Urbana, Illinois
November 22, 2004While
an important issue, the impact of soybean rust is not the only
factor that will influence price,
said a University of
Illinois Extension
marketing specialist.
"If current USDA projections
are correct, the 2004-05 U.S. soybean marketing year will end
with stocks of 460 million bushels," said Darrel Good. "That is
at least 260 million more than generally considered adequate.
Allowing for an increase in use to 2.9 billion bushels in the
2005-06 marketing year, the 2005 U.S. crop could be as small as
2.65 billion bushels without creating a shortage."
With a U.S. average yield of 40 bushels, a crop of 2.65 billion
bushels could be generated with harvested acreage of 66.25
million, 7.74 million fewer than harvested in 2004, Good added.
"Without some reduction in U.S. production or a substantial
increase in use, soybeans could remain in surplus for another
year," he said.
Good's comments came as he reviewed the impact of the discovery
of Asian soybean rust in some southern states. The discovery
triggered a flood of commentary about U.S. soybean acreage and
yield prospects in 2005 and beyond. Many believe that acreage
will be reduced in 2005 and that average yields will also be
negatively impacted.
"There are clearly more questions about the impact of soybean
rust than answers at this time," said Good. "The discovery of
rust at the end of the 2004 harvest season means that the
industry has some time to analyze alternatives and make
decisions based on the best information and recommendations of
experts.
"The first reactions may not reflect final decisions. One is
reminded of the example of soybean aphids in 2003. The early
response of many producers was to plan to sharply reduce soybean
acreage in 2004, but that did not happen."
Initially, the acreage response to soybean rust is anticipated
to be most significant in southern growing areas where rust
could be most problematic, Good noted. Soybean area in the 12
southern states totaled about 11
million acres in 2004. Reduced acreage in those states in 2005
might be anticipated as a way for producers to avoid the cost
and potential yield impact of the disease.
"However, sound economic alternatives for soybeans may be
limited due to low prices and increased cost of production of
other crops," Good said. "In addition, some acreage in those
states is already routinely treated with fungicides for the
control of other foliar diseases. Treating for soybean rust
might involve only a marginal increase in production costs for
those areas."
Soybean planting decisions in the Midwest should be impacted by
expectations of the probably of soybean rust in the area in
2005; the cost of treating; the potential yield impact; and the
economics of alternative crops, primarily corn.
"Producers will likely spend the winter months evaluating these
factors and making planting decisions," said Good. "It is
possible for adjustments to be made in some acreage decisions
late in the planning process. One of the factors that may
influence the decision is the rapid increase in the cost of corn
production.
"Crop production budgets for central Illinois, for example,
indicate that variable costs of corn production increased about
$21 per acre from 2000 to 2004 and might be another $9 higher in
2005. During the same time period, the variable cost of soybean
production increased by only $4 per acre and is projected to
increase another $4 in 2005, not including any fungicide
applications."
Good added that another important factor could be the recent
experience of high corn yields relative to soybeans. If
producers anticipate that relationship to continue, corn would
still be an attractive alternative to soybeans, even with higher
production costs. Finally, planting decisions will be influenced
by the relative price of corn and soybeans at planting time, as
well as planting time weather.
"Planting decisions in the upper Midwest could be positively
influenced by the discovery of soybean rust in the south," said
Good. "On an annual basis, there may be a lower probability of
the occurrence of soybean rust in those northern states.
Producers there might see expected acreage reductions in other
regions as an opportunity to expand acreage in 2005.
"At this juncture, it is difficult to anticipate the direction
and magnitude of soybean acreage change in 2005. Producers will
have to carefully evaluate all of the decision factors,
including production costs and relative yields and prices of
alternative crops."
Given the 960,000-acre increase in soybean area in southern
states in 2004, it would not be surprising to see a reduction in
2005, Good noted. Some of that decline could be offset by the
trend increase in soybean area in the
upper Midwest. The USDA's Winter Wheat Seedings report to be
released on Jan. 12 may provide some insight on the potential
changes in acreage of spring-planted crops, but will not be very
helpful in assessing the potential mix of those crops.
"The potential yield impact of soybean rust in 2005 is nearly
impossible to anticipate," said Good. "The impact will
presumably be influenced by the geographic extent of the
incidence of the disease, the timing of its occurrence, and the
effectiveness of control measures. It is known that the
potential impact is severe if not effectively treated.
"The market will have to work through the production and price
implications of soybean rust in the United States. In the
meantime, rust will again be an issue in Brazil. The planting
season has generally been favorable in Brazil, but the presence
of rust in commercial production has been confirmed."
By Bob Sampson, PhD |