The Forestry Forum

General Forestry => Archives => Poll Archive => Topic started by: Ron Wenrich on December 29, 2006, 09:32:37 PM

Poll
Question: How do you think the economy will fare in 2007?
Option 1: A lot better votes: 4
Option 2: A little better votes: 18
Option 3: About the same votes: 30
Option 4: A little worse votes: 27
Option 5: A lot worse votes: 3
Title: 2007
Post by: Ron Wenrich on December 29, 2006, 09:32:37 PM
Time to dust off the crystal ball and make your 2007 predictions.  Poll expires 1-14-07

For what its worth, here is what we predicted last year:

A lot better - 13%
A little better - 23.5%
About the same - 32.2%
A little worse - 25.2%
A lot worse - 6.1%
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: sjh on December 29, 2006, 09:39:24 PM
I think a little worse. A good indicater to me is how many costruction workers are working. Around Rochester NY not many as should be.
Scott
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Furby on December 29, 2006, 09:48:21 PM
I'd like to know the stats on this year if anyone knows them.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Faron on December 29, 2006, 09:56:06 PM
It is looking like the next several years may be very good for agriculture.  That can mean improvement in related sectors of the economy.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: DanG on December 29, 2006, 10:18:51 PM
I checked "about the same" because I think things will continue to improve as they have in the past few years.  While it is true that construction starts are a bit down, I look for a boom in the "affordable" housing market.  From what I've seen, folks are beginning to realize that we cannot sustain the glut of $million homes that have been built recently, but there is a big need for more modest houses.

I see the family farm coming back, though it probably won't be seen all that much in just one year.  It will be, IMHO, a gradual change in the way agri-business is done, over the next few decades.

Mostly, though, I base my short term economic optimism on the fact that we are at war.  The domestic economy has always done well in wartime. :-\
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Ron Wenrich on December 29, 2006, 10:22:46 PM
A lot depends on what you want to use as your indicator.  Although the GDP is increasing, it is doing it at a much slower pace.  Unemployment is down, but that's a lagging indicator.  Average hourly wages are up, but they are always up.

This past year has been pretty bumpy.  We've had some really high energy prices to contend with, now we are having high grain prices.  Will that end up as higher food costs?  Housing has dropped off by 25% and prices are starting to fall.  It has affected some parts of the wood industry, but not much in other parts.  Interest rates have gone up, but inflation hasn't fallen off that much. 

So, there's a lot that you can look at.  Its said that a recession is when your neighbor loses his job.  A depression is when you lose yours.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: DanG on December 29, 2006, 10:58:29 PM
Yep, housing prices are starting to fall.  Is that bad?  Only if you're selling.  I look at a "good" economy as one where the common man can afford to better his situation.  Housing markets have been absurdly high, of late, and the average fellow couldn't find anything he could buy.  I view lower housing prices as a positive thing.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Tom on December 29, 2006, 11:34:06 PM
Jacksonville is booming with new construction.  The homes (starter homes?) are in the "low" $200,000's.

I don't know about you, but $200,000 and "low" don't belong in the same sentence.  When I was working, I could have afforded this price but would not have done it. Homes then were starting around $80,000 and still too much for a young couple starting off.

We are creating a society that will have no home or land.  The housing boom is self supporting and I think will crash inside of 5 years when the carpenters can no longer buy the houses to live in and the grocery stores can't sell groceries to workers who have no money.

This year will sustain more of the same "growth" that has been seen over the last 5 years.  I just see it as being to no avail.  If I were a young person, I would be trying to leave rather than invest in an overextended balloon.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: DanG on December 30, 2006, 01:44:49 AM
That's exactly what I'm talkin' about, Tom.  Communities along the SE coast of Fla are already experiencing problems related to the high cost of land and housing.  They are going to fall over soon, because of it, too.  The trouble is, there is nowhere for the service class of people to live, so they are leaving in droves.  Now, there is nobody to run the convenience stores, or any other kind of stores for that matter, or to repair the autos and homes that have clogged the area.  Now, I know that doesn't sound very optimistic, but if that area goes down, the rest of the Country might just take heed, and see that EVERYBODY needs a place to live.  If they do, then the housing "crash" might just turn out to be a "boom" instead.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Ron Wenrich on December 30, 2006, 08:17:40 AM
Remember those good old days when you had to have 20% down just in order to buy a home?  That isn't the case anymore.  A lot of people have now gotten to the point where they have sucked all the equity out of their homes and then just make monthly payments to the bank.

But, when housing values drop, these folks are in a negative situation and have to make up the difference.  So, if their homes drop $10,000 in value, they need to come up with the difference just to satisfy their equity position.  If they had home equity, there wouldn't be a problem. 

Down in your area, there was a lot of speculation.  Housing values went way up, and people just refinanced so they had money to spend on other trinkets, instead of paying off the debt. 

If people want affordable housing, then they are going to have to settle for a lot smaller homes.  Things that don't have those high utility bills and high taxes.  But, builders don't make as much money on those, so they build the more expensive ones.  Then you run into the problem the car companies have.  They made a lot of expensive SUVs only to find that no one wanted them.  So, they got stuck with inventory.  Same thing with housing.

Things are going to start getting tougher as the boomers retire.  They will want to move to smaller housing due to needs and fixed incomes.  More of the big homes will be for sale, but there will be fewer buyers that can afford them.  You'll see the same thing in the stock market when boomers start to cash in their retirement accounts for a more stable income producer.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: dave7191 on December 30, 2006, 01:10:11 PM
 Well I'm going to be optimistic and say it will stay about the same  You were saying that ag was doing well that is only the grain farmer and even then the fuel prices have taken most of the price increase the meat and dairy industry is hurting because of the feed prices we have taken a .60 hit per rabbit in the last 4 months  was talking to the neighbor the other day and he said that his calf feed had gone up to 168 a ton fron 110  the dairys are having the same trouble with no increase in milk prices Housing cost are
starting down and that may help things some
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: DanG on December 30, 2006, 01:17:14 PM
Just call me a cockeyed optimist, but I think a crash might be a good thing, in the long run.  Sure, some hapless souls will lose their shirt, but maybe that will encourage them to start making shirts instead of just sitting there shuffling other people's money around.  The Constitution guarantees us the right to pursue happiness, but that doesn't ensure that we're gonna catch it.  I don't view it a tragedy if somebody who has been living high suddenly has to live like I do. :o ::)

Dave, that's exactly why I think the family farm is coming back.  My Grandpa had a little dairy, and he, along with my Uncles, raised all their own feed.  They were up before dawn to milk, and were out after dark milking.  In between, they tended the crops that fed the cows that fed them.  This notion that ya have to buy everything has got to go!
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: TexasTimbers on December 30, 2006, 02:22:09 PM
I am the sole vote for Alot Better!

You Naysayers can kiss my Grits!  ;D

But don't eat 'em I like 'em as much as DanG.  ;)

Probably more so now that they are on my "You can't eat that anymore" list

But back to the economy. It is going to be our best year yet in terms of almost everything. It might be our best worst year in terms of others. Pick your battles, praise God, and pass the ammunition (and the Girts!).

P.S. I think we will nab Osama on April fools day too. You heard it here first on the FF newswire . . . . . . .
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: D._Frederick on December 30, 2006, 03:33:07 PM
What about Exxon-Mobil paying a $400 million going away present to thier  ex-CEO? Our nation is out of balance in paying CEO's, the crooks have taken over our corporations.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: TexasTimbers on December 30, 2006, 04:01:50 PM
Quote from: D._Frederick on December 30, 2006, 03:33:07 PM. . . . the crooks have taken over our corporations. .. . .

Yep there will always be corruption and crime and sin. Even a cursory study of America's history of commerce and business endeavors of early entrepreneurs will point to a history of this from even before our country was officially founded. But there also comes a reckoning.

In the meantime do your best, be your best, live your best, forget the rest. Have a great year in spite of them.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: farmerdoug on December 30, 2006, 06:55:41 PM
After the 911 attack I remember an government econimist say that the econmy would get back on its feet if the people would just step up to the plate and start borrowing with equity they still have and spend it.  ::) What a crock of DanG.

When I was in High School I remember them saying that you should save aleast 20% of you pay.  When I finished college that was down to 10%.  By the mid 90's they said the interest is to low so spend it all.  By 2000 they said borrow as the interest rates are so low you are stupid not too.  :( Now this generation has not saved a dime and penisons and SS are disappearing fast.  DanG if we do not reeducate people there will be alot of homeless to come. >:(

Farmerdoug
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: dave7191 on December 30, 2006, 07:36:59 PM
 DanG that is one of the problems with raising rabbits is that they need the prosessed food to be produtive enough to pay to raise them and may be why we add to the goat herd and cut the rabbits way back at least till the market stablizes capasity for 150 working does don't have but 100 now and may cut it to 50
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Part_Timer on December 30, 2006, 08:39:15 PM
What I'm wondering is where the dairy/cattle farmers are going to get their corn around here.  They are breaking ground on 5 ethanol plants within 45 minutes of the house one of which ( Jay county) is supposed to be the largest this side of the Mississippi river. 

I was talking to our Electric company rep at work the other day and he was telling me of 4 more bout 2 hours south of here.  I asked him where they were going to get the power for all of them, my lights go out here 2-3 times a week as it is.  Guess I better get a bigger generator.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Paul_H on December 30, 2006, 09:57:58 PM
Iowa Corn Link (http://www.iowacorn.org/ethanol/ethanol_12.html)

Distillers dry grains can be fed to cattle after distilation and apparently the yeast adds extra protein.Does anybody here have experience with DDG's?
It sounds interesting.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Fla._Deadheader on December 30, 2006, 10:20:13 PM

FINALLY. Someone has said that you can get 2 times the value from Corn and also other grains. 

 
QuoteDistillers dry grains can be fed to cattle after distilation and apparently the yeast adds extra protein.

  I was trying to make that point on another thread a long while back, but, no one would listen. Same for Bio fuels, too.

  There is LOTS that can help with energy, right there in the States or anywhere.  8)
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: DanG on December 31, 2006, 12:57:49 AM
Yep, FDH!  You can take a 40lb bushel of corn, extract all the corn oil from it, then make all the alchohol you can out of it, and still have 32 pounds of cattle feed.  That's what all the naysayers are overlooking.  They are also ignorant of the fact that we can take all the manure that is produced by the cattle, as well as poultry, and compost it in methane digesters, then use the residue to fertilize the fields to grow some more.  We are already independant of petroleum, but don't even know it yet!  The so-called "farmers" around here are putting pine plantations in their fields to get that $42 per acre/per year from the CRP, and "working" at the university so they can buy their food at the supermarket! ??? ::)
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Norm on December 31, 2006, 08:10:26 AM
An Iowa corn link! DDG's are an excellent source of feed for cattle, unfortunately other animals are not able to digest it as well (piggers poultry and such). Where's the energy come from to produce it? One place is on the main rail line out of Wyoming another is teaming up with a big cattle feed yard burning the backside of the cattle. Some are putting up windmills (Iowa is a windy prairie state). Even then there is only so much corn to be had and the holy grail will be using celluose products for ethanol. There's tons of dollars in research being devoted to it and my guess is we'll have it in 5-7 years.

No one renewable energy will stop our oil use or even cut it much but it amazes me when oil gets expensive through supply and demand (not taxes) people start finding other ways to run the car and heat the house.

Me I think the economy will be about the same, 06 will be hard to beat. I already had to buy another wheelbarrow to take all the cash to the bank. ;D
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: farmerdoug on December 31, 2006, 08:37:03 AM
I am not sure if the yeast really adds that much protien to distillers grain.  The biggest thing going for distillers grain for cattle is you can feed alot more of it at a time to the cows replacing other protein sources than you can feed of regular corn.  Corn still has the starches in it and the distillers grain the starches have been removed for the ethanol therefore increasing the protein percentage that route.  The sugars and starches cause a real problem with cows causing bloating and can kill them so the distillers grain is much safer.  Therefore there will be more feedstock available from corn for the cows than can actually be used now.  The real problem will be the shift to corn production on other grains.  This will probably cost us more at the supermarket as ussual.

Farmerdoug
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Fla._Deadheader on December 31, 2006, 08:45:14 AM

The BIG picture is, there are BETTER crops to grow for fuel production than Corn. Don't know WHY everyone gets het up over Corn. It is HARD on the ground, taking LOTS of nutrients. There is LOTS of waste. You have to DRY it, for some applications or to store it for future use.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Patty on December 31, 2006, 09:13:15 AM
Yep, they are talking about converting several wasted acres of farm land into growing alternate crops for ethanal production. As long as oil prices stay high, alternate sources of fuel will be created. If oil prices drop, so does the incentive for alternate fuels. FOLLOW THE MONEY!   ;)

I used to actually listen to the chicken little doom sayers....what a downer! Once I learned to ignore them and follow my instincts, my world turned around and became a place of joy.   


The Future is so bright, I gotta wear shades!  8) 8)  (my favorite song)
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: farmerdoug on December 31, 2006, 09:20:48 AM
I think corn is the darling right now because it is cheap, easy the convert and the system to produce it is already in place.

I am looking for the refinement in producing methanol from biomass, then you can really use an underuesed resource.  The sad thing is that most methanol is made from natural gas now a days as it is cheaper than from biomass i guess.  As the price of grain rises the tech for produce methanol cheaply will probably replace ethanol I hope.

The same can be said for biodiesel.  There is now even a fraction of the oil to produce enough biodiesel to replace dino diesel either.

Farmerdoug
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Part_Timer on December 31, 2006, 10:07:23 AM
OOPS my bad.  I didn't know that the byproduct went into cattle feed.  I guess that answers my question.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: SPIKER on December 31, 2006, 10:46:56 AM
I know of at least 3 plants under construction and or getting permits to begin construction in the ethanol plants that is.  producing bio-gas & e85.   bad thing is they should be making more bio-diesel and producing more small 3~4 cyl cars running those like they do in Europe.   right now you can get a VW that gets 45+ over there while they won't even offer them here!   I know one guy who put a 3 cyl china made diesel into his 80 something compact mazda pickup and is gettign 50+ ,mpg...   now he did a lot of machining work to do so but the tech is pretty OLD so no real excuses other than EPA and peoples ignorance...

I'm the only vote for MUCH WORSE as like someone said a collapse is coming but when.   Here in ohio every day headlines are some other big employer is leaving & going overseas to produce cheaper stuff.   OK that is fine but who will  be able to afford buying it?   my company 3rd one I been at in lat 5 yrs is cut back hrs to ~32 hrs a week on average.   todays year in review top story was big plant closings...

most of us on this site have land/property and equipment to support our selves and each other.  what is going to happen (and has been happening for years) is city dwellers won't be able to buy, live work & eat there so they will move out in to the country driving up prices and making more and more need for fuel/gas pressure on the country dwellers lively hood.

While we are actually making something to contribute to the US many of the people are only making payments to the banks which are owned by other governments and or to the oil companies ect.   the big CEOs do little to actually RUN a company yet take billions in bonuses and or pay & benefits usually out of the workers pockets so that the workers can't buy the product, then CEO says I can get even more $ if I make it all over seas paying 1 buck a day to the worked & ship it back saving the company millin0os a day so my bonus check then triples...   the little guy is one that gets left out CEOS get big payday...   soon things will change and I think it will be this year...  so call me a doomsayer ;)

markM
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Rocky_Ranger on December 31, 2006, 10:54:02 AM
Back before I went back into the business of forestry I had a hog and cattle farm and did feed the mash from an ethanol plant.  Man, that stuff smells so good when it runs out that conveyor all warm and wet.  Some dairy folks started feeding it and things went sour (poor choice of words here) in a hurry.  It molds pretty quick.  Not a problem for hogs but milk tests are another story.  After the lawsuits the plant went out of business.  That was back in the 1980's - I wish I know then what I know now, I'd bought that thing.  The mash is very wet and warm, causing it to sour and mold up pretty quick.  Drying would take a lot of energy to get it down to a usable MC%.  Feeding it as it comes out would be great but that 's alot of mash for a critter to feed. 

By the way, I think things will be a little better this next year (2007).
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: TexasTimbers on December 31, 2006, 11:44:43 AM
Quote from: farmerdoug on December 31, 2006, 09:20:48 AM
I think corn is the darling right now

You might be right but I lost my fanny in corn in '97. Once bitten twice shy.  :o
I am sticking with oil. Small investing is still possible with oil unlike the popular belief that you must invest tens of thousands. You can buy shares several ways and often without a broker, without big minimums, and without taking huge risks. You can also go for a little risk if you want to play the short term market through the new e-mini contracts offered by the NYME. But that is for investors with a little experience and with eyes wide open and with risk capital.
DRIPs are a fantastic option for everyone, and if you are willing to do the due dilligence it takes you can invest directly in some drilling operations with as little as $5000.
But there are plenty of ways to invest in oil without huge risks. If it goes down it is no different than waiting through a MS ot TI valley. Hold 'em. I can almost assure you the bottom is not going to drop out out of oil anytime soon. :P
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: farmerdoug on December 31, 2006, 12:45:33 PM
Around here the dairy farmers use dry distillers grains.  I am sure you could also get the wet one also, but the dry stores alot better.

We have a plant to the north of us that has been producing for several years now.  There is one going in just south of us in Marysville that will produce 100 million plus gallons a year.

The profit is high in those plants because of the high gas prices.  I do not see them bringing down the price of fuel though.

Farmerdoug
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Fla._Deadheader on December 31, 2006, 01:54:46 PM

Not as much use for Ethanol as fuel. Used as additive for E85 more or less.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: farmerdoug on December 31, 2006, 06:49:41 PM
True, but I think the gasoline as more likely the additive in E85.  When they can build a plant and recoupe the costs in less then 5 years there is bucu profits there.

Farmerdoug
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Fla._Deadheader on December 31, 2006, 07:13:05 PM

Es Correcto, 85% Ethanol.

  Methanol is made by destructive distillation. Get something like 1 1/2 gallons per ton of wood ??
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: farmerdoug on December 31, 2006, 07:20:30 PM
That is one way.  You get alot of charcoal that way also. ;D

They are also working on an easier way with better production using fermentation just like ethanol.  I know it can be done with fermentation but the process is long and cumbersome.

Farmerdoug
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Woodcarver on January 01, 2007, 01:09:58 AM
There's a practical limit to the amount of distillers grains that can be fed to dairy cattle.  Too much results in a reduction in the butterfat content of the milk.  That's lost income to the dairy farmer.

Title: Re: 2007
Post by: farmerdoug on January 01, 2007, 09:44:13 AM
I beleive that the limit is 22% or 22 lbs per day in the diet, I am not sure which but it is double the allowable amount of corn though.  It allows a reduction in the daily feed of haylage or silage too and therefore saves on the production costs too.

Farmerdoug
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Tom on January 01, 2007, 10:36:43 AM
What does it do to Hogs and chickens?
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: DanG on January 01, 2007, 11:32:29 AM
Good question, Tom.  Cows ain't the only beasts that can use the stuff, and dairy cows ain't the only bovines, either.

I'm wondering what it would do to/for the small farmer.  Is it possible that a good, stable market for grains would make it practical again to grow 20-100 acres for a little income boost?  There are an awful lot of us wannabe farmers out here that have a few acres laying fallow.  There are a bunch of tractors and other equipment that's not being used for very much.  I can see an opportunity for a fellow to buy harvesting equipment and make some money in contract harvesting.  Such a movement could also cause the equipment mfrs to produce some smaller stuff, too.  My Uncle used to have a small, pull-behind combine that ran off the PTO on the tractor.  I don't think they've made those in many years, because it was no longer practical.  They could/would make them again, if there was a market for them.  It would be good for that industry, too. 
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Tom on January 01, 2007, 11:57:44 AM
I anticipate the government permitting/licensing the growing of corn and other grain crops if and when the volume of alcohol fuels begins to grow.  Much the same as they did for tobacco.  Bureaucrats will not be able to resist controlling the dollars and any excuse will do.  The first reason they will give is that the farmers are making their own beer and distilled beverages.

It's not the money, nor the product, nor the grain that proposes the problem, it's the control. God forbid that a citizen finds a way to begin crawling out from under Big Government's thumb.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: DanG on January 01, 2007, 12:20:26 PM
Cantankerous old curmudgeon! ::)
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Tom on January 01, 2007, 12:28:38 PM





;D
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: farmerdoug on January 01, 2007, 01:53:54 PM
The distillers grain is a high protein source so I do not see why it cannot be fed to anything that uses protein.  I know that it is in health food stores.  It is used in cat and dog food also.

I think the small farmer can make money for a while as the big farmers want big feilds to work.  The only problem is the when the farmers start making a little money the cost of input go up.  Just look at the price of fertilizer rising the last few years.

Farmerdoug
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Norm on January 01, 2007, 05:06:43 PM
You can use it to feed anything that needs protein in it's diet. The reason it's not as desirable to feed some is that it replaces a protein that is better utilized by that animal, soy protein for example. They will still gain weight but not as efficiently as with the protein it replaces.

Almost all of the new ethanol plants are the kind that have dry distillers grain as a leftover. The wet mill ones are for the most part converting to it.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Don_Papenburg on January 02, 2007, 12:29:07 AM
Someone mentioned grain prices going up and the prices at the grocery store also going up as a result.    Well it does not compute    Today corn is 2.58 at the elevator.  a Bu. of corn is 56lb.  a 14 OZ. box of corn flakes is 3.70     That is 64 boxes of cerial from a Bu. of corn. Maybe more because there are other things in cornflakes. Lets say 10 OZ per box. Making a Bu. of corn into 89.5 boxes of cerial
The price for the corn in that box is  whopping $0.o28 . That is less than 3cents a box  So we can double  the price paid to the farmer and never feal the 3cent increase in production cost.    The same works for bread  and other products. Farm prices can double and not effect the price of the consumer product. 
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: DanG on January 02, 2007, 01:34:13 AM
Naww Don, it don't compute.  But if the corn price doubled and they had to pay $0.056 per box, corn flakes would jump to $15 per box and Kelloggs would be screaming for a government bailout. ::) :D :D
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Ron Wenrich on January 02, 2007, 06:00:24 AM
When Tiger Woods graced the corn flakes boxes, it was said that he made more from each box of flakes than the farmer who produced it did. 
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: farmerdoug on January 02, 2007, 08:35:55 AM
They just use the price as an excuse to raise their prices.  My dad said in the early 70's that wheat went sky high(5-7 dollars a bushel I beleive) and the price of bread jumped big time too.  Well the price of wheat fell back to normal as usual but the price of beard never did come back down.  They saw that people got use to the price and just keep it there.  Just like OPEC with the oil prices.  I remember just a couple of years ago they were complaining the the oil prices were below 20 a barrel and they really needed to be around 28/barrel.  Now they are wanting it to stay up around 65/barrel since they now know that we will pump that gas into our cars at that price anyways with just a little grumble on the price.

Farmerdoug
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: SwampDonkey on January 02, 2007, 06:17:45 PM
My uncle (mom's brother) sees all this corn being grown here since the early-mid nineties and his comment is that cows really don't prefer corn for feed. He maintains that cows do better on timothy and clover feed, plus the usual mash rations. Dad, grandfather and my uncle had cattle of their own and they were never fed corn. They always grew their own feed.

yikes_smiley yikes_smiley yikes_smiley
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Gary_C on January 02, 2007, 08:04:49 PM
Up until October of 2006, I had dairy cows and regularly fed them Dried Distillers Grains from the local ethanol plant. The cows just love it and would eat it straight if you let them. It has been one of many ingredients that can provide good protein, fat, and some slower digesting protein.

I have a dairy ration balancing program and can say that it is very complicated to feed for maximum production. It really has nothing to do with what the cows prefer. You need to have a properly balanced ration considering ADF, NDF, fat, bypass protein sources, type of fiber fed, minerals, etc. The key is to have every mouthful that has everything the cows need and tastes good so they eat the maximum amount of dry matter they can consume.

In 2006, the ethanol plants were expected to consume 14% of the corn crop and there were many plants that were scheduled for completion late in the year. It was thus no surprise the corn price went up from below $2.00 to currently $3.65 for spring delivery in this area. There are many large farmers in this area that have already contracted this years crop and plan to switch all their acres to corn next year and have contracted next year's crop at these prices.

The down side to these higher prices is the livestock producers including the dairy farmers will suffer with high feed prices and may not survive unless they find alternative feed sources. For example, DDG's have increased from $70 per ton this fall to $120 per ton now because some smart livestock producers contracted their feed needs for the next year and reduced the available supply.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Corley5 on January 02, 2007, 08:13:11 PM
The increase in the cost of corn is going to lead to a dramatic increase in the price of milk and meat at the grocery store.  It's gonna have to be passed down the line.  We'll have high fuel and food costs  ::) :(
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Tom on January 02, 2007, 08:25:32 PM
Well now.  Don't fear.  The Government might sell back some of those Dairy Farms they shut down when they were trying to manipulate prices the other way.  :D :D :D
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: SwampDonkey on January 02, 2007, 08:25:57 PM
Gary, I guess I never really rationalized what I wrote. But, you have to understand my uncle's thinking.  ;) If they looked contented, and they did, he was happy. Only had to call for the cows when it was time for milking and they came eagerly. He talked to his cows like they were puppies. ;D :D I don't know his rationale behind the corn thing and am not in a position to argue about it.

I'm sure someone worked out what cows need to maximize production, they needed to as costs go up and returns dwindle.

....some (hobby) farmers go for contentment and have never made a living at it, so I just take certain thinks with a grain of salt. Some uncle's have their ideas and their nephews won't attempt to alter them, just keep the peace. ;)  :D
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: SwampDonkey on January 02, 2007, 08:40:22 PM
Quote from: Tom on January 02, 2007, 08:25:32 PM
Well now.  Don't fear.  The Government might sell back some of those Dairy Farms they shut down when they were trying to manipulate prices the other way.  :D :D :D

They don't even have to justify it that way. They finance the farm to a new immigrant as long as they have an Agricultural College degree of some kind. So what happens is the son of the old farmer in most cases can't get finances to purchase the farm unless they attend Ag college, so it gets sold to an immigrant who gets government purchasing subsidies. In most cases the next generation is not interested in farming. If there is interest there, the parents feel they will be dragged into a situation where they may loose their life savings to help out the son if there is a crisis. If it were me, and I know it would be hard to do this, but I'de hand over the keys after we worked out the legal financing of the farm purchase to the next generation and let the chips fall where they may. Go on with life, and let your son or daughter run it, sink or swim. Go to your workshop and make wood bowls or something. ;)
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Gary_C on January 02, 2007, 08:46:57 PM
SD

Yes, I know exactly how your uncle felt and he was somewhat right in his thinking. Cows actually are healthier eating oats rather than corn and grass rather than alfalfa. Cows that are fed these newfangled "hot" rations have more health problems and can easily go off their feed and then it is hard to get them going again. Just like humans, you have to keep your forage (fiber) intake up or things don't come out right in the end.  ;D
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Norm on January 03, 2007, 07:25:32 AM
We've had grain prices this high and much higher in the past. What gets passed on we'll see but keep in mind that corn is not the sole source of feed for most meat sources. Piggers and poultry use much of it but it is mixed with other proteins such as soybean meal. Cattle get fed much more roughage than you'd guess, corn is just part of their rations.

Around here there is much talk of more corn on corn acreage and plenty of other land that is either not producing or is in rotations of oats, alfalfa and pasture. Yields keep getting better also, we averaged 200 bu corn last year with some better areas getting 240 bu. Input costs for farming have been sky high the last couple of years with no real increase in grain prices. Nobody in my area is driving a Mercedes. :D
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: pigman on January 03, 2007, 10:20:50 AM
Quote from: Norm on January 03, 2007, 07:25:32 AM
Nobody in my area is driving a Mercedes. :D


You are right Norm. ;D Most American farmers prefer Cadillacs and Lincolns. It the European farmers that like the Mercedes.   ;)

Bob
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: OneWithWood on January 03, 2007, 11:41:31 AM
I think things will be marginally better in 2007.  Sort of like the calm before the storm  ::)

The real impact and reasoning for pushing ethanol as a fuel additive was explained at a Indiana State Soil Conservation Board meeting by Chuck Conner, who if I remember correctly is the under secretary or assistant secretary for ag at the national level.  What he said in a nutshell is that the increased demand for corn to be used for ethanol production is expected to drive up the price of corn to a level that will cause the trigger for price supports to not be triggered.  If this comes to pass all the millions included in the farm bill for price supports will not be spent and will become available for conservation or budget balancing or whatever (read that as increases in military spending to rebuild what we have squandered).  Another bennie is that the hue and cry from some of our trading partners concerning our farm subsidies should subside.
I expect this will be a short term budget windfall that will gradually disappear as ethanol and other alcohols are distilled from bio mass.  As has been stated, corn is hard on the soil and requires large energy inputs to keep producing it on the same patch of ground.  It does provide a quick fix for now.  We are better at quick fixes than strategic planning but I see this as a step in the right direction.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: SwampDonkey on January 03, 2007, 11:58:53 AM
Also, as far as acreage, there was a lot of land tied up as 'soil conservation' land. The farmer was given a subsidy to reduce his acreage. A lot of that land was let to grow back to woods. I see a lot of it in northern Maine, much of it grows back in aspen and birch and white spruce, just wild seed.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Fla._Deadheader on January 03, 2007, 01:21:45 PM

Stop paying farmers to NOT grow anything  >:( >:(

  Then watch the grain market. There are millions of acres laying fallow, and being paid to stay that way.

  There are other things to grow to convert to DIESEL Engine fuel, than Ethanol producing crops.  OWW, Buzz Sawyer, and several others on the forum are showing it CAN be done.  8) 8)  I'm trying to scrounge stuff right now.  ;) :) :)
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Ron Wenrich on January 03, 2007, 02:14:07 PM
The only question I have about the grain markets, if they are putting as much acreage into corn as they can, doesn't that rob the other grain crops of land to grow on?  That, in effect, would drive up other grain values by lowering the amount of harvest due to less acreage.

Title: Re: 2007
Post by: OneWithWood on January 03, 2007, 02:25:21 PM
Kiss the CRP and other marginal land that has been converted into wetlands and wildlife areas good-bye  :(

Just before this push for ethanol there was a big push to get farmers to re up their CRP acreage.  Some are probably kicking themselves . . . .
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Gary_C on January 03, 2007, 02:50:19 PM
Ron, you are right. In fact right now the price for soybeans is slowly climbing to "buy back acres from corn."
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: SwampDonkey on January 03, 2007, 03:53:50 PM
You guys are starting to remind me of the Mad Maxx movies. ;D
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Faron on January 03, 2007, 09:22:01 PM
In my area a lot of that CRP land was pretty marginal, and never will produce much.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Ed_K on January 04, 2007, 08:47:43 PM
 "he talks to the cows as if they were puppies"
Now thats a farmer who LOVES his farm  ;) . A while ago we (Rita & I) tried to buy the family farm from her brothers. No bank or loan facility would loan us the money. But the FSA would have loaned 2.1 mil to my wife as a Women owned Business. Alas, they wouldn't sell to her.
Up here fsa won't let us plant corn on land with more than 6% grade, so a lot of land went into the land bank.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: SwampDonkey on January 04, 2007, 09:09:19 PM
Quote from: Ed_K on January 04, 2007, 08:47:43 PM
A while ago we (Rita & I) tried to buy the family farm from her brothers. No bank or loan facility would loan us the money. But the FSA would have loaned 2.1 mil to my wife as a Women owned Business. Alas, they wouldn't sell to her.

My father ran into a similar situation when he bought some family farm that was hiership. They wanted to sell to the big potato processor at first without giving dad the opportunity to buy. Then grandmother stepped in and set everyone straight. Some family folk sure are odd balls.  ::)
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: timcosby on January 04, 2007, 11:42:43 PM
the farmers problem is someone else sets the price he gets until that changes he is out of luck.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Gary_C on January 05, 2007, 11:25:16 AM
Yes, the best thing that could happen as far as the farmers are concerned would be if a tornado went thru Chicago and destroyed the Board of trade building and spread the ruble and traders all over Lake Michigan.  ;D

On Wednesday corn dropped 19 cents a bushel, not because of some supply/demand change, but because some large fund traders are taking their profits and backing off of some their huge long positions.  >:(
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Ron Wenrich on January 05, 2007, 11:41:25 AM
But, if a farmer was happy with the price before the drop, he could ice in the sales price by selling a contract or so.  All of his harvest would have a guaranteed price before he even planted it.  If prices go higher, then just sell the contracts at a breakeven price. 

If you don't want to go the contract route, then buy puts where you can sell your crop at a certain price.  It acts as an insurance policy.  Its the same way your heating oil company can guarantee a certain price for oil all year long.  They can do it, so can farmers. 
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Gary_C on January 05, 2007, 08:57:46 PM
Yes, the futures market is certainly a tool that can be used. However, there are very few times that prices have been OK and they are very fleeting. This year, all the ethanol plant start ups may change that.

The futures market generally is no place for farmers, the faint of heart, and the less well to do. The farmers tend to use their knowledge of supply and demand to make decisions, in other words they are too logical. Those large fund traders can and will react so much faster than ordinary buyers that trying to keep up can be very expensive. For example today the market recovered some of what it lost. That sell off may have been just checking to see if they could panic other traders and when it did not, it may start back up and even go higher. Or if the pension funds and large traders move their money into the stock market as I have heard they are going to, it may collapse again.

I think most farmers, myself included expect to see corn at $4.00 by spring when the barges start moving again. After all, they are not shutting down Ethanol plants, they are starting them up. But that thinking may be too logical.

If the farmers could just get stable markets at some reasonable price, they would be happy. However that wish is in direct conflict with the wishes of the traders that cannot make enough money with stable markets, regardless of where the price has settled. For example, two or three years ago in the spring, I was delivering my beans to the local bean meal plant. The dump station operator told me that beans just had to go higher because everyone was just about out and they may have to shut down the plant. I did not have any money to invest at that time, but I watched as a $10,000 investment in the options market rose to $30,000 in just six weeks. Its easy to see how those large fund traders can make so much money and will do anything to protect their control over those volatile markets. But you better have plenty of cash and plenty of reserve to play their game because it can just as easily go the other direction. And the traders have a million pat answers as to why it went the wrong way.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: TexasTimbers on January 06, 2007, 10:07:32 AM
I'm just trying to figure out who the other guy on The Good Ship Optomistic is?

Ihere are only two of us. I'm wondering if he/she owns any cows. ???
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Rocky_Ranger on January 06, 2007, 12:04:50 PM
I didn't know you could distill ethanol using a dry method.  Can somebody point me to a website that informs a reader or somebody here 'splain it to a country boy in words he can understand?  Can it work for wood residue too?
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Gary_C on January 06, 2007, 12:28:29 PM
I am not sure about how they make the Ethanol but I do not believe it is a dry method. All the leftovers are very wet and they have to dry the distillers grains.

I do know they are working very hard and have made some Ethanol from switchgrass and next will the dry stover left in the fields like corn stalks. I do not know how fast that changeover will take as many of the Ethanol plants are coops owned by corn farmers.   ;D
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Norm on January 06, 2007, 01:09:38 PM
DDG's Website (http://www.ddgs.umn.edu/)

Here's a site that will give some info on ethanol production methods Rocky Ranger.

They are working on enzyemes that will break down fiberous material but it is still in the development stage.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: tcsmpsi on January 06, 2007, 01:18:17 PM
I voted 'a little worse'.

Of course, much of an applicable answer would be directly related to what is actually meant by, "economy".

For some, the "economy" will probably be 'better'.  For the nation of People, it will be a little worse.  What I see as a viable "economy" is the USD the People can earn and what it can/will provide.

Indebtedness is astronomical with the 'average person', and because of the grasping in of so much more when recent interest rates were at 'all time lows', it is stupendously astronomical.  Now, however, rates are higher and continuing to rise quite notably.  A very unbalanced proportion of the average USD of the average person pays interest collected by the lenders.  Were this money to be appropriately instated into the "economy" (development=jobs), then it might be a little better.  But, recent history/indicators relate that most will go to a very small proportion of the top of corporate/government structure.  

Unfortunately/fortunately, only the People who are at the very bottom are aware, significantly and realistically, of the vast proportion of society who exists there.
Cities 'hide' millions of the People who exist off the chart below poverty level.  

These ARE part of the nation, yet are not given significant bearing on what is generally noted as the "economy".  When we speak of prices of housing, money markets, interest, etc., these things have no direct bearing and insignificant indirect bearing millions of the People within our economic whole.

Millions of the People are, for all practical purpose, forced to work for 6-9 USD per hr.  Far, far below "poverty level", and any practical manner of 'living' whatsoever.

I believe we tend to overlook the number of corporations who, in the last year or so, have dropped tens of thousands of their employees.

Interest, taxes, price of living (goods/services) are all increasing significantly.  Are average and below average (the majority of the People) wages increasing exponentially?   Not even nearly so.

Mainstream publications, commentary, rhetoric are not going to view/relate matters in this perspective.  It is not conducive to their 'selling points'.

Personally, I do not find this perspective at all gloomy.  I just believe it to be objective.
I have to be, within myself, as objective as I possibly can in order to get a good, overall view to initiate and implement my own considerations.

Except for a couple of times (which were meaningfully disasterous)(feds getting into the silver market, most notably), my investments have always been in my own business(es).

Frankly, candidly and with painful honesty, I am not concerned with what the "economy" does.  As it is said, "I don't care if syrup goes to a dollar a sop".  :D

At the house fixing me something to eat the other night after I got in, kinda dancing around and singing and the wife asked what I was so happy about.  
I was home! and about to sit down and eat me something!  (just doesn't take much for us to be ecstatic, I reckon)    smiley_divide
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Rocky_Ranger on January 06, 2007, 04:23:50 PM
Well that's what I thought too, distillers mash and just like a moonshiner but somebody said there is a dry method.  I've fed distillers mash quite abit before, just pay for a little water in the mix is all.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: DanG on January 07, 2007, 01:28:17 AM
This is just a wild a$$ guess in the middle of a rainy night. ::)  If you look at the basic process of distillation, it is just evaporating the liquid from a fermenting mass of mash, right?  I'm guessing that they are just continuing to evaporate liquid from it until the mash is dry, sorta like ya do yer wood in yer kiln.  Maybe. ??? ::)
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Ron Wenrich on January 07, 2007, 07:23:24 AM
Alcohol evaporates at a lower point than water.  If memory serves me correctly, alcohol evaporates at 167°.  So, if you keep your temperatures low enough, the alcohol comes off and the water stays behind.

I looked into the alcohol thing back in the '70s.  What I found is that you can make things run with a lot lower proof than what most people think.  You can use a whiskey proof for home heating.  You don' t need that high of a proof even to run cars of the day.  I always figured you needed a higher proof when you mixed it with gasoline.  Too low of a proof would end up with water in the alcohol and that wouldn't mix with the gasoline.  Remove the gasoline from the mix, and the proof requirements go down.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Faron on January 07, 2007, 07:42:14 AM
http://www.grainprocessing.com/This company uses a wet milling process.  Most of their by product is corn gluten feed.  I think the by product of the ethanol plants will be distillers grains.  In checking on corn gluten, I found it is considered a natural herbicide for use around homes. ???  I don't know of a dry process, although the by product can be dried and pelletized so it will keep.  You can also buy it wet, which is much cheaper, if you can manage it and use it quickly enough to prevent spoilage.  I read an article the other day saying most of the plants were planned figuring they would have to landfill the by product.  In other words whatever they can sell is just gravy.  I am betting secondary business will develop to use this material for purposes other than feeding livestock, perhaps as a component in insulation or construction material.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Fla._Deadheader on January 07, 2007, 08:03:40 AM

As Den would say "think Vacuum". Lower heat, better recovery, easier dried.
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Ed_K on January 07, 2007, 11:20:22 AM
 Oh happy days  8) .Found out yesterday that the BILs sold the farm. The Autobon got it an sold the biggest contiguous piece to the Fish & Wildlife.The cows are gone on tuesday to a new & better home  ;) .
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Ed_K on January 08, 2007, 09:03:36 PM
 hey don't stop now  :( don't leave me hanging here I don't wana be a thread killer  :o .
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: farmerdoug on January 08, 2007, 09:44:12 PM
Ed_K,

We are just thinking about all the fresh steaks that will be coming on the market soon. digin_2

I will say at least it will not be a subdivision.  I hope the F&W will manage it well. ::)

Was this your family farm?

Farmerdoug
Title: Re: 2007
Post by: Ed_K on January 09, 2007, 08:50:30 PM
 Brother in Laws, Rita is the youngest sister to them.