USDA: Rice Tops List of Arkansas Commodity Exports

Jul 02, 2021

By Mary Hightower

Arkansas ranked No. 1 in the nation in rice exports, according to the State Agricultural Trade database released this week by the U.S. Agriculture Department.

The $722 million contribution by rice was part of the state’s total of $3.1 billion in agricultural exports, the report said.

Scott Stiles, extension economist for the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture said that of the $3.1 billion 78 percent, or $2.4 billion, was attributed to plant products.

The report covers the 2019 calendar year.

extension economist for the University of Arkansas System Division

NUMBER 1 — Arkansas was the nation's top rice exporter, according to the USDA. (U of A System Division of Agriculture photo)

“In terms of dollar value, Arkansas ranks first in the U.S. in rice exports, fifth in cotton and 11th in soybeans,” he said.

According to the report, here are the commodities ranked by their respective contribution to the total export value:

Rice — $722 million
Soybeans — $679.3 million
Cotton — $427.3 million
Other feed grains: barley, oats, sorghum — $73.2 million
Corn — $71.4 million.

Stiles said that “when grain prices were at record highs, the value of our crop exports alone was $3.2 billion back in 2012 and 2013. As commodity prices declined, we saw the dollar value of the state's crop exports steadily drop from 2014 to 2016.”

The trade war with China pulled the rug out from under those values.

“That pulled the value of crop exports down to $2.4 billion in 2018 and 2019,” Stiles said.

“As we look at the trends in export values, we have to think about the stories and events going on with our key trade partners,” he said. “China has long been the top export market for our soybeans and cotton. This year they are the top export market for our corn and other feed grains.”

Stiles said that although a state’s actual agricultural export value cannot be measured directly, USDA’s Economic Research Service estimates state exports of total and selected commodities based on U.S. farm cash receipts data. The Economic Research Service compiles data collected by the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Stiles said the next update will be in October.

Source : uada.edu

Video: The 15-Year Bet Behind Every New Variety!

Canada is trying to decide how much agricultural research capacity it can afford to lose. Brian Rossnagel believes the better question is whether the country can afford to rebuild it.

The longtime barley and oat breeder makes the case with a simple fact about his profession: the consequences of today’s decisions may not become visible for 10 or 15 years.

“Pick the right parents. That’s the biggest thing,” Rossnagel says. “If you pick the wrong parents, you’re not going to get anywhere—and you don’t know that until 10 years, 15 years later.”

That warning carries particular weight as Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada moves to reduce spending and streamline parts of its science operations. The department’s 2026–27 plan anticipates the loss of approximately 665 positions by 2028–29 and says some research will be reduced where capacity exists in academia or industry. AAFC says the changes will make its science operations more cost-effective over the long term.

For Canada’s seed industry, Rossnagel’s career illustrates what is at stake.

This fall, the retired University of Saskatchewan breeder will be inducted into the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame. During his 35-year career at the Crop Development Centre, he helped develop more than 100 barley and oat varieties, including CDC Austenson—one of Western Canada’s most widely grown feed barleys. His induction recognizes not only those varieties, but the collaboration and research system that made them possible.

Rossnagel is quick to emphasize that none of it was the work of one person.

“The first thing I thought about was all the other people who contributed to whatever success I and my program had over the years,” he says. “We know that it’s not an individual who does this. It’s a group—a team.”

That team extends well beyond the breeder whose name appears beside a variety. It includes technicians, pathologists, quality specialists, statisticians, regional testing sites, seed growers and industry partners. It also includes the breeders who came before and those who will carry the germplasm forward.

CDC Fraser barley, for example, moved through three breeding careers. Its parents came from Brian Harvey’s program. Rossnagel advanced the material after Harvey retired, and Aaron Beattie later guided it through registration and release.

That kind of handoff is normal in plant breeding. The person who makes the original cross may never see the resulting variety reach farmers.

It also explains why lost research capacity cannot simply be switched back on when budgets improve.

“If you shut it off, it’s very, very difficult—and particularly costly—to start it up again,” Rossnagel says. “If you have to start from scratch, it’s going to be at least 10 years before anybody notices whether you’re getting anything done or not.”

The concern is not simply how many experimental lines Canada can process. Modern equipment, statistical tools and genetic technologies allow today’s breeding programs to evaluate tens of thousands of lines—far more than Rossnagel could handle when he entered the field in the early 1970s.

But efficiency and automation do not generate every idea.

“If you pare back down, and instead of having six or seven individual scientists concentrating on wheat breeding, you go down and say three people could handle all this, well, that’s half the ideas gone,” he says. “Particularly if you happen to lose the three people who had the really neat and innovative ideas, boy, that’s a problem.”

It is a timely distinction for Canadian agriculture. Consolidating programs may preserve the volume of material moving through a system, at least initially. It may not preserve the diversity of thinking, regional knowledge or willingness to pursue unconventional crosses.

That regional knowledge matters because Canadian agriculture is not one uniform production environment. A variety suited to southern Alberta may face different disease, moisture and maturity pressures than one grown in Manitoba, Ontario or Atlantic Canada.

“Agriculture is applied biology,” Rossnagel says. “Biology, all around the Earth, moves from the poles to the equator. It does not move from Newfoundland to B.C. like politics do.”