The Texas cotton industry convened at the state Capitol for Cotton Day on March 7, 2023, to educate Senate and House members and staff on the importance of Texas’ No. 1 cash commodity crop.

Plains Cotton Growers representatives who attended the proceedings were PCG Chairman Brent Nelson, PCG President Martin Stoerner, PCG Board Member Todd Straley and PCG CEO Kody Bessent.  Many Texas cotton industry segments, groups and councils were in attendance, handing out cotton towels to members and staffers with information pertaining to the industry.

In addition, the PCG team met with members to emphasize the need for cotton infrastructure assistance for the 2022 crop year; cotton, wool and mohair research funding; and maintaining funding for the Boll Weevil Eradication Program.

“Back in 2011 when we thought the drought was so bad, my gin produced 47,000 bales,” Todd Straley told Rep. John Smithee (R-District 86). “This last year, we ginned 16,000.”

Sen. Charles Perry (R-District 28) introduced Senate Resolution 268 on the Senate floor, recognizing the great cotton industry in the state of Texas.

“Agriculture is the spirit of West Texas and the spirit of this nation…we want to recognize this industry for what it does for Texas and recognize this day as Cotton Day.”

Rep. Briscoe Cain (R-District 128) is the Texas House Agriculture Committee Chair for the 88^th Legislature. The legislative session started January 10th and runs through May 29th.

Cain earned his doctorate of jurisprudence from South Texas College of Law and owns and operates the Law Office of Briscoe Cain, PLLC.

While presenting at the Texas Agriculture Council meeting in Austin, Texas, on March 8th, Cain mentioned he was on his second read-through of the Texas Agriculture Code and that he would, “do everything I can to get the government off of your backs so you can thrive.”

While out of session, Cain resides in Deer Park, Texas, with his wife, Bergundi and their five children.

“We appreciate Chairman Cain’s support of our industry, and we look forward to working with him this legislative session,” said Kody Bessent, PCG CEO.

Rehman Naseem, CEO and owner of Fazal Cloth Mills, Ltd. In Multan, Pakistan, presented to the Plains Cotton Advisory Group on March 10, 2023.

Based on his presentation, the challenges facing the textile mill industry include the following:

Supply Disruptions Caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic

Not only was the supply chain broken as complications arose from the global pandemic, but demand skyrocketed. “Certain countries weren’t able to supply the demand,” he said. “Plus shipping of product from destination to the source was disrupted. Retailers were finding it hard to predict when a particular order would arrive so they were ordering more quantity than required due to the level of uncertainty in receiving the goods.” Naseem added that Pakistan was one of the countries that opened earlier than others so its production facilities were able to cash in on this demand. “Cotton consumption in Pakistan shot up to 16 million bales February 1, 2021.”

Inflation

Naseem stated the investment in the textile chain in Pakistan increased in 2021, as everyone expected the demand to remain constant or even increase going forward. Across the industry, from spinning, weaving, production, etc., there was investment in all segments. Unfortunately, inflation caused a different situation in 2022. “The central banks in most countries started raising interest rates and retailers were fearful of a recession and lack of demand as a result, so the focus transitioned to cutting down on inventory.” The second half of 2022, Naseem saw a reduction of capacity by 50% in his mill. China’s retail demand remained very low with their strict COVID policies; though, recently they have started to enter the marketplace. Naseem said his mill is now operating at 70% capacity — Pakistan needs to consume 16 million bales to be at full capacity. Right now, they are expected to consume 12 million bales this year.

Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act

Naseem stated this act enforced by the U.S. — along with other countries who imposed their own restrictions on importing goods from cotton grown in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of the People’s Republic of China — has had a negative effect on the textile mill industry as a whole. The restriction policies have put pressure on Chinese cotton prices. For the first time in many years, we are seeing the Chinese cotton price premium for new York futures reduced sharply, trading almost even with New York. Today, it’s trading at 14 to 15 cents above New York, when traditionally — over the last four to five years — China’s cotton price premium has been 25 cents over New York.

“This has a negative impact on our industry because Chinese mills are able to procure cotton at cheaper prices and are exporting yarn at a very cheap price,” Naseem added. “While the U.S. and some parts of Europe are banning Xinjiang cotton, other destinations like South America and Southeast Asia are not. So, a lot of demand has shifted to these cheaper yarns coming out of China. It’s hard for us to compete at this price level, and, once yarn is available at a certain price, the market adjusts to that price, so it’s difficult to ask for a premium.”

Naseem went on to say that he believes this price pressure is one of the main reasons cotton prices remain under pressure. “I expect this will be a critical challenge we will face for another six months until the issue is resolved somehow.”

Naseem’s annual mill use is roughly 450,000 bales per year. He said that Pakistan mills are well covered for the second quarter of the year, but they will need to buy additional cotton in the next six months to get back to 100% capacity. If this happens, he says Pakistan mills will need around three million bales.

The new cotton crop in Pakistan will arrive in August. Naseem acknowledged the tough crop year Pakistan had in 2022 with severe flooding and weather events — ending up with 5 million bales rather than the expected 10 million-plus. “Even during normal production years, Pakistan still imports a net of five to seven million bales per year,” he added. “Almost 20% of all cotton imported is from the U.S.”

ARC/PLC Decisions

ARC/PLC decisions must be reported to your local FSA office by March 15.

Conservation Reserve Program Sign-up Dates

General sign up for the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) will begin February 27 and end April 7.

U.S. Cotton Trust Protocol 

March 31, 2023, is the deadline for U.S. cotton producers to enroll their 2023 crop in the U.S. Cotton Trust Protocol.

PCG Annual Meeting

PCG’s 66th annual meeting is on March 28 at the Overton Hotel and Conference Center. Register online today! 

The House Committee on Agriculture convened a business meeting March 9, 2023, to consider its budget views and estimates letter for the 2024 fiscal year. After the letter was reported favorably out of committee, Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-Pa.) issued the following statement:

“The Committee’s budget views and estimates letter outlines a clear, bipartisan blueprint to invest in the hardworking men and women of American agriculture — the folks who work 365 days a year to feed and fuel our nation. While additional funds are necessary, there is no piece of legislation that provides a better return on investment than the Farm Bill. In the wake of record inflation, a global pandemic, and geopolitical turmoil, American farmers, ranchers, foresters, producers and consumers are suffering. The best way to support them is to pass an effective, bipartisan and timely Farm Bill, and the letter considered today provides a sensible path forward.”

Letter Highlights

• Return on Investment — “…in return for this modest investment…more than 43 million jobs, $2.3 trillion in wages, $718 billion in tax revenue, $183 billion in exports, and $7.4 trillion in economic activity.”
• Farm Debt — “[in 2021]…U.S. farm sector debt climbed above the previous record set in 1980 and has since continued to climb, underscoring the need for a strong farm bill.”
• Protecting the Farm Safety Net — “…Over the last 20 years, the farm safety net has repeatedly been looked to for deficit reduction…Congress has returned to the cycle of providing unbudgeted ad hoc assistance for both weather and market related disasters, totaling $93.3 billion over six years…more than 70% of federal funding for agriculture…Despite this infusion of assistance, the farm financial picture is beginning to erode due to repeated production losses and skyrocketing inflation.”

The letter, which outlines the financial challenges and needs of American agriculture, can be found here.

USDA WASDE Report – March 2023

Healthier Frying … with Cottonseed Oil

Things to Know About Inflation and the Consumer

The first House Agriculture Committee hearing of the 118th Congress took place Tuesday, February 28, focusing on uncertainty, inflation and regulations that present challenges to the U.S. agriculture industry. 

Rep. GT Thompson (R-Pa.), committee chair, opened the hearing stating legislators cannot write an impactful farm bill addressing the needs of those who grow, process and consume the food, fuel and fiber of this country without a comprehensive understanding of the industry’s challenges. 

“Our nation’s farmers, ranchers and foresters are exceptional, having increased food and fiber production nearly threefold since the 1940s,” added Thompson. “They’ve done so with no relative increase in inputs, serving as shining stars of sustainability and conservation practices. However, the uncertainty caused by a global pandemic, geopolitical unrest and government intrusion have led to a modest production decline in recent years.”

Thompson outlined his goal for the committee as providing necessary tools for farmers and ranchers to ease the barriers to production to prevent this decline from escalating. He identified the barriers as the following:

• Labor
• Fuel (average cost of diesel fuel per gallon increased 95% in 2021)
• Fertilizer (nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium increased 125% in 2021 and an additional 30% in the first five months of 2022 alone)
• Inflation (natural gas price increased 53% in 2021)
• Interest Rates

The one positive, Thompson added, was Americans’ heightened awareness of the importance of a reliable domestic food supply and the producers who provide it. “It’s the only silver lining.” 

He closed his opening statement by challenging committee members to “retire our dress shoes and put on our work boots. We have a lot of work to do.” 

The Challenges:
The first witness called for the first hearing of the 118th Congress was Zippy Duvall, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation. 

Duvall stressed that strong farm policy is part of a national security strategy. “The country that cannot feed itself is not secure.” 

The challenges listed by Duvall during his statement include the following:

• Losses experienced in the trade war with China
• Pandemic lockdowns
• Supply chain disruptions
• Record-high supply costs
• Unprecedented volatility that farmers and ranchers have faced in recent years.
• Short- and long-term interest rates are rising double and triple what they were a year ago.

Duvall went on to reference the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s forecast report of farm sector income. According to the report, net farm income for 2023 is projected to decrease by 15.9% — adjusted for inflation makes it 18%. However, the same report estimates that farm and ranch production expenses will increase by $18 billion, following a record increase of $70 billion in 2022. 

“Some of us remember the high interest rates caused by inflation combined with the federal response leading to a farm debt crisis in the 1980s,” he added. Duvall emphasized the need to make sure history didn’t repeat itself. 

While there are many challenges, there are also opportunities, Duvall noted, referencing our incredible advances in sustainability. However, government regulation is stifling the opportunity with the new Waters of the U.S. ruling, Endangered Species Act, access to important crop protection tools, immigration and labor regulations, etc. Not to mention the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s desire to impose new climate regulations, which Duvall says “are meant for Wall Street.” 

The hearing was more than five hours long, as six witnesses presented and every committee member was given an opportunity to ask them questions. “We appreciate everyone’s endurance, and, quite frankly, the ag industry and meeting the needs of every American family is well worth our endurance,” Thompson said in his closing remarks. 

Easing burdensome regulations off the backs of farmers will only allow them to prosper in their innovative efforts to do more with less. As Duvall stated, they already have uncertainty in the weather. Strong farm policy to further ease the measures outside of a farmer’s control allows everyone to do their part in securing the future of the nation. 

The full hearing can be viewed here.

Chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture, Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-Pa.), will host a Farm Bill listening session in Waco, Texas, on March 15th at 2 p.m.

Mr. Thompson will be joined by Congressman Pete Sessions (TX-17) , Congressman Ronny Jackson (TX-13) and Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett (TX-30), along with bipartisan Members of the House Committee on Agriculture. 

The event will bring together farmers, ranchers, producers, agribusiness owners and more to solicit public feedback — an integral part of the Farm Bill reauthorization process. All members of the Committee have been invited to participate as well as the Texas Congressional delegation. 

 Click here to view the livestream.

ARC/PLC Decisions

ARC/PLC decisions must be dictated to your local FSA office by March 15.

Conservation Reserve Program Sign-up Dates

General sign up for the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) will begin February 27 and end April 7.

U.S. Cotton Trust Protocol 

March 31, 2023, is the deadline for U.S. cotton producers to enroll their 2023 crop in the U.S. Cotton Trust Protocol.

PCG Annual Meeting

PCG’s 66th annual meeting is on March 28 at the Overton Hotel and Conference Center. Register online today! 

Shawn Holladay Featured on Cotton Companion Podcast

Bangladesh Relaxes Rule on Fumigation of U.S. Cotton Imports

Jordy Rowland and his wife Maegan and their children: Aubrey (11), Ace (10), Harper (9) and Tagg (5).

Q: Did you grow up in agriculture?

A: I grew up in Hart, Texas, and my dad farmed cotton, corn and wheat in Castro County. Farming has always been a passion of mine, and I still remember setting irrigation tubes and moving gated pipe. That was back when we had more water in the area than we do now. My kids will never know anything about that.

North Gin in Dimmitt, Texas.

Q: Where did you go to school (high school and college)?

A: I went to high school at Nazareth Independent School District and was really into sports. Sports and farming were my interests. We were competitive in football, basketball, baseball, track, and golf and I was interested in playing football in college. I decided to walk on to the Texas Tech University (TTU) football team. I played on special teams and at nickel/dime positions and was on a full scholarship the last two and a half years I played. It was a great experience and provided me with some friends that I still have today. I was on the team in 2008 when we made a great run and was a part of the thrilling game when we beat University of Texas at home.

Q: What did you major in while playing football?

A: I started out in mechanical engineering — I’m a numbers guy. However, playing collegiate football was a full-time job in and of itself, so I decided to change my major to agricultural economics. It was nice to be back with ag people. My transcript does look a little funny, though — it’s not every day you have advanced calculus and differential equations as electives.

Q: What did you do after graduation?

A:  I worked for a commercial lending group in Amarillo, Texas, as an analyst working my way up to credit underwriter. I was there for roughly four years when a loan officer position opened at People’s Bank back in Nazareth. My wife and I jumped on the opportunity to move back home.

Q: How did you end up at North Gin?

A: About a year after we moved back, I received a phone call from Jim Bradford. He indicated he was looking for someone to come run the gin. I was familiar with cotton production and had a farming background, but I didn’t know anything about ginning. Jim knew that and worked to teach me everything. He has been an excellent mentor. It took a year or two before I fully saw the operations of a gin season and how everything functioned. Now I’m heading into my 10^th crop.

Q: What is working with Jim Bradford like?

Jordy and Jim examine cotton samples at the gin.

A: Jim makes it easy to come to work every day. He is laid back and always finds a way to find the joy in the day. I have learned so much about how to handle different situations – good or bad. He never loses his cool and always handles business professionally. He is very generous and always looks to help those in need. I don’t know if there are words to adequately capture the totality of Jim Bradford. He is a wonderful mentor and an even better friend.

Q: What was the most challenging part of beginning your career with North Gin?

A: Learning the ins and outs of the gin itself was the most challenging part. Even now, I wouldn’t call myself an expert. We have an amazing gin superintendent, Johnny Emerson. With Johnny, we can always count on the gin being ready to run when the season begins. He’s the best.

Q: What is the average number of bales ginned at North Gin?

A: I wouldn’t say there’s an average number as much as a range that we stay within. For the 2021 crop, we ginned 47,000 bales. The two years before that we did between 20,000 and 30,000. In 2018, we ginned 72,000. Anything below 25,000 is considered below normal for us and we ginned 18,150 bales for the 2022 season.

Q: What’s the biggest challenge for you in your daily operations?

A: Our biggest battle every year is getting acres planted. This area is predominantly ruled by the beef cattle and dairy industries, so there are a lot of mouths to feed. The better irrigated acres in this area have been sold to the dairies. Some dairies are planting a little cotton where their water has dropped off, but the majority of them are planting some sort of feed like sorghum silage or corn silage. And cotton producers plant some, too, where they have water because the prices are good. We need a good 10 to 15 cent rally in the futures prices for cotton or we may lose more acreage in this area this crop season.

Q: What is something you wish more people understood about agriculture?

A: We hear a lot about sustainability these days, and I just wish more people understood the true nature of a farmer. They want to farm the land for generations to come, so they use sustainability practices to ensure that future. Don’t come in here and tell farmers how to be sustainable — they already wrote the book.

Jordy Rowland: Family Man

Jordy met his wife, Maegan in Kindergarten. They began dating their junior year of high school and were married in the summer of 2009. They live in Nazareth and have four children: Aubree (11), Ace (10), Harper (9) and Tag (5).

The Rowlands are active members of the First Baptist Church in Dimmitt, and Jordy’s love of sports has been passed on to his children. Whether its flag football or little dribblers, Jordy is usually coaching one or more teams on his Saturdays. “And, sometimes, I find time to play golf,” he adds.

Rep. August Pfluger (R-Texas) has reintroduced The Listing Reform Act, legislation designed to modernize the Endangered Species Act. 

Plains Cotton Growers supports this legislation, along with Texas Farm Bureau and Permian Basin Petroleum Association.

“This bill would modify requirements concerning the review of petitions to add a species to the list of endangered or threatened species or to remove a species from the list,” said Kody Bessent, PCG CEO. “Arbitrarily reviewing a petition to list a species simply based on when a petition was received, as compared to a more thorough analysis based on sound science, has, in times past, impacted a producer’s ability to produce a crop based on cropping practices that are agronomically sound for a specific region. Therefore, we support modifications for a more thorough review of the listing process and look forward to working with Rep. Pfluger and others on this important issue.” 

ARC/PLC Decisions

ARC/PLC decisions must be dictated to your local FSA office by March 15.

Conservation Reserve Program Sign-up Dates

General sign up for the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) will begin February 27 and end April 7.

PCG Annual Meeting

PCG’s 66th annual meeting is on March 28 at the Overton Hotel and Conference Center. Register online today! 

Williams Family Named 2023 High Cotton-Southwest Award Recipients

After Years of Disaster, Texas Farmers will Plant Far Less Cotton in 2023

The No-Till Texas organization hosted the Southwest Soil Health Symposium Feb. 14 and 15 in Lubbock, Texas.

“I ran over some stuff with a plow when I was 11 and my Uncle Eddie said, ‘Kris, the only person who hasn’t screwed something up is the one who hasn’t done it.’”

– Kris Verett
Crosby County

“Mindfulness is important when it comes to ecological situations. Sometimes what we deem insignificant can have a major impact later down the line.” 

-John Zak, Ph.D.
Texas Tech University

“We’re all about improving resiliency to survive West Texas.” 

-Barry Evans
Swisher County

The classing season is nearing the end for the 2022 crop season. While the majority of classing offices have completed classing samples for this crop year, Lubbock is still working with samples. 

Lubbock’s average daily number of cotton samples received this week is 492. The office is 99% complete in the classing of their season estimate of samples. Due to the lack of gins operating, this report contains seasonal data only. 

Lubbock Report

Yesterday, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released its February 2023 budget projections for a number of Federal programs, including farm-related programs and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).  All eyes are on the farm bill, which expires on September 30, 2023, and this latest update gives us an initial glimpse of the budget baseline that will be available to the farm bill authors this year.

CBO typically updates their budget projections early in the year, and yesterday’s release follows that pattern.  Following the release of the President’s budget in February, CBO will often release a revised outlook in March.  If the President’s budget is delayed, the updated outlook from CBO can stretch into late Spring or early summer – for example, in 2021, the update was released in July.  Why does this matter?  It is generally the update following the release of the President’s budget that is the baseline against which the cost of legislative proposals is “scored” throughout the year.  In other words, while the current release will get a lot of attention, CBO may choose to update their projections again this spring; if they do, that baseline likely will be used for writing the farm bill.  CBO will also typically release – at least to policymakers – their baseline projections by farm bill title.

In the meantime, there is much to glean from the information made publicly available in yesterday’s release.  As we noted in a Southern Ag Today article last summer, if we look back to the April 2018 baseline (the scoring baseline for the 2018 Farm Bill), the spending projections for CCC Price Support and Related Activities, Conservation, SNAP, and Crop Insurance accounted for $865.9 billion (Table 1), or 99.85% of the $867.2 billion in projected total baseline outlays for the farm bill.  Applying the same methodology to CBO’s most recent February 2023 baseline update, those four categories are projected to spend approximately $1.45 trillion over the next 10 years (Table 1).  The significant increase is due to an 81.6% increase in projected spending on SNAP, with SNAP now projected to account for $1.2 trillion, or 83.3% of the total farm bill baseline.  By contrast, the income support provisions for agricultural producers that make up the largest component of Title 1 – the Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC) programs – are projected to spend $48.6 billion over the next 10 years, or just 3.4% of the total farm bill baseline. Following are a few initial observations from Table 1:

• While some may look to the $71.8 billion in CCC Price Support & Related Activities (a $7.5 billion increase) as additional resources with which to write the farm bill, it’s not that simple.  In January 2020, CBO began including $100 million per year in the baseline as an estimate of the amount they project the Secretary of Agriculture to spend using discretionary authority available under the CCC.  In May 2022, CBO increased that amount to $1 billion per year (or $10 billion over 10 years).  In other words, absent the amount that CBO includes in the baseline as a guess of what they expect the Secretary to spend using discretionary CCC authority, the baseline for CCC Price Support & Related Activities would be going down.

• These estimates would also likely be considerably lower if one were using USDA’s latest market projections which were also released yesterday.  For example, USDA projects cotton prices in the long run that are 16% higher than CBO.  If USDA’s projections were to materialize, ARC and PLC spending would be considerably less and the safety net would still be doing nothing to address the high cost of inputs.

• The increase in conservation spending is almost entirely due to the infusion provided in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022, although CBO has revised downward the amount they expect USDA to spend on these efforts (by roughly $1.5 billion).

• On crop insurance, the increase in projected spending is generally attributable to expanded product availability over the last 5 years along with projected increases in liability coverage due to higher market prices.

Table 1. Congressional Budget Office (CBO) 10-Year Outlays in Million$

Bottom line: the already relatively small 10-year baseline for writing Title 1 may ultimately be an overestimate, especially when comparing with USDA’s economic outlook.  Even now, it pales in comparison to the almost $88 billion in unbudgeted ad hoc assistance that was provided to agricultural producers over the past 5 years alone.  If Congress plans to move away from ad hoc assistance to a more sustainable risk management framework for producers, additional resources will be needed for the farm safety net.

Author: Bart L. Fischer

Research Assistant Professor and Co-Director Agricultural & Food Policy Center at Texas A&M University

Author: Joe Outlaw

Professor and Extension Economist

Co-Director Agricultural & Food Policy Center at Texas A&M University

Lubbock Cotton Quality Report

By Kara Bishop

Now that the 2022 cotton crop is off the stalk, producers shift focus to markets and decisions for next year.

Going into the 2022 planting season, cotton prices hit $1.49 on May 4, 2023. For most, looking at a range of 82 to 85 cents after harvest hurts.

“We finished ginning a few days before Christmas, and normally this far out from ginning, we would have most of the cotton sold,” said Jordy Rowland, manager of North Gin in Dimmitt, Texas. “I’m still sitting on quite a bit of cotton. Most of it is on call with the basis locked in, but it’s hard for my guys to pull the trigger on 85 cents when prices were much higher at the beginning of the season.”

He’s not the only one.

“We ginned 66,000 bales and 32,000 bales are contracted,” said Alexa Reed, office/marketing manager for Moore County Gin in Dumas, Texas. “Some producers are still waiting on a better price.”

Mike Canale, merchandising manager for PCCA, believes that there may be more cotton out there unpriced than expected given the size of the 2022 crop.

Trying to make a profit, combined with volatile markets, supply and demand dysfunction, and a year of unfortunate weather can be a tough game for anyone to play.

The Players

Making decisions on selling cotton involves more than just the producer.

Landowners

“Sometimes landowners can play a role in the process,” said Martin Stoerner, producer in Lockney, Texas, and PCG president. “We had one landlord that wanted us to sell early so we did. Not because they want the money — they just like to keep their income in the same calendar year for tax purposes.”

Lenders

Lenders can spur sales decisions, as well, which is why purchasing call options are popular.

“I just came back from the Carolinas and they are selling at 87 and 88 cents over there,” said Lou Barbera, cotton trader for VLM Commodities. “They were saying, ‘No, we’re not going to get what we wanted but the basis is still better than the last couple of years at this time.’ And they didn’t want to dip into an 8.5% operating loan — that was the main factor.”

Economy

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Economic Research Service, food prices increased by 9.9% in 2022. The all-items Consumer Price Index decreased by 0.3% from November 2022 to December 2022 but was up 6.5% from December 2021.

Food prices were 10.4% higher from December 2021 to December 2022.

“Everybody has to eat,” said Quentin Shieldknight, producer in Spearman, Texas. “But you don’t have to switch out your wardrobe if your wallet dictates you can’t. If all you can afford is food, you’re not going to buy sheets, clothes or socks.”

Demand

Merchants have discussed in multiple Plains Cotton Advisory Group meetings this year that the market is looking for the demand — it just hasn’t been there.

This may be changing, though, based on the USDA Foreign Agricultural Service US. Export Sales Report released Jan. 26, 2023.

The report states 199,600 bales were sold with 28,500 cancellations netting 171,100 bales. “If we have roughly 150,000 bales sold or higher on a weekly report, we feel pretty good about where the demand is headed,” said Joshua Burris, southwest cotton manager for COFCO International.

For reference, 4,864,100 bales of Upland cotton have been sold this market year. Compare that to this week last market year, when 8,087,600 bales were sold. A 3.2-million-bale difference. China contributes 2 million bales to that difference, seeing as they’ve purchased 551,000 bales this marketing year and 2,545,600 last marketing year.

However, China and Turkey were the largest buyers this week. While that is encouraging, according to Barbera, it isn’t surprising.

“China buys around this time every single year,” he added. “They buy in the first two months of the year, and they buy again in May and of course as needed during the rest of the year.”

A chart from Lou Barbera indicating China’s cotton purchase schedule every year. Click on the image to download.

A true rise in demand will need a more consistent demand stream.

“The USDA has the most pessimistic view on demand and the most optimistic view of supply, which isn’t helping,” Barbera continued. “And we can’t forget the ‘perfect storm’ the textile mills have gone through. They were forced into a position starting in 2021 where they were told not to buy because the spreads were heavily inverted meaning prices were overinflated. That was at 88 cents by the way. Prices were then fixed around $1.40 and they were forced to buy, so now they’re holding out.”

At the same time, mills are starting to normalize. They’re willing to keep 20 to 25 day’s worth of supply whereas they normally keep 40 days. “Things are starting to normalize,” Barbera agreed. “They’re not at 30 days ago where we were in peak pessimism, and they’re not at 12 months ago, when we were at peak euphoria.”

The Rules

There are multiple options for selling cotton, which comes with multiple decisions.

Are producers going to choose to enter a seasonal pool at the beginning of the season that’s acreage based to eliminate weather-related production risks?

“Back in May, I was struggling with motivation to plant, because the prices were so great and the drought bad and expected to worsen,” Shieldknight said. “Weather can be one of the most frustrating parts of this whole deal.”

Are they going to commit to on-call agreements, purchase call options on the assumption the market will rally, or purchase put options assuming the market won’t?

“On-Call agreements have been popular this year with our producers,” Canale added. “If the market rallies it can increase your profit.  The producer can receive loan value up front and once invoiced the warehouse storage deduction stops as well.”

Are they going to hold cotton and do nothing, hoping loan interest rates and storage fees don’t eat into whatever profit comes from the price they agree to?

“Basically, you’re running on borrowed money with high interest and if you add storage fees on top of that, it’s hard to hold out for long,” said Bryan Baker, producer in Sudan, Texas. “And buyers know that, too, so they hold out. We’re all bluffing until someone folds.” 

The Teams

As prices and input costs currently stand, there are some producers who will largely minimize their cotton acres for this coming season.

“Up here we have more options,” Shieldknight added. “We’re going to increase our corn, milo and soybean acres to put us in a better position and decrease the risk. With loan interest rates double what they were, grains are just a better option for us.”

Baker said he grows black-eyed peas alongside cotton.

“They are similar to cotton in that they don’t need much water,” he added. “And prices for peas are better than cotton right now with less input cost. Prices for black-eyed peas are set at 65 cents per pound, so 1,000 pounds gives you $650 an acre. I’m still a cotton man though, don’t get me wrong.”

When to Play

The consensus from sources is that producers would let their unsold 2022 cotton go for 90 cents to $1.

“We would pull the trigger for $1,” Stoerner said.

“I did the math on what my operation needs to break even and it’s 85 cents,” Baker added. “I’d rather make a profit, so I’m hoping to see 90 cents before I have to make a decision.”

“Producers are holding on because the market sits at a break-even price,” said Guyle Roberson, manager of Texas Producers Cooperative Association. “They’re holding on and rolling the dice because they need a profit.  Normally you can sell cotton at 85 cents and be happy with that, but input costs this year change what used to be considered normal.”

“I believe if we saw 90 cents, most of our producers would sell,” said Reed and Jerrell Key, manager of Adobe Walls Gin in Spearman, Texas.

“There’s got to be a rally here somewhere,” Shieldknight added. “We’re going to break through 90 cents eventually. It’s been challenging because it gets up to 89 then falls back to 85 the next day. It’s fascinating to me that we’re not already at 90 cents after the disaster that Texas went through in 2022. We get to 90 and I think everyone will start selling like crazy.”

Baker also noted that the market could go back up once the USDA Risk Management Agency sets the 2023 projected insurance price at the end of this month.

Regardless of the strategy used when marketing and selling cotton, producers in the Texas High Plains play to win, even if they come up short.

Abilene Quality Report

Lamesa Quality Report

Lubbock Quality Report

USDA Launches Rural Data Gateway to Strengthen Partnerships and Expand Access to Resources for People in Rural America

Phase 2 of the Emergency Relief Program (ERP) has been talked about for months with the anticipation that the process would model that of Phase 1. However, the rule for Phase 2, published almost two weeks ago, is fundamentally different from Phase 1 in both formula and eligibility determination. 

A Comparison of Methodology

To understand the difference in implementation between the two phases of ERP, we’ll do a side-by-side comparison.

The Challenges with Phase 2

Gross Income
A producer’s actual production history (APH) is an adjusted average of 10 years’ yields, which is a more accurate measurement of expected gross income. Phase 2, however, is operating off a one-year base period using an individual’s taxable information. And, in some cases, this is not a true reflection of an individual’s crop production year. Obviously, expenses are not considered, and with input costs ever rising, it’s unfortunate that gross income is the litmus test here. 

Farm Service Agency
Phase 1 went relatively smoothly for FSA local offices. Producers received a pre-filled application from USDA and merely had to verify, sign and return to their local FSA office. Phase 2 requires local offices to input the data themselves, making it more labor intensive for offices that are already short staffed. Phase 1 was streamlined. Phase 2 is not.  

Incentive
If a producer were to jump through all the hoops and become eligible, the initial payment is a maximum of $2,000. If total calculated payments exceed the total funding available for Phase 2, the rule states that the ERP Factor may be adjusted and the final payment amounts will be prorated to stay within the amount of available funding. 

To further understand the application of Phase 2, consider the example Paul Neiffer provided to FarmJournal:

The Emergency Relief Program (ERP) Phase 2 Calculator is now available on the ERP website. This tool can help you determine eligibility for Phase 2 and can provide an estimated program payment calculation. 

The enrollment period for ERP Phase 2 closes June 2, 2023. 

Abilene Quality Report

Lamesa Quality Report

Lubbock Quality Report

The American Cotton Shippers Association will be hosting the International Cotton Institute at the University of Memphis from June 5-June 30, 2023.

The program is a four-week intense education on the cotton business with emphasis on functions of the trade, risk management, global logistics, and forward-facing global industry objectives.  The curriculum also gives a good foundation of US industry associations and contacts, their roles, and differences.  In addition to the content, this program creates a unique networking opportunity with the trade’s leadership and classmates that are growers, spinners, brand representatives, and policy influencers.

2023 Farm Bill Outlook

Tug-of-War Between Prices and Production

By Chris Torres with FarmProgress

Nearly a week after the chaotic House speaker election postponed the initial farm bill listening session at the Pennsylvania Farm Show, 20 speakers got to talk about their hopes for the 2023 Farm Bill in front of several members of the House Agriculture Committee.

Rep. Glenn “GT” Thompson, chairman of the committee and the first chairman from Pennsylvania in 170 years, said farm bill negotiations had reached “crunch time” given the current farm bill, enacted in 2018, will expire Sept. 30.

The hearing was the first of what he hopes will be several listening sessions across the country on the comprehensive five-year package that authorizes federal spending on crop insurance, commodity and conservation programs, nutrition (mainly the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), trade and more.

A wide range of speakers, from dairy and beef to organic farming advocates and even a representative of a local food bank, talked about their farm bill priorities for the next five years. Thompson gave little insight into a possible timeline of when a new farm bill could be passed or what the spending appropriation for the next five-year package would be.

Given the fraught political environment in Washington, especially the House, it may not be a surprise if farm bill negotiations get bogged down or more complicated as the year goes on. Thompson, though, downplayed the idea of a difficult negotiation.

“The farm bill is always bipartisan, always bipartisan,” he said. “At the end of the day, final votes are fairly bipartisan, and my goal is to keep it that way from the very beginning. I was really pleased with the bipartisan attendance here.”

Members talk priorities

Five members of the House Ag Committee took part in the listening session, along with two other representatives from Pennsylvania, and Russell Redding, state ag secretary.

Rep. Austin Scott, committee member and Republican leader of the General Farm Commodities and Risk Management subcommittee, said his goal is to help reduce the risk for ag producers, not guarantee a profit “as it distorts markets,” he said.

Scott said that reference pricing of commodities — for example, the loan rate for corn, $2.20, for the Marketing Assistance Loan program — are out of date and need updating across many programs.

Rep. Doug LaMalfa of California, member of the committee and the Republican leader of the Conservation and Forestry Subcommittee, said that voluntary participation is key to the success of conservation programs in the farm bill, not a mandated approach.

He is skeptical of climate change programs, particularly those that emphasize carbon reductions on farms, stating that agriculture and other industries are already burning cleaner engines and making improvements to land management that can reduce harmful emissions.

“We are already on a direction in this country of doing the most of any Western country, or third-world country, of reducing or controlling carbon dioxide,” he said.

Rep. Chellie Pingree, D-Maine, urged the importance of funding conservation programs, increasing rural broadband availability and funding nutrition with a focus on healthy dieting.

Ag leaders talk issues

But most of the listening session focused on local ag leaders and their wishes for the next farm bill.

Dave Smith, executive director of the Pennsylvania Dairymen’s Association, said a more reliable and year-round workforce is needed to address labor shortages in dairy, calling the current H-2A program inadequate to address the industry’s labor needs.

He also suggested the government look at raising the current coverage level cap of $9.50 in the Dairy Margin Protection Program to better reflect rising commodity feed costs and increasing the current Tier 1 production cap above 5 million pounds.

Richard Roush, dean of Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences, said there is close to $11.1 billion in deferred maintenance costs nationwide for ag-related facilities. In contrast, he said China is outspending the U.S. and is becoming more of a world power in agriculture.

“The competition is real. It’s about winning the world ag market and competing,” Roush said.

Elizabeth Hinkel, president of the Pennsylvania Corn Growers Association, who operates a 2,000-acre hog and grain operation in western Schuylkill County, said that while 65% of the state’s nearly 1 million corn acres are insured, many producers still believe the cost of crop insurance vs. potential returns is not good enough to sign up. She urged committee members to update crop insurance to make it more affordable for more farmers.

Aaron Young, co-CEO of Tri-County Rural Electric Cooperative in northern Pennsylvania, speaking on behalf of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, said that much more needs to be done to bridge the urban-rural internet divide and to ensure broadband reaches as many rural areas as possible.

David Graybill, member of Pennsylvania Farm Bureau, said the state is mostly in line with the American Farm Bureau Federation’s farm bill initiatives, including the idea of maintaining a unified farm bill with nutrition and agricultural titles as part of the same package, and ensuring USDA staffing and resources for technical assistance.

“This next farm bill will ensure ag is an attractive industry for many years,” Graybill said. “Our members rely heavily on crop insurance. Farming is a major risk, but Congress can lessen the risk with better crop insurance programs.”

The 66th annual meeting of Plains Cotton Growers Inc. will be March 28th at the Overton Hotel and Conference Center in Lubbock, Texas.

This year, PCG has partnered with the High Plains Journal and StoneX Group to offer workshops after the annual meeting.

PCG’s meeting will begin at 9 a.m. and end with lunch featuring keynote speaker John Kriesel.

The Cotton U workshop provided by High Plains Journal will be from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. with a reception following.

Cotton U will feature a legacy agriculture panel, three breakout sessions — that will repeat so attendees can choose two out of the three to attend — a farmer production panel, and end with a social hour. CEU credits are available for attendees. 

The Cotton Marketing and Hedging Workshop will also be from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. featuring speakers John Robinson and Mark Welch from Texas A&M University Extension Service, and Jared Morgan, Bailey Thomen and Donna Hughes from StoneX Group. Topics include: Current futures market conditions, risk management strategies and a physical overview of small grains and cotton.

PCG is excited to offer these learning options to our members. To register for this free event, click here.

Abilene Quality Report

Lamesa Quality Report

Lubbock Quality Report

Pakistan Textile Industry in Crisis

USDA Develops Naturally Fire-Resistant Cotton

Chairman Jodey Arrington

Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) was selected to serve as House Budget Committee Chairman for the 118th Congress Jan. 9, 2023.

 “I am humbled by the confidence and trust of my colleagues to lead the effort to rein in spending, reduce our debt and restore fiscal responsibility in our nation’s capital as chairman of the House Budget Committee,” Arrington said. “With the national debt surpassing $31 trillion and over 120% of our entire economy, I believe confronting our unsustainable debt is the greatest challenge of the 21st century. I look forward to working with all of my colleagues to ensure hte next generations of Americans inherit the same freedoms and opportunities we did.”

Debbie Stabenow Announces Retirement

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich), Senate Agriculture Committee Chair, announced January 5th she will not seek re-election in 2024. 

“Inspired by a new generation of leaders, I have decided to pass the torch in the U.S. Senate,” she said. “For the next two years I am focused on continuing the work to improve the lives of Michiganders. This includes leading the passage of the next five-year Farm Bill, which determines our nation’s food and agriculture policies.”

The Texas Legislature convened Jan. 10, 2023, for the 88th legislative session and elected Rep. Dade Phalen (R-District 21) as Speaker of the Texas House for a second term.

The chamber’s priorities for this session include: 

• Providing lasting, meaningful property tax relief;
• Increasing access to and giving patients greater control over their healthcare;
• Prioritizing criminal justice reform;
• Utilizing the state’s once-in-a-lifetime budget surplus to improve infrastructure;
• Fighting back against the exploitation, sexualization and indoctrination of Texas children;
• Making schools safer for students and teachers;
• Extending postpartum health coverage for new mothers to a full year; and
• Addressing the threats posed by a porous border.

Dr. Michael Gore, noted scientist and professor in Cornell University’s School of Integrative Plant Science (SIPS), is the 2022 Cotton Genetics Research Award recipient.

The announcement was made today during the 2023 Beltwide Cotton Improvement Conference, which convened as part of the National Cotton Council-coordinated 2023 Beltwide Cotton Conferences in New Orleans. Gore, who was selected by the Joint Cotton Breeding Committee, received a plaque and a monetary award.

SIPS Director Dr. Jocelyn Rose, one of Dr. Gore’s nominators, said his ground-breaking cotton genetics research has had a lasting impact on the cotton breeding and genetics community and beyond. She said that he has an innate passion for genetically improving crops through the large-scale identification of causal genes and the development of predictive models that are now being collaboratively used by breeders to accelerate the breeding process.

Specific to cotton, Dr. Rose said Dr. Gore’s research supported efforts to transfer the superior fiber traits of Pima cotton to higher yielding upland cotton. She noted that among other achievements, he has helped reveal the levels and patterns of genetic diversity for several cotton species and “his work has helped breeders on how to best find and utilize allelic diversity to increase the resiliency of cotton to changing weather patterns and rapidly evolving pests and pathogens.”

Another nominator, Dr. Jonathan Wendel, a professor in Iowa State’s Department of Ecology, Evolution and Organismal Biology, said Dr. Gore is “a remarkably productive, versatile, and accomplished scientist” who has been awarded more than $9.3 million in grant funding and his research accomplishments reported in 143 peer-reviewed articles. He said Dr. Gore, in fact, has averaged an astonishing 10 peer-reviewed publications per year in predominantly high impact journals since completing his Ph.D. in 2009. Dr. Gore, a member of multiple scientific and professional societies, currently serves as editor of The Plant Phenome Journal.

Dr. Gore has received numerous awards throughout his career among them being recently named a Fellow by the Crop Science Society of America.

Dr. Gore earned his bachelor’s degree in Plant Breeding from Cornell and his master’s and his Ph.D. in Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences from Virginia Tech. He was a researcher for Rohm and Hass, Pioneer Hi-Bred International and Lancaster Labs before joining USDA’s Agricultural Research Service as a research geneticist in Arizona in 2009. In 2013 he joined Cornell in SIPS’ Plant Breeding and Genetics Section as an associate professor later becoming a professor and then chair of that section.

The annual Cotton Genetics Research Award was established in 1961 by U.S. commercial cotton breeders to recognize and encourage basic research in cotton genetics, cytogenetics and breeding. It is administered by the Joint Cotton Breeding Committee consisting of representatives of the NCC, the USDA, state experiment stations, Cotton Incorporated and commercial breeders.

The January U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) report increased its production estimate by 438,000 bales, from 14.24 million bales to 14.68 million bales. This seems a little far-fetched when compared to other reports. The USDA Cotton Ginnings report states 12.6 million bales have been ginned with 141 gins still running, and the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service will have classed 12.8 million bales of U.S. upland cotton by the end of this week.

Furthermore, regional classing offices are near completion. For reference, the Lubbock office is estimated to be 98% complete; Abilene is estimated to be 90% complete; and Lamesa is estimated to be 94% complete.

So, why an increase in production estimates? According to the WASDE, yield estimates averaging at a record of 947 pounds per acre in the US. That being said, one regional producer’s sentiment from last year may still prove true at the end of the season: “Did y’all ride around on your unicorns in Narnia finding all this cotton?” To be continued as final cotton crop production numbers come in.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has published the official rule for Phase II of the Emergency Relief Program (ERP).

As it stands today, this is the methodology used to determine a Phase II payment. 

ERP Phase 2 Payment Calculation

Although producers will be able to apply for both the 2020 and 2021 disaster years, as applicable, on one form, ERP Phase 2 payments will be calculated separately for each disaster year. If a producer indicates that they have expected revenue for both specialty and high value crops and other crops for a disaster year, a payment will be calculated separately for specialty and high value crops and other crops for a disaster year.

To determine a producer’s ERP Phase 2 payment amount, FSA will calculate:

(1) The ERP factor of 70 percent [8] multiplied by the producer’s benchmark year allowable gross revenue, adjusted according to 7 CFR 760.1903, if applicable, minus

(2) The producer’s disaster year allowable gross revenue; minus

(3) The sum of the producer’s net ERP Phase 1 payments for the 2020 program year, if the calculation is for the 2020 disaster year, or for the 2021 and 2022 [9] program years, if the calculation is for the 2021 disaster year; minus

(4) The sum of the producer’s net CFAP payments (excluding payments for contract producer revenue), net 2020 WHIP+ payments, and net 2020 Quality Loss Adjustment (QLA) Program payments, if the calculation is for the 2020 disaster year; and

(5) Multiplied by the percentage of the expected disaster year revenue for specialty and high value crops or other crops, as applicable.

ERP Phase 2 payments are subject to the availability of funds. FSA will issue an initial payment equal to the lesser of:

The amount calculated as described above; or

A maximum initial payment of $2,000.

If a producer has also received a payment under ERP Phase 1, FSA will reduce the producer’s initial ERP Phase 2 payment amount by subtracting their ERP Phase 1 gross payment amount.[10] 

If total calculated payments exceed the total funding available for ERP Phase 2, the ERP Factor may be adjusted and the final payment amounts will be prorated to stay within the amount of available funding. If there are insufficient funds, a differential of 15 percent will be used for underserved producers similar to ERP Phase 1, but with a cap at the statutory maximum of 70 percent.[11] 

For example, if the ERP Factor is set at 50 percent, the factor used for underserved producers will be 65 percent, but if the factor is set at 55 percent or higher, the factor for underserved producers will be capped at 70 percent. An initial payment to a producer will not be recalculated or reduced if the total calculated ERP Phase 2 factored payment for that producer is less than the initial payment amount.

If a producer receives additional assistance through CFAP or ERP Phase 1 after a producer’s ERP Phase 2 payment is calculated, the producer’s ERP Phase 2 payment will be recalculated and the producer must refund any resulting overpayment.

If you have questions you may call the office at 806-792-4904 or contact your Farm Service Agency county office. 

Timeline for Phase II signup is January 23, 2023, through June 2, 2023.

Texas A&M AgriLife is gaining new ground in the South Plains for research, thanks to the generosity of Dolle Barker co-owner of Willingham Southwest Cotton Gin in Cochran County. 

Stephen Cisneros, Texas A&M AgriLife Research associate director of operations and development, said Barker has entered into a multi-year agreement to grant Texas A&M AgriLife personnel the right to utilize the property in Cochran County, now known as Barker Research Farm, to conduct research on irrigated and non-irrigated cropland. 

“We’re so excited and thankful for Dolle for allowing us to take our research from the lab to the field and engage with stakeholders and develop relationships within the community,” Cisneros said. 

The project will involve both AgriLife Research and Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service personnel from the center in Lubbock, according to Kerry Siders, AgriLife Extension Integrated Pest Management agent in Cochran, Lamb and Hockley Counties. 

Barker contacted Siders about allowing long-term research and educational programs on a 200-acre farm just east of Morton, Texas. This farm currently has 156 acres of center pivot irrigation, 34 acres in sub-surface drip irrigation and about 40 acres of non-irrigated corners.

Read the rest of the story in the West Plains IPM Newsletter.

USDA’s Key Policy Objectives for 2023

Register for the Plains Cotton Growers Inc. 66th Annual Meeting

January WASDE Report