Field assessment guide, August 2026
Twelve checks before choosing a crop for a field
This checklist will not tell you what to plant. It helps you organize field evidence, expose assumptions, and identify questions that deserve local verification before money or a season is committed.
A person who has worked the field may know about wet corners, late frosts, machinery access, weeds, buyers, or failed varieties that a dataset cannot see. Record that knowledge and test it where needed.
How to use it
Start with the decision, not the score
Name the field, crop or crop pair, intended planting window, and decision deadline. Then work through the checks using the best evidence you have. Mark missing evidence openly rather than filling every blank with a confident default.
A hard constraint can matter more than a strong average. Unreliable water, a shallow restrictive layer, no workable harvest window, or no buyer may deserve attention before a composite suitability score.
Do not turn this checklist into a fertilizer, irrigation, pesticide, investment, or legal prescription. Those decisions may require field measurements, labels, local rules, qualified advice, and a farm-specific budget.
Field evidence
The 12-check field screen
Work from climate and physical limits toward management and economics. The order is a prompt, not a rule. A known local constraint may deserve to come first.
Climate and season
- 1
Define the crop, cultivar, and decision
What exactly are you deciding, for which field and planting window?
- Collect
- Field boundary, intended use, cultivar or maturity class, planting window, and the decision deadline.
- Do not assume
- A crop-level average may not describe a particular cultivar or production system.
- 2
Check the usable growing window
Does the likely season provide enough time and heat without relying on an unusually favorable year?
- Collect
- Local temperature history, growing degree-day assumptions, frost dates, elevation, and cultivar maturity.
- Do not assume
- Historical conditions describe a range. They do not promise the timing of the next season.
- 3
Look for damaging weather, not only averages
Which heat, frost, wind, hail, or prolonged wet-weather events could interrupt the plan?
- Collect
- Field records, nearby station records, recent extremes, exposure, shelter, and crop-stage sensitivity.
- Do not assume
- A suitable seasonal average can hide a short event that matters at flowering, establishment, or harvest.
Soil and root zone
- 4
Confirm soil variability across the field
Are there distinct zones that should be sampled or managed separately?
- Collect
- Soil map, slope position, visible color and texture changes, wet spots, past yield patterns, and sampling zones.
- Do not assume
- Mapped soil is useful for screening. It may not capture within-field variation or recent management effects.
- 5
Test the soil you will manage
What do recent, representative samples show about the root zone?
- Collect
- Laboratory method, sampling depth and date, pH, salinity, organic matter or carbon, and locally relevant nutrients.
- Do not assume
- One indicator cannot describe soil function by itself, and a laboratory value still needs local interpretation.
- 6
Inspect depth and physical restrictions
Can roots, air, and water move through the intended rooting depth?
- Collect
- Effective depth, compaction, plow pan, stones, bedrock, structure, infiltration, and rooting observations.
- Do not assume
- Topsoil chemistry alone may look acceptable while a restrictive layer limits the crop.
- 7
Check drainage and field access
What happens after heavy rain, and when can machinery or people safely enter?
- Collect
- Ponding duration, water table clues, drainage infrastructure, slope, erosion, and access history.
- Do not assume
- A drainage class or map label does not show how a particular storm or blocked drain will behave.
Water and management
- 8
Verify the water source and delivery capacity
Can the available source deliver enough usable water when demand is highest?
- Collect
- Source reliability, legal access, storage, pumping and delivery rate, water quality, energy cost, and restrictions.
- Do not assume
- An estimated crop water requirement does not establish that water is available or suitable.
- 9
Compare demand with rainfall and soil storage
Where might a seasonal or peak-period water deficit occur?
- Collect
- Crop stage, reference evapotranspiration, crop coefficient assumptions, rainfall pattern, rooting depth, and soil water capacity.
- Do not assume
- Water-demand calculations are estimates and are sensitive to weather, canopy, soil, and management assumptions.
- 10
Review rotation and field history
What has this field already taught you about pests, weeds, disease, nutrients, and operations?
- Collect
- Previous crops, amendments, pesticide records, recurring problem areas, residue, tillage, yield, and observations.
- Do not assume
- Rotation effects vary with soil, climate, crop sequence, timing, and local pest pressure.
Economics and market
- 11
Confirm the route to market
Who may buy the crop, under what grade, timing, volume, and delivery terms?
- Collect
- Buyer conversations, written specifications, contracts, distance, storage, handling, rejection risk, and payment timing.
- Do not assume
- A regional price or search trend does not establish a buyer for your crop.
- 12
Build a farm-specific downside case
Does the plan still make sense with a weaker yield, price, or planting window?
- Collect
- Your yield history, quoted input costs, labor, machinery, land, finance, storage, loss assumptions, and break-even thresholds.
- Do not assume
- Reference budgets and modelled returns are starting points, not forecasts or guarantees.
Evidence discipline
Record what you know and what you are assuming
Confidence should follow the evidence and the decision. A direct measurement can still be unrepresentative, while a model can still be useful for finding patterns. Record the source, date, method, and mismatch risk.
| Evidence level | Examples | How to use it |
|---|---|---|
| Measured here | Representative soil sample, flow test, field inspection | Usually the closest evidence, provided the method and timing fit the decision. |
| Observed or recorded here | Field notes, yield history, ponding, pest records | Valuable local evidence that still needs context and consistent records. |
| Nearby or locally official | Station history, extension guidance, local soil survey | Useful context. Check distance, representativeness, date, and local variation. |
| Mapped or modelled | Gridded soil, reanalysis weather, modelled water demand | Good for screening and finding questions. Resolution and assumptions matter. |
| Assumed | Expected yield, future price, default crop coefficient | Keep it visible, test a range, and replace it when better evidence becomes available. |
Optional digital screens
Use AgriAuditor where a calculation helps
These tools can organize a question or test an assumption. They do not replace the field evidence collected above, and a result should be read with its inputs and limitations.
Compare historical heat accumulation and frost-date percentiles for a stated location and crop assumption.
Use mapped climate and soil evidence to form a shortlist, then replace estimates with field evidence where possible.
Screen seasonal crop water demand with explicit weather and crop-coefficient assumptions.
Test editable yield, price, and cost assumptions, including a weaker case before committing capital.
After planting, the field-monitoring workflow can keep observations, irrigation, weather signals, and season records attached to the field.
Take it to the field
Printable field sheet
Print the blank sheet or save it as a PDF. Add the source and date beside each observation so the next review can separate current evidence from an old assumption.
AgriAuditor field resource
Field suitability checklist
agriauditor.com/guides/field-suitability-checklist
| Check | Evidence, source, and date | Current signal | What still needs checking? |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Define the crop, cultivar, and decision | □ Favorable □ Unclear □ Constraint | ||
| 2. Check the usable growing window | □ Favorable □ Unclear □ Constraint | ||
| 3. Look for damaging weather, not only averages | □ Favorable □ Unclear □ Constraint | ||
| 4. Confirm soil variability across the field | □ Favorable □ Unclear □ Constraint | ||
| 5. Test the soil you will manage | □ Favorable □ Unclear □ Constraint | ||
| 6. Inspect depth and physical restrictions | □ Favorable □ Unclear □ Constraint | ||
| 7. Check drainage and field access | □ Favorable □ Unclear □ Constraint | ||
| 8. Verify the water source and delivery capacity | □ Favorable □ Unclear □ Constraint | ||
| 9. Compare demand with rainfall and soil storage | □ Favorable □ Unclear □ Constraint | ||
| 10. Review rotation and field history | □ Favorable □ Unclear □ Constraint | ||
| 11. Confirm the route to market | □ Favorable □ Unclear □ Constraint | ||
| 12. Build a farm-specific downside case | □ Favorable □ Unclear □ Constraint |
Screening worksheet only. A completed sheet does not guarantee crop performance or replace local agronomic, engineering, financial, legal, or regulatory checks.
Evidence and maintenance
Sources, scope, and corrections
This guide combines broadly applicable screening questions. It does not contain crop-specific thresholds, local regulations, or a field diagnosis. Independent agronomic review has not been completed for this edition.
- USDA NRCS: Web Soil SurveyOfficial U.S. soil survey information for general planning, with an explicit reminder that some decisions need onsite investigation.
- USDA NRCS: Soil Health AssessmentPhysical, chemical, biological, and visual indicators used to assess soil function without reducing soil health to one number.
- USDA NRCS: Conservation Crop Rotation Standard 328Rotation-planning context and a direction to use the locally adopted standard where one applies.
- FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56Reference method for estimating crop evapotranspiration from weather and crop-coefficient inputs.
- USDA ERS: Commodity Costs and Returns DocumentationDefinitions, survey basis, regional scope, exclusions, and limitations for U.S. commodity cost benchmarks.
Source pages checked: 27 August 2026. Editorial owner: AgriAuditor Research. Review the source pages and every product link at least every six months, and after any material change to the checklist or linked tools.
A correction is useful evidence
If a question is missing, a source is outdated, or the wording does not match field practice, tell us what should change and why. We would also be glad to hear how this resource could work better for your operation or extension work.
Questions that should remain open
Field suitability questions
Can this checklist tell me which crop to plant?
No. It helps organize evidence, expose constraints, and record what still needs checking. The final choice depends on the field, production system, local knowledge, buyer access, finances, and your tolerance for risk.
Can mapped soil data replace a soil test?
Usually not for a field-level input or amendment decision. A soil map can help identify likely patterns and sampling zones, while representative sampling, laboratory methods, field observations, and local interpretation provide different evidence.
How should I treat a modelled climate or water result?
Treat it as an estimate tied to its location, period, method, and assumptions. Compare it with nearby observations and your own records, then examine the range rather than relying on one displayed value.
What should I do when sources disagree?
Record the disagreement instead of averaging it away. Check dates, units, location, sampling depth, resolution, and method. Give more weight to evidence that directly represents the field and decision, while preserving any material uncertainty.
How often should I repeat the checklist?
Repeat it when the crop, field, cultivar, planting window, buyer terms, water access, or major cost assumptions change. Some observations remain useful for years, while weather, prices, and operational constraints can change quickly.
Does completing every check make the decision safe?
No checklist removes production or market risk. Its value is in making assumptions visible, identifying hard constraints early, and showing which questions deserve local agronomic, engineering, financial, or legal advice.