Adirondack Erratic

The NY times published an article yesterday by Minnesota farmer Jack Hedin who ran afoul of the Agriculture Department’s commodity farm program. After renting some land on local farms, he found that he was going to pay dearly for growing vegetables on “corn base” land:

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.)

At a time when consumers are looking for locally grown produce, US agriculture policy makes it difficult for growers to meet demand. The not-quite-finished 2007 Farm Billwill direct national farm policy for the next five years. I will be researching this complex bill and providing links over the next few weeks.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS