Minding Ag's Business
Marcia Zarley Taylor DTN Executive Editor

Monday 09/29/14

Let Watson Pick Your Farm Program
Computer simulators do the heavy lifting on your farm program choices.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 4:49PM CDT 09/29/14 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | Post a Comment
Comments (1)
Forgot to mention that the University of Illinois is hosting free webinars every Friday at 8 am- 9 am central time to coach you on farm bill decision aids. For our full schedule of webinars visit www.farmdoc.illinois.edu/webinars. Or pre- register for the hour-long webinar at https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/752956945
Posted by Marcia Taylor at 3:51PM CDT 09/30/14
 

Friday 09/26/14

Reshuffling Crop Insurance
News this week that John Deere had appointed Citigroup to sell its crop insurance unit opens the door to more jostling among the nation's 19 multi-peril insurance providers. The company's chief financial officer told an investor conference in Brazil that proceeds from the potential sale would be used to repurchase Deere stock, J.P.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 12:29PM CDT 09/26/14 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | 0 Comments | Post a Comment
 

Tuesday 09/23/14

The Cash Rent Squeeze
Cash rents rarely back pedal, but 2015 could turn out to be the exception to the rule for a large number of growers.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 11:09AM CDT 09/23/14 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | Post a Comment
Comments (2)
What about the guys that bought? nobody is going to change their payments. Like I stated on Katies blog theres going to be alot of auctions next year.
Posted by Raymond Simpkins at 11:29AM CDT 09/23/14
Property tax increase lag? I think the past increases have more than covered those expenses. I believe the pinch is going to be felt by the LANDOWNER, FARMER AND MAINSTREET RURAL AMERICA. Many of these landowners have been living high on the hog!
Posted by Unknown at 1:55PM CDT 09/23/14
 

Monday 09/22/14

Farm Payments a Moving Target
Six months of bearish news for corn prices means farm programs are suddenly relevant.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 1:00PM CDT 09/22/14 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | 0 Comments | Post a Comment
 

Tuesday 09/16/14

Q+A on Farm Bill Choices
We've been busy answering questions from the more than 1,000 people registered for our August webinar on "ARC or PLC: What's the Right Farm Bill Option for You?" You can still listen and download power points from a free one-hour rebroadcast with economists Gary Schnitkey of the University of Illinois and Carl Zulauf of Ohio State University at http://tinyurl.com/qz7aq6d.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 11:05AM CDT 09/16/14 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | Post a Comment
Comments (2)
I have customers that have recently purchased ground that has been in CRP the last 30-50 years. It is good farm ground and should never have been put in the program. The problem is it doesn't carry very many base acres. Is there a way to add base acres? I have spoken with several FSA offices, and they are not aware of any way, but it seems that there should be some way for these producers to update their base acres on those farms. Just something we have run into here in Kansas. --Aaron Cross
Posted by Marcia Taylor at 11:11AM CDT 09/16/14
Aaron, its my understanding as well that we are not going to be able to increase the total base acres a farm has, only reallocate the mix of crops contained in that total base.
Posted by Jarrod Bennett at 7:11AM CDT 09/17/14
 

Tuesday 08/26/14

Land Costs Hamper US Competitiveness
Cheap land costs in Brazil and Ukraine negate some of the USA's natural advantages in corn and soybean production, a team of researchers from 40 countries concludes.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 1:26PM CDT 08/26/14 by Elizabeth Williams | Post a Comment
Comments (3)
I see no actual numbers here for direct production costs. How much more is our land cost vs the other countries? How much is the difference of our input costs from one region to the other. Even seed costs are different from one region to the next here in the USA since the suppler will usually charge what the market will bare. We really don't know much if we can't get our heads around the per acre margins in other countries.
Posted by Vince Moye at 6:42AM CDT 09/03/14
I am wondering if in this analysis we aren't overlooking the elephant in the room. The US is producing GMO based commodities while in Russia, and China, and much of Europe there is a strong resistance against them. This resistance appears to be well established in Europe and growing. Except for transportation costs, unless we stratify the GMO vs. non-GMO as different crops, production costs by country aren't reliable. This is because the GMO's win on yield per acre, but are serving different customer bases. We should be aware that there appears to be increasing resistance to sale of meat produced with GMO inputs .
Posted by Lloyd Willard at 7:56AM CDT 09/05/14
Crop production works best in a Democracy where there is relative stability as in we know what is going to happen when we budget for a crop. We don't get "blindsided" too often. Fortunately a "Jimmy Carter " doesn't happen too often. I have heard of $3.50 corn 2014 for two years . As the Man says, "Save some for the lean times".
Posted by james kuntz at 10:33AM CDT 09/05/14
 

Friday 08/22/14

Help for Farm Program Homework
More than 700 attendees registered for DTN's free webinar yesterday, "ARC or PLC Choices: Which Farm Bill Contingency Plan is Right for You?" with economists Carl Zulauf of Ohio State University and Gary Schnitkey of the University of Illinois.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 3:34PM CDT 08/22/14 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | Post a Comment
Comments (1)
Editor's Note: The correct link to the webinar is http://tinyurl.com/qz7aq6d
Posted by Marcia Taylor at 4:02PM CDT 08/22/14
 

Wednesday 08/13/14

Debate Rages Over APH Forgiveness
Great Plains wheat growers are howling over USDA's decision to postpone relaxing crop insurance's APH rules until 2016. Some Illinois corn growers are losing out, too.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 3:23PM CDT 08/13/14 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | Post a Comment
Comments (15)
Let's side aside the promise part of the issue for now and just look at the logic of the promise... During a ten-year period, crop yields fluctuate mainly due to weather. Farmers buy crop insurance to protect themselves during the bad weather years. Taxpayers subsidize crop insurance for farmers to lower the premiums for farmers. The actual costs/payouts of crop insurance is directly related to weather. Farmers would like to be able to insure and be paid out for yields that would occur if we didn't experience bad weather. If we ignore bad weather in the equation, are we not setting up taxpayers for higher insurance costs subsidies for crops that may no longer be suited to be planted county-line to county-line for certain areas of the country? Farmers understand risk and they understand it very well when some sucker takes it away for them. Sure it is a lot more fun to drive up land rent costs to $400/acre than to pay full insurance costs of $45/acre. But all that whining sure does knock down the integrity bar for the American Farmer. Or did I miss something and we just threw the whole gadget away?
Posted by Timothy Gieseke at 8:13AM CDT 08/14/14
Tim, you have a legitimate argument, but in the past growers were able to plug a bad year in their individual APH with 60% of the county's 10-year average. The Senate bill would have raised that to 70%. During the Farm Bill debate, critics argued the current rule rewarded those who were "farming crop insurance." CBO actually argued the "forgiveness" provision would save money, Barnaby says. I'm not taking sides, I'm just pointing out this was supposed to limit taxpayer exposure, if CBO is accurate.
Posted by Marcia Taylor at 9:17AM CDT 08/14/14
I think Tim got a it pretty much right. You cannot take the variable of weather and throw it out the window. If we do not account for the worst years of weather, be it drought, excess moisture, frost, etc., then we set up our insurance program to be actuarial unsound and pay out more than necessary with our APH's to high. We already have the trend line yield adjustment. I think we have a good crop insurance program. Why do we continually look for more ways to lessen the risk of farmers, by off loading that risk on the taxpayer in the form of higher subsidy, artificially higher APH's, program expansion (i.e. corn in western plains). Farming is a risky business. Make farmers put more skin in the game, otherwise we will be nothing more than Wall Street, reckless and unsound because we know the government will bail our butts out!!!
Posted by Pedro Sanchez at 10:30AM CDT 08/14/14
I think if it was promised it should be delivered.
Posted by Unknown at 1:39PM CDT 08/14/14
Crop insurance providers would like RMA to stall implementation because it would raise coverage (amounts of insurance) without an increase in premium over the current status quo. When the APH yields go down, the premium cost per acre stays the same for the same coverage level. If farmers need to increase their coverage to cover operating loans or cash rent they will have to crease their coverage levels, say from 75% to 80%, at significantly higher premium cost per acre.
Posted by Steven Griffin at 10:47PM CDT 08/14/14
The purpose of the APH is to establish a realistic estimate of the productive value of the crop going into a crop year. It is not to discount the riskiness of that productivity, that is done by the rate itself. Reducing coverage simply because you have had a catastrophic event is like not being able to insure your new car at its value just because you had an accident with a previous car. Of course you don't want to over-insure the car. Otherwise there is the hazard of people having wrecks just to collect the insurance. Risky drivers and riskier parts of the country should pay higher premiums.
Posted by Steven Griffin at 10:55PM CDT 08/14/14
Then I guess the govt needs to let farmers install drainage in the prairie pothole region. We are riskier not by choice but because of govt regs. Let us be on the same playing field as everyone else. Let's next time have all of the rules written before a law
Posted by Unknown at 9:31AM CDT 08/15/14
passes. How is it even legal to pass these laws then write the law after it passes? Crazy!
Posted by Unknown at 9:34AM CDT 08/15/14
There appears to be some lack of understanding of how the APH adjustment will work and why it is necessary to have it in some parts of the country. The southwest region of the US suffered with a drought of record from late 2010 till mid year 2014. Actually, there are still areas that are considered in drought despite recent rainfall. You have to go back to the early-mid 1950s and the Dust Bowl of the 1930s to find anything corresponding to this recent situation. It is not like this is an every other year weather situation. The current APH rules and yield plugs were not constructed to deal with a weather cycle that only occurs every few decades. Compounding the problem along the Texas coast, a hurricane destroyed production once prior to the drought years. Producers, even with the yield plug, have seen their APH and thus the amount of coverage available decline dramatically. Depending on the county and individual producer's yields, by as much as 25-40%. This has become problematic to ag lenders trying to finance producers. I believe there are producers in the Midwest and northern Plains who may also benefit from the APH adjustment due to the combination of too much rain in some years and the drought of 2012. In Texas growers cannot simply buy up coverage to a higher level for two reasons. First, coverage is not offered above 75% and second, it is very expensive to buy above 65%. For corn, the counties of the Texas Panhandle have loss ratios very comparable to the best corn producing counties of Illinois and Iowa yet our cost per acre is 2-3 times higher for the same coverage. Producers who use the APH adjustment will not pay less premium for coverage. Actually they will pay the same as they would have without the adjustment or perhaps will even see higher premiums since the adjustment only applies to the APH yield. The APH yield determines the amount of coverage a producer can purchase. There is also a rating yield which determines the cost of insurance. The rating yield will not be adjusted so the producer will still pay an insurance premium reflecting his actual history. This is potentially a very expensive situation for the producer because cost of insurance is affected by both the rating yield and dollars of coverage. Low yields from the past few years will make the rating yield expensive while the APH adjustment will increase coverage, also adding to the cost of insurance. The APH adjustment needs to be implemented for the 2015 crop, including wheat that will be planted this Fall. RMA is delaying implementation till 2016, the third year of the farm bill. RMA is busy patting itself on the back for having SCO and STAX available for the majority of counties for 2015. It would never be tolerated for FSA to announce it will have ARC, PLC, and the ability to update bases and yields available in the majority of counties. My question then is why does RMA get a pass to delay some counties for SCO and STAX and the APH adjustment for another crop year. It was clearly Congressional intent that all of the new crop insurance provisions be available for the 2015 crop year. This intent is obvious not only from the language of the farm bill but also the fact Congress added millions of dollars in new funding for USDA to implement the farm bill. RMA can use those funds to hire outside contractors to help with the data collection and research necessary to implement the new provisions. Sadly, while RMA dithers on this issue, some producers will not be able to get financing for 2015. Dee Vaughan
Posted by MICHAEL D VAUGHAN at 3:41PM CDT 08/17/14
I scratch my head when I see all the destruction going on in farming now. Farmers farming land that should NEVER be touched(but yet getting tax payer money to do it) Drain Tiling land that is used to filter out the chemicals out of the water. And then that water is put in sloughs or rivers and that leds to more or worse flooding and then the tax payer has to pick up that bill to. Example red river valley and devils lake and northeast South Dakota. I have NO issue helping farmers on declared bad years( declared floods or drought, has to be a total wipe out). But why should we put the bill for their "risky" practices? Side note we farm, but we do a balance of conservation and farming since 1886. We have seen many farmers(still some balanced farmers out there) plow up pastures and hill sides and plant beans and corn and the beans last yr didn't even make 10 bushel, but yet they are paying over 180 per acre to rent it. now tell me, how is that even possible to maintain, easy, they falsified the yields they carried over, thus get the government check. this yr, the corn isn't even putting on ears on most of the plants, and it was a good yr for weather in that part. erosion is horrible in that field but yet they just put culverts in to cross...this is becoming the norm now,, Truly sad
Posted by ryn bohr at 4:33PM CDT 08/20/14
Scratch your head a little more. Research a little science and get by your uneducated opinion corrected a bit. Proper drain tiling will actually decrease the net run-off of chemicals, nutrients and solids. Todays Ag drain tiling is unlike the common storm sewer principles used in a curb and gutter practices. There is much info out there, take a look at facts, rather than the fabricated info which supports your opinion.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 8:33PM CDT 08/20/14
Great article and real interesting comments. Thanks
Posted by G. Sean O'neill at 8:41PM CDT 08/20/14
according to the University of Iowa , the chemical treatment on corn seed is filling the rivers and steams(which leads to the drinking water of iowa) at a alarming rate, in fact the chemical company themselves have said the amount in the water sources is 5 times!! the recommended leval for safe drinking water. They said, every since 2000, the amounts have ski rocketed so fast that they started to find the source. and according to them, they put sample monitors by the pipes of drain tiles( most of them drain into the ditchs which led to rivers,public land) and they found the rapid run off of phosphates, nitrates AND the chemical treatment on corn seed. I find it funny how the "agi companys" always use study's done by the chemical,seed, or drain tile companys themselves . Geee I wonder what they will say..lol,, remember when you mess with mother nature, she hits you right back. But then again, when you get gov. checks, what do they care about the land and environment. remember we got a farm to of over 700 acres.
Posted by ryn bohr at 12:45PM CDT 08/21/14
Let us consider this: If we (farmers) are allowed to pull our extreemly low yields should the insurance companies be allowed to pull the highest yields? I would argue it may be a way to get to the "real" average yield of an individual farm. You may pull as many low yields as you desire and the insurance company pull the same amount of high yields and average the rest.
Posted by DORAN ZUMBACH at 9:40PM CDT 08/21/14
There are many different departments and many different sources of funding in all University's Ryn. If the funding came from an anti-ag group, the results were in the computer prior to any research being conducted. I did try to describe the difference in the open tile inlet drain tile and a subsurface system. Remember such things as according the U.S. Geological survey indicates the Greater Chicago area is the largest single source of hypoxia issues in the gulf. I am not defending the reckless abusers on both sides of the issue. You mention UofI placing sensors. If they did, as these systems are mostly private, it was with cooperation of the land owner who is trying to improve the practices used on their land, rather than just whining about it, pointing their finger at someone else. If all the Enviro's would clean up their own curb and gutter, many issues and problems would correct themselves. In our watershed, several lakes were declared "Impaired" do to high concentrations of chlorine. I assume the source is not ag related.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 4:30AM CDT 08/22/14
 

Monday 08/04/14

Expert Advice to Pick a Farm Bill Contingency Plan
Do you or your landowners need more coaching on your one-time 2014-2018 farm bill decisions? If farmers I interviewed last week in Indiana are typical, many growers spent the last decade wishing farm programs would go away.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 12:44PM CDT 08/04/14 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | Post a Comment
Comments (1)
This post was corrected to reflect that landowners have 60 days to report incorrect, incomplete or missing records, USDA points out. If your history is correct, no response is necessary at this time. More information from USDA about the base and yield decision will follow.
Posted by Marcia Taylor at 3:34PM CDT 08/05/14
 

Thursday 07/31/14

Update Your Ancient FSA History?
Don't let your future farm program payments suffer from obsolescence.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 10:56AM CDT 07/31/14 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | Post a Comment
Comments (1)
Great article
Posted by G. Sean O'neill at 6:46AM CDT 08/02/14
 

Thursday 07/24/14

Fat-Cat Rents Most Vulnerable
It's those cut-throat, top-of-market leases bid up at cash corn's $6.89 season-average peak in 2012 that stand to see the biggest adjustments. Average rents drop much more slowly.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 11:46AM CDT 07/24/14 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | Post a Comment
Comments (6)
Can someone out there tell me what I am missing!I just read land sales in Progressive Farmer How are these guys going to pay for 13000 dollar an acre ground?I look at after taxes,all expences and depreciation you may clear 100.00 per acre on payed for land.So how do you make payments of that size, it would take 130 years to pay for it with no interest.Do they not figure in cost of living.
Posted by Raymond Simpkins at 8:53AM CDT 07/29/14
corn is at a 100-150 loss on my cash rent ground, can't take that kind of loss again
Posted by Unknown at 6:59AM CDT 07/30/14
Question Marcia. When referencing cash rent- Do the whiz kids actually use average cash rent or median cash rent? Example: 1,000 acres @ $100.00 /acre and 100 acres @ $1,000.00/acre is $550.00 median rent. The average, on the other hand is about $182.00 per acre using the same #'s.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 9:11PM CDT 07/30/14
Money solves all problems! If someone has the money they can rent or buy land at whatever value - just because they can, they have the cash. If someone does not the money they can't rent or buy land at high or reduced values - just because they can't, they don't have the cash. This is a fact of history and most current economists miss this important fact. During the Great Depression, in the 1980's and still today (money) makes the difference in what individuals can do. When some people suffer because of lack of money others with money can purchase assets even if buying them does not make sense. Most people do not like hearing this time honored fact of money! Put your pencils, calculators and computers away and understand what most economists miss - money solves all problems.
Posted by John Finley at 8:02AM CDT 07/31/14
John, most guys around here buying don't have cash. In fact some are in bad shape, but seem to find someone to finance them.Cash or not you wouldn't buy gold at it's highest knowing it is going to come down.
Posted by Raymond Simpkins at 11:53AM CDT 07/31/14
so the land owner is suppose to lower the rent,,,,is JD going to lower the price of a combine, is Monsanto going to lower the price of chemicals, are the employees going to take a cut in salaries on the farm, if they do, then the tenant can buy a new pick-up
Posted by Wally frey at 10:13AM CDT 08/21/14
 

Wednesday 07/23/14

Why Rents May Be Slow to Tumble
Farmers stand to lose money on cash rented land in 2014 and 2015, if average lease rates don't adjust to new economics. On the other hand, landowners may be slow to budge.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 10:59AM CDT 07/23/14 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | Post a Comment
Comments (7)
If I remember correctly, the last major correction ended with about 80% ,give or take, of the farm land in Iowa being in receivership.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 6:45PM CDT 07/22/14
Your right Bonnie and I don't think lenders are going to be to eager to carry someone losing money every year.Why would you feed a dead horse? I feel this is just the first of many low or no profit years to come.I am glad we have no debt at this time and can farm at these prices.
Posted by Raymond Simpkins at 8:01PM CDT 07/22/14
I had an interesting visit with a neighbor yesterday who farms about 5,000 acres. He has "pushed the pencil" and found that reducing his average rent of $360/acre to $320/acre would have similar consequences as adding 18 cents a bushel to his average corn price. The question then arrises - do you risk upsetting your landlord for 18 cents a bushel which might be obtained with good marketing. He's hoping that fertilizer prices will come back down from stratosphere levels as a result of reduced demand. Like my neighbor, I don't see how revenue insurance will keep us out of the red for 2015's crop. When will the ag press do a story on that, considering how gleefully they reported insurance "profits" in 2012!!
Posted by Curt Zingula at 7:51AM CDT 07/24/14
Curt, crop insurance might not keep you out of the red next year, but do you think farmers are factoring in potential ARC payments yet? Given current price scenarios, Univ of Illinois economist Gary Schnitkey pencilled in $45-$75/acre 2015 corn payments on Ill. farms last week, which might alleve some stress. If that's the case, time might be best spent persuading landlords to sign up for the right farm program rather than arguing over a few dimes per bu., as your neighbor says.
Posted by Marcia Taylor at 10:35AM CDT 07/25/14
C'mon Marcia, How does one factor potential?
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 4:21PM CDT 07/25/14
Curt is on point with what farmers can do! Less fertilizer demand!
Posted by Roger Cooper at 10:00AM CDT 07/27/14
We have been fortunate to get decent crops where we are when everyone else couldn't get a rain to save their lives, no basis is killing us with cash corn around two bucks, still county average yields are under sixty bushels per acre, it will take a miracle to save us this year!
Posted by JAMIE KOUBA at 11:27PM CDT 08/11/14
 
What Farm Widows Wished They Knew
Farm accidents can strike at any age. Good farm advisers and documentation of what couples own, farm lease terms and business roles after a partner's death can ease the grief.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 10:58AM CDT 07/23/14 by Elizabeth Williams | 0 Comments | Post a Comment
 

Monday 07/21/14

Cash Rent Needs a Relief Valve
Dan, an Iowa farmer, summarized the problem in a 16-word Twitter post last month: "$4 cash corn. Same as when I started in 2010, but cash rents are $100 higher." He could have added: Something's gotta give. DTN's national average cash price index--a collection of cash bid data from almost 3,000 locations across the U.S.--slid to $3.52 last Friday.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 4:40PM CDT 07/21/14 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | Post a Comment
Comments (4)
Don't drive in the yard driving a loaded up $50,000 pickup. Practice saying the word no - many times over. You may lose some ground, but if you're losing money, I guess I don't see why losing ground isn't the lesser of two evils. Get real good at telling your favorite seed guy no. There are many, many good choices out there. Figure out who wants to be Monte Hall. Also, show your land partner (a term I picked up on DTN) the money trail. Explain what a good sustainable fertilizer program costs. Explain what a good resistant weed avoiding chemical program costs. No land partner in their right mind wants their farm mined for nutrients or get resistant weeds started because their land partner (tenant) needed to skimp somewhere to make ends meet. Explain what your crop insurance costs, what it covers, and what it doesn't cover. Explain what the 2014 Farm Bill covers. Say the farm had $40/acre in Direct Payments under the old Farm Bill, and you're looking at less than that now; that should come off the rental value of the farm. Show what your take home pay is. Be prepared to be embarrassed or called out if it's too high. If you get to the end of a discussion like this and still can't see eye to eye, you're probably better off without that farm. - Jason Bode
Posted by Unknown at 9:10PM CDT 07/21/14
An acquaintance once quipped: When everyone else is running-You Walk! When everyone else is walking-You Run! Now if you were running when you should have been walking, Pay the price of the shifting load when the brakes lock up.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 5:23AM CDT 07/22/14
Don't worry. The large mega-farmers will be floated by the ag lenders, equipment manufacturers, seed, chemical and fertilizer dealers. If one or two of these guys go bad in a community it will have a ripple effect throughout. Not what the input providers want happening. They may be upside down on paper but they will be out there farming your land. SO GET YOUR RENT, CASH UPFRONT!
Posted by Mike Estadt at 9:05AM CDT 07/22/14
Mike I don't think that will happen.We have some large farms close to us that are struggling and I have seen they have changed who they do business with this spring.New seed company, fertilizer and some equipment.So that kinda tells me they have run the gament with the others.But yes, you are right when they go out they're going to take others with them.Like elderly landlords that won't get paid.
Posted by Raymond Simpkins at 11:07AM CDT 07/22/14
 

Friday 07/18/14

Spring Fling Lifts Land Markets
Midwest farmland values bounced back to life at mid-year, a new FCS analysis finds. But whether the rally survives lower prices remains a question.[Read Full Blog Post]
Posted at 5:06PM CDT 07/18/14 by Marcia Zarley Taylor | 0 Comments | Post a Comment
Blog Home Pages
July  2013
S M T W T F S
   1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31         
Subscribe to Minding Ag's Business RSS
Recent Blog Posts
  • Let Watson Pick Your Farm Program
  • Reshuffling Crop Insurance
  • The Cash Rent Squeeze
  • Farm Payments a Moving Target
  • Q+A on Farm Bill Choices
  • Land Costs Hamper US Competitiveness
  • Help for Farm Program Homework
  • Debate Rages Over APH Forgiveness
  • Expert Advice to Pick a Farm Bill Contingency Plan
  • Update Your Ancient FSA History?
  • Fat-Cat Rents Most Vulnerable
  • Why Rents May Be Slow to Tumble
  • What Farm Widows Wished They Knew
  • Cash Rent Needs a Relief Valve
  • Spring Fling Lifts Land Markets
  • Why Succession Plans Stall
  • Pick Estate Advisers Who Make the Grade
  • Farmland: Trophy or Investment?
  • Landowner Appeals Landmark CRP Case
  • Watch Sticker Prices on Farm Loans