ethanol policy puts the squeeze on livestock

From Melissa Moody with the Jeff/NA News-Tribune, yet another reason to hate our country's ethanol subsidies...

Since the 2007 Energy Bill included a mandate requiring an additional 15 billion gallons of ethanol to be produced primarily from corn, the cost for Adams to feed his livestock has gotten even more expensive. The price of livestock feed increased more than 25 percent from last year....

For pork producers in Clark County, and the rest of the state, the increasing price of corn for feed and the decreasing price for pork is leaving them with little profit. Pork producers are hit the hardest by the rising price of corn, but other livestock farmers are affected as well.

Increases in the cost of corn following the latest ethanol mandate is more adverse for Indiana than other states, said Dr. Wally Tyner, an agricultural economist at Purdue University. On average, half of Indiana’s agricultural income comes from livestock....

I know, let's subsidize pork producers too!

For Adams, the cost to farm his land has become a waiting game. When, and if, the price of pork becomes competitive again, the high cost of feed for his farm will be offset. There is more supply than demand in the pork market currently, and it looks like it will remain that way for another year.

Uhhh...something's not right here. How can be a surplus if supply is taking a hit? The increased costs should, relatively quickly, manifest themselves as higher prices for pork and other meats.

"How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?" Well, Pink, what should we do when meat prices rise? And if it's corn pudding, that's going to be pricier too...

Our country's ethanol policies should taken behind the proverbial barn...and shot!