U.S. Grain and Soybean Exports to Mexico—A Modal 

Share Transportation Analysis 

By Delmy L. Salin 

April 2008 

Summary 

Information on transportation systems and patterns of trade is important to 

U.S. grain exporters. Due to its geographic location, Mexico’s market is 

unique and can be served by overland truck and rail as well as maritime 

transportation. An analysis of the transportation of U.S. grain exports by 

mode provides information about changes in competitiveness and relative 

efficiencies among the modes. This report analyzes the current U.S.–Mexico 

grain and soybean trade patterns, followed by a description of modal shares 

for corn, sorghum, wheat, and soybeans. 

In the last 5 years, transportation of the commodities considered in this 

study (corn, sorghum, wheat, and soybeans) has shifted from maritime to 

overland. Rail is the major overland transportation mode for all grains but 

sorghum. Sorghum is shipped by truck because of the proximity of the 

production areas in Texas’ Rio Grande Valley to the border. Shippers 

(defined as producers and exporters for the purpose of this analysis) along 

the border have the advantage of proximity unless there are no local 

railroads available within about 350 miles, when they must ship by truck. 

Trucking dominates freight shipments on hauls of fewer than 300 miles. 

Recent data indicate that the average length of grain haul on Class I railroads 

is more than 900 miles—reaching 980 miles in 2005. Shippers located in 

Corpus Christi, TX, and Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico, are captive shippers. 

The distance to the border town of Laredo from either Corpus Christi or 

Monterrey is approximately the same—141 miles. The lack of rail service in 

the border region could lead to a concentration of regional transportation 

demand, causing shippers to consolidate their operations in joint shipments. 

Consolidation would give them more bargaining power with the Class I 

railroads, which find less profitability in short-haul service. The impact of 

railroad consolidation in the border area deserves further investigation. 

1
Introduction 

 

Transportation costs comprise 20 to 45 percent of the landed cost of shipping 

U.S. grain and oilseeds to Mexico, making information on the transportation 

system and patterns of trade of vital interest to grain exporters. Due to its 

geographic location, Mexico’s market is unique in that it is served both 

overland—by truck and rail—and by ship. Overland transportation has several 

advantages over maritime shipping: 

• The grain does not require transfer upon entry into the country, so there 

is less damage than to grain shipped by vessel. 

• Smaller lot sizes allow more specialized purchasing, with less variation in 

shipment quality. 

• Inventory costs are lower because smaller lots are purchased more 

frequently. 

• Supplies for some commodities are less costly because of improved 

access.1

 

Analysis reveals changes in competitiveness and in relative efficiencies 

among the modes.2

 This report analyzes the current U.S.–Mexico grain and 

soybean trade patterns, including a description of the modal share for corn, 

sorghum, wheat, and soybeans. 

Grain Transportation Conundrum 

Shippers along the border, in both countries, have the obvious advantage of 

their proximity to Mexico. However, this proximity results in fewer 

transportation services, making the physical advantage an economic 

disadvantage in areas without short-line or regional railroad3 services. 

Captive shippers4 in these areas are forced to ship by truck. Shippers located 

in Corpus Christi, TX, and Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico, are captive 

shippers. Both Corpus Christi and Monterrey are about 141 miles from the 

border town of Laredo. 

Under optimal conditions, railroads can be 6 times more energy efficient than 

trucks, and barges about 8 times more efficient.5 A gallon of fuel can carry a 

ton of grain 70 miles by truck, 420 miles by rail, and 530 miles by barge. In 

 

1

 Klindworth and Martinsen, 1995. 

2

 Marathon, VanWechel, and Vachal, 2006. 

3

 Local railroads operate less than 350 miles of track and regional railroads operate with at least 350 route 

miles (AAR, 2006). 

4

 Captive shippers are shippers located in areas lacking competitive rail services, that is, no service or only 

one railroad. 

5

 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2007. 

2
addition, it is more efficient at the border to clear a train hauling 10,000 tons 

of grain than a truck carrying 20–30 tons. 

The lack of rail service in the border regions could lead to some degree of 

concentration in the regional transportation demand. Shippers might 

cooperate in joint shipments to put together unit or shuttle trains and gain 

more bargaining power with the Class I railroads,6 which find less profitability 

in local short-haul service. Railroads would rather ship shuttle7

 trains to 

Mexico than either single cars or unit trains with at least 52 cars. Trucks 

compete with rail for shipments between 300 and 600 miles (USDA 1998). 

However, according to the Association of American Railroads (AAR), since 

2003 Class I railroads’ average length of grain haul is more than 900 miles,8

so shippers in areas below the average haul lengths are often limited to truck 

shipping. Trucks are the mode of choice when freight shipments weigh less 

than 50,000 pounds and travel fewer than 300 miles.9

 

Class I railroads serving the border region are Union Pacific Railroad (UP), 

Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF), and Kansas City Southern (KCS) on 

the United States side, and Ferrocarril Mexicano (FERROMEX) and KCS de 

Mexico on the Mexican side. Consolidating shipments would make it 

economically feasible to build shuttle train facilities. Shippers in that region 

could consolidate enough cargo to fill two or three shuttle trains per week. 

Shippers in the border areas are aware of this. In Mexico, grain importers in 

this area are consolidating imports of agricultural inputs, grains, and other 

products, and building a shuttle train facility that will be used at full capacity. 

This conundrum of proximity to the border being a location advantage but an 

economic transportation disadvantage should be further investigated by 

looking at the impact of railroad consolidation in the border area. 

Methodology and Sources of Data 

Modal Share 

Modal share is the portion of tonnages of grain moved by each mode of 

transport.10 Rail, truck, and ocean shares are presented as percentages. 

 

6

 There are 7 Class I railroads, ranging in size from just over 3,000 to nearly 33,000 miles of track 

operated. 

U.S. Class I railroads in 2006: Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway, CSX Transportation (CSXT), 

Grand Truck Corporation (GTC): includes almost all Canadian National (CN) operations in the U.S., Kansas 

City Southern Railway Company (KCS), Norfolk Southern Combined Railroad Subsidiaries (NS), Soo line 

Railroad Company (SOO): It is included under Canadian Pacific Railway, and Union Pacific Railroad (UP) 

(AAR 2005 and 2006). Two Canadian railroads, Canadian National (CN) and Canadian Pacific Railway, and 

two Mexican railroads, Ferrocarril Mexicano (FERROMEX) and Kansas City Southern de Mexico (KCS de 

Mexico), have enough revenue that they would be U.S. Class I railroads if they were U.S. Companies (AAR 

2006). 

7

 Unit trains have at least 52 cars. Shuttle trains have 75–110 cars and meet railroad efficiency 

requirements. A railroad car carries about 100 tons (90.72 metric tons). Corn weighs 56 pounds per 

bushel; wheat and soybeans 60 pounds each. 

8

 AAR, 2007. 

9

 AMS, 1998. 

10 Marathon, VanWechel, and Vachal, 2006.

3
Transport modes are determined from major export terminals to Mexico. 

The reported modal shares are based on total quantities exported to Mexico. 

Total Exports 

Total export data were obtained from a website of USDA’s Foreign Trade 

Statistics, published by the USDA/Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), entitled 

U.S. Trade Exports—FATUS Commodity Aggregations

<http://www.fas.usda.gov/ustrade>. The data on the FAS website come from 

the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Foreign Trade Statistics, a publication of 

the U.S. Census Bureau. 

Ocean Exports 

Ocean tonnages represent grain inspected for export by the USDA Grain 

Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA). 

Rail Exports 

Rail totals were estimated using the same method as Marathon, VanWechel, 

and Vachal 2006. Rail movements for 2002 to 2006 were obtained from the 

Surface Transportation Board’s (STB) Carload Waybill Sample, 2001-2006. 

The STB’s Waybill Sample is a stratified random sample of carload waybills 

for terminated shipments by railroad carriers. The STB collects operating 

statistics on U.S. railroads, which can be used to estimate rail traffic volumes 

and railroad characteristics. Total tonnages are derived from the weight-intons variable from the Waybill Sample by multiplying them by an expansion 

factor to obtain tonnages for all grain movements by all railroads. The 

expansion factor is calculated for each waybill according to the formula 

shown below. The expansion factor is used to expand the car, ton, 

trailer/container, and revenue statistics to 100 percent levels. 

Factor = (Population count / Sample count) 

Export regions are defined by five-digit Federal Information Processing 

Standards (FIPS) codes (table 1). Rail shipments are considered direct 

movements of grain from United States origins to destinations in Mexico. 

The remaining export regions are border crossing points for grain movements 

from the United States to Mexico. Shipments to those regions are assumed 

to be transported by rail to the border then interchanged to a different 

railroad and moved into Mexico. Total tonnages exported are then calculated 

using the designated export regions. To avoid double-counting, the following 

movements are not considered: 

• Movements originated and terminated in the same FIPS region; 

• Grain shipments that are rebilled from one railroad to another’s terminal 

markets. 

4
Table 1–FIPS regions included in rail export 

tonnages* 

State FIPS 

code County

Arizona 4023 Santa Cruz 

California 6025 Imperial 

California 6073 San Diego 

Texas 48061 Brownsville 

Texas 48141 El Paso 

Texas 48323 Eagle Pass 

Texas 48479 Laredo 

* FIPS: Federal Information Processing Standards 

Truck Exports 

Total truck tonnages are estimated by subtracting total rail and ocean from 

total exports tonnages. 

Model for Estimating Modal Tonnages and Share 

(1) Total Exports from Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, 

Foreign Trade Statistics. 

(2) Truck Exports = Total Exports - (Ocean Exports + Rail Exports). 

United States–Mexico Agricultural Trade 

Mexico is the second largest destination, after Canada, of U.S. agricultural 

exports, estimated in 2007 to be $12.3 billion. U.S. agricultural exports to 

Mexico are forecast to increase to $14.5 billion in 2008 due largely to 

increased exports of wheat, soybeans (including products), dairy products, 

and fresh fruit (ERS 2007a). Bulk commodities accounted for 63 percent of 

the total 28.9 million metric tons (mmt) of U.S. agricultural products 

exported to Mexico in 2006 (FAS 2007a), and coarse grains 57 percent of the 

bulk agricultural shipments. Soybeans and wheat accounted for 20 and 12 

percent of the 18.3 mmt of bulk exports, respectively. On January 1, 2003, 

under NAFTA, Mexico eliminated tariffs on agri-food products with the 

exception of poultry, eggs, dairy, and sugar. However, corn and dry beans 

were still subject to Tariff Rate Quotas (TRQs) until January 1, 2008 (Ag5
Canada 2006), when all tariffs and TRQs were eliminated for the products 

mentioned above. 

Corn Exports to Mexico 

Mexico is the fifth largest world corn producer, after the United States, China, 

the European Union (EU-27), and Brazil. However, it is the world’s second 

largest corn importer, after Japan and the Republic of Korea. Mexico 

processes much of its production of white corn into food products. 

Approximately 30 percent of Mexico’s corn is imported, almost all of it from 

the United States. It consists of yellow corn for livestock feed to support 

increased meat production (FAS 2007a and ERS 2007b). 

When corn tariffs were eliminated in 2008, Mexico’s imports of kibble or 

cracked corn, which were free of tariff because they were processed, began 

to be replaced by imports of whole-grain corn (Hoffman et al 2007). During 

2006, United States corn exports to Mexico increased 34 percent from the 

previous year, totaling 7.83 mmt. More than half of the U.S. corn exported 

to Mexico in 2004 was used as feed (Adcock, Rosson, and Varela 2007). 

Thirty-seven percent was made into corn starch and 9.4 percent was used for 

flour, cereals, and snack foods. U.S. corn was shipped to 24 destinations in 

Mexico. Jalisco was the most frequent destination, followed by Queretaro, 

Estado de Mexico, Sonora, Durango, and Veracruz. 

Corn Modal Share 

Most corn shipped from major export facilities to Mexico is moved by ocean 

vessel (tables 1 and 2, and figure 1). From 2002 to 2006, ocean vessels 

moved 44 percent of U.S. corn to Mexico, rail hauled 30 percent, and trucks 

carried 26 percent. Texas is the major entry point for rail corn shipments to 

Mexico, via Brownsville, Eagle Pass, Laredo, and El Paso. The Port of 

Veracruz is the major entry point for ocean vessels (figures 2 and 3, and 

table 4). All U.S. corn shipped by ocean originates from ports along the U.S. 

Gulf11 (table 2 and figure 3). More than 80 percent of the corn shipped to 

Mexico by ocean travels down the Mississippi River. Over the last 5 years, 

trucks have gained market share at the expense of ocean and rail carriers. 

Figure 4 shows that 45 percent of U.S. corn exports occurred during the last 

quarter of the year and reached a peak during December (21 percent). 

 

11 U.S. Gulf includes East Gulf, Mississippi River, North Texas, and South Texas. 

6
Table 2–Tonnages (MT) and modal share for U.S. corn exports to Mexico 

Mode of transport 

Ocean (U.S. Gulf) Rail Truck 

Year/type 

of 

movement 

Quantity Percentage Quantity Percentage Quantity Percentage

Total U.S. 

exports 

to Mexico

2002 2,922,617 55 2,404,138 45 0 0 5,326,755

2003 2,536,128 45 2,244,009 40 809,508 14 5,589,645

2004 2,177,339 39 1,437,018 26 1,999,437 36 5,613,794

2005 2,356,096 40 1,569,814 27 1,915,925 33 5,841,835

2006 3,191,020 41 1,108,978 14 3,534,855 45 7,834,853

Average 

02-06 2,636,640 44 1,752,791 30 1,651,945 26 6,041,376

Source: USDA/GIPSA, STB Carload Waybill Sample, and Dept. of Commerce/U.S. Census Bureau/Foreign 

Trade Statistics 

Figure 1–U.S. corn exports to Mexico by route

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Percentage

Maritime Overland

7
Table 3–U.S. corn exports to Mexico by route, 2002-2006 (MT) 

Route 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 

Maritime: 

 U.S. Gulf East Gulf 0 0 0 14,000 16,950

Mississippi River 2,907,033 2,314,520 2,119,617 2,005,811 1,362,821

North Texas 15,584 221,608 52,222 336,285 1,811,249

South Texas 0 0 5,500 0 0

Total 2,922,617 2,536,128 2,177,339 2,356,096 3,191,020

Maritime as % of total exports 55 45 39 40 41

Overland 2,404,138 3,053,517 3,436,455 3,485,739 4,643,833

Overland as % of total exports 45 55 61 60 59

Total U.S. Exports 5,326,755 5,589,645 5,613,794 5,841,835 7,834,853

Source: Dept. of Commerce/U.S. Census Bureau/Foreign Trade Statistics and USDA/GIPSA 

Figure 2–Major rail entry points to Mexico 

San Diego, California

Brownsville, Texas

Laredo, Texas

Eagle Pass, Texas

El Paso, Texas

Presidio, Texas

Customs District: International Trade Data, U.S. Census

Border Crossing: U.S. Rail Waybill Sample County, U.S. DOT

FERROMEX

KCS

Distrito Federal/Mexico City/Toluca 

Grain Consuming Region

Other Major Grain Consuming Region

Guadalajara

Monterrey

Chihuahua

Port

Tampico Mazatlan

Veracruz

Calexico,

California Nogales, 

Arizona

San Isidro, Santa Cruz, Arizona

California

8
Table–4 U.S. grain and soybean exports to Mexico by port, 

2006 

 Corn Sorghum Soybeans Wheat 

Port Percentage share 

Veracruz 63.3 57.5 79.5 76.8 

Tuxpan 14.8 2.1 0 8.1 

Progreso 10.6 33.0 19.3 4.2 

Altamira 9.9 0 10.8 0 

Tampico 0.7 0 0 0 

Coatzacoalcos 10.6 7.4 1.2 11.0 

Source: Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Transporte (SCT), Mexico 

Figure 3–Major origin-destination shipments of U.S. grains and 

soybeans to Mexico by ocean

9
0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Percentage

Figure 4–Mexico's average monthly corn imports

Total corn imports 03-06 U.S. corn 03-06*

Total corn imports 03-06 0.6 3.1 9.3 9.5 7.6 6.4 4.5 5.8 8.0 10.5 13.8 21.0

U.S. corn 03-06* 0.6 3.1 9.3 9.5 7.6 6.4 4.5 5.8 8.0 10.5 13.8 21.0

Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

*The U.S. share of total Mexican corn imports is almost 100 percent.

Source: SIAP/SAGARPA 

Sorghum Exports to Mexico 

Mexico is the world’s third largest sorghum producer after Nigeria and the 

United States and the second largest world consumer after Nigeria. In 2006, 

Mexico imported 28 percent of its sorghum from the United States (FAS

2007a). Sorghum is used exclusively for animal feed in Mexico (Adcock, 

Rosson, and Varela 2007). Mexican feeders are accustomed to feeding 

sorghum because corn imports have been limited by Mexican government 

policies (Hoffman et al 2007). U.S. sorghum exports to Mexico declined 8 

percent in 2006 from a year earlier. This trend is expected to continue in 

2008 with the elimination of corn TRQs. The top Mexican destinations for 

U.S. Sorghum in 2004 were Puebla, Yucatan, Jalisco, Veracruz, San Luis 

Potosi, and Nuevo Leon (Adcock, Rosson, and Varela 2007). 

Sorghum Modal Share 

The United States is the only sorghum supplier to Mexico. Over the last 5 

years, half of U.S. sorghum exports to Mexico were shipped by ocean 

10
through the U.S. Gulf, mostly from North Texas, South Texas, and the 

Mississippi River (tables 5 and 6, and figure 5). The port of Veracruz is the 

major ocean point of entry. On average, trucks moved 30 percent and rail 

hauled 19 percent of sorghum shipped to Mexico. Truck is the primary 

overland transport mode due to the location of the major production areas 

along the border in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas. The top rail destinations 

for U.S. sorghum exports to Mexico in 2005 were Nuevo Leon, Veracruz, 

Estado de Mexico, Jalisco, and Guanajuato (Adcock, Rosson, and Varela 

2007). Texas (Laredo and El Paso) and Arizona (Santa Cruz) are the main 

rail entry points (figure 2). The ports of Veracruz and Progreso are the major 

entry points by vessel (table 4 and figure 3). Half of the year’s sorghum 

exports to Mexico occur between January and May, reaching a peak in April 

(figure 6). 

Table 5–Tonnages (MT) and modal share for U.S. sorghum exports to Mexico 

Mode of transport 

Ocean (U.S. Gulf) Rail Truck 

Year/type 

of 

movement 

Quantity Percentage Quantity Percentage Quantity Percentage

Total U.S. 

exports 

to Mexico

2002 2,507,699 60 1,281,842 31 365,727 9 4,155,268

2003 1,564,878 55 775,186 27 495,369 17 2,835,433

2004 1,421,573 47 563,689 19 1,061,539 35 3,046,801

2005 1,394,923 49 162,400 6 1,313,129 46 2,870,452

2006 1,182,147 45 275,358 10 1,181,688 45 2,639,193

Average 

02-06 1,614,244 51 611,695 19 883,490 30 3,109,429

Source: USDA/GIPSA, STB Carload Waybill Sample, and Dept. of Commerce/U.S. Census Bureau/Foreign 

Trade Statistics 

 

11
Table 6–U.S. sorghum exports to Mexico by route, 2002-2006 (MT) 

Route 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 

Maritime: 

 U.S. Gulf East Gulf 0 0 0 0 0

Mississippi River 704,784 415,171 294,219 278,948 106,980

North Texas 1,298,527 933,591 690,250 761,129 946,231

South Texas 504,388 216,116 437,104 354,846 128,936

Total 2,507,699 1,564,878 1,421,573 1,394,923 1,182,147

Maritime as % of total exports 60 55 47 49 45

Overland 1,647,569 1,270,555 1,625,228 1,475,529 1,457,046

Overland as % of total exports 40 45 53 51 55

Total U.S. Exports 4,155,268 2,835,433 3,046,801 2,870,452 2,639,193

Source: Dept. of Commerce/U.S. Census Bureau/Foreign Trade Statistics and USDA/GIPSA 

Figure 5–U.S. sorghum exports to Mexico by route

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Percen ta

Maritime Overland

e

g

12
0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Percentage

Figure 6–Mexico's average monthly sorghum imports

Total sorghum imports 03-06 U.S. sorghum 03-06*

Total sorghum imports 03-06 9.1 9.6 10.6 11.4 9.4 5.9 8.2 8.4 8.9 6.7 6.0 5.8

U.S. sorghum 03-06* 9.1 9.6 10.5 11.3 9.1 5.9 8.2 8.4 8.9 6.7 6.0 5.8

Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

*The United States share of total sorghum imports is almost 100 percent

Source: SIAP/SAGARPA

Wheat Exports to Mexico 

Mexico grows some wheat, but it relies on imports to satisfy its demand. The 

United States and Canada are its major suppliers (figure 7). The U.S.’ share 

of Mexico’s wheat market varies from year to year because of Canadian 

competition (figures 7 and 8), which is based on quality and price 

(SIAP/SAGARPA 2007). Wheat exports consist mostly of hard red winter 

(HRW) wheat due to the proximity of the HRW-wheat-growing areas in the 

southern Plains to the Mexican border. The wheat is milled to make bread, 

cookies, cakes, and prepared flours (Ag-Canada 2006). As a result of 

NAFTA, there are no tariffs on U.S. and Canadian wheat exports to Mexico. 

Wheat exports to Mexico declined 18 percent in 2006 to 2.2 mmt from 2.7 

mmt in 2005. They are used almost entirely for human consumption 

(Adcock, Rosson, and Varela 2007). 

The 

United States and Canada are its major suppliers (figure 7). The U.S.’ share 

of Mexico’s wheat market varies from year to year because of Canadian 

competition (figures 7 and 8), which is based on quality and price 

(SIAP/SAGARPA 2007). Wheat exports consist mostly of hard red winter 

(HRW) wheat due to the proximity of the HRW-wheat-growing areas in the 

southern Plains to the Mexican border. The wheat is milled to make bread, 

cookies, cakes, and prepared flours (Ag-Canada 2006). As a result of 

NAFTA, there are no tariffs on U.S. and Canadian wheat exports to Mexico. 

Wheat exports to Mexico declined 18 percent in 2006 to 2.2 mmt from 2.7 

mmt in 2005. They are used almost entirely for human consumption 

(Adcock, Rosson, and Varela 2007). 

13
0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Percentage

Figure 7–Mexico's average wheat and "morcajo" monthly imports

Total wheat imports 03-06 U.S. wheat 03-06 Canadian wheat 03-06

Total wheat imports 03-06 7.7 7.8 9.4 7.4 7.6 6.0 8.8 8.8 8.3 7.9 9.5 10.8

U.S. wheat 03-06 6.6 6.7 7.3 5.8 4.8 4.3 6.7 7.2 6.6 6.1 6.0 6.5

Canadian wheat 03-06 1.1 1.1 2.0 1.3 2.7 1.7 2.1 1.7 1.7 1.8 3.5 4.2

Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

"morcajo": Mix of cerals (wheat and rye) to produce grey and dark flour

Source: SIAP/SAGARPA 

Figure 8–Mexico wheat and "morcajo" 3 year 

average* monthly imports

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

Jan

Feb

March

April

May

June

July

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Thousand metric tons

*Average: 2004-2006; "morcajo": Mix of cereals (wheat and rye) to produce grey and dark flour

Source: SIAP/SAGARPA 

Canadian wheat

Total Mexican wheat imports

U.S. wheat

14
Wheat Modal Share 

From 2002 to 2006, ocean vessels were the major transport mode for 

shipping U.S. wheat to Mexico (tables 7 and 8), but this trend is changing. 

Rail has gained a greater share of the market (figure 9) as more shuttle train 

facilities have been built along the border and in major distribution centers. 

During this period, rail hauled 36 percent and truck 11 percent of U.S. wheat 

to Mexico. Estado de Mexico was the major rail destination of U.S. wheat 

exports by rail, followed by the D.F., Nuevo Leon, Jalisco, Puebla, Coahuila, 

Guanajuato, and Queretaro (Adcock, Rosson, and Varela 2007). Texas 

(Laredo, El Paso, Eagle Pass, and Brownsville) and Santa Cruz, Arizona, were 

the major entry points of wheat by rail (figure 2). 

In 2006, almost 96 percent of U.S. wheat shipped by ocean originated in the 

Gulf, mostly from the Mississippi River and North Texas regions (table 8). 

The ports of Veracruz and Coatzacoalcos were the major points of entry into 

Mexico (figure 3 and table 4). Figure 7 shows that 54 percent of Mexico’s 

wheat imports occurred during the second half of the year, reaching a peak 

from November through December. The majority of U.S. wheat exports to 

Mexico (39 percent) occurred during the fourth quarter of the year.

Table 7–Tonnages (MT) and modal share for U.S. wheat exports to Mexico 

Mode of transport 

Ocean (U.S. Gulf) Rail Truck 

Year/type 

of 

movement 

Quantity Percentage Quantity Percentage Quantity Percentage

Total U.S. 

exports 

to Mexico

2002 1,523,135 65 715,593 31 86,918 4 2,325,646

2003 1,644,499 63 712,237 27 243,100 9 2,599,836

2004 1,288,797 46 941,399 33 587,424 21 2,817,620

2005 1,223,705 45 1,375,127 51 107,107 4 2,705,939

2006 1,058,575 48 821,422 37 339,369 15 2,219,366

Average 

02-06 1,347,742 53 913,156 36 272,784 11 2,533,681

Source: USDA/GIPSA, STB Carload Waybill Sample, and Dept. of Commerce/U.S. Census Bureau/Foreign 

Trade Statistics 

15
Figure 9–U.S. wheat exports to Mexico by route

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Percentage

Maritime Overland

Table 8–U.S. wheat exports to Mexico by route, 2002-2006 (MT) 

Route 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 

Maritime: 

 U.S. Gulf East Gulf 7,817 20,930 0 0 0

Mississippi River 699,598 880,148 715,444 685,050 668,082

North Texas 730,216 692,617 558,550 468,753 347,245

South Texas 15,990 32,915 0 0 

Subtotal 1,453,621 1,626,610 1,273,994 1,153,803 1,015,327

 

 Lakes Toledo 0 17,889 0 0 0

Duluth-Sup 0 0 0 0 18,890

Subtotal 0 17,889 0 0 18,890

 

 Atlantic North Atlantic 0 0 14,803 16,501 24,358

South Atlantic 69,514 0 0 53,401 0

Subtotal 69,514 0 14,803 69,902 24,358

Total 1,523,135 1,644,499 1,288,797 1,223,705 1,058,575

Maritime as % of total exports 65 63 46 45 48

Overland 802,511 955,337 1,528,823 1,482,234 1,160,791

Overland as % of total exports 35 37 54 55 52

Total U.S. Exports 2,325,646 2,599,836 2,817,620 2,705,939 2,219,366

Source: Dept. of Commerce/U.S. Census Bureau/Foreign Trade Statistics and USDA/GIPSA 

16
Soybean Exports to Mexico 

Mexico is the world’s fourth largest soybean importer, after China, the EU-27, 

and Japan. Mexican domestic production has virtually been displaced by 

U.S. imports because of reform in Mexico’s domestic crop support program 

and the elimination of soybean tariffs due to NAFTA, and because of 

improvements in rail transportation links at the border (Ash, Livezey, and 

Dohlman 2006). In addition, strong income growth among Mexican 

consumers has boosted consumption of meat and vegetable oils and 

increased demand for soybeans as a feed ingredient. U.S. soybean exports 

to Mexico increased 9 percent from 2005 to 2006, to 3.7 mmt (FAS 2007a). 

Soybeans are crushed into meal and oil in Mexico. Major soybean crushing 

facilities are located in Merida, Yucatan, Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, 

Guadalajara, Jalisco, northern Mexico City, Guanajuato, and near the ports of 

Veracruz and Coatzacoalcos (Adcock, Rosson, and Varela 2007). Soybean 

meal is an important protein feed for livestock, dairy, poultry, and 

aquaculture. Small portions are used as a baking ingredient and meat 

substitutes (Ash, Livezey, and Dohlman 2006, and American Soybean 

Association 2000). 

Soybean Modal Share 

Ocean vessels are the predominant transport mode for shipping soybeans to 

Mexico (tables 9 and 10, and figure 10). From 2002 to 2006, ocean vessels 

moved 45 percent of U.S. soybean exports to Mexico, rail hauled 32 percent, 

and truck carried 23 percent. The ports of Altamira and Veracruz were the 

major ocean points of entry of soybeans into Mexico (figure 3 and table 4). 

Almost all soybean exports originated in the Gulf, mostly from the Mississippi 

River (table 9). Texas (Brownsville, Eagle Pass, El Paso, and Laredo) was the 

major entry point for rail shipments (figure 2). Major rail destinations were 

Guanajuato, Nuevo Leon, Hidalgo, Tamaulipas, Jalisco, and San Luis Potosi 

(Adcock, Rosson, and Varela 2007). In the last 3 years, there has been a 

shift from maritime to overland shipments of soybeans to Mexico; trucks 

have gained market share at the expense of ocean and rail carriers. Figure 

11 shows that U.S. soybean exports are spread throughout the year, 

reaching peaks in April and October. 

17
Table 9–Tonnages (MT) and modal share for U.S. soybean exports to Mexico 

Mode of transport 

Ocean (U.S. Gulf) Rail Truck Year/type 

of 

movement Quantity Percentage Quantity Percentage Quantity Percentage

Total U.S. 

exports 

to Mexico

2002 2,047,166 52 1,872,810 48 0 0 3,919,976 

2003 1,985,002 51 994,517 26 908,285 23 3,887,804 

2004 998,748 35 859,880 30 1,012,228 35 2,870,856 

2005 1,549,847 45 987,614 29 903,054 26 3,440,515 

2006 1,545,366 41 1,050,397 28 1,146,953 31 3,742,716 

Average 

02–06 1,625,226 45 1,153,044 32 794,104 23 3,572,373

Figure 10–U.S. soybean exports to Mexico by 

route

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Percentage

Maritime Overland

Source: USDA/GIPSA, STB Carload Waybill Sample, and Dept. of Commerce/U.S. Census Bureau/Foreign 

Trade Statistics 

18
Table 10–U.S. soybean exports to Mexico by route, 2002-2006 (MT) 

Route 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 

Maritime: 

 U.S. Gulf East Gulf 145,716 46,088 0 54,407 12,560

Mississippi River 1,682,448 1,871,502 980,338 1,446,421 1,460,557

North Texas 195,154 48,480 18,410 17,407 72,249

South Texas 18,384 18,932 0 0 0

 

Subtotal 2,041,702 1,985,002 998,748 1,518,235 1,545,366

 

 Atlantic North Atlantic 0 0 0 0 0

South Atlantic 5,464 0 0 31,612 0

Subtotal 5,464 0 0 31,612 0

 Total 2,047,166 1,985,002 998,748 1,549,847 1,545,366

Maritime as % of total exports 52 51 35 45 41 

 

Overland 1,872,810 1,902,802 1,872,108 1,890,668 2,197,350

Overland as % of total exports 48 49 65 55 59 

Total U.S. Exports 3,919,976 3,887,804 2,870,856 3,440,515 3,742,716 

Source: Dept. of Commerce/U.S. Census Bureau/Foreign Trade Statistics and USDA/GIPSA 

19
0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Percentage

Figure 11–Mexico's average monthly soybean imports

All soybean imports 03-06 U.S. soybeans 03-06

All soybean imports 03-06 9.0 7.7 7.9 10.6 8.0 7.5 8.3 7.2 6.4 11.7 9.3 6.3

U.S. soybeans 03-06 9.0 7.7 7.9 10.0 7.2 6.3 6.4 5.5 6.2 11.7 9.3 6.3

Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

Source: SIAP/SAGARPA 

Conclusions and Further Research 

Exports of U.S. corn, sorghum, wheat, and soybeans to Mexico have shifted 

from maritime to overland modes during the last five years. Rail is the 

primary overland mode for wheat and soybeans. Trucks carry most overland 

transport for sorghum because the major production areas are along the 

border in the Rio Grande Valley. 

Grain shippers in both countries along the border have the advantage of 

proximity to Mexico. However, this close proximity results in less 

transportation service being available, translating the physical advantage into 

an economic disadvantage, if there are no short-line or regional railroad 

services available. Captive shippers in these areas are forced to use trucks 

as the only available means of transportation. 

Shippers located in Corpus Christi, TX, and Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico, 

are captive shippers. Corpus Christi and Monterrey are each about 141 miles 

from the border town of Laredo. The lack of rail service in the border region 

could lead to some degree of concentration in regional transportation. 

Shippers might cooperate to make joint shipments and gain bargaining 

power with the Class I railroads, for which short-haul service is less 

profitable. Railroads consider shipments in the border region to be short 

hauls. This United States–Mexico grain transportation structure should be 

further investigated by looking at the impact of railroad consolidation in the 

border area. 

ortation. 

Shippers might cooperate to make joint shipments and gain bargaining 

power with the Class I railroads, for which short-haul service is less 

profitable. Railroads consider shipments in the border region to be short 

hauls. This United States–Mexico grain transportation structure should be 

further investigated by looking at the impact of railroad consolidation in the 

border area. 

20
Acknowledgments 

The author would like to acknowledge Tamara VanWechel of the Upper Great 

Plains Transportation Institute for helping to identify rail shipments, and 

Byron Reilly of the Grain Inspection, Packers, and Stockyards Administration 

for providing export inspection data and reviewing the manuscript. 

Comments and critiques by Allen Baker and Edward Allen of the Economic 

Research Service, Erich Kuss of the Foreign Agricultural Service, C. Parr 

Rosson of Texas A&M University, Albert J. Allen of Mississippi State 

University, and Nick Marathon of the Agricultural Marketing Service are 

greatly appreciated. The author would also like to thank Jessica E. Ladd for 

her technical assistance and expertise in graphic design. Additional 

acknowledgement is given to Michael D. Smith for editorial comments and 

suggestions. 

21
References 

Adcock, Flynn J, C. Parr Rosson III, and Alejandro Varela. 2007. Tracking U.S. Grain 

and Soybean Exports in Mexico. Center for North American Studies, Texas A&M 

University. <http://cnas.tamu.edu/AMS%20Final%20Export%20Report.pdf> (PDF) 

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), USDA. 1998. Agricultural Transportation 

Challenges for the 21st Century. 

<http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dDocName=STELDEV3021834&acct=at

geninfo> 

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Biweekly Bulletin. March 31, 2006. 

<http://www.agr.gc.ca/maddam/index_e.php?s1=pubs&s2=bi&s3=php&page=bulletin_19_06_2006-03-31> 

American Soybean Association, Soy Stats Guide. 2000. “U.S. Soybean Meal Use by 

Livestock.” <http://www.soystats.com/2000/page_24.htm>. 

Ash, Mark, Janet Livezey, and Erik Dohlman. April 2006. Soybean Backgrounder. 

Electronic Outlook Report, ERS. No. OCS-2006-01, Economic Research Service, 

<http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/OCS/apr06/OCS200601/OCS200601_lowres.

pdf> (PDF) 

Association of American Railroads (AAR). August 2007. The Rail Transportation of 

Grain, Volume 4. 

—. November 2006. Class I Railroad Statistics; Railroad Facts, 2006-2007 Edition, 

and Overview of U.S. Freight Railroads, February 2005. 

 

Economic Research Service (ERS), USDA. 2007a. Outlook for U.S. Agricultural Trade,

AES-57 <http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/AES/AES-02-21-2008.pdf>, 

and U.S. Agricultural Trade Briefing Room 

<http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/AgTrade>. 

—. Corn Briefing Room. 2007b <http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Corn/>. 

—. Wheat Briefing Room. 2007c. <http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Wheat/>. 

—. Wheat Data: Yearbook Tables. 2007d. 

<http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/Wheat/WheatYearbook.aspx>. 

Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), USDA. 2007a. U.S. Trade Exports—FATUS 

Commodity Aggregations <http://www.fas.usda.gov/ustrade/USTExFatus.asp?QI=>. 

—. Gain Report #MX7020. March 13, 2007b. 

<http://www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles/200703/146280442.pdf> (PDF). 

—. Gain Report #MX7009. January 29, 2007c 

<http://www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles/200701/146280038.pdf> (PDF) 

22
23

Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), USDA. Exporting 

Grain. January 2007

<http://www.gipsa.usda.gov/GIPSA/webapp?area=home&subject=grpi&topic=iseg>. 

 

Hoffman, Linwood A., Allen Baker, Linda Foreman, and Edwin Young. March 2007. 

Feed Grains Backgrounder. Outlook Report No. (FDS-07C01, ERS.), Economic 

Research Service. 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/FDS/2007/03Mar/FDS07C01/

Klindworth, Keith A. and Arne J. Martinsen. September 1995. Shipping U.S. Grain to 

Mexico. AMS. 

Marathon, Nick, Tamara VanWechel, and Kimberly Vachal. October 2006. 

Transportation of U.S. Grains: A Modal Share Analysis, 1978-2004. AMS. 

<http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dDocName=STELPRDC5049160&acct=

atpub>. 

Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Transporte, Mexico. 2006. Anuario Estadístico de los 

Puertos de Mexico.

Servicio de Información Agroalimentaria y Pesquera (SIAP)/ Secretaría de 

Agricultura, Ganadería, y Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación (SAGARPA). 2007. 

Surface Transportation Board (STB), Carload Waybill Sample. 2001–2006. 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. December 2007. Re-Evaluation of the Recommended 

Plan: UMR-IWW System Navigation Study. Interim Report. 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and 

activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, 

marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, 

political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any 

public assistance program (not all prohibited bases apply to all programs). Persons with 

disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, 

large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice 

and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 

1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 

(voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.