090115 The Year In Agriculture: 2008
January 12, 2009
By Lisa Hare, Yankton Press & Dakotan -- One year ago, I wrote a feature on free
trade and the agricultural climate in our globalized economy. It was written in January —
pre-$8 corn; pre-$17 soybeans; pre-$20 wheat. It was before crude oil slipped past $100 a
barrel.
Who could have guessed how it all would work out? A short year later, with the U.S.
economy in a major recession and the global economy in turmoil, one could reasonably
argue that despite record highs in so many commodity markets, very little has "worked
out" for U.S. farmers.
MARKETS
In that story from last January, then-president of the National Family Farm Coalition
George Naylor warned, "Only the 'deep pockets' will be able to survive the economic
storm that will result when prices collapse."
And true to Naylor's foretelling, in the space of less than three months, the record
prices realized by most major commodities were cut in half.
"There were a lot of things that were so unprecedented that a year ago, no one could
have believed they'd be possible," said Brian Hoops, president of Midwest Market
Solutions, Inc. in Yankton.
Hoops attributed the enormous inflows of money from outside investors into the grain
markets to the record prices.
"When they pulled that money out, of course the prices dropped," he said.
The World Bank now estimates that global trade will shrink this year by more than 2
percent — the first set-back in globalization in more than a quarter-century.
U.S. ag exports hit a record $115 billion in fiscal 2008, but a failure to enact stalled,
bilateral free-trade agreements limited further export growth.
Doha Round's failure means countries can impose tariffs that could further shrink
global trade volumes by $728 billion to $1.7 trillion, according to a new report by the
International Food Policy Research Institute.
"On the whole, we'll have lower prices, because we'll have less speculative money in
the market," said Hoops. He added that the upside to that is, marketing should be less
frustrating for farmers. "We'll start to respond to more traditional fundamentals rather
than watching what crude oil and the U.S. dollar and the stock market are doing," Hoops
said.
But, Hoops also added that he believes the farming sector of the U.S. will be impacted
by the crunch in the overall economy.
"I think we're going to see more consolidation," he said. "There will be contraction in
the farm sector — like what we went through in the '80s, and in the hog markets in the
'90s."
Hoops predicts agriculture is entering a phase during which some people are going to
go out of business.
"Maybe some elevators, some of them family farms," he said.
"Farm prices will continue to contract for a while," he added.
That's not the best news for producers looking ahead to 2009.
With 2008's record prices for corn, soybeans and wheat that reached $8, $17 and $20
per bushel, respectively, farmers saw inputs skyrocket accordingly.
Now, with corn at a two-year low below $3 in early December and beans below $8,
farmers are saying they need $4-$4.50 corn and at least $9 for beans to be profitable with
this year's higher input costs.
"We're at a very vulnerable position," said Nebraska Farmers Union president John
Hansen. "All our production costs that are already set need to be offset by market prices,
but the commodity prices have already collapsed."
Another factor which will affect producers in the 2009 growing and marketing seasons
is the change in the income safety net provision of the Farm Bill.
"Commodity prices need to equalize with production costs because the income safety
net is not there," Hansen said. He added that if the federal deficit continues to worsen,
more of those funds intended for the safety net could get funneled into other programs.
In the livestock markets, hog prices have taken a tumble on speculation that export
demand for U.S. pork will decline.
USDA data showed U.S. pork shipments in 2009 will fall to 4.1 billion pounds, down
8.9 percent from a November forecast — effected in part by Mexico's recent ban on U.S.
meat products. It is a response, some speculate, due to its alliance with Canada in
opposition to U.S. Country of Origin Labeling mandate.
Cattle prices have slumped for the same reason, adding to that speculation that demand
for beef will fall as the recession deepens and U.S. economy continues to tighten.
POLICY
The biggest change in ag policy for the year came with the enactment of the Farm Bill.
Enacted in late June, the 2008 Farm Bill has 15 titles and more than 600 provisions —
50 percent more than the 2002 Farm Bill.
Highlights include :
• Country-of-Origin-Labeling mandate;
• Addition of Emergency Watershed and Emergency Conservation programs;
• Expanded Renewable Energy Development Programs.
But many producers and farm organizations were disappointed with the outcome of
some of the more contentious provisions of the Farm Bill, such as the competition title
and a lower AGI cap for receiving subsidies.
Another landmark case, still in debate, came in March when JBS, the world's largest
beef packer , announced its intention to purchase National Beef and the Smithfield Beef
group. Those acquisitions would have reduced the U.S. cattle market from five major
packers to just three and would have made JBS the largest U.S. beef packer with nearly
35 percent of the cattle slaughter market, followed closely by Tyson and Cargill. The top
four packers — JBS, Tyson, Cargill and National — together slaughter more than 85
percent of U.S. cattle. The cause of these competitive problems is the packers' use of
captive supplies, which permits the meatpackers to manipulate prices and drive down
compensation to cattle producers.
But on Oct. 20, the U.S. Justice Department and 13 state attorneys general filed a
lawsuit with the U.S District Court in Chicago seeking to stop the Brazilian meatpacker's
from violating U.S. antitrust laws with its proposed acquisition of National Beef Packing.
According to the Justice Department, their antitrust suit was joined by the states of
Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma,
Oregon, South Dakota, Texas and Wyoming.
Then, on Dec. 15, the DOJ and the state attorneys general involved suspended their
lawsuit to instead enter into settlement negotiations with JBS.
Cattle producers, along with several farm organizations, are anxiously awaiting
resolution on the issue in 2009.
ENERGY
Crude oil — tied more tightly to the ag economy than ever before — hit a record high
in 2008 when it climbed above $100 a barrel. By year's end, crude contract for February
settled at $37 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
Though lower fuel costs have given consumers and producers alike some breathing
room amidst a choking economy, focus on renewable energy development remains high.
"The renewable energy sections of the new Farm Bill are very farmer- and rural
development-friendly," Hansen said.
The 2008 Energy Independence and Security Act set a goal of producing 36 billion
gallons of biofuels by 2022 — a mandate that was meant to give a big boost to biofuel
makers. But a December report from the U.S. Energy Information Administration cast
doubt on that goal, saying the nation will probably only be able to produce 30 billion
gallons by that deadline.
The woes of corn-based ethanol companies were highlighted by the demise of the once
high-flying VeraSun Energy Corp., which declared bankruptcy in October.
"Who would have though that VeraSun — one the biggest ethanol companies —
would file bankruptcy?" Hoops said.
VeraSun billed itself as the world's largest ethanol company, with 14 ethanol plants
with a capacity to produce 1.4 billion gallons of ethanol per year — about 14 percent of
the U.S. ethanol production capacity.
But, like other makers of corn-based ethanol, the company had contended with high
corn prices and subsequent razor-thin margins through much of the year, and had
amassed about $1.5 billion in debt.
While nearly all makers of corn-based ethanol in 2009 saw their business drop and
valuations plummet, companies promising to make ethanol, biodiesel and a host of other
liquid fuels from non-food sources like switchgrass, trash and algae raked in the cash.
Whether those "next-generation" biofuel companies will do as well in 2009 is an open
question, however. None have so far produced fuel in commercial volumes at prices the
market can bear. And whether venture capitalists will continue to have an appetite for
investing in order to get them there is another question, given the global economy.
A recent survey by investment firm ThinkEquity indicates that cellulosic ethanol
companies will be able to supply only 28.5 million gallons in 2010, short of the
government's 100 million gallon goal
President-elect Barack Obama promised during his campaign to push for the country to
use 60 billion gallons of "advanced" biofuels by 2030. He pledged to require that all new
vehicles sold in the country be "flex-fuel" vehicles, able to use fuel containing mostly
biofuel, by the end of his first term. And he called for a national low-carbon fuel standard
that could be a boon to the industry.
ENVIRONMENT
A report issued in April by the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge,
Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) — a report initiated by more than
400 scientists from around the world — said the way the world grows its food will have
to "change radically to better serve the poor and hungry if the world is to cope with a
growing population and climate change while avoiding social breakdown and
environmental collapse."
The assessment was considered by 64 governments at an intergovernmental panel in
Johannesburg, South Africa, that same month.
The authors' brief was to examine food production systems in place in relation to
hunger, poverty, the environment and equity.
Though modern agriculture has brought significant increases in food production, the
report claims the benefits have been spread unevenly and have come at an increasingly
intolerable price, paid by small-scale farmers, workers, rural communities and the
environment.
The authors have assessed evidence across a wide range of knowledge that is rarely
brought together. They conclude that continuing with current trends would exhaust our
resources and put our future in jeopardy.
What started in 2007 with E. coli bacteria found in fresh spinach, continued into 2008
with melamine-laced gluten, tomatoes with salmonella and thousands of cases of
contaminated drinking water resulting from spring flooding.
As stated in the IAASTD report, the way to meet challenges in producing enough food
lies in putting in place institutional, economic and legal frameworks that combine
productivity with the protection and conservation of natural resources like soils, water,
forests, and biodiversity while meeting production needs.
While the year saw an explosion in organic farming and "buy-local" programs,
political will still falls far from the tree of environmental protectionism.
California poultry and egg production, as well as a few meat processing facilities, were
brought under scrutiny on the basis of humane treatment of animals. But the far-reaching
environmental effects of industrialized agriculture — such as antibiotic resistance, nitrate
poisoning and shrinking ecologies of water and soil life — are issues for which no
policies exist, though carbon trading, which gained momentum in the U.S. in 2008, is tip-
toeing in that direction.
"To argue, as we do, that continuing to focus on production alone will undermine our
agricultural capital and leave us with an increasingly degraded and divided planet is to
reiterate an old message," said Professor Bob Watson, Director of IAASTD. "But it is a
message that has not always had resonance in some parts of the world."
LOOKING AHEAD
As eventful and unpredictable as 2008 was, by all accounts, 2009 promises to be every
bit as interesting.
Farmers and ranchers have always been the providers of food and sustenance, and they
continue to be, though the nature of that role has grown more complex in recent years.
"Every fiscal and financial problem that is faced by the rest of our society and the
international community will eventually percolate to U.S. agriculture," Hansen said.
The New Year dawns on the U.S. in the midst of what some fear may be the second
Great Depression for the nation. Though we try to take our lessons from history where we
can, our more globalized method of production agriculture sets this era apart from the
Dirty Thirties. There are many more interwoven variables — to the problems and their
solutions.
"We must cooperate now, because no single institution, no single nation, no single
region, can tackle this issue alone. The time is now," said IAASTD panel member
Professor Judi Wakhungu.
No matter how you slice it, president-elect Obama, newly appointed Secretary of
Agriculture Tom Vilsack, and on down to each individual farmer and rancher have a
tremendous task and responsibility at hand that only a more wholely inclusive perspective
can encompass.
"You name it, every sector is connected," Hansen said.
As U.S. farmers and ranchers embark on 2009's uncharted path, only one thing is
certain: It's bound to be very different from 2008.
RETURN TO HOME PAGE
RETURN TO ARCHIVE PAGE