In pursuit of innovation, efficiency and profitability we have partnered with Agrinos. Contact the Alamo Helena location at 956-464-4411
Vol. 1 Issue 3
Staff Michelle Martin Owner/Editor michelle@theagmag.org (956) 330-8870
Proverbs 16:9
In his heart a man plans his course, but the Lord determines his steps.
Al Benavides
Graphic Designer
Melanie Neuhaus Wilson Field Specialist
A Letter from the Editor When I was a child the New Year was an exciting time for me - it meant I was allowed to stay up late. During my college days the New Year was about being at the best party. Now that I’m “older” the New Year is about setting goals for myself and becoming a better me. If you were to ask me a year ago where I would be or what I would be doing, I never would have fathomed having the Ag Mag. I have been out of college for five years and it is amazing how much can change in that amount of time, even more so in just a single year. God’s plan for me was much better than what I had planned for myself. Throughout 2014 I had my fair share of challenges and struggles, but they all brought me here - to where I am today. I learned a lot about myself and what my capabilities are. I have met some of the most amazing people in the past year, many who have enabled me to be the best I can be. A new year now comes with new challenges. It is a new crop to plant, a new crop to harvest, and new rules to abide by. I wish you many blessings to combat whatever trials you may encounter this year. I wish all of you success in whatever you are doing. Walt Disney once said, “All our dreams can come true, if we have the courage to pursue them.” Without you my dreams would not be fulfilled. Whether you are an advertiser, a reader, or a supporter in general you have been a blessing to me. My gratitude is stronger than ever to my supporters. The Ag Mag is growing rapidly and I owe it to every single person reading and supporting me. Thank you again. My husband Clayton Martin, my dogs Harley (pictured) and Dixie (not pictured because she can’t sit still for a photo), and myself wish everyone a Happy New Year. I look forward to bringing you bigger and better editions of the Ag Mag in 2015.
Owner/Creator of AG MAG
What’s Inside... Growing Beyond Borders..................Pg 6 The Arroyo Colorado Watershed....Pg 10 From the era of the dust bowl to the Present.......................... Pg 12 Troubled Waters...............................Pg 14
Feature Story From the Mississippi Delta to Texas...Pg 16 Stop Highway 68...............................Pg 19 So Tex Heritage Sale 2014................Pg 22 AHC Adopts Rules for Livestock Industry at Commision Meeting....Pg 23 Managing Soil Fertility with Low Commodity Prices...................Pg 24 Crop insurance Changes for 2015...Pg 26 LSMCIC Round-Up a Big Success! Pg 32 Could this be the Future of Farming?......................................Pg 34 Smokin’ On The Rio........................Pg 40 Volume1, Issue 3. January 2015. No part of this publication can be reproduced without the written consent of the publisher. Ag Mag reserves the right to edit, rewrite or refuse editorial materials and assumes no responsibility for accuracy, errors, omissions or consequence arising from it. All correspondence to the publication become the property of Ag Mag. Ag Mag is published bi-monthly © 2015. To advertise in Ag Mag, call (956) 330-8870 or email michelle@theagmag.org
The Texas Produce Industry:
GROWING BEYOND BORDERS WRITTEN BY: BRET ERICKSON
S
ince 1942, the Texas International Produce Association has been a business and political advocate for the fresh produce industry in Texas. Although the issues have changed over the years, TIPA’s commitment to serving the industry has not.
Headquartered in Mission, Texas, the association works on a variety of domestic issues such as water, labor & immigration reform, federal marketing order management, pest and disease issues, food safety, and US specialty crop policy development, to name a few. Over the last two decades, many of TIPA’s domestic grower/shipper members have expanded their operations into Mexico in order to provide a more consistent supply of fresh produce for a larger part of the year. The growth in imported Mexican produce has led to complex trade issues which TIPA has become heavily engaged in on behalf of association members.
6 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
Some may find this to be a surprising statistic, but USDA data tells us nearly two-thirds of all fresh fruits and vegetables consumed in or shipped out of the state of Texas are grown in Mexico. Nationally, over 40% of all the fresh produce consumed in the United States is now imported. There are a number of reasons for the rise in imported produce: a rapidly increasing population i.e rising demand yet at the same time we see declining agricultural production in the US due to drought, labor shortages, and overreaching government regulation. Imported produce has been a boom to the Texas economy particularly here in South Texas, although that growth has not come without significant challenges. One of the biggest hurdles is a lack of federal resources which are required to inspect and process the growing volume of trucks carrying agricultural commodities from Mexico into the US. Agencies such as FDA, USDA-APHIS, and CBP have struggled to keep pace with the burgeoning produce import industry. This in turn results in growth potential for US importers, many of whom also happen to be Texas grower/shippers. For the most part, the import story has been one of success. Texas has experienced double digit growth each of the last 7 years, over 70% since 2007. Texas has led the country in imported produce volumes 6 of the last 7 years. In 2012, the US imported $7.78 Billion
worth of fresh produce from Mexico, nearly $3.5 Billion of that came through the state of Texas alone, with the remaining coming through Arizona, and California. Texas is the fresh produce gateway to the US and Canada. Based on an economic impact analysis conducted by Texas A&M, in 2012 imported produce from Mexico contributed nearly $285 Million in direct economic impact to our state economy, including over 3000 jobs. By 2020, the direct economic impact could reach nearly $700 Million and close to 7000 jobs. The economic benefits of imported Mexican produce are undeniable and the shift towards a globalized market place is something that will undoubtedly continue for the foreseeable future. We often hear about the importance of being food secure. Generally we refer to food security as the ability to produce our own food supply domestically, but true food security is ensuring you have a stable and safe food supply chain that delivers consistently. The best way to achieve that is through international partnerships which provide a seamless transition at our ports allowing commodities to move freely and securely. Texas companies are working hard to ensure your food security. By growing both in Texas and beyond our own borders, the produce industry in Texas is creating jobs and delivering fresh delicious produce to your table all year round.
J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 1 5
7
The Arroyo
COLORADO WATERSHED W R I T T E N B Y : A S H L E Y H . G R E G O RY & J A I M E F L O R E S
Since 2002, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service has run a soil testing campaign for agricultural producers in the Lower Rio Grande Valley. The campaign provides free soil sample analysis to determine the amount of nutrients in the soil. This information is then used by the producer to determine the appropriate amount of fertilizer needed for the crop which is beneficial to producers’ bottom line and the environment. Initially, the soil testing campaign was funded by the United States Department of Agriculture-Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service, then by the Rio Grande Basin Initiative until the project ended in 2008. Realizing the importance of the campaign and the potential to reduce nutrient loading in the Arroyo Colorado, one of the goals outlined in the Arroyo Colorado Watershed Protection Plan (ACWPP), the Arroyo Colorado Watershed Partnership (ACWP) began covering the cost of the soil testing campaign via various funding sources. High nutrient content is one of the impairments facing the Arroyo Colorado and because much of the land within the watershed is cropland it is important to work with agricultural producers to reduce the amount of nutrients leaving the field in irrigation runoff. Since 2008, the Arroyo Colorado Watershed Partner10 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
ship has offered annual soil analysis to agricultural producers in Hidalgo, Cameron and Willacy counties completely free of cost. This season’s campaign kicked off on October 1, 2014 and will run through February 28th, 2015. The Arroyo Colorado Watershed is largely agricultural because of the approximate 333,000 acres of agricultural land within the 500,000 acres of the watershed. Based on a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study conducted by the TCEQ in 1998, the ACWP has determined that nutrient management and irrigation management are essential to reducing nutrient loading into the Arroyo Colorado. Utilizing residual nutrients in the soil decreases the possibility of excess nutrients leaving fields in irrigation runoff. Preventing irrigation runoff is just as important; keeping the water in the field prevents nutrients from making their way into the Arroyo. On October 16, 2014, to kick off the soil testing campaign, a Crop Fertility Program was held to discuss the benefits of soil testing, utilizing cover crops, reduced tillage and to raise awareness of the programs that support these efforts. In addition to offering the annual soil testing campaign, the ACWP provides educational programming on best management practices (BMPs) that can improve water quality and sup-
ports agencies that offer technical and financial assistance for implementing those practices. The Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB) is one agency that provides assistance through their administering of the Texas Nonpoint Source (NPS) Management Program and NPS Grant Program, which is funded by Clean Water Act (CWA) $319(h) dollars. The NPS Management Program gives guidance on the importance of obtaining a water quality management plan (WQMP), which is a voluntary, incentive-based natural resource conservation planning mechanism to agricultural producers and other rural landowners who choose to implement BMPs that prevent and abate NPS pollution. The NPS Grant Program provides financial assistance to implement practices specifically for landowners within the Arroyo Colorado watershed. Some of the most common practices implemented through this program include land leveling and pipeline installation; however there would be added benefits to increasing the implementation of practices such as planting riparian buffers along the Arroyo. The NPS Grant Program can provide a 60% cost share for implementing BMPs on agricultural land for those who obtain a WQMP. The cost share is capped at $15,000. For more information on WQMPs and related practices contact Ronnie Ramirez, Conservation Planner at the TSSWCB Regional Office in Harlingen, (956) 4215853 or rramirez@tsswcb.texas.gov. The activities of the ACWP are not just agriculture related; the Arroyo Colorado’s uses include agricultural, municipal, navigational, recreational, and flood control. The Arroyo Colorado plays a vital role in the community and addressing its impairments must be approached at the watershed scale. The surrounding land that drains into the Arroyo Colorado is known as the Arroyo Colorado watershed. When water moves across the surface of the watershed, whether it is agricultural irrigation water, stormwater or municipal wastewater, it ends up in the Arroyo Colorado. There are 18 wastewater treatment plants (WWP) that are permitted by TCEQ that discharge into the Arroyo
Colorado. Starting in the Port of Harlingen, the Arroyo Colorado has also been physically modified by widening and dredging the river to carry floodwaters/stormwaters into the Lower Laguna Madre (LLM) and to allow barge traffic into the Port of Harlingen. While all of these activities are necessary to the economy of the Rio Grande Valley, they threaten the Arroyo’s ability to serve as a recreational area for swimming and fishing, and pose harm to the unique and valuable natural resources of the Arroyo Colorado and the Lower Laguna Madre. In an effort to improve the water quality in the Arroyo Colorado and the LLM, the ACWP developed the Arroyo Colorado Watershed Protection Plan (ACWPP) in 2007. The ACWPP identified the sources of the impairments in the Arroyo Colorado watershed and selected a number of BMPs and an implementation schedule to address them. The ACWPP is meant to be a living document that can be updated as the land use in the watershed continues to evolve. Phase I of the ACWPP was intended to be a ten year implementation project. The project is currently in the eighth year and the ACWP has begun to plan and develop Phase II of the ACWPP that will outline implementation efforts for the period of 2016 through 2026.
tat to the native and migratory birds in the RGV. An estimated $150 million worth of improvements have been made to the WWTP’s to meet the new permit requirements. The increased capacity has allowed for homes in colonias to be hooked up to these plants. Between the period of 2000 – 2014, approximately 32,543 homes that were using On Site Sewage Facilities (OSSF) or septic systems were connected to a centralized WWTP ensuring better sanitary conditions for the residents and eliminating untreated or poorly treated wastewater from entering the Arroyo Colorado. For more information about the activities of the ACWP or to find out how you can get involved, visit www.arroyocolorodo.org.
Some of the major accomplishments from Phase I of the ACWPP have been in the area of municipal wastewater effluent discharge. Wastewater effluent discharge is a point-source pollution that is regulated by the TCEQ. The TCEQ is able to issue new discharge limits when they issue new permits to the WWTP’s. Discharge permits are renewed and issued every 5 years. The TCEQ in partnership with the ACWP issued more stringent effluent limits as part of Phase I. Because of the new permits limits, the WWTP’s in the watershed had to transition from antiquated, lagoonal treatment systems to modern, mechanical plants with increased capacity that are able to meet the new permit requirements. Three of the WWTP’s, San Benito, La Feria and San Juan have also added Tertiary treatment polishing ponds as an additional management measure to further treat the effluent before it is discharged into the Arroyo Colorado. These polishing ponds also provide habiJ A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 1 5
11
From the era of the dust bowl to the present. W R I T T E N B Y : C LY D E G O T T S C H A L K
“May 29, 2015 marks the diamond jubilee of the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB) and the beginning of Texas soil and water conservation districts (SWCDS). The date is also the official kickoff date for many celebratory events around the state throughout the year commemorating the event,” said Rex Isom, director of the agency. The problems of wind and water erosion in the 1930’s (which was the reason for the creation of the TSSWCB and SWCDS in Texas as well as in other states) caused great land devastation in Texas and throughout the Great Plains region of the country. The era was marked by a period of drought from 1931 to 1939 that was coupled with severe wind-driven soil erosion of overgrazed rangeland and soil exposed by the use of farming practices not adapted to the semiarid U.S. Great Plains. “In addition, this catastrophic display of nature caught public attention at a time when the state and nation was in the throes of a great economic depression. Nature just added additional woes to the suffering of the people because some of the worst dust storms that had ever been seen in the history of the country were occurring at that time. “So, out of this chaos of nature and economic depression the TSSWCB and SWCDS were born. It should be noted that since the creation of the TSSWCB and organization of local soil and water conservation districts we can proudly say that the majority of Texas farmers, ranchers and timber producers from one generation to the next for the past 75 years have voluntarily and continuously entered into working agreements with their local SWCDS to implement a soil and water conservation program on their farms and ranches to meet the changing conservation needs of every acre on that property. When the first version of a conservation law for Texas came out, the early movers and shakers for such a law found that it lacked stability and convinced then Governor Jimmy Allred to veto the bill which he did in June, 1937. Their reasons for wanting the bill vetoed was because the law would automatically establish soil conservation districts on a county basis, make the county commissioners court the governing body and called for a portion of county taxes to finance the program. “What they wanted in law was a farmer- rancher controlled program in which local landowners would determine whether a soil conservation district was needed. In addition, they 12 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
did not want a soil conservation district to have taxing authority or powers of eminent domain. A new bill was written which satisfied their concerns and passed in 1939 by the following legislature. The rest is history. Today the TSSWCB administers several key state programs that provide technical and financial assistance to landowners and land managers who wish to enter into a cooperative agreement with local SWCDS to protect their natural resources. In addition, the success of local voluntary conservation programs involves partnerships. Though the name has changed a few times over the years, a key partner working with the TSSWCB and local SWCDS is the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. NRCS employs people in numerous occupational disciplines including soil conservationists, rangeland management specialists, soil scientists, agronomists, biologists, engineers, geologists, engineers, and foresters. Some federal conservation financial assistance programs, enable these experts to help landowners and land managers develop conservation plans for crop, range, and timberlands.
The Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB) administers Texas’ soil and water conservation law and delivers coordinated natural resource conservation programs through the State’s 216 soil and water conservation districts. Additionally, the TSSWCB is the lead agency for planning, implementing, and managing programs for preventing and abating agricultural and silvicultural nonpoint sources of water pollution.The agency also administers a water supply enhancement program through the targeted control of water-depleting brush The TSSWCB, in an additional area of responsibility, acts to ensure that the State’s network of 2,000 flood control dams are protecting lives and property by providing operation, maintenance, and structural repair grants to local government sponsors. The agency also facilitates the Texas Invasive Species Coordinating Committee.
Troubled
WATERS W R I T T E N B Y : K AT H RY N B R A DY
I
magine the days long past when the best way to transport goods or move about the country was via waterways. The waterways that were capable of being navigated by a boat were considered navigable streams and eventually became known
14 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
as the “waters of the U.S � Not long after legislation was enacted to protect these water bodies from the discharges that led to pollution as well as to regulate navigation, trade and commerce; thus in 1899 the Harbors Appropriations Act was passed. But as times
changed and the country grew the law was expanded and re-defined becoming the Federal Water Pollution Act of 1948. This act could be used to develop programs to “eliminate or reduce the pollution of interstate waters along with improving the sanitary condition of the tributaries and underground water courses that connect” to the “waters of the U.S.” Eventually the modern Clean Water Act of 1972 was passed to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the nation’s waters” Fast forward to April 21, 2014 when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers jointly released a proposed rule to clarify protection under the Clean Water Act. The proposed rule will revise the existing definition of “waters of the U.S.” Currently “waters of the United States” include “wetlands, streams, rivers, lakes, ponds and the territorial season.” According to the proposed rule these waterways are critical for the nation’s economic and environmental health. Also included in this definition is any water-course with a “significant nexus” to the above mentioned waterways. But what is a “significant nexus”? This is the terminology that has many people concerned. In the proposed rules the EPA loosely defines a significant nexus as
any aquatic ecosystem or wetland that is “inseparably bound to the waters of the U.S.” In the Federal Register the EPA acknowledges that they are using science based publications to help define the “significant nexus” clause. Most scientific literature researched by EPA uses the term connectivity which they define as “the degree to which components of a system are joined by various transport mechanisms and is determined by the characteristics of both the physical landscape and the biota of the specific system .” This is why EPA is so concerned by the connected watercourses - they are alarmed about the pollution or contamination of these waters and the flow into “waters of the U.S.” According to the Clean Water Act website the exclusions and exemptions for agriculture will remain in effect. This includes normal farming and ranching practices, soil and water conservation practices, storm water discharge, flow from irrigated land; ie. irrigation ditches, construction and maintenance of farm or stock ponds, and maintenance of drainage ditches. This is still a proposed rule and nothing has been determined or set in stone yet.
H Feature Story
From the Mississippi Delta to e TEXAS e W ritten by :
M I C H E L L E M . M A RT I N
Tucked tightly off of 490 road in Raymondville lies Magnolia Farms. Magnolia Farms is run by the Braswell’s, father Buck and son Brian. The Braswell’s are not strangers to farming, doing so from the Mississippi Delta to South Texas brush country. Buck, a third-generation farmer, and son Brian, a fourthgeneration farmer, are natives of a little Mississippi town named Linn, where they farmed rice, soybeans, wheat, and, also custom harvested cotton . Buck and Brian were born to farm. “It is all I know,” Brian says. When Buck was a young boy his father gave him 40 acres. When his father became ill in 1969 Buck took over his dad’s farm and started farming on his own.He frequently traveled to the Rio Grande Valley, bringing pickers from Mississippi, and saw great potential in the Valley for farming. With a little convincing from friends, Buck moved to the Valley in 1987 and began his farming operations. Buck continued to farm for 23 years, until 2010 when the opportunity of a lifetime presented itself – partnering with his son, something Brian desired to do for many years. While the Braswell’s remain true to their home state Mississippi, which is known as the Magnolia State, the name only seemed fitting, thus the birth of Magnolia farms. Living on a farm and watching his dad led Brian to farming. 16 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
He can remember, as an 8-year-old, driving the tractor and then “graduating’ to grander things such as driving the combine at age 10. “There was never any question that I would be doing anything but farming.” Brian said. Likewise, Buck also learned farming from an early age. Buck was raised to appreciate the hard work of farming. Buck’s father started him out with a one-row mule at the age of 10. Buck can remember his father saying, “ The way you know you can farm, was because you were there before the end of the mule days.” “I have seen farming grow from a mule to now GPS,” Buck says. “I have seen it all.” Buck is more the traditional farmer while Brian is more of a “tech savvy” farmer. The combination has created a perfect recipe for successful farming. Using both practices turns out to be a nice balance for this father/son power duo. Having farmed during the good times and bad in both the Mississippi Delta area and now South Texas, the Braswell’s have some unique knowledge when it comes to farming different terrains. Their knowledge of traditional and current technological advanced farming also gives them multiple options when faced with obstacles to overcome.
Technology plays a key roll in alleviating human labor. Advances such as GPS and power steering has allowed the Braswell’s and their employees to focus their attention on more prominent issues that are occurring within the farm, such as changes in the land. Buck appreciates Brian’s knowledge when it comes to technology, but appreciates his own roots of knowing how to farm without all the “fancy” devices because at the end of the day all he cares about is watching the seed grow. “I see a lot of remote control things coming,” Buck said when asked where he saw farming in 20 years. “Luckily my son, who has been there since day one, will be the one of the ones who carries this farm on.” Thinking about the future has a tendency to bring about the past. Buck can recall his favorite years of farming in the 70s. “It was simple,” he says. “There were a lot of good people around, you didn’t have to spend a lot of money and you had a good crop.”
That, by no means, meant everything was easygoing. Buck says he can remember some of the worst years of farming in the late 70s and early 80s, during Jimmy Carter’s presidential years. The soybean crops were bountiful and expected to bring in $10 a bushel. Carter, however, placed an embargo on with Russia and prices plummeted, bringing in just $4 per bushel.
“
“It nearly broke everyone,” Buck says. “Interest rates went up to 21 percent when they originally had borrowed the money at seven percent. Some people are still paying on it to this day.”
“
“In the last seven to eight years technology has really gained momentum when it comes to GPS devices, precision agricultural, and variable-rate fertilizers,“ Brian says. “Most of the implementation of technology has been useful in various sectors of our family operations.”
There was never any question that I would be doing anything but farming
From farming in the Delta to farming in the Valley the Braswell’s have had their fair share of struggles, but more so success. As technology advances you can count on that this father son team, and their dedication to family and farming will advance as well. The passion these two exemplify for family and farming is remarkable, and really makes Magnolia farms unique.
J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 1 5
17
www.boggusford.com
T
he Rio Grande Valley is full of farm roads, citrus groves, and many small businesses. San Carlos has plenty of all three. Soon, however, many of the hard working families may lose their homes and businesses but, more importantly theirs means for providing. According to TX DOT the purpose of the project is to improve north-south mobility and travel capacity within eastern Hidalgo County and the Lower Rio Grande Valley. The ultimate HWY 68 project would consist of constructing a potentially tolled six-lane highway, with frontage roads, within a variable right of way width of approximately 300 to 400 feet. In a recent public meeting the room was filled with concerned business and homeowners, one family stood out in their bright red shirts that read,“STOP HWY 68.” The Fike family is one of the leading advocates for stopping the project. Why you ask? The proposed highway will cut straight through their property, located off of Mile 17 and Sharp Road. Their property has been in the family since 1935. The farm’s headquarters, which is on the west side of Sharp Road, lodges all the farm equipment, vehicles, and everything that can’t be left out overnight.
W ritten by : M I C H E L L E M . M A RT I N
State Highway 68 would separate the headquarters from the majority of farmland and run directly through not only the Fike’s home, but also through the home of their daughter Rachael. The loss of Fike’s home is not the prominent issue even though it was built from within the family, but the loss of the farm. The Fike family has grown their crops at their location since they can remember. The Fike’s have a passion for farming, that is beyond words. Farming is a way of life for them. They as well as many other hard-working families, work to provide for the community whether it be through donating their time or cooking up some delicious food for the children in extra circular activities. The Fike’s are not the only concerned family. The Perez family owns land in the projected path. Hector Perez said his father built their home on the land, north of San Carlos, and worked for decades to build up a family business,“Perez Family Farms.” “Soon it will all be gone, and I do not want my father to remember all his hard work turned into construction,” Perez says. There has been much debate about the implementation of a toll road in the Valley. Terri Hall (The founder/director for Texas uniting for reform and freedom) wrote in her article that tolling is anywhere from 10 to 1,000 times more expensive to drive per mile than a gas tax funded freeway. Therefore, most drivers cannot afford the expense of paying tolls on a regular basis. Since many toll projects involve managed toll lanes in the middle of existing freeways in metropolitan areas, the toll taxes are required too frequently to attract the necessary traffic to repay the debt. So the claim that tolls are
more fair,” and that gas tax is more regressive is patently false. Tolls are exorbitantly more expensive per mile than gas tax and essentially roads for the rich. Since most drivers cannot afford tolls, the free lanes surrounding the toll lanes remain congested — debunking another claim by the toll advocates that tolls reduce congestion.
If you are against this project you can join the Facebook Page Stop HWY 68 and sign the petition. Cited Source: http://blog.mysanantonio.com/terrihall/2014/01/txdot-sticks-to-tollroads-or-no-roads-agenda/ J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 1 5
19
South Texas Heritage Sale
2014
W ritten by :
L A R RY G A R Z A
tive Director for SGBI, Mr. John Ford and thanked the committee members for their hard work. Mr. Garza also led the audience in prayer, thanking the Good Lord and praying for all. Miss Whitney Taylor sang our National Anthem and absolutely nailed it, thank you Whitney.
T
he South Texas Heritage Sale, a showcase of purebred and Star5 Santa Gertrudis cattle, took place on November 22, 2014 at the Borchard Regional Fair grounds in Robstown, Texas. The sale is a showcase of Heritage Santa Gertrudis producers selling top quality females to the highest bidder.
The sale kicked off promptly at noon and the buyers responded with some of the best prices for Santa Gertrudis cattle, all sold in pens of 2,3, and 5. The sale averages are as follows:
31 bred Santa Gertrudis heifers $3680 37 open Santa Gertrudis heifers $2655 14 bred Star 5 Santa Gertrudis heifers $3200 31 open Star 5 Santa Gertrudis heifers $1970
The South Texas Heritage Sale consigners were Borchers Southern Y Cattle Co., Double G Farms, Double T Ranches, Hefte Ranches, JC Cattle Co., La Campana Ranch, John Martin Ranches, Maldonado Cattle Co., Red Doc Farms, Reese Ranch, San Jose Cattle Co., 777 Farms, Strait Ranches and Woman Hollerin Ranches. The Committee would like to extend a huge thank you to these fine people for their support and faith in the sale. We invite all to consign next year and with your support it will be bigger and better. The Sale festivities kicked off on Friday, November 21, 2014 with the cattle arriving and ready for viewing by 1:00 PM. Cattle folks from all over came to see the cattle, visit with old friends and make some preliminary selections of the cattle they were interested in. A South Texas Bar-B-Que followed as the Betancourt Cooking Team from Edinburg, Texas prepared sirloin fajitas and cilantro sausage provided by Chorizo De San Manuel. Mr. Pito Betancourt and his crew served the meal while Eric Garcia prepared and served his award winning Pan De Campo. The food was amazing. Sale day, November 22nd started off with a cowboy breakfast at 8:00 AM. We were pleased to see a fabulous turnout of people from near and far, there to view the cattle before the sale at noon that day. 113 head of excellent, functional Gert and Gert influence cattle were on display for potential buyers to choose from and mark on their catalogs. Mr. Leo Casas, one of the best auctioneers in the business, welcomed the crowd and thanked the consigners and buyers for supporting the sale. Mr. Larry Garza introduced Execu22 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
High selling lot was a heifer that calved at the sale, consigned by Double T Ranch. The pair sold for $8500. Thank you to Miss Renee Chapman for all your help in providing us with a beautiful venue for our sale and the Hot Gert Santa Gertrudis Jr. Show the next day. Thank you to all the committee members, Mrs. Kathryn Hefte Petty, Larry Garza, Adolfo Sanchez, Wade Ruddock, Felix Serna, Yancey Strait and K.T. Hefte.
AHC Adopts Rules for Livestock Industry at Commission Meeting AUSTIN , TX – The Texas Animal Health Commission (TAHC) held a regularly scheduled Commission meeting on September 16, 2014, at its headquarters in Austin. The following rules were adopted during the meeting and are now in effect: Chapter 38, Trichomoniasis, Testing/Herd Certification The commission adopted two newTrichomoniasis (Trich) testing requirements and two herd certification program requirements. • Testing Requirements : If a bull is sold and later found to be infected with Trich, other bull(s) from the infected bulls’ original herd of origin may be required to be tested if the bull was not exposed to female cattle after the sale, and prior to testing by the new owner. A second requirement passed states that if a bull is found to be infected with Trich on property not owned or managed by the original caretaker of the bull (a stray), other bull(s) from both the unit of origin and bull(s) found on the premises where the bull was last located must all be officially tested for Trichomoniasis. • Herd Management : The first amendment allows the commission to evaluate the effectiveness of a herd control plan and authorizes that the TAHC can choose to continue or disapprove the herd plan based on the progress or lack of progress made with the infected herd. A second amendment requires all herd owners enrolled in the Trich Herd Certification Program to have adequate perimeter fences to prevent the ingress or egress of cattle. Chapter 51, Entry Requirements, Cattle & Swine The commission added two exemptions to Trichomoniasis (Trich) testing requirements concerning the interstate movement of breeding bulls entering Texas. The commission also added an entry requirement for non- commercial swine entering Texas. • Cattle: The first testing requirement exemption is for Texas breeding bulls moving directly to an out-of- state facility that tests their gain and feed conversion for cattle (bull test stations). Such bulls do not need to be tested to return back to the Texas premises of origin as long as the bulls have been kept separate from female cattle while par-
ticipating in the feed trial. The second testing exemption is for breeding bulls that originate from a herd that is enrolled in a Trich certification program in another state that is substantially similar to the Texas Certified Trich Free Herd Program. • Swine: For non-commercial swine entering Texas for reasons other than immediate slaughter, the commission now requires accredited veterinarians to include a statement on certificates of veterinary inspection (i.e. health certificates) that the swine represented on the certificate have not originated from a premises known to be affected by Novel Swine Enteric Coronavirus Disease(s) (SECD), and have not been exposed to SECD within the last 30 days. Chapter 39, Scabies and Mange Mites The title and content of this chapter was modified to accurately identify that scabies and other contagious skin diseases identified in the chapter are caused by mange mites and to allow the use of new types of acceptable treatments for mange mites. Chapter 45, Reportable Diseases, Novel Swine Enteric Coronavirus Disease(s) The commission added Novel Swine Enteric Coronavirus Disease (SECD) to the list of reportable diseases. The following rules were proposed: Chapter 43, Tuberculosis, Movement Restriction Zone Based upon the recommendations of the 2014 “Bovine Tuberculosis Risk Assessment for El Paso and Hudspeth Counties,” the commission proposed amendments that would redefine the Movement Restriction Zone (MRZ) and specify that the El Paso and Hudspeth County MRZ restrictions are limited to bovine. The proposal would also remove the previous annual and bi-annual TB test requirements. Further, future TB testing of susceptible species in the MRZ would only be required if determined epidemiologically to be necessary by the commission.
facilities that are not licensed by the Texas Racing Commission. This requirement is intended to ensure that horses that compete at unsanctioned racetracks are tested negative prior to entry into the facility. Chapter 40, Chronic Wasting Disease, Movement Restriction Zone In 2012, the commission established two Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) zones (Containment and High Risk) in portions of El Paso, Hudspeth and Culberson counties in West Texas to protect against the spread of CWD. Because the two original zone movement requirements were identical when passed, the commission has now proposed to combine the two separate geographical zones into a single new zone defined as the “Containment Zone”. There is no change in zone requirements or boundaries, but simply a name change. The High Risk zone concept is still valid, and may be applicable for other locations in the future if necessary. Chapter 51, Entry Requirements, Swine To be consistent with USDA animal disease traceability and interstate movement requirements, the commission proposed changes to swine entry identification requirements to accept registration tattoos and ear notches as official identification methods. Chapter 57, Poultry, Laryngotracheitis Vaccine Virus For poultry entering Texas, the commission proposed an amendment to require accredited veterinarians to certify on the required health certificate that the poultry listed on it have not originated from an area that has had “active chicken embryo origin Laryngotracheitis vaccine virus” circulating within it in the last 30 days.
For more information, visit www.tahc.texas.gov or call 1-800-550-8242.
Chapter 49, Equine, Piroplasmosis Testing Racetrack Facilities The proposal would broaden the existing definition of a “racetrack facility” to include J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 1 5
23
Managing Soil Fertility with Low Commodity Prices
The 2015 growing season is already proving to be a challenging season. Commodity prices are significantly lower and input prices are static to higher. In these turbulent times, managing soil fertility becomes even more important. There are two schools of thought on the best way to navigate these times. One is to cut fertilizer costs across the board and hope to survive until commodity prices go back up.The second is to invest more in the crop hoping to make higher yields that can offset low commodity prices. Both options have risks, and growers are trapped in a place of choosing the lesser of two evils. In my mind, neither option sounds very good. Today there is technology and agronomic know how available that can provide growers with the positive benefits of both strategies. Soil fertility and nutrient interactions play the most important role in managing fertilizer inputs in today’s volatile en24 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
vironment. Texas has multiple soil types and fertility issues. Significant parts of the state have high pH, low pH, low phosphorus and potassium, high phosphorus and potassium, and high sodium. Each of these issues plays a significant role in fertility management and overall yield. There are two key ideas to understand when dealing with soil fertility management. One is that the yield ceiling is determined by the most limited soil nutrient. Most people understand that if nitrogen, phosphorus, or potassium is limited that yield will be limited. However zinc, sulfur, or iron deficiencies can cause just as many problems. The second is that issues in one fertility factor can significantly impact other fertility factors. Soil pH is only one soil fertility factor; however, pH affects availability of phosphorus, micronutrients, and indirectly potassium. Understanding these two key ideas allows growers to prioritize which soil fertility factors to address on their own farm. In a market where commodity prices are
low and input costs must be reduced, it makes much more sense to prioritize nutrient needs rather than to equally cut all nutrients. Technology can also help improve overall fertilizer efficiency. Utilizing precision soil sampling techniques (grid or zone sampling) can give an accurate picture of the most limited soil nutrient in each field. Utilizing precision soil sampling also enables a variable rate application of fertilizer. Variable rate application is a great tool to apply what you need where you need it, which can greatly improve overall fertilizer efficiency. However, many are hesitant about utilizing precision soil sampling because of the automatic association with variable rate application. This is problematic for growers that do not have access to variable rate applicators. The key to remember is that there is great value in knowing what the most limited soil nutrient factors are regardless of the ability to variable rate apply fertilizer. Maps generated from precision soil sampling are the best tool available to identify fertility problems and prioritize a fertilizer budget. There is no denying that 2015 will be full of challenges. Managing and adjusting a fertilizer program can greatly improve the odds of making a profit in a challenging year. Utilizing an accurate soil test is the first place to start. Precision soil sampling can accurately show within field variability or overall field averages. Both soil tests and precision soil sampling, with good agronomic support, will allow for prioritization of fertili-
zer inputs. Economics may dictate the overall fertilizer budget in 2015, but soil testing and mapping should be used to determine what fertilizer and what rate will be applied. Utilizing technology and agronomic know how gives the best opportunity to improve profit at lower costs. If you would like additional information or have questions about your farm’s fertility, please contact your local Helena representative.
Derek Emerine Southern Business Unit Agronomist Helena Chemical Company
Crop Insurance Changes for 2015 CLIPSO
N
J
anuary has always been a very busy time for the Rio Grande Valley Farmer. When you think about it, all the new changes and new decisions to make with crop insurance this year can seem very intimidating. Yes, the learning curve will be steep in a very short time period, but the results will be value added to farming operations across the RGV. W ritten
by :
CASEY
only). These programs will allow additional coverage over the top of producers’ normal crop insurance policies. Both of these two new programs are measured off of the county performance compared to the county expected yields. STAX is a revenue based only policy and is subsidized a 80% while SCO matches your underlying policy (YP Yield Protection or RP Revenue Protection) and is subsidized at 65% which makes both very affordable for the amount of protection. We see lots of opportunity for growers to manage risk effectively with these two new programs.
APH rule changes
Spring crops for 2015 crop year starts the beginning of a real shift in crop insurance. Additional coverage and endorsement options, new crop policies, and new rule changes that protect APH’s yields are all now available. Crop Insurance is no longer a one size fits all for producers. Crop insurance now allows Farmers the opportunity to dial in coverage and manage risk much more specifically and cost effectively than ever before. Now I’m not about explain in detail all the changes and bore everyone to death, but I will highlight some important facts and changes that producers should know about and take notice.
Another huge positive change is that producers will have the ability to omit disaster years from the Approved Yield calculation if the County yield was less than 50% of the expected county yield. While these rules are not yet final, there has been commitment from RMA to make this available for the 2015 spring crop year. This could be huge for growers especially who have suffered loss years during the worse drought on record over the last 5- 6 years. More to follow as it comes available.
Coverage Changes : IRR/NI and EU/EP
Sesame has been added to Cameron County for Cameron County Growers. Sesame has to have a contract in order to be insurable and also must be rotated by rule of the policy.
Producers now can write different levels of coverage for irrigated ground and non-irrigated ground. For Example Irrigated farmland can be written and 65% and Non-Irrigated land can be written at 75%. Producers are no longer required to write the same coverage for both practices like before. Producers can also choose Enterprise Units by county (EU the same as before) or Enterprise units by practice (EP All Irrigated land in one unit and All Non Irrigated in one unit) EP now becomes a more viable less risky option for the farmers who farm irrigated and nonirrigated land under the same entity.
SCO / STAX One of the biggest changes of the 2014 farm bill were the additions of SCO (for major crops) and STAX (for cotton
26 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
Sesame to Cameron County
One thing is for sure, there is a ton of new information 2014 Farm Bill that will affect every farmer. With these changes we at CROPGUARD GROUP know that farmers will need a better crop insurance agency in the future. CROPGUARD GROUP is committed to be that agency.
Call us….We Can Help!!
956-361-5550
www.cropguardgroup.com
W
hile the world of crop insurance is some thing of great importance for anybody in the agricultural industry, there is always some thing new you can learn and implement to either offset risk or stabilize your income. What we are going to focus on in this particular column is a form of crop insurance called “Revenue Protection Crop Insurance” that can aid you in reducing variability on what revenue you can expect for your crop. Revenue protection is exactly as it sounds in that it guarantees you a certain level of revenue, not just production.This type of insurance functions as a product of market prices and is used as a hedge against both declines in crop prices and yields. What should be of foremost note in this discussion is that not all crops are eligible for this type of insurance, which is in line with the fact that not all products are eligible for other styles of crop insurance as well. As with any insurance, you will be best served by asking your insurance agent about the particulars of your certain situation so you can find which products and strategies best fit your needs. In general, yield coverage for revenue protection is the same as for your typical yield protection insurance.The production portion of the revenue guarantee is based on an historic average of your actual yields which is typically referred to as your production history or your actual production history.Typically a scenario for revenue protection goes like this: Chicago Mercantile Exchange futures market prices and your production history are used to calculate your revenue coverage and guarantee. A harvest price is then determined by averaging the new crop futures prices for whatever crop you are hedging at the time.The final revenue guarantee is computed by multiplying the higher of either the projected price or the harvest market price by the production history yield for your farm, by whatever you have chosen your coverage level to be in terms of a percentage covered.Your actual revenue for insurance purposes is computed by multiplying your actual yield by the harvest price. You will receive an indemnity payment if your actual revenue falls below your revenue guarantee.The payment is equal to the difference between the two.
Kurt Schuster
To illustrate this concept we’re going to use the following example of corn futures taken directly from Iowa State University’s Extension and outreach office as they offer clear and concise examples of this concept. In this example the average December corn futures price during February we will use is $4.00.The actual production yield is 160 bushels per acre, and the coverage level then chosen is 75 percent.Thus, the revenue guarantee is $480 ($4.00 x 160 bu. x 75%) per acre. Remember that the revenue protection guarantee will increase if the futures price 28 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
increases from February to harvest. Say the December futures price declines to $3.20 at harvest. The actual yield is only 130 bushels.The estimated actual revenue of $416 is computed by multiplying the harvest price by the actual yield. Subtracting the estimated actual revenue from the revenue guarantee results in an indemnity payment of $64 per acre. Another scenario is if the futures price still declines to $2.50, lower than in the first example. However, the actual yield is now 160 bushels, equal to the actual production. Revenue is 160 bushels multiplied by the harvest price of $2.50, or $400 per acre. Subtracting the actual revenue from the revenue guarantee results in indemnity payments of $80. Note that because of the lower harvest prices an indemnity payment was made, even though the actual yield did not fall below projections. In our last example the futures price increases to $5.00 at harvest. Note that the revenue guarantee increases to $600 for revenue protection because of the higher harvest price.The actual yield is 110 bushels and the actual revenue is $550.The indemnity payment is $50 for revenue protection because of the increase in the revenue guarantee. It is important to note a few things about revenue protection insurance that are of benefit to purchasers.The premiums for revenue protection insurance are subsidized through the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, and the actual premium for a revenue protection policy is calculated using the projected price. If the harvest price is higher, the amount of insurance coverage increases but the premium does not change because the possibility of increased coverage has already been built into the premium structure. However, the harvest price legally cannot be 100% more than AgMag Columnist the price.This typically will never be the case, but in the case of our company and lime sales we did experience a swing from $20 to $100 per box price in limes in a season, so never say never.What also must be noted is that such insurance may vary wildly from company to region to crop. Specifics in units covered and other matters of calculation are something that must be investigated in whichever company you choose to insure your crops. Revenue protection insurance is a great tool that can be used to reduce the variability in your projected revenue while also reducing the liability of low yields or dragging markets. As this is a very technical subject we drew heavily on the extension agencies of Iowa State and Texas A&M University, and one of the first stops for any interested reader should be at these agencies for the wealth of knowledge in both this and other areas they have available.
Happy New Year from TDHA! Growing the next generation of hunters and wildlife ambassadors
texasdovehunters.com Your one stop for dove hunting in Texas: • Listings of Guides, Outfitters and Day Leases • Gun Dogs • Annual memberships • Sporting clay events • Youth programs • Environmental practices Join today and become a part of the newest and fastest growing wildlife associations in Texas! J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 1 5
29
FFA Events Sponsored by:
Saturday, January 10
Tuesday, March 31
Tuesday, May 19
COUGAR CLASSIC PROSPECT SHOW
RGV Ag Teachers Planning Meeting Red Gate
RGV Ag Teachers Planning Mtg @ Mr. Alaniz’s
Thursday & Friday, January 22-23
Wednesday, April 1
RGV FFA DISTRICT SHOW
State FFA Scholarship Apps due
Saturday, January 24
Wednesday, April 8
CITRUS FIESTA
Area X CDE’s
Monday - Sunday, March 2 - 8
Tuesday, April 28
STAR SHOW
RGV District FFA Check
March 12 - 22
Tuesday, May 5
RGVLS
RGV FFA District Banquet
30 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
4-H Events Sponsored by:
Saturday, January 10
Thursday, March 5
County Fashion Show
Photography Judging
Friday, February 13
Saturday, March 28
District 12 4-H Dairy Judging
District 12 Fashion Show
Thursday, February 19
April 1 - 5
District 12 Horse Judging
District 12 4-H Photography Contest
Thursday, February 26
Friday, April 10
4-H Photo Deadline
County 4-H Roundup
March 1 - April 7
Saturday, April 18
District 12 4-H Shooting Sports Postal League
District 12 4-H Livestock Judging Contest
Location TBA
in San Antonio
in San Antonio
Districtwide
Location TBA
in Falfurrias
Virtual
in Fredricksburg
J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 1 5
31
LSMCIC Round-Up
a Big Success! W ritten by :
“After 31 consecutive LSMCIC Country Cook-Offs, the Linn-San Manuel community hosted its first LSMCIC Round-Up at La Muneca Ranch on Saturday, October 25th. Over 525 guests were in attendance and were blessed with great weather. In keeping with a long-lasting community tradition, the event was dedicated to our L-SM Volunteer Fire Department Chief Elia Garza Vicencio for her 30 + years of loyal service and leadership. The Round-Up guests were treated to two hours of Mariachi Music by the Grammy nominated Los Arrieros donated by Sam Rodriguez, owner of RY Livestock from Rio Grande City. They were then served a delicious rib-eye dinner with all the trimmings prepared by Louie Flores and his team. The popular Pan de Cano prepared by Benny and James Cano was served as an appetizer.The food was served by the LSM 4-H Club and LSM Volunteer Fire Department Auxiliary Members. It was delivered to the tables in 17 minutes by officers of the Edinburg, Edinburg North and Economedes FFA Officer teams.” stated Sister Guerra, long time secretary-treasurer of the LSMCIC. “The traditional live auction followed with 40 unique items donated by friends of and Linn-San Manuel com-
32 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
CARLOS GUERRA
munity members. The top selling lot was donated by McAllen Ranch and was a quail hunt for four that sold for $4,000 to the volume buyers Tillmin & Carrie Beth Welch. The ten lots made and donated by the Brewster School teachers, students and parents were a big hit averaging $1,080 on eleven lots. Charlie Wilson donated his auctioneer services and helped to raise $61,275 in the live auction. The bull that is donated every year by La Muneca Cattle Co. will sell on November 22-25 at LMC Giving THANKS Online Sale as one of 25 lots donated by LMC and friends where 100% of the money raised will be donated to several charities. You can sign up at www. cattleinmotion.com. The exciting live auction was followed by C&W Music played by the popular Scott Randolph & his White Lightning band who kept the dance floor full until 1 AM. At this time Louie pulled out his famous menudo and barbacoa breakfast for all to enjoy. Many good folks have already committed to tables for next year’s Round-Up. The LSMCIC Round-Up benefits St. Anne’s Catholic Church, the L-SM Scholarship Endowment Fund, the L-SM Volunteer Fire Department,
Brewster School PTO, the L-SM 4-H Club, Brewster School Little League and Edinburg FFA students. Our community wishes to thank all of our volunteers, sponsors, donors, bidders and buyers in helping to make our first LSMCIC Round Up a big success. A Big Hearty Thanks also goes out to the Edinburg Volunteer Fire Department and Genco for sharing their equipment. “ stated Carlos X. Guerra, LSMCIC President. For more info, please contact Carlos at lamunecacattle@aol.com.
Could this be the future of
?
FARMING W ritten by : A ndrew S . M c A rdle & J ohn J ifon
W
ithin the last decade or so, a relatively old concept of farming has become more and more popular as a new way of growing vegetables sustainably. This concept actu ally dates back to the Aztecs and the ancient Egyptians. But what makes this concept so unique is that the plants are grown in a completely soilless environment, and it is not called hydroponics. This method of farming is known as aquaponics. In aquaponics the plant production component (hydroponic sub-system) is coupled with a recirculating aquaculture system (RAS). With this integration of the two production systems, a mutually beneficial ecosystem is formed. Aquaponic systems are typically fully enclosed, recirculating systems that have little or no waste water discharge.
34 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
Essentially how this works is that large tanks containing water are used to rear fish; all the waste residue derived from fish then flows out to the hydroponic component. The hydroponic portion refers to the location in which plants are grown in a soilless environment. Plants take up the nutrients directly from this constant source of water.The water then flows out of the hydroponic grow beds to a tank that houses a water pump which recirculates the water back to the fish.This cycle continues 24/7. The plants filter the water for the fish, reducing the need for expensive filtration devices, and the fish provide the fertilizers for the plants, removing the need for hydroponic fertilizers. Aquaponic systems can vary in size from very small tabletop units suitable for an apartment to very large commercial systems that can feed a city. With this easy
adaptation to new environments and the fact that it is a closed-loop-recirculating system these systems can be built and operated anywhere in the world. A commercial operation can be established within a greenhouse on the outskirts of a city or it can easily be incorporated into a warehouse within city limits. The fact that an aquaponic system can be operated fully indoors allows for these systems to be fully operational 365 days a year, meaning we not only can cut distribution costs immensely but can now have the freshest produce grown within your city even if you’re in the center of a blizzard or in the middle of a drought. The number of advantages gained with aquaponics is practically limitless, so here are just a few: With aquaponics you are producing two types of nutritious foods, vegetables and fish. No soil is utilized in these systems meaning, no more weeding is necessary and no soil-borne diseases to worry about. The plants can grow very quickly, one variety of mini romaine at the Texas A&M AgriLife Research and Extension Center located in Weslaco, Texas, was grown in 34 days from seed to harvest. This is 20% faster growth than if it were grown in the soil. One of the biggest advantages attained with aquaponics is the massive savings in water usage. Approximately 95% less water is used to grow the same crops in an aquaponic system vs. in the soil. Of course with advantages come disadvantages. It can be difficult to actually come up with some but there can be a few. One important thing to remember with aquaponics is that you are not just growing vegetables; you’re growing fish and bacteria as well.The fish are crucial since the feed that you provide them is essentially your new fertilizer. So a constant feed source that is nutritionally complete must be maintained. It is important to also remember and be careful when or if you are applying pesticides or any chemically-derived mixtures as they could be very toxic to the fish. And the bacteria are essentially what hold the entire system together. Without these beneficial bacteria, the system will fail. These bacteria work by keeping the ammonia that is produced from the fish from reaching toxic levels, and at the same time also producing nitrate as the end product. This nitrate is one of the primary macronutrients that plants require for vegetative growth. It should be obvious at this point that, by building an aquaponic system, you are basically creating an ecosystem that has many components that collectively contribute in keeping everything running smoothly. So care must be taken in maintaining a healthy environment for all the three players: fish, vegetables, and bacteria. Andrew McArdle, a Research Associate with Texas A&M AgriLife Research, started out as a graduate student with
Texas A&M University – Corpus Christi.With determination, hard work and the help from his graduate committee he managed to bring aquaponics to the Rio Grande Valley. He designed, built, and is currently still operating a 1,500 sq.ft. aquaponic production system capable of producing 1,500 lbs of tilapia (finfish) and 15,000 heads of lettuce per year. This system is currently being operated for demonstration and research purposes. On November 7th an Aquaponic Seminar was held to introduce the topic of growing aquaponically to the Rio Grande Valley. An audience of nearly 100 attendees learned about the inner workings of an aquaponics operation with presentations ranging from the science behind a system to fish & plant selection with the final speaker talking of his experience with starting an actual commercial operation. The session was concluded with a walk-through of the aquaponic research system that is on-site at the Texas A&M AgriLife Research and Extension Center located in Weslaco, Texas. With such a success-
ful event being held, more seminars are bound to follow in the near future.
If you would like more information about aquaponics feel free to contact Andrew McArdle at :
andrew.s.mcardle@gmail.com J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 1 5
35
Secretary of State Nandita Berry Visits
Rios Boots
We are proud to announce that the
76th Annual Rio Grande Valley Livestock Show will take place March 13-22, 2015. Listed below are this year’s entry deadlines as well as the entry fees.
ENTRY DEADLINE THURSDAY, JANUARY 15, 2015 Market Steers (one per exhibitor) $30.00 per head Market Hogs (one per exhibitor) $20.00 per head Market Lambs (one per exhibitor) $20.00 per head Market Goats (one per exhibitor) $20.00 per head Market Rabbits (one pen of 3 per exhibitor) $10.00 per pen Market Poultry (one pen of 3 per exhibitor) $10.00 per pen Horticulture (one per exhibitor) $10.00 per entry Jr. Breeding Rabbits $10.00 per head Photography (limit of 3 per exhibitor) $10.00 per entry
ENTRY DEADLINE FRIDAY, JANUARY 30, 2015 All Valley Cotton Style Show $10.00 per entry Breeding Cattle (Open Show) $30.00 per head Breeding Cattle (Group classes) $300.00 per entry *Breeding Cattle (Exhibit Only) $50.00 per head The Rio Grande Valley Livestock Show will only accept entries FFA - 4-H Shop Project $20.00 per exhibitor through our on-line program. Jr. Breeding Gilts $20.00 per head Entries may be submitted any Jr. Breeding Goats $20.00 per head time after November 3rd but Jr. Breeding Sheep $20.00 per head must be received in the Jr. Beef Heifers $30.00 per head Livestock Show Office by deadline. Go to: Jr. Commercial Female $30.00 per head Open Boer Goat $30.00 per head http://valley.fairmanager.com Open Commercial Heifer $30.00 per head Open Commercial & Purebred Female Pen Show $100.00 per entry
ENTRY DEADLINE FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2015 Horse Show (Youth/Open)
$10.00 per class
W ritten by : L U I S S A L DA N A
T
he crisp voice of the auctioneer cuts through the crowd’s applause , “ Smokin ’
on the Rio buys again! ”
Throughout the afternoon auction, kids from across the Rio Grande Valley parade across the auction block, holding up their ribbons and banners proudly. More impressive are the smiles of anticipation at the reward they hope to reap from a season of feeding , grooming , exercising , and caring for the livestock projects they diligently raised as part of their 4-H and FFA involvement. These projects help teach them some very important lessons about responsibility, leadership, life skills, and service to their community. There certainly is smoke in the air, but not the kind that you think, and everyone knows that where there’s smoke there’s fire. A group of men and women at the back of the buyer’s den in their matching shirts stand proudly waiving their buyer’s number, and the auctioneer says again, “Smokin’ on the Rio buys again!” At the end of the afternoon, after the last kid gets their opportunity, the auctioneer makes one last announcement , “and for the 7th year in a row, Smokin’ on the Rio is awarded our Volume Buyer Award.” 40 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
When the dust settles and the smoke clears, the proud group swells with pride because they know that all their hard work has resulted in helping 4-H and FFA kids by awarding them over $90,000 over the last three hours. The distinct smell of burning mesquite and oak permeated every square foot of the showgrounds in Mercedes. However, the smell was laced with incredible hints of sizzling ribs, fajitas, chicken, and brisket. Over 150 cooking teams from across the state came to Texas’ 3rd largest barbecue cook-off, Smokin’ on the Rio , held at the Rio Grande Valley Livestock Showgrounds in Mercedes. From its humble beginnings over twelve years ago with only 17 teams entered, it grew beyond its founders dreams to be not only the largest BBQ cook-off in the Rio Grande Valley but the largest south of San Antonio. Men and women traveled from across the state, vying for the cash and awards in each of the categories, especially the overall championship. But if you asked them, it was all about the bragging rights for many of these committed grillers. Walk through the event that is held the last Friday and Saturday of February and you will see some real masters at
work.The 2014 event brought in approximately 10,000 visitors from across the valley, many of our very own “summer northerners.” Oh yes, don’t forget the kids! There are kiddie rides and other fun things to do even for the smallest of tots. They can even try their hand at a little grilling in the Kids-Q contest. Throughout the two-day event, visitors can hear music across the grounds.The steering committee and volunteers host this annual event for the opportunity to help 4-H and FFA members at the RGV Livestock Show. All the proceeds that are collected at this event are all donated back to these deserving youth. Be part of this great opportunity to have fun and help build support for 4-H and FFA members across the RGV and support Texas agriculture. The old commercial, “Where’s the beef?” Well there is no question... beef, pork, and chicken are at Smokin’ on the Rio. The 2015 Smokin’ on the Rio event will be held on February 27-28, 2015 with carne guisada and pan de campo cooking events on Friday. Saturday events include pork spareribs, brisket, chicken, and fajita cooking contests. Throughout the event will be live music, food, beverages, and fun for everyone. For more information about this event, visit their website at www.smokinontherio.com or look them up on Facebook.
FREEDOM
Ride
Important upcoming dates for Ag Producers: Beltwide Cotton Conference, San Antonio - Jan 5-7 National Sorghum Producers Farm Bill Meeting , Rio Farms - Jan 12 RGV Cotton &Grain PrePlant Conference ,
Mercedes - Jan 14
CEU Workshop (5 hours),
Weslaco - Jan 21
Pesticide License Training , San Benito - Feb 5 CEU Workshop (5 hours),
Weslaco - Feb 18
Rio Grande Valley Livestock Show, Mercedes - Mar 13-22 Contact the County Extension Office for details on any of these events
Brad Cowan County Extension Agent - Agriculture Hidalgo County Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service 410 North 13th Avenue, Edinburg, TX 78541 b-cowan@tamu.edu http://hidalgo.agrilife.org o) 956-383-1026, m) 956-330-3208
November 20, 2013 the first Freedom Ride took place and 13 dogs left the Valley, headed to warm, loving foster homes in Illinois. For some of those dogs they had never been in a home yet alone had much human contact. Freedom Ride sent many unwanted dogs to Second City Canine Rescue in Chicago, and now they send dogs to Rescue Warriors in Elgin, IL. All are great groups with compassionate, caring people helping them get unwanted dogs here in the Valley into a loving home. Freedom Ride receives a small transportation fee from Illinois to help with costs. However, donations are welcome to help these dogs find a stable safe home. To date they have transported 243 dogs to Illinois and are proud to see updates of the dogs when they are brought to their forever family, or graduate obedience class. Freedom Ride works to educate the Valley on proper health and care for animals and reminds you to spay and neuter your pet. If you are interested in helping this great cause you can
email Jane at jander66@yahoo.com J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 1 5
41
a Farm Bureau publication
and increase farmer and rancher involvement.” Dave Edmiston of McCulloch County was elected vice president and Robert Gordon of Dallam County was elected secretary-treasurer. More than 1,100 farmers and ranchers from across the state convened Dec. 6-8 at the American Bank Center in Corpus Christi for the organization’s 81st annual meeting. Brackish water, property rights and fertilizer regulations topped the list of concerns during the policy session. “Delegates voted to protect landowners’ rights by including brackish water as part of their right to capture a fair share of groundwater beneath their property,” Boening said. “We believe landowners own the groundwater in place beneath their land and that includes brackish water.”
Russell Boening (left)–a South Texas dairyman, farmer and rancher– was elected the 10th president of Texas Farm Bureau. Past President Kenneth Dierschke (right) congratulates him.
Boening elected president, leads organization CORPUS CHRISTI , Texas — A South Texas dairyman, farmer and rancher was elected president of Texas Farm Bureau (TFB), the state’s largest farm and ranch organization. Russell Boening of Poth is the 10th president of TFB, which represents more than 513,000 member families. He grows cotton, corn, grain sorghum, watermelons and wheat, as well as manages a beef cattle operation and a 450 - cow dairy with his brother and father. It was the first change in leadership in 12 years, as Kenneth Dierschke retired from the position. “It’s an honor to lead the greatest agricultural organization,” Boening said. “Agriculture and Farm Bureau have been my life. I hope to help Texas Farm Bureau stay on the right track 42 Ag Mag
THEAGMAG.ORG
Due to the ongoing Red River boundary dispute, additional emphasis was placed on protecting property rights. Boening noted farmers and ranchers who have purchased titles and paid taxes on land should have priority standing in ownership disputes between parties, including state or federal governments. Policy to improve ammonium nitrate storage regulations was passed. “Ammonium nitrate is an important agricultural production tool,” Boening said. “Storage requirements are essential, but the fertilizer must remain affordable and accessible to farmers and ranchers.”
Delegates also voted to support the national beef checkoff established under the Beef Promotion and Research Act of 1985. They opposed the creation of a checkoff program under the Commodity Promotion, Research and Informational Act of 1996 as proposed by the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack. In other action, two new state directors were elected. Zachary Yanta of Runge in Karnes County is the new District 12 director. President of the Karnes County Farm Bureau,Yanta is a fourth-generation farmer and rancher and owns a land improvement business with his son. He and his wife, Linda, also have a daughter and one grandson. Val Stephens, a cotton farmer from Lamesa, is the new District 6 director. He was the president of Dawson County Farm Bureau and a member of the TFB Cotton Advisory Committee. He and his wife, Patricia, have two sons, one daughter and two grandchildren.