Check our advice monitor on ProFarmer.com for updates to our marketing plan.
Your Pro Farmer newsletter is now available...The Federal Reserve kept rates steady but noted enhanced economic uncertainty and a likely increase in inflation amid fluctuating policy and lingering trade unknowns. USDA opened Emergency Commodity Assistance Program (ECAP) funding, which will be sent in two payments, though USDA has not announced distribution of the $20.78 billion in ag disaster relief for 2023 and 2024. Meanwhile, a pullback in biofuel production in the U.S. and Canada could dampen demand for oilseeds, while exports could prove tricky in the coming months amid proposed ship fees on Chinese ships. Highly pathogenic avian influenza continues to cause concern, with USDA committing $100 million to research new therapeutics and vaccines as a part of a broader $1 billion effort to combat the disease and stabilize egg prices. Pro Farmer releases its 2025-26 planting projections ahead of USDA’s March 31 Prospective Planting Report. We cover all of these items and much more in this week’s newsletter. Click here to read more.
Pro Farmer 2025-26 planting projections…Corn acres expected to increase 3.5%. Our analysis of survey responses signals producers intend to plant 93.75 million acres of corn this year, up nearly 3.2 million acres (3.5%) from last year. Of those farmers who plan to shift acres, 60% indicated they would plant more corn. For all surveys, 36% said their corn acres would increase, 24% would decrease and 40% would be unchanged from last year.
Soybean acres expected to decline 2.4%. Producers indicate they intend to plant 85.00 million acres to soybeans in 2025, down 2.05 million acres (2.4%) from last year. Of those shifting acres from last year, 57% indicated they would plant fewer soybeans. For all surveys, 36% said their soybean acres would decline, 27% would increase and 37% would be unchanged from last year.
Other spring wheat and durum acres to decline. Spring wheat seedings as a whole are expected to decline 590,000 acres (4.6%) to 12.1 million acres. Our survey showed producers in the Northern Plains will favor durum over other spring wheat. Other spring wheat acres are projected to decline, which is not overly surprising given current prices. Producers indicated they would switch to alternative crops. Durum on the other hand showed a notable increase, although we had a small sample size. We expect durum seedings to be roughly steady with year ago.
Our analysis of survey responses signals producers intend to plant 9.75 million acres to cotton this year, down 1.432 million acres (12.8%) from 2024. Our survey lined up relatively closely with the National Cotton Council’s estimate of 9.6 million acres.
Our survey projected sorghum plantings at 6.15 million acres, which would be down 150,000 acres (2.4%) from last year. Chinese demand for U.S. sorghum has eroded, lowering prices and discouraging plantings.
The limited responses we received on the non-major crops indicated farmers favoring sunflowers over canola. Edible bean seedings are expected to rise as well. In the South, rice acres are seen rising, likely as an alternative to cotton. Barley, hay, sugarbeet acres are all seen as nearly steady.
Click here for more details.
March Cattle on Feed Report…
The USDA’s March Cattle on Feed report stated the number of cattle in large lots (1,000 head -plus) on March 1 at 11.577 million head, down 261,000 (2.2%) from the year-ago level. The year-to-year drop implies fed cattle supplies available to the beef packing industry will remain very tight through spring.
This is especially true since February feedlot placements dove 17.8% from last year. Given pre-report estimates averaging 14.2% under year-ago, this result seems likely to power a strong futures opening next Monday morning. The drop at least partially reflects the shorter month (19 workdays versus 20 in Feb. 2024), the cyclical shortage of calves and yearlings available to feedlots, as well as the sizeable drop in fed cattle and beef prices seen last month. But the big drop also reflected the ongoing embargo on imports of Mexican calves and yearlings as the U.S. and Mexico concentrate on limiting the potential spread of screw worms to the U.S.
The reduced number of workdays at least partially caused the big year-to-year reduction in February feedlot marketings as well, since monthly marketings and slaughter rates are directly linked by that factor. On the other hand, the loss or addition of a workday typically drives a 4%-5% shift in feedlot marketings. Thus, the outsized reduction from the year-ago figure suggests laggardly sales by domestic feedlots, which may limit somewhat the expected supportive reaction, since the low marketings total implies a commensurately large number of animals remains in feedlots.
NGFA tells members: Oppose costly Section 301 export penalties…A proposed government trade policy aimed at boosting U.S. shipbuilding could significantly increase costs for grain shippers and hurt America’s global competitiveness. Industry groups are pushing back, urging alternative solutions that don’t involve port fees and export restrictions. NGFA told its members: “If your business relies on exports, NGFA encourages you to submit comments to the U.S. Trade Representative before March 24 to make your voice heard.”
Of note: After the end of the comment period, USTR will review the comments and testimony before making a final determination on the proposed actions, which could include imposing port fees and requirements for U.S.-flagged vessels. Given the typical timeline for Section 301 investigations, which can take between 12 to 18 months to complete, and considering the investigation was initiated on April 17, 2024, a final decision is likely to be made by the end of April 2025 at the latest. However, the exact timing may vary based on the complexity of the case and the need for additional review or negotiations. Decisions may be influenced by ongoing diplomatic efforts or political pressures, which can lead to delays as different stakeholders negotiate or lobby for their interests. Conducting thorough assessments of the economic impact of potential remedies on both U.S. industries and global trade can also contribute to delays. Changes in global trade policies or unexpected developments in international relations can prompt the USTR to reassess its strategy, leading to delays in finalizing decisions. Also, pressure from Congress or other legislative bodies to expedite or alter the investigation’s course can also affect the timeline for a final decision.
EPA reaffirms WOTUS review and commits to cleanup efforts in Missouri….EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced that the agency, in coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, will move forward with reviewing the definition of Waters of the United States (WOTUS), fulfilling a pledge from the Trump administration. The EPA emphasized that the revised definition will reduce red tape and regulatory costs while maintaining protection of navigable waters, especially in light of the Supreme Court’s Sackett v. EPA decision.
Zeldin also toured irradiated sites in the St. Louis area alongside Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who pressed for a faster cleanup of the West Lake Landfill, a Superfund site. Hawley criticized the federal government for its role in the contamination and delays in remediation. Zeldin, who had previously promised to visit the site, met with affected residents and acknowledged their long-standing struggle, stating, “You are here as an example of a community that has been left behind and is in need of help.”
Trump administration escalates water dispute with Mexico…The Trump administration announced it will cut off Colorado River water to Tijuana, citing Mexico’s failure to meet water delivery obligations from the Rio Grande — a long-standing concern for Texas lawmakers. Though Tijuana relies minimally on this water source, the decision could strain binational water cooperation. The State Department’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs claimed Mexico’s shortfalls are “decimating American agriculture.” The move also coincides with U.S. frustration over untreated sewage and waste flowing from Tijuana into San Diego, prompting daily oversight from Administrator Lee Zeldin, who insists Mexico must “fully honor its commitment.”
Experts warn multi-front trade war could devastate U.S. agri-food sector….A multi-front trade war could have long-lasting and severe consequences for U.S. agricultural and food exports, trade experts cautioned during a panel hosted by the Washington International Trade Association (WITA) on March 19. Industry leaders warned that retaliatory tariffs, reputational damage, and shifting global trade dynamics could undercut U.S. market share for years to come.
‘Quite disturbing’: Former USDA top economist sounds alarm. Former USDA Chief Economist Joseph Glauber described the prospect of simultaneous trade conflicts with China, Canada, Mexico, and the European Union as “frankly, quite disturbing.” He underscored the importance of exports, which account for 20% of U.S. agricultural production, with key commodities like soybeans, cotton, and tree nuts relying on international markets for over half their sales. “These are critical markets for U.S. agriculture, and so it is hard to fathom … a multiple front trade war,” Glauber stated, warning that retaliatory tariffs could hobble key export sectors, including corn, soy, pork, beef, and dairy.
Soy growers fear repeat of market losses. Virginia Houston, Director of Government Affairs at the American Soybean Association (ASA), recalled how U.S. soy exports to China suffered during the 2018 trade war, allowing Brazil to cement itself as the world’s leading soybean exporter. “When U.S. soy was locked out of the Chinese market, that really gave Brazil incentive to ramp up their production to meet Chinese demand,” Houston noted. Even after tensions eased, the U.S. struggled to regain lost market share, highlighting the lasting impact of trade disputes.
Food & beverage companies face additional risks. Tom Madrecki, Vice President of Supply Chain Resiliency at the Consumer Brands Association (CBA), warned that U.S. food, beverage, and consumer product companies could be hit not only by retaliatory tariffs but also by consumer backlash abroad. “Iconic American brands that we represent are typically first in line for either being pulled off of a shelf or being tariffed,” Madrecki said, noting that beyond tariffs, trade partners could impose regulatory barriers that further restrict U.S. exports.
Trade aid cannot fully offset long-term damage. While the Trump administration previously provided nearly $30 billion in aid payments to farmers affected by trade disputes, Glauber stressed that financial relief cannot fully mitigate the lasting harm caused by lost markets. He pointed out that China’s growing soybean demand in recent years has primarily benefited Brazil, demonstrating how difficult it is for U.S. producers to reclaim lost ground. “Whether or not the monies are available this time around, I think is going to be a very big question,” Glauber added, referencing potential budgetary constraints on future trade aid programs.
Bottom line: As trade tensions escalate, panelists warned that even if disputes are eventually resolved, the economic damage to farmers, food manufacturers, and exporters could persist for years — altering global trade flows and reshaping the competitive landscape for U.S. agricultural and food products.