Corn stalks become commodity as price jumps because of drought

Monday, November 19, 2012 | 6:00 a.m. CST; updated 10:22 p.m. CST, Monday, November 19, 2012

COLUMBIA — With hay fields singed by the drought and cattle farmers searching for feed, corn stalks have become a profitable commodity across the Midwest.

The increased demand and rising price for so-called corn stover has led Missouri corn farmers to collect the stalks that were previously left in the field.

Corn stover has been selling in Missouri for $60 to $100 per ton or $35 to $45 per large round bail, according to the Missouri Weekly Hay Summary, an agricultural market summary collected by the Missouri Department of Agriculture.

"If you look at corn stover historically, it has really come into play this year," Gary Wheeler, vice president of operations and grower services at the Missouri Corn Growers Association said. "It has really helped out the corn growers and the cattle industry."

Sarah Wilkinson, the market reporter for the weekly hay summary, said this is the first year that a market price for corn stover has been tracked. The price has finally reached a level warranting the inclusion, she said.

Bob Garino, the director of the National Agricultural Statistics Service, said that this was the first time he has ever heard of statistics being collected on corn stover. The statistics service does not ask questions about corn stover on its survey.

"We don't view it as a commodity," he said.

That hasn't stopped Missouri farmers from selling corn stalks.

Jeff Fischer, a farmer from the Jefferson City area, said he had harvested and baled the corn stalks on his 1,500 acres the past two years, and will continue to do so as long as there is demand.

"Its been profitable," he said. With his corn crop yielding half of the anticipated production for this year, he considers the stover a "value added" crop.

Farmers' interest in harvesting corn stalks has driven agricultural equipment manufacturers to build round balers engineered to handle corn stalks.

Round baling corn stalks is "really hard on regular hay balers," Fisher said.  Fisher bought one of the new balers this year.

A new round baler made by Deere and Co. includes features such as heavier teeth to pick up the stalks of corn and stronger belts that are used to shape the round bale.

"It's a beefed-up version," Keaton Wheelan, a salesman at Sydenstricker John Deere in Mexico, Mo., said. The store plans to begin selling the new equipment soon, he said.

He said several customers are harvesting with a smaller baler designed to handle hay, but "we would absolutely find buyers for the new balers here in Missouri."

"There are quite a few operations harvesting corn stalks in the area."

Agricultural economists are worried about erosion and nutrient loss that can be associated with removing corn stalks.

"Not all land is suitable for corn stover harvest," Wheeler said. "Before making the decision to harvest, fields should be evaluated."

Glenn Davis of the USDA's Natural Resource Conservation Service said his agency recommends farmers not remove corn stalks on fields with slopes greater than 5 percent grade.

"The fields that have more slope are going to be more vulnerable," Davis said. "Many people undervalue the cost of erosion. That is a hidden cost."

Removing the stalks means there is less cover for the soil to prevent erosion, he said, especially in the spring when there is a substantial amount of soil loss.

Davis said flatter fields with slopes of less than 2 percent could safely harvest corn stalks without much worry of erosion.

"My land is table-top flat, so I am not really worried about erosion," Fischer said, "but if you talk to farmers north of me — Boone County — it is a concern."

Farmers can help reduce the amount of erosion in their fields by using cover crops, grasses that are meant to hold the soil in place after the corn stalks are removed and switching to no-till farming, an agricultural technique that eliminates deep plowing.

The cost of nutrient loss also needs to be factored in, Davis said. When corn stalks are removed from a field, nutrients in the stalks that would have been put back into the soil are removed, and if those nutrients are not replaced, soil health diminishes. Many of the nutrients lost during corn stover harvest can be replaced by nutrients in chemical fertilizers, Davis said.

That is why the corn growers association advises its members to annually test the soil quality of fields every three years, Wheeler said.

At this point, Fischer said he doesn't see nutrient loss as a huge issue as long as stalks aren't removed from the same fields every year. Fischer tests his soil every winter and uses a crop rotation of wheat, corn and soybean to help negate nutrient loss.

"Right now the benefit outweighs what we are taking from the soil," he said.

Supervising editor is John Schneller.

Like what you see here? Become a member.

Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Michael Williams November 19, 2012 | 9:03 a.m.

When corn stalks are removed from a field, nutrients in the stalks that would have been put back into the soil are removed, and if those nutrients are not replaced, soil health diminishes. Many of the nutrients lost during corn stover harvest can be replaced by nutrients in chemical fertilizers...Fischer said doesn't see nutrient loss as a huge issue as long as stalks aren't removed from the same fields every year.

Exactly. Most of the "energy from biomass" proponents fail to take this into consideration; their writings show an utter failure (either naively or nefariously, I don't know which) to understand that biomass contains a whole lot more than just zero-sum carbon. And that "whole lot more" comes from the soil; the concentrations are not infinite. Can you say "depletion?"

Corn is a grass; so are most of the proposed biomass sources. But the fact that both are grasses is not the point; the point is that they are living PLANTS each of which taps into the various arrangements of the 92 elements available here on earth.

Energy from biomass is decidedly NOT a freebie. In the above quotes, I wish I could have underlined the " long as stalks aren't removed from the same fields every year" part.

But, I can put explanation points!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(Report Comment)
Harold Sutton November 19, 2012 | 9:27 a.m.

Thanks, Michael...right on!!!!!

But, I am suprized that there have not been a few snarkey comments being made by a few "know-it-all" politically-motivated individuals. This article is probably to "corny" for them!!

(Report Comment)
Michael Williams November 19, 2012 | 10:13 a.m.

Harold: Thanks.

Now that we're down to a paltry number of posters, I don't expect to see many comments one way or the other. The Missourian has returned this place to Sleepytown, USA.

And that's too bad. Here's hoping the Colonel and Rosman aren't in a winter funk, knowing they will never again see "blue". As writers, I'm guessing both kinda liked the attention to their work.

Nonetheless, I'm confident there are many hereabouts who would castigate farmers for harvesting field trash to recover a few of their corn costs while risking erosion and a partial soil depletion. And, in the next article on "biomass", those same folks laud how taking biomass year after year after year from a field is an energy FREEBIE.

Just because someone else on the internet "says" so.

The farmers I know do NOT harvest field trash except for some periodic wheat straw that has some other really good farm applications.

PS: Some folks may have asked themselves (when driving in the country) why farmers are ripping their fields NOW rather than wait until spring.

"Ripping" soil goes deep...perhaps as much as 1.5 feet. Such an activity opens up the soil, allows MUCH rain/melted snow penetration down deep, mixes field trash with soil to promote rotting and recycling of nutrients, allows a deeper freeze/thaw which mellows the soil, AND permits earlier soil drying next spring to allow a more timely plant when weather permits. "Ripping" makes for a "roughened" soil surface with deep gouges; there is little erosion because the water flows down into the rips, and not off the land. That's a good thing.

(Report Comment)
Michael Williams November 19, 2012 | 12:21 p.m.

A bit of humor from another forum: "

Speaking of states that legalize gay marriage and marijuana on the same day.

Leviticus 20:13 - "If a man lays with another man he should be stoned."

We've just been interpreting it wrong all these years."

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.