The Rural Voice, 1986-10, Page 1614 THE RURAL VOICE
the first time he had experienced
weather-related losses in 20 years.
But Benson says he has never
subscribed to crop insurance,
having "more or less self-insured
myself," and would consider tak-
ing out crop insurance next year
only if changes were made to the
program.
Benson adds that he hasn't
enrolled in the plan mainly
because of the bad reputation
regarding payouts and because
"basically, the way it works, a lot
of fellows only have 75 per cent
coverage and a lot don't even
have that, due to the averaging
provisions."
"So, in other words, if you
have the same crop on four
farms, in four different locations,
and one farm is completely taken,
you wouldn't get one cent of
payout from that insurance pro-
gram." Benson notes, however,
that the negative publicity follow-
ing this summer's storms and the
appointment of a six -man com-
mission to review the crop in-
surance plan are encouraging
signs that a change is in the wind.
One farmer who lost uninsured
crops to a heavy windstorm some
years ago is Art Rivest of R.R. 2,
Durham. The winds hit at a time
when Rivest was expanding his
operation.
"When things went sour just
after buying a farm, with the
commodity prices being down
and having to pay $17,000, it
almost did us in. Whereas if we'd
had crop insurance, it would have
been a lot easier for three years,
I'll tell you."
Rivest wasn't insured for one
reason: he didn't know about the
program. The local agricultural
representative provided informa-
tion on the plan after Rivest's
loss. He's subscribed ever since,
and two years ago he went into
the insurance business himself.
"I believed so much in it I
figured you've got to tell the peo-
ple about it because somebody
may get stung like I did." Now
the dairy farmer handles a ter-
ritory that extends as far south as
Arthur and as far west as
Walkerton. About 75 per cent of
the farmers he visits sign up, he
says, and the crops they're insur-
ing are largely corn, canola, and
grain. He finds that there are
farmers who still don't know
about the plan, and farmers who
have heard the negative publicity
without hearing about cases
where the plan has helped. Rivest
promotes the fact that the plan
guarantees a certain crop yield.
Peter Roy of Clinton, a general
insurance agent, has been handl-
ing crop insurance since 1967 and
generally finds farmers receptive
when he approaches them about
the plan.
"Unfortunately, the way crop
insurance was designed, it doesn't
cover 100 per cent of their losses
and that's probably where the
problem arises. It was mainly
designed in the first instance to
cover their production costs ...
and that's what it does. If most
of the farmers look on it from
that perspective, I don't think
they'll be disappointed with it,
but if they think that it's going to
cover all their expenses whether
they get a crop or don't get a
crop, that they're not going to
suffer any type of financial loss,
then they'll be mistaken."
Roy is finding that the banks
have been putting more pressure
on their farm borrowers to enrol
in the insurance program. "1
would suspect now, after this
year when we ran into problems,
that the banks will use it more
... than they did in the past, and
they used it more in this past year
than they did the year before. So
the banks are using it more than
they used to but probably not as
much as I feel that they should
because of the security it gives
them to cover their loan."
Roy points to the example of a
large cash cropper who may have
a loan of $300,000 to $400,000 to
put his crop in — "all resting on
Mother Nature." If the weather
doesn't co-operate and the farmer
isn't insured, both he and the
bank face a financial loss.
Contrary to what might be
popular opinion, the agent says
he finds that it's the better
farmers who are more likely to
take out the insurance. The better
the farmer, and the higher his
crop yields, the better return that
farmer gets for his crop insurance
dollar, Roy notes. For example,
if one farmer produces a 140
bu./acre corn crop and another
farmer only a 70 bu./acre yield,
"the farmer producing 140 bu.
will be guaranteed twice as much
as the one with 70 bu., and
they're paying the same
premium."
Roy also recognizes that the
program's cost "does look pretty
prohibitive even though the
F.M. BRUBACHER
MANUFACTURING INC.
Complete line
for livestock
ry
of waterers
or poultry
SV% r,',
r' ,.
;
' / y'�ij ////�jj
///i ,
,;• ,,,
% !
A wide choice
of nipple
drinkers &
J pipes
Heavy cast waterbowls
available in
blue, black or green
One casting machined
for either paddle .:.>._,
or push button-.,
valve
�.y
Powerful electric
&
fencers & supplies
Call us for details
Dealer enquiries
welcomed
BOX 47 HAN KSVILLE, ONT.
NOB 1X0
519-699-4231
14 THE RURAL VOICE
the first time he had experienced
weather-related losses in 20 years.
But Benson says he has never
subscribed to crop insurance,
having "more or less self-insured
myself," and would consider tak-
ing out crop insurance next year
only if changes were made to the
program.
Benson adds that he hasn't
enrolled in the plan mainly
because of the bad reputation
regarding payouts and because
"basically, the way it works, a lot
of fellows only have 75 per cent
coverage and a lot don't even
have that, due to the averaging
provisions."
"So, in other words, if you
have the same crop on four
farms, in four different locations,
and one farm is completely taken,
you wouldn't get one cent of
payout from that insurance pro-
gram." Benson notes, however,
that the negative publicity follow-
ing this summer's storms and the
appointment of a six -man com-
mission to review the crop in-
surance plan are encouraging
signs that a change is in the wind.
One farmer who lost uninsured
crops to a heavy windstorm some
years ago is Art Rivest of R.R. 2,
Durham. The winds hit at a time
when Rivest was expanding his
operation.
"When things went sour just
after buying a farm, with the
commodity prices being down
and having to pay $17,000, it
almost did us in. Whereas if we'd
had crop insurance, it would have
been a lot easier for three years,
I'll tell you."
Rivest wasn't insured for one
reason: he didn't know about the
program. The local agricultural
representative provided informa-
tion on the plan after Rivest's
loss. He's subscribed ever since,
and two years ago he went into
the insurance business himself.
"I believed so much in it I
figured you've got to tell the peo-
ple about it because somebody
may get stung like I did." Now
the dairy farmer handles a ter-
ritory that extends as far south as
Arthur and as far west as
Walkerton. About 75 per cent of
the farmers he visits sign up, he
says, and the crops they're insur-
ing are largely corn, canola, and
grain. He finds that there are
farmers who still don't know
about the plan, and farmers who
have heard the negative publicity
without hearing about cases
where the plan has helped. Rivest
promotes the fact that the plan
guarantees a certain crop yield.
Peter Roy of Clinton, a general
insurance agent, has been handl-
ing crop insurance since 1967 and
generally finds farmers receptive
when he approaches them about
the plan.
"Unfortunately, the way crop
insurance was designed, it doesn't
cover 100 per cent of their losses
and that's probably where the
problem arises. It was mainly
designed in the first instance to
cover their production costs ...
and that's what it does. If most
of the farmers look on it from
that perspective, I don't think
they'll be disappointed with it,
but if they think that it's going to
cover all their expenses whether
they get a crop or don't get a
crop, that they're not going to
suffer any type of financial loss,
then they'll be mistaken."
Roy is finding that the banks
have been putting more pressure
on their farm borrowers to enrol
in the insurance program. "1
would suspect now, after this
year when we ran into problems,
that the banks will use it more
... than they did in the past, and
they used it more in this past year
than they did the year before. So
the banks are using it more than
they used to but probably not as
much as I feel that they should
because of the security it gives
them to cover their loan."
Roy points to the example of a
large cash cropper who may have
a loan of $300,000 to $400,000 to
put his crop in — "all resting on
Mother Nature." If the weather
doesn't co-operate and the farmer
isn't insured, both he and the
bank face a financial loss.
Contrary to what might be
popular opinion, the agent says
he finds that it's the better
farmers who are more likely to
take out the insurance. The better
the farmer, and the higher his
crop yields, the better return that
farmer gets for his crop insurance
dollar, Roy notes. For example,
if one farmer produces a 140
bu./acre corn crop and another
farmer only a 70 bu./acre yield,
"the farmer producing 140 bu.
will be guaranteed twice as much
as the one with 70 bu., and
they're paying the same
premium."
Roy also recognizes that the
program's cost "does look pretty
prohibitive even though the