HEAT DOME in the northwest. coming soon

[sdholloway56]

You won’t get any disagreement from me that farmers are paying for a lot of genetic stuff that probably has breakeven returns, at best.

Which is a different issue.

Corn yields mostly same ‘ol- conventional genetic improvement. And specifically mostly the ability to handle higher populations.

Yields clustered around trend the last 8 years- we just haven’t had an extreme low side outlier for 9.

Also been a while since an extreme to the upside- 2004 really. The last time most of the belt had near perfect weather.

I think we could do 190 easy in a year like that.

[timetippingpt]

While I seldom agree with you Dave, your last post is completely accurate and well said.

btw, the next big bump in corn yields is not coming from GMO, there are huge increases coming just from good ole genetic breeding, shorter corn with larger leaf area that grows faster early and fills longer in higher temps.

sw....I must be missing your point. We harvested a field of 250 bu corn last year, a 160, using 180# of N, low cost no-till planted into green rapeseed. The change is all genetics and our production system improvements, most of which are possible due to genetics. The corn genetics clearly pay returns.

On the soybeans, the genetics have a negative return on investment fwiw. Interestingly enough, no one in the small fraternity of the American Seed Trade Association will risk bringing out a fairly priced conventional bean that makes the farmer a lot more money. They are all tied up by the terms of genetic suppliers. That is a area of monopoly that the FTC should be all over, but won't be even with comrade Harris in charge. jmo    And, since farmers really like to grow corn, most farmers, like us, just use the best system to control the weeds, which is NOT Dicamba btw.

[timetippingpt]

Back to sw's question. It is kind of important to remember what we all have known for decades. These ridges move from the EAST to the WEST. Very, very seldom does a ridge move from the west to the east. Ellwyn Taylor taught us that back in the 1990's I think. 

Thus, the high probability is that sooner or later the ridge moves west over the mountains and the jet stream shifts back to normal and brings normal rains to the midwest. The rains the IL/IN/OH/MO/KY corridor are likely to shift west....the real question is will it shift soon enough to help the corn out there? I kind of doubt it but it is just unknown at this point. 

For beans though, it is likely that it will shift in time. We've cut 65 bu beans on thigh high 9 node plants with 4" of rain in August after none in June and early July. (2012 for example) So, there is more time to save the beans, or not. 

The wise money is all hoping for a normal decline, will they be "wealthy and wise" when it is all over? Who knows.

[sdholloway56]

Ken, for xxxx sakes.

I guess you have to maintain your cred with your guru clients, but really?

The only anti-trust the QAnon party is even remotely interested in is against big tech firms that they say aren’t “fair” to them.

Even though the Ag genetics firms are mostly split off now, their business model and regulatory environment are almost identical to Big Pharma. That’s the real 800 pound gorilla that doesn’t want anybody going remotely near there.

[sdholloway56]

mRNA technology was on the shelf and just by happenstance made a huge splash.

Now there are huge possibilities. 

But Big Pharma was and is only interested in blockbuster drugs that treat profitable widespread diseases (Which Big Food helps create) and to spend their cash on share buybacks.

There is absolutely no reason that Medicare and all public health programs shouldn’t be permitted to negotiate prices.

Notice I said Big Food, Which is a little different than Big Ag Which mostly just provides subsidized industrial inputs.

[sdholloway56]

BTW, farmers do have to make their own assessments and risk management decisions regarding the uncertain near future.

But hyping higher prices while denying what is an all time record, never seen before off the charts heat bubble is kinda sick.

[Hobbyfarmer]

Whoa, whoa up here a little bit.

you are making some pretty bold wide sweeping statements.

There are only written accurate records for about 140 years.

How do you know that is how it's always been?

There are tropical plant fossils under the arctic ice cap.

Also quite a few relics of glaciation as far south as central Missouri.

140 years is a miniscule slice of history to make any of those kind of  statements.

Very likely the last 100ish years have been the exception NOT the rule.

Adapt or die.

What the left wing kooks are thinking and trying to do is paramount to prehistoric people throwing virgins into volcanoes only with a worse social economic outcome.

Unbelievably idiotic.

[sdholloway56]

You are a dangerous, nihilistic idiot.

Blowing all time temperature records away by 10 degrees or more is an astonishing thing.

But, hey.......$12 corn!!!!!!!

BTW, underwriting and subsidizing weather risk for farmers was an enormous policy blunder*. Climate change is actually a plus until the APH goes down.

*as is the Fed flood insurance program.

[sw363535]

Time I think you have my point............ after you said you might have missed it.... you wrote a paragraph on soybeans that explains it.

I think you might be giving corn a pass when it comes to the economic analysis and comparability. ---maybe it is just too much fun harvesting those high numbers ---It is for me..... then comes the accounting always followed by questions like "How can we have 200 bushel of expenses in a 240/(on some fields) yield".   I have noticed one thing, when the yields are high, every salesman wants to hop on the combine and take credit.

We harvested a field of 250 bu corn last year, a 160, using 180# of N, low cost no-till planted into green rapeseed. The change is all genetics and our production system improvements, most of which are possible due to genetics. The corn genetics clearly pay returns.   

Maybe I read this wrong but it is not all genetics according to your statement, yet you can be quoted either way.   Increased yield seems to, but may not increase profit margin.  If I make 10% return on that 250 bu crop but made 18% profit on a 180 bushel crop 20 years ago..... is that progress.  No the costs are staggeringly higher than 20 years ago.

I want to add another point for you to consider.  In the 1970's & 80s the Counties around Dalhart Texas irrigation and many SW ks locations of irrigation were achieving 240 up to 280 yields with popular genetics of that time.  It is obvious that the genetics already existed to achieve those yields in excellent soils and conditions.  Those locations were solving their biggest problem--- water access and timing.   What is happening now to improve yields in much of the corn belt is learning to deal with their excess water problem, cover crops are part of that issue.  Production system improvements are most of your progress, just as irrigation and residue management was most of ours.  But until you assign value to every aspect of "production systems"  we don't understand economic progress.  Monsanto did a great job of marketing in that congressional hearing....... and we still Give they credit for far more Than they delivered.  They were right lots of technology was coming.... and they achieved a lot of blame for it..... but seed technology is still being valued far to highly.

If yield is your only measuring stick......... we can do a lot better.  Unfortunately yield is not the measuring stick that keeps agriculture going.

Not that many years ago I remember when Pioneer seed was bought out and the sales staff reached for ultimate pride.  They sent out the new corporate jet to pick up the largest and highest yielding producers in this area to fly to Iowa to look at the research plots, but first we taxied into the hanger to view the other company planes.  A Hugoton, KS farmer across the isle leaned over and said "this is not good"................ I agreed at the time and still do.  Progress has built corporate profits all around farming and farmers have struggled to hang on.  Part of the lecture that day was how many more acres we will be able to farm...... should have been said "you will have to farm more acres to pay for these jets."

GMO's only good input has been giving us more options in herbicide management.  We have tested and retested drought tolerance and it may stay green longer , but yield improvements without water by genetic modification have yet to show more economic benefit to yield than did the traditional breeder selection by variety we have had for decades.  GMO does allow new varieties to come to market faster, but the economic benefit of not knowing how the new handles the regional conditions, don't seem to be there.  Everything seems a little "unproven and expensive".     The trade off to monopolizing the seed industry needs economic analysis... 

Sometimes new just seems better, but always costs more......  Technology has solved their old problem of competition and declining value..... by bringing on the perception of New Technology at a more rapid rate and a higher cost.  Being able to bring on actual New GMO value may be why Monsanto sold.

[BA Deere]

I know this will garner labels of "tinfoil hat!" however it`s a mistake to assume every egghead scientist have mankind`s best interest at heart.  This is your "man made global warming".

https://gizadeathstar.com/2021/06/heat-waves-and-haarp/   

snippet:

Now note that the Gakona-HAARP Notice to Airmen was issued on June 17th, and the heat wave alert article is updated for  June 27. According to that article, a record heat wave is expected to hit the American northwest:

A historic and "life-threatening" heat wave is underway across the Pacific Northwest, the likes of which -- in terms of high temperatures and duration -- has never been experienced before in that part of the country. AccuWeather forecasters are calling for record-shattering heat to linger through early week, not only making life miserable for a part of the country where air conditioning is not prevalent but also posing a significant health risk to millions.

Consecutive days of high temperatures well into the triple digits are forecast throughout parts of Oregon and Washington, which includes the Interstate 5 corridor. Both Portland, Oregon, which could see the mercury crack the 110-degree-Fahrenheit mark, and Seattle, which is expected to top 100, will see temperatures soar 30 to 40 degrees above normal. Points farther inland are likely to have temperatures balloon to above 115.

Average highs in June can be anywhere from the 70s in eastern Washington and Oregon to the 80s in western areas and into Idaho.

The dangerous heat is forecast to peak through Monday as high pressure settles in and enables temperatures to climb to new heights. (Boldface emphasis added)

To this is appended the following picture, showing the area of high pressure in the northwest, and the corresponding area of low pressure over the central plains region of the country:

So how might this tie in to HAARP?

Very easily: HAARP is an ionospheric heater. That is to say, its phased antennae arrays are designed so load energy into the ionosphere, and can do so quite literally with pinpoint accuracy. Loading massive amounts of energy in such a fashion can raise the ionosphere, creating regions of low pressure, which in turn can lower it elsewhere, creating regions of high pressure, with corresponding shifts in the jet stream, all of which is visible on Accuweather's map.  (Think of the Chinese flooding of last year and this year in connection with this.)

So in my opinion, we're looking at weather modification here.