Inaccuracies a 'shot in the foot'

Just last week we completed the enrollment period for the first Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) general sign up since the spring of 2006. This program has been very popular and widely used in Bourbon County since its inception in 1986 bringing in a significant amount of annual rental payments over these past 24 years.

Since the last enrollment period, a new farm bill was passed that reduced the approved maximum acreage for the program. In addition, during some of the intervening years the contracts ending (acres coming out) were relatively few which did not provide for "freeing up" very many acres that could be available for new contracts.

Also during this interim time, the process for establishing the maximum CRP rental rates was changed. In the past, county FSA Committees were asked to evaluate current local conditions then establish an average cropland cash rent for their county from which the rates for the different soils are computed for CRP usage. A soil that is above average in productivity is factored up from the average cash rent --with a 1+ factor -- while a less productive soil is factored down for program purposes. In other words, the higher this cash rental rate, the higher the CRP annual rental rates.

As mentioned above for this enrollment time, the process was changed for establishing this base "average cash rent" figure. Instead of County FSA Committees seeking information -- using their knowledge of the county, gathering as much local data as possible, and sending in a recommended figure -- the Farm Service Agency hired the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS; and, for us, their state affiliate KAS) to do a survey of these cash rent figures.

Observing the data collection process now for many years, I was concerned that getting accurate data might be a problem within the county as most producers do not wish to provide any information at all for a survey. In addition, I detect an occasional tendency to perhaps provide incorrect information to a data collector.

When the figures came out, sure enough, the average cropland cash rent figure gathered by the statistics service showed $33 as the average -- down from $54 per acre on the books for the past several years. This represented a "reduction" in cash rents of nearly 40 percent which was then slated for reflection as an equivalent reduction in CRP rates offered.

The Bourbon County FSA Committee reviewed this figure and noted some basic problems with the new statistic: 1) cash rents have NOT decreased in the past few years; 2) the basic figure already established more accurately represented cash rental levels known to the committee members; 3) and that significant a reduction in rental rates would likely mark the effective end of new CRP contracts in the county.

Fortunately for anyone in the county interested in CRP, the County Committee's request for a review of this rate, and that it be restored to the former level ($54 per acre), was supported by the State FSA Committee and State Executive Director, and we were successful in getting the rate restored to the previous level before the general sign up started.

In speaking with the director of Kansas Agricultural Statistics (KAS), I found they do not use a figure unless they have a lease 30 responses in a county. My thought, then, that the average was based on only a few producers was not valid. She also assured me that the collection and sampling methods were consistent and thorough. So there did not appear to be anything seriously askew with how the data was gathered.

My conclusion: county producers did not provide the data collectors with accurate information when completing this spring's cash rent survey with KAS. This situation caused us to "shoot ourselves in the foot" in potential use of the erroneous data to determine CRP rates.

NAS does not keep track of who provides the collected data. Names are not recorded in connection with any data record. Providing this information does not directly raise anyone's taxes, nor get anyone in trouble, nor make your own "personal business" available on the Internet.

Based on this experience with the CRP rates, note some sensible advice to county farmers and ranchers: Please either 1) provide accurate information for these surveys, or 2) refuse to provide any information at all. Misleading and perhaps incorrect data nearly cost county producers the feasible use of a very widely used and beneficial USDA program!

Editor's Note: Doug Niemeir is the County Executive Director for the USDA/Farm Service Agency. He can be reached by emailing him at Douglas.Niemeir@ks.usda.gov