The domestication of plants and animals was one of the most important events in human history, but rarely have archaeologists been able to catch the process in the act. Now, research at an 11,000-year-old settlement in Turkey shows that some early farmers kept wild sheep penned up in the middle of their village—thus setting the stage for the dramatic changes that led to today’s domesticated animals.
Archaeologists studying the origins of farming have hundreds of sites to choose from across the Middle East, but few of them tell the full story. That requires a spot that spans the transition between a hunting and gathering lifestyle and a farming lifestyle, a period from about 10,500 to 9500 years ago. Researchers have long had their eyes on just such a site: Aşıklı Höyük, located on the banks of the Melendiz River in central Turkey—a land of idyllic streams and dramatic volcanic formations popular with tourists.
Earlier work had suggested that Aşıklı Höyük might be a center of the earliest stages of animal domestication. The new study, led by zooarchaeologist Mary Stiner of the University of Arizona in Tucson, confirms this. The team looked at an archaeological layer radiocarbon dated to between 10,400 and 10,100 years ago. The botanical remains from this level show intensive cultivation of cereals, lentils, and nuts, meaning that crop farming was already under way; but the spectrum of animal bones in the earliest parts of this layer reflects the hunting of a wide variety of wild animals including hares, tortoises, and fish, along with larger animals such as goats, wild cattle, deer, and sheep. The most abundant large animal was sheep, although they represented less than half of the total animals.
Moreover, the sheep bones from these early levels were clearly those of wild animals, which can be distinguished from domesticated animals by their larger size and the distribution of ages and sexes: Wild herds, left alone by humans, tend to include more older animals and a roughly equal number of males and females.
Beginning about 10,200 years ago, however, the proportions of wild animals in this layer began to change, as the team reports online this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The hunting of smaller animals appears to fall off to insignificant numbers, while the percentage of sheep—which outnumber goats by three to one—steadily increases. By about 9500 years ago, sheep represented nearly 90% of all animals at the site. Moreover, the researchers say that the age and sex pattern of the bones indicate active management, or herding, of the sheep: Only about 11% of the females died before the age of 6 to 7 months, whereas 58% of the males did, a typical pattern that reflects farmers’ desire to preserve females for breeding."
I remember teaching some basics in Ag I Animal Science class, but this goes into more detail than we did in the Stockman's Handbook. When I hear the word sheep, I think of Sunday School, my daughter winning champion lamb at the county fair and New Zealand.
When we were driving around the countryside, that is Sable the German Shepherd and I, we might pass the Achor Farm east of us. They keep 300 ewes and their lambs or so. I would cry out sheeeeep like baaaahhhh and Sable would about jump out of the truck. Herding is her natural instinct.
I never was a sheep man but livestock was very important to me the first 18 years of life or so. That's what my dad did for his livelihood.
Ed Winkle
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Tuesday, May 6, 2014
Water Rule
With the drought in the west and the floods in the east, I thought this article was thought provoking.
"Time to Ditch the Water Rule
"Time to Ditch the Water Rule
By Chris Chinn
My husband, Kevin, and I
farm in northern Missouri with his parents and brother. We are the fifth
generation of farmers in our family and we raise hogs, cattle, corn, soybeans
and rye. We are also raising our children on our farm and clean water is
important to us. Regardless of whether Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
requires it, protecting our water is one of our priorities. We want to pass our
farm on to the next generation so it only makes sense that we care for our
natural resources in a responsible manner.
EPA’s proposed Clean Water
Act rule will significantly affect our family farm. The proposed rule will
expand the scope of “navigable waters” subject to
Clean Water Act jurisdiction by regulating ditches, small and remote “waters”
and ephemeral drains where water moves only when it rains.
Most of these areas look
more like land than like “waters” and they are dry most of the year. This
proposed rule means any ditch on your land will be regulated by the EPA, even if
it only holds water one day a year. This will prohibit farmers from using land
that is in or near a ditch unless they have a Clean Water Act
permit.
Congress writes the laws of
the land, not federal agencies. When Congress created the Clean Water Act, it
clearly limited federal regulatory power to “navigable” waters. Congress did
not intend to allow EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers to regulate farmland
just because water occasionally flows across it. EPA should respect the limits
set by Congress.
Some people are saying
farmers and ranchers should have no concerns because we are “exempted” from the
rule but this is not the case. The “normal farming and ranching” exemption only
applies to a specific type of Clean Water Act permit for “dredge and fill”
materials. There is also no farm or ranch exemption from Clean Water Act permit
requirements for what the EPA would call “pollutants,” but I would call plant
nutrients and protection products. This means under the proposed rule, many
common and important practices like weed control and fertilizer spreading will
be prohibited in or near so-called “waters” unless you have a Clean Water Act
permit. This further complicates my situation due to the fact we frequently use
recycled fertilizer from our hog barns.
Another startling fact is
the EPA and the Corps have interpreted the word “normal” to mean only
longstanding operations in place since the 1970s—not newer or expanded farming
and ranching. Does this mean when we pass our farm onto the next generation’s
hands that they will no longer be able to farm that land? This rule would appear
to me to be detrimental to new and beginning farmers—exactly the type of farmer
that many of us in agriculture have been working hard to support. That just
makes no sense.
The proposed Waters of the
U.S. ruling is a bad idea and it will cripple the ability of farmers and
ranchers to continue to produce food. If the proposed rule prevails, it will be
illegal for farmers to spray for weeds or apply fertilizer to their ground
unless they have a permit. Routine tasks like building fences will even require
permits if they will be built in or near a ditch. Many farming practices are
time-sensitive and farmers cannot afford to wait on a government agency to
process a permit.
Common sense goes a long
way and it is desperately needed when looking at this proposed ruling. If dry
farm fields and ordinary farm ditches and ponds are allowed to be regulated as
“waters of the U.S.,” farming and ranching will suffer and so will those who
depend on agriculture for food.
We need to make our voices
heard. It is time to ditch the water rule. You can share your comments and make
your voice count by visiting the FBAct Insider page: http://capwiz.com/afb/issues/alert/?alertid=63192396."
Government regulation is impacting our industry more every day. What do you think of the point of this plea or regulation in general?
Thanks,
Ed Winkle
Monday, May 5, 2014
History Of Hybrid Corn In Ohio
A fellow who asked about open pollinated corn prompted this response from me.
Grandpa Winkle planted Bloody Butcher beside Reid's Yellow Dent in the 20's until he tried the first hybrid in the early 30's. Dad was 18-20 years old.
C38 and US 13 were early hybrids I remember from dad.
http://www.maydica.org/articles/49_155.pdf
This a really detailed and interesting history of corn in Ohio in the last century!
By 1938, 40% of Ohio's corn was hybrid corn. Can you imagine harvesting 130 bu when your neighbor got 25? It happened. Grandpa was considered the first man to break 100 bushels in Brown County in the 20's.
Ohio Seed Improvement was started at that time and I have worked with them since 1985, this will be my 30th year. I scout wheat and soybeans and other crops but the corn program which was so important is pretty much gone. The seed companies took over that responsibility and I don't know what year. Executive Secretary-Treasurer John Armstrong currently runs our state seed improvement, OSIA, I see they have a new website under development.
http://ohseed1.org/
I remember we broke 160 bushels in the 50's. Our record was 234 bushels 1971, the year after the awful Corn Blight. I didn't break that until 2004 at 265 bu on 50 acres. I have not broken 300 bushels field average, last year came close around here.
The picture is one of my favorite corn pictures of all time, my first corn crop on Horseshoe Road in 2011. It made a record 190 bushels for that farm the first time I ever farmed it and it quit raining July 17 with the last inch. It was the driest fall I remember. The link in my first sentence will lead you to two more of my favorite corn pictures of all time.
My favorite blog of all time is the one I wrote years ago about Hybridization Of Corn. Links may come and links may go, but the population growth chart link in this blog still works! I still enjoy clicking on it and watching it take off!
I really question if you and I would be here today if it weren't for hybrid corn. Think about it. Many consider that event genetic modification but the definition of a GMO is inserting the genes of one specie into another via a gun, virus or bacteria. Hybrid corn wasn't done that way, traited corn was.
Ed
Grandpa Winkle planted Bloody Butcher beside Reid's Yellow Dent in the 20's until he tried the first hybrid in the early 30's. Dad was 18-20 years old.
C38 and US 13 were early hybrids I remember from dad.
http://www.maydica.org/articles/49_155.pdf
This a really detailed and interesting history of corn in Ohio in the last century!
By 1938, 40% of Ohio's corn was hybrid corn. Can you imagine harvesting 130 bu when your neighbor got 25? It happened. Grandpa was considered the first man to break 100 bushels in Brown County in the 20's.
Ohio Seed Improvement was started at that time and I have worked with them since 1985, this will be my 30th year. I scout wheat and soybeans and other crops but the corn program which was so important is pretty much gone. The seed companies took over that responsibility and I don't know what year. Executive Secretary-Treasurer John Armstrong currently runs our state seed improvement, OSIA, I see they have a new website under development.
http://ohseed1.org/
I remember we broke 160 bushels in the 50's. Our record was 234 bushels 1971, the year after the awful Corn Blight. I didn't break that until 2004 at 265 bu on 50 acres. I have not broken 300 bushels field average, last year came close around here.
The picture is one of my favorite corn pictures of all time, my first corn crop on Horseshoe Road in 2011. It made a record 190 bushels for that farm the first time I ever farmed it and it quit raining July 17 with the last inch. It was the driest fall I remember. The link in my first sentence will lead you to two more of my favorite corn pictures of all time.
My favorite blog of all time is the one I wrote years ago about Hybridization Of Corn. Links may come and links may go, but the population growth chart link in this blog still works! I still enjoy clicking on it and watching it take off!
I really question if you and I would be here today if it weren't for hybrid corn. Think about it. Many consider that event genetic modification but the definition of a GMO is inserting the genes of one specie into another via a gun, virus or bacteria. Hybrid corn wasn't done that way, traited corn was.
Ed
Sunday, May 4, 2014
Heaven Is For Real
We broke our all time record of movie watching by going to see Heaven Is For Real after watching God's Not Dead two weeks ago.
"Heaven Is for Real is a stranger and better movie. Where God’s Not Dead is an independent film made on a shoestring, and looks it, Heaven Is for Real is prettily shot, has a few special effects, and stars actors you’ve heard of, including Greg Kinnear as Todd Burpo, the father and small-town minister who wrote the memoir on which the film is based. However pious, however sincere, this is a movie with worldly as well as celestial matters on its mind: produced by Sony, it is full of plugs for that studio’s The Amazing Spider-Man 2. Most prominent is a Spidey action figure that the central character, four-year-old Colton Burpo, carries with him pretty much everywhere except heaven. That might have been overkill, marketing-wise.
"Heaven Is for Real is a stranger and better movie. Where God’s Not Dead is an independent film made on a shoestring, and looks it, Heaven Is for Real is prettily shot, has a few special effects, and stars actors you’ve heard of, including Greg Kinnear as Todd Burpo, the father and small-town minister who wrote the memoir on which the film is based. However pious, however sincere, this is a movie with worldly as well as celestial matters on its mind: produced by Sony, it is full of plugs for that studio’s The Amazing Spider-Man 2. Most prominent is a Spidey action figure that the central character, four-year-old Colton Burpo, carries with him pretty much everywhere except heaven. That might have been overkill, marketing-wise.
Kinnear and the rest of the film’s cast, including Thomas Haden Church as a friend and church elder, and Kelly Reilly as Colton’s mom, ground the movie by giving unflashy performances, relying instead on their genial, low-key charisma. Kinnear in particular gives the scenes where Todd wrestles with the meaning of Colton’s experience an honest, appealing earnestness. What baffled secular me is why the film’s vision of heaven, which seemed almost boringly conventional—the handful of scenes illustrating Colton’s experiences look like the kinds of celestial imagery you’d see in a child’s Bible or on the walls at Mormon visitor’s center—is troubling to Todd and the members of his church. Their puzzlement felt like someone in an urban crime thriller being disturbed by a character’s firsthand account of a strip club that has poles and loud music. But maybe this all hinged on some doctrinal issue that escaped me. And without any conflict, the movie would have been over in 20 minutes, tops.
Aside from Jesus’s blue-green eyes and his horse—which, alas, we never see—what amused me most about Heaven Is for Real was the way the camera singles out Colton and tries to convey that he somehow stands apart from the rest of world. What with odd angles, back lighting, occasional flashes of lightning and even, at one point, a bedroom curtain eerily blowing in the wind, if you had the sound off you’d think you were watching a demon-seed movie. But films like these, which wear their goodness on their sleeves as a matter of course, have to find their dark, entertaining flourishes where they can, even when it strains."
Everyone has their own opinion. We enjoyed God's Not dead more but both were worth the price of admission. They make you think beyond this world. God's Not Dead held our attention every word and scene where Heaven Is For Real has beautiful Nebraska scenery and little Connor Corom who steals the show. Too much of the movie is focused on his dad, played by actor Greg Kinnear and the movie is slow in many places.
The young girl in Lithuania at the beginning and end of the movie ties it together, where God's Not Dead ties it together at least ten different ways.
The young girl in Lithuania at the beginning and end of the movie ties it together, where God's Not Dead ties it together at least ten different ways.
I never thought I would have the chance to be a movie critic on HyMark High Spots!
I better stick to agriculture, right?
Ed Winkle
Saturday, May 3, 2014
Worms, Roots And Cover Crops
"Soil Health aficionados like to say that roots and worms make channels down into the soil – transferring nutrients and carbon between soil layers. What this looks like in reality was made clear at a recent Soil Health field-day in Berwick, PA, sponsored by NRCS and the PA No-till Alliance, with crop consultant Gerard Troisi and soil tester Will Brinton from Woods End Lab, Maine.
A soil pit dug in the triticale cover crop at the Broyan family’s Faihopity Farm showed a remarkable coincidence of worms and the roots: the earthworm channels extended down nearly 28″ and following them, a trail of roots and humus. “We can’t tell which happened first – if the roots were followed by the worms eating their way down, or the worms made channels that the roots took advantage of, but it belongs to a healthy state”, explained Will Brinton who presented Soil Health Tool test (SHT) results for the farm.
Attendees at the event observed a significant quantity of earthworm castings on the soil surface in the triticale fields. Samples of soil taken under the triticale had Solvita respiration of 123 ppm CO2-C indicating an extremely vibrant biology in the topsoil profile. Recent published research in Applied Soil Ecology reported soil basal CO2 respiration around earthworm burrows to be twice that of surrounding soil. And, as the picture shows, those benefits are likely being transferred to deeper layers.
In 1881, Charles Darwin brought international recognition to the lowly earthworm by publishing detailed observations of earthworm habits in farm fields. Among his findings: worms are capable of moving and depositing as much as 15 tons of soil per acre/year as enriched castings on the soil surface. Earthworm awareness has increased significantly since his time, yet there is still under-appreciation of the quantitative role they play in soil building and just how much tillage may diminish their populations.
Closer observation of the picture makes evident that the worm/root channels have made a very significant impact with obvious infractions nearly every 4″ laterally across the pit sidewall and extending downwards to depths greater than 24″."
The field in question is slated to be no-tilled corn for 2014. Soil health tool results from Woods End Laboratories suggested reducing N rates and no additional P or K required. Farmer Chris Broyan says he plans to follow these SHT recommendations to see how it turns out."
I met Gerard at NNTC and see him every year. I've seen Steve Groff and David Brandt grow 200 bushel corn using cover crops so I know it can be done.
It's good to see others exploring alternative methods of raising crops by addressing soil health.
Ed Winkle
A soil pit dug in the triticale cover crop at the Broyan family’s Faihopity Farm showed a remarkable coincidence of worms and the roots: the earthworm channels extended down nearly 28″ and following them, a trail of roots and humus. “We can’t tell which happened first – if the roots were followed by the worms eating their way down, or the worms made channels that the roots took advantage of, but it belongs to a healthy state”, explained Will Brinton who presented Soil Health Tool test (SHT) results for the farm.
Attendees at the event observed a significant quantity of earthworm castings on the soil surface in the triticale fields. Samples of soil taken under the triticale had Solvita respiration of 123 ppm CO2-C indicating an extremely vibrant biology in the topsoil profile. Recent published research in Applied Soil Ecology reported soil basal CO2 respiration around earthworm burrows to be twice that of surrounding soil. And, as the picture shows, those benefits are likely being transferred to deeper layers.
In 1881, Charles Darwin brought international recognition to the lowly earthworm by publishing detailed observations of earthworm habits in farm fields. Among his findings: worms are capable of moving and depositing as much as 15 tons of soil per acre/year as enriched castings on the soil surface. Earthworm awareness has increased significantly since his time, yet there is still under-appreciation of the quantitative role they play in soil building and just how much tillage may diminish their populations.
Closer observation of the picture makes evident that the worm/root channels have made a very significant impact with obvious infractions nearly every 4″ laterally across the pit sidewall and extending downwards to depths greater than 24″."
The field in question is slated to be no-tilled corn for 2014. Soil health tool results from Woods End Laboratories suggested reducing N rates and no additional P or K required. Farmer Chris Broyan says he plans to follow these SHT recommendations to see how it turns out."
I met Gerard at NNTC and see him every year. I've seen Steve Groff and David Brandt grow 200 bushel corn using cover crops so I know it can be done.
It's good to see others exploring alternative methods of raising crops by addressing soil health.
Ed Winkle
Friday, May 2, 2014
Does RoundUp Still Work?
A farmer on Crop Talk asked if glyphosate would kill poa annua? I answered no. Poa annua is another glyphosate resistant weed in southern Ohio. The grass is so thick that a friend was visiting and commented on all of the cover crops planted here. I said pull over, and showed him the wild Kentucky bluegrass, poa annua. These fields have been sprayed with glyphosate since it came out or at least since RoundUp Ready soybeans were introduced nearly 20 years ago. I was sent this piece from Liz Stahl, an Extension Educator in Minnesota that clarifies my message.
"Does glyphosate perform as well today as it did when you first used it? When producers were asked this question at University of Minnesota Private Pesticide Applicator Training sessions across southern Minnesota in 2014, 87% of the respondents said "No". This percentage is up significantly from 2009, when 55% of respondents answered "No" to this question. Increasing issues with resistance to glyphosate is likely, at least in part, behind reported reductions in weed control. To address issues of reduced weed control with glyphosate, diversification is key.
"Does glyphosate perform as well today as it did when you first used it? When producers were asked this question at University of Minnesota Private Pesticide Applicator Training sessions across southern Minnesota in 2014, 87% of the respondents said "No". This percentage is up significantly from 2009, when 55% of respondents answered "No" to this question. Increasing issues with resistance to glyphosate is likely, at least in part, behind reported reductions in weed control. To address issues of reduced weed control with glyphosate, diversification is key.
Currently, resistance to glyphosate in Minnesota has been found in populations of waterhemp, giant ragweed, common ragweed, and kochia. Herbicide resistance, however, is not unique to glyphosate. In addition to glyphosate, resistance has been confirmed to date with three additional herbicide sites of action in MN. Herbicide resistance is not a new issue either. The first official confirmation of herbicide resistance in MN was to atrazine in common lambsquarters in 1982.
Further complicating weed control is the reality that resistance traits can stack up. For example, resistance to both ALS herbicides and glyphosate has been found in populations of waterhemp, giant ragweed, and common ragweed in MN. Also, research demonstrates there is often no "fitness cost" to these resistance traits in weeds. This means that once resistance to a particular herbicide develops in a population, the trait remains in the population regardless of future herbicide use, rendering the particular chemistry ineffective into the foreseeable future. These biological factors can significantly limit the number of tools available to combat weed populations into the future.
Starting with a pre-emergence herbicide is a key step in helping reduce the risk of developing herbicide resistant weed populations. Pre-emergence herbicides can also help in the management of weed populations already resistant to a particular herbicide. Growers are seeing the value of pre-emergence herbicides: According to surveys conducted at U of MN Private Pesticide Applicator training sessions across southern MN in 2014, 78% of growers surveyed plan to use a pre-emergence herbicide in soybean in 2014, and 80% plan to in corn. This is up dramatically from 2009, when 60% and 50% of survey respondents indicated they used a "Postemergence only" program in soybeans and corn, respectively.
Which pre-emergence herbicide is the best fit for you? The "Corn and Soybean Herbicide Diversification Tools" publication developed by U of MN and North Dakota State University, available athttp://z.umn.edu/herboptions, can help determine which pre-emergence herbicide is the best match for your needs. Weed control ratings are listed for key weed species including waterhemp, giant ragweed, common ragweed, lambsquarters, and kochia. Rotation restrictions are listed as well. This resource also compares non-glyphosate, postemergence herbicide options in corn and soybean.
Weed scientists across the Corn Belt also worked with the United Soybean Board to develop a number of useful tools to help growers and ag professionals in developing more diversified weed management programs. These tools can be accessed through the "Take Action" link on the U of MN Extension Crops website at http://www.extension.umn.edu/crops. Of particular note is the "Site of Action Chart", which lists the site of action for herbicides used in corn and soybean.
Want to learn more about how herbicide resistance occurs and the various sites of action for common herbicide chemistries? Check out the U of MN Extension Crops YouTube videos on herbicide resistance, available on the main U of MN Extension Crops website under "Social Media" (http://www.extension.umn.edu/crops)."
Ed Winkle
Thursday, May 1, 2014
"Wolves Gobbling Up Farmland"
Enthusiasm for agriculture as an investment “borders on speculative mania,” and “the wolves of Wall Street are eyeing millions of acres of U.S. farmland that will soon come up for sale, much of which has been in the hands of family farmers for generations.”
That’s from a report by the Oakland Institute, Down on the Farm — Wall Street: America’s New Farmer.
Institutional investors — including hedge funds, private equity, pension funds, and university endowments — “have trained their sights on America's agricultural infrastructure," says Lukas Ross, an Oakland Institute Fellow and author of the report. "If they succeed in consolidating control over our land and infrastructure, this new class of land barons could imperil our nation's food supply."
It's hard to appreciate and understand the change in America's economy and especially in agriculture the past ten years. The last six years has seen huge changes in both economies. The American economy crashed and nearly burned while the ag sector flourished. $8.20 corn and $15 soybeans changed rents, land cost and inputs, drastically. We are still adjusting to the change. Even though very few people enjoyed much of those record prices, expectations were based off them.
Personally, I haven't seen "Wall Street Wolves" prowling around here but where they have, they affected local economies, too. Maybe the upper middle class had a chance to act like them? Those of us in agriculture have had more money to spend than other sectors of the economy and now we must pay those prices just to operate.
The truth is many agricultural parcels have changed ownership the past ten years, some before the Wall Street crash, and some after. The landscape of land price and rent has changed.
How we respond to these changes will determine our profitability in the future.
How has your local economy performed compared to the ag sector? Here, there is a vast difference.
Ed Winkle
That’s from a report by the Oakland Institute, Down on the Farm — Wall Street: America’s New Farmer.
Institutional investors — including hedge funds, private equity, pension funds, and university endowments — “have trained their sights on America's agricultural infrastructure," says Lukas Ross, an Oakland Institute Fellow and author of the report. "If they succeed in consolidating control over our land and infrastructure, this new class of land barons could imperil our nation's food supply."
It's hard to appreciate and understand the change in America's economy and especially in agriculture the past ten years. The last six years has seen huge changes in both economies. The American economy crashed and nearly burned while the ag sector flourished. $8.20 corn and $15 soybeans changed rents, land cost and inputs, drastically. We are still adjusting to the change. Even though very few people enjoyed much of those record prices, expectations were based off them.
Personally, I haven't seen "Wall Street Wolves" prowling around here but where they have, they affected local economies, too. Maybe the upper middle class had a chance to act like them? Those of us in agriculture have had more money to spend than other sectors of the economy and now we must pay those prices just to operate.
The truth is many agricultural parcels have changed ownership the past ten years, some before the Wall Street crash, and some after. The landscape of land price and rent has changed.
How we respond to these changes will determine our profitability in the future.
How has your local economy performed compared to the ag sector? Here, there is a vast difference.
Ed Winkle
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



