• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Disaster Payments

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Disaster Payments

    We should be looking at Disaster payments in Canada for this year, over and above Crop Insurance for grain farmers.

    NAWG in the US gives a good discription of the reasons why:

    I found these articles on: http://www.agnewsonline.com/testtxt/story.asp?num=3261


    "WHY DO FARMERS WITH CROP INSURANCE NEED DISASTER ASSISTANCE?


    9/19/2002


    The National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) today responded to a question that is being asked more and more in the press, relative to disaster assistance. Many apparently believe that disaster assistance only needs to be provided to those agricultural sectors which do not have access to crop insurance tools.

    NAWG pointed out that the highest level of crop insurance available is 85% of production, but because of premium cost many producers must insure at even lower levels.

    "Crop insurance is an effective tool, but even at the highest coverage levels it requires at minimum a 15 percent deductible every single year," said Gary Broyles, President of the association. "The most common coverage is at 70%, resulting in a 30% annual deductible. In wheat country we have faced five consecutive years of drought, and no one can sustain 30% deductibles every year for five years in a row. Nobody has margins to absorb that impact. We certainly agree that disaster assistance for livestock producers is necessary, but crop producers also have acute needs for disaster assistance."

    Kansas State University agricultural economist Dr. Art Barnaby illustrated the point on his web site earlier this week. In a paper entitled If Crop Insurance is Working Why Do Farmers Need Disaster Assistance?, Barnaby made the following observation: "The worst outcome for insured growers is to suffer a 35% to 40% yield loss and higher prices. They will lose their counter cyclical payment because of higher prices, they have fewer bushels (production) to sell at the higher prices, even with this significant yield loss they will receive no payments under traditional ad hoc disaster aid, and their net insurance payments will be small or none." Barnaby referred to the lack of relief for insured acres as the "hole in the safety net".

    The scenario described by Barnaby is exactly what is happening in wheat and other crops. Multiple years of drought, coupled with production problems elsewhere in the world, have led to a tightening of wheat supplies and resulted in rising prices. US producers have fewer bushels to sell, but will receive no aid from price-based mechanisms because the prices have risen above trigger levels.

    "We're happy to see the Administration announce disaster relief for livestock producers," said Broyles. "We appreciate their creative proposal to address the needs in the livestock sector. We hope now Congress and the USDA will turn their attention to the serious needs of crop producers in this country, and meet that need as well."

    NAWG also called on members of the House of Representatives to co-sponsor H.R. 5383, a disaster bill introduced by Congresswoman Barbara Cubin, which has attracted bipartisan support and is now circulating in the House.

    National Association of Wheat Growers
    415 Second St. NE, Suite 300
    Washington, DC 20002 Phone (202)547-7800 / Fax (202)546-2638
    Contacts: Daren Coppock, Mark Geade
    Gary Broyles, NAWG President (406) 663-2115

    #2
    Charlie;

    I believe this article emphasises the need in Agriculture for a Disaster Program.

    If the AIDA and FIDP programs are to be a help, and we have a maximum 80% coverage level on crop insurance, FIDP and AIDA at 70%, large commercial farms must have help above the 70% to be maintained over a long term drought.

    I know the Alberta Gov. did the acreage program... and it is a help... but this is Ad-Hoc... and we need more than this for our communities to be sustained over the long term.

    What exactly is the new NISA Ag Framework program supposed to do more than FIDP does now?

    Comment


      #3
      Enhanced NISA is still a work in progress. A major part of the discussion is around how more of a disaster component is included versus straight income stabalization.

      Your other question comes down to cost and how much society is willing to support a farm business. As with car insurance, lower deductible (higher percentage of income/production covered) equals higher costs. Who picks up the tab?

      A principle I would suggest governments follow is that no government program should get built into land values/rental rates.

      Other questions come out as to how much you target funds or do make sure money is available to everyone?

      Comment


        #4
        Charlie;

        I agree totally on the capitalisation issue of payments into land values.

        No matter what support is given, the land value WILL increase as the program stabilises income... but the rates of captilisation are much higher on some forms of payments than others.

        FIDP is an example of a low impact program in my opinion, as are Ad-Hoc acreage payments...

        What is insane on this treadmill is that farms are forced to get bigger to benefit on economic scale issues, yet we become more at risk from trade and weather risks as we increase size.

        Risk management on a 10,000ac farm is absolutely critical, where on a 500 acre farm, if a mistake happens savings or an outside job for a year or 2 by someone can make up the difference.

        Prime Minister Chretien makes big points on fairness and sharing... but if our world doesn't have a stable food supply... just watch how fast people will start shooting at each other...

        So for civilisations sake... just what responsibility does the gov. have to maintain a stable farm economy?

        If we go to the EU, we know what the answer is, and the same in the US.

        Now what about Canada? Isn't this why the CWB was set up from a "political" point of view, to share the Canadian industrial wealth of our nation with farmers?

        What happened, is another issue, as the CWB is actually being turned against grain producers, as they have to lowest offering prices on feed wheat and barley, which is not helping grain producers most in trouble with low quality plus in many cases low yeilds to boot.

        So we import large volumes of corn, but feed wheat and feed barley on the CWB do not arbitage the corn prices, they are miles below them, yet these are the largest tonnage movements in our AG economy.

        WHy are we insisting on importing 3-4MMT of corn at $200/MT, a $800mil loss to our economy, plus all the green house gasses etc. all this churning of grain around... plus adding fusarium to Alberta's desease problems...

        What a deal, just like Condensation from high altitude Airline flight, causing Global warming ...

        Koyto isn't going to address the real issues on global warming... because it is not "politically correct" to take the airlines out of the air, use trains instead of trucks, or consider economies that don't depend on 3-5% growth rates to sustain them.

        We are busy taking the rail lines out, and finding new and innovative ways to ship grain to Iraq, while importing the same type of grain from Russia/Ukrane/Black Sea area.

        So what exactly is sustainable over the next 50/150/500yrs???

        Who will be farming in 20yrs???

        Does society want 99.9% of the population in urban areas, and be totally helpless in looking after themselves???

        Comment


          #5
          "We should be looking at disaster payments", means that if farmers go to the Government for help, the Government will be sure to oblige. The direction the EU is resorting to is a prime example.

          Be careful what you ask for! If you want help, be prepared for the kind of help that will put hair up on the back of your neck.

          There is no such thing as a free lunch, tom4CWB

          Parsley

          Comment


            #6
            Parsley;

            I agree with what you are saying...

            However, government promised us a "level playing field" and "free trade" if we got rid of our crow rate and other subsidies...

            Now we find that we are stuck...

            Does our society want our rural communities to all become ghost towns... without reinvestment, how does rural western Canada survive?

            I look at land taxes, fuel taxes, GST, Income taxes without averaging provisions, all building up the cost base to produce our AG products... then our products must compete against highly subsidised US/EU products... and we are then in deep trouble.

            If the Government allows Railways to remove and tare up the transportation system, and force everything onto roads, shouldn't the government be responsible for fixing the roads?

            Why were all these elevators... many of them perfectly functional for many years to come... torn down, just because our governments were greedy to tax them into oblivion...

            WHAT A DEAL... AND FARMERS PAY THE HIGHEST PRICE, ALONG WITH THE ENVIRONMENT...

            Parsley, do you actually see the present economic system as sustainable ... to get the world's economy going we need a war every 10years, and continious growth and consumption of copious liberal amounts of natural resourses... and concentrate everything into transnationals who will in the end nessasarily be controled by a multinational government...

            DO you see this system as sustainable???

            DON'T you think governments are in the end controling things now... anyway, as our laws mean nothing, if they oppose the governments flavour of the day and whim...???

            WHat is your solution???

            Comment


              #7
              tom4CWB,

              Small businesses express exactly the same problems anf frustrations. Companies like Sask Wheat pool, who were flying high in the '70's-'80's are currently laying off still more people Finetuning, partnering, sharing equipment, looking at your costs and deciding if they can be trimmed, and so on, renting vs purchasing, etc.

              Many large corporations tried to gloss over the hard, cold facts of the balance sheet, and they are paying dearly.

              Vote for a government that is prepared to watch our pennies.

              Just a few suggestions. We do have a whale of a good life!

              Parsley

              Comment

              • Reply to this Thread
              • Return to Topic List
              Working...