<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" version="2.0">

<channel>

<title>Policy Pennings Agricultural Policy Column</title>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray, Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, The University of Tennessee </itunes:author>
<description>A weekly column that discusses current, national and international agricultural policy issues</description>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/articles09.html</link>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2008</copyright>
<category>Education</category>
<itunes:category text="Education">
<itunes:category text="Higher Education" />
</itunes:category>
<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
<webMaster>mlwilson@utk.edu (Michele Wilson)</webMaster>


<item>

<title>Rational and wording of government regs always available in the published rule </title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/601.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/601.pdf</guid>
<description>In writing the final rule banning most extralabel use of cephalosporin in food-producing animals, the Food and Drug administration had to follow a prescribed pattern. In this and recent columns, we are working through that pattern of presentation, partly to demystify the government regulation process. Additionally, we believe that it is to your advantage to be able to read and understand both the rationale for the regulations and the actual wording of the rules that affect various aspects of your farming operation.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/601.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb  2012  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>FDA's reasoning behind restricting use of cephalosporins for food-producing animals</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/600.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/600.pdf</guid>
<description>The possible role of the veterinary use of antibiotics in the development of antibiotic-resistant strains of pathogens that have the potential to cause serious human illness has generated considerable attention in recent years. Concern has been focused on the low-level prophylactic use of these drugs in animal feed to prevent-as opposed to treat-disease. Also, this low-level use of antibiotics typically results in higher rates of weight gain per unit of feed, resulting in lower production costs for meat animal producers.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/600.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan  2012  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>FDA restricts use of cephalosporin in food-producing animals years after original order</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/599.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/599.pdf</guid>
<description>On January 6, 2012, three-and-one-half years after it "published an order prohibiting the extralabel use of cephalosporin antimicrobial drugs in food-producing animals" and over three years after it revoked that order, the Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reissued that order with some modifications. In issuing the order the FDA said, "we are issuing this order based on evidence that certain extralabel uses of these drugs in these animals will likely cause an adverse event in humans and, therefore, present a risk to the public health."</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/599.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan  2012  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>USDA's analysis of costs and benefits of Packers and Stockyards rule</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/598.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/598.pdf</guid>
<description>In this series of columns, we have engaged in a somewhat detailed examination of the GIPSA (Grain Inspection, Packers, and Stockyards Administration) final rule that was published December 9, 2011 in the Federal Register. We first reviewed the 11 provisions that were in the proposed rule, but were not included in the final rule as a result of the inclusion of language in the recent Agricultural Appropriations bill that prohibited the United States Department of Agriculture from moving forward on these provisions. While many producers were in favor of these provisions, these 11 provisions were strongly opposed by the packers/integrators and some growers with value-added contracts.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/598.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan  2012  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>GIPSA final rule: Issues relating to arbitration and the rule's overall impact</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/597.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/597.pdf</guid>
<description>One of the concerns long expressed by poultry producers is the arbitration clause in poultry contracts. To obtain production contracts with integrators, producers must agree to use arbitration to resolve contractual disputes thereby giving up the right to file lawsuits. Producer concerns about arbitration clauses were addressed in the proposed GIPSA rule published in the Federal Register on June 22, 2010. Producers offered comments expressing the importance of the proposed rule on arbitration clauses both in testimony during the 2010 "Workshops on Competition in Agriculture," sponsored by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of Justice, and in written comments submitted directly to the USDA.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/597.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jan  2012  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>GIPSA issues final rule on suspension of bird deliveries</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/596.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/596.pdf</guid>
<description>One of the most interesting parts of the GIPSA (Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration) final rule that was published in the Federal Register on December 9, 2011 is the discussion of comments that were received by GIPSA in response to the proposed rule, published on June 22, 2010. In making that statement, we admit that our tastes in reading material would not make the New York Times Best Sellers list, but that makes the comments no less interesting for those of us who have an interest in agricultural policy.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/596.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec  2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Eleven proposed GIPSA rules did not make the final cut</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/595.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/595.pdf</guid>
<description>After a year-and-a-half of wrangling and responding to Congress and input from stakeholders, the USDA published a final GIPSA rule on December 9, 2011. For some producers the result was far less than they hoped for while packers and representatives of the meat industry still found lots to complain about in the new rule.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/595.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec  2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Research needed to improve crop adaptation to changing global climates</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/594.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/594.pdf</guid>
<description>At the last minute-actually during an extension of time-the 17th United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Conference of Parties or COP17) in Durban South Africa, November 28-December 6, came to an agreement under which the participating nations committed themselves to extend the Kyoto Protocols and work toward adopting a new agreement by 2015. The 2015 agreement would likely not go into effect until 2020 but would be legally binding on all signatories. Given the difficulty over the last 17 years in coming to an agreement, there are those who are skeptical that an agreement will be reached by 2015.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/594.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec  2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Global warming: The argument vs. assessing the risk</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/593.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/593.pdf</guid>
<description>The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) convened in Durban, South Africa on November 28, 2011. The convention was the 17th Conference of the Parties (COP17) to the UNFCCC that brought together representatives of the world's governments, international organizations, and civil society. According to the UNFCCC website, "The discussions will seek to advance, in a balanced fashion, the implementation of the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, as well as the Bali Action Plan, agreed at COP13 in 2007, and the Cancun Agreements, reached at COP16-the present meeting is referred to as COP17-last December." </description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/593.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec  2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>No farm bill served-up by supercommittee so back to square one</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/592.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/592.pdf</guid>
<description>The failure of the supercommittee of the US Congress to come to an agreement on a 10 year deficit reduction package puts the crafting of the 2012 - or will it now be 2013 - Farm Bill back into the hands of the members of the House and Senate agriculture committees. As long as the 6 Republicans and 6 Democrats on the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction - the supercommittee's official name - were attempting to come to a workable compromise between reduced spending and enhanced revenue, the fate of the farm bill was in their hands.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/592.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec  2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>




<item>

<title>Fonio, a crabgrass relative and a hardy grain, supplies nutrition to millions in Africa</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/591.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/591.pdf</guid>
<description>Like many, we pride ourselves on lawns with a lush green growth that provide a green carpet around our homes and flower beds. The preferred grasses we like to encourage are various fescue and bluegrass varieties. </description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/591.pdf" length="28576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>Economist's suggestion: Revamp revenue insurance to reduce taxpayer-paid windfalls</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/590.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/590.pdf</guid>
<description>An examination of the farm bill proposals from commodity and farm groups like the National Corn Growers Association, the American Soybean Association, and the American Farm Bureau Federation, as well as proposals by Congressional leaders like Lugar and Stutzman makes it clear that they all base their proposals on the existence of some form of revenue insurance to serve as the foundation of a 2012 Farm Bill. There are implementation differences among the proposals and differences in the nature of the wrap-around programs that are used in conjunction with revenue insurance.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/590.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Environmental Working Group proposes major changes in farm program</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/589.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/589.pdf</guid>
<description>Most of the major players in the farm bill debate this time assume that revenue insurance will be a major component of the final package. Thus a number of the specific proposals by various commodity organizations offer a wrap-around program that covers shallow losses, leaving it to revenue insurance to serve as a kind of disaster program that covers deep losses. </description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/589.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>Farmers have consistently produced themselves out of prosperity-what about this time?</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/588.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/588.pdf</guid>
<description>In reading Jerry Hagstrom's report on a 3-day conference, Agriculture Investment Summit for the Americas, we were struck by the witty insight of Jason Henderson when he said, "I have never met a farmer who is unwilling to produce himself [or herself] out of prosperity."</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/588.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>American Soybean Association pitches its farm program proposal into the 2012 FB ring</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/587.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/587.pdf</guid>
<description>In recent weeks we have reviewed farm bill proposals from the National Farmers Union, the American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Corn Growers, and a congressional initiative led by Senator Richard Lugar and Rep. Marlin Stutzman. This week we focus our policy examination on a proposal by the American Soybean Association.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/587.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 28 Oct 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>NCGA proposes ACRE modifications for 2012 Farm Bill</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/586.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/586.pdf</guid>
<description>One of the farm groups that was able to get its policy concept incorporated into the 2008 Farm Bill was the Nation Corn Growers Association (NCGA) with its Average Crop Revenue Election (ACRE) program. While it was able to sell its program to Congress, it was less successful with farmers and landlords. Only 13 percent of total base acres were enrolled in the ACRE program.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/586.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>Insurance is an effective within-year price safety net but fails across years</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/585.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/585.pdf</guid>
<description>In early October, Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana, author of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) in 1985 and Chair of the "Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee in 1966" when Freedom to Farm was adopted, announced the introduction of a farm bill proposal that would save "$40 billion in USDA Cuts to Help Meet Federal Deficit Reduction Goals." The bill was co-sponsored by Rep. Marlin Stutzman, also of Indiana.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/585.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>American Farm Bureau's farm bill proposal</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/584.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/584.pdf</guid>
<description>The establishment of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction as a part of the recent legislation that increased the US debt limit has changed the process for the 2012 Farm Bill. With the establishment of this committee of 12 (6 Republicans and 6 Democrats), the focus of farm bill discussions is shifting from the agriculture committees in the House and Senate to this joint committee, rolling a number of programs into this effort to reduce the federal deficit over the next ten years.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/584.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>Impacts of a farm policy do-over for historical 1998 to 2010</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/583.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/583.pdf</guid>
<description>Over the last 13 years, 1998-2010, government payments for crops totaled $152.2 billion for an average of $11.7 billion per year. Keep in mind that these numbers do not include government subsidies to crop and revenue insurance products and other products that have been promoted as a substitute for ad hoc disaster payments.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/583.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Negative reaction to GIPSA rule may actually reinforce its justification</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/582.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/582.pdf</guid>
<description>In anticipation of potential Congressional action and the issuance of the GISPA rule by USDA, we have been rereading Informa Economics' "An Estimate of the Economic Impact of GIPSA's Proposed Rules," prepared for the National Meat Association. According to Informa's analysis, as a result of the implementation of the proposed GIPSA rule, the annual economic costs for the meat industry will total $1.6 billion and result in the loss of 22,843 jobs. These numbers are in contrast to the initial estimate by the USDA that the cost of the proposed rule would be negligible.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/582.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Negative reaction to GIPSA rule may actually reinforce its justification</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/581.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/581.pdf</guid>
<description>The reaction to part of the proposed GIPSA rule that was issued on June 22, 2010 may in itself suggest the need for Section 201.211. This is the section that addresses the issue of packers offering premiums to some producers and not others. The proposed rule is designed to ensure that packers offer the same premiums to all producers who can provide the required volume, kind, and quality of livestock, either individually or collectively.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/581.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>GIPSA: Does discriminatory behavior include issues of unequal access?</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/580.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/580.pdf</guid>
<description>The USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) published a proposed rule in the June 22, 2010 Federal Register that would "add several new sections to the regulations under the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921, as amended and supplemented. The new regulations that GIPSA is proposing would describe and clarify conduct that violates the P and S  Act and allow for more effective and efficient enforcement by GIPSA [Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration]. The proposed regulations would clarify conditions for industry compliance with the P and S Act and provide for a fairer market place." The USDA originally allowed for a 60 day comment period but under pressure from industry groups extended the comment period to November 22, 2010.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/580.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>




<item>

<title>Food stamp program (SNAP) taking a severe hit, as unemployment remains high</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/579.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/579.pdf</guid>
<description>The downhill ride that the stock market has taken in recent weeks is said to be evidence of a general weakness in the US economy and worries about the stability of interlinked financial institutions worldwide. Over the last two-and-one-half years, we have seen the unemployment rate in the US shoot upward and remain high as job creation has not been sufficient to make a dent in the overall unemployment rate, especially when those who have given up looking for work are included.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/579.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 02 Sep 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>New regulations coming on milk spills, dust, and pond water? No, but rumors persist</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/578.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/578.pdf</guid>
<description>Have you heard that the Obama administration is considering treating spills from milk tankers in the same way that spills from gasoline tankers are treated? We have heard that as well, only it turns out that it is not true.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/578.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>Dietary guidelines over the years: Many changes but still no mention of chocolate</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/577.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/577.pdf</guid>
<description>Growing up in the 1950s, we learned about the "Basic Four" food groups in elementary school. One of the elements lacking in this food guide was a lack of guidance on appropriate fats, sugars, and calorie intake. But compared to today with easy access to fast foods, large portions, and abundant sweets, childhood obesity was not as serious an issue. Working on the farm and walking to and from school provided plenty of opportunity to burn off any extra calories we consumed.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/577.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Aug 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Polls provide useful information but how poll questions are worded matter</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/576.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/576.pdf</guid>
<description>Have you ever wondered about those polls that tell you that a certain percentage of US residents are for or against a particular issue? And then there are those candidate polls in which each candidate declares that the polls in his district agree with her/him on a given issue even though each candidate holds polar opposite positions on the issue at hand.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/576.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Continuing the tradition of wearing the white hat of environmental stewardship</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/575.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/575.pdf</guid>
<description>Mention the words "pollution" and the "Environmental Protection Agency" (EPA) in the same sentence and you will have the attention of most US farmers. But the issue of the role of farming practices in environmental pollution predates the creation of the EPA in 1970 by Richard Nixon.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/575.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>If others cannot afford what we produce, how does that play out?</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/574.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/574.pdf</guid>
<description>The need to increase the world's agricultural production to meet both an increasing world population and changing diets, which include an increasing amount of grain-fed meat, has caught the attention of policy makers, agribusiness firms, and farmers alike. The implicit assumption in what we read is that most of this increase will come from the current set of major exporting countries including the US.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/574.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>




<item>

<title>A fruit that "gets to the heart of so many vital African needs"</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/573.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/573.pdf</guid>
<description>For this third article in a series on underutilized/under-appreciated crops in Sub-Saharan Africa-one that focuses on a fruit-our graduate student friend Lilian Mbuthia was quick to suggest that we write about the baobab tree and its fruit. Baobab, Adansonia digitata L., grows not only in Lilian's native land, Kenya, but also in savannah areas in sub-Saharan Africa. Six other varieties of Baobab grow in Madagascar and one in Australia.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/573.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Local food staples in developing countries not always wheat, rice, or corn</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/572.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/572.pdf</guid>
<description>Harwood's major professor for his PhD program in sociology was Asafa Jalata, an Oromo. The Oromo are the largest enthonational group in Ethiopia. For New Years' Eve one year, Harwood and his wife were invited to Asafa's home. Part of the festivities was a meal, which included a bread that they had never seen before.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/572.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>A weed to us, a food to others</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/571.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/571.pdf</guid>
<description>One of the nice things about our jobs as agricultural policy analysts is that it is never boring. We never know what issues will pop-up and grab our attention. Sometimes they are tragic issues like the E. coli outbreak in Germany and its implications for food safety in the US and around the world. At other times, the issues are of a regulatory nature, including the GIPSA rule and the controversy that surrounds its adoption.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/571.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Pathogen responsible for the German E. coli outbreak has distinguishing features </title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/570.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/570.pdf</guid>
<description>The strain of E. coli responsible for the recent German foodborne outbreak shows some characteristics that distinguish it from the strains that have caused illness in the US. First, except for the recent cases that are tied to tourists who have recently returned from that area in Germany, the German strain O104:H4, has only been traced to one previous foodborne illnesses in the US-"a [1994] outbreak of bloody diarrhea associated with consumption of raw milk in Montana." The most common outbreak strain found in the US is E. coli O157:H7, which is a Shiga-toxin producing strain and is considered an adulterant when found in meat samples.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/570.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Food Safety: Is it time to seriously consider routine use of irradiation?</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/569.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/569.pdf</guid>
<description>In response to our previous columns on the devastating E. coli 0104:H4 outbreak in Germany, a reporter called and asked the obvious question: "Can this happen in the US?" While we are neither pathologists nor epidemiologists, everything that we have read indicates that the answer is "Yes." We have nothing in place to prevent this type of outbreak.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/569.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>German E. coli outbreak: Are there lessons to be learned?</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/568.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/568.pdf</guid>
<description>In following the story of the E. coli outbreak in Germany, we were intrigued when they declared that they had determined that the point of origin was raw bean sprouts produced on an organic farm despite the fact that tests on bean sprout samples were negative for E. coli 0104:H4, the bacteria responsible for 30 deaths in Germany and 1 in Sweden. So far the number of those who have come down with hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), permanent damage of the kidneys, is nearing 800 out of 3,000 recorded illnesses. </description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/568.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>E. coli again: A troubling new twist with serious consequences</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/567.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/567.pdf</guid>
<description>As we are writing this column, 2,153 people have become ill from an E. coli outbreak that is centered in Germany, 22 have died and approximately 30 percent of the reported patients have contracted hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS). The species (serotype) of bacteria responsible for this outbreak is E. coli 0104:H4 which is a non-104:H7 STEC (Shiga Toxin producing Escherichia coli).</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/567.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Determining the agriculture budget for 2012-Round one</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/566.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/566.pdf</guid>
<description>For some months now we have been hearing that the 2012 Farm Bill will have less money to work with. Given the dominant sentiment in Congress, that has never been in doubt. The only questions have been 1) how much? and 2) in what programs? The same can be said concerning the "other 2012 budget event," agriculture's single-year appropriation for fiscal 2012.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/566.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>"Unjustified perceptions" explain why Africa's indigenous grains are not well known</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/565.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/565.pdf</guid>
<description>As we look at the issue of agricultural development in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), one area keeps cropping up (no pun intended). As introduced in last week's column, that area is the role of indigenous crops in the lives of both subsistence farmers and market oriented farmers who live above the subsistence level. </description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/565.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>Public research on indigenous cereal seed varieties could be a key to increasing food supplies in Africa</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/564.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/564.pdf</guid>
<description>With the world's population projected to exceed 9 billion people by 2050, many are concerned to make sure that we have the ability to feed the additional 2 billion people. With this growth as justification, some of those involved in producing genetically modified crops (GMOs) are using this as a means of pressuring those countries, particularly the Europeans, who have resisted the adoption of this technology, to accept the use of these crops. The argument is that only by the adoption of the available technology and using GMOs will farmers be able to feed the additional people who will inhabit this planet in 40 years.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/564.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>Current farm programs deserve criticism-they violate original farm policy intent</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/563.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/563.pdf</guid>
<description>We have seen it coming. We have even written about it in this column. But, it was still a shock to read it in the New York Times, "federal farm subsidies, long decried by policy makers as wasteful and antiquated but protected by powerful political interests, appear to be in serious danger." That is, going beyond eliminating specific excesses in farm programs during "these good times" to permanently eliminating farm programs in total.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/563.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Replacing the "buffer" created by world's starving and hungry with a grain buffer</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/562.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/562.pdf</guid>
<description>The issue of high and volatile agricultural commodity prices and its causes and impacts has been the subject of numerous publications and meetings over the last three years including Dakar Agricole 2011, a meeting that we spoke of in last week's column. Before continuing with our discussion of that meeting, we would like to establish a foundation for that discussion by reviewing a paper written for the Canadian Foodgrains Bank, The paper, "Protecting the Food Insecure in Volatile International Markets," was authored by Ian McCreary, an economist and former director of the Canadian Wheat Board. By way of disclosure, Daryll received and commented on an earlier draft of the paper.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/562.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>The second International Dakar Agricultural Forum: Learning from the past, looking to the future</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/561.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/561.pdf</guid>
<description>The high and volatile agricultural commodity prices of 2007/2008 and 2010/2011 have given crop farmers relief from years of low and often below-the-cost-of-production prices, but they also have resulted in food riots around the world and a major jump in the number of persons experiencing chronic hunger-from approximately 850 million people to over 1 billion people. By far, the most devastating impact has been felt in developing countries, particularly the least developed among them.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/561.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>A nineteenth century farm with twenty-first century technology-back to the food/fiber/fuel future?</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/560.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/560.pdf</guid>
<description>The current high prices and projections of low carry-over stocks have rekindled the food vs. fuel debate. Certainly the ethanol industry, directly, and corn farmers, indirectly, will face increasing calls for lowering the renewable fuels mandate and a reduction in or elimination of the blenders tax credit. If there are planting problems this spring or weather/pollination problems this summer, the pressure for change will intensify.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/560.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Forces affecting investment in agricultural technology and infrastructure</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/559.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/559.pdf</guid>
<description>Recently, we wrote a column making the case that the low prices of the late 1990s resulted in the increased political and economic investment of farmers in ethanol production. With local corn prices in the sub-$2.00 range, farmers were desperate for anything that would bring them even a couple of cents a bushel more than they were finding at the local elevator and ethanol held out the best promise.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/559.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>How does the need to double world crop production by 2050 compare with the growth in crop output of the last 40 years?</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/558.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/558.pdf</guid>
<description>Current projections hold that the population of the world will increase from 6.9 billion in early 2011 to somewhere between 9.0 and 9.3 billion by 2050, an increase of over 30 percent. When that increase is coupled with increased prosperity in developing countries and the desire for a diet that includes more meat, it is projected that the production of agricultural crops will need to increase by 70 to 100 percent.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/558.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Feeding the hungry in developing countries: A growth market for US grain agriculture?</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/557.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/557.pdf</guid>
<description>We recently ran across a belt buckle from the 1980s that read, "The American Farmer Feeds the World." For many producers, that statement underlies much of what they do from their on-farm decision making to the policies they support.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/557.pdf" length="28372" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 01 Apr 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Today's commodity programs: A safety net turned on its head?</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/556.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/556.pdf</guid>
<description>Twists and turns are part of life. As individuals, it is common to look back in wonderment, if not amazement, when considering how each of us "got to where we are." Public policy also has its twists and turns. Sometimes those twists and turns cause the policy to veer from its original purpose or reason for being. Take for example commodity programs.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/556.pdf" length="32768" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>EPA's Jackson says recent allegations of regulation overreach are not justified</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/555.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/555.pdf</guid>
<description>The issue of the impact of agriculture on the environment has long been an issue. In the early part of the 20th century, Henry A. Wallace was concerned about soil erosion and its impact on farmland as he characterized some farmers as "soil miners."</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/555.pdf" length="32768" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Land prices are up, up, but let's hope not away-like a bubble</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/554.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/554.pdf</guid>
<description>For most of us of a certain age, the experience of the agricultural sector in the 1980s is seared into our minds. The average value of all US farmland had relentlessly increased from $82 an acre in 1954 to $823 per acre in 1982-the best land was selling in the vicinity of $3,000 per acre. Beginning with the explosion of the export markets in in the early 1970s, US farmland prices increased at double-digit rates from 1973 to 1981.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/554.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Guidance document provides FDA's current thinking on use of antibiotics in food animals</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/553.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/553.pdf</guid>
<description>In June of 2010, the US Food and Drug Administration, Center for Veterinary Medicine, issued draft guidance #209 on "The Judicious Use of Medically Important Antimicrobial Drugs in Food-Producing Animals". According to the FDA, the "draft guidance is intended to inform the public of FDA's current thinking on the use of medically important antimicrobial drugs in food-producing animals" and was "distributed for comment purposes only."</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/553.pdf" length="32768" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>USDA to prepare carbon measurement and management guidelines</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/552.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/552.pdf</guid>
<description>In the February 18, 2011 issue of the Federal Register, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) published a "notice of project undertaken to develop technical guidelines and scientific methods for quantifying greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and carbon sequestration at the practice-, process-, farm- and entity-scales." </description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/552.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 25 Feb 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Farmers adjust acreage to high prices</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/551.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/551.pdf</guid>
<description>Several weeks ago when we were in Texas to speak to a group of farmers, the talk turned to the price of cotton on the futures market. At that time, it was around 150 cents per pound, a far cry from the 50 cents per pound futures price just two years earlier. Most said that they would be growing more cotton in 2011 than they had grown a year earlier. And, that was before the mid-February 2011 30 cent increase in the futures price.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/551.pdf" length="32768" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>Parallels to earlier "new eras:" And to the hangover that ensued?</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/550.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/550.pdf</guid>
<description>As we write this column, March 2011 corn futures closed at $6.87/bu., wheat at $8.53.bu., soybeans at $14.33/bu., rice at $15.80/cwt., and cotton at $1.67/lb. Compared to February 2006 those prices are stratospheric. What we are seeing is a second wave of a general price increase for commodities that began in late 2006 and saw its first peak in 2008 followed by a retrenchment.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/550.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Global warming is happening: How should farmers respond?</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/549.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/549.pdf</guid>
<description>There was a time when one could legitimately argue that there was a lack of scientific agreement over the issue of the role of humans in global warming and even whether we were in a cooling or warming period. Today, the question is a settled one.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/549.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Elements of the health care legislation benefit farmers</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/548.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/548.pdf</guid>

<description>Over the years as we have talked to farmers about their health care coverage, we find that they fall into four groups. A large number of farmers have a spouse who works in town and has access to health insurance through an employer-paid group insurance program. When asked, these farmers often acknowledge that the health insurance coverage is more important than the salary.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/548.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>New York Times attacks farm programs for all the wrong reasons</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/547.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/547.pdf</guid>

<description>The current concern over the US federal budget deficit will be a major factor in the formulation of the 2012 Farm Bill. An editorial in the Sunday, January 16, 2011 New York Times titled, "Here's an easy one," said "here is one big-ticket saving that all members of Congress should get behind: cutting the billions of dollars in farm subsidies that distort food prices, encourage overfarming and inflate the price of land."</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/547.pdf" length="32768" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Exports, uncertainty and the size of the ongoing "food crisis"</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/546.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/546.pdf</guid>

<description> In creating computer models of the agricultural sector, modelers have often treated stocks as a demand factor, leaving exports to take up whatever is left over-residual demand. As a consequence of this assumption, analyses of policies or conditions that cause grain supplies to increase while domestic demand remains relatively stable result in the overestimation of exports and prices.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/546.pdf" length="24576" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 14 Jan 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>


<item>

<title>Index funds and the 2006-2008 run-up in agricultural commodity prices</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/545.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/545.pdf</guid>

<description>One of the overriding questions surrounding the sudden and sharp increase in agricultural prices in the 2006-2008 period is the role of the index funds in the increase. We have written about it before, as have Derek Headey and Shenggen Fan in their IFPRI Monograph, "Reflections on the Global Food Crisis." Those who believe that the index funds contributed significantly to the price bubble believe that commodity exchange rules need to be changed. They would like to see similar position limits and other rules put on index funds that are already in place for traditional speculative traders.</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/545.pdf" length="28672" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



<item>

<title>Apples: Crop stocks available as normal market supplies; Oranges: Crop stocks in a reserve</title>
<link>http://agpolicy.org/weekcol/544.html</link>
<guid>http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/544.pdf</guid>
<description>In an examination of the causes of the 2006-2008 spike in agricultural prices that resulted in a food crisis for over 1 billion people, one of the issues that needs to be looked at is the role of crop stock levels. It is particularly important to look at this issue because, as Derek Headey and Shenggen Fan indicate in their IFPRI Monograph, "Reflections on the Global Food Crisis," "declining stocks [also] preceded the 1974 food crisis."</description> 
<enclosure url="http://agpolicy.org/weekpdf/544.pdf" length="32768" type="application/pdf"/>
<category>application</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011  09:00:00 EST</pubDate>
<author>dray@utk.edu (Daryll E. Ray)</author>
<itunes:author>Daryll E. Ray</itunes:author>
<itunes:subtitle>Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture</itunes:subtitle>

</item>



</channel>
</rss>
