DOCSLIB.ORG

Grain Inspection Handbook Book II Grain Grading Procedures

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Grain Inspection Handbook Book II Grain Grading Procedures Grain Inspection United States Department of Agriculture Handbook Marketing and Regulatory Programs Agricultural Book II Marketing Service Federal Grain Inspection Grain Grading Service Washington, D.C. Procedures October 2020 United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Marketing Service Federal Grain Inspection Service Program Handbook October 2020 Grain Inspection Handbook – Book II Grain Grading Procedures Foreword The effectiveness of the official U.S. grain inspection system depends largely on an inspector’s ability to sample, inspect, grade, and certify the various grains for which standards have been established under the United States Grain Standards Act (USGSA), as amended. In view of this fact, the Federal Grain Inspection Service (FGIS) published the Grain Inspection Handbook. Book II, Grain Grading Procedures, sets forth the policies and procedures for grading grain in accordance with the Official United States Standards for Grain. The information contained in this handbook is applicable to official grain inspection services performed by FGIS, delegated State agencies, and designed State and private agencies. Persons interested in obtaining official services may contact any FGIS field office or official agency. Trade names are used solely to provide specific information. The mention of trade names does not constitute a guarantee or warranty of the product by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) or an endorsement by the Department over other products not mentioned. In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its agencies, offices, and employees and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at How to File a Program Discrimination Complaint and at any USDA office, or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected]. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender. Distribution: FGIS, OSP, Grain Industry Originating Office: FMD, PPMAB TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: GENERAL INFORMATION CHAPTER 2: BARLEY CHAPTER 3: CANOLA CHAPTER 4: CORN CHAPTER 5: FLAXSEED CHAPTER 6: MIXED GRAIN CHAPTER 7: OATS CHAPTER 8: RYE CHAPTER 9: SORGHUM CHAPTER 10: SOYBEANS CHAPTER 11: SUNFLOWER SEED CHAPTER 12: TRITICALE CHAPTER 13: WHEAT CHAPTER 14: REVISION HISTORY CHAPTER 1: GENERAL INFORMATION CONTENTS 1.1 DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................... 1-2 1.3 VISUAL GRADING AIDS ................................................................................ 1-4 1.4 WORK RECORDS .......................................................................................... 1-5 1.5 PRELIMINARY EXAMINATIONS .................................................................... 1-5 1.6 BASIS OF DETERMINATION ......................................................................... 1-5 1.7 SUBMITTED SAMPLE INSPECTIONS ........................................................... 1-6 1.8 FGIS-APPROVED DIVIDER ........................................................................... 1-7 1.9 ODOR ............................................................................................................. 1-8 1.10 MOISTURE METERS ................................................................................... 1-10 1.11 TEST WEIGHT PER BUSHEL APPARATUS ............................................... 1-11 1.12 CARTER DOCKAGE TESTER ..................................................................... 1-13 1.13 MECHANICAL SIEVE SHAKER ................................................................... 1-15 1.14 BARLEY PEARLER ...................................................................................... 1-17 1.15 LABORATORY SCALES .............................................................................. 1-18 1.16 ROUNDING ................................................................................................... 1-19 1.17 EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS ................................................................... 1-20 1.18 FILE SAMPLE RETENTION (GRAIN) ........................................................... 1-23 1.19 UNOFFICIAL INSPECTION SERVICES ....................................................... 1-25 1.20 METRIC SYSTEM ......................................................................................... 1-26 TABLES TABLE 1.1 – TEST WEIGHT PER BUSHEL CONVERSIONS ................................. 1-12 TABLE 1.2 – DOCKAGE TESTER CONTROL SETTINGS AND SIEVES ................ 1-14 TABLE 1.3 – FACTORS THAT REQUIRE SIEVING ................................................ 1-15 TABLE 1.4 – REQUIRED DIVISION SIZES .............................................................. 1-18 TABLE 1.5 – CERTIFYING PERCENTAGES AND TEST WEIGHT ......................... 1-19 TABLE 1.6 – FILE SAMPLE RETENTION ................................................................ 1-23 TABLE 1.7 – CONVERSIONS .................................................................................. 1-26 TABLE 1.8 – EQUIVALENTS ................................................................................... 1-26 TABLE 1.9 – MEASURES ........................................................................................ 1-27 FIGURES FIGURE 1.1 – CARTER DOCKAGE TESTER FLOW CHART ................................. 1-13 CHARTS CHART 1.1 – PROCESSING ORIGINAL SAMPLE .................................................... 1-7 ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 1: GRAMS TO TEST WEIGHT PER BUSHEL (LB/BU) ................... 1-28 ATTACHMENT 2: TEST WEIGHT PER BUSHEL/KILOGRAM PER HECTOLITER CONVERSION ..................................................... 1-37 1.1 DEFINITIONS File Sample. The extra unworked portion cut from the representative sample that may be used in conjunction with the work sample when needed. Samples retained for grade should be approximately 1,400 grams or more, except for the lighter grains (e.g., oats or barley) that require less grain to determine grade. For factor only tests or official criteria (e.g., wheat protein or falling number), smaller file samples should prove sufficient to handle review services. File samples larger than 1,400 grams may be retained if deemed necessary to provide subsequent inspection service. Kind of Grain. A determination as to whether a sample meets the definition of a specific grain or oilseed as established in the Official U.S. Standards for Grain. Official Agencies (OA). State and private partners authorized by FGIS to provide official inspection and weighing services to the domestic and export grain trade on FGIS behalf. Official Personnel. Any authorized Department employee or person licensed by FGIS to perform all or specified functions under the Act. Official Service Providers (OSP). Federal offices and State and private agencies authorized by FGIS to provide official inspection and weighing services to the domestic and export grain trade. Representative Portion. A specified quantity of grain divided out from the representative sample by means of an FGIS-approved device. Representative Sample. The terms “Representative Sample” and “Original Sample” are used interchangeably in the Grain Inspection Handbook. Both terms refer to a sample size of approximately 2,500- 3,000 grams in size drawn from a lot by official inspection personnel using approved procedures and sampling devices. For more information on sampling, refer to Book I, “Sampling Procedures.” Review Inspection. All follow-up grade inspections available (reinspection, appeal, or board appeal). Work Sample. A representative portion of grain; approximately 1,000 - 1,050 grams, used to make determinations required for a particular grain. Grain Inspection Handbook II Chapter 1 – General Information Grain Grading Procedures October 1, 2020 Page 1-1 1.2 STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS ADM Admixture DLQ Distinctly low quality ADU Amber Durum wheat DKG Dockage ANFL Animal Filth DUWH Durum wheat MOTH Angoumois moths DYED Dyed BADS Badly stained ERG Ergoty BADW Badly weathered ERC
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Grain Grading Primer
    Marketing and Regulatory Programs Grain Agricultural Marketing Service Grading Federal Grain Inspection Service Washington, D.C. Primer October 2016 United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Marketing Service Federal Grain Inspection Service Informational Reference October 2016 Grain Grading Primer Foreword The effectiveness of the U.S. grain inspection system depends largely on an inspector’s ability to sample, inspect, grade, and certify the various grains for which standards have been established under the United States Grain Standards Act, as amended. This publication is designed primarily to provide information and instruction for producers, grain handlers, and students on how grain is graded. It is not designed for Official grain inspectors for they must necessarily use more detailed instruction than that provided herein. In view of this fact, the Federal Grain Inspection Service, published the Grain Inspection Handbook, Book II, Grain Grading Procedures, which documents the step-by-step procedures needed to effectively and efficiently inspect grain in accordance with the Official United States Standards for Grain. The mention of firm names or trade products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the United States Department of Agriculture over other firms or similar approved products not mentioned. Foreword Table of Contents The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in its programs on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, and marital or familial status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternate means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).
    [Show full text]
  • Grain Crop Drying, Handling and Storage
    363 Chapter 16 Grain crop drying, handling and storage INTRODUCTION within the crop, inhibiting air movement and adding Although in many parts of Africa certain crops can be to any possible spoilage problems. The crop must produced throughout the year, the major food crops therefore be clean. such as cereal grains and tubers, including potatoes, One of the most critical physiological factors in are normally seasonal crops. Consequently the food successful grain storage is the moisture content of the produced in one harvest period, which may last for only crop. High moisture content leads to storage problems a few weeks, must be stored for gradual consumption because it encourages fungal and insect problems, until the next harvest, and seed must be held for the respiration and germination. However, moisture next season’s crop. content in the growing crop is naturally high and only In addition, in a market that is not controlled, the value starts to decrease as the crop reaches maturity and the of any surplus crop tends to rise during the off-season grains are drying. In their natural state, the seeds would period, provided that it is in a marketable condition. have a period of dormancy and then germinate either Therefore the principal aim of any storage system must when re-wetted by rain or as a result of a naturally be to maintain the crop in prime condition for as long adequate moisture content. as possible. The storage and handling methods should Another major factor influencing spoilage is minimize losses, but must also be appropriate in relation temperature.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Water Treatment Math Formulas for Surface and Well Exams
    Basic Water Treatment Math Formulas for Surface and Well Exams These formulas are intended to serve as a general resource and are not intended to be an all‐inclusive list. AREA Rectangle: A, ft2 = L * W Circle: A, ft2 = 0.785 * D2 VOLUME Rectangular Tank: V, ft3 = L * W * H Circular Pipe or Tank: V, ft3 = 0.785 * D2 * H FORCE Force, lbs = Area, Sq. Inches x PSI DOSAGE (Pounds Formula) Lbs = mg/L * MGD * 8.34 Mg/L = lbs MGD * 8.34 FLUORIDATION AFI = Molecular Weight of Fluoride/Total Molecular Weight of Chemical * (100) Feed Rate, lbs/day = (Dosage, mg/L)(Flow, MGD)(8.34, lbs/gal) (Fluoride Solution, as a decimal)(Purity, as a decimal) Feed Rate, gpd = Feed Rate, lbs/day Chemical Solution, lbs/gal Feed Dose, mg/L = Desired Dose, mg/L – Actual Concentration, mg/L Mixture Strength, % = (Tank, gal)(Tank, %)+(Vendor, gal)(Vendor, %) Tank, gal + Vendor, gal For Saturator Feed Rate, gpd = Capacity, gpd * dose, mg/L 18,000 mg/L FILTRATION 2 Filtration Rate (gpm/ft ) = flow, gpm Surface Area ft2 Backwash Water, (gal) = (Backwash Flow, gpm)(Backwash Time, min) Backwash Flow, (gpm) = (Filter Area sq. ft.)(Backwash Rate, gpm/sq ft.) Backwash % = (Total Backwash, gal)(100%) Totaled Filtered, gal Rate of Rise, (ft/min) = Backwash Rate, gpm/ft2 7.48 gals/ft3 Revised 9/15 PUMPS AND MOTORS Water, whp = (Flow, gpm)(Total Water Head, ft) 3,960 Brake, bhp = (Flow, gpm)(Head, ft.) (3,960)(Decimal Pump Efficiency) Motor, mhp = (Flow, gpm)(Head, ft.) (3,960)(Decimal Pump Efficiency)(Decimal Motor Efficiency) Total Dynamic Head, ft = Static Head, ft.
    [Show full text]
  • Grain, Flour and Ships – the Wheat Trade in Portland, Oregon
    Grain, Flour and Ships The Wheat Trade in Portland, Oregon Postcard Views of the Oregon Grain Industry, c1900 Prepared for Prosper Portland In Partial Fulfillment of the Centennial Mills Removal Project Under Agreement with the Oregon SHPO and the USACE George Kramer, M.S., HP Sr. Historic Preservation Specialist Heritage Research Associates, Inc. Eugene, Oregon April 2019 GRAIN, FLOUR AND SHIPS: THE WHEAT TRADE IN PORTLAND, OREGON By George Kramer Prepared for Prosper Portland 222 NW Fifth Avenue Portland, OR 97209 Heritage Research Associates, Inc. 1997 Garden Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97403 April 2019 HERITAGE RESEARCH ASSOCIATES REPORT NO. 448 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Figures ......................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... v 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 2. Historic Overview – Grain and Flour in Portland .............................................................. 4 Growing and Harvesting 4 Transporting Grain to Portland ................................................................................... 6 Exporting from Portland ............................................................................................. 8 Flour Mills .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Grain and Soybean Industry Dynamics and Rail Service
    Grain and Soybean Industry Dynamics and Rail Service Analytical Models of Rail Service Operations Final Report Michael Hyland, Hani Mahmassani, Lama Bou Mjahed, and Breton Johnson Northwestern University Transportation Center (NUTC) Parr Rosson Texas A&M University 1 Executive Summary To remain globally competitive, the United States’ grain industry and associated transportation services underwent significant restructuring over the past fifteen years. New technologies, helped by weather changes, led to sustained yield volume increases in the Upper Midwest. To move larger volumes faster and at lower cost, the railroad industry introduced shuttle train service. Traveling as a unit to the same destination, shuttle trains save considerable time in transit and potential delay, bypassing intermediate classification yards. Grain shippers concurrently began consolidating and storing grain in larger, more efficient terminal elevators (shuttle loaders) instead of country elevators. This report examines the effectiveness of shuttle train service and the terminal elevators supporting the shuttle train system, under different demand levels, through the formulation of simple mathematical models. In order to compare shuttle and conventional rail service, this paper introduces three distinct models. The first model, referred to as the ‘time model’, determines the time it takes to transport grain from the farm to a destination (e.g. an export elevator). The second model, referred to as the ‘engineering cost model’, determines the aggregate variable costs of transporting grain from the farm to an export elevator. The third model, referred to as the ‘capacity model’, determines the maximum attainable capacity (i.e. throughput) of a rail network as a function of demand for rail transport and the percentage of railcars on the network being moved via shuttle service and conventional service.
    [Show full text]
  • Enhancing the Quality of US Grain for International
    Chapter 5 The Changing Role of . Contents Page Quality in the Market Place . 89 Changing Nature of Markets–A Case Study in Wheat. 91 Background 91 Product Consumption and Wheat Importation . 91 The Dynamics of the Wheat Market. 93 Analysis Results . 93 Case Study Summary . 98 Chapter 5 References . 99 Tables Table Page 5-1. Export Classes of Wheat Categorized by Characteristics and Country of Origin ● . .... ... ● . ..,..0.. 92 5-2. Required Protein Levels for Wheat-Based End Products and Protein Content of U.S. Wheat Classes. 92 5-3, Regional Tastes, Preferences, and the Requirements for Wheat-Based End Products . 93 5-4, Wheat Consumption in Selected Countries, 1984/85 . 94 5-5. Market Shares of Imported Wheat Classes, 1984/85. 95 5-6. Correlation of Imported Wheat Class Market Shares, Income, and Domestic Wheat Production, 1984/85 . 96 5-7. Average Growth Rates of Wheat Class imports by Country, Region, and World, 1961/62-84/85 ● ****.. .**.*.** ● **..*.. ● ******. ● *,.,..* * 97 5-8. Simulated Changes in Wheat Class Market Shares, 1985/95 . 98 Chapter 5 The quality concerns of each industry using The varying quality requirements exhibited wheat, corn, and soybeans are identified in by these industries, especially for wheat, high- chapter 4. Wheat, by its very nature, is the most light the need for the United States to become complex of the three grains in terms of defin- more aware of individual industry require- ing quality because of the vast array of prod- ments if the goal is to produce and deliver high- ucts and processing technologies involved. quality grain, The Nation has developed the Quality requirements differ not only by type reputation as a consistent supplier for any type and individual product, but between mills using and quality of grain desired; to become a sup- the same type wheat to produce flour for the plier of high-quality grains, it must become same type of product.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Study of 6 Inch and 7 Inch Spacings for Grain Drills1
    120 NORTH DAKOTA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION COMPARATIVE STUDY OF 6 INCH AND 7 INCH SPACINGS FOR GRAIN DRILLS1 By W. J. PROMERSBBRGER2 and C. M. SWALLERS2 4 Numerous experiments have been conducted to determine the effect of spacing upon plant development and yield of small grains and other crops6'7. Most of this work has been conducted by varying the rate of seeding in the row or by thinning the plants in the row. These studies have shown that tillering changes are sensitive to variation in spacing, while yields are determined largely by soil fertility, weather conditions, absence or presence of weeds, diseases and pests. Although evidence shows that spacing of drill rows within reason- able widths of four to eight inches has little or no effect on wheat yields', many users of grain drills have a preference for one width or another. Evidence of this is the construction and wide use of both six inch and seven inch grain drills. At one time the power necessary for drilling was a factor, especially on the press type of drill. At that time the seven inch drill came into use because it reduced the required power by one- seventh and by wider spacing eliminated some of the disadvantage of the closer wheels picking up soil when not quite dry. The wide use of tractor power has changed this picture today. Some farm implement manufacturers1 wish to discontinue the manufacture of one size and concentrate on the other size if either could be shown to be more desirable. To determine the more desirable width between the six inch arid seven inch drills, these grain drill manufacturers asked the North Dakota Agricultural Experiment Station, in cooperation with a number of other stations, to determine the relative merits of these two widths of drills.
    [Show full text]
  • The International Footprint of Teff: Resurgence of an Ancient Ethiopian Grain by Annette R
    Washington University in St. Louis Washington University Open Scholarship Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations Arts & Sciences Spring 5-15-2015 The nI ternational Footprint of Teff: Resurgence of an Ancient Ethiopian Grain Annette R. Crymes Washington University in St. Louis Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/art_sci_etds Part of the Food Security Commons Recommended Citation Crymes, Annette R., "The nI ternational Footprint of Teff: Resurgence of an Ancient Ethiopian Grain" (2015). Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 394. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/art_sci_etds/394 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Arts & Sciences at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST. LOUIS University College International Affairs The International Footprint of Teff: Resurgence of an Ancient Ethiopian Grain by Annette R. Crymes A thesis presented to the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts May 2015 St. Louis, Missouri © 2015, Annette R. Crymes Table of Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ iv List
    [Show full text]
  • Grain Growers Limited Policy Position Genetic Modification (GM)
    Grain Growers Limited Policy Position Genetic Modification (GM) Key Issue In the next decade Australia is poised to capitalise on Genetically Modified (GM) wheat varieties, currently under development, which may help to significantly increase productivity and profitability for grain growers. The current international market reflects a situation where 80% of Australia’s major trading partners do not currently accept GM produce and remain cautious about the presence of GM crops in its imports. Australia must remain adaptive and alert to this international market concern. Background Future research and development into biotechnological improvement of grains and GM crops is essential to the sustainability of the industry particularly with increasing challenges around natural resource management and changing climate conditions. GrainGrowers recognise agricultural biotechnologies, and transgenic crops, have potential to boost on-farm productivity and profitability by offering higher incomes for farmers and lower-priced and better quality food for consumers. GM wheat is in trial stage in Australia. The Office of the Gene Technology Regulator reports there have been 11 GM wheat products brought to field trial stage since 2005. In the current market agricultural use of genetically modified (GM) crops has been a subject of disagreement and debate in international markets. The global concerns around GM crops result in the need for Australia to develop a code of practice for GM segregated product flows in Australian grains handling. GM varieties are currently managed in contained, trial environments, outside of the commercial bulk handling system. The majority of our non- GM grain, which is moving through the bulk handling system in Australia, has minimal risk of comingling with GM crops.
    [Show full text]
  • Weights and Measures Standards of the United States—A Brief History (1963), by Lewis V
    WEIGHTS and MEASURES STANDARDS OF THE UMIT a brief history U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS NBS Special Publication 447 WEIGHTS and MEASURES STANDARDS OF THE TP ii 2ri\ ii iEa <2 ^r/V C II llinCAM NBS Special Publication 447 Originally Issued October 1963 Updated March 1976 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Wash., D.C. 20402. Price $1; (Add 25 percent additional for other than U.S. mailing). Stock No. 003-003-01654-3 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 76-600055 Foreword "Weights and Measures," said John Quincy Adams in 1821, "may be ranked among the necessaries of life to every individual of human society." That sentiment, so appropriate to the agrarian past, is even more appropriate to the technology and commerce of today. The order that we enjoy, the confidence we place in weighing and measuring, is in large part due to the measure- ment standards that have been established. This publication, a reprinting and updating of an earlier publication, provides detailed information on the origin of our standards for mass and length. Ernest Ambler Acting Director iii Preface to 1976 Edition Two publications of the National Bureau of Standards, now out of print, that deal with weights and measures have had widespread use and are still in demand. The publications are NBS Circular 593, The Federal Basis for Weights and Measures (1958), by Ralph W. Smith, and NBS Miscellaneous Publication 247, Weights and Measures Standards of the United States—a Brief History (1963), by Lewis V.
    [Show full text]
  • Five Common Mistakes in Grain Marketing
    Five Common Mistakes in Grain Marketing 2020 Minnesota Crop Insurance Conference Edward Usset, Grain Marketing Economist University of Minnesota Columnist, Corn & Soybean Digest & Farm Futures [email protected] www.cffm.umn.edu Grain Marketing is Simple Behold a seasonal price pattern that has held true for decades! Copyright © 2019 Center for Farm Financial Management, University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Cash corn prices are, on average, lowest at harvest and highest in the spring. based on MN corn prices received by farmers Copyright © 2019 Center for Farm Financial Management, University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Cash soybean prices are, on average, lowest at harvest and highest in the spring. based on MN soybeans prices received by farmers Copyright © 2019 Center for Farm Financial Management, University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. About the data… Monthly prices: USDA/NASS Futures prices: CME Group closing prices Cash prices: Corn and soybeans: Pipestone MN Average Iowa prices, 1990-2019 Spring wheat: Red River Valley, 1990-2019 N = 30 and No replication crisis Copyright © 2019 Center for Farm Financial Management, University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. A Different Approach to Marketing What is a Marketing Plan? A marketing plan is a proactive strategy to price your grain that considers your financial goals, cash flow needs, price objectives, storage capacity, crop insurance coverage, anticipated production, and appetite for risk Proactive, not reactive, not overactive Copyright © 2019 Center for Farm Financial Management, University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. …and not inactive Barney Binless Barney has no marketing plan, no storage and no interest in early pricing. He is our benchmark - his price is the harvest price each year.
    [Show full text]
  • (202) 463-0999 Fax: (703) 524-4399 Wheat Letter January
    3103 10th Street, North ● Suite 300 ● Arlington, VA 22201 Tel: (202) 463-0999 ● Fax: (703) 524-4399 Wheat Letter January 23, 2014 U.S. Wheat Associates (USW) is the industry’s market development organization working in more than 100 countries. Its mission is to “develop, maintain, and expand international markets to enhance the profitability of U.S. wheat producers and their customers.” The activities of USW are made possible by producer checkoff dollars managed by 19 state wheat commissions and through cost-share funding provided by USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service. For more information, visit www.uswheat.org or contact your state wheat commission. Original articles from Wheat Letter may be reprinted without permission; source attribution is requested. Click here to subscribe or unsubscribe to Wheat Letter. In This Issue: 1. GASC Tenders Reflect U.S. Wheat Buying Opportunity 2. Too Much of a Good Thing 3. India’s Massive Crop Grown from Poor Government Policies 4. Wheat Growers Welcome Introduction of Trade Promotion Authority Legislation 5. Practical Voices in the GMO Food Discussion 6. Wheat Industry News Online Edition: Wheat Letter – January 23, 2014 (http://bit.ly/19QTrHW) PDF Edition: USW Price Report: www.uswheat.org/prices 1. GASC Tenders Reflect U.S. Wheat Buying Opportunity By Casey Chumrau, USW Market Analyst This month, Egypt’s General Authority for Supply Commodities (GASC) accepted its first and second bids for U.S. wheat in marketing year 2013/14 (June to May). Considering the significant freight advantage enjoyed by Black Sea and European suppliers, the latest GASC tender results indicate that U.S.
    [Show full text]