《美国大豆协会 继续进行县的产量、付款差异工作》

  • 来源专题:食物与营养
  • 编译者: 潘淑春
  • 发布时间:2016-06-08
  • the American Soybean Association (ASA) has been working with National Corn Growers Association (NCGA), American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) and other commodity organizations to address discrepancies in county yields and payments under the Agricultural Risk Coverage program’s county option (ARC-CO).

    These discrepancies came to light last October, when payments were made for 2014 crops, the first year under the Agricultural Act of 2014 (AA-14), also known as the farm bill. The most notable differences were in corn yields and payments in several counties in North Dakota. Additional concerns have been raised by corn producers in South Dakota and Colorado.

    There is evidence that the number of affected counties may be more significant for the 2015 corn crop, for which payments will be made in October 2016. We have requested county yield data for the 2014 and 2015 soybean and wheat crops, but the problem to date appears to focus on corn. However, any unresolved problem for one crop will raise concerns about the viability of the ARC-CO program as a whole, and should be addressed as soon as possible.

    The cause of the problem is the “cascade policy” for establishing county yields adopted by the Farm Service Agency (FSA) after AA-14 was enacted. Currently, FSA requires that a county’s published National Agriculture Statistics Service (NASS) yield be used, which requires that at least 30 producer surveys be returned or that the returned surveys represent at least 25 percent of a county’s harvested acreage for the crop. If one of these conditions isn’t met, the county’s Risk Management Agency (RMA) yield is used. Since RMA yields are often higher than NASS yields, payments to producers in RMA counties can be significantly lower than payments to producers in counties with NASS yields.

    Since there is no legislative requirement or guidance for this policy, FSA is able to change it to provide more consistent yields and payments between counties in the same state. An alternative approach proposed by the North Dakota Corn Growers Association would blend NASS yields in adjacent or contiguous counties to establish yields in counties that don’t meet either of the requirements for a published NASS yield. In cases where there are no contiguous counties, the FSA State Committee would use NASS yields in comparable counties.

相关报告
  • 《美国大豆协会成员作证农业风险管理计划法案听证会》

    • 来源专题:农业科技前沿与政策咨询快报
    • 编译者:徐倩
    • 发布时间:2017-11-28
    • 2017年7月25日,在华盛顿举行的参议院农业委员会听证会上,大豆种植者凯文·斯科特(Kevin Scott)作证了美国农业立法风险管理计划的重要性。斯科特在美国大豆协会(American Soybean Association,ASA)董事会任职,并作为ASA管理委员会成员,向委员会详细介绍了农业法案中农业商品计划和作物保险计划下各项目的协调运作情况,并提出在农场经济状况不稳定时,可通过进一步改进运作方式帮助生产者。斯科特还证实了参议院农业委员会在湿地保护方面可以做出的积极变化,这在南达科达州是一个十分重要的问题。 在I类保险的讨论中,斯科特表示该类别下的两个主要项目——农业风险保障(Agricultural Risk Coverage,ARC)和价格损失补偿(Price Loss Coverage,PLC)已经按计划开展。 斯科特提出,保费计算应基于美国农业部风险管理局统计出的更加准确的产量数据,而不是基于向国家农业统计局报告的产量数据;I类保险的支付款额应基于近年被保险作物的平均种植数据而不是当年的种植数据。这样也可以鼓励农民积极跟踪市场信号而不是寄希望于政府补贴。 ASA将作物保险项目作为风险管理的必要工具,加强了该项目的支持力度。作物保险是农场安全网最有价值的部分,这一观点也已得到广泛认同。 听证会上,斯科特还建议美农部自然资源保护服务中心(Natural Resources Conservation Service,NRCS)改变农业法案保护计划中规定的湿地裁定方法。保护湿地对于环境保护非常重要。然而,对于农户来说,NRCS对湿地进行判定的过程缓慢且繁琐。斯科特提出的修正案包括:第三方裁定、为NRCS湿地裁定设置期限、将NRCS的裁定作为向地方法院上诉前的最后程序以及将NRCS资源重新分配给湿地存量最大的州。 (编译 徐倩)
  • 《美国大豆协会极力推动欧洲大豆性状的及时审批》

    • 来源专题:食物与营养
    • 编译者:panshuchun
    • 发布时间:2016-09-01
    • ASA ramped up its call for approval of three outstanding soybean traits by the European Union this week, saying that the tools are a critical part of the industry’s ongoing quest to meet sustainability and consumer demand goals, and that continued delays pose serious issues both for farmers and industry. In a letter to European Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis Tuesday, ASA expressed deep concern with the EU’s delayed authorization of three new soybean traits: Monsanto’s dicamba-tolerant RR2Xtend and Vistive Gold high oleic traits, as well as Bayer CropScience’s isoxaflutole-resistant Balance Bean trait. All three traits received positive opinions from the European Food Safety Authority in May and June of last year, and have awaited approval for five months following an Appeals Committee ruling in January. “The Commission’s lack of action in providing final authorization for these soy events has already caused unnecessary uncertainty, disruption and cost in the agricultural supply chain. Immediate authorization by the European Commission is needed to avoid substantial additional unnecessary costs and possible disruption to the essential supply of feedstocks needed by the EU’s livestock, poultry and feed industries, which are more than 70 percent dependent on imports of vegetable protein,” the letter stated. ASA also cited repeated assurances over the course of several months from EU officials that approval of the three traits was imminent as providing a false sense of security for farmers looking to utilize the traits to meet sustainability goals and comply with the food industry’s ongoing move away from trans fats in the American marketplace. “As the threat of resistant weeds continues to move across soybean country, and the specter of increased input costs coupled with a down farm economy looms over so many soybean farmers, we need more options in the marketplace. We are not benefited by new products that are stuck in a malfunctioning approvals pipeline,” said ASA President Richard Wilkins, a farmer from Greenwood, Del. “Add to that the ability of high-oleic soy to help answer the growing market for cooking oils free of trans fats, and you see the real value in these three traits. “The European Commission must abide by the timelines set out in in its own regulations, as well as its obligations under the World Trade Organization, and give these traits the approvals that it has said are forthcoming,” Wilkins added.