Alberta cattle producers who received an advance of their CAIS payment during the bleakest part of the BSE crisis may have to pay back some of the money.
When the equity loss advances were made available under the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization Program last year, they were based on the loss in value of their livestock, said Merle Jacobson, vice-president of risk management with the provincial financing body, AFSC.
As the year progressed, other BSE payments were made that counted as income, and prices of cattle increased, reducing their projected equity loss.
Read Also
University of Saskatchewan experts helping ‘herders’ in Mongolia
The Canadian government and the University of Saskatchewan are part of a $10 million project trying to help Mongolian farmers modernize their practices.
About 15 percent of the 2004 CAIS program payments have been calculated and only a small number of producers know if they will have to repay their equity loss advance, said Jacobson.
He said some producers are frustrated they now must repay the money.
“They just got through BSE, drought, weather and frost and now to have this happen is an added concern.”
Various repayment options have been developed, from early payment discounts to long-term, low-interest loans, to make the repayments as painless as possible, he said.
Producers have until the end of September to file their final information for 2004.
Alberta was the only province to develop an equity loss advance under the CAIS program to help producers.
Kevin and Lori Wiesner don’t have cattle, but they recently received two $49,000 CAIS cheques in the mail.
The Leduc, Alta., farm couple thought almost $100,000 in government money that came at the end of July for their 2003 CAIS year was too good to be true.
“We were expecting to get some money out of the program, but not quite this large,” she said.
Sure enough, about two weeks after they received their cheques, they received another letter stating that their final 2003 CAIS information had been reviewed and they would receive no money. They were asked to return the money plus two years worth of administration fees.
“We’re very lucky,” said Kevin, who held off paying fertilizer and fuel bills with the cheques.
“I did read the small print that did say this could be wrong,” said Lori, who is frustrated by the confusion. “I think this is a big mess of a program.”
Jacobson said when a CAIS overpayment has been made and it’s the administration’s fault, it tries to make repayments as flexible as possible.
