Author: Charley Martinez

  • Current Non-Real Estate Farm Debt

    Current Non-Real Estate Farm Debt

    Agricultural producers are currently having to manage numerous factors, including drought and rising input costs. In addition, the ag sector will see interest rates continue to increase as the Federal Reserve tries to reduce inflation. As the general economy and ag economy moves into a high interest rate environment, understanding agriculture debt becomes important. The majority of loans originate from the farm credit system or commercial banks. Every commercial bank in the U.S. submits quarterly performance reports. These reports include the number of agricultural loans and the status (on time or late) of the loans. Figure 1 displays the total loan volume, and total loan volume for all three late type volumes (30-89 days late, 90+ days late, Non-Accrual) for the last five quarters. The totals are for all the states in the Southern Region. 

    Through the first quarter of 2022, loans that are non-accrual and 90+ days late have maintained their trend. Non-accrual loan volume continued to decrease, while 90+ days late loans stayed relatively steady. These are positive indications that delinquent loan debt hasn’t increased. Total loan volume is approximately $1 billion higher than a year ago. This is expected as input costs have increased. Total debt volume for loans that are 30-89 days late continued to increase. This increase was expected due to the seasonality of these loans. That is, the highest volume of late loans is seen annually in Q1 and the lowest annually in Q3. Interestingly, the total volume of these loans (30-89 days late) is $8 million lower than in 2021. This also is a positive sign that loans stayed current over the past year, even with the increased input costs.   

    As we move into a high interest rate environment, the current status of commercial ag debt has some positivity. But this positivity could reverse for several reasons (i.e., drought continuation in areas). In the coming months, it is crucial that producers are efficient with their capital consumption and are mindful of their debt structure. 


    Martinez, Charley, and Haylee Ferguson. “Current Non-Real Estate Farm Debt“. Southern Ag Today 2(30.3). July 20, 2022. Permalink

  • Between a Rock and a Dry Place: Culling Decisions

    Between a Rock and a Dry Place: Culling Decisions

    In drought-stricken areas, cattle producers are having to sell more cattle than normal because of the lack of grass and increased costs of production. While some producers are selling feeder calves earlier than they wanted, the number of cull cows going to the market creates multiple ways to look at the situation. This article covers the current cull cow market and some potential management strategies to think about moving forward. 

                Figure 1 contains the weekly slaughter cow prices for Southern Plains auctions (current drought-stricken areas). The red line represents the 5-year average from 2016-2020, and illustrates the normal seasonal pattern observed in cull cow markets. The dotted line represents the weekly prices for 2021. Prices in 2021 were below the average from January-June, and then stayed relatively true to seasonal expectations. So far in 2022, prices have been frequently above the 5-year average and 2021 prices. This has created higher salvage value for cattle that had to be culled this year. But prices are starting to trend down due to the increased cull cow supply entering the market. The downward trend is expected based on seasonal patterns, but the decrease will likely continue. In the coming weeks, drought and production costs are going to be major drivers of slaughter cow supply as the market tries to find a floor. 

                From a management strategy, producers often start with older cows first. After the older cows, producers get pickier on reasons to cull (bad feet, other non-ideal characteristics). These types of cows have probably been culled already, which leaves the producer with management decisions (cull bred females? Cull yearling females?, etc.). To help with that decision, identify inefficient females. If they are bred, analyze the females calving cycle. If they are yearling females, look at their pedigree, and identify any maternal reproduction issues. If a producer has already culled based on age, bad feet and other physical traits, and reproduction, then look for alternative marketing strategies such as selling females to another producer in a region that isn’t in drought. If a producer has superior genetically based cattle, they probably won’t find enough salvage value from sale barn prices and having a marketing strategy to find more value could be useful for not only increased salvage value, but also for cash flow reasons. 

    Source: Livestock Marketing Information Center

    Martinez, Charley . “Between a Rock and a Dry Place: Culling Decisions“. Southern Ag Today 2(30.2). July 19, 2022. Permalink

  • Should Feeder Calves be PI Tested?

    Should Feeder Calves be PI Tested?

    In recent years, Southeastern producers have asked whether testing for Persistently Infected (PI) Bovine Viral Diarrhea (BVD) virus generates a premium for feeder cattle. The answer likely depends on certain factors. For example, if a group of feeder cattle is born and raised on the same ranch (home-raised), and the producer has a good vaccination program, then the producer might not PI test them before marketing. The risk of PI’s is likely much lower for cattle coming from a closed herd. Co-mingled cattle are likely to have a higher risk of being PI-positive. Backgrounding and stocker operations commonly  source calves from multiple cow-calf operations and multiple groups at auctions. However, co-mingled calves are perceived by buyers to be of higher risk than single-owner calves. So, sellers can use PI testing as a marketing tool to lower the risk perception of the cattle they are selling. 

    A recent University of Tennessee study examined price determinants at the Lower Middle Tennessee Cattle Association (LMTCA) Video Board Sale from 2015-2020. Figure 1 contains the annual percentage of PI tested lots sold for a for this sale. This trend has been seen in other value added sales throughout the Southeast. 

    Figure 1. Annual Percentage of PI Tested Lots Sold

    PI tested lots were found to generate a $1.19/cwt premium. These lots included cattle that sold from North Carolina, Alabama, and Tennessee. While there were home raised lots that were tested, majority of the tested lots were co-mingled lots. On average, cattle weighed 820 pounds in the study, generating a potential premium just under $10 per head. The cost of PI-testing varies by location, volume, and test type. In general, the test costs around $4-8 per head. However, it is important to note the test cost mentioned here does not include additional time spent, facilities utilized working cattle for testing purposes, or revenue loss from the proper disposal of cattle that test positive. 

    While there are some costs and risks associated with testing for PI-BVD, selling a “PI tested” lot does generate a premium. It does this by letting the buyer know that the cattle are guaranteed PI free and healthy, which mitigates risk for the buyer. These advantages are especially beneficial for co-mingled lots. 

    Martinez, Charley. “Should Feeder Calves be PI Tested?”. Southern Ag Today 2(19.2). May 3, 2022. Permalink

  • 2020 Net Farm Income

    2020 Net Farm Income

    The United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service (USDA-ERS) released the September Farm Income and Wealth Statistics Report on September 2, 2021. The report provided estimates of Net Farm Income (NFI), for each state, in 2020. NFI for the nation was approximately $94.6 billion in 2020, which was the highest since 2014. A key driver of this increase is due to the amount of direct government payments, which was approximately $45.7 billion. Government payments were up from $22.4 billion in 2019. The 2020 government payments account for 48.3% of NFI. Specifically, payments in the Price Loss Coverage (PLC) and Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC) both increased, but the largest increase was supplemental and ad hoc disaster payments. These types of payments include payments from the Coronavirus Food Assistance Programs and other USDA Pandemic Assistance for Producers, loans from the Small Business Administration’s Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and payments from the Wildfire and Hurricane indemnity Program (WHIP+), Quality Loss Adjustment (QLA) Program and other farm bill designated disaster programs (USDA-ERS, 2021).

    Figure 1 displays the 2020 NFI totals by state for the Southern region. The region totaled approximately $19.4 billion in 2020, with the highest total being Texas, at approximately $5.6 billion. While grain crop, cattle, and hog incomes were steady or up in 2020, states with poultry production sustained a decrease in poultry income. 

    Figure 1. Map of 2020 Net Farm Income Totals ($1000s) (source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Farm Income and Wealth Statistics)


    Martinez, Charley. “2020 Net Farm Income.” Southern Ag Today 1(46.3). November 10, 2021. Permalink