Farms.com Home   News

USDA Forecasts US Corn Production Down and Soybean Production Up From 2023

The Crop Production report issued today by USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) forecasted corn production down from 2023 and soybean production up from last year. Corn production is down 1% from last year, forecast at 15.1 billion bushels; soybean growers are expected to increase their production 10% from 2023, forecast at a record high 4.59 billion bushels.

Average corn yield is forecast at record high 183.1 bushels per acre, up 5.8 bushels from last year. NASS also forecasts record high yields in Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, South Dakota, Washington, and Wisconsin. As of Aug. 4, 67% of this year’s corn crop was reported in good or excellent condition, 10 percentage points above the same time last year.

Soybean yields are expected to average a record high 53.2 bushels per acre, up 2.6 bushels from 2023. If realized, the forecasted yields in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Ohio will be record highs.

All wheat production is forecast at 1.98 billion bushels, up 9% from 2023. Growers are expected to produce 1.36 billion bushels of winter wheat this year, up 1% from the previous forecast and up 9% from last year. Durum wheat production is forecast at 76.9 million bushels, up 30% from 2023. All other spring wheat production is forecast at 544 million bushels, up 8% from last year. Based on Aug. 1 conditions, the U.S. all wheat yield is forecast at 52.2 bushels per acre, up 3.6 bushels from 2023.

Today’s report also included the first NASS production forecast of the season for U.S. cotton. NASS forecasts all cotton production at 15.1 million 480-pound bales, up 25% from last year. Yield is expected to average 840 pounds per harvested acre, down 59 pounds from 2023.

NASS interviewed approximately 14,200 producers across the country in preparation for this report. NASS is now gearing up to conduct its September Agricultural Survey, which will collect final acreage, yield, and production information for wheat, barley, oats, and rye as well as grains and oilseeds stored on farms across the nation. That survey will take place during the first two weeks of September.

Source : usda.gov

Trending Video

How to fix a leaking pond.

Video: How to fix a leaking pond.

Does the pond leak? Ummmm....possibly a tiny bit. Well, more than a bit...ok, the darn thing leaks like a sieve!

QUESTIONS ANSWERED: Damit is not plastic. Therefore, there are no microplastics. I wish I had not mentioned plastic, but that is a very common polymer and I mentioned it as an example of a polymer. A polymer is simply a chain of repeating molecules, or "monomers." Cellulose is a polymer of glucose molecules. Starches are also polymers of various molecules such as fructose, maltose, etc. We have many polymers inside our bodies. In other words, just knowing something is a polymer doesn't make it bad, toxic, harmful, etc. However, this also doesn't mean all polymers are safe.

The specific polymer used for Damit is a trade secret, however, it has been closely scrutinized by multiple health and safety authorities. This includes the governmental authorities of Australia, the USA, Europe, and Asia. Not only have they determined that is safe to use in earthen ponds, and not harmful to fish, but it is considered safe to use in human potable water systems in all of these areas. And of course, they know the exact makeup of the polymer when making this determination. I'm told that the same polymer is in use by many municipalities to keep potable water storage tanks leak free. I can't tell you exactly what the polymer is, because I don't know, but given the confidence with which the governmental authorities have authorized its use, I would bet it is made of a monomer that we are exposed to all the time, like fructose or something.

It also breaks down in a matter of years, and does not accumulate in the environment. The end products of breaking down are CO2, water, and base minerals like potassium. The SDS reports no need for concern with ingestion, inhalation, or contact. If in eyes, rinse with water.

End result, can I say for sure that it is 100% safe? No, I don't know exactly what it is. But given people who do know exactly what it is, and have scrutinized it, have approved it for use in human potable water systems, I'm pretty comfortable putting it in an earthen pond.