Carbon Capture and Storage legislation and prospect of pore space leasing moves forward in Ohio

Written by Peggy Kirk Hall, Attorney and Director, Agricultural & Resource Law Program

Illustration of a carbon injection well

A bill authorizing the capture and storage of carbon dioxide via underground storage wells has passed the Ohio House of Representatives.  The nearly unanimous vote by the House now advances H.B. 170 to the Ohio Senate.

We’ve reported previously on the prospect of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) coming to Ohio.  CCS is one part of a strategy to reduce airborne CO2 emissions. It’s of high interest to hard-to-abate emission sources, such as ethanol, steel, chemical, and concrete production facilities. Rather than reducing the CO2 in their emissions, CCS allows such sectors to capture CO2 from emissions and store the CO2 in pore spaces far beneath the land’s surface. But landowners must be willing to lease their “pore space” for CO2 storage. If passed, then, CCS legislation will create pore space leasing opportunities and challenges for Ohio landowners.

Refer to our Ag Law Blog posts explaining CCS and discussing how CCS requires landowners to lease “pore space.”  We also reviewed the first CCS bills in Ohio, proposed last legislative session, in a third blog post.  Those  bills did not pass, and H.B. 170 represents a new version of the proposals, developed after additional consideration by interested parties.

What’s in H.B. 170?

H.B. 170 sets up a state regulatory framework that authorizes the storage of capture carbon dioxide into subsurface “pore space” via Class VI injection wells, which are regulated by the U.S. EPA under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act’s Underground Injection Control Program.  The bill addresses several

  • Agency authority and rules.  Delegates regulatory authority over CCS to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Oil and Gas Resources Management and directs the Chief to adopt rules that carry out the legislation.
  • “Pore space” interests.  Defines “pore space” as the subsurface cavities and voids that are suitable for use as storage areas for CO2, outlines procedures for severing and conveying pore space, clarifies the relationship between pore space, surface rights, and mineral interests, and limits the liability of pore space owners for the injection of CO2 into their pore space.
  • CCS projects.  Lays out the components of “carbon sequestration projects,” which includes “storage facilities” operated by “storage operators” who inject CO2 into pore space via injection wells.
  • “Pooling” of pore space.  Authorizes the pooling or “statutory consolidation” of pore space for carbon sequestration projects if the storage operator obtains the consent of owners of at least 70% of the pore space and establishes rights and responsibilities for statutory consolidation.
  • Project completion and closure.  Provides procedures for “certificates of project completion” that apply to the closure of storage facilities and a transfer of responsibility and liability to the State.
  • Fees and penalties.  Establishes fees for storage facilities and funds to pay for current and post-closure care program costs  and sets civil and criminal penalties for violation of CCS regulations.
  • Limitations on damages.  Limits claims for damages dues to injection or migration of CO2 to claims that establish direct physical injury to persons, animals, or property,  limits claims to diminution of value caused by the injection or migration and prohibits punitive damages in such cases.

What’s next for CCS?

The Ohio Senate now has its turn to consider H.B. 170.  The Senate President referred the bill to the Senate Energy Committee,  which already has a CCS bill before the committee. The Senate’s version of CCS, S.B. 136, was introduced last March but has not received any hearings. 

S.B. 136 mirrors the version of H.B. 170 first introduced in the House. But amendments to H.B. 170 occurred in the House Natural Resources Committee that created differences between the two bills.  It will be up to Energy Committee Chair Brian Chavez to determine which bill to advance, if any. 

For a comparison of the original introduced bills (H.B. 170 and S.B. 136) and the substitute bill for H.B. 170 that passed the House of Representatives, refer to this synopsis by the Legislative Service Commission that highlights the differences.

H.B. 170 is a step toward “primacy”

Ohio is already on its way toward seeking approval from the U.S. EPA to regulate Class VI injection wells within the state, a concept referred to as “primacy.”  State-based regulation of the well permitting program would speed up the permitting process for CCS, according to proponents of primacy.  However, the state regulatory program must be at least as stringent as federal requirements before the U.S. EPA will delegate the Class VI program to the state. H.B. 170 and its resulting regulations will be reviewed by the U.S. EPA when Ohio submits its application for primacy to the U.S. EPA.

To date, only five other states have obtained primacy over Class VI wells. Six other states are currently in the process of applying for such approval.  By obtaining primacy, Ohio could be ahead of many states in encouraging CCS development, proponents state.  

Implications for Ohio landowners: pore space leasing

We’ve heard that some companies are already out with offers of “pore space leases” to Ohio landowners.  Some are offering around $25 per acre for the right to use pore space for CCS.  But now is the time for caution.  The legislation is necessary to clarifying  legal interests in pore space and how CCS development will occur in Ohio—both important issues landowners need to know before entering into pore space leases.  A third important issue in need of clarification is the value of pore space, and it’s still too early to have firm answers to that question. Experience from oil and gas leasing teaches us, however, that early lease payment offers tend to be lower than later offers.

Landowners who want to move forward now on pore space leases, however, would be wise to work with an attorney.  Some attorneys across the state are already reviewing and negotiating pore space leases on behalf of the landowners.  Contact the agricultural law team for help with identifying attorneys knowledgeable in this area. 

Watch for more resources on CCS and pore space leases coming to our program soon.

September Rainfall

Despite the severe drought, our average rainfall for September is higher than what we received in August, however, did not create much impact.

With the drought, you may notice that our usual Autumn Colors aren’t as present. This is because in order for the leaves to slowly change colors before they die off, they need moisture. Without the adequate amount of rainfall, the leaves will just turn brown and die off.

You may also notice that in many areas the ground is as hard as concrete. In our area, a majority of our soils are of some sort of clay deposit. As the clay particles lose moisture, they will start to become closer to each other creating a hard, solid crust that could be brittle or cracked (think playdough that has sat out and gotten hard and very brittle).

Your lawn could start developing brown/dying patches due to the drought as well. It is best not to mow your lawn during this time as the drought stress has caused most grass species to go dormant, halting growth. Excessive activity on dormant, stressed, lawns can cause further damage.

To view the current Ohio Drought Monitoring Map, you can visit here

Currently, Seneca County is experiencing a D1-D3 drought, depending on the location.

If you have any questions about the current drought conditions, you can contact Pressley at 419-447-9722 or buurma.20@osu.edu

Forages for Horses Online Course Launches October 2025

Horse owners, managers, and equine enthusiasts will soon have access to an updated and comprehensive online learning opportunity focused on pasture and forage management. The Forages for Horses online course, developed by The Ohio State University Extension Equine Program, launches in October 2025 and will include live monthly webinars, a revised Forages and Pasture Management Manual, and additional digital learning materials.

The course will feature three live, 60-minute webinars held once a month in October, November, and December 2025. Each webinar will offer participants the chance to ask questions of featured speakers. Recordings will be available afterward for those unable to attend live.

Participants who register will gain access to the full online course through OSU’s Scarlet Canvas platform, where all recordings, resources, and the updated manual will be available for self-paced learning through September 2026.

The registration fee is $75, which includes a digital copy of the Forages for Horses Manual. A printed manual may also be purchased at checkout. Current and new members of the Ohio Forages and Grasslands Council are eligible for a $15 registration discount. Participants who attend all three live webinars will have the opportunity to earn a certificate of completion.

Registration for Forages for Horses is available through the PCE website.

In addition, the Equine Extension Team will host a free Equine Winter Webinar Series once a month in January, February, and March 2026. Registration for these sessions is also available at www.go.osu.edu/equinezoomseries25

This new course provides a flexible, research-based resource for anyone interested in improving horse care and pasture management—from casual horse owners to industry professionals. All Zooms will be recorded. For questions, please reach out to Janessa at hill.1357@osu.edu

Annual Cost of Storing Ohio Corn and Soybeans Since 1973

By: Carl Zulauf, Professor Emeritus, Ohio State University; and Eric Richer, Associate Professor and Field Specialist , Ohio State University Extension, October 2025

The cost of storing the average Ohio corn and soybean bushel since 1973 is examined.  Storage cost is measured three ways:  per bushel, relative to harvest price, and per acre of production.  All three measures are at or near post 1973 highs as total costs to store corn and soybeans have roughly doubled since 2020 and now exceed $1 per bushel for both corn and soybeans over a 12 month storage period.  This notable increase occurred after a long period (1974-2019) during which declining interest rates and thus interest opportunity storage cost per bushel largely offset increasing physical storage cost per bushel.  These storylines underscored the important role of interest rates and thus interest opportunity cost in offsetting or reinforcing on-going increases in physical storage cost.  The reinforcing role has been especially noticeable since 2020.

Procedures: 

Starting this study with the 1974 marketing year postdates the increase in price variability that occurred in the early 1970s (Kenyon, Jones, and McGuirk).  The study ends with the last complete marketing year, 2024.  Cash price is the average monthly price paid to Ohio farmers by first handlers as reported by USDA (US Department of Agriculture), National Agricultural Statistics Service.  Storage starts in October, the month with the lowest average cash price.  Storage cost includes (a) physical storage cost at commercial facilities to keep the crop in useable condition and (b) interest opportunity cost of storing instead of selling at harvest.  Annual physical storage cost is from USDA, Commodity Credit Corporation through the 2005 marketing year.  Thereafter, it is for an Ohio country elevator, cross checked with another first delivery point.  Interest opportunity storage cost is calculated by multiplying (a) the October Ohio cash price times (b) the average one year US Treasury bill rate quoted on an investment basis for October as reported by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. 

Physical storage cost for corn and soybeans can vary, even within a state, across different local markets in any year due, in part, to different local supply and demand conditions for storage.  Moreover, the structure of commercial storage cost for corn and soybeans often varies from year to year.  Common structures are (a) monthly or daily charge per bushel, (b) monthly or daily charge per bushel plus an upfront charge, and (c) an initial charge for a period, for example 3 months, then a monthly or daily charge per bushel.  To create a standard format across years, physical storage cost were converted into a cost for the year (i.e., 12 months of storage).

Corn Storage Cost per Bushel per Year since 1973

Total storage cost per bushel for Ohio corn changed little from 1974 through 2005 as declining interest rates and thus interest opportunity cost per bushel offset a small, on-going increase in physical storage cost per bushel (see Figure 1).  Between 2005 and 2020, a somewhat larger annual increase in physical storage cost per bushel was mostly, but not completely, offset by an interest rate and thus interest opportunity cost per bushel that approached zero.  Since 2020, both storage cost components have increased, pushing total storage cost to a post 1973 high.  For the 2024 marketing year, total storage cost for corn for one year was $1.46 per bushel divided into $1.30 of commercial physical storage cost and $0.16 of interest opportunity cost.

Soybean Storage Cost per Bushel per Year since 1973

Total storage cost per bushel for Ohio soybeans exhibited no trend from 1974 through 2020.  Lower interest rates, thus interest opportunity cost per bushel, offset increasing physical storage cost per bushel, even after physical storage cost increased faster after 2005 (see Figure 2).  Since 2020, total cost per bushel has reached a post 1973 high as both storage cost components increased.  For the 2024 marketing year, soybean storage cost for one year totaled $1.72 per bushel divided into $1.30 of physical storage cost and $0.42 of interest opportunity cost.

Total storage cost per bushel was higher for soybeans than corn in every year, averaging 37% higher since 1973.  The reason is that, while physical storage cost per bushel is usually similar for corn and soybeans, interest opportunity cost per bushel is higher for soybeans due to the price of soybeans being roughly 2.5 times higher than the price of corn.  Total storage cost per bushel for soybeans and corn was most similar during the 2009-2021 marketing years when interest rates were near zero.

Total Annual Storage Cost per Bushel Relative to Harvest Price

Because price and storage cost per bushel have increased for corn and soybeans since 1973, it is useful to examine the ratio of total storage cost per bushel to October harvest price.  By this measure of total storage cost per bushel, storing soybeans is cheaper than storing corn (see Figure 3).  The reason is that physical storage cost per bushel has usually been larger than interest opportunity cost per bushel while price is roughly 2.5 times higher for soybeans than corn.  Relative to the October price, total storage cost has averaged 20% for corn with a range of 6% (2012) to 38% (2024) vs. 11% for soybeans with a range of 3% (2012) to 21% (1981).  The low ratios for 2012 reflect low interest rates and low physical storage cost, with the latter reflecting competition among commercial storers for the drought reduced 2012 crop.  The ratio for 2024 is the high for corn (38%) and near the high for soybeans (17%).

Cost to Store One Acre of Production for One Year

Another perspective on storage cost is the total cost to store one acre of production for one year.  Despite increasing yields per acre, this cost measure barely changed from the late 1970s through 2005 (see Figure 4).  It then began to move higher as yield and storage cost increased.  The increase surged post 2020.  For the 2024 marketing year, total cost to store one acre of Ohio production for one year was $258 for corn and $86 for soybeans, which are somewhat below their highs in the 2023 marketing year.

Summary Observations

Ohio corn and soybean storage cost is measured three ways:  per bushel, relative to harvest price, and per acre of production.  For all three ways, total storage cost has roughly doubled since 2020 as both commercial physical storage cost per bushel and interest opportunity storage cost per bushel have increased.  Total storage cost is at or near post 1973 highs no matter how it is measured.

The post 2019 increase comes after an extended period of time, 1974 – 2019, when declining interest opportunity cost per bushel due to declining interest rates mostly offset increases in physical storage cost per bushel. 

The preceding two points underscore the important role of interest rates and thus interest opportunity cost in offsetting or reinforcing the on-going increase in physical storage cost.  The reinforcing impact has been especially noticeable since 2020.

Since 1973, on a per bushel basis, it has on average been more expensive to store soybeans than corn; but, when total storage cost is expressed relative to corn and soybean price, it has been more expensive to store corn than soybeans.  These finding may seem at odds but they reflect the interaction of a roughly 2.5 times higher price for soybeans with a usually similar physical storage cost per bushel for corn and soybeans.  In short, whether corn or soybeans is more expensive to store, depends on how total storage cost is measured.

References and Data Sources

Barchart.com.  August 2025.  Futures price data.  https://www.barchart.com/

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.  September 2025.  Federal Reserve Economic Data.  December.  https://fred.stlouisfed.org

Ohio Country Elevator.  2006-2017.  Personal inquiry of annual corn and soybean storage rates.

US Department of Agriculture, Commodity Credit Corporation.  1974-2007.  Annual personal inquiry.

US Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service.  October 2025.  QuickStats.  http://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/

Webinar for New Owners of Farmland

Written by Peggy Kirk Hall, Attorney and Director, Agricultural & Resource Law Program

Webinar announcement by National Agricultural Law Center

Are you a new owner of farmland? Whether inheriting or purchasing farmland for the first time, a new farmland owner must choose what to do with the land. Farm it, sell it, lease it, preserve it — all are viable options that require an understanding of economic considerations and legal requirements.

Our upcoming webinar for the National Agricultural Law Center can help. Join me and Robert Moore on October 15, 2025 at Noon EST as we present “So Now You Own a Farm: A Beginner’s Guide to Farmland Ownership.” 

Based on our recently published Beginner’s Guide to Farmland Ownershipthis webinar will provide practical insights and strategies on new farmland ownership.  We’ll cover topics such as:

  • Estimating the value of farmland;
  • How to sell, lease, manage, or preserve the land;
  • Protecting the farmland from risk.

The session can help both new farmland owners and the professionals who advise them better navigate the responsibilities, options, and decision-making that comes with farmland ownership.  Register for the free online webinar at https://nationalaglawcenter.org/webinars/beginners-farmland-ownership/. 

Prevent Combine Fires During Fall Harvest

Dee Jepsen, Extension State Safety Leader and Wayne Dellinger, ANR Educator Union County

Autumn weather conditions have led to an increase in combine fires. Two recommendations to prevent injuries and property damage include: preventative maintenance and pre-planning for fire emergencies.

Ohio ranks fourth in the nation for combine fires. Other states leading the list include Minnesota (1st), Iowa (2nd), Illinois (3rd), Kansas (5th), Nebraska (6th) and South Dakota (7th).

The majority of harvester fires start in the engine compartment. Contributing factors for heat sources include faulty wiring, over-heated bearings, leaking fuel or hydraulic oil. The dry crop residue makes a ready source for rapid combustion to occur when the machine is operated in the field. Birds and wildlife are known to make nests in the engine compartment or exhaust manifolds – which can add fuel sources for unsuspecting combine operators.

TIPS TO PREVENT COMBINE FIRES INCLUDE:

  • Have a daily maintenance plan during the harvest period. Keeping machinery well maintained plays a large role in preventing fires from these sources. Cleaning up spills, blowing off chaff, leaves, and other plant materials on a regular basis, proper lubrication of bearings/chains, and checking electrical connections should be part of the daily routine. Farmers may choose to do their daily maintenance in the morning while waiting for the dew to burn off the crops. However, performing maintenance at night will highlight any hot-spots or smoldering areas as the machine is cooling down. Removing chaff at the end of the day will reduce the amount of debris available to spark a fire.
  • Eliminate static electricity. A chain may also be mounted on the bottom of the machine to drag on the ground while in the field. This decreases the buildup of static electricity.

IF A FIRE BREAKS OUT, IT’S IMPORTANT TO HAVE AN EMERGENCY PLAN IN PLACE:

  • Call 911 or your local first responders at the first sign of a fire. Don’t wait to know if you can contain a fire yourself, rapid response is important to saving valuable equipment. Combine fires are often in remote locations where a specific address may not be available and access is limited. Emergency response times will be longer in these situations.
  • Have (2) ABC fire extinguishers mounted on the combine. A 10-pound ABC dry chemical fire extinguisher in the cab or near the ladder of the cab is quick access to protect the operator. A second extinguisher (20-pound ABC) is recommended to be mounted on the outside of combines where it is accessible from the ground. It’s possible that one unit will extinguish a small fire; having the second unit will help with any additional flare-ups. Don’t forget to check that the extinguishers are fully charged at the beginning of the season. Not having extinguishers ready when needed leads to a helpless feeling of watching one of your most expensive pieces of equipment go up in flames.
  • Have a water truck positioned by the field. Hot mufflers and catalytic converters from other vehicles driving in the field can pose a risk to the dry field fodder. Smoldering materials may go by 15 to 30 minutes before being noticed. A small gust of wind could rapidly turn that smoldering into a fire. In extreme dry conditions, a water truck may help protect against field fires. Never use water on fires that are electrical or fuel-sourced.
  • Have an emergency plan in place and discuss it with the other workers or family members. Knowing what to do in the event of a fire emergency is important. Knowing the address to the field and how to contact fire departments directly instead of through the 911 system are important safety conversations for the entire harvest crew.

Don’t get caught thinking it can never happen on your farm.  Take preventative action and be prepared.

Dee Jepsen, Extension State Safety Leader, can be reached at 614-292-6008 or jepsen.4@osu.edu. Wayne Dellinger, ANR Educator Union County, can be reached at 937-644-8117 or dellinger.6@osu.edu.

The above article is a cross-posting originally released in the Crop Observation and Recommendation Network Newsletter.

Vomitoxin in Corn Grain Bins

N95 respiratorN95 respirator

Mark Badertscher, Retired OSU Extension, Hardin County ANR Educator; with information from Pierce Paul, OSU Extension, Corn & Wheat Disease Specialist and Dee Jepsen, OSU Extension, Associate Professor and State Agricultural Safety Leader.

Some localized areas of Ohio experienced fields with Gibberella ear rot (GER) that was more than likely contaminated with mycotoxins. Infection of the ear, development of visual symptoms (ear rot), and contamination of grain with vomitoxin all depend on weather conditions during the weeks after silk emergence. Once the fungus enters the ear via the silks (infection) and begins to colonize the developing grain, it produces vomitoxin, even if subsequent weather conditions are not favorable for mold and ear rot to develop on the outside of the ear. This is particularly true if infections occur late and conditions become relatively dry and unfavorable for visual symptoms to develop.

Local markets such as ethanol plants, feed mills, and grain elevators test for vomitoxin levels in parts per million. Depending on the end use of the corn, these buyers will discount or reject loads at set levels of contamination. These levels increase with processing of the corn; and can cause significant issues when feeding to certain types of livestock. Severely diseased and toxin contaminated grain are usually smaller than healthy grain and covered with fugal mold. Compared to healthy grain, diseased grain kernels break easily during harvest, transport, and other forms of grain handling, increasing the number of fine particles and the amount of dust in the grain lot.

In the fall, it is recommended that fields with ear rot problems should be harvested as soon as possible and handled separately from healthy fields, even if it means harvesting those fields at a higher-than-usual moisture content. Adjusting the combine to minimize damage to the grain and increasing the fan speed will help to remove lightweight grain and dust particles, and as a result, reduce the level of mycotoxin in the grain. Once harvested, grain should be dried down to below 15% moisture with storage in a clean dry bin.

Unfortunately, there are no commercially available treatments to reduce vomitoxin levels in stored grain. Poor storage may cause toxin levels to increase. Warm, moist pockets in the grain promote mold development, causing the grain quality to deteriorate and toxin levels to increase. Aeration is important to keep the grain dry and cool. However, it should be noted that while cool temperatures, air circulation, and low moisture levels will minimize fungal growth and toxin production, these will not decrease the level of toxin that was already present in grain at the time of storage. When selling grain, corn that has been tested with vomitoxin should be sold as soon as possible.

Dry and store harvested grain to below 15% moisture or lower to minimize further mold development and toxin contamination in storage. Store dried grain at cool temperatures (36 to 44°F) in clean, dry bins. Moderate to high temperatures are favorable for fungal growth and toxin production. Periodically check grain for mold, insects, and temperature. If mold is found, send a grain sample for mold identification and analysis to determine if toxins are present and at what level. Clean bins and storage units between grain lots to reduce cross-contamination.

Harvesting and handling moldy grain may expose farmers to mycotoxin and other moldy conditions in the grain dust. Dust in grain harvested from GER-affected fields contain a mixture of tiny pieces of grain, husks, and cobs, all of which may be contaminated with vomitoxin, as well as pieces of fungal mycelium (mold). In fact, husks and cobs are usually more contaminated with mycotoxins than the grain. Breathing grain dust can have adverse effects on the human respiratory system. When the dust is also suspect of mycotoxins, it is especially necessary to take precautions.

Wearing a disposable, 2-strap N95 mask (respirator) helps protect the worker from breathing in dusty, moldy and toxic substances. This type of personal protection equipment will filter out at least 95% of the dust and mold in the air. The 1-strap mask does not have this level of protection, and is basically worthless in agricultural environments. The COVID-19 pandemic has made it difficult to purchase the recommended respirators for agricultural work. The suppliers have increased manufacturing of these items; however, some local outlets are still limited in their product availability due to an increased need to service medical personnel.

If disposable masks are not available, consider a reusable quarter face mask with interchangeable cartridges. P100 filters may be more readily accessible for online purchases. Quarter masks, with replaceable cartridges, may also be more economical in the long term because of their multi-functional applications in agricultural settings. Either an N95 or P100 respirator are the best forms of protection from moldy and dusty grain dust. Protect yourself and all workers exposed to grain dust while both harvesting and handling suspect corn.

For more information on respirators for farm use, consult the OSU Extension Factsheet: Dust and Mold, AEX 892.2.11, https://ohioline.osu.edu/factsheet/aex-892211.

Soil Testing

Conducting a soil test is important whether you have garden, lawn, landscape or agricultural land. Ohio State University Extension in Seneca County is offering standard fertility soil test kits for $25! We will come out, sample your area, ship off the soil and interpret the results for you. Additional testing is available at a cost. If you are interested in getting a soil test, you can contact our office at 419-447-9722.

Safe Combine Operation During Harvest

Kent McGuire – OSU Ag Safety and Health Coordinator

As we continue to progress further into harvest season, the continuous activity, diminished daylight and stresses that can be associated with harvest can often lead to agricultural related injuries. It takes multiple pieces of equipment working simultaneously to have an efficient harvest season and no piece of equipment is more important than the combine.  It is important to keep safety in the forefront when operating or working around the combine and combine safety starts with the operator.  Combine operators should consider these guidelines during harvest:

– Follow the procedures in the operator’s manual for safe operation, maintenance, dealing with blockages and other problems.

– Check all guards are in position and correctly fitted before starting work. Do not run the combine with the guards raised or removed.

– Keep equipment properly maintained and insure equipment has adequate lighting for working in low light conditions

– Reduce the risk of falls by ensuring access ladders, steps, or standing platforms are clean and free of mud or debris.

– Never carry passengers on the combine unless seated in a passenger seat and do not mount or dismount the combine when it is moving.

– Make sure to keep cab windows clean and mirrors are properly adjusted. Operator vision to the rear may be poor so be particularly careful when reversing.

– Keep the cab door shut to keep out dust and reduce noise. Ensure any pedestrians are clear of the combine before moving.

– Be alert to your surroundings. Know where other equipment is being positioned and be observant to individuals who may be walking around the equipment. Maintain eye contact and communicate your intentions with the other person.

– When unloading the combine on the move, you will need to plan and coordinate your movements carefully to match the tractor/grain cart working with you.

–  Remember the hazards posed by straw choppers and spreaders – allow adequate rundown time before approaching the rear of the combine.

– Do not operate the machine beyond its capacity or overload it.

– Regularly clean straw and chaff deposits from the engine compartment and around belts or pulleys to reduce risk of fire.

– Carry suitable fire extinguishers. These should be regularly checked and properly maintained/ serviced.

– Use extreme caution when working around overhead power lines, especially when extending the unloading auger or bin extensions.

– Follow correct procedures when transferring the header on and off the header cart, or working under the header (use the manufacturer’s safety supports).

– Utilize safe travel routes between fields, and take into account overhead height and roadway width clearances.

– Pre-plan road travel to account for potential problems with automobile traffic. Utilize escort vehicles when needed.

For more information about the OSU Ag Safety visit https://agsafety.osu.edu/ or contact Kent McGuire, OSU Agricultural Safety & Health, at mcguire.225@osu.edu or 614-292-0588.