PPIOIONNEEREER · time of year at Michigan Sugar— with the harvest beginning and factories...

P I O N E E RP I O N E E RFall 2002

2 P I O N E E R N E W S B E E T

PION EER N EWSBEETFALL 2002 • VOLUME 16, NO. 2

NEWSBEET TECHNICAL ADVISORS:Vice President—Agriculture: Robert BraemAgronomist: Teresa M. Crook (Editor)

PIONEER NEWSBEET PUBLISHED BY MICHIGAN SUGAR COMPANYAgricultural Office, P.O. Box 107, Caro, MI 48723

COMMUNICATIONS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO:Editor, Pioneer Newsbeet, P.O. Box 107, Caro, MI 48723

PIONEER NEWSBEET is published by Michigan Sugar Company in Saginaw,Michigan. It is prepared for grower members of Michigan Sugar Company,from information obtained from sources which the Company believes to bereliable. However, the Company cannot guarantee or assume any responsibilityfor the accuracy of the information or be responsible for the results obtained.Mention or illustrations of a special technique, specific equipment orproducts does not constitute endorsement by the Company. Reprinting orquoting articles appearing in Pioneer Newsbeet is granted with the exceptionof those items credited to outside sources.

ABOUT THE COVERSmall grains provide many different optionsfor wind erosion management. (See pages16 and 17.) At sugarbeet planting, drilledwheat between the sugarbeet rows providesgood protection in June, but does it provideadequate protection to sugarbeet seedlingsfrom an early May wind?

BUSINESSroot of the

TABLE OF CONTENTSRoot of the Business …………………………………2

2002 Crop Update ……………………………………3

Research Update……………………………………4–5

Money For Nothing—Getting Nitrogen Applications Right …………6–7

Province of Ontario Invests in Industry……………8

Factory News …………………………………………9

Information on Rhizomania ………………………10

Sugar Queen …………………………………………11

Around the Territory…………………………………11

Grower in the News ……………………………12–14

Grower of the Year …………………………………15

Cover Story—Wind Erosion Options …………16–19

Tips to Deliver Sugarbeets forLong-Term Storage ……………………………20–21

History of the Grower Associations …………22–24

Scholarship Recipients ……………………………24

Meet the Staff ……………………………………25–27

Sugarbeet Quality ………………………………28–29

Community Window…………………………………30

by Mark Flegenheimer, President and CEO

Autumn is always an excitingtime of year at Michigan Sugar—with the harvest beginning andfactories starting their processing

campaign. This year, there is even more excitementthan usual. The 2002/2003 campaign marks thefirst year of cooperative ownership of MichiganSugar. It is also the 100th year of operation foryour Carrollton, Croswell and Sebewaing facilities.

The ownership change has put a solid founda-tion under the company. It will ensure a full supplyof beets for your facilities. With “full” acreage yearin and year out, we can focus on running the busi-ness as efficiently as possible, allowing MichiganSugar Company to run for another 100 years.

The recently passed Farm Bill and the elimina-tion of the stuffed molasses activity/passage ofSenator Breaux’s Amendment further solidifiesthe base upon which your co-op is being built. Thenew six-year Farm Bill includes an allotment provi-sion restricting domestic marketing/production.These allotments should increase sugar prices.

The sweetener trade dispute in Mexico,unfortunately, remains unresolved. I am hopeful,however, a resolution will be reached in the nottoo distant future. Once our government settlesthis issue, our industry should enjoy reasonableprices for the next few years.

Your employees and I are enthusiastic and eagerto begin the first year together with our growers—the new owners of Michigan Sugar. We arealso looking forward to the upcoming 100th

anniversaries at the factories. We hope youshare in our excitement and pride.

Have a safe harvest!

F A L L 2 0 0 2 3

by Robert Braem,Vice President ofAgriculture

Producing thisfirst ever sugarbeetcrop for the

Cooperative has brought on manynew issues along with normalchallenges associated with beetproduction in Michigan. Whilecontracting acres, growers andagricultural staff had to account forevery share purchased and besure acres contracted matchedexactly. Filling out forms and gettingsignatures all ended with 125,000acres contracted this spring.

The first growers went into theirfields near April 1st, planting nearlya thousand acres in a week. Rainfallstopped planting most days priorto April 15th, then planting brokeloose. Years of experience andnumerous research trials showearly planting is imperative to highyield potential and quality. Growerswere anxious to plant and workedhard throughout the second halfof April. Approximately 90% of thecrop was planted prior to May 1st.The remaining percentage wassown between rain showers overthe next three weeks.

The sugarbeet crop emergedunder cold wet conditions. Beetstands were good in most areasand growth remained slow, butsteady for the first month. Oursingle most destructive event waswind on May 10th. Most of the9,000 acres replanted in 2002were caused by this storm. Manygrowers are now re-evaluatingways to control wind damage. Be

it planting in cornstalks, plantingdirection, cover crops or fieldselection, growers need to look attheir fields and decide how best tomanage this risk. The agriculturalstaff will discuss wind control laterin this Newsbeet and during thewinter in meetings.

Grower’s weed control practicescontinue to evolve. Fewer acreswere treated with preemergenceherbicides again this year. Micro-rated acres and the number ofapplications increased. Manygrowers cultivated less frequentlyand some did not cultivate at all.How did these changes work in2002 and will this trend continue?This was a tough year to controlweeds and maybe not a fair testof new weed control practices.Early wet conditions hinderedtimely micro-rate applications andspread weed emergence over alonger period of time. Cool growingconditions slowed canopy closureand small weeds were not shadedout. These late emerging weedsand escapes from sprayingappeared above the canopy inAugust. Unfortunately, weeds willbe an issue in some fields at har-vest and growers will be challengedto deliver clean beets.

Above average rainfall andwarmer temperatures from lateJune through early August pushedcrop growth and maturity. Thosesame conditions promoteCercospora leafspot and growersbegan spraying in July. A researchproject in Michigan called BEETCASThas tracked weather conditionsconducive to leafspot infection.This technology will aid growers

in determining when to startspraying and the interval betweensubsequent applications. The netresult can be more timely spraysand better control of this disease.In most areas, growers have con-trolled the disease with 1–3 spraysand good quality should havebeen insured.

Harvest this year will start earlierthan normal, on September 24th.Michigan Sugar will receive over20,000 more acres and over 10%more tons than a year ago. Thisearly start will ensure uninterruptedsupplies of sugar for our customersthis fall and keep campaign fromrunning too long. Significantchanges to the early deliverypremium were made for this year.Growers will be compensated fortonnage and sugar losses associat-ed with early harvest. Early deliverypremium remains in effect untilOctober 13th or the start of perma-nent piling. The Co-op needsgrowers from all areas to startharvesting to provide good suppliesto begin slicing and then adequatevolume to maintain full factoryslice until permanent piling begins.

This first crop year as a coopera-tive has been exciting and chal-lenging. Growers have produced agood crop under varied and attimes, difficult conditions. A safeand bountiful harvest will be aperfect finish to our year.

CROP UPDATE2002


UPDATEresearch

by Jim Stewart, Manager ofResearch

The sugarbeetvariety trials lookvery good this year

and we are confident some of thenew varieties will help boostsugarbeet yields in the near future.We have several 2nd year varietiesin the trials yielded in the 105%range in last year’s tests. At thistime, the only numbers availableare the emergence data. SeedexPrompt and the Hilleshog varietiesled the way in emergence this year.We will also collect information oninsect and disease tolerance as wellas the yield and quality data. Thisinformation will be available thefirst week in December. Table 1shows emergence values for theapproved varieties in this year’s trials.

Even though we spend most ofour time and resources on varietytesting, we are working in someother areas which could returnimportant dividends to our growers.One of these is a prediction modelfor determining when to apply ourCercospora leaf spot sprays. It wasdeveloped by Dr. Ron Pitblado fromRidgetown College in Ontario andsugarbeet growers in Ontario areusing it this year. The model iscalled BEETCAST and you canlearn a lot about it by logging onto michiganbeets.com. The modelmeasures leaf wetness and tem-perature on a daily basis andfeeds the information into a com-puter. The computer calculates adaily value (disease severity indexor DSV) for disease infection and

development. As the numbersaccumulate over time, the modelpredicts when it is time to spray.We are testing the model this yearwith the help of Dr. Pitblado and incooperation with Steve Poindexterand Sugarbeet Advancement. Aswe learn how BEETCAST fits ourgrowing area, we will be able tomore accurately predict when it istime to spray for Cercosporaleafspot. This program shouldmaximize the dollars spent on

disease control when using fungi-cides. Stay tuned for additionalinformation about the BEETCASTproject. If you have questions orwould like to see the testing site,you can contact myself, TeresaCrook or Steve Poindexter for moreinformation.

Several chemical companies arestarting to make generic formula-tions of herbicides and fungicidesthat we currently use for controllingweeds and diseases. Ag Value is a

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

% Emergence

Michigan Sugar Company

Suga

rbee

t Var

iety

Beta 5400=57.6

LSD (P= .05) 3.2, CV=4.1, Mean=61.9 Means followed by same letter do not significantly differ(P = .05, Duncan's New MRT)

a

b

c

d

e

Seedex Prompt=71.2

Hilleshog E4=66.9

Hilleshog E17=66.6

Hilleshog E33=65.5

Beta 5451=61.5

Hilleshog RH5=60.5

Crystal 1353=60.5

Crystal 648=58.4

Beta 5736=50.3

TABLE 1

Official Variety and Plant to Stand Trials—2002 Emergence Data —10 Trials Combined

F A L L 2 0 0 2 5

new company developing look-alike formulations of Nortron,Betamix and Stinger. We havetested these generic formulationsfor weed control and sugarbeetinjury and they appear to be quitesimilar to the current brand nameproducts. Two new look-alikeformulations of Topsin M are alsobeing sold in our area. We are alsotesting these products for diseasecontrol, but the results will not beavailable for a few more weeks.

We are continuing to developrecommendations for the use ofQuadris and similar products forcontrolling Rhizoctonia root andcrown rot. Our small plot datafrom the past two years indicatesQuadris gives effective control ofRhizoctonia when applied at the6–8 leaf stage or as an in-furrow.Our research has shown mid-season applications also providesome Rhizoctonia control at alesser degree. We are workingwith Steve Poindexter andSugarbeet Advancement on repli-cated large plot trials to learnmore about how to use Quadrisfor Rhizoctonia control. Preliminaryresults indicate in-furrow and 6–8leaf Quadris applications are work-ing when applied on a field scalewith commercial equipment. Rowclosure applications appear to beless effective and should not beconsidered unless it also servesas the first Cercospora leaf spotspray. We are also confirmingplanting Rhizoctonia resistantsugarbeet varieties are a goodmethod for controlling this disease.Additional research conducted atMichigan State University has

demonstrated planting sugar-beets after corn and plowing willreduce Rhizoctonia infestations.

Since early season applicationsof Quadris have given goodRhizoctonia control, many grow-ers want to know if they cantank mix Quadris with their post-emergence herbicides. We areconducting research in coopera-tion with Dr. Karen Renner toanswer these questions. Severaltrials have been establishedlooking at mixing Quadris andGem with the micro-rates andwith standard splits. It quicklybecame apparent neitherQuadris nor Gem can be used inthe micro-rates with MSO.Serious sugarbeet injury occurredin each test with these mixtures.We also looked at substitutingKinetic and other surfactants inplace of the MSO and we stillhad significant levels of injury.We have looked at applyingseveral low rates of Quadris inthe micro rate sprays which alsocaused serious injury. On a posi-tive note, Quadris and Gem bothappear to be safe when mixed withBetamix + Upbeet in standardsplits, if surfactants are not used.

Our research program alsoincludes work looking at Dual forweed control, the new generationof fungicides, foliar nutritionalsprays, sugarbeet replantingstudies and other trials. We willreport our research findings in awritten report and at the growermeetings we hold in the winterand early spring.

MARK YOURCALENDAR…

100 YEAR ANNIVERSARYCELEBRATIONS

Michigan Sugar Company isproud to be able to celebratethree 100 year anniversariesthis year. Carrollton openedon October 20, 1902; Croswellopened on October 23, 1902;and Sebewaing on October27, 1902.

We will be kicking-off thefirst of the three celebrations inSebewaing on November 8 &9, 2002. An Open House andFactory Tour will start on Fridayat 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m.and on Saturday at 7:30 a.m.until 5:00 p.m.

Croswell will host their OpenHouse and Tour on Friday,November 15 & 16, 2002. BothFriday and Saturday the doorswill open for tours beginning at8:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m.

Carrollton will end the roundof Centennial celebrations onDecember 6 & 7, 2002. Theywill host their Open House andTours beginning at 8:00 a.m.until 5:00 p.m. for both days.

Mark your calendar and joinus in our 100 year celebration!


By Mike Patchett & Patrick Jarvis,British Sugar. Reprinted from BritishBeet Research Organisation, BritishSugar Beet Review, Vol. 70, No. 1.(Nitrogen 100 kg/ha=89 lbs/A)

No, the title does not refer tothe Dire Straits song but to theopportunity many sugar beetgrowers have to maintain cropyields, improve quality and saveinput costs by timely application ofthe correct recommended rates ofnitrogen fertiliser. In addition toincreased pressure on input costs,there is growing pressure ongrowers to become moreenvironmentally aware andreduce the risk of leaching andrun-off of nitrates. Appropriatetiming and use of both organicand artificial nitrogen fertilizerswill help to achieve this.

• Timing of applicationAdvice on the timing of nitrogen

applications is aimed at producingthe maximum economic sugar yieldwhilst minimising physical andchemical damage to seedlingsand—importantly—minimisingnitrogen loss as run-off or leaching.

The standard recommendationremains unchanged: apply 30–40kg/ha N at drilling and the balancewhen the crop has fully emergedand by the two true leaf stage atthe latest.

Data from the British Sugar1991/2000 crop survey showedthat approximately half of thenational crop received the firstapplication artificial nitrogen atdrilling—as recommended—orwithin seven days. However, half

of the crop did not receive the firstapplication at the optimum time.

Although rates of nitrogen fertilis-er applied to the sugar beet crophave decreased over the last 30years (Fig. 2), the average rate ofartificial nitrogen fertiliser applied tothe UK sugar beet crop in 2001 wasstill 14 kg/ha above the recom-mended rates and represents anunnecessary overspend of £856,800by growers at 2001 prices. This fig-ure takes no account of any organicmanure inputs which would giveeven greater scope for cost saving.

The recommend rates of nitrogenfertiliser have been establishedfrom trials conducted over manygrowing seasons and sites. Trials byDr. Philip Draycott at Brooms Barnand extensive factory based work inthe 1970s are supported by morerecent programmes of work fundedby both the SBREC and BritishSugar. The optimum levels of nitro-gen fertiliser have not changed withthe advent of newer and higheryielding varieties.

The British Sugar national totalnitrogen fertiliser recommendations

based on soil type and previouscropping are:

kg/haLoamy Sand 120 Sandy Loams (inc. 'light silts') 120 Loamy Sand/Sandy Loam+ FYM 90 Loamy Sand/Sandy Loam following potatoes/legumes 90 Loamy Sand/Sandy Loam + poultry manure 60 Calcareous Loam 100 Clay Loam & Deep Fertile Silty Soils 60 Organic Soils (6–20% OM) 30 Peat Soils (greater than 20% OM) 0

There is no recommendationto apply more than 120 kg/hain any situation and there aremany circumstances where thisfigure should be reduced.

Typically, rates should bereduced by about 30 kg N/ha forpreceding crops with high nitrogenresidues such as brassicas, peas,grass leys or potatoes. Where FYMhas been applied the nationalrecommendation should be

M O N E Y F O R N OT H I N G — G E T T I N GN I T R O G E N A P P L I C AT I O N S R I G H T

reduced by 30 kg N/ha. Poultrymanure and other high fertilitymanures should be treated sepa-rately and their fertility levels takeninto account when calculating Nrequirements.

• Nitrogen Prediction Soil SamplingEach spring, British Sugar’s

Agricultural Business Developmentdepartment samples a range ofsoil types from the main sugarbeet growing areas to determinethe base levels of nitrogen fertilityat the start of the season.

The first samples are takentowards the end of February and,following analysis, the firstrecommendations for the artificialnitrogen requirements are made.The sites are resampled when 50percent of the national sugarbeet crop has been drilled. Thedata from this second set ofsamples enables the recommen-dations to be fine tuned to allowfor any reduction of residualnitrogen due to leaching, or anyincrease as a result of minerali-sation since the first sampleswere taken.

This soil sampling exerciseproved to be of great value lastyear when the results showed thatdespite heavy winter rainfall,leaching was less severe thananticipated and increased amountsof artificial nitrogen fertiliser wereunnecessary—beneficial for theenvironment and growers’ bankbalances.

For the 2002 crop, sampling willbe extended to additional sites inShropshire and Herefordshire and,

for the first time, sites in Yorkshirewill be sampled.

To monitor the accuracy of therecommendations, a fully replicatednitrogen response trial is carriedout each year on a sandy loamsoil to evaluate a range of artificialnitrogen fertiliser rates anddetermine whether the most costeffective rate was consistent withour recommendations. In mostyears it is.

• ConclusionAlthough much progress has

been made over recent years thereis still a long way to go before theUK sugar beet crop as a whole isreceiving the recommended rateof nitrogen fertiliser, at the recom-mended timing and growers arereaping the financial benefit aswell as showing environmentalawareness.

F A L L 2 0 0 2 7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000

% National CropPercentage of the national sugar beet crop receiving the first N application at or within one week of drilling.

Source: British Sugar Crop Survey

FIGURE 1

FIGURE 2

8090

100110120130140150160170

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990

kg N

/ha

Source: British Sugar Survey of the Sugar Beet Crop

Recommended rates of use

N Fertilizer Usage 1970–2001

1995 2000


P R O V I N C E O F O N TA R I O I N V E S T S I NE X PA N S I O N O F S U G A R B E E T I N D U S T RY

The Government of Ontarioinvested $752,000 (Canadian) in asector-wide project to expand thesugarbeet industry, AssociateMinister of Municipal Affairs andHousing Brian Coburn announcedon July 24, 2002.

“The Province is proud to be apartner in a project which has somuch benefit for the economy ofrural Ontario,” said Coburn who isresponsible for rural affairs.

This project supports the expan-sion of an industry which providesimportant diversification of theagricultural land base; representsan excellent alternative cash cropfor growers; creates jobs in pro-duction, handling and trucking;and generates revenue from U.S.exports, he added.

This project is funded throughthe Rural Economic DevelopmentProgram and involves:

• expanding the piling yard inDover Township to handle theincreased tonnage of sugarbeetswith new piling equipment;

• exploring the capability of pilingbeets in the field in LambtonCounty, following Europeanpractices;

• the pilot assessment of usingfield platforms to allow trucksto be loaded in fields ratherthan on concession roads; and

• applied research to identify opti-mal parameters for sugarbeetpiling, storage and handling asnew techniques are introduced.

The project will also focus onimproving the information systemsfor the management of Ontariosugarbeet production including

BEETCAST weather information,GIS field imaging and electronicweigh scales integration ondelivery.

Project partners OntarioSugarbeet Growers’ Association,Michigan Sugar Canada Limited,and Lambton Beet Harvesting Inc.will provide funding for the balanceof the $1.5 million project.

“We’re extremely pleased bytoday’s announcement,” said GlenJack, chair of the Ontario SugarbeetGrowers’ Association. “The provin-cial government’s financial commit-ment will help secure the future ofsugarbeet production in Ontario asan important source of jobs, invest-ment, income diversification andexports for rural Ontario.”

“I am delighted our governmentis funding this project,” said MarcelBeaubien, MPP for Lambton-Kent-

Middlesex. “This project will set agood example of how provincialsupport of partnerships among ruralindustries can lead to economicgrowth in rural areas.”

The five-year, $200-millionRural Economic Development(RED) Program is a componentof the Ontario Small Town andRural (OSTAR) DevelopmentInitiative, a two-part, $600 millioninitiative launched in 2000 toassist rural Ontario.

The RED Program’s goal is toremove barriers to economic growthin rural Ontario by promoting adiversified business climate;exploring new products and newmarkets; creating a climate forlong-term job growth; andinvesting in technologies andsectors that contribute to economicdevelopment in rural Ontario.

Left to right: Marcel Beaubien—Member of Provincial Parliament (MPP)for Lambton-Kent-Middlesex; Bob Braem, VP Agriculture, Michigan SugarCompany; Glen Jack—Chair, Ontario Sugarbeet Growers' Association;Ken Smith—Manager, Lambton Beet Harvesting Inc.; and Brian Coburn—Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing are pictured withthe $752,000 check from ONSTAR on July 24th, 2002.

by Herb Wilson, Vice-President ofOperations

Several timesthis past year Ihave been asked

why we stress slice rate and sugarproduction rates in our factories.Some have asked if it would helplower our losses or be easier onthe equipment if we backed offand went a little slower. Withinreason, the equipment has beendesigned, or we have modified it,to operate at our top processingrates. Although one could arguesome individual factory lossesmight be lessened at reducedrates, the reality is overall lossesand cost will be improved at thegreater throughputs. Increaseddaily slicing capacity translatesdirectly into the ability to processlarger crops during the same totaltime period thereby decreasingthe cost per ton and yielding ahigher return to growers. Forexample, the increased returnsfrom processing a given crop in130 days as compared to 135days is very significant.

Most of us are well aware of therisks involved with the long termstoring of sugar beets in piles. Weoften speak of weight shrink toexpress how well we have fared.Another way we evaluate the lossesin beet storage is to calculate thesugar shrink. Under adverse condi-tions, sucrose is lost even withoutweight loss, as the sugar will con-vert to other substances. Thisresults in sugar harvested whichwill never reach the factory in a

form that can be recovered in ourprocess. Worse yet, each pound ofsucrose converted to a non-sugar,will result in additional losses ofthe sucrose to molasses therebylowering the pack and our return.A factory operating at a highthroughput will minimize theselosses by shortening the length oftime the beets are at risk in storage.

The direct cost of processing abeet crop is also heavily influencedby the daily operating rate. Someof the operating costs change withthe rate of operation. We generallyrefer to these as variable costs.Examples of this type of cost wouldbe most of the major operatingsupplies and materials such aslimestone, chemicals, etc. Othercosts remain relatively constantand are independent of the factoryoperating rates. These are the costswe can improve, on a per unitbasis, by increasing the dailyoperating rates and processingthe maximum total tonnage percampaign. Major examples includerental expenses, property taxes,insurance, general overhead andseasonal labor.

Energy, one of our highest costitems, is an interesting factorbecause it is both variable andfixed. Although fuel usage increasesand decreases with operating rates,it does not do so in direct pro-portion to the processing. Thedesign of our process requires acertain amount of energy just to beon line and increasing the process-ing rate by, say, 10% does not nec-essarily require 10% more energy.

Another factor is sugar factoriesjust plain operate better at the top

rates. The equipment sizing isdesigned for the maximum ratesand is less efficient at reducedthroughput. Some of the chemicalsucrose losses experienced duringthe process are reduced at higherrates as well. This is due mainly tothe reduced time sucrose isexposed to high temperatures.

Sugar processing requires a hugeinvestment in facilities, equipment,maintenance and people. The bestutilization of that investment andthe lowest cost per ton comes withfactories operated at maximumcapacity.

A sugar campaign is an impor-tant and exciting race against time.Once the processing begins everyeffort is made to operate efficient-ly and at the highest practical rates.Twenty-four hours a day, sevendays a week until the entire crophas been processed. Slow downsand breakdowns can be a majorexpense in our business. Our peo-ple are tuned to this fact and knowthat reduced rates cost us moneyand lessen our ability to becompetitive in a tough business.

F A L L 2 0 0 2 9

NEWSfactory BEET FACTORY COSTS VS THROUGHPUT

1 0 P I O N E E R N E W S B E E T

Rhizomania iscaused by BeetNecrotic Yellow Veinvirus and is transmittedby the soil borne fun-gus, Polymyxa betae.The disease is spreadby movement of cont-aminated soil and soilparticles. In 1983,Rhizomania was firstfound in California;Michigan appears tobe one of the last areas

affected due in part to the Rhizomania quarantineenforced by the Michigan Department of Agriculture(MDA) since 1992. This quarantine allowed thesugarbeet breeders time to develop varieties tolerantto Rhizomania.

Symptoms of Rhizomania infected beets are firstseen as bright light green or yellow areas in fieldsand can be confused with lack of nitrogen or waterdamage. Infected sugarbeets will show elongatedand erect petioles. Below ground symptoms mayinclude stunted taproots with masses of hairy, sec-ondary roots. Some roots will be sprangled or showa constricted taproot several inches below the soil sur-face (wine-glass shaped). Pale yellow to dark browndiscoloration of the vascular tissue can be found whenslicing the root.

Yellow foliage and stunted roots can be caused bynumerous other factors such as nutrient deficiency,other fungal diseases, water damage, compaction ordrought. A positive identification can only be madewith a laboratory test.

Field sanitation measures are similar to those usedto control the spread of sugarbeet cyst nematodes.Focusing mainly on eliminating soil movement frominfested fields, growers should clean equipment beforemoving to a non-infested field. Tare dirt should alwaysbe returned to the field it came from or dumped in anon-agricultural area, if available.

Control measures include planting tolerant varieties.Rhizomania tolerant varieties have been tested tosee how well those varieties are adapted to Michigan.Seed companies have also focused breeding efforts

toward Rhizomania tolerance and continue to makeimprovements. New varieties with tolerance will beavailable in limited quantities for 2003. Plantingearly; longer crop rotation; good field drainage andfield equipment sanitation minimize the impact ofRhizomania.

We will keep you informed through letters, growermeetings and contact with your local agriculturalstaff. Please feel free to contact your local ag officewith any questions you may have.

I N F O R M AT I O N O N R H I Z O M A N I A

Fluorescent green of theelongated petioles has asharp contrast to the normalcanopy color.

Advanced Rhizomania development has a mass ofhairy-secondary roots with the appearance of“bearding.” Rhizomania can result in a 25 to 50% lossin recoverable sugar per acre (photo Ralph Fogg).

For more information on Rhizomania, you maysearch the following internet sites:

http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/r735100111.htm

http://www.ianr.unl.edu/pubs/plantdisease/nf121.htm

http://www.uidaho.edu/sugarbeet/Disease/rhizartcl.htm

http://www.ext.nodak.edu/extpubs/plantsci/rowcrops/pp1142-2.htm

http://www.sbreb.org/brochures/wyoming/wyoming.htm

http://www.hilleshog-us.com/Rhiz.htm

Close-up

The 2002 Michigan Sugar Queen is 20-year-oldJelanie Rae Schnettler of Munger, MI. She wascrowned at the Michigan Sugar Festival in Sebewaingon June 21st, 2002. Jelanie has a very busy yearahead of her. She represents the sugarbeet industry asshe visits with public officials, food industry leadersand the general public. Her schedule includes manyofficial appearances during the year, often riding onthe Pioneer® Sugar float in over 20 parades throughoutMichigan.

Jelanie, the daughter of Robert and SherrySchnettler of Munger, Michigan, is currently pursuinga degree in Physiology (pre-med) specializing inPublic Health and Humanities at Michigan StateUniversity. She is a child grief counselor and belongsto the Honors college.

The first runner-up was Terra Houthoofd, of Akron,Michigan. Terra is the daughter of Terry and WendyHouthoofd. Terra is attending the University ofDetroit-Mercy and studying to become a dentist.

The second runner-up was Emily Sneller, ofSebewaing, Michigan. Emily is the daughter ofDarwin and Kathy Sneller. She attends MichiganState University, majoring in Crop & Soil Sciencewith a bio-technology emphasis. Emily alsobelongs to the Honors college. Terra and Emily willserve on the queen’s court. In this capacity, theywill accompany Jelanie in many parades and otherpersonal appearances.

Michigan Sugar Company’s Jeff Adamo, Director ofHuman Resources was a first-time judge this year.He said, “The fourteen candidates were extremelywell-qualified and it was a difficult decision.”

Michigan Sugar Company and the Great LakesSugar Beet Growers Association sponsored theMichigan Sugar Queen competition. As the sponsors,the company and growers provide the queen with a$2,000 scholarship for use at the university of herchoice. Each member of the court receives a $750scholarship.

F A L L 2 0 0 2 1 1

2 0 0 2 M I C H I G A N S U G A R Q U E E NB E G I N S H E R R E I G N

A R O U N D T H E T E R R I TO RY

The 2002 Sugar Queen is Jelanie Rae Schnettler ofMunger, MI. First runner-up was Terra Houthoofd(right), of Akron, MI. Second runner-up was EmilySneller (left), of Sebewaing, MI.

Michigan Sugar Company, along with Bronner's Christmas Wonderlandand Zehnder's of Frankenmuth, sponsored a Mother's Day promotionwhere Mother's Day cards were distributed to the second and thirdgraders at more than 100 elementary schools in the Saginaw, Bay,Tuscola, and Huron counties. The cards were designed for the children tocolor and tell mom why she's the “sweetest.” On the back were couponsto be redeemed at Bronner's for a cookie cutter and a two-poundbag of Pioneer Sugar, or at Zehnder's Marketplace for three deliciousrosettes. The coupons were collected and put in a bowl for a drawingto be held on July 31st worth $300. The prize was a gift basket providedby Pioneer Sugar worth $100, Bronner's and Zehnder's gift certificatesfor $100 each. Michigan Sugar has co-sponsored this event with Bronner'ssince 1999. This was the first year Zehnder's joined in the fun.

Winner Maryke Weidman withson, Jared of Cass City.

by Jeff Elston, Agriculturalist,Sebewaing District

The Zimmerfamily has grownsugarbeets in the

Michigan Sugar Company’sSebewaing district for many years.This family-run operation inTuscola County sits just acrossfrom the Huron County line alongM-25, and is nestled north ofUnionville adjacent to the familyhomestead. The Zimmers havelived and farmed here since 1864.Tom Zimmer farms with his twosons, Mark and Mike. These threemen are the sole workforce for thefarm except during the beet har-vest. For this ten-day to two-week period, they hire part-timehelp to drive the sugarbeet trucksand run the defoliator. Tom’s wife,Sally, is an accountant in Bay City.She also helps with bookkeepingfor Tom’s part of the farm opera-tion. Mark’s wife, Lori, and Mike’swife, Terry, aid their husbandswith their bookkeeping.

During the mid 1930s Tom’sgrandfather, William, and father,Vernon, started growing sugarbeetsfor the Sebewaing factory. Tombegan farming with his fatherback in 1959 and worked withhim for many years. After Vernon’sretirement Mark joined the farm in1981, with Mike following later in1996. During the winter months,Mark and Mike work as contract-ed electricians. As springapproaches, the two sons jointheir father back on the farm fortheir fieldwork preparation.

Throughout Tom’s farming life,he has been an influence amongthe Sebewaing growers. He hasbeen on the local grower’s boardfor over a quarter of a century,holding many different offices,Vice-President and President. As aresult of these different positions,he has been involved with contractnegotiations, grower relations, andother various interactions betweenthe growers and Michigan SugarCompany. In addition, he has repre-sented the sugarbeet growers andindustry in legislative matterswith our government officials inboth Lansing, Michigan, and inWashington, D.C.

The last two-and-a-half years,Tom has had a bigger endeavoron his agenda. He was one of themain forces and biggest optimistsin forming our grower-ownedcooperative. During the negotia-tions he was the Vice-Chairman ofthe Co-op Board, and after theelection of new officers, he waselected Chairman of the Board.In addition to these positions, hehas been on the ExecutiveCommittee of the AmericanSugarbeet Growers Association.

As the fieldwork began lastspring, Mark planted the sugar-beets with a 12-row JD Maxemergeplanter in 30" rows. They usedmostly regular coated seed fromall four sugarbeet seed compa-nies in their fields. The Zimmersdid not use any preemergenceherbicides this year when theyplanted. They microrated (post-emergence sprays) usingBetamix, Upbeet, Stinger, andmethylated seed oil (MSO) five

times in their fields. As a whole,they had excellent weed controlthroughout their fields. They statedfor their operation, micro-rating isthe best approach for killingweeds. Assure was sprayed aloneto kill some annual grasses in theirfields. Each man takes their turn inspraying applications and cultivatingtheir sugarbeets. During harvest,Mike runs the 6-row Artswayharvester, Mark drives the semi-truck, and Tom does all the othervarious jobs to make the beetharvest run smoothly. Their cashcrop farm has a rotation ofsugarbeets, corn, drybeans, andwheat. In some years the Zimmerswill grow some soybeans, but thisyear they did not grow any. TheZimmers were also a foundingmember of Bayside Beans locatedin Sebewaing, where Mark ispresident.


Mark, Tom and Mike Zimmer(left to right) are in one of theirsugarbeet fields this year.

IN THE NEWSgrower PROFILE OF FAMILY FARM FOR THE ZIMMERS

F A L L 2 0 0 2 1 3

Besides farming, the Zimmersare committed to their familiesand their community. Tom andSally also have a daughter, Dawn,who is a registered nurse inBoston. Tom enjoys spendingtime with his grandchildren.Mark and Lori have two children,Gavin and Landin. Mike and Terryhave three children, Ryan,Madison, and Rylee.

Tom coached basketball in theUSA school system for 16 years.He is also on the Board of Eldersfor the Unionville MoravianChurch. Mike joined Tom in thecoaching ranks and is a youthadvisor at the Moravian Church.

The Zimmers enjoy spendingtime with their family and partici-pate in recreational sports such asgolfing, softball and bowling.

The Zimmer family has beenvery supportive and active inMichigan Sugar’s 4-H and FFASugar Beet Project. Three genera-tions starting with Tom, thenMark and Mike, and now Ryan,have participated in this project.Tom was on the 4-H committeefor many years representing thegrower’s board. He believes theproject gives the children anopportunity to be more involvedwith, not just sugar interests, butall farming interests and instills

community involvement andwell-being.

Besides getting married to Sally,raising their children and enjoyinghis grandchildren, Tom states hisbiggest accomplishment is helpingform the sugarbeet cooperative.He feels the Co-op has a goodmanagement team, excellent dis-tribution channels, plus the exper-tise and knowledge of growingquality sugarbeets in today’s com-petitive market. He firmly believesthis cooperative will thrive, suc-ceed and prosper as well as othergrower-owned sugarbeet coopera-tives operating throughout thecountry.

Tenacity. Stamina. Good luck. Hardwork. Reasonable weather. Andmost of all, seed that gives you the

best possible edge. That’s why more sugar-beet growers choose Hilleshög.

Find out what’s in store for the upcoming season. Ask your Hilleshög Sales Rep, call 1-800-331-4305, or visit www.hilleshog-us.com.

WHAT’S AT THEROOT OF YOUR SUCCESS?

Eastern District Sales Manager - Doug Ruppal • 989-691-5100 Office • 989-551-1261 Mobile

PROFILE OF FAMILY FARM FOR THE ZIMMERS


The talents ofour growers nevercease to amaze allof us. For example,Bob Tenbusch wasinducted into theMichigan StatePolka Music Hall ofFame in October1999. How, mightyou ask, does aperson achievethis honor when

farming full time, including sugarbeets?Bob Tenbusch has always lived in the “thumb” of

Michigan; he was born in Ubly; married Marie(Dekoski) from Parisville; and raised four childrennear Rapson. Bob and Marie currently reside onSectionline Road, Bad Axe.

When Bob started farming, the first year he rentedthe land. The next year he bought the farm with 50acres wooded and 150 tillable. He farmed thisground while working at the Nestle’s dairy in Ubly.Bob has been growing sugarbeets (directly andhelping his son, Wally) for 37 years. His farmoperation grew to 1,100 acres in the early 1980s.Crops included corn, wheat, dry edible beans (naviesand black turtles) and sugarbeets; plus they finishedsteers. They produced 300 acres of sugarbeets. Customharvesting 200 to 300 acres of sugarbeets was anothersource of income. They bought their second harvester,a Heston four-row, in 1971 and their custom harvestingbusiness continues today. Bob retired from farmingfull-time in 1999 for health reasons; his son, Wally,continues to farm today on a limited basis.

Forty-six years ago (1954), Bob created a bandcalled the “Melody Makers,” a four-member band

consisting of trumpet (Bob); sax; accordion anddrums. They played at many events such as weddingreceptions, showers and festivals in the thumbarea. In 1969, the band changed their name to theMichigan Cavaliers and with a couple differentmusicians played “honkey” style music. This bandmade their first polka album in 1971 with “PolkaMusic is Here to Stay.” The Golden Stars band wasformed in 1974. Since then the groups have madetwo more albums. Bob continued to play in bandsuntil he retired formally from music in 1999 after30 years.

Bob and Marie have been married for 43 years.They have four children: Wally; Doug; Celine andMaryJo; all of which are very musically inclined andaccomplished musicians in their own rite. The twoboys, Wally and Doug continue their fathers’ traditionand play in the “Tenbusch Brothers,” plus persist infarming 500 acres.

Bob has participated in additional activitiesincluding: Harbor Beach FFA Alumni; UblyFoxhunter’s Club, plus church Pastoral Council; choirdirector and building committee. In addition, Bob hasgraciously supported and organized many benefits forthe members of local community. Marie has alwaysbeen very active behind the scenes for the bands.She also sings in the choir and has lead the churchbible study group for years.

Bob’s dedication to the many things he feels areimportant is exemplified by his being selected asthe Outstanding Citizens by the Croswell SugarbeetGrowers Association in 2000. This award showsthe contributions Bob Tenbusch has made to hiscommunity, in addition to the full-time occupationof farming in his other life. This is how BobTenbusch achieved the induction into the MichiganState Polka Hall of Fame. TMC

IN THE NEWSgrower BOB TENBUSCH: GIFTED MUSICIAN

AND SUGARBEET GROWER

Marie and Bob Tenbusch proudlydisplaying a few of their manyawards.

2003

For the 2003 crop, Michigan Sugar Company will award its first ever Grower ofthe Year Award. The Grower of the Year Award program is designed to givegrowers an incentive to improve their agricultural production practices focusingon recoverable white sugar per acre (RWSA) not just tons per acre.

For the 100 years Michigan Sugar Company has been in business, growershave concentrated on producing tons of beets per acre. Growers have alwaysequated payment based on tons of beets delivered. Now the growers own theCompany, they need to understand their payment is directly related to theproduction and sale of sugar, pulp, and molasses. Recoverable white sugarper acre needs to be emphasized to all grower/owners.

To compete for the prestigious Grower of the Year Award you have to bewilling to follow these criteria:

1. All acres by production (grower) unit will be included in the average forRWSA and recoverable white sugar per ton (RWST). Company recordswill be used to determine RWSA and RWST. Dual growers will be expectedto verify delivery for all their sugarbeet acreage, and, in addition will useall their sugarbeet acerage’s yield to determine their RWSA.

2. Growers need to be willing to share their production practices and willing tohost a farm tour to their operation the subsequent year.

OF THE YEARgrower

F A L L 2 0 0 2 1 5

2001–1997 Grower Crop Records B/100 Summary

TABLE 1

B/100 T/A %S %CJP NH2 RWST* RWSA SEED SP <50 9.4 17.3 93.2 13.8 245.2 2316 4.62 60 12.0 17.1 93.2 14.2 242.5 2903 4.68 70 14.1 17.5 93.4 13.5 249.6 3504 4.62 80 15.3 17.4 93.3 13.4 247.0 3771 4.54 90 16.3 17.6 93.5 13.0 252.2 4109 4.58 100 18.1 17.6 93.5 13.1 251.9 4550 4.60 110 18.7 17.6 93.5 13.1 252.4 4714 4.54 120 19.6 17.7 93.6 12.8 253.7 4958 4.46 130 20.5 17.7 93.6 12.9 253.7 5207 4.40 140 21.2 17.8 93.7 12.7 255.9 5426 4.38 150 21.9 17.8 93.7 12.7 255.6 5589 4.32 >150 23.1 17.8 93.7 12.8 256.3 5921 4.18 115 19.3 17.7 93.6 12.9 253.5 4884 4.44

Key: B/100: Harvested Beet/100 ft. row; T/A: Tons per acre; %S: Percent sugar; %CJP: Percent Clear Juice Purity; NH2: Amino-nitrogen (meq/100g S); RWST: Recoverable white sugar per ton (lbs/ton) based on 120-day slice equation; RWSA: tons/A * RWST; Seed SP: Seed spacing at planting (inches)

Table 1 (Right): This is five-yeardata (1997–2001) from thegrower crop records (8513contracts). Note the impact ofB/100 (stand generated fromthe tare samples) on qualityand yield. As you increasestand; quality and yield trendupward.


Drilled wheat alongside the

sugarbeet rows at planting.

Wheat plantedthrough insecticidehoppers in the row with the sugarbeet seed.

F A L L 2 0 0 2 1 7

Fall planted rye.

Wheat drilled at angles acrosssugarbeet rows in spring.

Broadcast fall-seededwheat incorporatedwith field cultivator.

Fall planted wheat and

spring barley.

How much does wind erosioncost you each year? In 2000, wereplanted 19,636 acres and in2002 we replanted over 9,100acres primarily due to wind (andwater) erosion both years.

If the yield loss from wind ismore than 5.0 tons/A (see Figure1), this would justify wind erosion

control on ALL acres! At morethan 19,000 acres (replanted) X 5tons/A, the loss would be 95,000tons (conservatively) which wouldbe more than six days’ slice at thefour factories. The loss would bemore than $3.3 million at $35 perton (or more than $25/A for ALL125,000 acres). Wind erosionprevention can be achieved forless than $25/A!

The Great Lakes sugarbeetgrowing region is known forstrong spring winds. Winds in 2000actually killed sugarbeets in the8-leaf stage. To reduce the impactof wind erosion, follow suggestedpractices:1. Plow and fit ground at right

angles to the prevailing wind.

2. Plant rows north and south.

3. Use reduced or minimum tillage (leave a rough seedbed).

4. Use a cultivator tooth betweenrows at planting time.

5. Plant into fall-seeded oats orwheat.

6. Plant sand knolls to oats orwheat.

7. After planting sugarbeets, drilloats or wheat at intervalsacross the field.

8. Cultivate early and deep.

Plan now on what wind erosionpractices you will be implement-ing for your sugarbeet crop nextyear! Keep in mind, when youchange one part of your system, itmay impact another. For example,an insect (e.g., cutworm) will laytheir eggs in green material in thespring.

You cannot afford to replant yoursugarbeets from wind erosion!Protect your beets for the wind! TMC


W I N D E R O S I O N — P R OT E C T YO U RB E E T S F R O M T H E W I N D !

Good yield area: 23 tons/A Poor yield area: 18 tons/A

Original Replant

Yield Monitor Map of Sugarbeet Field

24.96 – 72.91 (5.54 ac) 22.11 – 24.96 (6.05 ac) 19.74 – 22.11 (6.21 ac) 17.57 – 19.74 (6.08 ac) 14.87 – 17.57 (6.06 ac) 10.13 – 14.87 (5.73 ac) 3.00 – 10.13 (3.76 ac)

Harvest Master Yield Mass(ton(US)/ac)

N

0 238.6 ft

Figure 1: This yield monitor map of a 2000 field shows the dramatic impact of wind erosion can have onsugarbeet yield. The yield of the original planted sugarbeets was more than 23.0 tons/A compared to thereplanted sugarbeets yield of 18.0 tons/A. This difference of 5.0 tons/A at $35 per ton could easily justifywind erosion practices. (Map courtesy of LAKKE Ewald Farms, Inc.)

Cultivate early and deep!

F A L L 2 0 0 2 1 9

PROTECTING SMALL SUGARBEETSFROM WINDby Dr. Karen A. Renner

Small sugarbeets and very windydays are a bad combination! If highwinds occur soon after a poundingrain, the sugarbeets are very vulner-

able to “sand blasting” by soil particles blowingacross the soil surface. This is what we experiencedin 2002 in clean-tilled fields and no cultivation. Manyfields and areas in fields were replanted whichnormally would not be considered problem areas.An early cultivation to “rough up” the field would beone option to protect small sugarbeets in clean-tilledfields. If growers cultivate small sugarbeets they shouldtry to cultivate within one to two days following theirpostemergence herbicide application. This shouldresult in the weeds in the row and between the rowbeing controlled at the same time (within 48 hours).If another broadcast or banded herbicide applicationis needed, very small weeds will be at a similar size(1/8 to 1/4 inch) across the field in the next 7–14 days(depending on temperature).

We have conducted some research over theyears on evaluating tillage and planting smallgrains for wind erosion protection. Bernia Farms,Paul Knoerr, and John Burk were co-operators. Weappreciate their insights into protecting sugarbeetsfrom the wind.

Summary:1. Mulch tillage after strip-cropping protects young

sugarbeet seedlings from wind erosion. Thirty-five percent crop residue cover remained in thespring after mulch tillage of corn stubble andsugarbeet planting. After mulch tillage of soy-bean stubble and sugarbeet planting, 12% cropresidue cover remained in the spring. Sugarbeetstands were 23% greater in corn residue.

2. No-till and zone-till systems had lower sugarbeetpopulations and yield compared to the conven-tional tillage system in two years of research.No-tillage and zone tillage reduced soil erosionby leaving up to 70% crop residue cover on the

soil surface. However, conventional tillage hadthe highest net return.

3. Small grains can be seeded in sugarbeet fields toprotect small beets from winds and blowing soil.Wheat or barley can be seeded in the fall or in thespring. Barley establishes quickly in the spring andworks as well or better compared to wheat forwind erosion protection. Oats should be frost-seeded in the spring. Rye could be seeded in thefall, but problems occur because it grows so rapidlyin the spring and is difficult to control. Spring-seeded rye would work better. Annual ryegrassdoes not work well because it establishes slowlyand is quite small, yet it can become a weedproblem in future years.

4 Cultivation alone does not control fall or springseeded cereals.

5. Roundup (glyphosate) (prior to sugarbeetemergence!!!) was very effective controlling allfall or spring-seeded cereals. However, very littlesmall grain residue remained on the soil surfaceto protect sugarbeets, particularly where smallgrains were seeded in the spring. Roundupcould be banded over the row before sugarbeetsemerge to allow spring-seeded cereals toremain between the row to protect sugarbeets.The small grain crop between the row wouldthen need to be killed with Select, Assure II, or Poast.

6. Assure II, Select and Poast easily kill oats. Rye isthe most difficult cereal to control, followed bywheat and then barley. Fall-seeded rye is verydifficult to control. Fall-seeded wheat and barleyare also difficult to control. Assure II or Select aremore effective than Poast. For spring-seededcereals, all three of these herbicides will work.Tank mixtures with Betamix or Progress willreduce the effectiveness of these herbicides. Ihave not tried to control these small grains witha micro-rate application including Poast, Select,or Assure II to know if the MSO overcomes thisproblem. The slower the kill of the small grain the

continued, page 27

To help ensure high quality sugarbeets are delivered for long-term pile storage for YOURcompany, you, the owners, need to deliver HEALTHY (not stressed) sugarbeets free ofexcess dirt, tops and weeds. Roots in storage piles are alive and must be maintained in this“live” condition. Michigan Sugar Company’s Ag Department strives to best manage piles byadjusting pile height; managing sugarbeet receiving temperatures; and utilizing infrared pilescanning; etc. We encourage weedy fields and/or fields which have “burned” down withleafspot (even to the point of regrowth) to be harvested during the early delivery period!This joint effort will help ensure maximum returns to you, the owners!

1. Deliver Clean Beets: Lifting needs to be done at a speed allowing the harvester toremove as much soil and remaining green material (tops and weeds) as possible.Slower harvester speeds will give you cleaner beets; more roots lifted; and fewerbroken roots (resulting in higher tonnage). Root breakage and bruising duringharvesting and truck loading provide openings for rot organisms. These rot organismswill increase the respiration rate, resulting in higher sugar loss in storage. Bemindful of ways to reduce breakage and bruising of your sugarbeets.

2. Heavy Weed Pressure, USE a Flail Shredder: In fields where heavy weed pressure ispresent at harvest, run a flail-shredder ahead of the defoliator, being careful not todamage the sugarbeet’s crown. This will improve the performance of your defoliator;extend the life of your rubber flails; and allow you to deliver sugarbeets acceptablefor long-term pile storage. A couple other options would be to have steel (or evensteel-studded paddles) on one of the drums OR run the defoliator two times inopposite directions.

3. Proper Defoliation: Green material (ALL) should be removed, butthe beet’s crown should remain intact. Leaves and petiolesremaining on the root decrease ventilation (air movement)through the pile which increases sugar losses in storage. One ofthe major causes of “poorly-topped” sugarbeets is the defoliator’sground speed being too fast (ideal speed is 3 MPH). In thetare room, the “green material” will remain on the beets as theyare sawed for quality analysis. This green material will cause adecreased sugar content on your contract.

4. Stressed sugarbeets do not store. Sugarbeets burned down fromleafspot or other pest problems need to be harvested duringearly delivery. Stressed sugarbeets have higher respiration ratesand do not store in the piles. As grower/owners, YOU want todeliver only healthy non-stressed sugarbeets for permanent pilingand long-term storage.

5. Proper Root Temperature is below 50°F: Roots in storage pilesare alive and must be maintained in a live condition. When piledhot (above 55°F), beets use much more sugar through respirationthan when piled cool (below 50°F). Higher root temperatures

T I P S TO D E L I V E R S U G A R B E E T S F O RLO N G -T E R M S TO R A G E


50°Proper root temperatureis below 50°.

Delivercleanbeets.

Well defoliatedsugarbeets storebetter in the piles.

You have worked hard all year. You need toharvest as much of the crop as possible. Alwaysharvest your poorest fields first. Leave thebest ones with the most potential to gain!Slow down your harvester! Have a safe andsuccessful sugarbeet harvest season! TMC

have increased respiration rates. Of sugar lost in storage, approximately70–80% is utilized for respiration. The remaining 20–30% is due to beet decayand fermentation which is accelerated by higher pile temperatures. Fermentation iscaused by decay organisms and a lack of oxygen in piles. Lowered oxygen levels canresult from excess dirt, weeds and tops reducing air movement through the piles.

6. NO Frosted or Frozen Roots: Frozen roots or beets with frozen crowns cannot bepiled for long-term storage under any condition. Frozen tissue is damaged andwill not heal once the root is harvested. Do NOT defoliate beets when freezingconditions are predicted; tops (leaves) help protect (insulate) the crown andbeet. Defoliated beets will have much more frost (or freeze) damage comparedto beets with the leaves remaining intact.

7. Improving Delivery Efficiencies: To decrease your truck drivers’ unloading time atthe pilers, please equip your trucks with chutes and flashing to reduce spillagearound the piler swings. The time it takes your truck hoist to come down greatlyaffects your truck’s unloading time at the pilers. Most truck hoists do and ALLshould come down in less than 60 seconds. Time is money!

F A L L 2 0 0 2 2 1

No frostedor frozenroots.

Think Safety First!Use these signs to notify of

slippery roads.


H I S TO RY O F T H E M I C H I G A N S U G A RC O M PA N Y G R O W E R ’ S A S S O C I AT I O N

The following is a compilation ofthe different phases the GreatLakes’ growing region growerassociations that have taken placesince their inception in the early1930s to present.

FARMERS AND MANUFACTURERSBEET SUGAR ASSOCIATION—YESTERDAY

The Farmers and ManufacturersBeet Sugar Association (F & M)was founded during the Depressionwhen farmers wanted to delivermore sugarbeets than theprocessors could handle due tothe relatively poor prices in othercrops. Groups of farmers andmanufacturers realized in order forthe beet sugar industry to survivethe two groups would have to joinforces and work together for mutu-al benefit. Originally founded in1932, the F & M had representationfrom Wisconsin, Indiana, Illinois,Ohio, Michigan and Ontario.

During its history, F & M providedservices which aided the sugarbeetindustry. The agricultural develop-ments included the following:

• Production of domestic seedbegan in 1940 (this was sig-nificant because importationof sugarbeet seed wasstopped at the beginning ofWorld War II).

• Introduction of mechanizationof thinning and harvesting.

• Agronomic practices included:experimentation in crop rota-tion; sugarbeet herbicides anddisease resistance in varieties.

THE TRANSITION FROM THEFARMER & MANUFACTURERSSUGARBEET ASSOCIATION TOTHE GREAT LAKES SUGAR BEETGROWER ASSOCIATIONBy Stanley Gettel

My knowledge of the Farmers &Manufacturers SugarbeetAssociation (F & M), began when Iwas first elected to the SebewaingSugarbeet Growers Association in1968. I have been told the F & Mbegan in the late 1930s, likely fol-lowing the organization of the var-ious local boards which took placearound 1934. Early membershipincluded the Michigan growingareas, several of which no longerexist (such as Alma, Mt. Pleasant,Lansing etc.), as well as severalareas in Ohio and those inWisconsin, Indiana, and Ontario.

As the title indicates, F & M wasmuch more than a growers’ group.As I recall, the office contained agrower representative, companyrepresentative, researcher director,and an advertising and public rela-tion person. These activities weredone jointly. Some of the wellknown people in these areas wereLoren Armbruster, Dick Posthumousworking for the growers, PercReeve worked for the Companiesas their spokesman. Dr. RichardZielke filled the research positionand covering the Public Relationarea for a period of time were JohnMcGill and John Rummel. Theseindividuals were some of the morerecent and better known to me.

The grower representativeworked much as our recent GreatLakes executives have, coveringthe legislative area and were very

involved in the actual writing ofthe Sugar Bill and working forcongressional support. They alsoassisted in local growing areaissues from trucking problems tocompany relations. Labor issueswere very important at the timeand the government held annualhearings regarding labor conditionsand set minimum pay rates bothhourly and per acre. Testimonyhad to be given on behalf of ourindustry.

As I came on our local board andhad the opportunity to attend theF & M growers’ meetings (not as avoting member), each Associationhad only one voting director at thattime (1968). Nine members wererepresented: three from Ohio andsix from Michigan. By the early1980s two Ohio associations haddropped out and the other plantowned by Great Western was hav-ing problems and eventually GreatWestern went out of business. Thisleft only the Michigan companies,and with concerns over anti-trustand collusion issues, the companiesdecided this was not the correctorganization for them. It was

Stanley Gettel

F A L L 2 0 0 2 2 3

decided to dissolve the organiza-tion entirely and our final growerannual meeting was held inAugust, 1982.

Prior to this final F&M meeting,the Michigan Sugar growers felt anorganization to bring the five grow-ing areas together on a regularbasis was essential. The Presidentsof the local associations were askedto draw up bylaws and articles ofincorporation for such an organiza-tion. This organization was officiallyadopted in December of 1982 andnamed the Great Lakes Sugar BeetGrowers Association. The first offi-cers were President Stanley Gettel;Vice President Roy Hickey;Secretary-Treasurer Garnet Hoard;and Executive Board members JohnHeussner and Jack Tagget. It wasdecided to hire an executive to aidin the functions of the organizationand Robert Young was namedExecutive Vice President.

Some other important growerswho come to mind in the F & Mwere: Elmer Haines from the Caroassociation who was Presidentfor many years; Carl Yackle, aSebewaing grower who was theF & M President for 4 years; JohnHeussner, a Croswell grower, whobecame President of AmericanSugar Beet Growers. Ralph Gilmorefrom Ohio was President of theF & M when it was dissolved.

GREAT LAKES SUGAR BEETGROWER ASSOCIATION—THEHISTORYBy Dick Leach

Directors representing theAlma Sugar Beet Growers, Inc.,Caro Sugar Beet Growers, Inc.,

Croswell Sugar Beet Growers, Inc.,Saginaw Sugar Beet Growers, Inc.,and the Sebewaing Beet GrowersAssociation, Inc. met in the F & Moffice to discuss the dissolution ofthe F & M and the reorganizationof a new grower association. OnDecember 14, 1982, the GreatLakes Sugar Beet GrowersAssociation held its first meetingat the Bavarian Inn. Forty directorswere present including Ohiogrowers. The Ohio growers wereoffered a membership after dueswere paid the following year.

Robert D. Young was hired onJanuary 18, 1983, as the ExecutiveVice President and FrancesSchnetzler as a part-time secretaryfor the office at 320 Plaza North,Saginaw, Michigan.

On April 12 at an ExecutiveBoard meeting, they approvedcommittees for the new associa-tion including a Political ActionCommittee (PAC). The Associationserved its members well in areasof contracting, seed selection,

research, political action, publicrelations, and youth programs.

In 1984, Michigan SugarCompany was sold to SavannahFoods and Industries, Inc. ofSavannah, Georgia. Carol Middletonwas hired as a part-time secretaryfor the association. In 1991, theGreat Lakes’ office was movedfrom the third floor (MichiganSugar Floor) to the fourth floor,Suite 485, in the Plaza NorthBuilding. Bob Young retired andRichard E. Leach Jr. was hired.

In 1997, Imperial Sugar pur-chased Savannah Foods andIndustries, including MichiganSugar Company.

Michigan Sugar and the GreatLakes entered into a joint ventureto explore the feasibility of amolasses de-sugaring operation in1998. Pioneer Growers, Inc. LLC,was created to represent thegrowers’ 50% share of theMichigan Molasses Alliance. Afterall costs were known, it wasdetermined the venture was notfeasible. At a special meeting inthe Spring of 1999, the directorsvoted to discontinue the project.

In the Winter of 2000, Imperialinvited the growers to form a co-opto explore the purchase ofMichigan Sugar. The growersformed a cooperative, MichiganSugar Beet Growers, Inc., and onFebruary 12, 2002, the purchaseof the company was completed.

MICHIGAN SUGAR COMPANYBOARD OF DIRECTORS—TODAY

As we look back at the historyof the sugarbeet industry in the

The six different presidents of theGreat Lakes Sugar Beet GrowersAssociation spanned 20 yearsfrom 1982 to 2002. Left to right(standing) Tom Zimmer; DonKeinath; Jack Tagget; RichardMaurer; and Stanley Gettel;Garnet Hoard (sitting).

continued, page 24


S C H O L A R S H I P R E C I P I E N T S2 0 0 2 – 2 0 0 3

ALBERT FLEGENHEIMER MEMORIAL SCHOLARSHIPMichigan Sugar Company recently awarded the Albert Flegenheimer

Memorial Scholarship to Jackie Ann Puvalowski, daughter of Claudeand Denise Puvalowski, of Ruth, Michigan. The $2,500 scholarship ispresented annually in recognition of academic excellence and communityinvolvement. Jacky Puvalowski is a senior at Ubly High School whereshe achieved a 3.83 grade point average. She is a member of theStudent Council, Business Professionals of America, the 4-H, NationalHonor Society, and the Pom-Squad. She is also active in her church andcommunity. Miss Puvalowski will be attending Michigan State Universityto pursue higher education in medicine.

Albert Flegenheimer was chairman of the board for Michigan SugarCompany from 1963 to 1970. His son, Ernest, created this scholarshipin his memory. The Albert Flegenheimer Memorial Scholarship hasbeen committed to providing financial assistance to high school seniorsin the Michigan sugarbeet growing area since 1979.

PHIL BRIMHALL MEMORIAL SCHOLARSHIP The Phil Brimhall Memorial Scholarship has been awarded to Kyle

Yackle, son of James and Sheila Yackle of Pigeon, Michigan. This is thesecond year this $1,000 scholarship has been given to a high schoolsenior. Kyle Yackle has achieved a 3.54 grade point average while beingan active member of the National Honor Society and the FFA. He wasawarded a Prestige Grower Award in the Sebewaing FFA/4-H program.Kyle will pursue higher education in computerized machine operation.

This scholarship is given in the memory of Phil Brimhall a long-timeemployee and Chief Agronomist at Michigan Sugar Company.

Great Lakes area, we can under-stand many changes have occurred.Our industry has flourished forthe past 100 years because ofchange. The sugar industry in theGreat Lakes region, as part of thetotal sweetener industry, remainsviable due to a law opposed byour very customers, the sugarusers. For the industry to contin-ue to be successful, it must havegrower/ producers. Growers arethe foundation of the industry. Forthe growers to continue growing,they must make a profit. The Co-op gives the grower a bigger share

of the sugar dollar. Growers nolonger produce tons of beets—they produce pounds of sugar peracre and as a cooperative, growerscan join with other growers withoutantitrust laws to worry about.

As the F & M became outdated,so has the Great Lakes Sugar BeetGrowers Association. Growers,now organized through theCooperative, can do everythingthe Great Lakes did, only now itcan be done together—growers,Co-op administration, and labor.As local associations reorganize aslocal Co-op organizations local

programs should continue. TheBoard has approved the followingcommittees: 4H-FFA, PublicRelations, Political Action (PAC),Seed, and Grower Relations. TheCo-op also has directors’ partici-pation on the American SugarbeetGrowers Association, SugarbeetAdvancement, and other tradeorganizations.

Michigan Sugar Company, theCo-op, and Pioneer Sugar—LocallyGrown, Locally Owned, has abright future. Our only limits areour imagination and our desire.

History of the Michigan Sugar Grower’s Association continued from page 23

F A L L 2 0 0 2 2 5

Mark Flegenheimer is the President and Chief Executive Officer of Michigan SugarCompany. He has been with the Company since 1994 and reports to the Board ofDirectors for Michigan Sugar Company. Prior to joining Michigan Sugar Company, Markworked for 11 years in New York City in the commodities trading business. Mark grad-uated from DePauw University in Greencastle, Indiana. Mark is a Trustee of the U.S. BeetSugar Association and a Director of the Sugar Association, in Washington, D.C. He alsoserves on the Board of Trustees of the Saginaw Community Foundation. He and hiswife, Anne, reside in Saginaw Township with their two children, Trevor age 8 andKatie age 7.

Jim Ruhlman is the Vice President of Administration. He oversees the gen-eral functions of administrative service departments including ManagementInformation Services (MIS); Human Resources (HR); Purchasing and Safety;reporting to Mark Flegenheimer. He received his B.S. degree from SaginawValley State University in Data Processing with a minor in Business. Jim hasbeen employed at Michigan Sugar Company for 19 years. Jim and his wife,Dawn, reside in Freeland with their four children, Nicole age 15; Matt age 13;Joe age 11 and David age 9. Jim is active in coaching youth basketball andbaseball programs and the education commission for Holy Spirit Catholic Church.

Herb Wilson is the Vice President of Operations reporting to Mark Flegenheimer. Hehas been employed by the same company for 37 years, despite numerous ownershipchanges. Herb is responsible for the overall operations and maintenance at MichiganSugar Company’s six factory locations (Caro, Carrollton, Croswell, Sebewaing, Findlay andFremont). He also coordinates operation reporting data and supports factory staffs. Heattended Santa Anna College studying engineering. Herb and his wife, Gail, reside inSaginaw Township. They have three grown children, Kristin; Jeff and Bethany.

Robert Braem is the Vice President of Agriculture reporting to MarkFlegenheimer. He has 21 years experience at Michigan Sugar Company with a B.S.degree in Crop and Soil Sciences from Michigan State University. Bob is responsi-ble for coordinating the agriculture department activities to assist our grower/owners in efficiently producing high quality sugarbeets. He also oversees receivingand storing the crop to ensure maximum sugar recovery. He is active in the TuscolaCounty Economic Development Board; Almer Township Park Board; St. PaulLutheran Church Council and Board of Fellows at Saginaw Valley State University.Bob and his wife, Jane reside in Caro and have two boys David age 17 and Mark age 14.

Denis Boissonneault is the Chief Financial Officer reporting to Mark Flegenheimer.His responsibilities include managing all finance, treasury and accounting functions.Denis received his B.A. and M.A. in Business Administration from Saginaw Valley StateUniversity. He is active in the community as treasurer for “Our Littlest Angels” golf andbowling tournaments; past chairman of Covenant Healthcare Foundation; past presidentof the Saginaw Exchange Club and member of the SVSU Annual Fund Committee. He isa lifelong resident of Saginaw.

M E E T T H E S TA F F F O RM I C H I G A N S U G A R C O M PA N Y

continued, page 26


Jeff Adamo is the Director of Human Resources reporting to Jim Ruhlman. Hereceived his B.A. from Saginaw Valley State University and a M.S. in Administration-Human Resources from Central Michigan University. Jeff has oversight responsibility forthe Human Resources function including recruiting and employment; compensation andbenefits; employee and labor relations; policy development and administration andgovernmental compliance issues. He is active at St. Stephen Catholic Church in theschool committee and Parent Advisory along with many of this children’s activitiesincluding t-ball, basketball and school activities. Jeff and his wife, Lynette, reside in

Saginaw Township and have two daughters, Justine age 7 and Elyse age 5.

Chris Dunham is the Director of the Management Information Systemsreporting to Jim Ruhlman. She is responsible for all computer systems func-tions including managing and planning system hardware and software projectsand setting the Information Systems staff’s priorities while keeping a customer-focus of providing accurate and timely information to management. Chris hasher B.S. degree from the University of Michigan in Computer Science. Christogether with her husband, Dave, reside in Caro and have two children, Davidage 7 and Emily age 6.

Sherrie Geitman is the Director of Purchasing reporting to Jim Ruhlman. She is respon-sible for the procurement of maintenance; repair; operating and packaging supplies forall facilities totaling more than $27 million annually. Sherrie works closely with the facili-ties on inventory management and is the liaison for all purchasing and inventory issues.She has an associates degree in office management at Delta college with continuingeducation toward a B.S. in Business Administration. Sherrie and her husband, Greg,

reside in Hemlock and have two children, Brandon age 7 and Tyler age 5.

Richard Leach is the Director of Community and Government Relationsand reports to Mark Flegenheimer. He oversees Michigan Sugar Company’sinvolvement in community events and public relations, in addition to repre-senting the Co-op in state and federal governmental issues. This involvesworking with grower programs such as Political Action Committee (PAC); 4Hand FFA youth program and coordinates the “Pioneer Sugar” logo promo-tions. Dick and his wife, Sharon have three married sons. Rick and Chuckoperate the family farm and Paul is a certified crane operator. His activities

in the community include 34 years on the Spaulding Township board and as a memberof the water board; also ten years on the State Farm Bureau Board.

John Yuill is the Controller and reports to Denis Boissonneault. He supervises allaspects of the accounting department including payroll, payables and financial report-ing. John began his employment at Michigan Sugar Company in 1980. He receivedboth his B.S. and M.S. degrees from Saginaw Valley State University and is a CertifiedPublic Accountant. John and his wife, Chris, reside in Saginaw Township and havethree children, Sarah age 20; Heather age 18 and Brad age 15.

M E E T T H E S TA F F F O RM I C H I G A N S U G A R C O M PA N Y continued from page 25

Barry Brown is the Vice President of Sales and Marketing reporting to the Executive VicePresident of Sales at Imperial Sugar Company. Barry has been in the sugar industry for 26.5

years. He received his B.A. degree from Michigan State University. Barry’s wife, Carol, is aninstructor of foreign language at Nouvel Central Catholic High School and they have two

grown sons, Jason who is a Captain and pilot in the USAF and Adam who is a Lieutenantand Doctor in the US Navy. Barry is active in the community as vice chairperson for “Our

Littlest Angels” golf and bowling tournaments; board member for Covenant HealthcareFoundation; Hospitality House and Michigan Food Processors Association; Michigan Grocers

Association and the Finance Committee at church.

Tony Moggenberg is the Manager of Production Planning. He is responsi-ble for finished product operations and coordinating information flow

between sales and factory personnel. Tony received a B.S. in Marketing witha concentration in Logistics Management from Central Michigan University.

His tenure will be twelve years this December. Tony resides in Elwell with hiswife, Holly, and children, Kelsie age 5; Seth age 4 and Owen age 2.

Photos by Bublitz Photography.

F A L L 2 0 0 2 2 7

Stand with the PROS!

The Pros at Betaseedwant you to discoverpest and d isease tol-erant varieties that don’tforsake yield. With vari-eties like Beta 5736, Beta5451, Beta 5400, andBeta 5977, you don’thave to worry aboutperformance.

So, stand with the Pros -Betaseed Prohanced andPRO200 sugarbeet seed.

Service Agronomist - Great Lakes AreaRob Gerstenberger

810-404-3353

R

TM

SALES PERSONNEL ARE EMPLOYEES OF IMPERIAL SUGAR COMPANY, SUGAR LAND, TEXAS, AND HOUSED AT THE GENERAL OFFICE IN SAGINAW, MICHIGAN.

longer the wind erosion protection will bepresent because more small grain residueremains on the soil surface for a longerperiod of time.

7. Broadcast micro-rates including UpBeet +Betamix (or Progress) will control spring-seeded oats, resulting in limited winderosion protection. Banded applications ofNortron preemergence will also controlspring-seeded oats in the row. I do notknow the effectiveness of these herbicideprograms on spring-seeded barley orwheat. These herbicide programs will notcontrol fall-seeded small grains and Assure IIor Select must be applied.

Protecting Small Sugarbeets from Windcontinued from page 19


E F F E C T O F VA R I E T Y, P O P U L AT I O N( S TA N D ) A N D N I T R O G E N O N S U G A R B E E T Q U A L I T Y I N M I C H I G A NThis paper was presented at the31st Biennial Meeting (Agriculture)of the American Society of SugarBeet Technologists in Vancouver,British Columbia (2001).

Have varieties changed over timein how they respond to productionpractices of increased stand ornitrogen application rates? Toaddress this question, the followingobjective of the impact of nitrogenand stand (B/100) on three vari-eties’ yield and quality in Michiganwas determined. To address thisobjective the following researchwas conducted over three loca-tion-years in Michigan with twolocations in 1998 at Weber loca-tion in Ruth and Stoutenburg loca-tion in Sandusky (Stout) and onelocation in 1999 at the Fogg loca-tion in Saginaw.

The experimental design was aRCBD with four replications with athree-factor factorial of split plotdesign. The factorial consisted ofthree commercially grown varieties,US “H20” (1970’s), Hilleshog “E4”(1982 to present—limited) andHilleshog “E17” (1996 to present);

(intended and thinned) populationsof 130, 180 and 230 beets per 100feet of row; and nitrogen rates of80, 130, 180 and 230 poundsnitrogen per acre. Plots were tworows; row width of 28 or 30-inches;and 30-feet long before alleys werecut. Nitrogen and stand were splitonto variety. Yield and quality datawere collected with only qualitydata of %S (sucrose content),%CJP (clarified juice purity) andRWST (120-day slice equation)presented.

Results and summary will begiven in order of RWST, %S and%CJP. The main effect of stand(B/100) combined over nitrogenand variety showed increasingRWST (Table 1) and % S as standincreased from 130 to 180B/100, but no change from 180to 230 B/100.

With an interaction of nitrogenby location (Table 2), the Weberlocation’s RWST decreased withadditional nitrogen applicationsfrom 80 through 180 lbs. nitro-gen/A. Stoutenburg and Fogglocations had no decrease inRWST from 80 to 130; but

decreased RWST from 130 to 180lbs. nitrogen/A. The Fogg locationdecreased RWST from 180 to 230lbs. nitrogen/A.

Main effect of nitrogen decreasedRWST (Table 2) and % S (Table 4)with all nitrogen applications. Withimproved genetics, varieties haveincreased RWST (Table 3) and%S (Table 5) at the Weber andStoutenburg locations for all threevarieties. At the Fogg location, E17had higher RWST (Table 3) and%S (Table 5) compared to eitherE4 or H20.

Weber location’s %CJP (Table 6)decreased at 80 to 130 lbs. nitro-gen/A; %CJP at Stoutenburg andFogg location decreased 130 to180 lbs. nitrogen/A; and %CJP atFogg location decreased 180 to230 lbs. nitrogen/A.

Variety H20’s %CJP (Table 7)decreased with all additional nitro-gen applications. Variety improve-ment has maintained %CJP (Table8) with nitrogen rates 80 to 130 lbsnitrogen/A for E4 and E17. Varietyimprovement has maintained %CJPwith nitrogen rates 130 to 180 lbsnitrogen/A for E17.

The main effect of stand (B/100) on RWST, %S and %CJP combined over varieties, nitrogen applications and locations.

TABLE 1

Stand B/100 RWST %S %CJP 130 253.4 18.1 92.3 180 256.7 18.3 92.5 230 257.6 18.3 92.7

LSD (0.05) 2.7 0.1 0.2

The interaction of nitrogen rate and location for RWST combined over varieties and stand (B/100).

TABLE 2

Nitrogen Weber Stout Fogg AVG(lbs /A) RWST RWST RWST RWST 80 280.9 266.3 251.2 266.2 130 274.3 262.0 248.6 261.6 180 264.4 253.3 234.2 250.6 230 259.3 250.5 225.5 245.1 LSD (0.05) 5.4 3.1

F A L L 2 0 0 2 2 9

The interaction of variety and location for RWST combined over stand (B/100) and nitrogen application.

TABLE 3

Weber Stout Fogg AVGVariety RWST RWST RWST RWST H20 252.5 241.5 230.1 241.4E4 272.6 258.6 232.7 254.6E17 284.1 273.9 256.9 271.7

LSD (0.05) 5.4 3.1

The main effect of nitrogen rate for %S combined over variety; stand (B/100) and location.

TABLE 4

Nitrogen (lbs/A) %S 80 18.7130 18.5180 18.0230 17.8

LSD (0.05) 0.2

The interaction of variety and location for %S combined over stand (B/100) and nitrogen applications.

TABLE 5

Weber Stout Fogg AVGVariety %S %S %S %S H20 17.7 17.6 16.9 17.4E4 19.0 18.8 17.1 18.3E17 19.5 19.5 18.3 19.0

LSD (0.05) 0.2 0.1

The interaction of nitrogen rate and location for %CJP combined over variety and stand (B/100).

TABLE 6

Nitrogen Weber Stout Fogg AVG(lbs /A) %CJP %CJP %CJP %CJP 80 94.2 92.4 92.6 93.1130 93.7 92.2 92.5 92.8180 93.6 91.7 91.5 92.3230 93.2 91.6 91.0 91.9

LSD (0.05) 0.4 0.2

The main effect of variety for %CJP combined over nitrogen; stand (B/100) and location.

TABLE 7

AVG Variety %CJP H20 92.2E4 92.2E17 93.1 LSD (0.05) 0.3

The interaction of nitrogen rate and variety for %CJP combined over stand (B/100) and location.

TABLE 8

Nitrogen H20 E4 E17 AVG(lbs /A) %CJP %CJP %CJP %CJP 80 93.1 92.6 93.4 93.1130 92.4 92.6 93.4 92.8180 92.0 91.9 93.0 92.3230 91.5 91.6 92.6 91.9

LSD (0.05) 0.4 0.2

In conclusion, varieties have changed over time,but they all responded similar to increasing stand of130 to 180 B/100 improving RWST, %S and %CJP for

H20, E4 and E17. However, variety E17 maintained%CJP at higher nitrogen applications. TMC

WINDOWcommunity

By Dick Leach,Director ofCommunity andGovernmentRelations

The Presidentsigned the Farm

Security and Investment Act of2002, Public Law 107-171, (betterknown as the "Farm Bill") into lawon Monday, May 13th, 2002.Thanks to the media, this is themost misrepresented and misun-derstood farm law in moderntimes. Fortunately, the majority ofCongress and the Presidentunderstand the importance offood security and the importanceof agriculture to the rural economyof America. In 1996, the Farm Billpassed the House by just ninevotes. In 2002, it passed theHouse by 139 votes. The cost ofthe 2002 bill is essentially equalto the cost of the 1996 Farm Billplus emergency and market losspayments. Approximately 22% ofthe total Ag. Budget goes to pro-duction agriculture and the balanceto other programs such as schoollunches, WIC (Women, Infants andChildren), and other programs(See Figure 1).

The U.S. sugar industry faredwell in this Farm Bill with severalissues being addressed to assurea viable market for the growersand a stable sugar supply to theconsumers for the next six years:(1) Repeal of the sugar loan for-feiture penalty, (2) Elimination ofthe marketing assessment (thiswas suspended for fiscal years2000 and 2001 only to resume foryears 2002 and 2003), (3) A sugar

marketing allotment when deter-mined to be necessary by theSecretary of Agriculture followingthe guidelines in the law. TheSecretary has announced marketingallotments are in effect for the2002 crop beginning October 1st,

2002. Any sugar produced overour allotment could go to fill otherprocessors’ allotments who arehaving a production year lowerthan their average.

Mexico remains a challenge asof this writing. Their sugar industryis in economic shambles with halfof their sugar mills being ownedand operated by the government.The strong Mexican union and thelocal economy where cane isgrown is highly dependent on thesugar industry. Mexico wants toexport all of its excess sugar tothe U.S. The U.S. corn growers

want to sell High Fructose CornSyrup (HFCS) to Mexico, butMexico has more sweeteners thanit needs. The Fox administrationstates for each pound of HFCSimported from the U.S., the U.S.will need to import a pound ofMexican sugar. Each country has anegotiating team working out anagreement. Ray VanDriessche, aMonitor grower and the pastpresident of the AmericanSugarbeet Growers Association,is a member of the U.S. team. I amvery confident an agreement willbe negotiated in the best interestof both countries.

I wish you all a safe harvest anda great crop.


THE FARM BILL AND MEXICO

Seedex sugar beetsnever stop producing .. . field after field and year after year.

Exceptional top endyield and high sugar

content mean moreprofit for you.

Call us or visit our web site . . . make your profits shine!SEEDEX: 1-800-777-7272 www.seedexseed.com

Our superior genetics produce

disease resistant seeds, and ourseed conditioning techniques andcoating options enhance our genetics.Bottom line . . . more profits for you!

PIONEER NEWSBEETFall 2002Michigan Sugar CompanyP.O. Box 107Caro, MI 48723

Address Service Requested

PRSRT STDUS POSTAGE

PAIDLANSING, MIPERMIT #75

Michigan Sugar Company is owned bylocal growers. Nearly every cent youspend on Pioneer Sugar stays in the localeconomy—helping provide jobs for morethan 1,350 people—helping build strongcommunities throughout our growingregion. Pioneer Sugar is pure, natural sugar,it adds a delightful taste at only 15 caloriesper teaspoon! Locally grown. Locally owned.In many ways, the best way to add a littlelocal flavor.

Locally Grown. Locally Owned.

PPIOIONNEEREER · time of year at Michigan Sugar— with the harvest beginning and factories...

Documents

Transcript of PPIOIONNEEREER · time of year at Michigan Sugar— with the harvest beginning and factories...