15 



They perhaps had harvested their papayas or bananas up to Sep- 

 tember 12. But for the balance of the year it was a total loss. There 

 is no way to say to the farmer, that well, you got what you needed 

 to get out of your crop and therefore there is no consideration for 

 disaster payment. 



In point of fact, those farmers who were depending upon yields 

 in September, October, November, and December got nothing, and 

 they also got nothing from the Federal Government. 



So it seems to me that a uniform rule cannot be applied equi- 

 tably when the nature of the crops are different. It is not as though 

 the crop was going to terminate because winter came in. That is 

 a seasonal phenomenon in the northern temperate climate. This is 

 not the case in the tropical areas. 



So that is a situation which seems to me to be so self-evident 

 that if it is an administrative decision, it is one that could be cor- 

 rected fairly easily. That is the one request of the farmers in my 

 district. 



Mr. Weber. I appreciate your comments on that. You do have a 

 statutory requirement that producers must suffer 40 percent loss 

 or if they have crop insurance, a 35 percent loss. 



I can understand where your producers are coming from, but I 

 can also remember back to my area of the country and a wheat 

 producer who loses his crop, he must suffer that 40 percent loss be- 

 fore being eligible for any type of disaster coverage. They are some- 

 what similar. 



I understand where you are coming from. 



Mrs. Mink. The criteria is in judging my farmer for his 100 per- 

 cent normal productivity when he had no storm and the storm oc- 

 curred in September and he lost everything. You cannot say to that 

 farmer after the hurricane damage, well, sir, you did not suffer a 

 40 percent or greater loss. He lost everything. 



This, it seems to me, is the impasse we are in and surely we 

 ought to be able to come to an accommodation for our local situa- 

 tion. 



Thank you, Madam Chairman. 



Mrs. Thurman. Mr. Nussle is also joining us. You all are a very 

 popular group today. We are glad to have you. 



Mr. Nussle. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 



This is a situation, very widespread, and I think as a result 

 takes on that kind of interest. I don't have an opening statement. 

 I have a couple of items when they are about to speak on the third 

 panel. 



I am not a member of this subcommittee, and I appreciate you 

 giving me a chance to do that. 



Mrs. Thurman. But you are a member of our Agriculture Com- 

 mittee. 



Mr. Nussle. I appreciate that, thank you. 



Mrs. Thurman. Mr. Weber, I have a series of questions, very 

 short, but just something I am interested in. I think it goes back 

 to Mrs. Mink's questions. 



Did any of the policy people that were involved in these deci- 

 sions, did they have any background in the fruit or vegetable or or- 

 namental plant industries? 



