“Go anywhere in rural Illinois and find me a single farmer that has real faith in USDA or sincere belief in their crop reports. You won’t meet even one,” says Grundy County producer Sam Halterman. “It’d be like looking for a needle in a haystack.”
“Call it distrust or disgust, but the relationship is broken,” Halterman continues. “We’re tired of the ‘hunky dory’ crowd and the ag organizations mingling on the White House lawn with a golden tractor. They’ve turned our data, the same data that everyone tells us is invaluable, into a market weapon that’s used against us.”
A greased hog of crop data has slipped the farm and turned into bacon for every other sector of the ag industry, contends Halterman, a particularly galling dynamic for many producers flailing for survival.
“The data and crop reports have grown into a monster,” echoes Bailey Buffalo, owner of Buffalo Grain Systems in Jonesboro, Arkansas. “The future is farmers generating their own proof. If enough bins were synced through a producer-controlled network, the market would no longer have to depend solely on USDA estimates. Buyers of corn, rice, and soybeans would have to negotiate against verified regional inventory controlled by the farmers who own the grain.”
Swinging from the hip, Halterman and Buffalo point toward extreme unrest in the present, and seismic change in the near future. “Farmers are worn to the bone by USDA’s actions,” Buffalo adds. “Only one side of the commodity chain benefits tremendously from the current crop data setup—and it sure as hell isn’t farmers.”
The Bleeding Continues
Beaucoup corn. On January 12, 2026, USDA released the 116-page NASS Crop Production 2025 Summary. The report contained unexpected corn yield jumps, setting the fuse on a market drop and a nightmare for farmers holding grain.
Tucked at the back of the summary, on page 114, in reference to the report’s source, USDA stated: The December Agricultural Survey (DAS) is a probability survey that includes a sample of approximately 73,100 farm operators selected from a list of producers that ensures all operations in the United States have a chance to be selected.
Yet, how many of the 73,100 farmers actually participated in the survey? Approximately 29,300.
Several days after the release, on Jan. 16, NASS explained that the 2025 Summary was based on a response rate of 40.2%, a drop from the 46% a year before.
“Are you kidding? Only 40% of farmers responded to USDA, but even though USDA knew the market would tank, they issued the report like everything was normal,” Buffalo contends. “That’s called guesswork once you get that low. USDA’s report title should have been, ‘Almost two-thirds of U.S. farmers don’t care to answer our surveys.’”
USDA-NASS Director Bryan Combs, Office of the Agricultural Statistics Board, doesn’t shy from the lower response rate. “Rather than simply accept that participation as an industry standard, we’re actively working to address it. We’re focused on making survey participation easier, reducing the burden on farmers where we can, and expanding our outreach efforts and really focusing on helping producers understand why their responses matter.”
“Every completed survey improves the quality of that data, so that’s really the message we want to get out to producers: when they participate, they help ensure that those NASS reports are accurately reflecting the conditions in their communities and across the agricultural sector,” Combs adds.
After the January USDA report, conspiracies ballooned across social media with claims of intentional government action tied to export profits. “What did they think was going to happen when farmers are already in desperate times?” Bailey exclaims. “Keep on issuing reports with a 40% return and just see how many more conspiracies grow.”
Reality, rather than conspiracy, was harsh enough. Markets responded to the USDA numbers. “Didn’t matter if the survey was accurate; didn’t matter that the vast majority of farmers had ignored the survey,” adds Halterman, 34, a seventh-generation producer in northeast Illinois’ Grundy County. “By basic common sense, anyone can see that markets can be twisted by those sketchy numbers. That’s a failure by our government, and it’s a failure on us if we don’t say anything.”
“And hell yes, farmers are tossing the surveys in the trash,” Halterman notes. “I know because I’m one of them. NASS is scrambling right now trying to blame all this on cuts or the economy or technology. Please. The problem is far, far more deep-rooted. American farmers are losing faith in USDA.”
Following the 40% response rate to the hot-button January crop report, the bleeding continued.
Almost three months later, USDA issued a March 31 Prospective Plantings report, manacled to an even lower response rate of 37.6%—the lowest participation tally on record, down from 44.3% the prior year.
According to AFBF: Response rates for these surveys have fallen from 80%-85% in the 90s to just 46% in 2024. Notably, between 2019 and 2024 the response rate dropped below 50% for the first time with fewer than 74,000 responses out of an average of 148,000 surveys issued since 2020.
“When can the government, ag organizations, and ag media stop doubling down with excuses?” Halterman asks. “How low of a response rate do you need before people admit trust has left the building?”
(For more on response rates, see NASS Concerned Criticism of USDA Reports Could Keep Farmers From Completing March Acreage Survey)
What response rate number is too low for USDA-NASS to use? “It’s a great question, and our goal is pretty straightforward,” Combs says. “We want every selected producer to participate. The more farmers that respond, the stronger and the more representative that data becomes. You know, at the same time, survey quality is about more than just a single response rate percentage, so NASS evaluates the overall quality and representativeness of the data before any report is released. If the information does not meet established statistical standards, additional review and analysis occur before any publication goes out the door.”
The Hanging Question
Grabbing hands grab all they can. Everyone, at each link of agriculture’s daisy chain, clamors for farm data: Government, agribusiness, media, ag organizations, machinery manufacturers, non-profits, marketers, and Wall Street all throw elbows at the trough.
Arguably, standing at the periphery while the feast unfolds? The American farmer.
“The demand for our data keeps growing,” Halterman says. “That tells me people are making money with it. Everything we do in the field and every dollar we spend is tracked and tabulated.”
“The government is neck-deep in our data,” he continues. “We already certify acres at FSA. We already submit everything to RMA and our agents for crop insurance. In other words, USDA has data control of every detail of our operations. Why not control it ourselves?”
Spot-on, echoes Buffalo. The hanging question for tomorrow, according to Buffalo, is whether farmers will own the data system or be the raw material feeding it.
GrainIQ
“Nobody should make a business decision based on 40% certainty,” Buffalo says. “That’s gambling. Not issuing a report is better, and more honest for everybody, than issuing something with a 40% response rate from a sampling of growers.”
When controversy erupted over USDA’s January data release, Buffalo went to work beyond bin design and construction: He built GrainIQ, an online application that generates commodity market intelligence for farmers.
“We need a way to be accurate,” Bailey details. “Everyone knows farmers aren’t responding to USDA reports like they used to. Blame is put on technology or staffing deficiencies or farmer distrust. I’m not here to claim I know exactly what is going on, but the one certainty all around me is that farmers are sick of USDA’s status quo.”
Ultimately, Bailey advocates for intelligence across regions and independence from USDA grain tallies. “We need producer-controlled aggregation with clear consent, clear ownership boundaries, and operational anonymity.”
The future, in his eyes, is a farmer-controlled grain inventory network across the U.S. “This has to happen. The technology is already here to watch grain totals in real time as the information comes right off farms.”
“As regional groups, farmers could then verify every USDA claim. Sync every bin up and let connected farmers be the keepers of their own bushels. Or at least let producers report to USDA without handing over the whole farm.”
Could farmers control grain data in the future? Buyer beware, USDA-NASS’ Combs contends: “We’ve been approached by private data entities that would like to do some of the things that we do, and I would say the most important thing to realize there is that at NASS, our mission is to produce an accurate, reliable, and independent number that farmers can use and rely on … There is some concern that can be brought in when you look at going with private sector companies to do that. They may have some outside influence that may want to have them push a statistic one way or the other, and it may not be as independent as what you see coming out of NASS.”
Bureaucrats and Big Business
Without fail, every few months, Halterman hears or reads a prediction perpetually pinballed around the farming industry: Data carries the same value as a crop—or soon will.
However, from a practical angle, data doesn’t translate to a financial return in his pocketbook. Instead, the drain of skyrocketing fuel, fertilizer, and chemical costs, coupled with anemic commodity prices, is Halterman’s reality.
“The data pile controlled by USDA is only getting higher, and in the coming age of AI, we’re told it’s going to reach unimaginable levels of value, and we’re supposed to be comfortable with USDA, a government department, raking it in? I think it’s reasonable to wonder if any of our farmer data is getting leaked to USDA that we don’t realize. If you think it’s not happening, then you don’t know anything about politicians and bureaucrats and big business.”
Coupled with myriad predictions regarding the booming value of farm data, Halterman’s assertion has merit in the eyes of many farmers.
“Think about the machinery, seed, and chemical companies with our planting data, our harvesting data, and our buying data. Is that going to USDA without our permission? Tell me with a straight face that you’d be totally surprised if a report comes out this year or next year, about farm data leaking to or from government,” Halterman posits. “Nobody would be shocked by such a report and we all know it.”
Skin in the Game
As the data pieces move around the farm board, massive changes lie dead ahead.
“There are legitimate considerations that farm data soon will be stored in blockchains,” Bailey describes. “No matter if that happens, the change will be huge. I want farmers to be ready. Surely, everyone can agree that the current setup puts farmers behind the ball.”
Combs says producer feedback is indispensable. “We hear the producers out there and we value their feedback, and we need their participation. Farmers are the foundation of every NASS report, and we’re committed to listening, improving, and ensuring that the statistics that we produce continue to serve America’s agricultural communities.”
Any improvement or restoration of trust, Halterman contends, rests on dual factors. One, a skin-in-the-game approach by USDA, and two, farmer-controlled data.
“If USDA ever hopes to change, then bring in farmers with no direct ties to any ag organization or business. USDA needs a revolving group of 20- to 40-year-old growers to steadily meet with. In a single day, USDA will gain more info that way than they get long-term from big agriculture.”
“Second, USDA already gets plenty of our data,” Halterman concludes. “The future, for American farmers, is to control the data ourselves.”
For more from Chris Bennett (@ChrisBennettMS or cbennett@farmjournal.com or 662-592-1106), see:
Stealing the Farm: China Continues Raid of US Agriculture by Theft and Agroterror
Corn and Cocaine: Roger Reaves and the Most Incredible Farm Story Never Told
How the Deep State Tried, and Failed, to Crush an American Farmer
Game of Horns: Iowa Poacher’s Antler Addiction Leads to Historic Bust
Ghost Cattle: $650M Ponzi Rocks Livestock Industry, Money Still Missing
Georgia Watermelon Heist Explodes into Epic Night of Pandemonium
Sisters of Farm Fraud: How 4 Siblings Fleeced USDA for $10M
When Conservation Backfires: Landowner Defeats Feds in Mindboggling Private Property Case
Cold-Busted: Frozen Deer Decoy Nabs Poachers and Cocaine in Spectacular Sting
Sticky Fingers: USDA Fraudster Steals $200M in Stunning Scam
