Ontario Pork has recently re-designed it’s popular grilling guide/recipe booklet, just in time for summer and grilling season. 

If ever a meat was destined to be grilled, it has to be pork – the most popular meat in the world!  Grilling is perhaps the easiest method of cooking, and pork on the barbecue tastes spectacular with only minimal preparation.  Approach the barbecue with a spirit of experimentation, enjoyment and relaxation.  You don’t have to follow these recipes to the letter; you can adapt them to come up with something that is uniquely your own.  Recipes included: Grilled Pork Steaks with Peach Salsa; Indonesian-Style Pork Kebabs; Parmesan Sage Pork Burgers; BBQ Asian Pork Tenderloins; Honey Garlic Back Ribs; Orange Country-Style Ribs

To view the new grilling guide, be sure to visit http://www.ontariopork.on.ca/Consumers/Resources.aspx

2012 Ontario Pork Congress:

Tuesday June 19 and Wednesday June 20

10:00AM-5:00PM

…the place to be for Ontario Hog Producers!

2012 OPC Executive

Back (L to R):
Lori Moser, Christine Schoonderwoerd, Blair Cressman, Joe Dwyer

Front (L to R):
Frank Hogervorst, Adam Rae, Linda Weitzel

Absent: Steve Thomas

2012 OPC Sponsors

REGISTRATION
Shur-Gain, Nutreco Canada Inc.

GOLD PLUS (Food Sponsor)
Grand Valley Fortifiers

GOLD PLUS (Social Tent)
Genesus Inc.

GOLD
Agribrands Purina Canada Inc.
Alltech Canada Inc.
Boehringer Ingelheim
Daco Animal Nutrition / Masterfeeds
Danbred North America
Elanco Animal Health
Intervet Canada Corp.
Kenpal Farm Products Inc.
Merck Canada
New-Life Mills
Ontario Pork
Pfizer/Alpharma Animal Health

SILVER
Molesworth Farm Supply
US Soybean Export Council (USSEC)
Wallenstein Feed & Supply Ltd.
Zantingh Direct Inc.

BRONZE
Ag Energy Cooperative
BSC Animal Nutrition Inc.
BioAgriMix Ltd.
Ontario Association of Swine Veterinarians (OASV)
S.M.I.- Shakespeare Mills Inc.
Swineweb.com
Vetoquinol Canada Inc.

Updated April 30, 2012

Ontario Pork Congress Mission Statement

To bring together all segments of the pork industry in order to showcase the technologies, services, wares, products,
programs and related resources.

To promote the health and well being of Ontario’s pork production, which might include welfare, carcass qualities, quality controls, environmental limits and farm safety.

Ontario Pork Producers Marketing Board

Fiscal Year 2011- November 28 2010-December 3rd 2011

Ranking of Associations by Producers

Download the Ontario Pork Hog Marketing Statistics for 2011.

Ontario is boosting grassroots marketing efforts for Ontario foods and strengthening the economy by encouraging people to buy locally grown food at farmers’ markets, at on-farm food stands, in grocery stores and in restaurants.

The province hosted its sixth annual Queen’s Park Celebration of Local Foods – Good things that grow in Ontario, farmers’ market on the lawn of Queen’s Park yesterday (Tuesday, May 29, 2012).  Approximately 20 exhibitors participated, representing dozens of different fresh Ontario products including eggs, dairy, pork, beef, honey, apples, mushrooms, flowers and others.

The event opened with remarks from Ted McMeekin, Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.  Other attendees included provincial MPP’s, dignitaries, media, agri-food organizations and consumers.

The wind and possibility of a thunderstorm did not stop people from coming out to sample a variety of fresh Ontario products.  Ontario Pork staff members Mary Jane Quinn and Kimberley Croft served pulled pork again this year to approximately 500 people, distributed recipes and answered questions about pork and pork products.

To find out more about the event and to join in the conversation, visit:  http://twitter.com/#!/foodlandont

Daily Market Outlook Report (data is subject to change during the day)
 for Wednesday, May 30, 2012

* Click on the link above to view the Ontario Pork Universal Services Daily Market Outlook Report*

NEW  RQ800™ “VIPER” Windows PC  

Bag Packaging System   

ReproQuest, Inc. continues to set the pace in innovative design and development by introducing the RQ800™ Windows™ PC bag packaging system featuring an imbedded Windows™ based, operating platform.

The RQ800™ PC features a larger 10.4″ fully integrated touch screen for easy data entry. Data may also be entered by bar code scanning.

Integrated motor and pump options give greater flexibility and speed from 800 doses per hour to 1,800 doses per hour.

Click Here => Watch RQ800 Video  <= Click Here

Key Features

• Fully integrated touch screen for data entry and program management.
• Operating speed of 800 – 1,800 doses per hour.
• Bar Code read and write capable.
• Ethernet connectivity for remote service support and diagnostics

Click Here => Request More Information  

* Windows is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and other countries.  

RQ Precision Temp™

Semen Storage Coolers

Precision Temp™ Semen Storage Units provide a uniform temperature with continuous air circulation.

Every unit is pre-programmed to operate at 17 degrees Celsius. Temp-Lock feature prevents unwanted tampering to the temperature controller.

• Units both heat and cool.
• Temp-Lock feature prevents tampering.
• Precision controlled accuracy (±0.5°C).
• Pre-programmed for 17°C.

Available in four sizes:

• 1.7  Cu. Ft. Unit – 100 dose capacity     RQ ITEM # – STOR 01 0001
• 2.5  Cu. Ft. Unit – 120 dose capacity     RQ ITEM # – STOR 01 0002
• 4.4  Cu. Ft. Unit – 300 dose capacity     RQ ITEM # – STOR 01 0003
• 11.0 Cu. Ft. Unit – 500 dose capacity    RQ ITEM # – STOR 01 0004

Click Here => To Learn More

The FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine announced today the availability of an updated National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System (NARMS) Strategic Plan, a dynamic roadmap which outlines the program’s commitment to sustained food safety through monitoring and research. The draft Strategic Plan was originally issued in January, 2011. Today’s Plan has been updated based on input from many sources including that received in a previous request for comments, from a series of public and internal meetings, and from conversations with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The NARMS program is a national public health surveillance system that tracks antibiotic resistance in foodborne bacteria in partnership with CDC and USDA and is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services overall strategy to address antimicrobial resistance and protect the health of Americans through safer food.

To address the problem of antimicrobial resistance, the FDA is working in collaboration with veterinarians, the animal drug industry, and animal producers on a strategy to protect public health and promote the judicious use of medically important antibiotics in food-producing animals. The agency will use data collected as part of the NARMS program to identify and track resistance patterns as well as data on the levels of resistance in animals, humans, and retail meat. The information collected will help target interventions to minimize resistance development.

In March 2007, an External Subcommittee of the Science Board to the FDA conducted a review of the NARMS program. This subcommittee made recommendations related to four areas of work performed by NARMS: 1) sampling, 2) research, 3) international activities, and 4) data management and reporting. Included in the report was a recommendation to develop long-range strategic plans.

This announcement is the culmination of these recommendations. The Strategic Plan lists NARMS’ accomplishments since its 1996 inception, strategic goals and objectives and challenges and opportunities.

NARMS has established four strategic goals. These goals build on progress made since NARMS’ inception, with special emphasis on the recommendations made by the FDA Science Board subcommittee review in 2007.

Goal 1: Develop a sampling strategy that is more representative of food animal production and consumption and more applicable to trend analysis
Goal 2: Optimize data acquisition, analysis, and reporting
Goal 3: Strengthen collaborative research projects
Goal 4: Collaborate with international institutions that promote food safety, especially those focused on mitigating the spread of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria

The number of hogs on farms in Canada as of April 1 is estimated at about 12 million head, up 1.8 percent from the same date a year ago, a sign that the industry is slowly rebounding from U.S. mandatory country-of-origin labeling law, the National Meat Association and North American Meat Processors Association noted in a joint newsletter.

Overall numbers were buoyed by growth in western Canada, which benefitted from the availability of cheaper feed grains last year. Saskatchewan boosted the herd by almost 14 percent, the groups said.

The number of sows on Canadian farms was nearly unchanged at 1.3 million head, according to USDA’s U.S. and Canadian Hogs report, but NMA and NAMP say farmers report improving efficiency.

During the first three months of the year pork plants processed slightly fewer hogs than they did in the same period a year earlier. Eastern Canadian plants received about 1.7 percent fewer, while western Canadian plants received 2.3 percent more, the groups said.

Meanwhile, exports dipped 1 percent in the first quarter compared to first-quarter 2011. Compared to pre-COOL numbers, exports are down about 50 percent, they said.

National Hog Farmer magazine has named three AASV members, Jim Lowe, Steve Pollman and Paul Yeske, to its list of 2012 Masters of the Pork Industry.

National Hog Farmer’s Masters of the Pork Industry are a very special, hand-picked group of leaders who share their personal stories and philosophies about the future of the pork industry. The Masters are professionals, entrepreneurs, and family-based men and women whose dedication and wisdom are sure to inspire young and old as they tackle the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead in an ever-changing, global pork industry. National Hog Farmer has devoted a portion of the May, “State of the Pork Industry” issue of the magazine to bringing these leaders’ stories to readers since 2006.

Source: AASV

Introduction
For many farms winter provides a break from constant outdoor activity and the opportunity to plan future farm projects. Granted, on livestock farms the regular animal care responsibilities still need to be done and the challenges of snow and cold make every day chores that much more difficult to complete. But even the busiest of farms need to plan their upcoming spring and summer activities. For many farms now is the time to plan the summer’s major projects and many livestock farms may be in the midst of planning new animal housing and manure storage facilities. The Generally Accepted Agricultural and Management Practices (GAAMPs) for Site Selection and Odor Control for New and Expanding Livestock Production Facilities (Siting GAAMPs) should be part of that planning process.

The Advantages to Siting GAAMP Verification
Most farms complete the Site Verification process in order to maintain the protection from nuisance lawsuits provided by the Michigan Right To Farm Act. Farms that move ahead with construction projects without first getting Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD) site verification risk losing the protections provided by the Right to Farm Act and in some cases may be forced to shut the facility down.

Right to Farm protection is not the only benefit from complying with Siting GAAMP verification guidelines. Other benefits include:

• Siting GAAMP verification maintains the farm’s opportunity to participate in the Michigan Agriculture Environmental Assurance Program (MAEAP). MAEAP verification requires the farm meet all applicable GAAMPs. New and expanded livestock facilities built after August 2003 must meet Siting GAAMP standards to be verified in the MAEAP program. The site verification process remains available for farmers after the project is complete but this type of planning is always easier when done as part of the pre-construction process.

• Siting GAAMP verification assures the farm considers the social and community impacts of the facility prior to construction. Property line setbacks and odor management plans are both intended to help livestock farms minimize their impact on neighbors and the rural community.

• Verification also assures the farm plans for an adequate land base and the appropriate use of accumulated manure nutrients after the new or expanded facilities are placed in production.

• Meeting Siting GAAMP standards assures the manure storage facilities meet current environmental standards. The Siting GAAMP verification process requires a professional engineer (PE) stamped design verifying the storage will meet NRCS 313 or Midwest Plan Service standards. A PE must also monitor the construction process and provide “as built” documentation verifying the manure storage structure meets design specifications. This documentation also allows for a smoother transition to becoming a M-DEQ permitted farm should the livestock farm continue to grow and exceed the Large CAFO threshold.

• Siting GAAMPs also consider the facility’s impact on ground water and any nearby residential water wells.

How Long will the Process Take?
MDARD staff is timely in their response to Site Verification requests. The time consuming portion of the process includes gathering all the information required within the site verification checklist, completing the Manure Systems Management Plan (MSMP), and other complementary documentation. Weather conditions, including frozen ground or extremely wet soils, may delay the subsurface soils evaluation. In these instances the verification request may be submitted to MDARD for review pending the results of the evaluation. If the farm lacks acceptable (defined as less than 3 years old and on increments of 20 acres or less) soil test results for all the fields included in the MSMP, the process will stall until all fields are sampled. Having acceptable soil test results are key to timely completion of the verification request.

The Verification Request
The approval or verification process begins with a livestock producer submitting a Site Verification request to MDARD. If the farm owner requests MDARD siting assistance, then MDARD staff will visit the site prior to any steps being taken, as a preliminary site evaluation. MSU Extension Educators may also be invited to the early site visit. Often these early visits will determine if the site has potential and if there are any extenuating circumstances the owner will need to consider during the application process. The site verification request requires the farm provide MDARD with the following information:

• The completed MDARD site verification checklist providing all the required information

• A site plan including the location of all utilities, fuel storage, water wells and driveways
• A complete Manure Systems Management Plan (MSMP)

• An odor management plan when needed

• If in-ground manure storage, earthen or concrete, is included in the project a subsurface soils evaluation indicating the seasonal high water table must be included in the verification request

• A PE stamped design certifying the manure storage structure meets NRCS 313 or Midwest Plan Service standards

• Results of the well isolation distance worksheet or a letter from the local health department verifying the well location. The well isolation distance worksheet is available at local NRCS offices.

• Aerial photos highlighting adjacent property owners and non-farm residents within one-half mile

• A topographical map and soils map of the site

Who Can Help?
MDARD staff is available to answer questions and make preliminary site visits. MSU Extension Educators are also available to help with the process. Many of Michigan’s Certified CNMP providers also assist with completing the site verification process.

Siting GAAMPs provide a planning process that can be used to properly plan new and expanding facilities, increase the suitability of a particular site and enhance neighbor relations. They help ensure high environmental and social standards so that the Michigan livestock industry can continue to grow.

To learn more about Site Selection GAAMP and to download an application form, go to: http://www.michigan.gov/mdard/0,4610,7-125-1567_1599_1605—,00.html

NW_LS500
Des Moines, IA Wed, May 30, 2012 USDA Market News

USDA NATIONAL CARLOT PORK REPORT as of: 3:00 P.M.
Purchases equated to FOB Omaha Basis.

Compared to Tuesday’s Close: Fresh bone-in loins and butts
generally steady; sknd hams 20-23 lbs steady, 23-27 lbs steady to 1.00 higher;
sdls bellies steady; lean trimmings firm to sharply higher. Trading moderate,
with moderate to good demand and light to moderate offerings.

——————————————————————————-
Loads PORK CUTS : 108.75
Loads TRIM/PROCESS PORK : 24.0
——————————————————————————-

USDA ESTIMATED PORK CARCASS CUTOUT
Based on FOB Omaha carlot pork prices and industry yields.

Calculations for a 200 lb Pork Carcass. Values reflect US Dollars per 100 pounds
53-54% lean, 0.65″-0.80″ backfat at last rib
——————————————————————————-
Today’s Primal Cutout Values
Date Loads Carcass Loin Butt Pic Rib Ham Belly
——————————————————————————-
05/30 132.75 80.78 102.84 94.03 56.27 131.72 61.88 91.77
Change : 1.95 2.72 -0.17 0.81 -0.04 4.61 0.24
——————————————————————————-
05/29 120.0 78.83 100.12 94.20 55.45 131.76 57.27 91.53
05/25 30.3 77.97 98.23 92.35 55.45 134.63 55.99 91.53
05/24 79.5 78.20 98.82 91.82 55.37 137.79 55.99 91.53
05/23 90.0 78.64 101.60 94.27 55.35 135.34 56.73 88.60
Current Five Day Simple Average -
78.88 100.32 93.33 55.58 134.25 57.57 90.99
——————————————————————————-
NOTE: Value may change without adequate test. A detailed
description of the cutout is available upon request.

FRESH PORK CUTS
LOINS, BONE-IN —————————————————————-
Primal Cutout Value = 102.84
—————————–Lds———Price Range————Wghtd Avg——
1/4″ Trim 21#DN-LGT
1/8″ Trm/less 21#DN-LGT 3.5 142.00 142.00
1/4″ Bladeless
1/4″ Trim 21#/UP-MED
Combos 26/Up#(SOW)
LOINS,CNTRCUT,10-11 RIB,1/4″TRM
Tender-in FLO 8-13# 3.0 172.00 – 174.00 173.33
Tender-out FLO 8-13#
BNLS Strap-on 5-11# 3.5 164.00 – 169.00 166.14
BNLS Strap-off 5-11# 10.0 172.00 – 183.00 178.60
WHLE BNLS LOINS 9-13#
BNLS SIRLOIN .75-1.5# 1.75 125.00 125.00
BONE-IN SIR 2.5-3.5# 4.0 77.00 – 89.00 81.38
BLADE ENDS 2-4#
TENDERLOIN 1.25/DN# 1.0 300.00 – 302.00 301.00
LOIN BACKRIB (BOXED)
FRESH 1.5/DN#
” 1.75/DN#
” 1.75-2.00#
” 2.00/UP# 2.25 267.00 – 282.00 273.44
PICNIC ————————————————————————
Primal Cutout Value = 56.27
—————————–Lds———Price Range————Wghtd Avg——
Smkr Trm, RS, combo 2.0 59.00 59.00
Smkr Trm, SS, combo
Smkr Trm, SS, boxed
PICNIC CUSHION MEAT
Boxed 92% Fresh 11.75 94.00 – 99.00 97.34
Boxed 92% Frozen
BOSTON BUTT ——————————————————————-
Primal Cutout Value = 94.03
—————————–Lds———Price Range————Wghtd Avg——
1/4″ TRM 5-10# 17.5 103.00 – 113.00 108.37
1/8″ TRM 5-10#
1/4″ Trim Stk Rdy
1/8″ Trim Stk Rdy 8.0 122.00 – 124.00 123.25
BNLS, Butt 4.0 118.00 – 123.00 120.13
Combo’s 11/UP#(SOW)
SPARERIB ———————————————————————-
Primal Cutout Value = 131.72
—————————–Lds———Price Range————Wghtd Avg——
3BAG/3 PCVAC4.25#/DN-LGT 7.5 139.00 – 153.00 147.00
COMBOS 4.25#/DN-LGT
2 BAG/3 PCVAC4.25#/UP-ME 10.0 135.00 – 140.00 137.20
COMBOS 4.25#/UP-MED
FRESH PORK CUTS-ADDED INGREDIENTS ———————————————
—————————–Lds———Price Range————Wghtd Avg——
BONE-IN LOINS 1/8″ TRIM
BONE-IN LOINS CC TENDER IN
BNLS LOINS STRAP-ON
BNLS LOINS STRAP-OFF
BNLS SIRLOIN .75-1.5#
BONE-IN SIR 2.5-3.5#
TENDERLOIN 1.25/DN#
LOIN BACKRIB FRESH 2.00/UP#
SMKR TRM SS PICNIC BOXED
1/4″ TRIM BUTT
1/4″ TRIM STK RDY BUTT
1/8″ TRIM STK RDY BUTT
SPARERIB 4.25#/DN-LGT
SPARERIB 4.25#/UP-MED
SKINNED HAM ——————————————————————-
Primal Cutout Value = 61.88
—————————–Lds———Price Range————Wghtd Avg——
BONE-IN TRIMMED
17-20# TRIM SPEC 1
20-23# TRIM SPEC 1 2.0 64.00 64.00
23-27# TRIM SPEC 1 5.0 64.00 – 65.00 64.40
BONE-IN 27#/up Trim Spec 1
NORTH AMERICAN EXPORTS
HAMS, BONE-IN 23-27# TS 1
BNLS 3 MUSCLE HAMS 94-96%
BNLS 4 MUSCLE HAMS 94-96 5.0 112.00 – 114.00 112.40
BNLS 5 MUSCLE HAMS 94-96%
INSIDE
OUTSIDE
KNUCKLE
LITE BUTT
INNER SHANK
HAM TRIMMINGS (CHEM LEAN)
Combo 72% Fresh
Boxed 72% Frozen
Combo 90% Fresh
Boxed 90% Frozen
Outer Shank Frozen
BELLY, SEEDLESS —————————————————————
Primal Cutout Value = 91.77
—————————–Lds———Price Range————Wghtd Avg——
SKIN-ON, TRIMMED 10-12#
SKIN-ON, TRIMMED 12-14#
SKIN-ON, TRIMMED 14-16# 2.0 93.00 93.00
SKIN-ON, TRIMMED 16-18# 3.0 93.00 93.00
SKIN-ON, TRIMMED 18-20# 2.0 85.00 85.00
SKIN-ON, TRIMMED 20-25#
SKINLESS, 9-13#
SKINLESS, 13-17#
TRIMMINGS/BONELESS PROCESSING PORK (CHEMICAL LEAN) FOB BASIS
—————————–Lds———Price Range————Wghtd Avg——
Combo 42% Fresh 12.0 42.00 – 44.00 43.67
Boxed 42% Frozen
Combo 72% Fresh 10.0 58.00 – 73.00 68.50
Boxed 72% Frozen
BONELESS PICNIC MEAT
Combo Fresh
Boxed Frozen
SKINNED JOWLS
Combo Fresh
Boxed Frozen
TRIM, VISUAL TRACE OF LEAN
Combo 12-16% Fresh 2.0 34.00 – 39.00 36.50
Boxed 12-16% Frozen
——————————————————————————-
Specifications for all reported cuts available upon request.
——————————————————————————-
STANDARD ADJUSTMENTS FOR CONVERTING TO VACUUM BASIS
Loins (13-23#’s): Butts (4-9#’s):
Vacpak : report basis Vacpak : report basis
Gas Pak : minus $2.00 Gas Pak : no price differential
Paper : minus $5.00 Paper : minus $3.00
Combo : minus $6.00 Combo : minus $4.00
Spareribs: Adjustments for Trim -
Vacpak : report basis Bone-in Center Cut Loins:
Polywrap: minus $7.00 False Lean Off (FLO): report basis
Tenderloins: False Lean On : minus $5.00
Vacpak : report basis Boneless Center Cut Loins:
Polywrap: minus $10.00 1/4″ Trim : report basis
1/8″ Trim : add $6.00
——————————————————————————-
Source: USDA Market News Service, Des Moines, IA
Chris Sommers/Alan Hummel 515-284-4460 Desm.LGMN@ams.usda.gov
24 Hour recorded market information 515-284-4830
www.ams.usda.gov/mnreports/NW_LS500.txt
www.ams.usda.gov/LSMarketNews

1530C

Play Now: MP3 (in page player)

Download:MP3 (right click to ‘save as’)Subscribe: RSS/iTunes XML

May 29, 2012

THE SEASON FOR DETERMINING CORN YIELDS IS UNDERWAY

The 2012 U.S. average corn yield will be one of the dominant factors in determining the level of corn prices over the next year. Expectations about that yield have started at a pretty high level, but the critical period for yield determination is really just beginning.

What do we know about yield potential as the summer growing season begins? The most important development to date is the generally timely planting of the crop. There is a relatively wide window of planting dates for maximum corn yield potential, with yield penalties associated with late planting. Since corn planting dates vary considerably by geographic area, corn planting occurs over a period of several weeks, and corn planting has been occurring earlier over time, there may be a number of ways to characterize timeliness of planting on a national basis. For the period beginning in 1986, we have defined late planting as the percentage of the crop planted after May 20 in the major corn producing states included in the USDA’s Crop Progress report.

This year, only four percent of the corn crop in the 18 major corn producing states was planted after May 20. That is the smallest percentage of the crop planted late during the 27 year period since 1986. On average, 18 percent of the crop was planted after May 20 from 1986 through 2011. There were 9 other years when less than 10 percent of the crop was planted after May 20. In those 9 years, the U.S. average yield was within two bushels of the trend yield in 5 years. Large deviations from trend yield occurred in the early-planted years of 1987 (+ 8 bushels), 1988 (-29 bushels), and 1992 (+16.8 bushels). These yield results are not especially informative for forming expectations about the average yield in 2012. Planting date may be important for yield potential with everything else equal, but summer weather conditions ultimately determine the level of yields. The small percentage of the crop planted late this year suggests that the U.S. average yield will be higher than if a normal percentage had been planted late, but the level of yields is still to be determined.

A second piece of early information relative to corn yield potential is the crop condition rating provided in the USDA’s weekly Crop Progress report. Historically, there has been a positive relationship between the percentage of the crop rated good or excellent at the end of the season and the U.S. average yield relative to trend. Early crop condition ratings are suggestive of yield potential, but ratings can and do change substantially by the end of the season. The first crop condition rating of the season this year showed that 77 percent of the crop was in good or excellent condition as of May 20. Since 1986, an average of only 66 percent of the crop was rated in good or excellent condition in the first report of the season. There were only 6 other years when the initial ratings showed 75 percent or more of the crop in good or excellent condition. The rating at the end of the season was higher than the initial rating in two of those years (1987 and 1994) and the U.S. average yield was well above trend in both years. The rating at the end of the season was below the initial rating in 4 of the 6 years. The average yield was near trend value in three of those years when the final ratings showed 60 to 69 percent of the crop in good or excellent condition. The U.S. average yield was well below trend in 1991 when the final rating showed 53 percent in good or excellent condition.

A small percentage of the crop planted late this year and the early condition of the crop point to the potential for an above-trend yield in 2012, but the most important part of the season is just beginning. The corn market will continue to follow weather developments and crop condition ratings in order to refine yield expectations. At this juncture two important developments may be required in order to maintain high yield expectations. The first is some convincing evidence that the relatively long period (8 months or so) of above average temperatures is giving way to normal or below normal temperatures. The second is for soil moisture deficits in important areas of the central, eastern, and southern Corn Belt to be eliminated.

In addition to yield prospects, the expected size of the 2012 crop will be impacted by the magnitude of planted and harvested acreage. The USDA will provide survey-based estimates in the Acreage report to be released on June 29. New crop corn prices are expected to remain under pressure as long as large crop expectations prevail.

Issued by Darrel Good
Agricultural Economist
University of Illinois