USDA’s Farm Service Agency released its planted acreage report last week. University of Illinois Ag Economist Darrel Good says planted corn acreage totaled 91.428-million – which was 2.657-million more than reported the previous month – compared to 97.379-million estimated by the National Agricultural Statistics Service. Good says recent history suggests the difference between the two will be smaller this year compared to previous years when final estimates are available. If the final difference is equal to the largest difference of the past six-years – 2.381-million in 2007 and 3.295-million in 2011 – he says the gap will narrow by 2.5 to 2.6-million acres. Good says the question is whether any reduction in the NASS estimate of corn-planted acreage – and acreage harvested for grain – could be large enough to alter prospects of a substantial increase in corn stocks by the end of the current marketing year. As for soybeans – Good says planted acreage reported to the FSA totaled 74.659-million – 2.598-million more than last month – compared to 77.178-million reported to NASS. Looking again at previous years – Good says they suggest the current gab between the two will narrow by about 1-million acres.
As for harvested acreage – Good says an average yield around 155-bushels of corn – a 2-million acre reduction would reduce the production estimate by 310-million bushels – resulting in year-ending stocks of nearly 1.545-billion bushels. With an average soybean yield of 41.2-bushels – he says an 800-thousand acre reduction in harvested acreage would reduce the soybean production estimate by 33-million bushels – resulting in year-ending stocks of nearly 120-million bushels. Depending on the average yield – Good says the potential change of harvested acreage of corn is unlikely to be large enough to alter prospects of surplus supplies – but could stabilize corn prices if large enough. For soybeans – he says any change in the harvested acreage estimate isn’t expected to be large – but could confirm prospects for another year of tight stocks that would support prices at or above the current level.
Ag Economist – Darrel Good
