Month: March 2025

That’s “a lotta” Corn

Source: USDA

Nationally, corn planted area for all purposes in 2025 is estimated at 95.3 million acres, up 5 percent or 4.73 million acres from last year. Compared with last year, planted acreage is expected to be up or unchanged in 40 of the 48 estimating States.

Ohio farmers intend to plant less corn and more soybean acreage in 2025 than they did last year, according to Ben Torrance, State Statistician, USDA NASS, Ohio Field Office.
Ohio corn producers intend to plant 3.25 million acres of corn this spring, down 4 percent from last year. Ohio soybean acreage is forecast at 5.10 million acres for 2025, up 1 percent from last year. Hay harvested area for 2025 is estimated at 830 thousand acres, up 5 percent from 2024. This includes alfalfa, grain, and all other types of hay intended to be harvested for dry hay.

Winter wheat acreage for 2025 harvest is estimated at 570,000 acres, up 10 percent from the previous year.

U.S. soybean planted area for 2025 is estimated at 83.5 million acres, down 4 percent from last year. Compared with last year, planted acreage is down or unchanged in 23 of the 29 estimating States.

Nationally, all wheat planted area for 2025 is estimated at 45.4 million acres, down 2 percent from 2024. If realized, this represents the second lowest all wheat planted area since records began in 1919. The 2025 winter wheat planted area, at 33.3 million acres, is down 2 percent from the previous estimate and down less than 1 percent from last year. Of this total, about 23.6 million acres are Hard Red Winter, 6.09 million acres are Soft Red Winter, and 3.66 million acres are White Winter. Area expected to be planted to other spring wheat for 2025 is estimated at 10.0 million acres, down 6 percent from 2024 estimate. Of this total, about 9.40 million acres are Hard Red Spring wheat. Durum planted area for 2025 is expected to total 2.02 million acres, down 2 percent from the previous year.

Introducing FARMS: A Comprehensive Tool for Farm Transition Planning

Farm transition planning is an essential process for agricultural operations. However, identifying and tracking assets and resources and preparing for transition planning can present significant challenges for farm families. To assist with these tasks, Ohio State University Extension has developed the Farm Asset and Resource Management Spreadsheet (FARMS), designed to provide a structured approach to organizing farm transition information.

What is FARMS?

FARMS is an Excel-based resource designed to support farm families and agricultural professionals in collecting and systematically organizing all necessary information related to farm transition planning. Whether at the preliminary stage or already engaged in detailed succession planning, FARMS enables users to input and manage varying levels of data effectively.  See example screenshots below for further explanation.

What Information Does FARMS Collect?

Farms collects all the following information:

  • Family and beneficiary names and contact information
  • Bank accounts
  • Financial Accounts
  • Life Insurance
  • Business Entities
  • Real Estate
  • Personal Property
  • Farm Property
  • Debt information
  • Designations for executor, trustee, power of attorney, guardian

What Does Farms Do with the Collected Information?

FARMS uses the information provided by the user to do the following:

  • Help ensure assets are titled to avoid probate
  • Determine net worth and value of estate
  • Calculate estate tax liability
  • Allocate assets and net worth between spouses
  • Allocate assets among beneficiaries to determine how much each beneficiary will receive from the transition plan
  • Provide information that will be needed to complete wills, trusts and power of attorney documents.

How to Use FARMS?

Given its foundation in Excel, users should possess at least a basic familiarity with spreadsheet navigation. Training videos are available on YouTube to assist new users with becoming familiar with FARMS, explaining how to enter data and use the summary and analysis functions.  A link to the training videos is provided below. Additionally, OSU Extension occasionally provides training sessions for potential users.  It is recommended to review the training videos or attend a training session before using FARMS.

Who Should Use FARMS?

FARMS is suited for anyone involved in the farm transition planning process, from family members beginning their farm transition plan to professional advisors engaged in developing detailed transition strategies for clients.

Accessing FARMS

To begin using FARMS, interested users can download the file at the link provided below.  We request users complete an initial, short survey prior to downloading FARMS, as user feedback is important to the ongoing improvement of the spreadsheet.  FARMS is available at no cost due to the financial support of key partners including North Central Extension Risk Management Education and the National Agricultural Law Center.

Conclusion

FARMS offers a structured, organized approach to farm transition planning, allowing farm families and professionals to collect comprehensive, accurate information.  For additional information and to begin utilizing FARMS, visit Ohiofarmoffice.osu.edu and discover how FARMS can positively impact your farm’s transition planning efforts.

Links for FARMS

Training Videos are available here: https://www.youtube.com/@osufarmoffice

FARMS can be downloaded here: https://farmoffice.osu.edu/farmsspreadsheet

Upcoming FARMS Online Training Courses

Click on registration link to register for the course.

April 7 @ 10:00 am:   https://osu.zoom.us/meeting/register/oJmnwm-VQx6XjqvBh7J0aA

April 16 @ 10:00 am:  https://osu.zoom.us/meeting/register/iY9cLoJeQwS0rUHkHr3DpA

April 23 @ 1:00 pm:  https://osu.zoom.us/meeting/register/vT_-X56FQQqBT63fKUQW4g

May 2 @ 3:00 pm:     https://osu.zoom.us/meeting/register/KmbdTjq2SryLkYNOaevp3Q

Ohio Farm Resolution Services

Ohio has over 76,000 farms and 13 million acres of farmland.  In such a large and diverse industry, conflicts commonly arise that can lead to disputes, litigation, and appeals.  Ultimately, these conflicts can cause harmful effects that threaten the viability of Ohio agriculture.

The goal of Ohio Farm Resolution Services at The Ohio State University (OFRS) is to cultivate solutions to the conflicts that impact Ohio’s farms and farm families.  Established in October of 2023 with funding from the USDA Farm Service Agency’s Certified Mediation Program, OFRS serves Ohio agriculture with a three-pronged approach to helping resolve farm conflicts that will provide:

  1. Educational resources on Ohio farm conflict issues.
  2. Conflict resolution and consultation services by OSU Extension legal and farm management specialists.
  3. Formal mediation services by trained mediators.

What issues will we cover? The types of issues OFRS will address include:

  • Family communication
  • Farm transition planning
  • Business entities/ practices
  • Energy leases
  • Farm leases
  • Zoning
  • Land Use
  • Labor
  • Neighbor issues
  • Lender/creditor
  • Property disputes
  • Farmland drainage
  • Crops/Agronomics
  • USDA/ODA appeals
  • Estate disputes
  • Other farm related issues

If you have a farm conflict issue we can help you with now, please e-mail program director Robert Moore at moore.301@osu.edu.

Weekly Commodity Market Update

Brownfield’s Weekly Commodity update featuring former OSU Extension Ag Economist Ben Brown. This week Will and Ben look at the growing competition in South American soybean production and emerging export opportunities.

Topics:

  • Market recap
  • Black Sea wheat outlook
  • Chinese soybean demand
  • South American soybean production
  • Corn export opportunity in Japan
  • Reports to watch

Market recap (changes on week as of Friday’s close):

  • May 2025 corn up $.06 at $4.64
  • December 2025 corn flat at $4.51
  • May 2025 soybeans down $.07 at $10.09
  • November 2025 soybeans down $.11 at $10.07
  • May soybean oil up 0.42 cents at 42.01 cents/lb
  • May soybean meal down $5.60 at $300.30/short ton
  • May wheat up $.01 at $5.58
  • July 2025 wheat up $.01 at $5.74
  • May 2025 cotton down 2.1 cents at 65.27 cents/lb
  • December 2025 cotton down 1.32 cents at 68.66 cents/lb
  • May WTI Crude Oil up $1.41 at $68.37/barrel

Weekly highlights:

US housing starts at 1.50 million exceeded expectations of 1.38 million and the 1.35 million in January.

The Federal Reserve decided to keep interest rates unchanged this week at a range of 4.25% to 4.5%, citing increased economic uncertainty and lowering its growth forecast for the year.

US crude oil stocks were up 73.3 million gallons, while gasoline and distillate stocks were down 22.1 and 118.1 million gallons. Implied gasoline demand was down 4% week over week, but still up 1% from the prior four-week average.

US ethanol production increased to an impressive 325 million gallons- up from 312 million gallons last week and 308 million gallons this time last year. Ethanol stocks were down 33.6 million gallons week over week but still 7% higher than the five-year average.

Weekly grain and oilseed export sales were mixed- corn sales were again strong at 58.9 million bushels. However, soybean export sales of 13.0 million bushels fell below all expectations Wheat sales were especially disappointing at net cancelations of -9.1 million bushels- 20 million bushels below the most bearish estimate.

Open interest in futures and options of grains and oilseeds was up 1.3% week over week. Producer and merchants decreased their net short 8,793 futures and options contracts. Money managers increased their net short 43,637 contracts to -205,435 contracts.

Weekly grain and oilseed export inspections were neutral to bullish on the week. Corn and soybean shipments of 57.6 and 30.2 million bushels, respectively were toward the top end of expectations, while wheat shipments of 17.8 million bushels topped all pre-report expectations. There were no grain sorghum inspections.

Spring Nitrogen Recommendations for Winter Wheat

Winter wheat is beginning to show signs of green-up (Figure 1). Nitrogen fertilizer should be applied to winter wheat between green-up and Feekes growth stage 6. (If you need a reminder on how to assess if wheat is at Feekes GS 6, see this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_f3VrqzV5c)

Nitrogen applied too early has the potential to be lost since wheat will use little N until after jointing. Urea-ammonium nitrate (UAN) or 28% has the greatest potential for loss and ammonium sulfate the least. Urea will have little potential for loss as long as it does not volatize. No stabilizer will protect the nitrate component of UAN, which is roughly 25% of the total N in UAN at application time.

Wheat fertility guidelines follow the Tri-State Fertilizer Recommendations for Corn, Soybean, Wheat, and Alfalfa (available here: https://extensionpubs.osu.edu/search.php?search_query=Tri-state&section=product). Spring N rates depend on wheat yield potential (Table 1). If you prefer to be more specific, the following equation may be used for mineral soils, which have both 1 to 5% organic matter and adequate drainage:

N Rate = (1.33 x Yield potential) – 13

As a producer, you can increase or reduce your N rate by changing the value for yield potential. Thus, a realistic yield potential is needed to determine the optimum N rate. To select a realistic yield potential, look at wheat yield from the past five years. Throw out the highest and lowest wheat yield and average the remaining three wheat yields. This three-year average should reflect the realistic yield potential.

No credit is given for previous soybean or cover crops, since it is not known if that organic N source will be released soon enough for the wheat crop. The Tri-State Fertilizer bulletin recommends that you subtract from the total (spring N) any fall applied N. We recommend taking no more than a 20 lb/A credit even if you applied a larger amount. Whether you deduct fall N depends how much risk you are willing to take and your anticipated return of investment from additional N. Based on the equation above and deducting 20 lb from a fall application, a spring application of 100 lb N per acre would be recommended for a yield potential of 100 bu, 90 for 90 bu potential; and 70 for a 80 bu potential.  Nitrogen rate studies at the Northwest Agricultural Research Station over the past 20 years have shown the optimum rate varies depending on the year. However, averaged over years, yield data from these studies correspond well with the recommendation equation given above. These studies have also shown apart from one year, yields did not increase above a spring rate of 120 lb N per acre.

Wheat generally does not benefit from a nitrification inhibitor since temperatures are relatively cool at application time and the application is made to a growing crop, this is especially true as the crop approaches Feekes GS 6. However, urea may benefit from a urease inhibitor (products containing NBPT) if conditions for volatilization exist for several days after application. These conditions would include an extended dry period with warm drying temperatures (risk increases with temperatures above 70°F) and evaporating winds. Urea applications need at least a half inch rain within 48 hours to minimize volatilization losses unless temperatures remain relatively cool. The urease inhibitor will prevent volatilization for 10 to 14 days with the anticipation of a significant rainfall event during this time.

ESN or polymer coated urea will reduce the potential for N loss from leaching, denitrification, and volatilization. Since these conditions are unlikely to occur in most years, it may not be economical to use this product. Cool weather may prevent the timely release of N from ESN, so if ESN is applied, it should be mixed with urea or ammonium sulfate and be no more than 60% ESN.

A split application of N may be used to spread the risk of N loss and to improve N use efficiency. However, Ohio State University research has not shown a consistent yield increase from this practice compared to a single application after green-up and multiple applications are more costly compared to a single application. In a split system, the first application should be applied no sooner than green-up. A smaller rate should be applied with the first application since little is needed by the crop at that time and the larger rate applied closer to Feekes GS 6.

USDA Expediting $10 Billion in Direct Economic Assistance to Agricultural Producers

WASHINGTON, March 18, 2025 – U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins, on National Agriculture Day, announced that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing up to $10 billion directly to agricultural producers through the Emergency Commodity Assistance Program (ECAP) for the 2024 crop year. Administered by USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA), ECAP will help agricultural producers mitigate the impacts of increased input costs and falling commodity prices.

 “Producers are facing higher costs and market uncertainty, and the Trump Administration is ensuring they get the support they need without delay,” said Secretary Rollins. “With clear direction from Congress, USDA has prioritized streamlining the process and accelerating these payments ahead of schedule, ensuring farmers have the resources necessary to manage rising expenses and secure financing for next season.”

 

Authorized by the American Relief Act, 2025, these economic relief payments are based on planted and prevented planted crop acres for eligible commodities for the 2024 crop year. To streamline and simplify the delivery of ECAP, FSA will begin sending pre-filled applications to producers who submitted acreage reports to FSA for 2024 eligible ECAP commodities soon after the signup period opens on March 19, 2025. Producers do not have to wait for their pre-filled ECAP application to apply. They can visit fsa.usda.gov/ecap to apply using a login.gov account or contact their local FSA office to request an application once the signup period opens.

Eligible Commodities and Payment Rates

The commodities below are eligible for these per-acre payment rates:

  • Wheat – $30.69
 Eligible oilseeds:
  • Corn – $42.91
  • Canola – $31.83
  • Sorghum – $42.52
  • Crambe – $19.08
  • Barley – $21.67
  • Flax – $20.97
  • Oats – $77.66
  • Mustard – $11.36
  • Upland cotton &

Extra-long staple cotton – $84.74
  • Rapeseed – $23.63
  • Long & medium grain rice – $76.94
  • Safflower – $26.32
  • Peanuts – $75.51
  • Sesame – $16.83
  • Soybeans – $29.76
  • Sunflower – $27.23
  • Dry peas – $16.02
  • Lentils – $19.30
  • Small Chickpeas – $31.45
  • Large Chickpeas – $24.02

Producer Eligibility

Eligible producers must report 2024 crop year planted and prevented planted acres to FSA on an FSA-578, Report of Acreage form. Producers who have not previously reported 2024 crop year acreage or filed a notice of loss for prevented planted crops must submit an acreage report by the Aug. 15, 2025, deadline. Eligible producers can visit fsa.usda.gov/ecap for eligibility and payment details.

Applying for ECAP

Producers must submit ECAP applications to their local FSA county office by Aug. 15, 2025. Only one application is required for all ECAP eligible commodities nationwide. ECAP applications can be submitted to FSA in-person, electronically using Box and One-Span, by fax or by applying online at fsa.usda.gov/ecap utilizing a secure login.gov account.

If not already on file for the 2024 crop year, producers must have the following forms on file with FSA:

  • Form AD-2047, Customer Data Worksheet.
  • Form CCC-901, Member Information for Legal Entities (if applicable).
  • Form CCC-902, Farm Operating Plan for an individual or legal entity.
  • Form CCC 943, 75 percent of Average Gross Income from Farming, Ranching, or Forestry Certification (if applicable).
  • AD-1026, Highly Erodible Land Conservation (HELC) and Wetland Conservation (WC) Certification.
  • SF-3881, Direct Deposit.

Except for the new CCC-943, most producers, especially those who have previously participated in FSA programs, likely have these forms on file. However, those who are uncertain and want to confirm the status of their forms or need to submit the new Form-943, can contact their local FSA county office.

If a producer does not receive a pre-filled ECAP application, and they planted or were prevented from planting ECAP eligible commodities in 2024, they should contact their local FSA office.

ECAP Payments and Calculator

ECAP payments will be issued as applications are approved. Initial ECAP payments will be factored by 85% to ensure that total program payments do not exceed available funding. If additional funds remain, FSA may issue a second payment.

ECAP assistance will be calculated using a flat payment rate for the eligible commodity multiplied by the eligible reported acres. Payments are based on acreage and not production. For acres reported as prevented plant, ECAP assistance will be calculated at 50%.

For ECAP payment estimates, producers are encouraged to visit fsa.usda.gov/ecap to use the ECAP online calculator.

More Information

FSA helps America’s farmers, ranchers and forest landowners invest in, improve, protect and expand their agricultural operations through the delivery of agricultural programs for all Americans. FSA implements agricultural policy, administers credit and loan programs, and manages conservation, commodity, disaster recovery and marketing programs through a national network of state and county offices and locally elected county committees. For more information, visit fsa.usda.gov.

How Inadequate Estate Planning Led to the Likely Sale of a Family Farm

By: Robert Moore, OSU Extension

As we all know, family farms often hold deep sentimental value. They are passed from generation to generation, with the hope that they will stay in the family. But without careful estate planning, these properties can become the subject of costly legal disputes—and even forced sales. A recent case from the Ohio Court of Appeals, Stephan v. Wacaster, is a textbook example of how inadequate planning can lead to the partition and sale of family land.

 

Don’t let this happen to the farm your family has worked for generations to build.  You can still register for our Planning for the Future of Your Farm Workshop. 

Click here for more details.

 

The Case: A Family Farm Divided

In Stephan v. Wacaster, the appeals court affirmed a decision forcing the partition[1] of a 95-acre farm in Miami County, Ohio. Here’s what happened:

Margaret Stephan, the original owner of the farm, left a will giving life estates to her two children, Connie Wacaster and DeWayne Stephan. Upon each of their deaths, the will directed that their respective shares would pass to their children. For DeWayne’s half, that meant his sons, Rick and Chris Stephan. For Connie’s half, her children, Tami Bodie and Todd Wacaster, would inherit.

Both Margaret and DeWayne passed away. Rick and Chris, now owning DeWayne’s one-half of the farm, filed a lawsuit seeking to partition the farm and divide the proceeds. Connie, still living and holding her life estate in half the property, objected. She argued that because she was still alive and held a life estate over the whole farm, the property couldn’t be partitioned until her death.

However, the court reached a different conclusion. It determined that Margaret’s will created a tenancy in common between Connie and DeWayne, rather than a joint survivorship. As a result, when DeWayne passed away, his sons, Rick and Chris, immediately inherited his half of the farm. This ownership gave them the legal right to seek partition of the entire property—even though Connie was still living there and held a life estate in her half.

If Rick and Chris move forward with partition, Connie will face a difficult choice: either purchase their half of the farm or allow the entire property to be sold—likely at public auction. If the property is sold, Connie may ultimately be forced to leave the farm altogether, losing not only her home but also the family legacy tied to the land.

Why This Happened: Poor Estate Planning

At the heart of this family dispute is a will that lacked clarity and failed to anticipate future complications. Margaret’s will did not create a survivorship interest for Connie and DeWayne, nor did it include restrictions to prevent partition actions. As a result, once DeWayne passed away, his children held a vested, possessory interest in half of the farm, and Ohio law granted them the right to partition the property.  It is probably safe to assume that Margaret would not have wanted the farm sold while Connie was still alive and lived on the property.

How Better Estate Planning Could Have Helped

This case is a cautionary tale for anyone who wants to keep property—especially family farmland—within the family. Here are a few ways Margaret’s estate plan could have avoided this outcome:

  • Survivorship Provisions: Margaret’s will could have created a joint survivorship life estate so that Connie would receive full ownership upon DeWayne’s death. This would have delayed the transfer of DeWayne’s share to his children until after Connie’s passing.
  • Use of a Trust: Rather than distributing life estates and remainders through a will, Margaret could have placed the farm into a trust, which would allow for more control over how the property was managed, used, and distributed over multiple generations.
  • LLC:  Margaret could have placed the farm into an LLC and her heirs could have inherited the LLC.  Provisions in the LLC agreement could prevent partition and only allow the farm to be sold if at least a majority of family members consented.

The Takeaway

Estate planning for real estate—especially family farms—requires careful thought and precise legal drafting. Without it, disputes like the one in Stephan v. Wacaster become commonplace.  Keeping land in the family for future generations can be accomplished by precise drafting in a will, the use of a trust, or setting up a land LLC.

This case is a reminder that even with the best intentions, a poorly drafted estate plan can drive wedges between family members and lead to the loss of important property. Anyone who wants to preserve their family land should work with an experienced estate planning attorney to create a plan that protects the property.

Weekly Commodity Market Update

Brownfield’s Weekly Commodity update featuring former OSU Extension Ag Economist Ben Brown. This week Will and Ben break down USDA’s record ag trade deficit projection and incoming US ag export tariffs.

Topics:

  • Market recap
  • USDA expects record ag trade deficit
  • Tariffs hitting US ag exports
  • Ethanol stocks swell
  • Reports to watch

Market recap (changes on week as of Friday’s close):

  • May 2025 corn down $.36 at $4.69
  • December 2025 corn down $.15 at $4.55
  • May 2025 soybeans down $.32 at $10.25
  • November 2025 soybeans down $.30 at $10.29
  • May soybean oil down 3.22 cents at 44.12 cents/lb
  • May soybean meal down $3.70 at $300.20/short ton
  • May wheat down $.49 at $5.55
  • July 2025 wheat down $.48 at $5.69
  • May 2025 cotton down 2.09 cents at 65.25 cents/lb
  • December 2025 cotton down $1.27 at 67.88 cents/lb
  • May WTI Crude Oil down $0.88 at $69.34/barrel

Weekly highlights:

Personal incomes increased 0.9% in January- partially aided by social security updates and state level minimum wage increases, but consumer spending fell 0.2% month over month- the first decline in 22 months, vs expectations of a 0.1% gain.

US energy stocks were up across the board. Crude oil stocks increased 98 million gallons on the week, gasoline stocks increased 17 million gallons, and distillate fuel stocks were up 164 million gallons.

US ethanol production pulled back just slightly to 318 million gallons produced- vs 319 million gallons, but sharply lower ethanol exports caused ethanol stocks to jump to their largest volume since April 2020.

US ethanol producers used 457.4 million bushels of corn in January according to USDA. The volume was down from the volume in December and a pretty disappointing volume for the month of January.

US soybean crushers crushed 212.6 million bushels of soybeans in January. The value exceeded all pre-report expectations and was slightly bullish to the soybean market.

At the USDA Ag Outlook Forum- USDA estimated corn and soybean acreage at 94.0 and 84.0 million acres, respectively. Yields were estimated at 181.0 and 52.5 bushels per acre, respectively.

Weekly grain and oilseed export sales were bearish on the week. Corn sales of 31.3 million bushels came in below all pre-report estimates. Wheat sales of 9.9 million bushels were also below all pre-report estimates. Soybeans sales at 15.1 million bushels were within expectations but down week over week.

Open interest in futures and options of grains and oilseeds were down 11.2% week over week. Producer and merchants reduced their net short position 6.7% and managed money holders reduced their net long position 26.1% or 57,650 contracts. Money managers are net long the complex 162,917 contracts.

Weekly export inspections for US grains and oilseeds were all as expected. Corn and sorghum shipments of 53.2 and 0.6 million bushels, respectively were up week over week, while soybean inspections of 25.5 million bushels were down week over week and wheat shipments were flat at 14.3 million bushels.