Sort by: Title | Date
  • Characteristics and Production Costs of U.S. Rice Farms

    SB-974-7, March 31, 2004

    The average cost of producing a hundred pounds (cwt) of rice was $6.00 for U.S. producers surveyed in 2000, ranging from about $2 per cwt to more than $10. Producers in the lowest quartile of production costs averaged $3.99 per cwt compared with $8.94 for producers in the highest quartile. Regional differences in production practices, farm characteristics, and growing conditions were major influences on production costs among rice producers. More than half of the low-cost farms were located in the Arkansas Non-Delta, the largest rice region. Most high-cost farms were in California and the Gulf Coast regions. Three-quarters of rice production was concentrated on large and very large farms, categories that included nearly two-thirds of all rice farms, but the link between size of enterprise and production costs for rice is weaker than for other commodities. At the marketing-year average price of $5.61 per hundredweight, 78 percent of rice farms were able to cover operating costs and 43 percent covered both their operating and ownership costs of rice production in 2000. After accounting for Government payments, nearly all rice farms (97 percent) were able to cover operating costs in 2000, and about 84 percent were able to cover both operating and ownership costs.

  • Rice: Background for 1995 Farm Legislation

    AER-713, April 03, 1995

    This report address considerations in the 1995 farm bill debate for rice, including market conditions, policy proposals, trade agreements, and the interactions between policy and markets for selected commodities. U.S. rice sector income has shown steady growth in recent years, reaching $2.1 billion in 1993/94. However, Government program payments have also grown in importance. Since 1985/86, rice program outlays have averaged $733 million per year, 42 percent of all returns from rice farming. Farm and industry economic health are linked to costs of production which vary significantly across the six rice-producing regions. Because of inflation in the cost of production since the early 1980s, frozen payment yields, reduced target prices, and continued reductions in farm program benefits due to budgetary pressures, some rice farmers have been operating at a loss. Any reductions in current rice program support levels would probably accelerate the trends of a declining number of U.S. rice farms, increasing farm size, and a shift of rice growing from the high-cost production regions along the gulf coast to the upper Delta States, while reducing both the participation rate and dependency on government program revenue.

  • Market-Oriented Agriculture: The Declining Role of Government Commodity Programs in Agricultural Production Decisions

    AER-671, June 01, 1993

    The portion of U.S. agricultural production covered by government income support payments has declined over the span of the last two 5-year farm acts. Consequently, nongovernmental supply and demand factors (market forces) are becoming more important in influencing farmers' production decisions. This report illustrates how agricultural supply has moved toward greater reliance on market forces (market orientation) by examining the declining role of government commodity programs in production decisions for corn, wheat, rice, and upland cotton. Payment coverage ratios, which measure the percentage of expected production covered by deficiency payments (income support payments made by the Federal Government to producers of certain agricultural commodities), have decreased. Thus, the role of government commodity programs in influencing farmers' production decisions at both the individual farm and national (aggregate) levels has declined. As a result, the share of US. cropland on which planting decisions are made based on market signals has increased, a trend toward market orientation that began with the 1985 farm act and continued with 1990 farm legislation.

  • Rice: Background for 1990 Farm Legislation

    AGES-8949, November 01, 1989

    This report address considerations in the 1990 farm bill debate for rice, including market conditions, policy proposals, trade agreements, and the interactions between policy and markets for selected commodities. Rice ranks ninth among major U.S. field crops in terms of value of production. All U.S. rice production is irrigated, providing more stable yields than many other crops. Three classes of rice are produced in the United States-long, medium, and short grain-with long grain predominant. Domestic use and exports of U.S. rice have increased in recent years due in part to the implementation of the marketing loan program in the mid-1980s following declines in both domestic use and exports in the early 1980s. As a result, carryover stocks have declined from a record high of 77.3 million cwt in 1985/86 to 32.4 million cwt in 1988/89. Costs of rice programs, however, rose to an estimated record $1 billion in fiscal year 1989 due to marketing loan costs and increased deficiency payments. Rice growers in the southern rice growing States are rapidly adopting high-yielding, semidwarf varieties of long-grain rice which could raise U.S. production. Rice issues facing farm legislators relate to rising production capacity, stagnant world trade, multilateral trade negotiations, high costs of marketing loans and other rice programs, loan rate differentials between long and medium/short grains, and adjusting the world price formula to further enhance U.S. competitiveness in the world rice market.

  • Provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985

    AIB-498, April 01, 1986

    The Food Security Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-198) establishes a comprehensive framework within which the Secretary of Agriculture will administer agriculture and food programs from 1986 through 1990. This report describes the Act's provisions for dairy, wool and mohair, wheat, feed grains, cotton, rice, peanuts, soybeans, and sugar (including income and price supports, disaster payments, and acreage reductions); other general commodity provisions; trade; conservation; credit; research, extension, and teaching; food stamps; and marketings. These provisions are compared with earlier legislation.