• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Agricultural land values increase...
 Agricultural land values increase...
 Agricultural land values increase...






Group Title: Department of Food and Resource Economics publication FE360
Title: Agricultural land values increase as citrus land values decrease
CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE PAGE TEXT
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00066715/00001
 Material Information
Title: Agricultural land values increase as citrus land values decrease 2002 survey results
Alternate Title: EDIS FE360
2002 survey results
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Creator: Reynolds, John E ( John Everett )
Publisher: University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, EDIS
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla.
Publication Date: [2002]-
 Subjects
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
System Details: Internet access required.
Statement of Responsibility: John E. Reynolds.
General Note: Title from Web page viewed on November 12, 2002.
General Note: At head of title: University of Florida, Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, EDIS.
General Note: "This is EDIS document FE360, a publication of the Department of Food and Resource Economics, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Published October 2002"--Footnote.
Funding: Florida Historical Agriculture and Rural Life
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00066715
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Marston Science Library, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida
Holding Location: Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station; Institute for Food and Agricultural Services (IFAS), University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved, Board of Trustees of the University of Florida
Resource Identifier: aleph - 002862337
oclc - 51048895
notis - ANZ3486

Table of Contents
    Agricultural land values increase as citrus land values decreaseL 2002 survey results
        Page 1
    Agricultural land values increase as citrus land values decreaseL 2002 survey results
        Page 2
    Agricultural land values increase as citrus land values decreaseL 2002 survey results
        Page 3
        Page 4
Full Text











July-August 2002


Florida Food and Resource Economics
No. 150


Agricultural Land Values Increase as Citrus Land Values Decrease:
2002 Survey Results

John E. Reynolds*


The 2002 Florida Land Value Survey results
indicate that the value of cropland and pasture land
increased in all regions of the state during the past
year. The value of citrus land declined for the
second consecutive year. Agricultural land values
vary by the type of land use and geographic area.
While survey respondents cited nonagricultural
demandfor landforthe relatively strong increases
over the past year, comprehensive plan
restrictions was mentioned as a factor exerting
downward pressure on land values in some areas.
The Florida Land Value Survey, conducted by
the Food and Resource Economics Department at
the University of Florida, provides estimates of the
value of different types of agricultural land for
geographic regions of the state. The survey
questionnaire was designed to obtain estimates of
the market value for different types of land as of
May 2002. Survey respondents included rural
appraisers, farm lenders, real estate brokers, farm
managers, land investors, county extension agents,
Farm Services Agency and Natural Resource and
Conservation Service personnel, county property
appraisers, and other persons who develop and
maintain information about rural land values in their
areas. Respondents provided 194 usable county
reports for the 2002 survey.
The state was divided, based on agricultural
production, into five major regions: Northwest,
Northeast, Central, South, and Southeast


* John E. Reynolds is a Professor in the Food and Resource
Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-0240.


(Figure 1). The Southeast was delineated as a
result of the impact of urbanization in southeast
Florida. Even though the state was divided into
more homogeneous regions, wide variation in
agricultural land values still exists within each
region.

Changes by Type of Land Use

The value of land used for crops and pasture
increased in all regions. The value of cropland
increased from 7 to 13 percent, and the value of
improved and unimproved pasture land increased
from 7 to 15 percent. The value of farm woods
increased 9 to 10 percent. However, the value of
orange groves declined 11 percent, and the value
of grapefruit groves declined about 15 percent
(Table 1).

Citrus. After two years of improved grove
values, the value of orange and grapefruit groves
declined in both the Central and South regions.
The value of orange groves declined 11.2 percent
inthe South and 11.4 percent inthe Central region.
The value of grapefruit groves decreased 15.6
percent in the South and 14.8 percent in the
Central region. The value of land with 5- to 7-
year-old citrus plantings decreased 8.8 percent in
the South region and 2.4 percent in the Central
region.


Economics Department, Institute of Food and Agricultural


UNIVERSITY OF Cooperative Extension Service

SFLORID A Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences






Cropland. The value of cropland increased in all
regions. The value of irrigated cropland increased 8
to 9 percent in the Central and South regions and
11 to 12 percent in the Northwest and Northeast
regions. The value of nonirrigated cropland
increased from 7.6 percent in the Northwest region
to 13.1 percent in the South. The value of
nonirrigated cropland increased 8.7 percent in the
Central region and 10.8 percent in the Northeast.

Pastureland. The value of pastureland also
increased in all regions. The value of improved
pasture increased 11 to 12 percent in the southern
regions and 9 to 10 percent in the northern regions.
The value of unimproved pasture increased 15
percent in the South, 11 to 12 percent in the Central
and Northeast regions and 7 percent in the
Northwest region.

Farm Woods. The value of farm woods
increased 9.3 percent in the Northwest and 10.1
percent in the Northeast region.

Regional Comparisons
of Land Values

The average value of citrus land was higher in the
South region than in the Central region. The value
of irrigated land and unimproved pasture was higher
in the Northeast than in other regions. However,
the value of other types of agricultural land was
higher in the Central region than it was in other
regions. The lowest agricultural land values were
reported in the Northwest region.
The average value of orange groves was $5,687
per acre in the South region, about $250 per acre
higher than in the Central region. The estimated
value of grapefruit groves was $3,658 per acre in
the South region, $44 per acre higher than in the
Central region. The average value of land with 5- to
7-year-old citrus groves was $5,211 per acre in the
South region, $543 per acre higher than in the
Central region.
The value of irrigated cropland was $2,859 per
acre in the Northeast and $2,807 in the Central
region. The value of irrigated cropland inthe South
was $2,314 per acre and $1,813 in the Northwest.
The value of nonirrigated cropland was $2,468 per


acre in the Central region and $2,171 in the
Northeast. The value ofnonirrigated cropland in the
South was $1,843 per acre and $1,502 in the
Northwest.
The value of improved pasture ranged from
$2,681 per acre in the Centralregionto $1,411 per
acre in the Northwest. The value of unimproved
pasture ranged from $1,936 per acre in the
Northeast to $1,165 per acre in the Northwest. The
values of improved and unimproved pastureland in
the South region were 63 and 77 percent,
respectively, of those in the Central region. The
value of both types of pastureland in the Northwest
were 63 and 60 percent, respectively, of those in the
Northeast.

Transition Land

Transition land is defined as agricultural land that
is being converted or likely to be converted to
nonagriculturaluses as sites for homes, subdivisions,
and commercial uses. Transition land values were
analyzed by metropolitan and non-metropolitan
counties for each region. Metropolitan counties are
those areas that are classified as Metropolitan
Statistical Areas by the U. S. Office of Management
and Budget and are considered as urban or
urbanizing areas, while non-metropolitan counties
are the more rural counties where less land is being
converted to urban uses. Transition land values
were three times higher in the Southeast region than
in the other regions. The values for transitional land
in metropolitan counties in the other regions were
about two times as high as the value of transition
land in non-metropolitan counties (Table 3).
The value of transition land within five miles of a
major town in metropolitan counties increased 6
percent in the northern areas and 8 to 13 percent in
the southern regions. The value of transition land
within five miles of a major town ranged from
$11,646 to $14,134 per acre, except in the
Southeast region where transition land values were
$45,000 per acre. The value of transition land more
than five miles from a major town in metropolitan
counties ranged from $6,280 to $8,923 per acre,
except in the Southeast region where transition land
values were $28,333 per acre. The value of
transition land within five miles of a major town in






non-metropolitan counties ranged from $4,107 to
$5,931 per acre, while transition land values more
than five miles from a major town in non-
metropolitan counties ranged from $3,234 to
$3,950 per acre.

Cash Rents

The estimated cash rent for nonirrigated cropland
was $31.09 per acre in the Northwest region and
$25.00 per acre in the Northeast region (Table 2).
The estimated cash rent for improved pastureland
was $25.00 per acre in the Northwest region,
$18.80 per acre in the Northeast region, $20.20
per acre in the Central region, and $18.65 per acre
in the South region. Cash rent for unimproved
pastureland ranged from $16.16 per acre in the
Northwest region to $8.83 per acre in the Central
region. The cash rent data indicate that cash rents
increased in the Northwest, Central, and South
regions for improved pasture. Cash rents in the
Northeast region and for other types of land
changed by only small amounts.
Cash rent as a percentage of the estimated value
of cropland and pastureland range from 1 to 2
percent in the Northwest and 1 percent or less in
the other regions. These rates are quite low as
compared to other areas ofthe country. These low
rates of return indicate that the market value of
agricultural land has been "bid up" beyond the
income earning capacity from agricultural uses and
reflects the nonagricultural demand for land on the
market value of agricultural and rural land.

Expected Trends

Survey respondents were asked if they expected
agricultural land values to be higher, lower, or
remain unchanged during the next 12 months.
Slightly more than three-fifths ofthe respondents in
the survey (northern and southern regions) expected
agricultural land values to increase during the next
year (Table 4). Only 2 percent of the respondents
in the northern regions and 10 percent in the
southern regions expected lower land values during
the next 12 months. Except for the Southeast
region, respondents expected land values to
increase from 3 to 6 percent during the next 12


months. Agricultural land values are expected to
increase 4.1 percent in the Northwest and 6.1
percent in the Northeast during the next year. In the
southern regions, respondents indicate that they
expect agricultural land values to increase 3.3
percent in the Central region and 5.9 percent in the
South. The Southeast region is expected to see the
largest increase of all regions at 14.4 percent,
primarily due to the urban demand in this region.

Use of the Survey Results

The estimates of land values provided in this
report are based on the opinions of many people
involved in the real estate market. Care must be
exercised when making year-to-year comparisons
between surveys for several reasons. First, the group
of participating respondents changes from year to
year. Second, government rules and regulations
affecting water, land use, and the environment may
change and affect agricultural land values. Finally,
with these changes, the results may not be directly
comparable with results from previous years.
Despite these limitations, this survey has provided
estimates of agricultural land values that have been
fairly consistent since the mid-1980s. These
estimates serve as a guide to the relative value of
different land uses within areas and between areas.
It is important, however, to emphasize that the value
of a specific tract of land may vary substantially from
these estimates because of the physical
characteristics of the tract, the location of the tract
and the economic and institutional factors that may
affect or restrict its use. Therefore, the value of a
specific tract of land should not be determined by
these survey results. A professional appraiser should
be used to determine the value for a specific tract of
land.

References

Reynolds, John E. "Citrus Land Values Decline as
Other Land Values Increase: 2001 Survey
Results" Florida Food and Resource
Economics, No. 147. University of Florida,
Gainesville, FL, July-August 2001.
www.agbuscenter.ifas.ufl.edu/landuse/







Table 1. Estimated land value per acre, by geographic
region and land use, 2001 and 2002
Date
Percent
Region/Land Use 5/01 5/02 Change
---- $/acre ------


5,687 -11 2
3,658 -156
5,211 -8 8


2,150 2,314 76
1,630 1,843 13 1


1,490 1,676 125
1.113 1.283 153


SOUTH
Mature Oranges
Mature Grapefruit
5-7 Yr Citrus
Cropland
Irngated
Nomrngated
Pastureland
Improved
Unimproved


CENTRAL
Mature Oranges
Mature Grapefruit
5-7 Yr Citrus
Cropland
Irngated
Nomrngated
Pastureland
Improved
Unimproved


NORTHEAST
Cropland
Irngated
Nomrngated
Pastureland
Improved
Unimproved
Farm Woods


NORTHWEST
Cropland
Irngated
Nomrngated
Pastureland
Improved
Unimproved
Farm Woods


2,580 2,807 88
2,271 2,468 87


2,418 2,681 109
1,494 1,659 11 0





2,561 2,859 11 6
1 960 2 171 108


2,229 98
1,936 11 6
1,726 93


1,630 1,813 11 2
1.396 1,502 76


Table 3. Estimated value of transition land by geographic region, May
2002

Date
Percent
Region/Category 5/01 5/02 Change
------ $/acre -----
Metropolitan Counties
< 5 Mi to Major Town
Northwest 11,000 11,646 5 9
Northeast 13,300 13,833 64
Central 13,120 14,134 7 9
South 12,688 13,873 9 3
Southeast 40,000 45,083 127

> 5 Mi to Major Town
Northwest 5,635 6,280 11 4
Northeast 6,828 7,500 9 8
Central 7,904 8,923 134
South 5,556 6,464 163
Southeast 26,250 28,333 7 9

Non-metropolitan Counties
< 5 Mi to Major Town
Northwest 3,853 4,107 66
Northeast 4,780 5,145 7 6
Central *** *** ***
South 5,275 5,931 124

> 5 Mi to Major Town
Northwest 2,928 3,234 105
Northeast 3,535 3,830 8 3
Central *** *** ***
South 3,533 3,950 11 8



Table 4. Respondents' opimnons regarding their expectations of land
values over the next 12 months, by geographic region, May 2002
Item Higher No Change Lower

----percentage ofresponses----
Land Values, Next 12 Months
Southern Regions 62 28 10
Northern Regions 61 27 2


1,411 93
1,165 7 1
1,134 10 1


"Florida Land Value Survey," Food and Resource
Economics Department, University of Florida, May 2002


Table 2. Cash rent by geographic region, May 2002
Land Class NW NE Central South

Improved Pastureland 2500 1880 2020
1865


Ummproved Pastureland 16 16 11 60 9 12 838


Nommigated Cropland 3109 2500


Figure 1. Geographic regions used for the Florida Land Value Survey


5,438 -11 4
3,614 -148
4,668 -2 4


Address editorial comments or correspondence regarding ArticlesappearingiFloridaFoodandResourceEconomicsmay This pubhcation was produced at an annual cost of
and Michael T Olexa, be reproduced, in whoe or in part, without special permission $150 20, or 7 5 cents per copy, to present research
IhI, I,, ,,1 I I -1 ,1Resource Economics re results and economic information on Florda food
Department, University of Flori, Gainesville, Florida326 11- Newspapers, periodicalsandother publicationsare encouraged and agricultural industries
0240 Editorial assistance provided by Carol Fountain to reprint articles that would be of interest to their readers.
Credit is requested if information is reprinted.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs