Winter Wheat Condition Rating Down from a Year Ago, Below Expectations

Oct 29, 2024

The US winter wheat crop is off to a poorer start than a year ago, mainly due to overly dry conditions across the southern Plains – particularly Oklahoma.

In its first condition rating for the 2025 nationwide crop on Monday, the USDA pegged it at 38% good to excellent as of Sunday. That is 9 points below last year’s initial rating for the 2024 crop and 5 points below the average pre-report trade guess. Almost one-quarter of the national winter wheat crop (23%) was rated in poor to very poor condition as of Sunday, 5 points higher than a year ago.

Aside from Montana (17% good, 0% excellent), the worst condition rating for the 2025 crop belonged to Oklahoma at just 21% good to excellent – a drop of 21 points from a year ago. One-third of the Oklahoma crop was also rated in poor to very poor condition as of Sunday, versus only 16% last year.

Almost 79% of Oklahoma was being impacted by some form of drought as of Oct. 22, compared to less than half the previous year.

On the other hand, the crop in the top winter wheat production state of Kansas was rated 38% good to excellent as of Sunday, up 6 points from last year. An estimated 20% of the Kansas crop was in poor to very poor condition, down from 34% a year ago.

The Soft Red crop in Michigan was rated 61% good to excellent as of Sunday, a jump of 20 points from last year, while the Ohio crop was pegged at 71% good to excellent, 10 points below last year’s initial state rating.

Nationwide winter wheat planting was estimated at 80% complete as of Sunday, up 7 points from a week earlier and behind last year and the five-year average at 82% and 84%, respectively. National emergence is also lagging, with 56% of the crop up as of Sunday, up 10 points on the week but behind 61% for last year and the average.

Planting in Oklahoma advanced just 4 points from a week earlier to 55% done, 22 points behind the state average, while only 36% of the crop had emerged, compared to 62% on average.

Kansas planting gained 9 points on the week to 87% done, near the average of 88%, while 63% of the state crop had emerged, up 15 points on the week and on par with the average.

Michigan was 89% planted as of Sunday, up 12 points from a week earlier and 10 points ahead of average. The Michigan crop was 65% emerged, versus 49% a week earlier and 60% on average.

An estimated 88% of the Ohio crop was in the ground as of Sunday, up 11 points from the previous week and 1 point ahead of the average. Just over half of the Ohio crop (52%) had emerged, up from 36% a week earlier but behind 59% on average.

Click here to see more...

Video: How to fix a leaking pond.

Does the pond leak? Ummmm....possibly a tiny bit. Well, more than a bit...ok, the darn thing leaks like a sieve!

QUESTIONS ANSWERED: Damit is not plastic. Therefore, there are no microplastics. I wish I had not mentioned plastic, but that is a very common polymer and I mentioned it as an example of a polymer. A polymer is simply a chain of repeating molecules, or "monomers." Cellulose is a polymer of glucose molecules. Starches are also polymers of various molecules such as fructose, maltose, etc. We have many polymers inside our bodies. In other words, just knowing something is a polymer doesn't make it bad, toxic, harmful, etc. However, this also doesn't mean all polymers are safe.

The specific polymer used for Damit is a trade secret, however, it has been closely scrutinized by multiple health and safety authorities. This includes the governmental authorities of Australia, the USA, Europe, and Asia. Not only have they determined that is safe to use in earthen ponds, and not harmful to fish, but it is considered safe to use in human potable water systems in all of these areas. And of course, they know the exact makeup of the polymer when making this determination. I'm told that the same polymer is in use by many municipalities to keep potable water storage tanks leak free. I can't tell you exactly what the polymer is, because I don't know, but given the confidence with which the governmental authorities have authorized its use, I would bet it is made of a monomer that we are exposed to all the time, like fructose or something.

It also breaks down in a matter of years, and does not accumulate in the environment. The end products of breaking down are CO2, water, and base minerals like potassium. The SDS reports no need for concern with ingestion, inhalation, or contact. If in eyes, rinse with water.

End result, can I say for sure that it is 100% safe? No, I don't know exactly what it is. But given people who do know exactly what it is, and have scrutinized it, have approved it for use in human potable water systems, I'm pretty comfortable putting it in an earthen pond.