Why Does the Govt. Pay Farmers to Not Grow Crops? EMAIL; BY Business Desk August 4, 2009 at 12:44 PM EDT. The price support program meant that farmers had to incur the expense of plowing their fields, fertilizing, irrigating, spraying, and harvesting them, and then selling their crops to the government, which stored them in silos until they either rotted or were consumed by rodents. USDA Urged To End Paying Farmers Not To Grow Crops. TBO.com The Washington Post. Published: July 11, 2008. that had been set aside for conservation. At issue is the Conservation Reserve Program, under which the government has paid farmers to stop growing row crops, such as corn and soybeans. 'The reason it's in the Conservation Reserve Program, it's environmentally fragile.Paying Farmers Not to Farm : NPR. Chuck Lesh of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service examines a mallard egg in a Conservation Reserve Program field near Wing, N. D. . Dan Charles, NPR. Dan Charles, NPR. A mallard's nest is tucked away in tall grass in a North Dakota field rented by the Conservation Reserve Program. Dan Charles, NPR. Dan Charles, NPR. An abandoned church in North Dakota. Critics of the CRP blame the program for putting millions of farm acres in North Dakota out of service, which they say led businesses to shutter and young people to move away. Dan Charles, NPR. Dan Charles, NPR. This map shows farmland enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program as of April 2. Each green dot represents 5. This map shows farmland enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program as of April 2. Each green dot represents 5. This year, instead of crops, 3. More farmers than expected applied to put their land in a government program that pays the farmers not to plant crops and not all of the acres could be accommodated, the USDA said. If the USDA accepts the offer, the farmer gets paid a fee, roughly equivalent to the rental value of the land, to stop growing crops on it. The USDA gives priority to. production reduces demand for fertilizer, pesticides, tractors and fuel. Farmers often confess to feeling odd about a program that pays them not to practice their profession. And environmentalists say the program. Paying Farmers Not to Farm. Environment Calls Grow to Subsidize Green Farming. More. Comments You. American farmland will produce tall grass, pheasants and ducks. That's thanks to the Conservation Reserve Program, a USDA program to protect soil, streams and wildlife habitat on farms that accounts for about 8 percent of all farm subsidies in 2. The CRP has had successes, but as Dan Charles reports for All Things Considered, the program is also controversial. Web Extra: For NPR. Dan Charles looks at how the 2. CRP program works: It's easy to tell what land in the Dakotas is part of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Why do we pay farmers not to grow food? Posted on July 11. Farmers are even paid not to grow certain crops, so that a limited supply will keep prices higher. The government is required to buy crops, particularly corn, meat, and cheese. Lastly, specific areas get earmarks. California get salmon fishing subsidies. I think it is about time we reconsider paying farmers to not grow crops just to prop up prices. What happened to FREE ENTERPRISE. For example, in an effort to reduce agricultural surpluses, the government paid farmers to reduce crop production [12] and to sell pregnant sows as well as young pigs. [13]. by which they agreed not to grow cotton on a portion of their land. By law. Agricultural Adjustment Act (1933) Agricultural Adjustment Act Amendment of 1935; Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act of 1936. Why do farmers get paid to not produce more crops? Why? Instead. the only form of payment now for not growing crops is a program called the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Certain types of environmentally sensitive areas, particularly riparian areas. The idea that farmers are being paid not to grow crops in some kind of widespread fashion is a myth. . fell to record lows. On the Great Plains, the rain stopped falling and only dust clouds filled the sky. Without rain, farmers couldn't grow crops to feed their cows and pigs. Without crops or livestock to sell, some farmers could not pay for their land. One program paid farmers to plant less of certain crops or not to plant at all. Another program taught farmers how to conserve the soil or paid them to plant trees. Yet under a federal agriculture program approved by Congress. Matthews is not alone. Nationwide, the federal government has paid at least $1.3 billion in subsidies for rice and other crops since 2000 to individuals who do no farming at all, according to an analysis of government records by The Washington Post. Most of the money goes to real farmers who grow crops on their land. Paying farmers not to farm? Not exactly. Listen to this story. Those farmers got shortchanged when they used crop rotations because the programs only paid on the actual planted acres of a specific crop in a given year, Hoefner said. In the 1990s, the new concept called “base acres” created a small incentive to grow different crops. Payments were based on the commodity production in years past. Those fields have no cattle grazing in them, and they aren't plowed or growing crops. Instead, they're filled with tall grass. Often, you'll see piles of rocks along the edges of those fields, a tell- tale sign that someone once plowed those fields and grew wheat there. Such fields cover about 5 million acres of North and South Dakota. Nationwide, there are 3. U. S. land that's planted in crops. That's an area bigger than the state of New York. The CRP costs taxpayers almost $2 billion a year — this year, that amounts to about 8 percent of all farm subsidies. Congress established the program in 1. It's the oldest and largest of the U. S. Department of Agriculture's efforts to protect soil, water and wildlife in farming areas. The program's goals have shifted over the years. The CRP started out as an erosion- control program. It's evolved into a wildlife and water- quality program," says Robert Harkrader, a district conservationist with the USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service in Coffee County, Kan. Farmers offer to enroll their land in the CRP. It has to be land where crops previously grew. If the USDA accepts the offer, the farmer gets paid a fee, roughly equivalent to the rental value of the land, to stop growing crops on it. The USDA gives priority to land where halting cultivation offers environmental benefits: Less erosion of soil, runoff into streams, or valuable habitat for wildlife. In some areas, CRP land has delivered real benefits. In the "prairie pothole" section of the Dakotas, a prime breeding ground for waterfowl, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service says CRP land has been the key to a dramatic recovery in duck populations. In Kansas, it has slowed the decline of the bobwhite quail and the lesser prairie chicken. And it's one reason why Dust Bowl conditions haven't returned to the Great Plains in recent years, despite droughts that were as bad as in the 1. Yet the CRP is not universally loved. Businesses that sell farm products don't like it, because taking land out of production reduces demand for fertilizer, pesticides, tractors and fuel. Farmers often confess to feeling odd about a program that pays them not to practice their profession. And environmentalists say the program falls far short of its potential. There would be more benefit to the environment, they say, if the USDA could focus on particular rivers or wildlife habitats and convince farmers in those areas to enroll large blocks of land in the CRP. Farmers, though, often have other things in mind. Most of the landowners who come in and sign up don't really ask, 'What is my payment going to be?'" says Harkrader. They say, 'I've got this problem area, I don't know what to do with it. It's an odd shape. It's out of the way. It doesn't fit my equipment.' They're looking to get rid of their problem areas." — Dan Charles. Why do we pay farmers not to grow food? One of the most complicated and passionately defended policies of many governments is that regarding agriculture. The European Union has the Appellation d’origine Contrôlée, Japan pays out huge sums to guarantee that they are self sufficient in rice production, and the US writes into its budget billions of dollars in farm subsidies each year. The history of farm subsidy is rooted in the Great Depression. Unsustainable farming practices and a long drought reversed plentiful harvests and people went hungry. Agriculture programs were put in place as part of President Roosevelt’s efforts to fight the Depression. Later, Lyndon Johnson expanded them as a part of his Great Society program, with the stated aim of getting “a chicken in every pot.”The most recent farm bill was passed in 2. At the time it was thought to cost between $2. Two thirds of the money will go to the food stamp program that gives poor families money to buy food. Relatively small amounts go to conservation programs. The remaining quarter, about $6. These take a couple of forms. Crop insurance is made cheaper. Farmers who grow staple crops, like wheat, cotton, corn and soybeans, get a check based on the acres they grow. Some other crops have set prices, and if the price goes below that the government makes up the difference for the farmers. Farmers are even paid not to grow certain crops, so that a limited supply will keep prices higher. The government is required to buy crops, particularly corn, meat, and cheese. Lastly, specific areas get earmarks. California get salmon fishing subsidies, while Kentucky farmers are paid to breed racehorses. It is indisputable that farming is a difficult, risky business. Only in very recent history has society as a whole been insulated from the effects of drought and insect, disease and flood. America no longer starves when the wheat crop in Nebraska fails. Some of this is surely due to the help that small farms receive from the government, which keeps them in business. But the mechanism is flawed. The concentration of subsidies on grains, particularly corn and soybeans, and on acreage, gives money more to Monsanto and General Mills than to small vegetable farmers. This causes trade tensions and is part of the reason why junk food is so much cheaper than the healthier stuff. The food bought by the government goes into the school lunch program, so schools are required to feed kids a certain amount of cornmeal and cheese. Congress and the Department of Agriculture pay billions, and the result is unhealthy food for poor Americans and kids. Farm_Bill_Extension_Act_of_2. Contents_of_the_bill. The Associated Press. The Congressional Budget Office.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
May 2016
Categories |