The Easter Freeze 

of April 2007

A Climatological Perspective and 

Assessment of Impacts and Services

Technical Report 2008-01

A NOAA/USDA technical report

i

An extreme climatic event such as the early April 2007 freeze, with its wide 

coverage and significant impacts exceeding two billion dollars across the central and 

eastern two-thirds of the United States, requires broad-ranging post analysis. What 

were the societal impacts? What happened meteorologically and why? How does this 

extreme event fit into our climatological record? What can we learn about our service 

from a national, regional, and local perspective to provide better service in the future? 

These are the key questions addressed in this report. 

This project is representative of a general need for such assessments. Through efforts 

such as this, we can systematically document the impact of climate extremes while 

continuously evaluating ways to improve services to the United States. Moreover, this 

report involves key federal, regional, and state partners in the climate community. It is 

only through the combined efforts of our partners that we can best summarize the scope, 

impacts, and services provided in extreme climatic events.

Ray Wolf

NOAA/National Weather Service

October 2007

PREFACE
ii

A report of this scope is possible only with contributions from a number of 

talented and dedicated people. Recent efforts by NOAA, and in particular the National 

Weather Service (NWS), to rebuild climate partnerships, both within and outside the 

agency, were important in making this report possible. Key contributions from federal, 

regional, and state-level climate partners from 15 states documented the freeze impacts 

on the local level. Contributions from NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center (CPC), National 

Climatic Data Center (NCDC), and the NWS, plus agricultural assessments from the 

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), provided background information 

documenting the large-scale perspective of this event, which includes an evaluation of 

NWS services. 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
iii

NOAA/National Climatic Data Center

Jay Lawrimore, Adam Smith, Neal Lott, Tom Ross, Tamara Houston

NOAA/Climate Prediction Center

Ed O’Lenic, Doug Lecomte

United States Department of Agriculture

Brad Rippey

State Representatives

Alabama – John Christy (SC)

Colorado – Nolan Doesken (SC)

Georgia – David Stooksbury (SC)

Illinois – Jim Angel (SC) 

Indiana – Dev Niyogi (SC) and Ken Scheeringa (Asst. SC)

Iowa – Harry Hillaker (SC)

Kansas – Mary Knapp (SC)

Kentucky – Stuart Foster (SC) and Tom Priddy (U. Ky Extension Agricultural 

Meteorologist)

Mississippi – Charles Wax (SC)

Missouri – Pat Guinan (SC)

Nebraska – Al Dutcher (SC) 

North Carolina – Ryan Boyles (SC), Mark Brooks, and Joshua Hemperly

Ohio – Jeffrey Rogers (SC)

Oklahoma – Ken Crawford (SC) and Gary McManus

South Carolina – Hope Mizzell (SC) and Mark Malsick

Regional Climate Centers

High Plains Regional Climate Center – Ken Hubbard

Midwestern Regional Climate Center – Steve Hilberg

NOAA/National Weather Service

Doug Kluck and Jim Keeney – Central Region Headquarters

Victor Murphy and Jack Settelmaier – Southern Region Headquarters

Ray Wolf – WFO Davenport, Iowa

CONTRIBUTORS
iv

AO Arctic Oscillation

AFD Area Forecast Discussion

CONUS Continental United States

CPC Climate Prediction Center

CRN Climate Reference Network

HPC Hydrometeorological Prediction Center

HPRCC High Plains Regional Climate Center

HWO Hazardous Weather Outlook

MOS Model Output Statistics

MRCC Midwestern Regional Climate Center

NASS USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service

NCEP National Center for Environmental Prediction

NCDC National Climatic Data Center

NDFD National Digital Forecast Database

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NWS National Weather Service

SC State Climatologist

USDA United States Department of Agriculture

WFO Warning and Forecast Office

ACRONYMS
v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface.............................................................................................................................................................i

Acknowledgments......................................................................................................................................... ii

Contributors................................................................................................................................................. iii

Acronyms......................................................................................................................................................iv

Report ..............................................................................................................................................................

Executive Summary...................................................................................................................................1

Event Overview..........................................................................................................................................2

Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................2

Records..................................................................................................................................................5

March and April Circulation Patterns..................................................................................................6

Impacts to Agriculture and Horticulture ...................................................................................................7

National .................................................................................................................................................7

Alabama...............................................................................................................................................12

Arkansas ..............................................................................................................................................13

Colorado ..............................................................................................................................................14

Florida .................................................................................................................................................14

Georgia................................................................................................................................................14

Illinois..................................................................................................................................................14

Indiana.................................................................................................................................................15

Iowa .....................................................................................................................................................16

Kansas..................................................................................................................................................17

Kentucky ..............................................................................................................................................18

Mississippi ...........................................................................................................................................22

Missouri ...............................................................................................................................................23
vi

Nebraska..............................................................................................................................................27

North Carolina.....................................................................................................................................28

Ohio .....................................................................................................................................................29

Oklahoma.............................................................................................................................................32

South Carolina.....................................................................................................................................32

Tennessee .............................................................................................................................................33

Virginia ................................................................................................................................................34

West Virginia........................................................................................................................................34

NWS Service Assessment........................................................................................................................34

Climate Prediction Center Products...................................................................................................34

National Digital Forecast Database Verification ...............................................................................35

Central Region WFO Products............................................................................................................36

Summary and Recommendations ........................................................................................................40

Appendix A Lowest temperature measured in each state - April 5-10, 2007 ...........................................41

Appendix B Lowest temperature measured within each climate division - April 5-10, 2007 ..................42

Appendix C Detailed comments from University of Missouri Extension Agronomists ..........................43

Appendix D WFO products and services survey for the freeze event of April 3-10, 2007.......................46

Photography Credits..........................................................................................................................................46

 
1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Unseasonably warm weather in March 2007 over 

the eastern half of the United States prompted early growth 

of many agricultural and horticultural crops, ranging from 

wheat in the Central Plains to fruit trees and pastures across 

the Southeast 

and par ts of 

the Midwest. 

March monthly temperatures averaged between 2 and 6°F above 

normal in these areas, and this was the second warmest March on 

record for the entire U.S. 

Arctic cold followed in early April with over 1500 weather stations 

breaking or matching record low temperatures. The magnitude 

and duration of the cold temperatures was particularly noteworthy 

in a climatological sense. Low temperatures in the teens occurred 

throughout the eastern half of the country, and freezing temperatures 

lasted almost a week in some areas. The duration of the cold combined with strong winds hindered efforts to take freeze protection 

measures for high value horticultural crops.

Agricultural and horticultural crops which started premature spring 

growth due to the warm March were thus highly susceptible to the 

freezing temperatures. Freeze damage was reported in nearly every state from Colorado and Oklahoma east 

to Virginia and Georgia. Preliminary damage estimates indicate total freeze-related losses will exceed the 2 

billion dollar mark, though subsequent drought, especially in the Southeast, also negatively impacted crops 

causing additional losses.

The National Weather Service provided advance warning of the Arctic freeze. The first indication of freeze 

potential in Climate Prediction Center products occurred in the 6-10 day issuance on March 29 and the U.S. 

Hazards Assessment on March 30. National Digital Forecast Database verification indicated forecasts made 

6 days prior to the one of the coldest days of the freeze did not reflect the cold outbreak (April 1 forecast for 

April 7), though 3-day forecasts were very good. Text products such as the Hazardous Weather Outlook, Area 

Forecast Discussion, and Freeze Warnings were assessed in Central Region and provided timely information. 

In addition, special efforts were made to utilize web pages and media contacts to insure the broadest possible 

dissemination of the threat. 

Findings from a survey of Central Region Warning and Forecast Offices indicate services could 

be improved by establishing and utilizing closer 

ties with University Extension Service specialists 

and USDA field offices. Specifically, input from 

University Extension Service specialists should 

be used to determine the need for Freeze/Frost 

products each season, not solely calendar dates 

or climatology. Second, USDA field offices, in 

particular the Farm Services Agency, can be 

an excellent source of impact information for 

regional reports and Storm Data.
2

Figure 1. April statewide temperature ranks. Source:

NCDC.

Figure 2. March 500mb heights and anomalies (upper left, m), departure 

from normal surface temperatures (upper right, °F); April 500mb heights and 

anomalies (lower left, m), and departure from normal surface temperatures 

(lower right, °F). Sources: 500mb data NOAA CPC; surface data High Plains 

Regional Climate Center.

Event Overview

Introduction

The April 3-10 2007 Cold Wave blasted much of the 

central Plains, Midwest and Southeast with Arctic 

air. For the entire month, April temperatures across 

the contiguous U.S. were near average, ranking 38th 

coolest since 1895 (113 years), although below average 

temperatures are apparent in these affected regions 

(Figure 1). The most significant impact of this cold 

wave was related to the timing and duration of the 

event in concert with crop development. Winter wheat 

across the central Plains and Midwest, blooming fruits 

across parts of the Midwest and southern U.S., and 

emerging corn in the South were among the hardest 

hit agricultural and horticultural crops.

Some of the more notable cold weather-related impacts 

reported in the media, but not detailed in this report, 

include cancellation of outdoor sporting events, 

cancellation or reduced attendance at Easter services 

and related events, lower 

retail sales, and increased 

energy consumption and 

cost. Environmental effects 

to wildlife, forests, etc. 

will occur though are hard 

to specify. Finally, losses 

of ag-related jobs such as 

fruit pickers and custom 

harvesters were expected 

due to the crop losses, but 

were not factored into loss 

estimates in this report. 

Several factors made this 

cold wave more harmful to 

agricultural interests than 

similar events in the past. 

March 2007 was exceptionally warm across a large 

portion of the U.S. from the 

northern Plains through the 

Mississippi Valley and into 

the Southeast (Figure 2, 

upper right), and in fact the 

second warmest on record 

nationally. A dominant ridge 

of high pressure entrenched 

across the contiguous U.S. 

allowed average monthly temperatures to exceed the 

average by more than 6°F. The prolonged warm spell 

led to premature spring growth for many plants and 

trees across the region. In contrast to the warmth across 

the Continental United States (CONUS), cold air was 
3

Figure 3. Climate Reference Network data as labeled. Source: NCDC.

STATION 

WIND

MINIMUM 

AIR 

TEMP 

oF

MINIMUM IR 

TEMP 

oF

NO. OF HOURS 

MIN AIR TEMP

MAX 

10-

SEC 

WIND 

(mph)

AVG 

SPEED

<32o <28o <24o <20o <16o

Gadsden, AL 24 17 19 11 0 0 0 15 5

Selma, AL 31 31 1 0 0 0 0 2 0

Batesville, AR 18 21 21 17 7 2 0 4 2

Watkinsville, 

GA 27 22 15 2 0 0 0 8 3

Newton 8, GA 30 30 3 0 0 0 0 1 0

Manhattan, KS 14 15 61 28 16 9 2 16 7

Bowling Green, 

KY 22 21 47 23 9 0 0 7 1

Monroe, LA 29 38 2 0 0 0 0 1 0

Chillicothe, 

MO 17 16 82 54 21 5 0 22 9

Newton, MS 30 31 2 0 0 0 0 5 4

Asheville, NC 21 14 47 27 9 0 0 13 3

Durham, NC 25 24 16 3 0 0 0 13 4

Stillwater, OK 24 24 19 8 0 0 0 11 4

Blackville, SC 25 26 9 3 0 0 0 2 <1

McClellanville, 

SC 30 22 2 0 0 0 0 3 0

Crossville, TN 14 13 70 45 16 7 3 15 4

Charlottesville, 

VA 25 23 37 11 0 0 0 13 3

Table 1. Temperature and wind data from the U.S. Climate Reference Network for April 4-10, 2007.

NOTE: All wind data is for only the hours during which the temperatures 

were < 32oF and were measured at 5 feet above ground level. 

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

entrenched across much of 

Alaska, making it the 3rd 

coldest March on record 

for the state.

In early April, a shift 

in the upper level flow 

pattern brought this cold 

Arctic air southward into 

the central and eastern 

U.S. The record-breaking 

cold air penetrated much 

of this region from April 

4-10 bringing near-record 

to record cold temperatures to parts of the central 

Plains and much of the 

Southeast. Temperatures 

in some locations dropped 

into the teens and lower 

20s overnight, with many 

hours of sub-freezing temperatures on multiple and 

subsequent days (Figure 

3). As many as four to 

five nights of extremely 

cold temperatures coupled 

with sustained desiccating winds during the subfreezing period made this 

event more harmful for plants 

and trees, and brought extensive 

losses in excess of an estimated 

2 billion dollars to agricultural 

and horticultural interests.

Data from the Climate Reference Network (CRN) across 

the central Plains and Southeast 

are shown in Table 1. During 

the time of the killing freeze, 

several CRN stations reported 

minimum temperatures in the 

teens. These include Batesville, 

AR (18°F), Manhattan, KS 

(14°F), Chillicothe, MO (17°F) 

and Crossville, TN (14°F). The 

number of hours the minimum 

air temperature was below 32°F 

across much of the region was 

considerable. 
4

Table 2. Selected record temperatures (oF) April 7-10, 2007.

7 April 2007 STATION ID New /Tied 

Record

Previous 

Record

Previous 

Date

HUNTSVILLE INTL AP, AL 014064 25.0°F 26.0 °F 3 Apr 1992

GLASGOW, KY 153246 18.0°F 20.0 °F 6 Apr 2007

BOONVILLE, MO 230817 19.0°F 20.0 °F 4 Apr 1975

CALIFORNIA, MO 231189 19.0°F 19.0 °F 3 Apr 1975

WASOLA, MO 238754 20.0°F 21.0 °F 4 Apr 1987

CAESARS HEAD, SC 381256 16.0°F 20.0 °F 7 Apr 1982

LAFAYETTE, TN 404987 20.0°F 22.0 °F 11 Apr 1973

8 April 2007 STATION ID New /Tied 

Record

Previous 

Record

Previous 

Date

ANNISTON METRO AP, AL 010272 26.0°F 26.0 °F 17 Apr 1905

MUSCLE SHOALS AP, AL 015749 26.0°F 26.0 °F 7 Apr 2007

EVENING SHADE 1 NNE, AR 032366 20.0°F 20.0 °F 7 Apr 1994

HOT SPRINGS 1 NNE, AR 033466 24.0°F 25.0 °F 10 Apr 2006

WEST MEMPHIS, AR 037712 25.0°F 26.0 °F 7 Apr 2007

GREERS FERRY DAM, AR 032978 26.0°F 26.0 °F 7 Apr 1971

LITTLE ROCK ADAMS FLD, AR 034248 28.0°F 28.0 °F 7 Apr 1971

DES ARC, AR 031968 28.0°F 29.0 °F 7 Apr 2007

LOUISVILLE 1 E, GA 095314 26.0°F 28.0 °F 1 Apr 1987

MACON MIDDLE GA AP, GA 095443 28.0°F 29.0 °F 1 Apr 1987

ALMA BACON CO AP, GA 090211 30.0°F 31.0 °F 1 Apr 1987

CAMILLA 3 SE, GA 091500 32.0°F 32.0 °F 13 Apr 1940

MOUND CITY, KS 145528 16.0°F 16.0 °F 3 Apr 1975

IOLA 1 W, KS 143984 19.0°F 19.0 °F 7 Apr 2007

STEARNS 2 S, KY 157677 15.0°F 18.0 °F 3 Apr 1992

SOMERSET 2 N, KY 157510 18.0°F 18.0 °F 3 Apr 1992

LONDON FAA AP, KY 154898 19.0°F 21.0 °F 7 Apr 1982

W KERR SCOTT RSVR, NC 319555 20.0°F 20.0 °F 9 Apr 1972

ROCKY MOUNT WILSON AP, NC 93759 23.0°F 25.0 °F 10 Apr 1985

ELIZABETH CITY FAA AP, NC 312724 27.0°F 29.0 °F 8 Apr 1982

FAYETTEVILLE REGL AP GRANNIS 

F, NC 93740 27.0°F 28.0 °F 10 Apr 1985

ELIZABETH CITY COAST GUARD 

AIR, NC 13786 27.0°F 27.0 °F 10 Apr 1985

WILMINGTON INTL AP, NC 319457 29.0°F 30.0 °F 20 Apr 1983

UNION 8 S, SC 388786 20.0°F 21.0 °F 7 Apr 1950

DILLON, SC 382386 24.0°F 24.0 °F 1 Apr 1964

COLUMBIA WSFO AP, SC 381939 26.0°F 26.0 °F 20 Apr 1983

SUMMERVILLE 4W, SC 388426 27.0°F 28.0 °F 20 Apr 1983

CHARLESTON INTL AP, SC 381544 30.0°F 30.0 °F 10 Apr 1972

SULLIVANS IS, SC 388405 32.0°F 32.0 °F 6 Apr 1975

ROSCOE, SD 397277 2.0°F 2.0 °F 7 Apr 2007

GREENEVILLE EXP STN, TN 403679 16.0°F 18.0 °F 7 Apr 1982

WOODBURY 1 WNW, TN 409866 18.0°F 18.0 °F 3 Apr 1992

SMITHVILLE 2 SE, TN 408405 18.0°F 19.0 °F 7 Apr 2007

CROSSVILLE AP, TN 402197 20.0°F 20.0 °F 7 Apr 2007

KINGSTON SPRINGS, TN 404876 20.0°F 21.0 °F 3 Apr 1992

BRISTOL AP, TN 401094 21.0°F 21.0 °F 7 Apr 1982

DRESDEN, TN 402600 22.0°F 23.0 °F 11 Apr 1973

ATHENS, TN 400284 22.0°F 22.0 °F 3 Apr 1992

SELMER, TN 408160 22.0°F 23.0 °F 4 Apr 1987
5

9 April 2007 STATION ID New /Tied 

Record

Previous 

Record

Previous 

Date

ROCK MILLS, AL 017025 24.0°F 24.0 °F 9 Apr 2000

BATESVILLE L&D 1, AR 030460 23.0°F 23.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

STUTTGART 9 ESE, AR 036920 28.0°F 28.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

PINE BLUFF, AR 035754 29.0°F 29.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

LIVE OAK, FL 085099 31.0°F 31.0 °F 1 Apr 1987

LAFAYETTE 3SW, GA 094941 22.0°F 22.0 °F 11 Apr 1973

MONTICELLO 3 NE, KY 155524 18.0°F 18.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

ROCHESTER FERRY, KY 156882 20.0°F 20.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

DONIPHAN, MO 232289 17.0°F 17.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

ARCADIA, MO 230224 18.0°F 18.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

ELIZABETHTOWN 3 SW, NC 312732 24.0°F 24.0 °F 10 Apr 1985

CELINA, TN 401561 18.0°F 22.0 °F 19 Apr 1983

LIVINGSTON RADIO WLIV, TN 405332 19.0°F 19.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

NEAPOLIS EXP STN, TN 406435 19.0°F 19.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

COOKEVILLE, TN 402009 20.0°F 20.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

COLUMBIA 3 WNW, TN 401957 20.0°F 20.0 °F 20 Apr 1983

PULASKI WWTP, TN 407459 22.0°F 22.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

KNOXVILLE EXP STN, TN 404946 22.0°F 22.0 °F 3 Apr 1992

HUNTINGDON WTP, TN 404417 23.0°F 25.0 °F 3 Apr 1992

SAMBURG WR, TN 408065 23.0°F 23.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

BROWNSVILLE, TN 401145 25.0°F 25.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

WHITNEY DAM, TX 419715 28.0°F 29.0 °F 11 Apr 1989

STILLHOUSE HOLLOW DAM, TX 418646 30.0°F 31.0 °F 7 Apr 1996

FREER, TX 413341 35.0°F 35.0 °F 8 Apr 2007

10 April 2007 STATION ID New /Tied 

Record

Previous 

Record

Previous 

Date

BROOKLET 1 W, GA 091266 30.0°F 30.0 °F 9 Apr 2007

KASKASKIA RIV NAV LOCK, IL 114629 22.0°F 23.0 °F 8 Apr 1990

CAIRO 3 N, IL 111166 26.0°F 26.0 °F 9 Apr 2007

NEW BERN CRAVEN CO AP, NC 316108 29.0°F 29.0 °F 15 Apr 1950

WALTERBORO 1 SW, SC 388922 26.0°F 26.0 °F 9 Apr 2007

LAWRENCEBURG FILT PLT, TN 405089 22.0°F 22.0 °F 11 Apr 1973

NASHVILLE ASOS, TN 406402 23.0°F 23.0 °F 7 Apr 1982

LENOIR CITY, TN 405158 23.0°F 24.0 °F 3 Apr 1992

MEMPHIS INTL AP, TN 405954 28.0°F 29.0 °F 4 Apr 1987

CHISOS BASIN, TX 411715 25.0°F 25.0 °F 6 Apr 1996

ROBERT GRAY AAF, TX 03902 32.0°F 32.0 °F 10 Apr 1973

MERCEDES 6 SSE, TX 415836 35.0°F 36.0 °F 10 Apr 1938

ZAPATA 1 S, TX 419976 38.0°F 38.0 °F 3 Apr 1987

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

Records

Between April 4 and 10, there were 1,237 broken and 

321 tied daily minimum temperature records in the contiguous U.S. These records are based on the historical 

daily observations archived in NCDC’s TD-3200 data 

set and reports from Cooperative Observers and First 

Order National Weather Service stations. The numbers 

are preliminary and subject to change pending final 

quality control. A subset of these reports are in Table 

2. Additional data consisting of the coldest temperature 

recorded during the period organized by state and 

climate division are in tabular format in Appendices 

A and B, respectively, and in Figure 4 for climate 

division numbers. Additional information is available 

at an NCDC web page focusing on the April freeze: 

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2007/

apr/apr-cold-event.php
6

March and April Circulation 

Patterns

Figure 2 illustrates the marked change in circulation 

pattern that took place from March to April. The 500 

mb height anomaly map for March (upper left) shows 

that nearly the entire CONUS had above normal 

heights, with positive anomalies centered over the 

Midwest and central West Coast regions. This means 

the jet stream was displaced well north of normal, 

resulting in temperatures more like late spring than 

late winter. Many locations in the U.S. posted monthly 

temperatures more than 8°F above normal, mainly in 

the central and northern Plains and the Midwest. Ten 

states reported one of the five mildest Marches on 

record, with Oklahoma the warmest and Kansas the 

second warmest. 

The April pattern stood in stark contrast to March 

(Figure 2, lower left). Specifically, during April 4-10, 

2007, the circulation was highly amplified, with deep 

500mb height troughs south of the Aleutians and from 

the Great Lakes to New England (Figure 2, lower left). 

Strong anomalous ridges covered Asia, the Western 

Arctic, western, central and northern Canada, the 

northeastern north Atlantic and central Europe. Modest 

positive 500mb height anomalies covered the far western United States. The anomalous wind flow implied 

by this pattern allowed Arctic air to 

penetrate into the central and eastern 

United States. 

Some of the areas that saw March 

temperatures 6 to 10°F above normal averaged 2 to 6°F below normal 

for April (Figure 2, lower right). 

This was especially the case for 

the Plains states from Kansas south 

through Texas. During the period 

of the freeze, April 4-10, average 

temperature anomalies ranged from 

+15°F or so in Alaska to -15°F or so 

in the Midwestern U.S., illustrating 

the strong teleconnection between 

Alaska and the central and eastern 

CONUS at this time of year. By 

contrast, the precipitation pattern 

was unremarkable, showing a tendency for below-median rainfall in 

the center of the coldest and warmest 

temperature anomaly regions. 

On the synoptic scale, the precursor to the onslaught 

of cold air was a surface low pressure system moving 

from the central Rockies into the Mid-Mississippi River 

Valley on April 2-3. Cold air, as evidenced by surface 

high pressure of 1048mb and sub-zero temperatures, 

was developing in central Canada. By April 4, the low 

pressure system had moved into the Great Lakes with 

a cold front dragging south through the Appalachians 

and across the Gulf Coast (Figure 5). The ridge of high 

pressure stretched from its center in Canada southward 

across the Plains to the Texas Gulf Coast. This pattern 

changed little during the next three days, accounting 

for the longevity of the event. Eventually, the surface 

high started to weaken on April 8, and the ridge axis 

moved eastward into the Great Lakes and mid-Atlantic 

region on April 9-10.

The change in weather from March to April was part 

of a significant Northern Hemisphere circulation 

pattern change. Figure 6 is time series graph of the 

Arctic Oscillation (AO) showing an index change from 

a positive 2 in March to negative 2 in early April. A 

negative AO is usually distinguished by a trough aloft 

in the northern Pacific near the Alaskan Aleutians, 

high pressure in the North Atlantic near Greenland, 

and a swath of low pressure to the south from the 

eastern U.S. across the Atlantic to Europe (Figure 7). 

In early April, a similar, although not identical, pattern 

Figure 4. Lowest temperature reported by climate division during the 

April 4-10 freeze. Source: NCDC.
7

Figure 6. Time series of the Arctic Oscillation (AO). Source: CPC. 

Figure 5. Surface weather map for 7 am on April 4, 2007. Contours are isobars every 4 mb. Standard frontal symbols apply, and shaded areas indicate 

precipitation. Source: NCEP.

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

developed across the Pacific and Atlantic basins. The 

accompanying composite of temperature impacts 

shows the warmth associated with a positive AO and 

the cold associated with a negative AO. In short, the 

hemispheric shift in circulation during early April 

which caused the jet stream to plunge southward and 

transport frigid air into a large part of the country 

occurred concurrently with a shift in the AO index.

Impacts to Agriculture and 

Horticulture

National Overview

A severe and historic early April freeze followed 

record-setting March warmth, damaging a variety of 

crops from the central and southern Plains eastward 

into the Ohio and Tennessee 

Valleys and the Southeast. On 

April 7-8, monthly record lows 

were established in several 

locations—including Jackson, 

Tennessee, and Paducah, Kentucky—that had just experienced record-high average 

temperatures for March.

On the state level, Oklahoma 

had experienced its warmest 

March on record (tied with 

1907 and 1910), and it had 

been among the ten warmest 

in 19 other states from Oregon 

and California eastward to 

Kentucky and Tennessee. Days 

later, a widespread, multi-day 

freeze struck the Plains, Midwest, and South. A partial list 

of commodities harmed by the 

cold outbreak included jointing- to heading-stage winter 

wheat, emerged corn, tree fruits 

(blooming and beyond), and numerous specialty and nursery crops. In 

addition, new growth of pastures, 

alfalfa, and red clover was burned 

back by the freezes. Crop growth 

stages, a factor indicating potential 

susceptibility to freeze damage, are 

listed for the most severely impacted 

crops in Table 3.

a. Winter Wheat

The winter wheat crop was harmed by the freeze in 

a nine-state area of the South and Midwest. Freeze 

damage was also reported on the central and southern 

Plains, particularly in Kansas and Oklahoma. For the 

Southern and Midwestern states, a comparison to 2006 

provides a reasonable approximation of yield reductions 

due to the freeze. Drought may also have contributed 

to yield reductions in parts of the Southeast, while a 

combination of factors (wetness in late 2006 and early 

2007; dryness in May 2007) may have helped to reduce 

yield potential in the Ohio Valley.

However, it is exceedingly difficult to quantify freeze 

damage on the central and southern Plains because 

last year’s (2006) drought-ravaged crop cannot be used 
8

Figure 7. 500mb height pattern and anomalies, and surface temperature anomalies by phase of the Arctic 

Oscillation. Source: CPC.

as a baseline, and because there were no pre-freeze 

estimates of yield or production. In addition, wetness 

caused quality and disease problems for the Plains’ 

maturing wheat, blurring the distinction between freeze 

damage and rain-related impacts.

In the absence of quantitative measures for Kansas and 

Oklahoma, one indicator of crop quality degradations 

due to the freeze (and other factors, such as unfavorable 

wetness and disease pressure at harvest time) is the crop 

condition report from USDA/National Agricultural 

Statistics Service (NASS). Wheat conditions at selected 

times—pre-freeze, post-freeze, and current—are listed 

in Table 4 for Kansas and Oklahoma, along with the 

nine-state Southern and Midwestern freeze-affected 

region.

In this nine-state area, the direct decline in winter 

wheat production from 2006 to 2007, mostly due to 

the April freeze, was 37.490 million bushels (Tables 5 

and 6). At the preliminary 2007 winter wheat price of 

$6.65 per bushel, direct freeze losses reached $249.3 

million.

Factoring in this year’s increased acreage, the 2007 

production potential—based on 2006 yields—could 

have reached nearly 260 million bushels. Thus, winter 

wheat lost to the freeze in this nine-state area potentially totaled around 66 million bushels, which at 2007 

prices equates to about $439 million.

b. Corn

Emerged corn was burned back or killed in early April, 

depending upon the severity of the freeze and the stage 

of development. Newly emerged corn was the most 

likely to survive the freeze, with more developed plants 

prone to irreversible damage. Reports indicated that 

freeze-damaged corn was replanted, when possible, 

or alternate crops were planted.
9

Winter Wheat Jointing and Heading

State % Jointing % Heading

Louisiana N/A 71

Arkansas N/A 44

Mississippi 90 40

Georgia 91 32

Texas N/A 16

Oklahoma 88 13

South Carolina N/A 11

Tennessee 76 N/A

Kansas 65 N/A

Indiana 21 0

Colorado 9 0

Ohio 4 0

Nebraska 3 0

Corn Emerged

State Percent 5-Year Average

Mississippi 85 36

Louisiana 76 50

Texas 55 46

Arkansas 46 20

South Carolina 45 24

Tennessee 22 2

Oklahoma 19 1

Peaches Blooming or Beyond

State Percent 5-Year Average

Georgia 97 89

Tennessee 85 71

Apples Blooming or Beyond

State Percent 5-Year Average

Tennessee 62 42

Georgia 51 23

Table 3. State agricultural reports from April 8, 

2007, provided a partial picture of crop stages at 

the time of the cold snap. Five-year average refers 

to 2001-2006.

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

With the exception of Illinois, Indiana, Missouri and 

Kentucky, corn is a minor commodity in the freezeaffected states. Only Kentucky, which accounted for 

1 percent of the national corn production total from 

2000-2004, registers on the national scale. At the time 

of the freeze, corn was not yet emerged in the key 

Midwestern production states, however, early corn had 

emerged in some southern states where damage was 

reported and replanting was necessary.

c. Peaches

USDA’s August 10 Crop Production report (latest 

available at the time of this writing) provided the latest 

peach production estimates (Table 7). South Carolina 

and Georgia traditionally have the second- and thirdhighest peach production totals behind California. In 

2006, California accounted for 70 percent of U.S. peach 

production, followed by South Carolina (6 percent) 

and Georgia (4 percent). This year, the number two 

and three peach production states were New Jersey 

(3 percent) and Washington (2 percent). In 2007, 

California’s share climbed to 82 percent of total U.S. 

peach production. 

South Carolina’s estimated 2007 peach production of 

9,000 tons represents an 85 percent reduction from last 

year. At the 2006 state price of $749 per ton, this year’s 

51,000-ton reduction in the peach crop represents a 

potential loss of $38.2 million. According to USDA/

NASS, South Carolina’s “severe post-bloom freeze in 

early April destroyed much of the peach crop. Many 

growers reported no peaches for harvest this season. 

Damage was reported across the entire state, with 

equally severe losses reported in both of the primary 

growing areas.”

Georgia’s estimated 2007 peach production of 13,000 

tons represents a 68 percent reduction from last year. 

At the 2006 state price of $892 per ton, this year’s 

28,000-ton reduction in the peach crop represents a 

potential loss of $25.0 million. According to USDA/

NASS, “freezing temperatures [in Georgia] on April 

7 and 8 severely damaged the crop, while dry spring 

conditions reduced fruit size. However, quality of 

harvested fruit has been excellent.”

For the contiguous 11-state area listed above, total 

peach losses for 2007 (compared to 2006) reached 

113,545 tons. The 2007 production of 36,245 tons 

represented a 76 percent decline from the previous year. 

These 11 states accounted for 14.8 percent of the U.S. 

peach production in 2006, but that number declined 

to 3.5 percent in 2007. Nearly 70 percent of the total 

tonnage losses in 2007 occurred in South Carolina 

and Georgia. Losses, based on 2006 prices, totaled 

around $63 million in South Carolina and Georgia, 

and around $99 million in the complete 11-state area 

listed above.
10

Winter Wheat Rated Very Poor to Poor by USDA/NASS

State April 1 April 22 June 10 July 8

South Carolina 1% 50% 70% N/A

Kentucky 5% 80% 64% N/A

Tennessee 3% 84% 57% N/A

Alabama 14% 36% 49% N/A

Arkansas 6% 64% 48% 48%

Missouri 8% 64% 54% 47%

Oklahoma 8% 8% 26% 38%

Kansas 4% 41% 35% 37%

North Carolina 3% 39% 38% 35%

Illinois 9% 29% 27% 21%

Indiana 12% 30% 23% 21%

United States 6% 21% 20% 25%

Table 4. USDA/NASS wheat condition in percent rated poor or very poor by state through 

the growing season.

State 2007 Winter Wheat Yield Estimate 2006 Yield Change (2007 Minus 2006)

Tennessee 39.0 bushels per acre 64.0 -25.0 bushels per acre

S. Carolina 28.0 bushels per acre 50.0 -22.0 bushels per acre

Arkansas 40.0 bushels per acre 61.0 -21.0 bushels per acre

Kentucky 51.0 bushels per acre 71.0 -20.0 bushels per acre

N. Carolina 39.0 bushels per acre 59.0 -20.0 bushels per acre

Indiana 55.0 bushels per acre 69.0 -14.0 bushels per acre

Missouri 42.0 bushels per acre 54.0 -12.0 bushels per acre

Georgia 38.0 bushels per acre 49.0 -11.0 bushels per acre

Illinois 57.0 bushels per acre 67.0 -10.0 bushels per acre

Table 5. State-level winter wheat yield, 2007 estimate vs. 2006 observed.

2007 Harvested Area 4.155 million acres (11.2% of U.S. total)

2006 Harvested Area 3.758 million acres (12.1% of U.S. total)

Change from Last Year Up 10.6%

2007 Yield Estimate 45.1 bushels/acre

2006 Yield Estimate 61.8 bushels/acre

Change from Last Year Down 27.0%

2007 Production Estimate 187.390 million bu. (12.2% of U.S. total)

2006 Production Estimate 232.145 million bu. (17.9% of U.S. total)

Change from Last Year Down 19.3%

Table 6. Nine-state (KY, TN, NC, SC, AR, IL, MO, IN, & GA) Harvest Area, Yield, and 

Production, 2007 vs. 2006.
11

State 2007 Production 2006 Production Loss

N. Carolina 50 173 123

Missouri 5 53 48

Ohio 55 102 47

Illinois 10 52.5 42.5

Indiana 30 55 25

Georgia 3 13 10

Tennessee 0.1 10 9.9

Kentucky 0.8 6.9 6.1

Iowa 1.8 6.7 4.9

S. Carolina 0.5 3.0 2.5

10 States 156.2 475.1 318.9

Table 8. Apple production and losses (million pounds)

Year

Peach Production (in 1,000 tons)

South Carolina Georgia

2005 75 40

2006 60 41

2007 9 13

Table 7a. South Carolina and Georgia Peach Production (in 000 

tons) by year.

State 2007 Production 2006 Production Loss (Tons)

S. Carolina 9,000 60,000 51,000

Georgia 13,000 41,000 28,000

Illinois 1,000 11,370 10,370

Missouri 15 6,390 6,375

N. Carolina 1,000 5,630 4,630

Arkansas 100 4,200 4,100

Alabama 6,000 9,000 3,000

Virginia 2,100 4,000 1,900

Tennessee 0 1,900 1,900

West Virginia 4,000 5,200 1,200

Kentucky 30 1,100 1,070

11 States 36,245 149,790 113,545

Table 7b. Summarizes peach losses (in tons) of all Southeastern and 

Midwestern states:

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

d. Apples

USDA’s October 12 2007 Crop Production report 

(latest available) provided the latest apple production 

estimates. Substantial freeze losses were reported in ten 

states across the Southeast 

and the Midwest. Table 8 

summarizes apple losses 

in million pounds.

Apples losses in the tenstate area totaled 318.9 

million pounds in 2007, 

representing a 67 percent 

production decline from 

the previous year. These 

ten states accounted for 

4.8 percent of U.S. apple 

production in 2006, but 

just 1.7 percent of the 2007 

production total. Based on 

2006 prices, those 318.9 

million pounds of apples 

lost to the freeze were 

worth about $76 million.

e. Pecans

The October 12 2007 Crop 

Production report (latest 

available) indicated that 

freeze-induced pecan losses 

were confined to Arkansas, 

Kansas, and Missouri. In 

those three states, production fell from 5.3 million pounds in 

2006 to 1.8 million pounds in 2007. 

Missouri suffered the most extensive 

losses, with production plummeting 

99.5 percent from 1.1 million pounds 

to just 5,000 pounds.

f. Other Crops

Table 9 provides a state-by-state 

snapshot of crops rated at least 25 

percent very poor to poor, in large 

part due to the April freeze. Crops 

harmed by the Southeastern drought 

are not included. Numbers were 

culled from the June 10 USDA/NASS 

state agricultural summaries. 

Agricultural impacts were summarized from official 

USDA information, including the Crop Production 

report, Crop Progress summaries, and state reports.
12

State Commodity VP to P

Georgia

Apples 91 percent

Pecans 38 percent

Illinois Red Clover 36 percent

N. Carolina

Peaches 93 percent

Apples 80 percent

Oats 41 percent

Rye 34 percent

S. Carolina Apples 70 percent

Oats 44 percent

Table 9. Crops rated at least 25 Percent Very Poor 

to Poor by USDA/NASS on June 10.

Figure 8. Counties declared disaster areas by the USDA Farm Services 

Agency (FSA) (in black) and counties contiguous (gray). Source: USDA FSA.

State Reports

Dollar losses are conservative estimates based on 

information available to state agricultural specialists at the time, and are subject to change. In some 

cases, these estimates may deviate from USDA 

values due to differing assumptions in making 

the estimates. In general, only direct losses to the 

freeze were included, though it can be difficult 

to determine and separate impacts of the freeze 

when other weather anomalies such as drought and 

flooding, and associated agronomic factors (e.g., 

disease, insects, market factors) have also negatively 

(or in some cases, positively) impacted crops and 

crop prices. Also, losses to the nursery industry are 

not comprehensive and are included only for a few 

states where information was available. Nationally, the 

nursery industry is valued at $150 billion and provides 

2 million jobs, according to Ron Gelvin from the North 

Carolina Association of Nurserymen. 

Table 10 denotes the total estimated loss by state. 

Details for each state follow.

Alabama

Sub-freezing temperatures in Alabama during the week 

of April 4-10 covered the northern and central portions 

of the state resulting in significant damage to fruit 

crops, winter wheat, and corn. Many locations dropped 

down into the mid-20s°F, and a few spots dipped to 

around 20°F. The number 

of hours below freezing 

ranged between 9 and 46 

in north Alabama. Strong 

winds and the duration of 

the freeze hampered crop 

protection efforts in unsheltered areas.

a. Winter Wheat and 

corn

An estimated 50 percent 

of the winter wheat crop 

was lost due to the freeze. 

Assuming a $5 bushel cash 

price and an estimated loss 

of 70,000 acres producing 

30 bu/acre, the yield loss is 

2.1 million bushels which 

Disaster declarations

The USDA declared nearly 1000 counties in 24 states

disaster areas due to freezing temperatures during the 

first part of April (Figure 8). This means that farmers 

in the counties declared, and counties contiguous to 

those, may be eligible for low interest emergency loans 

from the USDA’s Farm Service Agency.

For point of reference at the time of the freeze, severe 

to extreme drought was beginning to develop in eastern 

Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama, northern Georgia 

and the western Carolinas. By mid-autumn, drought 

conditions had spread covering most of the Southeast 

and increased in intensity to exceptional levels.
13

State Losses ($millions)

Alabama 13.4

Arkansas 116

Colorado N/A

Florida N/A

Georgia 400

Illinois 152.4

Indiana 48

Iowa 4

Kansas 66.5

Kentucky 133.5

Mississippi 29

Missouri 400

Nebraska N/A

North Carolina 105

Ohio 115

Oklahoma 350

South Carolina 39.3

Tennessee 50

Virginia N/A

West Virginia 1

Total 2023.1

Table 10. Financial loss estimates for agricultural 

and horticultural crops by state due to the April 

4-10 freeze, in millions of dollars.

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

totals $10.5 million. Around 150,000 acres of corn 

needed replanting. At an estimated cost of $50 per 

acre (could range from $40-100 per acre depending 

on seed cost), corn replanting cost about $750,000. In 

some cases, alternative crops were planted instead of 

replanting corn. To make matters worse, farmers who 

replanted to corn and had no irrigation (vast majority), 

lost their crop to the summer-fall drought. This was 

aggravated by the fact that replanted corn matured later 

in the summer when it was just too hot and dry. Losses 

related to the freeze for the purpose of this report are 

those associated with replanting, and do not include 

these subsequent effects resulting from the combination 

and drought and late planting dates.

b. Horticultural Crops

Losses estimated for horticultural crops were based 

on the 5-yr yield average and the 2006 pricing, and 

are as follows: peaches, 80 percent loss at $6.8 million; 

apples, 95 percent at $760,000; blueberries, 90 percent 

at $520,000; blackberries, 90 percent at $74,000; 

plums, 60% at $48,000; and strawberries, 30 percent 

at $96,000. In addition to these direct yield losses, 

smaller fruit size was noted. Total horticultural losses 

are estimated at $2.178 million. Combined with wheat 

and corn losses, the total agricultural and horticultural 

loss for Alabama resulting from the freeze is estimated 

at $13.4 million.

These assessments of the impacts of the freeze were 

provided by Alabama Cooperative Extension Service 

specialists Paul Mask (wheat), Robert Goodman 

(economist for agronomic crops) and Deacue Fields 

(economist for horticultural crops) and reports from 

the USDA NASS.

Arkansas

Losses were widespread in Arkansas in both agricultural and horticultural crops. 

a. Winter Wheat and Corn

Wheat yields were quite variable, and damage resulted 

based on the wheat stage of growth at the time of the 

freeze. In addition, nearly one-third of the corn crop 

needed to be replanted. Total losses in these crops are 

estimated at around $100 million dollars, assuming a 

cash price of $5 per bushel for wheat. Corn losses were 

estimated at $7 million dollars for replanting. Impacts 

to warm season pastures were also observed, but are 

difficult to quantify.

b. Horticultural Crops

Horticultural crops took a significant hit with about 80% 

of all fruit production wiped out. Apples and peaches 

were a total loss. Other losses include blackberries (75 

percent), grapes (90 percent, including some killed to 

the ground), blueberries (85 percent) and pecans (20-30 

percent overall, most in the north). Strawberries fared 

much better, especially if protected. In addition, the 

freeze has caused total loss of some fruit trees and 

increased disease susceptibility in others. Economic 

losses for these crops are not available.

Approximately half of the early tomato crop was lost 

as was some early sweet corn. Subsequent growth 

delays, due to the cold temperatures combined with the 

freeze damage, resulted in an estimated $8-10 million 

in losses. Total losses in Arkansas are likely to exceed 

$116 million.
14

These assessments of the impacts of the freeze were 

provided by Jason Kelley (wheat and corn), M. Elena 

Garcia (fruit crops), and Craig Anderson (vegetables) 

with the University of Arkansas Extension Service and 

reports from the USDA/NASS.

Colorado

Freeze damage in Colorado was limited to the West 

Slope (western one-third of the state) fruit growing 

regions. An estimated 25 percent of the fruit crop 

was lost (primarily peaches and apples, plus a variety 

of other crops as well), though economic losses were 

somewhat countered by higher produce prices resulting from the limited supply. Growth of wheat on 

the eastern plains had not advanced far enough to be 

susceptible to the freezing temperatures. 

Florida

While spotty areas of freezing temperatures and/or 

frost occurred in the panhandle and northern peninsula of Florida and caused some minor damage to 

vegetables, no significant losses were reported by the 

USDA/NASS.

Georgia

Freezing temperatures during April 6-9 significantly 

affected Georgia agricultural production with total 

production value losses of $257.5 million. Greatest 

values of loss were reported for blueberries, peaches, 

and pecans. The following losses occurred: blueberries $64.9 million, peaches $28.1 million, pecans $26.9 

million, small grains $19.1 million, and livestock 

grasses $47.8 million. The balance of production 

value losses are for vegetables and fruits. Total losses 

for reported commodities are greater than 75 percent 

of normal production value for peaches, blueberries, 

and apples. Losses are greater than 30 percent for 

small grains, tobacco, livestock grasses, and cantaloupes. Freezing temperatures are estimated to have 

contributed to losses ranging from $368.9 million to

$430.4 million. 

This information is from “Georgia Economic Losses 

Due to April 2007 Freeze,” a report by Archie Flanders, John McKissick, and Tommie Shepherd of the 

University of Georgia College of Agricultural and 

Environmental Sciences Center for Agribusiness and 

Economic Development. 

Illinois

In Illinois, March temperatures were 47.5°F, 6.4°F 

above normal and the sixth warmest March since 

statewide records began in 1895. Locations in Illinois 

averaged 9.1 days with temperatures at or above 70°F. 

The highest daily high temperatures for the month 

averaged 80.3°F. March statewide growing degree 

days (base 50°F) were 154, compared to a normal of 

43 – 3.6 times higher than average. As a result, plant 

development was much further along than is typical 

for this time of year. The warmest period was from 

March 21 to April 3 with temperatures 15.6°F above 

normal and the second warmest March 21-April 3 

period since 1900.

The warm temperatures in March and the first three 

days of April were followed by dramatically colder 

temperatures as a very strong cold front brought Arctic 

air into the region. The coldest period was from April 

4-9 with temperatures averaging 

14.0 °F b elow 

normal and the 

second coldest 

April 4-9 period 

since 1900. The 

lowest daily low 

t e m p e r a t u r e s 

for this period 

averaged 20.9°F 

st at ew id e. I n 

general, the lowest low temperatures ranged from 

18-20°F in northern Illinois, 18-22°F in central Illinois, 

and 22-24°F in southern Illinois. The cold temperatures 

were accompanied by windy conditions, causing strong 

vertical and horizontal mixing of the atmosphere. As 

a result, even less-exposed locations suffered damage 

and many traditional methods for protecting against 

freezes did not work. Hourly temperature records 

at the airport in Carbondale, Illinois, in the heart of 

the area most affected by the freeze, indicate that the 

temperature remained at or below 32°F for 47 hours 

between April 4-9, at or below 28°F for 25 hours, and 

at or below 24°F for 3 hours. 

a. Wheat

The June 2007 USDA acreage and yield estimates for 

wheat reflect a 16.5 percent reduction in the acreage of 

harvested wheat with approximately 80 percent of this 

reduction (about 130,000 acres) due to the freeze.
15

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

The June report projected yield at 55 bushels per acre 

in Illinois. Given the excellent weather in 2007 until 

the freeze, yields could have surpassed the record 68 

bu/acre yield in 2006. Assuming the yield would have 

been 70 bu/acre without the freeze, it is estimated 

that Illinois would have harvested 21.25 million more 

bushels than will be harvested at 55 bu/acre. At a cash 

price of $5 per bushel at the end of June, the estimated 

loss due to the freeze would be $106 million. Only when 

final harvest numbers are in can the final impact of the 

freeze be determined.

b. Corn

At the time of the freeze, corn planting in most of the 

state was just starting with less than one percent of 

the acreage planted as of the April 9 crop condition 

report. Some fields in southern Illinois were probably damaged and there was some replanting. Since 

replanting occurred early and there has been generally 

favorable weather, the overall impact of the freeze on 

corn harvest is expected to be minimal.

This assessment of the impacts of the freeze on wheat 

and corn was provided by Emerson Nafziger, Extension 

Agronomist with the University of Illinois UrbanaChampaign.

c. Fruit Crops

While the April freeze severely damaged both peach 

and apple crops, the peach crop was hardest hit. Approximately 80 percent of the peach crop is grown south 

of Interstate I-64 and experienced 100 percent losses 

from this event. The remaining 20 percent is grown in 

Calhoun County where losses were approximately 50 

to 60 percent. Together this resulted in a 90 percent loss 

of the crop. According to the USDA, the 2005 peach 

crop in Illinois was valued at $13.8 million. Ninety 

percent of that equals $12.4 million in losses from the 

April freeze.

The apple crop faired somewhat better. Approximately 

65 percent of the apple crop is grown south of Interstate 

I-64 and experienced 100 percent losses from this 

event. The remaining 35 percent of the apple crop is 

spread out across central and northern Illinois. The 

damage from the April freeze diminished northward. 

Some damage was reported in central Illinois and was 

on the order of 20 percent while none was reported in 

northern Illinois. Taken together, the apple crop loss 

was on the order of 70 percent. According to the USDA, 

the 2005 apple crop in Illinois was valued at $14.3 

million. Seventy percent of that equals $10 million in 

losses from the April freeze.

The combined losses from the peach and apple crop 

equal $22.4 million. While damages in other fruit crops 

are likely, for example strawberries, blueberries, etc., 

the dollar amounts are unknown.

This assessment was based on percentage damage 

estimates provided by Dr. Mosbah Kushad, University 

of Illinois extension specialist in fruit and vegetable 

crops.

d. Forage Crops

According to the USDA, Illinois has 400,000 acres in 

alfalfa and 330,000 acres in other kinds of hay. Media 

reports estimated that the April freeze may have cut 

yields in the first cutting of alfalfa by 30 to 60 percent. 

Using an estimate of a normal yield of 1 ton per acre 

for the first cutting of alfalfa with an estimated value of 

$100 per ton and total acreage of 400,000, a 30 percent 

reduction equals a loss of $12 million while a 60 percent 

reduction equals a loss of $24 million. Losses to the 

remaining hay acreage are unknown at this time.

This assessment was based on media reports with 

alfalfa yields and dollar value per acre from Dr. 

Robert Kallenbach, University of Missouri, as cited 

in the estimates of losses in Missouri compiled by Pat 

Guinan.

On June 7, the USDA granted Illinois Governor Rod 

Blagojevich’s request to designate 55 Illinois counties 

as natural disaster areas. The crops most impacted by 

the freeze were peaches and winter wheat. Total losses 

in Illinois are about $152.4 million.

Indiana

The timing of the cold weather that impacted Indiana 

crops in early April was not in itself unusual. Subfreezing temperatures are expected at this time of year, 

although the intensity of January-like minimums in the 

teens was unusual, even in northern Indiana. 

The significant damage to crops occurred rather 

because of the unusual warmth during the preceding 

weeks in March. Growing degree-day accumulations 

before April arrived were running near 150, about three 

weeks ahead of schedule in most of Indiana. This March 
16

warm period caused an early break from dormancy and 

encouraged advanced plant development. The more 

developed plants were located in southern Indiana, and 

it was this part of the state which suffered the greatest 

damage when the intense April cold arrived.

The early April freeze devastated Indiana fruit crops. 

Damage to wheat, hay, and vegetables was also 

considerable.

a. Fruit

The Indiana peach crop of about 400 acres was 

nearly a total loss. Its value is estimated at $750,000. 

About 70 percent of both grapes and blueberries were 

destroyed by the cold. Indiana has about 400 acres of 

grapes typically valued at $1.5 million and 600 acres 

of blueberries worth $4 million. Around one half of 

the 2,000 acres of apples were impacted. That loss is 

estimated at $3 million. Apricot and sweet cherry trees 

were also hard hit.

b. Wheat

The hard freeze of April 6-8 hurt wheat in far southwest 

Indiana the most. Yield this year is estimated to be only 

half of normal in that region. After the April freeze, 

wheat appeared to be completely flattened by the frost. 

In other areas of Indiana, however, the wheat damage 

does not appear to be widespread. It is isolated to those 

varieties that broke dormancy first or were within low 

areas of the field. Yields are down an average of 12 

bu/acre and 50,000 acres planted were never harvested. 

Compared to 2006 yields adjusted for fewer acres 

planted and a $5 bushel cash price, wheat losses from 

the freeze are estimated at $39.5 million.

c. Hay

Hay is harvested three or four times a year. The largest 

yields are usually taken on the first cutting, and it 

was this growth that suffered large yield declines due 

to the early April freeze. First harvest losses ranged 

from 20 to 70 percent across the state. These losses 

played a part in the current widespread hay shortage 

in Indiana.

d. Vegetables

Above ground parts of plants were generally killed by 

the cold if they were not protected by straw or other 

coverings. In many types of vegetables, roots are able 

to generate new above ground growth and eventually 

produce a yield.

Total estimated losses for Indiana agriculture and 

horticulture are around $48 million.

Iowa

A period of intense cold weather prevailed across Iowa 

from April 3-10, 2007. Overnight low temperatures 

fell well below freezing every night from the 3rd-4th 

through the 7th-8th, with hard freezes persisting across 

northern and western Iowa for two additional nights. 

Relatively few daily record low temperature records 

were set during this period; however, the persistence 

of the cold was unprecedented for this early April time 

period. Daily statewide temperature averages are available for Iowa for the period from 1893 through 2007. 

Temperatures across Iowa for the period April 4-13, 

2007 were the lowest on record during this time period, 

averaging 31.2oF, or 14.6oF below normal, and 2.2oF 

colder than any previous April 4-13 time period.

Official minimum temperatures during this cold spell 

varied from 11oF at Sanborn in northwest Iowa to 21oF 

at the Burlington Airport in southeast Iowa (Figure 

9). These temperatures are well below the thresholds 

required to inflict severe damage to tender vegetation. 

Unfortunately, these extremes were recorded for five 

to seven consecutive nights. Most locations across 

the northern two-thirds of Iowa recorded at least 40 

consecutive hours with temperatures at or below freezing, while the southern third of the state endured 16 to 

20 consecutive hours of freezing weather (Figure 10). 

These long durations of freezing weather were repeated 

two to three times throughout the state during this 

episode. Finally, wind speeds were strong throughout 
17

Figure 10. Consecutive hours with temperatures of 

32°F or lower in Iowa from April 3-10, 2007. Hours of 

freezing temperatures equal to or greater than 30 in 

blue, less than 30 in red. Source: Harry Hillaker, State 

Climatologist, Iowa Dept. of Agriculture and Land 

Stewardship.

Figure 9. Lowest official temperature (°F) in Iowa. 

Source: Harry Hillaker, State Climatologist, Iowa Dept. 

of Agriculture and Land Stewardship.

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

most of this cold period, thus rendering useless all of 

the typical freeze protection measures that depend upon 

light or calm winds to be effective.

Prior to this freeze event, Iowa had endured a variety 

of weather. The second one-half of the winter season 

(January 13 to March 7) had been unusually cold and 

snowy. This period was highlighted by perhaps the 

worst ice storm in Iowa’s history on February 24-25 

across the northeastern one-half of the state, followed 

by a crippling blizzard across northwest Iowa on 

March 1-3. However, this prolonged period of winter 

weather came to an abrupt end during the second week 

of March. Temperatures climbed above normal on 

March 8 and soared to 80oF at Keosauqua by March 

13 (Iowa’s earliest 80oF reading in 7 years). The 

final 11 days of the month each averaged at least 

10oF above normal, culminating in a high of 84oF at 

Sioux City on March 26 (Iowa’s highest temperature 

for so early in the year since 1991). Overnight low 

temperatures were in the lower 60s in some areas, 

with no freezes recorded anywhere in the state from 

March 24 through April 2. The ten day period of 

March 22 to 31 averaged 57.3oF across Iowa, 16.7oF 

above normal. A warmer late March period had only 

been recorded once in Iowa since daily averages 

became available in 1893 (60.6oF in 1910). This very 

mild late March period prompted vegetation to come 

out of dormancy unusually early, and set the stage for 

the severe freeze damage of early April. Without this 

mild March weather, it is likely vegetation would not 

have developed sufficiently to have been damaged 

by the severe cold of early April.

Agronomic and horticultural impacts in Iowa were 

not as significant as Missouri and Kansas since crops 

had not progressed as far as locations further south, 

although 10 counties received a disaster declaration 

from the USDA. Damage was most widespread in 

the central and southern parts of the state. Total 

losses for agriculture and horticulture in Iowa are 

estimated around $4 million. Losses occurred in 

the first cutting of alfalfa, apples, grapes, summer 

raspberries and blackberries, stone fruits (peaches, 

plums, cherries, apricots) and onions. Strawberries 

that remained under mulch avoided damage. Of the 

horticultural crops, apples and grapes suffered the 

most significant impacts according to Dr. Patrick 

O’Malley, Iowa State Extension fruit and vegetable 

specialist, and account for the largest portion of 

monetary losses.

Kansas

Separating the damage caused by the April freeze from 

other weather factors has been something of a challenge 

in Kansas. The freeze was followed by excessive rain 

and flooding in many areas of the state. Here are some 

of the damages in major production areas directly 

attributable to the freeze:

a. Wheat 

Two weeks after the freeze, 26 percent of the crop was 

reported as severely damage; 25 percent of the crop 
18

was estimated as moderately damaged. At harvest, 1.3 

million acres had been abandoned. Conservatively, a 

third of the acres abandoned were due to the freeze 

damage, with the remainder due to flooding and hail 

damage. Total loss in production is estimated at 13 

million bushels. Given an April price point of $5 a 

bushel, this would result in a $65 million loss. In addition, much of the wheat in the affected area had quality 

issues. This presents a problem for the coming year, as 

availability of quality, regionally suitable seed wheat 

is limited. Shifts to less well adapted varieties could 

result in increased disease and/or pest pressure in the 

coming wheat season.

b. Alfalfa

Most of the first cutting was lost to freeze damage. 

Subsequent cuttings were lower in quantity and quality 

compared to average. In addition, approximately 25 

percent of the acreage will either be replanted or shifted 

to other uses.

c. Fruit Production

Almost the entire production of apples, pears, plums, 

cherries and other orchard fruits was lost. Value of 

production lost (based on 2002 numbers) is estimated 

at over $1.5 million.

The total loss in Kansas is estimated at $ 66.5 million, 

not including alfalfa losses. 

Kentucky

The cold weather outbreak of April 4-10, 2007 had a 

devastating impact on Kentucky agricultural concerns, 

both private and commercial. According to weather 

observations archived by the University of Kentucky 

Agricultural Weather Center, 7 weeks of above normal 

temperatures prior to the cold outbreak, with four to 

six days of very rare high temperatures in the 80s°F 

in March created a “biological explosion” of record 

early-spring growth. 

The second part of this agricultural disaster was, in 

fact, the record cold outbreak of April 4-10. Plant and 

crop growth, and even field activity, had advanced to 

a point that was two to four weeks ahead of schedule 

for Kentucky. Fruit trees had advanced to the bloom 

stage. Wheat was advancing, and significant acres of 

corn had already been planted and emerged with the 

growing point above ground. Some damage would have 

occurred with even one day of frosty temperatures, 

but to experience four mornings with record and nearrecord low temperatures in the lower to mid 20s°F, and 

even some locations with temperatures in the teens, was 

well below the normal range for the state.

There is a third part to the agricultural disaster for 

Kentucky – and that is the long-term or residual impact 

to the state, especially, since dry weather conditions 

continued to develop during the spring months after 

a very difficult March and April. And while it is very 

difficult to put specific numbers to freeze-related 

losses, the losses were very real and will create impacts 

for months to follow.

Following are comments, damage, and cost estimates 

from specialists at the University of Kentucky, College 

of Agriculture.

a. Wheat

Estimated losses are about $63 million at this point. 

Those numbers: about 50 percent of the original crop 

has been destroyed and planted to corn or soybeans. 

Probably as much as 70 percent of the original crop will 

not make acceptable yields. The remaining 30 percent 

will average about 50 percent yield. These dollar 

losses are based on wheat grain price, acres intended 

for harvest and anticipated yields prior to the freeze. 

We have not included losses on wheat straw contracts. 

Many producers in Kentucky sell wheat straw for 

horses, houses, and construction.

b. Corn

Estimated losses are about $5 million. We estimate 

that about 100,000 acres of corn was replanted. The 

initial planting cost about $50/acre. The replanting 

cost another $2 million (about $20/acre). Most seed 
19

John Strang, UK College of Agriculture Extension 

Fruit and Vegetable Specialist, investigates blackberry 

freeze damage at the UK Horticulture Research Farm.

 Photo by Aimee Nielson 

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

companies provided a huge discount on replant seed.

This assessment was provided by Dr. Chad Lee, 

University of Kentucky extension specialist in small 

grains.

c. Fruit Trees and Fruit Crops

The University of Kentucky Horticulture Research 

Farm in Lexington, Kentucky recorded five nights in 

a row with temperatures as low as 22°F - much too low 

for the majority of fruit crops to survive. Asian pears 

particularly were hit hard, as were peaches and cherries.

“The freeze killed all the flowers on the Asian pear 

trees, but it also caused some wood damage,” reported 

Dr. John Strang, University of Kentucky extension 

specialist for fruit and vegetables. “We’ve pretty much 

lost all the peaches in the state except for a few select 

areas. The freeze pretty well eliminated stone fruit 

crops.”

Strang said some varieties of raspberries will produce a 

partial or full crop, but most of the blackberry fruit have 

been lost for the year. Strawberry growers will have a 

partial crop. Blueberries also took a significant hit.

Growers still need to maintain the fruit trees, vines, 

and bushes for the remainder of the season. Strang said 

growers may have to make tough decisions about trees 

with partial crops about whether or not the reduced 

crop is going to be worth spraying 15 to 16 times. 

This assessment was provided by Dr. John Strang, 

University of Kentucky extension specialist for fruit 

and vegetables.

For an estimated $20 million fruit tree and fruit crop 

commercial industry, damage estimates are near $16 

million. 

d. Grapes

Extensive damage was observed on grapevines due to 

the above normal temperatures in March followed by 

four nights of damaging low temperatures during the 

Easter weekend. All cultivars, regardless of heritage, 

suffered damage. However, the extent of damage varied 

with vineyard location, cultivar phenology (stage of 

development), species, and the level of canopy management applied by the vineyard owner.

Vineyards in northern Kentucky fared considerably 

better in terms of primary bud damage compared to 

central Kentucky vineyards, as the vines in northern 

Kentucky were not as advanced in phenology and were 

still mostly dormant. Vineyards in western Kentucky 

fared the best mainly due to cultivar heritage, since 

French-American hybrids have the highest cropping 

potential due to fertile secondary and latent buds. 

Vineyards in the central portion of the state, where a 

majority of the acreage is located, suffered the most 

losses, as some vines had as many as four leaves unfolded and shoots longer than eight inches. Across the 

state, the late ripening vinifera varieties were the last to 

break bud, so visual damage to the vines was minimal 

even 2 weeks after the freeze event. However, due to 

the sap flow already in the conductive tissues, damage 

is expected irrespective of cultivars, but especially in 

the cultivars of vinifera. It is still difficult to estimate 

the extent of the damage and crop loss and put a dollar 

figure on it at this point.

Growers are looking at a 50-90 percent crop loss 

depending on what varieties they have,” according to 

Dr. Kaan Kurtural, University of Kentucky College 

of Agriculture viticulturist. “It’s especially disappointing for new growers - ones who got started last 
20

Crop

Acres Yield/A & Price Gross 

return/A

Estimated 

crop value 

($)

Estimated 

crop loss 

(%)

Estimated loss 

from freeze ($)

Apple 1000 400 bu/A @ $20.50/bu $8,200 $8,200,000 90 $7,380,000

Peaches 500 280 bu/A @ $20.00/bu $5,600 $2,800,000 98 $2,744,000

Pears 30 400 bu/A @ $20.00/bu $8,000 $240,000 100 $240,000

Grapes, fruit 400 6.2 T/A @ $.50/lb $6,200 $2,480,000 60 $1,488,000

Grapes, vine 

replacement $512,000

Strawberries 210 8,000 lb @ $1.75/lb $14,000 $2,940,000 50 $1,470,000

Blackberries 110 4,000 qt @ $2.00/qt $8,000 $880,000 90 $792,000

Raspberries 40 4,000 lb/A @ $2.00/lb $8,000 $320,000 0 $0

Blueberries 120 6800 pt@ $1.25=$8,500

1700 pt@ $1.50=$2,550 $11050 $1,326,000 90 $1,193,400

Other Fruit 25 $4,000 $100,000

Total 2,435 $19,286,000 $15,819,400

Table 12. Estimate of Kentucky fruit crop value - 2007.

Crop Projected Crop Loss (%) Projected Crop Loss Range (%)

Apple 90% 60 - 100 %

Pears 100%

Peaches

98% 0 - 100 %(One grower has a crop on 

2 peach varieties)

Plums 100%

Cherries 100%

Pawpaws 100%

Grapes 60% 0 - 100%

Blackberries 90%

Raspberries 0%

Blueberries 90% Varies by variety and area of state

Stawberries (matted row) 50% 25 - 75%

Pecans 85%*West end of state hurt more

Hickories 60%

Black Walnuts *Depends on if variety was leafed out

Persian Walnuts 100% There is serious wood injury

Chestnuts *

Table 11. Projected fruit and nut crop losses from the Easter freeze.

* It is still very difficult to assess damage on some crops, because of variety differences, flower buds 

that are not visible yet and wood injury, growth vigor, and pollination effectiveness that are not readily 

assessable at this time.
21

UK Viticulturalist Kaan Kurtural checks grape 

vines at the UK Horticulture Research Farm 

after the 2007 Easter Freeze. He believes it may 

have wiped out 50 to 90 percent of Kentucky’s 

grape crop.

 Photo by Aimee Nielson

Some buds on grape 

vines may appear alive 

now, but fail later this 

summer.

Photo by Aimee Nielson

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

year. They are looking at a 

year’s loss in growth and 

hence bringing them into 

productivity later than they 

would’ve expected.”

“If they had been dormant, 

they would have been cold 

hardy down to 10°F,” he 

stressed. “Unfortunately, 

buds that were pushing out 

were only hardy down to 

24°F and those that had three 

to four leaves were only 

hardy down to 28°F. The 

freeze killed about 50 percent of the buds and shoots 

the first night and the temperatures kept consistently 

going down.” 

According to Dr. Kurtural, it 

is still hard to put a value on the crop at this point, but 

conservatively he estimated just the crop loss at around 

$2 million for growers, including replants.

The grape crop had a 60% projected crop loss and a 

projected loss range of 1-100%.

This assessment was provided by Dr. S. Kaan Kurtural, University of Kentucky extension viticulturist.

e. Tobacco

No significant impact, according to Dr. Gary Palmer, 

UK Tobacco Extension Specialist.

f. Forages and Pastures

Based on county reports, overall grass hay fields or 

grass/legume stands are producing 50 percent of normal 

crops, mainly due to freeze impact, but also due to dry 

conditions. Well managed stands (good fertility) are 

closer to 60 to 65 percent of normal, with “catch crop” 

stands (no management) producing 35 to 40 percent of 

normal. For most producers, the spring harvest on grass 

stands makes up the majority of the yield, so these 

reductions are significant. In the long term, the freeze 

does not seem to have affected grass stand persistence. 

Subsequent growth has been limited by dry conditions. 

Alfalfa stands vary widely. Growth at the time of the 

freeze was up to 20 inches in the western part of the 

state and about 8 inches in the northeastern part of the 

state. All topgrowth was frozen back. Some producers 

in the west cut this wilted topgrowth to make a partial 

hay or silage crop. In short, though, spring alfalfa 

yields are down. There was some stand thinning in 

some cases. Other stands show weakened regrowth. 

The final impact has yet to be determined. For the most 

part, though, alfalfa stands are recovering and should 

return to normal summer production with adequate 

moisture.
22

“Conservative estimates of the impact of the abnormal 

spring weather on the state’s hay production is $45 

million. Damage from the early April freeze was severe, 

but yield reductions, especially for grass stands, were 

exacerbated by below normal rainfall throughout most 

of the state,” according to Drs. Ray Smith and Garry 

Lacefield, University of Kentucky Extension Forage 

Specialists.

This assessment was provided by Drs. Ray Smith and 

Garry Lacefield, University of Kentucky extension 

forage specialists.

g. Livestock, including Goats

In addition to wheat damage, the freezing temperatures 

also limited the amount of forage available for the first 

cutting in hayfields and for grazing. This left many livestock producers searching for an alternative feedstuff 

for their animals. Cost of this impact is unknown.

There has been a high death loss in goat kids due to 

unseasonable cold weather during normal kidding 

periods, February and March. Goats are bred to kid 

later in the year to avoid cold weather kidding. This 

year many farmers were not prepared for the weather 

conditions. I would estimate a 12-15 percent loss due to 

cold weather alone. Cost: $500,000 according to Terry 

Hutchen, Extension Goat Specialist.

Total impact to Kentucky agriculture: $133.5 million.

Mississippi

Impacts of the April 2007 freeze event were both more 

damaging and, at the same time, less damaging as a 

result of unusual climate factors preceding the event. 

The first factor was the abnormally warm March 

temperatures. Statewide, March temperatures were a 

little over 5°F above normal. In the northern part of 

the state, where the freeze event was most pronounced, 

March temperatures averaged almost 7.5°F above normal. The second factor was that the statewide average 

rainfall for March was only a little over 1.5 inches, far 

below normal and the driest March on record in many 

places in the state. As a result, plant development was 

somewhat different than would be typical for this time 

of year, and freeze damage was consequently highly 

variable. For example, winter wheat was about two 

weeks ahead of schedule phenologically, and early 

heading stages are extremely sensitive to freezing 

temperatures, so wheat suffered significant damage. However, fruit was also ahead of schedule 

and was past the growth period during which 

freezing temperatures are most damaging (March 

15-April 1 in Mississippi), so fruit escaped freeze 

damage.

The coldest period was from April 7-8 with 

temperatures averaging as much as 22.0°F below 

normal. Freezing temperatures were reported 

during this three-day period in about the northern 

one-third of the state. The lowest low temperature 

was 22°F at Iuka in the northeast corner of the 

state and Sardis Dam in the north central part of 

the state. Hourly temperature records indicate that the 

temperature remained at or below 32°F between April 

7-8 for 12 hours at Tupelo, 6 hours at Memphis (representative of the northwest corner of the state), two hours 

at Greenville, and 11 hours at Columbus. No freezing 

temperatures were recorded for any length of time at or 

south of Jackson in the central part of the state.

a. Wheat

Before the freeze event, the wheat crop was forecast to 

be one of the best in recent history with 350,000 acres 

planted and record yield potentials of 65-70 bu/acre. 

Freeze injury occurred primarily north of a line from 

Clarksdale to Columbus (Figure 11). Damage in the 

freeze area varied substantially with yield reduction 

ranging from 10-100 percent depending upon wheat 

stage of development at the time of the freeze. Wheat 

yields in the freeze area ranged from 0-85 bu/acre, but 

averaged about 45 bu/acre, so average wheat yield loss 

was about 40 percent. Some growers chose to abandon 

heavily damaged wheat and benefited from earlier 

planted soybeans on the same fields.
23

Figure 12. Minimum temperatures in Missouri for 

April 4-9, 2007. Source: Pat Guinan, State Climatologist, University of Missouri Columbia.

Figure 11. Lowest temperature and freeze damage axis 

(black) in Mississippi. Source: USDA Mississippi Agricultural 

Statistics Service.

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

b. Corn

Mississippi growers planted about 980,000 in corn 

in 2007, nearly 95 percent of which had been planted 

at the time of the freeze. Injury was most significant 

in the same zone as for wheat (Figure 11). Since the 

growing point of the plant was protected below the soil 

surface at that point in the crop’s development, most 

plants recovered from the freeze. About 15-20 percent 

of the corn acreage was replanted statewide due to the 

late freeze. Since replanting occurred early, the overall 

impact of the freeze on corn harvest was minimal, with 

no loss documented as a result of the freeze.

This assessment of the impacts of the freeze on wheat 

and corn was provided by Dr. Erick Larson, Grain 

Crops Agronomist with Mississippi State University.

c. Fruit Crops

Damage to blueberries during the late freeze event was 

actually beneficial. Freeze damage thinned the bushes 

somewhat, allowing for larger berries on the remainder 

of the plants. No economic loss was reported. Tomatoes 

and watermelons, grown mainly in the southern part of 

the state did not suffer freeze damage, but production 

and yield was slowed by the cold temperatures that did 

penetrate to the southern parts of the state during the 

freeze event.

This assessment was based on percentage damage 

estimates provided by Dr. David Nagel, Extension 

Professor, Plant and Soil Sciences, Mississippi State 

University.

Wheat yield potential in Mississippi given the acreage 

planted and estimates above tallies 22,750,000 bu. 

USDA/NASS estimated a statewide yield of 18,480,000 

in 2007 with some acreage not harvested. The difference of 4,270,000 bushels at $5 bu would tally an 

estimated loss of $21.3 million. Around 960,000 acres 

of corn was planted in Mississippi according to the 

USDA NASS. If 20% needed to be replanted at an 

estimated cost of $40/acre, that would total around $7.7 

million. Thus total losses for Mississippi are estimated 

at $29 million.

Missouri

The record cold spell that affected all of Missouri 

during April 4-9, 2007 was nothing short of incredible and disastrous. The average temperature for the 

six-day period was 16-19°F below normal statewide. 

A major weather pattern shift in the form of an Arctic 

cold front swept through the state on April 3 and sent 

temperatures tumbling to record low levels for most 

locations, especially over Easter weekend (April 7-8). 

During Easter weekend, temperatures plummeted to 

the mid- and upper teens over much of the state, shattering previous records. Some locations experienced 

their latest spring date where the mercury dipped below 

20°F. For example, on Easter morning, Joplin, Missouri 

dropped to 19°F and tied their all time record low for 

the month of April. Figures 12 and 13, respectively, 

show the minimum temperatures that occurred statewide during this cold wave and the number of hours 

Columbia, Missouri was below freezing throughout 

the event. 
24

Figure 14. Temperature departure from normal for Columbia, MO for 

the period March 21-April 9, 2007. Source: Pat Guinan, State Climatologist, University of Missouri Columbia.

Figure 13. Average hourly temperatures and critical values at Columbia, 

Missouri for April 4-9, 2007. Source: Pat Guinan, State Climatologist, University of Missouri Columbia.

What made the situation more troubling was the 

unusual warm spell prior to the cold wave. Using 

Columbia as a midpoint for the state, Figure 14 shows 

the unprecedented nature of this event when the third 

warmest March 21-April 3 period on record abruptly 

transitioned to the coldest April 4-April 9 period on 

record. The average temperatures during the two week 

period of March 21-April 3 were 14-16°F above normal 

across Missouri and quickly spurred vegetative growth. 

This set the stage for a major disaster to sensitive 

vegetation as record cold temperatures, which had been 

bottled up in northern Canada 

and Alaska for weeks, poured 

southward and encompassed 

the eastern half of the United 

States. 

Another harsh ingredient of 

the freeze event was the wind 

associated with it. Strong winds 

persisted throughout the coldest period and prevented any 

successful effort of mitigating 

freeze effects. For 39 consecutive hours, beginning 5 a.m., 

April 6 through 7 p.m. April 7, 

the average 10 ft. hourly wind 

speeds at Columbia ranged 

from 10-16 mph with gusts approaching 30 mph. During this 

time, the temperature remained 

at or below 32°F for 34 hours.

Unfortunately, the impacts for Missouri were widespread. It was an economic burden for agricultural 

producers and commercial interests, not to mention the 

freeze damage homeowners experienced in their yards 

and gardens. Cost estimates and impacts on agricultural 

and horticultural interests for Missouri are discussed 

in this report, and, are not all encompassing by any 

means. According to preliminary cost estimates from 

various agricultural and horticultural experts, the losses 

incurred from the April freeze exceed $400 million 

in Missouri. This estimate does 

not include supplementary losses 

experienced by small nurseries, 

retail garden centers, farmers markets, homeowners, etc. The Easter 

Freeze of 2007 will go down as an 

historical and memorable event for 

many, with lingering effects that 

will last indefinitely.

a. Fruit and Nut Crops

The fruit and nut crop industry 

was hit especially hard by the 

April freeze event. Many fruit 

and nut varieties were in bloom 

at the time of the freeze and particularly vulnerable to freezing 

temperatures. According to Dr. 

Michele Warmund, University of 
25

Apples (90% loss)

4,000 acres X 250 bushels/acre = 1,000,000 X $12/bushel = $12,000,000

10% survival = $10,800,000 loss

Peaches (100% loss)

2,500 acres X 250 bushels/acre = 625,000 bushels X $12/

bushel

= $7,500,000

0% survival = $7,500,000 loss

Blueberry (95% loss)

75 acres X 10,000 pounds/acre = 750,000 lbs. X $1.50/lb = $1,125,000

5% survival = $1,068,750 loss

Blackberry (95% loss)

100 acres X 6,800 pounds/acre = 680,000 lbs. X $1.50/lb = $1,020,000

%5 survival = $969,000 loss

Strawberry (100% loss)

100 acres X 9.500 pounds/acre = 950,000 lbs. X $1.50/lb = $1,425,000

0% survival = $1,425,000 loss

Pecan (80% loss)

9.000 acres X 400 pounds/acre = 3,600,000 lbs. X $1.30/lb = $4,680,000

20% survival = $3,744,000 loss

Total Loss: = $25,506,750

Table 13. Freeze-related losses and value by crop.

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

Missouri Professor of Horticulture who specializes in 

fruit crops, “The only other freeze that had a greater 

impact was the Armistice Day Freeze of 1940 when 

whole fruit trees were lost due to the rapid drop in 

temperatures in autumn. I would say that this year was 

the most devastating spring freeze on both trees and 

small fruits.” Table 13 gives Dr. Warmund’s economic 

assessment of damage incurred on various commercial 

fruit and nut crops grown in Missouri.

b. Grapes

According to Dr. Keith Striegler, Director of the Institute for Continental Climate Viticulture and Enology at 

the University of Missouri, the freeze damage incurred 

by grapes in Missouri was unprecedented. The total 

bearing vineyard acreage for Missouri is approximately 

1,300 acres, and 50-60 percent of the grapes were lost. 

Southern Missouri vineyards took the biggest hit and, 

with the exception of only a few varieties, the grape 

crop was wiped out. Plant damage to some grape varieties in southern Missouri will result in yield reductions 

for next year’s crop. The average annual value of the 

grape crop in Missouri is approximately $4,000,000, 

and this year’s 50-60 percent crop loss translates to 

about a $2,000,000 economic loss. These figures are 

reported as farm gate value – additional losses through 

reduced value-added opportunities and irreplaceable 

fruit will likely be incurred.

c. Forage Crops 

Dr. Robert Kallenbach, Associate Professor and State 

Forage Extension Specialist at the University of Missouri, expressed that it is difficult to accurately assess 

damages for forage crops, but he was willing to give 

an estimate. According to Dr. Kallenbach, “There are 

just under 500,000 acres of alfalfa in Missouri and 

nearly everyone lost a significant portion of the first 

crop, especially in northern and central Missouri. If 

we assumed a 1 ton per acre yield loss (which is fairly 

conservative) and the hay would be valued at $100 

per ton (also conservative), then losses are about $50 

million.”

Dr. Kallenbach also stated: “As for cool-season grasses, 

which comprise over 10 million acres in Missouri, I 

would estimate a 25 percent annual yield loss. Most of 

this forage is pasture for beef cattle, so it is hard to give 

it an exact value. However, if we estimate a half-ton per 

acre loss and value the forage at $50 per ton, then the 

losses would be in the range of $250 million.”

d. Winter Wheat

Gene Danekas, Director of the Missouri Agricultural 

Statistics Service, provided the following synopsis on 

the winter wheat crop in Missouri.
26

Figure 15. Counties in the Missouri Bootheel. Source:

Pat Guinan, State Climatologist, University of Missouri 

Columbia.

“Based on our figures released on June 29, 2007, there 

were 1,050,000 acres of wheat planted with 850,000 

acres for harvest as grain. Due to the extended wet 

weather after the freeze, many producers that may have 

chose to abandon the wheat for another crop were prevented from entering the fields for an extended period, 

during which time the wheat seemed to recover better 

than earlier anticipated. Due to the freeze, there were 

about 100,000 acres more abandoned than normal over 

the past five years. Also, our June 1 yield forecast is 42 

bushels/acre, 11 bushels below the previous five year 

average. Assuming all this effect were due to the frost 

(some may have been due to the early May flooding, 

but not much), I would calculate the following:

“100,000 acres lost at 53 bushels/acre = 5.30 million 

bushels from lost acres

850,000 acres at 11 bushels/acre loss = 9.35 million 

bushels below normal

Total bushel potential loss = 14.65 million bushels

“A June 28, 2007 mid-Missouri cash price of approximately $5.10 per bushel equals a $74.72 million loss to 

potential farm gate wheat sales.”

Additionally, Ann Ulmer, an economist with the 

University of Missouri’s Commercial Agriculture 

Program, issued the following statements in a 2007 

winter wheat condition report for Missouri that was 

updated on June 29, 2007:

“The March Acreage Intentions for 2007 report 

released by the USDA/NASS estimated 1.05 million 

acres of wheat planted. Based on the number of acres 

planted, a historical (2000-2006) harvest rate of 89 

percent of acres planted and an average yield of 53 

bushels per acre, Missouri would expect to harvest 49.4 

million bushels of wheat. The June 29 Crop Release 

(USDA, NASS) estimated that 850,000 acres of wheat 

will be harvested. Assuming a production yield of 45 

bushels per acre, 38.3 million bushels of wheat will be 

harvested. At $5.50 per bushel Kansas City cash price, 

this 11.1 million bushel difference equates to an income 

decrease of over $61 million to Missouri producers.” 

e. Corn

On April 17, 2007 the Governor of Missouri requested 

Damage Assessment Reports from all 114 Missouri 

counties due to the freeze. According to these reports, 

the Bootheel region of southeastern Missouri was most 

affected by the April freeze, and thousands of acres of 

corn had to be replanted which resulted in significant 

economic losses. Costs associated with seed, fuel, 

labor, lower quality seed than original selections and 

less yield potential all contributed to the loss. Corn 

losses were also reported in some southwestern and 

central Missouri counties.

According to Greg Pfeffer, an agronomist with Pioneer, 

the following estimate was given for St. Genevieve 

county and every county south of there that raises corn 

in southeastern Missouri (Figure 15):

90% of the corn was planted (ca. 500,000 acres) 

60-75% of this planted corn was up (ca. 300,000-

375,000 acres)

2/3 of that which was up was replanted (200,000-

250,000 acres)

The County Emergency Board damage assessment 

report from Mississippi County stated there was 
27

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

an estimated 25 to 35 dollars per acre in expenses 

only for replanting. Using a $30 per acre replanting 

expense, and the 200,000 to 250,000 acres estimate 

for replanting in southeastern Missouri, translates to 

$6-7.5 million that was spent only for replanting in 

southeastern Missouri.

f. Landscape

Dr. Chris Starbuck, a University of Missouri Associate 

Professor in Plant Sciences, wrote an article in May on 

the freeze injury to landscape plants in Missouri, and 

the following are excerpts from his report: 

“Damage to landscape plants from the Easter freeze 

of ‘07 has become increasingly evident with the return 

of more normal temperatures. Many trees, shrubs and 

herbaceous landscape plants were in full bloom, with 

extensive, succulent leaf and stem growth when the 

temperature dropped to the mid- or lower 20s over 

much of the state. Since flowers and new shoots have 

little cold tolerance, 

most plants exhibited 

brown petals and foliage. Fruit growers 

around the state have 

reported partial or total 

crop loss. While some 

species, such as river 

birch and redbud, sent 

forth new shoots to fairly quickly replace those 

killed by the freeze, 

other species were only 

just beginning to show 

signs of recovery in the last week of April. For many 

plants, it may be months before the extent of the damage 

can be accurately assessed. In some cases, there may 

have been severe damage to the bark or to the vascular 

connections to buds and stems. This may result in 

a gradual dieback of stems or even death of entire 

plants of relatively cold sensitive species like Japanese 

maple and butterfly bush. In some cases, plants that 

appear to be recovering may collapse 

with the first heat 

because of vascular 

damage. Stem damage may also lead to 

increased incidence 

of canker-causing 

diseases like fire 

blight and anthracnose. Given that the Easter freeze 

of 2007 is unprecedented, it is hard to predict the extent 

of damage it has inflicted on landscape plants.” 

Two large commercial nurseries in Missouri were 

adversely affected by the April freeze and the following 

estimates were gathered from each of the nursery stock 

producers:

100,000 3-gallon nursery stock containers valued at 

$9.50 each translates to $950,000 loss

500,000 tree seedlings at 0.30 each amounts to a 

$150,000 loss

A variety of seeds were lost at an estimated $250,000

Total loss: $1,350,000

The other nursery stock producer reported a loss of 

37,519 trees x $8/tree = $300,152. Most of these trees 

were sweet cherry cultivars.

Other producers were obviously affected, including 

additional nurseries, retail garden centers, and farmers markets in Missouri. Homeowners with gardens 

and vulnerable trees, flowers, and shrubs were also 

affected by the freeze. The magnitude of the hard 

freeze is nothing short of amazing, considering all 114 

counties in Missouri were affected. When including 

all the economic impacts of this event on agriculture 

and horticulture, and the far reaching impacts on 

communities as a whole, the April freeze will likely 

rank as one of the costliest natural disasters on record 

for Missouri.

More detailed comments from University of Missouri 

Extension Agronomists across the state are in Appendix 

C. These comments were gathered during the latter half 

of June when more information was available in regard 

to the damaging effects of the freeze on vegetation.

Nebraska

a. Wheat

Early assessments of the impacts of the freeze on the 

wheat crop were estimated at less than 5 percent of 

the total kill; that is, enough damage was done that the 

producer tilled the field and replanted it with another 

production crop (corn in most instances). There is 

considerable debate as to whether a majority of these 

fields would have come back enough to provide 

harvestable yields. As a result of the price of corn and 

the time of year, these producers decided not to wait 
28

so that they could collect insurance and purchase corn 

seed from a supply stock that was exceptionally tight. 

The uniqueness of this event was the following period 

of very moist conditions that invaded much of the 

Central Plains. The wheat crop was not far enough 

along to cause significant damage to the crowns of 

individual plants, thus allowing for secondary tillers 

to form and fill in the fields. Unfortunately, the wet 

conditions promoted several diseases, the worst being 

rust. Yield results on this year’s crop show a wide 

range, with most fields between 20 and 60 bu/acre. The 

most popular variety fared the worst in terms of yield 

and look the brunt of the rust infestation. During the 

past two years, it has been the number one yielding 

variety averaging 60 plus bu/acre, with a few locations 

approaching 100 bu/acre. 

In terms of monetary losses, it is difficult to estimate 

due to a number of factors. With the problems in 

Kansas and Oklahoma adding over $2.50 per bushel 

to the price of wheat, as well as the ongoing problems 

to wheat crops across the globe, marketing of this 

year’s crop could be very lucrative, and producers 

will sit on some of their yield for awhile. Total 

projected income from this year’s crop is not yet 

available and will not probably be released until late 

this fall. Initial projections are that average statewide 

yields could drop slightly, but the yield decline will 

be more than offset by the price increase. However, there is going to be a large disparity between 

individual producers (some with returns of over 

$360 per acre, others in the $120-150 range [insurance may make up for some of the yield decline]). 

b. Alfalfa

Alfalfa was hit the worst. The initial estimate is a 

30 percent production decline across the southern 

one-third of the state. Like wheat, the crop grew out 

of the freeze, but the leaf matter was contained at the 

top of the canopy with nothing underneath. Moisture 

also contributed to significant blight problems. Lower 

quality, resulting from a very high ratio of stems to leaf 

matter coupled with low protein content, is not what one 

wants if one is a milk producer. Since first cutting has 

the biggest yield of the cuttings, there is concern that 

there may not be enough high quality feed as we enter 

the winter season. Replacement cost for feed stock may 

become excessive during the second half of the winter. 

Across northeastern Nebraska, alfalfa yield reductions were averaging less that 15 percent, with 

quality rated as average. The physical distance 

of 150 plus miles from southern Nebraska meant 

that the crop was just breaking dormancy and was 

not affected to the extent of southern Nebraska. 

c. Landscape

The most significant losses in urban areas were to 

Japanese Maples and a few non-native tree species. 

This year is a prime example of why people need 

to be cautious about using the newly revamped 

growing zone maps. They are now based on the 

1990 period to present, but offer nothing in the way 

of determining freeze variability. It is true that 

trees that can safely grow in warmer zones may be 

suited to a more northward placement (temporary or 

permanent yet to be debated) according to the latest 

zone maps. However, they are ill suited to handle 

the hard cold snaps that can occur all the way into 

the first part of May across the northern and central 

Plains, and this year was just a reminder of that fact. 

North Carolina

A very strong cold front moved through North Carolina 

on April 4, 2007 leading to several nights of unseasonably low temperatures over Easter weekend and 

causing widespread damage to crops in North Carolina. 

The N.C. Department of Agriculture and Consumer 

Services and other agencies are working to determine 

the extent of the losses. Current estimates put crop 

losses at $105 million (Table 14). The estimates could 

change as farmers and agriculture officials continue 

to assess damage.
29

Commodity Acres Affected Total $ Lost

Corn 243,867 $15,196,127

Wheat 275,454 $13,262,897

Pasture 71,360 $303,391

Oats 10,951 $560,465

Rye 6,720 $347,520

Barley 24,770 $1,154,054

Tobacco 230 $584,022

Hay 38,487 $1,019,726

Irish Potatoes 10,048 $1,555,204

Fruit & Vegetables 21,250 $31,180,220

Crop Total 703,137 $65,163,626

Nursery 20,064 $40,069,700

Crop Grand Total 723,201 $105,233,326

North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Agricultural Statistics Division

Sum of counties or commodities may not add to state total due to rounding.

100 counties reporting (Preliminary Data)

Table 14. Summary of freeze-related losses in North Carolina.

Figure 16. Departure from normal of minimum temperatures during the Easter 

freeze period (April 5-11, 2007) in North Carolina. The cool colors and negative values 

show how the minimum temperature for the entire state was below normal during 

this period. Source: Mark Brooks, State Climate Office of North Carolina.

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

Figure 16 displays the departure from normal of 

minimum temperatures during the Easter freeze period 

(April 5-11, 2007). The cool colors and negative values 

show how the minimum temperature for the entire 

state was below normal during this period. Figure 17 

depicts the lowest observed minimum temperature for 

that same time period.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has designated 

47 North Carolina counties as disaster areas because 

of the Easter weekend freeze. 

The USDA also included 

46 contiguous counties as 

part of the designation for 

assistance. Figures 18 and 19 

denote the acreage affected 

and the monetary losses by 

county, respectively.

Ohio

The freeze of April 4-10, 

2007 had a significant effect 

on agricultural productivity 

in Ohio. The impact of the 

freeze, however, is closely 

linked to a preceding extreme warm spell that took 

place during March and 

early April. Other climatic 

events having some effect on the net impact 

of the freeze include 

the unusual winter of 

2006-2007 and a moderate summer drought 

that dominated through 

the core of the growing season. Regarding 

the preceding winter, 

December 2006 was 

the sixth warmest on 

record in Ohio (of 113 

Decembers since 1895), 

and January was the 

seventeenth warmest 

since 1895. The following month, however, 

was the fourth coldest 

February on record. 

March 2007 returned 

to the ways of the early 

winter and was the 15th 

warmest such month on record. The core of the warm 

period was March 22-28 when high temperatures 

remained in the upper 70s and low 80s°F around 

the state. Overnight low temperatures remained 

uncomfortably high in the upper 50s to low 60s in the 

central and southern parts of Ohio. Perhaps significant 

is the fact that the northernmost portions of the state 

experienced winter-like air temperatures in the upper 

30s and low 40s°F on the morning of the 25th, thus re-
30

Figure 18. North Carolina acres, per county, affected by the Easter 2007 freeze. 

Source: Mark Brooks, State Climate Office of North Carolina.

Figure 17. Lowest minimum temperature during the Easter freeze period (April 5-11, 2007) in 

North Carolina. Source: Mark Brooks, State Climate Office of North Carolina.

high temperature on the 

7th was 35oF and the 

overnight low was 24oF, 

and overnight minima 

were below freezing 

each night from April 

5-10. The same applied 

at Cincinnati where 

temperatures were below freezing from April 

4-10, with a minimum of 

23oF on the 6th. These 

minimum temperatures 

are at, or near, record 

lows. Thus, while it is 

somewhat unusual for 

these cold conditions 

to exist in early April, 

it is the combination 

of the preceding warm 

spell with the hard freeze that set the stage for the 

agricultural damage in the state.

A brief overview of agricultural damage from the freeze 

and earlier weather events is given below. Outside of 

the forage estimates (below), extension specialists 

indicated that it would be very difficult to provide dollar 

estimates of crop losses due to the freeze. Estimates 

will be made in autumn, after harvests, and they will 

be made in conjunction with the designation on June 7, 

straining any early greening. Daytime maxima in the 

north were generally in the mid-70s°F at the peak of 

the mild weather.

The warm March weather was followed by a hard freeze 

lasting seven days from April 4-10. Air temperatures 

stayed below freezing for four days in northern Ohio 

(April 5-8), and as far south as Columbus, the air stayed 

at or below freezing for nearly 40 hours around the coldest day (April 7). In far southern Ohio at Piketon, the 
31

Figure 19. North Carolina dollars, per county, in crop losses because of the 2007 Easter 

weekend freeze. Source: Mark Brooks, State Climate Office of North Carolina.

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

2007, of all 88 Ohio counties as natural disaster areas 

due to losses caused by frost and freeze conditions 

in April. The designation permits the distribution of 

low-interest emergency loans from the Farm Service 

Agency.

a. Forage (Alfalfa Hay and Grass Hay)

Alfalfa was strongly frosted back in the southern part 

of Ohio, and this delayed the first alfalfa harvest by 

a minimum of two weeks. In the northern part of the 

state, alfalfa had been slower to leave dormancy and 

only the tips were injured. Frost damage disappeared 

rather quickly, and the first harvest was delayed by 

only a few days (less than a week). By mid-August 

it is expected that a reduction of at least 35 percent 

is expected in alfalfa production from normal and a 

reduction of 21 percent in grass hay. Prices of grass 

hay have nearly doubled from last year ($103 vs. $55 

per ton) while those of alfalfa have risen to $160 per 

ton from $126 per ton. Given current year prices and 

total acreage, the losses for both alfalfa and grass hay 

are expected to be around $130 million in Ohio. Additionally, pastured cropland losses may total as much 

as $81 million at 2007 prices. While some of the total 

$211 million in forage losses are due to the April freeze, 

it is difficult to separate those losses from that which 

additionally occurred due to the very dry summer.

b. Tree Fruit

Apples in the northern one-third of Ohio were 

largely unaffected by the freeze, as trees were largely 

in dormancy and/or 

blossoms were little 

damaged. In the southern two-thirds of the 

state, apple growers 

suffered major loses 

or had no crop at all. 

Damage to the Ohio 

peach crop was highly 

variable depending on 

the particular microclimate of the orchard. 

Sites in northern Ohio 

are known to have 

survived the freeze. 

USDA estimates of 

apple loss in Ohio are 

$16.3 million.

c. Nursery Fruit

Damage to nursery fruits was highly variable in Ohio, 

often governed by the microclimate of the nursery 

itself. Matted row strawberries appeared to be little 

affected by the freeze, and conditions just preceding 

harvest in late spring (dryness) may have been more 

important. Farmers involved in investment-heavy 

strawberry plasticulture appear to have suffered greater 

investment losses, perhaps as much as 60 percent of 

crops in the southern part of the state. Ohio has less 

than 200 acres of blueberry crop, about 30 percent of 

which was lost in southern Ohio, while the north was 

largely dormant at the time of the freeze.

Bramble damage was also variable. Blackberries 

were largely lost in southern Ohio, while the crop was 

50-70 percent of normal in the north. The summer red 

raspberry crop is expected to be 60 percent of normal, 

while fall red raspberries have been unaffected by the 

freeze, although the continuing drought may be an 

issue with these crops. Black raspberry damage was 

sufficient enough that southern Ohio may only get a 50 

percent of normal crop, while the northern part of the 

state will suffer far less damage. Part of the problem 

with the berries is that the winter was not cold enough 

or long enough to harden the berry bushes.

Given the points discussed, a total estimate due to 

the freeze in Ohio is cautiously estimated at $115 

million, or roughly half of the total losses estimated 

this season.
32

Figure 21. Number of hours below 24°F between April 5-12, 2007 in Oklahoma. Source:

Oklahoma Climatological Survey.

Information for this report has been provided by Marc 

Sulc, Ohio State University Forage Extension Specialist; Diane Miller, Ohio State University Extension Fruit 

Specialist; Matthew Kleinhenz, Horticulture/Crop 

Scientist, Ohio State University; Shawn Wright, Horticulturalist, Ohio State University; and Rick Borland, 

Ohio Farm Service Agency.

Oklahoma

The northeastern part of Oklahoma was the hardest hit 

by the freezing temperatures in early April, although 

freezing temperatures occurred at least briefly over 

all but the south central part of the state. Figures 20 

and 21 depict the number of hours below 32°F and 

24°F, respectively, which was sufficiently cold to 

cause significant damage to winter wheat and various 

horticultural crops, and minor damage to pastures and 

early planted corn.

Impacts to the wheat crop varied from total losses in the 

northeast, some loss in the central part of the state, and 

above normal yields in the southwest and panhandle. 

In addition, heavy rain caused some lodging and additional losses not related to the freeze. Thus, impacts 

are difficult to ascribe reliably solely to the freeze. It 

is estimated that one-half of the potential wheat yield 

in Oklahoma was not realized, which is around 70 

million bushels. Assuming a $5 per bushel cash price, 

this would value wheat losses at $350 million.

The pecan crop was nearly a total loss in the north 

and northeast, and 60 percent of the grape crop was 

lost. There were minor losses to peaches. Some sweet 

corn and early beans needed to be replanted, but 

losses to vegetable crops were minor overall. Overall, 

horticulture losses in dollar value are dwarfed by the 

winter wheat losses; thus the Oklahoma estimate of 

$350 million is a reasonable estimate overall.

These assessments of the impacts of the freeze were 

provided by Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service 

specialists Jeff Edwards (wheat), Eric Stafne (fruits 

and nuts), Lynn Brandenberger (vegetables), and 

reports from the USDA/NASS.

South Carolina

A cold air outbreak on April 6-10, 2007 set numerous low temperature records. Temperatures dipped 

well below freezing 

on the morning of 

April 8 (Figure 22). 

C olu m bi a Me t r o 

Airport measured 

26°F, and temperatures remained below 

freezing in Columbia 

for eight hours. The 

lowest temperature 

in the state was 17°F, 

recorded by an NWS 

cooperative observer 

in Pelion. The primary impact was to 

the state’s peach orchards, which had set 

early blooms due to 

warmer than normal 

temperatures experienced in March. The 

April freeze event 

negatively affected the apple and winter wheat crops. 

As a result, the USDA designated 41 of 46 counties 

primary natural disaster areas.

a. Fruit Crops

South Carolina is the nation’s second largest peach 

grower. The April freeze devastated South Carolina’s 

peach crop. 2007 production was down 79 percent (only 

18,000 pounds harvested) from 2006’s 100,000,000 

pound harvest worth $37,474,000. Using 2006 harvest 
33

Figure 22. Analysis of observed minimum temperatures for April 8, 2007 in South 

Carolina. Source: Mark Malsick, South Carolina State Climatology Office.

Figure 20. Number of hours below 32°F between April 5-12, 2007 in Oklahoma. 

Source: Oklahoma Climatological Survey.

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

prices, the April freeze event cost the South Carolina 

peach growers over $29 million, not including the cost 

of trees killed by the freeze.

South Carolina’s 2007 apple harvest was only estimated 

to be 500,000 pounds, down about 80-90 percent compared to 2006 and previous years’ harvests. The 2006 

harvest was 2,400,000 pounds valued at $374,000, 

which would imply a loss of $300,000 this year.

b. Winter Wheat

Winter wheat yields were 

down 39 percent from the 

2006 harvest, or nearly 2 

million bushels, even though 

more acres were planted and 

harvested for 2007 than 

2006. Two million bushels, 

assuming a cash price of 

$5/bushel, would total a $10 

million loss.

Thus the total agricultural 

and horticultural related 

losses in South Carolina 

would be $39.3 million.

Tennessee

Freezing temperatures resulted in a total loss of fruits 

and vegetables in some 

areas, and significant 

losses nearly everywhere 

else. Approximately 

one-third of the wheat 

crop was destroyed or 

damaged to some extent 

in what one agricultural 

specialist described as 

the worst spring freeze 

he had ever seen. 

Winter wheat in south 

Tennessee was totally 

wiped out while some 

grain was harvestable in 

other parts of the state. 

The early planted and 

early maturing varieties, 

which had developed the 

most at the time of the 

freeze, suffered the greatest losses. Early planted corn 

was also wiped out by the freeze. Around 200,000 acres 

of corn was replanted at about $50 acre, which tallies 

at $10 million. Losses for winter wheat are estimated 

at $30 million using a $5/bushel price.
34

Information for this state was provided by USDA/NASS 

and Virginia Cooperative Extension Service reports.

West Virginia

Temperatures in West Virginia in the two weeks prior 

to the April freeze averaged around 10-16°F above normal, helping some crops break dormancy. In contrast, 

temperatures during the two weeks of cold weather 

associated with the freeze averaged between 6 and 11°F 

below normal. Minimum temperatures in the mid teens 

to lower 20s°F were widespread across the state.

Initial reports indicated damage was widespread across 

the state particularly, affecting fruit crops, especially 

the early developing varieties. The degree of damage 

varied depended on the particular crop and microclimate. In the hardest hit areas, there was significant fruit 

loss of peaches and cherries, and substantial damage 

to the apple crop. Peach losses are estimated at around 

$0.7 million, assuming 1200 tons lost at $578/ton. 

Given the additional crops affected, total losses in West 

Virginia are estimated at around $1 million.

Information for this state was provided by USDA/NASS 

reports.

NWS Service Assessment

Climate Prediction Center 

Products 

The 8-14-day forecast issued March 27, 2007 underforecast the amplitude of the 500mb pattern (Figure 22, 

top left). This resulted in only the northern quarter of 

the U.S. forecast to have below-normal temperatures, 

and called for above normal temperatures in the South 

(Figure 23 top center).

Figure 24 shows the 6-10 day forecast made March 29 

(top row, 500mb heights, temperature anomaly, and 

precipitation anomaly), and the corresponding verifying data in the bottom row. This was the first CPC 

extended-range forecast to correctly capture the upper 

air height and surface temperature patterns associated 

with the April 4-10 cold wave.

Figure 25 depicts the U.S. Hazards Assessment also 

issued 30 March, 2007, three days before the Arctic 

air started spilling into the U.S. It largely echoes the 

Stone fruits (peaches, cherries, plums, apricots) and 

blueberries suffered total losses. Other losses include 

apples, 80 percent; grapes, 70 percent; and strawberries, 25 percent. This totals ~$13 million, not including 

the loss of trees/vines and next year’s production. In 

addition, nursery peach tree growers lost 75 percent 

of their trees estimated at ~$7 million.

For vegetables, only minor impacts to early sweet corn 

and tomatoes were noted.

Total agricultural and horticultural losses for Tennessee are $50 million.

These assessments of the impacts of the freeze 

were provided by Tennessee Cooperative Extension 

Service specialists Chris Main (wheat), Angela 

Thompson (corn), Dave Lockwood (fruits and nuts, 

Annette Wszelaki (vegetables), and reports from the 

USDA/NASS.

Virginia

Temperature anomalies in Virginia ranged from 6-

12°F above normal the two weeks prior to the freeze 

and from 5-10°F below normal during the freeze. 

Most areas experienced minimum temperatures in 

the 20s°F. The unusually warm weather prior to the 

freeze advanced development of some crops, making 

them more susceptible to the freeze. Both advective 

and radiational freezes occurred, and for several nights 

made freeze protection efforts difficult.

a. Forages and Small Grains

In general, these crops were slightly affected by the 

freeze, but impacts, especially in the forages, were 

complicated by subsequent dry weather that limited 

regrowth and recovery.

b. Fruit Crops

Fruit crops suffered variable losses depending on the 

location in the state and crop stage of development. 

Regional reports suggested losses as follows: Asian 

pears, 80-100 percent; grapes, 25 percent; apples and 

peaches, ~90 percent; strawberries and blueberries, 

50-60 percent; and unspecified losses to cherries. For 

grapes, more freeze injury occurred in the central and 

south than in the north. Mesoscale differences in topography and siting also affected resultant damage.
35

6-10 day forecast made the same day and calls attention 

to the possibility of a freeze. This was the first U.S. 

Hazards Assessment to warn of a freeze.

National Digital Forecast Database 

Verification

A cursory review of temperature forecasts from 

the National Digital Forecast Database (NDFD) is 

presented. However, this aspect of the assessment is 

one that deserves more attention than can be afforded 

here. Specifically, a more thorough review of temperature verification statistics and temperature forecast 

techniques is recommended.

Figure 23. 8-14 day forecast issued 27 March 2007 and verifying data. Top row from right to left – forecast 

500mb heights, forecast surface temperature probabilities (B=below normal, A=above normal), and forecast precipitation probabilities (B=below normal, A=above normal); bottom row – observed 500mb height 

anomalies and surface temperature (°F) and precipitation anomalies (mm)for the 7-day period April 4-10. 

Source: CPC.

Figure 26 (a-c) depict the NDFD (top) and the Global 

Forecast System gridded MOS (bottom) mean absolute 

error of the 12UTC temperature forecast issued 6 days 

(a), 3 days (b), and 1 day (c) before the peak of the cold 

event on April 7, 2007. Forecasts were verified against 

the Real-time Mesoscale Analysis produced at the 

National Center for Environmental Prediction (NCEP). 

Forecasts colder than those verified are indicated by 

the cool colors (blue-violet), and forecasts verifying 

warmer are indicated by the warm colors (yellow-red). 

Forecasts within 1 or 2°F are indicated by the white 

areas.

The Easter Freeze of April 2007
36

Figure 24. 6-10 day forecast issued 30 March 2007 and verifying data. Top row from right to left – forecast 

500mb heights, forecast surface temperature probabilities (B=below normal, A=above normal), and forecast precipitation probabilities (B=below normal, A=above normal); bottom row – observed 500mb height 

anomalies and surface temperature (°F) and precipitation anomalies (mm)for the 7-day period April 4-10. 

Source: CPC.

Some general trends can be noted from these figures. 

First, excluding the Great Lakes region, both MOS and 

NDFD forecasts showed a significant warm bias over 

the eastern two-thirds of the nation on Day 6. By Day 

3, this bias had been reduced substantially, though it 

appears the MOS overforecast the cold compared to 

NDFD from Oklahoma eastward through the Ohio 

River Valley. Finally on Day 1, forecast NDFD error 

was minimized over much of the region (excluding a 

cold bias along the edge of the cold air mass from the 

Southern Plains to the Gulf Coast). MOS error was 

relatively more significant in the heart of the cold air 

mass from Iowa southeast into the western Ohio River 

Valley. 

Although CPC outlooks indicated the change to cold 

weather and freeze threat over the eastern part of the 

U.S. in their products issued March 29 and 30, this 

information did not translate into NDFD forecasts at 

the longer time ranges (Day 6), probably because the 

extent and magnitude of the cold was not forecast by 

the Hydrometeorological Prediction Center (HPC) or 

MOS. These products are used as forecast guidance 

by NWS Warning and Forecast Offices (WFOs) in 

preparing NDFD forecasts for days 4-7.

Central Region WFO Products

Twenty-one Central Region WFOs completed a survey 

to assess the type and quality of products and services 

provided prior to and during the freeze event, and to 

help determine Best Practice recommendations for 

providing a higher level of support in future freeze 

events. The offices surveyed are shown in Figure 27, 

and a copy of the survey questions is in Appendix D.
37

Figure 25. U.S. Hazards Assessment issued 30 March 2007. The freeze threat was noted 

for the northern and central Plains, the Midwest, much of the East Coast, and parts of the 

Southeast. Source: CPC.

Two-thirds of the offices surveyed mentioned the 

freeze threat in their Hazardous Weather Outlook 

(HWO) prior to the event, up to as much as 5 days in 

advance (Figure 28a). Offices that did not mention the 

threat may have thought freezing temperatures would 

not have any impacts given the time of year, as crops 

are typically not yet at a growth stage susceptible to 

freezing temperatures. Indeed, this freeze occurred 

well before the average last freeze date (i.e., typical 

beginning of the growing season), especially in the 

northernmost offices. But as noted earlier, unusually warm March temperatures allowed crops to start 

developing quite early and thus become susceptible to 

freezing temperatures. Of the offices surveyed that did 

not mention the threat in their HWO, all were in the 

northern part of the survey area. 

Nearly all (86 percent) of the offices mentioned the 

freeze threat in their Area Forecast Discussion (AFD) 

prior to the event, and the majority did so at least three 

days prior to the onset of freezing temperatures (Figure 

28b). The AFD is aimed toward a more technical audience where it is easier to discuss forecast uncertainties 

compared to the HWO, perhaps a reason why more 

offices mentioned the threat in their AFD than the 

HWO.

About half (52 percent) of the offices surveyed issued 

a Freeze Warning prior to the event. Average lead time 

was 18 hours, and the Warnings verified for nearly 

every area issued. Again, the half of the offices that did 

not issue Freeze Warnings (48 percent) likely did not do 

so because they did not perceive a potential impact in 

their area. In some cases, this assumption was incorrect 

as the abnormally warm March temperatures allowed 

crop development to advance well ahead of what is 

typically expected in early April, thus making the crops 

vulnerable to freezing temperatures. Of the 10 offices 

that did not issue a freeze warning, 4 reported damage 

from the freeze.

One of the challenges faced by forecasters was the 

number of consecutive days of freezing temperatures. 

Typically when a threat is possible longer in the 

future (about 36 hours or so), a Watch is issued (e.g., 

with Winter Storms). However, that has not been past 

The Easter Freeze of April 2007
38

Figure 26 (a-c) depicts the NDFD (left) and the Global Forecast System gridded MOS (right) mean absolute 

error of the 12 UTC temperature forecast issued 6 days (a), 3 days (b), and 1-day (c) before the peak of the 

cold event on April 7, 2007. Forecasts colder than those verified are indicated by the cool colors (blue-violet), 

and forecasts verifying warmer than forecasted temperatures are indicated by the warm colors (yellow-red). 

Forecasts within 1 or 2°F are indicated by the white areas. 

Two survey questions focused on products and procedures that proved particularly useful or hindered efforts 

to provide high quality service. 

1) Procedures that worked well:

practice in WFOs for freeze events, even though NWS 

policy permits such a product. This was complicated by 

the forecasters’ high degree of confidence that Warning 

conditions would occur a couple of days in advance. 

Thus, only 13 percent of the offices surveyed issued a 

Freeze Watch for this event.
39

Figure 28. Number of days prior to and per cent of offices mentioning a freeze threat in their (a) Hazardous 

Weather Outlook and (b) Area Forecast Discussion. Source: NWS Central Region.

a) b)

Figure 27. NWS Central Region WFOs (in blue) who participated in the survey of products and 

services for the April 3-10 freeze event. Source: NWS Central Region.

The Easter Freeze of April 2007

•	 The HWO and AFD provided useful lead time

regarding the freeze threat, up to several days in 

advance. Special Weather Statements were also used 

in some cases.

•	 Freeze Warnings, where issued, provided significant

lead time prior to the onset of freezing temperatures.

•	 Web stories/headlines and Top News of the Day

provided “front page” coverage for our Internet users.

•	 Use of media interviews to highlight the forthcoming threat increased visibility.

•	 Coordination by a few offices with state agencies

regarding the status of agricultural and horticultural 

crops which documented the susceptibility to freezing temperatures supported forecaster decisions to 

issue Freeze Warnings.

•	 Internal WFO preparedness on freeze products and

procedures, which were determined via customer 

input prior to the event, led to staff issuing the ap-
40

propriate products at the appropriate times in line 

with customer needs.

•	 High-resolution NDFD grids(2.5km) allowed a more

realistic presentation of cold temperatures in areas 

of complex terrain.

2) Opportunities for improvement:

•	 Lack of knowledge regarding crop status and susceptibility to freeze damage – too much reliance 

on calendar freeze dates vs. what is going on in the 

current growing season.

•	 Collaboration: (1) the challenge faced by attempting

to forecast an extreme event in the day 4-7 timeframe of the forecast and forecasters’ tendencies 

to avoid doing so; (2) issues related to overreliance 

on calendar dates to determine freeze threat lead to 

reluctance to issue Freeze Warnings.

•	 Confusion regarding the use of specific products,

i.e., the role of the Special Weather Statement vs. the 

HWO and Freeze Warnings; and the use of Freeze 

Watch when the threat is very likely to occur more 

than 36 hours later. Policy guidance issued midevent regarding Watches by Central Region further 

confused the issue as some offices followed the 

guidance and others did not.

•	 CPC outlooks provided slightly more than one week

advance notice of the change to colder weather in the 

eastern U.S. and the potential for a freeze. Unfortunately, this information did not transition into Day 

6 and 7 forecasts produced by HPC and WFOs.

Summary and 

Recommendations

Overall services provided by NWS Central Region 

offices during this extreme event were quite good. 

Information flow was excellent, with widespread and 

generally early use of the HWO, AFD, web page, and 

support from media partners all used to spread the word 

about the freeze. These were all common practices at 

the offices surveyed. 

As with any event, there are lessons learned which 

if applied routinely in future events, can increase the 

quality of service as well as facilitate collaboration.

These are:

1) Issuance of Freeze Warnings should be based on 

potential impacts to agriculture, horticulture, nurseries, 

and home gardens rather than calendar dates. Variable 

climatic conditions from year to year result in the 

freeze threat not necessarily occurring at the same 

time every fall and spring. This was acutely evident 

in this event. 

2) Develop and utilize ties with University Extension 

Service specialists, state climatologists, USDA Farm 

Service Agencies, and other partners to: (1) determine 

when freezing temperatures are a threat; and (2) to 

gather quality, detailed post-event impact information for regional reports and event documentation 

(e.g., StormData). A person in each office could be 

designated as an agricultural focal point to address 

points 1) and 2).

3) To insure consistency amongst offices, some policy 

issues need to be clarified. Specifically, the use of 

the Freeze Watch should be clarified, particularly for 

events such as this when the event is highly likely to 

occur more than 36 hours in advance.

4) Use of the SPS and HWO to convey essentially 

the same information should be addressed, as use of 

both these products seems redundant and potentially 

confusing to customers.

5) Efforts should be made to translate CPC mediumrange forecast skill into NDFD Day 6 and 7 forecasts; 

e.g., the new Hazard grids.

6) Additional efforts to review temperature verification 

statistics and forecast methodologies, such as the use 

of standardized anomalies charts and GIS-based verification, may lead to ways of improving the technical 

aspects of the forecast quality of this extreme event. 

There is an opportunity for future research to review 

this topic in more detail than could be addressed in 

this report.
41

State Minimum Station Name Minimum

Alabama BELLE MINA 2 N 20

Arkansas LEAD HILL 12

Connecticut NORFOLK 2 SW 17

Delaware GREENWOOD 2NE 27

Florida GLEN ST MARY 1 W 30

Georgia MINERAL BLUFF #2 17

Georgia MOUNTAIN CITY 2 SW 17

Illinois JACKSONVILLE 2E 16

Indiana MADISON SEWAGE PLANT 10

Iowa SANBORN 11

Kansas BURR OAK 1N 12

Kansas HILL CITY 1E 12

Kentucky DIX DAM 12

Louisiana CLINTON 5 SE 29

Maine CLAYTON LAKE 6

Maryland OAKLAND 1 SE 17

Massachusetts WORTHINGTON 14

Michigan HERMAN -11

Minnesota EMBARRASS -8

Mississippi IUKA 22

Mississippi SARDIS DAM 22

Missouri MARYVILLE 2 E 12

Nebraska ARTHUR 7

Nebraska BARTLETT 4S 7

Nebraska HERSHEY 5 SSE 7

Nebraska VALENTINE MILLER FIELD 7

New Hampshire MOUNT WASHINGTON -2

New Jersey SUSSEX 2 NE 20

New York GLENS FALLS FARM 4

North Carolina MT MITCHELL 1

North Dakota BELCOURT KEYA RADIO 1

North Dakota VELVA 3 NE 1

Ohio CIRCLEVILLE 13

Oklahoma UPPER SPAVINAW PORT 19

Pennsylvania COUDERSPORT 7SE 10

Rhode Island NORTH FOSTER 1 E 21

South Carolina CAESARS HEAD 17

South Carolina LAKE CITY 2 SE 17

South Carolina PELION 4 NW 17

South Dakota MEDICINE MOUNTAIN -9

Tennessee MT LECONTE 1

Texas DELL CITY 5SSW 20

Texas MOUNT LOCKE 20

Vermont MOUNT MANSFIELD 8

Virginia BURKES GARDEN 14

West Virginia SNOWSHOE 6

Wisconsin HURLEY -2

Lowest Temperature Measured in the State From April 5-10, 2007

APPENDIX A
42

APPENDIX B

State 

Minimum

CD1 CD2 CD3 CD4 CD5 CD6 CD7 CD8 CD9 CD10 Overall

Alabama 20 22 22 24 24 28 30 37 20

Arkansas 12 16 22 19 23 24 24 26 28 12

Connecticut 17 22 22 17

Delaware 28 27 27

Florida 31 30 40 35 41 43 54 30

Georgia 21 17 17 26 24 26 29 25 22 17

Illinois 17 19 17 17 20 16 20 18 20 16

Indiana 15 19 18 21 20 21 21 22 10 10

Iowa 11 13 13 12 13 15 13 14 15 11

Kansas 12 12 14 17 14 16 17 19 18 12

Kentucky 17 14 12 15 12

Louisiana 32 33 35 32 34 29 35 36 39 29

Maine 6 15 20 6

Maryland 20 30 27 21 29 22 19 17 17

Massachusetts 14 18 21 14

Michigan -11 -2 6 5 14 15 15 12 17 11 -11

Minnesota 0 0 -8 4 2 0 2 10 13 -8

Mississippi 27 22 22 30 27 25 34 32 28 34 22

Missouri 12 16 17 14 13 25 12

Nebraska 8 7 11 8 12 7 11 11 7

New Hampshire -2 10 -2

New Jersey 20 23 31 20

New York 14 10 12 23 4 15 17 14 10 15 4

North Carolina 1 7 21 19 21 14 21 24 1

North Dakota 3 1 5 3 3 4 4 3 2 1

Ohio 17 16 18 15 13 18 17 18 20 19 13

Oklahoma 20 22 19 25 24 20 29 31 21 19

Pennsylvania 12 24 21 22 17 13 15 15 15 10 10

Rhode Island 21 21

South Carolina 17 20 21 17 19 17 24 17

South Dakota 5 2 1 -9 4 4 6 7 8 -9

Tennessee 1 15 16 19 1

Texas 21 25 28 23 20 25 30 35 24 35 20

Vermont 8 10 13 8

Virginia 17 20 18 22 16 14 14

West Virginia 16 16 19 6 17 20 6

Wisconsin 2 -2 8 12 5 14 11 16 18 -2

Lowest Temperature Measured Within the Climate Division (CD) From April 5-10, 2007
43

APPENDIX C

Detailed comments from University of Missouri Extension 

Agronomists

Alix Carpenter, Northeast Region

	 •	 80 percent loss of cherries

	 •	 100 percent loss of apricots

	 •	 25 percent loss of cool season grasses

	 •	 30-35 percent loss of alfalfa

Wheat was not as severely affected by the freeze in northeast Missouri (Lewis, Marion, Monroe, Ralls, and Pike 

counties); I’d estimate damage in the 10-20 percent range. We have had several areas which experienced loss, but 

from conditions not related to the freeze (primarily grub feeding). No corn had been planted at the time of the 

freeze, resulting in no damage to report.

Todd Lorenz, Central Region

In addition to first cutting alfalfa, first cutting red clover was also a total loss. Red clover mixed in cool season 

grasses (typically fescue) was partially protected by the grass, but was still set back substantially.

Matt Herring, East Central Region

Data about crop losses in Franklin County have been limited and without a lot of scientific merit. Farmers have told 

me they have harvested 40-70 bushels/acre wheat which is a normal range for the county. I believe that if the wheat 

didn’t look good by the first part of May that it was harvested for hay or simply destroyed and planted to either corn 

or soybean. I think the freeze had an important impact on early planted wheat, probably taking 50-70 percent of the 

yield in these fields. There were a few hundred acres of corn emerged during the freeze and I understand most of 

that was replanted. I doubt that affected yield as they were able to replant in a fairly timely fashion. Forages were 

negatively impacted. First cutting of alfalfa was reduced by 75-80 percent due to the freeze and an early cutting.

Most of the alfalfa has recovered nicely. Cool season grass and grass/clover hay yields have been reduced by 0-50 

percent - there seems to be a lot of variability in these losses. I have wondered how much yields may be reduced 

this year simply because fertilizer prices were high and farmers may have cut back to save money.

Richard Hoorman, East Central Region

Some farmers destroyed wheat and went to corn. Many did not due to weather issues and stage of growth concerns 

about getting a good kill. This information colors the wheat yields I have been hearing about. Most wheat is 

averaging around the upper 20 lbs/bu. I hear a lot that around 30 is the most common with a wide range of test 

weights. A few people are reporting low 50’s with good test weight >58 lb/bu. Due to the price, I’ve heard that 

folks are OK with the yields.

Hay tonnage is down. Most common is hay, yielding only 70 percent of normal. There have been a few reports of 

50 percent of normal. Most hay was not put up at the premium stage of growth due to wet weather and planting of 

full season beans. However, reports are that the “color” was good even if the fescue was flowering. It seems that 

more forage acreage is being hayed due to concerns over availability of forage later this year.Many comment that 

all of previous years’ hay has been depleted, and that there are no reserves.

Damaged alfalfa that was clipped and sprayed in a timely fashion recovered nicely. Fields not clipped had a mixed 

response to the freeze damage. I had reports of slow recovery, weeds, and even evidential crown deaths. I suspect 

from accumulation of pest pressures. Damaged fields were planted with corn.
44

Pat Miller, Southwest Region

	 •	 Pecans are damaged at least 90 percent from what Bill Reid at KSU tells me.

	 •	 First wheat cut I heard made 25 bu. with test weight of 51 lbs/bu. Hay yields are 50 percent. Pas

tures look bad.

	 •	 First cutting alfalfa was gone. Leaf disease because all the rain got the regrowth.

	 •	 We lost all the corn that was up - maybe 10 percent. A lot of the other corn got planted late because

of the rain. We had a lot of spots where crops were drowned out, and some of that was replanted.

Ted Fry, South Central Region

•	 70 percent loss each of grapes, blueberries, blackberries.

	 •	 90 percent loss of strawberries as some were protected.

	 •	 25 percent loss cool season grasses and fescue seed.

	 •	 My cool season veggies except for onions and peas are doing fine.

	 •	 Wheat that had higher doses of nitrogen resulted in greater losses (a normally good practice that back

 fired).

	 •	 Losses also incurred for oak mast production for wildlife, walnut and pecan harvest, and injury to woody 

 ornamentals.

Mike Milam, Southeast Region

For wheat, I have seen yields mostly in the 40-60 bushel range. Last year, SE Missouri averaged 61 bushels. The 

guy who made 60 bushels made 100 in the same field last year. We lost about 50 acres of watermelons which were 

grown on plastic. The grower had to scrounge around to find enough plants to make up the shortfall. We also had 

damage done to pecan trees with most not producing nuts this year.

Anthony Ohmes, Southeast Region

Wheat 3 year average has been around 65 bushel in Mississippi County. Reports from various folks indicate to me 

the average will be around 40-45 bushels... later planted wheat faired much more than early planted. By early, I 

mean October wheat which is the ideal window in most years. Fortunately for this county, we did not experience as 

much cold (we dropped down for two days to 26) as other areas and our wheat was not as far ahead as further south 

as well.

Corn was planted 7 to 14 days earlier than normal with planting starting in mid-March rather than late March. Any 

corn planted prior to March 27 (28) had to be replanted or should have been replanted. Many sandy loam acres 

are typically planted starting around this time but typically come up more slowly and into progressively warmer 

weather, rather than coming up in 4-5 days and then experiencing a ground freeze.

All fruit was damaged... peaches gone... lost some trees, both ornamental and production.

Jeff House, Southeast Region

Wheat

	 •	 Have verified as low as 18 to as high as 66 bu/acre wheat yields. 

	 •	 Solid average should be in the 45-50 bushel range, yields off 20 - 30 bushels/A consistently. The 66

bushel verification field has produced 100 bu/acre wheat before.

	 •	 Late planted fared better than early; sandy soil seemed to do better.

	 •	 Didn't see a lot of stalk freeze damage, but it was there in some fields.
45

Corn

As previously stated, we were 80-85 percent done with corn when the freeze hit. Anything planted before March 

29-30 being a total loss, which amounts to about 70-80 percent of acres planted before the freeze. I don’t have an 

acre figure; let’s just say it was a lot.

Alfalfa

What little alfalfa we have has perked back up after a first/second cuttings. The growers that cut it IMMEDIATELY 

after the freeze had the best re-growth. Don’t think we lost any in New Madrid County but some was definitely 

thinned. 

Pecan

The pecan trees put out new leaves and several went ahead and flowered, but I have not looked at any for small nuts. 

Some trees were REALLY slow about getting new growth.

Hay

Finally got into some hay this weekend, and looks like yields are down from at least 30 percent to as much as 70 

percent.

Gerald Bryan, Southeast Region

Wheat yields from damaged fields have been 15 to 40 bu. The 15 bu. was from a late planted field that looked 

OK--no seedhead damage, but lower stem damaged. The adjoining field was a different variety, planted at the same 

time (late) and yielded 40. Kernels are small with many small heads. Hay yields are 33-50 percent lower than average. Pastures are still short and never recovered. Alfalfa that was clipped or baled to remove damaged top growth 

recovered and made good second cutting.
46

APPENDIX D

WFO products and services survey for the freeze event of 

April 3-10, 2007

This survey is designed to gather information from each WFO regarding aspects of service provided prior to and 

during the freeze event of April 3-10, 2007. Early estimates indicate this event may lead to over a billion dollars in 

losses due to the freezing temperatures. Your participation is part of a multi-agency assessment of the impact of, 

and services provided for, this event. Your response by June 7 is most appreciated.

1. How many days prior to the first occurrence of freezing temperatures was this threat mentioned in the Hazardous 

Weather Outlook? in the Area Forecast Discussion?

2. If your office issued freeze warnings or advisories, what are the POD, FAR, and lead time for the warnings/

advisories issued prior to and during the event? If your office did not issue freeze warnings (e.g., too early in the 

season), please note that here. Did your office utilize a Freeze Watch? (Yes/No)

3. What procedures worked particularly well for providing service during this event? This may include items such 

as forecast/grid techniques or procedures to dissemination methods such as a web story, press release, direct contact 

to stakeholders, etc.

4. What issues, if any, did you face that hampered efforts to provide service during this event?

5. What reports of damage/impacts have you received from your CWA?

6. Is there anything else you wish to add about the event?

PHOTOGRAPHY CREDITS

Cover Page/Table of Contents Collage/page 27, leaf damage:

Grant Goodge, STG, Inc., Asheville, North Carolina

Page 19:

John Strang, UK College of Agriculture Extension Fruit and Vegetable Specialist, investigates 

blackberry freeze damage at the UK Horticulture Research Farm: Aimee Nielson

Page 21: 

UK Viticulturalist Kaan Kurtural checks grape vines at the UK Horticulture Research Farm after

 the 2007 Easter Freeze: Aimee Nielson

Buds on grape vines: Aimee Nielson 
47
48