FSA District Director will be in Carlsbad week of 4 May to 8 May.

All producers who suffered losses due to flooding in 2014 and have listed their farm/ranch on the Emergency Disaster list with Farm Service Agency and have not been contacted by FSA need to call in. Oscar of the Farm Service Agency will be in the Carlsbad Office to help with the paper work May 4, to May 8. If you have not been contacted or made and appointment call Stacy at the FSA office. Stacie Chavez Program Technician FSA Carlsbad- NM 575-887-3506 Ext 2 FAX 877-450-0860

Udall Water and Energy Conservation Bill to Receive Committee Hearing

Udall Water and Energy Conservation Bill to Receive Committee Hearing The Smart Energy and Water Efficiency Act helps save money, water and energy WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Tom Udall announced that legislation he has introduced to promote water and energy conservation will receive a hearing in the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources tomorrow, Thursday April 30 at 10 a.m. ET. Udall’s Smart Energy and Water Efficiency Act would fund smart water system pilot projects to help develop innovative strategies to manage water use and increase efficiency. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reports there are 880,000 miles of drinking water pipes in the United States, many of which are decades old and prone to leaks. An estimated 2.1 trillion gallons of treated clean drinking water are lost to leaks each year, which also wastes the energy used to treat and pump those lost water volumes. Udall’s bill would encourage innovative solutions to this problem by supporting smart water system pilot projects in three to five cities across the country. Communities would compete for grant funding to develop demonstration projects and to create a "smart-grid" for water — detecting leaks as soon as they happen, or even before they happen — to save both water and the energy needed to provide and clean it. The pilots would serve as models for other communities to replicate and build on. “Westerners are all too familiar with the impact of limited water resources on our way of life and our economy, but few of us realize how much clean water we lose because of leaks and other inefficiencies, and the amount of energy wasted in the process,” Udall said. “Leaks cost us more than two trillion gallons of clean drinking water each year — every drop really does count. Plugging these holes will take innovation and collaboration, and that’s what I’m encouraging with this bill. Upgrading our water infrastructure will help New Mexico communities make the most of every drop and every kilowatt.” The bill is based on recommendations made during the water conference Udall co-hosted with New Mexico State University in Las Cruces in 2012. Udall brought together farmers, industry, communities and individuals to talk about New Mexico's shared water needs. Afterward, he issued a report containing 40 proposed actions developed from the conference and related discussions. Udall has worked to advance the recommendations in Congress by introducing water efficiency legislation and fighting for funding for New Mexico as a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. The Smart Energy and Water Efficiency Act is endorsed by a number of organizations that promote water efficiency and sustainability, including Alliance for Water Efficiency, American Rivers, American Standard, Amy Vickers & Associates Inc., Cahaba River Society, Center for Water-Efficient Landscaping, Ecoblue, Econics, Falcon Waterfree Technologies, Global Water Policy Project, IAPMO, Kohler Co., KWC America, Marin Municipal Water District, National Association of Water Companies, Neponset River Watershed Association, New York City Environmental Protection, the City of Round Rock, Texas Water Foundation, Toto USA, WasteWater Education, Water Demand Management, Waterless Co., Western Resource Advocates, and Woodcock & Associates Inc.

Kitichen Creations for Dibetic cooking

This month’s article is within the attached Department of Extension Family and Consumer Sciences Quarterly Newsletter. It identifies several evidence-based programs for people with diabetes that are available free of charge in our state. There are only a two more cooking schools starting before we break for the summer. The cooking school in Gallup started last week, but new participants are welcome to attend the second session tonight. Please refer your clients with diabetes to these free classes. Pre-registration is required. County City Dates Registration # Bernalillo Albuquerque May 4, 8, 15, 18 (Spanish) 505-241-5172 Eddy Carlsbad May 4, 6, 11, 13 575-887-6595 McKinley Gallup Apr 20, 27, May 4, 11 505-863-3432 Thank you! Cassandra Vanderpool, MS, RDN, LD Extension Diabetes Coordinator New Mexico State University Cooperative Extension Service 5404 La Terra Bella Rd. NW Albuquerque, NM 87114 Phone: 575-202-5065 The mission of the Cooperative Extension Service is to provide the people of New Mexico with practical, research-based knowledge and programs to improve their quality of life. The base programs of the Cooperative Extension Service are agriculture and natural resources

MENTAL HEALTH FIRST AID CPR TO COMMUNITY SAFETY

One in five adults in the United State will suffer from a mental illness this year. Mental health disorders are more common than heart disease and cancer combined. You are more likely to see or be with someone having a panic attack than you to see someone having a heart attack. Yet most of us lack the knowledge and skills to appropriately respond. This class is intended for a variety of professions such as law enforcement, human resources persons, educators, faith communities, friends and family of individual with a mental illness or addiction or just about anybody who work with people as a supervisor of employer. Everyone can benefit form this training. Mental health first aid is based on the goals of traditional first aid: to create an environment where people know how to help someone in emergency situations. It is not intended to make you a mental health professional. This is an eight hour course that will be taught a half a day one day and a half a day the next. The next class will be offered from 1 to 5 pm on April 30 and from 9 am to 1 pm on May 1, and participants must attend both sessions. They will be held in the large meeting room of the Eddy County Extension Office 1304 West Stevens in Carlsbad NM. There is limited seating so you must register by calling 575-887-6595. If you are in need of special assistance due to a disability in order to participate please tell us when you register for this class. Eddy County Extension Service, New Mexico State University is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer and educator. All programs are available to everyone regardless of race, color, religion, sex, age, handicap, or national origin. New Mexico State University, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the Eddy County Government Cooperating.

Know your equipment costs to make educated choices about ownership

Owning farm equipment provides pride, convenience and even tax write-offs. It also costs more. “Equipment cost is the second-largest line item expense for most grain producers next to land,” says Chris Barron, Top Producer columnist and Iowa farmer. Several years of high crop profits resulted in new paint or machinery upgrades for many farmers. Now, some farmers have more equipment than they need. Underusing machinery minimizes return on investment, says Ron LeMay, chairman and CEO of FarmLink. The average annual equipment utilization rates are: Combine: 7% Planter: 10% Sprayer: 15% Tractor: 17% Factories view equipment as a necessary cost to manufacture high-quality products, Barron notes. “The goal is to produce as much as possible with a given machine, thereby lowering the cost of production,” he says. “If a machine costs $100,000 and operates 50% of the time, their cost has the potential to improve by 50%.” Farmers should look at their machinery fleet the same way. Barron suggests asking: What percentage of the time do your machines operate in-season? How much more could your equipment do operating 22 to 24 hours a day? “You might significantly lower per-acre equipment cost by reviewing performance and asking basic questions,” he says. With tighter profit margins, it’s important to “right size” equipment to acreage. “If you have excess machinery, sell it,” says Moe Russell, Farm Journal columnist and president of Russell Consulting Group. Be sure to consult your accountant about any tax implications. “If you took Section 179 depreciation, you will have to recapture that depreciation,” he says. Instead of owning farm machinery outright, consider custom hiring work, leasing or jointly owning equipment. The decision to lease or custom hire should be backed by financial calculations, Russell advises. After you determine your current machinery costs (see “How to Calculate Your Machinery Costs” below), then you can accurately weigh all of your machinery ownership options. “We’re seeing a lot more leasing, particularly of combines, because you transfer that fixed cost to a variable cost, which reduces risk,” Russell says. He’s also a fan of custom hiring some tasks. “In a lot of cases, you can get custom work done cheaper than if you own the equipment,” he adds. How to Calculate Your Machinery Costs Many farmers don’t constantly track their machinery costs, says Moe Russell, Farm Journal columnist and president of Russell Consulting Group. As a result, he sees per-acre machinery costs from $44 to $400. To calculate your annual machinery cost per acre, Chris Barron, Top Producer columnist and Iowa farmer, provides an easy formula (see below). Once you’ve determined that figure, take it a step further and factor in your fuel, labor, GPS subscriptions, etc. 1. Add up your total equipment value. Ensure your numbers accurately represent each machine. Ask your local equipment dealer to review your market value estimates. 2. Tally your total acres of operation (include all of the acres you farm plus any custom work). 3. Include a standard annual ownership cost. The general standard is 25% of your total machine value. This 25% is comprised of 10% interest or opportunity cost, 10% depreciation and 5% repairs. (If you have older machinery, your repairs might be higher, but depreciation would be lower.) For example, a farmer has 1,000 acres and a total machinery value of $450,000. Plug those numbers into this equation: (Total Equipment Value) / (Total Acres Farmed) = _______x (Annual Ownership %) = Annual Machinery Cost Per Acre $450,000/1,000 = $450.00 x 0.25 = $112.50

COW/CALF CORNER

COW/CALF CORNER The Newsletter From the Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service April 27, 2015 May cattle market roundup Derrell S. Peel, Oklahoma State University Extension Livestock Marketing Specialist It’s nearly May and the April showers continue in the southern plains bringing May forage. For the first time in a long time parts of western Oklahoma are experiencing flash flooding. Not only are we enjoying more rain than in many months, but the cumulative effect of continued rains, heavy in some locations, will provide better soil moisture penetration and surface water replenishment than the same moisture total in sporadic rains. The April Cattle on Feed report pegs March feedlot placements fractionally above year ago levels, higher than expected. Placement consisted of a large increase in placements over 800 pounds with reduced placements for all weights under 800 pounds. March marketings were 98 percent of year earlier totals with one extra business day this year. The April 1 on-feed total was equal to the same time last year. Feedlot placements were up in Kansas, Iowa and Nebraska but down in Colorado, Oklahoma and Texas. Nebraska had the largest state cattle on feed total for April 1; exceeding Texas for the third month in a row. Nebraska briefly exceeded the Texas total last year on May 1 for the first time in the current cattle on feed data series back to 1992. One third of the way through 2015, total cattle slaughter for the year to date is down 7.5 percent and beef production is down 5.3 percent. Total steer and heifer slaughter so far this year is down 7.3 percent, with heifer slaughter leading the decrease, down 8.2 percent. Total cow slaughter for the year to date is down 7.2 percent, with dairy cow slaughter up 2.1 percent and beef cow slaughter down 17.5 percent. Reduced heifer and beef cow slaughter indicate that herd expansion is continuing and perhaps accelerating in 2015. The April 1 inventory of heifers on feed was the lowest quarterly heifer on feed total since October, 1996; near the end of the last complete cyclical expansion in the U.S. beef cattle industry. Improving moisture conditions in Texas and Oklahoma increase the likelihood that herd expansion plans in those areas will continue. On January 1, 2015, the combined beef replacement heifer inventories in Texas and Oklahoma accounted for 58 percent of the year over year national increase in beef replacements, which was up 4 percent. Oklahoma State University, in compliance with Title VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Executive Order 11246 as amended, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and other federal laws and regulations, does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, religion, disability, or status as a veteran in any of its policies, practices or procedures. This includes but is not limited to admissions, employment, financial aid, and educational services. References within this publication to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, service mark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not constitute or imply endorsement by Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service.

Eddy County Home Economic Agent postion re-opened

If you know anyone who might be interested tell them about this position. Conduct Home Economic programming in the areas of nutrition, family and health. •Collaborate with community organizations and agencies to help further Extension home economic programs. •Recruit, train and support volunteer adult and youth leaders. •Team with other Extension Agents to plan and implement total Extension programs. •Maintain a favorable public image and gain acceptance for self, Extension and New Mexico State University among the county citizens. •Administratively responsible to the County Program Director and through him/her to the Eastern District Director, •Provide timely reports as required. https://jobs.nmsu.edu/postings/21830

Webinar 1 - Farm Bureau Patriot Mentor Program

Webinar 1 - Farm Bureau Patriot Mentor Program Wednesday, April 29 3:00 – 3:30 pm EST Farm Bureau is starting a pilot mentorship program this year called the Patriot Mentor Program to help military veterans transition into agriculture. Military veterans will be paired with more established Farm Bureau mentors in their area to meet regularly for farm visits. Join us and learn more about this national mentorship pilot program and how your state can get involved. The webinar will include a 15 minute presentation followed by a Q&A period. To connect to the webinar: 1. Access the audio through your telephone Dial-In Number: 800-768-2983 Access Code: 3688703 2. Access the visual presentation on your computer Click on the following link to register and join the conference: https://cc.callinfo.com/r/1vuqrb1tm20uc&eom Participants will be placed on “hold” until the presenter initiates the meeting. ________________________________________

Mrs. Stewart Roses

This is an odd title for my column, and this article is a little different but last month April 27-28 was Holocaust Remembrance Day. It surprised me how many people forgot. I was watching a program on PBS this past weekend about an Army clerk typist who typed the transcripts for the trials a Nurnberg. Also how important it was to him to tell other of the Holocaust. I was taken back to when I was a child on the road to becoming a man. There was an elderly couple who lived down the road from where I was raised. Mrs. Stewart who was not very tall, and seem old to me but she was about my age now. She was always puttering about her rose garden. Each plant had a name, and we kids thought she was a little strange because she talked to her roses as she puttered often calling them by name. When I was in sixth grade, Mr. Stewart passed away while my dad gave him CPR. I was instructed to go and mow Mrs. Stewart’s lawn after that and to accept whatever she paid me graciously. I mowed a number of lawns for pocket money and at that time received $2.00 for front or back, $4.00 for both but most people gave me $5.00. When I had finished mowing, trimming and edging, Mrs. Stewart pulled out her little leather coin purse that twisted to close and carefully pulled out a dime and laid it in my hand. I hate to admit this but I thought it was a joke. But I did as I was told and accepted it and thought I would never mow her lawn again not for a dime. I told my dad that too. My dad told me to go and mow her lawn each week and so I did. There is more to this part then I can talk about here and I will write the rest of the story down sometime. I caught a lot of guff from friends for working so hard and for only a dime. The lawn mower we had did not run on gas, it ran on muscle and you had to push it. I also did whatever odd jobs for her and no matter what the job was or how long it took the pay was the same. Mrs. Stewart was teaching me how to prune her precious roses when a thorn grabbed her shirt sleeve and pulled it up, she quickly push it back down as if embarrassed but I saw the numbers tattooed on the inside of her arm just below the elbow. It was in the spring and at school we had learned about the Holocaust on Holocaust Remembrance Day and saw the photo of such numbers, and I knew she was a survivor. She paid me the dime that day, and I went home, but instead of squandering that dime on gum with a baseball card I put it in a jar. My son now knows why those baseball cards I gave him were so important to me. I asked my dad about the tattoo and he took the time to tell me a little of Mrs. Stewart’s story but not a lot more in general. I cried that night, not because she and endured such a place, but because I had been so insensitive to that dime. I had made fun of the dime with my friends as well, I never did again. I also made fun of her talking to the roses but I realized that night the names given to each plant were that of friends and family who were lost in the camps. That is why each one was so special to her, and the dime was now worth more than the $10 that one man gave for doing his large lawn. My dad had allowed me to find my understanding in my own journey and it was far more than he could have told me. I never spent another one of her dimes, I kept them and that was what made my first college tuition payment all except for one dime that was in my pocket when I graduated, when I was married, and will be when I die. I write this now so that each of you who have read my articles, learn to prune a rose from me, now you too have a connection to Mrs. Stewart and the numbers tattooed on her arm. Eddy County Extension Service, New Mexico State University is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer and educator. All programs are available to everyone regardless of race, color, religion, sex, age, handicap, or national origin. New Mexico State University, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the Eddy County Government Cooperating.

'Better Process Control School for Acidified Foods Only' training to be held May 13-15

'Better Process Control School for Acidified Foods Only' training to be held May 13-15 The Food Technology Program at New Mexico State University will offer the “Better Process Control School for Acidified Foods Only” May 13 to 15. This certification course will be presented in Gerald Thomas Hall, room 303. This school satisfies the training requirements specified in both the FDA and USDA regulations for acidified foods only. This course is intended for managers and supervisors of food processing operations. It is designed to provide additional information and focus on critical issues that affect acidified foods production. Instructors have vast experience and knowledge of food regulations, processing and safety. They are recognized processing authorities who educate and assist food entrepreneurs and food companies as part of NMSU's land-grant mission. For more information on cost, agenda and registration, visit the web site at http://aces.nmsu.edu/ces/foodtech/better-process-control-s.html#anchor_13033 or send an email to glorhern@nmsu.edu or call 575-646-2198.

COW/CALF CORNER

COW/CALF CORNER The Newsletter From the Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service April 20, 2015 In this Issue: Keep or cull open replacement heifers?? (and buyer beware!) Glenn Selk, Oklahoma State University Emeritus Extension Animal Scientist Oklahoma forage conditions improving Derrell S. Peel, Oklahoma State University Extension Livestock Marketing Specialist Keep or cull open replacement heifers?? (and buyer beware!) Glenn Selk, Oklahoma State University Emeritus Extension Animal Scientist For some Oklahoma cow calf operations, the bulls go into the breeding pasture with replacement heifers in mid-April. As the bulls are being removed from the replacement heifers in two months, this would be an ideal time to call and make arrangements with your local veterinarian to have those heifers evaluated for pregnancy after another 60 days. In two months after the breeding season, experienced palpaters should have no difficulty identifying which heifers are pregnant and which heifers are not pregnant (open). Those heifers that are determined to be "open" after this breeding season, should be strong candidates for culling. Culling these heifers immediately after pregnancy checking serves three very useful purposes. 1) Identifying and culling “open” heifers early will remove sub-fertile females from the herd. Lifetime cow studies were conducted at a USDA experiment station in Montana. Over the span of 23 years, 1589 replacement heifers were exposed to bulls. Over that number of years 266 heifers were found to be “open” after their first breeding season. All of these "open" heifers were kept in the herd for an average of about 4 years. From the 1006 opportunities to become pregnant that followed, only 551 calves were produced. In other words, when the heifers that failed to breed in the first breeding season were followed throughout their lifetimes, they averaged a 54.9% yearly calf crop. Despite the fact that reproduction is not a highly heritable trait, it also makes sense to remove this genetic material from the herd so as to not proliferate females that are difficult to get bred. 2) Culling open heifers early will reduce production costs. If the rancher waits until next spring to find out which heifers do not calve, the winter feed expense will still be lost and there will be no calf to help eventually pay the bills. This is money that can better be spent in properly feeding cows that are pregnant and will be producing a salable product at weaning time. 3) Identifying the open heifers shortly (60 days) after the breeding season is over will allow for marketing the heifers while still young enough to go to a feedlot and be fed for the “choice” beef market. The grading change of several years ago had a great impact on the merchandising of culled replacement heifers. "B" maturity carcasses (those estimated to be 30 months of age or older) are much less likely to be graded choice. Therefore, it is imperative to send heifers to the feedlot while they are young enough to be fed for 4 to 5 months and not be near the "B" maturity age group. Certainly the percentage of open heifers will vary from ranch to ranch. Do not be concerned, if after a good heifer development program and adequate breeding season, that you find that 10% of the heifers still are not bred. These are the very heifers that you want to identify early and remove from the herd. Resist the temptation to “roll them over” to a fall-calving herd if they have failed to breed in a spring breeding season. Producers that are buying replacement females (at a quite hefty price) need to be wary of heifers that were exposed to bulls or artificial insemination/clean-up bulls and remain non-pregnant. This is the easiest opportunity to become pregnant that they will have. If they are still open after that first breeding season, they may be infertile at worst, or sub-fertile compared to other heifers. Remember the old Montana data that suggests that they will be 55% calf crop females the rest of their lives. Oklahoma forage conditions improving Derrell S. Peel, Oklahoma State University Extension Livestock Marketing Specialist Most of Oklahoma has received significant rain the past 10 days with totals generally ranging from one to three inches, with localized totals over 8 inches. Some of the best rain fell in some of the worst drought area of western Oklahoma. Much of northern Texas and the Texas Panhandle also received good rain. While this moisture does not eliminate all the drought conditions, the timing is superb for forage growth, not to mention the wheat crop in the region. This moisture ensures initial forage growth in warm-season pastures and provides producers an opportunity to assess the health of those rangelands after extended periods of stress. The temptation will be to stock pastures too heavily and too early. Patience and discipline are needed to ensure forage recovery and long term productivity. However, producers may finally be able to plan production offensively compared to being always on the defense. Cattle and beef markets have continued strong on continued tight supplies. Calf and stocker prices have holding close to spring highs on good summer grazing demand, which may be extended a bit with the recent rains. Limited numbers of wheat graze-out feeder cattle will be marketed over the next month, mostly in May. Feeder cattle prices have been steady; limited by the sharp discount on deferred Live Cattle futures. Cull cow prices in April are about 9 percent higher than this time last year on reduced cow slaughter. Total cow slaughter is down 7.3 percent for the year to date compared to one year ago, with a 1.9 percent increase in dairy cow slaughter partially offsetting a 17.5 percent year over year decrease in beef cow slaughter. Total steer and heifer slaughter is down 6.8 percent for the year to date from last year, with heifer slaughter down 7.6 percent so far this year. Reduced heifer and cow slaughter in 2015 suggests that herd expansion is continuing. Choice boxed beef averaged the fourth highest weekly average in history last week with Select boxed beef at the fifth highest weekly average. Fed cattle traded lower at $160-$161/cwt. in the southern plains last week. Seasonal supplies will build into May and June and push fed cattle prices lower into summer but how much lower is a question. Feedlot placements have been down year over year for 11 of the past 12 months and were down 7.5 percent in the November through February period. This is a total of 536 thousand head fewer cattle placed over the four months. Placements are expected to be down again for March in the upcoming April Cattle on Feed report. Live Cattle futures have stubbornly maintained a sharp discount to current cash markets based on normal seasonal summer price declines and beef demand concerns. Reduced placements in recent months suggest that seasonal supply pressure will be less than typical going into summer and, despite record wholesale and retail beef price ratios to other meats, there is little indication that beef prices are weakening relative to pork and poultry prices for the foreseeable future. I suspect that fed cattle prices will get through the summer at higher levels than futures currently indicate, likely averaging in the mid to upper $150 range. Oklahoma State University, in compliance with Title VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Executive Order 11246 as amended, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and other federal laws and regulations, does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, religion, disability, or status as a veteran in any of its policies, practices or procedures. This includes but is not limited to admissions, employment, financial aid, and educational services. References within this publication to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, service mark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not constitute or imply endorsement by Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service.

Interior moves to raise drilling fees on BLM tracts

Interior moves to raise drilling fees on BLM tracts The Interior Department kicked off a major rulemaking today that would update fees oil and gas companies pay to drill on public lands. The Bureau of Land Management published an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) that requests public comment on potential changes to oil and gas royalty rates, rental payments, lease sale minimum bids, civil penalty caps and financial assurances. The public has 45 days to weigh in. The ANPR asks the public to suggest how BLM should craft a rule, but it is not a regulation in itself. Updates to BLM's royalty rate structure would offer the agency important flexibility at a time when oil production has risen on public lands in each of the past six years, Jewell said. Conservation groups have supported higher fees to produce and maintain leases on public lands. Roughly half of those revenues go to the U.S. Treasury, with the rest going to the states where drilling occurs. But today's move will generate blowback from energy companies that argue they already pay more to operate on federal lands due to longer permitting times and the persistent threat of lawsuits from environmental groups...more

Calfhood vaccination to prevent post-weaning BRD

During last week’s Academy of Veterinary Consultants conference, Phil Griebel, DVM, PhD, presented research results suggesting vaccinating newborn calves, using a modified live, intranasal vaccine, can provide protection against pathogens causing bovine respiratory disease later in life. Griebel is a research fellow at the Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization and professor in the School of Public Health at the University of Saskatchewan. In his research, he studies the mucosal immune system in newborn calves. Over 70 percent of the cattle immune system, he says, is associated with epithelial cells on the surfaces of the respiratory, gastro-intestinal and reproductive system. And over 90 percent of pathogens, both respiratory and enteric, enter the animal’s system through mucosal surfaces. Shortly after birth, the mucosal surfaces of newborn calves are rapidly colonized by a wide variety of commensal microbes, which affect the development of the mucosal immune system, Griebel says. This is especially true in the upper respiratory system, which is the first point of infection for pathogens entering through the nostrils. Using an intranasal vaccine within the first four weeks of a calf’s life potentially can provide several benefits, Griebel says. · Protection when cows were not properly vaccinated pre-calving. · Protection in cases of sub-optimal transfer of maternal antibodies. · Protection when immune status of the cow and calf are unknown. · Protection in the face of an outbreak of respiratory or enteric disease among newborn calves. · Enhanced immune protection while maternal antibodies wane as the calf ages. Griebel says the early vaccination can establish an immune memory that provides protection during the early post-weaning period, particularly when compared with vaccinating weaned calves upon arrival at backgrounding or feeding operations, when it takes the vaccine three to four weeks to provide protection. Griebel also notes that immunoglobulin A (IgA) is the primary antibody secreted at the mucosal surface, and within a few days after a calf’s birth, most of the maternal IgA has been cleared from the respiratory mucosal surface, leaving little to interfere with activity of the vaccine. Griebel outlined a pair of trials he conducted, one to compare immunity between calves receiving a modified-live, intra-nasal vaccine at branding time (three to six weeks of age) and non-vaccinated control calves, and another study to compare the effects of calfhood intranasal versus intra-muscular modified-live vaccines on immune memory. In the first trial, researchers vaccinated one group of calves using the modified-live, intranasal vaccine and used a diluent (non-active fluid) intranasally on the control calves. Prior to weaning, they collected serum and selected 20 health calves from each group, which were shipped to the feedlot a week later. After a short receiving period, all the calves were challenged with aerosol containing bovine herpesvirus 1 (BHV-1), the virus associated with Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (IBR), one of the common causes of BRD. At the same time, they segmented the two groups and vaccinated again with the intra-nasal vaccine. This created four groups: One group with no vaccination, one with two vaccinations, one with an early vaccination but no late vaccination and one with late but not early vaccination. Results included: · Control cattle lost 20 kg of body weight over the first seven days post-challenge, while the calves vaccinated twice maintained weight. · The twice-vaccinated calves had significantly lower body temperatures than controls during the first seven days post-challenge. · All calves were shedding virus by day three, but control calves continued to shed large volumes while the twice-vaccinated calves stopped shedding by day 12. Calves that received the neonatal vaccine but not the weaning vaccine were intermediate in shedding. · Secondary bacterial infections caused some death loss in control calves but not in either of the vaccinated groups. · A single intranasal vaccine at three to six weeks of age reduced BRD mortality but not clinical disease. · Vaccinating early and again at weaning reduced clinical BRD incidence. In the second trial, the researchers used a similar process except that at branding, they divided calves into six groups. Two received an intramuscular modified-live vaccine, two received an intramuscular killed vaccine, one received the intranasal modified-live vaccine and one group received a diluents. In this trial, both of the modified-live vaccines helped reduce fever and reductions in gain during the post-challenge period, but the intranasal vaccine was the only one shown to induce sufficient immune memory to reduce the incidence of clinical disease.

Changes to the NASIS data model will require users to reinitialize after 20 April 2015.

ANNOUNCEMENT: Changes to the NASIS data model will require users to reinitialize after 20 April 2015. - A change is being made to the NASIS data model that will force all NASIS users to reinitialize their local database after 20 April 2015. - When the NASIS 7.0 data model was deployed, the Site Existing Vegetation table (this table was on the point data side of NASIS, i.e. not the componet (aggregated) side) was removed from the data model. Any data existing in that table were moved to the new Plot Plant Inventory table, which is a child of the Vegetation Plot table. This required a new record be created in the Vegetation Plot table. One of the columns in the Vegetation Plot table is the Vegetation_Data_Origin column. This field is used to help identify where/how the data came to be in the table. To help identify which vegetation plot records were created during the move of data from the Site Existing Vegetation table to the Plot Plant Inventory table a new choice has been added to the Vegetation_Data_Origin choice list. - The only data that was moved from the Site Existing Vegetation table to the Plot Plant Inventory table included the National Plant Symbol, the Scientific Name, and the National Vernacular Name, and perhaps the Order of Dominance, if it was recorded. There are many other attributes that can potentially be recorded for each National Plant Symbol in the Plot Plant Inventory table. However, unless the user has manually updated those records, only the few columns mentioned above will have any data in them. Basically, all the database is recording, at the time the data were moved from the Site Existing Vegetation table, is whether that plant was present. While this is important information, by itself it does not add much to the Ecological Site Description. - The new choice is labeled - "Site Existing Veg table". This will be displayed in the Data_Origin column in the Vegetation Plot table for each plant that was moved to the Plot Plant Inventory table. The change will be made without any interaction required from the users. - This choice can be used by the users when creating queries or reports used in their efforts to build new or update existing Ecological Site Descriptions. Include in a WHERE clause similar to: "...WHERE CODENAME(vegetation_plot.vegetation_data_origin) <> "site existing veg table" AND ...". Or, the where clause could be written as: "...WHERE vegetation_plot.vegetation_data_origin <> 8 AND ...". Including either of these WHERE clause parts in either a query or a report SQL script will ensure that only those records that record more than just a plant's presence is used for any aggregation tasks. Actions required from the User 1) As close to the close of business of 20 April 2015 as possible, the user should upload any changes made to records in the local database and then they should be checked in. This should be done at least daily as part of good NASIS standard operating procedure, anyway. 2) After the user logs into NASIS on or after 21 April 2015 the user will be asked if they want to reinitialize their local database. The user will need to give an affirmative response. Reinitializing the local database can take several minutes. Once the database has been reinitialized the user will be asked if they want to load any data the was in the local database prior to the reinitializing. Again, the user should respond in the affirmative to ensure any data existing in the local database prior the reinitializing will be avaible upon completion of that task. If there are any questions about reinitializing a local database or problems resulting from such a procedure please contact the SOILS Hotline via phone (402-437-5378)or via e-mail (LO-NE-NRCS-NSSC-SoilsHotline@one.usda.gov). Thanks, George Teachman

National Hay Situation and Outlook

The 2014 calendar year provided favorable growing conditions for hay producers across most of the U.S. Even drought-struck California produced more hay than anticipated, according to the USDA-NASS reports. This has contributed to a general story in the national hay complex of trending towards normal (pre 2010 and 2011 drought) production, stock levels, and prices. Hay is a highly regionalized crop, and drought can have varying impacts depending on the region. The highest hay acreage is typically in the middle of the U.S. spanning a direct line from Texas up to North Dakota. However, these are not necessarily the highest producing states. Texas, California, Missouri, South Dakota and Kansas are the top five in average total hay production for the time period of 2004-2014. U.S. hay production in 2014 was the largest since 2010, and prices, although trending slightly lower throughout the marketing year, continued to be supported by an increasing disappearance level and lagging increase in harvested acres as the industry continues to work its way back to pre-2011 drought levels. The increasing disappearance can be attributed to first a growing national dairy herd in 2014, and second the growth of the national beef herd which is forecasted to continue into 2015. Over the past 20 years harvested acres of alfalfa has been on a decreasing trend, down 24% compared to 1994. Since 2012 however, there has been a reversal of this trend and harvested acres of alfalfa have gradually increased year-over-year. Compared to calendar year 2013, 2014 recorded a 4% increase in alfalfa acres harvested, putting the total number at 18 million acres – the highest level since 2011. Looking at the same time frame for harvested acres of other hay, in the past 20 years they followed an increasing trend line until 2002 where the peak was experienced at 41 million acres. Since 2002 harvested acres have stayed in a steady range of 39 million to 41 million acres, except during the drought in 2011. Year-over-year, 2014 posted a 4% decrease in harvested acres to 38 million. Production in 2014 According to USDA-NASS Annual Crop report, national alfalfa production increased 7% in 2014 compared to 2013 to sit at 62 million tons. This was the result of a 4% increase in national harvested acres and a 3% increase in national yield. As shown in Table 1, the top 5 alfalfa hay producing states in 2014 were California, South Dakota, Idaho, Wisconsin, and Montana. Notable changes in production took place in South Dakota and Wisconsin, up 16% and 44%, respectively, in terms of production. Surprisingly, even though California experienced one of its worst droughts in history during 2014, alfalfa production only decreased by 2% in that state. National other hay production increased 1% year-over-year to 78 million tons. In 2014 other hay recorded a 4% decrease in harvested acres but a 5% increase in yield. The top 5 other hay producing states in 2014 were Texas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Kentucky, and Tennessee (shown in Table 2). The decreased production in Missouri, Kentucky, and Tennessee was the result of fewer acres harvested and lower yields. 2014 hay production numbers in Texas and Oklahoma are indicative of continued and significant improvement in production following the 2011 drought. The increase in production in Texas stemmed from a 140% increase in other hay yield compared to 2013, and Oklahoma saw a 400,000 acre increase in harvested acres with a 7% increase in yield. Other notable year-over-year total hay production changes include Kansas down 24%, Nebraska was up by 22%, Colorado up 21%, and Minnesota up by 15%. Kansas experienced a significant reduction in hay production, the result of a 450,000 harvested acres decrease and a 9% decrease in yield. Nebraska harvested an additional 80,000 acres with a 19% yield increase. Colorado’s hay production increase came from an additional 30,000 harvested acres on an 18% yield increase. Minnesota added 10,000 harvested acres and had a 15% yield increase overall. 2014/15 Prices Hay prices are tracked on a marketing year, and reported on a national monthly average basis by USDA-NASS. State specific annual average hay prices will be released in July. Increased annual hay production has helped lessen supply restrictions. Additionally most of the U.S. experienced favorable pasture and range conditions during the 2014 grazing season which allowed livestock producers to avoid sharp summer demand for hay, as seen during drought years. As indicated in the graphs below both alfalfa and other hay are following a slowly decreasing price trend, due to the reasons listed above. In the most recent Agricultural Prices report by NASS, February alfalfa hay prices were at $172 per ton, $16 per ton below year ago prices (9% decrease). Other hay prices recorded a 2% year-over-year decrease, and were $127 per ton in February, $2 per ton less than February 2014. This supports the general story in the hay complex of production and prices reverting back to historically normal levels, from the drought induced supply reductions, demand increases, and price spikes seen in the most recent years. Further, hay prices have begun the process of normalizing relative to other feedstuffs with the dramatic drop in grain (e.g. corn) and plant-based protein costs (e.g. soybean and cottonseed meal). For the crop marketing year, May through April, prices have been reported monthly through February. Seasonally, prices tend to trend up at the end of the marketing year before the first new cutting comes in. For the 2014/15 marketing year, alfalfa prices are expected to average about $195 per ton and other hay prices around $130 per ton. December 1 Stocks Hay stock numbers are released in terms of all hay, even though different states produce varying levels of alfalfa and other hay. USDA-NASS conducts two hay stock surveys each year, the most recent was December 1, 2014. Total U.S. stocks for all hay were up 3% compared to 2013. This is the largest December 1 stocks have been since 2010. Most major cattle producing regions in the U.S. recorded a year-over-year increase in December 1 stocks. Compared to 2013, the Western region is up 1% (even with the California drought), Great Plains up 7%, Southern Plains up 29%, and the Cornbelt region up 4%. The Northeast and Southeast both experienced a decrease in December 1 hay stocks compared to year ago numbers by 20% and 10%, respectively. February saw some harsh winter weather across the U.S. and notably in the cattle region of the Midwest, but March turned out to be a milder month in general. December 1 hay stock numbers support hay availability for cattle producers should they need to rely on it more, depending on how late winter and early spring weather evolve. May 1 hay stock reports will be released with the Annual Crop Production report on May 12, 2015

USDA Announces 2015 Cotton Loan Rate Differentials

USDA Announces 2015 Cotton Loan Rate Differentials 04/15/2015 12:40 PM EDT Release No. 0045.15 USDA Announces 2015 Cotton Loan Rate Differentials WASHINGTON, April 15, 2015 — The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Farm Service Agency (FSA) today announced the 2015-crop loan rate differentials for upland and extra-long staple cotton. The differentials, also referred to as loan rate premiums and discounts, have been calculated based on market valuations of various cotton quality factors for the prior three years. This calculation procedure is identical to that used in past years. The Commodity Credit Corporation adjusts cotton loan rates by these differentials so that cotton loan values reflect the differences in market prices for color, staple length, leaf, extraneous matter, micronaire, length uniformity and strength. The 2015-crop differential schedules are applied to 2015-crop loan rates of 52.00 cents per pound for the base grade of upland cotton and 79.77 cents per pound for extra-long staple cotton. The loan rate provided to an individual cotton bale is based on the quality of each individual bale as determined by Agricultural Marketing Service classing measurements. The tables of these loan rate differentials are available on the FSA website at http://go.usa.gov/3W8tV. If you have questions or need additional information, please contact Tiffany Arthur at (202) 720-4284 or by email at tiffany.arthur@wdc.usda.gov. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. To file a complaint of discrimination, write: USDA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (866) 632-9992 (Toll-free Customer Service), (800) 877-8339 (Local or Federal relay), (866) 377-8642 (Relay voice users).

HISTORY OF EDDY COUNTY EXTENSION Started 1 May 1915 to present

The Eddy County Cooperative Extension Service is a partnership between the United States Department of Agriculture, Land Grant Universities (New Mexico State University) and Eddy County Government. New Mexico State University is the administrative authority of the program with local input from advisory committee and county commissions. The mission of the Cooperative Extension Service, as stated by the Smith-Lever Act of 1914, is to bring research based knowledge to be used by industrious people to help solve local problems and improve their quality of life, in the fields of application of agriculture, livestock, crops, and horticulture; consumer and family science; youth development, 4-H; and engineering. In just a few short weeks we will be celebrating the 100th year of the Eddy County Extension program. Extension service is an out of the classroom educational system, in which adults and youth learn by doing. It is a partnership between the state, local, and federal governments, and local volunteers who provide service and education designed to meet the needs of the citizens of Eddy County. Its fundamental objective is the development of human resources, and to make people’s lives better. While it has been 101 years since the Smith-Leaver Act, Extension’s roots go back to 1785, when President Jefferson formed Agriculture societies to acquaint its members with practices that would improve their productivity. Abraham Lincoln signed the Morrill Act in 1862, in the middle of the civil war. Sponsored by Senator Justin Morrill of Vermont it was “an act donating public lands to the several states and territories, which may provide colleges for the benefit of agriculture and the mechanical arts.” This was the first Federal Aid to higher education. In 1887 the Hatch Act established State Agriculture & Mechanical Arts Experiment stations, such as the one in Artesia, to work with these land grant colleges. In 1902 Professor Knapp started what was to become 4-H in New Mexico. Eddy County was amount those first counties to form corn clubs and sewing societies led by the school superintendents in Hope, Artesia, Carlsbad, Loving and Malaga. These were the forerunner to what is now 4-H. In 1914 the Smith-Lever Act established the Cooperative Extension Service to extend this knowledge, from the colleges and experiment stations to people to use to improve their lives. When Congress passed the Smith-Lever Act in 1914 and created the Cooperative Extension System at USDA, it included work of various boys' and girls' clubs involved with agriculture, home economics and related subjects, which effectively nationalized the 4-H organization. By 1924, these clubs became organized as 4-H clubs, and the clover emblem was adopted. Cooperative Extension was designed as a partnership of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and land grant universities. Legislation in the various States, including New Mexico, has enabled local governments or organized groups in the Nation's counties to become a third legal partner in this education endeavor. The congressional charge to Cooperative Extension through the Smith-Lever Act of 1914 is far ranging. New Mexico College of Agriculture and Mechanical Arts quickly adopted the program under Dr. Fabian Garcia. The first Eddy County Extension Agent, Mr. J.W. Knorr came to work in the old Eddy County Court House in May of 1915 making Eddy County one of the first counties in the nation to have a County Extension Service. For 100 years Eddy County Commission has worked cooperatively with what is now known as New Mexico State University (formally NM A&MA) and the United State Department of Agriculture to serve the citizens and have helped improve the quality of life for the citizens of the county. I am looking for some old photographs of past County Extension Agents and Extension Activities. If you have some please contact me at 575-887-6595

Bovine Trichomoniasis

Bovine Trichomoniasis VDS conducts Trichomoniasis testing via real time polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Click here for collection guidelines. Bovine TF-Transit Tube Transport Study – Click here for abstract of a study conducted by VDS and presented at the 2014 AAVLD/USAHA annual meeting. Bovine Trichomoniasis – The New Mexico Livestock Board has implemented regulations to protect producers from this highly infectious, contagious disease. Rules adopted are consistent with other state regulations governing this disease. Currently, Bovine Trichomoniasis testing is done using real time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technology. This results in greater sensitivity and specificity for overall increased test accuracy. Handling of preputial samples, transport, collection techniques, etc., can compromise the quality of the sample using traditional culturing technique. Traditional culturing methodology: does not detect dead parasites, only identifies the presence of Trichomonas, and does not differentiate between T. foetus and other species of Trichomonas. Because PCR technology is DNA based, this methodology can detect infection that has been missed by traditional cultural technology because of very low organism numbers or dead/dying (in transit) organisms. However, accuracy of test results using PCR may be compromised if the sample is received more than 3 days after collection. With increased accuracy, some increased expense is incurred. Trich Movement and Forms – click here for further information on the movement of trich infected, exposed, non-exposed cattle through auction markets and to obtain the trich forms Trich Certifications - click here for NM Livestock Board contact information to obtain a list of trichomoniasis certified veterinarians.

Alexandra Eckhoff, D.M.V., Dr. Med Vet recently joined the New Mexico Livestock Board as a Field Veterinarian

Alexandra Eckhoff, D.M.V., Dr. Med Vet recently joined the New Mexico Livestock Board as a Field Veterinarian. Dr. Eckhoff was raised in Colombia, South America and is a graduate of the Universidad de La Salle, Bogota, Colombia with a degree in Veterinary Medicine. Dr. Eckhoff obtained a residency in large animal internal medicine at the Universität Leipzig in Leipzig, Germany and completed her veterinary postdoctoral studies to attain a European Ph.D. Upon completion of these studies, Dr. Eckhoff moved to the United States and continued with additional educational pursuits in other areas of interest and completed requirements for veterinary licensure in the United States. With a relocation to New Mexico in 2008, Dr. Eckhoff became an associate in an equine practice, where she actively practiced equine medicine and surgery for the past seven years. Dr. Eckhoff’s background, education and clinical practice experience are an asset as a Field Veterinarian for the NMLB. Dr. Eckhoff lives in Albuquerque with her husband, Dr. Andres Estrada, and their two cats. Welcome, Dr. Eckhoff!

Valles Caldera National Preserve Youth Camp

May 31-June 5, 2015 Valles Caldera National Preserve Youth 15-19 Years of Age $300 Registration Nationally, the average age in the ranching community continues to increase as more young people are opting to leave the ranch for careers outside production agriculture. As a result, the fabric of rural economies, as well as the ranching tradition and cultures, are in jeopardy. In a rural state like New Mexico, the situation has significant implications. The NM Youth Ranch Management Camp is an effort to reverse the aging trend in ranching by incorporating a hands-on educational approach to youth of New Mexico. Each day, a great deal of expertise presents information to camp participants; from college professors, extension specialists and agents, to industry professionals. The program is designed for 15-19 year old New Mexico youth and is limited in the number of youth selected to participate in this prestigious camp. Applications are evaluated by a select panel consisting of committee members, industry professionals and allied partners. Thirty of the top applicants are invited to attend this unique, learning experience at the Valles Caldera. "The ranch camp is a tremendous opportunity for high school youth and is the first of its kind across states I have been involved with," said Dennis Braden, general manager of Swenson Land and Cattle Co. in Stamford, Texas, and camp volunteer and presenter. "What the kids learned at the ranch camp has a direct impact on the quality of beef produced for future generations," said Dina Chacon-Reitzel, executive director of the NM Beef Council. The council was one of the many industry organizations and companies that helped sponsor the camp.

SINGLE NEW MEXICO DUCK TESTS POSITIVE FOR AVIAN INFLUENZA

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, APRIL 14, 2015: SANTA FE – A lone bird at Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge has tested positive for a highly pathogenic avian influenza strain that affects wild and domestic fowl, but is not known to be harmful to humans, officials announced. A cinnamon teal duck was one of 196 birds tested at the refuge for the disease that was first detected in the United States in late 2014. It was the first bird in New Mexico to test positive for the highly pathogenic strain. It is unknown whether the duck was migrating through the state. Most migratory birds have left the refuge for their northern nesting areas. Dr. Kerry Mower, wildlife disease specialist for the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, said although the disease poses no threat to humans, people should take precautions to protect their domestic flocks of chickens and other birds. The best way to do that, he said, is to isolate domestic flocks and avoid contact with wild birds. The strains of the avian flu virus that have been found in the United States are not the same as the virus strain that has infected humans in Asia, Africa, the Pacific, Europe, the Near East and Canada. Infected birds are not known to pose a threat to hunters, but people who handle wild game always are advised to take normal precautions to avoid disease and insect pests. • Do not handle or eat sick game. • Do not harvest or handle wild birds that obviously are sick or found dead. • Wear rubber or disposable latex gloves while handling and cleaning game or cleaning bird feeders. • Wash hands with soap and water or alcohol wipes immediately after handling game. • Wash tools and work surfaces used to clean game birds with soap and water, then disinfect with a 10 percent solution of chlorine bleach. • Do not eat, drink or smoke while handling animals. • Separate raw meat, and anything it touches, from cooked or ready-to-eat foods to avoid contamination. • All game should be thoroughly cooked (internal temperature of 165 °F). Dogs used in wild bird hunting are not considered at risk of acquiring avian influenza and there have been no documented cases of the virus infecting dogs. No cats have been documented with avian influenza in North America. Dog and cat owners should consult their veterinarian for more information about influenza in pets. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service encourages all bird owners, whether commercial or backyard producers, to practice good biosecurity, and prevent contact between their birds and wild birds. People are also urged to report sick birds or unusual bird deaths to New Mexico State Veterinarian Dr. Ellen Wilson, DVM, at 505-841-6163 or to USDA at (866) 536-7593. More information about biosecurity for backyard flocks can be found at http://healthybirds.aphis.usda.gov/. ###

Tolero increases water management efficiency

By Precision Laboratories April 08, 2015 | 7:11 am EDT Water insecurity, regulations and increased demand, in combination with an increasing population, makes it more critical than ever for growers to feed the world with less water and energy. To address these concerns, Precision Laboratories has introduced Tolero, an irrigation injection surfactant proven to increase crop yields while reducing irrigation water and the energy needed to move it. “Agricultural irrigation is the top consumer of water in the United States. With mounting competition for fresh water, growers are under immense pressure to increase crop yields while reducing water and energy,” said Don Spier, vice president at Precision Laboratories. “We understand these demands on growers and are proud to help them be successful in a whole new way that can revolutionize agricultural irrigation practices.” Irrigation in the U.S. covers nearly 52 million acres of harvested cropland and uses more than 79 billion gallons of water per day, according to the 2013 data from the USDA Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey. This vast amount of water has great opportunities for more effective management with less waste. Many growers experience issues with water reaching the crop due to run-off and lack of distribution in the soil. Tolero improves the infiltration of irrigation and rainfall by spreading it into and throughout the plant’s root zone, keeping it readily available as needed. The increased water content in the soil enhances the growing environment by reducing plant stress and improving water and nutrient distribution. “Lack of available water at critical stages of plant development negatively affects the establishment, fruit set, plant health and yield of most high-value crops,” said Spier. “Agronomists in western United States report thousands of acres of land are being removed from production due to insufficient water to grow crops. Incorporating Tolero into an overall water management program is proven to save water in one of two ways, either reducing irrigation time or increasing intervals between watering.” Tolero Trial Information Tolero’s efficacy was proven in third-party trials conducted on yellow squash, tomatoes, strawberries and romaine lettuce. Results indicate a significant crop yield increase while decreasing water use by up to 40 percent. Additionally, some trials resulted in reduced soil compaction, which enhances the growing environment for roots and overall plant health. Increased Fruit Yield – Yellow Squash Performance data with yellow squash shows a 48 percent increase in fruit weight per acre despite reducing water volume on tested plots by 40 percent. Yellow squash trials in Brooks County, Ga., indicate a 48 percent increase in fruit weight per acre, despite reducing water by 40 percent. There were two applications of Tolero applied through drip irrigation in this trial, one at transplanting and another 29 days later. In addition, data collected using a soil penetrometer confirmed soil compaction in the root zone was reduced by 33 percent. Moisture stress can damage a plant’s roots, flowers and fruit. In tomatoes, the most critical stages for consistent soil moisture are at transplanting, flowering and fruit development. Studies indicate that irrigated tomatoes treated with Tolero experienced an increase in fruit yield of 78.4 cwt. per acre, displayed improved plant health and reduced root zone compaction. The grower reduced water use by 40 percent, which also conserved energy needed to run the irrigation system. Increased Fruit Yield - Tomatoes Performance data in tomatoes treated with Tolero through the irrigation system experienced an increase in fruit yield of 78.4 cwt. per acre with a 40 percent reduction in water use. Future data trials will include such crops as citrus, celery, grapes and nut trees. “Providing specialized chemistries that enhance plants, seeds, soil and water is what we do,” said Spier. “We are excited to launch a product that not only helps growers be responsible stewards of the environment by using less water and energy, but also helps increase their return-on-investment.” More information on Tolero and other Precision Laboratories products are at www.precisionlab.com/Tolero.

11 land-grant institutions help protect pecan yields

More than 75 percent of the world's pecan crop is produced in the United States, and researchers and Extension specialists from 11 land-grant universities are working together to ensure that pests don't affect crop yield. The project, titled S-1049 Integrated Management of Pecan Arthropod Pests in the Southern U.S., is a multistate research project that helps pecan growers learn more about affordable, environmentally friendly, and sustainable pecan pest management options. The project was the 2014 Southern Region nominee for the Experiment Station Section Excellence in Multistate Research Award and was recently selected as the region's 2015 nominee. "Since 1972, S-1049 members have conducted experiments on over 300 acres of test fields across the country and collaborated with horticulturists and plant pathologists to develop best production practices to improve pecan nut quality and yields. This field data is critical to developing pest monitoring protocols and tools, like traps, treatments, and biological control options," said Dr. Donn Johnson, former chair of S-1049 and Entomology Professor at the University of Arkansas. Pests that are not managed can severely damage harvests of marketable nuts. For instance, in Arkansas, the USDA Specialty Crop Block Grant Program, administered through the Arkansas Agriculture Department, funded S-1049 members so that they could issue a survey to pecan growers and visit 16 pecan groves. The survey and site visits enabled the members to identify production problems that required additional research. The S-1049 researchers noted that insects and disease in unmanaged groves caused more than 30% nut damage. However, several groves were following pest management recommendations and had reduced damage to nuts to less than 5%. Using fewer but more effective and timely pest control treatments cuts growers' costs and reduces environmental as well as human health risks. In Texas, about 50% of pecan farmers have adopted the technology developed and recommended by S-1049 members. As a result, pesticide usage is about 192,000 kilograms per year less than in 1980 with a cost savings of $4.4 million per year for these producers. In addition, members of S-1049 train and educate pecan farmers, producers, and organizations about pecan production, pecan pest biology and pest management options. The project also includes a website where those interested and invested in the pecan industry can access management and assessment tools and information, including a real-time Pecan Nut Casebearer Risk Map. "This map includes real-time trap data from approximately 100 pecan groves in the Southern Region. It's a useful tool that helps growers identify when to scout for egg hatch and decide if and when to apply treatments or biological control options," said Dr. Marvin Harris, member of S-1049 and Entomology Emeritus Professor at Texas A&M University. Through these efforts, the S-1049 project helps to ensure that there is a continued availability of pecans, which have a number of human health benefits. Nuts, such as pecans, are low in sodium and full of fiber and healthy fats. Nut consumption may help with weight management and to help reduce the risk high cholesterol, heart disease, and diabetes. The 11 participating land-grant institutions include: •Auburn University •Kansas State University •Louisiana State University •New Mexico State University •Oklahoma State University •Texas A&M University •Texas A&M AgriLife •University of Arkansas •University of Florida •University of Georgia •University of Missouri

North American cattle situation: Mexico

COW/CALF CORNER The Newsletter From the Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service April 13, 2015 North American cattle situation: Mexico Derrell S. Peel, Oklahoma State University Extension Livestock Marketing Specialist The Mexican cattle and beef industry is always dynamic and continues to evolve. The industry has faced challenges in recent years with declining cattle inventories while attempting to maintain domestic production and cattle exports; all while beef exports have increased sharply. The Mexican beef cattle industry experienced the same drought conditions that affected the U.S. in 2011-2013 leading to forced herd liquidation. Moisture conditions improved significantly in 2014 and so far in 2015. Herd expansion has been slow to begin in Mexico but may be beginning at the current time. Cows and heifers have played a large role in maintaining domestic Mexican beef production and cattle exports in recent years and increased female slaughter contributed to herd liquidation. Record U.S. cattle prices and a weakening Peso contributed to a 12.8 percent year over year increase in Mexican cattle exports to the U.S. in 2014 despite extremely tight cattle supplies in Mexico. Increased Mexican cattle exports in 2014 included more steers and spayed heifers compared to the previous year. U.S. imports of Mexican cattle are up less than one percent for the first two months of 2015 compared to last year. Year to date U.S. imports of Mexican steers are up 4.5 percent while heifer imports are down nearly 15 percent. U.S. imports of Mexican beef are up 40 percent for the first two months of 2015 compared to the same period last year. Reduced U.S. beef production and record high U.S. beef prices, abetted by the strong dollar, provide a strong incentive for more beef exports from Mexico to the U.S. which, in 2014, resulted in a 23 percent year over year increase. Mexico has rapidly increased beef exports since 2009. Total Mexican beef exports increased 17 percent in 2014 compared to one year earlier. The 2014 export total is only slightly lower than the 2012 record despite the loss of the Russian market after 2012. Increased Mexican beef exports are the result of rapid growth in feedlot production, increased carcass weights (partially offsetting lower cattle slaughter), and widespread adoption of boxed beef technology in recent years. The U.S. is the largest destination for Mexican beef exports, accounting for 84 percent of the 2014 total. Mexico has been the fourth largest source of U.S. beef imports since 2010. Other major Mexican beef export markets include Japan and, in 2014, Hong Kong. Mexico has been one of the top four U.S. beef export destinations for 20 years. Mexico imported 8 percent more U.S. beef in 2014 compared to the prior year despite record high U.S. beef prices and a poor exchange rate which makes U.S. beef even more expensive in Mexico. However, U.S. beef exports to Mexico are down 13.5 percent year over year so far in 2015. Mexico, like the U.S. and Canada, is faced with the need for herd rebuilding which can only occur by squeezing current production to allow for increased heifer retention and reduced cow slaughter. It will be difficult for Mexico to maintain the current level of domestic beef production, cattle exports and beef exports as herd expansion begins. Continued strong U.S. prices for cattle and beef will continue to favor cattle and beef exports to the U.S. along with decreased imports of U.S. beef. Current exchange rates add to these incentives. However, limited cattle inventories and increased heifer retention in Mexico may moderate either cattle exports or beef exports or some combination of both. Early trade flows in 2015 may indicate that domestic Mexican cattle demand may be strengthening enough to retain more feeder cattle in the country. U.S. beef exports to Mexico will continue to face the disadvantage of high U.S. prices aggravated even more by a weak Mexican Peso. However, to the extent that Mexico continues to grow beef exports, imported beef will be needed to maintain domestic beef supplies. The increasingly bilateral nature of U.S.-Mexican beef trade emphasizes that beef trade is less about an imbalance in beef quantities in the two countries and more about the value enhancement from improved quality distribution and product mix in the two countries.

RAIN BRINGS SOME PLANTS WE HAVE NOT SEEN

It has been a long time since we have had moisture like this past fall and spring. It sure is nice to see. With this moisture we are seeing some plants that have been dormant for some time. One of my favorite is bright yellow flower low growing forb out in the desert. You see it in some fairly large patches to some small one but it is nice to see. This is comely called Fiddlers bladder pod. It is actually one of the few perennial mustard weeds, but it sit and wait until the moister is good then it grows and produces those yellow flowers and the seed pod that is reminiscent of a bladder hence the name bladder pod. There are a number of species of balder pod but the most common in Eddy County is the Fiddlers (Lesquerella fendleri). This makes wonderful sheep feed. The next plant we see a little more often it occurs in patches of purple flowers and is commonly called verbena (Abronia villosa). It in the four o’clock family of forbs. It is a soft-haired, sticky plant with bright pink, trumpet-shaped flowers in heads that bloom on stalks growing from leaf axils. Desert sand-verbena appears as a mat following winter rains, growing 20 in. across and 3-6 in high. Short, sticky hairs cover both the inch-long, oval, fleshy leaves and the many-branched stems. Erect, 1-3 in. stems bear conspicuous clusters of fragrant, lavender-pink flowers. This too is a perennial. The third one is a plant that all the ranchers are glad to see but home owner consider it a weed. That is Filaree Storksbill (Erodium cicutarium), also called "Heron-bill," this creeping desert plant is one of the first bloomers of the season. Red stems spread along the ground up to 20 inches long supporting flowers and tiny, sword-shaped fruits. Ripening seed pods twist into a spiral. Fern-like leaves are 1/2 to 4 inches long. Filaree, a member of the Geranium Family (Geraniaceae) was native to Eurasia and introduced into the US by early Spanish settlers then became naturalized in Eddy County and the Southwest. The Texas Storksbill (E. texanum) has flowers twice the size and is as widely distributed. Read more: http://www.desertusa.com/flowers/filaree-storksbill.html#ixzz3XCrIBjgd I often receive phone call on how to control this weed, usually after the plant is large and difficult to control. At which time it is best to manual remove the plant before the seeds mature and dispose in the dumpster or burn. It can be controlled with broad leaf herbicide, 2,4,D compounds, glyphosate when it is small. It is a winter annual weed so once it starts to set the seed head, just like London rocket mustard, it has completed its lifecycle and will soon die. In this stage all the nutrients and resources are going to the seed so herbicides have little or no effect on the plant. The exception are contact herbicides, like Germoxone, or Telar. Ones it starts flowering 2,4,D and glyphosate will have little or no effect. Eddy County Extension Service, New Mexico State University is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer and educator. All programs are available to everyone regardless of race, color, religion, sex, age, handicap, or national origin. New Mexico State University, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the Eddy County Government Cooperating.

CATTLE OUTLOOK – Ron Plain and Scott Brown

CATTLE OUTLOOK – Ron Plain and Scott Brown Ag Economics, MU April 10, 2015 Beef imports were up 48.8% during February with most of the increase coming from Australia, Brazil, Mexico and New Zealand. Beef imports equaled 14.4% of U.S. production during February. U.S. beef exports were down 2.6% in February with sizable declines in shipments to Mexico, Hong Kong and Canada. Beef exports equaled 10.1% of February production. Cattle imports from Canada were down 15.2% in February. Imports of cattle from Mexico were up 3.5% compared to February 2014. Domestic beef demand was up 12.5% in February compared to a year earlier. The April WASDE predicted 2015 beef production will be down 0.2% compared to last year with fed cattle prices averaging in the low $160s. Fed cattle prices this week were lower on light volume. Through Thursday, the 5-area average price for slaughter steers sold on a live weight basis was $163.13/cwt, down $3.54 from last week’s average, but up $13.81 from a year ago. The 5 area average dressed price this week for steers was $264.01/cwt, down 71 cents for the week, but up $24.43 compared to the same week last year. This morning the choice boxed beef cutout value was $257.16/cwt, up $1.19 from the previous Friday and up $34.89 from a year ago. The select carcass cutout was $251.05/cwt this morning, up $1.58 from last week and up $38.09 from a year ago. Cattle slaughter this week totaled 502,000 head, down 4.4% from the week before and down 12.7% from the same week last year. The average steer dressed weight for the week ending on March 28 was 874 pounds, up 3 pounds from the week before and up 22 pounds compared to the same week last year. Steer weights have been above year-ago each week since June 14, 2014. Feeder cattle prices at Oklahoma City were mostly steady to $3 higher this week. Prices for medium and large frame #1 steers by weight group were: 400-450# $309-$343, 450-500# $304, 500-550# $281-$301, 550-600# $253-$283, 600-650# $248-$268, 650-700# $229.50-$234.25, 700-750# $217-$225.50, 750-800# $212.50-$224.50, 800-900# $195.75-$213.25, and 900-1000#, $187.25-$199/cwt. The April live cattle futures contract settled at $158.80/cwt today, down $4.22 for the week. June fed cattle settled at $148.80/cwt, down $4.57 from the previous week. August fed cattle lost $3.27 this week to settle at $146.55/cwt. October live cattle ended the week at $148.42/cwt. The April feeder cattle contract ended the week at $212.45/cwt, down $7.92 for the week. May feeders settled at $209.72/cwt which is $7.73 lower than the week before. The August contract ended the week at $211.45/cwt.

Restricted access to waterways on private land could prompt legal battle

Taos News By Staci Matlock The Pecos River starts in the rugged mountains of the Pecos Wilderness on public land and winds its way down a narrow tree-lined canyon east of Santa Fe. The river is popular year-round with anglers, hikers and campers. The river, like others in the state, also cuts through private land. It waters farms like Ralph Vigil’s near the village of Pecos. But Vigil said too often, anglers and waders leave the river to avoid a tangle of brush and trees blocking the water, traipse across his land without permission and leave a mess along the way. They’ve cut fences, stolen from his garden and left trash behind. “They are disrespectful of our land,” said Vigil, the ninth-generation in his family to work the land. “They ruin areas where we spend money and break our backs trying to improve the river.” Vigil was among those who successfully pushed for a bill in the most recent legislative session that would make it illegal for anglers, boaters, hikers and others to wade or walk a public stream or river where it crosses private property without written permission from the landowner. The bill is now on the desk of Gov. Susana Martinez, who has not indicated whether she will sign it into law. Even if she does, it could be just the start of a prolonged legal battle expected to be launched by opponents who say the measure is unconstitutional and puts private interests above the public good. “There’s little question in my mind that, although the language used avoids stating it explicitly, the bill was intended to privatize public waters,” said Michael Hayes of the Adobe Whitewater Club of New Mexico. At issue is not only when and how the public can access streams and rivers across private land, but the property values of people who bought land along those waters, thinking they had exclusive rights to enjoy them. New Mexico isn’t the only state grappling with disputes between private landowners and the public over access to rivers and streams. Montana has a law that recognizes the right of the public to wade and walk as greater than the right of a private property owner to restrict public access. Colorado has a law that allows the public to float a river or stream across private property, but not set foot or drop anchor on the private streambed. Both laws have been challenged. By law, water flowing down the Pecos River and other New Mexico streams is public. But the streambed is sometimes private. A long-simmering dispute over whether anglers, bird watchers and people portaging a boat can walk in a streambed across private land led to the bill. “The real tragedy and irony is that the public will have to litigate at their expense for something that was theirs to begin with, the use of public waters,” said Garrett VeneKlasen, executive director of the New Mexico Wildlife Federation, which opposed the bill. But sportsman Jim Welles of Albuquerque said he was surprised stream access had become an issue. “I’ve always understood that privately posted land was just that,” said Welles, president of the New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides, which represents about 60 outdoor businesses. “I have always obtained written permission or verbal permission to access that private land.” The state Department of Game and Fish has told anglers for decades they are trespassing if they wade streams across private land without permission. The department’s website states that a person is trespassing if he or she “enters private property that is legally posted and they do not have written permission to be there. This includes stream and river bottoms located in private property.” But attorney Jason Kerkmans, a lifelong fly fisherman who studied the lawsuits and rules around stream access, said the department has no legal basis for restricting public access to streams across private land. Like Welles, Kerkmans grew up understanding the state Department of Game and Fish had a rule requiring permission from a landowner to follow a stream across private property. But as a law student, he looked more closely and found nothing to back up the rule. “Both sides of this issue have been wrong on what the law is, at different times,” Kerkmans said. “Ultimately, this will be something the Supreme Court will have to decide.” Kerkmans thinks the state constitution, and a prior state Supreme Court decision in a 1945 case known as Red River Valley, makes the public’s right to walk a stream across private land superior to the right of the property owner to restrict access. Rep. Luciano “Lucky” Varela, D-Santa Fe, also an angler, asked former New Mexico Attorney General Gary King to weigh in on the issue of permission. King’s April 2014 opinion saying the public had a right to walk in streambeds without a landowner’s permission set off a firestorm. “There was no clarification of really key definitions within the legislation,” VeneKlasen said. Boaters should be as worried as anglers or waders about what the law means, he added, because “clearly, this law says if you are floating and touch anything on private land without written permission, including the streambed, you are trespassing.” Vigil, who is also an angler, says there are plenty of places to fish on the state’s public waters. “There’s no reason to have to cross people’s private property,” he said. And Welles, a guide and also a real estate agent who sells riverfront parcels, said if private property owners can’t restrict access, it could reduce the value of land some of them bought years ago thinking they had an exclusive right. Hayes, a river runner, said the problem is that privatizing any portion of a public water can end up making the entire river or stream off-limits for recreational use. “I see this bill as completely abandoning New Mexico’s public trust doctrine in respect to the waters of the state,” Hayes said. Albuquerque Rep. Bill Rehm, the sole Republican to vote against the bill in the House, said the bill puts law enforcement officers in an awkward position. “I could be fishing with a friend on the friend’s property, and if a game warden asks me if I have written permission and I don’t, the officer has to make a decision,” said Rehm, a retired police officer. “He could be discriminating and not cite, or do his job and cite.” “I think they need to bring the bill back and rewrite it,” Rehm said. In economic terms, outfitters and guides support the stream access bill as one that will help their ventures, while boat guides and others say the bill will hurt their recreational businesses. The legal issues around stream access are convoluted and complex, ones Kerkmans outlined in a 2012 article he wrote for the New Mexico State Bar newsletter. Some states base the public’s right to use a river or stream on whether it is “navigable” and a boat can float on it well enough to deliver goods from one place to another. New Mexico has taken a different view of the public’s rights, he wrote. Kerkmans notes the state constitution declares “the unappropriated water of every natural stream, perennial or torrential within the state of New Mexico” belongs to the public and can be put to beneficial use. The state Supreme Court’s decision in the 1945 Red River Valley case interpreted the constitution as giving the public the right to “float and wade in any stretch of stream that passes through private land, so long as the public has legal access,” Kerkmans wrote. In addition, “The small streams of the state are fishing streams to which the public have a right to resort so long as they do not trespass on the private property along the banks,” the state Supreme Court found. Kerkmans said he understands private property owner angst over the unfettered use of streambeds through their land. But he believes the law is clear that the public has the right to use those streambeds for now. “Absent a constitutional amendment or a new holding by the New Mexico Supreme Court overruling Red River Valley then, in New Mexico, all natural streams are public waters and the public will retain an easement over any private property those streams pass over regardless of any other title the Game Commissioner or Legislature tries to give to those waters,” he wrote in an email.

Deal reached for new dairy rule

New Mexico Political Report By Matthew Reichbach A dispute between the Susana Martinez administration and environmental groups looks to be nearing a conclusion after more than four years of dispute. Environmental groups, citizens and dairies came to an agreement on Monday on rules governing protection of water. The agreement came just hours into hearings that were scheduled to last through the end of the week. The agreement is between the Citizens Dairy Coalition, which includes environmental groups and citizens who live near dairies, the Dairy Industry Group for a Clean Environment, which represents the dairy industry, the Attorney General and the state Environment Department. The Water Quality Control Commission will consider the agreement at its May meeting. At that meeting, the groups will be able to provide input to what will become the new administrative rule for dairies in relation to water. One concession by the Citizens Dairy Coalition was that dairies would be allowed to use clay liners. These are less expensive and the environmental groups say less effective than the synthetic versions. “This agreement, while offering more flexibility to both the industry and the Environment Department in permitting requirements, retains a system for monitor wells to provide early detection of groundwater pollution. Dairies will still be held responsible for cleaning up pollution they cause,” Dan Lorimier of the Sierra Club Rio Grande Chapter said in a statement. “To have collective buy-in from the Dairy Industry Group for a Clean Environment (DIGCE) and the Coalition on the stipulated proposal is a huge win for the public and all interested parties,” Environment Department General Counsel Jeff Kendall said in a statement. “If the Commission adopts the stipulated proposal we can return our focus and resources to regulating dairies and protecting the environment, under a regulatory framework that is manageable for NMED and transparent for permitted facilities.” New Mexico Environment Department Secretary Ryan Flynn said the location of the hearing was important. “We were pleased that the WQCC was able to conduct the hearing in the heart of New Mexico’s dairy region, here in Roswell, where the citizens and economy are most affected by these changes,” Flynn said. “As the Environment Department has argued all along, hearings on important rulemakings need to be held in locations where those most affected will be able to participate in the process regardless of the subject matter. In this case, that location is clearly southeast New Mexico.” “By enabling site specific discretion for the regulator, each dairy may attain groundwater compliance within the proposed rule, rather than seeking a variance to an overly prescriptive rule,” NMED Director of Environmental Protection Programs Trais Kliphuis said in a statement. “In addition, the contingency portion of the rule is improved to trigger evaluation of rising contamination trends before ground water quality is threatened by levels that exceed our protective standards.” Environmental groups had sought to have the hearing in Santa Fe. The controversy over the dairy rule came as soon as Martinez entered office. She attempted to block the dairy rule, which passed in late 2010, from being published. The executive order to stop the publication of the rule to the state register, which would put it in effect, came just minutes after she became governor. The state Supreme Court ruled that this was illegal and ordered the rule, and two others Martinez sought to stop from going into effect, published. Another dairy rule was passed in 2011 and went into effect but a push by the dairy industry for yet another new rule started immediately. Environmental groups said that the Environment Department stopped enforcing the 2011 rule in anticipation of the new rule.

Expect roadblocks statewide during hunting seasons

SANTA FE – The Department of Game and Fish will conduct roadblocks throughout the state during hunting seasons to collect harvest data and to detect wildlife law violations. Hunting season for youth turkey hunters starts April 10 and the general season starts April 15, as listed in the department’s Hunting Rules & Information booklets. At roadblocks, conservation officers also will check for compliance with the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Act and the Aquatic Invasive Species Control Act. Drivers of vehicles hauling wood products will be asked to produce documentation as required by the Forest Conservation Act. Department officers may be assisted by other law enforcement agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, New Mexico State Police or county sheriff’s offices. As a result, the public may encounter minor delays. To report a wildlife-law violation, please contact a Department of Game and Fish area office in Santa Fe, Albuquerque, Raton, Roswell or Las Cruces, or call the toll-free Operation Game Thief hotline at (800) 432-GAME (4263). Callers can remain anonymous and earn rewards for information leading to charges being filed.

USDA Expands Beef and Pork Trade with Mexico and Peru

USDA Continues to Remove Barriers and Open Trade Opportunities for U.S. Farmers and Ranchers DES MOINES, Iowa, April 10, 2015 - Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced today that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has recently reached agreements allowing U.S. beef and pork producers greater access to consumers in Mexico and Peru. The two agreements announced Friday will allow U.S. producers to export slaughter cattle to Mexico and expand access to consumer markets in Peru for U.S. fresh and chilled pork. The Secretary made the announcements during a meeting with producers in Des Moines, Iowa. "Our priority at USDA is not only to open or reopen markets for our producers, but to help drive U.S. economic growth through trade by supporting and creating American jobs on and off the farm," said Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack. "Mexico is an important market for U.S. cattle producers, with the potential to import $15 million of live U.S. cattle per year and we expect Peru's market could generate $5 million annually in additional pork sales." The United States and Mexico reached an agreement that takes effect immediately and will allow U.S. producers to export slaughter cattle to Mexico for the first time in over a decade. The USDA has been working with Mexico since 2008 to reopen this market and the final agreement was reached between USDA Under Secretary Ed Avalos and Enrique Sanchez-Cruz with SAGARPA during meetings this week in Washington, DC. Exporters and producers can find the required documents on the APHIS website or through their local Veterinary Services office. Similarly, USDA has conducted extensive negotiations with Peru's Servicio National De Sanidad Agraria (SENASA) since 2012 to expand access for U.S. fresh, chilled pork and pork products. USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service export library will be updated to the new export requirements for these pork and pork products exports. "More than one million people go to work every day thanks to exports of American-grown products. Expanded U.S. agricultural exports mean more new jobs, but our farmers and ranchers will miss out on new markets for American products if Congress doesn't act on Trade Promotion Authority early this year and if we don't continue to build support for a Trans-Pacific Partnership with Asian nations." USDA continues its push to eliminate all remaining trade barriers to U.S. cattle and cattle products stemming from past detections of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service continues to work with its trading partners to ensure any unnecessary requirements for U.S. origin beef are eliminated. The World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) considers the United States' to have negligible risk for BSE. This is OIE's lowest risk category for this disease. The U.S. Department of Agriculture continuously seeks opportunities for U.S. agricultural products and producers to expand access to overseas markets and contribute to a positive U.S. trade balance, to create jobs and to support economic growth. The past six years have represented the strongest period for American agricultural exports in the history of our country. In fiscal year 2014 American farmers and ranchers exported a record $152.5 billion of food and agricultural products to consumers worldwide. # USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. To file a complaint of discrimination, write: USDA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (866) 632-9992 (Toll-free Customer Service), (800) 877-8339 (Local or Federal relay), (866) 377-8642 (Relay voice users).

Mid Day Cattle Comment

April 10, 2015 Live Cattle: So far, only the April contract has set a new low from Monday's high. The June is only $.05 from a new low and the remainder of the months between $.20 and $.40. If June were to trade under $150.20, this will suggest that minor waves 1 & 2 are complete and minor wave 3 is in progress. Downside target for the minor wave 3 measures to $144.50. Although difficult to see, the June did gap down this morning. It was not by enough to clear yesterday's low, but it will show up on the candlestick chart as a gap down. This is anticipated to be a tough decline to overcome for futures. Previously, the futures were attempting to catch the cash, now it is anticipated that cash will turn and run towards the futures. Feeder Cattle: Now there are a multitude of articles and comments suggesting the profit margins, or the non-existence of, may be curtailing some of the buying. I understand that if you are going to be in the cattle business, you have to own or trade cattle. However, business is about making money or keeping from losing money. When the appearance of margins are thin, it would lead one to perceive that there is little room for risk. The futures being the fastest way to curtail that risk suggests to anticipate some acceleration in selling as the past 4 weeks is perceived to have marketed the bulk of the spring inventory. If producers are able to keep the recently purchased lighter weight cattle on pasture or programs, the bulk of inventory now coming to market is anticipated to be heavier, at a lower price, and therefore beginning to turn the feeder cattle index. All feeder cattle contract months have set a new low in this decline from Monday's high. This leads me to confirm the termination of a minor wave 1 & 2 and the beginning of minor wave 3. Downside target for the minor wave 3 basis August is $203.76. Up trend lines are being broken. Previous highs are being overlapped. Technical indicators are turned south. My analysis suggests the major wave B is or is nearly complete. This leads me to anticipate a major wave C decline that will be anticipated to be of equal length of the major wave A. Basis May, if you subtract the price width of the wave A, $43.57, from the high of the major wave B, $220.87, it produces a downside target to $177.30. In a simple zig zagcorrection, waves A and C are anticipated to be like in price width within the same magnitude of the wave count. Although the premiums on the recommended options below continue to increase, I perceive these still the most advantageous. I recommend buying the August $2.12 puts, and the October $210.00 puts. ***This is a sales solicitation.*** Corn: Corn is perceived completing a multi month, complex, correction. With the initial move, prior to the formation, having been a rally, I anticipate the break out to come to the upside

NMSU program at Corona focuses on solar water pumping, off-grid lighting

CORONA, N.M. – In New Mexico, remote ranches may not have ready access to electricity but almost always have access to abundant solar energy. So, how do you get from a sunny day to a usable solar electric system? Participants will be able to get answers about solar water pumping and off-grid lighting during the Wednesday, April 29, Beyond the Roundtable program at New Mexico State University’s Southwest Center for Rangeland Sustainability in Corona. “Ranches and other agricultural operations need to be efficient in managing their costs however possible,” said Shad Cox, superintendent of NMSU’s Corona Range and Livestock Research Center. “Experts at this program will give practical guidance on using solar energy as a power source – from solar electric system design to available cost shares and grants for installation costs.” The program will begin at 10 a.m. with a session on the basics of solar electric systems by Thomas Jenkins, professor of engineering technology with NMSU’s Engineering New Mexico Resources Network. Stirling Spencer of Bartz-Spencer Solar LLC will speak at 10:30 a.m. on water pumping design, installation and costs. Lunch will be provided at noon. At 1 p.m., Jenkins will discuss off-grid lighting, followed at 1:45 p.m. by a description of available publications and tools from the Engineering New Mexico Resources Network and NMSU’s Cooperative Extension Service. A discussion of available cost shares and grants for installation from the U.S. Department of Agriculture will be at 2:30 p.m. A roundtable discussion and case studies of solar applications will be at 3 p.m. Registration is free but limited to the first 45 participants. Register online at www.corona.nmsu.edu. For more information, contact Shad Cox at 575-849-1015 or shadcox@nmsu.edu. For directions to the center, visit the Corona Range and Livestock Research Center’s website at www.coronasc.nmsu.edu.

2015 New Mexico Cotton Conference Report

The New Mexico Cotton Conference took place on January 14th, 2015 at the Ruidoso Convention Center, Ruidoso, NM. About 70 farmers and stakeholders attended the conference. Topics presented during the cotton conference included cotton economic prospects, pest and weed control in reduced tillage systems, weed control in cotton, potential insect pests for 2015 growing season, and glandless cotton research and production in New Mexico. Other topics covered included cotton breeding developments at NMSU, cotton ginning research update and NM cotton seed production and certification. Several industrial representatives also presented updates on new and current products available for cotton production. We thank our speakers/moderators for 2015. Our speakers/moderators included Mr. Doug Starr (Calcot); Mr. Dennis Neffendorf (Orthman Manufacturing); Dr. Carol Sutherland (NMSU); Mr. Woods Houghton (Eddy County, Ag. Agent); Mr. Greg Alpers (Dow AgroSciences); Dr. Jinfa Zhang (NMSU); Dr. Robert Flynn (NMSU); Dr. John Idowu (NMSU), Dr. Jane Pierce (NMSU) Dr. Tracey Carrillo (NMSU) Mr. Michael Ronquillo (NMSU) and Dr. Ed Hughs (USDA-ARS). We also appreciate the efforts of Dr. Patrick Sullivan and Mr. Bill Chambers of the NM Cotton Boll Weevil Control Committee for their help. We thank our sponsors who generously donated to make our 2015 meeting a success. Our donors for 2015 included Bayer CropScience, Dow AgroSciences-PhytoGen, Americot/NexGen Cotton, BASF, Calcot, Inc., Crop Production Services, All-TEX Seed, Dyna-Gro, Farm Credit of New Mexico, Gowan USA, Helena Chemical, Jess Smith, Mesa Farmers’ Cooperative, NMSU Seed New Mexico State University Extension Plant Sciences Cotton Newsletter: Volume 6, Number 1 (April 2015) 2 Certification, Pecos Valley Implement/John Deere, South Plains Implement/John Deere and West Gaines Seed and Delinting