Green Horizons

Volume 4, Number 3
Autumn 1999

Are tree farmers real? (Part 2)

In the Summer 1999 issue of Green Horizons we shared Arlyn Perkey's comments on how Tree Farmers who suffer major crop losses are not eligible for government disaster payments. The following is more commentary by Perkey with some specific thoughts on what Tree Farmers and timber owners should do to correct this inequity. Perkey is a forester with the USDA Forest Service at Morgantown, W. Va. and a Tree Farmer.

Timber should be viewed as a legitimate agricultural crop. It is a fiber crop, just as cotton and wool are fiber crops. It is unique in that for most family farm Tree Farms, actual received income is not annual - it's periodic.

That doesn't make Tree Farmers less creditable as farmers. In our verbal communications about Tree Farming, we need to refer to trees as an agricultural crop, a fiber crop. If we expect others to consider timber a legitimate crop, we have to describe it that way ourselves.

The Small Business Administration cites a law as the basis for their decision not to provide disaster assistance to Tree Farmers. The Farm Service Agency is basing their decision (to deny disaster assistance) on interpretation at the national office. It appears logical that the rationale for Congress prohibiting SBA from getting into the agricultural arena is because the USDA is intended to provide assistance to that community.

The only way Tree Farmers will be treated equitably as farmers is if they consistently insist on and expect equitable treatment through appropriate channels. My intent is not to berate any government agency. My purpose is to call attention to a gap in service between two government agencies that should be filled. It appears most logical to me that the Farm Service Agency should fill the gap.

Tree Farmers can learn about and support the Tree Farm National Operating Committee's resolution to the U.S. Congress on tax code reform.

"Be it resolved by the Tree Farm National Operating Committee that the U. S. Congress reform the tax code to allow Tree Farmers to take losses over and above their basis in response to presidentially declared natural disaster, thereby encouraging the continued ownership of such disaster-affected lands, relieving pressure to convert said lands to non-forest uses, and enabling the continued sustainable management of forests for the benefit of all Americans."

We need to recognize that, as growers, the longer our crop is exposed to the elements, the greater the risk of loss. This fact favors application of more intensive management practices to grow the desired products in a shorter time. This strategy doesn't eliminate the risk, but it does lessen it.

Whether it's fires in Florida, floods along the Mississippi River, gypsy moth defoliation in Pennsylvania or ice damage in New England, natural disasters happen to Tree Farmers, too. It is not expecting too much to be treated equitably by agencies charged with administering disaster relief and acknowledging deductible losses. The benefits Tree Farms provide to society certainly warrant the same support that society provides to other agricultural producers.