Another growing debate over crop insurance is whether conservation methods should be rewarded for reducing risk through lower crop insurance premiums. If you take steps to protect your soil with no-till and cover crops, should you be rewarded with a discounted crop insurance premium? The idea is not new, but it’s never found its way into a farm bill.
The last farm bill debate tied conservation compliance to crop insurance for the first time, requiring every farmer to have a conservation plan in place if they wanted to receive premium subsidy assistance. But having a conservation plan in place is nothing to the level of saving farmers money on the premium side of crop insurance if they implement no-till or make cover crops part of their rotation.
“Tying crop insurance to conservation programs would have ecological, conservation and production impacts that we could not even imagine,” says Jerry Hatfield, director of the National Laboratory for Agriculture and the Environment.
Start with yield variability. What is the most common reason behind a 20% gap in corn and soybean yields — the difference between attainable and actual yield — across the Midwest? It’s most likely excess moisture in spring or drought in summer. Farmers who use good soil health practices, build organic matter and protect against erosion rarely see those variable yields, Hatfield says.