Southern Ag Today

Blog

  • OTT Dicamba Returns, Prompting Lawsuits

    OTT Dicamba Returns, Prompting Lawsuits

    OTT dicamba has returned.

    On February 6, 2026, the EPA approved labels for over-the-top (OTT) dicamba herbicides to be used with dicamba-tolerant cotton and soybean varieties.  These labels pave the way for OTT dicamba to be used for the first time since the District Court of Arizona issued an order to vacate the EPA’s labels in February 2024.  

    New Labels

    In addition to retaining legacy restrictions from the older OTT dicamba labels, the EPA added four new restrictions in the latest 2026 labels.  

    The first restriction pertains to the maximum application rate, which has been cut in half.  Under the new labels, a maximum of two applications of 0.5 lbs. of dicamba can be made annually.  The purpose of this restriction is to reduce total dicamba in the environment and minimize potential exposure to endangered species.

    The second restriction requires applicators to add 40 ounces/acre of approved volatility Reduction Agents (VRA) to every application.  This amount is double that from prior labels.

    The third restriction involves mandatory conservation practices, a relatively new concept that arose from the EPA’s incorporation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) into the pesticide regulatory structure created under the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).  Under this restriction, growers must achieve 3 runoff/erosion mitigation points at a minimum, and 6 points in certain Pesticide Use Limitation Areas (PULAs) where especially vulnerable species maintain habitat.  

    The fourth restriction creates temperature-based limits on applications, as opposed to the previously used date-based restrictions.  Specifically, an applicator may apply OTT dicamba to no more than 50% of their untreated DT cotton and soybean acres in a given county on days when the forecasted temperature is between 85°F and 95°F, either on the day of application or the following day. If the forecasted temperature reaches or exceeds 95°F on the day of application or the following day, OTT dicamba applications are prohibited.

    New Lawsuit

    As expected, the EPA’s decision to register OTT dicamba has created some controversy.  The National Family Farm Coalition, the same organization that previously sued the EPA to de-register dicamba in 2020 and again in 2024, has filed a lawsuit against the EPA to remove OTT dicamba from the market once again.  In this lawsuit, the National Family Farm Coalition alleges that the EPA violated its duties under FIFRA and the ESA by re-registering OTT dicamba.  Of note, these claims are very similar to the claims successfully made in 2020 and 2024.  

    Brown, Nicholas. “OTT Dicamba Returns, Prompting Lawsuits.” Southern Ag Today 6(11.5). March 13, 2026. Permalink

  • U.S. Agricultural Export Trends: Stability, Growth, and a China‑Driven Rollercoaster

    U.S. Agricultural Export Trends: Stability, Growth, and a China‑Driven Rollercoaster

    Now that the December 2025 trade data have been released, we can look back over the past fifteen years to evaluate how U.S. agricultural exports have evolved across major markets and how shifting global dynamics, especially the dramatic rise and subsequent decline of exports to China, have shaped overall performance. U.S. agricultural exports from 2010 through 2025 reveals a story of both stability and notable volatility. Total agricultural exports rose from $119 billion in 2010 to a high of $196 billion in 2022, before settling at $171 billion in 2025. Exports in 2025 were more than $5.0 billion lower than the previous year, driven primarily by reduced soybean shipments, along with declines in coarse grains, beef, wine, and rice. Much of the variation in U.S. agricultural trade can be traced to the dramatic rise and fall of U.S. exports to China, a market that transformed from the leading U.S. destination to a source of sharp decline. Indeed, the widening U.S. agricultural trade deficit, which grew from –$37.6 billion in 2024 to –$41.7 billion in 2025, stems largely from the steep collapse in exports to China (USDA, 2026). 

    Figure 1 shows U.S. agricultural exports to the major destinations—China, Mexico, Canada, the European Union, and Japan. With the exception of China, most major U.S. export markets exhibit steady or gradually increasing demand, even during periods of heightened trade tensions and uncertainty. However, it’s hard to ignore the extremely volatile path of U.S. agricultural exports to China. Beginning at $18 billion in 2010, exports to China climbed substantially, peaking at $38 billion in 2022, primarily due to rising exports from the Phase One Trade Agreement and relatively high commodity prices. However, exports to China have significantly declined since, falling to just $8 billion in 2025, representing a loss of $30 billion in only three years. No other major market exhibits such a rollercoaster pattern. This deterioration also helps explain why total U.S. exports fell from $196 billion in 2022 to $171 billion in 2025, despite persistent exports elsewhere.

    In contrast, exports to nearly every other major destination remained stable or even trended upward. Mexico increased from $15 billion in 2010 to $31 billion in 2025. Canada remained consistently strong, rising from $18 billion to $28 billion over the same period. The EU and Japan both show moderate, incremental increases, with none experiencing sharp swings comparable to China. Overall, recent trends illustrate two simultaneous dynamics: the inherent volatility of U.S. agricultural trade with China and the remarkable stability of U.S. exports to virtually every other major market. While the collapse in Chinese demand resulted in a noticeable drop in total exports after 2022, the resilience of other destinations helped buffer the decline. These trends highlight both the opportunities and the vulnerabilities that come with relying heavily on a single, now‑unpredictable trading partner.

    Figure 1. U.S. Agricultural Exports to the Top Destination Markets: 2010–2025

    Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service, Global Agricultural Trade System (GATS) (USDA, 2026)

    Reference

    U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (2026). Global Agricultural Trade System. Foreign Agricultural Service. https://apps.fas.usda.gov/gats/default.aspx

    Muhammad, Andrew. “U.S. Agricultural Export Trends: Stability, Growth, and a China‑Driven Rollercoaster.” Southern Ag Today 6(11.4). March 12, 2026. Permalink

  • March WASDE Recap  

    March WASDE Recap  

    The March edition of the World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) from USDA is not known for generating market fireworks. For the U.S., most information regarding supply–the size of the previous summer and fall crops–are pretty well settled. Additional insight into questions of grain consumption, particularly feed use, is still ahead of us, coming in the Grain Stocks report at the end of March. We are in the midst of key production cycles in South America: first crop harvest and second crop plantings. Changes to production estimates in that key agricultural region can move markets.  

    This month’s report did not vary from the mold. The production estimates of U.S. corn, soybeans, and wheat were unchanged from the February WASDE, as shown in Table 1. All three crop saw record high yields in the U.S. in 2025.  

    There were no changes to the use estimates for corn, leaving ending stocks unchanged at 2.2 billion bushels. Days of use on hand at the end of the marketing year for corn is estimated at a 49.7 day supply. That is up significantly from the 37.4-day carryover at the end of the 2024/25 marketing year. 

    The U.S. soybean supply was up 5 million bushels this month on an increase in imports.  Soybean crush increased 5 million bushels as well, leaving ending stocks and carryover to use unchanged at 350 million bushels and 30 days of use on hand, respectively. 

    No changes to U.S. wheat supply and use this month. USDA did raise the season average farm price estimate by five cents to $4.95 per bushel, the report noting expectations of higher prices for the remainder of the marketing year. 

    Changes to world ending stocks for grains and soybeans were mixed this month (see Table 2). World corn ending stocks increased on higher production and lower use. Soybean ending stocks were down with a lower supply estimate exceeding the lower use number.  Wheat ending stocks were down with increased use outpacing the supply increase.  

    Up next are two important reports on March 31: Grain Stocks and Prospective Plantings. As mentioned above, quarterly grain stock inventory numbers verify and validate use estimates in the previous quarter, especially feed. With USDA surveying farmers in late-February and the first three weeks of March, there is still time for the impact of the war in the Middle East to influence planting intentions. Fertilizer prices and availability are suddenly in question, but commodity prices are higher too. Stay tuned. 

    Table 1. U.S. Supply and Demand

    March WASDE 2025/2026 CornSoybeansWheat
    Planted Acreage (Mil. Acs.)
    Harvested Acreage (Mil. Acs.)
    Yield (Bushels)    		98.8(+0)
    91.3(+0)
    186.5*(+0)    		81.2(+0)
    80.4(+0)
    53.0*(+0)    		45.3 (+0)
    37.2(+0)
    53.3*(+0)
    Supply– – – Million Bushels – – –
       Beginning Stocks
    Production 
     Imports    		1,551(+0)
    17,021*(+0)
    25(+0)    		325(+0)
    4,262(+0)
    25(+5)    		855(+0)
    1,985(+0)
    120(+0)
    Total Supply18,597*(+0)4,612(+5)2,959(+0)
    Disappearance
    Domestic Use
       Exports    		13,170*(+0)
    3,300*(+0)    		2,687*(+5)
    1,575(+0)    		1,128(+0)
    900(+0)
    Total Use16,470*(+0)4,262(+5)2,028(+0)
    Ending Stocks2,227(+0)350(+0)931(+0)
    Carryover/Use (days on hand)49.7(+0)30.0(+0)167.6(+0)
    Average Farm Price ($/Bu.)4.10(+0)10.20(+0)4.95(+0.05)
    *record high
    Values in parentheses represent change from prior month.
    Source: USDA, OCE, World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates, March 2026

    Table 2. World Supply and Demand

    March WASDE 2025/2026 CornSoybeansWheat
    Supply– – – Million Metric Tons – – –
       Beginning Stocks   
    Production    		295.82(+1.47)
    1,297.44*(+1.53)    		123.84(+0.18)
    427.18(-1.00)    		259.63(-0.14)
    842.12*(+0.32)
    Total Supply1,593.26*(+3.00)551.02*(-0.82)1,101.75*(+0.18)
    Total Use1,300.51*(-0.78)424.16*(-0.58)824.80*(+0.74)
    Ending Stocks292.75(+3.77)125.31*(-0.20)276.96(-0.55)
    Carryover/Use
    (days on hand)    		82.2(+1.1)107.8(-0.0)122.6(-0.4)
    *record high
    Values in parentheses represent change from prior month.
    Source: USDA, OCE, World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates, March 2026

    Welch, Mark. “March WASDE Recap.” Southern Ag Today 6(11.3). March 11, 2026. Permalink

  • Cull Cow Prices High and Bull Prices Break $200

    Cull Cow Prices High and Bull Prices Break $200

    Authors: David Anderson and Josh Maples

    Cow prices normally increase seasonally until about June each year.  2026 prices have had little seasonal increase, but they remain in record high territory.    Auction prices in the Southern Plains for 85-90 percent lean cows have increased by about $3 per cwt to $167 per cwt since the beginning of January.  National average cutter quality cows have increased about $13 per cwt since the first of the year.  Likewise, the cow beef cutout has steadily increased by $19 per cwt to $331 per cwt in early March.  

    Across the South, cull cows at auctions have trended higher this year.  Since the first of the year, Mississippi breaker quality cow auction prices have been as high as $175, and started early March at $162 per cwt.  Kentucky culls of the same quality began in March at $164.  Breaker cows at Georgia auctions have been even higher, beginning in March at $174 per cwt.  

    Yield grade 1 cull bulls broke the $200 per cwt barrier during February in Mississippi and Georgia auctions.  Those prices are about $30 per cwt higher than this time last year.  Bull prices have increased a little more than cow prices this Spring.  

    Tighter supplies are boosting prices.  Beef cow slaughter is down more than 20 percent from last year so far in 2026. Only 34,200 head were slaughtered during the last week of January, making it the smallest non-holiday week slaughter in years.  Dairy cow slaughter is running 7.3 percent higher than last year.  The largest dairy cow herd since the early 1990s and sharply lower milk prices will keep dairy cow slaughter ahead of 2025’s pace in the coming weeks.  The high price of calves, especially beefXdairy crossbred calves, has helped to boost dairy cow inventory as producers are seeing larger returns from the calves to help offset lower milk prices. 

    Short supplies of fed cattle are reducing overall beef production, which is helping to keep non-fed beef prices high.  Record high fed steer dressed weights, over 980 pounds per carcass on average, are boosting supplies of fat.  The larger supplies of fat require larger amounts of lean beef to blend to desirable ground beef percentages.  That increase in processor demand for lean beef to mix with ample supplies of fat is also helping to boost cull cow values. Cull prices are seeing a boost from both the supply and demand sides of the equation.  

    Events of the last week are likely to test the strength of beef demand.  Ground beef usually gets a grilling season boost in the Spring and could get an extra boost ahead of this summer’s FIFA World Cup. That demand bump usually leads to higher cull cow prices.  So, there is still some room for higher cull cow prices this Spring.

    Anderson, David, and Josh Maples. “Cull Cow Prices High and Bull Prices Break $200.” Southern Ag Today 6(11.2). March 10, 2026. Permalink

  • What Determines Peanut Crop Insurance Projected and Harvested Prices During the Price Discovery Period?

    What Determines Peanut Crop Insurance Projected and Harvested Prices During the Price Discovery Period?

    Authors: Yangxuan Liu, Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia; Susmitha Kalli, Graduate Student, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia; Hunter D. Biram, Assistant Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, University of Arkansas

    For peanut farmers, understanding how crop insurance projected and harvested prices are determined is essential for purchasing crop insurance with confidence. The projected price determined in early spring guides how much crop insurance coverage a peanut grower can expect. Later in the season, the harvest price determines whether an indemnity payment is triggered if market conditions fall short. 

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Risk Management Agency (RMA) sets the peanut crop insurance projected and harvest prices using the Peanut Formula Price (PFP). Because peanuts do not have an active futures market, their crop insurance projected and harvested prices are based on the futures prices of related commodities of wheat, cotton, soybean oil, and soybean meal. The market behavior of these commodities has historically correlated with peanut prices.

    The PFP is calculated from the December futures contracts of these four commodities traded during the peanut crop insurance price discovery period within the insurance year. USDA also establishes a loan rate for in-shell peanuts, which serves as a price floor for both projected and harvest prices used in crop insurance. If the calculated PFP falls below this loan rate, the loan rate becomes the effective minimum, ensuring that coverage does not drop below a guaranteed level, even during a market downturn. 

    Factors that determine PFP are announced annually by the USDA and vary by production year and by sales closing date. For peanut crop insurance, the sales closing dates include January 31, February 28, and March 15 (Kalli, Liu & Biram, 2025). For the 2026 crop year, the following links take you to the RMA technical pages with current peanut factor values: January 31, 2026, February 28, 2026, and March 15, 2026.

    Based on the peanut factors announced by RMA, the projected prices ($ per Pound) for the 2026 peanut crop insurance with different sales closing dates are as follows:

     January 31February 28March 15
    Runner 0.24090.24550.2477
    Spanish 0.33000.31910.3220
    Valencia0.27220.28480.2848
    Virginia0.27220.28480.2848

    References:

    Liu, Yangxuan, Susmitha Kalli, and Hunter D. Biram. “What Determines Peanut Crop Insurance Projected and Harvested Prices During the Price Discovery Period?” Southern Ag Today 6(11.1). March 9, 2026. Permalink