As acreage surveys begin arriving in farm mailboxes across rural America, skepticism about USDA production numbers is still echoing through coffee shops, grain elevators and market commentary. Farmers, economists and segments of the grain trade have openly questioned recent estimates, particularly after sharp market reactions to the January report and a large uptick in USDA’s corn acreage estimates in 2025.
For the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), that skepticism presents a deeper concern than short-term volatility. If doubts about accuracy discourage participation in farmer surveys, it could weaken the very foundation of the reports critics are scrutinizing.
Lance Honig, chair of the Agricultural Statistics Board at NASS, says as the 2026 acreage survey collection period ramps up, farmer participation is more important than ever, but he’s concerned fewer farmers may participate, especially if they’re frustrated.
Mounting Doubts After Big Acreage Revisions
According to reporting from Reuters, USDA, which has been long viewed as the global gold standard for crop data, is facing mounting doubts about the reliability of its estimates. The scrutiny intensified after deep staff losses within the department and a sharp upward revision in harvested corn acreage. That’s caused confidence in USDA reporting to erode.
Farmers, traders and food manufacturers worldwide rely on monthly USDA reports on production, supplies and demand to anticipate price direction and inventory levels. When those numbers shift significantly, the ripple effects move quickly through commodity markets.
At issue is how dramatically USDA’s corn acreage estimate evolved over the past season.
In June, USDA estimated farmers planted 95.2 million acres of corn, up 5% from the prior year. At the time, plantings were nearly complete, which gave many in the trade confidence in the estimate. But by August, USDA raised its planted acreage estimate by more than 2%, contributing to a 3% drop in corn prices. Another upward revision followed in September.
By January, USDA estimated corn plantings at 98.8 million acres, 3.8% higher than its initial June estimate. For some farmers and analysts, the size of that swing was unsettling.
“Given the turmoil and turnover at the USDA at the time, there were already concerns about data quality, with the miss from June to final doing everything to reinforce those fears,” Angie Setzer, partner at Consus Ag Consulting, told Reuters. “A swing of this size from June to final plantings has never happened before, making many feel it is more difficult to adequately manage risk.”
According to Farm Journal’s January Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor, released at Top Producer Summit, the majority of economists, producers and retailers say their confidence in USDA reports has declined compared to past years.
- 68% of economists say they are less confident in USDA reports.
- 73% of producers say their confidence has declined.
- 78% of retailers report waning trust.
Some producers told Reuters they did not understand why USDA could not produce a more accurate assessment in June, especially with planting largely complete.
That context is now shaping how farmers view the acreage survey currently underway.
How the Acreage and Harvested Numbers Evolved
Honig says it’s important to understand how USDA constructs those estimates.
USDA based its June acreage estimate on surveys of nearly 68,000 farmers. Those responses were used to estimate planted acres and, initially, harvested acres. Farmers were surveyed again in December, and updated harvested acreage results were incorporated into the January report.
“In January, it made sense to increase the number of acres harvested for grain because poor weather had not hindered farmers,” Honig explains. “Plantings were larger than previous years, and the number of acres harvested for silage stays relatively unchanged annually.”
Silage acres tend to remain fairly stable from year to year. If total plantings rise significantly and weather does not prevent harvest, the share of acres harvested for grain can logically increase as well.
Still, the magnitude of the revision has prompted USDA to take a closer look.
As part of its review, Honig says USDA and NASS will confirm its procedures functioned as intended. But contrary to some media reports, USDA NASS does a review every year.
“We actually always reevaluate,” Honig says. “We do hundreds of surveys a year, and every time we finish a process, we look back and say, ‘All right, is there anything that first off went wrong? Is there anything that didn’t go the way it was supposed to?’ You always want to make sure you rule that out.”
The review process, he emphasizes, is not reactionary — it is routine. But unusual outcomes, like historically large acreage revisions, provide an opportunity to refine methodology.
“When you plant the largest number of acres in a long, long time, it changes the dynamics of how your harvested and planted relationship works,” Honig says. “We’re going to take a hard look at that and say, ‘Okay, do we need to do something a little bit different when we get these extremely large planted acreage numbers, whether it’s corn, soybeans or any other crop, moving forward?’”
Acreage Survey Collection Is Already Underway
All of that makes the current acreage survey especially significant. USDA’s March acreage survey, which will then be turned into USDA’s Prospective Plantings report released at the end of March, is already hitting mailboxes.
“We’re basically in the middle of it now,” Honig says. “What we’re looking at right now is trying to capture farmers’ planting intentions.”
Surveys have already been in farmers’ mailboxes for about a week. As February closes, NASS is increasing follow-up efforts by phone and through on-farm visits.
“Now’s when we’re really going to start doing some follow-up via the phone, maybe send some folks out to the farms where they’re at and capture some information that way,” Honig says. “We’ll be doing that for probably the next three weeks. It’s a fairly long window because we’re looking at 60,000 to 70,000 farmers we’re trying to get a hold of.”
While private analysts are already publishing acreage guesses based on price ratios and profitability projections, Honig stresses USDA’s March Prospective Plantings report will be the first farmer-reported indication of actual intent.
“Obviously there are some numbers floating around out there already,” he says. “But they’re largely based on what it seems like economics might suggest are going to happen. So this is really the first opportunity to hear from the farmers themselves, ‘What are you actually planning to do this season?’”
Participation: The Critical Variable
Honig acknowledges response rates have grown more challenging in recent years.
“I don’t think it’s any secret that getting farmers to respond has been a little bit more challenging recently,” he says. “And any time you’ve got a little bit of controversy surrounding some numbers, that raises the concern level a little.”
That’s where his concern lies. If skepticism over prior revisions leads to lower participation, the quality of future estimates could suffer.
“Honestly, I would say this is the time to double down,” Honig says. “Because if there’s concerns about how accurate the numbers are, there’s several things we can do to always make things better, but the biggest thing is if we can get more and better information coming in the door. There’s no question that’s going to make a better product going out the door at the end of March.”
Lessons from the 2025 Crop Season: Bigger Acres, Resilient Yields
As the 2025 growing season wrapped up, Hong says it was a year full of lessons, from managing historically large acreage to understanding how modern genetics are changing the resilience of crops.
Honig points to the challenges and insights of planting record acreage in 2025 and the impact that can have on an overall yield, which proved to be a record in 2025.
“When you plant the largest number of acres in a long, long time, it changes the dynamics of how your harvested and planted relationship works. We’re going to take a hard look at that and say, ‘Do we need to do something a little bit different when we get these extremely large planted acres, whether it’s corn, soybeans or any other crop moving forward.’ That’s a marker we can leverage to make sure we do an even better job in the future,” Honig says.
Looking across the Corn Belt, the analyst highlights high yields weren’t limited to traditional “I states.”
“We definitely saw some problems through the heart of the Corn Belt, but it is not all about the I-states. Tremendous yields north and south more than made up for some of those challenges,” he says.
He also notes the role of modern crop genetics in mitigating stress.
“With these advances, some problems don’t seem to have quite the impact they used to because the crop is much more resilient than it was in past years, especially from a drought perspective. Some of the dry conditions we saw in 2025 — if that had happened 10 years ago, it would have been a completely different story. We need to focus on what today’s genetics are telling us, not what a similar situation 10, 15 or 20 years ago would have meant.”
A Defining Moment for Trust in the Data
The current acreage survey arrives at a pivotal moment. Global grain markets are tightly linked, price volatility remains elevated and confidence in official data is being publicly debated.
USDA’s numbers influence everything from local basis levels to export competitiveness and crop insurance guarantees. But those numbers begin with farmer-reported data. For Honig, the message is straightforward.
If farmers want the reports to reflect what is happening in their fields and communities, participation is the most direct way to ensure it.
In a season defined by scrutiny, the strength of USDA’s next set of estimates may hinge less on methodology debates and more on how many producers choose to answer the survey now sitting in their mailboxes.