Loading...
The Rural Voice, 1986-10, Page 15to insure only about 60 per cent of the crop's value. In 1985, 18,000 Ontario farmers insured at least one crop. The plan's premium payments were $41.8 million and because 1985 was an excellent crop year, there was a payout of only $10.8 million, with lima beans, black tobacco, and onions the major losses, says William Regan, acting manager of the Crop Insurance Commission of Ontario. The picture is far less rosy this year. Mark Mitchell of R.R. 1, Moorefield, who cash crops 1,500 acres, including 600 acres with his father, is one Wellington County farmer who saw a mini -tornado and hailstorm flatten many of his fields. Mitchell, who had been anticipating yields higher than average, now fears that the July crop damage may cost him his farming operation. Ironically, Mitchell has insured his corn crops since 1975, mainly as a safeguard against frost damage, filing a claim under the program only once. The July storm ripped through 100 acres of Mitchell's corn, 220 acres of wheat, and a field of soybeans. The wheat was uninsured because it was an intensively managed crop, and Mitchell says that this is one area where the crop in- surance plan falls down. "I'm looking at $250 an acre input costs on intensive -managed wheat and all you can insure spring grain for is something like $60 or $70 an acre," he says. But what disturbs Mitchell even more is that even on his insured crops he may not collect. Part of the problem is that a farmer can collect on a maximum of 80 per cent of his average farm yield only. Mitchell's farms are spread over a 10 -mile radius, and only one field of corn suffered extensive damage from the mini - tornado. "If the rest of my corn makes up 80 per cent of my yield, 1 don't get a cent. I've completely lost that .100 acres... Now that's what I hate about it." Also, if Mitchell is still farming next year and uses the insurance plan, his loss this year will take away from his guaranteed yield average. Mitchell uses this analogy: "... you have four fenders on your car. Somebody runs into you and you get one fender wiped out. If it was set up by crop insurance, they'd say, well, you've still got three fenders, we're not going to pay you. Plus, when it comes to next year, you've reduced your coverage by a fender so you're only guaranteeing two fenders. So if you had another fender hit the next year, they'd say, well, you still have two fenders. And you still wouldn't get paid." Mitchell is also concerned that government officials may overlook the seriousness of the Wellington County crop losses because there wasn't more damage to persons or property. He recalls telling a television reporter covering the tornado story: "I can insure my buildings and they are insured for full value. If my house blows down, no big deal, I can replace that house. (But) I've lost my business here and I cannot get insurance for those crops to cover what I have in it — I just can't." Bill Benson, a neighbour of Mitchell's, also had crops destroyed by the mini -tornado, REVIEWING THE ISSUES If Ontario's crop insurance program were to be revised tor the 1987 crop year, changes would have to be announced by early November, says Roger George. Otherwise, information brochures could not be made available by signup time. George, who farms in the North Bay area, is one of six members of a review committee that has been working for several months toward recommending changes that would make the in- surance program more effective. Although the review commit- tee, appointed by Minister of Agriculture Jack Riddell after the OFA issued a critical brief on the crop insurance program last February, has already finalized its recommendations, George was unable to reveal them. An agree- ment between the OFA, the in- surance commission, and the agriculture minister was that the recommendations would remain confidential until Riddell had time to study them. George will say, however, that "the critical thing from our point of view is that we feel we have to make crop insurance something that everybody is going to want to buy. And they're only going to want to buy it if it contains the things that they deem to be necessary. Two of those things are coverage for hail and high winds and, also, the spot -loss coverage." If a Gallup poll were taken of the Ontario farmers who don't buy crop insurance, George adds, "they would likely say they'd only buy it if it becomes meaningful ... and until that kind of coverage is available, farmers just aren't going to buy crop insurance in the numbers needed to waylay any of the pro- blems when we have a disaster like those we had this year a cou- ple of times." As well as George, who represents the Ontario Federation of Agriculture on the review com- mittee, members are: William Regan, acting general manager of the Crop Insurance Commission of Ontario; Greg Brown, a crop specialist with the commission; Gaetan Beaudry, a dairy farmer from the Nipissing district and a crop insurance commissioner; George Piker, representing the federal government; and Lynn Girty, a Kent County farmer, also representing the OFA. Ontario isn't alone in the move to reform crop insurance. According to George, there's a move across the Canadian pro- vinces to spruce up crop in- surance programs as a means of "taking some of the sting out of the cash crop situation." George, a hog farmer who is sharecropping barley, has used the crop insurance program in the past, but like the majority of cash croppers, isn't enrolled now. He's optimistic, however, that Riddell's appointment of the review committee and his indica- tion that he will re -open discus- sions on the Niagara peach losses are signs that the crop insurance program will be revamped. "I think the climate for change is out there from a political point of view. I think that the commis- sion can certainly win by making some changes. Certainly the politicians can win, and our organization (OFA) can win. But I think the biggest winners of all can be the Ontario farmers who are finally going to have, we hope they're going to have, a more meaningful crop insurance pro- gram."O OCTOBER 1986 13