Crop insurance must change the type of coverage offered to farmers.
For years we have dealt with crop diseases that are weather induced. Often these diseases result in crops that should not be harvested. Growers cannot buy crop insurance that will protect them from a crop that is refused at the elevator or should be refused because of quality issues.
The worst of these diseases centre on toxin producing fungi such as Fusarium. This year it appears as if we have just dodged another disease bullet in corn. Luckily the disease affecting corn this year does not produce toxins.
When growers are hit by weather induced diseases such as Fusarium there is a great deal of blending that goes on, to get rid of the crop. This all comes at a cost to the producer and an even greater cost to the end users who are often livestock producers.
The blended product meets the acceptable level for that toxin in the feed, but some would argue that the livestock industry would be better off if that crop had been destroyed. They believe that even low levels of some of these toxins put extra stress on the livestock.
One of the reasons given that “crop quality insurance” is not available is because it would cost too much.
How do they know? It has never been offered.
If the folk who handle crop insurance are really looking after their customers they will find the best insurance possible and then offer it to their customers. Let the customers decide if it is too expensive.
As I read information from the United States I get the impression that “crop quality insurance” as well as yield insurance is available to our cousins to the south. BF