u.s. canola digest - jan/feb 2015

Farm Bill Implementation • Pollinators and Neonicotinoids • Perspective: Planting Growth

Large Commodity Supplies, Economic and Geopolitical Transitions Push Down Canola Market

OUTLOOK ON OILSEED MARKETS

The official publication of the U.S. Canola Association and Northern Canola Growers Association

January • February 2015

Delivering Performance in Every FieldGrow the world class BrettYoung Genuity® Roundup Ready® varieties on your farm this season – including the proven yield performer 6070 RR – you will not be disappointed. We select each variety to meet the performance needs of USA canola growers. Our priority is helping you grow.

A World of Knowledgein Every Bag…

1 Based on NDSU and private trial data from 2010 to 2013 converted to 90 DTM base.

2 Yield data based on North Dakota State University (NDSU), Minnesota Canola Council and Agrotech small plot variety trials 2010-13. 6064 RR data from 2013 only.

Monsanto Company is a member of Excellence Through Stewardship® (ETS). Monsanto products are commercialized in accordance with ETS Product Launch Stewardship Guidance, and in compliance with Monsanto’s Policy for Commercialization of Biotechnology-Derived Plant Products in Commodity Crops. This product has been approved for import into key export markets with functioning regulatory systems. Any crop or material produced from this product can only be exported to, or used, processed or sold in countries where all necessary regulatory approvals have been granted. It is a violation of national and international law to move material containing biotech traits across boundaries into nations where import is not permitted. Growers should talk to their grain handler or product purchaser to confirm their buying position for this product. Excellence Through Stewardship® is a registered trademark of Biotechnology Industry Organization. Always read and follow pesticide label directions. Roundup Ready® crops contain genes that confer tolerance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup® brand agricultural herbicides. Roundup® brand agricultural herbicides will kill crops that are not tolerant to glyphosate. Genuity Design®, Genuity Icons, Genuity®, Roundup Ready®, and Roundup® are trademarks of Monsanto Technology LLC. BrettYoung is a trademark of BrettYoung Seeds Limited. 3823 08/14

Visit brettyoungusa.com1-800-665-5015

6070 RR 6064 RR 6044 RR

Days to Maturity1 91.0 92.7 90.3

Yield2 109% 113% 106%

Blackleg R R R

Standability Excellent Excellent Excellent

ExcellentHARVESTABILITY

Client: BrettYoungProject: A World of Knowledge...Date: Sept 2014Designer: JM

Publication: US Canola DigestSize: 8.5” x 11”Bleed: .125”Colour: CMYK

Agency: ON CommunicationAgency Contact: Jen GrozelleTelephone: 519-434-1365 Ext.220Email: [email protected]

features

8 Bee Smart:Protecting Pollinators Protects Canola and Other Crops

122014 Farm Bill: It’s Not That ComplicatedCompromise Creates Choices for Farmers

14 Under Pressure: 2015 Global Oilseed OutlookLarge Commodity Supplies, Economic and Geopolitical Transitions Push Down Canola Market

18 2014 National Canola Research Conference:Studies Highlight Golden Opportunities for Canola

22 Perspective: Planting GrowthPositioning Canola as Major U.S. Oilseed

24 Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2015Sustainability New ‘Menu’ Item

25 Diseases Impacting Winter Canola in Southern Plains Blackleg and Sclerotinia Top List

U.S. Canola Digest is published four times a year in January/February, March/April, September/October and November/December by the U.S. Canola Association (USCA) and Northern Canola Growers Association (NCGA). Subscription is complimentary to all USCA and NCGA members and other qualified members of the U.S. canola industry. Reproduction of contents is forbidden. Copyright 2015. Postmaster: Send address changes to Northern Canola Growers Association, 2718 Gateway Ave., #301, Bismarck, ND 58503 or email [email protected].

departments

2 Editors’ Letter 4 USCA Update 6 NCGA News 26 PNW News

28 GPCA News 29 MCC News 30 Quick Bytes 32 Canola Cooks

on the cover

While demand for canola continues to increase, there is downward pressure on its price due to rising oilseed stocks, a stronger U.S. dollar and broader economic uncertainties.

JANUARY • FEBRUARY 2015VOL. 10, NO. 1

24

08

12

WWW.USCANOLA.COM

EXECUTIVE EDITORAngela [email protected]

MANAGING EDITORAlison Neumer [email protected]

ASSISTANT EDITORMolly Collins [email protected]

CONTRIBUTING WRITERSTerry Barr; Jack Brown; Barry Coleman; Sheri Coleman; John Damicone; Jon Dockter; Tom Hance; Heath Sanders; Ron Sholar; Karen Sowers; Dale Thorenson

PUBLISHER Issues Ink 1395-A S. Columbia Road PMB 360 Grand Forks, ND 58201-9901 tel: 877.710.3222

OWNED BYU.S. Canola Association 600 Pennsylvania, SE, Suite 320Washington, DC 20003tel: 202.969.8113 • fax: 202.969.7036www.uscanola.com

Northern Canola Growers Association2718 Gateway Ave, #301Bismarck, ND 58503tel: 701.223.4124 • fax: 701.223.4130www.northerncanola.com

REGIONAL AFFILIATESGreat Lakes Canola Associationwww.agry.purdue.edu/ext/canola

Great Plains Canola Associationwww.greatplainscanola.com

Minnesota Canola Councilwww.mncanola.org

2 U . S . C A N O L A D I G E S T J A N UA RY • F E B R UA RY 2 0 1 5

executive editor [email protected]

managing editor [email protected]

THE LIST OF NEW YEAR’S resolut ions a lways seems to stare back at us with a menacing challenge. But this is the year! Let U.S. Canola Digest help you with some of your tasks. In this issue, we take a closer look at the new farm bill programs, examine sh i f t s ahead in the oi l seed market and review findings from the National Canola Research Conference.

Turning to the f ield, we also update you on canola diseases in the Southern Plains and how the agricultural sector is addressing the issue of pollinator health. On the food front, learn what the Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2015 may have in store.

Oilseed OutlookNew economic rea lities around the world have led to a significant increase in the value of the U.S. dollar and put added downward pressure on dollar-dominated commodity markets: oilseeds, grains and energy. However, commodities with the most rapid increases in prices from 2010 to 2013 are declining the fastest. Get a peek at the overall oilseed market forecast on page 14.

Farm Bill Implementation ProgressBy Feb. 27, land owners must decide whether they want to allocate their farm program base acres to the simple average of the crops grown on the farm for the years 2009-12. Dale Thorenson of the U.S. Canola Association walks us through the new approaching deadlines for the 2014 Farm Bill and what it can mean for you and your farm on page 12.

Pollinators and NeonicotinoidsPollinators, including honey bees, butterf lies and beetles, are essential to crop production. The health of the honey bee has been a recent cause for concern, with neonicotinoid insecticides unjustif iably receiving the bulk of the blame. Learn what agricultural stakeholders are doing to minimize any potential impact of neonics on pollinators as well as what you can do as a grower on page 8.

Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2015The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) just wrapped up its f inal meeting in December and will issue

editors’ letter

New Year, New Cropits report in early 2015 for the 8th edition of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. It may revise recommendations regarding intake of omega-3, saturated and trans fats as well as dietary cholesterol. Also, the DGAC is considering for the first time agriculture/aquaculture sustainability; foods/nutrients and cognitive function; biotech foods and clinical outcomes; nutrient overconsumption; gene nutrient/gene food interactions; food environment; food systems; and food safety. Learn more on page 24.

Research ReportThe National Canola Research Conference last November near Los Angeles attracted a standing room-only crowd. Among many agronomic and end use topics, researchers discussed canola oil’s potential as a feedstock for renewable jet fuel, the viability of farming canola in newer territory such as Texas and Ohio, and the genomic road ahead for improving canola traits. Browse summary highlights from more than 30 oral presentations delivered by university and industry researchers on page 18.

Southern Plains Disease WatchIf the weather wasn’t frustrating enough to growers in the Southern Plains in recent years, diseases affecting canola production there may be adding insult to injury. While blackleg is the most common problem, Sclerotinia can also be serious and black rot and aster yellows must be watched. To learn more about these diseases, turn to page 25.

Warm Up this WinterFor a healthy way to f ill up this winter, make a batch of Caramelized Caulif lower Soup with Herbed Canola Oil Drizzle. It looks cream-based, but instead it’s f illed with nutritious vegetables and fresh f lavor. Check it out on page 32.

May you conquer all of your New Year’s resolutions and may your crops be bountiful in 2015!

Happy New Year,

You expect InVigor ® canola to yield higher than other hybrids, but that’s not where the advantages stop. Last season InVigor introduced three new hybrids, offering high yield plus either superior oil content, sclerotinia tolerance or shatter-resistant pods.

Now it’s time to save on those new hybrids—and more—by getting a reward of $30 on every bag when you Early Book your InVigor canola before March 20, 2015.

Save $30 a bag.To Early Book your InVigor canola, talk to your seed retailer. For program details visit bayercropscience.us

Expect more. Save more.

©2014 Bayer CropScience LP, 2 TW Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Always read and follow label instructions. Bayer, the Bayer Cross and InVigor are registered trademarks of Bayer. For additional product information, call toll-free 1-866-99-BAYER (1-866-992-2937) or visit our website at www.bayercropscience.us.

CR1214INVIGOA165V00R0

usca update

4 U . S . C A N O L A D I G E S T J A N UA RY • F E B R UA RY 2 0 1 5 W W W.U S C A N O L A .CO M U . S . C A N O L A D I G E S T 5

Ag Priorities Fare Well in OmnibusRiders Restrict EPA Requirements on Clean Water LawsDALE THORENSON

AS THE LAME DUCK session of the 113th Congress ended in December, lawmakers passed a $1.014 tr i l l ion omnibus appropriations bill that will f und most government operat ions through Sept. 30, 2015.

Within that legislation, agricultural research received small increases over the previous year. Agricultural Research Service funding increased by $11 million to a total of $1.133 billion and funding for the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) increased by $12 million to a tota l of $1.289 bil l ion. Included in the NIFA funding was

$825,000 for the Supplementa l and A lternative Crops, which funds the National Canola Research Program.

Signif icant funding increases were also provided for several transportation priority areas supported by agricultural g roups. The U.S. A rmy Corps of Engineers Construction account for waterways infrastructure was increased by $514.5 million above the administration’s request, including $112 mil l ion in additional funding for Inland Waterways Trust Fund (IWTF) projects.

The omnibus appropriations bill funds the Olmsted Lock and Dam project, with

85 percent covered by the IWTF and the remaining 15 percent by the general treasury. Previously, it was split 50-50, consuming nearly all of the available IWTF dollars. This reflects the language in the Water Resources Reform and Development Act that was enacted earlier this year. The omnibus also provides $1.1 billion for the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, which is an increase of $100 million above the previous year.

Overa l l, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers fared well with a $921 million increase in its civil works account and a $47.5 million increase in the operations

W W W.U S C A N O L A .CO M U . S . C A N O L A D I G E S T 5W W W.U S C A N O L A .CO M U . S . C A N O L A D I G E S T 5

usca update

A TAX PACKAGE passed by the Senate just before adjourning in December will result in an estimated $1.4 billion in tax savings for the U.S. agricultural sector for the 2014 tax year.

The legislation extended tax breaks for businesses through Dec. 31, 2014, including the extension of bonus depreciation and the extension of increased expensing limitations and treatment of certain real property as section 179 property. The latter

Congress Reinstates Key Tax Provisions for 2014TOM HANCE

provision reinstates the small business expensing limitation of $500,000 and the phase-out amount to $2 million for property placed in service during 2014.

Also included in the package is the extension of the $1 per gallon tax credit for biodiesel and renewable diesel, which plays a significant role in keeping biodiesel production competitive in the market.

The package additionally included a provision to increase the barge fuel fee by nine cents a gallon, which will

provide funds for needed waterways infrastructure projects. The fee, which was supported by the waterways industry and agricultural stakeholders, dedicates funds to new waterways infrastructure construction and major rehabilitation via the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.

TOM HANCE IS A POLICY EXPERT AT GORDLEY ASSOCIATES IN WASHINGTON, D.C.

and maintenance account – levels that wil l help the Corps in its ef forts to maintain operations on the Mississippi River and other inland waterways as well as make upgrades to aging infrastructure. Crops and other agricultural products are transported on these waterways.

Water Laws Rolled BackThe omnibus also included a rider

that requires the U.S. Environmental P ro t e c t ion A g enc y to w i t hd r aw the interpret ive ru le regarding the applicability of the Clean Water Act

signed on March 25, 2014. Numerous farm organizations had called for this rule to be withdrawn over concerns about its unintended consequences. Specif ica lly, farmers were concerned that jurisdiction could be asserted over streams and existing drainage ditches as well as their surrounding watersheds, ultimately prohibiting farming itself.

Another rider bars the use of funding to require a Section 404 permit for placing f i l l or dredging materia l in “navigable waters” of the U.S. when conducting “normal farming, silviculture,

and ranching activities such as plowing, seeding, cultivating, minor drainage, harvesting for the production of food, fiber, and forest products, or upland soil and water conservation practices” or during “construction or maintenance of farm or stock ponds or irrigation ditches, or the maintenance of drainage ditches,” both of which are currently considered “non-prohibited” activities under the statute.

DA LE T H O R EN SO N I S A SS I S TA N T D I R EC TO R O F TH E U. S . C AN O L A ASSOCIATION IN WASHINGTON, D.C.

StarpowerCanola can make you a star. Especially when you earn a 6 percent premium by growing top-yielding, high-oil hybrids in our Star Grower Program.

or call Zack at 1-855-5CANOLA

Power up at NorthstarAgri.com


regional news

Research Conference Prepares GrowersFocus on Blackleg ManagementBARRY COLEMAN AND SHERI COLEMAN, B.S.N., R.N.

8th Annual Canola Research Conference

T he Nor t hern Ca nol a Grower s Association (NCGA) held its 8th Annual Canola Research Conference in Fargo, N.D., on Nov. 20. The conference is an opportunity to hear the results of 2014 research funded by the NCGA and National Canola Research Program for the north-centra l region. More than 50 industry partners, producers and researchers attended.

“ T he NCG A f u nd s more t ha n $265,000 in important canola research projects each year that are designed to enhance the canola industry and solve problems and create opportunities for canola growers in the U.S.,” said NCGA President Jon Wert.

Wert highlighted important issues discussed at the meeting, including a canola disease survey, noting it “reinforces the need for growers to fol low best management practices to combat blackleg in canola.”

The NCGA, along with North Dakota State University, recommends growers rotate their canola varieties to prevent the build-up of black leg in the soil. Control l ing volunteer canola is a lso very critical to preventing spread of the disease. Growers who have experienced losses to black leg may a lso want to consider a longer rotat ion to avoid blackleg problems.

Growers and industry members heard reports from researchers on the following research projects for canola:• Expanding the Geographic Range of

Winter Canola in North Dakota

• Identification of Heat-Tolerant Genes in Canola

• Seeding Date Effect on Winter Canola in North Dakota

• Canola Oil and Breast Cancer Risk: Synergistic Effects with Lipotropes

• Development of High-Oil Canola Utilizing Double Haploid Breeding Technique

• Breeding of Frost-Tolerant Spring Canola in North Dakota

• Canola Disease and Flea Beetle Survey for North Dakota

• Aster Leafhopper Control in Canola• Increasing Canola Yields through Split

Application of Nitrogen• Impact of Previous Crop on Soybean

and Canola Yield• Evaluation of Winter/Spring Canola

Crosses in North Dakota• Integrated Management of Blackleg in

Canola• D e v e l o pm e nt o f Ne w C a n o l a

Germplasm for Increased Oil Per Acre • Identification of Brassica napus Sources

of Resistance to Blackleg• Impact of Previous Crop on Soybean

and Canola Yield

Managing BlacklegCanola growers who include canola

in their rotation more often than once every four years need to use blackleg management tools to ensure that selection pressure does not outpace canola breeding efforts to combat the disease. Data from studies in North Dakota shows that blackleg is increasing in the northeastern canola-growing regions of the state and that blackleg management strategies must

be practiced to ensure successful canola production. Suggested strategies include:

1. Rotate canola varieties. Research in Australia and Canada has shown that the risk of blackleg increases if only one or two varieties are grown in close proximity to the prior year’s stubble of those same varieties. Using the same variety could result in selection pressure since many different genes are responsible for blackleg resistance. By using different canola varieties from various companies, growers can create a resistance mix in their crop’s genes and help maintain resistance.

2. Use blackleg-resistant canola varieties. Canola varieties with an “R” rating for blackleg are strongly recommended. Rotation studies have found that blackleg severity dropped significantly when an “R”-rated hybrid was grown compared to a susceptible variety.

3. Control volunteer canola. Research has shown that volunteer canola and a lternate hosts such as wild mustard and Shepherd’s Purse can serve as ideal hosts for blackleg in non-canola f ields. Paying attention to these in corn, soybean or small


regional news

grain crops is important. Controlling these volunteers will help to break the disease bridge.

4. Use certified seed. Certified seed that has been treated with a seed treatment is a smart tool for controlling blackleg infestations. Such seed will ensure that each canola plant has the same genes, while second generation seed may not have the same mix of resistance genes.

5. Consider fungicides. If planting in fields with a history of high blackleg incidence, consider applying foliar fungicides no later than three weeks after planting to protect seedlings until they reach the fourth-fifth leaf growth stage. Research has shown that blackleg infections occurring before the plants reach the fourth-fifth leaf growth stage can result in economic yield reductions. Consult

Trend-Adjusted Canola

your extension specialists for a list of fungicides registered for use in canola.

Trend-Adjusted Crop Insurance

At the request of the NCGA, the U.S. Department of Agricu lture’s Risk Management Agency announced crop insurance changes for canola that were implemented in 2013. This newer Trend-Adjusted Canola Option allows growers to update their Actual Production History to better ref lect current canola yields. The program was first offered to corn and soybeans in select counties in the U.S. last year and canola was not scheduled to be implemented until 2016 or 2017.

However, according to Watts and Associates, “Canola was included in this pilot three years earlier than it had been scheduled as a result of work between Watts and Associates [on behalf of the NCGA] and the product’s owners.”

“reThink” Cooking Oil I n N o v e m b e r , t h e N C G A

participated in The Culinary Institute of A merica’s inaugura l “reThink Food” conference, a unique program co-presented by MIT to examine how technology, economics, design and other areas of innovation impact consumer food and cooking choices. The conference, attended by more than 600 key influencers, delved into topics such as big data, social networking, mobi l e c omput i n g , m a rk e t i n g , neuroscience and agricultural practices to better understand food markets, systems and consumer needs.

The NCGA dist r ibuted canola oil information to participants and dishes prepared with canola oil were served throughout the event. The final luncheon allowed the NCGA an excellent opportunity to showcase a gourmet-f lavored canola oil at each table, demonstrating how canola oil applies to current food trends.

B A R R Y CO L E M A N A N D S H E R I CO L E M A N , B . S . N . , R . N . , A R E E X E C U T I V E D I R E C T O R A N D A S S O C I A T E D I R E C T O R , RESPECTIVELY, OF THE NORTHERN CANOLA GROWERS ASSOCIATION IN BISMARCK, N.D.

2013 2014

Country

Acres

Electing

TA

Total

Crop

Acres

# of TA

Policies

% Acres

Electing

TA

Acrests

Electing

TA

Total

Crop

Acres

# of TA

Policies

% Acres

Electing

TA

Benson 1,769 12,101 23 15% 3,139 9,552 25 33%

Bottineau 15,744 81,746 56 19% 16,723 83,544 99 20%

Burke 7,828 70,589 22 11% 12,006 65,990 52 18%

Burleigh 92 3,999 1 2% 1,393 4,572 6 30%

Cavalier 38,200 167,878 162 23% 104,376 271,412 408 38%

Divide 124 12,957 1 1% 155 18,006 1 1%

Grant 149 4,295 3 3% 0

Eddy 0 694 1,604 10 43%

Foster 0 370 632 2 59%

Hettinger 7,991 53,085 27 15% 14,633 57,637 63 25%

Mchenry 3,954 35,407 22 11% 6,177 36,537 39 17%

Mclean 2,455 63,741 11 4% 5,917 74,759 35 8%

Mercer 883 11,194 4 8% 569 10,664 5 5%

Morton 284 2,177 2 13% 340 3,458 5 10%

Mountrail 8,390 72,040 37 12% 11,092 78,744 51 14%

Nelson 2,751 14,374 9 19% 3,693 16,342 12 23%

Oliver 772 4,262 3 18% 671 3,134 6 21%

Pembina 2,153 4,272 12 50% 1,016 3,025 7 34%

Pierce 1,922 24,547 17 8% 4,556 25,318 35 18%

Ramsey 10,698 52,100 71 21% 19,372 57,785 130 34%

Renville 9,936 78,901 38 13% 15,216 69,236 86 22%

Rolette 12,624 45,560 83 28% 21,016 63,642 128 33%

Sheridan 615 11,612 3 5% 2,725 14,851 16 18%

Slope 502 8,403 3 6% 237 10,488 2 2%

Stark 489 10,428 4 5% 613 8,961 5 7%

Stutsman 0 296 846 2 35%

Towner 23,130 85,003 113 27% 35,591 109,069 204 33%

Walsh 2,250 13,626 9 17% 2,687 27,571 15 10%

Ward 15,288 108,387 74 14% 17,731 84,467 114 21%

Wells 258 1,190 3 22% 294 1,441 2 20%

Williams 0 408 32,264 2 1%

Total 171,263 1,053,866 813 16% 303,705 1,245,550 1,567 24%


Bee SmartProtecting Pollinators Protects Canola and Other Crops ANGELA DANSBY

POLLINATORS ARE VITAL for a thriving agricultural sector, including canola. One-third of the crops consumed today depend to some extent on insect pollination for reproduction, such as a lmonds, apples, berries, cucumbers, melons and many more. In fact, the total economic va lue of insect pollination worldwide is estimated to be more than $200 billion and accounts for around 10 percent of agricultural production.

Bees, butterf lies, beetles and other insects are natural pollinators that play a role in agriculture but honey bees are arguably the most important. Keeping these hard-working bees healthy is essen-tial not only to grow crops but also to ensure farmers can turn a profit and ulti-mately, feed the world.

Reports of honey bee losses across the Northern Hemisphere, especially in parts of Europe and North America, have therefore been met with concern among all stakeholders. As a result, significant resources have been committed to inves-tigating the causes of honey bee decline and helping farmers reduce their poten-tial impact on all pollinators through best management practices.

Causes of ConcernScientists have not attributed honey

bee decline to any one cause. Numerous factors affect bee health, including pests and diseases, management practices, weather, environmental conditions, agri-cultural practices, and availability and quality of food sources.

But it is the neonicotinoid class of crop protection products, widely used as seed treatments as well as for foliar applica-tions, which are most popularly cited in the media for honey bee loss. Introduced 20 years ago, neonicotinoids are a family of insecticides chemically similar to nic-otine that protect emerging plants from various pests. They are now the world’s most widely used insecticide class.


W W W.U S C A N O L A .CO M U . S . C A N O L A D I G E S T 9

Some people argue that exposure to seed treatments is killing bees, which led the European Union to restrict the use of certain neonicotinoids. Others recognize that while it is important to reduce the exposure of bees to seed treatment dust, these treated seeds are a key part of agri-cultural production and provide signifi-cant benefits.

Seeds treated with neonicotinoids prior to planting have reduced the amount of crop protection product spraying required for healthy crops. All neonicotinoids have been extensively tested to ensure that, when used properly, only target pests are impacted. Numerous f ield studies and real life examples show that bee health is not related to the use of seed treatments. For example, in Switzerland, the rate of honey bee loss is the same at altitudes above 1,000 meters – where no crops are grown and no neonicotinoids are used – to the lowlands where neonicotinoids are used on intensive cropping. Meanwhile, in Australia, where neonicotinoids are used widely, the honey bee population has remained stable.

Nonetheless, the crop protection indus-try is doing its best to reduce the poten-tial risk posed to bees and other pollina-tors from dust created during planting of treated seeds. As such, it continues to improve seed applications and planting technology as well as promote best man-agement practices among farmers.

Sweet on Stewardship“Pollination is not just a free service but

one that requires investment and steward-ship to protect and sustain it,” noted the United Nations Environment Programme in its 2010 report on pollinators.

While very stringent regulatory safe-guards are in place to ensure that crop protection products do not pose unaccept-able risks to wildlife, best management practices by the crop protection industry, farmers and beekeepers are necessary to help protect pollinators. The industry, for example, educates farmers on ways to min-imize any risks to these beneficial insects. Farmers can improve and protect pollina-tor habitats in a variety of ways. And bee-keepers should regularly monitor colonies for mites and diseases.

For decades, the crop protection indus-try, government agencies, universities and beekeeper organizations have promoted best management practices among farm-ers to protect pollinators. Such practices

include following instructions on crop protection product labels, only using gen-uine products, avoiding use of certain products when pollinators are active in the crop or under windy conditions, vary-ing the timing of applications and plant-ing flowers at field borders. Moreover, the use of modern applicators, such as nozzles that create spray droplets less affected by wind, help keep crop protection products only where intended. With treated seed, farmers can minimize dust by carefully pouring seed out of bags, using prop-erly calibrated and specialized seeding machinery, avoiding seed spillage, prop-erly disposing of unused seed and bags, and regularly cleaning seed equipment.

Another important way to protect pol-linators is for farmers and beekeepers to

communicate. Farmers can inform bee-keepers when they are going to apply crop protection products to their fields so hives can be moved. Similarly, communication among all parties involved in protecting pollinators is critical. To this end, the crop protection industry is leading proj-ects like “Operation Pollinator” and coor-dinating with groups such as the Honey Bee Health Coalition and Project Apis m. These partnerships aim to improve honey bee health through outreach, education and research.

Bite the Varroa Mite The parasitic mite Varroa destructor

has emerged as one of the most impor-tant reasons for further research. Varroa infestation weakens bee colonies, spreads

Bee Interest Groups “Colonize” to Protect Pollinators

TO BOOST EFFORTS to improve and protect pollinator health, several stakeholder groups have banded together. The U.S. Canola Association and Canola Council of Canada, for example, are among 30 organizations in a new Honey Bee Health Coalition and the crop protection industry is working with U.S. farmers to improve pollinator habitats.

Launched in June 2014, the Honey Bee Health Coalition is a public-private partnership that brings together beekeepers, growers, researchers, government agencies, agribusinesses, conservation groups, crop protection product manufacturers and others to improve the health of pollinators. Its mission is to achieve a healthy population of honey bees while supporting healthy populations of native and managed pollinators in productive agricultural systems and thriving ecosystems. The coalition aims to improve honey bee health in four areas: forage and nutrition; hive management; crop pest management; a nd out reach, educat ion, a nd collaboration. Ultimately, the coalition strives to achieve its vision: “Healthy Bees, Healthy People, Healthy Planet.”

Another initiative called “Operation Pollinator” is helping farmers in the

U.S. and Europe boost the number of pollinators on their farms by creating habitats tailored to native insects. The initiative originated in the U.K. in 2001 where over 700 farmers were trained in habitat management and 1,200 hectares of special flowering plant seed mix attractive to pollinators were sown in field margins and on pockets of land where crops cannot easily be farmed. Today, Operation Pollinator works with more than 3,000 farmers across the United States and 16 European countries.

Establishing these habitats helps signif icant ly increase pol l inator populations. Independent monitoring has shown bumblebee numbers increase by up to 600 percent, butterfly numbers are up 12-fold and other insects more than 10-fold within three years. The habitats can also improve crop yields due to better pollination, create habitats for small mammals and birds, simplify field management and help protect soil and water.

Initiated by the crop protection industry, Operation Pollinator is supported by many partners, including universities, farmer groups, non-governmental organizations, beekeeper associations, government agencies and food producers.


among them and makes bees susceptible to bacterial and viral infections. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency identified the Varroa mite as “the major factor under-lying colony loss in the U.S. and other coun-tries.”

Bee pathologist Denis Anderson agrees: “This [Varroa] is the most dangerous threat that we have of bees around the world.”

The crop protection industry has commit-ted significant resources to researching Varroa mites and developing new crop protection products to help protect beehives from them.

Honey Bees AbuzzIn spite of the threats to honey bee health,

and notwithstanding recent overwintering losses of honey bees in Europe and North America, population figures for 2013-14 have suggested an upturn in honey bee fortunes.

The honey bee research network COLOSS looked at nearly 400,000 bee colonies from 21 countries in Europe and the Mediterranean and found 2013-14 colony losses to be 9 per-cent – the lowest level since COLOSS started collecting data in 2007.

TOP 10 WAYS FARMERS CAN PROTECT POLLINATORS

In Canada and the U.S., overwintering honey bee losses have also declined this year, despite both countries experiencing a long, cold winter. Excluding Ontario, where losses were higher than normal, overwintering losses in Canada were down to 19.6 percent compared to an average of up to 40 percent. In the U.S., overall mortality dropped to an average of 23 percent compared to 30.5 per-cent for the 2012-13 winter.

While these latest global figures cannot be described as a genuine trend – that would require consistent declines over many years – they demonstrate the difficulty to draw simple conclusions of cause and effect on pollinator health.

And no matter what the latest figures say, the agricultural sector will continue to do all it can to ensure “busy bees” are able to main-tain their vital service to agriculture.

ANGELA DANSBY IS EXECUTIVE EDITOR OF U.S. CANOLA DIGEST. THIS ARTICLE WAS ADAPTED FROM LEADING THE VISION E-NEWSLETTER, A PUBLICATION OF CROPLIFE INTERNATIONAL.

1) LOOK AT LABELS. Follow crop protection prod-uct instructions, including using the recommended dose, preventing drift of sprays and dusts, not applying in windy conditions or when there is a danger of drift to non-target areas.

2) GET REAL. Only use genuine crop protection products. Counterfeit and illegal products have unknown impacts and could potentially harm wild-life.

3) SPARE THE SPRAY. Apply crop protection prod-ucts within an Integrated Pest Management pro-gram, only using them when necessary. For sprays, consider spot-spraying ( just applying to infested areas).

4) BUST DUST. Minimize distribution of dust from treated seed by carefully pouring it out of bags, using properly calibrated and maintained seeding machinery and recommended additives, avoiding seed spillage (cleaning it up otherwise) and dis-posing of seed bags and unused seed properly.

5) USE A CLEAN MACHINE. Utilize seed planting machinery that eliminates the production of dust and regularly clean seed equipment.

6) MIND THE TIME. Avoid spraying when bees are foraging and plants are flowering.

7) PROTECT LIQUID ASSETS. Avoid contamination from spray liquids by using drift-reduction appli-cation equipment that is properly maintained and calibrated, being cautious when mixing and load-ing, properly disposing of waste and used material, cleaning up any spills and carefully cleaning equip-ment.

8) EMPOWER WITH FLOWERS. Improve pollinator habitats by planting flower borders and maintain-ing hedgerows and unsprayed headlands.

9) COMMUNICATE AT THE FARM GATE. Farmers should inform local beekeepers when they are going to apply crop protection products so nearby hives can be moved or otherwise protected. Similarly, the crop protection industry can help farmers by promoting good application practices.

10) “BEE” RESPONSIBLE. Beekeepers also need to follow good management practices with good hygiene, disease control, proper feeding, access to water, genetic diversity and moving hives out of areas to be sprayed.

JohnDeere.com/Ag

Tomorrow’s success starts here and the key is in John Deere equipment

Before you turn the ignition on another canola season,

make sure the machines in your shed can get you from one

destination to the next, and not just a stop or two along

the way. John Deere equipment and services are the only

complete solutions you can trust to get you from seeding,

through application, and into harvest.

Start your season off strong with a new 9R/9RT Series Tractor

paired with precise Air-Seeding tools – combined they give you the

power and productivity to set the stage for higher yields. Ensure your

canola gets consistent application coverage, acre after acre, thanks to

our impressive line of self-propelled sprayers. On the back end, get the

best harvesting options in the business with a John Deere Windrower or

S-Series Combine to pull the most revenue out of the feld. Want to know

the whole story? Swing by Deere.com/Ag for more information on the full

John Deere suite of technology for superior canola production. Nothing Runs Like A Deere™.

61139_Canola JDprod1P.indd 1 10/2/14 7:08 PM


SHORTLY AFTER THE FARM Service Agency’s 2014 Farm Bill informational meetings started last fall, I received a call from back home with a few pointed questions: “Do you know the people who wrote this farm bill?” “Was it their intent to make it so complicated?” “Why would they write a bill that requires so many decisions?”

At first blush, I can understand the frustration. For years, the Direct Payment arrived in October like clockwork. The farm bill had turned into a fixture that provided an infusion of cash at the end of the year whether needed or not. It didn’t require a lot of thought. Unfortunately, it will take a little more effort to receive that check from now on.

The process of developing a replacement for the decoupled Direct Payments unleashed vast regional differences in farm policy. The Midwest corn-belt favored a simplif ied revenue program. The states north and west of the Mississippi River with large counties agreed with that approach as long as the revenue program was farm-specif ic. However, the southern states preferred price protection.

One problem remaining from the negotiations is that the programs are coupled to current year plantings, which is a deal breaker for many growers. There is too much incentive to favor crops that previously paid the most in the event of a commod-ity price collapse.

In the end, the solution was akin to King Solomon’s decision to cut the baby in half. Farm policy wasn’t a living child, so there could be a choice between the preferred policy options. And for the most part, payments would remain decoupled and be paid on base acres, not current year plantings.

The eventual compromise – a dirty word these days in

2014 FARM BILL: It’s Not That ComplicatedCompromise Creates Choices for FarmersDALE THORENSON

Washington – is actually a decent bill. While no one group received exactly what it wanted, each did receive what it needed.

The mechanics of the 2014 Farm Bill really aren’t that com-plicated, unless you become bogged down in the individual option for revenue protection. It just requires a little homework.

Decisions, DecisionsLand owners, with the help of those farming their land, have

until Feb. 27 to decide whether or not to reallocate their farm program base acres to the simple average of the crops grown on the farm for the years 2009-12. They also have to decide if they want to update their program yields by crop to 90 percent of their 2008-12 yields. If the old yield is better for a certain crop, keep it. This yield update is a no-brainer.

Reallocating the base acres are another matter though. Which crops will provide better support during the years 2014-18? The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and many land grant universities have developed decision-making tools to help you make that choice.

Another choice is required by March 31: whether or not to sign up a crop for the Price Loss Coverage (PLC) program or the Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) program.

PLC vs. ARCTo help understand how these two programs work, let’s walk

through the mechanics of PLC and ARC using the data from the larg-est canola producing county in the U.S. – Cavalier County in north-eastern North Dakota – as if the average represented a typical farm in that county. Remember, all these steps are done automatically for you when using the decision-making spreadsheets mentioned above.


Cavalier County canola yields for 2008-12 were 1,754; 1,860; 1,960; 1,730 and 1,580 pounds per acre respectively. Ninety percent of the simple average yields of these five years is 1,579 pounds per acre. That will be the updated yield for the typical farm in Cavalier County, unless the current program yield is higher, which is doubtful. While this yield will only be used for the PLC program, a farm can update all yields on a farm, even if the ARC program is chosen for some of the crops.

PLCThe PLC program will trigger a support payment if the

national average price is lower than the reference price using the following formula: (85 percent) * (base acres) * (program payment yield) * (reference price minus the 12-month national average market price).

Canola’s reference price is $20.15 per cwt. The Food and Agriculture Policy Research Institute’s (FAPRI) November projection for the 2014 crop’s marketing year is $16.45 per cwt. Therefore, the projected PLC payment for 2014 as of last November for canola on this typical Cavalier County farm is $49.66 per acre: (85 percent) * (1) * (1579) * (.037).

ARCThe ARC program at the county level will trigger a payment

when county revenue is less than 86 percent of the previous five-year Olympic Average of county revenues. Payments are limited to 10 percent of that Olympic Average. Actual county revenue for a current year is obtained by multiplying the county yield times the national average market price. The payment formula for ARC is: (85 percent) * (base acres) * (difference between the ARC guarantee and the actual crop revenue, but not to exceed 10 percent of the ARC guarantee).

Actual county revenue for canola in Cavalier County for the five previous years is as follows:

The mechanics of the 2014 Farm Bill really aren’t that complicated, unless you become bogged down in the individual option for revenue protection. It just requires a little homework.

To obtain the five-year Olympic Average of revenue, the high of $418.70 and the low of $301.32 are dropped and the sum of the remaining three years is divided by three, which equals an ARC canola guarantee of $403.89 per acre in 2014. The actual Cavalier County revenue for canola in 2014 is $330.65, which is obtained by using FAPRI’s projected canola price of $16.45 and an estimated yield of 2,010 pounds per acre. As of November, the projected ARC payment for canola in Cavalier County is $14.19 per acre: (85 percent) * (1) * ($347.34 - $330.65). The maximum ARC payment that could be generated would be limited to 10 percent of the guarantee of $347.34 * 85 percent, or $34.33.

FAPRI predicts canola prices in the years 2015-18 to range from $17.05-$18.72 per cwt. Based on the 2014 calculations and future price projections as of last November, and coupled with average yields in coming years, PLC would provide more support than ARC for canola in Cavalier County during the life of the farm bill.

What each farmer in Cavalier County needs to do prior to Feb. 27 is go through this same exercise using the decision-making tools provided by the USDA to determine the support provided to the other crops on their farm. It’s likely that the predominate crop in current farm acreage bases is wheat followed by barley because the bases were established in the early 1980s prior to the introduction of canola in the county. The decision to reallocate base acres to include more canola (and less wheat and barley) will be determined by whether or not ARC or PLC will provide more support per base acre for those crops versus canola.

As a final note, I did not delve into the mechanics of the individual coverage under ARC simply because it requires enrolling the entire farm in that program, with no option for PLC coverage. Also, the payment factor drops to 65 percent from 85 percent for individual coverage and I believe that most farms will find that is too steep a penalty to have the program tailor made to fit their farm.

DALE THORENSON IS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE U.S. CANOLA ASSOCIATION IN WASHINGTON, D.C.

Year Yield Price Revenue

2013 2,030 20.6 $418.18

2012 1,580 26.5 $418.70

2011 1,730 24 $415.20

2010 1,960 19.3 $378.28

2009 1,860 16.2 $301.32


Large Commodity Supplies, Economic and Geopolitical Transitions Push Down Canola MarketTERRY N. BARR

Under Pressure: 2015 Global Oilseed Outlook

DESPITE AN INCREASING demand for canola, rising oilseed stocks, the stronger U.S. dollar and broader economic uncertainties are applying downward pressure on canola prices.

Commodity markets are now seeking new equilibrium price levels as the global economy struggles with economic realignments and larger supplies of energy, grains and oilseeds entering the marketplace. The economies of the United States and United Kingdom appear to be building sustainable, albeit moderate, growth momentum.

At the same time, Japan and key economies in the European Union are sliding back into mild recessions. China and the emerging markets, which were key growth drivers over the past decade, are entering more subdued growth paths in the face of lower trade volumes and more subdued capital inflows. The slower growth rates in emerging markets with the largest populations and the fastest growing middle classes have slowed commodity demand. All of these factors are further compounded by the rising geopolitical concerns with respect to Russia and the Ukraine and continued turmoil in the Middle East. Political leadership in the U.S., Japan and Europe will also be challenged in the year ahead. These pressures are readily apparent in both the energy and agricultural commodity markets.

This divergence in growth prospects has created new challenges for the world’s central banks. In the United States and United Kingdom, central banks have ended the use of quantitative easing and adopted a data-dependent approach regarding the timing of interest rate increases. However, it is clear that the zero interest rate environment that has dominated the global economy since 2008 is about to change. At the same time, the Bank of Japan and European Central Bank are maintaining zero interest rate policies and adding further quantitative easing across a broader range of securities. Major economic

Chart source: Knowledge Exchange Division, CoBank, ACB (confidential and proprietary)Data source: World bank

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175Indexes (2010=100)

Energy Agriculture (all commodities)

8 6 8 8 9 0 9 2 9 4 9 6 9 8 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 6 0 8 1 0 1 2 1 4 1 6 1 8

RisingGlobal

Middle class

EconomicTurmoil2009‐13

PolicyRealignment2014‐18

Mother nature, global growth, liquidity and geo‐politics will drive

market!

Commodity Markets are Seeking Equilibrium Amid Economic Transition

Chart source: Knowledge Exchange Division, CoBank, ACB (confidential and proprietary)

* C u rre n c ie s w e ig h te d b y re la t iv e m a rk e t im p o r ta n c e to to ta l U .S . tra d e .

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150Indexes of major currencies/US$ (March 1973=100)

8 0 8 2 8 4 8 6 8 8 9 0 9 2 9 4 9 6 9 8 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 6 0 87 4 7 6 7 8 1 0 1 2 1 4

From 2002 to 2011 ……….……...... ‐39 %From Aug. 2011 to Nov. 2014 .... +20 %

Dollar declined by over 25% after floating in 1973!

Volkerslide

U.S. Dollar Continues to Strengthen Against Broad Range of Currencies

Currencyto US dollar:ChinaEuroJapanBrazilAustraliaCanadaMexico

Change from2013 2012‐0.5% +2%‐8% ‐3%‐16% ‐43%‐11% ‐23%‐8% ‐20% ‐8% ‐14% ‐4% ‐4%


policy reforms are also required in both Japan and the Eurozone.

Prices in FluxThese new economic realities and

transitions in monetary policies among the advanced economies has led to significant increases in the value of the U.S. dollar and added downward pressure on dollar-denominated commodity markets. The value of the trade-weighted U.S. dollar has increased nearly 10 percent this year and now is 20 percent above 2012 levels. This increases the cost of U.S. products in local currencies and reduces price declines in the currencies of competitive producers.

At the same time, each commodity has a unique transition pattern relative to these global pressures. Commodities with the most rapid increases in prices from 2010 to 2013 are experiencing the most rapid declines as their carryover stocks build. Resilient market demand or loss of demand in strategic markets, such as China, have altered the pace of some price adjustments. The new energy paradigm has had implications beyond the collapse in oil prices. The growth in terms of demand for biofuels, particularly corn ethanol, has peaked and plateaued just as expanded grain and oilseed supplies have entered the market.

The price pressures have been significant over the past 18 months. Since July 2013, corn prices have declined by 47 percent, soybean prices have declined by 34 percent and canola prices have fallen by 27 percent. Transportation issues have disrupted grain movement in recent months and these declines may actually understate the declines in some U.S. regions. Markets have gained some support from the fact that we are transitioning from very low inventories to rebuilding of carryover, particularly in the oilseeds complex. The refilling of the pipeline has steadied markets in recent months.

The building global carryover levels are not large enough relative to use to completely eliminate pricing opportunities in the year ahead. The carryover level for wheat and coarse grains is projected to reach a 15-year high with the majority of the buildup occurring in the coarse grain segment. However, these stocks would represent only 21 percent of current usage and not be considered burdensome by historical standards.

Oilseed Stocks The oilseed complex is more difficult to

assess because of the extreme reliance on China as a major consumer and importer

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00Dollars per bushel corn

0

3

6

9

12

15

18

21

24

27

30

Dollars per bushel soybeansDollars per cwt. canola

C o rn

2 0 0 7 2 0 0 8 2 0 0 9 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3

S o yb e a n s

C a n o la

2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5

Grain and Oilseed Prices Realigning


(prices received by farmers)

4Chart source: Knowledge Exchange Division, CoBank, ACB (confidential and proprietary)

70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 12 140

100

200

300

400

500Million metric tons of wheat & coarse grains

0

8

16

24

32

40Stocks-to-use percentage

World stocks Stock/use

Global Grain Stocks Continue to Build But Not at Burdensome Levels

of oilseeds. China accounts for nearly two-thirds of global imports of soybeans and about one-third of tota l world consumption. Any assessment on the adequacy of carryover stocks must contain a caveat regarding China activity.

The South American harvest is not complete but there will clearly be a large, if not record, soybean crop. In combination with the record harvest in the U.S., the global soybean carryover is projected to reach 90 million metric tons, an increase of 60 percent over the previous year. Stocks relative to use are projected to reach

a record high of nearly 32 percent. This dramatic increase in carryover has been slowed by uncertainty over transportation capacity to move larger volumes. But substantial storage capacity is available since bins were virtually empty after last season’s drawdown to minimum levels and the need to refill the pipeline. In addition, China has remained an aggressive buyer despite the emerging record harvest.

While U.S. canola stocks have also risen sharply over the past few years, total domestic consumption has more than doubled over the past decade. As a result,


stocks relative to use are not rising to the historically high levels seen in the soybean complex. However, the sharp increase in available oilseed supplies continues to pressure the market.

In this global environment, producers have strategic decisions to make regarding the marketing of 2014 crops and planting alternatives for 2015 crops. Today is a much different environment than what has prevailed over the past five years and substantial adjustments in strategies may be necessary to optimize returns. If global demand growth remains subdued and the 2015 crop potential begins to emerge, there may be more pressure on prices in 2015.

While weather will continue to be a major uncertainty in 2015, planting decisions and crop developments in key regions of the world will be strategic. Incentives to maintain acreages in many U.S. competitor countries (Australia, Canada, South America and former Soviet Union countries) remain strong as the strong U.S. dollar gives competitors an edge in the marketplace and limits the price declines in local currencies. Developments in the Black Sea region with respect to Russia and the Ukraine will also pose challenges going forward.

In the U.S., there remains substantial uncer ta int y over planted acreage adjustments for 2015. The sharp declines in corn prices relative to soybeans has been an early indicator of a potential acreage shift to soybeans, particularly given the relative input cost differentials. The U.S. faces significant competition in the corn export market and the growth in corn use for ethanol appears to be over. Growth in feed use is limited by the continued low cattle inventory. But there may be more downside price risk in the soybean complex if stocks continue to build and China slows the pace of its soybean purchases. The buildup in global cotton stocks has been even more dramatic than in soybeans and there will likely be less cotton planted in 2015-16. Canola, wheat and other commodities are not likely to see much acreage shift unless weather dictates some adjustments.

TERRY N. BARR IS SENIOR DIRECTOR, KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE DIVISION, AT COBANK, ACB IN WASHINGTON, D.C.

5Chart source: Knowledge Exchange Division, CoBank, ACB (confidential and proprietary)

70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 12 140

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Million metric tons of soybeans

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Stocks-to-use percentage

Ending stocks Stocks-to-use

World Soybean Stocks Will Increase Sharply If Global Harvests Materialize

87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 130

50

100

150

200

250Million metric tons

0

5

10

15Stocks-to-use percent

U.S.ending stocks Stocks-to-use

Rising Oilseed Supplies Have Pressured Canola Prices Despite Less Carryover Pressure


Potential Acreage Shifts Driven By Input Costs, Weather and Global Developments

C o rn

B a rle y

S o y b e a n s

C a n o la

W h e a t

U p la n d C o tto n

5 o th e r c ro p s *

H a y h a rv e s te d

To ta l o f a b o v e

C R P

To ta l a c re a g e

-3 .0

+ 0 .0

+ 3 .5

+ 0 .1

+ 0 .0

-1 .0

-0 .1

+ 0 .6

+ 0 .1

+ 0 .0

+ 0 .1

C h a n g e1 4 to 1 5

----------------- m illio n a c re s -----------------

* O a ts , s o rg h u m , r ic e , s u n flo w e rs , a n d p e a n u ts

9 1 .9

2 .5 6

7 5 .0

1 .0 7

5 4 .4

1 4 .7

1 3 .3

5 7 .6

3 1 0 .5

3 1 .1

3 4 1 .6 8

2 0 1 1

9 7 .2

3 .6 6

7 7 .2

1 .7 6

5 5 .1

1 2 .3

1 5 .3

5 8 .7

3 2 1 .2

2 9 .5

3 5 0 .7

2 0 1 2

9 5 .4

3 .5 3

7 6 .5

1 .3 7

5 6 .2

1 0 .4

1 6 .4

5 8 .3

3 1 8 .1

2 7 .0

3 4 5 .1

2 0 1 3

9 1 .6

2 .9 8

8 4 .8

1 .7 1

5 6 .8

1 1 .4

1 6 .8

5 7 .6

3 2 3 .7

2 5 .5

3 4 9 .2

2 0 1 4

8 8 .6

3 .0 0

8 8 .3

1 .8 1

5 6 .8

1 0 .4

1 6 .7

5 8 .2

3 2 3 .8

2 5 .5

3 4 9 .3

2 0 1 5



Studies Highlight Golden Opportunities for Canola ALISON NEUMER LARA

2014 National Canola Research Conference:

JUS T L IK E G ROWERS , canola researchers are going for the gold.

From breeding and agronomy to production and end uses, the crop’s potentia l was on ful l display at the National Canola Research Conference (NCRC) Nov. 4-5, 2014. Among many topics, researchers discussed the future of canola as a renewable jet fuel, the viability

of farming it in newer territory such as Texas or California and the genomic road ahead for improving canola traits.

“The conference is unique in that researchers can attend presentations on all topics related to canola,” said Michael Stamm, M.S., a canola breeder at Kansas State University and the conference program chair.

The 2014 conference featured more than 30 oral presentations and nearly as many poster presentations. It a lso attracted a crowd.

“We had standing room only at the symposium sessions, so that indicates to me that the conference was timely and important to the research community,” Stamm noted. “I also witnessed a great


deal of networking between researchers and those in private industry. There were several major companies represented, with several attending out of pure interest in canola.”

Orga n i z ed by t he U.S . Ca nola Association every three to four years, the NCRC is a forum for both university and industry researchers to share their findings and for all participants to discuss future research priorities to get the most out of canola. It is held in conjunction with the international annual meetings of the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America and Soil Science Society of America in Long Beach, Calif.

Below are summary highlights from a handful of this year’s presentations. All 2014 NCRC presentations will be posted on uscanola.com by early 2015.

Turning Brassica Crops into Renewable Jet Fuel

The U.S. mi l it a r y av iat ion and commercia l a irl ines urgently need a renewable fuel to reduce their biggest expense – fossil fuel, said David W. Archer, Ph.D., an agricultural economist at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Research Service’s Northern Great Plains Research Lab.

Through a program called “Farm to Fly,” the USDA and Federal Aviation Administration aim to set up supply chains that will help produce 1 billion gallons of sustainable jet biofuel by 2018.

Canola was one of six oils Archer’s team examined that are suitable to production of hydrotreated, renewable jet fuel. Other oils included camelina and rapeseed.

“Oilseeds in the Brassicaceae family have been ident i f ied a s promising feedstocks, with relatively high oil content and characterist ics that make them suitable for fuel production,” Archer said. “These oilseeds could be incorporated into existing cropping systems, largely using exist ing farm equipment, and potentially with limited displacement of food and feed crops.”

A key part of the project analysis, however, is whether growing oilseeds for jet biofuel would be at tract ive economically for farmers. Prices must be low enough to make jet fuel production viable, but high enough for growers to plant feedstock crops.

In the current market, Archer said, canola oil is more valuable for food than

jet fuel and other crops may make more sense economically as a feedstock for jet fuel.

Rapeseed Production in Europe

European countries together plant about 16 million acres of rapeseed, said Matthew Clarke, who gave an overview of rapeseed production in the European Union (EU). Clarke is a rapeseed breeder for the U.K., Nordics and Baltics at Monsanto.

Virtually all of the rapeseed cultivated in the EU is rapeseed 00 (double zero), which is low in erucic acid and glucosinolates, like canola. Rapeseed 00 is grown for its oil content and used as both an edible oil and primary feedstock for biodiesel. By most estimates, less than 2 percent of total cultivation area is high-erucic acid rapeseed, which is grown for specific industrial use.

According to Clarke, France leads in planted acreage of rapeseed, followed by Germany, Poland and the U.K. These countries have average yields of about 3,000 pounds per acre for spring rapeseed. Winter rapeseed can achieve almost double this amount, Clark noted.

In northern Europe, winter rapeseed is the second or third most important crop in rotation. Wheat is the f irst, followed by barley or maize. About 70 percent of varieties planted are hybrids. Hybrids achieve more consistent and higher yield, Clarke said, and the EU’s ban on neonicotinoids in seed treatments makes hybrids more important for plant establishment.

Canola Down Under in Australia

Australia’s dry conditions, infertile soils, and low and variable rainfall present a sizable challenge to any crop, noted John Kirkegaard, Ph.D., an agronomist at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, the country’s national science agency.

Early efforts with canola in the 1970s failed as the crop was decimated by blackleg. Locally-bred resistant varieties released after 1990 helped the crop expand, but ultimately what drove canola’s success in Australia was planting wheat after it, Kirkegaard said. Even in dry years, wheat yields were high if preceded by canola. Today, the country plants close to 6 million acres of canola.

“Canola is the most important broad-leaf rotation crop in Australia’s dryland cropping system and the third most valuable crop overall,” Kirkegaard said.

Hybrids represent about 50 percent of the market and canola is expanding into higher rainfall areas of Australia using later-maturing European winter canola. Australia largely produces spring canola grown though the winters, which are mild.

A recent innovation is “dual-purpose” canola for both human and animal consumption by using it as pasture, Kirkegaard noted. Farmers allow sheep to graze for 4-6 weeks, removing them from the field before plant budding, without any yield penalty.

Austra lia continues to vigorously fund canola research, Kirkegaard added, including a new five-year study to improve profitability through agronomic tactics.


Three-Year Canola Rotation Ideal in Canada

There are about 20 million acres of canola planted annually in Canada, where it is traditionally grown every fourth year, said Robert E. Blackshaw, Ph.D., research scientist at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. But good economic terms and better cultivars allow canola to be grown every two years and some farmers even want to grow it every year.

Black shaw conducted a s i x-yea r experiment to examine yields at different time intervals: planting spring canola (no till) every year, every second year and every third year.

Predictably, the study found that yields are higher with greater intervals. Shorter intervals produced thinner stands, delayed maturity and flowering, and even growth with greater green seed content. Greater intervals also lowered the incidence of disease and pest pressure. Two-year rotations increased yield by 9-14 percent and three-year rotations increased yield by 15-27 percent.

“We kind of knew this beforehand and I think growers know this, too, but we wanted to show it,” Blackshaw said. “A minimum three-year rotation is really the way to go.”

Rotational Effects of Legumes on Hybrid Canola

Legume crop residue can produce higher canola and barley yields, said John T. O’Donovan, Ph.D., research scientist at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.

“High costs of fertilizer in western Canada have generated interest in alternative nitrogen sources,” he explained. “Legumes produce nitrogen through fixation and may increase soil residual and mineralizable nitrogen, thus reducing the need for nitrogen fertilizer in subsequent crops.”

The study examined yield and quality of canola following field peas, lentils and faba beans, with the latter both harvested for grain and grown as a green manure.

O’Donovan observed that when field pea or lentil was the preceding crop, hybrid canola yields increased by 10 percent and even higher when preceded by faba bean green manure.

As far as quality, “the legumes had little negative effect on percent canola oil,” O’Donovan said. Nitrogen was applied at an increasing rate on the plots and yield did increase accordingly, however the percent of oil decreased.

Potential for Spring Canola Production in Texas

Could canola make it big in Texas? Clark B. Neely, Ph.D., small grains and oilseed specialist at the Texas Agrilife Extension, discussed the possibility, noting that acreage is rapidly expanding in the southern Great Plains and already spreading into Texas.

According to December figures from the USDA’s Farm Service Agency, Texas planted about 21,000 acres in 2014 – the highest reported acreage in six years. In comparison, Oklahoma planted 280,000 acres in 2014, according to the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service.

Neely tested spring rather than winter canola noting that “spring canola lacks vernalization requirements and reaches maturity quicker than winter canola, potentially avoiding heat stress.” Texas’s warm winters and long summers pose a problem for winter canola.

In trials, early September plantings were in mid-bloom by December but succumbed to freezes, while late September plantings bloomed in February but also froze. Trials will continue in 2015 with two new potential cropping scenarios: 1) fall planted in late October to early November, then spring harvested by May; or 2) late summer double-cropping behind warm-season crops in August and harvested by December.

Despite challenges, Neely is optimistic that canola acreage in Texas will continue to trend upward, especially in the state’s High Plains because growers will soon be able to take their crop to Lubbock, where ADM has updated its facility to start crushing canola.

Winter Canola Performance in Ohio

Ohio growers first tried their hand at winter canola in the early 1990s, but largely abandoned it after severe winters, explained Edwin M. Lentz, Ph.D., professor and crop specialist at Ohio State University Extension. Since then, public and private sources developed varieties better suited to Ohio conditions and the state participated in the National Canola Variety Trials from 2005 to 2012.

Lentz reported average yields of 2,274 pounds per acre and 3,026 pounds per acre and a yield range of 1,743 to 3,128 and 1,446 to 4,042 pounds per acre for the two trial sites. Based on these figures, he concluded there are enough suitable varieties to successfully grow winter canola in Ohio. The challenge is where to take the harvest.

“At this time, there are no crushing facilities in the state that take canola grain,” he said. “I do not see any large increase in winter canola acres in Ohio until a canola seed crusher or a shipping hub is located in the state.”

For complete presentation slides and posters, please visit uscanola.com.

ALISON NEUMER LARA IS MANAGING EDITOR OF U.S. CANOLA DIGEST.

Access www.american-seed.com on your computer, tablet or smartphone and keep up-to-date on all the industry news concerning seed treatments, biologicals, polymers and other technologies.

www.american-seed.com

.COM

For advertising inquiries call 1-877-710-3222 or email [email protected]

DESKTOP

TABLET

PHONE


Perspective: Planting GrowthPositioning Canola as Major U.S. Oilseed JACK BROWN, PH.D.

CANOLA WAS FIRST grown in the United States in North Dakota in 1977. Soon after, other U.S. producers showed interest in growing this new oilseed from Canada and in 1985, the U.S. Food and Drug Association granted canola Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) status. Many believed that canola acreage would increase rapidly to become a major oilseed crop in the U.S. as it had in Canada and Europe (known as double 00 rapeseed there).

Indeed, U.S canola acreage soared. In 1990, less than 100,000 acers were planted but acreage rose to over 1.4 million acres in 2000 – an increase of 145,000 acres a year.

Since 2001, however, canola acreage increase in the U.S. has leveled off and been somewhat erratic between 800,000 acres in 2004 and over 1.5 million acres in 2012. Acreage has continued to rise over the past 14 years, albeit at a rate of only 20,000 acres each year.

So why has canola not yet become the major acreage crop that was predicted? Why has U.S. canola production not marched along with the increasing demand for high-quality oil in the food industry?

First, it should be noted that the great-est majority of U.S. canola acres are located in North Dakota. Growing conditions in this region are similar to those in Canada and Canadian spring canola cultivars have proved to be highly adapted to the North Dakota environment. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada has put considerable fund-ing into developing the optimal agronomic conditions to maximize grower profitabil-ity and these also work when applied in the Northern Plains. So for the past 14 years, between 80 and 90 percent of all U.S. canola acres have been harvested in North Dakota.

Advantage: WinterMore recently, however, there has been

greater interest in growing canola in and around Oklahoma and the inland Pacific Northwest.

In these potential canola-growing regions, spring canola does not do as well and fall-planted winter canola crops have the great-est adaptability. In general, Canadian win-ters (like those in North Dakota) are too

severe to allow survival of winter canola and no Canadian research has been directed to developing winter cultivars.

However, worldwide (e.g., Europe), winter types predominate. Greater efforts in winter canola cultivar development and investigations in basic agronomic systems will be necessary to make this a crop suitable for major acreage in the other U.S. states.

U.S. farmland is finite, however, and few additional crop acres are available. Future increases in canola production will need to replace already existing crops. The three major acreage crops in the U.S. are corn, soybean and wheat in that order. Therefore, large increases in canola would need to be at the expense of reduced acres of one or more of these major crops.

Shifting AcreageConsider first corn or soybeans and take

as an example production of these crops and canola in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota and Kansas. In 2013, per acre returns on corn were $801, $759, $736, and $578; and from soybean $660, $596, $542 and $474 in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota and Kansas, respectively. If canola was grown in these regions competitively with corn and soybean returns, it would require canola yields of 3,479, 3,277, 3,042, and 2,505 pounds per acre in the four states, respectively. Such yields in these states have been achieved, but rarely consis-tently. Indeed, U.S. acreage of corn and soybeans have increased (874,026 acres/year for corn and 670,130 acres/year for soybean) over the past 20 years.

In contrast, U.S. wheat acres have decreased by an average of 790,805 acres per year over that period. Compared to wheat, profitability of canola is more favorable. In 2013, grower returns from canola exceeded those for wheat in North Dakota, Montana, Oklahoma and Colorado, and were equiva-lent to wheat in the Pacific Northwest, where wheat yields were highest.

It is therefore most likely that further increases in canola acreage will be at the expense of wheat. There is also good syn-ergy between wheat and canola and it is common that the highest wheat yields are obtained after canola crops. Sustainability of wheat in the U.S. would be enhanced by including a broadleaf crop in rotation and canola would seem a good candidate. Integrating these crops into appropriate cropping systems will demand substantial effort, which will require increased fund-ing for breeding and agronomic research.

Collective ThinkingAnother world region has seen a dra-

matic increase in canola acreage recently is Australia. It may be significant that agricultural research funding from crop check-offs in Australia is somewhat differ-ent from the U.S. system.

In Australia, the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC) over-seas national funding of agricultural grains research. Funds are collected from growers in the same way that the U.S. wheat, barley and oilseed commissions collect grower check-offs according to productivity. Australian agriculture, like many U.S. regions, is predominated by small grain cereals, but a high proportion of GRDC funds is directed to developing rotational crops such as canola and pulses that increase the sustainability of their cropping systems as a whole.

Perhaps it is time to consider such a system of more collective and collaborative research with U.S. commodity check-off funding. Just a thought.

JACK BROWN, PH.D., IS A PROFESSOR OF PLANT BREEDING AND GENETICS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO IN MOSCOW.

PO Box 370 | 13251 George Weber Drive, Rogers, Minnesota 55374P: 763.428.5858 F: 763.428.5859 E: [email protected] Use your QR reader to view our website

With Profile Industries you get:

•Superior,heavydutydesign

•Green,zeroenergyconsumptiongravityfedtechnology

•FREEconsultationandneedsassessment

ALL SEPARATORS IN STOCK AND READY TO SHIP TODAY!

Call us or visit our website today! 763.428.5858 | www.profile-ind.com

Sort the Good from the Bad, with the best spiral separators in the industry.

Enclosed Separator

Open Separator

TAKE THE CHALLENGE – FREE

Send us your toughest seed problem...

Wewillseparateit,showyoutheresults

and

provethatProfileIndustries’separator

s

arethebestintheindustry.

www.profile-ind.com/challenge To take the challenge visit:

2012 March Germ Profile Industries option 2.indd 1 12-02-28 1:45 PM


Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2015Sustainability New ‘Menu’ Item ANGELA DANSBY

RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING dietary fats in the forthcoming Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2015 will likely not be anything new, but how much those fats are consumed and where they are sourced may be. Sustainability, among other non-nutrition topics, appeared for the first time this year on the agenda of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC). More stringent recommendations regarding saturated and trans fat consumption may also be considered.

The DGAC already agrees that dietary fat quality is more important than quantity and the science in support of this fact does not need to be revisited. However, fat-related top-ics the DGAC is re-evaluating include recom-mended intakes of omega-3 fats from seafood and limitations on trans fats (partially hydro-genated oils, ruminant fats), saturated fat and dietary cholesterol.

New topics for consideration that may directly or indirectly impact dietary fat rec-ommendations are foods/nutrients and cog-nitive function; biotech foods and clinical outcomes; nutrient overconsumption; gene-nutrient/gene-food interactions; food envi-ronment; agriculture/aquaculture sustainabil-ity; food systems; and food safety.

The most trendy of these topics is agricul-ture and aquaculture sustainability and per-haps the most difficult to address in the face of nutrition. The most nutritious foods, for example, may not be the most sustainably produced or abundant, such as fish. And on the flip side, some of the most sustainable crops like sugarcane, may fall short in nutri-tion. The DGAC is exploring how, what and where foods are grown and their relationship with the long-term health of humans and the planet. Whether it is able to weave sustainable food choices into nutrition recommendations will be eagerly awaited.

Driving this new DGAC topic – includ-ing how food is grown, produced, processed, distributed and marketed – is consumer inter-est in sustainability. Nearly three in four (72 percent) feel that “one of the best ways to stay healthy is by keeping the environment and

planet healthy,” according to a 2014 survey by the Natural Marketing Institute. To this end, one in three consumers polled said they have aligned their purchasing decisions with how they affect the sustainability of the world and people.

Moreover, the DGAC is looking at the influence of policy on what foods are grown and their prices; local and regional foods and markets/systems; consumer food handling; toxic components in the food supply; food production/distribution and microbiologi-cal hazards; what, where, how people are eat-ing and drinking; dietary patterns and health outcomes; and what works for individuals to adhere to healthy dietary patterns.

Considering that more than one-third (35 percent or 78.6 million) of U.S. adults are obese per the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Dietary Guidelines for Americans remain a critical tool for consum-ers and health professionals. Obesity-related conditions include heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes and certain types of cancer – some of the leading causes of preventable death.

The final, 7th meeting of the 2015 DGAC was Dec. 15. In early 2015, this committee’s report will be submitted to the Secretaries of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture. After submission, a Federal Register notice will announce the availability of the report, a public comment period and date of a public meeting to provide input to the federal gov-ernment on the report. In the fall of 2015, the two government departments are slated to jointly release the 8th edition of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

ANGELA DANSBY IS EXECUTIVE EDITOR OF U.S. CANOLA DIGEST.

2010 Dietary Guidelines and Canola OilHere are the current U.S. government recommendations as they relate to canola oil:

• Consume less than 10 percent of calories from saturated fat by replacing them with mono- and polyunsaturated fats. o Oils that are rich in monounsaturated fats include canola, olive, and safflower oils.o Consuming less than 10 percent of calories from saturated fats and replacing them

with monounsaturated and/or polyunsaturated fats is associated with low blood cholesterol levels, and therefore a lower risk of cardiovascular disease. Lowering the percentage of calories from dietary saturated fats even more, to 7 percent of calories, can further reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease.

• Consume less than 300 milligrams per day of dietary cholesterol.• Keep trans fat consumption as low as possible by limiting foods that contain syn-

thetic sources of trans fats, such as partially hydrogenated oils, and by limiting other solid fats.

• Reduce the intake of calories from solid fats and added sugars.• Limit the consumption of foods that contain refined grains, especially refined grain

foods that contain solid fats, added sugars, and sodium.• Use oils to replace solid fats where possible.


Diseases Impacting Winter Canola in Southern Plains

IN RECENT YEARS, reduced winter canola productivity in the southern Great Plains can largely be blamed on erratic weather patterns. Dry weather during planting, early hard freezes and drought conditions in the winter and spring have impacted the crop. However, several diseases have affected winter canola in the region, too, and continue to appear despite the adverse cropping conditions. Some diseases are widespread but often overlooked, others could become important if they become severe, while a few are of only minor concern.

BlacklegBlackleg is

the most wide-spread prob-lem affecting canola in areas where canola has the lon-gest history. The fungus

overwinters on old crop stubble where it rip-ens and produces airborne spores that cause leaf spot during periods of rainy weather and dew. Leaf spots up to a half-inch in diame-ter are grey, becoming tan in color, and con-tain numerous tiny specks. These specks are fruiting structures that produce sticky spores spread by rain splash and water runoff. The fungus somehow progresses though leaf stems into the base of the plant where it causes a stem canker on the lower plant near the soil line as plants mature.

When the disease occurs early in crop development, it generally causes more severe cankers because the disease progresses slowly. Leaf spot was observed in fall and early win-ter of 2009 and again in 2013 and 2014. Leaf spot developed later, during flowering in the spring, in crops planted in 2011 and 2012. Extreme heat and drought during the sum-mers of 2011 and 2012 likely delayed fungal ripening on the stubble.

Growers should focus disease manage-

ment efforts on blackleg by ensuring adequate crop rotations, selecting resistant varieties and using fungicide where appropriate. Plant breeders are making considerable progress in identifying resistant varieties and hybrids by screening for resistance on seedlings under controlled conditions. Similarly, Oklahoma State University has identified the most effec-tive fungicides for blackleg control, but has not been able to pinpoint a single best time to apply a fungicide or years when applying a fungicide would be beneficial. The challenge in the southern Great Plains, where winter canola is in the field for nine months, is to properly time an application that has activity for only about three weeks.

SclerotiniaA not he r d i s -

ease to watch for is Sclerotinia stem rot or white mold. It is very destructive because it kills plants before maturity. This disease is a problem in the southeast-ern U.S. and North Dakota, but so far an isolated issue in

the southern Great Plains, where conditions do not favor its build up. That’s because of summer plants and producers rotating canola with wheat – a non-host for the disease. Rainy weather during bloom favors stem rot devel-opment.

Aster YellowsAster yel-

lows is a virus-l ike disease spread by leaf-hoppers. It is most severe in thin stands

and around the edges of research plots, which are apparently highly attractive to leafhop-

pers. Aster yellows is very conspicuous after plants bolt in the spring because f lowers stay green and fail to set pods. Aster yellows causes 100 percent yield loss in affected plants. Fortunately, the disease has not become very prevalent as usually only a low percentage of plants become infected.

Oklahoma State University monitored insects in canola fields in the 2014 fall and trapped several aster leafhoppers in sweep nets and on yellow sticky cards. It may be that plants become infected in the fall and don’t show symptoms until flowering.

Black RotBlack rot

i s a bacte-rial disease of Brassica crops that has been obser ved in winter canola. It is easy to find on leaves

in canola planted in short crop rotations during periods of warm weather in the fall and spring. Black rot causes V-shaped lesions at the edges of leaves with a yellow border and tan center. Unlike blackleg, it does not cause circular spots in the middle of leaves and lacks the black specks. Black rot is mostly a cosmetic disease and not believed to affect yield except in a few isolated patches where the bacterium appeared to kill the tops of plants that were freeze-damaged during flowering.

Powdery mildew is the only other foliar disease observed in Southern Plains canola. However, it appears to be of minor importance because it attacks lower leaves after flowering.

J O H N DA M I CO N E , P H . D . , I S A N E X T E N S I O N P L A N T PAT H O LO G Y SPECIALIST AT OKL AHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY IN STILLWATER.

Blackleg and Sclerotinia Top List JOHN DAMICONE, PH.D.


regional news

Oilseed and Direct Seed Cropping Systems ConferenceInformation May Increase Canola in Pacific NorthwestKAREN SOWERS, M.S.

REGISTRATION CONTINUES for the 2015 Pacific Northwest (PNW) Oilseed and Direct Seed Cropping Systems Conference, Jan. 20-22 at the Three Rivers Convention Center in Kennewick, Wash. The event is a joint effort by the Washington Oilseed Cropping Systems Re sea rch a nd E x tens ion ( WOCS) Project at Washington State University (WSU) and the Pacific Northwest Direct Seed Association. Crops covered include canola, camelina, saff lower, sunf lower, f lax, mustard, soybean and some grasses.

T he m e d “C r opp i n g C onc e p t s : Feed ing Fa rmer Innovat ions ,” the conference’s sessions wi l l center on exploring and sharing new and proven strategies to improve crop production and ultimately generate more income for PNW producers. Attendees will have the opportunity to attend a trade show, general and breakout sessions, research poster sessions and demos applicable to irrigated and dryland cropping systems throughout the PNW.

The focus of day one is production innovations and strategies; day two looks at soil health, weed and disease management; and day three ta rgets ma rket ing and economic s . Th i r t y brea kout s e s s ions t h roughout t he conference will provide more detailed information about oilseed and direct seed ma nagement a nd produc t ion pract ices a s wel l a s the latest crop research and industry developments.

Gener a l s e s s ion s w it h ke y note speakers and panels of researchers and production experts will occur each day. Notable speakers include:

• Markus Braaten, B.S., agronomist, Agri-Trend

• Ji l l Clapperton, soi l scientist and founder, Rhizoterra

• Lindsey du Toit, Ph.D., vegetable seed pathologist, WSU

• Randy Fortenbery, Ph.D., economist, WSU

• Neil Harker, Ph.D., cropping systems specialist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

• Rob Myers , reg iona l d i rec tor of extension programs, North Central Reg ion Su s t a inable A g r icu lt u re Research and Education

• Michae l Nef f, Ph.D., molecu la r geneticist, WSU

• Elston Solberg, agronomist, Agri-Trend • Mike Stamm, M.S., canola breeder,

Kansas State University• Nick Zentner, M.S., geologist, Central

Washington UniversityOther accla imed regional speakers

include Jack Brown, Ph.D., Jim Davis, M.S., Aaron Esser, M.S., Dave Huggins, Ph.D., Scot Hulbert, Ph.D., Dan Long,

Drew Lyon, Ph.D., Stephen Machado, Vicki McCracken, Ph.D., Andy McGuire, M.S., Jim Moyer, Ph.D., Bill Pan, Ph.D., Wayne Thompson, Marlon Winger, Don Wysocki, Ph.D., and Frank Young, Ph.D.

Topics covered by producers, industry and university experts include chem fallow management; cover crop studies and issues; oilseed varieties, research and production strategies; unmanned aerial vehicle usage and demonstration; crop insurance and adjustments; weed and disease management issues; direct seeding return on investment; oilseed marketing update and strategies; biotechnology; residue management; and soil health.

The conference format maximizes networking and learning opportunities in large and small group settings each day, encouraging a high level of interaction and information sharing among the expected 500 producers, industry experts, research scientist s and ag suppliers attending from around the PNW and North America.

Farmers, ranchers, livestock producers, crop input suppliers, advisors, bankers, re sea rchers and suppor t ing agency personnel are a l l invited to attend. Complete conference and registration information can be found online at css.wsu.edu/biofuels/2015Conference a nd d i re c t s e ed .org /e vent s /a nnu a l -conference.

KAREN SOWERS, M.S., IS AN EXTENSION AND OUTREACH SPECIALIST IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CROP AND SOIL SCIENCES AT WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY IN RICHLAND.


regional news

O N G O I N G R E S E A R C H a t Washington State University will soon help canola growers determine the right nutrient requirements for their crops.

Studies, led by soil scientist Dr. Bill Pan under the aegis of the Washington Oilseeds Cropping Systems (WOCS) project, focus on canola nitrogen (N) use and uptake eff iciency, N cycling and root shape and structure (morphology) of canola plants in relation to nutrient uptake. Pan has led the WOCS project since it began in 2007.

“We have 14 site years in two rainfa l l zones on N response of canola ,” Pan noted. “Our data shows that N carryover from the previous season’s crop, which includes inorganic soil N in the entire root profile and N mineralization from crop residue, needs to be factored in to overall N supply when making N fertilizer recommendations for canola, similar to wheat.”

Pan added that past studies show uptake of N fertilizer by canola is approximately 30 percent in a single season, yet total N uptake efficiency (fertilizer + inorganic + mineralization) is 50-75 percent. One of the practical

Research in Action:Nitrogen Use Studies Improving Fertilizer Recommendation

implications of this high nitrogen use efficiency is that soil sampling needs to be deep (3-4 inches for spring canola, 4-6 inches for winter canola) to account for all N sources and to achieve more accurate N fertilizer recommendations for canola.

“However, canola has a much higher N requirement per grain weight than wheat,” Pan said. “On the other hand, we have shown from root zone sampling and excavation t hat c a nola i s a deep -rooted scavenger of residual soil N, so little N fertilizer is required in situations of high N carryover from previous cropping. The year to year challenge is the variation in yield and growth potential of canola, which also factors into nutrient requirements.”

As a result of Pan’s research, revised fertilizer recommendations for spring and winter canola production in eastern Washington are in progress.

Moreover, Pan’s root imaging research clearly shows longer root hairs on both the taproot and lateral roots of canola than on wheat roots. This morphological feature allows canola to mine for nutrients that are less mobile in the soil such

as phosphorus, ammonium and potassium, some micronutrients and even for mobile nutrients that are slowed during dry conditions. Root scans revealed the chemical and physical stresses and responses of canola roots to ammonium toxicity when growing into a urea fertilizer band. This underscores the importance of fertilizer placement away from the canola seed row.

“With the historically monoculture c roppi ng s y s t em s o f e a s t e r n Washington, the WOCS project really made our entire team think more about the importance of rotational aspects of the economics, agronomics and pest cycles in all rainfall zones,” Pan noted. “We have expanded our perceptions of nutrient use efficiency and cycling through entire, multi-year cropping systems rather than a single season. The stuff we are learning is making its way into the literature and the classroom.

“The WOCS project has been, and is, a great opportunity to collaborate across disciplines and across state lines to continue work on adoption of canola as a viable rotation crop in the Pacific Northwest,” he concluded.

A close up of root hairs in canola and wheat. Researchers examine soil.


regional news

Low Production Costs Key to Sustaining ProfitsGrower Education Efforts ContinueRON SHOLAR, PH.D., AND HEATH SANDERS, M.S.

AFTER AN AMAZING RUN OF HIGH agricultural commodity prices, farmers are now getting hammered. In the past year or so, prices received for every commodity important to the southern Great Plains fell fast, prompting concern that the agricultural economy could be facing its first sustained slump in a decade.

During the period of improved commodity prices, production costs increased significantly. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) tracks both farm commodity prices received and the costs of production inputs. The USDA used the 1910-14 period as a base and concluded that prices received by today’s farmers increased by at least a factor of six. However, prices paid for production inputs increased by at least a factor of sixteen.

The reason commodity prices rise and fall starts with supply and demand, but there is a great deal of complexity in that fact. An individual producer has no influence over the price he receives for his product on any given day, no matter how much supply and how much demand is out there.

With lower commodity prices and even narrower profit margins, producers must look for efficiencies in all areas of production. Even during the period of excellent prices, there was wide variability in how producers fared due to their ability or inability to control production costs. Those who used good agronomic practices held their production costs down, leaving more for the profit column. In the Corn Belt, analysis showed that the cost of producing corn varied several dollars per bushel between the most and least efficient growers. For inefficient growers, current prices may cause production costs to be greater than returns.

Using good agronomic practices will be essential to future profitability – more so than marketing strategies. Reward for marketing

skills may come later, but only if a grower can keep production costs within a reasonable range.

Drilling Down to BasicsCanola production increased dramatically

in the southern Great Plains during the last decade, but largely by attracting new growers who have little or no experience with the crop and need guidance to properly set planting equipment.

Planting is the single most important pass across a producer’s field for any particular crop, especially for canola. The proper calibration of planting equipment continues to be a concern for growers and those who provide farm services to producers, such as crop consultants and advisors. If this step is not performed properly, poor results can be seen throughout the entire growing season and will ultimately result in lower yields.

During the fall 2014 planting season, the Great Plains Canola Association (GPCA) and Oklahoma State University (OSU) hosted six drill and planter calibration clinics across the southern Great Plains with four events in Oklahoma and one each in Kansas and Texas. The purpose of the clinics was to train those who provide on-farm services to producers in a train-the-trainer program. A number of producers who wanted to learn how to calibrate their own equipment also attended.

Josh Bushong, OSU winter canola extension specialist, took the lead on air seeders and row crop planters while Heath Sanders, GPCA canola field specialist, presented the details of box drill calibrations. The clinics were divided into two sessions – a classroom session for presentations and a hands-on calibration session. The classroom portion covered preparation of equipment and procedures used to calibrate

box drills, air seeders and row crop planters. The hands-on session demonstrated actual equipment calibrations with step-by-step processes. These clinics provided tips and techniques honed over the last 10 years of calibrating seeding equipment for canola in the southern Great Plains.

The clinics drew almost 90 growers, crop advisors and extension educators in the three states.

“Granting” Education The USDA’s Risk Management Agency

awarded the southern Great Plains region two grants totaling $200,000 for canola risk management education during the 2014-15 crop season.

Mike Stamm, M.S., canola breeder at Kansas State University, teamed up with Godsey Precision Ag to implement this project in Kansas and Colorado. An OSU group led by weed scientist Angela Post, Ph.D., teamed with the GPCA, Texas A&M University and New Mexico State University to secure a grant for Oklahoma, Texas and New Mexico.

“The risk management grants will help us tremendously in continuing to develop and grow this industry,” said GPCA President Jeff Scott. “Despite the fact that we are now about a decade into commercial level canola production, growers still have many challenges in understanding how to incorporate it into their production systems.”

These grants will provide resources to allow university and GPCA educators and researchers to develop risk management materials and conduct educational events, field demonstrations and tours.

RON SHOLAR, PH.D., IS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE GREAT PLAINS CANOLA ASSOCATION IN STILLWATER, OKLA. HEATH SANDERS, M.S., IS THE ASSOCIATION’S CANOLA FIELD SPECIALIST.


regional news

T H E M I N N E S O TA C A N O L A COUNCIL (MCC) ha s been busy promoting canola recently across northern Minnesota through events intended to educate producers on the f inancial and agronomic benef its of incorporating canola into their crop rotations.

Ron Beneda, North Dakota State University extension agent for Cavalier County and resident canola expert, was tapped to present an educational forum for producers at the Dec. 11 Prairie Grains Conference in Grand Forks, N.D. He reviewed the highlights of the 2014 growing season, talked about the rotational benefits canola offers producers and offered tips for growers to maximize their canola production. His presentation was aimed at piquing the interest of small grains producers who don’t currently grow canola but may consider doing so after learning about it.

Promotional efforts continued with the MCC’s annual winter meeting entitled, “Add Gold to Your Rotation and Watch Your Profits Grow!” Held at Gene’s in Roseau, Minn., the meeting brought together regional experts, industry leaders and producers eager to learn more about the new advances in canola production. Educational sessions included “New Innovations in Canola Production” (a look at new varieties and storage options available for the 2015 crop year); “Beating Blackleg – Ways to Manage Leptosphaeria;” “PLC vs ARC: What You Should Know” (an analysis of the 2014 Farm Bill’s Title I options); “Protecting Your Investment – Canola Crop Insurance Options;” “2014 Canola Production Centre Highlights;” “Canola: Short History, Bright Future” (a canola market/

Northern Minnesota Canola Acreage TargetNew Partnership Promotes New VarietiesJON DOCKTER

economic outlook); and “Canola in Your Rotation – A Profitable Option.”

New Partnership Targets Red River Valley

In an additional effort to boost canola acreage in northern Minnesota, the MCC formed a new partnership to highlight the rotational benefits of canola in an area where the crop’s production has traditionally been very low: Red River Valley. Northstar Agri Industries, Bayer CropScience, the Northern Canola Growers Association and MCC joined together to inform farmers about the many benefits of including canola in their crop rotations. As part of the partnership, Bayer aims to introduce the company’s InVigor Liberty Link® technology. Roundup Ready crops -- sugar beets, soybeans and corn –

dominate the Red River Valley so there is a need for an alternate weed control chemistry and advancements in canola varieties make Liberty Link® a good fit.

The partnership promotes the benefits of canola in a rotation with sugar beets, corn and soybeans because it leads to better weed resistance management, improved soil tilth and health, and deep rootedness. These advantages can dry out fields during wet cycles and utilize deep soil moisture during dry years. Other advantages include planting f lexibility, disease management and diversification of rotation.

JO N D OCK TER IS A S S O C I AT E DIRECTOR OF THE MINNESOTA CANOL A COUNCIL IN ST. PAUL, MINN.

Low Production Costs Key to Sustaining Profits

quick bytes


capitol hill A tax package passed by the Senate just before adjourn-ing in December will result in an estimated $1.4 billion in tax savings for the U.S. agricultural sector for the 2014 tax year. The legislation extended tax breaks for businesses through Dec. 31, 2014, including the extension of bonus depreciation, increased expensing limitations and treat-ment of certain real property as section 179 property. Also included in the package is the extension of the $1 per gallon tax credit for biodiesel and renewable diesel, which plays a significant role in keeping bio-diesel production competitive in the market.

T h e U. S . B i ote c h C r o p s Alliance, which the U.S. Canola Association joined in 2014, wrote letters to President Obama and Congress about the U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade. The group asked for the discussion to re-establish a consistent process for enabling compliance with Chinese laws and regulations regarding bio-tech products. With such a pro-cess in place, U.S. agriculture can continue to supply China’s demand for imported commod-ities without disrupting trade.

agronomy Research has shown that straight cutting canola can help increase crop yields, reported The Western Producer. Researchers suggest growers evaluate swathing verses cut-

ting to see what works best for them. “There are times when you need to swath,” said Chris Holzapfel of the Indian Head Agr icultural Research Foundation. “When it’s badly lodged, with a lot of green material and variability, it can even out those prob-lems.” On the other hand, BASF research has shown that straight cutting improves pod fill by allowing the plant to mature. The Canola Council of Canada, which aims to increase production to 52 bushels per acre from 32 by 2025, estimates that about two of these increased bush-els will come from harvest management strategies such as straight cutting.

During the winter months, canola should be top-dressed with nitrogen, sulfur and boron, according to Enid News. The dressing should be done during the rosette stage when winter canola is dormant, which is usually December through February. About two-thirds of the total nitrogen needed by the canola crop should be applied at this time, just as plants begin to show increased growth.

nutritionThe Internet creates a large forum for rumors to spread, particularly about canola oil. NutritionAction.com, a pub-lication of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, noted this in an ar t icle intended to help dispel the misinformation and provide helpful facts about the neu-tral cooking oil. Among other points, a professor of food science explains that most critics confuse canola with rapeseed.

On United Healthcare’s UHC-TV, nutr it ion expert Kathleen Zelman answered questions about how canola oil is pro-cessed. She explained that canola oil is produced in a similar way to other common vegetable oils and adheres to the highest safety and quality standards by several authori-ties around the world. In fact, Zelman noted that canola oil is one of the healthiest cooking oils available because of its low saturated fat content.

oil around the world Quebec made changes in December to its Food Products Act , removing barr iers to the production and sale of vegetable oil-based dairy products, according to The Leader-Post. The restriction lift, following a ruling that such barriers violated internal trade laws, now allows edible oil products to be freely sold in Quebec. “This is a welcome and overdue development for our producers ,” sa id Saskatchewan’s Agriculture Minister Lyle Stewart. “They n ow h ave m o re m a r ke t access oppor tunit ies for the many products that use S a skatchewan edib le o i l ingredients, such as certain margarines, coffee whiteners and dessert toppings.”

Canadian officials spoke to the Indian government regard-ing the contentious issue of labeling canola oil in India, reported FnBNews.com. Under current regulations, the Food Safety Standards Authority of India mandates that imported canola oil should instead be labeled “rapeseed oil – low-erucic acid,” a generic term. “The world over, [canola] oil is imported under [this] name,

and people are more familiar with the health benefits attached with it,” noted Bruce Jowett, vice presi-dent of market development at the Canola Council of Canada.

latest industry newsOral arguments for the Grocery Manufacturers Associat ion’s l a w s u i t a ga i n s t Ve rm o nt ’s upcoming b iotech l a bel ing law are tentatively scheduled for early January, according to the Burlington Free Press. The association is arguing that the law violates the U.S. Constitution by compelling manufacturers to “convey messages they do not want to convey,” among other points. The results of the lawsuit could affect implementation of other labeling laws in northeastern states. The U.S. Canola Association is a member of the Coalition for Safe Affordable Food with the Grocery Manufacturers Association and 35 other farm groups, industry representatives and non-governmental organizations that are opposed to the labeling laws. They are concerned about the effects such laws could have on misconceptions of biotechnology and the agricultural economy.

about USCA eventsIt’s not too late to submit your entries for U.S. Canola Digest’s “Lights, Camera, Canola!” photo contest! The deadline of Jan. 1 has been extended until Feb. 1, 2015. All photos must feature U.S. canola and be taken no earlier than the previous calendar year. E-mail your entries to Alison Neumer Lara at [email protected] and check our contest rules for other specifics.


Support the Canola Industry by Becoming a USCA Member

The U.S. Canola Association (USCA) is the only national organization repre-senting all industry segments—includ-ing producers, processors, food manu-facturers, exporters, seed and crop pro-tection companies—with the shared goal of increasing U.S. canola acreage. By becoming a USCA member, you’ll help influence agricultural policy and have access to the most up-to-date canola news. Join today by visiting the membership section of the USCA web site at www.uscanola.com and take this “golden” opportunity to support a promising U.S. crop.

For regular updates on what’s happen-ing in the world of canola, sign up for a free subscription to Canola Quick Bytes, an e-newsletter covering such topics as agronomy, legislation, nutrition and biodiesel. Subscribe at www.uscanola.com.

Grow With Us

canola cooks


A FAMILY AFFAIR Celebrate with Brassica Foods this Winter

This deliciously fragrant soup seems like it’s made with cream, but it’s not. The herbed drizzle adds a pop of fresh flavor.

6 Tbsp canola oil, divided2 Tbsp minced fresh parsley1 Tbsp minced fresh chives1 (2 lb) head cauliflower, chopped, about 5 to 6 cups1 medium onion, coarsely chopped, about 1 cup2 Tbsp chopped garlic, about 2 cloves1/2 cup dry vermouth or cooking sherry, optional1 (32 oz) container chicken broth1/2 tsp salt4 oz Asiago cheese, finely grated

1. Combine 3 tablespoons canola oil and herbs; set aside.

2. Heat remaining 3 tablespoons canola oil in 8-quart pot over medium heat. Add cauliflower, onion and garlic; cook about 10 minutes, stirring frequently, or until caramelized and toasty brown. Add vermouth, if desired, and 1/2 cup broth. Stir to scrape up any browned bits on bottom of pot.

3. Working in batches in food processor, pulse cauliflower mixture until smooth. Return to pot, adding remaining broth and salt. Heat on low just to boil; reduce heat and simmer until warm, about 5 minutes.

4. To serve, ladle about 1.5 cups soup into bowl; top with cheese and drizzle with about 1 tablespoon herbed oil.

Servings: 4.

Tip: For a chunkier soup, don’t process all of the cauliflower-onion mixture.

SHERI COLEMAN, B.S.N., R.N.

WHEN YOU SEE A GROUP OF PEOPLE with similar features and gestures, the natural conclusion is that they’re a family. Whether the traits are learned or inherited, families have shared characteristics. Canola’s family is no exception. Canola oil has a great nutritional profile and its vegetable relatives are just as impressive.

Canola is a member of the Brassica family, which is named after its most popular member: cabbage. In addition to all the varieties of cabbage from bok choy to Brussels sprouts, the Brassica family includes mustards, broccoli, cauliflower, radish, turnip, arugula, watercress and many other cruciferous vegetables with cross-like petals. Their culinary uses are just as varied. Mustard is a spice, canola provides oil, horseradish is a condiment and others take their places as appetizers, main courses or sides.

In addition to its many members, the Brassica family has an extensive nutrient profile. Brassica vegetables typically have high levels of vitamins A, C and K as well as fiber and some protein (broccoli, for example, has about 4 grams per 50-calorie serving). While not high in fat, these vegetables do provide omega-3 fat in the form of alpha-linolenic acid. They are also good sources of micronutrients and minerals such as magnesium, manganese, phosphorus and potassium. Serve up generous portions of Brassica vegetables with canola oil several times a week for a delicious health boost.

Derived from a Brassica member itself, canola oil enhances the flavor of its “relatives” (Brassica vegetables). Like them, it is versatile and nutritious. Canola oil contains little saturated fat and high levels of monounsaturated and omega-3 fats as well as vitamin E and plant sterols, making it arguably the most heart-healthy oil on the market.

In addition, canola oil’s high heat tolerance is ideal for frying, grilling and roasting. Its light taste works well for carrying other ingredient flavors in salad dressings, dipping oils or herbed marinades.

The caramelized caulif lower soup below with herb-infused canola oil is a delicious way to get the benefits of the Brassica family, plus the whole dish is quick and easy to make.

SHERI COLEMAN, B.S.N., R.N., IS ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF THE NORTHERN CANOLA GROWERS ASSOCIATION IN BISMARCK, N.D.

CARAMELIZED CAULIFLOWER SOUP WITH HERBED CANOLA OIL DRIZZLEDeveloped for the Northern Canola Growers Association by HealthyFood411


A FAMILY AFFAIR Celebrate with Brassica Foods this Winter

JOB #: 53338 Print Scale: NoneCLIENT CODE: WINF03 Version: CanolaCLIENT: CROPLAN

Description: CanolaPublication: US Canola DigestDocument Name: 53338_CROP_Canola_Farmer_Ad_

USCanolaDigest_v1.indd

Proof #:

Page #:

1

1

Bleed: 8.75" x 11.25"Trim: 8.5" x 11"Live: 7" x 10"Gutter: NoneFold Type: None

Date: 9-2-2014 2:05 PMUser Name: Wheeler, JamiePrevious User: Hortsch, MarcInDesign Version: InDesign CS6Notes: 4C

Cyan Magenta Yellow Black

GCD: bryan AD: brit CW: lee AE: steph PM: audrey PA: jamieTE

AM

/ A

PP

RO

VE

WinField is a trademark, and Answer Plot and CROPLAN are registered trademarks of Win� eld Solutions, LLC. © 2014 Win� eld Solutions, LLC

Every acre has a soul mate.We know that conditions in your area are unique.

That’s why CROPLAN® offers speci� c seeds for your

speci� c needs. In fact, CROPLAN® seeds combine the

most advanced genetics on the market with � eld-tested

Answer Plot® results and the latest in satellite data to

provide you with the most local seeds you can buy.

For all your speci� c � eld conditions, trust CROPLAN®

by WinField. Visit your local CROPLAN® retailer or

go to croplan.com to learn more today.

T:8.5"T:11"

For plots in your area go to Pioneer.com/YieldFor plots in your area go to Pioneer.com/Yield

Pioneer® Hybrid Maturity1

Competitor Hybrid/Brand

Number of Comparisons

Percentage of Wins

Pioneer Yield (Bu/A)

Competitor Yield (Bu/A)

Yield Advantage

(Bu/A)

45H29 (RR) 5 InVigor 5440 18 56% 49.5 47.4 2.1

45H29 (RR) 5 InVigor L130 23 78% 51.7 49.1 2.6

45H29 (RR) 5 DeKalb 74-44BL 66 56% 53.3 52.7 0.6

45H29 (RR) 5 DeKalb 74-54RR 25 56% 49.3 47.7 1.5

45H31 (RR) 5 InVigor 5440 22 68% 50.2 48.9 1.3

45H31 (RR) 5 InVigor L130 19 53% 52.2 50.7 1.6

45H31 (RR) 5 DeKalb 74-54RR 21 57% 48.8 48.3 0.5

45H33 (RR) 5 DeKalb 74-44BL 8 63% 45.3 44.5 0.8

45H33 (RR) 5 DeKalb 74-54RR 9 56% 52.0 50.0 2.0

45S56 (RR) 5 DeKalb 74-44BL 9 44% 42.4 42.4 0.0

45S56 (RR) 5 DeKalb 74-54RR 7 43% 45.1 44.8 0.3

46H75 (CL) 6 Brett-Young Seeds 5525CL 30 90% 54.4 51.0 3.4



Data is based on average of 2013 & 2014 comparisons made in North Dakota and Manitoba, Canada through October 6th, 2014. Comparisons are against all competitors, unless otherwise stated. Product responses are variable and subject to any number of environmental, disease and pest pressures. Individual results may vary. Multi-year and multi-location data are a better predictor of future performance. DO NOT USE THIS OR ANY OTHER DATA FROM A LIMITED NUMBER OF TRIALS AS A SIGNIFICANT FACTOR IN PRODUCT SELECTION. Refer to www.pioneer.com/products or contact a Pioneer sales representative or authorized dealer for the latest and complete listing of traits and scores for each Pioneer® brand product.1MATURITY: 9 = Late; 6 = Medium; 5 = Medium-Early; 3 = Early; 1 = Very Early.

HERBICIDE TOLERANT TRAIT: Hybrids and varieties with the Roundup Ready® gene (RR) are tolerant to labeled rates of Roundup® branded herbicides. This technology allows for post-emergent applications of Roundup without crop injury or stress (see herbicide label). Labeled Roundup herbicide should only be used over the top of those hybrids and varieties that carry the Roundup Ready designation. Hybrids and varieties with the CLEARFIELD® trait (CL) are tolerant to labeled rates of Beyond®, Odyssey® or Absolute® herbicides. This technology allows for post-emergent applications of these herbicides without crop injury or stress (see herbicide label). Labeled herbicides should only be used over the top of those hybrids and varieties that contain the CLEARFIELD trait.

Roundup Ready® and Roundup® are registered trademarks used under license from Monsanto Company.

The unique Clearfi eld symbol and Clearfi eld® are registered trademarks of BASF.

All products are trademarks of their manufacturer.

The DuPont Oval Logo is a registered trademark of DuPont. PIONEER® brand products are provided subject to the terms and conditions of purchase which are part of the labeling and purchase documents.®, TM, SM Trademarks and service marks of Pioneer. © 2014 PHII. DUPPCO.14006_CD-JF15

u.s. canola digest - jan/feb 2015

Documents

canola marketoutlook

canola association

canola market18

minnesota canola council

us canola digestsize

roundup ready crops

rr data

commodity crops