United States 

Department of

Agriculture

National

Agricultural

Statistics

Service

Research and

Development Division

Washington DC 20250

General Overview of the 

NASS Objective Yield and 

Objective Measurement

Programs

Denise A. Abreu

Zulma T. Riberas

RDD Research Report

Number RDD-08-10

This report was prepared for limited distribution to the research community outside the United 

States Department of Agriculture. The views expressed herein are not necessarily those of the 

National Agricultural Statistics Service or of the United States Department of Agriculture.
i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this document is to provide a summarized history of the objective yield 

and objective measurement programs conducted by the National Agricultural Statistics 

Service (NASS) since the early 1950s. The document presents historical data on state 

participation and sample sizes for all crops included in the national program and relevant 

information on state specific programs. The national program, directed from the NASS 

headquarters in Washington D.C., and funded under the Federal budget, includes (or has 

included) the following crops: corn, cotton, potatoes, rice, sorghum, soybeans, 

sunflower, tobacco, and wheat. The state specific programs are only conducted in 

specific states and are funded by local state governments or specific industries.
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ........................................................................... 1

2. HISTORY ............................................................................................................................... 1

3. RESEARCH ON PLOT SIZE AND LOCATION ................................................................. 3

4. GENERAL METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................. 5

5. SAMPLING ............................................................................................................................ 5

6. FIELD PROCEDURES .......................................................................................................... 6

7. NATIONAL PROGRAM..................................................................................................... 13

7.1 Corn............................................................................................................................... 13

7.2 Cotton............................................................................................................................ 19

7.3 Potatoes......................................................................................................................... 25

7.4 Rice ............................................................................................................................... 27

7.5 Sorghum........................................................................................................................ 28

7.6 Soybeans....................................................................................................................... 29

7.7 Sunflower...................................................................................................................... 33

7.8 Wheat ............................................................................................................................ 34

 7.8a Winter Wheat............................................................................................................... 36

 7.8b Spring Wheat ............................................................................................................... 39

 7.8c Durum Wheat............................................................................................................... 40

8. STATE SPECIFIC PROGRAMS......................................................................................... 41

8.1 Arizona.......................................................................................................................... 41

8.1a Lemons......................................................................................................................... 41

8.2 California ...................................................................................................................... 42

 8.2a Naval Oranges.............................................................................................................. 42

 8.2b Valencia Oranges......................................................................................................... 44

 8.2c Pistachios ..................................................................................................................... 46

 8.2d Almonds....................................................................................................................... 49

 8.2e Walnuts........................................................................................................................ 51

 8.2f Grapes.......................................................................................................................... 53

 8.2g Lemons......................................................................................................................... 55

 8.2h Peaches......................................................................................................................... 56
iii

8.3 Michigan ....................................................................................................................... 57

 8.3a Tart Cherries ................................................................................................................. 57

8.4 New York...................................................................................................................... 58

 8.4a Onions........................................................................................................................... 58

8.5 Oregon........................................................................................................................... 59

 8.5a Hazelnuts....................................................................................................................... 59

REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 60

Additional reading materials are available on-line at: 

http://www.nass.usda.gov/research/reports/Internet_Yield/reportsxyield.html
1

General Overview of the NASS Objective Yield and Objective Measurement 

Programs 

Denise A. Abreu and Zulma T. Riberas

1

Abstract

This document provides an overview of the objective yield and objective measurement programs 

conducted by the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) since the early 1950s. The 

document presents historical data on state participation and sample sizes for all crops included in 

the national program and relevant information on state specific programs. The national program, 

directed from the NASS headquarters in Washington D.C., and funded under the Federal budget, 

includes (or has included) the following crops: corn, cotton, potatoes, rice, sorghum, soybeans, 

sunflower, tobacco, and wheat. The state specific programs are only conducted in specific states 

and are funded by local state governments or specific industries. 

Key Words: Objective Yield Surveys, Objective Yield Program, Objective Measurement

Program

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

This document provides a summarized history of the objective yield (OY) and objective 

measurement (OM) programs conducted by the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS)

since the early 1950s. It presents historical data on state participation and sample sizes for all 

crops included in the national program and relevant information on state specific programs. The

national program, directed from the NASS headquarters in Washington D.C., and funded under 

the Federal budget, includes (or has included) the following crops: corn, cotton, potatoes, rice, 

sorghum, soybeans, sunflower, tobacco, and wheat. The state specific programs are only 

conducted in specific states and are funded by local state governments or specific industries.

2. HISTORY

The main goal of the objective yield and objective measurement programs is to forecast/estimate 

crop yield by direct measurement of plant characteristics. The sampling for the objective yield 

surveys has been on a probability basis from the inception.

The National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) is a recognized world leader in the use of 

objective yield technology. Objective yield surveys produce the primary indications for yield 

forecasts and estimates for the major feed and food grains in the United States. Additionally, 

NASS has made long term commitments to make this technology available internationally. 

 

1 Denise Abreu and Zulma T. Riberas are Statisticians with the National Agricultural Statistics Service, Research 

and Development Division, 3251 Old Lee Highway, Room 305, Fairfax, VA 22030. The authors would like to thank 

all contributing NASS staff members for their assistance on this research project.
2

Through cooperative agreements, NASS has demonstrated or helped implement objective yield

programs in many countries of Asia, Africa, and Central and South America.

Yield and production of major field crops in the United States have been forecasted and estimated 

by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) since President Abraham Lincoln‘s 

administration in the 1860s. Crop condition surveys were prepared monthly by the USDA as 

early as 1863, the year following the creation of the Department. Until 1884 pre-harvest reports 

were in terms of condition as compared to an ―average‖ crop. In 1884 the reporting concept 

changed. Condition began being asked as a percent of a ―normal‖ crop, given no adverse effect 

of weather, disease or pests.

Although crop acreage changes from year to year, some of the largest variations in crop 

production are caused by fluctuations in yield per unit area. For more than a century, yield 

forecasts were based on voluntary producer appraisals of expected yield. It was recognized early 

on that actual changes in yield were not fully reflected in subjective grower appraisals. By 1898,

traveling agents started to supplement farmer-crop reporters‘ information with on site 

observations of crop conditions. By 1903, more than 100,000 agriculture related business 

operators, including cotton ginners, millers, elevator operators, and transportation agents were 

paneled to gain insight into the agricultural situation.

In 1910, a shift began from the practice of reporting crop condition to forecasting actual 

production during the growing season. By 1915, cotton production forecasts became available 

during the growing season. Making the transition from condition to yield forecasts required 

regression modeling. This was almost entirely done by visual interpretation of charts prior to the 

use of computers in the late 1960s.

Objective measurements for forecasting yield started with cotton in 1928. These early efforts 

involved statisticians driving along the perimeter of cotton fields, making boll counts at 

predetermined locations in fields. There appears to have been no effort made to directly relate the 

field counts to yield. Thus, it may be more appropriate to think of these early efforts as 

―Objective Condition‖ surveys. Later, corn and wheat were added to this program, but this early 

work in objective methods was discontinued at the start of the World War II. Research into 

objective measurements of wheat, corn, and cotton was resumed in 1954. 

The ―birth‖ of probability sampling for agricultural statistics and objective yield methods came in 

1957 when the Agricultural Marketing Service, a NASS predecessor, proposed to Congress a long 

term initiative titled ―A Program for the Development of the Agricultural Estimating Service.‖ 

The significance of the project was that it provided a basis for a fundamental change in 

agricultural estimation methods. The project provided for annual enumeration of a large 

probability sample of agricultural segments throughout the country, as well as annual 

measurements in sample fields for improving yield forecasts and estimates. This did not 

eliminate the use of mailed voluntary crop reports, but it did make available valuable new 

indications based on probability samples.

The cotton and corn objective yield programs became operational in 1961. Wheat came on line a 

year later. Soybeans joined the national program in 1967 and potatoes in the early 1970s. Grain 
3

sorghum, sunflowers, and rice were added to the objective yield survey program in the 1980s. 

However, due to budgetary constraints, grain sorghum and sunflowers were dropped from the 

operational program in 1988, and rice was eliminated in 1993. Over the years, state participation 

and sample sizes for all program crops were affected by budget constraints.

Objective yield work for other crops is also done, generally through state funding to assist 

marketing and industry groups. A partial list of these crops include citrus in Florida and 

California, grapes in California, tart cherries in Michigan, nut crops in California, Oregon, and 

Washington, and onions in New York. Background research for developing estimation methods 

for apples, peaches, and pecans have been conducted periodically. 

3. RESEARCH ON PLOT SIZE AND LOCATION

Plot Size 

The corn, cotton, and soybean objective yield programs plot sizes have remained unchanged since 

their inception in the mid-1950s. Although variations in plot sizes have been investigated through 

the years, none have been found to outperform the plot sizes currently being used. The plot sizes 

have remained 2 rows by 15 feet for corn; 2 rows by 10 feet for cotton; and 2 rows by 3 feet for 

soybeans. To arrive at these optimum plot sizes an assortment of variables have been evaluated 

with respect to variance and cost. Some of these variables are: number of ears for corn, pods with 

beans for soybeans, and large bolls for cotton. 

Plot sizes for wheat were derived differently than for corn, cotton, and soybeans. More than an 

assessment of various variables, the original plot size was selected based on the ability to expand 

to a per acre basis. In the 1950s, the original plot size used for wheat was 3 rows by 26.14 inches 

for drilled fields and 24 inches by 26.14 inches for broadcast fields. Optimum plot size research 

conducted in 1973 in Kansas and Washington compared rigid steel frames of 14.4 inches and 21.6 

inches in length against the 26.14 inches frame. The results of this research showed that it took 

40 percent less time to make counts with the 14.4 inch and 20 percent less time with the 21.6 inch 

frame. Additionally, for variables used in forecasting wheat yield (number of stalks and emerged 

heads), the 14.4 inch frame was considered optimum. Since there were concerns over the 

inclusion of borderline plants within the frame, the 21.6 inch frame was selected over the 14.4 

inch one. The 21.6 inch frame is the one currently being used. 

Plot Location 

Objective yield samples are selected from acreage reported on the March and June surveys. 

These surveys were developed to obtain information on crops, livestock, and other agricultural 

items with a known probability and use a multiple frame sample design consisting of an area 

frame and a list frame. Information on sampling procedures for specific crops is provided on 

Section 5, Sampling. All identifiable land units in the area frame are called a segment. Each 

segment consists of tracts or farms. Once the tract and segments are identified, the next step 

becomes selecting the sample acre (plot) within the field. 
4

The procedures for locating the plot within the field have been the same for corn, cotton, and 

soybeans since the mid 1950s. Initially, plots were randomly located within the field. The first 

unit was randomly selected from one of the following four locations: 1) 1st row, 20 paces into 

row; 2) 10th row, 1 pace into row; 3) 20th row, 1 pace into row; or 4) 20th row, 10 paces into row. 

The second unit was then located an additional 20 rows and 20 paces into the field. These nonrandom plot locations forced too many plots to be situated in border areas and end rows. Border 

plots tended to underestimate yield, while non-border plots tended to overestimate yield. 

In 1955, two methods were evaluated to select plot location for cotton in North Carolina. The 

first method involved selecting two coordinates for Unit 1. The first coordinate for Unit 1 was 

selected between 1 and the maximum number of rows for a field. The second coordinate was 

selected between 1 and the maximum number of paces for the field. The second method required 

that 12.5 percent of the sample units fall in border areas. Unit 1 was selected using random 

numbers between 1 and 20 for 25 percent of the fields and between 21 and 40 for the remaining 

75 percent. Unit 2 was located 30 rows and 30 paces further into the field from Unit 1, regardless 

of the method used to select Unit 1. The results of this analysis showed that non-randomly 

located plots were more homogeneous in the interior of the field than those plots randomly 

located. Also, the proportions of non-random plots in border and end row areas should be the 

same as proportions of plots in those areas if they had been randomly selected. As a result of this 

research, plot locations were randomly selected starting in 1956. 

A 1965 study in Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, and Kentucky found that there were too many plots 

located in the interior instead of border areas of corn objective yield fields. As a result of this 

analysis, the table of random locations was re-designed to reflect the field‘s proportion of border 

and interior areas. The re-designed table was built for fields of 8, 16, 32, and 80 acres. It 

assumed that fields were rectangular, had widths of 5/8 of an acre and the maximum number of 

rows (or paces) was 1⁄2 the length of the field. It was also recommended that Unit 2 be located 

independently of Unit 1. This method of locating Units 1 and 2 for corn, cotton, and soybeans, is 

the one currently being used. 

Most of the research on wheat plot locations was documented after 1965. This surge in plot 

location research most likely occurred as a result of the 1965 corn study in Indiana, Iowa, 

Nebraska, and Kentucky. Wheat related research looked at potential biases from a 

disproportionate number of plots in turn row areas and the location from which the enumerators 

accessed the field, among other things. In 1977, a newly re-designed table of plot locations was 

introduced to select plots in border, turn-row, and interior portions of the field in the same 

proportions as the field‘s acreage in these areas. To select Unit 1, the table included plot 

locations for 7, 15, 29, 47, and 128 acres. Plot locations for strip farmed fields were based on a 

30 acre field, 3⁄4 mile long and 1/16 mile wide. To minimize damage and to limit the time 

required to locate the plot, the area in which a plot could fall was limited to 1⁄4 of a field for less 

than 60 acre fields, to 1/9 of a field for fields over 60 acres, and to 1/8 of a strip farmed field. To 

simplify procedures and to minimize crop damage, Unit 2 is located 30 paces further into the field 

and 30 paces further along the edge from Unit 1. In an effort to minimize the enumerator‘s 

decision as to where the edge of the field lies, no chance of selection is given to 0 paces (i.e., no 

plot located on the extreme border). This method of locating Units 1 and 2 is the one currently 

being used. 
5

4. GENERAL METHODOLOGY

The concepts and methodology used in objective yield surveys for forecasting and estimating 

yields are similar for all field crops. Forecasts and estimates are based on actual counts and 

measurements made in sample fields by trained enumerators, and on data obtained by laboratory 

analyses of fruit from the crops. Two components of yield — number of fruit (heads, bolls, ears, 

etc.) and weight per fruit — are used to forecast yield levels. Various plant characteristics are 

used to predict these components during the growing season. Harvest losses, estimated by 

gleaning small plots in the sample fields after harvest, are deducted to obtain a net yield.

During the early growing season, crop maturity varies considerably by region. As the season and 

plant maturity progresses, the plant characteristics and measurements made to forecast yield 

change. The enumerator determines the maturity stage of the crop in the sample field during each 

visit and makes appropriate counts and measurements for the growth stage.

Observations for each sample are made on two randomly selected plots (units) in each of the 

selected fields. Each plot consists of a specified number of parallel rows of predetermined length, 

or a rectangular unit drawn to specification if crop rows are indistinguishable at the unit location. 

Forecasts are made from plant and fruit counts obtained each month during the growing season. 

A small portion of mature fruit is sent to a regional laboratory to make moisture and weight 

measurements.

States are selected for the objective yield program with the intent of covering over 80 percent of 

the production of the crop. This is done as long as there are no budgetary constraints.

5. SAMPLING

Objective yield samples are selected from acreage reported on the March and June Agricultural 

Surveys and the June Area Survey. Winter wheat samples are selected from the March 

Agricultural Survey. Spring wheat, durum wheat, corn, cotton, and soybean samples are selected 

from acreage reported on the June Area Survey. Potato samples are selected from the June 

Agricultural Survey.

Winter wheat samples are unique, as they are selected from the March Agricultural Survey using 

a multiple frame (combined list and area survey) design. Also, winter wheat varies in that 

samples are drawn from  ̳fields to be harvested for grain‘, while other crops are sampled from 

fields  ̳planted and to be planted‘ on the parent survey.

The objective yield sample for each crop is allocated to the most important production states such 

that 80 percent or more of the nation‘s crop is included. Allocations are made to minimize 

production estimates‘ coefficients of variation (CV). Until about 1990, allocations were made to 

maintain minimum harvest level CV‘s. As estimation models have improved, an effort has been 

made to allocate samples to maintain a minimum CV across the growing season within budget 

constraints.
6

The June list and area surveys are major annual survey efforts conducted by NASS that serve as 

the parent surveys for several of the objective yield surveys. Nationally, the area frame 

component includes approximately 11,000 segments, each about one square mile -- collectively

representing about 42,000 farms, which are enumerated in early June to identify land use. The 

enumerated acreages of planted crops in a given sampled segment are expanded by the associated 

segment-level expansion factor. Objective yield samples are then selected proportional to the 

expanded acreage. Proportional sampling ensures that the distribution of the objective yield

sample will approximate the distribution of the crop as discovered in the June Area Survey. 

Sampling procedures are similar for winter wheat except that the March Agricultural Survey is 

the base survey.

Survey states, sample size, and sample distribution are reviewed annually, but NASS has 

attempted to maintain consistent state involvement and sample sizes to maintain year-to-year 

comparability and to meet target coefficients of variation. 

6. FIELD PROCEDURES

Enumerators are provided aerial photographs with a segment outlined in red. Operators of land in 

these segments were interviewed during the June Area Survey. Within the segment there may be 

more than one tract (farm). The enumerator locates and interviews the operator of the tract for 

the specific objective yield survey being worked.

Seven reporting forms are used during the course of the growing season to collect information 

from the farm operator or for recording the counts and measurements in the field. The reporting 

forms are designated by an alphabetic letter, which, in general, reflects the chronological order in 

which they are used during the growing season. The data collected on each form are similar for 

all crops in the objective yield program.

A convenient way to describe the field procedures for the objective yield surveys is to describe 

each reporting form, and explain its use.

Form A - Also known as the ―Initial Interview‖ form, it is completed on the first visit to the farm 

operation. It is used to update the crop acreage intended for harvest and to identify the sample 

field for the survey. It is also used to gain permission from the farmer to enter the field to lay out 

the objective yield survey sample units and to query the farmer about pesticide usage so the 

enumerator can take appropriate personal safety precautions. 

This form is used to verify or change planted and harvested acreages that were reported earlier 

with the mid-year survey. It‘s also the mechanism for selecting the field for making actual field 

counts and measurements. 

Form B – This form is the field observation recording form. It is used to record counts and 

measurements of the plants and fruiting forms. In addition, Form B reiterates instructions for 

locating, constructing, and processing the sample units. A separate Form B is completed each 

survey month until harvest time, when a final Form B is completed.
7

A Form B is done for each month until very near harvest. Close contact is maintained with the 

operator so that a sample field is not harvested before a final Form B (just before harvest) can be 

completed. During this last visit before farmer harvest, a sample of the mature crop is sent to the 

laboratory. This sample is the basis for  ̳at harvest yield‘ estimates. 

Forms C-1 and C-2 – These forms are used to record laboratory observations and are not seen by 

the field enumerator. Form C-1 records data from the early season, pre-harvest field visits, while 

the C-2 is generated from the last field visit made at, or just before, farmer harvest.

Form D – This form was used to record the actual number of acres harvested at the end of the 

year and the operator estimated yield of the field. It was discontinued in 2002.

Form E – This is a field observation form used to collect data for determining field harvest loss 

so that a net yield estimate can be made. The field visit to collect Form E data must be within 3 

days after harvest to determine harvest loss accurately, as loose grain deteriorates quickly or is 

lost when left in the open. From the gleanings recorded on this form, an estimate of harvest loss 

is obtained that is subtracted from gross yield to arrive at a net yield. Plot location of this postharvest unit is similar to the location process of the original unit. A measured rectangle is staked 

out, and fruit remaining in the unit after harvest is collected and sent to the lab. There it is 

counted, weighed, and moisture tested to estimate the harvest loss. It should be noted that 

gleaning plots are not located in the same place as the Form B plots, since enumerators hand 

harvest these plots and bias the harvest loss.

Form H – This is also a farmer interview form, and it is completed at the same time as the Form 

A. It is used to collect data on seed, fertilizer, and pesticide application rates and tillage practices. 

These data are used for further economic analysis, and are not part of the yield estimation 

program.

Locating the Unit

After completing Forms A and H, the units are constructed in the sample fields by the 

enumerator. Two units are laid out for each sample. Unit 1 and Unit 2 are located independently 

of each other (except in wheat where unit locations are dependent). The random number of rows 

and paces for locating Units 1 and 2 are computer generated and preprinted on a label on Form B.

The point of entry into the field, or starting corner, is the first corner reached when approaching 

the field that allows the units to have a chance of falling in any area of the field – interior, border,

or turn-row. Ideally, any area of the field should be available for selection; however, particularly 

for very large fields, this is not logistically feasible. Therefore, procedures focus on ensuring 

randomness and that various types of field locations are appropriately represented. As part of the 

selection process, the shape of the field must be considered. Research has indicated that there are 

no statistical differences related to starting corners. Therefore, any field corner which does not 

exclude some part of the field is acceptable.

In locating the sample plots based on a designated number of paces along and into the field, the 

enumerators are instructed to walk their normal paces. It is very important that they not vary their 
8

pacing based on specific areas they may be seeing in the field, so as not to bias the plot location. 

The pacing process, if allowed to be truly random, should ultimately result in the inclusion of 

some barren areas (not delineated on Form A) as well as some especially lush ones.

The steps below are followed when locating and laying out the sample units for corn. There are 

slight variations in these procedures from crop to crop.

Step 1: The enumerator marks the starting corner with a piece of plastic flagging ribbon so that it 

will be clearly visible on later visits. He/she usually ties a piece of red plastic flagging ribbon to a 

fence or some nearby object or drives a large stake in the ground and attaches the ribbon. The 

enumerator then makes a note of the location and the type of marking used on the kit envelope 

field sketch.

Step 2: The enumerator then walks along the end of the crop rows until the number of rows (or 

paces for wheat and broadcast seeded fields) indicated for Unit 1 is reached. A piece of flagging 

ribbon is tied on the first plant in Row 1. This helps locate the same row on subsequent visits. 

The next row in the direction of travel will be Row 2 of Unit 1. 

Step 3: The enumerator walks the required number of paces into the field between Row 1 and 

Row 2, starting the first pace 1.5 feet outside the plowed end of Row 1. This makes it possible 

for a unit to fall anywhere in the field including the very edge.

Step 4: After the last of the required paces is taken, a dowel stick is laid down so that it touches 

the end of the enumerator‘s shoe. The dowel is placed across Row 1 and Row 2, at a right angle 

to the rows. The unit is laid out in the direction of travel of the last pace.

Step 5: The zero end of a 50 ft. tape is anchored at the dowel stick directly beside the plants in 

Row 1. The sample number is written on a florist stake and inserted at the anchor point.

Florist stakes are color coded pieces of lath about 6 to 8 inches long. They are highly visible 

markers commonly used in nursery and greenhouse operations to mark seed beds. Florist stakes 

deteriorate quickly so no hazard will be created if they are lost or abandoned in the field after the 

survey.

Step 6: In Row 1, a starting florist stake is placed exactly 5 feet from the anchor point. It is 

marked ―U1-R1‖. This measured  ̳buffer zone‘ helps ensure that the unit location is not 

subjectively biased in its location by the enumerator. The florist stake should be placed beside 

the row about 2 inches from the base of the plants. The marker is placed outside the plant row to 

avoid any damage to the developing crop.

Step 7: Working outside the unit, the enumerator carefully measures the unit length and places a 

florist stake at the designated point. Corn, cotton, and potatoes have larger unit lengths which are 

measured with a tape. For example, the corn count area is 15 feet long. A rigid metal frame is 

used for marking wheat and soybeans where the unit size is smaller. 
9

Not all the fields are square or rectangular, and other special situations may arise when locating 

and laying out a unit. The Interviewers‘ Manual provides detail instructions on how to handle 

most of these situations. Some of the problems that more commonly occur include: blank areas 

in the field that were known or unknown during the mid-year survey; the field is not large enough 

to accommodate the number of rows or paces specified; row direction changes; odd shaped fields 

are encountered as circular fields under pivot irrigation; fields planted on contours; or crop rows 

that are not distinguishable due to sowing practices. All these situations are covered with precise 

instructions.

The Form B is the recording form for counts and measurements that are made at the units. Visits 

to these sample units will take place monthly during the growing season except for potatoes, 

when only one visit is made within 3 days of harvest or when vines are dead.

Because the same sample unit must be revisited monthly, it is important that the enumerator 

precisely mark the location of the unit. Plastic flagging ribbon is used. This is highly visible, but 

like florist stakes, quickly disintegrates so that it may be abandoned after the survey.

Counts and Measurements

The steps below apply specifically to corn. There are slight variations in these procedures from 

crop to crop.

Step 1: The first field procedure is to measure row spaces. For corn, 1-row and then 4-row space

measurements are required. Measurements are made from the plants in row 1 to row 2 and then

from row 1 to row 5. These measurements are used to calculate the area of the unit.

Step 2: The enumerator counts the number of plants in each row in the designated unit.

Step 3: The enumerator classifies the unit by maturity category. Descriptive four page handouts 

with color picture examples are provided to assist in determining maturity.

Step 4: There is typically a small area of the unit in which more specific counts and 

measurements on fewer plants are made. Different counts are made depending on the maturity 

level category. The crop and type of counts are as follows:

Soybeans: 1) plants; 2) nodes; 3) lateral branches with blooms, dried flowers, or pods; 4) 

blooms, dried flowers and pods; and 5) pods with beans.

Corn: 1) plants; 2) average length of kernel rows; 3) diameter of ear; 4) stalks with ears or 

silked ear shoots; 5) number of ears; 6) ears with kernel formation; and 7) cob length.

Cotton: 1) plants; 2) burrs, open and partially opened bolls; 3) large unopened bolls; 4) small 

bolls and blooms; and 5) squares.

Wheat: 1) stalks; 2) heads in late boot; 3) emerged heads on all stalks; and 4) detached heads.
10

Potatoes: 1) hills; 2) tubers; and 3) field weight of tubers in the unit.

After completing Unit 1 counts and measurements, the enumerators have to go back to the 

beginning of the Row 1, Unit 1 and walk to the designated row, or number of paces, for Unit 2. 

The enumerators are instructed to continue in the original direction of travel as when locating 

Unit 1, if the Unit 2 count exceeds the Unit 1 count. After locating Row 1 of Unit 2, they have to 

walk the required paces into the field to set up Unit 2, and make the counts and measurements 

required.

Table 1 presents the number of states participating in the national objective yield program by 

commodity since the start of the program.
11

Table 1: Number of States in the National Objective Yield Program by Commodity: 1954-2008

CROP CORN COTTON SOYBEANS WINTER 

WHEAT

SPRING 

WHEAT

DURUM 

WHEAT

POTATOES RICE SUNFLOWER SORGHUM

1954 10 10

1955 10 10 2

1956 23 10 11 2

1957 23 13 11 9

1958 23 13 11 9

1959 23 13 11 9

1960 23 13 12 9

1961 23 13 12 9

1962 23 13 11 9

1963 23 14 na2

9

1964 23 14 11 9

1965 29 14 11 na

1966 30 14 11 15 5 3

1967 30 14 14 15 5 3

1968 24 14 14 15 5 3

1969 24 14 14 15 5 3

1970 24 14 14 15 5 3

1971 19 14 14 15 5 3 6

1972 19 14 14 15 5 3 7

1973 19 14 14 15 5 3 7

1974 19 14 14 15 5 3 7

1975 19 14 14 15 5 3 12

1976 20 14 14 15 5 3 12

1977 18 12 17 15 5 3 12

1978 18 12 17 15 5 3 11

1979 18 6 17 15 5 3 11

1980 16 6 17 15 5 3 11

1981 10 6 15 14 5 3 11 1 1 1

1982 10 6 15 14 5 3 11 1 1 1

1983 10 6 15 14 5 3 11 2 1 2

1984 10 6 15 13 5 1 11 5 3 5

1985 10 6 15 15 5 1 11 5 3 5

1986 10 6 15 15 5 1 11 5 3 5

1987 10 6 15 15 5 1 11 5 3 4

1988 10 6 14 15 5 1 11 5

1989 10 6 14 15 5 1 11 3

1990 10 6 11 12 4 1 11 2

1991 10 6 11 15 4 1 11 2

1992 10 6 11 na 4 1 11 2

1993 10 6 8 13 4 1 11

1994 10 6 8 13 4 1 11

1995 10 6 8 13 4 1 11

1996 7 5 8 10 3 1 7

1997 7 5 8 10 3 1 7

 

2

The cells shown with a ―na‖ represents those for which no information was available.
12

Table 1: Number of States in the National Objective Yield Program by Commodity: 1954-2008 

(continuation)

CROP CORN COTTON SOYBEANS WINTER

WHEAT

SPRING

WHEAT

DURUM

WHEAT POTATOES RICE SUNFLOWER SORGHUM

1998 7 11 8 10 3 1 7

1999 7 12 8 12 3 1 7

2000 7 15 8 12 3 1 7

2001 7 7 8 10 3 1 7

2002 7 7 7 10 3 1 7

2003 7 7 7 10 3 1 7

2004 10 7 11 10 3 1 7

2005 10 7 11 10 3 1 7

2006 10 7 11 10 3 1 7

2007 10 7 11 10 3 1 7

2008 10 6 11 10 3 1 7
13

7. NATIONAL PROGRAM

7.1 Corn

History

The corn objective yield survey started as a research project in 1954, in conjunction with the 

cotton objective yield survey. The first corn objective yield survey was conducted during the 

week of August 22, 1954. The plant observations during the first visit consisted of counts and the 

measurement of ears. The second visit took place during the week of September 19, 1954. Then,

the samples of ears were weighed and tested for moisture content to derive a pre-harvest yield 

indication. Post harvest visits were made after the farmers had harvested the crop. This initial 

survey was conducted in 10 southern states: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas. For 1955, the 

corn survey was moved up a month to coincide with the first cotton survey in late July. 

In 1956, the corn objective yield research program was expanded to the north central region of the 

country. An additional 13 states were added to the program for a total of 23 states. The 

additional 13 states were: Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, 

Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, South Dakota, Virginia, and Wisconsin. In 1961, the program became 

operational in all these states.

In 1965, six new states were added to the program: New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, 

Delaware, Florida, and West Virginia. Maryland was introduced to the program a year later in 

1966. Delaware, Arkansas, Louisiana, New Jersey, Oklahoma, and West Virginia were dropped

from the program in 1968. In 1971, seven states were dropped from the program: New York, 

South Carolina, Florida, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, and Texas. That same year, Delaware 

was reinstated to the program and Colorado was introduced for the first time. Texas was 

reinstated to the program in 1976. In 1977, Maryland and Delaware were dropped from the 

program. 

In 1980, the corn sample was reduced from 3,200 to 2,870, primarily by dropping Virginia and 

Colorado from the program. In 1981, major financial restraints resulted in significant changes to 

the corn objective yield program. Six states were dropped from the program: Georgia, Kansas, 

Kentucky, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Texas. The total sample size was reduced by 

almost half. 

In 1991, the sample sizes were increased for Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska. In 1996,

Michigan, Missouri, and South Dakota were dropped from the program. By 1997, the corn 

objective yield program was down to seven states. In 2004, three states were reinstated into the 

program: Kansas, Missouri, and South Dakota.
14

Corn Objective Yield Survey Timeline

1954 ----------

Initial corn survey conducted in 10 states: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, 

Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, 

Tennessee, and Texas.

1955 ----------

Corn survey moved up a month to coincide with the first cotton survey in 

late July.

1956 ----------

Thirteen states were added: Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, 

Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, South Dakota, Virginia, 

and Wisconsin.

1961 ---------- Program became operational in all 23 states.

1965 ----------

Six states were added: New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, 

Florida, and West Virginia.

1966 ---------- Maryland was added.

1968 ----------

Delaware, Arkansas, Louisiana, New Jersey, Oklahoma, and West Virginia

were dropped.

1971 ----------

Seven states were dropped: New York, South Carolina, Florida, 

Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, and Texas;

Two states were added: Delaware (reinstated) and Colorado.

1976 ---------- Texas was added (reinstated).

1977 ---------- Two states were dropped: Delaware and Maryland.

1980 ---------- Corn sample was reduced from 3,200 to 2,870;

Two states were dropped: Colorado and Virginia.

1981 ---------- Total sample size was cut in half due to financial constraints;

Six states were dropped: Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina, 

Pennsylvania, and Texas.

1991 ---------- Sample sizes were increased for Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska.

1996 ---------- Three states were dropped: Michigan, Missouri, and South Dakota.

1997 ---------- OY program includes a total of 7 states.

2004 --------- Three states were added: Kansas, Missouri, and South Dakota (reinstated).
15

Participating States and Sample Sizes 

The tables below present sample size information for the participating states during the different 

stages of the program. Table 2 presents information for the research part of the program and 

Table 3 contains the information for the operational part.

Table 2: Corn Objective Yield Research Program: 1954 - 1960

STATE 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960

AL 24 26 70 70 60 60 150

AR 13 8 50 50 40 40 100

GA 34 32 70 70 60 60 150

IA 136 138 145 193 150

IL 109 113 125 166 150

IN 54 57 60 81 75

KS 16 17 20 26 45

KY 40 70 60 60 150

LA 8 6 50 50 40 40 100

MI 22 23 25 34 45

MN 66 75 85 114 75

MO 75 75 80 106 75

MS 21 28 50 50 40 40 150

NC 25 24 70 70 60 60 150

NE 65 52 55 74 75

OH 47 46 50 66 75

OK 3 2 50 50 40 40 80

SC 22 17 50 50 40 40 100

SD 51 48 55 74 75

TN 24 23 70 70 60 60 150

TX 26 27 70 70 60 60 120

VA 40 50 40 40 100

WI 36 36 50 66 45

Totals 200 193 1,357 1,400 1,350 1,600 2,385
16

Table 3: Corn Objective Yield Operational Program: 1961 - 1969

STATE 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969

AL 180 180 180 120 120 120 130 120 110

AR 120 100 100 100 100 80 100

DE 60 60 70

FL 30 80 110 110 110

GA 180 180 180 180 160 130 150 140 130

IA 180 200 200 200 185 170 190 220 220

IL 180 200 200 200 180 170 190 220 220

IN 120 120 120 120 130 130 160 180 180

KS 120 120 120 120 105 110 150 150 160

KY 180 180 180 150 145 130 150 150 150

LA 120 100 100 100 105 100 110

MD 80 110 110 120

MI 40 100 120 150 130 120 150 160 160

MN 60 150 150 150 130 130 160 180 190

MO 60 120 120 150 140 130 150 170 170

MS 120 120 120 140 120 100 120 120 100

NC 180 180 180 180 155 130 150 160 160

NE 60 150 150 180 155 150 180 200 200

NJ 30 60 100

NY 60 80 300 300 280

OH 60 120 120 120 125 130 140 160 150

OK 120 100 100 100 85 70 60

PA 60 100 160 170 180

SC 120 120 120 120 105 100 120 120 120

SD 60 120 120 120 100 100 140 160 170

TN 180 180 180 150 130 130 150 150 150

TX 250 200 200 180 145 120 150 150 150

VA 60 120 120 120 110 110 150 150 160

WV 30 60 100

WI 40 120 120 150 130 120 180 180 180

Totals 2,790 3,280 3,300 3,300 3,260 3,300 4,280 3,930 3,920
17

Table 3: Corn Objective Yield Operational Program: 1970 - 1979 (continuation)

STATE 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979

AL 80

CO 160 170 170 170 170 170 170 160 165

DE 90 90 90 90 100 100

FL 100

GA 120 100 100 120 120 110 110 110 110 110

IA 220 230 230 230 220 220 230 240 240 240

IL 220 250 260 260 260 260 260 240 260 260

IN 180 200 210 200 210 210 210 210 210 210

KS 170 160 170 170 190 190 200 200 200 200

KY 140 140 140 140 140 150 150 140 140 145

MD 120 120 110 100 95 100 100

MI 140 130 120 130 130 130 130 120 120 120

MN 190 210 200 210 210 210 210 210 210 210

MO 180 180 180 180 180 170 170 190 180 165

MS 100

NC 170 170 170 150 155 150 170 130 130 130

NE 220 200 200 200 200 190 200 215 220 235

NY 240

OH 160 180 180 180 190 180 180 180 180 180

PA 180 170 170 170 170 180 180 170 160 150

SC 120

SD 170 150 140 140 140 130 130 130 130 130

TN 150

TX 150 200 195 210 220

VA 160 160 160 160 160 170 160 180 170 160

WI 190 200 200 200 190 180 170 170 170 170

Totals 3,870 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,220 3,200 3,430 3,200 3,200 3,200
18

Table 3: Corn Objective Yield Operational Program: 1980 - 1989 (continuation)

STATE 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989

GA 110

IA 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240

IL 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260 260

IN 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210

KS 185

KY 155

MI 120 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110

MN 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210

MO 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

NC 130

NE 235 235 235 235 235 240 240 240 240 240

OH 195 195 195 195 195 190 190 190 190 190

PA 145

SD 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140

TX 200

WI 185 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

Totals 2,870 1,920 1,920 1,920 1,920 1,920 1,920 1,920 1,920 1,920

Table 3: Corn Objective Yield Operational Program: 1990 - 1999 (continuation)

STATE 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

IA 240 270 270 270 310 330 330 330 330 330

IL 260 270 270 270 280 290 310 310 310 310

IN 210 210 210 210 210 210 200 200 200 200

MI 110 110 110 110 110 100

MN 210 230 230 230 210 210 210 210 210 210

MO 150 150 150 150 150 150

NE 240 270 270 270 270 270 300 300 300 300

OH 190 190 190 190 170 160 140 140 140 140

SD 140 140 140 140 140 140

WI 170 170 170 170 160 150 130 130 130 130

Totals 1,920 2,010 2,010 2,010 2,010 2,010 1,620 1,620 1,620 1,620

Table 3: Corn Objective Yield Operational Program: 2000 – 2008 (continuation)

STATE 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

IA 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330

IL 310 310 310 310 310 310 310 310 310

IN 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200

KS 150 150 150 150 150

MN 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210

MO 150 150 150 150 150

NE 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

OH 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140

SD 150 150 150 150 150

WI 130 130 130 130 150 150 150 150 150

Totals 1,620 1,620 1,620 1,620 2,090 2,090 2,090 2,090 2,090
19

7.2 Cotton

History

The cotton objective yield research program began in 1954 in conjunction with the corn objective 

yield research program. Both programs followed the same guidelines except for their survey start 

dates. The sample of cotton growers was visited during the last week of July 1954 to get 

estimates of acreage for harvest and prospective production, together with counts of bolls, blooms 

and squares, and data on weevil damage on selected sampling units in randomly selected fields. 

These data were used to develop a forecasting equation. The same fields and field plots were 

visited again during the week of August 22, 1954. At this time, open cotton on the selected 

sampling units in the field was picked and weighed to provide a harvest indication of yield. The 

sample was visited a third time to get the growers‘ reports of acreages harvested, final production, 

and data on amount of cotton left behind in the sample fields. This initial research was conducted 

in 10 southern states: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina,

Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas. 

In 1957, the program was expanded to three other states: Arizona, California, and New Mexico. 

A sample of 110 fields was selected from these last 3 states to study the behavior of plants on 

irrigated land. These states followed the same sampling procedures as all the others. Their 

schedule of surveys was also the same except that a fourth visit was made to a subsample of fields 

where only large bolls were counted. The data from these surveys were expected to provide a 

basis for developing preliminary forecasting procedures and for testing the extent to which 

relationships found in the rainfall cotton belt might apply to irrigated cotton. 

In 1961, both the cotton and corn objective yield programs were expanded to the full operating 

level to provide estimates in 13 and 23 states respectively. Missouri was added to the cotton 

objective yield program in 1963. In 1977, New Mexico and North Carolina were dropped from 

the program and the total sample size was decreased by 110 samples. 

In 1979, there were major changes to the cotton objective yield program. The total sample size 

was dropped from 2,390 to 1,780. The number of participating states was reduced from 12 to 6. 

The states that were dropped from the program were: Alabama, Georgia, Missouri, Oklahoma, 

South Carolina, and Tennessee.

In 1981, sample sizes were reduced in Arizona, Arkansas, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, and 

Texas due to budgetary constraints. In 1983, the total sample size was decreased again from 

1,650 to 1,580. In 1984, the sample size was reduced from 1,580 to 1,345. This was attained by 

cutting the sample size for Mississippi and Arkansas in half. To reduce the severity of model 

instability, the models in 1985 were based on the most recent five years rather than just three 

years of data.

Arizona was dropped in 1996. By 1997, the cotton objective yield program was down to 5 states. 

In 1998, the concept of using regions was adopted. States were grouped by regions and sample 

sizes were set to meet target CVs at the region level. The Southeast region was the first region 
20

defined to the cotton objective yield program with 145 samples. The Southeast region was 

comprised of: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia. 

The West region was defined to the program in 1999 with 235 samples. Arizona and California 

comprised the West region. The total number of states was increased to 12 when Arizona was 

reinstated into the program. 

The Southwest and Delta regions were defined in 2000. The Delta region included Arkansas, 

Louisiana, Mississippi, which were already in the program. Missouri and Tennessee were added 

to this region in 2000. The total sample size for the region was 470. The Southwest region 

included Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas, which was already in the program. The 

total sample size of the region was 560. Virginia and Florida were dropped from the program in 

2000. 

All regions were dissolved for the 2001 survey, and the samples were drawn at the state level. 

Alabama, Arizona, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Tennessee were dropped from the 

program in 2001. Only seven states remained in the program: Arkansas, California, Georgia, 

Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Texas. 

In 2003, a proposal to cancel this program was rejected. The program continued with similar 

procedures as in previous years. Sample sizes were reallocated across the states in 2007. The 

latest change occurred in 2008, when California was dropped from the program.
21

Cotton Objective Yield Survey Timeline

1954 -------

Initial Survey: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North 

Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas

1957 -------

3 states / 110 samples added - Arizona, California, and New Mexico, 

primarily to study behavior of plants on irrigated land

1961 ------- Program expanded to full operational level, providing estimates in 13 states

1963 ------- Missouri added

1977 ------- 2 states dropped - New Mexico and North Carolina

Total sample size was decreased by 110 samples

1979 -------

6 states dropped - Alabama, Georgia, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Carolina, 

and Tennessee

6 states remain, total sample size dropped from 2,390 to 1,780

1981 -------

Sample sizes reduced in Arizona, Arkansas, California, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, and Texas (budget constraints)

1983 ------- Total sample size decreased from 1,650 to 1,580

1984 -------

Total sample size reduced from 1,580 to 1,345 by cutting Mississippi and 

Arkansas sample sizes in half

1985 -------

Models based on most recent 5 years in lieu of recent 3 to reduce model 

instability

1996 ------- Arizona dropped, leaving 5 states in survey

1998 -------

Southeast Region (6 states/145 samples) added - Alabama, Florida, 

Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia

1999 ------- Arizona was added and West Region was created (2 state/235) 

2000 -------

Southwest Region (4 states/560 samples) was defined - Kansas, New 

Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas

Delta Region (5 states/470 samples) was defined - Arkansas, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee

2001 ------- Regions dissolved, samples drawn at state level

6 states dropped - Alabama, Arizona, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Carolina, 

and Tennessee

7 states remain - Arkansas, California, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, 

North Carolina, and Texas

2003 ------- Proposal to cancel Cotton OY rejected

2007 ------- Sample sizes reallocated across the states

2008 ------- California dropped from program
22

Participating States and Sample Sizes 

The tables below present sample size information for the participating states during the different 

stages of the program. Table 4 presents information for the research part of the program; and 

Table 5 contains the information for the operational part.

Table 4: Cotton Objective Yield Research Program: 1954 - 1960

STATE 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960

AL 12 13 70 70 50 50 60

AR 33 18 125 125 100 100 100

AZ 30 30 30 60

CA 50 50 50 100

GA 8 8 70 70 50 50 60

LA 7 7 70 70 50 50 60

MS 21 21 125 125 100 100 100

NC 3 4 70 70 50 50 50

NM 30 30 30 50

OK 12 14 70 70 50 50 60

SC 11 10 70 70 50 50 50

TN 9 9 70 70 50 50 50

TX 84 83 260 250 200 200 200

Totals 200 187 1,000 1,100 860 860 1,000

Table 5: Cotton Objective Yield Operational Program: 1961 - 1969

STATE 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969

AL 150 150 150 130 140 150 130 130 130

AR 300 300 300 270 230 260 300 300 300

AZ 30 30 60 150 180 180 100 100 115

CA 55 55 100 100 200 230 250 250 250

GA 150 150 150 130 130 140 120 120 120

LA 150 150 150 120 120 130 100 100 100

MO 40 60 80 80 80 80 70

MS 300 300 300 325 260 300 360 360 360

NC 150 150 150 130 115 115 80 80 75

NM 25 25 50 70 100 80 60 60 60

OK 150 150 150 175 200 180 120 120 120

SC 150 150 150 130 115 115 100 100 100

TN 150 150 150 100 90 90 80 80 80

TX 500 500 500 600 630 630 700 700 700

Totals 2,260 2,260 2,400 2,490 2,590 2,680 2,580 2,580 2,580
23

Table 5: Cotton Objective Yield Operational Program: 1970 - 1979 (continuation)

STATE 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979

AL 130 120 120 120 120 120 120 110 110

AR 300 285 285 285 285 270 270 260 250 230

AZ 120 120 120 110 110 110 110 110 110 120

CA 250 240 240 240 240 260 260 280 290 290

GA 120 100 100 100 100 80 70 70 70

LA 100 100 100 100 100 130 130 130 130 110

MO 70 70 70 80 80 70 70 70 70

MS 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 340

NC 70 65 65 65 65 50 50

NM 60 60 60 60 60 70 70

OK 120 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110

SC 100 100 100 100 100 80 80 80 80

TN 80 80 80 80 80 90 90 100 100

TX 700 700 700 700 700 710 710 710 710 690

Totals 2,580 2,510 2,510 2,510 2,510 2,510 2,500 2,390 2,390 1,780

Table 5: Cotton Objective Yield Operational Program: 1980 - 1989 (continuation)

STATE 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989

AR 220 200 200 200 110 110 105 105 105 105

AZ 130 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115

CA 300 275 275 275 275 275 275 275 275 275

LA 110 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

MS 330 300 300 310 165 165 170 170 170 170

TX 690 660 660 580 580 580 580 580 580 580

Totals 1,780 1,650 1,650 1,580 1,345 1,345 1,345 1,345 1,345 1,345

Table 5: Cotton Objective Yield Operational Program: 1990-1999 (continuation)

STATE 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

AL 23 41

AR 105 125 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

AZ 115 115 115 115 115 115 70

CA 275 275 235 235 235 235 235 235 235 165

FL 8 9

GA 64 111

LA 100 100 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130

MS 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

NC 34 59

SC 11 19

TX 580 560 560 560 560 560 560 560 560 560

VA 5 6

Totals 1,345 1,345 1,360 1,360 1,360 1,360 1,245 1,245 1,390 1,490
24

Table 5: Cotton Objective Yield Operational Program: 2000 - 2008 (continuation)

STATE 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

AL 47

AR 90 95 95 95 95 95 95 112 112

AZ 55

CA 160 150 150 150 150 150 150 104

GA 115 115 115 115 150 150 150 160 160

KS 3

LA 85 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

MO 56

NM 7

MS 161 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

NC 60 60 60 60 120 120 120 140 140

OK 16

SC 23

TN 78

TX 534 545 545 545 545 545 545 545 545

Totals 1,490 1,215 1,215 1,215 1,310 1,310 1,310 1,311 1,207
25

7.3 Potatoes

History

The potato objective yield survey started in 1971 in six states: Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, North 

Dakota, Oregon, and Washington. Wisconsin was added to the survey in 1972 through matching 

state funds. In 1975, the program was expanded to 12 states, but no information on state specific 

sample sizes is available. In 1978, California was dropped from the program. Colorado, 

Michigan, New York and Pennsylvania were dropped in 1996. Currently only seven states 

remain in the program: Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, North Dakota, Oregon, Washington, and 

Wisconsin. 

Participating States and Sample Sizes

The table below presents the states and their corresponding sample sizes for the potato objective 

yield survey.

Table 6: Potato Objective Yield Program: 1971-1979

STATE 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979

CA P

3

P p

CO P P p p p

ID 150 290 330 330 P P p p p

ME 90 140 160 155 P P p p p

MI P P p p p

MN 150 140 140 145 P P p p p

NY P P p p p

ND 150 140 160 160 P P p p p

OR 150 140 140 140 P P p p p

PA P P p p p

WA 150 140 160 160 P P p p p

WI 300 300 120 P P p p p

Totals 840 1,290 1,390 1,210 2,100 2,100 2,175 2,100 2,100

 

3

 The cells shown with a ―p‖ represent those years for which only total sample sizes were available, but no 

information was available about specific states sample sizes.
26

Table 6: Potato Objective Yield Program: 1980-1989 (continuation)

STATE 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989

CO p

4

p p 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

ID p p p 355 355 355 355 360 360 360

ME p p p 210 210 210 210 210 210 210

MI p p p 140 140 140 140 140 140 140

MN p p p 175 175 175 175 175 175 175

NY p p p 165 165 165 165 160 160 160

ND p p p 275 275 275 275 275 275 275

OR p p p 185 185 185 185 180 180 180

PA p p p 110 110 110 110 110 110 110

WA p p p 215 215 215 215 220 220 220

WI p p p 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

Totals 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100

Table 6: Potato Objective Yield Program: 1990-1999 (continuation)

STATE 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

CO 100 100 100 100 100 100

ID 360 360 360 340 340 340 340 340 340 340

ME 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210 210

MI 140 140 140 140 140 140

MN 175 175 175 175 175 175 185 185 185 185

NY 160 160 160 160 160 160

ND 275 275 275 275 275 275 295 295 195 195

OR 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180

PA 110 110 110 110 110 110

WA 220 220 220 220 220 220 220 220 220 220

WI 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

Totals 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,080 2,080 2,080 1,600 1,600 1,500 1,500

Table 6: Potato Objective Yield Program: 2000-2008 (continuation)

STATE 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

ID 340 340 340 340 340 340 340 340 340

ME 210 170 210 210 210 210 210 210 210

MN 185 155 155 155 155 155 155 155 155

ND 195 175 175 175 175 175 175 175 175

OR 180 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

WA 220 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200

WI 170 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

Totals 1,500 1,340 1,380 1,380 1,380 1,380 1,380 1,380 1,380

 

4

 The cells shown with a ―p‖ represent those years for which only total sample sizes were available, but no 

information was available about specific states sample sizes.
27

7.4 Rice

History

The rice objective yield survey started as a two year research project in Arkansas in 1981 and 

1982. The sample sizes were 130 and 100, respectively. The emphasis then was on improving 

the at-harvest estimation capability and the early season forecasting procedures. California was 

added to the research program in 1983 with a sample size of 125. The emphasis was to extend 

and verify the at-harvest estimating procedures developed for Arkansas. In California, data 

collection was restricted to counts at-harvest to produce a final season yield estimate.

The rice objective yield survey became operational during 1984 in five states: Arkansas, 

California, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. Detailed yearly information on sample sizes by 

state is provided in the table below. In 1985, to reduce model instability, the models were based 

on the most recent five years of data, rather than just three.

Mississippi and Texas were dropped from the program in 1989. California was dropped from the 

program in 1990. The entire program was discontinued in 1993.

Participating States and Sample Sizes

The table below presents the states and their corresponding sample sizes for the time period in 

which the rice objective yield survey was operational.

Table 7: Rice Objective Yield Program: 1984-1992

STATE 1984 1985 1987 1986 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992

AR 240 250 255 255 255 255 255 255 255

CA 200 190 190 190 190 190

LA 160 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165

MS 100 100 95 95 95

TX 135 130 130 130 130

Totals 835 835 835 835 835 610 420 420 420
28

7.5 Sorghum

History

The sorghum objective yield survey started as a three year research project in Kansas from 1981-

1983 with samples of 141, 125, and 125, respectively. In 1983, Texas was included in the 

research project with a sample size of 125. 

The survey became operational in 1984 in five states: Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma 

and Texas. Yearly information on sample sizes by state is provided in the table below. 

Oklahoma was dropped from the program in 1987, since it was not producing enough sorghum to 

justify staying in the program. In 1987, Arizona requested to be included in the program was 

declined. The entire program was discontinued in 1988.

Participating States and Sample Sizes

The table below presents the states and their corresponding sample sizes for the time period in 

which the sorghum objective yield survey was operational.

Table 8: Sorghum Objective Yield Program: 1984 - 1987

STATE 1984 1985 1986 1987

KS 250 260 270 270

MO 100 110 110 110

NE 170 170 170 170

OK 100 90 90

TX 380 370 360 360

Totals 1,000 1,000 1,000 910
29

7.6 Soybeans

History

The soybean objective yield research program began in 1956 in 11 states: Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, 

Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas. It 

continued as a research project until 1962 at about the same sample size level as in 1956. 

Arkansas was added to the program in 1960 and Mississippi in 1962. South Dakota and 

Wisconsin did not participate in the research project in 1962. In 1966, Iowa was included in the 

research program.

The soybean objective yield survey became operational in 1967, and it was expanded to 14 states. 

The following states were added in 1967: North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and 

Louisiana. In 1967, Iowa was dropped from the program. In 1968, Iowa was reinstated into the 

program, and Michigan was dropped.

Three additional states were added in 1977: Alabama, Georgia, and Kentucky. In 1981, Kansas 

and Kentucky were dropped from the program. Kentucky was reinstated into the program in 

1985, and South Carolina was dropped from it that same year. Alabama was dropped from the 

program in 1988. In 1989, 20 mid-western soybean samples were shifted to Ohio in an effort to 

increase precision. Ohio‘s soybean acreage was evenly divided between wide and narrow row 

plantings, resulting in a non-homogeneous population which required a larger sample. 

In 1990, Kansas was reinstated into the program and Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, and 

Tennessee were dropped from it. The total sample size was reduced to 1,540, distributed in 11 

states. Kansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi were dropped in 1993. 

In 2002, Arkansas was dropped from the program, but it was reinstated in 2004 along with 

Kansas. South Dakota was also reinstated into the program in 2004 after having been dropped 

almost 40 years earlier. Also in 2004, North Dakota was included in the program for the first 

time, and the overall total sample size was increased to 1,865 in 11 states.
30

Participating States and Sample Sizes 

The tables below present sample size information for the participating states during the different

stages of the program. Table 9 presents information for the research part of the program; and 

Table 10 contains the information for the operational part.

 Table 9: Soybean Objective Yield Research Program: 1956 - 1966

STATE 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966

AR 30 30 30 na5

150 150 na

IA 23 23 20 20 30 60 60 na 110 110 na

IL 42 48 42 42 60 90 90 na 140 140 na

IN 19 17 16 16 26 60 60 na 160 160 na

KS 6 6 6 6 6 40 30 na 30 30 na

MI 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 na 20 20 na

MN 21 19 18 18 26 26 40 na 130 130 na

MO 21 14 14 14 30 30 40 na 130 130 na

MS 15 na 160 160 na

NE 6 6 6 6 6 6 20 na 20 20 na

OH 17 22 20 20 18 18 30 na 150 150 na

SD 6 6 6 6 6 6

WI 6 6 6 6 6 6

Totals 173 173 160 160 250 378 421 na 1,200 1,200 na

 Table 10: Soybean Objective Yield Operational Program: 1967 – 1979 (continuation)

STATE 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979

AL 80 80 80

AR na 170 170 170 170 170 Na 160 160 160 160 150 150

GA 80 80 80

IA 135 135 155 155 155 Na 170 165 160 175 170 170

IL na 160 160 160 160 160 Na 165 170 180 190 190 190

IN na 140 140 140 140 140 Na 145 140 130 130 130 130

KS na 35 50 50 50 50 Na 60 60 60 60 60 60

KY 80 80 80

LA na 110 110 110 110 110 Na 105 110 110 100 100 100

MI na

MN na 125 125 125 125 125 Na 125 135 130 120 120 120

MO na 155 155 145 145 145 Na 155 150 160 160 160 160

MS na 150 150 150 150 150 Na 140 140 130 130 130 130

NC na 90 90 90 90 90 Na 80 80 75 75 80 80

NE na 35 50 60 60 60 Na 60 65 75 80 75 75

OH na 140 140 140 140 140 Na 140 130 130 125 140 140

SC na 100 100 90 90 90 Na 80 75 75 80 80 80

TN na 100 100 90 90 90 Na 90 90 100 90 90 90

Totals na 1,645 1,675 1,675 1,675 1,675 Na 1,675 1,670 1,675 1,915 1,915 1,915

 

5

The cells shown with a ―na‖ represent those years for which no information on sample sizes was found.
31

Table 10: Soybean Objective Yield Operational Program: 1980 - 1989 (continuation)

STATE 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989

AL 80 80 75 100 100 100 100 100

AR 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

GA 75 75 85 110 100 100 100 100 100 100

IA 170 170 165 165 165 170 170 170 170 160

IL 190 190 190 190 190 200 200 200 200 190

IN 130 130 130 130 135 130 130 130 130 130

KS 60

KY 90 100 100 100 100 100

LA 100 100 115 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

MN 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

MO 160 160 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

MS 130 130 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

NC 80 80 75 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

NE 75 75 75 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

OH 140 140 135 135 140 140 140 140 140 160

SC 75 75 75 105 105

TN 90 90 85 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Totals 1,915 1,765 1,765 1,915 1,915 1,920 1,920 1,920 1,820 1,820

Table 10: Soybean Objective Yield Operational Program: 1990 – 1999 (continuation)

STATE 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

AR 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

IA 160 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240

IL 190 210 210 210 210 240 240 240 240 240

IN 130 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180

KS 120 120 120

LA 120 120 120

MN 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

MO 170 170 170 170 170 150 150 150 150 150

MS 120 120 120

NE 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 120

OH 160 160 160 160 160 150 150 150 150 150

Totals 1,540 1,690 1,690 1,330 1,330 1,330 1,330 1,330 1,330 1,350
32

Table 10: Soybean Objective Yield Operational Program: 2000 – 2007 (continuation)

STATE 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

AR 150 150 285 285 285 285 285

IA 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240

IL 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240

IN 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180

KS 120 120 120 120 120

MN 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

MO 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

ND 120 120 120 120 120

NE 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

OH 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

SD 140 140 140 140 140

Totals 1,350 1,350 1,200 1,200 1,865 1,865 1,865 1,865 1,865
33

7.7 Sunflower

History

The sunflower objective yield survey started as a research project in North Dakota from 1981 to 

1983. The sample size was 125 for all three years. The main objective was to improve the atharvest estimation capability and to collect another year of data for developing early-season 

forecasting procedures. 

The sunflower objective yield survey became operational in 1984 in three states: North Dakota, 

Minnesota, and South Dakota. In 1984, the intended sample size was expected to be 450;

however, the estimated number of tracts with sunflower fields in Minnesota and South Dakota did 

not allow sampling at the desired rate. The sample size for 1984 ended up being 190. There were 

plans to develop a sampling frame for sunflowers to conduct a probability acreage survey in 1985 

and use a multiple frame approach for future sunflower objective yield surveys. In 1986, 

sunflower fields were selected from both list and area frame operators to allow for substantially 

higher sample sizes in both Minnesota and South Dakota. The entire program was discontinued 

in 1988.

States and Sample Sizes

The table below presents the states and their corresponding sample sizes for the time period in 

which the sunflower objective yield survey was operational. 

Table 11: Sunflower Objective Yield Program: 1984-1987

STATE 1984 1985 1986 1987

ND 125 125 125 125

MN 25 25 100 100

SD 40 50 100 100

Totals 190 200 325 325
34

7.8 Wheat

History

The wheat objective yield research program began in 1955 in Oklahoma and Texas. The program 

was expanded in 1957 to the following states: Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, 

Nebraska, and Ohio. The fields were selected by a random process, with probability proportional 

to size from farms reporting acreage in a survey conducted in December 1956. The same nine 

states continued in the program from 1959 to 1961. However, no detailed information on sample 

sizes is available for those years. In 1962, the winter wheat objective yield program became 

operational in nine states. 

In 1966, the spring and durum wheat objective yield programs became operational. Spring wheat 

was conducted in five states, and durum wheat in three states. This change increased the number 

of states in the wheat objective yield program to 17. The program remained stable through the 

1970s with no states being added or dropped from the program for either crop type. In 1973, the 

sample size for spring wheat was increased by 20 samples for a total sample size of 400. That 

same year the sample size for durum wheat was increased by 40 for a total sample size of 230. 

In 1981, South Dakota was dropped from the winter wheat program, and Michigan was dropped 

in 1984. Montana and South Dakota were dropped from the durum wheat program in 1984, since 

sample sizes were too small to adequately forecast and estimate yields in both states. Arkansas 

and California were introduced to the winter wheat program in 1985. The sample sizes for the 

winter wheat objective yield program peaked in 1985 at 2,090 samples, but began a steady 

decline in 1987 until 1990.

California, Idaho, Indiana, and Oregon were dropped from the winter wheat program in 1990, and 

South Dakota was reinstated to winter wheat after a decade. Idaho was dropped from the spring 

wheat program in that same year. Idaho, Indiana, and Oregon were reinstated to the winter wheat 

program in 1991. In 1993, Arkansas and Indiana were dropped from the winter wheat program. 

South Dakota, Idaho and Oregon were dropped from the winter wheat program in 1996. South 

Dakota was also dropped from the spring wheat program in that year. Oregon and Idaho were 

later reinstated to the winter wheat program in 1999 but dropped again in 2001. For 2006, due to 

an ongoing project with the Farm Service Agency (FSA), the Nebraska sample was selected from 

the winter wheat acres for harvest on land associated with a specific FSA farm number.
35

Wheat Objective Yield Survey Timeline

1955 ---------- Initial survey: Oklahoma and Texas.

1957 ----------

Seven states were added: Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, 

Nebraska, and Ohio.

1962 ---------- Winter wheat objective yield program became operational.

1966 ----------

Spring and durum wheat objective yield programs became operational;

total number of participating states increased from 9 to 17.

1973 ----------

Spring wheat sample size was increased by 20 samples for a total of 400.

Durum wheat sample size was increased by 40 samples for a total of 230.

1981 ---------- South Dakota was dropped from winter wheat program.

1984

----------

Michigan was dropped from winter wheat program.

Two states were dropped from durum wheat program: Montana and South 

Dakota.

1985 ----------

Two states were added to winter wheat program: Arkansas and California

Sample sizes for wheat objective yield program peaked at 2,090.

1990

----------

Four states were dropped from the winter wheat program: California, Idaho, 

Indiana, and Oregon. South Dakota was reinstated to the winter wheat 

program. Idaho was also dropped from the spring wheat program.

1991 ----------

Three states were added to the winter wheat program: Idaho, Indiana, and 

Oregon.

1993 ----------

Two states were dropped from the winter wheat program: Arkansas and 

Indiana.

1996 ----------

Three state were dropped from the winter wheat program: South Dakota, 

Idaho, and Oregon. South Dakota was also dropped from the spring wheat 

program

1999 ---------- Two states were added to the winter wheat program: Oregon and Idaho.

2001 ---------- Two states dropped from the winter wheat program: Oregon and Idaho.

2006 ----------

Nebraska sample selected from winter wheat acres for harvest on land 

associated with specific Farm Service Agency (FSA) number due to an 

ongoing project with the FSA.
36

Participating States and Sample Sizes by Type of Wheat

7.8a. Winter Wheat

The tables below present sample size information for the participating states during the different

stages of the program. Table 12 presents information for the research part of the program; and 

Table 13 contains the information for the operational part.

Table 12: Winter Wheat Objective Yield Research Program: 1955 - 1961

STATE 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961

IL 19 19 na na na

IN 13 14 na na na

KS 67 64 na na na

MI 15 11 na na na

MO 38 16 na na na

NE 27 22 na na na

OH 22 21 na na na

OK 31 na6

91 46 na na na

TX 29 na 58 19 na na na

 Total 60 na 350 232 na na na

 

Table 13: Winter Wheat Objective Yield Operational Program: 1962-1963 and 1970 - 1979 

STATE 1962 19637

1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979

CO 120 120 120 120 120 120 100 90 100 100

ID 90 100 100 100 100 100 100 90 90 90

IL 100 100 85 85 85 85 80 80 100 100 90 90

IN 100 100 85 90 90 90 80 80 80 80 80 80

KS 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 320 320 320

MI 15 100 80 75 75 70 70 70 60 60 60 60

MO 20 100 90 100 100 100 90 90 80 90 90 90

MT 90 100 100 100 110 100 120 110 110 110

NE 30 150 145 130 130 140 150 150 130 130 130 120

OH 100 100 85 85 85 80 80 80 80 80 80 80

OK 150 200 200 200 200 200 210 220 200 200 200 200

OR 80 80 80 80 80 80 100 100 100 110

SD 55 55 55 55 60 60 60 60 60 60

TX 150 250 230 220 220 220 210 210 210 210 210 210

WA 145 140 140 140 140 140 160 160 160 160

Total 965 1,400 1,880 1,880 1,880 1,880 1,880 1,880 1,880 1,880 1,880 1,880

 

6 The cells shown with a ―na‖ represent those years for which no information on sample sizes was found.

7 No information available on state participation or sample sizes between 1964 and 1969.
37

Table 13: Winter Wheat Objective Yield Operational Program: 1980 – 1989 (continuation)

STATE 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989

AR 100 80 75 75 75

CA 100 100 80 70 70

CO 100 100 100 100 120 120 120 110 100 100

ID 100 100 100 100 110 110 110 100 100 100

IL 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 80 70 70

IN 80 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70

KS 320 300 300 300 310 310 310 295 275 275

MI 60 50 50 50

MO 90 110 110 100 100 100 100 85 80 80

MT 110 110 110 110 130 130 120 110 100 100

NE 120 120 130 120 130 130 130 115 110 100

OH 80 90 90 90 90 90 90 85 80 80

OK 200 200 200 200 200 200 210 190 170 170

OR 110 120 120 120 120 120 120 110 90 90

SD 60

TX 200 200 200 200 220 220 230 200 170 180

WA 160 180 170 190 200 200 210 180 160 160

Total 1,880 1,840 1,840 1,840 1,890 2,090 2,090 1,885 1,720 1,720

Table 13: Winter Wheat Objective Yield Operational Program: 1990 – 1999 (continuation)

STATE 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

AR 75 80 na

CO 100 100 na 100 100 120 120 120 120 120

ID 100 na 100 100 100 62

IL 70 80 na 80 80 80 80 80 80 80

IN 80 na

KS 275 280 na 280 280 280 310 310 310 310

MO 80 80 na 80 80 80 80 80 80 80

MT 100 100 na 100 100 110 100 100 125 125

NE 100 110 na 110 110 110 110 110 110 110

OH 80 80 na 80 80 80 80 80 80 80

OK 170 180 na 180 180 180 170 170 195 195

OR 100 na 100 100 100 60

SD 80 80 na 80 80 80

TX 180 210 na 210 210 200 200 200 225 225

WA 160 170 na 170 170 170 160 160 175 153

Total 1,470 1,830 na 1,670 1,670 1,690 1,410 1,410 1,500 1,600
38

Table 13: Winter Wheat Objective Yield Operational Program: 2000 – 2007 (continuation)

STATE 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

CO 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

ID 62

IL 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80

KS 310 310 310 310 310 310 310 310 310

MO 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80

MT 125 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

NE 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110

OH 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80

OK 195 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170

OR 60

TX 225 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200

WA 153 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160

Total 1,600 1,410 1,410 1,410 1,410 1,410 1,410 1,410 1,410
39

7.8b. Spring Wheat

Table 14 contains the information for the operational part of the program.

Table 14: Spring Wheat Objective Yield Program: 1966 - 1969

STATE 1966 1967 1968 1969

ID na8

na 50 50

MN na na 55 55

MT na na 60 60

ND na na 160 160

SD na na 55 55

Total na na 380 380

Table 14: Spring Wheat Objective Yield Program: 1970 – 1979 (continuation)

STATE 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979

ID 50 60 60 50 50 50 50 50 50 60

MN 55 50 50 60 70 80 90 90 90 90

MT 60 60 60 80 70 60 50 50 50 50

ND 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 150

SD 55 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

Total 380 380 380 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

Table 14: Spring Wheat Objective Yield Program: 1980 – 1989 (continuation)

STATE 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989

ID 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60

MN 90 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80

MT 60 70 70 70 80 80 80 80 80 80

ND 150 140 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130

SD 50 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60

Total 410 410 400 400 410 410 410 410 410 410

Table 14: Spring Wheat Objective Yield Program: 1990 – 1999 (continuation)

STATE 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

MN 80 80 na 80 80 80 80 80 80 80

MT 80 90 na 90 90 90 90 90 90 90

ND 130 130 na 130 130 130 130 130 150 150

SD 60 80 na 80 80 90

Total 350 380 na 380 380 390 300 300 320 320

Table 14: Spring Wheat Objective Yield Program: 2000 – 2007 (continuation)

STATE 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

MN 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80

MT 90 90 90 90 150 150 150 150 150

ND 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

Total 320 320 320 320 380 380 380 380 380

 

8

The cells shown with a ―na‖ represent those years for which no information on sample sizes was found.
40

7.8c. Durum Wheat

Table 15 contains the information for the operational part of the program.

Table 15: Durum Wheat Objective Yield Program: 1966 - 1969

STATE 1966 1967 1968 1969

ND na9

na 100 100

MT na na 50 50

SD na na 40 40

Total na na 190 190

Table 15: Durum Wheat Objective Yield Program: 1970 – 1979 (continuation)

STATE 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979

ND 100 100 100 140 140 140 140 140 140 140

MT 50 50 50 45 45 45 45 45 45 45

SD 40 40 40 45 45 45 45 45 45 45

Total 190 190 190 230 230 230 230 230 230 230

Table 15: Durum Wheat Objective Yield Program: 1980 - 1989(continuation)

STATE 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989

ND 140 130 130 130 150 150 150 150 150 150

MT 40 40 40 40

SD 40 40 40 40

Total 220 210 210 210 150 150 150 150 150 150

Table 15: Durum Wheat Objective Yield Program: 1990 - 1999(continuation)

STATE 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

ND 150 150 na 150 150 140 140 140 120 120

Total 150 150 na 150 150 140 140 140 120 120

Table 15: Durum Wheat Objective Yield Program: 2000 – 2007 (continuation)

STATE 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

ND 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

Total 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

 

9

The cells shown with a ―na‖ represent those years for which no information on sample sizes was found.
41

8. STATE SPECIFIC PROGRAMS

8.1. Arizona

8.1a. Lemons

History

The Arizona field office participated in the lemon objective yield program in the 1970s. The 

program was discontinued in the early 1980s. Neither sample sizes nor any other related 

information was available at the time of this report.
42

8.2. California

8.2a. Navel Oranges

History

California produces approximately 84 percent of the navel oranges for fresh use in the United 

States.

A navel orange objective measurement (OM) survey was conducted by NASS for the first time 

during the 1984-85 crop season for the Navel Orange Administrative Committee (NOAC) in the 

Central Valley area. Data from the first two years were used for research purposes in developing 

crop estimating models. Size data used in estimating the models were obtained from the NOAC‘s 

monthly tagged fruit and growth survey. The first four forecasts were made using OM data and a 

September farm report of navel orange crop condition and yield.

The purpose of the survey is to collect data on fruit counts for use in forecasting models to 

estimate current season navel orange production. Individual fruit size data are collected by the 

industry and used in the forecasting models. No survey was conducted for the 1991-92 season

due to a lack of industry funds because of the crop losses from the December 1990 freeze. 

Methodology

Two trees are selected in each grove with two random paths per tree. Trunk and branch 

measurements along with fruit counts are then made on each tree.

Since establishing new samples are costly, the same basic sample is used each year. However, 

new samples are added each year in new bearing navel orange groves to replace samples in pulled 

out groves.

In mid-August, after the sample has been selected, field enumerators enter the selected groves to 

collect survey data. The data collected are incorporated into statistical models that indicate navel 

orange production. Since this estimate is generated from a probability sample, it has a measure of 

statistical confidence associated with it.

The four components used in establishing the production forecast are (1) bearing acres, (2) trees 

per acre, (3) number of oranges per tree, and (4) fruit size.

The four components are obtained as follows:

(1) Bearing Acres: Acreage data are kept on a parcel record database for navel oranges. This 

will provide a universe from which to draw sample orchards. Updates are made as new 

information becomes available. Since acreage data are used to determine the sample's 

distribution, current information such as this is vital to the success of the estimating program.
43

(2) Trees per Acre: Tree spacing, number of trees, and number of acres are maintained in the 

parcel record database. Therefore, trees per acre are calculated.

(3) Oranges per Tree: To determine oranges per tree, enumerators count oranges along randomly 

selected branches of a randomly selected tree. Work begins at the tree's trunk, where a crosssectional measurement is taken. From here, enumerators take cross-sectional measurements 

at each branch forking. Using a random number table and the cross-sectional measurements, 

one branch is randomly selected to continue the path. This procedure is continued until a 

terminal branch is reached. Using this random methodology, it is possible to end up on any 

one of the tree's numerous terminal branches. Because random numbers are used, there is a 

probability of selection associated with the chosen path. This probability is used to expand 

fruit counts along the chosen path and then arrive at an estimated set for the entire tree. This 

procedure is used because of its statistical efficiency.

(4) Fruit Size: Size data are collected by the industry in August, and then monthly growth is 

measured through March 1.

Sample Sizes 

The counts provided in table 16 represent the number of blocks with two trees randomly selected 

per block.

Table 16: Navel Orange Objective Yield Program: 1986/87 through 1989/90 Seasons

STATE 1986-1987 1987-1988 1988-1989 1989-1990

CA 300 300 350 350

Table 16: Navel Orange Objective Yield Program: 1990/91 through 1999/00 Seasons (continuation)

STATE 1990-

199110

1991-

199211

1992-

1993

1993-

1994

1994-

1995

1995-

1996

1996-

1997

1997-

1998

1998-

1999

1999-

2000

CA 431 398 488 480 498 521 531 498 478

Table 16: Navel Orange Objective Yield Program: 2000/01 through 2006/07 Seasons (continuation)

STATE 2000-

2001

2001-

2002

2002-

2003

2003-

2004

2004-

2005

2005-

2006

2006-

2007

CA na

12 527 510 498 526 569 557

 

10

 Data for 1990-91 (a freeze year) were not used in any of the forecasts after 1990. 

11 No objective measurement survey was conducted for the 1991-92 season due to lack of funding.

12 The cells shown with a ―na‖ represent those years for which no information on sample sizes was found.
44

8.2b. Valencia Oranges

History

California produces approximately 78 percent of the Valencia oranges for fresh use in the United 

States. 

The Valencia orange objective measurement survey was funded by the Valencia Orange 

Administrative Committee and has been conducted in southern California since the 1984-1985 

crop year and in the Central Valley since the 1985-1986 crop year. These data were used for 

research purposes until the 1986-1987 season. Forecasts provided until the 1990-1991 season 

were made using objective measurement data and the December Farm Report of Valencia orange 

crop condition and yield. The 1991-1992 forecast was made using objective measurement data 

and the subjective probability citrus survey of grower production and yield. Also, for this 

forecast and all subsequent forecasts, objective measurement data from the 1990-1991 crop year 

were not used due to the freeze. For the 1993-1994 crop year, only objective measurement data 

were used in the forecast. The program was discontinued in 1994 due to lack of funds. After a

six year absence, a Valencia orange objective measurement survey was resumed for the 1999-

2000 crop year. Starting with the 1999-2000 season, survey results were published in March 

prior to the December release of previous crop years. A forecast of Valencia production based on 

the objective measurement survey was not available until the 2003-2004 crop year. Several years 

of data are normally required before any estimating model can accurately forecast production. 

Methodology

The methodology used for Valencia oranges is the same as the one used for navel oranges. For 

more information refer to section 8.2a.

Sample Sizes

The counts provided in Table 17 represent the number of blocks with two trees randomly selected 

per block.

Table 17: Valencia Orange Objective Yield Program: 1986-1987 through 1989-1990 Seasons

STATE 1986-1987 1987-1988 1988-1989 1989-1990

CA 271 285 292 304

Table 17: Valencia Orange Objective Yield Program: 1990-1991 through 1999-2000 Seasons

(continuation)

STATE 1990-

199113

1991-

1992

1992-

1993

1993-

1994

1994-

199514

1995-

1996

1996-

1997

1997-

1998

1998-

1999

1999-

2000

 

13 Data for 1990-91 (a freeze year) were not used in the any of the forecasts after 1990. 

14 Program discontinued from 1994-1995 thru 1998-1999 seasons due to lack of funding.
45

CA 364 387 na15 385 343

Table 17: Valencia Orange Objective Yield Program: 2000-2001 through 2005-2006 Seasons

(continuation)

STATE 2000-

2001

2001-

2002

2002-

2003

2003-

2004

2004-

2005

2005-

2006

CA 782 804 780 785 589 650

 

15 The cells shown with a ―na‖ represent those years for which no information on sample sizes was found.
46

8.2c. Pistachios

History

California produces virtually all the pistachios grown in the United States. Approximately 70 

percent of the pistachio crop is consumed in the U.S., and the remaining 30 percent is exported. 

Almost three-fourths of the California pistachio crop is marketed in the shell for eating out-ofhand snack food. The remaining one-fourth consists of nut meats, which are obtained from 

unsplit nuts, referred to by the industry as shelling stock. Nut meats are used in candy, ice cream, 

and bakery products.

Forecasting research on the California pistachio crop began in 1980, sponsored and requested by 

the California Pistachio Commission (formerly, the California Pistachio Association). In 1980, 

six trees were randomly selected for the study of growth and production characteristics. Detailed 

observations were made of the total number of clusters, nuts within clusters, and the cluster 

locations on each tree. In 1981, 31 trees located in 17 orchards across the state were monitored. 

Weights and measurements were taken weekly and charted to display the amount of change. 

Most of the kernel growth had occurred by August 1st, and it was determined that early August 

would be the best time to conduct a full-scale survey. After the 1981 study, it was proposed to 

conduct a summer survey of at least 300 orchards for a minimum of two years to collect statistical 

data for the purpose of monitoring and refining methodology for a pre-harvest forecast. In

addition to the summer survey, the proposal included visiting the orchards in April to estimate the 

number of fruit buds set on each tree. It was reasoned that the fruit bud counts might have a 

strong correlation to final production. The linear regression models developed were patterned 

after those models developed for walnuts and almonds, which had performed satisfactorily over 

time. In 1984, after the results of the summer survey, it was recommended that the California 

Pistachio Commission approve a 1985 production forecast to be issued with the USDA Crop 

Report. The forecast would be based on the August Survey using the clusters selected by the 

April Survey results. However, the Commission decided to keep the project on a research basis 

for one more year. In 1986, the first pistachio production forecast was issued in September with 

the USDA Crop Report. No objective measurement survey was conducted in 1993 due to lack of 

funds. Acreage data were usually collected by a special acreage update survey. Prior to 1993, 

collection of this information was funded by the state of California and the industry. In 1993, the 

State Legislature eliminated this funding. As a result, future acreage updates would require 

industry funding. In 1994, the California Pistachio Commission began funding a complete 

acreage survey of pistachio growers every third year. Starting in 1998, two random paths were 

performed for each tree. In 2003, the objective measurement survey was modified in order to 

provide an earlier production forecast to growers and processors. The survey was conducted 

primarily during July, one month earlier than in previous years, therefore eliminating much of the 

sizing data. The program was discontinued in 2004.

Methodology

Two trees are sampled in each orchard. Since establishing a new sample orchard is costly, when 

possible, sample orchards are reused. This, however, is not done at the expense of accuracy. 
47

While some samples are retained from year to year, at least 20 percent of any year's samples are 

new. The pistachio tree population is not constant from year to year; it is necessary to add new 

samples and drop old ones to obtain an accurate representation of pistachio acreage.

The four components used in establishing the production forecast are (1) bearing acres, (2) trees 

per acre, (3) number of sound nuts per tree, and (4) nut size and/or weight.

The four components are obtained as follows:

(1) Bearing Acres: Acreage data are collected by a special acreage update survey. Since acreage 

data are used to determine the sample's distribution, current information is vital to the success 

of the estimating program.

(2) Trees per Acre: Tree spacing, number of trees, and number of acres are maintained in the 

parcel record database. Therefore, trees per acre are calculated.

(3) Clusters per Tree: To determine clusters per tree, enumerators count clusters along randomly 

selected branches of a randomly selected tree. Work begins at the tree's trunk where a crosssectional measurement is taken. From there, enumerators work their way out the tree taking 

cross-sectional measurements at each forking branch. Using a random number table and the 

cross-sectional measurements, one branch is randomly selected to continue the path. This 

procedure is continued until a terminal branch is reached. Using this methodology, it is 

possible to end up at any one of the tree's numerous terminal branches. Because random 

numbers are used, there is a probability of selection associated with the chosen path. This 

probability is used to expand cluster counts along the chosen path and then arrive at an 

estimated set for the entire tree. This procedure is used because of its statistical efficiency.

(4) Nut Size: While conducting measurements and nut counts along the random path, 

enumerators pick a random portion of the clusters they encounter at the terminal branch. At 

the end of the sampling day, these nuts are taken to sizing stations. Additional personnel 

called Asizers@ weigh, measure, and determine the number of sound nuts within each sample

and within each cluster.
48

Sample Sizes 

The counts provided in Table 18 represent the number of blocks with two trees randomly selected 

per block.

Table 18: Pistachio Objective Yield Program: 1986 through 1989

STATE 1986 1987 1988 1989

CA 332 286 347 367

Table 18: Pistachio Objective Yield Program: 1990 through 1999 (continuation)

STATE 1990 1991 1992 199316 1994 1995 1996 1997 199817 1999

CA 373 389 394 491 586 562 642 610 603

Table 18: Pistachio Objective Yield Program: 2000 through 2003 (continuation)

STATE 2000 2001 2002 2003

CA 555 632 623 636

 

16 No objective measurement survey was conducted in 1993 due to lack of funds.

17 Since 1998, two random paths were performed for each tree.
49

8.2d. Almonds

History

California produces virtually all the almonds grown in the United States. Approximately onefourth of the almond crop is consumed in the U.S. and the remaining three-fourths is exported. 

California grows 80 percent of the world's supply, including the domestic market. 

The USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service, California Field Office began its almond 

forecasting work in 1962. At that time, handlers and growers of almonds were finding it difficult 

to market the crop solely on the basis of subjective (grower opinion) surveys. This subjective 

method provided reasonably dependable forecasts and was relatively inexpensive. However, as 

more and more reliance was placed on fruit and nut crop forecasts, more dependable and timely 

production forecasts were needed. This need for more accurate production information brought 

about objective yield survey research. Between 1962 and 1967, information was collected by our 

Agency in an effort to forecast the almond crop as of May 1. In 1968, after five years of research, 

survey data showed that a significant portion of total nut drop occurred after May 1, thus 

decreasing the accuracy of the report. It was also discovered that the magnitude of the loss varied 

greatly from year to year. Following these findings and starting in 1968, the objective survey 

forecast was moved to the current July 1 time frame. In addition to the July forecast, the National 

Agricultural Statistics Service issues a May production forecast that is based on a grower opinion 

survey.

Methodology

The methodology used for almonds is the same as the one used for pistachios. The only 

difference is that nuts-per-tree is the third component for almonds instead of clusters-per-trees. 

For more information refer to section 8.2c.

Sample Sizes 

The following table presents the sample sizes available by year for the almond objective yield

program in California.

Table 19: Almond Objective Yield Program: 1965 through 1979

STATE 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 -

1976

1977 1978 1979 

CA 535 534 566 491 539 480 na18 700 700 na

Table 19: Almond Objective Yield Program: 1980 through 1989 (continuation)

STATE 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989

CA na na na na na na na na na na

 

18 The cells shown with a ―na‖ represent those years for which no information on sample sizes was found.
50

Table 19: Almond Objective Yield Program: 1990 through 1999 (continuation)

STATE 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

CA na na 678 767 766 798 872 887 979 838

Table 19: Almond Objective Yield Program: 2000 through 2007 (continuation)

STATE 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

CA 686 798 786 777 749 838 834 865
51

8.2e. Walnuts

History

California produces virtually all the English walnuts grown in the United States. 

NASS began walnut forecasting work using objective measurement procedures in 1958. Prior to 

this, subjective surveys were the basis for walnut production forecasting. As more reliance was 

being placed on fruit and nut crop forecasts, not only for pricing, but also in the efficient 

marketing of the crop, more accurate production information prior to harvest was needed. In 

response to this need, research was conducted which led to the walnut objective measurement 

survey. The original sample of blocks was chosen proportionally to county, variety, and the 

bearing acreage. With each succeeding year, additions and deletions were made to adjust the 

sample for acreage removed, new acreage planted, and refusals.

Methodology

The methodology used for walnuts is the same as the one used for pistachios. The only difference 

is that nuts-per-tree is the third component for walnuts instead of clusters-per-tree. For more 

information refer to section 8.2c.

Sample Sizes 

The following table presents the sample sizes available by year for the walnut objective yield 

program in California.

Table 20: Walnut Objective Yield Program: 1960 through 1969

STATE 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969

CA 468 468 488 500 501 520 na19 na na na

Table 20: Walnut Objective Yield Program: 1970 through 1979 (continuation)

STATE 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979

CA na na na na 575 na 600 600 na 600

Table 20: Walnut Objective Yield Program: 1980 through 1989 (continuation)

STATE 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989

CA na na na na na na na na na na

 

19 The cells shown with a ―na‖ represent those years for which no information on sample sizes was found.
52

Table 20: Walnut Objective Yield Program: 1990 through 1999 (continuation)

STATE 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

CA na na na na na na na 678 731 640

Table 20: Walnut Objective Yield Program: 2000 through 2007 (continuation)

STATE 200020 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

CA 626 679 686 694 655 682 665

 

20 Survey not conducted in 2000.
53

8.2f. Grapes

History

California produces virtually all the raisin-type variety grapes grown in the United States. The 

three primary uses are dried for raisins, fresh, and crushed for wine. USDA=s National 

Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) California Field Office has been funded by the Raisin 

Administrative Committee (RAC) to conduct an objective measurement (OM) survey on the 

state's raisin-type grape crop. The grape objective measurement survey uses randomly selected 

vines, bunch counts, and bunch sizes to forecast crop production.

In 1956, objective measurement research procedures began with the selection of 1,300 sample 

vineyards in counties having 500 or more acres planted to grapes. Individual units were selected 

by a random method within variety groups. From three vines in each sample block, counts of 

bunches and measurements were taken at specified times. Ratios of counts and measurements 

with the previous year were available for the first time in 1957. In 1958, the principal expansion 

to a production forecast was produced. A new sample was selected in 1959 with probability of 

selection proportional to acreage. The accumulation of data over a series of three years permitted 

refinements in the 1959 methods of forecasting. In 1960, after an analysis of sample size 

requirements, the number of units was reduced by 24 percent. To test the effects of sampler bias 

in the selection of bunches to be sized, a random method of selection was started in the 1961 

season. Results from 1961 were encouraging for raisin grape varieties, while disappointing for 

wine and table varieties. 

The survey was conducted consecutively each year until 1982, when California terminated survey 

funding during a budget crisis. Several attempts were made by interested grape industry entities 

to find funds to restart the project. It was not until 1985 that a funding agreement was arranged 

between the California Wine Grape Growers and the RAC to continue the annual survey. In 

1988, the California Wine Commission took over the wine segment portion of the funding from 

the California Wine Grape Growers. The wine industry decided not to fund the survey after the 

1990 season. From 1991 to 2000, only raisin-type varieties were sampled and funded by the 

RAC. The raisin industry decided not to fund the survey after the 2000 season. The RAC 

decided to reinstate the OM survey for 2005 and 2007.

NASS forecasts grape production in July, August, and October. Grape growers are surveyed and 

asked to estimate (subjective) the expected yield for their grape acres. These reports are tabulated 

and summarized in Sacramento to arrive at a crop forecast in July for raisin, table, and wine type 

varieties. In August and October, forecasts are revised based on updated subjective reports. The 

OM survey conducted in mid to late July is the main foundation for the season's raisin-type grape 

forecast.
54

Methodology

Since establishing new samples are costly, the same basic sample is used each year. However, 

new samples are added each year in new bearing vineyards to replace samples in pulled-out 

vineyards.

In early July, after the sample has been selected, field enumerators enter selected vineyards 

throughout the state to collect survey data. The three components used in establishing the 

production forecast are (1) bearing acres, (2) number of normal bunches per vine, and (3) bunch 

size.

The three components are obtained as follows:

(1) Bearing Acres: Acreage data are collected by a special grape acreage update survey. This 

annual survey of all grape growers in the state is funded by the grape industry. Growers are 

contacted to update their grape acreage data by county, variety, and year planted. This survey 

provides a basis from which to draw sample vineyards. Since acreage data are used to 

determine the sample's distribution, current information is vital to the success of the 

estimating program.

(2) Bunches per Vine: To determine bunches per vine, enumerators count the grape bunches in a 

randomly selected vine space.

(3) Bunch Size: A few randomly selected bunches in the sampled vine space are clipped. At the 

end of the sampling day, these bunches are taken to sizing stations. Sizers measure the 

length, width, and thickness of the sampled bunches.

Sample Sizes 

The counts provided in Table 21 represent the number of vines sampled.

Table 21: Grape Objective Measurement Program: 1986 through 1989

STATE 1986 1987 1988 1989

CA 327 328 319 285

.

Table 21: Grape Objective Measurement Program: 1990 through 1999 (continuation)

STATE 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

CA 319 346 317 248 330 294 362 376 313 303

Table 21: Grape Objective Measurement Program: 2000 through 2007 (continuation)

STATE 2000 2001 200221 200321 200421 2005 200621 2007

CA 294 294 319 298

 

21 Survey not conducted from 2002 through 2004, and 2006
55

8.2g. Lemons

History

A research project was initiated in 1955 with the primary purpose of assessing the feasibility of 

developing an objective crop forecasting procedure for lemons. 

For tree fruit which has a single, well-defined harvesting period and for which the forecast 

precedes harvest by only two or three months, the basic data taken at forecast time was more 

likely to refer to (1) the fruit set, as measured, for example, by the average count of fruit per 

sample tree and (2) size of fruit as measured by diameters of individual fruit. The basis of the 

forecast was that the set at forecast time would likely be a good indicator of the set at harvest and 

similarly, that size of fruit at forecast would likely be well related to size at harvest. 

While the same principles appeared to be applicable to the forecasting of lemon production, the 

problem was complicated by the fact that production was continuous and that harvest was spread 

over the whole marketing year in a multiplicity of picks. Changes in the timing of these picks 

created substantial differences in the aggregate volume of lemons harvested during the year. The 

forecast of lemon production on March 1 included production that would be harvested over eight 

months, although the bulk of the production to be forecasted was concentrated in the four months, 

March through June. Under such conditions, even an optimal procedure would possibly yield 

forecasts with a wide error band. Due to these factors, it was deemed likely that more elaborate 

measurements would be needed for lemons than for fruit which is completely harvested each year 

within a relatively short period of time. 

As a result, the research on the development of an objective yield forecasting program for lemons 

was initiated as a two year intensive pilot study in which a variety of measurements would be 

collected and analyzed. Three surveys were carried out in Ventura County: (1) a set-size survey 

made in March in which counts of fruit and diameter measurement of fruit on 51 randomly drawn 

trees were obtained; (2) a growth survey in which weekly or biweekly measurements of diameters 

were made for a sample of tagged fruit from March through October; and (3) a harvest survey in 

which the number of fruit, fruit size, and weight of fruit were obtained for each pick during the 

period, March-October, for a sample of 90 trees.

No further documentation was available on the results of the two year research pilot study. 

However, a report from 1995 outlined a series of releases related to the lemon objective 

measurement forecast. It lists releases from 1959 until 1985. Sample sizes were not available.
56

8.2h. Peaches

History

The California Field Office participated in the peach objective yield program in the 1970s, 1980s,

and early 1990s. The program was discontinued in the mid to late 1990s. Neither sample sizes 

nor any other related information were available at the time of this report. 

During the late 1960s, four years of experimentation were devoted at improving the forecasting 

model for the California cling peach crop. It was determined that the best objective yield 

estimates of peach production were obtained from the expansion of counts from sample limbs 

(terminals). Sample limbs were selected by a random path method using probabilities 

proportional to size (PPS).

The South Carolina Field Office also conducted research on peach objective yield in the early 

1980s. Again, neither sample sizes nor any other related information were available. 

 
57

8.3. Michigan

8.3a. Tart Cherries

History

Tart cherry yield and production estimates have been made by the Agricultural Statistics Board of 

USDA‘s National Agricultural Statistics Service for over three decades. Before that time, 

estimates were made for tart and sweet cherries combined. Historically, reports by growers of 

yield prospects for their own orchards or localities were the primary basis for these estimates. 

Experience over many years, though, proved that growers' surveys are not accurate in years of 

very heavy or very light crops.

To strengthen the source of data from which cherry crop estimates are made, a pilot tart cherry 

objective yield program was started in Michigan in 1958. This survey was expanded in 1960 and 

again in 1961. Results from these surveys were very encouraging. In 1962, the tart cherry yield 

project was introduced in New York, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The pilot project was 

discontinued after 1963 because of a lack of funds, but research resumed in 1967 and 1968 in 

Michigan. In 1972, the tart cherry objective yield survey became operational in Michigan. 

Procedures to be followed were based on the experience from earlier pilot projects and previous 

surveys. The information collected was used to compute a state average yield per tree.

The last complete tart cherry objective yield survey was conducted in 2001. The survey was 

underway in 2002 when a devastating series of freezes occurred which reduced the crop to 15 

million pounds of production. This compared with an average of 234 million pounds for the 

previous 5 years. It was the smallest crop since 1927 when 18 million pounds were harvested. In 

2003, funding for the survey was discontinued because the industry did not have sufficient 

assessment dollars collected from the 2002 crop to conduct the survey.

At various times, the Michigan Field Office conducted other objective yield surveys: corn, 

potatoes, wheat, and dry beans. Also, a pilot objective yield survey was conducted for blueberries.

Sample sizes were not available.
58

8.4. New York

8.4a. Onions

History

The first onion objective yield survey was conducted in Michigan in 1956 as a five year research 

program designed to measure the harvest yield of onions in a given area.

In New York, the onion objective yield survey began in 1971 in response to the need for more 

accurate yield estimates. Limited resources kept the sampling rate at one sample unit per 100 

acres in Orange County, New York. In 1977, the survey was expanded to all major onion 

producing areas at the same sampling rate of one unit per 100 acres.

Sample sizes were not available.
59

8.5. Oregon

8.5a. Hazelnuts

History

Objective yield research for hazelnuts began in the mid-to-late 1960s. The initial number of 

sampled orchards was 90 for each year, most of the time. For each orchard, three trees were 

sampled. However, 99 orchards were sampled for one or two four-year periods beginning in 

1988. In 2000, the number of sampled trees was reduced to 2 per orchard, following a study 

which found that the third tree did not reduce coefficients of variation by a significant amount. 

Sample sizes were not available.
60

REFERENCES

1989 Corn Objective Yield Survey Specifications. Statistical Methods Branch. Estimates 

Division. National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA.

1989 Cotton Objective Yield Survey Specifications. Statistical Methods Branch. Estimates 

Division. National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA.

1989 Potato Objective Yield Survey Specifications. Statistical Methods Branch. Estimates 

Division. National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA.

1989 Rice Objective Yield Survey Specifications. Statistical Methods Branch. Estimates 

Division. National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA.

1989 Soybeans Objective Yield Survey Specifications. Statistical Methods Branch. Estimates 

Division. National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA.

1989 Wheat Objective Yield Survey Specifications. Statistical Methods Branch. Estimates 

Division. National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA.

1993 Corn Objective Yield Survey Specifications. Statistical Methods Branch. Estimates 

Division. National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA.

1993 Soybeans Objective Yield Specifications. Statistical Methods Branch. Estimates Division. 

National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA.

1993 Wheat Objective Yield Specifications. Statistical Methods Branch. Estimates Division. 

National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA.

Almond Objective Measurement Survey Manual. Unpublished Manual. California Crop and 

Livestock Reporting Service. 1970. Author Unknown

Almond Objective Measurement Survey Sizing Instructions: 1978 Survey. Unpublished 

Manuscript. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service.

Aune, D. (1986). Changes in the Sorghum Objective Yield Program. Unpublished Manuscript. 

Statistical Methods Branch. Estimates Division. National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA.

California Pistachio Production & Survey Projections, 1982-1986. Unpublished Manuscript. 

CASS.

Data Processing Operations for 1963 Almond. Unpublished Manuscript. California Crop and 

Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.
61

Davis, A., Krug, K, and Birkett, T. (1983). 1983 August Pistachio Objective Measurement 

Survey. Unpublished Manuscript. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Fenley, D. (1965). Summary of SRS Sorghum Research. Unpublished Manuscript. Statistical 

Reporting Service. Standards and Research Division. USDA.

Field Instructions (1958). Objective Walnut Crop Forecasting Surveys Field Instructions – 1958 

Surveys. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Field Instructions (1959). Objective Walnut Crop Forecasting Surveys Field Instructions – 1959 

Surveys. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Field Instructions (1961). Objective Walnut Crop Forecasting Surveys Field Instructions – 1961 

Surveys. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Field Instructions (1962). Objective Walnut Crop Forecasting Surveys Field Instructions – 1962 

Surveys. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Field Instructions (1963). 1963 Almond Count Survey. California Crop and Livestock Reporting 

Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1963). Objective Walnut Crop Forecasting Surveys Field Instructions – 1963 

Surveys. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Field Instructions (1964) – 1964 Almond Count Survey. California Crop and Livestock 

Reporting Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1964). Objective Walnut Crop Forecasting Surveys Field Instructions – 1964 

Surveys. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Field Instructions (1965). 1965 Almond Count Survey. California Crop and Livestock Reporting 

Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1965). Objective Grape Surveys Size Increment Survey. California Crop and 

Livestock Reporting Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1965). Objective Walnut Crop Forecasting Surveys Field Instructions – 1965 

Surveys. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Field Instructions (1966). 1966 Almond Count Survey. California Crop and Livestock Reporting 

Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1966). Objective Grape Surveys Size Increment Survey. California Crop and 

Livestock Reporting Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1966). Walnut Objective Measurement Forecasting Research Project—

Preliminary Report 1966California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.
62

Field Instructions (1967). Objective Grape Surveys Size Increment Survey. California Crop and 

Livestock Reporting Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1967. Objective Walnut Crop Forecasting Surveys Field Instructions – 1967 

Surveys. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Field Instructions (1968). 1968 Almond Count Survey. California Crop and Livestock Reporting 

Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1968). Objective Grape Surveys Size Increment Survey. California Crop and 

Livestock Reporting Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1968). Objective Walnut Crop Forecasting Surveys Field Instructions – 1968 

Surveys. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Field Instructions (1969). 1969 Almond Count Survey. California Crop and Livestock Reporting 

Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1969). Objective Grape Surveys Size Increment Survey. California Crop and 

Livestock Reporting Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1969). Objective Walnut Crop Forecasting Surveys Sizing Instructions – 1969 

Surveys. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Field Instructions (1970). Objective Grape Surveys Size Increment Survey. California Crop and 

Livestock Reporting Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1971). Objective Grape Surveys Size Increment Survey. California Crop and 

Livestock Reporting Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1972). 1972 Almond Count Survey. California Crop and Livestock Reporting 

Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1972). Objective Walnut Crop Forecasting Surveys Field Instructions. 

California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1973). 1973 Almond Count Survey. California Crop and Livestock Reporting 

Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1973). Grape Forecast Survey. California Crop and Livestock Reporting 

Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1974). 1974 Almond Count Survey. California Crop and Livestock Reporting 

Service. USDA.
63

Field Instructions (1974). Grape Forecast Survey. California Crop and Livestock Reporting 

Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1975). 1975 Almond Count Survey. California Crop and Livestock Reporting 

Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1975). Grape Forecast Survey. California Crop and Livestock Reporting 

Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1978). Grape Objective Measurement Survey. California Crop and Livestock 

Reporting Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1980). Grape Objective Measurement Survey. California Crop and Livestock 

Reporting Service. USDA.

Field Instructions (1990). 1990 Grape Objective Measurement Survey. California Agricultural 

Statistics Service. USDA.

Grain Sorghum Study (1966). Unpublished Manuscript. Statistical Reporting Service. Standards 

and Research Division. USDA.

Grape Objective Measurement Forecasting Project- Final Report 1961. Unpublished Manuscript. 

California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. USDA.

Halley, R. (1997). History of Crop Yield Surveys in the U.S. Unpublished Presentation Slides. 

Houston, TX. National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA.

Henderson, W. W. & Todd, R. L. (1969). Almond Objective Measurement Forecasting Research 

Project. Unpublished Manuscript. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Houseman, E. E., and Huddleston, H. F. (1966). Forecasting and Estimating Crop Yields from 

Plant Measurements. Unpublished Manuscript. Monthly Bulletin of Agricultural Economics and 

Statistics, Vol. 15 #10.

Huddleston, H. F. (1958). Objective Methods in Forecasting Components of Corn Yield. 

Unpublished Manuscript. Agricultural Estimates Division. Agricultural Marketing Service. 

USDA.

Huddleston, H. F. (1960). Report on 1957 Research Surveys. Unpublished Manuscript. 

Agricultural Estimates Division. Agricultural Marketing Service. USDA.

Huddleston, H. F. (1978). Sampling Techniques for Measuring and Forecasting Crop Yields. 

Unpublished Manuscript. Economics, Statistics and Cooperatives Service. USDA. Research 

Report # ESCS-09
64

Kelly, B. W. (1957). Preliminary Report on Objective Procedures for Soybean Yield Forecasts. 

Unpublished Manuscript. Agricultural Estimates Division. Agricultural Marketing Service. 

USDA. Research Report # 57-01.

Kelly, B. W., and Kirkbride, J. W. (1964). Forecasting Crop Yield. Unpublished Manuscript. 

Statistical Reporting Service. USDA.

King, A. J., and Jebe, E. H. (1940). An Experiment in Pre-Harvest Sampling of Wheat Fields. 

Unpublished Manuscript. Agricultural Experiment Station Iowa State College of Agriculture and 

Mechanic Arts. Statistical Section. Research Bulletin #273.

Krug, K. (1985). Crop Reporting Service Pistachio Research, 1980-1984. Unpublished 

Manuscript. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS. 

Krug, K. (1986). Crop Estimating Progress Report to the California Pistachio Commission. 

Unpublished Manuscript. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Krug, K., and Kleweno, D. (1984). 1984 August Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey. 

Unpublished Manuscript. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Kuznets, G.M. (1959). Statistical Limitations of Grape Crop Forecasts. Unpublished Manuscript. 

University of California. 

Matthews, R. V. (1985). An Overview of the 1985 Corn, Cotton, Soybean, and Wheat Objective 

Yield Surveys. Unpublished Manuscript. Statistical Reporting Service. Statistical Research 

Division. USDA.

McGregor, R.A. (1981). 1981 Pistachio Research Report. Unpublished Manuscript. California 

Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Peak, R. W. (1977). Almond Objective Measurement Survey Sizing Instructions. Unpublished 

Manuscript. California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Progress Report on Objective Surveys for Forecasting Winter Wheat Yields (1959). Unpublished 

Manuscript. Agricultural Marketing Service. USDA.

Raisin and Grape Surveys - 1963. Unpublished Manuscript. California Crop and Livestock 

Reporting Service. USDA.

Report on 1955 Research Surveys (1957). Unpublished Manuscript. Agricultural Marketing 

Service. USDA

Report on 1961 Objective Surveys for Forecasting Soybean Yields (1962). Unpublished 

Manuscript. Statistical Reporting Service. Standards and Research Division. USDA. Research 

Report # YRB 62-01.
65

Report on 1962-1963 Research Projects (1968). Unpublished Manuscript. Statistical Reporting 

Service. Standards and Research Division. USDA.

Report on Objective Cotton Yield Studies (1959). Agricultural Marketing Service. USDA. Report 

#YRB 59-04.

Report on Validation of Soybean Objective Yield Field Procedures (1965). Unpublished 

Manuscript. Statistical Reporting Service. Standards and Research Division. USDA.

Rockwell (1954). Report on 1954 Research Surveys. Unpublished Manuscript. Agricultural 

Marketing Service. USDA.

Sampling Instructions (1974). Walnut Objective Measurement Survey Sampling Instructions. 

California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. USDA.

Sampling Instructions (1976). Walnut Objective Measurement Survey Sampling Instructions. 

California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. USDA.

Sampling Instructions (1977). Walnut Crop Measurement Survey. California Crop and Livestock 

Reporting Service.

Sampling Instructions (1979). Walnut Objective Measurement Survey Sampling Instructions. 

California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. USDA.

Sarle, C. F. (1932). Adequacy and Reliability of Crop-Yield Estimates. Unpublished Manuscript. 

National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA.

Sizing Instructions (1963). Objective Grape Forecast Survey 1963 Sizing Instructions. California 

Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

Sizing Instructions (1979). Grape Objective Measurement Survey. California Crop and Livestock 

Reporting Service. USDA.

Summary and Order of Field Operations – Almond Count Survey. Unpublished Manuscript. 

California Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. CASS.

T-Instruction (1955). Research Program—Objective Yield – Size Determinations. Agricultural 

Marketing Service. USDA. Instruction 1911.

T-Instruction (1956). Research Program—Objective Yield Surveys for Cotton, Corn and 

Soybeans. Agricultural Marketing Service. USDA. Instruction 1964.

T-Instruction (1959). Research Program—Objective Winter Wheat Yield Surveys. Agricultural 

Marketing Service. USDA. Instruction 2149.
66

T-Instruction (1959). Research Program—Objective Yield Surveys for Cotton, Corn and 

Soybeans. Agricultural Marketing Service. USDA. Instruction 2167.

T-Instruction (1960). 1960 Objective Yield Surveys for Cotton, Corn and Soybeans. Agricultural 

Marketing Service. USDA. Instruction 2228.

T-Instruction (1960). 1960 Objective Yield Surveys for Cotton, Corn and Soybeans (Supplement 

to Instruction 2228). Agricultural Marketing Service. USDA. Instruction 2233.

T-Instruction (1960). Research Program—Objective Winter Wheat Yield Surveys. Agricultural 

Marketing Service. USDA. Instruction 2208.

T-Instruction (1961). 1961 Objective Winter Wheat Yield Surveys. Agricultural Marketing 

Service. USDA. Instruction 2258.

T-Instruction (1961). 1961 Objective Yield Surveys for Cotton, Corn and Soybeans. Agricultural 

Marketing Service. USDA. Instruction 2284.

T-Instruction (1962). Objective Yield and Interview Survey Manuals. Statistical Reporting 

Service. USDA. Instruction 31-62.

T-Instruction (1964). May Winter Wheat Objective Yield Survey Transmittal of Data. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction 29-64.

T-Instruction (1964). Transmittal of Objective Yield Survey ADP Output. Statistical Reporting 

Service. USDA. Instruction 60-64.

T-Instruction (1966). Moisture Adjustment for Wheat Objective Yield Data. Statistical Reporting 

Service. USDA. Instruction 31-66.

T-Instruction (1967). 1967 Objective Yield Surveys for Cotton, Corn and Soybeans. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-79-67.

T-Instruction (1967). 1967 Winter and Spring Wheat Objective Yield Surveys. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-25-67.

T-Instruction (1967). Corn, Cotton and Soybean Objective Yield Surveys. Statistical Reporting 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-115-67.

T-Instruction (1967). Wheat Objective Yield Record Form. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-51-67.

T-Instruction (1968). 1968 Objective Yield Surveys for Corn, Cotton and Soybeans. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-32-68. 
67

T-Instruction (1968). 1968 Objective Yield Surveys for Corn, Cotton and Soybeans. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-52-68.

T-Instruction (1969). 1969 Objective Yield Surveys for Corn, Cotton and Soybeans. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-49-69.

T-Instruction (1969). 1969 Winter and Spring Wheat Objective Yield Surveys. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-16-69.

T-Instruction (1969). November 1 Cotton Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. 

USDA. Instruction T-107-69.

T-Instruction (1970). 1970 Objective Yield Surveys for Corn, Cotton and Soybeans. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-51-70.

T-Instruction (1970). November 1 Cotton Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. 

USDA. Instruction T-107-70.

T-Instruction (1970). Objective Yield Surveys for Corn, Cotton and Soybeans – 1970. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-66-70.

T-Instruction (1971). 1971 Objective Yield Surveys for Corn, Cotton and Soybeans. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-47-71.

T-Instruction (1971). Corn, Cotton, and Soybean Objective Yield Post Harvest Surveys. 

Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-12-71.

T-Instruction (1971). Corn Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-82-71.

T-Instruction (1971). Objective Yield Surveys for Corn, Cotton and Soybeans – 1971. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-65-71.

T-Instruction (1971). Potato Objective Yield Surveys and Storage Research Project. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-101-71.

T-Instruction (1971). Potato Probability Acreage and Objective Yield Surveys. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-138-71.

T-Instruction (1971). SSO Computer Edit Programs - Objective Yield. Statistical Reporting 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-109-71.

T-Instruction (1971). Winter and Spring Wheat Objective Yield Surveys -- 1971. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-22-71.
68

T-Instruction (1972). June Multiple Frame Potato Acreage and Potato Objective Yield Surveys. 

Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-47-72. 

T-Instruction (1972). Potato Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-86-72. 

T-Instruction (1973). Corn and Soybean Objective Yield ―Mini‖ State School. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-91-73.

T-Instruction (1973). Corn, Cotton and Soybean Objective Yield Post-Harvest Surveys. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-13-73.

T-Instruction (1973). Objective Yield Stakes & Sacks – Inventory and Supply. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-114-73.

T-Instruction (1973). Objective Yield Surveys for Corn, Cotton and Soybeans – 1973. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-56-73.

T-Instruction (1973). Potato Objective Yield. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T82-73.

T-Instruction (1973). Winter and Spring Wheat Objective Yield Surveys - 1973. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-12-73.

T-Instruction (1974). 1974 Potato Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-74-74.

T-Instruction (1975). 1975 Potato Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-57-75.

T-Instruction (1975). 1975 Winter and Spring Wheat Objective Yield Survey. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-18-75.

T-Instruction (1975). Objective Yield Surveys for Corn, Cotton and Soybeans – 1975. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-48-75.

T-Instruction (1976). 1976 Potato Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-49-76.

T-Instruction (1976). 1976 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-13-76.

T-Instruction (1976). Objective Yield Surveys for Corn, Cotton and Soybeans – 1976. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-46-76.
69

T-Instruction (1977). 1977 Corn and Cotton Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-86-77.

T-Instruction (1977). 1977 Potato Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-54-77.

T-Instruction (1977). 1977 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-16-77.

T-Instruction (1977). Objective Yield Surveys for Corn, Cotton and Soybeans – 1977. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-46-77.

T-Instruction (1978). 1978 Potato Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-61-78.

T-Instruction (1978). 1978 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-15-78.

T-Instruction (1978). Objective Yield Surveys for Corn, Cotton and Soybeans – 1978. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-55-78.

T-Instruction (1979). 1979 Potato Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-74-79.

T-Instruction (1979). 1979 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-17-79.

T-Instruction (1980). 1980 Corn, Cotton and Soybean Objective Yield, Fertilizer Usage and 

Pesticide Surveys. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-54-80.

T-Instruction (1980). 1980 Potato Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-61-80.

T-Instruction (1980). 1980 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-14-80.

T-Instruction (1981). 1981 Corn, Cotton and Soybean Objective Yield Surveys. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-29-81.

T-Instruction (1981). 1981 Potato Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-37-81.

T-Instruction (1981). 1981 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-9-81.
70

T-Instruction (1982). 1982 Corn, Cotton and Soybean Objective Yield Survey. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-34-82.

T-Instruction (1982). 1982 Potato Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-39-82.

T-Instruction (1982). 1982 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-14-82.

T-Instruction (1983). 1983 Corn, Cotton and Soybean Objective Yield Surveys. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-38-83.

T-Instruction (1983). 1983 Potato Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-34-83.

T-Instruction (1983). 1983 Rice, Sorghum and Sunflower Objective Yield Surveys. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-24-83.

T-Instruction (1983). 1983 Wheat Objective Yield Survey and Wheat Validation Study Surveys. 

Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-11-83.

T-Instruction (1984). 1984 Corn, Cotton, Rice and Soybean Objective Yield Surveys. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-21-84.

T-Instruction (1984). 1984 Potato Objective Yield Survey. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. 

Instruction T-23-84.

T-Instruction (1984). 1984 Wheat and Grain Sorghum Objective Yield and Wheat Validation 

Study Surveys. Statistical Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-1-84.

T-Instruction (1985). 1985 Corn, Cotton, Rice and Soybean Objective Yield Surveys. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-24-85.

T-Instruction (1985). 1985 Potato and Sunflower Objective Yield Surveys. Statistical Reporting 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-28-85.

T-Instruction (1985). 1985 Wheat and Grain Sorghum Objective Yield Surveys. Statistical 

Reporting Service. USDA. Instruction T-11-85.

T-Instruction (1986). 1986 Corn, Cotton, Rice, Sorghum, and Soybean Objective Yield Surveys. 

National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA. Instruction T-6-6.

T-Instruction (1986). 1986 Potato Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-22-86.
71

T-Instruction (1986). 1986 Sunflower Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-27-86.

T-Instruction (1986). 1986 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-7-86.

T-Instruction (1987). 1987 Midyear Objective Yield Survey Training Workshops. National 

Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA. Instruction T-20-87.

T-Instruction (1987). 1987 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-5-87.

T-Instruction (1988). 1988 Midyear Objective Yield Survey Training Workshops. National 

Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA. Instruction T-15-88.

T-Instruction (1988). 1988 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. T-4-88.

T-Instruction (1989). 1989 Midyear Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-15-89.

T-Instruction (1989). 1989 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-4-89.

T-Instruction (1990). 1990 Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics Service. 

USDA. Instruction T-11-90.

T-Instruction (1991). 1991 Midyear Objective Yield and Cropping Practices Surveys. National 

Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA. Instruction T-15-91.

T-Instruction (1991). 1991 Potato Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-16-91.

T-Instruction (1991). 1991 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-5-91.

T-Instruction (1992). 1992 Objective Yield and Cropping Practices Surveys. National 

Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA. Instruction T-8-92.

T-Instruction (1997). 1997 Midyear Objective Yield Surveys. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-10-97.

T-Instruction (1997). 1997 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-4-97.
72

T-Instruction (1998). 1998 Midyear Objective Yield Surveys. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-13-98.

T-Instruction (1998). 1998 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-3-98.

T-Instruction (1999). 1999 Midyear Objective Yield Surveys. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-12-99.

T-Instruction (1999). 1999 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-3-99.

T-Instruction (2000). 2000 Midyear Objective Yield Surveys. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-12-00.

T-Instruction (2000). 2000 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-6-00.

T-Instruction (2001). 2001 Midyear Objective Yield Surveys. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-13-01.

T-Instruction (2001). 2001 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-3-01.

T-Instruction (2002). 2002 Midyear Objective Yield Surveys. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-18-02.

T-Instruction (2002). 2002 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-8-02.

T-Instruction (2003). 2003 Cotton Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-14-03.

T-Instruction (2003). 2003 Midyear Objective Yield Surveys. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-11-03.

T-Instruction (2003). 2003 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-3-03.

T-Instruction (2004). 2004 Midyear Objective Yield Surveys. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-15-04.

T-Instruction (2004). 2004 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-6-04.
73

T-Instruction (2005). 2005 Midyear Objective Yield Surveys. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-23-05.

T-Instruction (2005). 2005 Objective Yield Workshop. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-10-05.

T-Instruction (2005). 2005 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-8-05.

T-Instruction (2006). 2006 Midyear Objective Yield Surveys. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-26-06.

T-Instruction (2006). 2006 Wheat Objective Yield Survey. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. USDA. Instruction T-8-06. 

USDA Crop Report (2003). 2003 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey Report. 

CASS. Released July 31, 2003.

USDA Crop Report (2002). 2002 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey Report. 

CASS. Released August 29, 2002.

USDA Crop Report (2001). 2001 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey Report. 

CASS. Released August 31, 2001.

USDA Crop Report (2000). 2000 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey Report. 

CASS. Released September 1, 2000.

USDA Crop Report (1999). 1999 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 1999.

USDA Crop Report (1998). 1998 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 1998.

USDA Crop Report (1997). 1997 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released August 1997.

USDA Crop Report (1996). 1996 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released August 1996.

USDA Crop Report (1995). 1995 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 1995.

USDA Crop Report (1994). August 1994 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey 

Results. CASS. Released September 1994.
74

USDA Crop Report (1992). August 1992 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey 

Results. CASS. Released August 1992.

USDA Crop Report (1991). August 1991 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey 

Results. CASS. Released August 1991.

USDA Crop Report (1990). August 1990 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey 

Results. CASS. Released August 1990.

USDA Crop Report (1989). August 1989 California Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey 

Results. CASS. Released September 1989.

USDA Crop Report (1988). Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey 1988 August Survey 

Results. CASS. Released September 1988.

USDA Crop Report (1987). 1987 Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey. CASS. Released 

September 1987.

USDA Crop Report (1986). 1986 Pistachio Objective Measurement Survey. CASS. Released 

September 1986.

USDA Crop Report (1986). Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey: 1986-87 Survey. 

CASS. Released September 1986.

USDA Crop Report (1987). 1987-88 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey. CASS. 

Released September 1987.

USDA Crop Report (1988). 1988-89 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey. CASS. 

Released September 1988.

USDA Crop Report (1989). 1989-90 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 1989.

USDA Crop Report (1990). 1990-91 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 1990.

USDA Crop Report (1992). 1992-93 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 1992.

USDA Crop Report (1993). 1993-94 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 1993.

USDA Crop Report (1994). 1994-95 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 1994.
75

USDA Crop Report (1995). 1995-96 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 1995.

USDA Crop Report (1996). 1996-97 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 1996.

USDA Crop Report (1997). 1997-98 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 1997.

USDA Crop Report (1998). 1998-99 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 1998.

USDA Crop Report (1999). 1999-00 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 1999.

USDA Crop Report (2001). 2001-02 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 2001.

USDA Crop Report (2002). 2002-03 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 2002.

USDA Crop Report (2003). 2003-04 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 2003.

USDA Crop Report (2004). 2004-05 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 2004.

USDA Crop Report (2005). 2005-06 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 2005.

USDA Crop Report (2006). 2006-07 Navel Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released September 2006.

USDA Crop Report (1986). Valencia Orange Objective Measurement Survey: 1986-87 Survey. 

CASS. Released December 1986.

USDA Crop Report (1987). 1987-88 Valencia Orange Objective Measurement Survey. CASS. 

Released December 1987.

USDA Crop Report (1988). 1988-89 Valencia Orange Objective Measurement Survey. CASS. 

Released December 1988.

USDA Crop Report (1989). 1989-90 Valencia Orange Objective Measurement Survey Results. 

CASS. Released December 1989.
76

USDA Crop Report (1990). 1990-91 California Valencia Orange Objective Measurement Survey 

Results. CASS. Released December 1990.

USDA Crop Report (1991). 1991-92 California Valencia Orange Objective Measurement Survey 

Results. CASS. Released December 1991.

USDA Crop Report (1993). 1993-94 California Valencia Orange Objective Measurement Survey 

Results. CASS. Released December 1993.

USDA Crop Report (1999). 1999-00 California Valencia Orange Objective Measurement Survey 

Results. CASS. Released March 1999.

USDA Crop Report (2000). 2000-01 California Valencia Orange Objective Measurement Survey 

Results. CASS. Released March 2000.

USDA Crop Report (2001). 2001-02 California Valencia Orange Objective Measurement Survey 

Results. CASS. Released March 2001.

USDA Crop Report (2004). 2004-05 California Valencia Orange Objective Measurement Survey 

Results. CASS. Released March 2004.

USDA Crop Report (2005). 2005-06 California Valencia Orange Objective Measurement Report. 

CASS. Released March 2000.

USDA Internal Report. Summary of SRS Optimum Plot Size Research. Unpublished 

Manuscript.

USDA Internal Report. Summary of SRS Optimum Plot Location Research. Unpublished 

Manuscript.

Vogel, F. (1963). Preliminary Report on 1962 Objective Surveys for Forecasting Soybean Yields. 

Unpublished Manuscript. Research and Development Branch. Statistical Reporting Service. 

Standards and Research Division. USDA.

Waldhaus, E., Oaks, E., and Steiner, M. (1993). History and Procedures of Objective Yield 

Surveys in the United States. Unpublished Manuscript. National Agricultural Statistics Service. 

USDA.

Walnut Survey – August 1958. Unpublished Manuscript. California Crop and Livestock 

Reporting Service. CASS.

Warren, F. B. (1985). Corn Yield Validation Studies, 1953-83. Unpublished Manuscript. 

Statistical Reporting Service. Statistical Research Division. USDA. Research Report #YRB-85-

07.
77

Wood, R. A., and Warren, F. B. (1972). A Study of Sampling and Estimating Procedures for 

California Cling Peaches. Unpublished Manuscript. Research and Development Branch. 

Standards and Research Division. Statistical Reporting Service.

Additional reading materials are available on-line at: 

http://www.nass.usda.gov/research/reports/Internet_Yield/reportsxyield.html