Canadian pulse growers can breathe half a sigh of relief.
American politicians have taken the first of two big steps toward creating the next farm bill and, so far, there is no direct support for pulse crops in the proposed legislation.
Members of the House Committee on Agriculture have drafted their version of the 2001 farm bill, a bill that will set United States farm policy for the next 10 years.
It calls for increased support for crops covered under the existing legislation but there is no coverage for pulses – a relatively new crop for American farmers.
Read Also
Man charged after assault at grain elevator
RCMP have charged a 51-year-old Weyburn man after an altercation at the Pioneer elevator at Corinne, Sask. July 22.
“We’re very disappointed that the House didn’t include peas, lentils and chickpeas,” said Paul Thomas, executive director of the North Dakota Dry Pea and Lentil Association.
His group has been pushing for the three crops to be included in the farm bill’s nonrecourse marketing assistance loans and loan deficiency payments. Those programs would establish a guaranteed floor price for pulse crops similar to what exists for grains and oilseeds in the U.S.
Canadian pulse growers are concerned the floor prices would threaten their thriving new industry by encouraging oversupply south of the border and driving down pulse prices.
At a recent international convention, Canadian industry representatives said the “pulse party could be over,” but the situation looks a little better now.
“At least we have some hope now that there’s some sober second thoughts about it and hopefully things will turn out well,” said Germain Dauk, chair of Pulse Canada.
“We’re very, very pleased that it has taken this new turn.”
But the version of the bill drafted by the House of Representatives is only half of the equation. The U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture still has to propose its farm bill. The two bodies will then hash out their differences, if there are any.
“It’s not over with until it’s over and I’m not relieved right now,” said Garth Patterson, executive director of Saskatchewan Pulse Growers Association.
“There’s months of negotiations yet and we still view it as a threat to the industry.”
That’s because the U.S. senate is more favourable to including pulse crops in farm programs.
The Democratic majority in the senate recently proposed a $7.5 billion emergency aid package that included $20 million for peas, lentils and chickpeas.
This package is separate and distinct from the farm bill, which is a long-term policy document.
The senate eventually gave in and supported a $5.5 billion aid package put together by the Republican-dominated house because of time constraints. It doesn’t include any direct support for pulse crops.
Thomas said the reason the senate is more responsive to the lobbying efforts of the U.S. pulse industry is that those crops are primarily grown in Washington, Idaho, Montana and North Dakota, four states with considerable representation and influence on the senate’s agriculture committee.
“We certainly think that (the committee) has expressed an interest in supporting peas, lentils and chickpeas,” said Thomas.
If the senate version of the bill doesn’t include pulse crops or if they are left out of the final version of the legislation agreed to by both houses of congress, there would be little growth prospects for peas, lentils and chickpeas in the U.S.
“It certainly may cause some growers to think twice about planting these crops,” said Thomas.
The senate agriculture committee is now on a break, gathering input from commodity groups and farmers. It will reconvene in September. Thomas expects its version of the farm bill to be announced in the fall or winter.
The current farm bill expires at the end of September 2002 so something has to be in place by then. The new bill could be operational by the beginning of the next crop year.
