cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
timetippingpt
Honored Advisor

Why Comparing to 3 Year Averages is MISLEADING

YIELD ESTIMATES FOR 2013   Expected   Accuracy: +/- 3%      
                   
  Date Crop Scouted: 8/19/2013              
  Fields Scouted: 23              
          Divisor EST YIELD TO AVG    
DESCRIPTION % of Acres Ears Rows Kernels (90/bu) BU/AC AMT    
                   
Water Killed 1% 0 0.0 0 90 0.0 0.0    
Water Damaged 2% 22 12.0 25 96 68.8 1.4    
Sandy Hills/Bottoms 12% 26 15.6 28 95 119.5 14.3   Drought Killed
EndRows/Manure/Errors 10% 28 15.8 30 91 145.8 14.6     N or Compaction
White Clays 25% 29 16.0 32 90 165.0 41.2     Hangin On
Brown Loams 25% 30 16.1 34 89 184.5 46.1   Solid  
Dark Blacks 25% 30 16.5 40 89 222.5 55.6   Assured  
                   
AVERAGES 100% 28.6 15.8 33.4 90.3   173.3    
                Est % of  
  If PLUS 3%= 178.5       3 YEAR AVERAGE = 167.1 103.7%  
  If MINUS 3%= 168.1              
            5 YEAR AVERAGE = 177.9 97.4%  
                   
            HIGHEST 5 YEAR AVERAGE (2011)= 182.2 95.1%  
                   
            Century Record High Yield (2008) = 199.2 87.0%  
                   
            Century Record Low Yield (2002)= 133.6  

 

 

 

0 Kudos
15 Replies
timetippingpt
Honored Advisor

Re: Why Comparing to 3 Year Averages is MISLEADING

This is real data from walking 6 miles yesterday for our farm. The spreadsheet is just how

I have alwasy done it. Never missed by more than 3%. We know % of soil types for the

whole spread so it makes it much more accurate than a PF walkin study.

 

Also, the past are weighed yields on planted acres fwiw.

 

This week the no-till corn is really shining (just meaning it is dying much slower than some).

 

IMPORTANT to note the % of the 3 YR AVG. When you have 3 below avg years in a row,

comparing to 3 year averages is not really very wise...errrr...maybe ignorant is a better way to say it.

 

The 3 YR AVG = 167.1 ...  2013 will be 103.7%

 

Trend for us is about 186...   2013 will be 93% of TREND (or USDA's fav number)

 

So you see, on a national basis, a 10% swing in perception (from 103.7 to 93), swings the

crop about  1.3 Bil Bu, or most of the entire carryout.

 

Just saying, using a 3 yr average is not wise.

Red Steele
Veteran Advisor

Re: Why Comparing to 3 Year Averages is MISLEADING

Time, do you do an analysis farm by farm, or do you farm in one small location?

 

I am a medium sized farmer and have ten miles of crops, with very different rainfall amounts this year. Several rains have hit or missed one farm, and not the others. One event dumped 2 inches in one area, and five miles away, not even a tenth. Even the same farm has had rainfall that mudded the ground on one side, and a mile away on the other side, the ground was barely wet.

 

Very hard to extrapolate results without actually harvesting the fields.

 

One additional comment about the USDA guess on trendline yields. I own 80% of what I farm, and I have improved the land through irrigation, tiling, fertilizer and lime. On my rented ground, there are limits as to what I can do to improve the land. If I would go out and rent an additional chunk of medium to low level productive ground, I could make an argument that I would have a historical yield , times the new acres, and get some number. But that would not be a very valid number since the expanded acres would not yield like my base. I think the expansion into the fringe acres causes the USDA numbers to be invalid, and producers should plan accordingly.

0 Kudos
ehoff4187600
Frequent Contributor

Re: Why Comparing to 3 Year Averages is MISLEADING

You need some real yield volatility over there in the east. My 6 categories would be ozark rocks, terrace channels (wet), exposed eroded clay subsoil, good upland (6-8" of topsoil over clay), pattern tiled wet bottoms, bottom silt loams. Anyway we are gonna be 150% of 3 year average, and 115% of trend. We have been blessed.

0 Kudos
timetippingpt
Honored Advisor

Re: Why Comparing to 3 Year Averages is MISLEADING

Of the 23 fields, some are in heavy rain areas (3" in July+August) and some are in the no rain areas (.9" July/August).

So, since I know acres of each, I can adjust to the average kernels per ear based on rainfall. Field by field, the averages would look a little like the overall numbers since some fields are poor soils, and some are incredibly good. And, we have learned over the years, rainfall is higher on the good soils. It just is, I know not why.

 

As to rented farms, we operate them as if we own them. There are ways to improve rented farms if you really want to do so.

Since we are still mostly crop share, where we manage the selling price for the owner, we have very few farms where making improvements does not benefit the landowner. Well, none come to think of it. Nothing is perfect of course, we have just been blessed with a group of long-term earnings oriented owners I suppose.

 

 

0 Kudos
timetippingpt
Honored Advisor

Re: Why Comparing to 3 Year Averages is MISLEADING

Eddie...can't wait to see you gents. You earned a great year, hope you like hauling grain!

 

Our area is one of the most yield consistent areas on the entire planet. We know and appreciate that fact just about EVERY YEAR!

That is why my joke about being the new KA was supposed to be funny. Not so I guess.

0 Kudos
timetippingpt
Honored Advisor

Re: Why Comparing to 3 Year Averages is MISLEADING

Of course, no one is talking about beans, which I understand because they can't be guessed. They are most likely going to be terrible, thus the GRP claim.

0 Kudos
ECIN
Senior Advisor

Re: Why Comparing to 3 Year Averages is MISLEADING

Time ------- I thought your joke was funny -- lol 

 

Anyway just to let you know - I'm working on a Milo Dealership -- Hey since we now live in New Kansass - might as well start planting some - they tell me it do's pretty good in the desert .

 

Let me know how many pro boxs you will need -- it do's come in boxs don't it ??

0 Kudos
vrbuck
Advisor

Re: Why Comparing to 3 Year Averages is MISLEADING

Indiana and ohio needed to crank out 210 whole field averages to make up for the shortfall in Iowa and Minnesota.  Not gonna happen.  Now the vhi maps have indiana second to SD as the garden spot this year.

0 Kudos
ehoff4187600
Frequent Contributor

Re: Why Comparing to 3 Year Averages is MISLEADING

I,be got the pods for good beans but not the weather forecast.
0 Kudos