Standing corn residue captures moisture from several recent light snows in eastern Nebraska. Photo by Brett Hampton

February 24 update to Feb. 10, 2003 issue

The five projects have earned grants totaling about $2.9 million. This includes two grants awarded in December by the U.S. Department of Agriculture -- one for $1.3 million, to create Web-based tools that will allow producers nationwide to assess and manage risk more strategically; the other, for $95,000, to fund a series of drought-risk management workshops in Nebraska in February and March.

5 drought mitigation workshops scheduled, beginning this week The University of Nebraska will conduct five workshops titled "Drought Risks and Mitigation on the Agricultural Landscape." The workshops, funded by a $95,000 U.S. Department of Agriculture grant, will include a discussion of patterns, trends and geography of natural hazards in agriculture; how to reduce drought risk; crop insurance basics; new tools for forecasting drought and documenting crop losses; mitigating drought risk through changing cropping practices; strategies for multi-year droughts; and more. The curriculum for the free workshops will be based in part on information gleaned from selected producers at a series of listening forums conducted earlier this year, said Don Wilhite, director of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln-based National Drought Mitigation Center. Workshops can be attended in person, or viewed at extension offices via satellite. The workshop schedule: Feb. 27, 9 a.m. to noon (Neb*sat Channel 107) and 1-4 p.m. (Neb*sat Channel 102), Jackson Hall, Southeast Community College, Beatrice. March 4, 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Neb*sat Channel 107), Student Center, Chadron State College. March 7, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Neb*sat Channel 107), Communications Center, University of Nebraska-Kearney. March 13, 9 a.m. to noon (Neb*sat Channel 107) and 1-4 p.m. (Neb*sat Channel 102), Conn Library, Wayne State College. March 19, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Neb*sat Channel 107), Panhandle Research and Extension Center, Scottsbluff. Check with local extension offices for arrangements. To register for the workshops, email Ann Fiedler or call her at (402)472-6707. On-site registration is available from 8:30-9 a.m. the days of the workshops. The $95,000 grant came from USDA's Risk Management Agency. It is one of a series of grants, totaling about $2.9 million, that have been awarded to the university in the last couple of years to address drought mitigation issues.

The flurry of projects stems in part from congressional passage of the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000, which promoted a federal emphasis on ag risk management that goes well beyond the traditional tool of crop insurance, said Bill Waltman, research coordinator with the University of Nebraska-Lincoln's Department of Computer Science and Engineering and one of the researchers involved in several of the projects.

The law sees ag risk as "not something you just mitigate after the fact," said Don Wilhite, director of the National Drought Mitigation Center, based at NU's Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Instead, the 2000 act asks, "What can we do up front to mitigate risk?"

This approach is more farmer and rural community friendly, less regulatory and perhaps a bit more holistic than earlier farm bills, Waltman said.

The various projects bring together researchers from the drought center, the UNL Departments of Computer Science and Engineering and Agricultural Economics, NU Cooperative Extension, the UNL-based High Plains Regional Climate Center and the University of Nebraska-Omaha's Department of Geography-Geology with non-university partners such as the Center for Rural Affairs, USDA's Risk Management Agency and National Agricultural Statistics Service and the U.S. Geological Survey.

Especially potent is the application of cutting-edge computer science technologies to producers' age-old decision-making processes.

"What we're all about is trying to bring together data and information to improve decision making, particularly by producers in Nebraska" and, ultimately, nationwide, Wilhite said.

Steve Goddard, UNL assistant professor in computer science, leads the $1.3 million project titled "Risk Assessment and Exposure Analysis on the Agricultural Landscape" and a $1 million National Science Foundation Digital Government project titled "A Geospatial Decision Support System for Drought Risk Management." Over the next few years, he expects the research team to develop a set of tools to help producers assess a variety of risks.

Goddard's team is developing a Web-based tool to compute drought and flooding frequencies, durations and intensities at national, state and county levels. Next, researchers will develop a risk-rating system that captures and measures the impacts of natural hazards on crop production, including identifying regions at particularly high or low risk for various natural hazards.

The research also will identify "agro-ecozones" to define landscapes with similar soils and climates. It will couple climate indicators and significant weather events with historical data from the Census of Agriculture and National Agricultural Statistics Service to create maps that illustrate potential impacts of hazards on ag infrastructure. Also, the research will lead to a planting date guide that computes probabilities and extremes of frost dates and a crop development calendar based on growing degree days.

Later research will focus on range and fire danger indicators.

Training materials and sessions are planned, first for Nebraska producers and NU Cooperative Extension educators, then nationally.

"Producers will be able to see some patterns" specific to their own farmland, Goddard said. They'll be able to decide their level of risk as they choose planting dates and make crop selections. They'll be able to ask questions like "I've been growing corn for 20, 30 years. Can I grow grapes instead?"

"You could take a look at this and find out the risks of growing grapes," Goddard added.

The joint venture of the Nebraska Department of Agriculture and University of Nebraska Cooperative Extension accepts all pesticides except those in pressurized cylinders. Now in its seventh year, the program has collected and incinerated nearly 850 tons of unwanted pesticide products from across the state, said NU extension pesticide education specialist Larry Schulze.

Pesticides that can be turned in include all types of herbicides, insecticides and fungicides; and all types of agricultural, livestock, home, lawn and garden, structural and commercial pesticides (including those in aerosol containers).

Farmers can dispose of old electrical transformers left over from irrigation system renovations. These transformers can contain PCBs, which have been linked to certain cancers and other health problems. Items such as oil, antifreeze, paint, varnish, thinners, cleaners and solvents are not accepted. Neither are pesticide products in pressurized cylinders.

Collection sites are open 8 a.m. to noon, at each location. Preregistration is not necessary at any of the sites and there are no fees charged for quantities of pesticides up to 1,000 pounds, Schulze said. Those expecting to turn in more than a half ton of waste products should notify Rich Reiman at the NDA, in advance, by phoning (402)471-2394.

Products brought to a collection site totaling over 1,000 pounds require a nominal fee of $1 per pound for each pound of product over 1,000 pounds, Schulze said.

Persons turning in pesticides or transformers are encouraged to:

• Leave pesticide labels on containers.
• Handle containers with chemical resistant gloves and in a way to prevent them from spilling.
• Wash hands with soap and water after handling.
• Take pesticide materials in for identification and disposal if containers' labels have been removed or are not legible.
• Transport smaller quantities of pesticides in fragile containers in a plastic bucket or other container that will contain the pesticide if it begins leaking.
• Do not transport pesticides in the passenger compartment of vehicles.

Occasionally, however, producer concerns turn to the bigger picture. One ever-important question focuses on the likely level of commodity prices years into the future. Economists love to try to answer such questions. Our response depends fundamentally on expected supply and demand in a worldwide market. In turn, these fundamentals will be impacted by things such as weather, economic growth and trade relationships. Unfortunately, the farther into the future our projections go, the riskier they become.

Policy brief

The U.S. Department of Agriculture recently issued 10-year projections for United States and world agriculture. Following is a brief overview for Nebraska's two largest crops, corn and soybeans:

U.S. corn prices are expected to average $2.40 per bushel for the marketing year that began last Sept. 1. Next year, prices fall to $2.20 and then to $2.10 for several years after that. Not until 2011-12 will prices creep back up to $2.40.

The projected price pattern is similar for soybeans. After an expected average price of $5.40 per bushel this year, prices drop to $5.15 next year. By 2009-10, prices inch back to $5.40, before peaking at decade-high of $5.60 in 2012-13.

While I have no reason to refute any of these projections, neither would I want to bet much on them. They're simply USDA's best estimates, given the information at hand. A year from now, when the estimates are updated, they may look much different. And that will hold true for each subsequent annual estimate through 2012-13.

If risks are certain in making long-term price projections, other parts of the big picture in agriculture are easier to assess.

For one thing, low-cost producers will continue to have an advantage in good times and bad. They attain that status by good management skills, astute use of capital and other factors. In short, they're the most competitive producers in a competitive industry. Not insignificantly, they tend to be medium-size to larger producers whose operations are growing.

Another reality is that commodity marketing is becoming increasingly sophisticated. It's not enough anymore to try to pick a high-price day to sell after the crop's in the bin. Savvy producers know what market opportunities are available throughout the year. They're also able to evaluate contracts and other marketing agreements as alternatives to cash sales. Not unlike the production side of agriculture, the advantage increasingly will go to those who navigate their way through an array of market opportunities.

Roy Frederick
Extension Policy Specialist

The program will feature advice on everything from drafting job descriptions to firing a problem employee. Employees will learn how to spot potential job issues before they become problems and gain a better sense of what employers expect. Guests include Bernard Erven, Ohio State University Extension human resources management specialist, and Sarah Fogleman, Kansas State University Extension ag economist. Erven and Fogleman emphasize the importance of clear communication and offer tips on avoiding the most common communication pitfalls.

Also on the program, Don Levis, a nationally recognized authority on swine reproduction management, will talk about improving artificial insemination techniques in the swine industry.

Cracked mud was all that was left in some watering holes by late last summer. Nebraska reservoirs -- already low after last year's drought -- will need to depend mostly on snowmelt from Colorado for their long-term recovery. Photo by Brett Hampton

As of Jan. 27, Lake McConaughy stood at 722,400 acre-feet, which is 41% of capacity and 52% of long-term average for this date. On Sept. 23, 2001 McConaughy stood at 573,800 acre-feet, or 33% of capacity. Inflows are currently averaging 700 cubic feet per second (cfs), compared to the normal inflow average for this time of year of 1100-1200 cfs. These levels are below what was projected last fall.

Lake McConaughy is projected to peak out at 800,000 acre-feet prior to irrigation season. This would be the lowest spring peak since the lake was filled in 1948. The all time record low was 380,000 acre-feet in 1956, which could easily occur with irrigation this year. Of special note, representatives of the Natural Resource and Conservation Service believe the 800,000 acre-feet projection may be too optimistic.

Conditions within the Republican River basin are as bad, or worse, than the Platte River system. As of Jan. 27, there was zero flow at the Colorado-Nebraska border. There has been no flow for over two weeks. Harlan County Reservoir stands at 51% of capacity, compared to 79% at this time last year. Other reservoirs across southwestern Nebraska are as follows (first value: this year; second value: last year): Bonny (Colorado): 46% (57%); Enders: 28% (29%); Swanson: 20% (23%); Butler: 36% (51%); and Strunk: 56% (78%). Some preliminary estimated water delivery information was presented to the CARC Committee based on information through Jan. 14. These are estimates and do not constitute guaranteed delivery.

Snow melt runoff projections for the Platte Watershed continue to decrease. The basin snowpack in Colorado and Wyoming was over 125% of normal in mid-November and had dropped to 75% of normal by Jan. 1. Runoff projections for the spring peak are projected to be approximately 55% of normal if the basin receives average snowfall through mid-April.

If snowfall within the basin continues to remain below normal, these estimates will be lowered. In order for the snowpack to achieve normal conditions by the statistical peak in mid-April, the basin will need to receive nearly 200% of average snowfall during the next 10 weeks. Even with a normal snowpack, runoff would only average 80-90% of normal. Conditions are so dry in Wyoming that more of the melt water would be lost to infiltration than normally would be expected.

Much of western Nebraska continues to be in a severe drought, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor, a product of the Drought Mitigation Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

An additional concern has been raised by scientists monitoring the snowpack feeding the Platte and Missouri river basins. While many of the south-facing mountain slopes are nearly barren above tree line, many of the monitoring sites are in protected areas below tree line. The scientists are concerned that runoff estimates actually may be less than previously projected, by as much as 20% in some locations.

Pasture concerns

Speakers also addressed current pasture conditions and future viability of pastures. Of the 1.1 million acres in CRP in Nebraska, 318,000 acres were grazed or hayed last year. Farm Service Agency representatives were concerned as to whether these acres will provide adequate forage this year if they are again released for emergency assistance.

Native prairie species have suffered from the prolonged drought and by some estimates may take over a year to fully recover. Some Panhandle producers have expressed concern that pastures are so poor that they may not provide an adequate forage base this year.

Governor Johanns asked FSA representatives to advise U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman of the state’s current situation. He also requested that they ask what steps the state should take to begin the process of drought declarations, if needed, in order to expedite the release of CRP. Since CRP release is dictated by percent of normal precipitation received over a defined time, it was hoped that by notifying Secretary Veneman now Nebraska might warrant special consideration of carryover effects from last year’s drought on pastures.

The forecast

The weather during the next three to four months will dictate much about how Nebraska fares during the upcoming production season. Most areas of central and western Nebraska have accumulated three-year precipitation deficits of 75-100% of normal annual precipitation. The statistical likelihood of completely alleviating these deficits over the next year is less than 5%. It would take nearly 400% of normal precipitation to eliminate this deficit by May 1.

Long-lead models continue to point toward the tendency for above normal precipitation during the next three months; however, with each successive release of these forecasts, the models have reduced the statistical likelihood. Recent precipitation trends are encouraging, but we have seen these wet periods off and on for the past 15-18 months. Usually, they have lasted only four to six weeks and have been followed by extremely dry conditions. Until a prolonged wet spell occurs, we will need to treat current events as a mild wet spell in an overall dry pattern.

It is entirely possible that dryland crops could have a normal or even above normal production year in 2003. We will need to see abundant moisture during the next four months to build soil moisture reserves. At present, all of the High Plains Regional Climate Center soil moisture sites are pointing toward an average of two inches of available moisture. This ranges from a low of one inch of available moisture for western Nebraska sites to four inches at extreme eastern Nebraska sites. All of the moisture is contained in the top two feet of the soil profile.

Even if abundant rains do fall this spring and summer, the hydrological situation will persist into next year. In order for reservoirs in western Nebraska to return to normal, above normal mountain snows will be required through next winter. It is important to remember that reservoirs in Colorado and Wyoming are as bad or worse than those in Nebraska. We need to see these lakes return to normal before significant recovery can be expected.

Al Dutcher
State Climatologist

Addressing program and crop insurance issues

Fortunately, the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 retained all of the planting flexibility allowed in the 1996 farm bill. The “Freedom to Farm” program removed nearly all restrictions in terms of the crops that may be planted on base acres. Producers may plant any program or non-program crop on base acres, with the exception of designated fruit and vegetable (FAV) crops. In western Nebraska, the key FAV crop in irrigated cropping systems is dry edible beans. Growers with a history of planting dry beans will be allowed to plant them on all “free” or non-base acres with no penalty, and on base acres with an acre-for-acre reduction in direct farm payments. This payment reduction will not be a limiting factor for dry bean producers.

The crop insurance issues are more difficult to evaluate. Irrigated crop producers are facing limited water supplies and uncertainty in the notification dates on these water sources. This uncertainty will have numerous implications as producers make planting decisions and attempt to insure the crops that are planted.

Lack of rainfall for irrigated producers is not an insurable peril. For those producers planning to grow crops without any irrigation water on traditionally irrigated land, the crops will be insurable. However, these crops will only be insurable as dryland crops. The yield history on these irrigated farms will not be applicable, so these farms will need to use “T” yields that may not reflect the actual productivity of the land base. Because dryland production is inherently more risky, the premiums paid for the reduced yields of the dryland production will be higher. This is a double edged sword for producers looking to plant dryland crops on previously irrigated acres that will not have a water supply in 2003.

For the farm that is expecting some water to be available, the percentage of the land that is expected to have an adequate water supply to make a crop will be insurable as irrigated production. The remainder will need to be insured as dryland production. Timeliness of information from the Bureau of Reclamation and irrigation districts on the amount of water available for irrigation will influence the actual insurability of the crops planted this spring. As information on water availability becomes available, insurance providers will need to determine whether crops are going to be insurable and whether all of the acreage is insurable as an irrigated practice.

The final option for producers is to take the prevented planting (PP) option in the crop insurance program. Initially developed for producers in areas that may be too wet for spring planting, the prevented planting provision is available in all insurance contracts with drought included as one of the perils.

The prevented planting coverage is difficult to understand, and even more difficult to actually implement. Prevented planting can be applied for, assuming that the time for planting and the late planting period, according to the coverage, has passed. The lack of moisture in conjunction with a failed water supply should qualify the producer for prevented planting. This assumes that the condition is prevalent throughout the area, meaning that a number of farmers in an area will need to apply for the same peril.

For irrigation districts that may not have water, this will be a matter of proving that the water is not available for a significant portion of the acres in the irrigation district. Prevented planting will require that the producer has purchased insurance and paid the appropriate premiums. In addition, the actual adjustments will not occur until late in the season. The prevented planting regulations are not easy to understand and should be reviewed with a crop insurance professional before considering this option. Growers who take the prevented planting option will be able to leave the land idle, plant a cover crop, or plant a crop for grazing. Any crop that is planted and harvested for sale will not be allowed on prevented planting acres. The other concern with prevented planting claims is a limit on the number of times that it may be claimed. If this drought persists into 2004, any acres that prevented planting was claimed on in 2003 would not be eligible for prevented planting on that crop in 2004.

Spring crops will need to be enrolled in insurance programs by March 15, similar to previous years. If the intention is either dryland, irrigated, or prevented planting on irrigated land, the crop must be enrolled in the crop insurance program by this deadline.

The most important consideration for crop producers facing drought and limited irrigation water supplies is to remain informed about the options available, both for crops and the programs that will allow for insurance. Check with crop insurance advisors before making any decisions that divert from the standard practices.

Paul Burgener
Extension Agricultural Economist
Panhandle REC

Daily plant water use throughout the season for wheat, corn, and soybean. Critical periods of high water use differ among the crops, allowing for targeted irrigation when each crop needs it most. (From "Management Strategies to Stretch Limited Water Supplies," J.P. Schneekloth and N.L. Klocke. Proceedings of the 2002 Central Plains Irrigation Shortcourse, 2002.)

What are a crop producer’s best options for selecting crops this year, given the prospects for limited water supplies?

1. Before making any cropping decisions, check with the appropriate Farm Service Agency, CRC coverage, Revenue Assurance, etc. regarding any restrictions.

2. When selecting crops, look at when the crop most needs water as well as how much water will be needed. Compare when the crop needs the water with when it will be available from the irrigation district. If water is not expected to be available during a critical growth period, consider another crop. Try to make adjustments that will work in a dry year, but will not limit potential yields if the drought ends.

3. Make sure there is an economic use for the crop being considered as well as the technical expertise and equipment necessary for growing a different crop.

Seed companies continue to improve the yield under both dry and wet conditions and some rate the drought tolerance of the seed they market. Changes in maturity and time of critical events can influence how a variety responds to drought. Earlier maturing, drought hardy varieties make sense as long as you don’t give up much yield potential at the high end. You probably will not be able to make direct comparisons of drought ratings among companies since they use different scales and criteria.

When we look across the state of Nebraska, varieties and hybrids have a rather limited area of adaptation. Both corn and soybean need to stay fairly close to their adapted areas. When comparing yields of potential varieties and hybrids, look within your geographic area and consider the experiences you’ve had on your farm. Don’t throw out all your current varieties and replace them with ones you’ve never tried. It is safest to replace 25% or less of the acres with a new, untried variety or hybrid.

Crop traits

Corn. When water is limited, avoid full season corn hybrids and adjust fertility rates for a lower yield goal. Reducing plant population for corn can reduce water use, but populations must be planted below approximately 16,000 plants per acre before substantial water savings can be expected. With lower plant populations, weed control becomes even more important later into the season. Also, studies have shown that water stress early in corn has much less of an impact on yield than water stress during tasseling. If water supplies are limited, concentrate irrigation at tassel time.

Soybean. For soybean, if the soil profile is near field capacity at planting, the late flower through pod elongation periods are critical water use periods. If there is a chance water may not be available at pod fill, consider planting the soybean earlier (although frost and some insects may increase risks). Planting early may not gain you a lot on maturity, but it can help. Planting earlier may allow the plant to have access to more rainfall events than if the crop is planted later.

At the Rogers Memorial Farm, 10 miles east of Lincoln, Paul Jasa, Extension Engineer, no-till planted soybean to evaluate planting date and whether late planted soybean would have adequate rainfall or soil moisture during August for the important pod fill period, the main determinate of yield. In 2000 it rained in July but not in August during pod fill. Table 1 lists planting dates and soybean yield for two maturity dates.

Table 1. Soybean planting date and yield for two maturity dates. Planting date Soybean yield, bu/A Maturity 2.4 3.2 March 6 42 38 March 29 43 35 April 19 38 37 May 10 39 37 May 31 36 37 June 21 28 27 Seed coated with RivalTM and AllegianceTM

Last year some soybean fields seemed to tolerate drought a little longer in wider rows, however the benefit wasn’t enough to warrant changing your present system.

Dry bean. In western Nebraska dry bean is a good choice where water supplies are limited. Because dry bean is not a program crop and is considered a fruit or vegetable crop, be sure an acreage increase does not jeopardize your corn base. Early or late water stress on dry bean has been shown to depress yields somewhat; however, maintaining soil water during flowering can still produce respectable yields. Although dry bean only uses about 16 inches of water, most of it is used during July and early August. If water availability is limited to early spring, production can be reduced.

Small grains and forages. Most areas of the state have the greatest potential for precipitation in early spring. Even though conditions are dry, excess rain during the spring can result in water loss to deep percolation or runoff. Planting a crop such as small grains and forages or having winter wheat planted may allow irrigators to take better advantage of the spring rains. These crops are actively growing in the early spring and can use the water that may not be useable by more traditional row crops. In some parts of the state, animal forages may be a good option for producers who also raise cattle since the cost of forage will likely increase if dry conditions persist.

Summary

Soil water conditions may change, but it appears likely that areas in Nebraska will face shortages of irrigation water. Always check with the appropriate agency before selecting crop, planting dates, and other production practices which may affect eligibility for programs.

Bob Klein
Extension Cropping Systems Specialist
West Central REC
Lenis Nelson
Extension Crop Variety Specialist

A center pivot must be capable of delivering the amount of water needed by the crop during the peak crop water use period. Table 1 illustrates the amount of water that can be applied with different system capacities and with one crop or with multiple crops whose critical water needs are at different times. For example, if a 130-acre field was planted half to wheat and half to corn, an 800-gpm system would be able to apply 0.64 inches a day to the half of the field requiring water most at that time.

To operate efficiently, many irrigation districts plan to deliver a minimum of one inch of water per week. For example, if 6 inches of irrigation water is available for the summer, the maximum length of the irrigation season would be six weeks -- less if water demands are greater than one inch per week. The Bureau of Reclamation has estimated that the amounts of water listed in Table 2 will be available for 2003. The district uses these estimates to determine how much to supply water users. In districts where water is expected to be restricted, reduce the estimates if the district does not plan to deliver one inch of water every six to seven days.

Table 1. The amount of water that can be applied to a single crop or multiple crops requiring water at different times on a 130-acre system. System capacity Number of crops One Two Three (inches per day) 200 gpm 0.08 0.1 0.24 400 gpm 0.16 0.32 0.48 600 gpm 0.24 0.48 0.73 800 gpm 0.32 0.64 0.96 1000 gpm 0.40 0.80 1.21

In the North Platte Valley drainage, ownership of water in reservoirs at the end of December was only 73,000 acre-feet. This compares to 261,000 acre-feet last year when water supplies ran out in early August and an average water ownership of 557,000 acre-feet. Needless to say, without significant snow in the Colorado and Wyoming mountains coupled with spring rains, water delivery could be severely limited to four to six weeks or less. Current snow pack as of December 31 in the North Platte Valley drainage area averages about 60% of normal.

Irrigators with low capacity groundwater wells also will need to prepare for dry soil conditions by maintaining and preparing their systems for a potential early start. If the soil moisture is not near field capacity at planting, regardless of the crop, irrigation will need to begin earlier in the season than usual to keep from getting too far behind. As soon as weather permits, system maintenance and repairs should be initiated to avoid any unnecessary delays.

Bob Klein
Extension Copping Systems Specialist, West Central REC
Dean Yonts
Extension Irrigation Specialist, Panhandle REC
Bill Kranz
Extension Irrigation Specialist, Northeast REC

Table 2. Estimated water availability for 2003, as of Jan. 14, 2003, Bureau of Reclamation. If conditions don’t improve, some districts have said that they may not deliver any water in 2003. District Estimated Farm Delivery (inches) Mirage Flats 4.0 Ainsworth Full supply Sargent** 15.0 Farwell** 12.0 Twin Loops Full supply Frenchman Valley and H&RW 1.0 Frenchman-Cambridge, Meeker, Red Willow and Bartley 2.5 Cambridge Canal 8.0 Almena 4.5 Bostwick in Nebraska 7.0* Bostwick in Kansas 8.5* Kirwin 11.0 Webster 10.0 Glen Elder Full supply Central Nebraska Public Power and Irrigation District*** Full supply Other canals that contract for storage water out of Lake McConaughy Yet to be determined *Estimates based on most recent delivery efficiencies **Estimates provided by the Loup Basin Reclamation District which now controls these reservoirs. ***Estimate provided by the Central Nebraska Public Power and Irrigation District.

Using no-till on center pivot-irrigated fields can save even more soil moisture than no-till in dryland fields because the residue on the soil surface reduces evaporation from wet soil surfaces. (From "Evaporation from soil influenced by crop shading, crop residue, and wetting regime" by R.W. Tood, N.L. Klocke, G.W. Hergert, and A.M. Parkhurst, in the Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Mar/Apr 1991.)

1. Control weeds on a timely basis by selecting the right herbicide and applying it at the right time. Even small weeds can use a substantial amount of water. University of Nebraska research suggests that in dry seasons the critical period of weed control moves closer to plant emergence. Because weeds compete more vigorously for available soil water than most crops, weeds can easily get the upper hand and limit water available for plant growth and development.

2. For dryland conditions, reducing tillage operations conserves soil water by keeping crop residues on the soil surface. Crop residues provide a barrier between incoming radiation and the soil surface which lowers soil evaporation loss. Keeping crop residue on the soil surface also can help suppress weed growth, improve infiltration rates of the soil and reduce soil crusting from raindrop impact. All are especially important when precipitation finally comes in torrents with summer thunderstorms.

3. Use no-till on center pivot-irrigated fields to save even more soil moisture -- as much as 1 to 4 inches -- as compared to no-till in dryland fields. First, by eliminating tillage prior to planting and in-season cultivations, water is saved just as in dryland. It’s estimated that each tillage pass can cause 0.5-0.75 inch of soil moisture loss. Equally important in irrigated fields is that when residue is not left on the soil surface, evaporation from the wet soil increases after every water application, for as much as a 2.0 to 2.5 inch loss. Minimizing or eliminating tillage will maintain more surface residue while helping limit soil moisture loss.

Robert Klein
Extension Cropping Systems Specialist
West Central REC

With respect to fumonisin contamination, approximately 40% (29 of 72 samples) of the corn crop surveyed by the Nebraska Department of Agriculture exceeded the FDA action level for food-grade corn (5 ppm). This was a significant issue for some food-grade corn producers and marketers in Nebraska. Horses should not be fed grain contaminated at this level (5 ppm). No samples were determined to have greater than the FDA action level for mature cattle (60 ppm). Many samples exceeded the fumonisin action level established for swine (20 ppm) and appropriate caution should be exercised in feeding this grain to hogs.

The long-range forecast for the 2003 growing season projects another year of below average precipitation and above average temperatures. If that holds true, the risk of aflatoxin contamination in the 2003 corn crop will be high. The level of heat and moisture stress during pollination will determine the level of risk in each field. Other factors may increase the risk of aflatoxin contamination, including, insect damage during the grain fill period and in postharvest storage, hybrid genetics, and mechanical damage during harvest and postharvest handling. A crop management plan should be developed to minimize crop stress and insect or mechanical damage.

Featured speaker Dwayne Beck, research manager at the Dakota Lakes Research Farm, a no-till operation in Pierre, S.D., will discuss the benefits of no-till, especially under dry conditions. Beck has been developing no-till systems for irrigated and dryland areas in central South Dakota since 1985. The systems have allowed producers to profitably adopt no-till techniques.

Paul Jasa, NU extension engineer, will speak on no-till system management, planting equipment, adjustments, operation, soil structure and compaction.

Pre-registration is due by Feb. 11. For more information or to register, contact NU Cooperative Extension at (402) 624-8030 or (800) 529-8030 or e-mail at kglewen1@unl.edu. The event is free and sponsored by Cooperative Extension in NU’s Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Nebraska Soybean Board, Lower Platte North Natural Resources District, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service and USDA Farm Services Agency.

Participants will learn about five common mistakes in grain marketing, grain pricing tools, the role of crop insurance in marketing plans, said Deborah Rood, programs coordinator for the UNL agricultural economics department. They also will write personalized marketing plans and then use a simulation game to test their plans. Speakers will include Ed Usset and Robert Craven from the Center for Farm Financial Management at the University of Minnesota.

Cost is $25. Registration deadline is Feb. 14. For more information or to register, send name, address, phone number and a check payable to the University of Nebraska to Women in Agriculture, 303 C Filley Hall, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Neb. 68583-0922.

NU Extension speakers will include Bob Klein, cropping systems specialist; Bill Kranz, irrigation specialist; Roger Elmore, crops specialist; Dean Yonts, irrigation specialist; and Richard Ferguson, soils specialist. Franklin Choutka, Nebraska claims manager, North Central Crop Insurance Company, will discuss insurance coverage issues this year. Regular features on the weather and markets also will be included.

Third driest year in 2002

NU field test results

Selecting Alfalfa Varieties for Nebraska, EC03-153, to be available in mid February, includes a discussion of how to compare and select varieties, a table of characteristics and relative yields of alfalfa varieties, based on selected Nebraska tests, 1982-2002; a similar table of alfalfa variety characteristics for experimental seed; and a table of seed sources.

In December, the EPA released new regulations for confined operations, which replaced the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit program administered by the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality.

The February and March meetings will help livestock producers with the changes in the NPDES permit program and other producers who have not had to apply for coverage under this program in the past.

Producers who want to know if they are required to apply and what will be needed to obtain a permit should attend this meeting.

Historically, large feedlots in Nebraska had NPDES permits issued with their state operating permits. However, the new rules now apply to all confined animal feeding operations, not just feedlots. Any confined livestock operation over 1,000 head of beef cattle, 2,500 head of swine over 55 pounds, 10,000 nursery pigs (under 55 pounds), 700 dairy animals, 82,000 layers, 125,000 chickens (other than layers), 55,000 turkeys or 500 horses are now required to apply for coverage under the NPDES program.

The new regulations require operations to address design and manure management issues relative to the production area and land application activities. The new permit will require a nutrient management plan, documented site and equipment inspections, required setback requirements for land application areas, manure and soil samples, spill records and an annual report. Concentrated animal feeding operations will be required to manage manure according to crop phosphorus needs.

Depending on the final date for printing in the federal registrar, some existing operations may be required to apply as soon as June 1, 2003. All CAFO will be required to have a Nutrient Management Plan in place by Dec. 31, 2006.

Representatives from EPA and NDEQ will be present to explain the new rules and requirements and how they expect they will be applied in Nebraska.

The workshops are co-sponsored by the Nebraska Farm Bureau Federation, Nebraska Cattlemen, Nebraska Pork Producers Association, Nebraska Department of Agriculture, Nebraska Soybean Association, Nebraska Poultry Industries, Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality, Environmental Protection Agency Region 7 and the Nebraska Natural Resource Conservation Service.

Workshop dates, times and locations are:

• Feb. 27 -- 1 p.m., Lincoln County Fairgrounds, Ag Activities Building, North Platte
• Feb. 28 -- 9 a.m., Prairie Wind Community Center, Bridgeport
• Mar. 4 -- 1-4 p.m., Platte County Agricultural Park, Columbus
• Mar. 4 -- 7-10 p.m., Lifelong Learning Center, Norfolk
• Mar. 5 -- 7-9 p.m., Holiday Inn, Kearney
• Mar. 6 -- 2-5 p.m., Lancaster Country Extension Office, Lincoln

Doak Nickerson, district forester at NU's Panhandle Research and Extension Center at Scottsbluff, emphasized managing dry trees with mulch, anti-transpirant spray and water.

"The importance and benefits of mulching are even more pronounced in times of drought," he said. "Mulching of any kind conserves existing soil water for the next growing season and reduces the time, energy and expense of supplemental watering in addition to increasing tree planting survival." Snow cover also serves as natural mulch, but it won't reduce the impact of the state's drought, said David Mooter, NU program leader for community forestry for the Nebraska Forest Service in Omaha. The state would need two to three years of average precipitation for conditions to return to normal, he said.

Anti-transpirant spray helps seal evergreen foliage from moisture loss and prevents winter desiccation, sand blasting and wind burning, Nickerson said.

"Winter watering is a fine art," he said. "The winter weather conditions of the Front Range in Colorado are very similar to what we face in western Nebraska and the rules of winter watering of trees apply."