timekiller
No, you can't pet him.
Andy-
I've got some ocean front property for you. Cheap!
I've got some ocean front property for you. Cheap!
ajadams
PMA Member
It doesn't have to be dirt cheap, just reasonably priced with a little income potential. I have found a couple that will pencil out, I'm just looking for other options. I can't count the number of times that a piece of ground has come up that I wanted to buy but didn't have the money. I've spent quite a bit of time on the computer looking, just seeing if anyone else had any suggestions.
JNRBRONC
Well-Known Member
It may sound morbid, but watch the obits in the paper. Privately picking up ground from an estate can be a good way to go. Like Pharmer said, if anybody hears about a good deal, they will either jump on it or it won't last long enough to tell you about it.
If you are cash tight, I'd educate myself on contract purchasing. You might be able to talk a seller into that. This might work for a farmer heading to a retirement or nursing home. Again, kind of ambulance chasing...
If you have it penciled out, start bending the ear of your banker. Show them you will provide an income stream. You might have to carry a side note to beef up your down payment (you do have some sort of down payment or collateral, don't you?). You might be financially strapped for a few years, but I think it will be worth it.
If you are cash tight, I'd educate myself on contract purchasing. You might be able to talk a seller into that. This might work for a farmer heading to a retirement or nursing home. Again, kind of ambulance chasing...
If you have it penciled out, start bending the ear of your banker. Show them you will provide an income stream. You might have to carry a side note to beef up your down payment (you do have some sort of down payment or collateral, don't you?). You might be financially strapped for a few years, but I think it will be worth it.
NEIOWAARCHER
New Member
If there was cheap land in Iowa we would all have some. Can't help much here in the NE unless your in the $2000 to $3000/ acre brackett.
I would recommend buying a smaller tract of land so you can afford it in Clinton County. Land to the west or south of Clinton County is still going to be in the $1800-$3000 range (if it is a good piece). Try to buy next to a larger tract that is managed. If you have lived in Clinton County very long you have to know where these areas are and which areas have produced the bigger bucks. I would rather own 40 acres in a managed area than own 160 acres in an area that has no management. May work best (price wise) to buy a place that has a house on it. This will also allow you to watch/patrol it. Unless you don't care if every Tom, [censored], and Harry hunts it when your not there. Which will happen if your an absentee owner. Even if you live on the place it may not solve all your problems. I have a good friend that owns 160 acres that he lives on. For years he has had problems with trespassers. Some would even wait until he left for work in the morning and then would push thru his ground. It took him 6-8 years of having trespassers written up before he got a handle on it. Now he has poachers that shoot deer from the road and leave them lay. Owning land can be the ultimate dream come true and at the same time a nightmare! I'm sure other IW landowners could tell stories as well. Not trying to discourage you but many people think they will buy a piece of land, post it, then shoot 175" class deer on regular basis. The main reason to find something close to home is so you can spend more time enjoying your investment. Good Luck.
JNRBRONC
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I would recommend buying a smaller tract of land so you can afford it in Clinton County. Land to the west or south of Clinton County is still going to be in the $1800-$3000 range (if it is a good piece). Try to buy next to a larger tract that is managed. If you have lived in Clinton County very long you have to know where these areas are and which areas have produced the bigger bucks. I would rather own 40 acres in a managed area than own 160 acres in an area that has no management. May work best (price wise) to buy a place that has a house on it. This will also allow you to watch/patrol it. Unless you don't care if every Tom, [censored], and Harry hunts it when your not there. Which will happen if your an absentee owner. Even if you live on the place it may not solve all your problems. I have a good friend that owns 160 acres that he lives on. For years he has had problems with trespassers. Some would even wait until he left for work in the morning and then would push thru his ground. It took him 6-8 years of having trespassers written up before he got a handle on it. Now he has poachers that shoot deer from the road and leave them lay. Owning land can be the ultimate dream come true and at the same time a nightmare! I'm sure other IW landowners could tell stories as well. Not trying to discourage you but many people think they will buy a piece of land, post it, then shoot 175" class deer on regular basis. The main reason to find something close to home is so you can spend more time enjoying your investment. Good Luck.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well said!
I would recommend buying a smaller tract of land so you can afford it in Clinton County. Land to the west or south of Clinton County is still going to be in the $1800-$3000 range (if it is a good piece). Try to buy next to a larger tract that is managed. If you have lived in Clinton County very long you have to know where these areas are and which areas have produced the bigger bucks. I would rather own 40 acres in a managed area than own 160 acres in an area that has no management. May work best (price wise) to buy a place that has a house on it. This will also allow you to watch/patrol it. Unless you don't care if every Tom, [censored], and Harry hunts it when your not there. Which will happen if your an absentee owner. Even if you live on the place it may not solve all your problems. I have a good friend that owns 160 acres that he lives on. For years he has had problems with trespassers. Some would even wait until he left for work in the morning and then would push thru his ground. It took him 6-8 years of having trespassers written up before he got a handle on it. Now he has poachers that shoot deer from the road and leave them lay. Owning land can be the ultimate dream come true and at the same time a nightmare! I'm sure other IW landowners could tell stories as well. Not trying to discourage you but many people think they will buy a piece of land, post it, then shoot 175" class deer on regular basis. The main reason to find something close to home is so you can spend more time enjoying your investment. Good Luck.
[/ QUOTE ]
JNRBRONC
Well-Known Member
2006 Land Value Survey
Iowa Farmland Value at Record Level for Fourth Year in a Row
12/19/2006
AMES, Iowa -- The average value of an acre of farmland in Iowa increased $290 to an all-time high of $3,204 in 2006, according to an annual survey conducted by Iowa State University. This is the fourth year in a row with a new record high, according to Mike Duffy, ISU Extension farm economist who conducts the survey.
The 2006 average value topped a previous record of $2,914 reported last year, and it represented a 10.0 percent increase statewide over the 2005 average and the first time the average value of an acre of land in Iowa topped $3,000. Duffy said values increased in all 99 counties in Iowa, with seven counties topping $4,000 an acre, and one, Scott County on the Mississippi River in eastern Iowa topping out at $5,073 per acre, the highest ever recorded in the history of the survey.
The total value of the state’s 32.6 million acres of farmland is about $105 billion. Duffy said the results of this year’s survey are notable not just for the relative strength and record values reported. He said the increases can be tied to the rapid increases in grain prices. Corn prices averaged $2.07 per bushel from January to October of this year, but current cash corn prices are well over $3.00 and it is possible to sell corn for the next couple of years for that price.
The change in demand for corn, partly attributed to its role in the bioeconomy, is having far reaching impacts on Iowa agriculture, Duffy said. Land values and rents are increasing. One difference noted in this year’s survey is that the percentage of land sales to existing farmers increased this year for the first time in several years, after losing ground to investor purchases.
Duffy said the double-digit percentage increases of the past three years raise the question of whether we are entering a time similar to the 1970s when land values increased rapidly, only to crash in the 1980s. “There are several important differences to keep in mind when pondering that question,” he said. Iowa land values increased more than 30 percent per year for 1973, 1974 and 1975, but the current increases in values are no where near that level. The boom in the values in the early 1970s followed a period of relative stability in Iowa land values.
“The increases we are seeing today are coming at a time when Iowa land values have been increasing fairly steadily over the past several years. Since 2000 Iowa land values have increased $1,347 per acre on average or a 73 percent increase. This is a substantial increase, to be sure, but it is no where near the over 125 percent increase in values from 1972 to 1975,” Duffy said. There are other differences such as the level of inflation, the fact that the more land is held without debt and the fact that more land is being held by older people.
Values increased in all 99 Iowa counties and topped $1,400 an acre in every county for the first time since ISU began conducting the survey in 1941. The highest average values in the state were reported in the Northwest Iowa crop reporting district at $3,783 per acre. The South Central district had the lowest average values at $1,927, and that district also had the lowest percentage of increase at 7.5 percent on average. The highest percentage of increase was 14.7 percent in Southeast Iowa
The survey of real estate brokers, farm lenders, and others who work directly with the land markets, indicated nearly half of the counties (45) in the state showed increases of more than 10 percent. There were 59 counties with average values between $3,000 and $4,000 an acre. The smallest percentage increase was 2.9 percent in Jones County, and the largest increase was 17.2 percent in Audubon County. The average value increased for the seventh year in a row after slight declines in 1998 and 1999. The largest dollar increase was $495 per acre in Louisa County.
Duffy said good grain prices were a major factor in value increases this year and were mentioned by 42 percent of those responding to the survey. Other positive factors were good crop yields, mentioned by 18 percent of the respondents; low interest rates, tax-free treatment of transactions involving land exchanges, and bio-fuel demand, each mentioned by 14 percent; and scarcity of listings, mentioned by 13 percent.
Negative factors that worked against greater increases this year included an uptrend in interest rates, mentioned by 16 percent of the respondents, high input and machinery costs, mentioned by 12 percent, and land prices that are already too high, mentioned by 11 percent.
The survey indicated low grade land, which averaged $2,195 per acre in 2006, increased 11.9 percent over the previous year. Medium grade land averaged $3,011 per acre, a 10.0 percent increase, and high grade land averaged $3,835 per acre, an increase of 9.2 percent.
Fifty-one percent of the survey respondents said the number of sales this year was about the same as last year, while 26 percent said there were more sales in 2006, and 23 percent said there were fewer sales. Existing farmers were the buyers in about 60 percent of the transactions this year, with investors accounting for about 35 percent of the sales, new farmers 3 percent and other purchasers 2 percent.
About 1,100 copies of the survey are mailed each year to licensed real estate brokers, ag lenders, and others knowledgeable of Iowa land values. Respondents are asked to report values as of Nov. 1. Average response is 500 to 600 completed surveys, with 490 usable surveys returned this year. Respondents provided 623 individual county estimates, including land values in nearby counties if they had knowledge of values in those counties.
Only the state average and the averages for the nine crop reporting districts are based directly on data collected in the survey. The county estimates are derived through a procedure that combines ISU survey results with data from the U.S. Census of Agriculture. The ISU survey is the only one of several conducted throughout the year that reports data for all 99 counties.
The survey is sponsored by the Iowa Agriculture and Home Economics Experiment Station at ISU, with results reported by ISU Extension. Duffy was assisted in the project this year by Darnell Smith, extension program specialist in economics.
Additional information on the 2006 survey is available on the ISU Extension Web site at www.extension.iastate.edu/landvalue/
-30-
By Crop Reporting District:
2006 2005 2005-2006 Change
District $/acre $/acre $ %
Northwest 3,783 3,393 391 11.5%
North Central 3,478 3,222 256 7.9%
Northeast 3,187 2,963 224 7.6%
West Central 3,410 3,048 362 11.9%
Central 3,716 3,415 301 8.8%
East Central 3,725 3,396 329 9.7%
Southwest 2,580 2,350 231 9.8%
South Central 1,927 1,793 134 7.5%
Southeast 2,849 2,483 366 14.7%
State Average 3,204 2,914 290 10.0%
By County:
2006 2005 2005–2006
County Name $/acre $/acre $ Change % Change
Adair 2,198 2,020 179 8.8%
Adams 2,203 1,952 251 12.9%
Allamakee 2,126 1,978 148 7.5%
Appanoose 1,564 1,455 109 7.5%
Audubon 3,311 2,824 487 17.2%
Benton 3,619 3,314 305 9.2%
Black Hawk 3,952 3,636 316 8.7%
Boone 3,917 3,597 320 8.9%
Bremer 3,621 3,345 276 8.3%
Buchanan 3,562 3,289 273 8.3%
Buena Vista 3,914 3,555 359 10.1%
Butler 3,458 3,191 267 8.4%
Calhoun 3,958 3,626 332 9.2%
Carroll 3,581 3,307 274 8.3%
Cass 2,950 2,610 339 13.0%
Cedar 4,012 3,667 346 9.4%
Cerro Gordo 3,567 3,302 265 8.0%
Cherokee 3,581 3,186 395 12.4%
Chickasaw 2,909 2,746 163 5.9%
Clarke 1,811 1,607 205 12.7%
Clay 3,612 3,281 331 10.1%
Clayton 2,919 2,716 203 7.5%
Clinton 3,285 3,157 128 4.1%
Crawford 3,254 2,880 375 13.0%
Dallas 3,385 3,167 219 6.9%
Davis 1,956 1,676 280 16.7%
Decatur 1,465 1,321 144 10.9%
Delaware 3,866 3,494 372 10.6%
Des Moines 3,179 2,947 232 7.9%
Dickinson 3,404 3,049 355 11.6%
Dubuque 3,513 3,267 245 7.5%
Emmet 3,721 3,380 341 10.1%
Fayette 3,337 3,032 305 10.1%
Floyd 3,320 3,058 263 8.6%
Franklin 3,518 3,273 245 7.5%
Fremont 2,832 2,588 244 9.4%
Greene 3,470 3,154 316 10.0%
Grundy 3,996 3,759 237 6.3%
Guthrie 2,963 2,643 320 12.1%
Hamilton 4,097 3,785 312 8.2%
Hancock 3,592 3,344 248 7.4%
Hardin 3,667 3,387 279 8.2%
Harrison 3,093 2,756 337 12.2%
Henry 3,073 2,812 261 9.3%
Howard 2,621 2,422 199 8.2%
Humboldt 3,873 3,600 273 7.6%
Ida 3,668 3,243 425 13.1%
Iowa 3,131 2,708 423 15.6%
Jackson 2,931 2,724 207 7.6%
Jasper 3,301 2,924 376 12.9%
Jefferson 2,375 2,099 276 13.1%
Johnson 3,911 3,473 438 12.6%
Jones 3,147 3,059 88 2.9%
Keokuk 2,836 2,460 376 15.3%
Kossuth 3,707 3,456 251 7.3%
Lee 2,893 2,620 273 10.4%
Linn 3,983 3,661 322 8.8%
Louisa 3,413 2,918 495 17.0%
Lucas 1,672 1,555 117 7.5%
Lyon 3,447 3,088 360 11.6%
Madison 2,644 2,427 218 9.0%
Mahaska 2,963 2,619 344 13.1%
Marion 2,925 2,563 363 14.2%
Marshall 3,433 3,303 130 3.9%
Mills 3,095 2,714 381 14.0%
Mitchell 3,252 2,995 257 8.6%
Monona 2,838 2,492 346 13.9%
Monroe 1,981 1,718 263 15.3%
Montgomery 2,630 2,404 227 9.4%
Muscatine 3,647 3,311 336 10.1%
O'Brien 4,255 3,811 444 11.6%
Osceola 3,640 3,261 380 11.6%
Page 2,372 2,206 166 7.5%
Palo Alto 3,525 3,248 277 8.5%
Plymouth 3,830 3,386 444 13.1%
Pocahontas 3,830 3,547 283 8.0%
Polk 3,487 3,180 307 9.6%
Pottawattamie 3,294 2,973 321 10.8%
Poweshiek 3,124 2,767 358 12.9%
Ringgold 1,726 1,494 232 15.5%
Sac 3,824 3,425 399 11.6%
Scott 5,073 4,707 366 7.8%
Shelby 3,287 2,925 363 12.4%
Sioux 4,063 3,617 446 12.3%
Story 4,021 3,679 342 9.3%
Tama 3,320 3,015 305 10.1%
Taylor 1,948 1,791 157 8.8%
Union 2,085 1,927 158 8.2%
Van Buren 2,159 1,850 309 16.7%
Wapello 2,237 2,056 180 8.8%
Warren 2,935 2,716 219 8.1%
Washington 3,624 3,144 480 15.3%
Wayne 1,596 1,485 111 7.5%
Webster 4,040 3,732 308 8.3%
Winnebago 3,238 3,013 224 7.4%
Winneshiek 2,720 2,522 198 7.8%
Woodbury 3,014 2,650 364 13.7%
Worth 3,268 3,025 243 8.0%
Wright 3,988 3,707 281 7.6%
Contacts :
Michael Duffy, Economics, (515) 294-3000, [email protected]
Del Marks, Continuing Education and Communication Services, (515) 294-9807, [email protected]
Iowa Farmland Value at Record Level for Fourth Year in a Row
12/19/2006
AMES, Iowa -- The average value of an acre of farmland in Iowa increased $290 to an all-time high of $3,204 in 2006, according to an annual survey conducted by Iowa State University. This is the fourth year in a row with a new record high, according to Mike Duffy, ISU Extension farm economist who conducts the survey.
The 2006 average value topped a previous record of $2,914 reported last year, and it represented a 10.0 percent increase statewide over the 2005 average and the first time the average value of an acre of land in Iowa topped $3,000. Duffy said values increased in all 99 counties in Iowa, with seven counties topping $4,000 an acre, and one, Scott County on the Mississippi River in eastern Iowa topping out at $5,073 per acre, the highest ever recorded in the history of the survey.
The total value of the state’s 32.6 million acres of farmland is about $105 billion. Duffy said the results of this year’s survey are notable not just for the relative strength and record values reported. He said the increases can be tied to the rapid increases in grain prices. Corn prices averaged $2.07 per bushel from January to October of this year, but current cash corn prices are well over $3.00 and it is possible to sell corn for the next couple of years for that price.
The change in demand for corn, partly attributed to its role in the bioeconomy, is having far reaching impacts on Iowa agriculture, Duffy said. Land values and rents are increasing. One difference noted in this year’s survey is that the percentage of land sales to existing farmers increased this year for the first time in several years, after losing ground to investor purchases.
Duffy said the double-digit percentage increases of the past three years raise the question of whether we are entering a time similar to the 1970s when land values increased rapidly, only to crash in the 1980s. “There are several important differences to keep in mind when pondering that question,” he said. Iowa land values increased more than 30 percent per year for 1973, 1974 and 1975, but the current increases in values are no where near that level. The boom in the values in the early 1970s followed a period of relative stability in Iowa land values.
“The increases we are seeing today are coming at a time when Iowa land values have been increasing fairly steadily over the past several years. Since 2000 Iowa land values have increased $1,347 per acre on average or a 73 percent increase. This is a substantial increase, to be sure, but it is no where near the over 125 percent increase in values from 1972 to 1975,” Duffy said. There are other differences such as the level of inflation, the fact that the more land is held without debt and the fact that more land is being held by older people.
Values increased in all 99 Iowa counties and topped $1,400 an acre in every county for the first time since ISU began conducting the survey in 1941. The highest average values in the state were reported in the Northwest Iowa crop reporting district at $3,783 per acre. The South Central district had the lowest average values at $1,927, and that district also had the lowest percentage of increase at 7.5 percent on average. The highest percentage of increase was 14.7 percent in Southeast Iowa
The survey of real estate brokers, farm lenders, and others who work directly with the land markets, indicated nearly half of the counties (45) in the state showed increases of more than 10 percent. There were 59 counties with average values between $3,000 and $4,000 an acre. The smallest percentage increase was 2.9 percent in Jones County, and the largest increase was 17.2 percent in Audubon County. The average value increased for the seventh year in a row after slight declines in 1998 and 1999. The largest dollar increase was $495 per acre in Louisa County.
Duffy said good grain prices were a major factor in value increases this year and were mentioned by 42 percent of those responding to the survey. Other positive factors were good crop yields, mentioned by 18 percent of the respondents; low interest rates, tax-free treatment of transactions involving land exchanges, and bio-fuel demand, each mentioned by 14 percent; and scarcity of listings, mentioned by 13 percent.
Negative factors that worked against greater increases this year included an uptrend in interest rates, mentioned by 16 percent of the respondents, high input and machinery costs, mentioned by 12 percent, and land prices that are already too high, mentioned by 11 percent.
The survey indicated low grade land, which averaged $2,195 per acre in 2006, increased 11.9 percent over the previous year. Medium grade land averaged $3,011 per acre, a 10.0 percent increase, and high grade land averaged $3,835 per acre, an increase of 9.2 percent.
Fifty-one percent of the survey respondents said the number of sales this year was about the same as last year, while 26 percent said there were more sales in 2006, and 23 percent said there were fewer sales. Existing farmers were the buyers in about 60 percent of the transactions this year, with investors accounting for about 35 percent of the sales, new farmers 3 percent and other purchasers 2 percent.
About 1,100 copies of the survey are mailed each year to licensed real estate brokers, ag lenders, and others knowledgeable of Iowa land values. Respondents are asked to report values as of Nov. 1. Average response is 500 to 600 completed surveys, with 490 usable surveys returned this year. Respondents provided 623 individual county estimates, including land values in nearby counties if they had knowledge of values in those counties.
Only the state average and the averages for the nine crop reporting districts are based directly on data collected in the survey. The county estimates are derived through a procedure that combines ISU survey results with data from the U.S. Census of Agriculture. The ISU survey is the only one of several conducted throughout the year that reports data for all 99 counties.
The survey is sponsored by the Iowa Agriculture and Home Economics Experiment Station at ISU, with results reported by ISU Extension. Duffy was assisted in the project this year by Darnell Smith, extension program specialist in economics.
Additional information on the 2006 survey is available on the ISU Extension Web site at www.extension.iastate.edu/landvalue/
-30-
By Crop Reporting District:
2006 2005 2005-2006 Change
District $/acre $/acre $ %
Northwest 3,783 3,393 391 11.5%
North Central 3,478 3,222 256 7.9%
Northeast 3,187 2,963 224 7.6%
West Central 3,410 3,048 362 11.9%
Central 3,716 3,415 301 8.8%
East Central 3,725 3,396 329 9.7%
Southwest 2,580 2,350 231 9.8%
South Central 1,927 1,793 134 7.5%
Southeast 2,849 2,483 366 14.7%
State Average 3,204 2,914 290 10.0%
By County:
2006 2005 2005–2006
County Name $/acre $/acre $ Change % Change
Adair 2,198 2,020 179 8.8%
Adams 2,203 1,952 251 12.9%
Allamakee 2,126 1,978 148 7.5%
Appanoose 1,564 1,455 109 7.5%
Audubon 3,311 2,824 487 17.2%
Benton 3,619 3,314 305 9.2%
Black Hawk 3,952 3,636 316 8.7%
Boone 3,917 3,597 320 8.9%
Bremer 3,621 3,345 276 8.3%
Buchanan 3,562 3,289 273 8.3%
Buena Vista 3,914 3,555 359 10.1%
Butler 3,458 3,191 267 8.4%
Calhoun 3,958 3,626 332 9.2%
Carroll 3,581 3,307 274 8.3%
Cass 2,950 2,610 339 13.0%
Cedar 4,012 3,667 346 9.4%
Cerro Gordo 3,567 3,302 265 8.0%
Cherokee 3,581 3,186 395 12.4%
Chickasaw 2,909 2,746 163 5.9%
Clarke 1,811 1,607 205 12.7%
Clay 3,612 3,281 331 10.1%
Clayton 2,919 2,716 203 7.5%
Clinton 3,285 3,157 128 4.1%
Crawford 3,254 2,880 375 13.0%
Dallas 3,385 3,167 219 6.9%
Davis 1,956 1,676 280 16.7%
Decatur 1,465 1,321 144 10.9%
Delaware 3,866 3,494 372 10.6%
Des Moines 3,179 2,947 232 7.9%
Dickinson 3,404 3,049 355 11.6%
Dubuque 3,513 3,267 245 7.5%
Emmet 3,721 3,380 341 10.1%
Fayette 3,337 3,032 305 10.1%
Floyd 3,320 3,058 263 8.6%
Franklin 3,518 3,273 245 7.5%
Fremont 2,832 2,588 244 9.4%
Greene 3,470 3,154 316 10.0%
Grundy 3,996 3,759 237 6.3%
Guthrie 2,963 2,643 320 12.1%
Hamilton 4,097 3,785 312 8.2%
Hancock 3,592 3,344 248 7.4%
Hardin 3,667 3,387 279 8.2%
Harrison 3,093 2,756 337 12.2%
Henry 3,073 2,812 261 9.3%
Howard 2,621 2,422 199 8.2%
Humboldt 3,873 3,600 273 7.6%
Ida 3,668 3,243 425 13.1%
Iowa 3,131 2,708 423 15.6%
Jackson 2,931 2,724 207 7.6%
Jasper 3,301 2,924 376 12.9%
Jefferson 2,375 2,099 276 13.1%
Johnson 3,911 3,473 438 12.6%
Jones 3,147 3,059 88 2.9%
Keokuk 2,836 2,460 376 15.3%
Kossuth 3,707 3,456 251 7.3%
Lee 2,893 2,620 273 10.4%
Linn 3,983 3,661 322 8.8%
Louisa 3,413 2,918 495 17.0%
Lucas 1,672 1,555 117 7.5%
Lyon 3,447 3,088 360 11.6%
Madison 2,644 2,427 218 9.0%
Mahaska 2,963 2,619 344 13.1%
Marion 2,925 2,563 363 14.2%
Marshall 3,433 3,303 130 3.9%
Mills 3,095 2,714 381 14.0%
Mitchell 3,252 2,995 257 8.6%
Monona 2,838 2,492 346 13.9%
Monroe 1,981 1,718 263 15.3%
Montgomery 2,630 2,404 227 9.4%
Muscatine 3,647 3,311 336 10.1%
O'Brien 4,255 3,811 444 11.6%
Osceola 3,640 3,261 380 11.6%
Page 2,372 2,206 166 7.5%
Palo Alto 3,525 3,248 277 8.5%
Plymouth 3,830 3,386 444 13.1%
Pocahontas 3,830 3,547 283 8.0%
Polk 3,487 3,180 307 9.6%
Pottawattamie 3,294 2,973 321 10.8%
Poweshiek 3,124 2,767 358 12.9%
Ringgold 1,726 1,494 232 15.5%
Sac 3,824 3,425 399 11.6%
Scott 5,073 4,707 366 7.8%
Shelby 3,287 2,925 363 12.4%
Sioux 4,063 3,617 446 12.3%
Story 4,021 3,679 342 9.3%
Tama 3,320 3,015 305 10.1%
Taylor 1,948 1,791 157 8.8%
Union 2,085 1,927 158 8.2%
Van Buren 2,159 1,850 309 16.7%
Wapello 2,237 2,056 180 8.8%
Warren 2,935 2,716 219 8.1%
Washington 3,624 3,144 480 15.3%
Wayne 1,596 1,485 111 7.5%
Webster 4,040 3,732 308 8.3%
Winnebago 3,238 3,013 224 7.4%
Winneshiek 2,720 2,522 198 7.8%
Woodbury 3,014 2,650 364 13.7%
Worth 3,268 3,025 243 8.0%
Wright 3,988 3,707 281 7.6%
Contacts :
Michael Duffy, Economics, (515) 294-3000, [email protected]
Del Marks, Continuing Education and Communication Services, (515) 294-9807, [email protected]
dbltree
Super Moderator
[ QUOTE ]
Just thinking how nice it would be to retire to Rio once the rut is over.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just wondering where Iowa's land prices are headed once the full affect of the ethanol plants hits us?
I read in Iowa Farmer Today that this year the plants required 49% of Iowa's corn crop but when they are all operating they will require 129%
If corn prices stay high (and I expect they will eventually go even higher)...and farmers can actually make a profit...it's hard to say where land prices will head.
It looks to me like ethanol may eventually change the entire "face" of Iowa as we now know it.
There is talk of pulling ground out of the CRP program, converting pasture land and switching from a soy/corn rotation to all corn.
Some top ground in my area recently was leased for $200 an acre so I think we will see very fierce competition from now on.
In a few years...$2500 an acre may seem like a bargain...
Just thinking how nice it would be to retire to Rio once the rut is over.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just wondering where Iowa's land prices are headed once the full affect of the ethanol plants hits us?
I read in Iowa Farmer Today that this year the plants required 49% of Iowa's corn crop but when they are all operating they will require 129%
If corn prices stay high (and I expect they will eventually go even higher)...and farmers can actually make a profit...it's hard to say where land prices will head.
It looks to me like ethanol may eventually change the entire "face" of Iowa as we now know it.
There is talk of pulling ground out of the CRP program, converting pasture land and switching from a soy/corn rotation to all corn.
Some top ground in my area recently was leased for $200 an acre so I think we will see very fierce competition from now on.
In a few years...$2500 an acre may seem like a bargain...