding Kansas animal-handling practices. In other words, Hayden and other Kansas lawmakers interested in squelching dissent were guilty of state-sanctioned discrimination based on viewpoint.“We reject this approach,” the federal Court of Appeals said. “It elevates form over substance and permits Kansas to do just what the First Amendment prohibits: License one side of a debate to fight freestyle, while requiring the other to follow&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marquess_of_Queensberry_Rules">Marquis of Queensberry rules</a>.”The U.S. Supreme Court declined in 2022 to review the Court of Appeals’ unraveling of the Farm Animal and Field Crop and Research Facilities Protection Act.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/3/1711230441938.png" alt=" Kansas Rep. Lisa Moser, a Republican and rancher, asked House colleagues to ditch unconstitutional provisions of Kansas law and adopt a revised strategy for thwarting animal-rights activists engaging in undercover work to expose livestock industry practices. (Rachel Mipro/Kansas Reflector)" />
 <figcaption> Kansas Rep. Lisa Moser, a Republican and rancher, asked House colleagues to ditch unconstitutional provisions of Kansas law and adopt a revised strategy for thwarting animal-rights activists engaging in undercover work to expose livestock industry practices. (Rachel Mipro/Kansas Reflector)</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>‘Just shouldn’t go’</h2>The courthouse outcome was celebrated by the coalition of special-interest groups led by ALDF as a victory for animal rights and free speech. They also could see a path to placing their people — whistleblowers — as employees at targeted facilities to collect insider information for articles and videos about hog, beef and dairy or poultry operations, processing facilities and other agriculture businesses in Kansas.“The industry works hard to keep its practices secret, knowing consumers won’t accept the intense confinement and other inhumane treatment of animals,” said Stephen Wells, executive director of the Animal Legal Defense Fund.The Kansas Livestock Association, with more than 5,000 members involved in dairy, swine and beef production along with other farm enterprises, went to work drafting a rebuttal bill. The objective was to refine the state’s protection against trespassers on farm property or people making fraudulent statements on employment applications to gain access to land and facilities.Results of that effort, wrapped into House Bill 2816, was approved 99-24 this week by the Kansas House after five minutes of floor debate. KLA’s legal product avoided the sticky mess caused by language about “intent to damage” and “effective consent” that helped to undermine the 1990 statute. The package forwarded to the Kansas Senate also clarified criminal penalties and blocked use of drones and aircraft below 500 feet directly above agriculture businesses.“There are some places that people just shouldn’t go without permission,” said Rep. Lisa Moser, a Wheaton Republican and rancher. “This is tailored language done specifically to address the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision.”Moser noted the bill resolved the free speech issue by applying sanctions to any unauthorized trespasser on agriculture cropland, farm research facility or animal operation whether those people were engaged in covert investigations or innocent behavior.None of the likely opponents of the bill, such as the ALDF, the Sierra Club of Kansas or Humane Society of the United States, testified during the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee hearing March 6.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/3/1711230407996.png" alt="The Kansas Livestock Association’s attorneys prepared House Bill 2816, which easily passed the House, to restore protections of the beef, dairy, hog and poultry industries, crop producers and research facilities that might be targeted by animal-rights organizations. (Tim Carpenter/Kansas Reflector)" />
 <figcaption>The Kansas Livestock Association’s attorneys prepared House Bill 2816, which easily passed the House, to restore protections of the beef, dairy, hog and poultry industries, crop producers and research facilities that might be targeted by animal-rights organizations. (Tim Carpenter/Kansas Reflector)</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>KLA steps into void</h2>Jackie Garagiola, associate counsel to the Kansas Livestock Association, said the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court not to hear the state’s appeal meant the law had to be revised so “critical protections provided by the act for these facilities remain, but in a manner that does not come into conflict with the First Amendment.”Under House Bill 2816, Kansas would make it illegal to enter or remain in animal facility or field crop production areas without permission of the owner or to knowingly make false statements on an employment application to gain access to those places. The same standards would apply to agriculture research areas controlled by private, university, federal, state or local government entities.Garagiola said “effective consent” language in the Kansas law was unconstitutional because it regulated speech as opposed to conduct.The new bill addressed the federal court’s contention the old Kansas law forbid speech made with the “intent to damage the enterprise conducted at the animal facility.” To clear up constitutional violations, the House-passed bill created the simple prohibition for trespass or use of fraudulent employment applications regardless of intent of the individual.It would be a class A misdemeanor to enter or remain on these properties without consent and a class B misdemeanor for making bogus statements on job applications to gain access. The penalty for property damage or destruction of an animal or crop facility would be a level 9 nonperson felony for damage ranging from $1,000 to $25,000 and a level 7 nonperson felony for damages of $25,000 or more.KLA’s approach was endorsed by Kansas Farm Bureau, Kansas Grain &amp; Feed Association, Kansas Agribusiness Retailers Association, Kansas Pork Association and Kansas Dairy Association.Janet Bailey, CEO of the dairy association, said the fastest growing segment of Kansas agriculture — dairying — needed lawmakers to&nbsp; close the gap left by the Court of Appeals’ decision. In particular, she said, the dairy industry was keen to secure criminal sanctions against people seeking jobs under false pretenses. The threat of prosecution has been an effective deterrent to undercover inquiries in the United States.“Labor is a top concern among those in the dairy industry,” Bailey said. “As such, it can make our industry even more vulnerable to those who might seek employment with motives other than working in the care of our animals and production of milk. Their motives are clear in their desire to damage our industry and the livelihoods of the industry.”

Kansas House tries to fix constitutional flaw to shield agriculture from animal-rights activists

<a href="mailto:melgares@ksu.edu" target="_blank">By PAT MELGARES</a> K-State Research and Extension news service&nbsp;&nbsp;

A trio of Kansas State University graduate students recently reported their findings regarding threats to the animals that graze the Kansas prairie – and the impact of prescribed fire on those threats.

They reported their findings&nbsp;<a href="https://www.asi.k-state.edu/events/cattlemens-day/">during K-State’s recent Cattlemen’s Day</a>, which highlights cattle-related research being conducted at the university.

The students’ multi-year research projects compared the effects of prescribed burning of pastures in spring, summer and fall.

Zach Duncan, who completed the doctoral degree in ruminant nutrition last December, compared the effects of burning in the three seasons on the growth performance of stocker cattle. The study zeroed in on how fire reduces the growth of sericea lespedeza, an invasive weed that has degraded more than 600,000 acres of native Kansas rangeland – most of that in the Flint Hills region.

“Flint Hills ranches traditionally apply a spring-season fire in April, then intensively graze yearling beef cattle from May to August,” Duncan said. “Unfortunately, this practice has not limited the proliferation of sericea lespedeza.”

Previous research at K-State led by range management specialist KC Olson determined that burning in August or September reduces the presence of sericea lespedeza, but that practice has been limited, Duncan said, “because burning pastures later in the year could have unknown major effects on the growth performance of stocker cattle during the next grazing season.”

The six-year study studied the effects of fire in spring, summer and fall with nearly 2,000 yearling beef cattle grazing the land. Duncan said the results indicate shifting burning from August to October reduced yearling stocker cattle weight gains by 10-14 pounds during a 90-day grazing season.

Ranchers should weigh that finding, however, against the reduced need for herbicides against sericea lespedeza, improved wildlife habitat, and the reduced downwind impacts of smoke on air quality, Duncan said.

In another study, Andrea Salazar – a K-State doctoral candidate in entomology – found that spring- and summer-burned pastures had lower counts of ticks compared to fall-burned areas.

High tick burdens on cattle, Salazar said, results in decreased production, anemia, skin irritations, pruritus (itching) and stress.

“Furthermore, ticks serve as vectors for diverse pathogens, such as bacteria, protozoa and parasites, leading to diseases in animals and humans,” she said.

The study was conducted at K-State’s Beef Stocker Unit west of the Manhattan campus. Salazar said three tick species were found: The Lone Star tick, American dog tick, and the Gulf Coast tick. “Significantly fewer ticks were collected from fire-treated areas compared to non-burned areas during eight months of sampling,” she said.

“Among seasonally burned areas, tick counts in fall pastures were higher than summer and spring pastures,” Salazar added.

“The findings suggest that consistent annual burning of grazing areas, particularly when conducted in the spring, holds the potential to substantially diminish tick populations. This approach presents an efficient non-chemical method for tick control. The strategic timing of prescribed fires is crucial, aligning them with conditions that target specific tick species during vulnerable phases in their life cycle to optimize the impact on tick control.”

The choice of when to burn does not seem to make a difference in protecting populations of dung beetles, an important part of the pasture ecosystem. First-year entomology graduate student Herman Griese said “the difference was not significant” in a study that looked at spring, summer and fall prescribed burns.

Dung beetles feed on or store feces to provide housing and food for their young, which in turn transports nutrients to the subsoil and improves nutrient cycling, soil structure and forage growth on the prairie.

For farmers, the benefits to their land and livestock herds also are real: reduced parasite pressure, better aeration, reduced compaction, reduced runoff after rain events and decreased ammonia levels.

“Based on our study, ranchers who are worried about killing their decomposers (such as dung beetles) by burning their pastures can choose what time of year to burn based on other desired outcomes,” Griese said.

The full listing of research reports presented during the 2024 K-State Cattlemen’s Day is&nbsp;<a href="https://www.asi.k-state.edu/extension/beef/focusareas/24_CattlemensDaySummary.pdf">available online</a>.

READ MORE:&nbsp;<a href="https://salinapost.com/posts/e75818b1-80eb-49fc-a472-5e13faca548b">Propane Central celebrates retirement for 26-year employee</a>

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/3/1710440580581.jpeg" alt="Recent research on the effects of prescribed burning in Kansas has looked at benefits to the ecosystem. Image courtesy K-State Research and Extension" />
 <figcaption>Recent research on the effects of prescribed burning in Kansas has looked at benefits to the ecosystem. Image courtesy K-State Research and Extension</figcaption>
 </figure><a href="mailto:melgares@ksu.edu" target="_blank">By PAT MELGARES</a> K-State Research and Extension news service&nbsp;&nbsp;A trio of Kansas State University graduate students recently reported their findings regarding threats to the animals that graze the Kansas prairie – and the impact of prescribed fire on those threats.They reported their findings&nbsp;<a href="https://www.asi.k-state.edu/events/cattlemens-day/">during K-State’s recent Cattlemen’s Day</a>, which highlights cattle-related research being conducted at the university.The students’ multi-year research projects compared the effects of prescribed burning of pastures in spring, summer and fall.Zach Duncan, who completed the doctoral degree in ruminant nutrition last December, compared the effects of burning in the three seasons on the growth performance of stocker cattle. The study zeroed in on how fire reduces the growth of sericea lespedeza, an invasive weed that has degraded more than 600,000 acres of native Kansas rangeland – most of that in the Flint Hills region.“Flint Hills ranches traditionally apply a spring-season fire in April, then intensively graze yearling beef cattle from May to August,” Duncan said. “Unfortunately, this practice has not limited the proliferation of sericea lespedeza.”Previous research at K-State led by range management specialist KC Olson determined that burning in August or September reduces the presence of sericea lespedeza, but that practice has been limited, Duncan said, “because burning pastures later in the year could have unknown major effects on the growth performance of stocker cattle during the next grazing season.”The six-year study studied the effects of fire in spring, summer and fall with nearly 2,000 yearling beef cattle grazing the land. Duncan said the results indicate shifting burning from August to October reduced yearling stocker cattle weight gains by 10-14 pounds during a 90-day grazing season.Ranchers should weigh that finding, however, against the reduced need for herbicides against sericea lespedeza, improved wildlife habitat, and the reduced downwind impacts of smoke on air quality, Duncan said.In another study, Andrea Salazar – a K-State doctoral candidate in entomology – found that spring- and summer-burned pastures had lower counts of ticks compared to fall-burned areas.High tick burdens on cattle, Salazar said, results in decreased production, anemia, skin irritations, pruritus (itching) and stress.“Furthermore, ticks serve as vectors for diverse pathogens, such as bacteria, protozoa and parasites, leading to diseases in animals and humans,” she said.The study was conducted at K-State’s Beef Stocker Unit west of the Manhattan campus. Salazar said three tick species were found: The Lone Star tick, American dog tick, and the Gulf Coast tick. “Significantly fewer ticks were collected from fire-treated areas compared to non-burned areas during eight months of sampling,” she said.“Among seasonally burned areas, tick counts in fall pastures were higher than summer and spring pastures,” Salazar added.“The findings suggest that consistent annual burning of grazing areas, particularly when conducted in the spring, holds the potential to substantially diminish tick populations. This approach presents an efficient non-chemical method for tick control. The strategic timing of prescribed fires is crucial, aligning them with conditions that target specific tick species during vulnerable phases in their life cycle to optimize the impact on tick control.”The choice of when to burn does not seem to make a difference in protecting populations of dung beetles, an important part of the pasture ecosystem. First-year entomology graduate student Herman Griese said “the difference was not significant” in a study that looked at spring, summer and fall prescribed burns.Dung beetles feed on or store feces to provide housing and food for their young, which in turn transports nutrients to the subsoil and improves nutrient cycling, soil structure and forage growth on the prairie.For farmers, the benefits to their land and livestock herds also are real: reduced parasite pressure, better aeration, reduced compaction, reduced runoff after rain events and decreased ammonia levels.“Based on our study, ranchers who are worried about killing their decomposers (such as dung beetles) by burning their pastures can choose what time of year to burn based on other desired outcomes,” Griese said.The full listing of research reports presented during the 2024 K-State Cattlemen’s Day is&nbsp;<a href="https://www.asi.k-state.edu/extension/beef/focusareas/24_CattlemensDaySummary.pdf">available online</a>.READ MORE:&nbsp;<a href="https://salinapost.com/posts/e75818b1-80eb-49fc-a472-5e13faca548b">Propane Central celebrates retirement for 26-year employee</a>

K-State Cattleman’s Day: Students present research on impacts of prescribed burning

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Drivers in eight Midwestern states will be able to fuel up with a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/ethanol-e15-gasoline-midwest-epa-40550ba65a308617fdc490dcf9e57ad9">higher blend of ethanol</a>&nbsp;throughout the year under a final rule announced Thursday by the Environmental Protection Agency.

The biofuels industry and farming groups, with support of Midwest governors, sought the end of a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-biden-business-smog-environment-4a877e9afc2837609c4a0aee72a042bc">summertime ban</a>&nbsp;on sales of gasoline blended with 15% ethanol for years. The higher blend has been prohibited because of concerns it could worsen smog during warm weather.

The move reflects the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/congress-debt-ceiling-iowa-ethanol-fb4c486ef4ee2aab944946a187a8c128">importance of ethanol to agriculture</a>. The fuel additive consumes roughly 40% of the nation's corn crop, so higher sales of ethanol could mean greater profits for corn farmers.

The rule, which takes effect in April 2025, will apply in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin. Those states grow the bulk of the U.S. corn crop and are home to much of the nation's ethanol production.

The EPA said it delayed implementation of the new rule because of concerns there wasn't enough supply to meet demand this summer. Ethanol producers welcomed the change but criticized the EPA for that delay.

“While we are pleased to see EPA has finally approved year-round E15 in these eight states, we are extremely disappointed by the agency’s needless decision to delay implementation until 2025,” the Renewable Fuels Association, a trade group, said in a statement. “It’s helpful to finally have some certainty about 2025 and beyond, but what happens this summer?”

Most gasoline sold across the country is blended with 10% ethanol, though 15% blends are becoming increasingly common, especially in the Midwest. E15 summer sales still will not be allowed in most of the country during summer, though agricultural groups are pushing for a nationwide policy change.

The biofuels industry and politicians of both parties have portrayed ethanol as a product that helps farmers, reduces prices at the pump and lessens greenhouse gas releases because the fuel burns more cleanly than straight gasoline. However, environmentalists and others have said increased ethanol production can increase carbon releases because it results in more corn production, leading to increased use of fertilizer and greater releases of nitrate. Synthetic and natural fertilizers also are a leading source of water pollution.

The EPA has approved sales of E15 for cars and trucks manufactured after 2000. Grow Energy, another bioenergy trade association, estimates the higher blend will cost consumers 15 cents a gallon less than 10% ethanol.

Petroleum refiners have opposed the Midwest-specific rules, saying a special blend in one region would increase costs and could lead to tighter fuel supplies.

The American Petroleum Institute, a trade group, said a national standard was needed.

“We are concerned this piecemeal approach could weaken the resiliency of the region’s fuel supply chain," Will Hupman, a vice president at the group said in a statement. "We continue to call on Congress to pass the bipartisan Nationwide Consumer and Fuel Retailer Choice Act, which would bring much needed consistency to the marketplace by allowing for the year-round sale of E15 nationwide, preserving access to E10 and eliminating the need for regional or state-specific waiver petitions.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/12/1639069226448.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Drivers in eight Midwestern states will be able to fuel up with a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/ethanol-e15-gasoline-midwest-epa-40550ba65a308617fdc490dcf9e57ad9">higher blend of ethanol</a>&nbsp;throughout the year under a final rule announced Thursday by the Environmental Protection Agency.The biofuels industry and farming groups, with support of Midwest governors, sought the end of a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-biden-business-smog-environment-4a877e9afc2837609c4a0aee72a042bc">summertime ban</a>&nbsp;on sales of gasoline blended with 15% ethanol for years. The higher blend has been prohibited because of concerns it could worsen smog during warm weather.The move reflects the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/congress-debt-ceiling-iowa-ethanol-fb4c486ef4ee2aab944946a187a8c128">importance of ethanol to agriculture</a>. The fuel additive consumes roughly 40% of the nation's corn crop, so higher sales of ethanol could mean greater profits for corn farmers.The rule, which takes effect in April 2025, will apply in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin. Those states grow the bulk of the U.S. corn crop and are home to much of the nation's ethanol production.The EPA said it delayed implementation of the new rule because of concerns there wasn't enough supply to meet demand this summer. Ethanol producers welcomed the change but criticized the EPA for that delay.“While we are pleased to see EPA has finally approved year-round E15 in these eight states, we are extremely disappointed by the agency’s needless decision to delay implementation until 2025,” the Renewable Fuels Association, a trade group, said in a statement. “It’s helpful to finally have some certainty about 2025 and beyond, but what happens this summer?”Most gasoline sold across the country is blended with 10% ethanol, though 15% blends are becoming increasingly common, especially in the Midwest. E15 summer sales still will not be allowed in most of the country during summer, though agricultural groups are pushing for a nationwide policy change.The biofuels industry and politicians of both parties have portrayed ethanol as a product that helps farmers, reduces prices at the pump and lessens greenhouse gas releases because the fuel burns more cleanly than straight gasoline. However, environmentalists and others have said increased ethanol production can increase carbon releases because it results in more corn production, leading to increased use of fertilizer and greater releases of nitrate. Synthetic and natural fertilizers also are a leading source of water pollution.The EPA has approved sales of E15 for cars and trucks manufactured after 2000. Grow Energy, another bioenergy trade association, estimates the higher blend will cost consumers 15 cents a gallon less than 10% ethanol.Petroleum refiners have opposed the Midwest-specific rules, saying a special blend in one region would increase costs and could lead to tighter fuel supplies.The American Petroleum Institute, a trade group, said a national standard was needed.“We are concerned this piecemeal approach could weaken the resiliency of the region’s fuel supply chain," Will Hupman, a vice president at the group said in a statement. "We continue to call on Congress to pass the bipartisan Nationwide Consumer and Fuel Retailer Choice Act, which would bring much needed consistency to the marketplace by allowing for the year-round sale of E15 nationwide, preserving access to E10 and eliminating the need for regional or state-specific waiver petitions.”

EPA approves year-round sales of higher ethanol blend in 8 Midwest states

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — On the first business day of the new year, Missouri Treasurer Vivek Malek began accepting applications for about $120 million of state-subsidized, low-interest loans to small businesses, farmers and affordable housing developers.

Within six hours, Malek had so many requests for the money that he had to&nbsp;<a href="https://treasurer.mo.gov/newsroom/news-and-events-item?pr=2d796735-a82e-4215-8b83-c1c159e7c95f">cut off applications</a>.

“The demand is huge, and it is real,” Malek said.

Missouri's situation, though extreme, is not entirely unique. From New York to Illinois to Montana, states have seen surging public interest in little-known programs that use state funds to spur private investment with bargain-priced loans. The programs have taken off after a series of key interest rate hikes by the Federal Reserve made virtually all&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/treasury-yield-rates-wall-street-mortgage-aa78d3c3c50728ed62291a58695f3cd0?utm_source=copy&amp;utm_medium=share">loans more expansive</a>, whether for farmers purchasing seed or businesses wanting to expand.

To&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/federal-reserve-inflation-prices-interest-rates-cuts-815e42c425cff3e76e89b8f37aaa52f4?utm_source=copy&amp;utm_medium=share">combat inflation</a>&nbsp;in consumer prices, the Fed raised its benchmark interest rate 11 times from March 2022 to last July, setting it at a two-decade high.

Under so-called linked-deposit programs, states deposit money in banks at below-market interest rates. Banks then leverage those funds to provide short-term, low-interest loans to particular borrowers, often in agriculture or small business. The programs can save thousands of dollars for borrowers by reducing their interest rates by an average 2-3 percentage points.

States typically cap the amount of money available for such discounted rates at either a flat dollar amount or a percentage of their total fund balances, because the programs result in less earnings for the state. Many states have built large surpluses from pandemic-era revenues, meaning they have more money available to deposit in banks.

Though most states don't currently offer such programs, some that shelved them when interest rates were low are now considering whether to revive them to aid financially-strapped businesses and residents.

“I can say in talks with other state treasurers that there is a definite increased interest in treasury money, whether that is through a linked-deposit program or a different vehicle," said Illinois Treasurer Michael Frerichs, who is president of the National Association of State Treasurers.

Illinois has nearly $950 million of deposits linked to low-interest loans for farmers, businesses and individuals. That's up substantially from past years. In 2015, Frerichs said, the state's agricultural investment program had just two low-interest loans. By 2022, that had grown to $51 million of loans. Last year, Illinois made $667 million of low-rate deposits for agricultural loans.

With rising demand, Frerichs recently raised the program’s overall cap from $1 billion to $1.5 billion.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/1/1705584027458.png" alt="Missouri Treasurer Vivek Malek stands near a poster promoting drought conditions and state aid programs on Jan. 4, 2024, at his Capitol office in Jefferson City, Mo. Agricultural entities are among several categories of businesses that can receive low-interest loans backed by deposits of state funds made by the treasurer's office. Participation in such programs has grown in various states. (AP Photo/David A. Lieb)" />
 <figcaption>Missouri Treasurer Vivek Malek stands near a poster promoting drought conditions and state aid programs on Jan. 4, 2024, at his Capitol office in Jefferson City, Mo. Agricultural entities are among several categories of businesses that can receive low-interest loans backed by deposits of state funds made by the treasurer's office. Participation in such programs has grown in various states. (AP Photo/David A. Lieb)</figcaption>
 </figure>JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — On the first business day of the new year, Missouri Treasurer Vivek Malek began accepting applications for about $120 million of state-subsidized, low-interest loans to small businesses, farmers and affordable housing developers.Within six hours, Malek had so many requests for the money that he had to&nbsp;<a href="https://treasurer.mo.gov/newsroom/news-and-events-item?pr=2d796735-a82e-4215-8b83-c1c159e7c95f">cut off applications</a>.“The demand is huge, and it is real,” Malek said.Missouri's situation, though extreme, is not entirely unique. From New York to Illinois to Montana, states have seen surging public interest in little-known programs that use state funds to spur private investment with bargain-priced loans. The programs have taken off after a series of key interest rate hikes by the Federal Reserve made virtually all&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/treasury-yield-rates-wall-street-mortgage-aa78d3c3c50728ed62291a58695f3cd0?utm_source=copy&amp;utm_medium=share">loans more expansive</a>, whether for farmers purchasing seed or businesses wanting to expand.To&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/federal-reserve-inflation-prices-interest-rates-cuts-815e42c425cff3e76e89b8f37aaa52f4?utm_source=copy&amp;utm_medium=share">combat inflation</a>&nbsp;in consumer prices, the Fed raised its benchmark interest rate 11 times from March 2022 to last July, setting it at a two-decade high.Under so-called linked-deposit programs, states deposit money in banks at below-market interest rates. Banks then leverage those funds to provide short-term, low-interest loans to particular borrowers, often in agriculture or small business. The programs can save thousands of dollars for borrowers by reducing their interest rates by an average 2-3 percentage points.States typically cap the amount of money available for such discounted rates at either a flat dollar amount or a percentage of their total fund balances, because the programs result in less earnings for the state. Many states have built large surpluses from pandemic-era revenues, meaning they have more money available to deposit in banks.Though most states don't currently offer such programs, some that shelved them when interest rates were low are now considering whether to revive them to aid financially-strapped businesses and residents.“I can say in talks with other state treasurers that there is a definite increased interest in treasury money, whether that is through a linked-deposit program or a different vehicle," said Illinois Treasurer Michael Frerichs, who is president of the National Association of State Treasurers.Illinois has nearly $950 million of deposits linked to low-interest loans for farmers, businesses and individuals. That's up substantially from past years. In 2015, Frerichs said, the state's agricultural investment program had just two low-interest loans. By 2022, that had grown to $51 million of loans. Last year, Illinois made $667 million of low-rate deposits for agricultural loans.With rising demand, Frerichs recently raised the program’s overall cap from $1 billion to $1.5 billion.Though smaller in scope, New York's program also has seen an explosion of applicants.In 2022, New York had 42 applications for state deposits in financial institutions linked to $20 million in low-interest loans. Last year, that rose to 317 applications linked to more than $220 million of loans, said Rafael Salaberrios, a senior vice president who manages capital access programs at Empire State Development, New York's economic development agency.“As the banks see the benefit, they are inundating us with applications — and that’s a good thing,” Salaberrios said. He added: "The linked deposit has allowed for the growth of small businesses to continue even during these high (interest) rate environments.”Because of rising demand, Missouri's linked-deposit loan program neared its statutory cap of $800 million last May. After some existing loans expired, the treasurer's office was able to reopen applications at 10 a.m. on Jan. 2. By 4 p.m. that day, it had approached the cap again — receiving 142 applications totaling over $119 million — and closed the application window.About half the applications came on behalf of customers of just two financial institutions — OakStar Bank and FCS Financial, a leading agricultural lender. FCS Financial had over 100 additional applications in line to submit when applications were cut off, said Brian Zimmerschied, vice president for its commercial crop lending team.BTC Bank in rural Bethany, Missouri, had planned to turn in about dozen applications on behalf of its customers. But it missed out entirely because of the quick cutoff, bank CEO Doug Fish said.Among those left disappointed was Jason Bernard, a farmer near Bethany who had hoped for a low-interest loan to help purchase this year's supply of seed, fertilizer and chemical spray.With higher interest rates, "it’s a lot harder to make it, just because your payments,” Bernard said.The Missouri treasurer's office is&nbsp;<a href="https://house.mo.gov/Bill.aspx?bill=HB1803&amp;year=2024&amp;code=R">backing legislation</a>&nbsp;to raise the program's cap from $800 million to $1.2 billion, which would mark a 50% increase in capacity. The expansion could cost the state $12 million of potential earnings, though that could be partly offset by the economic activity generated from those loans, according to a legislative&nbsp;<a href="https://documents.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills241/fiscal/fispdf/3236H.01I.ORG.pdf">fiscal analysis</a>.In Montana, lawmakers last year authorized a new program to address a shortage of affordable housing. The Montana Board of Investments launched a linked-deposit loan initiative in October that received $77 million of applications within two months, reaching a self-imposed cap and forcing it to close applications sooner than expected.Republican state Rep. Mike Hopkins, who sponsored the housing incentive legislation, was thrilled with the response.“We’re in a bit of a jam in the state of Montana" for affordable housing, Hopkins said, and “we were able to get money out the door as quickly as possible.”Officials in Iowa, Kansas and Ohio also told the AP they had increased demand for programs that deposit state money in banks to provide low-interest loans. The number of such loan recipients in Kansas tripled from 2022 to 2023. In Ohio, the amount of money provided for those loans rose by two-thirds during that time, to more than $600 million.Oklahoma's linked-deposit program has been dormant since 2010 amid low interest rates, but at least two banks recently contacted the treasurer's office about the possibility of restarting it, said Deputy Treasurer Jordan Harvey.Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller said he hadn't approved any linked deposits for low-interest loans since taking office in 2015 — until last year, when he approved his first two.“There wasn’t much need because interest rates were cheap," Miller said."But now that the rates are up," Miller added, “it could be a viable program, and we could help some people.”