Integrated Farm/Livestock Management Demonstration Program, 2002

Farm/Livestock Management Demonstration Program produced by Iowa Departmment of Agriculture and Land Stewardship

Farm-Level Analysis of Risk Management Proposals, March 2000

This paper presents a detailed report of the representative farm analysis (summarized in FAPRI Policy Working Paper #01-00). At the request of several members of the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the U.S. Senate, we have continued to analyze the impacts of the Farmers’ Risk Management Act of 1999 (S. 1666) and the Risk Management for the 21st Century Act (S. 1580). Earlier analysis reported in FAPRI Policy Working Paper #04-99 concentrated on the aggregate net farm income and government outlay impacts. The representative farm analysis is conducted for several types of farms, including both irrigated and non-irrigated cotton farms in Tom Green County, Texas; dryland wheat farms in Morton County, North Dakota and Sumner County, Kansas; and a corn farm in Webster County, Iowa. We consider additional factors that may shed light on the differential impacts of the two plans. 1. Farm-level income impacts under alternative weather scenarios. 2. Additional indirect impacts, such as a change in ability to obtain financing. 3. Implications of within-year price shocks. Our results indicate that farmers who buy crop insurance will increase their coverage levels under S. 1580. Farmers with high yield risk find that the 65 percent coverage level maximizes expected returns, but some who feel that they obtain other benefits from higher coverage will find that the S. 1580 subsidy schedule significantly lowers the cost of obtaining the additional coverage. Farmers with lower yield risk find that the increased indemnities from additional coverage will more than offset the increase in producer premium. In addition, because S. 1580 extends its increased premium subsidy percentages to revenue insurance products, farmers will have an increased incentive to buy revenue insurance. Differences in the ancillary benefits from crop insurance under the baseline and S. 1580 would be driven by the increase in insurance participation and buy-up. Given the same levels of insurance participation and buy-up, the ancillary benefits under the two scenarios would be the same.

Integrated Farm/Livestock Management Demonstration Program, 2004

Farm/Livestock Management Demonstration Program produced by Iowa Departmment of Agriculture and Land Stewardship

Integrated Farm/Livestock Management Demonstration Program, 2001

Farm/Livestock Management Demonstration Program produced by Iowa Departmment of Agriculture and Land Stewardship

Integrated Farm/Livestock Management Demonstration Program, 2003

Farm/Livestock Management Demonstration Program produced by Iowa Departmment of Agriculture and Land Stewardship

Get a GRIP: Should Area Revenue Coverage Be Offered through the Farm Bill or as a Crop Insurance Program? 2007

The successful expansion of the U.S. crop insurance program has not eliminated ad hoc disaster assistance. An alternative currently being explored by members of Congress and others in preparation of the 2007 farm bill is to simply remove the “ad hoc” part of disaster assistance programs by creating a standing program that would automatically funnel aid to hard-hit regions and crops. One form such a program could take can be found in the area yield and area revenue insurance programs currently offered by the U.S. crop insurance program. The Group Risk Plan (GRP) and Group Risk Income Protection (GRIP) programs automatically trigger payments when county yields or revenues, respectively, fall below a producer-elected coverage level. The per-acre taxpayer costs of offering GRIP in Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa for corn and soybeans through the crop insurance program are estimated. These results are used to determine the amount of area revenue coverage that could be offered to farmers as part of a standing farm bill disaster program. Approximately 55% of taxpayer support for GRIP flows to the crop insurance industry. A significant portion of this support comes in the form of net underwriting gains. The expected rate of return on money put at risk by private crop insurance companies under the current Standard Reinsurance Agreement is approximately 100%. Taking this industry support and adding in the taxpayer support for GRIP that flows to producers would fund a county target revenue program at the 93% coverage level.

Indexes of prices received by Iowa farmers for farm commodities.

The Iowa Crop and Livestock Report

Farm scale alcohol production : the Iowa State University ethanol distillery, 1981.

This publication was prepared to describe how the Iowa State University distillery has been operating, including information on distillery size, equipment, tanks, condenser, heat exchanger, pumps and the process. Photos and diagrams are also included.

Iowa Family Farm Meat Directory, 2007

This directory is for all the meat producers in Iowa.

U.S. Farm Policy and the Variability of Commodity Prices and Farm Revenues, February 2000

A dynamic, three-commodity rational-expectations storage model is used to compare the impact of the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform (FAIR) Act of 1996 with a freemarket policy and with the agricultural policies that preceded the FAIR Act. Results support the hypothesis that the changes made when FAIR was enacted did not lead to permanent significant increases in the volatility of farm prices or revenues. An important finding is that the main economic impacts of the Pre-FAIR scenario, relative to the free-market regime were to transfer income to farmers and to substitute government storage for private storage in a way that did little to support prices or to stabilize farm incomes.

Pharmaceutical and Industrial Traits in Genetically Modified Crops: Co-existence with Conventional Agriculture, August 2006

This paper discusses the implications of using genetically modified crops to biomanufacture pharmaceuticals and industrial compounds from the perspective of their co-existence with conventional agriculture. Such plant-made pharmaceuticals and plantmade industrial products rely on exciting scientific and technological breakthroughs and promise new opportunities for the agricultural sector, but they also entail novel risks. The management of the externalities and of the possible unintended economic effects that arise in this context is critical and poses difficult questions for regulators.

Adoption Subsidies and Environmental Impacts of Alternative Energy Crops, March 2007

We provide estimates of the costs associated with inducing substantial conversion of land from production of traditional crops to switchgrass. Higher traditional crop prices due to increased demand for corn from the ethanol industry has increased the relative advantage that row crops have over switchgrass. Results indicate that farmers will convert to switchgrass production only with significant conversion subsidies. To examine potential environmental consequences of conversion, we investigate three stylized landscape usage scenarios, one with an entire conversion of a watershed to switchgrass production, a second with the entire watershed planted to continuous corn under a 50% removal rate of the biomass, and a third scenario that places switchgrass on the most erodible land in the watershed and places continuous corn on the least erodible. For each of these illustrative scenarios, the watershed-scale Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) hydrological model (Arnold et al., 1998; Arnold and Forher, 2005) is used to evaluate the effect of these landscape uses on sediment and nutrient loadings in the Maquoketa Watershed in eastern Iowa.

Living Near A Vineyard

It is widely assumed that living in rural Iowa means you live near a field of corn or soybeans. It is common to see large equipment during spring and fall and most people are aware that care should be given when using certain pesticides near these fields. In general, most everyone knows what to expect. Now there’s something new dotting the Iowa landscape . . . Vineyards! Like row crops, vineyards also use farm equipment and pesticides. We would like to take you on a written tour of what you might expect in a vineyard throughout our growing season. For a “real” tour, contact a local grape grower!

Department of Commerce, Farm Account FY2007

These Facts sheets have been developed to provide a multitude of information about executive branch agencies/departments on a single sheet of paper. The Facts provides general information, contact information, workforce data, leave & benefits information, and affirmative action data. This is the most recent update of information for the fiscal year 2007.

Department of Commerce, Farm Account FY2008

These Facts sheets have been developed to provide a multitude of information about executive branch agencies/departments on a single sheet of paper. The Facts provides general information, contact information, workforce data, leave & benefits information, and affirmative action data. This is the most recent update of information for the fiscal year 2007.