| 
			 A quick review of the 2015 harvest season shows that yields on 
			corn, which appears to be the predominant crop in Logan County, were 
			down considerably over 2014 and 2015. The price per bushel at the 
			elevator was also down, making for a “lose-lose” situation for 
			farmers in the Midwest, and particularly in the heart of Illinois. 
 What was the cause? There are several factors playing into this new 
			recession in the Ag industry.
 
 The weather did play a big role in production this year as heavy 
			rains in the early growing season drowned out fields, and affected 
			yields on a large portion of Logan County Farms. The end result, an 
			average yield that was about 50 bushels per acre lower than 2014 and 
			also lower than the national average.
 
 In the big picture, this might be a good thing. How can that be? 
			Because we are experiencing record stockpiles of corn in the U.S., 
			and that goes back to the basic economic rule of supply and demand. 
			The value will drop as supply increases, and this is a part of the 
			reason grain crops are falling consistently.
 
 But why do we have such a supply, with little demand?
 
 There was a time when the local agricultural community only knew 
			what was going on at the local elevator, and there was less 
			understanding of how the world markets and world trade impact local 
			farms. Today we have, through technology, a greater understanding of 
			the role the world plays in our local economy. And the world is not 
			in good shape.
 
			
			 The U.S dollar is strong in the world markets right now, and that 
			should be a good thing, but for foreign buyers it is not. Because we 
			have added value to our currency, countries like China that are 
			suffering a very weak economy right now, cannot afford to purchase 
			our products.
 According to an article written by Philip Abbot, Professor of 
			Agricultural Economics at Purdue University, “The reduction in 
			export sales is a key influence on sharply lowering U.S. farm 
			income.” He goes on to state that Ag exports dropped $12.6 billion 
			in 2015 compared to 2014, and he predicts additional declines in 
			2016.
 
 Because the dollar is strong, according to a podcast delivered by 
			Logan County farmer Bill Graff on February 8th, U.S. currency is a 
			commodity and foreign countries are in a crunch because they don’t 
			have the dollar, and they need it to rebuild their economies.
 
 Graff said that the reason they are missing dollars is because the 
			U.S. has become less dependent on foreign oil. He noted that as the 
			U.S. works to provide its own energy resources, it is buying less 
			oil from foreign countries, deflating the value of the product, and 
			also creating a cash crunch in those countries, that is ultimately 
			having a circular effect and impacting the U.S. in a negative way.
 
 So, is the answer that the U.S. should back off on its fuel 
			production? Some are afraid that it could go that direction, 
			especially with ethanol. If oil is cheap, and foreign trade needs 
			our dollars to rebuild their economies, will the U.S. back off on 
			the production of grain fuels? And if that happens, what will be the 
			impact on Logan County farmers? More grain with less marketing 
			options equates to higher supply and lower prices, and here we go 
			again.
 
 Low yields and low prices make farmers a high risk
 
 In Graff’s podcast number 120 – “Farm Finances, it's ugly out there” 
			posted at the end of December, he noted that it is a fact that 70 to 
			80 percent of Illinois farmers lost money in 2015 based on their 
			accrual accounting.
 
 In that accounting process, those farmers looked not only at the 
			decrease in yields and dollars per bushel but also at the deflation 
			of their longer term assets. Grain in the bin was worth less in 
			October of 2015 than in October of 2014. Those who were holding on 
			to older crop as their rainy day umbrella were seeing holes punched 
			in the canvas, and the profits were running out like water.
 
			
			 With 2015 being less than a break-even year on a cash basis, fewer 
			investments were made in farm machinery. That equated to older 
			equipment on the asset sheet, and again a decrease in value, and a 
			decrease in net worth.
 Land prices are also falling. According to Graff’s podcast, the year 
			of $14,000 per acre land has passed, and in 2015 land prices fell by 
			about 7 percent. Land is often considered to be the wealth of the 
			farm, but if the value is depleting, then so is the wealth.
 
 In January of this year, United States Congressman Darin LaHood held 
			a roundtable discussion in Logan County, calling together farmers 
			and agricultural suppliers throughout his district to create an 
			agriculture advisory committee of his constituents.
 
 In that meeting, there were several who expressed concern over the 
			economy, and one attendee noted that the Central Illinois farmer is 
			going to be considered a high risk in the banking industry this 
			year. He noted that the bank may go along with financing operating 
			costs for one more year, but if the downward spiral continues, that 
			banker will probably not go the second year.
 
 So what is the solution to this downward spiral? Short answer – quit 
			farming. Seriously. Even Graff noted that he lost money in 2015 and 
			was willing to lose money in 2016 if it works out that way, but he 
			said he would not do it in 2017.
 
 For some of the small farmers with less than a thousand acres, it 
			may be time to look at becoming a landlord. While cash rents also 
			appear to be on a downward trend, there is still money in cash rent 
			for the landlord. With even 500 acres in the low one-third land 
			quality bracket price of $275 an acre, as noted in John Fulton’s 
			introduction, the landowner can yield $137,500. After taxes, and 
			depending on if there are current farm loans to pay off, this could 
			bring in enough cash for the family household. The idea is that the 
			larger farmers can better handle the risk than the small farm. 
			Considering the risk involved in being unable to pay a bank loan, 
			that ultimately over the next year or two could even lead to 
			bankruptcy, it is a reasonable option, for the small farmer.
 
 For the larger producer, this may not be the best option simply 
			because they have too much invested in their operation, and to 
			simply stop farming would not solve their financial issues. That 
			will mean that these farms must determine how to reduce the 
			operating costs while producing a crop, and hope that the prices 
			will eventually come back up.
 
 Graff mentioned in his podcast that one plan is to plant with a 
			lower plant population, thus reducing seed costs. Another idea, be 
			conservative in chemical applications and plan on running that 
			combine another year even though it is depreciating. Also, this may 
			be the year not to contract fertilizer and other inputs.
 
 
			
			 
			Buying early can often result in lower pricing, but will it this 
			year? When we buy early, we are guaranteeing the demand for a 
			product. This could be a year to offer no guarantees. If the 
			manufacturers cannot see that demand on the books, will they respond 
			by lowering prices? Probably so.
 
 And, as frightening as this may sound, our future as a farming 
			industry may depend much on the federal government. LaHood recently 
			announced that he will co-chair a U.S. and China Working group. The 
			goal is to build the diplomatic relationship between the U.S. and 
			China and strengthen both economies. If this program proves to be 
			successful, it could have a positive impact on many of the economic 
			sectors of the U.S., including agriculture.
 
 [to top of second column]
 | 
            
			 
            LaHood is also optimistic about improving trade relationships with 
			Cuba and noted that trade with Cuba would be good for Illinois 
			farmers, as well as the Illinois-based manufacturer, Caterpillar. 
            Another program that sounds good in theory is the Trans-Pacific 
			Partnership (TPP). Again this is a program that LaHood supports 
			saying that it will be good for the farm economy in the Midwest. In 
			that plan, the U.S. may participate trade in agreements with several 
			countries that have borders on the Pacific. Among those are Japan, 
			Vietnam, Singapore, Brunei, Malaysia, Australia, New Zealand, Chili, 
			Peru, Mexico, and Canada.
 The TPP has met with some negative feedback based on its 
			composition. The partnership agreement covers a wide range of 
			issues: pharmaceutical regulations, state-owned industries, foreign 
			investment, labor rights, environmental protections, copyright law, 
			government procurement, e-commerce, and more. Opponents of the 
			partnership say there is too much restriction, and that it will have 
			a negative impact on some very important world issues such as 
			digital innovation and the global effort to combat AIDS.
 
 However, proponents of the agreement say that it will open trade 
			doors for the U.S. by lowering some of the barriers that are now in 
			place, and make trade with the U.S. more affordable and more 
			attractive to the partnership members.
 
            Hanging our hopes on ethanol
 And finally, the future of ethanol is still strong, and must be 
			exploited for the sake of the family farm. According to the 
			Renewable Fuels Association in November of 2014 and March of 2015, 
			ethanol exports topped out at 84 million gallons. From March 2015 to 
			August 2015 the exports dwindled down to a mere 34 million gallons. 
			However, in January of this year, the U.S. hit a new all-time high 
			when the exports totaled 87.1 million gallons. Notably, one-third of 
			that market was purchased by China.
 
 Production of biofuels will continue to grow according to mandates 
			passed by the federal government. The Energy Independence and 
			Security Act of 2007 outlines the growth of renewable fuels to a 
			total of 22 billion gallons by 2022.
 
 Though there is a mandated demand, there is also concern about the 
			price at the pump and whether or not consumers will purchase ethanol 
			when gasoline is less expensive. However, there are other factors 
			coming into play that offset consumer decisions.
 
            
			 
			While petroleum-based gasoline is competing strongly at the pump 
			with ethanol, ethanol is competing strongly with the octane 
			enhancers used to manufacture various octane levels of gasoline, 
			keeping up the demand for the grain-based product.
 At the pump, gasoline products are marketed as Regular, Mid-grade, 
			or High-Octane. The difference in the products is the octane level 
			of each. That octane level is reached through the chemical compounds 
			commonly known as aromatics added to the gasoline at the refinery. 
			Aromatics used in gasoline include Benzene, Toluene, and Xylene.
 
 In addition to these chemicals, ethanol is becoming a major player 
			in the gasoline additive market, because as an additive, it is 
			cheaper than the three chemical compounds.
 
 In a February 3, 2016, article in Farmdoc Daily, Scott Irwin and 
			Darrel Good of the Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics 
			at the University of Illinois offered price comparisons from January 
			2013 to January 29, 2016.
 
 
  
 In the article, the authors provide a visual that demonstrates that 
			over the three-year period ethanol was consistently less costly than 
			the chemical compounds. What should also be noted on the chart is 
			that in November of 2013, Benzene was the most expensive aromatic at 
			well above $5 per gallon. Since that time, the price of all the 
			aromatics has fallen and in January of this year were at their 
			lowest. Even so, ethanol is still about half-price to the three 
			aromatics.
 
 So, is it possible to conclude this article with an optimistic view? 
			Let’s compare ourselves in 2015 to ourselves in the 1970’s and 80’s, 
			rough, rough years for farming. Most of us came through then, and 
			most of us will come through this as well. Let us hope for higher 
			demand, higher yields, and higher prices, lower input costs, and 
			we’ll get by just fine!
 
            
			 
			Sources
 
 Purdue Agricultural Economics Report
 Outlook for the Agricultural Economy in 2016
 https://ag.purdue.edu/agecon/Documents/PAER%20DECEMBER%202015%20-%20DIGITAL%20VERSION.pdf
 
 Farm and Ranch Country
 Logan County Farmer Bill Graff
 http://farmandranchcountry.com/about/
 123 – Strong Dollar, Cheap Oil & Farm Economy
 http://farmandranchcountry.com/strong-dollar-cheap-oil-farm-economy/
 
 Renewable Fuels Association
 Ethanol Exports Surge in December; DDGS Exports Set New Annual 
			Record
 By Geoff Cooper in E-blog Posted February 8, 2016
 http://www.ethanolrfa.org/2016/02/ethanol-exports-surge-in-december-ddgs-exports-set-new-annual-record/
 
 Farmdoc Daily
 February 8, 2016 - Weekly Outlook: Exports of Ethanol and 
			Distillers' Grains Remain Strong
 By Darrel Good Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics - 
			University of Illinois
 http://farmdocdaily.illinois.edu/2016/02/exports-ethanol-distillers-grains-remain-strong.html
 
 Farmdoc Daily
 February 3, 2016 - The Competitive Position of Ethanol as an Octane 
			Enhancer
 Scott Irwin and Darrel Good
 Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics - University of 
			Illinois
 http://farmdocdaily.illinois.edu/2016/02/ethanol-position-as-octane-enhancer.html
 
              |