Organic farmers want more time to get their corn crops in the ground and still be able to qualify for crop insurance. Right now, they are held to the same timelines as conventional farmers, which they say puts them at a disadvantage and could cost them their full insurance coverage.

Both conventional and organic farmers are required to have their corn crops in the ground by the end of May in order to be eligible for all of their crop insurance if they need it. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Risk Management Agency sets final planting dates based on crop and location.

Kelsey Willardson, policy associate at the Center for Rural Affairs, said organic farmers face challenges their conventional counterparts do not, and organic producers need more time for planting without losing their crop insurance coverage.

"Organic farmers need to plant later because they need the soil to be warmer for their seeds, so they will emerge quicker," Willardson pointed out. "It also is a big part of organic weed management, is the timing of their planting."

Willardson noted organic farmers also have to wait until neighbors who may be conventional farmers are done planting before they put their crops in the ground to avoid pollen contamination. Currently, for each day farmers go past the planting deadline, they are penalized 1% of their potential crop insurance coverage while still paying for the full amount.

Noah Wendt, an Iowa crop insurance salesman and owner of A&W Organic Farms, sees stark differences in what conventional and organic farmers are allowed to use on their crops. Organic farmers use fewer seed treatments and other chemicals so they can retain their certification.

Wendt said as a result, organic farmers plant their crops two to three weeks later than conventional ones, putting them right up against the crop insurance deadline. He said an extension by the Risk Management Agency would give organic producers a lot more flexibility.

"So they don't feel like they're under the gun to get it planted when the soil conditions and the weather is not fit," Wendt explained. "It gives them more time and allows them to still achieve a higher revenue guarantee on crop insurance."

The Center for Rural Affairs said the Risk Management Agency can improve the equity of its services and protect the organic producers who are taking extra effort to care for and responsibly manage their land.

The chair of the Federal Trade Commission will be in rural Iowa this weekend to hear from farmers and other residents about the proposed sale of Iowa Fertilizer to Koch Industries.

The sale is pending FTC approval. Iowa spent $500 million to build an Iowa Fertilizer factory in Weverly to create competition in an already consolidated industry.

Aaron Lehman, president of the Iowa Farmers Union, said he plans to tell FTC Chair Linda Khan a sale to Koch Industries would backtrack on any competitive progress the state has made.

"Our concern is that an industry that already lacks competition and has all sorts of monopoly problems would only get worse if this sale is allowed to go through," Lehman explained.

Koch and other corporate ag conglomerates have said consolidating allows them to provide better products to farmers more efficiently. The hearing is set for Saturday on Main Street in Nevada.

In addition to reducing competition for fertilizer, Lehman argued the sale would increase prices for farmers, and ultimately mean higher food prices for Iowans. He wants Khan to hear stories firsthand, from the people on the ground in Nevada.

"We know that we might not be able to have a dialogue with the people who are investigating this situation, because they need to be impartial," Lehman acknowledged. "But our farmers need to tell their story about how the industry is already in a monopoly state."

Some 18 other ag organizations have joined the Iowa Farmers Union calling on the FTC and the Justice Department to investigate the proposed sale.

A farm group is helping Iowa agriculture producers find ways to reduce the amount of nitrogen they use on their crops.

Excess nitrates can wind up in ground and surface water, and cause health problems.

Practical Farmers of Iowa is encouraging farmers to find just the right amount of nitrogen they need for their crops - while avoiding applying too much, which the group says is common.

PFI's Field Crops Viability Coordinator - Chelsea Ferrie - said thanks to federal grants and private funding, the group will pay farmers up to $35 for every acre that has a lower than normal yield if they didn't apply enough nitrogen.

"No cost to the farmer, either," said Ferrie. "We're trying to help incentivize them. This is something that farmers want to do - I mean, they want to be good stewards of the land - but also, that they need to have a profitable farm."

The application period for the program is open through the end of April.

To help them reach the right nitrogen balance, Ferrie said PFI will help farmers on the front end of the process, too - so they aren't left guessing how much to apply.

"Talk through what your typical fertilizer plan is, and what your reduction plan would be," said Ferrie. "Then you would implement this year, going into the spring and into the season."

Farmers have relied on nitrogen-based fertilizers for generations - but when applied in excess, nitrates run off into ground and surface water, posing health concerns for animals and people.




get more stories like this via email

Pesticides are still common in agriculture. Organic producers who avoid them have seen ups and downs in pushing for stronger regulations, and they point to a South Dakota example of the harm associated with widespread use among neighboring farms.

At the heart of the regulatory fight is the application of the weed-killing pesticide dicamba, and how it can drift from one farm to another. Last month, a federal court blocked "over the top" spraying of dicamba products, but the EPA followed with an order to allow the spraying of existing supplies.

Glenn Pulse, co-owner of an organic farm in Vermillion, said a 2017 drift incident had a big impact on his operation.

"Our entire farm was covered. We lost a lot of livestock, and thousands of bees were killed," he explained.

It also resulted in health concerns for his family, having to regain his organic farmer certification, and a legal battle over restitution. Groups such as the National Family Farm Coalition have been fighting what they call the deregulation of these chemicals, arguing the drift and runoff effect has damaged millions of crops.

Dicamba-manufacturing companies deny responsibility, instead blaming farmers who apply it for not following guidelines.

The EPA has said there were already millions of gallons of dicamba in circulation prior to the court's ruling, prompting the agency's order. Pulse feels there are farmers who are careful in spraying chemicals, but he wants stronger enforcement against those he describes as "loose cannons."

"The guys that are not following the labels and they're spraying in weather conditions that are not favorable, that is where, I would say, 90% of the problems are happening with drift incidents," Pulse said.

His calls for better responses to these incidents coincide with policy demands to heavily restrict dicamba products. Meanwhile, Rep. Dusty Johnson, D-South Dakota, is the main sponsor of a bill supporters say would assure uniformity in national pesticide labeling under federal law. But opponents argue it would limit longstanding state and local pesticide safety rules.