Corn guide

January 2018

2018 Search for lower costs

Our panel helps chart the year ahead PG. 5 EARLY Weeds We knew they’re expensive, but new science shows they cost more than we ever imagined PG. 3 CORN Markets Philip Shaw tells us to prepare for a year with some serious surprises PG.18

YOU KNOW FARMING. WE KNOW CORN. NEW high yielding corn product with early maturity, delivering above ground protection against corn borer.

DUPONT PIONEER - GENETICS. ADVICE. SUPPORT. SERVICE.

To find out more, talk to your local Pioneer Hi-Bred sales representative or visit: pioneer.com/Canada Follow us on:

NEW

P7527

Twitter @PioneerWCanada

Pioneer® brand products are provided subject to the terms and conditions of purchase which are part of the labeling and purchase documents.

Roundup Ready®,YieldGard® and the YieldGard® Corn Borer design are registered trademarks used under license from Monsanto Company. Liberty Link® and the Water Droplet Design are trademarks of Bayer. Herculex® I insect protection technology by Dow AgroSciences and Pioneer Hi-Bred. Herculex® and the HX logo are trademarks of Dow AgroSciences LLC. AM - Optimum® AcreMax® Insect Protection system with YGCB, HX1, LL, RR2. Contains a single-bag integrated refuge solution for above-ground insects. ®, SM, TM Trademarks and service marks of DuPont, Pioneer or their respective owners. © 2017, PHII.

Cornguide

Those early weeds Forget the old arithmetic. Your losses from early weeds are probably much more costly than you’ve ever imagined

I

n a time of low commodity prices and a growing incentive to maximize profit on every acre, it’s hard enough to accept that some growers are giving up $14 per acre on corn.

It’s unfathomable that they might be losing $84 per acre.

Yet that’s the startling assessment of the impact of delayed herbicide application on the yield of Roundup Ready corn in a study conducted by Dr. Peter Sikkema. Older data on the impact of delayed herbicide application in corn indicated a loss of 0.5 bu./ac./day, but with higher corn yields in the past decade, Sikkema believes the loss is now closer to 1.0 bu./ac./day.

In more competitive environments, in fact, the yield loss can run as high as 3.5 bu./ac./day.

In field-scale terms, based on a combination of an average weed pressure, 1,000 acres of corn and a price of $4 per bushel, a one-day delay in herbicide application would result in a yield loss of 0.5 bu./ac./day or $2 per acre for a total $2,000 on those 1,000 acres. A delay of seven days means a $14 per acre loss or $14,000 total loss.

Under “competitive environments” with heavy weed pressure on that same 1,000 acres of corn at the same price, that one-day delay costs $12 per acre or $12,000 per 1,000 acres. In a worst-case

Canada fleabane continues to challenge farmers in Ontario, especially as the biotype that’s resistant to glyphosate continues to spread.

Corn Guide, January 2018

By Ralph Pearce, CG Production Editor scenario where spray application is delayed for seven days, it becomes $84 per acre and $84,000 on 1,000 acres of corn.

Sikkema has long been a proponent of timely herbicide applications, and he believes the positive message actually is getting out and getting acted on. He adds, though, there are a few nuances with the numbers. First, the trials were based on Roundup Ready corn and the use of glyphosate only. Second, there’s been a fairly wide adoption of two-pass weed control in corn lately, and this is reducing the risk.

“Growers appreciate how sensitive corn is to early weed interference,” says Sikkema, a professor of weed science at the University of Guelph’s Ridgetown Campus. “There’s been a shift from total post-emergence programs in corn to twopass weed control where they’re putting down an effective pre-emergence herbicide followed by a post herbicide to clean up any weed escapes.”

Sikkema stresses that this trend is being driven by profitability, and that growers appreciate how rapidly they’re losing yield during the “critical weed-free period,” which he adds is much shorter than what is cited in some peer-reviewed literature.

As a result, growers are adjusting their weed management programs accordingly.

It’s also a departure from using the post-emergence grass products that were part of the 1990s weed control movement.

Sikkema recalls the days when growers would wait until weeds emerged, and the recommendation was to spray only the portions of the field that had weeds and use only those herbicides that were required. With that messaging and the introduction of Roundup Ready soybean in 1997 (and corn in 2001), there was a shift away from soil-applied, pre-emergence herbicides to total post programs.

“I think the hidden yield loss — for Continued on page 4

3

that matter, the hidden dollar loss — across Ontario was enormous, yet it’s a totally undocumented yield and financial loss,” says Sikkema. “Let’s say there’s a field with 223 bu./ac. corn with a postonly program. If that had been a two-pass program, that same field might have yielded 235. That is undocumented yield and financial loss that has occurred in many fields across the province for years.”

A third proviso worth noting is that past weed management practices can increase a grower’s flexibility when it comes to the herbicide use. There are some farms in southern Ontario, says Sikkema, where families in the past 50 years have had near-perfect weed control of their farms through the use of very effective integrated weed management programs. Those farms today tend to have very low weed pressure, and have a lot of flexibility in terms of when they put on their post-emergence herbicide.

“In contrast to that, we have conducted research on numerous farms in southwestern Ontario during the past 25 years and the yield loss on some of those farms would be tremendous due to early weed pressure,” says Sikkema. He has seen yield loss as early as the one-leaf stage in corn versus some where there’s no yield loss if application is delayed until the eight-leaf stage. “It varies all over the board… it has to be balanced.”

Diversity in the field In spite of the rise of the four glyphosateresistant weed species in Ontario — Canada fleabane, giant ragweed, common ragweed and waterhemp — growers do have the tools to manage those weeds in a corn-soybean-wheat rotation.

“It increases the level of management on the part of those farmers who have those resistant biotypes, but with the herbicides that are currently available in Ontario, I think we can manage those weed biotypes,” says Sikkema. “We just have to start talking about diversity and not relying exclusively on herbicides for weed management.”

That diversity comes in all farming practices, including more diverse crop rotations and using as many different herbicide modes of action as possible. It would mean including winter wheat in the rotation where it makes sense and using cover crops after wheat. In soybeans, it might translate to decreasing row widths from 30-inch down to 20- or 15-inch spacings or increasing the seeding rate.

4

One point of interest regarding the new technologies available to growers such as Roundup Ready Xtend and Enlist is that growers do not force the technologies where they don’t fit. At the same time, it’s important to make full use of them where they do work and work well.

As an example, Roundup Ready Xtend soybeans have an excellent fit for managing glyphosate-resistant Canada fleabane or glyphosate-resistant giant ragweed in Ontario. It’s biologically active on those two weed species. In contrast to that, Sikkema calls it forcing a square peg into a round hole for growers trying to make the Xtend technology work in terms of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp. That has more to do with the biology of the weed and its extended emergence, which begins in May and continues through October. As a result, dicamba in a preemerge application of XtendiMax or Engenia might provide 10 to 14 days of residual control of waterhemp before it loses efficacy.

Dicamba is very effective as a postemergence treatment for the control of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp, but Sikkema cautions that sensitive crops in adjacent fields may have emerged at that time. This puts those at a much greater risk due to off-target movement.

Late-season applications Another point from Sikkema pertains to late-season herbicide applications, where a grower might apply a pre-emergence herbicide in corn. Though the field has been perfectly clean up to the six-leaf stage (V4), the grower notices some newly emerged weeds. Will those weeds reduce yield? Would it be worth it to apply a post herbicide?

The answers to those questions are “No” and “Probably not.” And Sikkema says this is part of a rather profound shift in the past 10 years.

Sikkema cites a recent paper written

by Dr. Jason Norswor thy of the University of Arkansas, who stated that growers need to approach 100 per cent weed control in all fields in all years, and as long as they’re farming, they need to reduce weed seed return to the soil, especially from glyphosate-resistant biotypes.

“The thought is that if there’s no weed seed returned to the soil, we are going to deplete the soil-seed bank, and there are just fewer weeds that are exposed to herbicides,” he says. “As a result, there will be reduced selection intensity for herbicide-

resistant weeds in general, and glyphosate-resistant weeds in particular. I’m changing my thought process, and I think we have to look to almost perfect weed control for those weed species that have a greater propensity for selecting or evolving herbicide resistance.”

The primary reason behind this is well known: There have been no new herbicide modes of action for 35 years in field crop production. There might be new modes being developed, but it’s not known whether they will arrive in time to address some of the current weed management challenges. Finally, herbicides should be viewed as an exhaustible resource. Sikkema says more must be done to protect this exhaustible resource so that future farmers will realize the same weed management benefits from these valuable weed management tools. CG

The key finding in Dr. Peter Sikkema’s research is that a one-day delay in herbicide application can cause yield loss of 0.5 bu./ac./day or $2 per acre.

Corn Guide, January 2018

Cornguide

Lower basis may be a short-term challenge but interest rates can’t rise out of sync with the global economy.

Ready for the NEW cost of production?

C

alculating your farm’s cost of production (CoP) has been a focus of discussion for more than 20 years.

According to some in the agri-food industry, it’s been embraced by more growers in the past 10 years, particularly with cyclically low commodity prices, comparatively higher land costs, plus seed and technology costs and the need to invest in technologies like precision agricultural systems.

Proponents of the “know your CoP” mantra insist that it’s every bit as important in farming as a yield monitor or calibrating machinery.

Yet as the summer of 2017 turned to autumn, several new parameters were introduced into the CoP equation, to the extent that some in the industry wondered how they would affect farmers’ bottom lines.

Higher interest rates, an expected drop in the commodity basis, and an increase in Ontario’s minimum wage will all have significant impacts and alter socalled conventional CoP calculations.

Country Guide approached four industry stakeholders — some of whom also farm — and posed a variety of questions on how these factors will affect agriculture in the coming year. Each responded with their own insights on the changes producers might expect.

Overall, the consensus is that growers are definitely more aware of their cost of production, either as a result of their own Corn Guide, January 2018

undertaking or with the help of a trusted adviser such as an agronomist, accountant or banker.

There are those who still need to increase their awareness, or adjust it according to current and emerging influences, but overall, growers are asking more questions and they’ve come a long way in understanding CoP in the past 10 years.

QUESTION: Which of the new parameters will have the greatest impact on short-term and longterm impact on growers?

Wayne Black believes the change in basis will have more of an immediate impact than interest rate hikes. An independent certified crop adviser (CCA), Black reasons that if a farm operation is highly leveraged, a lot of the interest rates can be locked-in for longer terms. As it stands now, 6.0 per cent interest may look high, but he believes anything under 8.0 per cent is a bonus, and it’s unlikely they’ll go higher without falling out of sync with the global economy.

“If it does, the basis will erode even more,” says Black. “At least with the basis, the main commodities can be protected by locking in the basis and/or the futures price at the same time you purchase your inputs. If the basis drops, it’s most likely the cost of the commodity input would drop in sync with the change in the dollar (all other factors aside).”

A bit more complex, but a lot more accurate

By Ralph Pearce, CG Production Editor From a banking perspective however, the key will be the individual’s level of farm debt, according to Troy Packet, vicepresident of Agriculture Services with TD Canada Trust.

“While the reducing basis may have a large impact on break-even or profitability, given increased levels of farm debt, interest rate hikes could have a major impact on CoP, as well,” says Packet.

“Minimum wage increases will have a larger impact on labour-intensive sectors of agriculture, such as the greenhouse industry.”

The rising minimum wage will also affect other sectors that rely more on labourers — livestock, poultry and the fruit and vegetable sectors.

From the seed, chemical and traits side of the business, Maizex Seeds’ territory manager Adam Parker believes it’s the basis while Stephen Denys, director of business management, points to interest rates. Parker states that without the basis in the past two or three years, farmers would be looking at significantly lower profit margins in the cropping sector in Canada.

“As much as basis can provide risk, there have definitely been marketing opportunities to capitalize on, due to basis,” says Parker. “A farmer who knows their CoP can make significant gains Continued on page 6

5

when forward contracting or taking advantage of rallies in the market.”

Denys notes that interest rate hikes are far from the 20-plus per cent days of the 1980s, and like Black, believes that rates can’t go much higher without a significant impact on a lot of other people.

“With high levels of consumer debt, an urban-focused government cannot allow interest rates to climb out of control,” says Denys. “If the dollar increases in value relative to the U.S. dollar, it’s a double whammy with a shrinking basis.

If we look at the U.S. experience in this part of the commodity cycle — the net prices we would experience with a higher dollar — the impact has been a lowering in land prices and further consolidation. Farms leveraged on land purchases would see a significant impact on the balance sheet.”

QUESTION: Will these factors affect other business decisions?

This is where changes taking place may provide an unfortunate side effect.

Black has seen more farmers recognizing the benefit of long-term investments in a balanced fertility program or cover crops where they’re needed, and keeping their weed control programs in check.

“Cover crops, weed control and fertility programs pay dividends later,” he says, citing the need for replacement of nutrients in the face of higher crop yields.

“Otherwise, crop health may be negatively impacted, and it could take years to rebuild that fertility.”

To Packet, farmers generally recognize the importance of good agronomic management and are excellent stewards.

While some have the ability to get more precise in their fertility programs and herbicide applications, most will likely continue with current farming practices and look for ways to maximize yield.

“I would expect many to look for other ways to cut costs, such as delaying equipment replacement and lowering land rental costs,” he adds.

“I see the use of precision ag increasing in farming as margins get tighter,” says Parker. “The more a farmer can accurately use inputs, whether it’s seed, chemical or feed, if there is an ROI, the farmer will use the technology. Digital platforms are also allowing for much easier access to evaluating performance.”

6

“Given increased levels of farm debt, interest rate hikes could have a major impact on CoP.” — Troy Packet, TD Canada Trust QUESTION: Recent drops in fertilizer prices could help offset some of the impacts of interest rates, basis and the minimum wage. But are those prices too hard to predict?

Fertilizer prices present an interesting set of influences, notes Denys. Prices certainly have an impact on the grower as an input cost but the looming guidelines or regulations on phosphorus expected for Ontario and other provinces could affect crop management strategies in the long term. For the time being, fertilizer prices remain low.

“Unless there are global shortages that spike the price higher, which we have seen in some years past, it tends to mirror demand in the U.S. in terms of corn acres,” says Denys. “If acres are down, this helps fertilizer prices.”

Both Parker and Black believe that price histories make it too difficult to predict why prices drop or how much they may come down. And given the volatility and uncertainty of fertilizer prices, adds Packet, it’s unlikely they’ll play a major role in offsetting other costs or decisions.

QUESTION: What, if any, influence will interest rates have on land purchases?

The general consensus on this is that “farmers will continue to farm.” Interest rate hikes may slow the pace of transactions but the larger-scale farms that can cash-flow land purchases will continue to buy. And again, an urban-based government and high consumer debt loads will likely to keep rates where they are for now. For those who are leveraged a little more, there will be a tendency to rein in expanding land bases.

The final word As for other factors that can influence CoP with these changing paradigms, the advice is simple, yet varied. For one, understand value, says Black, urging growers not to “cheap-out” to save on an expense.

“Also, know your adviser, and keep a trusted advisory team,” Black adds. “They may not be the least expensive, but they’ll provide the best advice for the long-term viability of your operation.”

For Denys, it’s a set of concerns that affects the bottom line but more from outside of the industry, particularly on government regulation.

“Out of one side of its mouth, the government talks about family farms and wanting small business, but regulatory creep is increasingly leading to consolidation and a reduction in the number of businesses,” says Denys. “This will be a difficult trend to reverse.”

Denys also emphasizes the need for farmers to manage their cost structures, and he points to technology as a way of taking some of the risk out of production, as witnessed by the back-to-backto-back large corn crops in the U.S. What helps is a businesslike approach to commodity pricing and capturing the profitable prices when possible.

On Packet’s supplementary list is a reiteration of “knowing your CoP,” especially in the face of significant change from the three new influences.

“As margins tighten, investment decisions become more difficult and those who best understand their all-in CoP, which includes items such as labour and depreciation, will have an advantage in growing their operations.”

Like Denys, Parker has a series of cost-related, production-influenced additions, including the need for socalled rainy-day funds. Environmental change is another looming concern, with farmers subject to drought, floods, frost, hail, storms and diseases having a greater effect, all of which add to the risk of production failures.

“Barriers to entry are also concerning me for the future of agriculture,” says Parker. “The level of capital investment required to compete in today’s market is overwhelming for anybody trying to make a go of it on their own. With such tight margins, the return on investment is too long, and much too risky.” CG Corn Guide, January 2018

WHACK

WESTERN BEAN CUTWORM

Western bean cutworm doesn’t stand a chance with the fast and effective control of Delegate™. Its unique Group 5 chemistry provides contact and residual control of western bean cutworm to help ensure a high-quality corn crop at harvest. This year, bring the hammer down on WBC with Delegate.

Trademark of The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) or an affiliated company of Dow. 11/17-58366

®™

Cornguide

The next tipping point

Some Illinois growers are already at the tipping point for resistant weeds.

Are Canadian corn growers far behind?

By Ralph Pearce, CG Production Editor

T

Palmer amaranth has become a serious issue in the U.S. Midwest but hasn’t made a large-scale intrusion into Ontario… yet.

8

he march of glyphosate-resistant Canada fleabane through Ontario has been nothing short of striking, going from Essex County in 2010 to the Ottawa Valley by 2015. And now other resistant weeds are also spreading.

In the U.S., waterhemp and Palmer amaranth are the new “dynamic duo” with their own resistance movement.

It’s to the point now where researchers and specialists in the U.S. are sounding the alarm on herbicide resistance, referring to it as a “tipping point” and forecasting the possibility that for some weeds, we may not have any adequate chemical options at all.

In a bulletin circulated last October, University of Illinois ecologist Dr. Adam Davis noted that Palmer amaranth and waterhemp have gone beyond mere “hard-to-control” weeds. Palmer amaranth has seen a rapid migration from the Deep South and mid-south states into the U.S. Midwest similar to Canada fleabane’s through Ontario. And waterhemp in east central Illinois is now resistant to five of the six modes of action common to cornsoybean rotations.

It begs the question: Are farmers in Canada looking at a similar kind of “tipping point?”

Dr. François Tardif doesn’t believe we are, and he maintains that what we’re seeing in the U.S. is a small action and a strong reaction. He concedes there are concerns about resistance and the lack of new modes of action, but the bulk of weed control is still based on herbicides.

“Even if you have four out of five resistant modes on your weeds, you can still spray the remaining mode of action,” says Tardif, an associate professor in the department of plant agriculture at the University of Guelph. “If your weeds Corn Guide, January 2018

show resistance to all of the available modes of action, then that would be the tipping point. We’ll reach that level when a significant proportion of fields will be uncontrollable and farmers will rely more on mechanical control, cover crops and weed-seed destruction as the main methods of management, not just as supplementation to herbicides.”

Asked whether Canadian farmers are protected by the tendency towards longer rotations, Rob Miller believes growers are more aware of weed challenges in their crops. They also lean towards greater diversity with their rotations.

“While we’ve been dealing with weed resistance for a number of years, the increase in glyphosate-, Group 2- and triazine-resistant weeds over the last few years has brought more attention to this challenging issue,” says Miller, technical development manager for BASF in Eastern Canada. “Growers are starting to look at ways to take an integrated pest management (IPM) approach to tackling some of these weed challenges.”

It’s not that we’re ahead of the learning curve relative to the U.S., nor are we “protected,” notes Miller. We’re just at a different point using different strategies.

He believes more growers here are incorporating biological and cultural methods with chemical means, creating greater diversity in the soil. They might lengthen their crop rotations, and by doing so change the weed spectrum and perhaps create a more competitive environment.

“As we introduced more conservation tillage and more no till, we actually started to see some weed shifts to more perennials, and we started to see more weeds like dandelion start to show up,” says Miller. “That’s when growers had to change their mindset… that pest always seems to adapt.”

Tough sell It’s by no means a new challenge, but with tighter margins and increasing costs, one of the larger hurdles across the agrifood sector is convincing growers to spend more money on their weed management strategies. Agronomic sales representative with Syngenta Canada Steve Johns says, human nature being what it is, growers are more likely to commit to dealing with the problem only after it arrives on their farm, and he points to the Corn Guide, January 2018

situation with Canada fleabane as a prime example.

About 20 years ago, without new modes of action coming to the market, chemical companies determined the best course of action was to develop tolerance or resistance to existing chemistries and put them into crops. Roundup Ready and LibertyLink technologies were the first arrivals, and Xtend and Enlist are the latest to enter the marketplace. Next, growers might see a stacking of various chemical resistance factors, like glyphosate with glufosinate and mesotrione.

“All of those things will be stop-gaps for a while, and overall, we can usually find a way to manage things,” says Johns.

“It might take a totally new technology — like RNA interference (RNAi) and adding that to glyphosate, so waterhemp that was affecting its enzyme system can no longer do that, allowing the glyphosate to work.”

The arrival of those stacked chemistries should have been the first step in the evolution of tolerances and resistances, according to Tardif. Models show that three-way mixes are better at preventing resistance than rotation or alternation of chemistries.

“We should have had three-way stacked crops from day one — for example, glyphosate, glufosinate and auxinics together, or other combinations of traits,” says Tardif. “But historically and commercially, that was impossible. Once you spend millions of dollars on developing a new technology, you want to recoup your investment as quickly as possible.”

Impractical pricing In the University of Illinois document, it suggested one way to reduce the reliance on glyphosate would be to ramp up its price, saying “herbicide susceptibility in weeds should have been viewed as a finite resource all along, like the global oil supply. As resources start to dwindle, prices should theoretically go up.”

In the case of herbicides, prices in the past 30 years have decreased. Yet Tardif quickly dismisses the analogy citing the many subtle differences among herbicides.

There are different formulations and ionic variations, but oil will always be oil.

“With herbicides, glyphosate is not dicamba, is not sethoxydim and is not mesotrione,” Tardif says. “They differ in their efficacy, spectrum, residual and cost

Canada fleabane is the primary herbicide-resistant weed species in Eastern Canada, but others are becoming challenging, including giant ragweed.

Photo courtesy of Mike Cowbrough, OMAFRA

of manufacturing. A herbicide may be very good on the market — good weed control, good crop safety — but then may be too expensive to manufacture, and that may take it out of the market.”

Another way of lengthening the life of a technology is to shift the mindset on the use of residuals. Both Johns and Miller believe this is happening.

In a way, says Johns, the industry was fortunate that when Roundup Ready corn came to market, many growers continued to use residual products in addition to glyphosate on their crop to maximize yield and profits.

“We really tried to get that message out to not let your crop see weeds, to use residual chemistry, and overall, a lot of farmers continued to use residual chemistry in Roundup Ready corn,” says Johns.

Johns maintains that most growers understand the connection between the continued need for residual chemistries and any long-term use of stacked herbicides, such as glyphosate with dicamba or with 2,4-D. Changes in cultural practices are also on the list of action items from Miller’s perspective. Longer rotations provide different application timings for different crops. As well, renewed interest in cover crops may help in the resistance fight as well. The addition of cover crops — after wheat or soybeans and inter-seeded into corn — helps create competition in a beneficial way. Best of all, they’re an effective part of IPM strategies.

“The use of chemistry is a vital tool in the tool box,” says Miller. “But it’s best used as part of an IPM strategy.” CG 9

Cornguide

The Prairies —

adoption set to speed up Projections of eight million acres may be optimistic, but breeders are making fast progress in adapting corn hybrids to Western Canada

By Angela Lovell

10

T

wo years ago, Monsanto and DuPont Pioneer announced ambitious plans for expanding corn acreage in Western Canada to eight to 10 million acres within 10 years, and grain corn acres have indeed increased in traditional corn-growing areas like southern Manitoba, where growers seeded a record 410,000 acres in 2017, up more than 18 per cent from the year before.

But acres haven’t increased significantly in other western provinces.

A few factors are contributing to the underwhelming growth. Lower corn prices are dampening the enthusiasm among some prospective growers. And, also on the economic side, investments in equipment such as row planters and grain dryers look less enticing with longer paybacks in today’s markets.

It would be a mistake, though, to think all those corn hopes have dried up.

Plant breeders report they are making good progress in developing earliermaturing and higher-yielding hybrids suited to western Canadian growing areas.

“We’re ahead of where we thought we would be from a yield standpoint and right on schedule from a maturity standpoint,” says Dan Wright, Canada corn and soybean portfolio lead for Monsanto Canada. “What’s exciting is when we first started breeding for this area, we were aiming for 70 days to maturity and 100 to 110 bushels per acre yield, and that’s not even on our charts now when we’re looking at advancement. We’re already at above 130 bushels per acre with that earlier maturity, and that’s great news for growers.”

DuPont Pioneer released three new early hybrids in 2015 — a 2000-corn heat unit (CHU) hybrid, P7005AM and two 2050 CHU hybrids, P7202AM and P7211HR. “These products have established themselves in the Western Canada marketplace and our customers are happy with the performance that they’re

seeing,” says Steve King, evaluation zone lead for DuPont Pioneer. “These three hybrids have allowed us to grow more corn acres in the West.”

First taste of success Climate change is also having an impact on many breeding programs. With climate scientists predicting warmer, drier growing seasons on the Prairies, another focus is developing high-yielding genetics that can manage drought stress.

Both companies test all new hybrids for Western Canada under local conditions and have several products in development for release over the next few years that they believe will be viable for the region.

“In our current pipeline we have a lot of material that’s earlier flowering, good test weight, and reaches a harvest moisture that would be less than 2000 heat units,” says King. “Those will continue to provide options for the short-season areas of Western Canada.”

“We have increased our number of yield trial plots in Western Canada dramatically,” adds Wright. “Western Canad­ ian growers are aggressive, they like to try new things, and we really feel that it’s Monsanto’s role to trial and test under local conditions so that when growers have their first experience with a new crop like corn they’re going to be successful.”

A lot to learn Although there are similarities between the northern U.S. and Canada, breeders have had much to learn as corn moves north, including how to deal with both new and familiar pests and diseases as well as different production systems such as no till.

For example, developing hybrids with better resistance to “green snap” is a focus of breeding programs for northern areas.

Green (or brittle) snap is the breakage of corn stalks by violent winds, which are more common on the Prairies than in traditional corn-growing areas in the eastern U.S. and Canada.

Corn Guide, January 2018

Photo: DuPont Pioneer

Results of a Farming Smarter study in Alberta suggest that a narrower row spacing of 20 inches and a seeding rate of 30,000 seeds per acre give better emergence and significantly more yield than on a 30-inch row spacing at lower seeding rates.

Breeders have also discovered it doesn’t take long for traditional pests such as European corn borer to find new corngrowing areas. “As corn moves across Western Canada, we have found out that even in areas where corn has never been grown, corn borer finds corn,” says Wright. “So hybrids need the normal pest and disease package that’s built in, and again that local testing for other diseases that might be present is also important.”

“There are a whole series of traits that we’re breeding for in our product development pipeline,” says King. “Maturity and yield are major ones, but also standability and diseases like Goss’s wilt, which is particularly important in Western Canada. We screen all our genetics for Goss’s wilt in a special disease nursery to ensure we’re not advancing material that’s too susceptible to the disease.”

Corn Guide, January 2018

Fitting into no till Ken Coles of Farming Smarter has just completed a three-year, dryland grain corn agronomy study at four locations in Alberta: Lethbridge, Medicine Hat, Bow Island and Vauxhall. One goal was to determine how grain corn can fit into a no-till system. All the locations had drought in two out of the three years, with an average of 60 per cent less than normal moisture and average temperatures 13 per cent above normal.

Results suggest that a narrower row spacing of 20 inches and a seeding rate of 30,000 seeds per acre give better emergence and significantly more yield than a 30-inch row spacing at lower seeding rates. In a fertility study, overall across eight trials there was very little response to nitrogen at any of the rates applied, which were zero, 50, 100 and 150 lbs. of actual N

applied in various ways — granular sidebanded at seeding and as split applications. Background N levels were not high — averaging between 13 and 60 lbs.

“The average yields for us from small plots were between 70 and 100 bushels per acre, so they’re not bumper crops, but when you consider that they’re dryland, and that you don’t necessarily need to put much nitrogen down, I think it pencils out,” says Coles. “I feel pretty confident under an average year, it is possible to hit 100 to 120 bushels, and looking at the current prices, even a 70- or 80-bushel corn crop pencils out compared to a 20-bushel wheat crop in southern Alberta.”

A two-year crop sequencing study also gave interesting results, indicating that previous crops are more important for yield Continued on page 12

11

Hybrids plus agronomy The take-home message from the study, says Coles, is that dryland grain corn can work. He’s confident that with the lower heat unit varieties that are now available, corn can be added as a viable option in any production system in southern Alberta.

That said, there is definitely a learning curve to corn in no-till systems.

“We need to learn, as farmers and researchers, how to deal with planters because it’s a different cropping system,” says Coles. “It’s different than an air seeder, and some adaptation is needed to make those planters work well in a directseeding scenario. You can’t just take what you know about running an air seeder and apply that to a planter. They’re precision planters that require a little more detail and level of knowledge to use them properly. I think we can make it work in zero till but farmers will need to be careful about the precursor crops.”

Monsanto has several research farms and technology development representatives across Western Canada. In areas where the company anticipates corn could be an option for growers, it has been working to understand the agronomics such as planting dates, fertilization and how corn fits into a no-till production system.

“We have been doing a tremendous amount of work on the agronomic side, for example with things like strip till (where soil is blackened only in the seed row), which we believe is a good option for western Canadian no-till growers,” says Wright.

“Our research is something we don’t talk about enough, so we are building our plan to make sure we’re co-operating with universities and sharing what we’re doing collectively, so the industry can learn together.

If we’re all helping move the needle forward, that’s positive for growers.”

12

A Monsanto research plot in Saskatoon where the company says yields are zooming past their original goals.

“I feel pretty confident under an average year it is possible to hit 100 to 120 bushels, and looking at the current prices, even a 70- or 80-bushel corn crop pencils out.”

— Ken Coles, Farming Smarter King says DuPont Pioneer is also working on the agronomy side, taking the global expertise and knowledge that it has with growing corn in many different environments and making sure it still applies or can be adapted to Western Canada.

“We’re doing studies on plant populations and planting densities to see how Western Canada corn responds to increasing plant populations either for grain or silage use,” says King, who adds the company is also looking at corn development from planting to flowering under various Prairie conditions. “There’s a lot of historical information from the U.S. Midwest about the number of leaves that are needed to reach tassel stage, and how many heat units you need to get to certain tassel stage, so we did a study this past summer where we took these ultraearly genetics that are adapted and bred for Western Canada and tried to repeat some of that historical information and see if the same applies here.”

King says the data is still being analyzed but the company is hoping to share the findings with growers, retailers and agronomists soon. Meanwhile, yield data from Pioneer plots across the West are available to growers. Corn yields averaged 161 bushels per acre in plots 2016, and although 2017 wasn’t as good due to hot, dry conditions in some areas, the average yield across those plots was still 130 bushels per acre. “Obviously not every field is going to achieve that amount of yield but we definitely feel comfortable that we’re achieving enough yield to make corn an economically viable crop in growers’ crop rotations,” says King.

What’s the potential?

Global demand for corn grew by 1.8 billion bushels in 2016 and continues to grow annually, which could be a significant factor in grower decisions about whether to grow corn.

But are the predictions of eight to 10 million acres of grain corn in Western Canada realistic?

Wright isn’t sure of the exact number, but he’s confident there is going to be significantly more acres of corn on the Prairies in the future.

“Growers will decide how it fits on their farms, but the work that we’re doing gives growers another option from a profitability standpoint,” he says.

“We talk to a lot of growers who are searching out new crops to help them be more profitable on their existing land base versus growing the same crops and increasing their land base.”

King believes the estimates may be a bit optimistic, but he does believe growth will continue at a steady pace.

“Even if the number is half that amount, it’s still significant growth and a significant presence for corn in Western Canada, but it’s going to take a long time to get there, it’s not going to happen in a couple of years,” says King. “With any new crop there are always early adopters and if they have good experiences the news spreads and you reach a point where the market takes off. From a research perspective, we have a longterm commitment to the West. Breeding takes a long time, and we’re making very good progress.” CG Corn Guide, January 2018

Photo: Monsanto

than the tillage regime. In the second year of the trial, corn was planted on corn, soybean, wheat, pea, lentil, canola and mustard stubble using both tillage and no-till plots. Although overall emergence on any of the plots was more even with tillage, there was definitely better emergence in the no-till system on low-residue crops such as soybeans, peas and lentils. Taken overall, there weren’t significant yield differences except where corn followed a non-mycorrhizae crop such as mustard or canola.

FARMING HAS ALWAYS BEEN A SERIES OF RISKS. LOSING HALF YOUR NITROGEN DOESN’T HAVE TO BE ONE OF THEM. When commodity prices decline, making smart decisions about your nitrogen investment is more critical than ever. AGROTAIN® nitrogen stabilizer protects your nitrogen, keeping it available to your plants to maximize performance and optimize yield potential.

In fact, in corn trials conducted over a three-year period, AGROTAIN® stabilizer increased yield an average of 20 bushels an acre compared to untreated urea.* To learn more, visit agrotain.com. * Based on U.S. data collected from 2010-2013 trials where nitrogen loss was the limiting factor. Actual results may vary based on a number of factors, including environmental conditions.

AGROTAIN® and the AGROTAIN logo are trademarks of Koch Agronomic Services, LLC. Koch and the Koch logo are trademarks of Koch Industries, Inc. ©2018 Koch Agronomic Services, LLC.

643-1711A Canada AGROTAIN Risks FullPage 8.125x10.75.indd 1

12/1/17 9:42 AM

Cornguide

Here’s a new way to do sprayer cleanouts that saves time and is great for the environment

By Ralph Pearce, CG Production Editor

Continuous rinse C ertain jobs on the farm aren’t anybody’s favourites. Repairing a planter in the middle of a soy­ bean field in early June is right up there on that list, and so is picking stones on just about any day. And up there with them is cleaning out the sprayer, which is another of the chores about which no one ever said puts the joy in farming.

The somewhat official line on clean­ outs is that they should be performed at the end of a day’s application, and defi­

After four serial rinses, in spite of the rinsate looking clean and being odour free, soybeans still exhibited cupping.

14

nitely when changing from one treatment to another. But a conventional triple rinse procedure takes anywhere from 20 to 45 minutes (according to an informal survey of Ontario growers) and even under good conditions, there are often gallons of spray mix left in the lines, pump and tank sump.

Left undiluted, the residues can dry on or soak into sprayer parts, and they have the potential to lift and cause crop injury during subsequent application, or to build up until the sprayer is thoroughly cleaned.

Now there’s a system which can per­ form the task in roughly one-third of the time. At the 2017 edition of Canada’s Outdoor Farm Show, Dr. Jason Deveau and Mike Cowbrough, both specialists with the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA), hosted daily demonstrations of a new continuous-rinse system.

The demonstrations included a short tour through plots exhibiting crop injury to small amounts of dicamba, just to show the damage these can cause.

This continuous-rinse design was first constructed and pressed into service in Europe, where pressure has been increas­ ing in countries that take water from ground sources. Since 2006, farmers in France and Belgium have been legislated to perform tank cleanouts, not just at the end of the day, but BEFORE leaving a field.

In fact, the regulations stipulate they can’t leave the field until their spray is down to one to two per cent of the origi­ nal tank concentration as sampled at the nozzle.

The legislation came after testing revealed unacceptable levels of farm chemicals in drinking water samples in those two countries. Point source con­ tamination occurred from tank fills and cleanouts performed repeatedly in the same spots. The surface run-off leeched chemicals into the water supply.

According to Deveau, other European countries are now discussing similar reg­ ulations.

Corn Guide, January 2018

Pump more, or more pumps?

The problem was forcing farmers to take 20 to 45 minutes to rinse the sprayer after every field. European engineers knew that the sprayer’s pump was employed for two different tasks, which could not occur simultaneously: spray from the boom or draw water from the clean water tank.

This is why the triple-rinse method is a tedious back-and-forth dance of drawing clean water into the product tank, then circulating, then spraying out the rinsate. But beyond the time and manual effort required to change valves, the real problem is that there can be five to 15 gallons of spray mix left in the sprayer when “empty.”

“If you introduce one-third of the clean water you’re carrying using the main pump through the rinse-down nozzle, it dilutes the remaining five to 15 gallons and you get slightly less dirty water,” says Deveau, the spray specialist with OMAFRA. “Then you circulate that through the system as best you can, climb back into the cab and spray it out the boom. But again, you’ve left five to 15 gallons of now more-dilute solution behind.”

That step is repeated two more times with the remaining solution becoming more dilute each time. This reality of adding clean water to dirty is also why a single, high-volume flush is not as effective as multiple, lower-volume serial dilutions, but they take a great deal of time, dissuading some operators from the practice.

What if it could be faster?

To help, European engineers added a dedicated low-volume pump for the clean water, creating the continuousrinse system.

“When the product tank is empty, the operator flips a switch in the cab to start the clean-water pump. It draws from the clean-water tank, rinsing the product tank via the wash-down nozzles from the tank,” says Deveau. “The main pump is free to continually spray while rinsing is happening. This means clean water displaces the dirty water rather than dilutes it. Best of all, you never leave the cab, so operator exposure is nil, and you’ve sprayed that rinsate out over the field where it can break down naturally rather than dumping it in a single location.”

According to Deveau, continuous rinsing is not exactly a new concept. There are still farmers who remember their fathers Corn Guide, January 2018

A simplified layout depicts the addition of a dedicated low-volume pump for clean water, creating a continuous-rinse system.

Dr. Jason Deveau (standing at left) and Mike Cowbrough (right) host the continuous rinse demonstration at Canada’s Outdoor Farm Show in September 2017.

parking the sprayer, plumbing a water supply hose into the suction line while spraying out the rinsate. However, the sprayer is stationary and the rinsate accumulates in that single location.

During formal testing in the late 1990s, results indicated that continuous cleaning was more efficient than triple rinsing. In Deveau’s and Cowbrough’s demonstrations, continuous rinsing is “as good as” the triple- or quadruplerinse procedures.

Last year, OMAFRA worked with HJV Equipment to adapt the system to a Rogator, and then worked with Green Lea

Fertilizer and Application Equipment to instal a similar design on a Case IH Patriot 4440 for about $3,000 (not including labour). That may sound expensive, but in view of the time savings, the reduction in residue within the sprayer and the subsequent reduced potential for accidentally carrying over sprays into a sensitive crop the team says it pays for itself fairly quickly.

Even without the return on investment, it’s worth considering just for the environmental stewardship benefits alone.

Continued on page 16

15

Direct to the lines and boom There is another modification that Deveau and others are exploring, which would allow the operator to shunt clean water directly from the rinse tank to the lines and boom. Such a configuration already exists as an option on some sprayers, yet it can be added cost-efficiently to a continuous rinse system and initiated from the cab.

“Consider a scenario where the operator is rained out, or perhaps has too much spray mix,” says Deveau. “Their intention is to return later to finish, but they don’t want product to sit in the lines and nozzles where residue can form. So they elect to rinse out the lines and boom using the rinse pump, bypassing the product tank and product pump. It’s a nifty little perk requiring only one more electric solenoid valve, a switch and an additional ‘T’ in the plumbing.”

A couple of other clarifications are helpful. Although the plot demonstrations exhibited low-level crop injury in soybeans, this continuous rinse system is not exclusive to dicamba formulations.

Any spray application will benefit from a system like this. Deveau emphasizes that the Outdoor Farm Show represented a very stringent metric to demonstrate that both rinsing protocols are equally effective, but that no rinsing method is as effective as a full sprayer decontamination. That process requires the use of a detergent and soaking time to address all dead-end plumbing issues.

It’s also interesting to note that Monsanto and Syngenta are two companies that are interested in researching a continuous rinse system.

In the field plots — seeing is believing During the Outdoor Farm Show demonstrations, Cowbrough shared his observations and insights from the plots that provided a visual indication of soybean sensitivity to dicamba.

According to Cowbrough, he had two goals with the demonstration: to see if the continuous rinse process was equivalent to the triple-rinse process (in terms of spray cleanout), and to illustrate how sensitive soybeans are to dicamba.

“We thought the best way to quantify the equivalence between continuous 16

Mike Cowbrough from OMAFRA discusses the dangers of small amounts of dicamba rinsate on soybeans at Canada’s Outdoor Farm Show in September 2017.

“The continuous rinse system cannot replace a thorough decontamination or clean-out procedure.”

— Mike Cowbrough, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs and triple rinse was to spray the rinsate collected over top of a sensitive crop, make visual injury ratings, and take yield,” says Cowbrough. “We have completed harvest at two sites and soybean yield was equivalent using both methods, once you got to the final rinses (third or fourth rinse compared to 75 and 100 per cent water run through using the continuous rinse system).”

In testing for sensitivity in soybeans, Cowbrough refers to the body of research on the topic that shows the impact varies based on application timing, with exposure during the vegetative stage having less impact than at the reproductive stage.

One research paper cited a 10 per cent yield loss in soybean at 0.16 per cent of the labelled rate of dicamba, so the cupping symptoms do show up at lower doses.

“All of this is to say that if one does not do a thorough decontamination of a sprayer — clean the filters, end caps — with certain herbicides like dicamba, there will be issues,” says Cowbrough. “This was also meant to demonstrate that the continuous rinse system cannot replace a

thorough decontamination or cleanout procedure, since we collected enough dicamba in the filters after each method of rinsing.”

It’s a quick, efficient method to routinely rinse out the majority of the sprayers so that the decontamination process is easier and more efficient.

Again, Cowbrough’s and Deveau’s comments and the demonstrations they hosted were not an indication of dangers that are unique to dicamba. They apply to all chemistries, even though the crop damage in the soybeans from the dicamba rinsate was rather obvious.

For more information, check spray-

ers101.com/installing-a-continuousrinse-system/ and sprayers101.com/ continuous-rinsing-should-be-consideredin-north-america/.

“Even for myself, I knew dicamba was potent,” says Cowbrough. “But it wasn’t until I started to go through the literature and see the cupping from what we collected from the sprayer… the rinsate coming out of the sprayer was looking clean and was odour free, yet we still saw cupping. And that was after four serial rinses. CG Corn Guide, January 2018

Are you a member yet?

Activate your Glacier FarmMedia membership account for free today and enjoy these benefits!

country guide free for a year!

CHOOSE FROM

13

ISSUeS

Simply complete our short survey to sign up for your free Glacier FarmMedia membership and receive a complimentary one year subscription to Country Guide magazine! — Essential reading for farmers!

OR

FREE PRINT CLASSIFIED AD

In the publication of your choice:

PLUS ONLINE LISTING AT

And there’s more!

When you sign up for a Glacier FarmMedia Member Account — you get free news, markets, weather, and equipment listings — in customizable dashboards and personalized newsletters — on your mobile or desktop.

Who is Glacier farmMedia?

Glacier FarmMedia is Canada’s largest agricultural publisher, producing more than 20 print and digital titles that include many of the most trusted names in Canadian agriculture. Members benefit from decades of industry insight and experience.

Go to www.membersgetmore.ca to sign-up today - It’s free!

Cornguide

For Canada’s corn growers, it is the best of times and the worst of times

Markets 2018 T

By Philip Shaw

18

here is no question that growing corn is a rewarding thing to do.

Increases in productivity over the last several years have helped farmers boost yields across Canada as well as throughout the greater American Corn Belt. This has led to an abundance of corn on the ground almost everywhere, but with a corresponding drop in price. We can’t have everything.

Now, as we look out into 2018, corn growers have a myriad of corn market factors to consider.

Corn growers are caught in a vicious cycle. With burgeoning new technologies embedded in every corn seed, there is a constant yield improvement, which is increasingly turning into a default. Some might argue that corn yields are going up exponentially.

Importantly, this phenomenon is true not only in Canada and the United States.

It’s also taking place around the world, and it has led to a corn market of everincreasing supply that in turn drives down corn futures prices.

Of course, we’ve seen vicious cycles in agriculture before, including the kind that leave us asking: What has to come first, the chicken or the egg? Does corn supply have to collapse, or can we hope the global demand will grow even faster?

Regardless, as we move into 2018, we’re getting a fairly clear picture of what we will be facing. The challenge for corn farmers will be to find marketing opportunities despite this cycle.

We need to ask ourselves a few questions. How much corn will be planted in the United States and in Canada, especially in Ontario and Quebec in 2018?

Will there be a shift away from corn to soybeans? Will the corn futures price remain in a low range between $3.38 to $4? Will corn demand continue to grow within this cheaper price environment? Is there a black swan event looming on the horizon, which may send corn futures prices much higher?

In the middle of winter, estimating and musing about the 2018 corn crop

remains only hypothetical. However, a look back at the 2017 growing season gives us some indication of where the market may be heading.

During 2017, American farmers planted 90.4 million acres of corn, harvesting 83.1 million acres according to the November 2017 USDA report. At the start of the 2017 growing season there was much conjecture within the market that higher soybean futures prices might actually lead to the United States planting more soybeans acres than corn. However, this did not happen; soybean acres came in at 89.5 million acres planted.

The pricing scenario going into winter of 2018 is similar. For example, November 2018 soybeans at the end of November 2017 were $10, while December 2018 corn futures were $3.83. The U.S. cash price using DTN’s national corn index on December 1 was approximately $3 per bushel, with many sub-$3 prices across much of the corn belt. Soybean cash prices were $9.19 per bushel.

How these ratios will affect planting intentions in the spring of 2018 is anybody’s guess. However, like 2017, there is a signal to plant soybeans over corn.

Whether it manifests itself in similar corn acres in 2018 will be a major factor in corn futures prices.

USDA released some early projections in late November 2017. They predicted that 2018 corn would come in at 91 million acres with an average yield of 173.5 bu./ac. At current demand this would result in a 2.6-billion bushel ending stock, a huge number. At the same time they predicted that soybeans would tie corn for acres at 91 million, with an average yield of 48.4 bu./ac. and 376 million bushes in ending stocks. These are very big numbers versus 2017.

The acreage numbers will be important in 2018 for shaping the future of corn supply. Increasingly, it’s obvious how resilient the newer corn hybrids are.

Statistics Canada this year is predicting an Ontario corn yield of 169.5 bu./ac., which is close to a record. At the same Corn Guide, January 2018

time in the November USDA report the U.S. corn estimate of 175.4 bu./ac. was a record yield.

This came about despite a growing season that was uneven in many parts of the U.S. Even though the USDA initial figure for 2018 is 173.5 bu./ac., with benign weather, that yield could be substantially higher, even more than 2017.

This could catapult us into an ending corn stocks situation that would be worse than onerous, and that would have the effect of keeping corn futures prices in the low range.

This range as we headed into winter was seeing March corn at $3.53 per bushel and December 2018 corn at $3.86 per bushel. This is happening in an everexpanding supply situation, but demand cannot be ignored. Simply put, corn demand is strong and has been at nearrecord levels over the last couple of years.

In 2017-18 total corn usage in the U.S. is slated to come in at 14.435 billion bushels. With last year’s production from the November report of 14.578 billion bushels, there is not a lot of room for a production calamity. Needless to say, so far the corn supply is outstripping the record demand and it needs to stay that way for prices to stay low.

The big demand components for U.S. corn are feed and residual at 5.575 billion bushels; food, seed and industrial at 6.935 billion bushels; and ethanol at 5.475 billion bushels. These components, along with exports, make up total demand. The ethanol component of this demand continues to grow slowly but it is unlikely to ever repeat the explosion of 2008. However, low corn prices will likely continue to stimulate feed and food demand. Corn exports from the U.S. largely depend on price as well as the value of the American dollar. Recent moves by the Trump administration against Mexico, the largest American export destination for corn, has led to a curtailment in shipments.

There are more geopolitical issues beyond the tension between the U.S. and Mexico. For instance, China is moving toward a policy of a 10 per cent ethanol blend in gasoline nationwide by 2020. At the present time there are approximately 205 million cars in China, which consume 3.8 billion galCorn Guide, January 2018

To Canadian farmers hoping for $6 corn again, I say, “Keep hoping,” but at the same time, always remember that hope is not a marketing plan lons of gasoline. China has huge corn reserves and much of that would be consumed in expanding their ethanol mandate by 2020. An expanded Chinese ethanol corn policy may ultimately result in an increase in corn demand by 1.4 billion bushels. Of course, it should not be forgotten that this is unlikely to help the corn price in 2018, but it could ultimately be part of future demand helping out our corn price.

In Ontario, corn production in 2017 was approximately 2.015 million acres.

Historically, Ontario consumes more corn than we produce. In the past, this has meant that corn has been exported during harvest time (low basis) only to be imported back in during the later parts of spring and summer, when it creates a better basis.

However, this is changing as corn productivity in Ontario continues to grow. It is conceivable that in the future, Ontario corn may remain on an export basis continually. (Conversely, if Ontario domestic demand for corn can be increased substantially, cash basis levels may be sustained at certain times a year, while the Eastern Ontario basis will likely continue to always be higher than cash basis levels in southwestern Ontario.)

The Canadian dollar will have an effect on this to some extent. However, its value does not affect corn basis levels in Ontario as much as it does Ontario soybeans and wheat, where the cash price optics in Canadian funds often look so different than cash prices in the U.S. Of course, what’s needed to lift corn futures prices is some type of production calamity somewhere in the world to bring corn supplies down. History tells us that this will happen someday.

However, when corn futures prices reached $8.49 in 2012, we taught the rest of the world to grow corn. Overseas production in Brazil and the Black Sea region continue to be resilient.

To Canadian corn farmers hoping for $6 corn again, I say, keep hoping. But at the same time, always remember that hope is not a marketing plan.

There hasn’t been a kernel of 2018 corn planted yet. There surely will be marketing opportunities ahead as there are all kinds of potential risks in the coming year. The challenge will be to capitalize on some of these corn-marketing opportunities in a generally bearish environment.

Let’s keep our eyes open. In 2018, there surely will be some surprises. CG 19

You can’t change the weather.

But you can be ready for it.

More stations, more data, more weather tools for farmers All the weather tools you’ll need:  Access to the largest on-farm weather network in Canada  Analyze weather feature  Radar & satellite images  Historical data  Provincial maps  Photo community

weatherfarm.com

For more information on WeatherFarm or purchasing a weather station please call Spencer at: 1-888-930-5753 or email: info@weatherfarm.com