The USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) released the March 2026 Prospective Plantings report Tuesday, and with no major surprises, the story this year may not just what farmers plan to plant, but how few farmers actually responded. Only 37.6% of producers participated, marking the lowest response rate in the survey’s history.
For NASS, the implications go beyond a number. According to Lance Honig, chair of the Agricultural Statistics Board, the low participation highlights a growing trust gap between farmers and the agency.
“We’ve got a bit of a trust issue out there,” Honig tells U.S. Farm Report. “That’s what I read on social media. That’s what I read in various farmer comments. That’s an issue right now… something we’ve got to work on rebuilding. We’re open to hearing what we can do to help rebuild that. We had a session at the Outlook Forum to talk about it. We’ve got the data user meeting coming up in just a few weeks on April 22nd. And we’ve got a request for information out there. We are seeking input from our users and our customers to tell us what we can do better, what we can do to help reestablish that trust. That’ll hopefully get farmers willing to respond to these surveys again.”
NASS @usda_nass is a small group of statisticians. They're good people. They have a tough job. Big Ag is much more nefarious. I think lots of people have it backwards. https://t.co/14ZOQW4m6m
— Joe Vaclavik (@StandardGrain) April 1, 2026
Even before the results were released this week, Honig told Farm Journal farmer participation is more important than ever, but he was concerned fewer farmers may participate, especially if they’re frustrated.
Honig emphasizes that rebuilding trust is critical because accurate data ensures farmers have a level playing field in agricultural markets.
“What we’re doing is to benefit everyone in agriculture, specifically the farmers, because we’re out here level in the playing field,” he says. “If we don’t produce accurate numbers, there are large companies out there that are going to be in a much better position to know what’s going on. We don’t want farmers to be at a disadvantage. But in order to keep that working smoothly, we do also need the cooperation of the farmers. We need to work together. We want to work together. And anything I can do to help make that better, I’d love to hear it because I’d love to do it.”
Regional Patterns, Response Challenges
Even with a low response rate for this report, Honig says response rates vary across the country each year, with certain regions consistently harder to reach. Honig noted that the Plains states—from Kansas up through the Dakotas—pose ongoing challenges.
“Response typically varies across the country,” he said. “Some of the toughest areas to get cooperation are through the Plains states… this time was no exception. But when you know where you’ve got these regional dips, we make some adjustments with our sampling in those areas. We didn’t see any change in the pattern of where response is higher and lower this time.”
Seth Meyer, who was the chief economist for USDA for the past five years, before returning to the University of Missouri as the director of FAPRI earlier this year, points out this is simply what farmers intend to plant, and these numbers will likely change.
“This is like watching the beginning of a negotiation. And so this is a really a survey based upon farmers’ response of what they might do, what they’re thinking about doing,” says Meyer. “And you’re kind of watching the bid process with the market, but you’re only seeing the farmers offer. Now you got to see the market go back and forth a bit.”
Timing of Responses Could Be Key
In an effort to increase transparency, NASS released daily response rates for the first time, giving analysts and farmers insight into when the data came in, which is key this year due to the ongoing conflict in Iran.
“Well, really two reasons. One is we try to really double down on transparency and rebuilding relationships out there, making it as clear about what these data represent as possible. We felt that was a key piece of information that we could share. So you can see within that two-and-a-half-week window when the data came in, what farmers were thinking when they reported—it’s really critical for this report. Specifically, there have been some events during that period that really had a big impact on what farmers might be thinking. Fertilizer prices spiked and things of that nature. We just wanted folks to be able to look at the data and see for themselves: what do you think the data really mean, knowing that this is when farmers actually told us what their intentions were?”
Meyer says by NASS reporting the share of farmer responses they received by day, from February 27 to March 15, it could help shine light on the share of responses that were submitted before the war started.
“And you know why [Lance] did it this year? Because we had the war with Iran beginning towards the end February and then continuing on. And so I think what happened is there’s something that initially folks might have thought was going to be a short action continues until today,” says Meyer. “So I think it was important for him to know where we were at, how many responses he’s getting because we saw fertilizer prices climb immediately, but then stay high as time went on. I think it was a critical piece of information for NASS, to say this is the response farmers were giving us and putting that in context of high oil and high fertilizer
Noticed this one, good context for this year, what was the response rate? https://t.co/f7YSGyezxG
— Seth Meyer (@SethMeyerMU) March 31, 2026
Market analysts say global events and regional fertilizer access likely influenced farmer responses to the Prospective Plantings survey. Joe Vaclavik of Standard Grain agrees that timing could have played a role in this survey, but it’s hard to put an exact percentage on how many acres could possibly change.
“The surveys were being taken as the Iran and fertilizer situation was all unfolding. I’ve heard differing things about the fertilizer situation. Some of it appears to be regional. Feels to me, and based on what I’ve heard, farmers in the central Corn Belt and maybe in the eastern Corn Belt also had a lot of their nitrogen needs locked up prior to the initial attacks in Iran. And it seems like in some of, call them fringe areas or western Corn Belt areas, maybe not so much,” says Vaclavik.
He also points to market price shifts as another factor affecting planting intentions.
“Corn prices did rise at least momentarily following the initial attacks, and that may have helped to offset some of the fertilizer increase… but now we’ve given back all of those gains,” Vaclavik said.
The combination of global events, regional fertilizer access, and short-term price swings highlights the complexity of interpreting early March planting intentions, underscoring why NASS emphasizes that the report captures intentions, not final plantings.”
Crop Trends
While the report itself revealed some expected shifts, they were largely secondary to the trust and response issues. Corn acreage is projected at 95.3 million acres, down 3% from 2025, while soybeans are projected up 4% to 84.7 million acres. Wheat acreage continues a long-term decline, hitting a record low, with both winter and spring wheat contributing to the drop. Rice acres also declined slightly.
Honig describes these numbers as consistent with trends but reinforced the importance of interpreting them carefully.
“There weren’t a lot of surprises in this report,” he said. “But certainly some interesting numbers, and we want people to know this is what farmers were thinking in early March, given the economic environment and input prices at that time.”
Even with declining corn acreage and rising soybean intentions, analysts say the March Prospective Plantings report was largely in line with expectations. Dan Basse, president of AgResource Company, describes the report as “rather an even keel situation.”
“No, I think it was tied,” Basse says. “When you lose three and a half million acres and gain three and a half million of soybeans, three and a half million acres of corn loss, you end up with rather an even keel situation. We need those extra, if you will, soybean acres. I would still say the market has a lean to buy more soybean acres relative to corn, but there’s also a strong historical tendency that we find additional corn acres by the June report. Over the last five to ten years, we tend to go up somewhere around two million acres in total. So again, maybe not that much this year because of [market conditions].”
With historical trends suggesting corn acreage may still rise slightly before final plantings are set, keeping the market closely watching June acreage updates.
Looking Ahead to June
With planting season underway, the June acreage report will provide an updated picture of plantings. As Basse pointed out, if you look at what history shows, corn acreage tends to increase by 2 million acres from March to June. But NASS officials emphasize that rebuilding farmer participation is critical for the reliability of all future reports.
“Absolutely,” Honig said. “I want to do everything I can to help reestablish that trust. I want to hear from folks: tell me, from your perspective, what we can do to help rebuild that trust. This is a partnership. Accurate numbers are critical for farmers. We need your cooperation, and we want to work together.”