Growers previously turned away can expect to soon have policies that will fit their farming needs By Kiley Russell / ASSOCIATED PRESS
FRESNO -- Organic farming has been brought in from the fringes of American agricultural practices, elevated from a touchy-feely hippy endeavor and codified in federal law for the first time as a "good farming practice."
The distinction was granted by a single phrase buried deep within a 99-page law recently signed by President Clinton. It will completely change the way organic farmers are judged when purchasing crop insurance, the cornerstone of an economically sound commercial farm, according to organic farm advocates.
"It's huge for organic farmers because, in one fell swoop, it provides the insurance infrastructure at organic prices that they've never had," said Bob Scowcroft, director of the Organic Farming Research Foundation in Santa Cruz.
The new law says that insurance providers don't have to cover losses because of a farmer's failure "to follow good farming practices, including scientifically sound sustainable and organic farming practices."
Until now, good farming practices have been defined as having very specific characteristics that included the use of chemical fertilizer and pesticides -- an anathema to organic farmers.
Because of the new law, growers who have been turned away will soon be able to go to their insurance providers with every expectation of being offered a crop insurance policy right for their needs.
Previously, organic farmers have been able to buy crop insurance, but only at rates and with coverage suitable to conventional farm practices.
"I've never had a problem getting insurance for my crop; they cover us, but they cover us as if we were a conventional grower," said Oscar Carrillo of Carrillo Organic Farms in Fresno County.
This means that when Carrillo, a fourth generation California farmer, lost 20 acres of organic table grapes to a rare fungus this year, his crop insurance policy reimbursed him at only $5 a box, rather than the $15 he was expecting on the market.
"I'll probably be losing a quarter of a million dollars over the next three or four years," he said.
Had the new rules been in place when Carrillo purchased his policy, he most likely would have seen payments more closely resembling his actual losses.
Although growers and organic farm advocates are excited about the new law, no one is quite sure who wrote the section dealing with organic farmers and why they included it in this year's Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000.
"Based on changes in the legislature and changes in direction indicated by Agriculture Secretary (Dan) Glickman, we are trying to develop a reasonable program," said Bill Smith, an insurance specialist with the Risk Management Agency at the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
A spokesman for the House Agriculture Committee said lawmakers simply felt "it was about time" organic growers were included in America's agricultural mainstream.
Despite its somewhat mysterious origins, "this is a key infrastructure, the cornerstone for a farmer," Scrowcroft said.
"Because when you go to get a crop loan, especially in the grain belt, a lot of the time you need to have crop insurance and show you're meeting good farming practices," he said.
Because organic farmers don't use pesticides or herbicides, financial institutions "assumed that organic farms were at a greater risk to pestilence," Scrowcroft said.
This law will change all of that, he said.
But industry observers are warning farmers not to expect major changes in the coming weeks.
"As I understand it, (the law) sets in place a strategy and direction but doesn't establish the program itself; so it's a few years down the road before it's done," said Cornelius Gallagher, an agricultural business executive for Bank of America.
The USDA still has to collect enough data to develop risk assessment criteria for the entire industry, assess the cost of production and establish actuarial tables for every organic crop grown in the United States and evaluate possible payment and premium plans.
"The USDA has to do this research, so you might be a long way away from implementation," Gallagher said.
The government also needs to develop some mechanism by which coverage is provided, and perhaps subsidized, and USDA officials still have to define good organic practices so that insurance providers can evaluate the risks associated with doing business with organic growers.
Part of that process has been underway for 11/2 years. The USDA has suggested national standards for organic produce, livestock and processed goods. The new rules would ban organic labels on foods that have been treated with antibiotics, zapped with radiation to kill bacteria and pests, or produced using sewage sludge as fertilizer.
There are about 6,600 certified organic farmers nationwide, with about 2,000 registered in California. Consumers, leery of pesticides and other contaminants, are spending about $3.5 billion a year on organic food.
Although it could take years to fully implement the new law, USDA officials say they're enthusiastic.
"It lends credibility to the organic producers; it establishes that they're following good farming practices and they fall within the limits of good management," the USDA's Smith said.:
