Food Production
Understanding how, how much, where, and which types of food are grown within a region can help increase the supply of and demand for local food and identify opportunities to shift farming practices. There are many prerequisites for food production, from knowledge of how to raise crops and livestock, to access to land, to favorable environmental conditions (sun, soil, water), to agricultural inputs (seeds, livestock, soil amendments, tools, farm equipment, labor). Land development, population growth, changing climate conditions, and consumer preferences also shape the production landscape. The dashboards below outline information about the current supply of local agricultural products, local production acreage, the agricultural workforce, and how changing climate conditions may affect food production.
Much of the publicly available data on food production stems from a single source: the United States Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA NASS) Census of Agriculture. Each Census, conducted every five years, is a nationwide survey designed to gather detailed information about all farms and ranches and the people who operate them.
The Census provides valuable long-term trend data but also has important limitations that should be considered when interpreting it:
Frequency of data collection: Because the Census is conducted every five years, it cannot capture year-to-year changes in production or emerging local trends. This limits the ability to understand short-term fluctuations or quickly identify new opportunities or challenges. More frequent and localized data collection would support more responsive planning and a clearer picture of production across the region.
Potential response bias: Although producers are required by federal law to respond, the 2022 response rate declined to roughly 61%. This creates uncertainty about who is represented in the data and increases the potential for bias if certain groups are less likely to respond. Nonresponse can stem from time constraints, financial pressures, limited internet access, or limited interaction with federal programs. Historical discriminatory practices at federal agencies—documented among Black, Native American, Hispanic/Latino, and female producers—contributed to financial loss and uneven land ownership over time, which may have reduced trust in federal data collection. This history may continue to affect participation, potentially leading to underrepresentation of specific producer groups and production types.
Missing county-level data: Some data points are suppressed when disclosure could reveal information about an individual farm—for example, when only one producer in a county grows a particular crop. As a result, certain dashboard indicators may appear incomplete or missing for some counties. This confidentiality requirement protects producers but limits the level of detail available for local analysis.
Questions to Consider
How many farms are there in Central Texas? What is their size breakdown?
What is currently grown in Central Texas, and how is this influenced by environment and culture?
How does local food production in Central Texas compare to consumer demand?
Where is there opportunity to import less food that can be grown locally?
Where are areas with underutilized arable farmland?
Given land use competition, development pressures, and jurisdictional issues, how can Central Texas work at a regional level to preserve agricultural land?
Where is there availability of city- or county-owned land to support food production on publicly owned land?
How do Central Texas farmers compare to the general population in terms of race and ethnicity, gender, and age?
What are the environmental effects of local food production? How do different farming practices affect the surrounding environment?
What would strengthen local food producers’ resilience and reduce crop loss in the face of extreme weather conditions and natural disasters?
List of Dashboards
Continue scrolling to view the dashboards linked below or click on a link to visit a specific part of this page.
-
Consumption vs. Production
Agricultural Sales by Product Type
Number of Farm Operations and Farm Acreage
Crop and Livestock Production
Farm Income
-
Race and Gender of Producers
Age and Experience of Producers
Producers with Military Service
Farm Labor
-
-
Mapping Land and Water Resources
Drought Conditions
Water Pollution
Agricultural Input Use
Organic Agriculture
Agricultural Supply and Demand
Consumption vs. Production
Understanding the gap between current production and demand helps identify opportunities to increase local agricultural production in Central Texas. Research suggests that Central Texas’ production cannot realistically meet its total demand for food, but the charts below help highlight opportunities for increasing production. The chart below on the left shows the estimated consumption of agricultural products in Central Texas. The chart below on the right shows the amount locally produced for the same categories of agricultural products. Note that this dashboard only includes food grown for human consumption, not all agricultural production. Comparing sales volume is an imperfect measure because it does not indicate the quantity of food that was purchased or sold and does not consider differences between agricultural sale prices and consumer prices.
Highlights: Sales of food for human consumption are highest in McLennan County, followed by Falls and Milam counties. Most of these sales are generated from animal proteins rather than produce. While overall production exceeds consumption in half of Central Texas counties, as a region, sales meet only 23.4% of consumption. This is due to large gaps in the counties with the highest consumption, including Travis, Hays, and Williamson counties.
Both charts are shown on the same scale to highlight the gap between production and consumption in Central Texas. This gap suggests that much of the food consumed in Central Texas is produced outside the region. This means that a significant portion of the food supply depends on external supply chains and longer transport distances, which may increase vulnerability to disruptions and environmental impacts.
Note that the consumption chart includes food beyond what is produced locally. The data do not indicate that production is the only issue contributing to mismatches in supply and demand; distribution, waste, and economic and physical access to food may also be considered.
Filter data by county by selecting the county name on the filter to the right of the charts. Click on a year to change the agricultural sales chart and gap/gap % values in the table. Click on a header in the table to sort by that column. Drag the circles up and down on the y-axis of the bar charts to adjust the y-axis.
Data Sources:
Consumption: 2023 5-Year American Community Survey (ACS) and 2024 Esri Consumer Spending Data
Sales: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed:
Consumption: Annually
Sales: Every 5 years; next Census data expected in 2029
Dashboard last refreshed June 2025
Agricultural Sales by Product Type
The chart below shows total farm sales by product type and the number of farm operations in Central Texas by sales amount or product type.
Missing data is an important limitation in sales amounts for many products. Therefore, this metric should be interpreted with caution as it may not fully represent regional sales for each specific product.
Highlights: Animal product sales represent the majority of all farm sales in Central Texas, and most farm operations are focused on producing animal products—especially cattle. Sheep and goats are second in terms of number of farms raising them, but they do not constitute a large portion of sales.
Grains are another major category in terms of sales, as are other field crops (e.g., hay) in terms of the number of farms producing them. Most of these grains are not grown for human consumption but for livestock feed or fuel (ethanol). These trends have remained stable over the past three census periods. The share of all operations growing fruits and vegetables increased steadily from 3.3% in 2012 to 4.9% in 2022, though their share of sales dropped between 2012 and 2017 before rising again in 2022 to 3.1%.
For the most part, Central Texas’ top agricultural products mirror Texas’ top agricultural products in terms of sales, with cattle and calves in first place, followed by poultry and eggs, milk, and grains.
Filter data by county by selecting the county name on the filter at right. Filter by year and sales/operations data using the filters below the chart.
Included categories represent nearly all categories in the census; tobacco, nursery, equine, and other miscellaneous crops and livestock were omitted to simplify the chart. Note that the vegetable category includes melons.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years; next Census data expected in 2029. Dashboard last refreshed April 2025.
Number of Farm Operations and Farm Acreage
Central Texas is home to over 32,000 farms. These farms produce a variety of food, as seen in the dashboards above. Land is a finite resource and farmers and ranchers who want to expand their operations may face many barriers to accessing additional land. These include land being in short supply overall due to development pressures, which also drive up land costs.
The first chart below shows the acreage in each county used for different agricultural purposes and compares it to the total acreage in each county. Pastureland is used to approximate the amount of land devoted to raising livestock, but note that this does not take into account land used for non-ruminant animals like poultry and hogs that are not pastured. This chart is missing land that may not currently be used for agriculture but could potentially be used for that purpose. The second chart below shows the number of farm operations in Central Texas by farm size.
Highlights: Recent farm and farmland losses are most striking in the Austin MSA and far northeast part of the region. The first chart shows that, across the region, farmland decreased by 6.6% from 2012 to 2022. However, this loss has been experienced unevenly across the region. Between 2012 and 2022, farmland acreage increased in six counties, mostly in the northern part of the region (Falls, Bell, Coryell, San Saba, Lee, Lampasas). Falls County experienced the greatest increase at 27.6%. Conversely, farmland decreased by more than 10% in nine counties, including the entire Austin MSA (Hays, Bastrop, Williamson, Travis, Caldwell, Mills, Gillespie, Burnet, Freestone).
The second chart shows that Central Texas lost nearly 1,800 of its farms from 2012 to 2022—a 5% drop. Again, losses and gains were experienced unevenly across the region. Between 2012 and 2022, the number of farms increased in eight counties, mostly in the western part of the region (San Saba, Coryell, Gillespie, Llano, Milam, Lampasas, Fayette, Mills). San Saba County increased by the greatest margin at 16.3%. The number of farms decreased by more than 10% in six counties, mostly in the Austin MSA (Hays, Travis, Caldwell, Limestone, Freestone, Bastrop).
Hays County experienced both the greatest drop in acreage and number of farms: 41.9% and 34.7%, respectively.
Across all counties, the vast majority of agricultural acreage is used for pasturing livestock and most farms are smaller than 100 acres.
Filter data by county by selecting the county name on the filter at right. Toggle between years using the year filter.
Note that the acreage in agriculture chart does not include all categories (e.g., structures, non-grazed woodland) but covers the categories most closely linked to production, which represent the vast majority of agricultural land.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years; next Census data expected in 2029. Dashboard last refreshed April 2025.
Crop and Livestock Production
As shown in the dashboards above, most agricultural sales and land in Central Texas are focused on animal production, with relatively few dollars and acres devoted to fruits and vegetables, which are referred to as specialty crops. The dashboards below provide more detail on the products produced.
Highlights: A wide variety of crops are produced in Central Texas, but most farms and acreage produce agricultural products that are not for human consumption but rather for feed, fiber, and fuel. Corn and sorghum, along with many other grains and soybeans, are primarily used for livestock feed and/or producing fuel ethanol or industrial products.
Overall, fruit and vegetable operations and acreage are trending up. Still, only 0.73% of acreage is devoted to growing them.
From 2012 to 2022, the number of farms producing vegetables increased 32%, and vegetable acreage increased 67%. Tomatoes were the top vegetable in all three census years in terms of number of operations, though peppers nearly matched them in 2022. In terms of acreage, squash was the top vegetable.
The number of farms producing fruit increased by 76% and fruit acreage increased by 98% from 2012-2022. Peaches were the top fruit in terms of acreage in all three years, followed by grapes (grapes are not differentiated by use, e.g., table grapes vs. wine grapes). Melons were produced by the most farms in 2012, followed by peaches and grapes, but in 2017 and 2022, peaches were produced by the most farms, followed by grapes.
There are also a variety of types of animals raised, including bee colonies and aquaculture. However, cattle are produced by the highest number of operations across the region. The largest number of animals produced are poultry, which includes turkey and quail. From 2012 to 2022, the number of cattle raised for beef dropped by more than 50% and turkey production nearly disappeared. Meanwhile, the number of operations with honeybee colonies more than quadrupled.
Use the county, metric, and year filters to adjust the view. Drag the y-axis up and down to see differences among crops in more detail. Click on a category in the legend or table to highlight all crops or livestock in that category in the view. For the sake of space, horticultural products were not included.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years; next Census data expected in 2029. Dashboard last refreshed April 2025.
Farm Income
Due to the inherent uncertainties of agricultural production and market fluctuations, farming is not always a profitable venture. The following dashboard displays information about the average net income per farm operation and the share of farms that operated with a gain or a loss.
Nearly one-third of farm operations in Central Texas report sales of less than $1,000 per year. However, this does not necessarily mean that these operations are all small working farms. A farm is broadly defined by the Census as “any place from which $1,000 or more of agricultural products were produced and sold, or normally would have been sold, during the census year.” The number of farms reporting less than $1,000 in sales has increased in recent Census counts, up to more than one in five farms. The reasons for farms reporting less than $1,000 in sales are potentially many: small farms facing losses from extreme weather conditions (e.g., drought, flooding, hail, strong winds), ranchers who do not sell cattle in a given year, farmers growing crops to feed their households, and beginning farmers just learning the ropes. Another reason could be that there are tax breaks (agricultural exemptions) for land designated as farmland. This group of farms includes disproportionate numbers of female producers, producers of color, and producers with higher household wealth. Additional research could help clarify how these operations contribute to the local production landscape, what characteristics they share, which farms may benefit from targeted support, and how owned or leased acreage compares to acreage actively in production.
Highlights: The average net cash income per farm was negative in all three of the most recent census years, though the deficit in 2022 reverted to 2012 levels. Outcomes varied by county. Half of all counties had negative income in all three years, while four (Falls, Freestone, McLennan, and Milam) were positive in all three. Several counties fluctuated, and of these, Bell, Travis, and Williamson counties were negative in 2022, while Coryell, Limestone, Mills, and San Saba were positive in 2022. One-third of counties had positive net cash income in 2022, mostly in rural northern counties. The share of farms operating with gain dropped from 29% across the region in 2012 to 23% in 2017 and 2022.
Filter data by county by selecting the county name on the filter at right.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years; next Census data expected in 2029. Dashboard last refreshed April 2025.
Farmer and Rancher Characteristics and Farm Labor
The following dashboards highlight various demographic aspects of the Central Texas farming and ranching population. Understanding these demographics, such as race, ethnicity, and gender of agricultural producers, helps clarify long-term trends in land ownership, production capacity, and how resources are distributed across the region, which, in turn, influence who is participating in agriculture, how much land is actively farmed, and the region’s overall ability to meet current and future food production needs. Demographic patterns also highlight where data may be incomplete or where certain producer groups may be underrepresented in existing datasets. Recognizing these dynamics helps users interpret food system metrics more accurately and supports more informed planning across Central Texas.
Note on data collection methodology: Starting with the 2017 Census of Agriculture, the USDA changed its methodology to include demographic data about all producers involved in agricultural production instead of only the principal farm operator. This methodological change resulted in a 7% increase in the total number of agricultural producers from 2012 to 2017. Changes in methodology are highlighted in the dashboards below.
Race and Gender of Producers
A diverse producer base can help strengthen regional food production by expanding the types of crops grown, supporting a wider range of production practices, and contributing to the availability of culturally familiar foods. National nutrition guidance, including the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, emphasizes that effective dietary interventions should align with cultural preferences to support long-term behavior change and chronic disease prevention. Encouraging participation among producers with varied racial and ethnic backgrounds helps ensure that production trends reflect the needs and preferences of Central Texas residents.
The following dashboards show the race or ethnicity and gender of producers in Central Texas. Note that the gender options on the Census of Agriculture are “male” and “female.”
Overall, the number of farmers declined in the 20th century, but this varies by racial group. The number of Asian and Hispanic or Latino/a/e farmers increased sharply, while the number of White, Black, and Native American farmers dropped. Black farmers experienced the largest decline, from a peak in 1920, when 14.3% of all farmers in the US were Black, to the 2022 Census of Agriculture, when 1.4%* identified as Black.
One factor that can help explain uneven land ownership and producer counts is the practice of heirs’ property, a form of undivided inheritance common in some Black and Native American communities. When land is passed on without a will, multiple heirs may share ownership without clear title, making the land more vulnerable to sale and more difficult to use as collateral for loans or certain forms of federal assistance. These conditions can contribute to long-term land loss and reduced participation in agricultural programs.
*April 2025 update: This statistic originally cited another website that is not currently active. Click here for the archived version of that page.
Highlights: Across Central Texas, 89% of producers identify as White, and they operate 93% of farmland. At both the state and national levels, 95% of producers identify as White. These patterns differ from the overall population, in which approximately 40% of Texas residents identify as White, with county-level figures in Central Texas ranging from 35-82%. Central Texas farmers are slightly more racially and ethnically diverse than at the national level and at the Texas level, where 95% of all producers identify as White. As of 2022, Texas had more Black producers than any other state, though they represented only 3% of all producers in Texas. Notably, Freestone County has more Black farmers and ranchers than any other county in the U.S.: 19% of farmers are Black and 74% are White. The only other county with less than 80% of farmers identifying as White is Travis, at 78%.
Nationally, nearly two-thirds of producers identify as male. This figure is lower in Texas, at 61%, and lower still in Central Texas, at 60%. Though six in 10 producers are male, nearly seven in 10 acres are operated by male producers. The average female-operated farm is 30% smaller than the average male-operated farm.
Filter data by county and year using the filters at right and below the charts.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years; next Census data expected in 2029. Dashboard last refreshed April 2025.
Age and Experience of Producers
Understanding how many producers are just entering the farming business versus approaching retirement can help determine where more training and support are needed to ensure that subsequent generations of producers can thrive. The dashboards below show the number of producers by age group and number of years farming. A new and beginning producer is one who has been farming for 11 years or less on any operation. A young producer is one who is age 35 or younger.
Highlights: The average age of a farmer across all counties was 61.1 years in 2012, 60 years in 2017, and 60.8 years in 2022 (note that principal operators were counted in 2012, and all producers were counted in 2017 and 2022). This mirrors national trends, though Central Texas farmers are slightly older than at the national level. Only 5% of producers are under age 35. The fact that the average age of farmers is approaching what would be considered retirement age in most other professions highlights how essential it is to train the next generation of farmers and ensure that their farm operations can be economically viable. The average number of years spent farming has remained fairly steady (23 in 2012, 21.3 in 2017, and 21.6 in 2022). The share of new and beginning farmers and ranchers increased slightly in 2022 to 31%.
Filter data by county and year using the filters at right and below the charts.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years; next Census data expected in 2029. Dashboard last refreshed April 2025.
Producers with Military Service
The 2017 Census of Agriculture collected data on producers who have served or are serving in the United States Armed Forces for the first time, as well as the number of acres operated. As Texas is home to the largest military base and has one of the largest veteran populations in the United States, understanding the number of farmers with military service can help quantify the need for additional programs to support this farming population.
Highlights: The number of producers with military service and the number of farms they operate decreased by 21% overall from 2017 to 2022. Overall acreage also decreased, though five counties saw increases: Bell (acreage tripled), Freestone, Lampasas (doubled), Lee, and Travis (doubled). Bell and McLennan counties have the highest number of producers and operations, and Bell and Lampasas counties have the highest acreage.
Filter data by clicking on a county name at right or a metric button below the chart.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2017 and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years; next Census data expected in 2029. Dashboard last refreshed April 2025.
Farm Labor
Labor availability and working conditions directly affect planting, harvesting, and day-to-day farm operations that contribute to production capacity. Farm labor includes seasonal and migrant positions as well as unpaid work, which usually involves members of farming households. These workers may face occupational risks such as heat-related illness, exposure to pesticides and other chemicals, and challenges related to immigration requirements for those working under temporary or migrant labor programs. Note that the Census of Agriculture does not provide a complete count of all migrant workers.
Highlights: According to the Census of Agriculture, most farms in Central Texas do not hire large numbers of farm laborers. The largest category for farm labor is unpaid labor, which is mostly comprised of household members helping with farm and ranch duties. Among farms that hire outside labor, 91% employ fewer than five workers. These numbers vary slightly from county to county and between census years.
Filter data by county and year using the filters at right and below the charts.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years; next Census data expected in 2029. Dashboard last refreshed May 2025.
Community Food Production
Community gardens and school gardens have the ability to build community and connection to food while contributing to small-scale food production. The map below shows these locations, where community members can grow food on public land or for the public good. There is opportunity to better research the long-term impacts of school gardens, which have been shown to increase fruit and vegetable consumption and promote an openness to trying new foods. An area of interest for community garden research would be to find yield data and determine how much these gardens contribute to food and nutrition security of participating gardeners. Currently, little is known about the production levels of these gardens and the impact they have on the health and wellbeing of those who access them.
There is no robust dataset on home gardens (indoor container, patio, raised or in-ground garden beds in front or backyards). The number of home gardens, their yields, and their impact on food security and health outcomes are also understudied, though recent research indicates that home gardening may increase food security.
Highlights: Community gardens and food forests are concentrated in more urban areas across Central Texas. Rural counties have fewer community gardens. Note that information is limited on community gardens that are not on City of Austin-owned land or outside of Travis County. Additional locations have been added based on suggestions from partners and internet searches. School gardens are reported through the Farm to School Census, a nationwide survey conducted every four years. Not all schools are reflected in the survey, so the census results may not reflect all active programs. The school garden locations marked on the map represent school food authorities (SFAs) responding to the Census. Of the 80 SFAs in Texas—6.9%—that have school gardens, 11 are located in Central Texas. SFAs often represent an entire school district. See the table for the total number of gardens reported by the SFAs marked on the map. School garden numbers dropped between 2019 and 2023.
The Food Access Community Needs Assessments (CNAs) currently being undertaken by Central Texas Food Bank present opportunities to learn more about the local community garden and school garden landscape.
Toggle between years using the year filter.
Data Sources:
Community Gardens: City of Austin Community Garden Program and partner input/internet searches for locations outside the City of Austin (last verified September 2025). For the most up-to-date list of community gardens in Austin, visit www.austintexas.gov/department/community-gardens-program.
School Gardens: USDA Farm to School Census, 2019 and 2023 [2023 data are shown as 2025 to enable combined school garden/community garden viewing]
Refreshed:
Community Gardens: Annually
School Gardens: Every 4 years
Dashboard last refreshed September 2025
Agriculture and Climate
Agricultural production is heavily influenced by extreme temperatures, floods, heavy winds, and droughts, which are all occurring more frequently. These events increase the level of uncertainty involved in production and can make farming less economically viable, such as when farmers experienced significant revenue losses from crops destroyed by Winter Storm Uri in February 2021.
Production can also vary greatly depending on the size of an operation and the types of growing techniques, practices, and inputs used, which can impact the surrounding environment in different ways. Certain farming practices may help capture carbon, improve soil health, and increase biodiversity, for example, while others may contribute to the pollution of air and waterways and health issues among farm operators and laborers.
To maintain long-term production capacity, there is opportunity for producers to consider crop varieties and livestock breeds that are suited to changing climate conditions. For example, scientists are developing plant varieties with greater drought tolerance and improved resilience to heat and cold stress.
Mapping Land and Water Resources
Agricultural production is shaped by the environmental resources that surround it. Food production (fruits, vegetables, and other specialty crops) and agricultural production (feed, fiber, and fuel crops) have different environmental requirements. The maps below provide an overview of the land and water resources available in Central Texas. Thank you to Jarred Maxwell, formerly of Foodshed Investors, for sharing the concept, design, and data sources for the maps below.
In the Central Texas Land and Water Map, explore where good soil overlaps with abundant water. Noting where there is farmland that can be used for food production can help identify potentially underutilized arable farmland and factor into conversations about preserving agricultural land, managing land use competition, and development pressures. See which types of soils are present (Major Land Resource Areas), which can dictate which areas are best suited for different types of land use; and note where existing water resources are located (Major and Minor Aquifers). Also included on the map are areas under particularly limiting water conditions (Priority Groundwater Management Areas).
In the Central Texas Crop Map, explore which types of crops are grown where.
Highlights: These maps contain a wealth of information that can be explored in many ways. Below are a few suggestions for layers to look at in combination to learn about the intersection of good soil and abundant water in Central Texas.
Farmland Classification and Major Aquifers: Note the areas in Bastrop, Caldwell, Fayette, and Lee counties that are primarily classified as farmland of statewide importance and are also covered by major aquifers, indicating that they have good farmland with abundant water and may be suitable for growing food crops.
Farmland Classification and Major Land Resource Areas: The major land resource areas and farmland classification layers illustrate the ecoregions present within Central Texas. Though the Texas Blackland Prairie is known for having highly fertile soils and these soils correspond with prime farmland (dark green) on the farmland classification map layer, these areas are more suited to crops used for feed, fiber, and fuel (more information below)
Farmland Classification and Crops: Compare the Central Texas Crop Map to the Farmland Classification layer in the Central Texas Land and Water Map. Areas classified as prime farmland correspond to areas with high corn and cotton concentration on the crop map. These also correspond to the Blackland Prairie soils on the Major Land Resource Areas layer. This illustrates that prime farmland is used for dry cropping, and these crops are generally not used for food production but for feed, fuel, and fiber, highlighting the difference between agriculture and food production.
Click on the legend (3 lines) and layers (3 stacked diamonds) icons on the top right of each map to explore, or click on “View larger map” in the bottom left corner of each map to open it in a new tab. Click layers on and off using the checkboxes to the left of each layer name.
Data Sources:
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service: Farmland Classification (2024), Major Land Resource Areas (2022), Crops (2025)
Texas Water Development Board: Major Aquifers (2006), Minor Aquifers (2017)
Texas Center for Environmental Quality: Priority Groundwater Management Areas (2018)
Refreshed: Annually. Dashboard last updated July 2025.
Drought Conditions
Low water availability can reduce crop yields and food for animals while increasing farming costs due to the need for increased irrigation. Groundwater depletion complicates the issue of irrigation because sufficient water is in shorter supply. Crop yields decrease by half in fields that were irrigated but can no longer be irrigated. If temperatures increase, some crops that typically require little to no irrigation may require it in the future. Opportunities to reduce water use include using reclaimed wastewater, modernizing irrigation systems, creating new water storage facilities, and improving soil health.
The data below show how drought levels have changed in Central Texas from 2000-2025 and how Central Texas drought conditions compare to those of the state.
Highlights: Drought conditions vary from year to year, with high drought conditions spanning from 2011-2014 and dropping in 2016. Since 2016, drought conditions have increased again gradually, with 2022 and 2023 approaching 2011-2014 levels and over 90% of land under abnormally dry conditions or worse. Looking at Central Texas drought levels within the context of statewide drought levels, there are only slight differences.
Drag the circles in the timeline to filter for a specific time period. Filter data by a particular county by selecting the county name in the table under the chart.
Data Source: National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC), USDA, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 2025
Refreshed: Annually. Dashboard last refreshed September 2025.
Water Pollution
Agricultural production can contribute to water pollution when high amounts of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides are used and when farm waste is not carefully managed. Also, the common practice of allowing soil to lie fallow with no cover can lead to soil erosion and over-silting of waterways. Conversely, agricultural production can be negatively impacted by poor water quality. The map below shows impaired waterways and impaired bodies of water in Central Texas. Note that agriculture’s contribution to this overall level of pollution is not specified.
Highlights: The two counties with the highest share of impaired miles are Limestone and Williamson. The counties that exceed the overall regional rate of impaired miles tend to be in the northern and northeastern parts of Central Texas.
Refreshed: Approximately every 2 years. Dashboard last updated September 2025.
Agricultural Input Use
Agricultural inputs include fertilizer, pesticides, and herbicides. These can be synthetic (manufactured from inorganic materials) or organic (naturally derived). Organic inputs can be purchased or produced on-farm in the form of manure and compost. Responsible fertilizer application requires a delicate balance of meeting plant needs while minimizing the risk of nutrients leaching into soil and waterways. High use of fertilizers and other agricultural chemicals, whether organic or inorganic, can contribute to water and soil pollution.
Different crops require different amounts of nutrients. Looking at the types of crops grown in Central Texas, there are research opportunities related to crop selection and application of fertilizer and other chemicals and to explore planting crops that use fewer resources.
The dashboard below shows the number of acres treated with various agrochemicals in Central Texas. Fungicides tend to be used to control diseases in crops and orchards; insecticides are used to control insects; nematicides are used to control nematodes; herbicides are used to control weeds; and other chemicals are used to control growth, thin fruit, and encourage ripening. Note that organic fertilizer data were first collected in 2017.
Highlights: The agricultural input used by the highest number of operations and acres is commercial fertilizer, with herbicide a close second. Manure and organic fertilizer are used by a small percentage of farms on a small number of acres.
Filter data by clicking on a county name or a metric button on the bottom right.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years; next Census data expected in 2029. Dashboard last refreshed May 2025.
Organic Agriculture
The National Organic Program (NOP)’s USDA Organic certification is one of several certifications intended to identify foods produced using specific environmental and animal care practices. Though the certification was established in 2002, many of the farming practices included in the standards have long histories in agriculture. Within farming communities, there is ongoing discussion about which practices should qualify as organic and how consistently certification standards are applied.
Outside of any certification program, farms may still use practices that meet or exceed aspects of organic standards with the goal of conserving and maintaining healthy soil, including integrated pest management, reduced tillage, and cover cropping. As a result, counts of USDA Organic-certified operations do not capture the full range of environmentally conscious production methods used in Central Texas, but they provide one indicator of farms choosing to pursue this particular certification.
Several barriers exist to obtaining and maintaining a USDA-organic certification. One barrier is cost—roughly $1,000 per farm per year. Another barrier is the amount of documentation needed to obtain and retain the certification. A third barrier is that the cost and paperwork required can result in a lack of economic incentive to get certified. It takes three years for farms to transition from conventional to organic due to the time it takes to rebuild soil health through organic means. Farmers can face financial hardships in the interim due to increased expenses and labor without being able to receive a premium price for organic products.
“Certified transitional” addresses this three-year gap. Farmers transitioning to organic production can market their products using this language starting in the second year of transition. Also shown on the dashboard are exempt operations, or farms with less than $5,000 in gross annual organic sales that are exempt from certification but can market their products as organic if they comply with USDA Organic standards.
Small farms might already be receiving the highest price they can get for their products at a farmers market or other direct-to-consumer outlet. When small or mid-sized farms are looking to scale up their operations, certification can come into play to help them differentiate their products and access new market channels.
Highlights: Across the US, 0.9% of farms are certified organic. In Texas, this percentage drops to 0.17%, though this is a slight increase over 2017’s 0.13%. (However, Texas has the fourth-highest organic product sales nationwide.) The number of organic farms in Central Texas is currently 0.18% and has dropped by nearly half since 2012, though Gillespie, Hays, McLennan, Milam, San Saba, and Travis counties all saw their number of organic farms increase since 2017. Since 2017, the number of organic farms decreased 5% nationwide; however, sales increased 32% and the number of producers remained steady during the same time period, indicating that organic farms now have higher average sales. In 2022, more than two-thirds of the region’s organic farms were either certified or transitioning to organic, in contrast to 2017, when nearly two-thirds were small enough to be exempt from certification.
Filter data by county by selecting the county name in the filter at right.
Note that Falls, Freestone, Llano, and Mills counties do not appear on the county filter because they had zero organic farms in the past three census years.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years; next Census data expected in 2029. Dashboard last refreshed May 2025.