Cool, ideal summer weather set high expectations for the country’s corn crop, and the USDA’s latest World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimatesreport shows just how much the crop benefited.

In Tuesday’s report, the USDA forecast 2014-2015 corn production at a record 14.03 billion bushels, 172 million bushels higher than forecast in the USDA’s July report.

“The first survey-based corn yield forecast, at a record 167.4 bushels per acre, is up 2.1 bushels from last month’s trend-based projection,” the USDA wrote.

The report also projected

• Record corn supplies for 2014-2015 at 15.24 billion bushels, with an increase in production partly offset by a 65-million-bushel reduction in beginning stocks;
• An increase in corn use for ethanol and exports by 45 million bushels and 20 million bushels, respectively, for 2013-2014;
• Slightly higher ending stocks for 2014-2015; and
• Lower season-average farm price, which is expected to range between $3.55 and $4.25 per bushel.

For soybeans, the USDA forecasts production to top 3.8 billion bushel due to a higher yield, which is projected at a record 45.4 bushels per acre. The season-average soybean price is expected to range between $9.35 and $11.35 per bushel, down 15 cents on both ends of the range.

The USDA sees reduced soybean imports and increased exports for 2013-2014.

“Imports are lowered 5 million bushels to 80 million based in part on revised import data for September – December 2013 from the U.S. Department of Commerce,” the USDA wrote. “Exports are raised 20 million bushels to 1,640 million reflecting both revised export data for September through December 2013 from the Department of Commerce and inspections data for July 2014. These changes are offset with lower residual use, leaving ending stocks unchanged at 140 million bushels.”

Click here to read the full report.

Please go to the Preppers and Patriots website for more info. This is going to be a good event!

Another tale of despicable waste from those who are “protecting” people….No License, No Food. By the way, Michigan is a “right to farm” state. As Mark Baker’s case with the wrong phenotype of hog indicates, the “right to farm” doesn’t protect all farmers.

Raw milk from My Family Co-Op being poured into a sprayer at Hill High Dairy, the farm that produced the food.

The government-sponsored dump of nearly $5,000 of milk, eggs, butter, and cream from Michigan’s My Family Co-Op yesterday carried a very clear and powerful political message to all Americans: We control your food and we don’t like you buying your food outside the corporate food system. Every now and then, we are going to remind you of what bad children you are being by taking your food and throwing it in the garbage. In fact, we are going to do more than remind you, we are going to completely humiliate you by preventing you from even feeding it to farm animals and instead forcing it to be disposed of in a landfill or dumpster.(For more photos and a brief video of the food dump that took place see the Facebook Page of Hill High Dairy LLC, the producer of the food.)

It’s the same message that was communicated in Minnesota when the regulators seized food from Michael Hartmann and Alvin Schlangen in 2011. And in California in 2010 and 2011, when the regulators twice took food from Rawesome Food Club. And in Wisconsin in 2010 when the regulators threw blue dye into Vernon Hershberger’s raw milk. And in Florida in 2012, when regulators confiscated $45,000 worth of food going to half a dozen food clubs in that state (described in Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Food Rights), and forced the farmers who produced it to pay $2,000 in dumping fees to have it thrown in a landfill. And in Oregon in 2011 when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration sought personal legal penalties against Kelli and Anthony Estrella of Estrella Family Creamery for the high crime of feeding condemned cheese to farm animals, as if to say, the humiliation must be complete.  And the message first communicated in Michigan in 2006 when the state confiscated and disposed of $8,000 of raw milk from farmer Richard Hebron (and forced him as well to pay a $1,000 fine).

If you think I am exaggerating the intent of what is going on here, ask yourself this question: When was the last time you saw government agents seize and condemn food from a place like Foster Farms or Taco Bell or Del Monte or Kellogg’s or Trade Joe’s when their food has been found to contain pathogens, or made people sick? There’s been not even a suggestion that food at My Family Co-Op contained pathogens or made anyone sick.

There were all kinds of other ways for the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development to have handled any problems they saw with My Family Co-Op. They could have warned Jenny Samuelson, the co-op’s owner that she was possibly violating a 2013 policy statement on herdshares. They could have given her a citation, listed the charges against her, held a hearing where she and the owners of the food could have attempted to answer the charges, and then levied a fine if she was found to be in violation. (Actually, the fine and such can still happen, since the seizure order placed on the food last week carries possible penalties, at the MDARD’s discretion.)

But those kinds of civilized steps would have forced the state to be businesslike and law-abiding. Collective punishment isn’t about being businesslike and law-abiding. It isn’t about presenting charges and letting the accused respond. It is about brute force and complete control. It is about sending a message about who is in charge, and what happens if you cut into corporate profits.

The big problem with collective punishment is that, while it may deal with the immediate problem at hand (an unwanted competitor), longer term it breeds alienation among the people who are being penalized and humiliated. I naively thought that possibly such actions were being curtailed or eliminated as officials got the message that it is dangerous to mess with such fundamental rights as the right to obtain food from farm animals you have ownership of.

We can expect more such examples of collective punishment. Dean Foods and its henchmen are losing big bucks in the precipitous decline of pasteurized milk sales. (Dean Foods is understood to control as much as 90% of the milk market in Michigan.) Like the Mafia, oligarchs don’t take well to losing money. Their modus operandi is control and bullying, so they don’t take the customary business steps of trying to find ways to compete. No, they pay big money to the politicians who control the hacks at places like the MDARD, and they demand action. Yesterday, they got it.

Passionate Farmer Takes On Her Government Harassers

With her life’s dream of being a small family farmer in Virginia, Martha Boneta obtained 64 acres in Fauquier County, Va., in 2006 to raise vegetables, herbs, raw honey, eggs, and host small animals. Little did she know that a birthday party with eight 10-year-old girls would trigger zealous county regulators who saw the party as an event needing special exception permits and required a hearing that would impose fees.

Thinking she had all the right commercial permits and licenses, Boneta was still threatened with $5,000 per day fines despite Virginia being a right-to-farm state, where local governments are considered unable to use zoning laws to bring nuisance suits for customary farm operations.

Soon enough, it became clear that there were outside interests who seemed connected to county government, the IRS and even her mortgage company who wanted to force her off her land, and she decided to fight back. (RELATED: IRS Inspector General Probes Whether Agency Abused Virginia Tea Partier)

As citizens rallied behind her passionate defense of farming and property rights, she found her way to “Fox And Friends,” where a national following continued to build. Pressure mounted against government harassment and this month with her passionate, determined civic leadership, the Boneta bill was signed into law by Virginia’s governor, providing farmers greater protections for customary activities at small family farms.

Serving as a model for other citizens feeling targeted and harassed by government, Boneta says, “Never give up because our freedoms, our liberties, our property rights are fundamental to us all.” Even at great personal cost, connecting with other citizens and groups gave Boneta courage that most don’t know is there for them too.

To learn more about Boneta’s Liberty Farm, go here.

Mrs. Thomas does not necessarily support or endorse the products, services or positions promoted in any advertisement contained herein, and does not have control over or receive compensation from any advertiser.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/20/passionate-farmer-takes-on-her-government-harassers/#ixzz387CCDlI2

From Missouri Rural Crisis:

I was asked to do an op ed piece on Amendment for a Missouri newspaper, it is copied below. Please feel free to spread it about and re-post at your will. We need to stop this change to our Constitution!

by Doreen Hannes

Amendment 1, on the Aug. 5 ballot in Missouri, is deceptive right from the first sentence. The amendment was supposed to be on the ballot in November but has been moved up to the August primary election, likely to minimize opportunity for those who see the danger of the amendment to educate voters on the issue.

Originally, the proposed amendment specifically protected “modern practices and agricultural technology.” That means factory-style farming of livestock and biotech, particularly genetically modified plants and animals. Yes, animals. Today there are pigs crossed with mice, spider genes inserted into goats and human genes inserted into cattle. They are all patented, and just as you cannot tell GMO corn from heirloom corn by looking at it, you cannot tell genetically modified animals have other species of DNA in them.

The entities pushing amendment 1 are large agri-biz and biotech companies, including Monsanto, owner of patents on genetically modified life forms, which is experienced in destroying farmers’ livelihoods by taking them to court over crops contaminated by Monsanto’s seed, and Cargill, who helped bring even more illegal immigration by dumping cheap GMO corn into Mexico’s market and destroying the small Mexican farmer’s ability to make a living. Another biotech organization that supports the amendment is Syngenta, which looks to secure more ground for its patented life forms. Farm Bureau (even though it has among its membership some of the best people in the world) is arguably the biggest proponent of free-trade agreements, which destroy the ability of American farmers to sell their products in an open and honest market at a livable price.

Several of us who fought in the legislature to stop this wrong-headed proposal from becoming a constitutional amendment offered a substitute that would actually benefit Missouri family farmers. The proponents of amendment 1 would not hear of it. They said it wouldn’t protect their “constituents.” Here is the substitute offered:

“That agriculture which provides food, energy, health benefits, and security is the foundation and stabilizing force of Missouri’s economy. To protect this vital sector of Missouri’s economy, the right of farmers and ranchers to engage in direct trade with consumers shall be forever guaranteed in this state. No law shall be enacted which abridges the right of farmers and ranchers to employ agricultural practices that secure independent family farm’s ability to save seed, preserve livestock bloodlines, or impede their access to market.”

The supposed “right to farm” amendment is being sold as a way to mitigate the effects on agriculture of “radical animal rights activists.” While the radical animal rights movement is dangerous, its proponents have not consolidated agriculture and negotiated away the family farm in order to line the pockets of multi-national corporations, bureaucrats and lobbyists. The major pushers for Amendment 1 have certainly done so.

Should this change to our constitution pass, courts, lawyers and bureaucrats must define “farming” and “ranching.” If you’re harmed by a factory-farm, you won’t have much recourse to sue. GMOs, which are increasingly being outlawed in other countries, will be unstoppable, and vertical integration (quite possibly under Chinese ownership) will take over Missouri’s family farms and reduce them to a fond memory.

If you want to save the family farm, vote NO on Amendment 1.

Here are some Free Kindle books on some really excellent topics…Enjoy!

			Healing Plants: An Introduction to the Healing Power of … Healing Plants: An Introduction to the Healing Power of Plants – Kindle edition by Helen Collins. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or …
			View on www.amazon.com	Preview by Yahoo

			Amazon.com: A-Z of Traditional Home Remedies eBook: … A-Z of Traditional Home Remedies – Kindle edition by Peter Dunn. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookma…
			View on www.amazon.com	Preview by Yahoo

			Amazon.com: The Naturally Bug-Free Garden: Controllin… The Naturally Bug-Free Garden: Controlling Pest Insects Without Chemicals (Permaculture Gardener Book 2) – Kindle edition by Anna Hess. Download it once and re…
			View on www.amazon.com	Preview by Yahoo

			Amazon.com: Sustainable Energy: How To Save Money U… Amazon.com: Sustainable Energy: How To Save Money Using Renewable Energy, Living Green And Living Sustainably (sustainable energy, sustainable living, living …
			View on www.amazon.com	Preview by Yahoo

			Amazon.com: Canning and Preserving: Your Complete G… Canning and Preserving: Your Complete Guide to Canning and Preserving Food in Jars for Ultimate Freshness and Flavor (Canning and Preserving for Beginners … …
			View on www.amazon.com	Preview by Yahoo

(From PRCNEWS.org, links at original post)

The Missouri DNR (and their counterpart in virtually every other State in the Union) has taken point on bringing about the EPA’s desired Clean Water Restoration Act plans. The CWRA never made it through Congress, but the EPA has no compunctions about handing out money to State agencies to have them move forward without legislative oversight by taking a full on back door approach to control land, water and people through “integrated land and watershed management”.

The ploy is coming to your doorstep via “nonpoint source” pollution management plans. Missouri’s plan is contained in a 166 page pdf, and it not fun reading…at least not for me. Here is a link to the pdf. You may make comments to the DNR through July 8th regarding the NPS Management Plan.

If past agency actions mean anything, they will say, “This is only a draft!” Well, as my friend Bob said regarding the National Animal Identification dissimulation, “It’s like finding a diary of a guy with very detailed plans about how he is going to come into your house, take all of your possessions and then rape and murder your wife and children, in extreme detail. When you confront him with it, he says, ‘Why are you so upset? It’s just a draft.'”

Here again is the link to the Missouri DNR “draft” for Nonpoint Source Pollution Management.
Areas to be managed under the NPS Management Plan. Note that they extend beyond the borders of Missouri.
Critical to understanding this plan are the definitions. Following are the most important definitions for our understanding.

First of all, we have to know what “noinpoint source pollution” means. From the plan, here it is:

Nonpoint source (NPS) pollution: Occurs when water runs over land or through the ground, picks up natural or human-made pollutants, and deposits them in surface waters or groundwater. Pollutants commonly associated with NPS include nutrients (phosphorus and nitrogen), pathogens, clean sediments, oil and grease, salt, and pesticides.

Then we need to know what specifically the agency defines as “pollutant”. NPS is what occurs when water runs over land or through the ground….like when it rains. So we look for the definition of “pollutant”. Here it is:

Pollutant: Dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator reside, sewage, garbage, sewer sludge, munitions, chemical waste, biological material, radioactive materials, heat, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt, filter backwash or industrial, municipal or agricultural waste discharged into water.

Rock? Sand? Biological material? How on earth are you supposed to stop rain and wind from moving rock, sand and…leaves, pollen, bugs, skin cells, egg shells, or other “biological material”? Obviously you can mitigate animal waste from livestock to a certain degree, but you can’t stop the trees.

Ok, fine. So we are again going to remove nature from involving itself in natural processes. If you are familiar with “good agricultural practices”, you already know about that.

Now then, what exactly is it that the DNR is going to “manage”? Well, “waters of the state” via “watershed” management. So how have they defined “waters of the state”? Here it is…and it is not good:

Waters of the state: All rivers, streams, lakes, and other bodies of surface and subsurface water lying within or forming a part of the boundaries of the state which are not entirely confined and located completely upon lands owned, leased, or otherwise controlled by a single person or by two (2) or more people jointly or as tenants in common. These waters also include waters of the United States lying within or adjacent to the state.

And then the watershed portion of their management is the real cherry on top in this plan. Here’s their definition:

Watershed: An area of land that catches rainfall and snowmelt, which then drains into low-lying bodies of water. Watersheds come in all shapes and sizes, from a few acres to over a million square miles and are sometimes difficult to delineate. Consequently, Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUCs) were created to logically convey the drainage relationship of stream systems, watersheds, and larger river basins.

So, even if you have a pond that is wholly contained on your property and you are a single person with free and clear title and no grant money that might cloud your title, you are still within a water shed, and therefore you fall into their management plan for “nonpoint source pollution”, which is anything that might get into water.

Following are some things that they intend to achieve through this new management plan. These will look very familiar to those who fought the White River Blueway designation at this time last year:

•Removing dams and levees

•Keeping a buffer zone from livestock

•Wetland Restoration and Renaturalization

The restoration of wetlands that are hydrologically connected to surface waters is important for the effective filtering of NPS pollutants. Projects that restore previously existing wetland areas that are being degraded through existing land uses such as farming, mowing or other activities are encouraged.

 Nutrient management projects (must include more than planning);

 Sediment control projects (particularly riparian or other filter areas);

 Some forestry BMPs;

 Some controlled drainage projects;

 Livestock exclusion and manure management projects;

 Conservation crop rotation projects with cover crops;

 Riparian re-vegetation and/or protection projects; and

 Buffers and field borders.

It’s beginning to sound entirely too familiar, isn’t it? The US Army Corps of Engineers and the USDA and EPA are partners in this plan. They will be doling out grant money to increase “stakeholder” support for these NPS management plans.

Please contact your County Commissioners and your State Representatives about this. It is entirely too overreaching and they are planning on throwing around grant money like we aren’t nearly 18 trillion dollars in debt.

Comments should be submitted to the Department of Natural Resources, Water Protection Program, Watershed Protection Section, P.O. Box 176, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0176 or by email to greg.anderson@dnr.mo.gov. Emails should provide contact information of the sender (i.e., name, mailing address, phone number) and include “Nonpoint Source Management Plan” in the subject line.