- For many producers, the rush to get the corn crop planted this year meant abandoning or modifying plans to apply nitrogen before or after planting, or before tillage. According to University of Illinois crop sciences professor Emerson Nafziger, it is likely that many acres that have remained wet have not had a nitrogen application.

"Spring sampling has shown that, as expected, nitrogen left over after last year's drought has moved down in the soil, and some of it has moved out of the field through tile lines following the rains this spring," Nafziger said. "So, as is typical in Illinois, soils this spring had little nitrogen left over from last fall, and crops will need nitrogen from both soil organic matter and from fertilizer in order to meet its yield potential."

Some growers may wonder whether or not nitrogen applied last fall or early this spring will be available for this year's crop. Nafziger said some samples taken this spring following fall application show that a considerable amount remains in the top two feet of soil. "Much of it is in the nitrate form now, which is the form subject to movement down in the soil with water," he explained. "In areas where rainfall has been heavy, it's likely that some of this has moved down by now."

If nitrogen has moved down in the soil, Nafziger said it does not necessarily mean that it will remain unavailable to the crop.

"If soils dry out in the coming weeks and roots can grow deeper, nitrogen will move with water to the roots, and can come from layers below the root zone," he said. "If soils stay wet, however, roots will tend to remain shallow. This will limit upward movement of nitrogen and may also limit the ability of the crop to withstand periods of dry soils later in the season."

While it is important to apply nitrogen before the crop becomes deficient, Nafziger said the chances are fairly small of having nitrogen deficiency early in corn planted into warm soils. "Nitrogen uptake is slow in small corn plants, and as soils warm up the mineralization process–the production of plant-available nitrogen from soil organic matter–kicks in. This process can provide as much as half the nitrogen needed by the crop in a season, especially in soils with high amounts of organic matter," he added.

As corn crop growth kicks into high gear, the rapid growth will mean an increasing demand for nitrogen. "Mineralization is usually too slow to meet this demand, and the crop will need fertilizer nitrogen by the time it's knee-high or so in order to prevent the loss of yield potential that comes from deficiency," he said.

With this rapid growth, it is important to apply nitrogen as soon as possible, Nafziger said, but added that it makes little difference what form of fertilizer nitrogen is used, as long as care is taken to not injure the plants with the application of nitrogen solutions to the leaves. "Placing urea or UAN solution on the soil surface brings some risk of loss, but only if it stays dry for a week or so after application. Injecting UAN or using a urease inhibitor with either of these forms helps to protect the nitrogen from loss."

What if growers are late in applying nitrogen to corn crops?  Nafziger explained that later-applied nitrogen has little time in which to be lost before plant uptake begins. "This means lower overall loss potential and so less need to apply insurance amounts of nitrogen. As an example, a plan to split-apply nitrogen–right after planting and again at sidedress–might now be modified to apply less total nitrogen in a single application if the first application couldn't be made before the crop emerged," he said.

"Have we lost enough early-applied nitrogen to justify reapplying some amount, or applying more than we had planned to apply? In parts of western Illinois where May rainfall has been well above normal, losses through tile lines might be considerable, and it may make sense to increase the sidedress rate to replace some of any nitrogen previously applied," Nafziger said.

The replacement rate should be tied to how much of the previously-applied nitrogen is likely to be, or to have been, in the nitrate form before rainfall events. Nafziger explained that the earlier the application and the more nitrogen applied as nitrate, the greater the potential for loss up to now. For ammonia applications made in early April, he said there is little reason to expect that a lot of nitrogen has been lost from the field.

Nitrogen loss is likely to be low or moderate in areas with normal rainfall in May. In these areas, Nafziger said it might be prudent to wait to see what the weather does over the next few weeks before applying additional nitrogen to those fields where it was applied early. "If it dries out and warms up, crop growth should take off and nitrogen supply should improve. If it returns to wet weather, especially warm and wet, then some supplemental nitrogen might be considered," he said.

Due to continuing wet weather, some farmers will not have planted all their corn by the final planting dates contained in their crop insurance policies. Once the final planting date has been reached, a farmer that has purchased the COMBO product (RP, RP with exclusion, or YP) will have the option of taking a prevented planting payment. In many cases, taking the prevented planting payment will be an economically attractive alternative.

Need to Contact Crop Insurance Agent

The following material lays out alternatives when faced with late planting and illustrates a spreadsheet for comparing alternatives. As will become apparent, prevented planting is complex. Farmers need to contact their crop insurance agent when considering taking prevented planting payments.

Of specific concern are rules that dictate the number of acres available for prevented planting. As a general guideline, the maximum acres eligible for prevented planting payments on corn equal the maximum acres of corn planted in the last four years, adjusted for acreage increases between 2012 and 2013, less corn acres planted in 2013. Each situation is specific and there are variations from the above guideline. Crop insurance agents can make sure farmers are eligible for prevented planting payments.

Final Planting Dates

A key date relative to prevented planting is the final planting date. In Illinois, the final date is May 31st for extreme southern counties and June 5th for all other counties.

Once the final planting date has been reached, farmers have three options:

1. Take a prevented planting payment. Prevented planting payments are available to holders of Revenue Protection (RP), RP with the harvest price exclusion, and Yield Protection (YP). Prevented planting is not available for Group Risk Plan or Group Risk Income Plan polices. To take a prevented planting payment, plantings have to be prevented for insurable causes.
2. Plant corn after the final planting date.
3. Plant soybeans after the final planting date.

Each of these three alternatives is discussed in the following sections.

Take a Prevented Planting Payment

Unless a 65% or 70% buy up option has been selected at crop insurance signup, prevented planting payments equal 60% of the spring-time guarantee. As an example, take an RP policy with an 80% coverage level having a 180 bushel per acre guarantee yield. The 2013 projected price $5.65. This policy has a guarantee of $814 per acre (80% coverage level x 180 bushel guarantee yield x $5.65 projected price). In this case, the prevented planting payment is $488 per acre ($814 x .60). The 65% and 70% buy up options would replace the 60% factor in the payment calculation with 65% and 70%, respectively, resulting in higher payments.

Even though RP's guarantee equals the higher of the projected or harvest price, the prevented planting payment is based only on the projected price.

If a prevented planting payment is taken, a farmer cannot plant another crop during the late planting period consisting of 25 following the final planting date. Planting another crop during this 25 day period will eliminate the prevented planting payment.

After 25 days, another insured crop can be planted, usually resulting in a reduction in prevented plating payments to 35% of the original amount. In double-crop situations, obtaining the entire prevented planting payments while planting soybeans may be possible.

Planting Corn after the Final Planting Date

Famers can still plant corn after the final planting date. If they do, they will not receive a prevented planting payment. Also, the guarantee will be reduced by 1% per day for each day after the final planting date up to 25 days after the final planting date. After 25 days, the guarantee will be 60% of the original guarantee.

To illustrate, take a farmer having an RP policy with a minimum guarantee of $814 per acre from the above example. Note that this is a minimum guarantee, as the guarantee can increase if the harvest price is above the projected price. If the harvest price is above the projected price, the higher harvest price is used in calculating guarantees. Assume this farmer is in a county with a final planting date of June 5th. If corn is planted on or before June 5th, the minimum guarantee is $814 per acre. A 1% reduction occurs if planting takes place on June 6th and the guarantee is $807 ($814 x (1-.01)). Planting on June 7th results in a 2% reduction, or $799 ($814 x (1-.02)). After 25 days, the guarantee is 60 percent of the original, or $488 per acre ($814 x .60).

Plant Soybeans after the Corn Final Planting Date

Soybeans can be planted on acres intended to be planted to corn. In this case, there will not be a prevented planting payment for corn. The soybeans will be insured if the farmer has elected to insure soybeans. This will be a "normal" soybean policy, unless soybeans are planted after the final planting date for soybeans (in mid-June). In this case, the guarantee is reduced, similar to that in the above example for corn.

Economics of Prevented Planting

The Prevented Planting Module will aid farmers in making the choices by calculating expected returns for the alternatives. The Prevented Planting Module is a part of the Planting Decision Model, a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet that is part of the FAST series available for download from the farmdoc website (here). The specific spreadsheet is available (here).

In the Prevented Planting Module, users can enter details on their county location (brings up final planting dates), crop insurance policies, expectations of commodity prices, and crop costs. Resulting comparisons are shown in Table 1 for Adams County, Illinois. In the example, the farmer has an RP policy with an 80% coverage level and a 180 bushel APH yield. Planting will take place on June 6 and corn is expected to have a 151 bushel yield and soybeans a 55 bushel yield. These yields are estimated based on yield loss functions contained in the module. Obviously, yield expectations from planting have large impacts on net returns. Costs come from 2013 Illinois Crop Budgets.

In the above example, net returns are estimated at:

1. $445 per acre for taking a prevented planting payment for corn. This includes the $488 prevented planting payment minus $15 of weed control costs and $28 of crop insurance premium.
2. $388 per acre net return for planting corn. This is based on a 151 bushel per acre yield a cash price of $5.50 per bushel. Costs total $441 per acre
3. $387 per acre of net return for planting soybeans. This is based on a 49 bushel per acre yield and a cash price of $12.80 per bushel. Costs yet to be incurred are $245 per acre.

In the above example, taking the prevented planting payment has the highest expected net return. In many scenarios, prevented planting has the highest net returns. Prevented planting is more attractive when:

• Crop insurance is taken a high coverage level such as 80% and 85%. These policies have higher prevented planting payments.
• Production costs have not been incurred. If nitrogen or pesticides have been applied, those costs are fixed. As such, these costs should not be included in the comparisons.

Prevented Planting and Units

Prevented planting does not have to be taken on all acres in an insurable unit. However, there is a minimum number of acres on which prevented planting can be received: the lower of 20 acres or 20 percent of the acres in the unit.

Take as an example a unit with 400 acres. This unit has 250 acres of corn planted and 150 acres on which nothing is planted. Once the final planting date has been reached, prevented planting can be taken on 150 acres. The remaining 250 planted acres will have the corn policy in place. Potential insurance payments on the 250 planted acres will be influenced by production from those 250 acres. There will be a guarantee based on 250 planted acres. The prevented planting payment on the other 150 acres will not impact the payment on the 250 planted acres.

Enterprise Unit Premiums and Planting

Enterprise units have significantly lower premiums than basic or optional units. To be eligible for an enterprise unit, a farmer must plant the lower of 20 acres or 20 percent of insured acres in at least two sections. If no planting occurs, the farm will receive prevented planting payments, but will not be eligible for enterprise unit premiums, instead paying the higher basic or optional unit premiums.

If a farm planted acres meeting the acreage requirement (lower of 20 acres or 20 percent of insured acres in at least two section), the farmer will be eligible for an enterprise unit premium. Enterprise unit premiums are based on planted acres, with more planted acres yielding lower premiums. Only planted acres will be used in determining the enterprise unit premium. For example, take an enterprise unit with 100 planted acres and 400 prevented planted acres. The enterprise unit's premium will be based on 100 acres and not the 500 acres of insured production.

APH Yields and Prevented Planting

Generally, prevented planting will not impact the APH yield in future years, unless a second crop is planted on prevented planting acres.

Take as an example an insurable unit that has 500 acres and 400 acres are planted to corn. Prevented planting payments are taken on 100 acres and a second crop is not planted on those 100 acres. In this case, the yield used in calculating the APH will be based on production from the 400 planted acres divided by 400 planted acres.

If, on the other hand, the 100 acres were planted to a second crop (e.g., soybeans) after 25 days from the final planting date, the 100 prevented planted acres will be assigned a per acre yield of 60 percent of the APH yield for the unit. The 60 percent of the APH for the prevented planted acres will be added to the production from the 400 acres to give production for the unit. Production for the unit then will be divided by 500 acres to arrive at the yield for the year.

Sometimes a unit will have all acres in that unit prevented planted. Again there will be a difference in treatment depending on whether a second crop is planted. If a crop is not planted, zero planted acres will be assigned to the unit and a yield for that crop will not enter into the APH yield calculation. If a second crop is planted, the yield is 60 percent of the APH yield.

Summary

Upon reaching the final planting date, farmers should consider the prevented planting alternative, as it could be an economically attractive alternative.

The June 3rd deadline for enrolling Farm Service Agency farms into Average Crop Revenue Election (ACRE) for 2013 is rapidly approaching. On ACRE enrolled farms, direct payments will be reduced by 20% (on most farms, between a $3.50 and $5.00 per acre reduction). For this reduction in direct payments, there is chance for ACRE payments. ACRE payments will occur when state revenue is below a guarantee. Farmers concerned about low revenues will find ACRE attractive.

Projected 2013 Payments

Some farmers and landowners have delayed the ACRE decision to gain a better feel for price expectations for the 2013 marketing year. Lower price expectations lead to higher chances of payments under ACRE. Hence, lower price expectations increase the attractiveness of the ACRE program.

Price expectations based on harvest-time futures contracts currently are not much different than price expectations earlier in the year. Currently, the December 2013 Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) corn contract is trading near $5.50 per bushel and the November 2013 soybean contract is near $12.85 per bushel. These futures prices have been placed in the 2013 State ACRE Payment Estimator, a FAST spreadsheet available here. This spreadsheet is used to estimate the chance and expected levels of 2013 ACRE payments. Estimates for Illinois are:

• For corn, ACRE has a 27% chance of making a payment. The expected ACRE payment (x .85) is $18 per acre. This $18 includes the 73% of the time that ACRE is expected to pay $0 per acre. If Illinois has a 170 bushel per acre state yield, ACRE will pay at price levels below $4.56. At a $4.50 price, the ACRE payment (x .85) will be $9 per acre. At a $4.00 price, the ACRE payment will be $81 per acre.
• For soybeans, ACRE has a 17% chance of making a payment. The expected ACRE payment (x .85) is $4 per acre. If Illinois has a 50 bushel per acre state yield, ACRE would pay at price levels below $10.68 per bushel. At a 10.50 per bushel price, the ACRE payment (x .85) will be $8 per acre. At a $10 per bushel price, the ACRE payment (x .85) will be $30 per acre.

Prices low enough to trigger ACRE payments are not likely. However, they can occur. One of the best reasons for taking ACRE is concern about low revenues caused by low prices. Average to above average yields in 2013 could begin a multiple year period of lower prices. Lower 2013 prices could trigger 2013 ACRE payments, which could be useful to have in a low price period. From a historical perspective, ACRE will make payments if this year is like 1998, the beginning of a period of low prices. In essence, taking ACRE is insurance against low prices and other causes of low revenue.

Summary

The Field Crop Scouting Workshop series offers a combination of hands-on and classroom experience in integrated pest management, soil and water management, and crop growth and development. CCA continuing education credits will be applied for at all sessions as shown above.

Sessions will be from 9-11 am each time at the listed cooperator's farm or business. If you would like to be on the email reminder list for sessions, or know of someone else who would, please send an email to fultonj@illinois.edu . Of course, if you received this by email, you're on the list!

Please try to bring a lawn chair for the classroom portion of the sessions.

With less costly soybean seed and the wide range of which soybean plant populations produce similar yields, soybean seeding rates have not historically been as closely calculated as those for corn. But soybean seed costs have risen to the point at which farmers don't want to plant more seeds than they need for top yields, according to University of Illinois crop sciences professor Emerson Nafziger.

"Although we often don't see this, it's possible in some cases that high soybean plant populations might increase lodging or stress, and actually result in lower yields, especially in wider rows, where plants are closer together," he added.

With yields usually maximized at 80,000 to 100,000 plants per acre, Nafziger suggests aiming to establish 100,000 to 120,000 plants, which allows for lower- than-expected emergence.

Nafziger said that decreased pod set due to stress in 2012 means that seed this year tends to be larger than normal. This can sometimes mean more stress cracks or mechanical damage, but germination percentages are generally reported to be good and it appears that seed quality isn't much of an issue.

"Even with good seed germination, we often find soybean seeds establishing plants at lower percentages than we see with corn," Nafziger said. "This is in part due to lower standard (warm) germination percentages and partly to the fact that soybean seeds, which need to stay healthy long enough to drag the large cotyledons up and out of the soil, often struggle to emerge, especially if conditions are wetter or cooler than normal, or if soils form a crust after planting.

"To help make seeding rate decisions for soybean, Dennis Bowman and I developed a seeding rate calculator–or rather, we resuscitated one that we had running some years ago," Nafziger said.

The web-based PC version is available at ow.ly/ko8gL, the Android app is at ow.ly/ko8sm, and the iPhone/iPad online spreadsheet is at ow.ly/ko8au.

The calculator asks for either weight and seeds per pound for seed units sold by weight, or for seeds per unit for seed sold by number. It then asks for the percentage of warm germination, which is required to be on the seed tag or container, and for the cost per unit. Field size and row spacing are also requested.

The only subjective information requested by the calculator is an estimate of the percentage of germinable seed expected to emerge and establish plants under the soil conditions and perhaps the weather forecast at planting.

Nafziger said that under very good conditions it is reasonable to expect close to 100 percent of good seed to emerge. But if soils are cold or wet (or likely to get wet), this percentage should be decreased. The calculator goes from 100 percent to 70 percent, with the idea that expecting less than 70 percent emergence of good seed should be a signal to wait for better conditions before planting.

"The calculator returns seed spacing down the row, seed requirements per acre and for the field, and the amount of time it will take to plant the field," Nafziger said. "While we developed the calculator for soybean, it works for corn or small-grain seed as well."

The Illinois Society of Professional Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers conducts an annual study of farmland prices and cash rents (see here). As part of this process, the Society asks its membership what cash rents will be for the upcoming production year. Society members indicate that the 2013 cash rents for farmland with expected corn yields over 190 bushels per acre will be $396 per acre, up $17 from the 2012 rent of $379 per acre.

Survey

This survey is of professional farm managers. Hence, cash rents reported in the survey tend to be higher than average cash rents that consider all farmland. For a variety of reasons, including that farm managers are knowledgeable of market conditions, average rents on managed farmland tend to be higher than on farmland not professionally managed.

Average 2013 Cash Rents

The Society asks its members for cash rents of four farmland classes:

1. Excellent quality farmland has expected corn yields over 190 bushels per acre,
2. Good quality farmland has expected corn yields between 170 and 190 bushels per acre,
3. Average quality farmland has expected corn yields between 150 and 170 bushels per acre, and
4. Fair quality farmland has expected yields below 150 bushels per acre.

For each class, an average cash rent is given for the high 1/3, the mid 1/3, and the low 1/3 of leases. In 2013, the average of the mid 1/3 leases is $396 per acre for excellent farmland, $339 per acre for good quality farmland, $285 per acre for average quality farmland, and $235 per acre for fair quality farmland (see Table 1)

As can be seen in Table 1, there is a great deal of variability in cash rents for a given productivity class. In the excellent land class, for example, the high 1/3 leases average $447 per acre while the low 1/3 leases average $320 per acre, a range of $127 per acre. The other productivity classes have similar ranges: Good has a $111 range ($385 for high 1/3 - $274 for low 1/3), average has a $103 per acre range ($324 for high 1/3 - $221 for low 1/3) and fair has a $86 range ($265 for high 1/3 - $179 for low 1/3).

These ranges largely exist because of differing relationships between landlord and tenants and because of difference in return desires of landlords. These ranges would be larger if all - and not just professionally managed - farmland had been included. The ranges point out that relying on simple averages to gauge the farmland markets misses a great deal of the variety.

Trends in Cash Rents

Cash rents have increased over time, as illustrated by averages of the mid 1/3 leases (see Table 2). In 2007, rents for the mid 1/3 for excellent quality farmland were $183 per acre. From $183 per acre, cash rent levels increased to $241 per acre in 2008, $267 in 2009, $268 in 2010, $319 in 2011, $379 in 2012, and $396 in 2013. Since 2007, mid 1/3 rents increased by $213 per acre ($396 in 2012 - $183 in 2007).

Cash rent increases between 2013 and 2012 are less than those between 2011 and 2012. For excellent quality farmland, rents increased $17 between 2012 and 2013 ($396 in 2013 - $379 in 2012), compared to a $60 increase when 2011 and 2012 ($379 in 2012 - $319 in 2011).

Summary

Rents on professional managed farmland will be higher in 2013 than in 2012, continuing a string of years of cash rent increases. The increase in 2013 is less than that which occurred between 2011 and 2012. The next year could be pivotal in terms of cash rent increases. If normal crops occur and commodity prices fall, cash rents in 2014 may not increase.

The Illinois Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers annually publishes a booklet that gives detailed information on farmland prices and rents for ten regions in Illinois. Information on ordering this booklet can be found on the Illinois Society of Professional Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers website at the following page: http://www.ispfmra.org/2013/03/2013-illinois-farmland-values-lease-trends/.

This blog post discusses a "basic" product which will be appropriate for most farm situations. This "basic" product uses Revenue Protection (RP) insurance. Also discussed are situations in which Group Risk Income Plan with the Harvest Revenue Option (GRIP-HR) and RP with the Harvest Price Exclusion (RP-HPE) are appropriate choices. The post summarizes an online webinar that is available for viewing when deciding between crop insurance products.

The on-line webinar is available here.

The webinar also is available as a download as a zip file here.

A pdf of the presentation is available here.

Basic Product: The basic choices appropriate in most situations are:

• RP used at a 75% through 85% coverage level. In my opinion, most farmers with find the 80% and 85% coverage level products provide guarantee levels that will cover mosts costs.
• Enterprise units , and
• Use the Trend Adjustment Actual Production History (TA-APH) Yield Endorsement.

This product will provide cost effective protection based on farm yields. It has a harvest price increase provision, which provides useful protection to those farmers who hedge or price grain prior to harvest. The harvest price provision also is useful in widespread drought years, providing payments when yields are below guarantees at the higher harvest prices.

When should GRIP-HR be used? GRIP-HR pays based on county yields rather than farm yields. GRIP-HR will be useful in the following situations:

• Farmers who are concerned more about price risk than yield risk. Because RP has a 90% coverage level option, it will provide better risk protection than RP.
• Farms that do not have an enterprise option available. GRIP-HR generally is more costly than RP at the enterprise unit level. However, basic units have higher costs than enterprise units, causing GRIP-HR to have close to the same costs as RP.
• Farms whose Actual Production History (APH) yields are low relative to their expected yields.
• Farms that do not want to deal with the yield record keeping associated with farm-level products.

There are a number of features that farmers should be aware of if they take GRIP-HR:

• GRIP-HR does not have replant or prevented planting provisions.
• GRIP-HR payments will not be known until the National Agricultural Statistical Service (NASS) releases yields in February following harvest.
• NASS yield determination is final. NASS yields are determined following statistical procedures, but occasionally questions are raised about yield levels. In any case, NASS yields are final.

Who should take RP-HPE? RP-HPE provides a revenue guarantee that will not increase if the harvest price is above the projected price. RP-HPE may be appropriate in the following situations:

• Cost conscious crop insurance purchasers may find RP-HPE attractive as it has lower premiums than RP.
• Farmers who do not hedge much crop prior to harvest. RP-HPE does not have a guarantee increase. Therefore, pre-harvest hedging can reduce risk protection offered by RP-HPE.
• Farmers who are willing to take "drought" risk. RP-HPE will pay much less than RP during drought years like 2012. If a farmer is willing to have lower payments during drought years, RP-HPE may be appropriate.

Who should take basic or optional units? Most individuals who can take enterprise units will find it beneficial to take enterprise units. Basic and optional units may be useful in situations in which quality of farmland varies greatly.

Who should not take the TA-APH Yield Endorsement? The TA-APH yield endorsement is beneficial in the vast majority of situations. It will provide the same dollar guarantees for the same or lower price. The only situations TA-APH is not beneficial is when yields are extremely low and the APH yield is based on floors and other limits.

Summary

Most farmers will find RP at high coverage levels using enterprise units and the TA-APH yield endorsement to be a good product. GRIP-HR is good for individuals more concerned about price risk. RP-HPE is a good product for cost conscious buyers who do not do a great deal of pre-harvest pricing of grain.

The National Agricultural Statistical Service (NASS) recently released county yields for corn and soybeans for 2012. These yields confirm that the drought significantly lowered 2012 production, with extremely low yields being prevalent in southern Illinois. Corn yields were more impacted than soybean yields. With county yield estimates, Group Risk Income Plan with the harvest price option (GRIP-HR) can be estimated. Most counties will have GRIP-HR payments for corn, with many counties having large payments. Fewer counties had GRIP-HR payments for soybeans.

Illinois Corn Yields

Illinois corn yields were extremely low, with some of the lowest corn yields in southern Illinois (see Figure 1 as well as Appendix Table 1 for yields). The county with the lowest corn yield was Marion County, having a yield of 19 bushels per acre. There were five counties with corn yields in the 20 bushel range, all of which are located in southern Illinois: Washington (21 bushel per acre, Perry (23 bushels), Richland (27 bushels), Jasper (29 bushels), and Fayette (29) counties. Obviously, the 2012 drought had a devastating impact on yields in southern Illinois.

Central Illinois also had low yields, with three areas particularly hard hit. In western Illinois, near the Mississippi River, there were several counties with below 90 bushel yields: Adams (76 bushels), Schuyler (76 bushels), and Brown (87 bushels) Counties. Logan and Menard Counties in mid-central Illinois had yields of 97 bushels per acre. In east-central Illinois, Ford County had a 64 bushel yield and Livingston County had an 83 bushel yield.

The highest corn yields generally were in western Illinois, centered around Mercer County. Mercer County had a 180 bushel per acre yield.

Illinois Soybean Yields

While not exceptional, Illinois soybean yields were not as poor as Illinois corn yields (see Figure 2). There were many counties in northern and central Illinois that averaged over 50 bushels per acre. Most counties in southern Illinois had yields above 25 bushels per acre. Carroll County in northwest Illinois had the highest soybean yield of 59 bushels per acre. Washington County in southern Illinois had the lowest county yield of 22 bushels per acre.

There were six counties that had average soybean yields that higher than average county corn yields, an unusual occurrence. All these counties were located in southern Illinois and included Cumberland (43 bushel soybean yield versus 34 bushel corn yield), Fayette (35 bushel soybean yield versus 39 bushel corn yield), Jasper (39 bushel soybean yield versus 29 bushel corn yield), Marion (28 bushel soybean yield versus 19 bushel corn yield), Richland (27 bushel soybean yield versus 26.5 bushel corn yield), and Washington Counties (22 bushel soybean yield versus 21 bushel corn yield).

GRIP-HR Payments for Corn

Group Risk Income Plan with the Harvest Revenue IGRIP-HR) is the most used county level insurance product, with most individuals taking the policy at the 90% coverage level. With the release of county yield data, reasonable estimates of GRIP-HR estimates can be made. Figure 3 shows GRIP-HR estimates at the 90% coverage level and the 100% protection level. The 100% protection level is the highest protection level. Farmers can choose a lower protection level. If farmers choose a 60% protection level, the lowest protection level, the payments would be 60% of those shown in Figure 3.

Many counties in southern Illinois, and several counties in central Illinois, have estimated payments over $1000 per acre. This would be an expected outcome in a drought year for a product with the harvest price increase. Lower yield trigger payments that are then paid at the higher harvest price.
Note that there are several counties that have blanks in Figure 3. There were a number of counties that have GRIP policies for which NASS did not report county production data: Boone, Clay, Lawrence, Jefferson, Rock Island, Massac Counties. It remains to be seen how RMA will determine GRIP-HR payments in these counties.

GRIP-HR Payments for soybeans

Fewer counties had GRIP-HR payments (see Figure 4). For those counties having payments, GRIP-HR payments were lower than for corn. These lower payments reflect the fact that soybean yields were less impacted by the drought compared to corn yields.

Summary

Corn yields were low over much of Illinois, with the lowest yields occurring in southern Illinois. As a result of low yields, GRIP-HR will make payments in most Illinois counties. Soybeans yields were not as low as corn yields. Fewer counties will have GRIP-HR payments.