The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013



2012 Crop Review, 48-Row Planters, Disease Management Tips

Transcript of The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

Page 1: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013
Page 2: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013


source of


in the


So where would folks be without your sugar in their coffee?

Or without a hundred years of Holly know-how?

Or the science of SESVanderHave?

Or our tracks in the �eld right next to yours?

re weho wS

t yuohtie ws bklod f foluore w

eeffeffor ciehn tr iagur suot y


rr tur o O

e ocneice sh t

dnut a huoh

xet nhgid rlee �hn ts ikcar

? evaHrednaVSEf Se o

-wony kllof Hs oraed yred

?sruoo yt tx

? woh-


Page 3: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

— Feature Articles —

2012 Crop Year Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 426th annual summary encompasses all areas

Planting Ante Up to 48 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16RRV farm puts in crop with three 48-row planters

Managing Beet Diseases in the Central Great Plains 20Nebraska plant pathologist’s series of reminders

— Regular Pages —

Dateline: Washington . . . . . . . . . . 12Farm bill, biotech & crop insurance

30 Years Ago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Excerpts from the January 1983 issue

Write Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Relax & Count Blessings

Around the Industry . . . . . . . . . . . 22Who, what & where it’s happening

— Front Cover —

Most sugarbeet areas wereblessed with a very productiveseason in 2012. Our annual cropsummary begins on page 4.

USDA’s November estimate of2012 U.S. sugarbeet productionwas nearly 35 million tons. An updated estimate comes

out in mid-January.

Photo: Don Lilleboe


Page 16Page 4

‘Serving The Nation’s SugarbeetCommunity Since 1963’

Volume 52 Number 1January 2013

Sugar Publications4601 16th Ave. N.Fargo, ND 58102

Phone: (701) 476-2111Fax: (701) 476-2182

E-Mail: [email protected] Site:

Publisher: Sugar Publications

General Manager & Editor: Don Lilleboe

Advertising Manager: Heidi Wieland (701) 476-2003

Graphics: Forum Communications Printing

The Sugarbeet Grower is published sixtimes annually (January, February, March,April/May, July/August, November/December)by Sugar Publications, a division of ForumCommunications Printing.

North American sugarbeet producers re-ceive the magazine on a complimentary basis.Annual subscription rates are $12.00 domes-tic and $18.00 for foreign subscribers.

Advertising in The Sugarbeet Growerdoes not necessarily imply endorsement of aparticular product or service by the publisher.

Visit Our Website!

Page 4: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

Amalgamated Sugar Company

The 2012 crop year set severalrecords for the Amalgamated SugarCompany, LLC. The first was a recordper-acre yield of 35.5 tons, as comparedto last year’s previous record yield of34.7 tons. Total tons harvested set an-other record at more than 6.9 milliontons. Sugar content looked to be aboveaverage, but an early October hardfrost set the sugar so that averagesugar content was at 16.98% — justbarely higher than last year’s sugarcontent of 16.94%.

Early spring plantings were dam-aged by high winds and frosts in theeastern part of Idaho. There weremore than 24,000 acres of replants outof 122,000 acres planted. Stand countswere lower than in 2011. The westerndistricts of the production region didnot have as many replants.

Water was plentiful, and the grow-ing season was hot in the westernareas. Insect and disease pressure waslow to average across the region. A lot of things can happen to a crop ofbeets; but enough “right things” hap-pened in the 2012 growing season toallow production of the record crop. —John Schorr

American CrystalSugar Company

Preparations for a record cropbegan with ideal fall weather in 2011,allowing for near-optimum conditionsto apply fertilizer and complete tillagefor excellent seedbeds in the spring of2012. Planting began on April 10 andwas 95% complete by May 1. Seedbedconditions were very good for germina-tion and emergence in most districts.Plant populations were excellent withan average of 188 beets per 100 feet ofrow. Replants were only 2.8% and lo-cated primarily in the Drayton district.Most replanting was caused by high

winds. Roundup Ready® varieties wereplanted on about 96% of the acreage.

Early season growth was muchahead of normal due to ideal growingdegree days and good rainfall. Earliest-planted fields had the rows closed bymid-June, setting the stage for veryhigh yields.

Rainfall was well below average inthe entire growing area beginning inlate July and through August and Sep-tember. But despite the drought, thecrop rooted to eight, nine or even 10feet deep, utilizing stored soil watervery effectively to maintain growth.

The drought brought some unusualpest problems that are rarely seen inour growing area. Root aphids causedserious damage in numerous fields inthe drier areas. Yield losses of up tofive to eight tons occurred in somefields. Root maggot populations werealso high in the traditional locales ofnortheastern North Dakota.

Root rot diseases were variable; butin general, incidence and severity werelower in 2012. Fungicide use for Rhi-zoctonia control has increased greatlyin recent years. Aphanomyces inci-dence and severity were low due to dryconditions. However, Fusarium inci-dence was near normal, with severeyield loss when fields were not plantedto resistant varieties. Rhizoctonia was


These pages contain our26th annual sugarbeet cropsummary. All current NorthAmerican sugarbeet productionregions are represented in thereports included here.

The Sugarbeet Growerwishes to extend our sincerethanks to those individualslisted who submitted the reportfor their company.

Our 26th Crop Summary


to: D

on L


oe /




ar C



e, S



f, N


2012 Crop Year ReviewReports from All North American Beet Regions

Page 5: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

A Great Harvest!Amity Technology was a proud partner of many hardworking farmers during the 2012 harvest. Thank you for trusting your harvest to defoliators and harvesters from Amity Technology. Our �eld-proven designs work well in a variety of conditions. Engineers at Amity Technology continually improve design and ef�ciency, resulting in equipment that holds its value. Further, Amity Technology is unmatched in company and dealer commitment to quality, parts availability, and service.

Amity Technology is the world leader in sugar beet harvesting equipment. Because of its high quality and low maintenance requirement, it’s the safe choice today for tomorrow.

2800 7th Avenue NorthFargo, ND 58102

Phone: 701.232.4199Fax: 701.234.1716

Page 6: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

also severe in many fields with a his-tory of infection.

Weed control was exceptionallygood in most fields. A future concern isidentification of some fields that ap-pear to have glyphosate-resistant wa-terhemp and kochia present.

Prepile harvest began August 14 be-cause of expected very high yields.Crop quality was excellent for the earlystart date. Stockpiling began on Octo-ber 2 as temperatures cooled to levelsthat made long-term storage of thecrop acceptable. Above-average rain-fall and several snows in October andNovember created very difficult har-vest conditions. Frost shutdowns werefrequent in late October and November.

Harvest was completed on Novem-ber 21. This was the longest harveston record from the early prepile startto a late finish. Yield was a record 27.1tons per acre with a record 19.14%sugar content. — Allan Cattanach

Lantic Inc.Alberta’s 2012 beet crop was an ex-

cellent reward after a tough year nego-tiating a contract between growers andthe company. Growers harvested atotal of 827,000 metric tonnes (911,502

short tons) from 30,512 acres, for anaverage yield of over 27 metric tonnes(29.8 short tons) per acre. The qualityrivaled that of last year’s crop with thefactory average sugar being 19.3%.About 120,000 tonnes (nearly 132,300short tons) of beets are ventilated forlong-term storage.

The entire crop was planted toRoundup Ready sugarbeets. Firstplanting date was April 14, and plant-ing continued through the third weekof May. A significant frost event onMay 10 necessitated the replanting ofclose to 2,000 acres. Some early seededfields also had poor stands, probablydue to cool soil temperatures and verycool nighttime temperatures throughmost of April and May. Soil crustingwas also an issue in some fields. Thereplants were completed by June 7.

Early June punished the area withseveral hailstorms and a tornado thatpassed through a portion of the grow-ing area. An estimated 4,000 acreswere severely impacted by thesestorms, with crop damage from hail re-sulting in 30-100% defoliation. Winddamage was also extensive. Irrigationpivots and wheel lines were damagedin the storms. Some fields experiencedextreme flooding and erosion due to

running water. Wind erosion becamean issue for these hailed-out acres, andmany growers cultivated in an attemptto prevent further damage.

Cutworm, root maggots and beetleaf miners were all observed this sea-son. Early season use of insecticideand seed treatments limited crop lossfrom these pests. Root disease was evi-dent in some fields, perhaps more thanin previous years.

Throughout June and July, variousstorms continued to damage fields withhail, accompanied by heavy rainfall.Wet conditions affected the timing ofglyphosate applications on some fields.But despite all of the weather impacts,row closure was evident in the majorityof fields prior to July 1.

Summer finally arrived in southernAlberta in the first weeks of July.Growers maximized crop potentialusing irrigation during the hotweather. Fields started looking verypromising at this point in the season,and a special crop was predicted.

Hot temperatures continuedthroughout July and August, resultingin a hectic irrigation schedule for manygrowers. Field staff started to suspectthat the late-June yield estimates mayhave been conservative. Yellowing ofthe canopy became evident in somefields as August progressed.

Harvest began on September 19. Aheavy rain on October 9 slowed theharvest for a few days. More than 5.5inches of snow fell on October 23, slow-ing the harvest significantly.

As the snow melted, wetness be-came an issue in many fields. Repeatedsnowfalls and frost continued throughthe final days of October and into earlyNovember. Excessive amounts of mudcaused the duration of harvest to be areal struggle for growers and pilingground staff.

A few acres at a time continued tobe harvested whenever conditions al-lowed until November 21. Huge dirtlumps and deterioration of beets due tovery cold conditions dictated the end ofharvest 2012, with 170 acres being leftin the ground. — Vanessa Bastura

Michigan Sugar Co.What a year! “Unbelievable” is a

term often used when talking about the2012 sugarbeet crop in Michigan.

It all started back on March 15when the first field was planted. Wehad 98,000 acres — approximately 60%of the crop — planted under ideal con-ditions in March. It did not take longfor the remaining acreage to beplanted. By mid-April, all fields were


Page 7: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

Always read and follow label instructions.

Engineered to protect.™Protect your sugar beet seed from the inside out. Choose the advanced chemistry of METLOCK™ SUITE Sugar Beets System1 for fungicide disease protection, or NipsIt™ SUITE Sugar Beets System2 when youneed a fungicide plus insect protection. Both innovative seed treatments deliver unsurpassed contact and super-systemic protection from the most threatening diseases, including early-season Rhizoctonia and Fusarium. NipsIt SUITE Sugar Beets also features proprietary Lock Tight™ Technology for unmatched handling. To learn more, contact your seed supplier or go to

1METLOCK SUITE Sugar Beets System is a promotional combination of METLOCK™ Fungicide (EPA reg. #59639-171) from Valent U.S.A. Corporation and Sebring™ 318 FS Fungicide (EPA reg. #55146-107) from Nufarm.2NipsIt SUITE Sugar Beets System is a promotional combination of NipsIt INSIDE® Insecticide (EPA reg. #59639-151) and METLOCK™ Fungicide (EPA reg. #59639-171) from Valent U.S.A. Corporation and Sebring™ 318 FS Fungicide (EPA reg. #55146-107) from Nufarm.

Lock Tight, METLOCK, NipsIt and Engineered to protect are trademarks and NipsIt INSIDE and Products That Work, From People Who Care are registered trademarks of Valent U.S.A. Corporation. Lock Tight Technology is covered under U.S. Patent 8,232,229. Sebring is a trademark of Nufarm. ©2012 Valent U.S.A. Corporation. All rights reserved. 12S-1062

The most advanced way to beat early-season Rhizoctonia.

Page 8: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

planted and we were seeing very goodemergence on the early planted beets.Historically, very few acres get plantedin March and we hope to have all acresplanted by late April.

The month of May arrived, and thestand counts and plant populationswere the “best ever.” Everyone begantalking about the crop’s potential. Ournormal stand count over the previousfour years was 176 beets per 100 feet ofrow. The average this year was 209 —20% better than our historical average.We were truly blessed with an excel-

lent start to the growing season. In June, the once “absolutely beau-

tiful” crop was being negatively influ-enced by some dry soil conditions.Some fields were showing signs ofmoisture stress from the dry soils. Rhi-zoctonia was beginning to develop, andthere was a concern for development ofCercospora leafspot. The dry condi-tions continued, for the most part, wellinto July, and the extreme heat addedto the moisture stress. The once “unbe-lievable” crop was now not so pretty.

On August 10, rainfall arrived with

a vengeance. There were reports ofrainfall in our west district on that dayof anywhere from 5.5 inches all theway to over 10. It was a bit much; butwith the extremely dry conditions pre-viously, it did not take long for the ex-cess to run off and the crop to respondin a positive manner to the replenishedsoil moisture.

Harvest started on August 20 atone factory site, August 27 at two othersites, and the last in Bay City on Au-gust 30. Our scheduled early deliverycontinued until October 20 when weopened delivery for long-term storage.Unfortunately, warm weather arrivedtwo days later, and we were forced tostop harvest for five consecutive days.Over the five-day stretch (October 22-26) the average high was 73 degreeswith a record 78 degrees on October 25!

We returned to harvest on October27, only to be rained out by HurricaneSandy on October 30. The two-dayrain event kept us out of the field againuntil November 4. At that time, westarted to check the calendar date —we were only 49% harvested and wewere several days into November! Wewere fortunate to avoid any severenighttime temperatures, and harvestbegan to wind down by mid-November.The last load of beets was received onNovember 30.

Many records were set, includingtotal number of beets received and av-erage yield. Here are the 2012 num-bers for Michigan Sugar Company:

• Harvested Acres – 162,611• Average Yield – 29.22 T/A• Final Tons – 4,751,048• % Sugar – 18.66• Purity – 95.50This crop had a great start and a

strong finish. The sugarbeets wentinto storage with a little extra tare; butoverall, beet temperatures were good.— Paul Pfenninger

Minn-DakFarmers CooperativeGrowers began planting the 2012

crop in early April. By month’s end,nearly the entire crop was planted.Biotech sugarbeets were planted forthe fifth year on virtually all of theacreage. Weed control was very goodall season long.

The crop made excellent progressduring May and June. Plans weremade in late May to prepare for a mid-August start. The July crop samplesconfirmed the advanced growth of the2012 crop. The growing season of 2012will be remembered for bright sunshine


Page 9: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

along with above-average tempera-tures from May through August.

Because of advanced crop size, pre-harvest was under way by August 14.Weather was not a factor in schedulingstation deliveries during preharvest.From early August through the mainharvest period, little to no rainfall wasrecorded in nearly all areas.

Main harvest started on October 3.It was a dry harvest with little-to-nomoisture recorded in all Minn-Dakareas but the most northern. Therewas one heat shutdown and threefreeze shutdowns during the main har-vest period. Receiving stations hadseveral record-breaking delivery days.

Harvest was completed on October18, with a total of 3,058,045 tons har-vested from 114,513 acres. The cropaveraged 26.67 tons per acre with arecord 19.09% sugar content, an 88.3%purity and 1.53 percent tare. —Christopher DeVries

Sidney Sugars, Inc.Sidney Sugars agriculture staff

began contracting sugarbeet acres inMarch of 2012. The winter preceedingthis spring was very warm and dry.We had only a few small snowstorms.Spring temperatures remained warmwith very little rain.

Growers started planting a week ortwo ahead of normal into mostly dryseedbeds. Some fields had just enoughmoisture to germinate the seeds.Many of our fields had to be irrigatedfor good emergence. The ones that did-n’t get irrigated often had thinnerstands or had to be replanted.

We went into summer with not thebest of plant populations. The youngsugarbeet fields struggled until theywere irrigated. Our summer was hotand again dry, and growers had a con-stant schedule of irrigations. There wasno let-up with the frequent watering offields. If growers kept adequate mois-ture in the fields, with the constantheat the beets showed rapid growth.

Harvest started the last few days ofSeptember. After building inventoryfor the factory, harvest was stopped be-cause of warm temperatures. Thewarm spell was broken by a storm sys-tem that deposited our most significantrain event of the year. Along with thestorm, we had a couple nights of freez-ing temperatures that definitely lockedin the sugar percent.

Our growers harvested a total of32,918 acres. The crop broke a Sidneyrecord with an average yield of 27.8tons per acre. The average sugar per-cent was 17.99%, which was a little

disappointing. However, beet puritieswere very good. The factory is having agood campaign and should slice out themiddle of February. — Russ Fullmer

Southern MinnesotaBeet Sugar Cooperative

The 2012 season began with con-cerns about having adequate moistureto get the crop started, as the winterand early spring provided limited pre-cipitation. Fortunately, the middle ofApril experienced reasonable rainfall,and by the end of the month nearly theentire crop was planted and had ade-quate moisture to start growing.

Nearly ideal rainfall amounts andtiming continued through May andJune. Temperatures remained warmthroughout the spring, and the cropwas off to a great start. A few fieldsexperienced crusting and had to be re-planted, but this was less than 2% ofthe planted acres.

The well-timed June rains had al-lowed the crop to grow rapidly withminimal root disease. By the end ofJune, the crop was closing its rows andlooking good enough that many fieldshad already received their first Cer-cospora leafspot fungicide application.However, at this time the rains becamemore sporadic; and by the middle ofJuly most of the growing area wouldhave welcomed a significant rainfallevent. Unfortunately, the rainfall re-mained sporadic, and only a few areaswere lucky enough to catch meaningfulprecipitation. This dry period contin-ued until after harvest was completedin mid- to late October.

Despite the dry conditions, the cropcontinued to grow rapidly. This rapidgrowth, coupled with a planting toler-ance of up to 110% of stock acres, facili-tated the decision to begin our prepileharvest on August 14 — the earliestever for SMBSC. With virtually norainfall during August and September,prepile harvest went quite smoothly.By the third week in September, itstarted to become apparent that the

dry conditions were limiting the contin-ued growth of the beets and drivingsugar content upward.

With the slowed growth of thebeets, it was decided to utilize the cooltemperatures during the night andearly morning hours at the end of Sep-tember to begin piling in earnest. Thispractice continued for several daysuntil the daytime highs allowed forround-the-clock harvesting.

There were a few mornings withfrost shutdowns, but by then 85% ofthe beets had been harvested. The re-maining tons were piled in a few days,and the harvest was completed October22 with a final yield of 26.40 tons peracre and SMBSC record 17.69% sugar.

Beet storage has been good throughthe end of November despite some less-than-desirable temperatures. We areexpecting to finish slicing beets some-time during the first half of April. —Todd Geselius

Spreckels Sugar Co.Planting began for the 2012 Impe-

rial Valley crop the first week of Sep-tember 2011, with temperatures above110 degrees. Some of the growers heldoff planting, hoping the weather wouldcool down. But by mid-September thetemperatures had not cooled, and mostgrowers began planting the crop. Wereceived some heavy rains in the south-ern part of the growing area that de-layed planting and caused somereplanting, due to crusting, before thecrop came up.

October was hotter than normalwith temperatures in the 105-degreerange and planting in full swing. LateOctober brought cooler weather withtemperature in the mid 90s. Insectpressure was high, and growers had tocontrol white flies, flea beetles andarmyworms.

November finally brought somecooler temps, in the mid 80s and low


Page 10: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

90s. The crop was growing very wellwith the ideal temperatures. Decem-ber brought some cooler-than-normaltemperatures, with lows the first partof the month right at the freezingpoint. Root samples taken the first ofthe month showed average growth andabove-average quality.

January was another cool monthwith some freezing temperatures thefirst of the month. Again, root samplesshowed average growth and above-av-erage quality. February was coolerthan normal, and the root samplesshowed average growth and above-av-erage quality. March turned outwarmer than normal, and root samplesshowed average growth and quality.

Harvest started April 1 with yieldsa little above average and qualityabout average. The rest of April waswarmer than normal, and yields con-tinued to climb above average. Maywas hot, with temperatures above 100degrees, and saw the crop growing verywell. Quality began slipping due to thehotter-than-normal temperatures. Theestimate was raised by half a ton be-cause of the above average yields seen.

June was another hot month withtemperatures above 110 degrees, andthe estimate was raised another 0.7

ton, bringing it up to 44.7 tons per acre.July yields continued to climb andquality slipped a bit as the estimatewas raised to 45.5 tons. Temperatureswere hot for the entire month of July.

Yields were increasing as the har-vest finished up on the 14th of August.Final numbers for the 2012 harvestwere 46.5 tons per acre (a record yieldfor the Brawley factory), sugar contentof 15.98% and purity of 88.35%.

It was a great crop for the Brawleygrowing area in spite of the lower-than-normal quality. The growers did an ex-cellent job delivering a clean, well-topped beet to the receiving station.Thanks to all for the hard work duringthe 2012 sugarbeet harvest. We arelooking forward to another good cropfor the 2013 harvest. — Ron Tharp

Western Sugar Cooperative

The 2012 crop year started off dryacross all Western Sugar regions withabove-normal temperatures and below-normal precipitation.

Irrigation water supplies wereabove average and allowed the crop tohave a full irrigation, except for theFront Range of Colorado. The com-

bined heat and irrigation created arecord sugarbeet crop.

There were very few disease issuesin all growing regions. Also, below-nor-mal seasonal hail damage helped cre-ate a bumper crop. Insect pressurefrom armyworms in Nebraska and Col-orado and spider mites in Montanacaused some yield reductions.

The Rocky Mountain region experi-enced good fall growing conditionsuntil a hard freeze occurred in the firstweek of October, causing the sugar per-centage to be locked for the remainderof the harvest.

Early harvest started on September9. Regular harvest conditions weregood in all regions, with sugarbeetsgoing into the pile clean and cool.

Yields in the northern region aver-aged 28.8 tons per acre, with a 17.68%sugar. Nebraska averaged 29.9 tonswith a 17.96% sugar and Colorado 32.4tons with a 16.70% sugar. The cooper-ative averaged 10,418 pounds of sugarper acre, which is a WSC record.

Sugarbeet processing is scheduledto be complete in mid- to late February.— Jerry Darnell

Wyoming Sugar Co.The Wyoming Sugar Company and

growers experienced a great year. Westarted out with concerns about seedvariety availability and the future ofGMO sugarbeets, but our attentionquickly turned to the dry weather.

Our growing season began withvery pleasant mild spring weather, butquickly turned hot and dry. Some irri-gation districts sent out probable watershortage warnings; but when it was allsaid and done, our growing areas re-ceived adequate irrigation water tokeep the crop going. Keeping up withthe irrigation demands placed by thehot dry weather was the number-oneissue for growing the 2012 beet crop.

Our harvest began in mid-Septem-ber. The warm temperatures slowedharvest until early October, when tem-peratures cooled off nicely and harvestcould run at a normal schedule. Itturned out to be a very nice dry harvestthat concluded by Halloween.

The 2012 processing campaign isgoing very well. Many new improve-ments and upgrades in the factoryhave really aided our processing abil-ity. We have projected that we will fin-ish slicing beets in the few days priorto Christmas.

Wyoming Sugar Company’s final2012 crop numbers came in at 29.3tons per acre and 17.89% sugar con-tent. —Myron Casdorph �

call 519-339-6015


Harvest simplifi edHarvest simplifi ed


North ∙ [email protected]


Page 11: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013





!"#$%&'#()%!*++$'#++,'-./01.2304-'256'% 7'#44-/8'9:;<'=<>??<@@A<?BBB'C' 15/0DE'*440'#44-'=<@=><@BF<A?>>'

Good Things Come from Common Ground

ACH V1 7/12

Page 12: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

Much of the time between Elec-tion Day and Christmas has

been spent watching the two politicalgladiators (President Obama andHouse Speaker Boehner) battle overtaxes and spending to avoid the fis-cal cliff. When the media and votersare fixated on both the battle and theoutcome, it is a tremendous opportu-nity for both parties to further definethemselves and their political oppo-nents.

It has been said that in politics,“You never want to waste a crisis.”So the nation must wait until all ofthe theatrics of the negotiations haveplayed out. With no time left on theclock, we pray that good decisionsare made to chart a new and prosper-ous future for our country. By timeyou read this article, it will be clearwhether an agreement had beenforged by our political leaders be-tween Christmas and New Year’s.

— Farm Bill — There were great hopes that the

2012 farm bill would be made part ofthe final deal to help reduce our na-tion’s annual deficits and staggeringdebt. The Administration, Senateand House Democrats wanted a farmbill as part of the final package, butHouse Republican leadership stalledthose efforts at least until Christ-mas. When Congress left for its briefChristmas holiday, all indicationswere there would be some form ofbrief extension of the 2008 farm bill,with plans to complete it in early2013. However, we are still in a pe-riod and a process where even thebest predictions are, quite frankly,unpredictable.

As for sugar policy, we are now in

a very different market scenariothan when the House AgricultureCommittee and the full Senate con-sidered our policy. Given the over-supply of sugar in the world market,large beet and cane crops in both theU.S. and Mexico, and an additional420,000 tons of imports allowed intothe U.S. market (based on incorrectdata at the time of the decision), wehave seen both the raw and refinedsugar markets collapse from previ-ous-year levels. Will sugar userspass on savings of lower prices toconsumers? They have not passed onsavings in the past, and we do notexpect that to occur in the future. Itwill make their arguments muchmore difficult to defend in anotherpublic debate.

Assuming the farm bill slips intonext year and faces votes again inthe Senate and House, there aremany new members in both bodiesthat will need educating. We have87 new members in the House and15 in the Senate. With all of thesenew faces, we must work hard to ed-ucate them about the sugar industryand U.S. sugar policy.

We want to thank everyone whohas participated in their political ac-tion committees, because it providesindustry representatives the oppor-tunity to speak directly to the mem-bers of Congress so they can betterunderstand our issues and thestrategic importance of our industry.

— Biotech —On November 15, the last appeal

on a Roundup Ready® issue wasruled on, ending a long legal battleover biotechnology in sugarbeets.We spent almost five years (1,755


days) in the courts during which wewere engaged in four cases in twoU.S. district courts (San Franciscoand Washington, D.C.) and three ap-pellate cases in the Ninth CircuitCourt of Appeals (San Francisco).

It is our sincere hope the oppo-nents of biotechnology will now ceasetheir attacks on our efforts to raiseour crop in a more efficient and envi-ronmentally friendly way. We haveproven that the technology is safe,the sugar is the same as that fromconventional production, and thatour producers are great stewards inremoving bolters and managingagainst weed resistance — becausegrower stewardship is essential toretain the value of the technology.

Biotech opponents, however, arerenewing their efforts to pass stateballot initiatives to require labelingof foods that contain ingredientsfrom biotech crops. While they lostsuch an effort in California last year,they are targeting Washington, Ver-mont and Connecticut. We standshoulder-to-shoulder with otherbiotech crop producers to opposesuch labeling efforts. Our AmericanSugarbeet Growers Association hasestablished a new Biotechnology andResearch Committee to monitor andengage in these types of efforts forthe years to come, and we are pre-pared to face the challenges and op-portunities before us.

— Crop Insurance —Price election for 2013 will be

$58.95, which is appropriate giventhe state of the current marketplace.One important change this year isthat replant reimbursement will notbe 1.5 times price election, but rathera fixed dollar amount of $80 per acre.We successfully sought this modifica-tion to avoid an annual battle to re-tain a more reasonable replantamount. When sugar prices drop, re-plant costs do not, so this is a greatimprovement over our traditionalcoverage. �



Luther Markwart


Vice President



Growers Assn.

Page 13: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013



MORE PRECISIONMORE ACRES PER DAYMORE PLANTER OPTIONSMORE PROFITABILITY 24 Row 22" Bulk-fi ll air seed delivery or hopper boxes Hydraulic variable drive or contact drive Liquid fertilizer option “Plug-and-play” ISOBUS-monitor compatibility

For more information, visit your local KINZE® Dealer today … or visit




©2013 by KINZE Manufacturing, Inc. KINZE®, the KINZE® logo and EdgeVac® are registered trademarks owned by KINZE Manufacturing, Inc.

KINZE_SugarBeetAd-SugarBGrowr1212.indd 1 12/21/12 3:31 PM

Page 14: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

Global production for 2012/13 is estimated flat after rising20% over the past three years, as sharply lower produc-

tion in both India and the EU is offset by other producers.Global imports are estimated down 3% as China’s imports

decline on increased production. World raw sugar prices aredown sharply during November compared to the past twoyears and are expected to support higher consumption.

Brazil’s production, estimated at 37.5 million metric tons(MMT), is up 4%, based on a higher sugarcane renewal rateand better yields. Also, the low price of gasoline (with re-spect to ethanol) has diverted some sugarcane away fromfuel use. In October 2011, the percentage of ethanol blendedto gasoline dropped from 25 to 20%, and is expected to re-main unchanged at least until May 2013. Exports and con-sumption are expected to remain constant.

India’s production is expected to drop about 10% to 25.6MMT, as below-normal rains in the first half of the monsoonseason (June-September) discouraged additional sugarcaneplanting and caused some cane to be used for cattle feed. Ex-

ports are estimated to plunge nearly 40% to 2.2 MMT, solarge markets such as Sri Lanka, United Arab Emirates andBangladesh will have to find other suppliers. In May 2012,sugar exports were liberalized, eliminating the need to ob-tain export release orders. Mills and exporters are thus freeto export, but the government is monitoring exports closely.Consequent to lower production, imports are estimated upfrom 100,000 MT to 500,000 MT.

EU production is estimated to fall 10% to 16.4 MMT dueto unfavorable beet growing conditions, despite a slight in-crease in beet acreage. Beet yields suffered from continuedwet and cold weather during spring and summer in much ofnorthwest Europe, which includes the main beet-producingareas, while summer droughts limited beet yields in south-east European production areas. Beet sugar content is fore-cast to be closer to normal levels as weather improvedtoward the beet maturation period.

EU exports are estimated at 1.5 MMT, the EU WTO ceil-ing for sugar. Imports are estimated to remain at 3.8 MMTwith Brazil as the leading supplier. However, imports mightexceed this volume and the mix of suppliers might change iffree trade agreements with Colombia, Peru and six CentralAmerican countries become operational following the ratifi-cation procedures. Once implemented, these FTAs will grantadditional duty-free TRQs, totaling 264,000 MT, with annualincreases of 3%. Ending stocks are estimated at almost 4.4MMT, partly as a result of unsold out-of-quota sugar from2011/12 being carried over.

China is estimated to produce 14.6 MMT of sugar in2012/13, up nearly 20%, resulting from higher yields and ex-panded area for sugarcane and beets. Sugarcane plantedarea, which represents 87% of area planted to sugar, is ex-panding as producers switch from less-profitable crops, suchas cassava. Rising incomes are expected to support in-creased domestic consumption as demand expands for key in-dustries (confectionary, beverage, etc.). Imports areconsequently expected to drop by about 50% to 2 MMT.

Thailand’s production is expected to decline 3% to 9.9MMT due to lower sugarcane production resulting from unfa-vorable weather conditions. Sugar production had grownsignificantly over the previous years while the government ofThailand operated a three-year project that provided softloans to cane growers to help them buy harvesters and im-prove production efficiency. Exports are expected to remainat 7.5 MMT as demand is steady in top markets.

U.S. production is estimated at 8 MMT, up 4%, as a resultof increased cane and beet sugar production. If realized, thiswould be the highest production level since 1999/2000. Con-sumption is up slightly to a record 10.3 MMT, and Mexico isexpected to remain the largest supplier.

Mexico’s production is estimated to increase more than10% to 6.0 MMT, just under the 2004/05 record. Conse-quently, exports, consumption and ending stocks are all esti-mated higher. Sugar use under the “other disappearance”category, mainly for the Mexican re-export program, is alsorevised upward. The IMMEX program allows sugar to besold to Mexican food manufacturers as raw material for fur-ther processing. These food manufacturers must thenprocess the sugar within six months from the date of pur-chase and export the final processed product.

Russia’s production is estimated to fall from last year’srecord 5.5 MMT, but remains the second largest at over 4.8MMT as production of sugarbeets is expected to remain high.Consumption is estimated slightly lower as more sugar sub-stitutes are used by the food processing industry. In spite oflower consumption, imports are estimated up 20% to 900,000MT, but well below the 2.5 MMT of just two years earlier. �

2v THE SUGARBEET GROWER (Upper Midwest) January 2013

USDA Projects 2012/13 Global Sugar Output

Production Flattens As Consumption Rises

Summary of Foreign Ag Service November Report

H & S Sugar Beet Cart20, 24, 30 & 35 Ton

´ Head and Shoulders above the rest.µ1-800-ROW-CROP

1-800-769-2767 ‡

‡ Quality Built for Over 15 Years‡ Increase Your Payment with Less Tare‡ Reduce Truck Turn-Around Time

Come ee s @The International

Crop Expo Feb. 20th & 21st


Page 15: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

Get Superior Control and Better Returns.


COUNTER, LOCK’n LOAD, and SMARTBOX are registered trademarks of AMVAC Chemical Corporation. YES and Yield Enhancement Solutions are trademarks of AMVAC Chemical Corporation. COUNTER is a restricted use pesticide.

Always read and follow label directions. Due to environmental conditions, results may vary. ©2012 AMVAC Chemical Corporation.

Get Back to the COUNTER® Attack: Superior Control & Better Returns Protect your profit with COUNTER® 20G. You can’t afford convenience at the expense of control. COUNTER delivers the control of sugarbeet rootmaggot, wireworm and springtails you demand. And COUNTER 20G in theSmartBox® System gives you proven granular control – control that canhelp you increase tons per acre and return on investment. Say “YES” toCOUNTER 20G, one of many Yield Enhancement SolutionsTM from AMVAC.Stop in and ask us about COUNTER 20G, today. For more information, go to:

Leading Seed Treatment @ 68g ai/ac Untreated Check

COUNTER 20G @ 1.5lb a.i./acre (7.5 lb./ac)

Results from Standard Test, North Dakota State University Sugar Beet Root MaggotTrials, 2012 —St. Thomas, ND. COUNTER 20G applied at 1.5lb a.i./acre — SeedTreatment applied at 68g a.i./acre.

Available in the SmartBox® System and Lock’n Load® Containers

“For convenience, I went to a liquid at-plant and hadspringtail problems. A few years later, I used a seed treatment and had severe wireworm issues. I came back toCOUNTER for the second time. Eventhough it’s not as convenient –– it works!”

John McDonald – Fisher, MN

“We came back toCOUNTER because weweren’t getting theroot maggot controlwe expected fromseed treatments”

Scott Johnson – Manvel, ND

“I switched fromCOUNTER to seedtreatments for the convenience. After disappointing results on sugarbeetroot maggots we cameback to COUNTER and haven’t had a problem.”

John Suda – Grafton, ND

Counter 20G Sugar Beets AD - Sugar Beet Grower Sept 2012_2-860853496.e$S_Layout 3 12/19/12 9:27 AM Page 1

Page 16: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

AMaryland company announced inDecember that it had been awarded

$1.8 million in funding from the U.S.Department of Energy’s Advanced Re-search Projects Agency-Energy(ARPAE). Plant Sensory Systems,based in Baltimore, said the award willsupport a three-year program to de-velop an enhanced energy (sugar) beet,optimized for biofuel production. Thebeets will be engineered to use fertilizerand water more efficiently and producehigher levels of fermentable sugarscompared to current feedstocks.

According to Plant Sensory Sys-tems, the new beet crop will have lowerproduction costs and increased yield forbiofuels — without competing againstfood-grade sugar.

“ARPA-E’s support will allow us toaccelerate the development of the en-hanced energy beets for biofuel,” saidDr. Frank Turano, Plant Sensory Sys-tems’ chief research officer. “We antici-pate a 30% increase in fermentablesugars, which will substantially in-

crease domestic fuel production. Thebenefits will be shared by a number ofentities in the biofuel supply chain, in-cluding beet producers as well as thebiorefineries.”

The energy-beet project, headed byTurano, will be conducted in collabora-tion with Dr. Ann Smigocki, a sugar-beet research geneticist with the U.S.Department of Agriculture at Beltsville,Md., along with economists at NorthDakota State University, led by Dr.David Ripplinger. The research teamwill work closely with ARPA-E to expe-dite the development and commercial-ization of the enhanced beets for biofuelproduction.

ARPA-E supports transformationalresearch that translates science intobreakthrough energy technologies thatare too early for private-sector invest-ment. Projects are selected through amerit-based process that is highlycompetitive. Plant Sensory Systems’Energy-Beet project was one of 66 proj-ects selected from thousands of

concept papers and hundreds of full ap-plications.

“The 66 projects selected . . . repre-sent the true mission of ARPA-E:swinging for the fences and trying tohit home runs to support developmentof the most innovative technologies andchange what’s possible for America’senergy future,” said Energy SecretarySteven Chu.

“Plant Sensory Systems’ Energy-Beet project is one such innovated proj-ect whose goals are closely aligned withARPA-E’s mission,” the companystated. “If successful, the engineeredbeets will enhance the economic andenergy security of the U.S. by expand-ing and diversifying the biofuel feed-stock in the U.S. and increasing thebiofuel production capacity per acre —and they will reduce energy-relatedemissions by requiring less nitrogenfertilizer.”

Plant Sensory Systems, LLC is aprivately held agricultural biotechnol-ogy company that develops technolo-gies to improve crop performance forproduction of food, feed, fiber, biofueland bio-based products. The companyhas developed traits that increaseyields, improve nitrogen and water useefficiency, promote tolerance to droughtand high temperature, increase seed oilcontent for biofuel production, and en-hance nutritional value. �

4v THE SUGARBEET GROWER (Upper Midwest) January 2013

Energy Beet Project GarnersSupport from Dept. of Energy

Page 17: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

The highest performance. The highest return. The highest integrity.

You can’t trust the weather. You can’t trust the conditions.So what exactly can you count on?

While you might have the best soil for

sugarbeets, things out here can be fairly

unforgiving when it comes to Mother

Nature, disease and a host of other factors

impacting your success. Good thing we have

the best seed genetics you’ll ever see. Just

look at the Grower Practice Data.


e hhT


e hh. Tecnamrofret peshgi

eshgie hh. Tnrutet reshgie h

.ytirgetnt ies

Page 18: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

Minn-Dak Farmers Cooperativeheld its 40th annual meeting in

December 2012. But efforts to gainacreage allotments and to build a sug-arbeet factory in the southern end ofthe Red River Valley actually date backto the early 1950s. The long and cir-cuitous route that farmers in the re-gion traveled prior to Minn-Dakbecoming an operating reality twodecades later contained numerous ob-stacles — but those farmers obviouslypersevered and succeeded. During the’50s and ’60s, they worked toward theirambitious goal under the banner of theSouthern Red River Valley Beet Devel-opment Association.

The following story, recounting a1961 lobbying trip made by a smallcontingent of Wahpeton/Breckenridgesugarbeet activists to Washington,D.C., is excerpted from The History-Makers: Challenges Met, 1950-1990,a history of Minn-Dak Farmers Cooper-ative up through 1990.

“The pace picked up for this groupas the decade of the 60s arrived, adecade of determination, decision anddeeds, some quite daring and somemore mundane.

“However, one flight to Washingtonwent into the records as belonging tothe daring category. This dramaticflight was made by Leo Yaggie; BobWaite, executive secretary; and GlenChambers, Wilkin County ExtensionAgent. They were traveling to a hear-ing scheduled for Friday, May 19, 1961.Robert Schuler, a Breckenridge busi-nessman, provided his airplane for thetrip and acted as their pilot.

“Coffee breaks involved makingstops along the way. However, whenthey got to Wheeling, West Virginia,coffee they could find, but a map of theeast coast they could not. Undaunted,they decided to fly to Bailey’s Cornernear Alexandria, Virginia. However,they discovered they were in a majorairline route. Schuler radioed for direc-

tions and was guided to a smallairstrip. As he was about to land, hesaw another plane which appeared tobe taking off. Not wanting to collide,Schuler aborted the landing. The planewas not taking off, but since theairstrip was small, Schuler was unableto get back into landing pattern. Con-fusion led to the plane eventually land-ing on a four-lane highway.

“Though Waite remembered trafficwhen they arrived, he said there wasnot a car in sight when they crashed.The fire department came and wantedto foam the plane. Waite pulled out hisvolunteer fireman’s badge and askedthem not to, explaining they had tospeak at a formal hearing the next dayand didn’t want to take a chance ontheir clothes being damaged. A deputysheriff, the highway patrol and FederalAviation authorities were all on-site toinvestigate the crash.

“The plane was totalled but no onewas injured. Odin Langen, a Min-nesota congressman, denounced thegroup for staging a publicity stunt rightbefore the sugar hearings, according toWaite. However, Langen allowed themen to use his office during their stay.Waite recorded, ‘His (Langen’s) helpwas invaluable.’ ” �

A Harrowing Trip To D.C.

6v THE SUGARBEET GROWER (Upper Midwest) January 2013

Short Snippet from the Long Road Leading to Minn-Dak’s Formation

Page 19: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013
Page 20: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013
Page 21: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

30 Years Ago Excerpts from theJanuary 1983 Issue ofThe Sugarbeet Grower

Lou Towater President New American Growers /By Janice Grauberger — “When Lou Towater talks aboutthe sugarbeet industry, there is a determined set to hisjaw and an undeniable twinkle in his eye.

“The longtime resident of Scottsbluff, Neb., who ispresident of the American Sugarbeet Growers Associationand SUGRO, has found a special niche in the industry.

“His fellow producers and association board memberscan testify to Towater’s long-lived dedication to securing ahealthy, viable sugarbeet industry which will live longinto the future. That dedication is mirrored in his 30-plusyears of work on behalf of beet growers and processors.

“The proudest, most exciting moment in his life waswalking up to accept the presidency of the American asso-ciation, he says. It was a long climb for the Panhandlebeet grower — a seed that started with a need to back theindustry that had been good to his family and ended in astrong tree acting as a mainstay in the industry.

“He and his wife Audrey started farming in 1946after Towater was released from astint in the military. ‘That’s whatI wanted to do,’ Towater remem-bers with a grin and a shrug. . . .Beets were a part of Towater’s oper-ation from the beginning, and thecrop so often dubbed the ‘mortgagelifter’ continued to be so successful; itbecame a mainstay for many commu-nities, Towater says.”

Editor’s Note: Lou Towater is pic-tured in the magazine cover at right.

November Harvest Start-up Pro-duces Maximum Tonnage — “Texasgrowers starting sugarbeet harvest aboutNovember 1 will produce maximum ton-nage and sugar. Growers that harvestearlier will reduce yield and returns. De-laying harvest after November 1 is notlikely to increase yield much, but greatly increases thepossibility of bad weather and harvest problems.

“Dr. Steve Winter, Texas Agricultural Experiment Sta-tion sugarbeet researcher from the Texas A&M Center atAmarillo, came to this conclusion after four years of re-search. Each year Mono-Hy D2 sugarbeets were plantedin March in Pullman clay loam soil at the USDA Conser-vation and Production Research Laboratory at Bushland.The sugarbeets were managed for high yields.

“Each year the researcher harvested the sugarbeets attwo-week intervals from September 1 to November 9. . . .On the average, by September 1, beet yield was 24 tonsper acre. By November 9, tonnage increased to 31 tonsper acre. During the same time, sugar percentage in-creased from 13.5 to 16.0.”

Michigan Growers Form Association — “Onethousand sugarbeet growers in Michigan’s Saginaw Val-ley and Thumb Region have established a new growers’

organization. The Great Lakes Sugar Beet Growers Asso-ciation (GLSBGA) consists of growers producing sugar-beets for Michigan Sugar Company.

“The purpose of GLSBGA is to: (1) promote the state’ssugar industry; (2) educate Michigan consumers and tax-payers about the importance of the industry; (3) supportand review research projects; (4) work with legislators inMichigan and Washington, D.C., in order to maintain astrong domestic industry; (5) improve members’ knowl-edge of recent improvements and advancement of the sug-arbeet industry.

“The new officers are as follows: President, Stanley G.Gettel of the Sebewaing Beet Growers Assoc., Inc.; VicePresident, Roy J. Hickey of the Caro Sugar Beet Growers,Inc., and Secretary-Treasurer, Garnet Hoard of the AlmaBeet Growers Assn., Inc. . . . The Great Lakes Sugar BeetGrowers Association was established as a reorganiza-

tional move after the Farmers and Manu-facturers Beet Sugar Association wasdissolved.”

Domestic Industry Promotes NewEducational Program of ‘The Facts’— “The domestic sugar industry, underattack by what spokesmen called‘greedy special-interest groups deliber-ating distorting the facts,’ has an-nounced a new program to disseminateinformation about United States sugarproduction.

“Five industry groups have organ-ized the Sugar Information Bureau,based in Washington and staffed byprofessional information specialists,to meet what was termed ‘an obvi-ous and growing need for the fac-tual story of domestic sugar.’ The

groups are the American Sugarbeet Growers Asso-ciation, representing farmers in 16 states; the FloridaSugar Cane League, Hawaiian Sugar Planters’ Associa-tion, the Rio Grande Valley Sugar Cane Growers Coopera-tive and the United States Beet Sugar Association, agroup of processing companies. . . . Together the groupsrepresent virtually all of the domestic sugar industry,which has long been viewed by government as essential toUnited States consumer and commercial interests.”

Researchers Study [Role] of Herbicides in Con-trol of Weeds — “Herbicides usually effective in control-ling weeds can sometimes cause more harm than good tothe crop. To prevent this problem, researchers are tryingto develop herbicide-resistant crops. ‘Such crops wouldlead to more complete weed control, increased yields, andlower consumer prices for food,’ says Garry A. Smith,USDA-ARS plant geneticist at Fort Collins, Colo. . . .

“In a two-year study, the plant geneticist found 15lines of sugarbeets which offered varying degrees of sus-ceptibility to herbicides.” �


Page 22: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

I hope you had a good harvest season.In general, it was a pretty good beet

crop nationwide. Take some time nowto celebrate with family and friends.

Maybe it’s caused by the season,But it feels awfully good to be me,

With a grandchild sitting here on my lapAnd one perched there on each knee.

I’m reading the whole Christmas storyTo children who’ve heard it before.

But we still enjoy the retelling,So I’m going to read it once more.

The holiday lights are all shining,There’s plenty of wood for the fire.

The house smells of Christmas baking,Our spirits just couldn’t be higher.

The harvest was pretty successful.I’m done buying and selling this year.

Most of the bookwork is already done,And next week my schedule is clear.

My mother is off at my sister’s,No snow is piled up in the drive.

So my obligations are pretty darn low,And it’s fun just being alive.

So ’til the first week of next yearWhen reality gives me a slap,

I’ll just forget about cleaning the shop,And lay down for a long winter’s nap.

David Kragnes farms near Felton, Minn.A former board chairman of AmericanCrystal Sugar Company, he currentlyserves on the board of directors ofCoBank.

Relax & Count Blessings


mil tonplanters .com


Customize with seed wheels for over 40 different crops.

Customize with two forward press wheel types.

Customize with eight rear pack wheel types.

Smooth seed delivery into furrow without drop tube.

Made in the USA!


By David Kragnes

Page 23: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

© 2013 Syngenta. Important: Always read and follow label instructions. Some crop protection products may not be registered for sale or use in all states or counties. Please check with your local extension service to ensure registration status. Hilleshog,® the Alliance Frame, the Purpose Icon and the Syngenta logo are trademarks of a Syngenta Group Company. Hilleshog® is a business unit of Syngenta Seeds, Inc. MW 18DC3005-P1 01/13

Syngenta sugarbeet seed, seed care, and crop protection products are designed to excel in the environment that matters most—your �eld. And with our Hilleshög® brand seed, we have over a century of successful harvests to back that up. Of course, in this business, being complacent with past results is a quick way to the back of the pack. That’s why we’re always moving forward to make sure our sugarbeet portfolio meets your needs today and tomorrow.

Group Creative Director: Jeff TresidderArt Director: Donny BrunnerCopywriter: Eric SchlauchPhotographer: Chad Holder Retoucher: Todd CarlsonPrint Production Manager: Sandra ChuteSeparator: M|WArt Producer: Lisa CrawfordAccount Manager: Leigh Thiel / Josh NelsonProject Manager: Nathan WaldvogelCreative Tech: Kaveh Rahimi

Syngenta“You prefer tried and. true..”Mag., Pg. 4/C Bld.BL: 9" x 11.5"TR: 7.75" x 10.5"LV: 7" x 10"

Martin/Williams Job No: 18DC3005-P1


Page 24: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

Bigger may not automatically trans-late into better; but if and when the

situation calls for it, adding some sizecan make a lot of sense.

That’s Chris Hong’s philosophywhen it comes to planter capacity. Inthe spring of 2012, Hong Farms, based

at Buxton, N.D., used three 48-rowplanters to put in their sugarbeet, corn,soybean and edible bean crops. Thethree Deere DB88 48R22s coveredabout 17,000 acres last spring, includ-ing 7,400 acres of beets.

The Hongs aren’t the only large

growers in the Red River Valley andSouthern Minnesota sugarbeet regionto employ 48-row planters, but thatgroup is obviously the exception ratherthan the rule. It comes down to need-ing to cover a lot of ground during theregion’s typically short row-crop plant-ing window — and doing so with lessmanpower and fewer tractors thanthese operations would otherwise need.It also comes down to the size, shapeand terrain of many of the region’sfields: large, rectangular and flat.

The Hong units are equipped withMartin row cleaners, along with severalfeatures from Precision Planting, Inc.,including 20/20 AirForce® for automaticmeasurement and management ofdown force, the 20/20 SeedSense® moni-







Planting Ante Up to 48RRV Farm’s Beets Go In With Three 48-Row Units

Left: Chris Hong (right) visits with hisAmerican Crystal Sugar agriculturist,Tim Leshuk, during the 2012 plantingseason. “Considering the amount ofacres, coupled with varying day-to-day field conditions, Chris, Curt andScott do a nice job with stand estab-lishment,” Leshuk observes. “We’vebeen shooting for higher plant popu-lations recently, and it’s been a rareoccasion to go out in one of theirfields and find less than 200 emergedbeets per 100 feet of row.”

Page 25: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

tor system, and eSet® vacuum metering.They also have Deere’s iGuide imple-ment guidance and RowCommand™ in-dividual row control systems, plusKeeton seed firmers. For 2013, theHongs are adding Martin Spading-Clos-ing wheels to help minimize furrowsidewall compaction.

Prior to 2009, the Hongs — Chris,brother Curt and father Scott — hadbeen running three 24-row plantersacross their row-crop acreage. Theyneeded more capacity for their expand-ing operation, “but instead of gettinganother 24-row, we went with two 48s,”Chris explains. That freed up twoplanter operators for other duties andalso negated the need for two plantertractors.

By the following year, however, theydecided to add a 24-row planter. Then,in 2012, seeing a need to once again ex-pand their planting capacity, they soldthe 24-row, opting for a third 48-rowunit. They also traded in the two origi-nal 48-rows — so ended up using threenew DB88s last spring.

Chris says they can cover 45-50acres per hour with each DB88, de-pending on ground speed. In the springof 2010, when a wet weather systemwas rolling in, he seeded about 1,750acres in a 48-hour period with one ofthe planters. “So I have definitely putit to the test,” he affirms. They typi-cally pull the large planters with JohnDeere 8360R tractors, although theyhave, in a couple instances, substitutedtheir Case IH 550 Quadtrac under wet-ter planting conditions.

While the Hongs rarely operate allthree 48-row planters within the samefield, it has occurred. On one occasion,they planted a quarter section of ediblebeans in a period of about 45 minutes.

The most common question he getsfrom other growers, Chris relates, isabout the size of their headlands — 96rows on each end. “But that hasn’t re-ally been an issue for us,” he says.“We’ve been doing it for four years nowand are accustomed to it. Actually, dur-ing harvest, it’s nice to have that extraroom to maneuver all the trucks andother equipment.”

There’s also the matter of plantingthat last group of rows on a field whenthere are just a dozen or two left.“With the 48-row, I just overlap whereI’ve already seeded,” Chris notes. “Imove over accordingly with the GPS,shut off those already-seeded rows (hisupdated RowCommand shuts off infour-row sections), and just drive overthem. Some people probably thinkdriving over what has already beenseeded would hurt crop emergence

there, but I haven’t seen that happen.”The shut-off also, of course, means he’snot applying starter fertilizer a secondtime to those affected rows.

The 48-row units’ planting capacityhas another benefit, Hong says — onethat, at first glance, may seem contra-

dictory to the stated goal of getting thecrop in as expeditiously as possible.“”With a bigger machine, there is a lit-tle less pressure to drive too fast,” hepoints out. “You don’t have to be push-ing them to the max all the time.Going a little slower results in a better

!"#$%"%&#%'('&"%))"#%%"%&#%'('*+,' !"#$%"-#.!'('///01234567837904:6


The Schmeiser Till an’Bedder™Thorough soil preparation.




Page 26: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

stand — especially with beets and corn. “You only have one chance to put

the crop in, so you want to do it right.Doesn’t matter whether you have 500acres or 5,000.”

The 48-row planter “is a good fit for

us,” Chris concludes. “If you have anoperator who can run a 24-row planter,he can run a 48-row, with all the preci-sion tools that are on these units.”

Given the size of the Hong operationas of 2012/13, Chris doesn’t have as

much tractor time as he once did. “Butone thing I still do is plant,” he says. “I enjoy it. These are my ‘babies.’ Thefirst step in getting a good crop is plant-ing it right, and that’s what these ma-chines do.” — Don Lilleboe �


Buying or SellingBeet Stock?

800.279.3200, ext.

The Alerus advantage: Current market pricing Signed written contracts Escrowed funds Assistance with transfer documents

The leader in sugarbeet stockbrokerage since 1994.

This information does not constitute an offer to buy nor a solicitation to sell. The products offered (1) are not FDIC insured, (2) are not deposits or other obligations of a bank or guaranteed by a bank and (3) involve investment risks, including possible loss of principal amount invested. Alerus Securities is a wholly owned subsidiary of Alerus Financial.


Page 27: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013
Page 28: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

Sugarbeets in Nebraska and otherareas of the Great Plains may be af-

fected by a number of diseases from allpathogen groups, including fungi, bac-teria, viruses and nematodes. Fungaldiseases are commonly encounteredcausing leaf spots (Cercospora, Phoma,and Alternaria), root rots (Fusarium,Rhizoctonia, Pythium, Aphanomyces,).Bacteria are generally less problematicin this region but can cause both foliarblights, leaf spots (bacterial leaf spot)and root rots (bacterial vascular necro-sis and rot – formally Erwinia root rot).Both viruses (rhizomania and beet soil-borne mosaic) and nematodes (sugarcyst and false root-knot) commonly are

found residing in soils, resulting in rootdisease problems.

The appearance and severity of spe-cific diseases is highly dependent uponlocal environmental conditions, and themost destructive diseases one year maynot be the same the next. Each diseaseis strongly influenced by environmen-tal conditions and other factors, suchas choice of variety, proximity to previ-ously infested fields, and cultural prac-tices that promote favorable conditionsfor either the pathogen or the host.

Below are eight general suggestionsor reminders that should help youmanage some of the common diseasesin sugarbeets — and in most of theother crops on your farm. We hopethat this article will also provide someassistance for growers and consultantsby introducing the possible diseaseproblems that may be encountered,how to recognize them, and to begin

understanding those conditions that in-fluence disease development for thosemost likely to occur. Learning to iden-tify and distinguish between these var-ious diseases is important for makingthe correct diagnosis, which then be-comes a critical first step for choosingthe most effective option for diseasemanagement.

1. Integrated Pest Management(IPM) — This term is used frequentlyby pathologists, but for good reason.The simple idea behind this concept isthat it is desirable to use multiplestrategies to manage disease, not justone. IPM reduces your chances of amanagement failure occurring. If thegenetic resistance bred into varietiesdoesn’t work for some unknown reason,you might still be covered because yourotated properly, are prepared to applya fungicide, etc.

2. Know Your Enemy — There isan increasing amount of informationavailable to help in disease identifica-tion and management. The Universityof Nebraska’s Panhandle Research &Extension Center attempts to dissemi-nate information that seeks to provideaccurate symptoms and key pointsabout disease that you are likely to see.We realize that differentiating diseasescan be difficult, and as a result, ques-tions and/or submissions to extensioneducators, or the center’s plant pathol-ogy diagnostic lab, are encouraged.

Similarly, we will try to get criticalinformation out as diseases are occur-ring. Whether it is the UNL website,radio spots or newspaper or trade jour-nal articles such as this, it is importantto stay informed.

3. Find the Enemy — Scouting isone of the most important parts ofdisease management. If you areuncertain what disease(s) youhave, it is very difficult to makeinformed decisions about specificmanagement tools. For example,if you identify a severe epidemicof Rhizoctonia or Aphanomycesroot rot, then the next time you goback in that field you might wantto plant a resistant cultivar. Sim-ilarly, foliar fungicides are mosteffective in the early stages of anepidemic. If you let Cercosporaleafspot get ahead of you, for in-stance, you can lose yield andprofitability quickly. This is a dis-ease that you cannot play catch-up with after it gets out of control.Furthermore, foliar fungicide ap-plications would not be effectivein managing bacterial leafspot, socorrectly diagnosing the problemis critical.


Managing Beet Diseases In the Central Great Plains— Eight Tips for Continued Success —

By Robert M. Harveson

Robert Harveson is extension plantpathologist with the University of Ne-braska’s Panhandle Research & Exten-sion Center, Scottsbluff.

Figure 1: Sample Foliar Diseases of Sugarbeets —




ert H



Page 29: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

4. Rotation — Sugarbeetsgenerally perform better after ro-tations. Three- to four-year rota-tions are typically recommended,depending on crops grown withinthe given rotation. Most of thesoilborne root pathogen problemswill be diminished somewhat bythis length of rotation. However,they don’t disappear completely,as these pathogens have built-insurvival mechanisms to persist forlong periods in soil, even underadverse conditions.

5. Varietal Resistance —For a number of reasons, the se-lection of a particular cultivar isperhaps the most important deci-sion you make. If you have a fieldhistory of rhizomania, planting acultivar with some resistance willlikely be the most cost-effectivedisease management tool at yourdisposal. Just remember that “re-sistance” does not guarantee com-plete control, as none of theresistant varieties offer “immu-nity.” In the case of rhizomania,the resistance does not prohibitinfection and replication of the viralpathogen. The plant simply grows andyields well in spite of being potentiallyinfected. We are currently screeningsoil samples for the Western Sugar Co-operative, looking for the incidence orpresence of pathogen isolates that maybe able to overcome the genetic resist-ance incorporated into all the varietiesused in this region.

6. Seed Treatments — Sugarbeetsmay be treated with one or more of sev-eral fungicides for protection againstcertain fungal pathogens such as Rhi-zoctonia, Aphanomyces or Pythium.These products will not last for the en-tire season, but may be useful for re-ducing damping-off and standreduction problems during the mostimportant part of the plant’s develop-ment. Establishment of a healthystand is critical for a healthy crop.However, integrating a seed treatmentwith a resistant cultivar or a later fun-gicide application is a good example ofemploying the concept of IPM.

7. Foliar Fungicides — On sugar-beet crops in Nebraska and other areasof the Central Great Plains, the mostimportant disease to manage withfungicides is Cercospora leafspot(CLS). Although other common leafdiseases (Alternaria, Phoma and bacte-rial leafspots) (Figure 1) are readilyfound in beet fields in this region, onlyCLS is damaging enough to economi-cally justify making fungicide applica-tions. This makes a correct diagnosis

particularly important. For example, ifgrowers mistakenly thought they hadan epidemic of CLS and it turned outto be bacterial leafspot, they wouldwaste their money applying a productwith no chance of being effective. Con-versely, if CLS was confused withPhoma leafspot and was not sprayedwith a fungicide (knowing that Phomararely requires treatment), the growerwould very likely incur a loss due tothe failure to treat CLS.

8. Stay Engaged and Adapt —

The changes in the world of agricultureoccur quickly. In the future, we wouldalso anticipate that diseases and dis-ease management will be different. Wemay have new diseases (or races) toworry about, new resistance in hybridsto combat them, and new fungicides orother products to use — and new rec-ommendations to go with them. Themore knowledge you have about dis-ease management, the more likely youare to be able to manage diseases in achanging world. �

For more information: 989-553-5253 or Email: [email protected]

New harvester sales

Factory reconditioned used harvesters available with warranty

Numerous header options available: 9R20”, 8R22”, 8R20”, 6R30”, 6R20”, 4R30”, 4R28” or inquire for more options

Parts and Service


Figure 2: Sample Root Rot Diseases of Sugarbeets —




ert H



Page 30: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

Davison Elected Minn-Dak Chair;Butenhoff Chosen Vice Chairman

At their annual reorganizationalmeeting in early December, the Minn-Dak Farmers Cooperative Board of Di-rectors selected Brent Davison ofTintah, Minn., as the new board chair-man. Davison, a Minn-Dak directorsince 2004, also currently serves on theboard of directors of United Sugars Cor-poration as well as that of the AmericanSugarbeet Growers Association. As chairman, he succeeds Doug Ettenof Foxhome, Minn., who retired fromboard service after serving the 15-yearmaximum allowed by Minn-Dak by-laws.

Davison became the cooperative’schairman 30 years to the month afterhis father, Earl, was elected to head theMinn-Dak Board of Directors. EarlDavison served as a Minn-Dak directorfrom 1973 to 1987.

Dennis Butenhoff of Barnesville,Minn., was elected to succeed Davisonas Minn-Dak’s vice chairman. A boardmember since 2005, Butenhoff alsoserves on the board of Midwest Agri-Commodities.

Board member Dennis Klosterman(Mooreton, N.D.) was elected secretary,and Pat Freese (Kent, Minn.) waselected treasurer. Current directorsChuck Steiner (Foxhome, Minn.) andKevin Kutzer (Fairmount, N.D.) werere-elected by their respective districts’shareholders.

During the co-op’s annual meeting,Tim Deal of Doran, Minn., was electedby shareholders to a seat on the Minn-Dak Board of Directors.

Minn-Dak’s 2012 annual meetingwas its 40th. The cooperative recentlyannounced plans for a $70.3 millionmolasses desugarization add-on facilityat its Wahpeton, N.D., factory.

Green Re-elected Crystal Chair;Erickson Now Vice Chairman

Robert Green, St. Thomas, N.D.,was re-elected chairman of the Ameri-can Crystal Sugar Company Board ofDirectors during the board’s December6 reorganizational meeting followingthe cooperative’s annual meeting.

Brian Erickson was elected vicechairman at the board meeting. Erick-son, an ACSC director since 2005,farms near East Grand Forks and Ada,Minn. He also currently serves on theboard of directors of Midwest Agri-Com-modities.

Newly elected director Kelly Erick-son joined American Crystal’s board atthe December meeting. Erickson, whofarms near Hallock, Minn., is currentlypresident of the American SugarbeetGrowers Association. He previouslyserved as president of the Red RiverValley Sugarbeet Growers Association.

Neil Widner of Stephen, Minn., a di-rector since 2000 and former ACSCboard chairman, reached his term limitafter four consecutive three-year termsof service.

Michigan/Ontario ResearchReporting Session Is Jan. 30

The 2013 Michigan/Ontario Sugar-beet Research Reporting Session isscheduled for January 30 at the Dou-bleTree Hotel in Bay City. This seventhannual reporting session will cover cur-rent sugarbeet research being con-ducted in the Great Lakes region. Theprogram runs from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00p.m. Meal reservations are required.

For more information about the2013 research reporting session, con-tact Steve Poindexter, Michigan StateUniversity Extension, Saginaw, at (989)758-2500.

2013 International Sugarbeet Institute March 13-14 in Fargo

The 51st edition of the InternationalSugarbeet Institute will be held March13 and 14, 2013, at the Fargodome inFargo, N.D. The ISBI is North Amer-ica’s largest sugarbeet industry tradeshow. The 2012 event in Grand Forks,N.D., showcased about 125 exhibitorsand drew more than 2,300 visitors.

Featured speakers at the 2013 ISBIwill be Luther Markwart, executivevice president of the American Sugar-beet Growers Association, on the 13th;and Howard Dahl, president of AmityTechnology, on the 14th.

Companies desiring exhibiting infor-mation for the International SugarbeetInstitute can contact exhibits coordina-tor Bob Cournia at (218) 281-4681.Other ISBI-related questions should bedirected to Dr. Mohamed Khan, com-mittee chairman, at (701) 231-8596.

37th ASSBT Biennial MeetingScheduled for Feb. 27-March 2

The American Society of Sugar BeetTechnologists will celebrate the 75thanniversary of its founding during theorganization’s 37th biennial meeting, tobe held on February 27-March 2, 2013.The meeting takes place at the Disney-land Resort, Anaheim, Calif.

The event begins on the 27th withregistration, poster setup and theevening President’s Reception. A gen-eral session is held on the morning ofthe 28th, followed by agricultural andoperations technical sessions that after-noon and throughout the next two days.The 2013 ASSBT meeting concludeswith the traditional awards banquet onthe evening of March 2.

Complete meeting information canbe found on the ASSBT’s website — �

Photo 22-A b/wpull from Nov/Dec p. 21 Around The Industry


Brent Davison Dennis Butenhoff Robert Green Brian Erickson

30th InternationalSweetener SymposiumAug. 2-7 Napa,

Page 31: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

Feeling good about recyclingis another benefit.

To get started, contact your ACRC Contractorfor collection schedules and locations


The ACRC is a non-profit organizationcomprised of 24 member companies and

7 affiliates whose purpose is to promote andsupport the collection and recycling of

properly rinsed high density polyethylene (HDPE)crop protection product containers.

CO, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, MI, MO,MN, NE, ND, OH, SD, WI, WYTri-Rinse Inc.St. Louis, MOMike [email protected]

AZ, CAInterstate Ag PlasticsButtonwillow, CABrad [email protected]

ARMKC PlasticsParagould, ARLarry [email protected]

AL, FL, GA, LA, MD, MS, NM,NC, OK, PA, SC, TN, TX, VA, WVUSAg Recycling Inc.Waller, TXSam Gibson800-654-3145; [email protected]

ID, OR, WANorthwest Ag Plastics, Inc.Moxee, WASteven [email protected]


Through the program efforts of ACRC Member Companies and Affiliates, over92,000,000 pounds of HDPE plastic containers have been collected by ACRCContractors since 1992 and recycled into useful products. ACRC Contractors accepttriple rinsed high-density polyethylene containers in all sizes, up to 55 gallon drums. Richard Underwood

H&R Ag - Pasco, WARecycling with ACRC Contractors Since 2002

Amvac Chemical Corp.Arysta LifeScienceBASFBayer CropScienceBecker UnderwoodCertis USACheminova, Inc.Chemtura Corp.Dow AgroSciences

DuPont Crop ProtectionFMC Corp.Helena Chemical Co.Makhteshim Agan of

North America, Inc.Monsanto Co.Nichino America, Inc.Nufarm America Inc.RiceCo LLC

SePRO Corp.Sipcam Agro USA, Inc.Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc.Tenkoz, Inc.United Phosphorous, Inc.

(UPI)Valent USA Corp. &

Valent BioSciencesWilbur-Ellis Co.


Cimarron LabelCousins-Currie Ltd.Hedwin Corporation

Lee ContainerPretium Packaging

Reliance Products LPRieke Corporation

For All Other States

And for additional information relatingto ACRC program activities, call theACRC: 202-861-3144Visit online:

Recycled Uses

Used HDPE Containers

ACRC Sugarbeet Grower 7 x 10:Layout 1 1/30/08 4:40 PM Page 1

Page 32: The Sugarbeet Grower Magazine January 2013

For over forty years, the people behind Betaseed’s research and breeding programhave continued to provide growers the best possible sugarbeet genetics available in North America. From our industry-leading nematode tolerant varieties, to our strong, multiple disease tolerant packages like MultiSource,™ to our Betashield™ seed treatments, !"#$!%&'()&*$&'")+,$)-&-.(-&-.$&/$-(%$$,&0(!1$-1$%&-.$2&34()-&(!$&5!"6&3$"34$&who care about their success.

Contact your local Betaseed Sales Representative today. 800-428-8455

It All Starts Here