[jamesash]

Backward rather than forward-looking, so slightly off topic, but for a high-level understanding of US crop production, nothing beats the US Crop Production 2021 summary. [Here - https://downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/...]

Skip the first 92 pages and go straight to 93-96 which give a total rundown of all US crop acreage and production, from corn and soybeans down to maple syrup and peppermint oil. Continue with page 97 which has a complete month-by-month rundown on US weather with comments on impact on specific crops.

Comprehensive.

[palisade]

My dad explained to me that in the 1960s and 1970s, USDA assessors would just drive down the road and look at a field and scribble a random number into their notebook. The data might not be very accurate. The reason he said they never cared to write an accurate number is that after they gave the numbers to the USDA, the USDA would just write the number they wanted to hear down instead. It had something to do with keeping the price they needed to keep exports flowing. For farmers of course, it hits them right in the pocket book because it prevents the prices reaching where they should be. On the other hand, subsidies help alleviate that a bit.

I'm not sure if this is true still today. But, I doubt they're counting every successful crop correctly. And, there's a lot that can happen before they are actually harvested; floods, insects, blight, drought, etc. For example, there'd be a huge drought and the USDA would announce a bumper crop and he'd laugh. And, that was recent.

Either way, past data is probably pretty suspect. And, today's data might have the same problem. Which means if you're basing prediction models on this you might expect to be disappointed when things don't pan out. This is especially dangerous if we enter an era where food becomes more scarce. It is an accounting issue if you think about it.

[HWR_14]

USDA crop predictions in the 1960s seemed to be less than 10% off 4 months in advance and less than 5% off two months in advance.

It possible that the made up numbers were discarded because they were bad predictors because they were made up.

[thechao]

I know USGS does IR (and other spectra) analysis, and the data correlate at the state-level with expected production. That imagery has been around for decades.

[akamoonknight]

Definitely some interesting info. Has this been produced for previous years? I'm intrigued how the sentiment in the weather highlights might have changed over time.

[tablespoon]

> Definitely some interesting info. Has this been produced for previous years? I'm intrigued how the sentiment in the weather highlights might have changed over time.

I would imagine so. Something like this was a key part of the plot to the 80s comedy movie Trading Places.

[earleybird]

+1 for Eddie Murphy explaining the futures market :-)

and also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySxHud7abko

[akamoonknight]

Ah makes sense it'd be something that would be useful to track and then provides information that people can arbitrage.

I had tried some initial URL hacking that didn't work, but think I found the set here: https://usda.library.cornell.edu/concern/publications/k35694...

[greggsy]

Are there any periodic reports like this that tie together crop production and fertiliser use?

[Kon-Peki]

Yes, USDA NASS. Sign up for the regions/reports you are interested in and they’ll email you them the moment they are published. Crop production reports are weekly during the growing season.

[greggsy]

Thanks!

[killjoywashere]

This is a good comment.