| The first reason is that because of continuous rains in the spring, 
			beans and corn were planted very late, some as late as May 15 
			(significant because that was the plant date for corn back when it 
			was grandpa's farm). Late planting 
			pushes back the harvest date. The second reason that such large 
			contingents of the crops are still in the field is that the corn 
			crop is coming in very wet, with harvested moisture above 20, and 
			producers are taking this extra bit of time before the first major 
			frost to dry the corn down in the field. Corn with lower moisture 
			levels presented at the elevator means the producer will pay less 
			for expensive drying processes. 
			 And the third reason the crops are still in the field is that the 
			prices for corn and beans right now are lower than desired, and 
			lower than they have historically been for the last couple of years, 
			and the size of the bean crop is variably less than hoped for. Since 
			prices are low and the size of each bean is less than desired, why 
			hurry to get it to market. The corn crop across the nation is good to excellent, translating 
			into lower prices for all the producers. Together with higher input 
			prices, this means that the producer will have a much lower net 
			profit per acre since 2007. Added costs at the point of sale, such 
			as higher drying costs and the cost of testing for quality issues 
			such as aflatoxin, further erode the profit per acre (see the 
			introduction by John Fulton). The only hedge farmers have against lower immediate prices at 
			harvest is to either put a portion of their crop in on-farm storage 
			at an additional expense, or put a portion into storage at the 
			elevator -- again, an added expense. 2011 was the great change year for the price of corn. The average 
			sale price for corn prior to 2011 fell short of the $4 mark, with 
			2010 averaging $3.83. The average price in 2011 jumped to $6.01 
			nationally, and higher regionally, an increase of almost 64 percent. 
			Perhaps this jump in prices was due to the optimism of increasing 
			local markets for corn with the expansion of ethanol production and 
			the federal stimulus for ethanol production. This jump in prices 
			continued in 2012 to an average of $6.67 due to the drought-related 
			shortfall of the Midwestern crop.  Then the expected glut of corn in 2013 and the failed expansion 
			of local markets pushed average pricing back down below the 2011 
			mark. Any increase in cost and decrease in price shrinks the on-farm 
			profit and the amount of money available in farming regions for 
			ag-related products. One of the possible dilemmas for producers is related to the 
			development of drought-tolerant corn. Drought-tolerant corn is the 
			result of selecting varieties of seed that showed better 
			characteristics of performance, particularly valuable during drought 
			conditions.  Drought conditions in both 2012 and 2013 should have dried corn 
			down to lower moisture levels by the expected harvest dates, but in 
			both years, producers found that their test harvests brought in corn 
			with moisture levels much higher than expected.  This year's initial spot tests in the third week in September 
			brought in corn testing at 23 percent, a level that was rejected at 
			some elevators, causing the corn harvest to be pushed back.  Since the killer frost has not yet hit in earnest in Logan 
			County, producers put the corn harvest on hold to allow for further 
			drying and instead began to harvest beans. The soybean crop was 
			variable since the rains crucial to bean production during the last 
			two weeks of production were almost nonexistent. Beans began to dry 
			earlier than expected in the fields, and the size of the crop was 
			less than hoped for in many areas. 
			[to top of second column] | 
 
			 Corn harvested three weeks later, in the middle of October, 
			showed that the crop had dried down only about 2 percent, to 21. 
			Killer frosts continue to be delayed (a killer frost prevents the 
			further drying of corn in the fields because the tissues in the corn 
			plant for moving moisture are damaged or destroyed), and strips of 
			corn in the fields continue to stay green. A possible explanation for this apparent failure to dry in the 
			fields is that the very same characteristics that make 
			drought-tolerant corn excellent during drought years also cause the 
			plant and, more important, the kernels to hold on to moisture and 
			dry more slowly. The result is added cost to dry the harvested corn. Altogether, higher input costs and lower sale prices translate to 
			lower profits per acre for the producer.  A contingent of Logan County farmers got together in 2005 in an 
			attempt to increase the local market for corn with the development 
			of an ethanol plant in the county. A local ethanol production 
			facility would give local producers another outlet for their corn 
			crop and would likely increase the profit margin for participating 
			farmers. This valiant effort to increase profits came to a 
			screeching halt late in 2011, mostly due to the protests by Logan 
			County residents who resisted locating the ethanol plant in their 
			"backyards," followed by the shrinking federal ethanol subsidy, 
			making the success of the ethanol production facility doubtful. This failure to locate a local competing outlet for the corn crop 
			left Logan County producers at the mercy of the Chicago market and 
			large-scale buyers, ADM and Cargill. Input costs are likely to continue to climb as new challenges are 
			presented to producers. Production will follow the weather and 
			climate trends, sometimes making Logan County producers the winners 
			in the competition to grow a larger-than-usual crop when producers 
			in other regions fall below their norm, and sometimes making Logan 
			County producers the losers in the production competition. Costs at 
			the point of sale will likely continue to rise as new legislation 
			calls for more testing for safety and further restricts the sale of 
			damaged corn. These and other challenges have made the selling price and costs 
			to market a game changer. Perhaps the most adequate answer is another attempt to develop 
			more diverse and local markets for corn and beans, or diversify the 
			crop with specialty food crops to local markets.  Either way, being a producer today is a very challenging job. 
              
[By JIM YOUNGQUIST]
 |