Many farmers in portions of the Upper Midwest have been dealing with the impacts of severe storms and heavy rains during the month of June. A widespread area of West Central and Northern Minnesota, along with portions of North and South Dakota have been impacted by the tornadoes, strong winds, and heavy rainfall. Some locations in West Central Minnesota have received 12-16 inches of rain or more during the month of June, which has resulted in flash flooding near rivers and streams and considerable standing water in many areas. The result of the severe storms and excessive rainfall has been significant drown-out damage to crops, some loss of livestock, and physical damage to buildings and other property on farm sites. There are some USDA assistance programs to potentially assist producers that are available through the USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA).
Following are some of the assistance programs that that could be available through USDA:
• Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP) - The LIP program is available to livestock producers that incur damage to livestock due to the tornadoes, flooding, or other natural disasters. This program is intended to aid livestock producers that lost livestock or had livestock sales impacted by the natural disaster. Producers that have livestock-related losses need to submit evidence of the losses to their local FSA office. Livestock producers that experience losses related to tornado or strong wind damage should check with their local FSA office for further details on LIP eligibility.
• Emergency Livestock Assistance Program (ELAP) - The ELAP program for livestock, honeybees, and farm-raised fish to provide eligible producers and compensation for feed and grazing losses. To qualify for ELAP, producers are required to complete a notice of loss and a payment application at their local FSA office. The deadline for 2025 ELAP applications at FSA offices is January 30, 2026. There is a separate Tree Assistance Program (TAP) available through FSA offices for orchard owners that had lost or damaged fruit trees.
• Emergency Relief Program (ERP) - USDA has initiated the Emergency Relief Program (ERP) on several occasions in recent years to provide additional assistance to crop producers with extensive crop losses due to natural disasters. It is expected that the sign-up period will begin very soon for the 2023 and 2024 disaster assistance program. One segment of the ERP program provides payments beyond federal crop insurance coverage to eligible producers, while the other segment of ERP is for crops not covered by federal crop insurance. No ERP program has been announced for the 2025 crop year at this point; however, the crop loss data that is gathered from the local FSA offices and through crop insurance agents is important to determine the need for an ERP program. Payments through the ERP program are typically made after the crop year has been completed and all crop insurance claims have been filed.
• FSA Low-Interest Loans - Producers that are in counties with a primary USDA disaster declaration, including contiguous counties, are eligible for emergency loans through local FSA offices to help them recover from physical and production losses due to natural disasters. These loans can be used be used to replace buildings and equipment, for feed and farm input purchases, and for other farm-related expenses. Many times the emergency loans are at lower interest rates than regular loans and can be amortized for more than one year. It is likely that many counties in Minnesota, North and South Dakota will be included in disaster declarations in the coming weeks, which will make farmers and ranchers in those areas eligible for the FSA emergency loans. Farmers that had damage to grain storage and handling facilities could also utilize the low-interest Farm Storage Facility Loan (FSFL) program to finance repair or replacement costs for those facilities. For more details on the emergency loans and FSFL loans, as well as the loan requirements, producers should contact their local FSA office.
• Report Losses to Local FSA Offices - The local FSA office is the point site to gather disaster-related information and loss data for USDA to determine the need for additional USDA disaster programs. It also important for farmers to report any lost crop acreage, loss of livestock, and physical damage to property from the heavy rainfall and severe storms to local FSA offices, so that they can do an accurate assessment of the damage and put together a request for disaster assistance.
All Farmers need to pay attention to FSA and Crop Insurance Deadlines
Once the crop is planted and we get into mid-Summer, it is easy to overlook some important deadlines at Farm Service Agency (FSA) offices, crop insurance, and other important deadlines. Missing some of these deadlines can be a costly mistake, as many of the program payments and benefits are linked to compliance with these deadlines. Following is a couple of those important deadlines:
• FSA Acreage Certification - The 2025 crop acreage reporting deadline for all Spring planted crops is Monday, July 15 at local FSA offices. Farmers are required to report their 2025 crop acres of corn, soybeans, spring wheat, and other Spring planted crops to FSA offices. This includes crop acreage of hemp and wild rice. The only exception is for crops that were planted after the deadline. In that case, farmers have an additional 15 days to report their crop acreage. Producers also need to report any 2025 prevented planted crop acres to the FSA office by the July 15 deadline. Fall-seeded small grain crops must be reported by November 15, 2024. Farm operators can certify their crop acreage electronically to the FSA office by utilizing “farmers.gov portal”. This FSA portal also allows farmers to have the ability for online farm program enrollment and data submission. For more information on the setting up a FSA portal, farmers should contact their local FSA office or go the FSA website at: https://www.farmers.gov/
• Crop Insurance Acreage Reporting Deadline - The 2025 crop acreage reporting deadline for corn, soybeans, and other Spring planted crops with local crop insurance agents is also Monday, July 15. Farmers are required to report their 2025 crop acres in order to maintain their 2025 crop insurance coverage. This is extremely important in 2025 due to the strong crop insurance guarantees for corn and soybeans, along with the potential for crop production issues in some areas due to late planting, flooding, and other weather-related issues in some areas. Similar to FSA, any 2025 prevented planted acres need to be reported for crop insurance purposes, as well as any crop acres that were replanted this year.
Farm and Rural Stress Assistance
The combination of continued low grain prices, together with the likely crop loss from the recent flooding and natural disasters, is likely to result in reduced farm income levels for some farmers in 2025. This is likely to increase the mental stress level for many farmers and farm families. There are some good resources available to assist farm and rural families in the Upper Midwest States that have been impacted:
• Minnesota - The Minnesota Department of Agriculture has rural and mental health assistance resources available through the following:
“Minnesota Farm and Rural Helpline”- 833-600-2670 Website - https://www.mda.state.mn.us/about/mnfarmerstress
•  North Dakota --- The North Dakota Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources has rural and mental health assistance resources available at: https://www.ndda.nd.gov/. The NDSU Extension Service also has some excellent resources available at: https://www.ndsu.edu/agriculture/ag-hub
• South Dakota - The South Dakota Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources has rural and mental health assistance resources available at: https://danr.sd.gov/
For additional information contact Kent Thiesse, Farm Management Analyst, Green Solutions Group Phone - (507) 381-7960; E-mail - [email protected]

The old saying “rain makes grain” may hold true in many instances; however, excessive precipitation amounts again this year early in the growing season has caused extensive crop loss in some areas of the Upper Midwest. Portions of West Central and Southern Minnesota have been impacted by severe storms and excessive rainfall amounts in recent weeks. This has caused considerable drown-out areas in some fields, as well as crop damage to the remaining crop in many fields. In addition, severe storms have caused considerable hail damage to crops in some locations in the Upper Midwest, as well as tornadoes and strong winds that have damaged grain bins and farm buildings.
 
Portions of West Central Minnesota have received 200 percent or more of their normal rainfall amount for the month of June during a 10-day period in mid-June. Many locations in the Upper Midwest have had rainfall amounts during the month of June that are well above normal. Some locations in West Central Minnesota received 6-10 inches of rain or more during a 3-day period in mid-June, and have received additional rainfall since that time. There was also a large area of eastern South Central Minnesota that received excessive rainfall amounts during that period. Soils in the impacted areas of the region are totally saturated and drainage systems are at capacity, so any amount of excessive rainfall can quite rapidly result in considerable standing water in crop fields. In affected areas, the primary crop loss has been to existing crops that had already been planted in 2025.
 
The heavy rainfall in 2025 have been more localized in nature than the large major rainfall events in Southern Minnesota and Northern Iowa in 2024 that caused major flooding and crop loss. As of June 23, the University of Minnesota Southern Research and Outreach Center at Waseca had received just over 4 inches of rainfall during the month of June, which compares to a normal average June rainfall of 5.32 inches. For the year, total precipitation at the Waseca site is just over 16 inches, or about 1.8 inches below normal. By comparison, the research center at Waseca received 12.45 inches of rainfall during June in 2024, and received a total of over 19 inches of precipitation in May and June last year. Even though the June rainfall at the Waseca research facility is slightly below normal, just a few miles away in extreme Southern Minnesota, some areas have received 8-10 inches of rainfall or more during June.
 
In addition to the crop loss from the excess precipitation, another major concern that is developing as a result of the frequent heavy June rainfall events is the loss or lack of available nitrogen for the growing corn. Much of the nitrogen fertilizer for the 2025 corn crop was applied last Fall or early this Spring, prior to planting. Soil nitrogen losses increase substantially during heavy rainfall events early in the growing season, such as have occurred in the past few weeks. Many corn plants have developed very shallow root systems, which have not been able to access the nitrogen that is deeper in the soil profile. In some cases, farmers planned to side dress the nitrogen after planting, but have been unable to do so due to the continual saturated field conditions. As a result of these situations, there may be a need for supplemental nitrogen applications to maintain normal crop development.
 
Another concern with the persistent wet field conditions is timely herbicide applications for weed control. Producers that were relying totally on post-emergence herbicides for weed control have had difficulty getting these products applied in a timely fashion, which is resulting in strong weed pressure in some fields. We have already passed the time window for allowable applications of dicamba herbicide in soybeans in many areas, as well as for some other post-emergence herbicides used in corn and soybeans. Producers should contact their agronomist or crop consultant for further considerations regarding additional nitrogen for the 2025 corn crop, as well as for late season post-emergence herbicide options for this year’s crop.
 
 
The weekly U.S. Drought Monitor that was released on June 19 shows a growing area of drought conditions in much of Nebraska and South Dakota, as well as in parts of western and southern Iowa. Portions of southwest Minnesota were also listed with some level of drought concern; however the overall drought footprint in Minnesota has diminished considerably in the past month or so. As of June 15, the U of M Southwest Research and Outreach Center at Lamberton, Minnesota had recorded only 3.44 inches of precipitation from May 1 through June 15, which was about 2 inches below the normal precipitation for the early portion of the growing season. The stored soil moisture was at 6 inches in the top 5 feet of the soil profile at the Lamberton site, which is just slightly lower than the long term average for mid-June. A year ago, the stored soil moisture level in June at Lamberton was at the maximum capacity of 9.1 inches. At this point, the rainfall at Lamberton has been adequate and very timely for good crop growth and development.
 
Warmer weather during the last half of June has resulted in rapid crop growth and development in most portions of the Corn Belt. As of June 23, the accumulated growing degree units (GDU’s) at the Waseca Research Center since May 1 totaled 774 GDU’s, which is slightly ahead of normal and is very similar to the GDU figures in late June in 2024. In areas that have avoided the heavy rainfall events and crop loss in June, the adequate moisture and warmer temperatures have resulted in favorable growing conditions for corn and soybeans in most areas of the Midwest.
 
The weekly USDA Crop Condition Report on June 16 listed 72 percent of the U.S. corn crop and 68 percent of the U.S. soybean crop as “good to excellent”. The crop rating has remained fairly steady in recent weeks; however, there is some concern due to developing dryness in portions of the Western Corn Belt and the Central Plains States. The “good-to-excellent” crop ratings for Iowa were at 84 percent for corn and 80 percent for soybeans, while Minnesota was at 75 percent for corn and 74 percent for soybeans. The June 16 “good-to-excellent” crop ratings for both corn and soybeans were also near the U.S. average in Illinois, Nebraska, and Missouri. About the only major corn and soybean producing States that are slightly lower than the national average “good-to-excellent” rating for corn and soybeans were South Dakota, Indiana, and Ohio. Only 5 percent of the corn and soybeans in the U.S. were rated as “poor” in the June 16 report.
 
Crop Insurance Considerations
Farmers in areas that received excessive rainfall during June have been contemplating replant decisions. These decisions may vary from farm-to-farm depending on the type of Federal Crop Insurance policy and the level of insurance coverage that a farm operator is carrying for 2025. Producers with a “replant clause” on their crop insurance coverage could be eligible for some compensation for replanting following crop losses from heavy rains, hail, or other natural causes. To qualify for replant compensation, farmers must have a loss area of at least 20 acres, or 20 percent of the total acres in an insured farm unit, whichever is less. With “enterprise units”, smaller areas of fields may be grouped together to reach that threshold level. The crop insurance replant provision can only be exercised once in a given year on the same crop acres.
 
Producers need to report prevented planted and replant acres need their crop insurance agent. The insurance agents can also be a good resource regarding final planting dates, prevented planting options, and replant considerations. Every producer’s situation is different regarding late and prevented planting options. As a result, the best option will vary considerably from farm-to-farm, depending on differences in yield potential and insurance coverage. In addition to their crop insurance agent, farmers should consult with their agronomist, farm management advisor, and ag lender regarding the best options for replant decisions. The choice that is made could result in a difference of thousands of dollars by year-end, depending on the resulting crop production and crop insurance coverage.
For additional information contact Kent Thiesse, Farm Management Analyst, Green Solutions Group
Phone - (507) 381-7960; E-mail - [email protected]

Over the years, the swine industry has long been a source of farm income stability for many farmers and in many rural communities; however, in recent years profitability in hog production has been much more mixed and has been negative for many producers. The swine industry was hit hard by the U.S. trade war with China in 2018 and 2019 and then by the Covid pandemic in 2020. In recent years, producers have dealt with higher input costs and interest rates, disease pressure that has reduced production levels, and market prices that have struggled to stay at profitable levels for long periods. In addition, they have dealt with the domestic pork sales problems caused by the implementation of the Proposition 12 legislation in California, as well as another looming trade war with China, Mexico, and other countries. These issues have especially impacted modest sized swine farrowing and finishing operations in the Midwest.
A comprehensive 2021 swine industry study titled “The United States Pork Industry 2021 Report”, involving USDA and several Universities, analyzed the economic impact of the pork industry on the U.S. economy, as well as looking at the economic impact for individual States. According to the Study, there were more than 66,000 pork producers in the U.S. in 2021 that marketed over 140 million hogs valued at over $28 billion in gross receipts. The value-added from the hog marketing’s resulted in a total of $35 billion in personal income and added $57 billion to the GDP in the U.S. The study estimated 610,000 jobs in the U.S. can be linked to the overall impacts of the pork industry. Based on recent pork industry data, it was estimated that the forty largest swine farrowing operations in the U.S. owned or managed over 70 percent of the swine breeding herd at the end of 2024.
Economic Challenges for Hog Farmers
Many hog producers lost $20 to $40 per head on every pig marketed during first half of 2023, after some showed negative profit margins in 2022. Obviously, farm operations can only withstand those types of losses for a given time before they need to make some decisions regarding their future in hog production. In the past two years, the number of producers exiting the hog business has increased significantly due to the low profit margins. In the short-term, the liquidation of mother sows sent even more hogs to market and added to the over-supply of pork in the U.S., putting even more downward pressure on already depressed market hog prices. In the bigger picture, the reduced sow numbers should result in reductions in the total hog inventory and help strengthen market prices.
An analysis of farm financial data through the University of Minnesota FINBIN farm management system for hog producers throughout the United States indicated some of the financial challenges that producers are facing. Most of the producers in the FINBIN analysis would be considered modest-size producers. The data showed that the average hog producer made an average net return to labor and management of only $.53 per head on every hog produced through a weaning-to-finish management system during an 7-year period from 2018-2024. The range was from an average positive profit margin of $13.75 per head in 2021 to a loss of ($18.18) per head in 2023. Other negative profit years per head were ($11.84) in 2018 and ($3.25) in 2022, while other positive return years per head were +.86 in 2019, +$12.85 in 2020, and +$7.88 in 2024. The FINBIN data also showed that the average direct expenses to produce a market hog from weaning to finish increased from near $90 per head from 2018-2020 to over $125 per head in 2022 and 2023, dropping back to  near $114 per head in 2024. 
For the same 7-year period (2018-2024), the FINBIN data showed an average return to labor and management of $9.34 per litter produced for farrow-to weaning hog operations. There was a wide range in profitability from year-to year ranging from a high return of +$48.05 per litter in 2022 to a loss of ($12.09) per litter in 2023, with only a modest recovery to a profit of +$4.17 per litter in 2024. The average number of sows in the FINBIN data was 1,100, with an average of approximately 2,300 litters per year. This would be considered a modest-sized farrowing operation in today’s U.S. hog industry. 
 
Tariffs and Another Possible Trade War Raises Concern
The on-again/off-again tariff scenario has raised concern among pork producers. They are especially concerned with potential retaliatory tariffs against the U.S. by China and Mexico, the two of the largest export destinations for U.S. pork products. In 2023, the U.S. exported $2.3 billion of pork products to Mexico, $1.4 billion to Japan, and $1.3 billion to China. Approximately 25 percent of the pork produced in the U.S. ends up being exported, so another trade war with the major export destinations could have major economic implications on the U.S. swine industry. Hog market prices dropped considerably during the last U.S. trade war with China in 2018 and 2019, costing the U.S. pork industry millions of dollars.
Proposition 12 Creates New Challenges for the Pork Industry
The “Farm Animal Confinement Initiative”, or the so-called “Proposition 12” law, was passed by the voters of California in November of 2018. The new law mandated that all whole pork sold in the State of California must come from market hogs that were born from sows that had had housing of at least 24 square feet of floor space with the ability to turn around, meaning that it would ban the use of sow gestation crates in hog facilities. The Proposition 12 law went into effect in on July 1, 2023, and applies to all uncooked pork that is sold is sold in California, whether it was raised in California or raised in any other portion of the U.S. or other countries. California accounts for somewhere between 10-15 percent of the total pork consumption in the U.S, based on various estimates; however, the State produces far less than one percent of the pork that is consumed within its borders. This means that most of the fresh pork being sold in California is likely being raised and processed in Iowa, Southern Minnesota, and other Midwest locations.
Most commercial sow gestation units in the Midwest currently have 18-20 feet of floor space per sow and utilize gestation crates that allow for individual customized feeding, breeding and care of the sows. Increasing the requirement to the new California standard of 24 square feet increases the space requirement per sow by 25-35 percent. This means that a producer can house 25-30 percent less sows in the same area of building space and produce 25-30 percent fewer hogs each year, compared to traditional sow housing systems. In addition, converting existing sow housing facilities to the new required standards can be quite expensive and there will likely be added labor expense to handle the sows in the converted sow housing style. Producers have no guarantee that they will receive any added value for the market hogs that are being sold to be processed for pork sales in California.
Bottom-line on Profitability for Hog Producers
At the farm level, the low profit margins have been driven by modest market hog prices, higher input costs, rising interest rates, and swine disease challenges. Some small-to-medium size swine producers have exited the business in the past two years, and more producers may be forced to leave hog production if profit margins do not improve in the next couple of years. In recent months crop producers have received economic assistance payments to offset low crop prices, and some may receive 2023 and 2024 disaster payments in the coming months; however, there have been no assistance payments approved to offset low prices and reduced profit margins for hog producers. It is hoped that some improved risk management “safety-net” provisions for hog producers can be included in the next Farm Bill. Fortunately, profit margins in hog production have improved slightly in the first half of 2025, mainly due to lower feed costs; however, the combination of higher than expected hog numbers and concern over tariffs has resulted in very modest improvement in hog market prices. At the retail level, fresh pork is still a very economical choice for consumers compared to other meat and protein food choices.
For additional information contact Kent Thiesse, Farm Management Analyst, Green Solutions Group
Phone --- (507) 381-7960; E-mail --- [email protected]