Category: Farm Management

  • Three Strategies to Improve Profitability for Small Cow-calf Operations

    Three Strategies to Improve Profitability for Small Cow-calf Operations

    Running a small cow-calf operation can be rewarding, but it is not without challenges. Larger farms spread their costs over more cows, making it harder for smaller herds to compete. There also tend to be scale efficiencies related to labor, input purchases, and other expenses that make larger operations more economically efficient. But smaller producers can be profitable, and this article focuses on three strategies small operations should consider to improve their profitability.

    Keep Overhead Costs in Check

    Cow-calf operations are capital intensive by nature, so I chose to use the words “in check” rather than something more specific. But the reality is that an operation running 30-40 cows can’t have the same overhead structure as one running several hundred. This sounds obvious, but I often see new cow-calf operations that are badly overcapitalized from the start. Smaller operations should focus on being lean with respect to equipment, facilities, and other fixed costs. In a lot of cases, this means limiting capital investment and ensuring that the scale of equipment is proportional to the scale of the operation. However, performing custom work with owned equipment is another way to spread that capital investment over more hours of use and add a second income stream. Regardless of what approach is taken, small cow-calf operations must be aware that disproportionately large overhead cost structures can be a major drain on profitability.

    Outsource Strategically to Save Time and Money

    A small cow-calf operation does not have to do everything themselves and may be best served by outsourcing some farm operations. The first area that comes to mind is hay production. It may be more economical for a small cow-calf operation to purchase hay, rather than own hay equipment and devote land and time resources to producing it themselves. In some areas, hay is not easy to source and may require significant effort. But by spending time developing relationships with hay producers and planning for winter feeding needs well in advance, the operation may be able to avoid significant hay production expenses.

    Outsourcing other farm operations may also be worth consideration. For example, it may be easier to hire someone to transport cattle to market, rather than owning and maintaining hauling equipment that isn’t used very often. Heifer development is another area that can be a bit more challenging for small operations. It may make sense for a small operation to purchase a few bred heifers each year and focus on terminal production, rather than developing a small number of heifers on their own.

    Outsourcing is typically justified on the basis of limiting investment (i.e., avoiding overcapitalization) or limiting variable expenses. But it also frees up another very valuable resource – time. Most small cow-calf operators have off-farm employment or other significant off-farm commitments. By outsourcing some farm operations, additional time becomes available and can be devoted to the elements of the operation the farmer chooses to focus on.

    Explore Value-added Marketing Opportunities

    While the first two considerations were largely focused on cost control, this one is focused on the revenue side of the profit equation. Since production costs tend to be higher for smaller operations, it is even more imperative that they look for ways to add value to the cattle they sell. Since they are likely to sell cattle in smaller groups, they have an even greater incentive to consider co-mingled / value-added sales where they can potentially get price premiums associated with larger lot sizes and health programs. They also have more incentive to consider direct-to-consumer markets such as freezer beef, farmers’ markets, etc. While everyone will be comfortable adding value in their own way, the point is that smaller operations need to focus on ways to increase profit per head, since they have a smaller number of head from which to profit.

    Small cow-calf operations should recognize that they are unlikely to successfully compete with large operations on scale and cost efficiency. For that reason, they need to approach their operations differently and utilize the unique advantages that come with being lean and flexible. By carefully managing their overhead cost structures and outsourcing operations that can be done more efficiently by other operations, they have the potential to see significant cost benefits. And by exploring value-added marketing opportunities, they may be able to capture revenue benefits as well.

  • A Dollar Saved is a Dollar Earned

    A Dollar Saved is a Dollar Earned

    As the adage goes, “a dollar saved is a dollar earned”. Perhaps even more so if the dollar is saved from paying taxes and can go towards funding retirement. Many farmers may imagine a scenario where they keep working until their dying breath, and while that might be possible, it is prudent to have other income and a backup plan if needed. Additionally, there can be tax advantages to contributing to a retirement plan now, regardless of whether the income is needed in the future.

    Many farmers fall under the sole proprietor / self-employed category, so that will be the predominant situation we’ll examine. It could be that the farmer, their spouse, or both are also working off-the-farm and contribute to their employer’s retirement plan. That can certainly be beneficial (especially if the employer matches contributions), but in some cases, it may alter the tax impacts of a self-employed retirement plan. Each farm’s situation will be a bit different, so be aware that this is not financial or tax advice but general education. 

    traditional IRA allows taxpayers, such as self-employed individuals, to contribute up to an annual set amount. The limits are published each year by the federal government. For the 2025 tax year, the annual limit is $7,000 ($8,000 for age 50+), and in 2026 it increases to $7,500 ($8,600 for age 50+). Not only is the amount invested and allowed to grow tax-free until withdrawal from the account (when the withdrawal is taxed as income), but it can also provide a current-year tax deduction when the contribution is made. Another significant feature of these accounts is that contributions can be made up until the tax filing deadline of the next year. For example, a contribution can be made up until April 15 of this year, and it will count as a contribution for the 2025 tax year. Practically speaking, this means that a “pro-forma” or hypothetical tax return could be prepared to estimate current taxes and see how various IRA contribution amounts affect the taxes owed. You will need to specify to your IRA plan administrators the year to which the contribution should apply.

    Traditional IRA contributions are deducted on line 20 of the Schedule 1 (Form 1040) and can reduce Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) (line 11a Form 1040) on the tax return. Both spouses can contribute to their own traditional IRA for a potential deduction of up to $14,000. Again, the deduction amount can be impacted by whether either spouse is covered by a work retirement plan and the couple’s overall income, but it can provide a significant deduction if allowed to take the full amount. If the taxpayer or preparer is using tax software to run scenarios, it can make comparisons fairly straightforward. If software is not available, an IRA Deduction Worksheet is included with the Form 1040 instructions that can be a manual way to calculate the traditional IRA deduction.

    Many questions come up about Roth IRA accounts. They are also a helpful planning tool but are a bit reversed from traditional accounts. Roth accounts do not provide a current-year tax deduction, but when contributions and earnings are withdrawn later, they are not subject to income tax. It is important to note that the annual contribution limits are considered combined for both the traditional and Roth IRAs. For instance, a $3,500 contribution could be made to a Roth and a $3,500 contribution made to a traditional, as long as the combined total does not exceed the $7,000 limit per individual. Other plans exist, such as SEP, SIMPLE, and 401(k) retirement plans that are similar in nature, with some differing features and stipulations. As always, consult your accountant and/or tax professional for specific guidance on these and other tax/retirement planning tools. For further reading visit IRS Publication 590-A and the IRS website on retirement plans


    Burkett, Kevin. “A Dollar Saved is a Dollar Earned.Southern Ag Today 6(8.1). February 16, 2026. Permalink

  • Analyzing Wheat Alternatives in the South

    Analyzing Wheat Alternatives in the South

    Southern wheat producers are experiencing significant losses this year due to low prices, weather conditions, and a shortage of stockers for grazing. To maximize returns or minimize losses, farmers must evaluate whether producing wheat for grain, grazing, or hay is most financially viable under current market and production conditions.

    We have a Wheat and Small Grains Decision Aid (Link) to help farmers decide whether to use wheat for grain, grazing, or baling. To make an informed choice, compare the prices of grazing, wheat hay, and grain, expected yields, production costs, crop rotation options, available equipment, and insurance coverage. What follows is an example analysis with basic assumptions, check out the decision aid to include your operation-specific data.

    Although all alternatives show negative returns this year, hay production continues to offer higher profits under similar conditions. In this example, baling hay is more favorable due to lower wheat grain prices. Actual results will depend on your wheat bale prices and may vary if you own harvesting or baling equipment.

    Grazing is also more favorable if farmers were able to graze wheat early, have sufficient moisture and forage, and enough livestock to maximize beef production.

    The decision aid enables you to compare alternatives from both economic and financial perspectives. Analyzing cash flow helps identify the most advantageous option, particularly if you own a combine or hay baling equipment.

    You can also use this information to determine the hay sale price needed to match wheat grain profit margins or to set an appropriate grazing price. The Decision Aid uses your data and costs to calculate breakeven prices for hay and grazing (see Graphs 1 and 2).

    Graph1: Break-Even Hay Prices

    Consider baling wheat if you can sell hay above the breakeven price, based on current wheat prices and expected yields. For example, with a yield of 40 bushels per acre at $5 per bushel, baling is preferable only if the net price per ton of hay exceeds $119, assuming 76% of the estimated biomass or 2.07 tons per acre.

    Graph 2. Breakeven Grazing Prices

    Similarly, with a yield of 40 bushels per acre at $5 per bushel, grazing is advisable only if the grazing price exceeds $0.60 per pound of gain. 

    With low wheat prices, alternatives such as grazing or hay production may provide better financial outcomes. The Wheat and Small Grain Decision Aid (Link) is designed to help farmers evaluate these options. Using your own data on yields, prices, and costs is essential for effective analysis. If you need assistance with the decision aid, please let us know.


    Abello, Pancho. “Analyzing Wheat Alternatives in the South.Southern Ag Today 6(7.1). February 9, 2026. Permalink

  • The Outlook for Interest Rates in 2026

    The Outlook for Interest Rates in 2026

    Although it may be a new year, it brings many old questions, including how the Federal Reserve will manage interest rates in 2026. The Federal Reserve adjusts the federal funds rate, the rate at which banks in the Federal Reserve System lend to one another.  Their objective in adjusting rates is to 1) keep inflation low and stable and 2) maintain full employment in the economy. After swiftly raising the federal funds rate in 2022 to combat inflation, the Federal Reserve began lowering its target rate slowly in the second half of 2024. The federal funds rate held steady for most of 2025; however, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), the group within the Federal Reserve that sets interest rates, resumed rate cuts at its September meeting. The FOMC implemented additional cuts at its next two meetings in October and December.

    Additionally, at the December meeting, the FOMC released its latest economic projections and monetary policy expectations. These projections summarize the views of the thirteen FOMC members on economic growth, unemployment, and inflation, as well as their views on appropriate monetary policy in both the short and long term. Table 1 summarizes FOMC members’ projections for 2026. While FOMC members largely agree on how the economy will perform this year, they differ on how the federal funds rate should change.

    Table 1. 2026 Economic Projections of FOMC Members as of December 30, 2025

     Median (%)Central Tendency (%)1Range (%)
    Change in Real GDP2.32.1 – 2.52.0 – 2.6
    Unemployment Rate4.44.3 – 4.44.2 – 4.6
    PCE Inflation2.42.3 – 2.52.2 – 2.7
    Federal Funds Rate3.42.9 – 3.62.1 – 3.9
    The central tendency represents the range of projections, excluding the 3 highest and 3 lowest values.

    How the FOMC manages the federal funds rate in 2026 will depend on how inflation and unemployment change. All else equal, if inflation rises again, the FOMC is more likely to maintain or raise the federal funds rate. On the other hand, if unemployment increases, the FOMC is likely to lower the federal funds rate and may do so more rapidly than it currently plans. If we take the FOMC’s median projection as its most likely course of action, we expect the FOMC to make a single quarter-point cut to the federal funds rate in 2026. While it may implement this cut early in 2026, during its January or March meeting, it’s more likely that a single cut would occur in the third or fourth quarter of 2026. This would imply a 3.5-3.75 percent federal funds rate to start the year, with a cut to 3.25-3.5 percent at some point between June and December.

    Figure 1 uses data from the Dallas Federal Reserve’s Agricultural Survey to illustrate how the FOMC’s actions affect agricultural lending rates. Ag lending rates tend to move with the federal funds rate and are about 4-5 percentage points higher on average. If this relationship continues, a single quarter-point cut would imply average ag lending rates in the Dallas Federal Reserve District in the mid-to-upper 7 percent range for operating loans and in the low-to-mid 7 percent range for intermediate and real estate loans. However, the actual rate a borrower receives will depend on their relationship with the lender and their perceived creditworthiness.

    Figure 1. Agricultural Lending Rates by type and the Federal Funds Rate, 2022-2025

    References

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (US), Federal Funds Effective Rate [FEDFUNDS], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FEDFUNDS.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (US), Agricultural Survey, retrieved from the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas; https://www.dallasfed.org/research/surveys/agsurvey.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (US), December 30, 2025: FOMC Projections Materials, Accessible Version.  Retrieved from: https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomcprojtabl20251210.htm.


     Wright, Andrew. “The Outlook for Interest Rates in 2026.Southern Ag Today 6(6.1). February 2, 2026. Permalink

  • Pine Sawtimber Prices Soften as Pine Pulpwood Continues to Fall

    Pine Sawtimber Prices Soften as Pine Pulpwood Continues to Fall

    Southern Timber Market Update

    In the fourth quarter of 2025, average pine sawtimber stumpage prices across the South softened further. Pine sawtimber averaged $23.23/ton, about 6% lower than a year ago and 10% below its early-2022 peak (TimberMart-South, 2026). Pine chip-n-saw prices remain relatively stable at $17.50-18.20/ton, essentially unchanged from last year but roughly 20% below 2022 levels. Pine pulpwood prices continued to slide, averaging $5.96/ton, down 22% year over year and 46% below their 2022 peak. Hardwood pulpwood prices held around $8/ton, stable over the past two years but still 33% lower than 2022 levels. Hardwood sawtimber prices remained relatively stable at $33.55/ton.  

    Stumpage prices varied widely across states and subregions. In Q4 2025, pine sawtimber prices ranged from about $17-21/ton in Tennessee, South Carolina, and Alabama to over $30/ton in Florida and North Carolina (Figure 1). Timber prices are inherently local, influenced by mill demand, weather, accessibility, timber quality, species mix, and local inventories. Compared to a year ago, pine sawtimber prices rose moderately in North Georgia (+20%) and North-Central Florida (+14%), declined in South Carolina (-26%), Northeast Texas (-16%), Alabama (-19%), and North Carolina (-12%), while remaining relatively stable elsewhere.

    Figure 1. Average pine sawtimber stumpage prices by state and subregion, Q4 2025

    Data source: TimberMart-South (2026)

    In Q4 2025, pine pulpwood prices ranged from below $4/ton in Arkansas, Southern Louisiana, Tennessee, and Southeast Texas to $9-14/ton in North-Central Florida, South Georgia, Eastern North Carolina, and Virginia (Figure 2). Compared to a year ago, prices declined sharply in South Georgia (-40%), South Carolina (-32%), Arkansas (-27%), and Louisiana (-26%), while remaining relatively stable in Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee. 

    Figure 2. Average pine pulpwood stumpage prices by state and subregion, Q4 2025

    Data source: TimberMart-South (2026)

    A closer look at southern timber markets

    Weaker pine sawtimber prices reflect softness in the housing market. Over 70% of the U.S. softwood lumber and structural panel consumption is tied to single-family construction and remodeling activity (Alderman, 2022). While new single-family homes now account for a larger share of for-sale inventory than before the pandemic, overall supply remains constrained by affordability challenges, higher construction and financing costs, labor shortages, zoning restrictions, and rising existing homes for sale. In October 2025, single-family housing starts fell 7.8% year over year to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 874,000 units (U.S. Census Bureau, 2026). 

    Tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber have increased sharply since August 2024, with total duties now reaching 45.16%. While these higher tariffs may support U.S. production over the long term, they are likely to increase construction costs in the short run and further constrain housing starts. 

    Reflecting weaker lumber demand, lumber mill utilization rates declined from 81% in Q2 2021 to 68% in Q3 2025 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2025). Several major lumber producers have announced deeper curtailments and downtime to better align output with market conditions.  

    The continued decline in pine pulpwood prices reflects ongoing structural changes in the pulp and paper industry, including product shifts, increased use of recycled fiber, mill modernization, and relocation to lower-cost regions. These trends intensified in 2025, reducing regional demand for pulpwood and placing downward pressure on stumpage prices (Figure 3). Between 2023 and 2025, more than 10 major pulp facilities in the South closed, removing over 25 million tons of annual fiber demand and significantly reshaping regional pulpwood markets.

    In areas heavily impacted by Hurricane Helene, storm-related salvage further compounded these effects, leading to sharper price declines. Conversely, new investments and mill expansions in South Alabama and Arkansas have increased local demand and helped support pulpwood prices in those areas. 

    Figure 3. U.S. South wood-using pulping capacity, 2014-2025

    Data source: Forisk (2025)

    Looking Ahead

    Single-family building permits, a leading indicator of housing starts, fell to 876,000 units in October, 9.4% lower than a year earlier (U.S. Census Bureau, 2026). Although Federal Reserve interest rate cuts in 2025 may ease financing conditions, housing starts are expected to remain under pressure in 2026. Remodeling and repairing activity, however, is projected to continue slow but steady growth (JCHS, 2025; NAHB, 2026). Higher tariffs on Canadian lumber may provide modest support demand for domestic production. 

    Overall, pine sawtimber prices in the South are expected to remain relatively stable. Areas heavily damaged by Hurricane Helene may face tighter timber supply and upward pressure on sawtimber prices due to inventory losses, particularly where growth-to-drain ratios were already low (USDA Forest Service, 2024). Pulpwood prices are expected to continue trending downward in most areas through 2026, though prices may remain stable locally where new investments add demand. 

    References

    Alderman, D. 2022. U.S. forest products annual market review and prospects, 2015-2021. General Technical Report FPL-GTR-289. Madison, WI.

    Forisk. 2025. Forisk North American forest industry capacity database. Athens, GA: Forisk.

    JCHS. 2025. Leading Indicator of Remodeling Activity (LIRA). Cambridge, MA.

    NAHB. 2026. NAHB/Westlake Royal Remodeling Market Index (RMI).  

    TimberMart-South. 2026. Market news quarterly. Athens, GA.

    U.S. Census Bureau. 2025. Quarterly survey of plant capacity utilization. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/qpc.html

    U.S. Census Bureau. 2026. Monthly new residential construction, October 2025. https://www.census.gov/construction/nrc/index.html

    USDA Forest Service. 2024. Forest Inventory Analysis Program Forest Inventory EVALIDator web-application. St. Paul, MN. 


    Li, Yanshu. “Pine Sawtimber Prices Soften as Pine Pulpwood Continues to Fall.Southern Ag Today 6(5.1). January 26, 2026. Permalink