December 2014, Volume 18, Issue 8 by Matrix Digital Media Inc

December 2014 â&#x20AC;˘ Volume 18, Issue 8

Monument Measures Voted Down

Wolf Packs Threaten Ranch Viability

ÂŽ

Idaho Farm Bureau

Thanksgiving Dinner Cost Survey

Advancing Agriculture in 2014 By Bob Stallman AFBF President

The mid-term elections are over. No doubt you’re as relieved as I am to see the campaign ads fade away. Now the holidays are already upon us. As we celebrate with friends and family, it’s a good time to pause, look back and give thanks for the past year. Not much sooner than the holiday dinner dishes are

GMO Labeling Measures Fail in Oregon, Colorado

cleared from the table, we’ll also look to what we hope the next year will bring. At Farm Bureau, we’re proud of the progress we’ve made so far this year, and we are eager to do even more for farmers and ranchers in the coming weeks and months. Taking on the Tough Questions Farm Bureau recently announced a historic agreement among agri-

similar measures in recent years and now nearly half of all states have considered labeling requirements.

President Idaho Farm Bureau Federation

Only one state, Vermont, has passed a law requiring GMO labeling. It’s facing a legal challenge there and is not slated to take effect until 2016.

Ballot measures requiring labeling of food made with genetically modified ingredients recently failed in Colorado and Oregon. California and Washington voters rejected

In Oregon, one of the nation’s most liberal states, the measure lost by a narrow margin. Many pundits thought a labeling bill had a good chance of passing there. In Colo-

By Frank Priestley

The Butterfly Effect and the Price of Sugar By Rick Keller CEO Idaho Farm Bureau Federation

Farmers and ranchers are intimately aware that events half a world away and often in remote, nameless locations, may have a significant impact upon their livelihoods and future. It is referred to as the butterfly ef2

The Ag Agenda

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

cultural technology companies and farm groups on farm data privacy and security principles. We have led in asking tough questions to ensure data remains secure as new technologies that make farming more efficient also expose farmers and ranchers to new risks. Farmers and ranchers overwhelmingly agree they should own their farm data, and Farm Bureau has played See STALLMAN, page 6

rado the measure was defeated by a two to one margin. Millions of dollars have been spent both advocating for GMO labeling and defending the status quo. So what is the takeaway message from this effort to implement state labeling laws? In our opinion, this trend of turning GMO ballot measures down is in part due to the fact that it’s confusing to voters. However, for others who take the time to educate See PRIESTLEY, page 6

fect. The phrase refers to the idea that a butterfly’s wings might create tiny changes in the atmosphere that could ultimately alter the path of a hurricane or delay, accelerate, or even prevent the occurrence of a tornado in another location. This theory was perpetuated by Edward Lorenz, a mathematician, as he tried to perfect weather forecasting for the U.S. Army Air Corps during World War II and discovered a small trifling rounding error significantly altered the modeling outcome.

sands of miles away affected Idaho farmers just occurred two weeks ago. In recent years U.S. and world sugar producers have glutted the markets with excess sugar production. The stockpiles have kept sugar prices down. The sugar excess was expected to continue into next year, with little hope of recovery.

An example of how an event thou-

See KELLER, page 7

Then in mid-November, the butterfly gently flapped its delicate wings, creating an atmosphere that drastically raised sugar prices more in one

Volume 18, Issue 8

IFBF OFFICERS President ................................... Frank Priestley, Franklin Vice President ...................................Mark Trupp, Driggs Executive Vice President ............................... Rick Keller BOARD OF DIRECTORS Bryan Searle ............................................................Shelley Mark Harris ................................................. Soda Springs Chris Dalley ....................................................... Blackfoot Dean Schwendiman ........................................... Newdale Danny Ferguson ........................................................Rigby Scott Steele ..................................................... Idaho Falls Gerald Marchant .................................................. Oakley Rick Pearson ................................................... Hagerman Rick Brune............................................................Hazelton Curt Krantz ............................................................. Parma Cody Chandler....................................................... Weiser Tracy Walton ........................................................ Emmett Marjorie French ............................................... Princeton Alton Howell ................................................ Careywood Tom Daniel ............................................... Bonners Ferry Carol Guthrie ......................................................... Inkom Luke Pearce ............................................. New Plymouth STAFF Dir. of Admin. Services ....................... Nancy Shiozawa Dir. of Organization............................... Dennis Brower Commodities & Marketing Assistant ........... Peg Pratt Member Services Assistant ..................... Peggy Moore Public Relations Assistant ........................ Dixie Ashton Dist. I Regional Manager ........................... Justin Patten Dist. II Regional Manager .............................. Zak Miller Dist. III Regional Manager .................. Charles Garner Dist. IV Regional Manager ..........................Brody Miller Dist. V Regional Manager ....................... Bob Smathers Dir. of Governmental Affairs ................Russ Hendricks Asst. Dir. of Governmental Affairs .... Dennis Tanikuni Energy/Natural Resources ....................... Bob Geddes Director of Public Relations .............. John Thompson Video Services Manager ............................ Steve Ritter Broadcast Services Manager ..................... Jake Putnam Office Manager, Boise .................... Julie Christoffersen Member Services Manager ........................ Joel Benson Administrative Assistant ............................... Cara Dyer Assistant Treasurer.................................. Tyler Zollinger Printed by: Owyhee Publishing, Homedale, ID GEM STATE PRODUCER USPS #015-024, is published monthly except February, May, August and November by the IDAHO FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, 275 Tierra Vista Drive, Pocatello, ID 83201. POSTMASTER send changes of address to: GEM STATE PRODUCER P.O. Box 4848, Pocatello, ID 83205-4848. Periodicals postage paid at Pocatello, Idaho, and additional mailing offices. Subscription rate: $6.00 per year included in Farm Bureau dues.

MAGAZINE CONTACTS: Idaho Farm Bureau Federation EDITOR (208) 239-4292 â&#x20AC;˘ ADS (208) 239-4279 E-MAIL: dashton@idahofb.org www.idahofb.org

Cover: A frosty morning in Bear Lake County. Photo by Jim Parker

Custer County Commissioner Wayne Butts, left, in back of pickup, discusses public land issues with local residents near the Herd Creek Wilderness Study Area during a rally held in April 2012. The area along the East Fork of the Salmon River would become part of a new national monument in the Boulder White Clouds region if designated by presidential proclamation. Custer County residents oppose the monument as do residents of Fremont County, where a national monument is also under consideration. Farm Bureau file photo

Custer, Fremont Voters Oppose Monument Plans By John Thompson Voters in Custer and Fremont counties turned out in early November to overwhelmingly oppose creation of new national monuments in the Boulder White-Clouds region and in Island Park near Yellowstone National Park. Vote tally in both counties came in at over 90 percent opposed. In Custer County the vote margin was 1,352 opposed to 72 in favor and in Fremont County 3,798 voted to oppose while 305 were in support. Both ballot measures are advisory only. It was made clear that residents in both counties oppose more federal regulations. However, President Obama is said to be considering using the Antiquities Act to create the two monuments in Idaho. The Antiquities Act was passed by the U.S. Congress and signed by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1906. The Act allows the president by proclamation to restrict the use of public land. It has been used over 100 times by various presidents, most recently, President Obama created national monuments in New Mexico and California. President Obama recently stated that he is not finished declaring national monuSee MONUMENT page 4 Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

MONUMENT

Continued from page 3

ments. According to a White House press release, “President Obama has previously used his authority under the Antiquities Act to create or expand 12 other National Monuments across the country, including the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument in the south-central Pacific Ocean in September, the largest marine reserve in the world that is completely off limits to commercial resource extraction. With this designation, President Obama has now protected more than 260 million acres of land and water, more than any other President since the Antiquities Act became law in 1906.” Custer County Commissioner Wayne Butts said 63 percent of Custer County voters cast a ballot in the November election as opposed to a nationwide voter turnout that set a 72-year low record with only 36.4 percent of eligible voters participating. The lowest voter turnout in U.S. history was recorded in 1942 with only 33.9 percent participation. Butts said after canvassing the ballots they found that only 14 Custer County voters left the national monument question blank. He believes the ballot measure helped drive the high voter turnout. “The reason we did it in the first place was informational from our point of view,” Butts said. “We represent the people and we want to know what the people think. Now when we send a message back to Washington D.C. we can back it up with numbers. The people here 4 #

don’t want government putting another layer of bureaucracy over the Boulder White Clouds region.”

ment would encompass nearly 600,000 acres as opposed to about 333,000 designated as wilderness under CEIDRA.

Fremont County Farm Bureau President Val Hammond said he wasn’t surprised by the election results. “The people who live here don’t want anything to do with a national monument in Island Park,” he said. “With 93 percent opposed it reflects those feelings well but we’re not sure that will matter to President Obama. At least we have a core feeling for how the majority of the people in Fremont County feel about the topic.”

Commissioner Butts said at present he opposes CEIDRA. He said Simpson’s office has not been in contact with the Custer County Commission with regard to CEIDRA. “My question for Simpson is which CEIDRA?” Butts said. “In the last 13 years it has changed so many times I can’t support it right now because I don’t know which version of the bill he is talking about.”

With regard to the Boulder White Clouds region, Idaho Congressman Mike Simpson is attempting to reinvigorate his Central Idaho Economic Development and Recreation Act (CEIDRA). Rep. Simpson has asked President Obama for time to gauge interest in the bill in lieu of creating a new national monument. CEIDRA has been discussed and amended numerous times over the past several years. The bill has never gained favor with the other members of Idaho’s congressional delegation or Gov. Butch Otter. Idaho Senators Mike Crapo and Jim Risch did sponsor a CEIDRA bill in 2010 but Risch later pulled his support and the bill died. Rep. Simpson has publicly stated that if CEIDRA isn’t passed by Congress, he believes the Obama Administration will create a new monument. He believes CEIDRA is a better option. The proposed monu-

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

Butts added that he doesn’t like Simpson’s leveraging his wil-

derness bill over a monument designation. “In the beginning it was a discussion about what was best for Custer County and what the county needed. They don’t seem to care about that anymore.” CEIDRA creates three new wilderness areas in the region, encompassing a total of 332,775 acres. It also releases 130,453 acres currently designated as Wilderness Study areas, provides grants to Custer County and provides various other incentives to user groups. Specifics can be found at http:// simpson.house.gov/ciedra/ highlights.htm.

Celebrating 75 Years Conserving the Idaho Way

LOW INTEREST LOANS FOR IDAHO SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION Sprinkler Irrigation, No-Till Drills, Fences Livestock Feeding Operations Solar Stock Water Pump Systems 2.5%-3.5% Terms 7-15 Years Up to $200,000 CONSERVATION

LOAN PROGRAM

swc.idaho.gov | 208-332-1790

Rancher concerned with FSA Wolf Predation Program By Jake Putnam CASCADE — Rancher Phil Davis lost five calves to wolves this year on summer range in Valley County. The Bar O Ranch, owned by Davis, has the unenviable distinction of suffering more losses to wolf depredation than any in the state. In past years Davis was compensated, but under the new Farm Bill he might not get any money for kills dating back to 2011. “We lost a bunch this summer,” Davis said. “There’s a new deal in the 2014 Farm Bill where the Farm Service Agency will pay for depredations, but it has to be in excess of the normal mortality rate which according to them is four percent. So unless it’s in excess of that, they’re not going to pay a dime unless we convince them otherwise.” According to the FSA the normal mortality rate in an Idaho cattle operation is four percent per year. Gwen Miller of the Canyon County FSA said for every 100 head of cattle four will die from disease or other causes. “There’s a normal mortality deducted off that, if we can see what he lost from other causes it might bring him up above the four percent and we would compensate documented losses,” said Miller. “We just don’t want to pay out something in the range of normal rate. There’s a normal amount you lose to disease.”

Idaho’s Congressional Delegation fought to have the wolf predation compensation included in the 2014 Farm Bill. “Threats to livestock have been compounded by increased presence of federally reintroduced wolves, not only that but the 2013 wildfires further limited grazing rangeland in Idaho. While not a cure all, Congress did included programs in the enacted Farm Bill to help producers recover from these losses,” said Idaho Senator Mike Crapo. Davis says he’s thankful that wolf predation was included in the 2014 Farm Bill. But says the Farm Service Agency overlooking the program has set loss-percentages much too high and now ranchers face severe hardships despite the good inA calf mortally wounded by wolves on the Bar O Ranch in Valley County. tentions of Congress. Photo Courtesy of Phil Davis

“This new program is not enough,” said Davis. “Before Defenders of Wildlife paid us for wolf kills and the Department of Agriculture (Idaho) also paid out. Now what it amounts to, is that I’ll submit my claim to the FSA guys and they’ll deny it and I’ll have to appeal. The program is mixed up with their feed disaster program and that is based on a formula that’s messed up. It doesn’t work for wolves.”

the Farm Bill wolf predation program.

Davis thinks the Idaho Congressional delegation needs to ask the FSA about their predation formula. He thinks Congress can improve the program just by clarifying their intent of

In the 2013 Idaho Wolf Monitoring Progress Report, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game and the Nez Perce Tribe agreed that not all wolf packs are docu-

“We need to get this fixed. I hate to say it but I think I’m going to be the test dummy again in this Farm Bill problem,” said Davis. “The federal government is responsible for the reintroduction of wolves in Idaho, and thus responsible for the impacts of this reintroduction,” said Senator Crapo.

mented but estimates reveal that there are at least 659 wolves in Idaho. Some advocates think the actual number is twice that. “This last calf died from a bite above the shoulder,” said Davis. “The wolf got a small artery and the calf bled out internally. We tried to save the little calf and did everything we could. We found the bite mark and it was confirmed by Wildlife Services. The most disturbing thing is that his tail was gone. That’s an indication that the wolves were training wolf pups on him. The wolf held the calf down and let the pups chew on See WOLF PREDATION page 7

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

STALLMAN

Continued from page 2 a leading role in educating them about asking the right questions before signing data sharing agreements. Technological advancements also raise questions for consumers—questions that farmers must be willing and able to answer if we are to maintain access to biotechnology. Farm Bureau has equipped farmers with a new toolkit to help them answer consumers’ questions and dispel biotech myths, and we will be rolling out more resources to explain why agricultural innovation is important to us all. Speaking of the recent elections, we were pleased to see that voters in Colorado and Oregon recognized that state initiatives requiring that “GMO” products be labeled as such would do more harm than good. Rather than a state-by-state or county-bycounty patchwork, we support a national labeling bill introduced in Congress. Consumers have a right to know what’s in their food, but the information should be based on facts, not fear.

Standing Up to Regulatory Overreach The EPA and Corps of Engineers also have been hard at work this year—trying to place more roadblocks on the productive use of farmland. The agencies’ Waters of the U.S. proposed rule amounts to an unprecedented land grab, as its vague and confusing language leaves plenty of loopholes for the agency to regulate most ephemeral drainage features, ditches and small wetlands on farmland and pastures, even if they are only occasionally wet. Hundreds of thousands of comments have been submitted to the public docket, many of them from landowners who joined Farm Bureau in calling for the agencies to Ditch the Rule. Farm Bureau expects the 113th Congress to be hard at work on this and other key issues in the remaining weeks of this year. It’s time for regulatory overreach to stop standing in the way of common farming activities. We were pleased to see the House stand with farmers and ranchers by passing H.R. 5078, which would block im-

plementation of the “WOTUS” proposed rule. Farm Bureau is urging the Senate also to act before the year ends. Investing in the Future of Farming Another top priority for farmers and ranchers is action on several important tax provisions that expired at the end of 2013. Farmers depend on tax incentives like bonus depreciation to increase their cash flow and allow them to purchase equipment without taking on too much debt. Restoring these provisions would help boost rural economies as farmers and ranchers plan their business decisions for the next season. In a few short weeks, Farm Bureau members from all around the nation will gather in San Diego to set the agenda for next year, while the new Congress will be just getting under way in Washington. As we look to what’s next, we can also be proud of how agriculture has united for action this year, to ensure farmers and ranchers can keep doing their work of feeding a growing world.

PRIESTLEY

Continued from page 2 themselves about this complex issue, they learn that the advocates are trying to solve a problem that does not exist. Let’s look at biotech sugarbeets as an example. The crop is engineered to resist applications of herbicide or weed-killer. After sugarbeets are processed, which is a method of grinding them up and cooking them down into a syrup and then refining that syrup into sugar, there is no trace of any genetic modification of the plant left. The same is true with all of the other genetically modified crops that are processed into food products also to include meat and dairy products. When livestock are brought into the equation the ability to label products becomes slightly more complex. Some state ballot measures would have required labeling of products that come from livestock that consumed genetically modified feed. Others would not. This is where the complexity of labeling food gains momentum and 6

turns voters off. Livestock producers have been feeding cattle, sheep, hogs and chickens genetically modified corn and soybean meal for over 20 years now. Genetically modified feed makes up a significant percentage of the feed produced in the USA. Science can’t tell the difference between meat, milk, cheese and other products that came from cows that ate genetically modified feed and products that came from livestock that didn’t. And if genetically modified feed caused health problems in livestock, as some labeling advocates allege, it would surely have surfaced by now – it’s been over 20 years after all. One of the problems with individual states adopting labeling legislation is that the country would wind up with a patchwork of different laws. This would put a lot of strain on companies that package, transport and distribute our food, which would add cost for consumers.

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

There are several other problems that arise from labeling food that has no discernable difference from other food. However, for consumers who want to avoid food products that contain GMO ingredients, following are a few simple rules: Shop around the outside aisles in the grocery store and avoid processed foods. Livestock feed and ethanol make up the bulk of the end products derived from genetically modified crops in this country. There are very few genetically modified fruits and vegetables available at the present time. Get to know local farmers by shopping at farmers markets, ask them questions about their production methods and buy meat and dairy products locally. Take an active role in understanding where your food comes from and how it’s produced and you’ll soon realize that more government intervention in our lives is rarely if ever a good thing to advocate.

WOLF PREDATION

Continued from page 2 him. I wish people could see how cruel it was.”

Farm Bill and see what the intent was.”

and federal policy.”

Senator Crapo says it’s well documented that wolves have killed livestock throughout Idaho over the past decade. Last year alone the U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services responded to hundreds of calls of wolf predation reported by ranchers, both sheep and cattle kills. Davis says he could work with the old system, but he’s out of money under the FSA program.

Last fall, members of the Idaho congressional delegation raised concerns about the prolonged drought and wildfires on livestock operations.

“We pressed House and Senate leadership to help meet the federal responsibility by extending disaster assistance programs to assist with recovery,” Crapo said.

Sen. Crapo said the intent centered on growing pressures on livestock operations.

The 2014 Farm Bill provides assistance with the Livestock Indemnity Program and the program has made coverage available for wolf kills dating back to October 1, 2011. However, ranchers say the FSA needs more realistic definition of what is ‘excessive livestock death’ due to wolves.

“I know the FSA has to go by the rules, I don’t blame them for that,” said Davis. “They have to go to the district office to make a decision that might be different from guidelines. Wildlife Services have confirmed every kill, that’s not an issue. We average five or six kills a year. We need to find out who authored this part of the

“The wolf attacks put pressure on our cattle operations,” said Crapo. “Those, along with new range management policies reduced grazing and timber harvests and increased fuel loads on federal land. This means more fire threats and intense fires. In the past two years more than 85,000 acres burned in Idaho and that cuts into grazing allotments. The federal government must step forward and help address damages triggered by the impacts of fire

Ranchers across the West like Davis could be stuck with staggering bills from wolf depredation. They’re asking Western Congressional delegations to help iron out a more equitable wolf predation program under the 2014 Farm Bill, sooner than later.

KELLER

Continued from page 2 week than any single week in the past six years. Brazil, the world’s biggest producer and exporter of 40 percent of sugar, quietly announced sugar cane production is winding down early. Brazil is experiencing the worst drought in 100 years. The drought also set the stage for wildfires which are scarring sugar growing regions. Sugar mills are shutting production down early because of the lack of cane. Brazil announced a 17 percent reduction in production this year. The conditions will also reduce the cane harvest in the next crop season because the cane that was young and devastated by the fires must be replanted and some of that cane won’t be ready for the next harvest. And yet, more than six thousand miles away from São Paulo, a sugar beet farmer in Burley, Idaho benefited from the inaudibly announced reduced world supply in a commodity he produces. Most of the world’s consumers of sugar were not affected by the news that was overlooked by media outlets. The consumers continued their daily routine, drinking coffee and stirring in a spoonful of sugar, oblivious to the better fortune of the Idaho farmer and his family. Similar events happen time and time again and are part of the daily life of a farmer or rancher. The farmer knows not if the butterfly’s wings will affect him for good or bad, but he must be flexible and nimble enough to react to its outcome. The same principle which affects the markets for our crops, also applies to life. We know not how one little act of kindness, one gentle word spoken, a warm smile, or a gesture of hope will change the life of one person and crescendo into a life-changing event for others. We may never see the result of such actions, but we know it works. The price of sugar tells us so. Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

Captive bison graze in a private pasture in Lemhi County. Two environmental groups recently petitioned the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to list Yellowstone Park bison as endangered. Farm Bureau file photo

Extremist Groups Petition for Listing of Yellowstone Bison By John Thompson Two environmental groups recently submitted a petition to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service claiming the Yellowstone bison should be listed as an endangered species. Specifically, the Western Watersheds Project, an organization based in Hailey with a top priority of removing all livestock 8

from federal land, and the Buffalo Field Campaign, based in West Yellowstone, Montana, whose members are known for chaining themselves to livestock trailers and obstructing bison management activities, are arguing that the Yellowstone bison herd should be listed as an endangered Distinct Population Segment of plains bison.

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

Reasons for listing cited in the 61-page petition include introgression with cattle genes, potential for disease outbreaks, habitat limitation due to noxious weeds, natural catastrophe including global warming, and ongoing management activities that are part of the Interagency Bison Management Plan (IBMP).

The IBMP is a cooperative, multi-agency document that guides management of bison and the disease brucellosis in and around Yellowstone National Park. Brucellosis is a livestock disease that causes abortion. Prevalence of the disease in Yellowstone bison exceeds 50 percent according to the U.S. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). Elk and bison in the Yellowstone Park vicinity are the only remaining pool for the disease in the U.S. The IBMP with cooperating agencies including the National Park Service, Forest Service, APHIS and Montana departments of livestock and fish wildlife and parks negotiated the plan over a ten-year period. It was adopted in 2000 with the stated goals of maintaining a wild, free-ranging bison population; reducing the risk of brucellosis transmission from bison to cattle; to manage bison that leave Yellowstone Park and enter Montana and to maintain the state’s brucellosis-free status. Three Native American tribal entities also agreed to the plan and signed on in 2009. They include the Nez Perce Tribe, the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes and the Inter Tribal Buffalo Council. In spite of multiple claims in the petition to the contrary, Yellowstone bison numbers at the present time are near an all-time high at nearly 5,000 head. The IBMP stipulates 3,000 head as the carrying capacity of Yellowstone Park. Petition History Prior to the filing of this petition in midNovember were three other attempts to list the Yellowstone bison. The US Fish and Wildlife Service turned back requests to list the bison in 1999, 2007 and 2011. In each of the circumstances USFWS found that petitions did not present substantial information indicating that listing was warranted. In the 2007 response, the USFWS documents contradict repeated claims in the WWP/BFC petition. It states the USFWS no longer consider the Yellowstone herd to have remained in a wild state since prehistoric times due to the fact that in 1902 the herd size was reduced to 30 animals. The herd was built up again using animals

from captive herds in Montana and Texas. The Yellowstone herd is now considered a conservation herd, the same as many others across the US and Canada. Introgression with Cattle Genes The petition frequently cites scientific literature published by Dr. James Derr of Texas A&M University. It shows that cattle and bison have been bred in captivity and some bison that have been tested in both private and wild herds do show small genetic traces of cattle DNA. However, other scientific literature suggests the petition does not provide balanced evidence. Consider the following: “Mitochondrial DNA testing of the Custer State Park herd have shown that 6 percent of the animals have bovine DNA traits and Dr. Derr from Texas A&M University, who lead a study into bison genetics, conceded that the ‘hybrid’ animals tested were at least 15-20 generations from the original base stock and those animals contained only 0.003 percent bovine DNA. This herd was started in 1901 with a relatively small number of animals (<30). Not all public herds in the US and Canada have been tested for bovine DNA but the Elk Island Plains Bison Herd in Canada has been tested as pure. Other public herds that are believed pure include the Yellowstone Park Bison Herd, the Henry Mountains Bison Herd and the Wind Cave Bison Herd. Since DNA testing for purity has become available, there is a growing movement among bison ranchers to test their herds and cull animals that test positive for bovine DNA. The largest private herd in the world, with over 50,000 animals, is currently undergoing such a program. As similar programs gather momentum among smaller private herds, the level of hybridization among private herds will likely reduce to a very small level as there is no commercial gain to be had by hybridization and both the Canadian and American Bison Associations share the goal of preserving pure bison herds. However, at present, most private herds have yet to be tested for bovine DNA and the majority of Plains Bison in North

America can be found in these private herds. As these herds have been built from the same original base stock as the public herds, is possible that up to 6 percent of some herds may contain bovine DNA. Consequently, out of approximately 500,000 bison in North America, it is possible that up to 30,000 may have some bovine DNA. Fortunately, due to many base herds having started pure with feed stock from pure public herds such as Elk Island Park, this is a worst case figure and the true numbers of bison containing bovine DNA are likely to be significantly lower.” Source Wikipedia Other Threats Several other alleged threats are listed in the petition including harsh winters and coexistence with large predators. However, according to National Park Service data, the Yellowstone herd is prolific and shows high survival rates. Since wolves were reintroduced in the region beginning in 1996, bison numbers have remained stable. Data from the same source shows wolves prefer elk because they flee from predators and are easier to bring down. Bison that are weak or sick are sometimes killed by wolves but healthy bison are not a regular food source for Yellowstone Park wolves. As can be expected from any document originating from the Western Watersheds Project, the petition faults livestock grazing and lists grazing as a threat to bison. The petition states that sheep are reservoirs for several diseases that may threaten bison and that cattle disturb the soil crust and distribute the seeds of noxious weeds and cheat grass. The petition however, fails to mention that bison graze in similar patterns as cattle and also disturb the soil crust and distribute seeds. In addition to many other unsubstantiated claims, the petition alleges that the bison capture and quarantine facilities north of Yellowstone Park pose a threat to bison because of their “extensive size.” The facility is a 400-acre double fenced property. The petition in its entirety can be downloaded at http://www.buffalofieldcampaign.org/

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

A new American Farm Bureau survey shows young farmers and ranchers from across the nation are optimistic about the future. Farm Bureau file photo

Focus on Agriculture Young American Farmers Brim with Optimism Each year, the American Farm Bureau Federation surveys about 1,000 young farmers and ranchers from across the country. The 22nd annual survey found that 91 percent of young people in agriculture are more optimistic about farming than they were five years ago. An equal percentage say they expect to be lifelong farmers. Just as promising, 88 percent say they would like to see their children follow in their footsteps. That is reason for all of us to feel hopeful, because our nation will need new crops of farmers and ranchers to keep growing food for the world. Of course, we all lean toward a feeling of optimism when we are young and “invincible.” The possibilities seem endless; the threats, easily conquered. However, farm10

ers, even young ones, see things a little differently. They are optimistic, but they are also pragmatic. They remain mindful of the challenges they face, such as the growing list of federal regulations that increase the cost and complexity of farming. Availability of labor, water and – especially for younger producers – land are also concerns. Even so, farmers and ranchers of all ages and types are dedicated to continuous improvement in everything they do. This includes striving to decrease our environmental footprint – the demonstrated ability to produce more food on the same number of acres with fewer inputs (labor, seeds, feed, fertilizer, etc.). Our farmers have made great strides in this

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

area, using new tools and technology to get the job done, whether that means feeding the world, caring for the land or supporting communities in rural areas. In 2008, America’s farmers produced 262 percent more food with fewer inputs compared with 1950. U.S. farmland used for crops has declined by 70 million acres or 15 percent, since 1985. And it takes 40 percent less feed for a dairy cow to produce 100 pounds of milk today compared to 30 years ago. It’s clear that this optimistic new generation of young family farmers is well-positioned to contribute to feeding the world while caring for the earth.

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

Holly is a golden eagle trained to protect sheep from predators. Her trainer is Ben Woodruff. Photo by Steve Ritter

Falconers Address Predation at Sheep Gathering By Jake Putnam PARK CITY UTAH - Her eyes are piercing and talons sharp. Her wingspan is enormous and she’s hungry in a room full of sheep ranchers. Holly is a North American golden eagle, weighs as much as a bowling ball and can kill a lamb, coyote or rabbit with ease. Her handler, Ben Woodruff represents the North American Falconers Association. This hunting pair recently attended the five-state gathering of Western Sheep Producers in Park City, Utah and they’re on a mission. “We’re getting a pretty good reception here,” said Woodruff from a crowded 12

convention booth. “There’s some that see eagles as the big bad wolf and hate them, but most see them as noble animals and while its unfortunate that they eat lambs, we’re here to work with ranchers and solve problems.”

them for falconry. Once they’re trained, they won’t go back to those ranches.”

The North American Falconers Association attended the meeting to open up a dialogue with ranchers, address the sticky issue of range predation and get their help.

The federal government delisted the golden eagle but they’re still protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940. The act provides for the protection of the bald eagle and the golden eagle by prohibiting killing, capture possession or sale eagles dead or alive. Trapping eagles with the help of ranchers gets falconers around the Protection Act.

“There are laws in place, that if an eagle is killing sheep, they can allow eagle falconers to come to ranches and trap eagles that are causing damage rather than killing them,” explained Woodruff. “We’ll take them back home with us and train

According to Woodruff some eagles are trained to take out coyotes, foxes and even wolves. “They’ll eat coyotes which is good for the wool industry,” said Woodruff. He says its basic training by the handler, but it’s nothing new.

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

Falconry is the art of catching game with wild raptors and can be traced back more than 4,000 years. In ancient times humans used trained raptors to capture food.

to get started they need a wolf carcass and that’s hard to come by. Eagles hunting wolves? Sound far-fetched? Since the time of Marco Polo falconers in Russia and Mongolia hunted wolves with eagles.

“It’s pretty cut and dried, we train them with food first but it’s not a reward system with like with dogs. It’s more like a form of social bonding. So giving them food they eat off your glove, they hop to your fist and fly to your fist and you build that trust and then you introduce them to rabbits. They’ve already been hunting, and they view you as a hunting partner, or in essence a hunting dog just flushing rabbits for them,” said Woodruff.

“Oh yea, it’s the same kind of eagle, the bird weighs as much as a bowling ball,” Woodruff said. “Can you imagine that eagle dropping out of the sky? And with their feet, they have 1,200 pounds of crushing grip per square inch. Yes, people have been training eagles for over 5,000 years. It’s a very well documented and established way of hunting. Not many people do it these days, but it’s making a comeback.”

And Woodruff says these days their targets are fellow predators. “When we train them we mostly train them to kills rabbits, foxes and coyotes,” said Woodruff.

Falconers need rancher support to save eagles and to help address sheep ranch predation problems.

Some falconers are talking about training eagles to hunt wolves, but Woodruff says

“The problem that has come up is that the Region 6 Wildlife Service barred trapping eagles a few years ago, so we’re try-

ing to work with them to get it reopened,” said Woodruff. “We’re looking for help from sheep ranchers to go to the government and say, ‘this is a problem.’ We have eagles eating our sheep and we value this opportunity to get the eagles out of that situation without killing them.” The petition on the table at the sheep producer convention was full of signatures. Woodruff wasn’t sure how he would be received but apparently the gamble paid off. He says a favorite quote by John F. Kennedy may explain the dichotomy: “The fierce beauty and proud independence of this great bird aptly symbolizes the strength and freedom of America.” John F. Kennedy “So, I’m glad we came here,” said Woodruff. “People seem thrilled with the idea of taking the eagles out without having to kill them.”

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

Cost of Tha

Cost of Thanksgiving Dinner Rises

WASHINGTON annual informa

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 20, 2014 – The American Farm Bureau Federation’s 29th annual informal price survey of classic items found on the Thanksgiving Day dinner table indicates the average cost of this year’s feast for 10 is $49.41, a 37-cent increase from last year’s average of $49.04. The big ticket item – a 16-pound turkey – came in at $21.65 this year. That’s roughly $1.35 per pound, a decrease of less than 1 cent per pound, or a total of 11 cents per whole turkey, compared to 2013. “Turkey production has been somewhat lower this year and wholesale prices are a little higher, but consumers should find an adequate supply of birds at their local grocery store,” AFBF Deputy Chief Economist John Anderson said. Some grocers may use turkeys as “loss leaders,” a common strategy deployed to entice shoppers to come through the doors and buy other popular Thanksgiving foods. The AFBF survey shopping list includes turkey, bread stuffing,

sweet potatoes, rolls with butter, peas, cranberries, a relish tray of carrots and celery, pumpkin pie with whipped cream, and beverages of coffee and milk, all in quantities sufficient to serve a family of 10. There is also plenty for leftovers. Foods showing the largest increases this year were sweet potatoes, dairy products and pumpkin pie mix. Sweet potatoes came in at $3.56 for three pounds. A half pint of whipping cream was $2.00; one gallon of whole milk, $3.76; and a 30-ounce can of pumpkin pie mix, $3.12. A one-pound relish tray of carrots and celery ($.82) and one pound of green peas ($1.55) also increased in price. A combined group of miscellaneous items, including coffee and ingredients necessary to prepare the meal (butter, evaporated milk, onions, eggs, sugar and flour) rose to $3.48. In addition to the turkey, other items that declined modestly in price included a 14-ounce package of cubed bread stuffing, $2.54; 12 ounces of fresh cranberries, $2.34; two nine-

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

inch pie shells, $2.42; and a dozen brown-n-serve rolls, $2.17.

Year Average 1986

$28.74

The average cost of the dinner has remained around $49 since 2011.

1987

$24.51

1988

$26.61

“America’s farmers and ranchers remain committed to continuously improving the way they grow food for our tables, both for everyday meals and special occasions like Thanksgiving dinner that many of us look forward to all year,” Anderson said. “We are blessed to be able to provide a special holiday meal for 10 people for about $5.00 per serving – less than the cost of most fast food meals.”

1989

$24.70

1990

$28.85

1991

$25.95

1992

$26.39

1993

$27.49

1994

$28.40

1995

$29.64

1996

$31.66

1997

$31.75

1998

$33.09

1999

$33.83

2000

$32.37

2001

$35.04

2002

$34.56

2003

$36.28

2004

$35.68

2005

$36.78

2006

$38.10

2007

$42.26

2008

$44.61

2009

$42.91

2010

$43.47

2011

$49.20

2012

$49.48

2013

$49.04

2014

$49.41

The stable average price reported this year by Farm Bureau for a classic Thanksgiving dinner tracks closely with the government’s Consumer Price Index for food eaten at home (available online at http://www.bls.gov/news. release/cpi.nr0.htm), which indicates a 3-percent increase compared to a year ago. A total of 179 volunteer shoppers checked prices at grocery stores See THANKSGIVING DINNER page 23

Coverage Selection for New 2014 Farm Bill Underway

Producers have until March 31, 2015 to choose best option

Producers have until March 31, 2015 to choose best option The U.S. Department of Agriculture online resources, available at www.fsa. farming operations, farmers can use new from the convenience (USDA) farm owners and produc- usda.gov/arc-plc, Web tools at that www.fsa.usda.gov/arc-plc, The reminds U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) reminds farm owners and producers the opportunity to of their computerprograms, or mobile device ers choose that the opportunity to choose which Risk can beCoverage accessed from the and convebetween the new between 2014 Farm Bill home established Agriculture (ARC) at any time. thePrice new 2014 Bill established nienceMarch of a home or a mobile LossFarm Coverage (PLC),probegins Nov. 17, 2014, and continues through 31,computer 2015. The new degrams, Agriculture Risk Coverage at any time.significant To learn more about upprograms, designed to help(ARC) producers better manage risk,online ushertools, in onevice of the most reforms to “In addition to the new andU.S. Pricefarm Loss programs Coverage (PLC), begins coming educational meetings, farmers can in decades. USDA has done extensive outreach, inNov. 17, 2014, and continues through contact their local Farm Service Agency cluding partnering with State Cooperative http://go.usa.gov/pYV3 March 31, 2015. The new programs, decounty on office “USDA is committed to keeping farm owners and toproducers welland informed allatsteps in this process to Extension Services hold meetings signed to help producers better manage ensure that they have all of the information that owners they need making theirannouncement coverage choice,” saidposToday’s was made meet with farm and before producers,” risk, usher in one of the most significant Farm Service Agency Administrator Dolcini. and sible PLCthrough programs provide more the 2014 FarmaBill, which saidVal Dolcini. “USDA“The leadersnew will ARC continue reforms to U.S. farm programs in decades. rational approach to helping farmers manage risk owners by ensuring familiesbuilds don’tonlose the economic farm because historic gains inofrural visiting with farm and producers “USDA is beyond committedtheir to keeping farm to share information and answer questions America over the past five years, while events control.” owners and producers well informed on the new programs. We want to help pro- achieving meaningful reform and billions of dollars in savings for and the taxpayer. Since ducers boilinthe information underall USDA steps in this process to ensure that they helped create online tools to assist the decisiondown, process, allowing farm owners producers enactment, USDA has made significant stand theirand options make the best decihave of theinformation information that theytheir need operation toall enter about seeand projections that show what ARC and/or PLC will to access implement provision of sionscenarios. on which program ARC or PLC is progresscan before making their coverage saidfuture mean for them under choice,” possible Farm–owners and–producers theeach online thisofcritical includingorprovidFarm Service Agency Administrator Val right for them.” resources, available at www.fsa.usda.gov/arc-plc, from the convenience their legislation, home computer ing disaster relief to farmers and ranchDolcini. “The new ARC andtime. PLC promobile device at any Covered commodities include barley, ers; strengthening risk management tools; grams provide a more rational approach canola, large and small chickpeas, corn, expanding accesspartnering to rural credit; funding to helping farmers manage risk by ensur“In addition to the new online tools, USDA has done outreach, including with State crambe, flaxseed, grain extensive sorghum, lentils, critical research; establishing innovative ingCooperative families don’t lose the farm because of Extension Services tomustard hold meetings and meet with farm owners and producers,” said seed, oats, peanuts, dry peas, public-private partnerships; events beyond“USDA their control.” Dolcini. leaders will continue visiting with rice, farmmedium ownersgrain and producers to conservation share information and rapeseed, long grain developing new markets for rural-made answer questions the new programs. We want to help producers boil the information down, understand USDA helped create online tools to as- rice (which includes short grain rice), safproducts; investing in infrastructure, and make the best on which ARC or PLC – isand right for them.” flower seed, sesame,program soybeans, – sunflower sisttheir in theoptions decision process, allowing farm decision housing and community facilities to help owners and producers to enter information seed and wheat. Upland cotton is no longer improve of life in rural America. Covered commodities include barley, canola, large and small chickpeas, corn,quality crambe, flaxseed, grain a covered commodity. about their operation and see projections For more information, visit www.usda. sorghum, lentils, mustard seed, oats, peanuts, dry peas, rapeseed, long grain rice, medium grain rice that show what ARC and/or PLC will mean To learn more about which safety net op- gov/farmbill. includes rice), safflower seed, sesame, soybeans, sunflower seed and wheat. Upland for (which them under possibleshort futuregrain scenarios. tions are most appropriate for specific cotton isand no producers longer acan covered commodity. Farm owners access the Dates associated with ARC and PLC that farm owners and producers need to know: • Now through Feb. 27, 2015: Farm owners may visit their local Farm Service Agency office to update yield history and/or reallocate base acres. • Nov. 17, 2014 to March 31, 2015: Producers make a one-time election between ARC and PLC for the 2014 through 2018 crop years. • Mid-April 2015 through summer 2015: Producers sign contracts for 2014 and 2015 crop years. • October 2015: Payments issued for 2014 crop year, if needed. Now through Feb. 27, 2015 Farm owners make base reallocation/yield updates

Nov. 17, 2014, to March 31, 2015 Producers make election between ARC/PLC

Mid-April through October 2015 Summer 2015 Producers sign Payments issued for contracts for 2014 and 2014 crop year, if 2015 crop years needed Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

Salute to Veterans Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance of Idaho recognized southeast Idaho veterans during the 4th Annual Salute to Veterans on November 7. Photos by John Thompson

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

Idaho Ag Outlook Seminar The University of Idaho Extension is offering an Idaho Ag Market Outlook Seminar. This seminar will focus on the following topics: ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Global Ag Outlook - Dr. Cathy Roheim, U of I U.S. Economic Outlook - Doug Robison, NW Farm Credit Services Farm Bill Overview - Paul Patterson, U of I Idaho Ag Outlook - Dr. Garth Taylor, U of I Input Cost Trends & Outlook - Paul Patterson, U of I Grain Situation & Outlook - Kelly Olson, Idaho Barley Comm. Potato Situation & Outlook - Paul Patterson, U of I Beef & Cattle Outlook - Chris Miller, Beef Northwest Dairy & Alfalfa Situation & Outlook - Wilson Gray, U of I

Locations & Times: Idaho Falls Burley Caldwell

Shilo Inn Burley Inn Best Western Plus

December 11th December 10th December 9th

8:30 to 4:00 8:30 to 4:00 8:30 to 4:00

Cost: $50 per person includes lunch and materials. Registration: Please RSVP to the Teton County Extension Office by December 9th. (208) 354-2961 or beborn@uidaho.edu

For questions or persons with disabilities who require alternative means of program information or reasonable accommodation should contact Ben Eborn by December 10th at the Teton County Extension Office, 235 S. 5th Street E., Driggs, ID 83442 (208) 354-‐2961. The University of Idaho provides and is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer and educational organization. We offer our programs to persons regardless of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, sexual orientation or disability.

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

The Christmas Tree - So Many Choices By Yvonne Barkley “It’s beginning to look a lot like Christmas Ev’rywhere you go; There’s a tree in the Grand Hotel, one in the park as well, The

sturdy kind that doesn’t mind the snow.” The holiday season is upon us and for 3035 million American families, the centerpiece of their holiday tradition is a live Christmas tree. Or, if you live in the White House, 54 live Christmas trees. Since none

of us will have the estimated 90,000 visitors that “America’s House” will receive over the holiday season, one, perfect, live Christmas tree will probably do. “Oh Christmas tree, Oh Christmas tree! How are thy leaves so verdant!” Approximately 450 million Christmas trees are grown annually on specialized farms that support thousands of American families. These 12,976* U.S. Christmas tree farms provide all of us with many benefits. While they are growing, Christmas trees absorb carbon dioxide and other gases and emit fresh oxygen, stabilize soil, protect water supplies, and provide green belts that shelter and sustain wildlife. Live Christmas trees are renewable – in order to meet our yearly demand, growers plant 1 to 3 seedlings for every tree harvested. And once the holidays are over, your live tree can be recycled and reused in a number of ways. In 2013, 27 percent of those selecting a live Christmas tree cut theirs own at a choose and harvest Christmas tree operation. If given the proper care, these freshly cut trees will last indoors for approximately 4 to 5 weeks. Many more of you (69%) bought your live tree from a nursery/ garden center, chain store, or retail lot of some sort. These trees have been harvested sometimes as early as late October in order to prepare and ship them to their re18

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

tail destinations. Because of this, they can only be expected to last about 2 to 3 weeks indoors. “Please have snow and mistletoe and presents on the tree.” Here is a quick summary of the most popular Christmas tree species in America. White pine (Pinus strobus) has soft, bluish-green needles that are 2 to 4” long. Though needled retention is good, white pine has little fragrance and the flexible branches are not suitable for heavy ornaments. Scotch pine (Pinus sylvestris) has soft, bright green needles that are about 1”long. Though it has little fragrance, Scotch pine needles will not fall off even when dry. Its sturdy branches will support all types of ornaments. White spruce (Picea glauca) has sharp, bluish-green needles that are 1/2 to 3/4” long. It has excellent needle retention and a mild fragrance. White spruce has a good natural shape and is excellent for all types of ornaments. Colorado blue spruce (Picea pungens) has sharp, green to silvery-blue needles 1 to 1 1/2” long. This species has good retention, good natural form, sturdy branches, but little to no fragrance. Fraser fir (Abies fraseri) has soft, dark blue-green needles that are 3/4 to 1 1/2” long. It has good needle retention, sturdy branches that turn slightly upwards, and a

pleasant fragrance. Concolor fir (Abies concolor) has soft, narrow, blue-green needles that are 1 to 1 1/2” long. Concolor fir has good needle retention and a pleasant fragrance. Balsam fir (Abies balsamea) has soft; dark green needles that are 3/4 to 1/1/2” long. It has excellent needle retention and a pleasant fragrance that will last through the season. Noble fir (Abies procera) has soft, dark green needles that are 1 to 1 1/2” long. The needles turn upwards, exposing the lower branches, and have excellent retention. Nobel fir also has stiff branches good for heavy ornaments, wreaths, and garlands. Grand fir (Abies grandis) has soft, bright green, lustrous needles 1 1/2 to 2” long. Grand fir is very fragrant and long-lasting, but has branches that are not suitable for heavy ornaments. Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) is one of the most popular Christmas tree species nationwide. It has soft, dark green to blue-green needles that are 1 to 1 1/2” long. The needles have a sweet fragrance when crushed. “Rocking around the Christmas tree…” Display your tree in a sturdy stand that has a deep reservoir. Before putting the tree in the stand, cut about a 1/2-inch thick disk of wood from the base of the trunk. Avoid whittling

down the sides of the trunk to get it to fit into the stand - the outer layers of the trunk are the most efficient in taking up water and should not be removed. Once the tree is in place, fill the reservoir to the very top with water. Check the stand daily to make sure that the water level does not go below the base of the tree - this is the most important thing you can do to ensure the longevity of your tree. Keep displayed trees away from sources of heat (fireplaces, heaters, heat vents) and use low heat-producing lights such as miniatures or LEDs. Always inspect light sets prior to placing them on the tree and if worn, replace with a new set. Do not overload electrical circuits and always turn off the tree lights when leaving the house or when going to bed. And once all the carols have been sung and the tree begins losing its looks, know that there are over 4,000 local Christmas tree recycling programs throughout the United States. Call your local waste management center for information about a program near you. “Hang a star from the highest bough, And have yourself a merry little Christmas now.” *2012 Census of Agricultural Tables Yvonne Barkley is an associate extension forester for the University of Idaho. She can be reached at yvonnec@uidaho.edu

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

Here’s to bringing up the sun. Here’s to muddy boots and grease-stained hands. Here’s to caring for this great land.

Here’s to protecting what you live for. We’re proud of our agricultural roots, and proud to be the insurance company so many families rely on to protect them from the unexpected. Here’s to protecting you, your family and your future.

www.fbfs.com FB10 (4-14)

ID-Here’sTo…(4-14).indd 1

5/14/14 3:04 PM

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

American farm bureau federation news

National Rural Entrepreneurship Challenge WASHINGTON, D.C., November 18, 2014 – The American Farm Bureau Federation together with Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business Global Social Enterprise Initiative and the Georgetown Entrepreneurship Initiative’s StartupHoyas today announced the four national finalists of the first-ever Rural Entrepreneurship Challenge. The challenge provides an opportunity for individuals to showcase ideas and business innovations being developed in rural regions of the United States. The finalist businesses, chosen from more than 200 applicants, will advance to the next phase of the challenge. They are: Pasturebird, LLC (Temecula, California), a cost-effective method of producing pastured poultry on a large scale. Team lead: Paul Greive; Pulaski Grow (Pulaski, Virginia), an aquaponics facility to provide local youth with job training. Team lead: Lee Spiegel;

ScoutPro (Lone Tree, Iowa), software to assist farmers with crop maintenance. Team lead: Michael Koenig; and Golden Bridges, Inc. (Palmyra, Missouri), customized moving and relocation services for older Americans. Team lead: Suzanne Ellerbrock. “Strengthening rural America begins with growing entrepreneurship―business by business,” AFBF President Bob Stallman said. “Helping rural entrepreneurs turn great ideas into successful businesses in their local communities is what this competition is all about.” After a series of virtual team interviews with 10 semi-finalists, judges chose the four finalists to continue in the challenge. The four challenge finalists will each win $15,000. They will pitch their business ideas to a team of judges at the AFBF 96th Annual Convention in San Diego in January in hopes of winning the Rural Entrepreneur of the Year Award for an additional

$15,000, and the Peoples’ Choice Award for $10,000 more. The challenge will provide the finalists with prize money totaling $85,000 to implement their ideas. The Farm Bureau Rural Entrepreneurship Challenge is a key component of the Rural Entrepreneurship Initiative, a joint effort between AFBF and the Georgetown McDonough School of Business. The Rural Entrepreneurship Initiative is directly tied to AFBF’s mission of building strong and prosperous agricultural communities. “REI builds on the strength of Georgetown in entrepreneurship and Farm Bureau’s work building strong rural communities across America,” said Jeff Reid, founding director of the Georgetown Entrepreneurship Initiative. For more information about the challenge or the finalists, contact Cyndie Sirekis at cyndies@fb.org or Brynn Boyer at Brynn. boyer@georgetown.edu.

Coalition Calls for Lame-Duck Congress to Extend Key Tax Provisions WASHINGTON, D.C., November 18, 2014 – America’s farmers and ranchers are ready for Congress to act swiftly to restore tax provisions essential to boosting small businesses and rural economies, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation. In a letter to House and Senate leaders, Farm Bureau urged members of both chambers to work across the aisle to renew and preserve important tax provisions that expired at the end of 2013. “Farmers and ranchers rely on tax provisions that allow them to manage their cash flow and put that money back to work for their businesses,” said AFBF President 22

Bob Stallman. “Section 179 and bonus depreciation are important tools that lend stability and help minimize risk in an unpredictable industry.” Agriculture is overwhelmingly united in its support of Section 179 and bonus depreciation, which provide flexible means for farm and ranch businesses to write off and deduct business expenses. Letters of support have been sent by groups from around the country, including the Broad Tax Extender Coalition. The coalition’s letter has been signed by more than 500 organizations. “We’re seeing a broad level of support

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

here because these tax provisions make for good business. They allow farmers and ranchers to plan wisely,” Stallman said. “Congress needs to act now if we’re going to see continued growth in the agriculture sector.” Farm Bureau also called on Congress to renew tax incentives that would promote clean, renewable, domestic energy, as well as provisions that encourage donations of conservation easements and promote charitable donations to food banks. Read AFBF’s letter to Congress at: http:// bit.ly/1EZwMF1

nnual informal price survey of classic items found on the Thankdicates th

verage

The AFBF survey shopping li

products and Thanksgiving Dinner pumpkin pie mix.

$28.74

$24.51Continued from page 14

Sweet potatoes came at $3.56 for shopin 35 states. FarminBureau volunteer $24.70 pers are asked to look for the best possible three

$26.61

prices, without taking advantage of special Acoupons total ofor179 promotional purchase deals, such $25.95 shoppers as spendingvolunteer $50 and receiving a free turkey.

$28.85

$26.39

$27.49

$28.40

$29.64

$31.66

$31.75

$33.09

$33.83

$32.37

$35.04

$34.56

$36.28

$35.68

$36.78

$38.10

$42.26

$44.61

$42.91

$43.47

checked at in all arShoppers with an eye prices for bargains grocery stores in to 35 eas of the country should be able purchase Farm Bureau individual states. menu items at prices comparable to the Farmvolunteer Bureau survey averages. Another shoppers option for busy families without are asked to looka lot forof time to cook is the ready-to-eat Thanksgiving meals best possible for up to 10 people, with all the trimmings, prices, without taking which are available at many supermarkets advantage and take-out restaurants of forspecial around $50 to promotional coupons $75. or purchase deals,

The AFBF survey was first conducted in such as spending 1986. While Farm Bureau does not make any $50 and scientific claims about receiving the data, it isaan inforfree turkey. mal gauge of price trends around the nation. Farm Bureau’s survey menu has remained unchangedShoppers since 1986 towith allowan for consistent eye for bargains in price comparisons.

Item

2013 Price 2014 Price Difference

Misc. ingredients

3.20

3.48

+.28

Sweet potatoes, 3 lbs.

3.36

3.56

+.20

Whipping cream, 1/2 pint

1.85

2.00

+.15

Milk, 1 gallon whole

3.66

3.76

+.10

Pumpkin pie mix, 30 oz.

3.10

3.12

+.02

.81

.82

+.01

Green peas, 1 lb.

1.54

1.55

+.01

Cubed stuffing, 14 oz.

2.67

2.54

-.13

21.76

21.65

-.11

Fresh cranberries, 12 oz.

2.42

2.34

-.08

Pie shells (2)

2.49

2.42

-.07

Rolls, 12

2.18

2.17

-.01

1-pound relish tray (carrots and celery)

16-pound turkey

TOTAL 49.04 49.41 all areas of the country should be able to purchase individual menu items at prices comparable to the Farm

+.37

American farm bureau federation news nation. Farm Bureau’s survey menu has remained unchanged since 1986 to allow for consistent price comparisons.

AFBF Calls on EPA to Ditch the Rule

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 14, 2014 $49.48 – The Environmental Protection Agency’s $49.04and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ proposed Waters of the U.S. rule is a blatant $49.41 effort to expand federal authority over land use by regulating land as if it were “water,” the American Farm Bureau Federation said today.

$49.20

AFBF filed formal comments with the EPA after rallying farmers, ranchers, other regulated industries and members of Congress behind its popular #DitchtheRule campaign. EPA keeps spinning its rule to sell it to different audiences, but individual regulators won’t care about that spin when

they’re out enforcing the rule, AFBF said. Agriculture clearly isn’t buying the spin, as 146 agricultural groups joined in the AFBF-led comments. “EPA is hiding behind vague and confusing language, but that language can easily be read to regulate most any piece of land where rainwater pools or flows,” AFBF President Bob Stallman said. “This proposal is a perfect example of agencies run amok – in this case, running far past the limits set by Congress and two Supreme Court decisions.” According to Stallman, “There’s no way to know which areas are regulated and, most importantly, which are

not. That makes farmers, ranchers and other businesses and land owners vulnerable to arbitrary agency enforcement and even citizen lawsuits – regardless of any actual environmental impact of their activities.” Farmers and ranchers know how important clean water is to all of us, and they take great pride in protecting our natural resources. But this proposal is hopelessly broken. “The agencies need to go back to the drawing board and give the public the clarity and certainty that we’ve been promised,” said Stallman. Read AFBF’s full comments submitted to EPA at: http://bit.ly/1tRtgnT.

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

Grain Marketing with Clark Johnston

Feed Wheat Market in Flux: Sell Barley if the Opportunity Presents By Clark Johnston With the emotion of the past harvest dwindling producers can now take a deep breath and look forward to marketing the grain that is in the bin as well as next spring and next harvest. The local markets have adjusted slightly to make room for some lesser quality wheat. However there was a very large amount of feed wheat that contracted at harvest that possibly will be considered milling wheat before next harvest arrives. I usually say that when the crop is less than desirable it will be wise to not be the last one owning feed wheat but, this year is a little different as there is so much wheat that was damaged that we are seeing some of this wheat move into the flour milling market. It is going to be a long time before next harvest and the industry needs to use as much of this wheat as they are able in order to stretch the good wheat into next August. Knowing this the producers that have wheat that is a little less than border line milling quality could have the opportunity to contract at a little better than the feed wheat market is willing to pay. I’m not talking about the wheat that truly is feed but we are seeing quite a few bushels that could mill in the months ahead. One of the lessons that we learned this year is that producers with on farm storage still might have been forced to contract their wheat as feed but, many had and still have the opportunity to do a little better than the feed wheat bid at harvest. 24

It is important for producers to have the flexibility to contract and deliver their commodities when it is right for them (not necessarily when they are forced into unsavory decisions). Once again producers might have contracted their crop at feed prices but, it was after they had a little time to take a deep breath and analyze the market. Basis levels have not only moved to higher than usual levels but, they have remained there and actually moved even higher over the past month. We are seeing wheat contract at levels higher than the posted bids in most markets. The processors aren’t willing to post the higher bids but are taking a serious look at any offers for wheat that is stored on the farm. Collecting good bin samples taken as the grain is augured into the bins at harvest is very important as processors are willing to look at your offer as long as the sample you submit does represent the grain in the bin. With falling numbers coming into play this year you need to be prepared to deal with this grading spec in the years to come. I will agree with everyone who says that we probably won’t see these harvest conditions again in our life but, now that the falling number indicators have moved to the forefront I really don’t see them retreating. I hope I am wrong with this but, I wouldn’t be surprised if we see falling number discounts remain in the years ahead. In the local barley market there just isn’t a lot that can be done this year. Producers that have rejected malt or simply feed barley will need to sell their inventory when

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

Clark Johnston someone is willing to buy it. With the good quality corn crop and wheat moving into the feed channels in the high volume that it did this year it just doesn’t look all that good for feed barley right now. Having said this we are hearing of the barley market finding some additional interest into the California market but, here again, sell when they want to buy. At this time I don’t see any reason to hold barley over into the next crop year unless you are forced into holding due to a lack of buyers. There is so much sprout damage in this year’s crop that it would be difficult to hold over thinking that we could blend it with good barley next year. The old rule of thumb when it comes to blending grain is that if you take a good load and put it into a bin of bad grain you have just lost your good load of grain. On the other hand when you take a bad load and put into a bin of good grain you have just ruined the bin of good grain. Let’s do the best we can this year and keep looking forward to next. Clark Johnston is a grain marketing specialist who is on contract with the Idaho Farm Bureau. He is the owner of JC Management Company in Northern Utah. He can be reached at clark@jcmanagement. net

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

Top Farm Bureau Agents

Rookie of the Month:

Lynnae Gliege

Agent of the Month:

Rob Ellis Palmer Agency

Agency of the Month:

Gliege Agency

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

IDAHO FFA WELL REPRESENTED AT NATIONAL FFA CONVENTION Idaho FFA Members Earn Recognition in 24 Career Development Events Congratulations to FFA members representing Idaho and earning recognition in National FFA Career Development Events (CDEs) October 29— November 1 in Louisville, KY. CDEs provide competitive learning activities that help students develop the abilities to think critically, communicate clearly, and perform effectively in a competitive job market. Teams and individuals representing Idaho on the national level earned the right to compete by placing first at the state level earlier in the year.

Congratulations to Idaho’s top placing team, Meridian FFA’s 2nd Place Veterinary Science Team. Pictured from left are Mr. Steve Wilder, Meridian FFA Advisor, Maddie Bennett, Jamie Short, Patrick Krinke and Abbie Reno. Patrick Krinke was 3rd High Individual in the event. All teams and individual represented Idaho extremely well in very tough competition. Here are the rankings for all Idaho participants:  Agricultural Communications – Filer FFA

Chapter, Silver Award

 Agricultural Issues Forum – American Falls

FFA Chapter, Silver Award

 Agricultural Sales – Middleton FFA Chapter,

Bronze Award

 Agricultural Technology and Mechanical

Systems – Middleton FFA Chapter, Silver Award  Agronomy – Fruitland FFA Chapter, Silver Award  Creed Speaking – Caleb Johnston, New Plymouth FFA Chapter, Silver Award

 Dairy Cattle Evaluation and Management –

Castleford FFA Chapter , Silver Award

 Dairy Cattle Handlers' Activity – Auguste

Curtis, Filer FFA Chapter, Silver Award

 Environmental and Natural Resources –

Cambridge FFA Chapter, Gold Award and Bret Kindall, 3rd High Individual  Extemporaneous Public Speaking – Morgan Howard, New Perce FFA Chapter, Bronze Award  Farm Business Management – Meridian FFA Chapter, Gold Award, 5th Place Team  Floriculture – Kimberly FFA Chapter, Gold Award, 7th Place Team  Food Science and Technology – Kimberly FFA Chapter, Gold Award and Kaylee McKay, 9th High Individual  Forestry – Vallivue FFA Chapter, Gold Award, 10th Place Team  Horse Evaluation – Emmett FFA Chapter, Silver Award  Job Interview – Lindsey Woodworth, American Falls FFA Chapter, Silver Award  Livestock Evaluation – Hagerman FFA Chapter, Bronze Award  Marketing Plan – Marsing FFA Chapter, Silver Award  Meats Evaluation and Technology – Kuna FFA Chapter, Silver Award  Milk Quality and Products – Fruitland FFA Chapter, Gold Award, 6th Place Team  Nursery/Landscape – Rigby FFA Chapter, Silver Award  Parliamentary Procedure – Kuna FFA Chapter, Gold Award  Prepared Public Speaking – Riley Geritz, American Falls FFA Chapter, Silver Award  Veterinary Science – Meridian FFA Chapter, Gold Award, 2nd Place Team and Patrick Krinke, 3rd High Individual

For more information about Idaho FFA: www.idahoffa.org www.idffafoundation.org FFA—Premier Leadership, Personal Growth and Career Success through Agricultural Education

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

American farm bureau federation news

Agreement Reached on Big Data Privacy KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI, November 13, 2014 – A coalition of major farm organizations and agriculture technology providers (ATPs) recently announced an agreement on data privacy and security principles that will encourage the use and development of a full range of innovative, technology-driven tools and services to boost the productivity, efficiency and profitability of American agriculture. The coalition supporting the principles includes: American Farm Bureau Federation, American Soybean Association, Beck’s Hybrids, Dow AgroSciences LLC, DuPont Pioneer, John Deere, National Association of Wheat Growers, National Corn Growers Association, National Farmers Union, Raven Industries, The Climate Corporation – a division of Monsanto, and USA Rice Federation. “The principles released today provide a measure of needed certainty to farmers regarding the protection of their data,” said American Farm Bureau President Bob Stallman. “Farmers using these technology-driven tools will help feed a growing world while also providing quantifiable environmental benefits. These principles are meant to be inclusive and we hope other farm organizations and ATPs join this collaborative effort in protecting farm-level data as well as educating farmers about this revolutionary technology.” The principles promise to greatly accelerate the move to the next generation of agricultural data technology, which includes in-cab displays, mobile devices and wireless-enabled precision agriculture that has already begun to boost farm productivity across the United States. Many analysts compare today’s big-datadriven precision ag to the “green revolution” of the 1960s and 70s, which has likely saved a billion lives or more from starvation since its inception. 28

Central to the effort surrounding the principles will be grower education initiatives that will include an easy-to-use transparency evaluation tool for farmers. The tool would allow farmers to compare and contrast specific issues within ATP contracts and to see how the contracts align with these agreed-upon principles, and how ATPs manage and use farmers’ data. “The privacy and security principles that underpin these emerging technologies, whether related to how data is gathered, protected and shared, must be transparent and secure. On this matter, we all agree,” said Stallman. “Farmers are excited about this new technology front, which is why Farm Bureau asked these groups to come together and begin this collaborative dialogue.” Using precision technology, farmers send large amounts of business and production information to ATPs regarding their planting, production and harvesting practices. Companies use that data to produce “field prescriptions” and benchmarks that provide valuable information farmers can use to make decisions on when, how and which crop varieties to plant, and optimize the application of crop protection and fertilizer inputs. “That’s good for the environment and efficient for food production, too,” Stallman said. The principles cover a wide range of issues that must be addressed before most farmers will feel assured to share their private business information with data providers. Highlights include: Ownership: The group believes that farmers own information generated on their farming operations. However, farming is complex and dynamic and it is the responsibility of the farmer to agree upon data use and sharing with the other stakeholders with an economic interest such as the tenant, landowner, cooperative, owner of

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

the precision agriculture system hardware, and/or ATP etc. The farmer contracting with the ATP is responsible for ensuring that only the data they own or have permission to use is included in the account with the ATP. Collection, Access and Control: An ATP’s collection, access and use of farm data should be granted only with the affirmative and explicit consent of the farmer. This will be by contract agreements, whether signed or digital. Notice: Farmers must be notified that their data is being collected and about how the farm data will be disclosed and used. This notice must be provided in an easily located and readily accessible format. Third-party access and use: Farmers and ranchers also need to know who, if anyone, will have access to their data beyond the primary ATP and how they will use it. Transparency and Consistency: ATPs shall notify farmers about the purposes for which they collect and use farm data. They should provide information about how farmers can contact the ATP with any inquiries or complaints, the types of third parties to which they disclose the data, and the choices the ATP offers for limiting its use and disclosure. An ATP’s principles, policies and practices should be transparent and fully consistent with the terms and conditions in their legal contracts. An ATP will not change the customer’s contract without his or her agreement. Choice: ATPs should explain the effects and abilities of a farmer’s decision to opt in, opt out or disable the availability of services and features offered by the ATP. If multiple options are offered, farmers should be able to choose some, all, or none of the options offered. ATPs should provide farmers with a clear understanding of what services and features may or may not be enabled when they make certain choices.

American farm bureau federation news Portability: Within the context of the agreement and retention policy, farmers should be able to retrieve their data for storage or use in other systems, with the exception of the data that has been made anonymous or aggregated and is no longer specifically identifiable. Non-anonymized or non-aggregated data should be easy for farmers to receive their data back at their discretion.

Data Availability: ATPs agree they should provide for the removal, secure destruction and return of original farm data from the ATP, and any third party with whom the ATP has shared the data, upon request by the account holder or after a pre-agreed period of time. Market Speculation: ATPs will not use farm data to illegally speculate in com-

modity markets. Liability & Security Safeguards: The ATP should clearly define terms of liability. Farm data should be protected with reasonable security safeguards against risks such as loss or unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification or disclosure. Policies for notification and response in the event of a breach should be established.

Survey: Gauging the Aspirations of Women in Agriculture WASHINGTON, D.C., – The American Farm Bureau Women’s Leadership Program has launched “Women in Ag,” an online survey that aims to gauge the goals, aspirations, achievements and needs of women in American agriculture in a number of different areas. All women who are farmers, ranchers, farm/ranch employees, employed in agricultural businesses, pursuing ag-related higher education or supportive of agriculture in other ways are invited to participate in the survey at womeninag.fb.org. Respondents must reside in the United States. Farm Bureau membership is not required to participate. “This comprehensive survey is the first of its kind to ask women in-depth questions about how they are connected to agriculture and what leadership skills they think are most

important today, as well as the top business challenges they’re facing,” said Terry Gilbert, a Kentucky farmer and chair of the American Farm Bureau Women’s Leadership Committee. “All women involved in agriculture – not just Farm Bureau members – are invited to participate in the survey,” Gilbert emphasized. Data collected from respondents will be used to gauge trends related to the achievements of women in agriculture, including leadership positions, business successes and election to public office. The AFB Women’s Leadership Committee is sponsoring the survey and is working with other farm and agriculture organizations to encourage participation. Participants will be eligible for an opportunity to win one of five $100 gift cards after the survey closes. Preliminary findings from the

survey will be released in February 2015 at AFBF’s FUSION Conference in Nashville, Ten-

nessee; the full report will be released in late spring.

Idaho Farm Bureau members can save a significant amount on their medications. Take 5 minutes to get a price quote.

USE IDAHO FARM BUREAU CODE (IDFB) Toll-Free Phone 1.866.335.8064 www.thecanadianpharmacy.com

Step 1:

Call 1.866.335.8064 or go to www.thecanadianpharmacy.com

Step 2:

Tell them you are with the Idaho Farm Bureau (code IDFB) and that you need a price quote on your medication.

Step 3:

If this price is lower than what you currently pay, then The Canadian Pharmacy will help you get your prescription at the discounted price.

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

Establishing a Business Plan Part One In A Series

By M. Andrew Junkin Former United States President John F. Kennedy told the world that he wanted to “put a man on the moon in 10 years.” Who could have predicted that such a simple statement would have inspired so many people and change the course of history? JFK was an expert at uniting people, at motivating them to push themselves beyond their own limits. He understood that a simple and clear message could steer millions and allow them to achieve what seemed impossible. His message was so powerful that it continued to resonate after his death—and his mission was accomplished! It’s time to take a page from Kennedy’s book and use simple messaging to pull your family together and move your business forward. Far too often families have no vision of what the farm—or their lives—will look like in a decade. Without some planning and an agreement on the final destination, everyone will end up in a place they don’t want to be. Imagine a father-and-son team embarking 32

on a road trip in an old, beat-up truck. The son wants to go skiing in Utah; the father wants to enjoy the sun in Florida. They start at the Canada-U.S. border. The father starts driving south while the son naps. The son wakes up a few hours later and offers to drive. When he takes the wheel, he changes courses starts driving west. They never talk to each other. One just keeps driving south, and the other keeps driving west. At the end of the week, they look up and realize that they’re out of money, out of gas, and stuck in a snowstorm in Muskogee, Oklahoma. If a family doesn’t take the time to talk about and agree on a precise end destination, its members will always end up miserable, in a spot where no one wants to be. Had the father and son in the example above just talked it out, they could have compromised on a place they both liked: Nashville for instance. The father could have enjoyed himself at the Grand Ole Opry and the son could have had a good time out on the town. They could have been there in 10 hours, instead of spending a frustrating week stuck in the truck in the middle of a snowstorm.

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

This is where a business plan can help. A business plan’s purpose isn’t to get money from the bank. It’s to put money in the bank! A business plan isn’t just facts and figures outlining projected expenses and profit. It should be a one page plan that maps out the farm’s future and gets everyone focused on the same goals. It gets everyone pulling in the same direction. Not every family needs a 5,000 acre farm to be happy or satisfy their lifestyle. Bigger isn’t always better. That is why it is so critical to discuss personal goals prior to business goals. Sometimes a family can agree on a final destination in five minutes. Sometimes it takes quite a bit longer. Either way, it’s an important investment of valuable time because it not only lays a clear path for your business, but can also help you avoid most family conflicts. It’s like picking an end destination that everyone can drive towards together (i.e. Nashville). JFK described his vision of NASA’s future in one line. What one liner will get everyone in your family striving toward the same goals?

A strategic business plan should address five simple questions: 1. Vision: What will the farm look like in 10 years? 2. Mission: What makes your approach to farming different from your neighbor’s? 3. Core Values: What makes your operation philosophy different from your neighbor’s? 4. Strategies: What are your five biggest competitive advantages and your five greatest weaknesses that you want to turn into strengths? 5. Strategic Objectives: What major purchases and changes do you plan to make over the next five years? Consider equipment, buildings, land, etc. (Shopping List) A business plan shouldn’t be a fancy document created to please a bank or other investors. It should be a simple one-page plan of action specific to the needs of your farm and the people on it. Very few farms have written a strategic plan over the past 40 years, and those that have, tend to store

them in a filing cabinet never to be thought of again. A good strategic plan outlines your destination, a route that details how to get there, and a way to navigate detours so that you can get back on track without losing your cool. Once written, your plan should be everywhere—on the shop door, above the toilet—any place you and your farm employees can see it every day. If you keep it in a filing cabinet, the plan won’t work. Putting your plan out in the open is a key driver towards success. Certain tactics, such as arranging to buy a farm by having the neighbor take back the mortgage might be kept more secretive. But the “big picture” should be a simple plan everyone knows. Part of keeping your plan out in the open means that you—and everybody else— should be talking about it all the time. A lot of families like to guard their business plan as if it were a military secret. It’s silly because no matter how hard you may try, your plan to grow is obvious to your neigh-

bors. If you keep it under lock and key, the chances are that you’ll forget about it yourself, and so will your employees and the rest of your family. Everyone has to know what the plan is if it’s going to happen. Had President Kennedy’s kept NASA’s strategy a secret, the United States may never have sent a man to the moon. A business plan is the easiest way to get everyone focused on what matters. When you go on a long road trip to somewhere you haven’t been before, you don’t just look at the map for a few minutes and throw it into the glove box. No, you keep it on the seat next to you and you look at it throughout the trip. You check off when you achieve milestones and use it as a guide to get back on track when you hit detours. Once everyone starts pulling in the same strategic direction, everything else is like water running downhill. Mark Andrew Junkin is a farm succession expert and owner of Agriculture Strategies. He can be reached at chairman@ agriculturestrategy.com

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

Farm Service Agency Microloan Cap Grows To $50,000 Idaho Farm Service Agency (FSA) Executive Director, Mark Samson recently announced that USDA’s microloan borrowing limit increased from $35,000 to $50,000. Microloans offer borrowers simplified lending with less paperwork. Samson said it makes borrowing from FSA a “first opportunity” to farm or ranch or quickly expand existing operations. New flexibilities created by the 2014 Farm Bill will help more people become independent businessmen and women. USDA is working to encour-

age more beginners and young people, especially those from historically underserved communities, to consider farming and ranching as a way of life. It’s a rewarding way to build or expand a family operation. “For some people farming is something they have always wanted to do but never could,” said Samson. “Idaho FSA is here to help beginning farmers succeed and new tools like the microloan program assist us in achieving that goal.” The microloan change allows beginning, small and mid-sized farmers to access an additional $15,000 in loans using a simplified application process with up to seven years to repay. Microloans are part of USDA’s con-

AFBF Releases Videos tions and seed varieties, agrion Big-Data Risks, Re- cultural technology providers collect data that help farmers wards for Farmers The American Farm Bureau Federation released a series of short educational videos to help farmers and ranchers understand the rewards and risks of data-analysis technologies sweeping the agricultural landscape. From collecting weather data to analyzing nutrient applica34

increase efficiency and yield higher profits. But many questions remain unanswered regarding who owns and controls this information once it is collected. Farm Bureau is leading the way in helping farmers get answers to these questions and secure their business data.

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

tinued commitment to small and midsized farming operations. To complement the microloan program additional changes to FSA eligibility requirements will enhance beginning farmers and ranchers access to land, a key barrier to entry level producers. FSA policies related to farm experience have changed so that other types of skills may be considered to meet the direct farming experience required for farm ownership loan eligibility. Operation or management of non-farm businesses, leadership positions while serving in the military or advanced education in an agricultural field will now count towards the experience applicants need to show when apply-

19 ‘My American Farm’ Games Available on Tablets

All 19 “My American Farm” games offered by the American Farm Bureau Foundation for Agriculture can now be played online using any type of tablet, including all versions of Apple iPad. Thanks to a generous technology enhancement grant by DuPont Pioneer, each game was updated to enable online game-play on all tablets. Us-

ing for farm ownership loans. “If you want to comment on our changes to the microloan and loan eligibility, you have an opportunity to share suggestions,” Samson said. The comment period runs through Dec. 8, 2014. Since 2010, Idaho FSA has made a record number of farm loans. In 2014 we delivered 811 loans to farmers and ranchers totaling over $100,000,000. Nationwide 165,000 loans totaling nearly $23 billion were issued. More than 50 percent of USDA’s farm loans now go to beginning farmers. In addition, FSA has increased its lending to socially-disadvantaged producers by nearly 50 percent since 2010.

ers can now simply visit www. myamericanfarm.org through a PC/Mac or tablet and play all games with ease. My American Farm is an educational game platform launched in 2011 to engage preK through fifth- grade learners in agriculture. Today the free site offers 19 agriculturally themed games and more than 100 free educator resources such as lesson plans, activity sheets and comics.

in design protocols for reguUSDA Announces Measures to Diversify lated authorized releases of genetically engineered crops Weed Control

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack recently announced several steps that the Agriculture Department is taking to address the increase of herbicide-resistant weeds in U.S. agricultural systems. “Weed control in major crops is almost entirely accomplished with herbicides today,” said Vilsack. “USDA, working in collaboration with the Environmental Protection Agency, must continue to identify ways to encourage producers to adopt diverse tactics for weed management in addition to herbicide control.” The steps announced by USDA include: USDA’s Natural Resource Conservation Service will offer financial assistance under its Environmental Quality Incentives Program for herbicide-resistant weed control practices that utilize Integrated Pest Management plans and practices. Later this year NRCS will be soliciting proposals under the Conservation Innovation Grants Program for innovative conservation systems that address herbicide resistant weeds.

USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service will actively promote use of best management practices

and will include recommendations for BMPs with the authorization of field trials of HR crops.

USDA is partnering with the Weed Science Society of America and is providing funds to develop education and outreach materials for various stakeholders on managing herbicide-resistant weeds.

USDA - New WholeFarm Revenue Insurance Protection

WASHINGTON, Nov. 6, 2014 — The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Risk Management Agency (RMA) today announced that the new Whole-Farm Revenue Protection insurance policy is now available for the 2015 crop year. The policy allows producers to insure between 50 to 85 percent of their whole farm revenue and makes crop insurance more affordable for producers, including fruit and vegetable growers and organic farmers and ranchers. Whole-Farm Revenue Protection allows these growers to insure a variety of crops at once instead of one commodity at a time. That gives them the option of embracing more crop diversity and helps support the production of a wider variety of foods.

NW Potato Production is up 3 Percent from Last Year.

Potato production in Idaho is forecast at 134 million cwt., up 2 percent from last year. Harvested area, at 316,000 acres, is unchanged from 2013. Yield is expected to be 425 cwt. per acre, up 10 cwt. from 2013. Production for the 10 Southwestern counties in Idaho is forecast at 8.24 million cwt., down 7 percent from last year. Harvested area, at 16,000 acres, is down 1,000 acres from 2013. Yield is expected to be 515 cwt. per acre down 5 cwt. from the previous year. Production in the other Idaho counties is forecast at 126 million cwt., up 3 percent from a year ago. Harvested area, at 300,000 acres, is up 1,000 acres from 2013. Yield is expected to be 420 cwt. per acre, up 11 cwt. from 2013. Potato production in Oregon is forecast at 22.8 million cwt., up 6 percent from the previous year. Harvested area, at 39,000 acres, is down 600 acres from 2013. Yield is expected to be 585 cwt. per acre, up 40 cwt. from 2013. Potato production in Washington is forecast at 99.8 million cwt., up 4 percent from last year. Harvested area, at 165,000 acres, is up 5,000 acres from 2013. Yield is expected to be 605 cwt. per acre up 5 cwt. from the previous year.

million cwt, up 3 percent from last year. Area harvested, at 926,200 acres is down slightly from 2013. Yield is expected to be 439 cwt. per acre, up 14 cwt. from the previous year. Total potato production in the United States is forecast at 443 million cwt., up 2 percent from 2013. Harvested area, at 1.05 million acres is down slightly from last year. Yield is expected to be 422 cwt. per acre, up 8 cwt. from 2013.

Take Steps to Avoid Costly Agritourism Accidents

Corn mazes, apple picking, hayrides – autumn might be the best time of year to enjoy agritourism. But autumn is also peak time for agritourism injuries. “If there is a serious injury, whether as part of a regular farm or an agritourism activity, there will be negative consequences for the farm,” said Marsha Salzwedel, agricultural youth safety specialist with the National Children’s Center for Rural and Agricultural Health and Safety. “Attendance can go down; sometimes you get sued. Depending on what happens, this can close down the farm or operation.” The website, “Integrating Safety into Agritourism,” is loaded with resources to address safety shortcomings.

Nationally, production of fall potatoes is forecast at 406 Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

FARM BUREAU COMMODITY REPORT GRAIN PRICES

Portland:

White Wheat 11% Winter 14% Spring Oats

Ogden:

White Wheat 11% Winter 14% Spring Barley

Pocatello/ Blackfoot:

White Wheat 11% Winter 14% Spring Hard White

Burley:

White Wheat 11% Winter 14% Spring Barley

Nampa:

White Wheat (cwt) (Bushel)

Lewiston:

White Wheat H. Red Winter Dark N. Spring Barley

10/29/2014

11/19/2014

Trend

7.01 7.47-7.67 9.27 265.00

6.92 7.17-7.36 9.35 265.00

- .09 - .30 to - .31 + .08 Steady

6.45 6.36 7.52 5.50

6.60 6.31 7.49 5.55

+ .15 - .05 - .03 + .05

6.25 7.03 6.82 7.03

6.25 6.82 7.12 6.87

Steady - .21 + .30 - .16

6.20 5.85 6.60 5.20

6.30 5.75 6.65 5.20

+ .10 - .10 + .05 Steady

10.50 6.30

Steady Steady

6.72 7.68 9.33 141.50

6.60 7.16 9.41 141.50

- .12 - .52 + .08 Steady

LIVESTOCK PRICES 10/24/2014 11/19/2014 Feeder Steers Under 500 lbs 500-700 lbs 700-900 lbs Over 900 lbs

Feeder Heifers Under 500 lbs 500-700 lbs 700-900 lbs Over 900 lbs

Holstein Steers Under 700 lbs Over 700 lbs

Cows

Utility/Commercial Canner & Cutter

Stock Cows Bulls

Slaughter

BEAN PRICES: Pinto Pink Small Red

Trend

245-350 210-300 185-238 159-210

250-352 210-292 180-246 160-212

+ 5 to + 2 Steady to - 8 - 5 to + 8 + 1 to + 2

230-342 200-282 175-227 142-206

230-345 196-275 171-227 150-212

Steady to + 3 - 4 to - 7 - 4 to steady + 8 to + 6

150-225 124-200

150-230 135-204

steady to + 5 + 11 to + 4

94-120 83-105

92-125 80-110

- 2 to + 5 - 3 to + 5

1450-2175

1225-2275

- 225 to + 100

96-140

105-147

+ 9 to + 7

27.00-30.00 Not Established 38.00-40.00

28.00 Not Established 38.00-40.00

+ 1.00 to - 2.00 N.A. Steady

Compiled by the Idaho Farm Bureau Commodity Division 36

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

more than 10% grass), used with visual appearance and intent of sale Quantitative factors are approximate and many factors can affect feedin value.

IDaho Hay Report

Quality

USDA Market News, Moses Lake, WA

Fri Nov 14, 2014 USDA Market News Tons: 9000 Last Week: 4850 Last Year: 6125 Compared to last week, Premium and Supreme testing Alfalfa steady.Trade moderate this week as more Organic hay was reported with good demand for non-rained on high testing supplies. Demand light for heavy rained on supplies. Retail/feed store/ horse not tested this week. All prices are dollars per ton and FOB the farm or ranch unless otherwise stated.

POTATOES FOR PROCESSING

November 18, 2014 IDAHO---Open-market trading by processors with growers was inactive.

POTATOES

UPPER VALLEY, TWIN FALLS-BURLEY DISTRICT, IDAHO---Shipments 775-768-801 (includes export of 4-5-4) ---Movement expected to remain about the same current week (Nov 16) and then decrease the following week (Nov 23) due to holiday shipping schedules. Trading very active. Prices higher. Russet Burbank U.S. One baled 5 10-pound film bags non size A mostly 4.00-4.50; 50-pound cartons 40-70s mostly 12.50, 80s mostly 10.50-11.00, 90s mostly 9.00, 100s mostly 7.50-8.00. Russet Norkotah U.S. One baled 5 10-pound film bags non size A mostly 4.00-4.50; 50-pound cartons 40-70s mostly 12.00, 80s mostly 9.50, 90s mostly 8.50, 100s mostly 7.50. Shipments for the week ending November 15, 2014 were generally Russets with 47 percent Burbanks and 48 percent Norkotahs.

5 Year Grain Comparison

Grain Prices.................11/18/2010...................11/17/2011.................. 11/26/2012.................11/22/2013.................11/19/2014 Portland: White Wheat...................No Bid.............................5.92 ............................No Bid.............................7.11 ........................... 6.92 11% Winter.....................No Bid.........................6.87-7.02.......................9.65-9.77.........................92-7.97........................7.17-7.36 14% Spring......................No Bid............................ 10.17 .............................9.98 ...........................8.40...............................9.35 Corn..................................223.50....................... 267-267.25....................308-310.50.......................No Bid........................... 65.00 Ogden: White Wheat..................... 5.95 ..............................6.00.............................. 8.30............................. 11% Winter....................... 5.68 .............................5.82 ............................. 8.47............................. 14 % Spring...................... 7.22 ..............................8.75 ............................. 8.97............................. Barley.................................8.50 ............................ 11.40..............................12.00.............................

6.57............................ 6.60 7.21............................. 6.31 7.54............................. 7.49 7.30............................. 5.55

Pocatello: White Wheat..................... 5.65 .............................5.65................................8.00.............................. 6.25............................. 6.25 11% Winter....................... 5.60 ............................. 5.91 ..............................7.92.............................. 7.03............................. 6.82 14% Spring.........................7.41 ..............................8.81 ..............................8.43.............................. 7.00..............................7.12 Barley..................................7.81 ........................... 10.41..............................11.83........................... No Bid........................... 6.87

IDAHO HAY – 11/14/14 Tons: 9,000 All prices are dollars per ton and FOB unless otherwise stated. Tons

Supreme Supreme - Organic Premium/SupremeTarped Good - Tarped Utility – Rain Damage

Price Range Alfalfa Large Square 2,100 240.00 5,000 280.00 600 205.00 600 700

155.00 120.00

Avg. Price 240.00 280.00 205.00 155.00 120.00

http://www.ams.usda.gov/mnreports/ML_GR312.txt USDA Market News, Moses Lake, WA 509-393-1343 or 707-3150

Alfalfa hay test guidelines, (for domestic livestock use and not more than 10% grass), used with visual appearance and intent of sale Quantitative factors are approximate and many factors can affect feeding value.

ONIONS, DRY

IDAHO AND MALHUER COUNTY OREGON---Shipments 311-303-285--- Movement expected to remain about the same current week (Nov 16) and then decrease the following week (Nov 23) due to holiday shipping schedules. Trading fairly slow. Prices Yellow super colossal lower, others generally unchanged. Yellow Spanish Hybrid U.S. One 50-pound sack Super Colossal 7.00-8.00, colossal 6.00-7.00, jumbo mostly 5.00, medium mostly 4.00;White 50-pound sacks jumbo 12.00, medium 10.00; Red Globe Type U.S. One 25-pound sacks jumbo 6.50-7.00, medium mostly 5.00.

Burley: White Wheat.....................6.00 .............................5.85................................7.98...............................6.17.............................. 6.30 11% Winter....................... 5.35 ..............................5.67 ..............................8.01...............................6.51...............................5.75 14% Spring.........................7.14 ..............................8.71 ..............................8.44...............................6.82.............................. 6.65 Barley.................................8.25 ...........................10.25..............................12.25..............................7.50.............................. 5.20 Nampa: White Wheat (cwt).......... 9.00 ..............................8.67 .............................13.08.............................10.42............................ 10.50 (bushel)........... 5.40 ..............................5.20................................7.85...............................6.25.............................. 6.30 Lewiston: White Wheat..................... 6.05 .............................5.64................................8.50............................. 6.94............................ 6.60 Barley............................... 161.50............................194.50............................241.50......................... 141.50.........................141.50 Bean Prices: Pintos...........................22.00-24.00........................45.00........................ 35.00-38.00.................40.00-42.00.................40.00-42.00 Pinks............................24.00-25.00........................45.00........................40.00-42.00......................No Bid..........................No Bid Small Reds...................24.00-28.00.................. 45.00-46.00..................40.00-42.00......................No Bid..........................No Bid ***

IDAHO OCTOBER MILK PRODUCTION UP 3.9 percent November 19, 2014 Milk production in the 23 major States during October totaled 16.0 billion pounds, up 3.9 percent from October 2013. September revised production, at 15.5 billion pounds, was up 4.3 percent from September 2013. The September revision represented an increase of 22 million pounds or 0.1 percent from last month’s preliminary production estimate. Production per cow in the 23 major States averaged 1,868 pounds for October, 51 pounds above October 2013. This is the highest production per cow for the month of October since the 23 State series began in 2003.

The number of milk cows on farms in the 23 major States was 8.59 million head, 89,000 head more than October 2013, and 3,000 head more than September 2014. October Milk Production in the United States up 3.8 Percent Milk production in the United States during October totaled 17.1 billion pounds, up 3.8 percent from October 2013. Production per cow in the United States averaged 1,842 pounds for October, 52 pounds above October 2013. The number of milk cows on farms in the United States was 9.28 million head, 77,000 head more than October 2013, and 4,000 head more than September 2014. Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014

5 Year livestock comparison .....................................11/20/2010................... 11/18/2011....................11/26/2012...................11/22/2013...................11/19/2014 Under 500 lbs................109-155 .....................130-194 ......................126-191.........................150-218........................250-352 500-700 lbs..................... 95-131 ........................122-158..........................116-167.........................143-186........................210-292 700-900 lbs.....................90-121 ......................101-137..........................103-140.........................125-165........................180-246 Over 900 lbs...................85-101..........................105-120..........................91-116......................... 100-148........................ 160-212 Feeder Heifers Under 500 lbs................ 107-138 ......................121-166..........................121-172.........................145-201........................230-345 500-700 lbs.....................96-129 ...................... 112-145..........................117-149.........................130-165........................196-275 700-900 lbs..................... 90-113..........................105-129..........................92-145..........................120-146........................ 171-227 Over 900 lbs...................80-102...........................88-115............................80-116......................... 100-127........................ 150-212 Holstein Steers Under 700 lbs..................63-85 ...........................65-94 ..........................75-105...........................80-118.........................150-230 Over 700 lbs....................55-80 ..........................65-100...........................63-102.......................... 75-108.........................135-204 Cows Utility/Commercial...........35-59.............................40-71.............................57-78.............................61-80........................... 92-125 Canner & Cutter..............35-52.............................44-62.............................45-70............................ 50-69........................... 80-110 Stock Cows.....................500-1300.......................750-1325.......................700-1500.....................1100-1675....................1225-2275 Bulls – Slaughter............45-71.............................45-75 ...........................61-90............................ 65-90.......................... 105-147

Cattle on Feed November 19, 2014

United States Cattle on Feed Up Slightly Cattle and calves on feed for slaughter market in the United States for feedlots with capacity of 1,000 or more head totaled 10.6 million head on November 1, 2014. The inventory was slightly above November 1, 2013. Placements in feedlots during October totaled 2.36 million, 1 percent below 2013. Net placements were 2.26 million head. During October, placements of cattle and calves weighing less than 600 pounds were 690,000, 600-699 pounds were 570,000, 700-799 pounds were 462,000, and 800 pounds and greater were 635,000. For the month of October, placements are the second lowest since the series began in 1996. Marketings of fed cattle during October totaled 1.69 million, 8 percent below 2013. October marketings are the lowest since the series began in 1996. Other disappearance totaled 97,000 during October, 28 percent above 2013.

Cattle Outlook November 14, 2014 The November WASDE increased by 0.4% USDA’s forecast of 2014 beef production, but lowered their forecast of next year’s production by 0.5%.They now predict 2014 beef production will be down 4.9% from last year and next year’s beef production will be 3.2% lower than this year.This year’s beef production is the lowest since 1994. USDA’s forecast for fed cattle prices is for the average to be close to $154.40/cwt this year and in the upper $150s next year. These are far above last year’s record of $125.89/cwt. Total red meat and poultry production is forecast to be 1.6% higher in 2015 than this year. USDA lowered their forecast of 2014 corn production by 68 million bushels and raised their forecast of the seasonal average corn price by 10 cents to between $3.20 and $3.80 per bushel. They left the midpoint of their soybean price forecast unchanged at $10/bu. Fed cattle sales volume was light again this week. Through Thursday, the 5-area average price for slaughter steers sold on a live weight basis was $167.53/cwt, up 66 cents from last week’s average and up $36.68 from a year ago. The 5 area average dressed price for steers was $262.00/cwt, up 87 cents for the week and up $57.00 from the same week last year. Boxed beef prices were mixed this week. This morning the boxed beef cutout value for choice carcasses was $252.87/cwt, up $3.71 from the previous Friday and up $50.62 from a year ago.The select carcass cutout is $238.35/cwt, down 9 cents from last week, but up $49.85 from a year ago.

Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMBER 2014

This week’s cattle slaughter totaled 560,000 head, down 0.7% from the previous week and down 6.8% from the corresponding week last year. This was the 37th consecutive week with cattle slaughter below the year-ago level. Slaughter weights continue to be very heavy. The average steer dressed weight for the week ending on November 1 was 902 pounds, unchanged from the week before, but up 25 pounds compared to the same week last year. Feeder cattle prices at this week’s Oklahoma City auction were mostly steady to $2 higher on heavier weights and $5 to $10 higher on calves. This week’s prices for medium and large frame #1 steers by weight were: 400-450# $334-$350, 450500# $308-$341, 500-550# $290-$315, 550-600# $267-$299, 600-650# $243-$286, 650-700# $227.50-$252.50, 700-750# $220-$245, 750-800# $220-$240, 800-900# $222.50-$241.25, and 900-1000# $217/cwt. The December live cattle futures contract settled at $170.20, up $3.40 for the week. February settled at $171.27/cwt, up $2.90 from the previous Friday. The April contract closed at $169.25/cwt. The November feeder cattle contract ended the week at $240.00/cwt, up $1.48 for the week. January feeders closed at $236.12/cwt, up $3.67 compared to last Friday.

University of Missouri

Classifieds Animals

Miscellaneous

Wanted

Reg. Angus and Salers bulls for sale at fall prices. Long yearlings-black and red. Starting at $3500. B&B Livestock, New Meadows, ID 208-347-2345

Downsizing - 1985 Flatbed trailer, 3pt hitch generator, 30’ of quanset still in straps, barbed wire, weed sprayers, lumber, lawn mower, outdoor hydrants, rear tine tiller, anvil, square light fixtures, truck tires, several old farm implements. Inkom, Id. Call Barbara at 208-254-9315

Wanted: 1/2 cubic foot of north side Snake River ground water; milk silo for water storage; 208-536-6448

Paying cash for old cork top bottles and some telephone insulators. Call Randy. Payette, Id. 208-740-0178.

Wanted: any Chrysler 2.2L turbo vehicle such as Plymouth Reliant, Chrysler LeBaron, Dodge Aries, any year from 1985-1990. Must have 2.2 turbo. Any condition. Contact: Marline, 208-345-3301.

DEADLINE DATES:

Farm Equipment Heiser and Out West Saddle for sale. $600/ each. Good using condition or for display. 14” tree. Solid and beautiful. 208-313-4840. New squeeze chute, green hand-pull. $1,200. Midvale, Id 208-355-3780. Balewagons: New Holland self-propelled or pull-type models. Also interested in buying balewagons. Will consider any model. Call Jim Wilhite at 208-880-2889 anytime Help Wanted

Earn $75,000/yr Part Time in the livestock or equipment appraisal business. Agricultural background required. Classroom or home study courses available. 800-488-7570.

Household Gas/Propane Hot Water Heater, Make: G.E. Capacity - 40 Gal. (Tall) Great Condition. Paid $550 - Asking $250. Shelly, Id. 208-528-5337 Outdoor pellet furnace for sale. Uses existing forced air system or radiators. Cheaper than oil, electric or propane heat. Heats home and hot water, comes with pellet hopper. Easy to load/use. You will love the heat. Horseshoe Bend, Id. Call John at 208-781-0691

Coleman 17 ft canoe, oars, and stadium seats. $250. Bliss, Id. 208-490-1300.

Real Estate/Acreage 20 farm acres with water rights. 2014 3 Bdr, 2 Bath, 28x66 Modular home with double wide 3 bdr, 2 bath. $295,000. Springfield, Id. 208-680-1928. For Rent: Mobile Home Lot - 14x70 or smaller Mobile Home - 2005 Mobile Home or Newer. $175.00 monthly, includes water/ sewer Only. Shelley Area. Application process and contract required. Please call 5285337, leave message.

Paying cash for German & Japanese war relics/souvenirs! Pistols, rifles, swords, daggers, flags, scopes, optical equipment, uniforms, helmets, machine guns (ATF rules apply) medals, flags, etc. 549-3841 (evenings) or 208-405-9338. Old License Plates Wanted: Also key chain license plates, old signs, light fixtures. Will pay cash. Please email, call or write. Gary Peterson, 130 E Pecan, Genesee, Id 83832. gearlep@gmail.com. 208-285-1258

ADS MUST BE RECEIVED BY

DEC. 20 FOR NEXT ISSUE.

Recreational Equipment Camp trailer, 28’ Sunnybrook. One slide out, very clean and nice with hitch. Bennington, Id. 208-847-1262.

Vehicles 1984 Chev pick-up, 79 thousand miles, manual shift, AC, good tires With 1984 9½ ft S&S camper, self-contained, refrigerator, 3 burner stove plus oven, water heater, electric pump, catalytic heater, queen bed. $2,500. Bruneau, ID. 208-845-2248

FREE CLASSIFIED ADS

FOR IDAHO FARM BUREAU MEMBERS send to: dashton@idahofb.org Idaho Farm Bureau producer / DECEMber 2014