NDSU Offers Updated Crop Compare Program

untitled%20drawing%201The program provides a tool for producers to check the changing scenarios until final planting decisions are made this spring.

The North Dakota State University Extension Service has updated the Crop Compare program, which is a spreadsheet designed to compare cropping alternatives. The most favorable crop budgets were in the western part of the state.

Each region in North Dakota has at least a few crops that project a profit in 2017, says Andy Swenson, North Dakota State University Extension Service farm management specialist.

However, because of agronomic and risk factors, enough profitable crop options may not be available to provide a sustainable crop rotation in many regions of the state.

Crop Compare provides a tool for producers to check the changing scenarios until final planting decisions are made this spring.

The program uses the direct costs and yields from the 2017 projected crop budgets for nine regions of North Dakota, but producers are encouraged to enter the expected yields and input costs for their individual farm.

The user designates a reference crop and enters its expected market price. Depending on the region, a broad selection of nine to 18 crops are compared. The program provides the prices for competing crops that would be necessary to provide the same return over variable costs as the reference crop.

“Producers can compare these break-even prices to expected market prices to see which crop is most likely to compete with the reference crop,” says Andy Swenson, NDSU Extension farm management specialist. “Grain prices can move quickly. The program provides a tool for producers to check the changing scenarios until final planting decisions are made this spring.”

It should be noted that an underlying assumption is that fixed costs, such as machinery ownership, land and the owner’s labor and management, do not vary among crop choices and therefore do not need to be included in the analysis.

“In practice, there may be differences in fixed costs that should be considered,” says Swenson.

“For example, there may be additional labor, management and risk associated with a competing crop. If all the labor and management is provided by the owner-operator, it would be considered a fixed cost and could be excluded. However, the producer should add some cost if he or she would only want to produce the crop when an adequate reward would be received for the extra time and management required relative to the reference crop.”

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s