ASGA President

Russ Mauch

Hilleshög is a business unit of Syngenta Seeds, Inc.

HILLESHÖG®, the ALLIANCE FRAME, the HILLESHÖG logo, the PURPOSE ICON and the Syngenta logo are trademarks of a Syngenta Group Company.

©2010 Syngenta Seeds, Inc. Longmont, CO 80501. All rights reserved.

Firmly rooted in your industry...Today’s choices grow into tomorrow’s rewards. Look to Syngenta’s Hilleshög® brand sugarbeet varieties’ plantability and stacked disease-toleranttraits to help you get there.

Allow your crop to reach its full potential. Call yourSales Rep today or visit www.hilleshog-us.com to learn more.

— Feature Articles —Historic City, Historic Event . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Report from ASGA’s 35th annual meeting in Charleston

‘Speaking With a Unified Voice’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8A visit with ASGA’s new president, Russ Mauch

2010 Focus Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12ASGA’s Luther Markwart on coming year’s priorities

Climate Change Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Why the issue has the beet processing sector concerned

Chaff Trails & N Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Report on first year of Idaho strip-tillage study

— Regular Pages —

Dateline: Washington . . . . . . . . . 10 Crop insurance, next farm bill

30 Years Ago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Excerpts from our March 1980 issue

Write Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Beet growers & the health care debate

— Front Cover —Russ Mauch of Barney, N.D., is the new president of the

American Sugarbeet Growers Association. See article on page 8.

Photo: Don Lilleboe

THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010 3

Page 8Page 16

‘Serving The Nation’s SugarbeetCommunity Since 1963’

Volume 49 Number 3March 2010

Sugar Publications4601 16th Ave. N.Fargo, ND 58102

Phone: (701) 476-2111Fax: (701) 476-2182

E-Mail: sugar@forumprinting.comWeb Site: www.sugarpub.com

Publisher:Sugar Publications

General Manager & Editor: Don Lilleboe

Advertising Manager:Heidi Wieland(701) 476-2003

Graphics:Forum Communications Printing

The Sugarbeet Grower is published sixtimes annually (January, February, March,April/May, July/August, November/December)by Sugar Publications, a division of ForumCommunications Printing.

North American sugarbeet producersreceive the magazine on a complimentarybasis. Annual subscription rates are $12.00domestic and $18.00 for foreign subscribers.

Advertising in The Sugarbeet Growerdoes not necessarily imply endorsement of aparticular product or service by the publisher.

Visit Our Web Site!

www.sugarpub.com

4 THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010

With the American Sugarbeet Growers Association celebrating some his-tory of its own, it was appropriate for the group to gather in a very historiccity — Charleston, S.C. — for its 2010 annual meeting. ASGA marks its35th anniversary this year; and with sugar prices strong and a favorablefarm bill being administered, there was good reason for an upbeat atmos-phere at this winter’s meeting. Nearly 300 growers, spouses and affiliatedindustry gathered at the event, held January 31-February 2.

But the sugarbeet industry is never without serious challenges, and meet-ing participants heard about them as well. Ongoing legal issues regardingRoundup Ready® sugarbeets and the prospective impact on the beet process-ing sector of pending climate change legislation were among the importanttopics covered. House Ag Committee Chairman Collin Peterson addressedthe meeting via phone, stating the sugar program is working well.

Pictured on these pages are several of the speakers who addressed theASGA audience. A profile of new president Russ Mauch is on pages 8 and9, with a summary of executive vice president Luther Markwart’s commentsbeginning on page 12. Finally, on pages 16 and 17, we carry a synopsis ofremarks by Janet Anderson on the impact that climate change legislationcould have on the beet sugar sector. (The sugar market commentary present-ed by the American Sugar Alliance’s Jack Roney was reported upon in theFebruary issue of The Sugarbeet Grower.)

Historic City,Historic Event

ASGA Celebrates 35thAnniversary During2010 Annual Meeting

Right: Jim Miller, under secretary for Farm and Foreign AgriculturalServices, oversees several of the key USDA agencies whose areas ofresponsibility directly impact the sugar industry — among them, theFarm Service Agency, Risk Management Agency and ForeignAgricultural Service. After providing an overview of the challenges andpriorities of the Obama Administration, Miller focused on the ongoingimplementation of the current farm bill. Noting that “we have a very size-able [crop insurance] program” for beets, he added that USDA “is in theprocess of looking at a revenue program for sugarbeets” — an undertak-ing not without controversy.

Miller said USDA believes domestic sugar stocks are adequate forthe short term, but that the agency also monitors closely the globalshortages that have led to higher world market sugar prices. On theMexican situation, he reported that U.S. and Mexican government repre-sentatives have met — in his office — to discuss the issues of sugar andHFCS trade between the two countries under what is now essentially a“common market” under the terms of NAFTA. Referring to the recom-mendations of the U.S.-Mexico industry task force, Miller said “we havecommitted to work with our colleagues in Mexico to provide you with aunified response” — hopefully by this spring.

Left: Erik Peterson, senior vice president for the Center forStrategic and International Studies, provided a striking presentationtitled “The Seven Revolutions” — a long-term look at major globaltrends during which he scanned the world out to 2025 and beyond.

The Seven Revolutions that Peterson described include: (1)Population — Today the world supports 6.9 billion people; by 2025it will have 8.0 billion. The population is getting older as lifeexpectancy increases, and it’s also becoming increasingly urban.(2) Resource Management — The agricultural community continuesto produce more food, but there are some critical constraints, withthe most crucial by 2025 being that of water. (3) Technology —“Deep computing” and “pervasive computing” are ever-intensifyingfacts of life. (4) Knowledge — The sheer rate of increase translatesinto less time for making more-complex decisions. (5) Integration —The world is increasingly interconnected, with a fundamental shiftoccurring in global production/consumption patterns. (6) Conflict— We have moved beyond the Cold War era into one threatenedby “terrorist groups with no return address.” (7) Governance —Walmart represents the world’s 31st biggest economy, an exampleof globalization and its implications for how nations govern.

We live in a time of both “promise and opportunity” and “periland instability,” Peterson stated. The overriding need is for national“leaders, not managers,” with the vision to leverage the positive.

Ann

ual M

eetin

g P

hoto

s B

y D

on L

illeb

oe

Above: Don Parrish, senior directorfor regulatory relations with theAmerican Farm Bureau Federation,spoke to the annual meeting audienceabout facets of the Clean Water Act thataffect agriculture, including current leg-islation covering regional clean waterinitiatives. He encouraged sugarbeetgrowers to work closely with other agcommodity groups to monitor and voicetheir positions on these key issues.

Below: Kelly Smith of the AmericanBeverage Association addressed theissue of states implementing new taxeson soft drinks and how her organizationis working against them. The severebudget pressures faced by numerousstates means “everybody is looking formoney,” Smith noted — and new exciseand/or sales taxes are seen as oneanswer. The beverage sector is takingan increasingly aggressive approach inresisting such taxes, she reported.

Above: Jim Wiesemeyer, veteranWashington ag journalist with InformaEconomics, provided the ASGA audi-ence with insightful commentary on theoverall political scene in the nation’scapital, as well as analysis of the sugarsituation. “You had a good year; you’regoing to have another good year,” hetold sugarbeet growers. Wiesemeyersuggested USDA likely will consider anincrease in tariff rate quota levels afterApril 1, however.

THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010 5

Art’s-Way Manufacturing Co., Inc.

PO Box 288 Armstrong, IA 50514 Ph: (712)864-3131 Fax: (712)864-3154 www.artsway-mfg.com

Model 6812AHarvester

6, 8 or 12 Rows22” to 30” Spacing

4 Pair Grab Roll BedSuperior Cleaning

Model 4600Harvester6 or 8 Rows

22” to 30” Spacing3 Pair Grab Roll Bed

Superior Cleaning

For all yourHarvesting

needs...look to Art’s-Way Mfg.

Model 1222HS DefoliatorEnclosed Shroud on Front Rotor with Cupped Steel Knives

# 2 Rotor, 6-Pin Rubber Flails - # 3 Rotor, 8 Pin Rubber Flails

Above: Russ Mauch (right), incoming American Sugarbeet Growers Associationpresident from Barney, N.D., presents outgoing president Alan Welp with a plaquein recognition of his outstanding service to the organization during his two-yearterm. Welp farms near the northeastern Colorado community of Wray.

Above Right: The ASGA leadership team for the coming year includes, left toright: Luther Markwart, executive vice president; Russ Mauch, president; KellyErickson, Hallock, Minn., vice president; and Mike Wheeler, Declo, Idaho, treasurer.

Right: Wayne Tang (left) of Felton, Minn., was one of three outgoing directorsrecognized by Alan Welp for their service to ASGA. Other exiting board memberswere Terry Jones of Powell, Wyo., and Jeff Bieber of Fairview, Mont.

Below: John Snyder, president of theWashakie Beet Growers Association,displays sodas containing sugar, notHFCS. Cans of ‘Throwback’ Pepsi, DrPepper and Mountain Dew were bottledand donated by Admiral Beverage ofWorland, Wyo., for enjoyment by ASGAmembers during the Tuesday morningmeeting break.

6 THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010

www.simplot.com www.chooseavail.com

As ironical as it may sound, the newpresident of the American Sugar-

beet Growers Association actuallyplaced his college education on hold forthis crop.

Russ Mauch was a student atNorth Dakota State University in thefall of 1974 — a time that coincidedwith the first harvest for growers ofthe new Minn-Dak FarmersCooperative. Among the originalstockholders in the Wahpeton, N.D.-based co-op were Mauch’s father andbrother, Bernard and Randy. Theyneeded more manpower to bring inthat initial beet crop, and Russ madehimself available. “So I took off thefall semester of my sophomore year todrive sugarbeet truck,” he smilinglyrecounts.

The Barney, N.D., farmer has beenimmersed in sugarbeets ever since.Following his graduation from NDSUwith a B.S. in animal science, hereturned to Richland County and a

career in agriculture. Along with rais-ing beets, corn and soybeans, he, hisfather and brothers Randy and Billalso operated a large feedlot, running1,000-plus head of cattle.

Though the cattle may be longgone, Russ Mauch’s cash crop enter-prise has grown considerably throughthe years. Today, he and his partner— brother-in-law Rick Bladow — farmabout 7,500 acres. Corn is planted onapproximately 80% of their acres, withsugarbeets on 15% and soybeans onthe remaining 5%.

(Like other past and present ASGA

leaders, Mauch is quick to credit thefolks at home who keep the farm run-ning while he is absent on sugarbeetbusiness. Without Rick Bladow andRick’s son, Chris, handling day-to-dayoperations back in Barney, Mauchaffirms, “it would be impossible” forhim to serve as ASGA president.)

Always ready to innovate, Mauchwas among the first in the Minn-Dakarea to plant cover crops on lighterground, back in the latter 1980s. Heand brother Bill took an old Allowayplanter, removed its units, andinstalled two S-tines over each row, followed by a set of harrow teeth. The“inverted cultivator” provided whatwas, in essence, an early form of striptillage, with the primary motivationbeing protection against spring winderosion and the conservation of soilmoisture in what were then some verydry years.

More recently, Mauch was one ofthe first Minn-Dak growers to embracethe spreading of spent beet lime on hisfields. He began doing so severalyears ago as a means of combatingAphanomyces. Since then, he’s alsocome to view the lime as an importantcomponent of his fertility program.Today, all of the Mauch and Bladowfields have had lime applied at rates offrom four to 12 tons per acre.

So what, as of 2009/10, does RussMauch view as his most critical sugar-beet production challenge?

“Drainage,” is his unhesitatingreply. The southern Red River Valleyhas been going through a wet cyclesince the early 1990s, and in someyears excess moisture has stronglyimpacted the yield and quality of anumber of Minn-Dak fields — Mauch’sincluded. “We had terrible sugarbeetyields in the wet years of 2005, 2007and 2009,” he says. “But we had excel-lent crops in the [drier] years of 2006and 2008 — and hopefully we’ll havethat again in 2010.”

Last year, Mauch was unable todrive equipment through a “preventiveplant” field until literally July 20.That day, they disked the old cornstalks. Mauch hired a contractor to tilethe field in September — and the tileline water flowed the remainder of thefall. On the field’s sandier portions,the lines were 80 feet apart; on theheavier clay areas, about 40 feet.

Mauch has since purchased a draintile plow, stringer and backhoe, andintends to start installing subsurfacedrainage on his remaining acreage.“We’re so serious about it that we’regoing to go right into standing cornground [in 2010],” he says. The goal is

‘Speaking WithA Unified Voice’New ASGA President Russ Mauch DiscussesHis Farming Background & Association Role

Pho

tos:

Don

Lill

eboe

8 THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010

Working with members ofCongress and their staffs is ‘a continual educationprocess on how the sugarprogram works — andwhy it’s working so well.’

to have subsurface drainage on all hiscropland within five years (subject toapproval by any affected neighbors).The result, he’s confident, will be con-sistently improved yields, quality anddisease control.

While that extensive drainage proj-ect is getting underway, however,

Russ Mauch simultaneously will bebusy serving a two-year term as presi-dent of the American SugarbeetGrowers Association. He took over theASGA reins from Colorado growerAlan Welp during the 2010 annualmeeting in early February. The south-eastern North Dakota grower had beenvice president the past two years.

A 12-year member of the Minn-DakFarmers Cooperative Board ofDirectors, Mauch still serves as the co-op’s treasurer. He also has been adirector of Minn-Dak Yeast Companyand Midwest Agri-Commodities, andcurrently is a board member of UnitedSugars Corporation.

Like dozens of other sugarbeetgrowers, Mauch spent part of lateFebruary in Washington, D.C., visitingmembers of Congress and their staffs.Together, he and his fellow beet pro-ducers stopped at more than 200 con-gressional offices, educating CapitolHill personnel on the sugar industryand the importance of the sugar pro-gram. “It’s a continual educationprocess on how the sugar programworks — and why it’s working so well,”he affirms. “It has not cost the federalgovernment any money since 2002 —and it is projected not to through2020.”

While certain congressional mem-bers and staffs are somewhat familiarwith the sugarbeet sector, many arenot. “With some of them,” Mauch says,“we have to basically start out with apicture of a sugarbeet and ask, ‘Haveyou ever seen a sugarbeet? Do youknow where sugar comes from?’Generally, people think sugar comesfrom sugarcane. But 54% of [domesti-cally produced] sugar comes frombeets.”

Some congressional office stopsgenerate more interest than others,Mauch concedes. But the fact that thevisitors are “bonafide sugarbeet farm-ers” is usually a big plus. Members ofCongress typically “are very interestedin talking to people who are trying tomake their living out in the country,”he observes.

“A lot of congressmen follow(Minnesotan and House Ag CommitteeChairman) Collin Peterson’s lead,”Mauch remarks. “They may under-

stand some things about agricultureand the sugar program — but theyrely on Collin’s advice. Having a leaderlike him in Congress really helps.”

While the state of the sugarbeetindustry is generally strong right now,ASGA leaders have no intention ofbecoming complacent. Priorities for2010 include continued monitoring ofthe international trade scene, closeattention to the legal challenge to theuse of Roundup Ready® sugarbeets,the “cap and trade” climate change leg-

islation proposals, the ongoing admin-istration of domestic sugar policy —and any other emerging issues thatmay impact beet growers.

“We are always concerned aboutwhat’s coming up behind and aroundus,” Mauch affirms. “We’re not a bigindustry, and small changes in policycould really hurt us. So we’re alwaysmonitoring what’s out on the horizon,trying to be proactive.”

A key strength of the U.S. sugarindustry, ASGA’s new president con-cludes, is the united voice with whichit addresses important issues. “Wework together,” Russ Mauch empha-sizes. “Any issues that pop up, weresolve internally. We never bring adivided industry to Washington.

“Speaking with a unified voice istruly a source of our strength.” — Don Lilleboe �

Russ and Mary Mauch, along with daughter Skye, are shown here at the conclu-sion of the 2010 ASGA meeting in Charleston, S.C. The Mauchs also have raisedtwo other daughters, Tina and Tori, on their Richland County, N.D., farm.

THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010 9

‘We’re not a big industry, andsmall changes in policy couldreally hurt us. So we’re alwaysmonitoring what’s out on the

horizon, trying to be proactive.’

For more info call 519-786-3025 www. ropanorthamerica.com or e-mail: info@ropanorthamerica.com

euro-Maus euro-Tiger

10 THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010

Dateline:Washington

ByLuther Markwart

ExecutiveVice President

American Sugarbeet

Growers Assn.

2012 Farm BillHouse Agriculture Committee

Chairman Collin Peterson is send-ing signals to American agriculturethat all segments of farm and foodpolicy need to roll up our sleevesand start work on the 2012 farmbill.

While no official schedule hasbeen set at this time, indicationsare that initial committee hearingswill begin this spring and earlysummer, both in Washington, D.C.,and around the nation.

Next year, Congress will befaced with budget cuts across theboard in order to deal with the stag-gering budget deficits and the inter-est on the accumulated nationaldebt. It is clear that the nationcannot sustain the spending bingeit is on, and all government policieswill be under close scrutiny.

Chairman Peterson has wiselydetermined that work on a new billneeds to begin now, with the intentof concluding House action by theend of next year to address anypotential funding issues.

It is important to note that thebill would essentially be written ina non-election year (2011). Thiswould allow the bill to be reconciledwith a Senate bill in early 2012.

The Senate AgricultureCommittee has not indicated how orwhen it plans to proceed with delib-

eration of the farm bill. Once thehearing schedule is solidified, ourindustry will participate where it isappropriate.

Crop Insurance Price Election

The Risk Management Agency(RMA) announced an increase inthe price election for sugarbeets forthe 2010 crop. The initial priceelection was set at $41 per ton, butafter your grower leaders workedwith RMA officials in January andFebruary, the RMA adjusted therate upward to $43.75 per ton.

While we believe this is a veryconservative adjustment, someuncertainty remains as to if or howmuch sugar would be imported afterApril 1 of this year. There is alwaysa concern to not set the price elec-tion too high to avoid any incentiveto not harvest a difficult crop.

Congressional VisitsGrower leaders from across the

nation made their annual visits tocongressional offices in lateFebruary and early March. It wasan opportunity to visit with staffand members in more than 200offices to discuss a number of issuesimportant to our industry.

This is an annual reminder ofthe strategic importance of ourindustry and where we stand onkey issues before the Congress,including farm policy, food security,trade agreements, and cap andtrade climate legislation. It is alsoa time for growers to attend timelyfundraisers for members ofCongress. This is important andproductive time well spent by ourgrower leaders, and we appreciatethem taking precious time out ofbusy schedules to do this good work.

Cleavinger InternshipAs a reminder, we are accepting

applications for the CleavingerInternship Program until the end ofMarch. This is a wonderful oppor-tunity for a college student to spendup to eight weeks in Washington,D.C., to work in our office.

We appreciate financial supportfrom Bayer CropScience to helpmake this opportunity available totalented young men and women. �

The initial price electionwas set at $41 per ton, butafter your grower leaders

worked with RMA officials inJanuary and February, theRMA adjusted the rate

upward to $43.75 per ton.

It’s obviously common knowledgewithin the beet sector; but if there

was ever any doubt of how extensivelyUpper Midwest sugarbeet growers usedRoundup Ready® beets in 2009, it waserased by the annual survey of regionalweed control and production practices.Results of this 41st survey, conductedby sugarbeet specialists at NorthDakota State University and theUniversity of Minnesota, are based onreplies received from American Crystal,Minn-Dak and Southern Minnesotagrowers responding to a September2009 mailing.

Growers planted more than 676,000acres of beets in the region in 2009.The 187 growers who responded to theSeptember survey represented nearly14% of total acres planted.

Of the acres reported for the pastseason, 88% were in Roundup Readybeets, and 12% were planted to conven-tional varieties. This corresponds veryclosely to the actual amount ofRoundup Ready beets planted in theregion in 2009, say the survey’sauthors. Those growers who plantedboth Roundup Ready and conventionalvarieties seeded — as a group — about60% of their acres to Roundup Ready.

Taking into account multiple herbi-cide treatments on each acre, growersplanting only conventional varietiesapplied herbicides to 299% of theiracreage in 2009 (compared to 407% in2008). Growers planting only RoundupReady varieties applied herbicides to225% of their ’09 acreage — the sameas in 2008. “The reduction in the per-centage of total sugarbeet acreagetreated with herbicides is attributed tothe increased planting of RoundupReady sugarbeet and a decrease in thepercentage of conventional sugarbeetacreage treated with herbicides,” thesurvey authors report. “The decreasein conventional sugarbeet acreagetreated with herbicides is likely due tolate planting, which usually reducesweed density.”

Nortron and Dual were the onlysoil-applied herbicides reportedly usedin 2009 in Upper Midwest beet fields.Two decades ago — in 1989 — 47% ofthe region’s beet acreage received asoil-applied herbicide treatment. In2009 that level was down to 5%.

Postemergence herbicide use for allsugarbeets declined again in 2009, to224%. That compares with 279% in2008, 340% in 2007 and 388% back in2002. The 2009 level was the lowestsince 1987, when post use was 229%.

Use of postemergence grass herbicidesin 2009 was just 29% of all sugarbeetacreage. That compares to 104% in2008, 189% in 2007 and 215% in 2006.The rapid decline in post grass productuse is due to the rapid adoption ofRoundup Ready beets.

The most common herbicide treat-ment in 2009 was glyphosate appliedat 0.75-lb acid equivalent per acre (e.g.,22 fl oz of Roundup PowerMAX orWeatherMAX). Glyphosate + Select

and glyphosate + Stinger were the tankmix partners cited most frequently bythose growers planting only RoundupReady varieties.

Based on postemergence herbicideapplications, only Roundup Readygrowers reported “excellent” weed con-trol on 77% of their acres. That com-pares to 22% of only conventional grow-ers reporting “excellent” control. Thecorresponding numbers for 2008 were85% and 34%, respectively. �

Upper Midwest Growers Report on ’09 Weed Control

THE SUGARBEET GROWER (Upper Midwest) March 2010 1v

ook at your land and you see more than soil. You see opportunity.

We see it in our sugarbeet seed. Strong early season vigor, exceptional stand counts, consistently reliable yields and solid revenue per acre —they're all engineered right in.

Your land has always done well by you. Do your best by your land with SESVanderHave.

My Landof Opportunity

(877) 373-8115www.svdhbeets.com

o

ok at your land and

L

Construction is now officially under-way on the new state-of-the-art,

3,100-ton-per-day Louisiana Sugar

Refining (LSR) refinery at Gramercy,La., following an early Februarygroundbreaking ceremony. The refin-

ery is a joint venture of Louisiana sug-arcane growers and millers, Cargilland Imperial Sugar Company.

For the roughly 700 Louisiana sug-arcane growers, the sugar refinerymeans economic stability and teamingwith reliable production, marketingand distribution partners, according togrower-owned cane mill group leaders.

For Imperial Sugar Company, thenew refinery will result in the retire-ment of Imperial Sugar’s existing refin-ery, built originally in 1898. Followingthe startup of the Louisiana SugarRefining refinery in 2011, Imperial willown or participate in two of the mostmodern sugar refineries in NorthAmerica. Imperial Sugar’s other majorsugar refining plant is located at PortWentworth, near Savannah, Ga.

Imperial Sugar CEO John Sheptorsaid construction adjacent to the exist-ing refinery would allow LSR to takeadvantage of current infrastructureand operational support, and promotean orderly transition from the existingrefinery to the new, state-of-the-artrefinery while at the same time keep-ing the option of running the existingrefinery longer if needed.”

Alan Willits, president and businessunit leader for Cargill Corn Milling

2v THE SUGARBEET GROWER (Upper Midwest) March 2010

Ground Broken for Cane Refinery

UNDISPUTED TRACK STAR !"#$ %#"&'()*+$, !"#$ %"-$#.'/, !"#$ #$/*01/$, WHY SETTLE FOR ANYTHING LESS?

!"#$%#&'"#($)&#*++,"-.*&"/#%"*&0,")#$%# &'"# 123445# 6",.")# 1$7.89&,*-:#);)&"(# .)# &'"# -$(%$,&# 9# &'"#123445#6",.")# &,*-&$,)# -$("# <.&'# &'"# +&.9=./":# )0)+"!).$!># <'.-'# -0)'.$!)#"?",;# ,./@"># 70(+# *!/# ,0&# &'"#&,*-&$,# "!-$0!&",)A# 2'"# 1$7.8"9&,*-#0!/",-*,,.*@"#*8)$#+,$?./")#-$!)&*!&#-$!&*-&#<.&'#&'"#@,$0!/>#<'.-'#@.?")#;$0# # 0+# &$# B4C# 8"))# )8.++*@"A#2'.!D#$%#.&#*)#/$.!@#B4#'$0,)#$%#<$,D#.!#*#E#'$0,#/*;A##

F'"!# +*.,"/# <.&'# *# G3G9'+# 5H2I#"!@.!"#*!/#BJ9)+""/#5H2I#+$<",)'.%&#&,*!)(.)).$!># ;$0# @"&# &'"# ($)&#+,$/0-&.?"># +$<",%08># *!/# ,"8.*78"#&,*-&$,#.!#&'"#(*,D"&A#

123445#6K=LK6

!"#$%&'()*+,-.&'/!+0)

1"&'2&&.345!665!36748

9-:)*'+;<4=!66>!4?@48

A-+;-.:0.<4=!753!=7448

B*'C0<4=!6?4!>=448

D'*.28B0';:<4=!<<5!76>?8

E*.;-.:0.<4=!676!<7<7

F*)&:$0 .<4=!65=!=744

G-.0$<4=!?56!>54?

H-&''&345!667!5744

I*J-28K-$/345!>76!7?54

L-0#M8B*%%:345!>>3!>4=4

YOU CAN COUNT ON US FOR EQUIPMENT SOLUTIONS AND THE BEST IN DEALER SUPPORT.

AgCountry Farm Credit Servicesis proud to serve the Red River Valleysugarbeet growers and processors.

We thank you for your contributionsand commitment to agriculture.

Corporate Office • (701) 282-9494 or toll free 800-450-8933 • www.agcountry.com

4v THE SUGARBEET GROWER (Upper Midwest) March 2010

North America, said, “What each com-pany brings to this alliance creates analmost perfect union. Imperial’sGramercy site, its existing assets,infrastructure and its commitment topurchasing sugar for its on-site retailpackaging business gives LSR strategicbenefits and efficiencies that it wouldnot otherwise have realized. The canegrowers of this region have a 200-plusyear heritage in growing and millingsugarcane and give LSR a sturdy foun-dation in this region’s rich history. Butto fully participate in this industry forthe next generation, they needed totake it a step further, into refining fin-ished products and marketing them tofood customers.

“That’s where Cargill comes in.Cargill has been marketing to foodmakers for most of our 140 years. Wesell flour, salt, flavorings, oils and anarray of sweeteners, among many otheringredients. Adding sugar to our port-folio is a natural extension. And there’sno better place to make high qualitysugar for those U.S. food manufactur-ers than right here in Louisiana.”

When the new refinery is completedin 2011, Imperial will continue to oper-ate the small bag packing facility inGramercy, with refined bulk sugar pur-chased from LSR under a long-term,market-based supply agreement. �

7623 County Road 19Tintah, MN 56583

Phone: (218) 369-2136Fax: (218) 369-2680

Rotary Hoes - 60 to 88 Ft.

All Crop SprayerUp to 2000 Gal. Tank

HIGH-PROFILEBROADCAST SPRAYERS

Boom Width Up to 132 Feet1,000- to 1,500-Gal. Fiberglass Tanks

— Contact Keller Today —

Model 1500

Model 1000

Call todayfor pricing.

Convert yourbandsprayer to a

broadcastsprayer!

V-Plows for JD Planters

Simplot Grower Solutions

• Start-to-Finish, Simplot does the work• Complete Software Collection / Fully Integrated• In-House Data Management and Archives• Fast Turnaround• Commitment to Education and New Technology

A Complete Precision Ag PackageIncluding Sound Agronomic Recommendations

Services Include:• Topography Mapping• Veris Mapping• Nitrogen Management with Satellite Imagery• Satellite Imagery Archive• Drainage Assistance• GPS Directed Soil Sampling

Call or visit the Simplot Grower Solutions Location nearest you today!

Bringing Earth’s Resources to Life

North Dakota MinnesotaCavalier - (701) 265-4524 Grafton - (701) 352-0861 East Grand Forks - (218) 773-2421Joliette - (701) 454-6304 Walhalla - (701) 549-2744 Shelly - (218) 886-6325Minto - (701) 248-3212 Crystal - (701) 657-2332 Hendrum - (218) 861-6222

Moorhead - (218) 233-7271Stephen - (218) 478-3312

}

Narrow Tires & Axles.Less Damage to Your Crop.

Apache High-Clearance Sprayersfor Sugarbeet Applications

Designed to accomodate 22” sugar-beet rows, Apache sprayers are built with narrow tires set on 88” centers, with the combination of dual tires on the rear. Combine this with Apache’s dependable mechanical drive and smooth hydraulic suspension, and you’ve got the perfect sugarbeet sprayer.

“The lightweight Apache is the perfect self-propelled sprayerfor the sugarbeet custom applicator and farmer.”

Fillbrandt’s Bigg Dogg Agg, Felton, MN

Call today 1-866-362-2472 oremail tellmemore@apachesprayer.com to receive a FREE DVD of customertestimonials and the Apache in action.

Paul PetersonET North Central Regional Manager

Cell: 701-261-6920

Janson Equipment9676 Saginaw St.Reese, MI 48757

989-868-4118

Park River Implement701 Park St. W.

Park River, ND 58270701-284-6316

Janson Equipment7581 E Monroe Rd.

Breckenridge, MI 48615989-842-3141

Central Sales3976 Hwy 281

Jamestown, ND 58401701-252-7030

Janson Equipment799 Island Hwy.

Charlotte, MI 48813517-543-0070

Central Sales151 Langer Ave. S.

Casselton, ND 58012701-347-4432

Pioneer West61055 McDonald LaneLaGrande, OR 97850

541-663-9375

Provided here is the second half ofthe 2010 NDSU planter test stand

schedule, from March 19 to conclusion.Sugarbeet growers wishing to have

their planter units checked out forwear and other potential problemsshould contact their sugar companyagriculturist or the host site for a test

stand appointment. The 2010 schedulegot underway in late February.March 19 —

• JD Equipment, Grafton, N.D.March 22 —

• Steve Williams Farm, Fisher, Minn.• Betaseed Research, Moorhead

March 23 —• Steve Williams Farm, Fisher• Betaseed Research, Moorhead• Oppegard Equipment, Hillsboro

March 24 —• Steve Adams Shop,

East Grand Forks, Minn.• Oppegard Equipment, Hillsboro

March 25 & 26 —• Steve Adams Shop, E. Grand Forks• Evergreen Implement,

Warren, Minn.March 30 —

• Hefty Seed Co., Pembina, N.D.March 31 & April 1 —

• Hilleshog Research Farm, Glyndon, Minn.

• Kittson County Implement, Kennedy, Minn.

April 5 & 6 —• Cavalier Implement, Cavalier, N.D.

April 7, 8 & 9 —• Crystal Seed Plant, Moorhead �

6v THE SUGARBEET GROWER (Upper Midwest) March 2010

Planter Test Stand Schedule: Part II

Call: 218-280-3793 or Email: kielinnovation@yahoo.com

TTHHEE KKIIEELL RROOWWFFIINNDDEERR

Controls both Steeringand Depth, and is made to

Back-up with theHarvester Down

SSeeee uuss aatttthhee SSuuggaarrbbeeeett IInnssttiittuuttee,,

GGrraanndd FFoorrkkss,, NNoorrtthh DDaakkoottaaMMaarrcchh 1177 aanndd 1188

aanndd rreeggiisstteerr ttoo wwiinn $$550000 ooffffaa nneeww rroowwffiinnddeerr

Kiel Innovation Corporation1429 st. mary’s drive, crookston, mn 56716

SUGARBEET SPECIALISTSInnovative solutions since 1907

Beet Defoliators 4 to 12 Rows

More than 45 years of experience building defoliators.

Parma offers heavy duty triple drum models with front steel

cup or L-knife flails. Large 24" or 15" rear struts provide

even floatation in front of ground driven or hydraulic

scalpers leaving the cleanest beets to harvest.

Sugar Beet Harvesters6 Models - Rear Elevator or Wheel - 6 to 8 Rows

PARMA COMPANY

P.O. Box 190 • Parma, Idaho 83660

CALL: 208-722-5116 • FAX: 208-722-6012

Email: parmacom@parmacompany.com

Website:

www.parmacompany.com

The new 2900 Series with a larger hopper and high capacity rear elevator

now comes with large 1 15/16" grabroll bearings in both 6 & 8 rows. Also

introducing the new Model 2700 Series specially designed for the

heavy mud of the Red River Valley. Parma harvesters utilize a center feed

six & eight grabroll bed design for simple, economical cleaning.

Contact your dealer for early order discounts

19587ParCom12h 2/19/08 3:09 PM Page 1

A2009 Michigan study looking atthe impact on beet yields from

sprayer track compaction found a 1.6-ton difference on field strips containingsprayer tracks versus those strips withno sprayer tracks.

The study, reported upon in theannual report of Michigan SugarbeetREACH (Research & EducationAdvisory Council), was conducted aspart of a zone- (strip-) till trial nearBreckenridge in Gratoit County, Mich.

The field, which has a loam soil,was divided into two sections. Onesection was disked and chisel plowedin the fall; the other was zone tilled.Both sections had a stale seedbed, i.e.,no spring tillage was conducted priorto planting. Beets were planted April10 in 30-inch rows.

In all, seven trips — one for fertiliz-er application, three herbicide treat-ments and three fungicide trips —were made by the sprayer during the2009 growing season. All trips weremade in the same track, with both the

sprayer and planter equipped withRTK to avoid running on rows.

The grower’s sprayer was a 36-rowself-propelled John Deere 4720 with800-gallon capacity.

Data were developed from 12-rowstrips. In the 12-row strips thatincluded wheel tracks, the averageyield was 24.8 tons per acre; in thestrips without sprayer wheel tracks, itwas 26.4 tons. “The yield loss due tothe sprayer on a per-acre basis for a36-row sprayer was 2.0%, or 0.52 tonper acre, in 26-ton beets,” the REACHreport states. “[Had the sprayer been]48 rows and caused the same damage,the loss would have been 1.5% or 0.39ton/acre.”

The trial harvested 45 consecutivestrips using truck weights.

The grower, Clay Crumbaugh, saidnone of the seven trips were madewhile soil conditions were particularlywet. He described compaction fromthe sprayer as “light to moderate,”compared to his past experiences. �

THE SUGARBEET GROWER (Upper Midwest) March 2010 7v

Mich. Study Looks At Effect of SprayerTrack Compaction on Sugarbeet Yields

27th International SweetenerSymposium Is July 30-Aug. 4

The 27th InternationalSweetener Symposium is scheduledfor July 30 to August 4 at the VailMarriott Mountain Resort & Spa inVail, Colo. The event is sponsoredby the American Sugar Alliance.

Individual speakers and panelswill address several “hot topics,”including the global financial situa-tion, integration of the U.S. andMexican sugar markets, currentworld and domestic sugar supplyand demand, and the status ofinternational trade issues.

Traditionally, about 400 peopleattend the symposium to hearabout significant and timely issuesaffecting the industry and to net-work with their sweetener industrycolleagues. The schedule allowsfree time every afternoon toenhance industry relations.

For details on the InternationalSweetener Symposium, visit theAmerican Sugar Alliance website —www.sugaralliance.org — or call theASA at (703) 351-5055.

8v THE SUGARBEET GROWER (Upper Midwest) March 2010

Parents, grandparents and kidsvisiting the 2010 InternationalSugarbeet Institute in Grand Forkswill have the opportunity to go homewith a multi-generation photo ofthemselves — and contribute to aworthy cause in the process.

Their $20 donation will go to helpsupport activities of the Red RiverValley Sugarbeet Historical Museumat Crookston. The museum, foundedin 2004, collects, displays and demon-strates sugarbeet- and other ag-relat-ed equipment and memorabilia. Itsponsored the 5th annual HarvestFestival this past September.

Along with the professionallyprinted photo, participants also willreceive a copy of one of Red RiverValley sugarbeet grower and poetDavid Kragnes’ most popular cre-ations — the poem titled “Farmin’With My Dad.”

Syngenta Seeds/Hilleshög is help-ing sponsor this special project.

The 2010 International SugarbeetInstitute takes place on Wednesdayand Thursday, March 17 and 18, atthe Alerus Center in Grand Forks. �

Beet Institute Photo Project Benefits RRVSugarbeet Museum

We Are the Manufacturer of the

DEE RowfinderProviding Parts, Sales & Service

DealerInquiriesWelcome

CW Crookston Welding & Machine, Inc.

Highway 75 South • Crookston, MN 56716

(218) 281-6911 or

(800) 569-1309

The OnlyRowfinder on The Market To Control

BOTHSteering & Depth

• A full line of sprockets, rollers & idlers for harvesters.

• Carrier of heavy-duty roller chain.

• We build and repair grab rolls for beet harvesters;also plastic-sleeve them.

• Flails for sugarbeet defoliators . . . bearings . . .pillow blocks . . . drive lines.

• Complete line of keyed shafts and cold-rolled shafts.

• Gearbox exchange program for WIC defoliators.• Grab roll exchange for WIC harvesters.

The fungicide you’ve always wanted is finally within reach.

©2009 Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc., P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419. Important: Always read and follow label instructions before buying or using this product. Inspire XT is not registered for use or sale in all states. Please check with your state or local regulatory agency before buying or using this product. Inspire® XT is a trademark and the Syngenta logo is a registered trademark of a Syngenta Group Company. Syngenta Customer Center: 1-866-SYNGENT(A) (796-4368). www.farmassist.com MW 1TNV8021-A 2/09

There’s no better partner for your sugarbeet disease management program than Inspire® XT fungicide. Trusted the world over, Inspire XT is proven to deliver long-lasting control of Cercospora leaf spot, powdery mildew and other damaging diseases. And as part of your overall spray program, Inspire XT can help sustain fungicide effectiveness and manage resistance. Top of the class.

In what areas will the AmericanSugarbeet Growers Association be

focusing its efforts during the comingyear? Luther Markwart, ASGA’s long-time executive vice president, updatedmembers on several of the association’stop 2010 priorities during the group’sannual meeting in early February.

• Crop Insurance — ASGA hasworked for several years toward theremoval of stages for sugarbeet cropinsurance. That effort, which beganwith a pilot project in Minnesota, hasnow culminated in stage removal in allU.S. sugarbeet states except California(whose growers typically do not takeout crop insurance on beets).

As to price election for the 2010sugarbeet crop, USDA’s Risk Manage-ment Agency (RMA) announced in lateNovember 2009 that it would be set at$41 per ton. (The 2009 crop level was$43.) In early January, ASGA leader-ship met with top officials at RMA topresent information in support of anupward adjustment in the electionprice. “We did not give them a specificnumber, but said we could expect beetpayments to be in the $50 or higherrange — so the price election should besomewhere near [that level],”Markwart reported. An RMA decisionon the adjusted level was expected inlate February. (See update on page 10.)

“We have to be careful with this,”Markwart added, “because we don’twant to get the price election too high

so it creates an incentive for a producerto walk away from a crop if it gets a lit-tle difficult to harvest. As cooperativeowners, you want as much volumemoving through those factories as pos-sible. And if some people don’t harvest,that’s going to affect your bottom lineto some extent.”

Actual revenue history (ARH) wasanother topic of discussion during theJanuary meeting with RMA. It’sunclear as to how soon that couldbecome a reality, due to funding issues.“We fall under ‘administrative pay-go,’” Markwart noted. “So if a revenue pro-gram is going to cost more money, they(RMA) need to find other money to cutin order to fund this program.” Whilethere’s no guarantee, ASGA’s hope is to

have some type of ARH policy in placefor 2011.

Finally, ASGA has been investigat-ing the possibility of getting crop insur-ance extended to include beets thathave been harvested — but, due tofield conditions or another obstacle,could not be trucked from the field to apiling site. Currently, coverage endsonce the beets are harvested — regard-less of whether they are hauled awayor left at the edge of a field in “clamps.”Including clamped beets in one’s insur-ance coverage “would perhaps allow usto help farmers who might [otherwise]lose a crop or let a crop go [unharvest-ed] because of a fear of losing theirinsurance,” Markwart said.

RMA, of course, needs to know howcovering clamped beets would affectthe loss levels that may be incurred.Depending on that answer, this may bean opportunity to increase coveragewithout raising premiums. For now, itis too early in the process to predictwhether clamped beet coverage willactually come to pass, Markwartemphasized.

• Biotech Front — The ASGA hasbeen extensively involved, along withother segments of the sugarbeet indus-try, in the legal challenge to the use ofRoundup Ready® beets. Judge JeffreyWhite of the U.S. District Court (9thCircuit) was scheduled to hear plain-tiffs’ arguments on March 5.

“Clearly, working through all of ourlegal issues is our number one priority,”ASGA’s executive vice president toldhis annual meeting audience. “We dofeel good about that; but we have to getthrough those issues.”

On another Roundup Ready-relateditem, Markwart referred to the numer-ous comments and questions he hasreceived from growers upset about thetechnology provider’s (Monsanto)increase in the tech fee for 2010. “My ears are still ringing [from callsreceived] from growers around thecountry,” he quipped.

“This is a long-term relationship wehave with our seed and technologyproviders,” Markwart continued. “It’s18 years from the time that patentbegins [until] it stops. Over that peri-od, we’re going to transfer about $1 bil-lion from growers to the tech providerand the seed companies in order tohave that technology available and tobenefit from it.

“With that long-term relationship,we need to make sure it is right, it ispositive — and that we’re able to maxi-mize the technology,” he stated. “Anyissues relating to the tech fee have to

2010 Focus AreasASGA Executive Vice President Luther MarkwartOutlines Association Priorities for Coming Year

Luther Markwart

12 THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010

Accord sugar beet planterPlant your seed more effectively

-precise seed spacing and placement -robust yet light weight, low horsepower, early planting -population adjustment as you plant -individual row control

Ropa North America Inc. www. ropanorthamerica.com

www.kvernelandgroup.com

http://www.beetseed.com

be dealt with by the individual cooper-atives with the tech provider and theseed companies. It is not an issue thatcan be addressed by ASGA.”

• Sugar Policy — Though the ’08farm bill has been operative for sometime, the administration of its detailsby USDA continues to evolve. Plus, thenext farm bill is on the horizon.

Always seeking to be proactiverather than reactive, the AmericanSugarbeet Growers Association annual-ly brings in dozens of its grower-lead-ers to Washington, D.C., to visit withmembers of Congress. During a two-week period in late February and earlyMarch of this year, ASGA memberswould be visiting about 220 differentcongressional offices, Markwart noted.

“We need to continue to put the‘grower face’ on our issues — and toconstantly tell our story,” he empha-sized. “This is not a sprint that we doin the year the farm bill is actuallyunder consideration. This is amarathon that we have to work at allthe time.”

• Climate Change — Referring tothe ASGA meeting presentation byJanet Anderson (see page 16) on cur-rent climate change legislation propos-als, Markwart bluntly stated, “Whenyou stare at that problem, it is a‘death sentence’ for this industry goingforward, if those kinds of proposals areput in place.”

How so? “We are trying to explainto members of Congress that, withmost of our ag commodities, when theyleave the farm gate, you can sell themto anybody you want to,” the ASGAleader explained. “But that is not thecase with sugarbeets.

“First of all, thebeets are of no valueuntil you get the sugar,pulp and molasses outof them. And you onlyhave one place you cantake them to for pro-cessing — a factorythat is owned by grow-ers. So sugarbeets donot become commercially viable untilthey’ve been processed.” For that rea-son, beet factories should be includedunder the “agricultural exemption”within the current group of climatechange proposals.

“A little piece of that factory really‘belongs’ on your farm,” Markwartillustrated, “because the factory is anextension of your farm.

“Only once those beets have gonethrough the factory do you have some-

thing [that has] commercial value.”

• International Trade Issues —The U.S. sugar industry continues tobe very focused on Mexico. With thetwo nations now being essentially acommon market in sugar, the level ofsugar production in Mexico and howmuch will be moving into export arequestions of paramount importance forthe U.S. sugar sector.

Other trade issues — such as WTO— are relatively quiet at present. “Butjust because they’re quiet does notmean they’re going away,” Markwartstressed. “We’re always monitoringthem” for signs of activity that couldimpact the domestic sugar industry.

• Political Action — With 2010being an election year — and withmany House and Senate race outcomesbeing far from predictable — many ofthe current and potential members ofCongress are open to talking withgroups like ASGA. “Why? Because wehave political action funds,” Markwartstated. “We have the capability to helpsupport their campaign.”

So association leaders are spendinga lot of time visiting with candidates,exchanging points of view and deter-mining whether there is much in com-mon. “If we think we have somethingin common, we’ll try to work withthem. If we don’t, it’s ‘thank you andgood-bye’ — and we hope they don’twin,” Markwart said with a smile.

“It’s going to be a very busy year.”

In closing, Markwart praised outgoingASGA president Alan Welp of

Colorado for his dedication and leader-ship the past two years. “He has

worked for this organi-zation with greatintegrity,” Markwartnoted. “He has set thebar high — and leaveswith the industry ingreat shape.”

Referring to incom-ing president RussMauch, vice presidentKelly Erickson and

new board members, ASGA’s executivevice president added, “We have anothergreat leadership team coming in. Thesecret of a successful organization is tohave one leadership team and be ableto transition to another — and neversee the difference.”

Part of that success also is due, heemphasized, to his fellow ASGA staffmembers: Ruthann Geib, Pam Altherand Brianne Blevins — “a hard-work-ing, talented team.” �

14 THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010

‘This is not a sprint thatwe do in the year the

farm bill is actually underconsideration. This is amarathon that we haveto work at all the time.’

Buying or SellingBeet Stock?

800.279.3200, ext. 3402alerusagstock.com

The Alerus advantage: Current market pricing Signed written contracts Escrowed funds Assistance with transfer documents

The leader in sugarbeet stockbrokerage since 1994.

This information does not constitute an offer to buy nor a solicitation to sell. The products offered (1) are not FDIC insured, (2) are not deposits or other obligations of a bank or guaranteed by a bank and (3) involve investment risks, including possible loss of principal amount invested. Alerus Securities is a wholly owned subsidiary of Alerus Financial.

Member FINRA & SIPC

100’sOF HEAVY SPEC

TRUCK CHASSIS’S

USED – NEW – LATE MODEL – LOW MILESTANDEM AXLES – LIFT AXLES – FULL DIFF

LOCK – CUSTOM FABRICATION – BODYSWAPS – WHEELBASE CHANGE

FRAME MODIFICATIONS6X4’S – 6X6’S – DAY CAB TRACTORS

Booth #76 @ The International Sugarbeet

Institute Grand ForksSee Dave Johnson or call 800-826-2308

and ask for Dave Johnsonwww.vhtrucks.com<http://www.vhtrucks.com/> –

d.johnson@vhtrucks.com

30 Years Ago Excerpts from the March 1980 Issue ofThe Sugarbeet Grower

Heussner Elected President of ASGA — “JohnHeussner, Marlette, Michigan, was elected President ofthe American Sugarbeet Growers Association at theirannual meeting in San Antonio, Texas. . . .

“Heussner has grown sugarbeets for 40 years on his1,100-acre farm near Marlette. He has been president ofhis local grower board for the last 18 years, and ispresently serving as president for the 3,000 sugarbeetgrowers in Michigan and Ohio. He has been a strongvoice for the industry in Michigan for many years. Hisexperience, knowledge and dedication will help to main-tain a viable domestic industry.”

Pepsico, Inc., to Use HFCS — “Pepsico, Inc., thenation’s second largest soft drink company, said onMarch 4 it will use 55 percent high fructose corn syrupto replace up to 50 percent of the sugar used in its PepsiCola syrup.

“The move was expected by theindustry in light of Coca-ColaCo.’s decision in January to use55 percent high fructose for up tohalf the sugar needs in its Cokesoft drink. A spokesman for[Pepsico] said it was not immedi-ately clear how much of the compa-ny’s sugar needs will be cut by thechange.”

U.S.-Latin Debate Hinges onSugar — “The beginning of a bitterdebate between the U.S. and LatinAmerica is the result of the rejectionby Congress to implement internation-al coffee and sugar agreements.

“While the U.S. has voiced concernfor the welfare of Latin America, theaction of Congress has scarred what goodintentions the U.S. may have claimed.And with the Carter Administration guar-anteeing a stabilization in the distressed Caribbean andCentral America regions, the dispute over the agree-ments has created an obvious tension.

“It seems probable that these areas will continue towear a frown in response to the refusal by Congress toimplement legislation of the sugar agreement, andbecause comparable legislation of the InternationalCoffee Agreement has stagnated. . . .

“A large percentage of the job market in CentralAmerica exists in the coffee industry. Likewise, over 10million Latin American workers depend on the sugarbusiness.”

Top-Rate Weed Control Job in Sugarbeets PaysDividends — “Keeping weeds down in sugarbeets is anexpense every grower faces. The first step in holdingdown costs is doing a top-rate weed control job on allcrops in the rotation, not only sugarbeets. Herbicides

and hand hoeing needed to keep sugarbeets weed-freeare expensive. ‘It just makes good sense to keep weedsfrom going to seed in crops like sorghum and wheatwhere herbicides are relatively cheap and hoeing is notnecessary,’ says Dr. Allen Wiese, Texas AgriculturalExperiment Station researcher from Bushland, Texas.

“He gave this advice to sugarbeet growers during thespring sugarbeet meeting at Hereford, Texas, onFebruary 19

“Picking a field without perennial weeds is the secondstep to economical weed control in sugarbeets, accordingto the researcher. Combining good culture, hoeing andherbicides will not control perennial weeds like john-songrass, field bindweed, Texas blueweed or lakeweed ata reasonable cost in a sugarbeet field. These weeds mustbe controlled in other crops or during fallow periods in

the four- or five-year crop rotation usedwith sugarbeets. . . .

“In 1980, [Texas sugarbeet] grow-ers will have several herbicides avail-able. RoNeet and Nortron are pre-plant herbicides. Betanal andBetanex in a 50-50 mix called SN-503 is a good postemergence herbi-cide that controls a variety of weeds.Treflan and Eptam are labeled forlayby. Antor, a good preplant her-bicide for controlling grasses, maybe labeled for 1981.”

Root Maggot, CutwormControl Cleared for RedRiver Valley — “A relativelynew product has been added tothe arsenal of insect weaponsavailable to Red River Valleysugarbeet growers. It’s

Lorsban 15G, cleared for use in NorthDakota and Minnesota early last year. The Special LocalNeed registrations cover at-plant application to controlboth sugarbeet root maggots and cutworms, or postemer-gence application (up to 2-4 true leaf stage) for maggotcontrol. To date, it’s the only product labeled for earlyseason application to control cutworms.

“ ‘Sugarbeet root maggots remain the number oneinsect problem for most sugar producers in the Valley,’reports Larry Kennedy, manager of Simplot Soilbuildersin Grafton, North Dakota. ‘The university reports anestimated 65 to 70 percent of our total sugarbeet acreageis treated for this pest every year.’

“ ‘Less prevalent and far less predictable are cut-worms, which show up somewhere every season, but notas consistently as root maggots. Quite often, cutwormswill totally wipe out a certain section of the field, butleave the rest with little or no damage. There’s just nosolid pattern to them. I do know that a lot of growersare scouting for cutworms more closely now, becauseeven a relatively light infestation can cut into yields.’ ” �

THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010 15

Why should beet producers be inter-ested in — and concerned about

— pending climate change legislation? That was the question Janet

Anderson sought to answer in her pres-entation at the early February annualmeeting of the American SugarbeetGrowers Association. Anderson, who issenior technology and policy advisor forthe Washington, D.C., consulting firmof VanNess Feldman, focuses on pro-viding government policy counsel inthe areas of global climate change, effi-ciency, clean technology and air quality.

Anderson outlined the two-decadehistory of international climate changediscussions and agreements under theauspices of the United Nations. In1992, she pointed out, the UnitedStates was one of the signers of thebinding — but unenforceable — RioEarth Summit agreement that essen-tially created the UN framework. “Allthe [signers] agreed they would stabi-lize greenhouse gas concentrations at alevel that would prevent dangerousmanmade interference with the climatesystem,” she said. Conferences of theparties (COPs) have been held regular-ly since then — among them, the famil-iar Kyoto summit of 1997.

“What makes climate change aproblem for burning fossil fuels is that[doing so] increases the concentrationof greenhouse gases — in particular,CO2, methane, nitrous oxide and a fewother trace gases,” Anderson observed.There is scientific consensus that anincrease in greenhouse gas concentra-tions of more than two times that of“pre-industrial” levels carries with it

dangerous conse-quences forEarth’s climate,she added. Theconcentration ofCO2 has gonefrom 280 partsper million inpre-industrialtimes to now 380ppm — “and the

globe is very much on track to hit 550ppm in short order,” Anderson stated.

Since the early 2000s, a number oflegislative proposals have come forth inthe U.S. Congress on this nation’s rolein addressing climate change. Some ofthose proposals remain “on the table”as of 2010. The majority have focusedon market-based programs — i.e., “capand trade” bills that offer industries

economic incentives to cut their green-house emissions — and, as well, disin-centives if they don’t. Over time,newer legislative proposals have tend-ed to be more stringent than their ear-lier counterparts.

So what, about all this, is of suchconcern to the sugarbeet industry?

Legislation working its way throughCongress addresses both “covered”industries and “uncovered” sectors.Industries like electrical generationand petroleum refining fall within the“covered” category, while productionagriculture is among the “uncovered”ones. The difference between being inone sector versus the other generallylies in the difficulty in measuring andaccounting for a certain type of emis-sion and in administering enforcement,according to Anderson. Agriculture is“uncovered” since it is virtually impos-sible to accurately keep track of emis-sions from their sources, e.g., individualfarms. About 15% of the overall U.S.economy consists of uncovered sectors.

“The over-arching goal of a cap-and-trade system — or basically any CO2regulatory program — is to shift theeconomy, including manufacturing,away from existing practices, to prac-tices that emit less CO2 per unit of eco-nomic output,” Anderson explained.For the beet processing sector, thatwould equate to less CO2 per ton ofsugar produced.

The sugarbeet processing sector is atrisk for this primary reason: About

90% of U.S. beet processing factoriesare coal-fired. That’s in sharp contrastto the domestic sugarcane industry,where most cane mills use large quan-tities of bagasse — a cane byproduct —to fuel their boilers.

Compared to an industry like elec-tricity generation, the amount of CO2emitted by the nation’s sugarbeet facto-ries is very small. (See chart at left.)The combined beet processing sectoremits about 4.3 million metric tons peryear — roughly the same as a singlemedium-sized (600 megawatt) coal-fired power station, Anderson noted.But because beet factories fall into the“covered” industry category, they mustsurrender allowances (a type of “get-out-of-jail-free card”) to EPA equal tothe volume of their on-site emissions.

The picture gets quite complicated,with different “allowance prices”depending on whether an industry isconsidered EITE (energy-intensive andtrade-exposed) — which sugar is. Thebottom line is this: The beet sugar pro-cessing sector’s cost of complying withlegislation passed by the U.S. House

Climate Change LegislationWhy the Beet Sugar Processing

Sector Is So Concerned

Below: This chart compares the levels of annual greenhouse gas emissions (as of2007) that come from various industries, including sugarbeet processing. The beetsugar sector — at 4.3 million metric tons of CO2 — is very minor compared to theother noted industries, both “covered” and “not covered.”

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

coal mining

natural gas wells

oil production wells

cement production

beet sugar

petroleum refining

chemicals

transportation

electricity generation

(4.3 Mmt CO2)

not covered by climate billcovered by climate bill

Million metric tonsCO2

Selected Greenhouse Gas Emissions, By Industry (2007)

Janet Anderson

16 THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010Source: EPA & EIA Data

last June — the Waxman-Markey bill— would start out at around $20 mil-lion in 2014 and rise to about $80 mil-lion annually by 2025. Under less-opti-mistic assumptions regarding the priceof emission allowances (the “get-out-of-jail-free card”), those costs would startat about $30 million in 2014 and endup at about $125 million by 2025.

Meanwhile, the sugarcane indus-try’s cost for compliance would be muchless (due to its use of bagasse) — thusplacing the beet sector at a severe com-petitive disadvantage. Should suchlegislation be passed, “it [basicallyamounts to] a 10-year orderly shut-down of your industry,” Anderson stat-ed. “After ‘free allowances’ disappear,it would become extremely difficult forbeets to compete with cane.”

The sugarbeet industry is not rollingover and waiting for the axe to fall

as Congress continues its deliberationsof climate change legislation. It isworking with similarly affected agindustries to make sure its concernsare heard in Congress. (See LutherMarkwart’s comments on page 14.)Noting that no legislative package hasyet come out of Congress, “this is still agood time for your industry to be work-

ing on this issue,” Anderson stated.It’s also important for the sugarbeet

industry to stay alert to state andregional climate programs, she added.

Examples are those developing forCalifornia, for a consortium of north-eastern U.S. states, and the MidwestGreenhouse Gas Reduction Accord. �

Below: This chart shows the estimated costs sugarbeet processors could beexpected to incur under provisions of the Kerry-Boxer bill that has been introducedin the U.S. Senate. Under the “no international” allowance-price scenario, the annu-al cost would be about $30 million in 2014, rising to nearly $125 million as of 2025.It’s based on U.S. sugarbeet factories, as a group, emitting about 4.3 million metrictons of C02 annually. The scenario under the Waxman-Markey bill, which haspassed the U.S. House, is fairly similar.

Projected Cost Impact to Beet Sugar Processors of Cap & Trade Surcharge

Source: VanNess Feldman

THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010 17

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

$140

Sector Emissions

Rebate Allowances

Cost of Purchased Allowances

Mill

ion

Met

ric

To

ns

CO

2

Millio

ns $

(2007)

EIA "Basic" Allowance Price

"No International" Allowance Price

The introduction of strip tillage tosugarbeet production in southern

Idaho has brought challenges as well asopportunities to local beet growers. One challenge is accounting for chaff(residue) trails left behind by combines.These trails create uneven distributionof residue throughout the field, whichcan be a challenge for ensuing crop pro-duction with strip tillage.

Specifically, growers are concernedthat the areas with little residue will bedroughty and more susceptible to weedgrowth, while areas with heavy residuecoverage may have more fertilizer andherbicide binding in the residue — andmore soil-borne disease pressure undera cooler, more-moist and higher-carbonsoil environment.

Another major hurdle in strip-tillage systems is nitrogen application.Because broadcast fertilizers can nolonger be incorporated into the soil,growers have to either (1) broadcastnitrogen fertilizers and rely on irriga-tion to move the fertilizer into the soil,or (2) shank in (knifed or banded) thenitrogen fertilizer simultanuously dur-ing a spring strip tillage pass.

Surface-applying nitrogen fertilizersincreases the potential for volatilizationlosses (conversion of fertilizer ammoni-um to ammonia gas) and binding withsurface residues. Shanking is effectivefor avoiding these issues, but it may becostly for the grower to outfit tillageequipment for fertilizer applications.Using recommended fertilizer ratesmay also be problematic for shanking,as the concentrated band of nitrogencan potentially burn roots.

To address these concerns, we devel-oped a study with varying amounts

of barley residue cover, nitrogen appli-cation methods and applied nitrogenrates for sugarbeet production.

Crop residue levels in this studyranged from 0.8 to 7.7 tons/ac. Nitrogenapplication methods used were: (1)broadcast granular urea fertilizer with-out incorporation; (2) shanked liquidurea-ammonium-nitrate (UAN) to adepth of 4.0 inches using strip-tillageequipment; and (3) no applied nitrogen.

A four-row Strip Cat implement byTwin Diamond Industries was used forfertilizer application and seedbedpreparation. Nitrogen application ratesof 71 and 142 lbs N/ac were based onan application goal of 4.0 and 6.0 lbs ofnitrogen per ton of beets.

Averaged across residue levels, beetyield did not increase significantly

with added broadcast urea up to 142lbs N/ac (Table 1). However, emergenceand beet count decreased significantlywhile beet weight trended higher withincreasing broadcast urea rates — sug-gesting that seed burn caused by con-tact with granular urea prevented seedgermination. The surviving plants inthe broadcast urea plots increased inbeet weight with higher fertilizer rates,suggesting that if the seeds can make itpast germination, they do very well.

Plants receiving 71 lbs N/ac asshanked UAN increased in yield from25.8 to 32.9 tons/ac. However, yieldsdecreased to 27.2 tons when rates wereincreased to 142 lbs N/ac (Table 1). It’slikely the concentrated UAN in the soilis burning the roots of the plant, thuslowering beet counts and beet weights.

Excluding controls, stunting ratesalso were highest for the high-shank Ntreatment (data not shown).

Sugar content was not affected byapplication method, but it did drop sig-nificantly as nitrogen rates increased(Table 1).

Increasing residue levels from 0.8 to7.7 tons/ac decreased beet yields forbroadcast urea treatments and the 142-lb N/ac rate for shanked UAN; however,yields increased slightly for the 71-lbN/ac rate with increasing residue (datanot shown). For the broadcast treat-ment, it is likely the higher carbonamount in the residue would immobi-lize the surface-applied N. The cause ofthe contrasting yield responses for theshanked low- and high-N treatmentshas not yet been determined .

At a depth of 0-12 inches, soil bulkdensity did not appear to be affected byresidue level. This was expected, astillage effects often take several yearsbefore impacting soil density.

Gravimetric and volumetric soilmoisture content trended 1% higher inmid-April for high-residue plots (3.9-7.7tons/ac) compared to low-residue plots(0.77-1.71 tons/ac), but showed no effectin mid-October. This suggests thatgreater residue cover prevents someevaporation of soil water earlier in theseason, likely prior to row closure.

At the 3.0-inch depth, maximum soiltemperatures appeared to decreasefrom 83 to 81 degrees and minimumtemperatures increased from 44 to 46with increasing residue levels (0.8-7.7tons/ac), indicating that greater residuecoverage has a buffering effect on soiltemperature. Average soil temp did notappear to change with residue level.

No stand reduction or root diseasescaused by soil-borne pathogens

were observed during the growing sea-

Chaff Trails & N Applications

Results from Year One of Idaho Strip-Tillage Study

By Amber Moore, Don Morishita & Oliver Neher*

18 THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010

* Amber Moore is extension soils spe-cialist, Don Morishita is extension weedscientist, and Oliver Neher is extensionsugarbeet specialist/plant pathologist atthe University of Idaho-Twin Falls.

N Appli.Method

Control

Broadcast

Control

Shank

N Rate

071142

071142

Soil N +Applied N

69140211

69140211

BeetYield

25.825.025.8

25.832.927.2

Est. Rec.Sugar

7,2486,7806,989

7,2489,1097,301

SugarContent

15.915.615.4

15.915.715.3

BreiNitrate

5686120

5669142

Emerg-ence

554531

556057

BeetWt.

6.87.48.3

6.89.38.6

BeetCount

7,7926,8146,174

7,7927,2757,065

Table 1. Yield, Beet Quality & Emergence Response of SugarbeetsCultivated in a Strip-Tillage System / Kimberly, Idaho / 2009*

* Data are averaged over residue levels ranging from 0.8 to 7.7 tons per acre.

Lbs/Ac T/Ac Lbs/Ac % ppm % Lbs/Beet Beets/Ac

Put A Farmer In Charge

Ijust can’t hold back any longer. Ineed to weigh in on the health

care debate. Right there is a large part of the

problem: They aren’t debatinghealthcare. Congress is only arguingabout who will pay the bill. No, Iadmit I haven’t read the 2,000 pages,but the news is only about the bitterposturing.

Let me go back 20 years for amoment. I had taken the family toFlorida. We went to an alligatorfarm to see the show. At the end, amember of the audience asked,“Weren’t alligators almost extinct?What happened to make this greatcomeback?” The show man said, “Welet farmers start raising them.American farmers will overproduceanything.”

So I come back to my premise:Stop all the biting and snapping andput some farmers in charge. We willproduce so much health care theprice will drop to a point where any-one can afford it. In the time ittakes to get a “crop” through medschool, we would have so many heartsurgeons we’d be trucking semi loadsof them around the country, lookingfor extra storage. Outdoor sportingevents would get H1N1 vaccinations

from a spray plane. There would bevasectomy futures trading on theChicago Board of Trade.

The only downside might be if welet some big company start GMOingour kids to resist cancer. Wait, thatwill take some extra thought.

On another note, I hope many ofyou come to the International

Sugarbeet Institute and stop by theRed River Valley Sugarbeet Museumbooth. Syngenta Seeds/Hilleshöghas agreed to help us out with a funproject. For a donation of $20 to theSugarbeet Museum, you can pose fora multi-generation picture that willin turn be professionally printed foryou, along with my poem, “Farmin’With My Dad.” Bring dad, grandpaand the kids.

Just a reminder, by the way: The 2010 International Sugarbeet

Institute takes place on Wednesdayand Thursday, March 17 and 18 atthe Alerus Center in Grand Forks,N.D. �

son. The absence of soil-bornepathogens was probably related towater management. The plots wereirrigated at optimum levels and notover-irrigated, which would haveincreased disease potential.

Also, no effects of residue levels andweed densities in regard to increasedpathogen pressure or disease occur-rence were observed. Seedling emer-gence was uneven and stretched outover multiple weeks, and was probablymore related to the shank treatmentthan to soil-borne pathogens or residuelevels. As noted, the plots were striptilled when the soil was wetter than itshould have been. This sometimes lefta visible crack in the soil three to fourinches deep, where some of the seedswere deposited during planting.

Weed control was not significantlyaffected by crop residue level,

nitrogen rate or application method(broadcast versus shanked). Evaluatedweed species included common lamb-squarters, redroot pigweed, kochia,common mallow, annual sowthistle,green foxtail and barnyardgrass.

The study area was overseeded inlate fall with Russian thistle, hairynightshade and all of the species previ-ously mentioned (with the exception ofannual sowthistle and common mal-low). Though the study site wassprayed with glyphosate in the fall tocontrol volunteer wheat, common mal-low that had survived through the sum-mer was not controlled, and we antici-pated problems controlling this weedthe following spring.

Glyphosate was applied three timesat 22 fl oz/ac (0.75 lb ae/A) with ammo-nium sulfate at 17 lbs/100 gallons ofspray mixture (3.5 lbs/ac). The firstglyphosate application was made onMay 23 when the crop was in the two-leaf stage. Subsequent applicationswere made June 3 and June 30.

Weed seedling emergence wascounted on June 23 to see if any differ-ences in weed populations by speciesand density could be seen among thecrop residue levels and nitrogen appli-cation rates and methods. The only dif-ferences observed in weed seedlingemergence was with redroot pigweed,i.e., redroot pigweed densities werehigher in the low-straw-residue treat-ments compared to the high-residuetreatments.

Plans are underway to repeat thisstudy again in 2010 to further eval-

uate the interactions between residuecover and nitrogen application in astrip-till system. �

WriteField By David Kragnes

David Kragnes farms near Felton, Minn.He is a former chairman of AmericanCrystal Sugar Co., and currently serveson the board of directors of CoBank.

THE SUGARBEET GROWER March 2010 19

http://www.betaseed.com