Sunday, March 02, 2008

The Forbidden Fruit
A good op/ed in the New York Times on farm subsidies. It is still amazing how much congress works against Americans best interests and in favor of big agra business.

Last year, knowing that my own 100 acres wouldn’t be enough to meet demand, I rented 25 acres on two nearby corn farms. I plowed under the alfalfa hay that was established there, and planted watermelons, tomatoes and vegetables for natural-food stores and a community-supported agriculture program.

All went well until early July. That’s when the two landowners discovered that there was a problem with the local office of the Farm Service Administration, the Agriculture Department branch that runs the commodity farm program, and it was going to be expensive to fix.

The commodity farm program effectively forbids farmers who usually grow corn or the other four federally subsidized commodity crops (soybeans, rice, wheat and cotton) from trying fruit and vegetables. Because my watermelons and tomatoes had been planted on “corn base” acres, the Farm Service said, my landlords were out of compliance with the commodity program.

I’ve discovered that typically, a farmer who grows the forbidden fruits and vegetables on corn acreage not only has to give up his subsidy for the year on that acreage, he is also penalized the market value of the illicit crop, and runs the risk that those acres will be permanently ineligible for any subsidies in the future. (The penalties apply only to fruits and vegetables — if the farmer decides to grow another commodity crop, or even nothing at all, there’s no problem.)

In the farm bill fruits and vegetables are called specialty crops.


2 comments:

Crunchy Chicken said...

Check out this campaign to contact members of Congress to address the issues with commodity farmland in the Farm Bill.

cheflovesbeer said...

Wow, I read your blog and have been thinking about adding it to the blogroll. I will definitely check out the campaign.