Report on Specialty Crop Insurance

U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Risk Management Agency
ii

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the 

basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital 

or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 

alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audio tape, etc.) should 

contact USDA's TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten 

Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call 202-720-5964 (voice or 

TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

May 2004
iii

Contents

PREFACE............................................................................................................................................. iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................... v

DEFINITIONS.................................................................................................................................... viii

FCICPROGRESSIN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF INNOVATIVERISK 

MANAGEMENT PRODUCTS

Background ...............................................................................................................................1

Insurance Availability.....................................................................................................................1

Small- and Moderate-Size Farms..............................................................................................2

Section 508(h) Products ............................................................................................................4

Pilot Program Development, 1995-2003...................................................................................4

FY 2001 Research, Development, and Evaluation Projects......................................................5

Pilot Crop Insurance Program Evaluations ...............................................................................9

FY 2002 Request for Applications (RFA) Projects................................................................. 12

New Pilot Programs Beginning the 2002 Crop Year .............................................................. 13

Pilot Program Conversions and Expansions for the 2003 and 2004 Crop Years .................... 14

Future Risk Management Program Development Plans ......................................................... 15

Measuring Progress................................................................................................................. 16

FCICPROGRESS IN INCREASING THE USE OFRISK MANAGEMENT PRODUCTS 

OFFERED THROUGH THE CORPORATION

Background ............................................................................................................................. 18

Risk Management Education (RME) ...................................................................................... 19

Public Awareness .................................................................................................................... 20

Community Outreach .............................................................................................................. 22

Other Initiatives....................................................................................................................... 22

Measuring Progress................................................................................................................. 22

APPENDIX TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1 - Current Status of Crops Identified in Section 10006 of the 2002 Farm Bill............. 27

Table 2 - RMA-Developed Pilot Program History, 1995-2003 ............................................. 28

Table 3 - Crops Insured Under 1998 Crop Insurance Programs ............................................. 30

Table 4 - Crops Insured Under 1999 Crop Insurance Programs ............................................. 31

Table 5 - Crops Insured Under 2000 Crop Insurance Programs ............................................. 32

Table 6 - Crops Insured Under 2001 Crop Insurance Programs ............................................. 33

Table 7 - Agricultural Commodities Insured Under 2002 Crop Insurance Programs ............. 34

Table 8 - Agricultural Commodities Insured Under 2003 Crop Insurance Programs.............. 35

Table 9 - Active Pilot Risk Management Programs for the 2003 Crop Year .......................... 36

Table 10 - Underserved States Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002............................................ 37

Table 11 - Number of Policies With Earned Premium in Underserved States,

1998-2002 ..........................................................................................................................38

Table 12 - Specialty Crops Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002 ................................................. 39

Table 13 - Specialty Crops Number of Insured Policies, 1998-2002 ...................................... 41

Figures 1-16 - Underserved States Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002 ..................................... 43

Figures 17-32 - Number of Policies With Earned Premium in Underserved States,

1998-2002 ..........................................................................................................................47

Figures 33-82 - Specialty Crops Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002 ......................................... 51

Figures 83-132 - Specialty Crops Number of InsuredPolicies, 1998-2002............................ 58
iv

Preface

Section 10006 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (2002 Farm Bill) directs the 

Secretary of Agriculture to submit to the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives 

and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate a Report on Specialty Crop 

Insurance. In accordance with the above provisions, this Report on Specialty Crop Insurance is 

hereby submitted.

This report demonstrates that the Risk Management Agency has made excellent progress in making 

crop insurance protection available to specialty crop growers. For example, during 1998-2002:

• The number of insurable crops increased 29 percent (see appendix table 3)

• The number of active policies increased 28 percent (see appendix table 13)

• The amount of coverage (liability) increased 98 percent (see appendix table 12)

In addition, a number of innovative pilot programs were developed that make insurance protection 

available for livestock and aquaculture producers. However, because these products are considered 

commodities and not crops, they fall outside the parameters of this report.
v

Executive Summary

This Report on Specialty Crop Insurance provides an overview of the progress made by the Federal 

Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) in research and development of innovative risk management 

products and the progress made by FCIC in increasing the use of FCIC's risk management products 

by producers of specialty crops, by small- and moderate-sized farms, and in areas that are 

underserved, as determined by the Secretary.

The Risk Management Agency (RMA) and its many partners have achieved significant progress in 

the research and development of innovative risk management products. Appendix 1 shows that 21 

of the 31 crops named in section 10006 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 

(2002 Farm Bill) are currently insured, with 8 still in the pilot stage. Six of the remaining 10 named 

crops are at the forefront of FCIC's research and development priorities, with projects underway for 

fiscal year (FY) 2003. A seventh crop, eggplant, is currently covered under the Adjusted Gross 

Revenue (AGR) plan in certain States and is being considered as part of a study for small value 

crops, which will have a research report and feasibility study contracted for during FY 2004. RMA 

plans to assess the interest in a wild blueberry program before entering into a contract or partnership.

The feasibility for the development of a carrot program was studied during FY 2001 and is not 

being recommended to proceed to the development stage because of insufficient producer interest. 

Mushrooms have not been moved higher on the priority list due to insufficient interest in a crop 

insurance program, which has been repeatedly communicated to RMA by the mushroom industry.

A cost of production (COP) insurance concept was researched and developed by AgriLogic, Inc., 

one of the contractors in the FCIC’s research and development pool of contractors under an 

umbrella contract implemented in 2001. Cotton was the first of 12 crops to be researched and 

developed by AgriLogic under their contract task order. Specialty crops included in the 12 crops are 

almonds, apricots, cranberries, nectarines, onions, and peaches. On October 22, 2002, the FCIC 

Board of Directors (Board) tabled a docket that would have authorized implementation of a Cotton 

Cost of Production Pilot Crop-Revenue plan of insurance pending resolution of issues raised by 

expert reviewers, RMA, the USDA Office of the General Counsel, and the FCIC Board. RMA and 

the contractor attempted to resolve the Board’s issues, and on July 1, 2003, the Board voted to send 

the revised COP program out for independent expert review. Based on these reviews, on October 9, 

2003, the FCIC Board of Directors voted to disapprove the COP product because it was “unable to 

make a determination that the policy and associated materials, as submitted, complies with all 

applicable provisions of the Federal Crop Insurance Act...” The Board continues to search 

diligently for innovative risk protection products that meet the needs of farmers and ranchers that are 

actuarially appropriate and promote program integrity.

The Board also approved an AGR-Lite crop insurance program in Pennsylvania. This insurance plan 

allows farmers to insure a portion of their revenue from crops; animals such as chickens, dairy cows, 

hogs, and sheep; and animal products such as eggs, milk, meat, and wool. Under this insurance plan, 

producers can also cover revenue generated from the production and sale of any of the specialty 

crops listed in section 10006 of the 2002 Farm Bill. On August 1, 2003, the FCIC Board voted to
vi

expand the availability of AGR-Lite to include most agricultural counties in Connecticut, Delaware, 

Maine, Maryland, West Virginia, New York, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode 

Island, and Vermont, for crops grown in 2004. On May 6, 2004, the Board voted to expand the 

availability of AGR-Lite to include most agricultural counties in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, 

and North Carolina, for crops grown in 2005.

In addition to the projects listed above, research, development, and evaluation projects were 

awarded through contract or partnership agreements in FY 2001 and 2002 to develop various risk 

management tools for small- and moderate-sized farms and specialty crop producers. RMA and its 

public and private sector partners undertake a number of initiatives each year to increase the use of 

risk management products offered through FCIC. Two major initiatives that target specialty crop 

producers, underserved areas, and small/moderate-sized farms are risk management education and 

public awareness.

RMA established risk management education programs for specialty crop producers in a number of 

States during FY 2001 through partnership agreements with State departments of agriculture, 

universities, and grower organizations. The objective of these partnerships included survival in the 

agricultural market place, risk management opportunities for alternative crops, risk analysis and 

decision support skills to help producers manage risks inherent in agriculture, and other general 

agricultural risk management issues and opportunities.

For FY 2002, RMA expanded its educational efforts directed to specialty crop producers. The 

agency announced the availability of funds for risk management education partnerships, with a 

priority for programs reaching producers of commodities not currently covered by crop insurance, 

specialty crops, and underserved commodities. In response to this announcement, RMA received 

101 applications requesting $5.6 million to help RMA deliver risk management education to 

producers. An evaluation panel selected the 72 most meritorious proposals, and RMA used 

approximately $3.7 million to fund these projects. Many of the funded partnerships specifically 

targeted specialty crop producers during FY 2002. Several of the projects build on the risk 

management education efforts for specialty crops from FY 2001.

A significant component of the risk management education initiative is RMA’s website, which 

contains a vast amount of information about risk management programs and tools available to 

specialty crop producers. RMA’s public website is located at http://www.rma.usda.gov and 

interested parties are encouraged to explore and utilize the available information.

Another risk management education initiative is to encourage wide participation and input from 

producers and other outside organizations that may be impacted by a program under consideration 

for feasibility or development. Most of the feasibility studies and development projects currently 

underway are for specialty crops. RMA seeks input through consultation memos sent to 

organizations and producers who will be impacted by the program under consideration. In addition, 

contractors and partners hold listening sessions with producers, producer groups, and insurance 

company representatives as a program is studied, when recommendations are developed, and when
vii

alternatives are considered. RMA regional offices also serve as a local contact point for such 

activities to ensure that local issues, concerns, and differences are considered. With the new 

emphasis on research and development of programs through contracts and partnerships, producers 

and producer groups are encouraged to participate in listening sessions and other forums that 

provide the opportunity to become involved in the research and development process.

The following measurements are used to evaluate FCIC’s progress in increasing the use of risk 

management products by producers of specialty crops, and in areas that are underserved:

C Insurance Liabilities in States determined to be underserved (see appendix table 10 and 

appendix figs. 1-16)

All but one underserved State had increases in insurance liability (coverage) during 

1998-2002. The total liability for all 15 underserved States increased 91 percent 

during 1998-2002, from $477 million to $909 million.

C Number of Insured Policies in States determined to be underserved (see appendix table 11 

and appendix figs. 17-32)

All 15 underserved States had increases in the number of insured policies with earned 

premium from 1998 to 2002. The total number of policies in the 15 underserved 

States increased 64 percent during 1998-2002, from 17,272 to 28,389.

C Insurance Liabilities for Specialty Crops (see appendix table 12 and appendix figs. 33-82) 

Of the 46 specialty crops listed in appendix table 12, insurance liability (coverage) 

increased during 1998-2002 for 43 crops. Insurance liabilities for the 46 specialty 

crops increased 98 percent during 1998-2002, from $4.358 billion to $8.643 billion.

C Number of Insured Policies for Specialty Crops (see appendix table 13 and appendix figs. 83-

132)

Of the 46 specialty crops listed in appendix table 13, the number of insured policies 

with earned premium increased during 1998-2002 for 34 crops. The 46 specialty 

crops in total increased 28 percent during 1998-2002, from 58,139 to 74,504 policies.

The FCIC has made significant progress in research and development of innovative risk management 

products and in increasing the use of risk management products offered through FCIC to producers 

of specialty crops, to small- and moderate-sized farms, and to areas that are underserved.
viii

Definitions

Small- and Moderate-Sized Farms - Farms earning less than $250,000 gross income per year.

Specialty Crops - For the purpose of this report, specialty crop means any agricultural crop, 

except wheat, feed grains, oilseeds, cotton, rice, peanuts, and tobacco.

Underserved Agricultural Commodities - Agricultural commodities (as defined in section 518 

of the Act) for which no Federal crop insurance programs are available.

Underserved Areas - Underserved areas are geographic areas within the United States where 

there is traditionally, and continues to be, a low level of Federal crop insurance participation and 

availability. Underserved areas may be determined without regard to whether such areas are 

located within underserved States.

Underserved States - RMA has designated 15 States, as determined by the Secretary, for 

education and risk management assistance purposes in section 524 of the Act. In addition to 

those other States specified by RMA, the same 15 States listed below are also considered 

underserved States for research and development purposes under section 522 of the Act. Twelve 

of the designated underserved States are contiguously located in the Northeastern United States, 

and the remaining three States are contiguously located in the Western United States. Others may 

be located around the country, depending on whether the crops produced in the States are 

adequately covered by insurance.

The 15 designated States for the purpose of section 524 of the Act are:

Connecticut Nevada Rhode Island

Delaware New Hampshire Utah

Maine New Jersey Vermont

Maryland New York West Virginia

Massachusetts Pennsylvania Wyoming
1

FCIC Progress in Research and Development of Innovative Risk 

Management Products for Producers of Specialty Crops

Background

The Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000 (ARPA) was enacted (1) to strengthen the safety net 

for agricultural producers by providing greater access to more affordable risk management tools and 

improved protection from production and income loss, (2) to improve the efficiency and integrity of 

the Federal crop insurance program, and (3) for other purposes.

Sections 131 and 132 of ARPA significantly changed the way the Risk Management Agency (RMA) 

develops new risk management programs. Section 131 amended the Federal Crop Insurance Act 

(Act) by adding research and development provisions as section 522 and pilot program provisions as 

section 523 of the Act. The new provisions in section 522 of the Act prohibited the research and 

development of any new policies by the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) for an 

agricultural commodity offered under the title and authorized funding for FCIC to enter into 

contracts and partnerships for research and development of new risk management programs.

Section 522(b) of the Act provided for the reimbursement of research, development, and 

maintenance costs directly related to a policy, plan of insurance, provision of a policy or plan of 

insurance, and related materials that (1) are submitted to and approved by the FCIC Board under 

section 508(h) of the Act for reinsurance, and (2) the Board approves such reimbursement.

The current status of FCIC's progress in research and development of innovative risk management 

products for specialty crop producers is described in the sections that follow.

Insurance Availability

In crop year 2003, crop insurance is available for 62 specialty crops. The State where crop 

insurance is available depends on the specialty crop. Insurance is available in the primary growing

areas for these crops. If the specialty crop is not a pilot program crop, producers in areas for which 

actuarial documents are not available may apply for insurance coverage through a written agreement. 

Nursery crop insurance, for example, is available in 50 States and 3,087 counties.

Following is a list of specialty crops from appendix table 12 and the number of States and counties 

where insurance is available:
2

Crop States Counties

Number

Crop States Counties

Number

Almonds 1 16 Green peas 13 150

Apples 32 349 Macadamia nuts 1 3

Avocados 2 7 Macadamia trees 1 3

Avocado/mango trees 1 1 Millet 3 55

Blueberries 9 32 Mint 4 9

Cabbage 15 27 Mustard 1 19

Canola/Rapeseed 8 146 Navel oranges (CA dollar) 1 4

Cherry 6 21 Nursery 50 3,087

Chili peppers 2 3 Onions 8 61

Citrus 4 46 Peaches 26 258

Citrus trees (Texas) 1 3 Pears 2 17

Crambe 1 7 Peppers 1 13

Cranberries 6 30 Plums 1 7

Cultivated wild rice 2 10 Potatoes 39 325

Dry beans 20 287 Raspberries/blackberries 3 7

Dry peas 6 97 Stonefruit 1 18

Figs 1 4 Strawberries 4 21

Florida fruit trees 1 28 Sweet corn for canning 11 170

Fresh market beans 3 5 Sweet potatoes 5 8

Fresh market sweet corn 13 213 Table grapes 2 12

Fresh market tomatoes 6 33 Tomatoes for canning 10 88

Grapes 13 91 Walnuts 1 26

Green beans for canning 17 32 Winter squash 6 18

Small- and Moderate-Size Farms

A partnership agreement called Research of Labor Issues and Development of Labor Cooperatives 

as Operational Risk Management Tools for Limited Resource and Small Family Farms in 

Mississippi and Florida was awarded in FY 2002 that specifically targets small- and moderate-size 

farms. This partnership is designed to establish two agricultural cooperatives to demonstrate to 

farmers how to utilize cooperatives as risk management tools.

Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR) Insurance Pilot Program Expansion - The AGR program was 

expanded to eight counties each in California and Pennsylvania for 2003 and succeeding insurance 

years. The AGR pilot program, which was significantly modified in 2001, will now be available in 

18 States and 230 counties. AGR protects the revenue derived from the sale of various agricultural 

commodities under one policy, and includes crops for which a Federal crop insurance program is not 

available. AGR coverage is calculated by multiplying the approved adjusted gross revenue by the 

coverage level and then multiplying the lost revenue by the payment rate selected by the producer.

The coverage level determines when indemnity payments begin. The payment rate determines how 

much the producer will be paid for each dollar lost under the coverage level. AGR participation in 

crop year 2002 included 752 policies earning premium in 14 States.
4

AGR-Lite - The Board approved AGR-Lite on October 22, 2002. AGR-Lite is an insurance plan 

that allows producers to insure a portion of the revenue they make from crops; animals such as 

chickens, dairy cows, hogs, and sheep; and animal products such as eggs, milk, meat, and wool. 

Under this plan, producers can also cover revenue generated from specialty crops.

Section 508(h) Products

An innovative risk management product for specialty crop producers, small- and moderate-size 

farms, and underserved areas submitted to and approved by the FCIC Board under the provisions of 

section 508(h) is described below. These products are often referred to as "508(h) products" due to 

their enabling legislation reference.

The AGR-Lite pilot was developed by the State Department of Agriculture for the Commonwealth 

of Pennsylvania. The pilot program was initially available in all counties in Pennsylvania except 

Philadelphia County. On August 1, 2003, the FCIC Board expanded the availability of AGR-Lite to 

include most agricultural counties in Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, New York, West 

Virginia, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont for crops grown 

in 2004.

Under this plan, the revenue from all commodities, including byproducts such as milk, can be 

protected with one insurance policy. Eligible producers can purchase coverage levels of 65-, 75-, or 

80-percent of their 5-year revenue history, or current year's expected farm income, whichever is 

lower. Total coverage for each policy (liability) is limited to $250,000. Coverage for AGR and 

AGR-lite are calculated the same way, by multiplying the approved adjusted gross revenue by the 

coverage level, and then multiplying the lost revenue by the payment rate selected by the producer. 

The coverage level determines when indemnity payments begin. The payment rate determines how 

much the producer will be paid for each dollar lost under the coverage level.

Pilot Program Development, 1995-2003

Appendix table 2 shows the development and expansion of new pilot risk management programs by 

FCIC or the RMA and their public and private sector partners for the 1995-2003 crop years. As 

indicated in the table, this listing does not include products submitted and approved under the 

provisions of section 508(h) of the Act. New program development was encouraged under the 

provisions of the Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act 

of 1994. Appendix table 2 shows increasing numbers of new programs being developed and 

expanded for specialty crops during the 1995-2003 crop years. A number of factors contributed to 

the significant progress during this period; however, two major factors were (1) the agency's 

increased emphasis on new program research and development, and (2) lessons learned and 

refinement in the research and development process, including leveraging the resources of RMA field 

offices and the private sector through their participation and leadership on new program 

development teams.

As indicated in the introduction of appendix table 2, pilot programs are limited in scope and used to 

test new risk management products before they become permanent programs through the regulatory
5

process. As a general rule, expansion of a pilot program during the pilot period is considered only if 

such expansion will provide different program experience (such as different crop types or practices) 

than may be gained from the original pilot program. After sufficient testing of the pilot program, 

including any modifications made as a result of the test, successful pilot programs may be approved 

by the FCIC Board and converted to permanent program status. At that time, the scope of the 

program may be expanded to additional States and counties, insurance types, crop varieties, or the 

like.

When the program is converted to permanent program status through the regulatory process, 

producers in areas for which actuarial documents are not available may apply for insurance coverage 

through a written agreement. This opportunity to insure through a written agreement in counties 

that are not designated for insurance is not an available alternative for pilot programs because the 

pilot programs are new and limited in scope. The number of years required for a program to 

graduate from pilot to permanent status varies, depending upon a number of factors. Some of the 

major factors are: producer participation levels, actuarial soundness of the program, FCIC's overall 

experience with the insurance plan or model utilized, credibility of the experience database, 

modifications required and tested during the pilot period, and competing priorities for limited human 

and financial resources in the agency.

Appendix tables 3-8 show the crops insured under 1998-2003 crop insurance programs, with 

specialty crops in bold. These tables show products developed by RMA-led teams as well as those 

submitted to RMA and approved under section 508(h) of the Act.

Appendix table 9 shows the active pilot risk management programs in effect for the 2003 crop year. 

Specialty crops are shown in bold along with the year they were introduced. The pilot period is 

normally 4 years, with the fifth year being an evaluation year for the crop. The evaluation is to 

determine whether the crop should be continued as a pilot, modified, terminated, or converted to a 

permanent program.

FY 2001 Research, Development, and Evaluation Projects

Project name/Contractor/Status:

• Biomass Feasibility Study (National Crop Insurance Service) - The purpose of this project, 

awarded to National Crop Insurance Services on September 16, 2002, is to conduct a 

feasibility study of the potential to develop risk management programs for the producers of 

biomass. If this project is feasible, it is designed to increase producer participation by 

developing an alternative innovative risk management program for existing crops. Potatoes 

are included in this feasibility study. Work is continuing on this project.

• Changes to the Pilot Fresh Market Snap Bean Crop Insurance Program (internal) - The 

purpose of this project was to obtain input from fresh market snap bean producers and 

producer groups in the pilot program States to address issues and concerns raised by growers 

about how the program operates. Changes implemented for the 2002 crop yearinclude:

o Adding stage guarantee language for loss adjustment consistent with other Dollar 

Plans of insurance. The stage guarantee compensates the producer for crop losses 

based on the crop’s stage of development as determined by the number of days after
6

planting;

o Adding new requirements to insurable acreage. The new requirements allow the 

insured the option to replant the damaged acreage and collect a replanting payment, 

or not to replant and receive an indemnity based on the stage of growth the plant 

attained at the time of damage;

o Removing the spring planting period for Florida and modifying language to 

accommodate planting period differences among Florida, North Carolina, and 

Virginia;

o Adding replanting payment provisions to allow for replanting payments in accordance 

with section 13 of the Common Crop Insurance Policy Basic Provisions;and

o Modifying the minimum value option provisions to allow for modifications to the 

minimum values in the Special Provisions of Insurance documents.

The Miami-Dade County program in Florida makes up approximately 87 percent of acreage 

in the pilot program. Policies sold increased by approximately 20 percent each year from 

2000 through 2002. Net acreage insured increased approximately 64 percent for the 2002 

crop year.

• Cut Flower Research Report (National Crop Insurance Services) - The purpose of this 

project was to research the best techniques for insuring cut flowers and cut cultivated floral 

greens. The final research report for this project was accepted September 10, 2002. RMA 

decided not to proceed with the development of a cut flowers and cut foliage crop insurance 

program because of insufficient actuarial data and a lack of interest by the cut flower and cut 

foliage growers.

• Direct Marketing of Perishable Crops (TKC Communications, Inc.) - The purpose of this 

project is to conduct a feasibility study and identify the risks faced by producers of crops 

marketed directly to consumers and to assess the potential economic impact of providing a 

new crop insurance policy for direct market producers. An FY 2002 GovWorks contract 

was awarded. Most directly marketed crops are specialty crops. Completion of this project 

is scheduled for August 2004.

• Dry Bean Appraisals - Beans per Plant by Variety (Watts and Associates) - The purpose of 

this project is to study possibilities for improving dry bean appraisals for use in the crop 

insurance program. A contract was awarded through GovWorks in October 2002. Work is 

continuing on this project.

• Expanding Crop Insurance Coverage to Include Federal Agency Actions (ERS) - The 

purpose of this project is to study the feasibility of expanding eligibility for crop insurance 

under the Act and noninsured crop assistance under the Federal Agriculture Improvement 

and Reform (FAIR) Act to agricultural producers experiencing disaster conditions caused 

primarily by Federal agency action restricting access to irrigation water, including any lack of 

access to an adequate supply of water caused by failure by the Secretary of the Interior to 

fulfill a contract in accordance with the Central Valley Project Improvement Act. RMA 

entered into an agreement with ERS on August 14, 2002, to conduct this study. Phase I of 

the study was completed in May 2003. This project has three phases and is scheduled for
7

completion in September 2005.

• Fresh Vegetables - Research Report (AgriLogic, Inc.) - The purpose of this project was to 

perform research and develop a risk management strategy to provide coverage for asparagus, 

broccoli, carrots, cauliflower, celery, garlic, globe artichoke, head lettuce, leaf lettuce, 

romaine lettuce, and spinach. During the course of the research project, the contractor 

determined that any subsequent development project should be expanded beyond fresh 

vegetables to include processed vegetables. The research report is completed and RMA is 

proceeding with a vegetable program development project, awarded September 30, 2003, for 

the following vegetables: asparagus, broccoli, celery, head lettuce, leaf lettuce, romaine 

lettuce, and spinach. Carrots, garlic, and globe artichokes are not included in the 

development project because the producers were not interested in a crop insurance program.

• Feasibility of Revenue Coverage Plans That Maximize Producer Revenue - ResearchReport 

(Watts and Associates) - The purpose of this project was to investigate opportunities for new 

and improved revenue coverage plans. A contract was awarded in FY 2003 to proceed with 

the development of new revenue plans of insurance for the following specialty crops: apples, 

avocados, dry beans, dry peas, maple syrup, oranges, and grapefruits.

• Hawaii Tropical Fruits and Trees - Research Report (AgriLogic, Inc.) - The purpose of this 

project was to conduct research and identify a risk management strategy for the following 

crops: bananas, coffee, guavas, papaya, pineapples, mango, lychee, rambutan, and atemoya 

(moya). The feasibility study was completed and a program development contract was 

awarded on September 26, 2002. The program development project is limited to yield, 

future crop value, and tree rehabilitation and replacement coverage for coffee, banana, and 

papaya; and tree rehabilitation and replacement coverage for specialty trees (guava, mango, 

lychee, rambutan, and atemoya). The project is scheduled for completion in 2004.

• Hawaii Tropical Fruits and Trees Pilot Program Development (AgriLogic, Inc.) - This 

project follows research conducted as a result of a project awarded during FY 2001. The 

project was awarded to AgriLogic in September 2002. The program development project is 

limited to yield, future crop value, and tree rehabilitation and replacement coverage for 

coffee, banana, and papaya; and tree rehabilitation and replacement coverage for specialty 

trees (guava, mango, lychee, rambutan, and atemoya). Completion of this project is 

scheduled for the second quarter of FY 2004.

• Lawn Seed Pilot Program Feasibility Study (Promar International) - The purpose of this 

project is to conduct research and provide RMA a report on the feasibility of a pilot program 

to provide lawn seed producers a risk management tool to address their needs. A contract 

was awarded through GovWorks for FY 2002. Work is continuing on this project and is 

scheduled for completion by June 2004.

• Multiple Year Coverage - Research Report (Watts and Associates) - The purpose of this 

project was to determine if a multi-year policy would reduce fraud, waste, and abuse of crop 

insurance in certain geographic areas. The project promotes the purpose of section 522(c)(7) 

of the Act requiring the FCIC to contract with a qualified person to determinewhether
8

offering policies that provide coverage for multiple years would reduce fraud, waste, and 

abuse by participants in the Federal crop insurance program. The feasibility study is 

completed. The development project will be referred to as Preferred Producer Discount Pilot 

Risk Management Program and will include the specialty crop sweetpotatoes.

• Nursery Program Plant List Research, Updating, and Revisions (DataScape, LLC) - The 

purpose of these projects was to update and expand the nursery eligible plant list for the 

2003 crop year, to review and revise winter storage requirements as needed, to address other 

nursery issues, and to update and enhance the nursery program software operating system. 

This project added new plants to the insurance plant list and also revised the hardiness zones 

to meet the needs of the growers of nursery crops. RMA updated the nursery program 

beginning with the 2003 crop year, including updating the software from a 16-bit to a 32-bit 

application to improve efficiency.

• Nursery Program Plant List Research, Updating, and Revisions (DataScape, LLC) - The 

purpose of these projects is to update and expand the nursery eligible plant list for the 2004 

crop year, to review and revise winter storage requirements as needed, and to address other 

nursery issues. The contractor is currently entering plant and wholesale price data into the 

Eligible Plant List database. This project assists specialty crop producers by updating and 

adding new plants to the insurance plant list, and also revising the hardiness zones to meet 

the needs of nursery growers.

• Perennial Pathogen Research Report (AgriLogic, Inc.) - The purpose of this project was to 

research the potential to develop a risk management strategy for tree, vine, and bush crop 

growers that are subject to perennial crop pathogens. The research for this project is 

completed and RMA is using the information developed under this task order to identify a 

risk management strategy for covering disease.

• Quarantine Research and Program Design Report (AgriLogic, Inc.) - The purpose of this 

project was to research the potential to develop a risk management tool for producers of 

crops subject to quarantine regulations. Any quarantine risk management program will 

address underserved specialty crops that are neither currently insurable under the Federal 

crop insurance program nor generally insurable in the private sector, and will expand 

coverage for some crops, including specialty crops, currently insured but unprotected from 

quarantine risk. AgriLogic presented their findings and recommendations to senior RMA 

Research and Development staff in Kansas City on August 8, 2002. A contract was awarded 

on September 29, 2003, for the development of a quarantine risk management program. The 

specialty crop citrus and avocado will be covered as well as specialty crops in 10 counties in 

California.

• Research and Development of a Cost of Production (COP) Insurance Program for 

Soybeans, Corn, Cotton, Wheat, Rice, Almonds, Peaches, Cranberries, Apricots, Nectarines, 

Onions, and Sugarcane (AgriLogic, Inc.) - The purpose of this project is to research and 

deliver components of cost-of-production based revenue insurance programs for the 12 

specified crops in select areas. On October 22, 2002, the FCIC Board tabled a docket that 

would have authorized implementation of a Cotton Cost of Production (COP) Pilot Crop-
9

Revenue plan of insurance pending resolution of issues raised by expert reviewers, RMA, 

Office of the General Counsel, and the FCIC Board. At the May 7, 2003, FCIC Board 

meeting, RMA updated the Board on the status of COP. The Board was informed that the 

contractor was making changes to address the concerns of the expert reviewers, RMA, and 

the Board. The revised COP Board Package was presented at the July 1, 2003, FCIC Board 

teleconference. The Board approved the request to forward the package on to the expert 

reviewers for a second evaluation.

Based on these reviews, the FCIC Board of Directors voted to disapprove the COP product 

on October 9, 2003, because it was “unable to make a determination that the policy and 

associated materials, as submitted, complies with all applicable provisions of the Federal 

Crop Insurance Act...” The Board continues to search diligently for innovative risk 

protection products that meet the needs of farmers and ranchers that are actuarially 

appropriate and promote program integrity.

• Risk Management Stabilization Accounts - Feasibility Study (ERS) - The purpose of this 

project is to conduct research and provide RMA a research report on the feasibility of a 

program to provide producers risk management stabilization accounts to enable them to 

manage or mitigate production or income losses, with priority consideration for producers 

growing agricultural commodities for which no Federal crop insurance program is available. 

This project was awarded to ERS late in FY 2002. ERS representatives met with RMA 

representatives on September 20, 2002, to discuss issues and approaches for this research. 

Work is continuing on this project and is scheduled for completion in September 2004.

• Tree, Vine, and Bush Replacement Program Feasibility Study (AgriLogic, Inc.) - The 

purpose of this project is to conduct research and provide RMA a research report on the 

potential research and development of a tree, vine, and bush replacement program as an 

option for growers of grapes, citrus, tree fruit, nut, kiwi, blueberries, and other high-value 

permanent crops. This task order was awarded to AgriLogic on September 26, 2002, with a 

scheduled completion date of February 2004.

Pilot Crop Insurance Program Evaluations

The purpose of the following projects is to conduct evaluations on pilot crop insurance 

programs. RMA will then use this information and the recommendations to determine whether 

to modify the programs, convert the programs to permanent program status, or take other 

appropriate actions based on the results of each evaluation and subsequent report. If the 

program is converted from pilot program to permanent status, the scope of the program may be 

expanded to additional States and counties, insurance types, and crop varieties. These projects 

address the objective in ARPA of increasing participation for underserved commodities by 

expanding the scope of the program where no program currently exists.

Project name/Contractor/Status:
10

• Cherry Evaluation - A contract was awarded to AgriLogic, Inc., in March 2003.

• Florida Fruit Tree (and Avocado/Mango Tree) Pilot Research and Modifications - This task 

order was awarded to AgriLogic in September 2002. Work is continuing on this evaluation 

and is scheduled for completion in June 2004.

• Pecans (Evaluation report from previous year's evaluation) - This internal evaluation is 

complete. On September 19, 2002, the FCIC Board approved expansion into 79 additional 

counties in Georgia for the 2003 crop year and conversion of the pilot program to permanent 

status as soon as the regulatory process to covert the pilot program is complete.

• Squash and Pumpkin Evaluation - A contract was awarded to Agrilogic, Inc., inMarch 

2003.

• Sweetpotato (evaluation report from previous year's evaluation) - A contract was awarded 

to Watts and Associates in March 2003.

• Wild Rice Evaluation - A contract was awarded to Watts and Associates in March 2003.

Projects awarded through other vehicles - Following is a listing and status of research and 

development projects for specialty crops funded since FY 2001 awarded through contract or 

partnership vehicles other than the Base R&D Contract Pool.

Project name/Contractor/Status:

• Assess the Demand for Specific Weather Peril Insurance (University of Georgia) - The 

purpose of this project is to research the feasibility of developing a general class of insurance 

products to protect against specific weather risks such as high or low precipitation or 

temperature. If feasible, developing this type of program would provide protection for all 

crops, including specialty crops. Work is continuing on this project.

• Avocado Pilot Rating Evaluation and Analysis (GovWorks/Signal) - The purpose of this 

project is to evaluate a pilot crop insurance program as required under section 523(a)(5)(A) 

and (B) of the Act as amended by ARPA. The evaluation process is one of the key steps in 

the research and development process for a specialty crop pilot program. RMA will then 

determine disposition of the pilot program for the future.

• California Crop Insurance Utilization (University of California) - The purpose of this 

project is to identify the potential market for specialty crop insurance and provide the data to 

evaluate options for new or modified insurance programs to meet the needs of specialty crop 

producers. Through this partnership with researchers at the University of California, Davis, 

specialty crop producers were contacted to determine how crop insurance programs could be 

designed to better meet their needs. The results of the survey are being analyzed and a final 

presentation to RMA is expected in FY 2004.
11

• Florida Specialty Crops Survey (University of Florida) - The purpose of this project is to 

identify the potential market for specialty crop insurance and provide the data to evaluate 

options for new or modified insurance programs to meet the needs of specialty crop 

producers. Through this partnership with researchers at the University of Florida, specialty 

crop producers were contacted to determine how crop insurance programs could be designed 

to better meet their needs. The results of the survey are being analyzed and a final 

presentation to RMA is expected in FY 2004.

• Forecasting the Occurrence of Potato Late Blight (University of Idaho) - The purpose of 

this project is to develop a Potato Late Blight forecasting model for potatoes. Weather 

stations were calibrated in March and April 2002, and deployed in nine commercial potato 

fields and one research plot location. Research plots were established at Bonners Ferry and 

Aberdeen, ID, and researchers are in the process of creating the predictive model, performing 

fungicide tests, and scouting fields.

• Investigation of Producers' Management of Storage Problems for Onions (University of 

Idaho) - The purpose of this project is to research how producers can minimize losses to 

stored onions. Work is continuing on this project and is scheduled for completion in May 

2005.

• New York Specialty Crops Survey (Cornell University) - The purpose of this project is to 

identify the potential market for specialty crop insurance and provide the data necessary to 

evaluate options for new or modified insurance programs to meet the needs of specialty crop 

producers. Through this partnership with researchers at Cornell University, specialty crop 

producers were contacted to determine how crop insurance programs could be designed to 

better meet their needs. The results of the survey are being analyzed and a final presentation 

to RMA is expected in FY 2004.

• Organics Study (USDA, ERS) - The purpose of this project is to study and provide 

recommendations on yields, risks, and related issues regarding crops grown for organic crops 

including specialty crops, dry beans, dry peas, lettuce, tomatoes, apples, grapes, and citrus. 

Work continues on this project.

• Pecan Pilot Evaluation Feedback and Issues Report (GovWorks/Signal/North Carolina 

A&T) - The purpose of this project was to evaluate the pecan pilot crop insurance program, 

as required under section 523(a)(5)(A) and (B) of the Act, as amended by ARPA. The 

evaluation process is one of the key steps in the research and development process. Both the 

project and the final evaluation of this pilot program are complete. On September 19, 2002, 

the FCIC Board approved expansion into 79 additional counties in Georgia for the 2003 crop 

year and conversion of the pilot program to permanent status as soon as the regulatory 

process to convert the pilot program is complete.

• Pennsylvania Specialty Crops Survey (Penn State University) - The purpose of this project is 

to identify the potential market for specialty crop insurance and provide the data necessary to 

evaluate options for new or modified insurance programs to meet the needs of specialty crop
12

producers. Through this partnership with researchers at Penn State University, specialty 

crop producers were contacted to determine how crop insurance programs could be designed 

to better meet their needs. The results of the survey are being analyzed and a final 

presentation to RMA is expected in FY 2004.

• Product Portfolio Study - In their September 19, 2002 meeting, the FCIC Board authorized 

the FCIC Manager to take such action as necessary to enter into and execute contracts with 

certain expert reviewers to review FCIC’s product portfolio. The objective of this review is 

to assist RMA and the FCIC Board in the design and implementation of a comprehensive 

review of the existing and anticipated FCIC product portfolio to help the Board ensure that:

o Producers' needs are being adequately and appropriately addressed;

o FCIC and insurance company involvement in the assumption of risks for such 

products meets overall program objectives, guidelines, and legal requirements; and

o The pattern and pace of future product development is managed in a strategic 

framework that reflects public policy priorities expressed by Congress and the 

Secretary of Agriculture, producer needs, and agency and delivery system resource 

constraints.

The expert reviewers completed the study on May 31, 2003, and the results of that study are 

currently being examined and reviewed by the Board and RMA.

• Production Input Expenditures Study for Existing RMA Policies (University of California) -

The purpose of this project is to develop a methodology for determining and updating 

production input expenditure data for certain crops, particularly specialty crops, to facilitate 

the research and development of new and modified risk management products for producers, 

and to update crop budget information for current Dollar Plan specialty crops. This 

information will help the specialty crop producers developing new risk management 

programs for insurance and by providing updated data on which indemnities are calculated. 

The study was scheduled for completion in August 2003 and is currently being evaluated.

• Sweetpotato Pilot Evaluation Feedback and Issues Report (GovWorks/North Carolina 

A&T) - The purpose of this project is to evaluate a pilot crop insurance program as required 

under section 523(a)(5)(A) and (B) of the Act as amended by ARPA. The evaluation 

process is one of the key steps in the research and development process. The project was 

scheduled for completion by the end of 2003 and is currently beingevaluated.

FY 2002 Requests for Applications (RFA) Projects

Project name/Contractor/Description:

• Organic Comparative Analysis Tool (OCAT) (Georgia Organics, Inc.) - Compare and 

contrast direct marketing strategies for organic producers and develop a tool that can be used 

to select the best strategy in production areas to reduce income variation.
13

• Reduce Exposure to Drought Risk in Potato Production Systems (University of Idaho) -

Develop a web-based software tool that can be used by potato growers, water managers,and 

risk management personnel to reduce exposure to drought risk in potato croppingsystems.

• Risk Reduction for Specialty Crops in the Southeastern U.S. (University of Florida) –

Develop decision aids and tools to assess climate-related economic risks in peanut and 

tomato production systems, and reduce fertilizer use and environmental exposure in potato crops.

• Risk Management for Fruit Crops Through Prediction of Frost Conditions (University of 

Georgia Research Foundation, Inc.) - Develop a risk management system based on an 

Artificial Neural Network designed to utilize short-term weather data to predict frost and 

reduce risk for horticultural crop producers, especially fruit crops, in the Southeastern United 

States.

New Pilot Programs Beginning the 2002 Crop Year

Beginning with the 2002 crop year, RMA implemented a Pilot Raspberry/Blackberry Crop Insurance 

program and a Pilot Forage Seed (Alfalfa) Crop Insurance program. The following program 

participation information was taken from RMA's weekly Summary of Business report as of 

September 30, 2002. Current information on the participation by producers in these and other 

programs can be obtained from the RMA website under Participation Data.

The Pilot Raspberry/Blackberry Crop Insurance program was initiated in the following seven 

counties in California, Oregon, and Washington:

C California - Monterey and Santa Cruz Counties;

C Oregon - Clackamas, Marion, and Multnomah Counties;

C Washington - Clark and Cowlitz Counties.

Pilot Raspberry/Blackberry Crop Insurance program participation (2002 crop year):

Policies Units Net

Policies Earning Earning Acres Loss

Sold Premium Premium Insured Liability Premium Ratio

27 25 27 1,710 $1,094,225 $75,940 0.00

The Pilot Forage Seed (Alfalfa) Crop Insurance program was initiated in the following 10 counties in 

California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming:

C California - Kings County;

C Idaho - Owyhee County;

C Montana - Big Horn County;

C Nevada - Humboldt and Pershing Counties;

C Oregon - Malheur County;

C Washington - Grant and Walla Walla Counties;

C Wyoming - Big Horn and Park Counties.
14

Pilot Forage Seed (Alfalfa) Crop Insurance program participation (2002 crop year):

Policies

Policies

Earning

Units

Earning

Net

Acres Loss

Sold Premium Premium Insured Liability Premium Ratio

106 62 172 10,394 $5,174,196 $385,589 0.00

Pilot Program Conversions and Expansions for the 2003 and 2004 CropYears

Conversion and Expansion of the Pilot Millet Crop Insurance Program - The final rule was published 

in 7 CFR part 457, on January 23, 2002. Beginning with the 2003 crop year, the Pilot Millet Crop 

Insurance Program is being converted to permanent program status and expanded from 5 counties to 

55 counties in Colorado, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.

The five original counties for the pilot program were Logan County, Colorado; Cheyenne and Deuel 

Counties, Nebraska; Dickey County, North Dakota; and Bennett County, South Dakota.

The 50 expansion counties for millet are:

Colorado: Adams, Arapahoe, Cheyenne, Denver, Elbert, Kiowa, Kit Carson, Lincoln, Morgan, 

Phillips, Sedgwick, Washington, Weld, and Yuma Counties;

Nebraska: Banner, Box Butte, Chase, Dawes, Garden, Keith, Kimball, Morrill, Perkins, Scotts 

Bluff, and Sheridan Counties;

North Dakota: Sargent County; and

South Dakota: Beadle, Corson, Day, Dewey, Faulk, Gregory, Haakon, Hand, Hughes, Hyde, 

Jackson, Jones, Lyman, Meade, Mellette, Pennington, Perkins, Shannon, Spink, Stanley, Sully, 

Todd, Tripp, and Ziebach Counties.

With conversion of the pilot program to permanent program status, producers in the above 55 

counties will be able to insure their millet crop under the Millet Crop Insurance program through the 

actuarial documents being made available for their county, provided the producers meet the policy 

eligibility requirements. Producers in counties other than the 55 insurable counties may be able to 

insure their crop through a written agreement as a result of the permanent program status, provided 

the policy eligibility requirements are met.

Continuation and Conversion of the Pilot Blueberry Crop Insurance Program - On February 7, 2002, 

the FCIC Board voted to continue the Pilot Blueberry Crop Insurance program through the 2003 

crop year and to convert the program to permanent status beginning with the 2004 crop year. When 

the pilot program is converted to permanent status, producers in counties without a program in place 

may able to insure their crop through a written agreement, provided the policy eligibility 

requirements are met.
15

Expansion and Conversion of the Pecan Revenue Pilot Program - A Pecan Revenue Pilot program 

has been available in Dougherty, Lee, and Mitchell counties, in Georgia since 1998, with 102 policies 

in force and over $7.9 million in liability in 2001. The program was evaluated during FY 2001 and 

2002. On September 19, 2002, RMA provided a copy of the pilot program evaluation to the FCIC 

Board at their meeting in Kansas City, MO. The FCIC Board approved conversion of the pilot 

program to permanent status for the 2004 crop year in that meeting. Based on that decision, the 

FCIC Board then approved expansion of the pilot program into 79 additional counties in Georgia for 

the 2003 crop year. When the pilot program is converted to permanent status, producers in counties 

without a program in place may be able to insure their crop through a written agreement, provided 

the policy eligibility requirements are met.

The expansion counties for pecans in Georgia are Appling, Atkinson, Bacon, Baker, Baldwin, Ben 

Hill, Berrien, Bibb, Bleckley, Brantly, Brooks, Bulloch, Burke, Calhoun, Camden, Candler, Clinch, 

Coffee, Colquitt, Cook, Crawford, Crisp, Decatur, Dodge, Dooly, Early, Emanuel, Evans, Grady, 

Hancock, Houston, Irwin, Jasper, Jeff Davis, Jefferson, Jenkins, Johnson, Lamar, Lanier, Laurens, 

Lowndes, McDuffie, Macon, Marion, Meriwether, Miller, Montgomery, Peach, Pierce, Pike, 

Pulaski, Putnam, Randolph, Richmond, Schley, Screven, Seminole, Spalding, Stewart, Sumter, 

Talbot, Tattnall, Taylor, Telfair, Terrell, Thomas, Tift, Toombs, Truetlen, Turner, Twiggs, Upson, 

Ware, Washington, Wayne, Webster, Wheeler, Wilcox, and Worth counties.

Future Risk Management Program Development Plans

FY 2003 - Feasibility projects expected to initiate include: Christmas trees, melons, small-value 

crops, crop storage options, vegetable, and flower seed. Development projects expected to initiate 

include expansion of the nursery-eligible plan list for the 2005 crop year, perennial pathogen 

destruction, quarantine crop insurance, and vegetables. The following pilot programs scheduled for 

evaluations include avocado revenue, cabbage, mint, onion pilot stage removal option, processing 

chili peppers, processing cucumbers, and strawberries.

Feasibility Studies for FY 2004

• Bulbs, Corms, Tubers and Rhizomes

• Cost of Production for Additional Crops

• Fresh Cucumbers

• Green House Vegetables

• Hazelnuts

• Herbs

• Olives

• Radishes

Program Development Projects for FY 2004

• Acts of Terrorism

• Crop Storage Options

• Direct Marketing of Perishable Agricultural Commodities

• Expanding Crop Insurance to Include Federal Agency Actions
16

• Lawn Seed

• Organics

• Tree, Vine and Bush Replacement Program

• Triticale

Pilot Program Evaluations for FY 2004

• Adjusted Gross Revenue

• Apple Quality Option

• Citrus Dollar (Navel Oranges)

• Fresh Market Beans

Feasibility Studies Tentatively Scheduled for FY 2005

• Brussels Sprouts

• Eggplant

• Pod Peas

Measuring Progress

Various methods may be selected to measure the progress in the research and development of 

innovative risk management products for specialty crops. For this report, the following indicators 

are used:

Number of Insured Crops or Agricultural Commodities (referred to as crops in this section) -

Crops can be counted in a number of ways. For this report, the listings in appendices 3-8 include crop 

counts on the last line of each page. Each listed crop has been counted as one crop, except that citrus 

and stonefruit counts were determined by counting the bulleted types of citrus and stonefruit; for 

example, citrus represents eight crops and stonefruit represents three crops.

During 1998-2003, the number of specialty crops insured increased from 48 to 62 (a 29-percent 

increase, or about 6 percent per year). During 1998-2003, the number of total crops insured increased 

from 70 to 88 (a 26-percent increase, or about 5 percent per year).

Number of Crop-Plan Combinations Insured - Crop-plan combinations counts are listed on the last 

line of each page in appendix tables 3-8. Each listed crop has been counted as one crop-plan 

combination, except crops having multiple insurance plans; for example, corn has five different 

insurance plans and is counted as five crop-plan combinations.

During 1998-2003, the number of specialty crop-plan combinations insured increased from 48 to 63 

(a 31-percent increase, or about 6 percent per year). During 1998-2003, the number of total cropplan combinations insured increased from 90 to 114 (a 27-percent increase, or about 5 percent per 

year).

Non-Insurance Risk Management Tools - Non-insurance risk management tools represent a small
17

but increasingly significant portion of the risk management portfolio available through FCIC. As 

indicated in this report, a number of other non-insurance risk management tools are under research 

and development by RMA. Examples of such tools or products are listed below and described 

elsewhere in this report.

o Investigation of Producers' Management of Storage Problems for Onions

o Forecasting the Occurrence of Potato Late Blight

o Organics Study

o Risk Management for Fruit Crops Through Prediction of Frost Conditions in Georgia

o Reducing Exposure to Drought Risk in Potato Production Systems

o Research of Labor Issues and Development of Labor Cooperatives as Operational 

Risk Management Tools for Limited Resource and Small Family Farms in Mississippi 

and Florida

o Risk Reduction for Specialty Crops in the Southeastern United States

o An Organic Comparative Analysis Tool (OCAT) for Direct Marketing Strategies of 

Organic Commodities

o Risk Management Stabilization Accounts

o Bioterrorism Research and Interim Solutions

In addition to the above projects, a large number of risk management education and community 

outreach programs reported elsewhere in this report provide producers with information and 

education on risk management issues and topics to help them better manage their risks. These 

products and programs represent a significant change in the transition of FCIC's and RMA's product 

portfolio to include much more than crop insurance, and validate that new and innovative 

approaches are not only being considered but implemented to enable America's agricultural 

producers to manage their risks. More than at any time in its history, RMA is emphasizing the 

research and development of market-based products to meet producers' diverse risk management 

needs.

Innovative Enhancements to Existing Crop Insurance Programs - At the same time the agency is 

developing new and innovative risk management solutions for producers, RMA is also strengthening 

and diversifying its existing crop insurance programs to stay current with the ever-changing 

agriculture industry. Examples include the introduction of new programs for existing products as 

indicated below:

o Apple Pilot Quality Option (2001)

o Coverage Enhancement Option (2000)

o Onion Pilot Stage Removal Option (2000)

Number of Pilot Programs Being Tested - As shown in appendix table 9, FCIC tested 30 pilot 

programs for the 2003 crop year. This has grown from two pilot programs on blueberries and 

canola/rapeseed for the 1995 crop year, and some pilot programs have been converted to permanent 

programs in the intervening years. Appendix table 2 provides a historical review of this progress 

during 1995-2003.
18

FCIC PROGRESS IN INCREASING THE USE OF RISK MANAGEMENT 

PRODUCTS OFFERED THROUGH THE CORPORATION

Background

A number of initiatives are undertaken each year by RMA and its public and private sector partners 

to increase the use of risk management products offered through the Corporation. Two major 

specific initiatives are discussed: risk management education (RME) and public awareness

These initiatives have a significant impact on the use of risk management products, whether they are 

new and innovative or have been available to producers for some time. There is no guarantee that 

producers will purchase crop insurance or participate in other risk management products offered 

through FCIC, and producers sometimes choose other means to manage their risks. These initiatives 

are expected to increase the use of risk management products offered through FCIC by raising 

producers' awareness of those risk management opportunities and their associated benefits. In fact, 

these initiatives raise producers' awareness of risk management opportunities and benefits beyond 

those offered through FCIC.

Risk Management Education (RME)

FY 2001 RME Activities - RMA established a number of RME programs for specialty crop 

producers during FY 2001 through partnership agreements with State departments of agriculture, 

universities, and grower organizations.

Examples include a partnership agreement with the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer 

Services that resulted in a curriculum “Risk Management Training and Information for Florida 

Specialty Crop Producers.” This multi-faceted program with a minimum of 15 initiatives was 

conducted with 5 major Florida agricultural groups as well as the University of Florida’s Department 

of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. More than 40 training/education/informational modules were 

implemented during October 2001 through August 2002. A partnership agreement with the Georgia 

Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association resulted in education and information sessions being 

delivered to specialty crop producers at the 2002 Fruit and Vegetable Winter Conference and the 

Southeastern Peach Convention held January 11-13, 2002, in Savannah, GA. The success of the 

conference was demonstrated by a larger number of concurrent educational sessions being offered by 

more subject matter experts to an increased number of specialty crop producers.

FY 2002 RME Projects - For FY 2002, RMA expanded its educational efforts directed to specialty 

crop producers. The agency announced the availability of funds for RME partnerships, with a 

priority for programs reaching producers of commodities not currently covered by crop insurance, 

specialty crops, and underserved commodities. In response to this announcement, RMA received 

101 applications requesting $5.6 million to help RMA deliver education to producers. An evaluation 

panel selected the 72 most meritorious proposals, and RMA used approximately $3.7 million to fund 

these projects. Many of the funded partnerships specifically target specialty crop producers during 

FY 2002. Some of the projects build on RME efforts for specialty crops from FY 2001. These 

projects are authorized by sections 522(d) and (e) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act. The FY 2002 

RME projects listed in this report in general include RME programs for small and limited-resource
19

farmers, livestock and specialty crop producers, underserved producers including minority operators, 

and other socially disadvantaged operators. Through these projects, RMA seeks to improve the 

financial health of small farms, increase specialty crop producers’ skill and knowledge of risk

management, and increase crop insurance participation for those specialty crop producers that could 

benefit. These producer education and information sessions and publications address a number of 

specific topics that are categorized under two general themes below.

C Availability and usage of risk management opportunities and tools:

o Aquaculture processing, direct sales, and marketing techniques

o Contract production

o Crop insurance and non-insured disaster assistance program (NAP)

o Crop production and harvest timing strategies to manage risk

o Enterprise budgets and market analysis usage to reduce risk through the production 

of alternative specialty crops

o Enterprise diversification

o Futures markets

o Information on specific risk management tools to best fit producers' needs, how the 

tools operate, and where to obtain them

o Localized risk management decision analysis using computers and other risk 

management decision-analysis tools

o Marketing specialty crop and aquaculture products to institutional buyers to mitigate 

risk

o Optimal crop-mix decisions

C General risk management education and information topics and issues:

o Agribusiness management

o Agronomic, economic, and regulatory information regarding canola and wild rice 

production practices

o Economic concepts (introductory training)

o Estate planning

o Farm enterprise evolution and individual expertise enhancement in a time of dynamic 

change in agriculture

o Farm food safety risks (understanding and managing those risks)

o Forestry issues

o Garden center management for nurserymen and growers

o Global risks

o Greenhouse tomato production, disease and pest control, economic risks, marketing 

risk, and environmental considerations

o Landscape design and management

o Marketing risk (general topics)

o National retail risks

o Nursery and landscape industry alternative production, marketing risk, financial risk, 

and health and safety risk

o Organic production transition through knowledge and exposure to agricultural
20

research and statistics

o Sunflower irrigation information and training

o Value-added, agriculture-related products

o Wholesale marketing risks

Detailed information on the 2002 RME partnership agreements can be obtained at 

http://www.rma.usda.gov/news/2002/11/agreements.html, including recipients, amounts, targeted 

audiences, and contact people.

In addition, RMA administered two other educational programs that benefited specialty crop 

producers during FY 2002. The first was authorized in ARPA as an amendment to section 524(a)(2) 

of the Act. This program establishes crop insurance education and information programs in States in 

which crop insurance participation has been historically low. Most of these 15 States have a 

relatively high percentage of specialty crop production. Currently, RMA is implementing this 

program by establishing partnerships with State departments of agriculture, universities, and

others in the underserved States.

Another RMA program to benefit specialty crop producers in the 15 underserved States is the 

Agricultural Management Assistance (AMA) program. RMA administers this program in 

collaboration with USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS). RMA’s contribution to AMA is through assistance to producers in the 

purchase of AGR insurance, a product particularly well suited for diversified specialty crop 

producers. It guarantees a revenue level for the whole farm, and rewards more diversified farmers 

with higher coverage levels and smaller insurance premiums.

The FCIC Board authorized expansion of the AGR program into eight counties each in California 

and Pennsylvania for the 2003 and subsequent crop years. California counties included in the 

expansion are Fresno, Kern, Riverside, San Diego, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Tulare, and 

Ventura. Pennsylvania counties included in the expansion are Crawford, Columbia, Erie, Fayette, 

Lancaster, Schuylkill, Westmoreland, and York. Introduced into 36 counties in 5 States in 1999, 

the program is now available in 230 counties in 18 States. (See the related information pertaining to 

the AGR-Lite program discussed in a separate section on 508(h) products in this report.)

Public Awareness

Internet Web Sites - RMA's public Internet home page is devoted to making it easier for producers 

and other customers to access crop insurance data and materials related to the agency’s work. As 

the web site is subject to change, web site location references below are likewise subject to change. 

A vast amount of information exists on RMA's web site, and interested parties are encouraged to 

explore and utilize the available information. Specialty crop producers may access information on 

crop policies, available pilot programs, and producer training sessions. Producers may also locate

crop insurance agents and use the Premium Calculation software. The following is a sample of the 

information provided via the web site at http://www.rma.usda.gov.

Actuarial Information
21

Agent Locator 

Events/Calendar 

Crop Policies 

Crop Weather 

Participation Data 

Pilot Programs

Feasibility Studies (Under Pilot Programs/Archives) 

Publications, including:

--FCIC Board Briefs and Manager’s reports

--Summary of Business Reports (Under Participation Data)

--County Crop Program Listings (Under Participation Data)

--Manager’s Bulletins

--Research and Development Bulletins

In some cases, the contractors and partners working on the specific program research, development, 

and evaluation projects maintain updated information on their projects through their web sites. As a 

general rule, the organization that was awarded the project is listed in this report.

Consultations with Producers and Producer Groups - To encourage wide participation and input 

from producers and other outside organizations, RMA seeks their input through consultation memos 

sent to major organizations and producers who may be impacted by the program under 

consideration. In addition, contractors and partners hold listening sessions with producers, producer 

groups, and insurance company representatives as a program is being studied, as recommendations 

are being developed, and again when alternatives are being considered. RMA’s Regional Offices 

also serve as a local contact point for such activities to ensure that local issues, concerns, and 

differences are considered. With the new emphasis on research and development of programs 

through contracts and partnerships, producers and producer groups are encouraged to participate in 

listening sessions and other forums that provide the opportunity to become involved in the process. 

In some cases, the contractors and partners working on the projects maintain updated information 

on their projects through their web sites.

In its rule-making process, RMA staff often contact grower groups when considering changes to 

programs. National, State, and regional grower groups, crop associations, and councils are 

contacted as program issues are raised and as programs are being researched, developed, or 

modified. These groups are very helpful in obtaining producer input from various areas of the 

country regarding crop program changes and relaying them to RMA for consideration. In the 

conversion of pilot programs to permanent program status, grower groups are included in the 

evaluation of the program. In addition, grower groups often serve as the catalyst for change by 

advising RMA at the local or national level of concerns with the programs that affect them.

RMA is also conducting four projects to identify the potential market for specialty crop insurance 

and to provide the data necessary to evaluate options for new or modified insurance programs to 

meet the needs of specialty crop producers. Through these partnerships with researchers at Cornell 

University, Penn State University, the University of California at Davis, and the University of 

Florida, specialty crops producers were contacted to determine how crop insurance programs could 

be designed to better meet their needs. The results of these contacts are expected soon.
22

RMA representatives routinely participate in meetings, field visits, training sessions, speaking 

engagements, and other activities with growers, grower association representatives, the insurance 

industry, Congressional representatives, and other public and private organizations to inform those 

individuals and organizations about the agency's new and specialty crops programs and to gather 

information on the needs and interests of specialty crop producers. Public awareness of agricultural 

risk management has also been increased significantly by the efforts of representatives of Congress, 

the crop insurance industry, contractors, and partnership entities conducting projects for RMA, other 

government agencies, academia, the media, and the agriculture industry in general.

Community Outreach

RMA is funding 46 outreach projects for FY 2002 totaling over $3 million in approximately 30 

States. Through these partnership projects, women, limited-resource, and other traditionally 

underserved agricultural producers will receive program technical assistance and training on the 

availability and use of risk management tools to improve their economic viability. Partners include 

1890, 1994, and 1862 land-grant universities; Hispanic-serving institutions (HSIs); and communitybased and other State organizations serving women, limited-resource, and other traditionally 

underserved farmers and ranchers.

Other Initiatives

Examples of other recent initiatives undertaken by RMA and other organizations to increase the use 

of risk management products by producers include:

C The RMA St. Paul, MN, regional office (RO) director attended the special session and spoke 

with State lawmakers on September 19, 2002, about State flood relief aid. State officials tied 

State aid for flood-damaged crops to crop insurance losses. The State will distribute $3 

million in crop loss aid only to those farmers who purchased crop insurance and can prove 

they had a crop insurance loss of 50 percent or greater. Officials estimate 750,000 acres,

which includes a small amount of acreage of canola, in 15 counties could qualify for $4.00 

per acre of State money.

C Organic Written Agreements. Since crop year 2001, insurance is offered through the use of 

written agreements to insure organic production. The numbers are up and liability has 

increased to approximately $7.4 million in 2002 from $1.3 million in 2001.

Measuring Progress

Various methods may be selected to measure the progress in increasing the use of risk management 

products offered to specialty crop producers through FCIC. This report uses the following 

indicators to measure this progress:

Number of Risk Management Products Offered through FCIC and Utilized by Producers - The 

following indicators that were reported earlier on the progress in the research and development of 

innovative risk management products are also indirect indicators for the increased use of risk 

management products offered through FCIC. RMA makes every effort to ensure that producers,
23

before proceeding with substantial research and development activities, will utilize the new products 

that are researched and developed. As new products are developed, increased utilization of risk 

management programs offered by the FCIC takes place. The progress details for each indicator can 

be found in the previous Measuring Progress section.

o Number of Insured Crops or Agricultural Commodities

o Number of Crop-Plan Combinations Insured

o Number of County Crop (Insurance) Programs in Place

o Non-Insurance Risk Management Tools

o Innovative Enhancements to Existing Crop Insurance Programs

o Number of Pilot Programs Being Tested

Insurance Liabilities in Underserved States (see appendix table 10 and appendix figs. 1-16) - All 

underserved States except Massachusetts increased in insurance liability (coverage) during 1998-

2002. Following are the liability increases (Massachusetts decrease) and percentage changes during 

those 4 years, as well as the simple average percent change per year for each underserved State:

o Connecticut - Liability increased from $44.49 million to $75.10 million 

This is a 69-percent increase during 1998-2002 (17 percent peryear)

o Delaware - Liability increased from $19.55 million to $35.29 million 

This is an 81-percent increase during 1998-2002 (20 percent per year)

o Maine - Liability increased from $36.04 million to $51.21 million 

This is a 42-percent increase during 1998-2002 (10 percent per year)

o Maryland - Liability increased from $65.30 million to $127.99 million 

This is a 96-percent increase during 1998-2002 (24 percent per year)

o Massachusetts - Liability decreased from $51.44 million to $42.75 million 

This is a 17-percent decrease during 1998-2002 (4 percent per year)

o Nevada - Liability increased from $1.57 million to $14.10 million

This is a 989-percent increase during 1998-2002 (247 percent per year)

o New Hampshire - Liability increased from $3.08 million to $8.99 million 

This is a 192-percent increase during 1998-2002 (48 percent peryear)

o New Jersey - Liability increased from $28.56 million to $66.12 million 

This is a 132-percent increase during 1998-2002 (33 percent per year)

o New York - Liability increased from $82.68 million to $180.96 million 

This is a 119-percent increase during 1998-2002 (30 percent per year)

o Pennsylvania - Liability increased from $79.44 million to $222.22 million 

This is a 180-percent increase during 1998-2002 (45 percent peryear)

o Rhode Island - Liability increased from $.89 million to $1.67 million 

This is an 88-percent increase during 1998-2002 (22 percent per year)

o Utah - Liability increased from $4.89 million to $8.06million

This is a 65-percent increase during 1998-2002 (16 percent per year)

o Vermont - Liability increased from $4.79 million to $10.68 million 

This is a 123-percent increase during 1998-2002 (31 percent per year)

o West Virginia - Liability increased from $8.78 million to $12.70 million 

This is a 45-percent increase during 1998-2002 (11 percent peryear)

o Wyoming - Liability increased from $45.39 million to $51.22 million
24

This is a 13-percent increase during 1998-2002 (3 percent per year)

o All 15 underserved States - Liability increased from $477 million to $909 million 

This is a 91-percent increase during 1998-2002 (23 percent per year)

The decrease in liabilities in Massachusetts is almost entirely due to economic problems faced by the 

cranberry growers in Massachusetts. Liabilities decreased in cranberries because of a drop in the 

price election available for cranberries producers. In 1998, the price election available for 

cranberries was $66.00 per barrel. In 2002, the price election available for cranberries was $22.00 

per barrel. Cranberry liabilities in Massachusetts decreased by $27 million, from $38 million to $11 

million from 1998 to 2002. Most of the other crops in Massachusetts increased for a net decrease in 

liabilities of $9 million.

See appendix table 10 and appendix figs. 1-16 for specific numbers for each underserved State. 

RMA plans to conduct further, more detailed analysis of the data to determine any appropriate 

action to be taken.

Number of Insured Policies in Underserved States (see appendix table 11 and appendix figs. 17-32) -

All 15 underserved States increased in number of insured policies with earned premium during 1998-

2002. Following are the policy number increases and percentage changes during the 4 years, as well 

as the simple average percent change per year for each underserved State:

o Connecticut - Policies increased from 275 to 372

This is a 35-percent increase during 1998-2002 (9 percent per year)

o Delaware - Policies increased from 744 to 999

This is a 34-percent increase during 1998-2002 (9 percent per year)

o Maine - Policies increased from 538 to 596

This is an 11-percent increase during 1998-2002 (3 percent per year)

o Maryland - Policies increased from 2,757 to 3,768

This is a 37-percent increase during 1998-2002 (9 percent per year)

o Massachusetts - Policies increased from 511 to 726

This is a 42-percent increase from 1998 to 2002 (11 percent per year)

o Nevada - Policies increased from 17 to 52

This is a 206-percent increase during 1998-2002 (52 percent per year)

o New Hampshire - Policies increased from 94 to 117

This is a 24-percent increase during 1998-2002 (6 percent per year)

o New Jersey - Policies increased from 587 to 1,144

This is a 95-percent increase during 1998-2002 (24 percent per year)

o New York - Policies increased from 2,961 to 4,144

This is a 40-percent increase during 1998-2002 (10 percent per year)

o Pennsylvania - Policies increased from 5,007 to 11,824

This is a 136-percent increase during 1998-2002 (34 percent per year)

o Rhode Island - Policies increased from 37 to 44

This is a 19-percent increase during 1998-2002 (5 percent per year)

o Utah - Policies increased from 372 to 499

This is a 34-percent increase during 1998-2002 (9 percent per year)

o Vermont - Policies increased from 346 to 539
25

This is a 56-percent increase during 1998-2002 (14 percent per year)

o West Virginia - Policies increased from 617 to 767

This is a 24-percent increase during 1998-2002 (6 percent per year)

o Wyoming - Policies increased from 2,409 to 2,798

This is a 16-percent increase during 1998-2002 (4 percent per year)

o All 15 underserved States - Policies increased from 17,272 to 28,389 

This is a 64-percent increase during 1998-2002 (16 percent per year)

See appendix table 11 and appendix figs. 17-32 for specific numbers for each underserved State. 

RMA plans to conduct further, more detailed analysis of the data to determine any appropriate 

action to be taken.

Insurance Liabilities for Specialty Crops (see appendix table 12 and appendix figs. 33-82) Of the 46 

specialty crops listed in appendix table 12, insurance liabilities (coverage) increased during 1998-

2002 for all but 3 crops:

Almonds (26-percent decrease) 

Crambe (96-percent decrease) 

Cranberries (66-percent decrease)

The decrease in liabilities for almonds is from the producers switching coverage levels and selecting 

a lower price election. The decrease in liabilities for crambe is due to the processors not offering the 

producers contracts until they had a loan price on crambe seed. This was not resolved until well 

after the acreage reporting date when the contracts had to be in force for crop insurance to attach.

Liabilities decreased in cranberries because of a drop in the price election for cranberries producers. 

In 1998, the price election for cranberries was $66.00 per barrel. In 2002, the price election for 

cranberries was $22.00 per barrel.

The 46 specialty crops, in total increased from $4.358 billion to $8.643 billion. This is a 98-percent 

increase during 1998-2002 (25 percent per year). See appendix table 12 and appendix figs. 33-82 for 

specific numbers for each specialty crops program. RMA plans to conduct further, more detailed 

analysis of the data to determine any appropriate action to be taken.

Number of Insured Policies for Specialty Crops (see appendix table 13 and appendix figs.83-132) -

Of the 46 specialty crops listed in appendix table 13, the number of insured policies with earned 

premium increased during 1998-2002 for all but the following 12 crops:

Avocado/Mango Trees (15-percent decrease) 

Chile Peppers (12-percent decrease)

Citrus Trees in Texas (12-percent decrease) 

Crambe (94-percent decrease)

Cultivated Wild Rice (16-percent decrease) 

Dry Beans (2-percent decrease)

Green Peas (9-percent decrease) 

Mint (8-percent decrease) 

Plums (7-percent decrease) 

Raisins (8-percent decrease)

Sweet Corn for Canning (6-percent decrease) 

Tomatoes for Canning/Processing (8-percent decrease)
26

The 46 specialty crops, in total, increased from 58,139 to 74,504 policies. This is a 28-percent 

increase during 1998-2002 (7 percent per year). Relatively small decreases and increases in policies 

with earned premium occur each year due to producers being unable or electing not to get processor 

contracts on their acreage. The number of policies sold continues to remain steady or increase year 

to year. With the exception of two crops decreasing from 2000 to 2001, all of the other fluctuations 

in number of policies earning premium appear normal. Two crops that had large decreases were 

crambe and green peas. The 24-percent decrease in policies earning premium for crambe was the 

result of the processors not offering the producers contracts until they had a loan price on crambe 

seed. This was not resolved until well after the acreage reporting date, when the contracts had to be 

in force for crop insurance to attach. The 25-percent decrease in policies earning premium for green 

peas was partially the result of a large processor closing and another processor changing the 

processes of the plant and being unable to offer contracts to the producers of green peas.

See appendix table 13 and appendix figs. 83-132 for specific numbers for each specialty crops 

program. RMA plans to conduct further, more detailed analysis of the data to determine any 

appropriate action to be taken.
27

Appendix table 1 -- Current Status of Crops Identified in Section 10006 of the 2002 Farm Bill

Crop Ins. Perm. Ins. Pilot Not Ins. Plans/Activity

Apples X Quality Option Pilot added 2001 CY

Asparagus X Fresh Vegetables FS TO (FY 01) 

FY 03 Development

Blueberries (domestic) X Conversion to Permanent Status 04 CY

Blueberries (wild) X Assessing interest in a program

Cabbage X Pilot Evaluation FY 2003

Canola X

Carrots X Not recommended for development in 

Fresh Vegetables TO

Cherries X Pilot Evaluation

Christmas Trees X FY 03 TO

Citrus Fruits X Citrus Canker fruit damage protection 

under consideration

Cucumbers X Pilot Evaluation FY 03

Dry Beans X Revenue TO

Eggplants X FY 03 FS TO (Small Value Crops)

Floriculture X Cut Flowers Dev TO (FY 03)

Grapes X Pierce's Disease

(Per. Path TO - FY 01)

Greenhouse and Nursery 

Ag Commodities

X X Greenhouse vegetables FS TO - 04; 

Bedding & Garden plants addition to 

nursery program

Green Peas X

Green Peppers X X Pilot Evaluation for Chiles FY 03

Hay X Quality Options being explored

Lettuce X Fresh Vegetables Dev. TO (FY 03)

Maple (Syrup) X R&D (FY 03)

Mushrooms X Insufficient mushroom industry interest

Pears X Pathogen TO

Potatoes X U of ID - Forecasting Potato Late Blight

Pumpkins X Pilot Evaluation

Snap Beans X Pilot Evaluation/Changes in 2002 CY

Spinach X Fresh Vegetables Dev TO (FY 03)

Squash X Pilot Evaluation (Winter squash) 

Summer squash not insurable

Strawberries X Pilot Evaluation FY 2003

Sugar beets X Crop Storage Options FS TO (FY 03)

Tomatoes X

TOTAL (31 crops)*

CY = Crop Year

FS = Feasibility Study 

FY = Fiscal Year

R&D = Research & Dev.

TO = Contract Task Order

13 9 11 28 crops with ongoing research and 

development.

* 33 total columns because: (1) Although Nursery is insurable, the program doesn't cover greenhouse vegetables; (2) Bell 

green peppers are insured under a permanent program and chile peppers are insured under a pilot program.
28

Appendix table 2 -- RMA-Developed Specialty Crop Pilot Program* History, 1995-2003

Pilot programs are used as a means to test new risk management tools before they become 

permanent programs through the regulatory process. Prior to the enactment ofARPA, teams led by 

RMA representatives developed most pilot programs. With the enactment of ARPA and the 

prohibition of research and development of new policies by FCIC, RMA representatives now 

oversee the research and development of new risk management products by others in the public and 

private sector.

1995 Crop Year

Blueberry (APH) pilot initiated (4 States) 

Canola/Rapeseed (APH) pilot initiated (5 States)

Cotton Harvest Incentive pilot initiated (TX) (program terminated beginning the 2000 crop year) 

New Producer pilot initiated (10 States/26 crops) (terminated beginning the 1999 crop year)

1996 Crop Year

Apple Scab pilot initiated (2 States) (1996 crop year only) 

Florida Fruit Tree pilot initiated (FL)

Millet (APH) pilot initiated (4 States) (Expanded from 5 counties to 55 counties and converted to 

permanent program status beginning the 2003 crop year)

1997 Crop Year

Blueberry (APH) pilot expanded (ME)

Canola/Rapeseed (APH) pilot expanded (fall canola in 3 States)

1998 Crop Year

Avocado Revenue pilot initiated (CA)

Avocado/Mango Tree pilot initiated (FL) (Originated as part of Florida Fruit Tree pilot program in 

the 1996 crop year; separated out in 1998.)

Canola/Rapeseed (APH) pilot expanded (fall canola in 2 States)

(Spring canola/rapeseed programs converted to permanent status)

Corn Rootworm IPM pilot initiated (6 States/several crops; such as corn, popcorn, hybrid seed) 

Pecan Revenue pilot initiated (3 States)

Sweetpotato (APH) pilot initiated (5 States)

1999 Crop Year

Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR) pilot initiated (36 counties in 5 States) 

Cabbage (GYC) pilot initiated (7 counties in 5 States)

Cherry (Fixed Dollar) pilot initiated (9 counties in 4 States)

Crambe (APH) pilot initiated (7 counties in ND) [other ND cos. avail. via written agreement] 

Cultivated Wild Rice (APH) pilot initiated (4 counties in CA; 6 counties in MN)

Florida Avocado (APH) pilot initiated in Dade Co., FL (Miami-Dade County beginning in 2002) 

GRP Rangeland pilot initiated (12 counties in MT)
29

Appendix table 2 -- RMA-Developed Pilot Program* History, 1995-2003 - Continued

1999 Crop Year Continued

Mustard (APH) pilot initiated (11 counties in ND) (other ND counties via written agreement) 

Watermelon (APH) pilot initiated (15 counties in 7 States) (suspended beginning the 2000 crop year) 

Winter Squash (Dollar) pilot initiated (12 counties in 4 States)

Blueberry (APH) pilot expanded (5 counties in NC)

Canola/Rapeseed (APH) pilot expanded (56 counties in 5 States); converted to permanent 1998, 1999

2000 Crop Year

Aquaculture (Cultivated Clam) (Aquaculture Dollar) pilot initiated (13 counties in 4 States) 

Cabbage (GYC) (6 counties in 4 States) pilot initiated with the 1999 States (see 2000 expansion) 

Fresh Market Bean (Dollar) pilot initiated (5 counties in 3 States)

Mint (APH) pilot initiated (9 counties in 4 States)

Onion Pilot Stage Removal Option (OPSRO) pilot initiated (all onion counties in 2 States) 

Processing Chile Pepper (Fixed Dollar) pilot initiated (3 counties in 2 States)

Processing Cucumber (Fixed Dollar) pilot initiated (11 counties in 4 States) 

Strawberry (Fixed Dollar) pilot initiated (21 counties in 4 States)

Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR) (Revenue) pilot expanded (52 more counties and 6 more States) 

Blueberry (APH) pilot expanded (12 counties in 5 States)

Cabbage (GYC) pilot expanded (14 counties in 7 States) - 11/30 filing (see 2000 initiation above) 

Cherry (Fixed Dollar) pilot expanded (12 counties in 6 States)

Florida Fruit Tree pilot expanded (24 counties in FL)

Mustard (APH) pilot expanded (8 counties in ND) - Additional counties with actuarial documents; 

34 counties remain available by written agreement

Winter Squash (Dollar) pilot expanded (pumpkins added as insurable type) (6 counties in 3 States)

2001 Crop Year

Apple Pilot Quality Option initiated

Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR) (AGR plan) pilot expanded (126 more counties and 6 more States) 

CA Avocado Revenue pilot expanded (5 counties in CA)

Citrus (Navel Oranges) (Dollar) pilot initiated (4 counties in CA)

2002 Crop Year

Forage (Alfalfa) Seed (APH) pilot initiated (10 counties in 7 States) 

Raspberry and Blackberry (Fixed Dollar) pilot initiated (7 counties in 3 States)

2003 Crop Year

Millet pilot expanded from 5 counties in 4 States to 55 counties in same 4 States (FCIC Board also 

approved conversion of the pilot program to permanent program status beginning the 2003 

crop year)

Pecan Revenue pilot expanded (79 counties in Georgia) - Board also approved conversion of the 

pilot to permanent status beginning the 2004 crop year, pending the regulatory process

* The above listing does not include private submissions under Section 508(h) of the FCI Act.
30

Appendix table 3 -- Crops Insured Under 1998 Crop Insurance Programs

Almonds 

Apples

Avocado (Revenue*) 

Avocado Trees (Florida)* 

Barley (APH, GRP*) 

Blueberries*

Canola 

Citrus

C Grapefruit

C Lemons

C Limes

C Mandarins

C Murcotts

C Oranges

C Tangelos

C Tangerines 

Citrus Tree (Texas)

Corn (APH, CRC**, GRP*, IP*, RA**) 

Cotton (APH, CRC**, GRP*, IP*) 

Cranberries

Dry Beans 

Dry Peas 

ELS Cotton 

Figs

Flax

Florida Fruit Tree* 

Forage (APH, GRP) 

Forage Seeding

Fresh Market Sweet Corn 

Fresh Market Tomatoes

Grain Sorghum (APH, CRC**, GRP*, IP*)

Grapes

Green Beans for Canning 

Green Peas

Hybrid Corn Seed

Hybrid Grain Sorghum Seed

Macadamia Nuts 

Macadamia Trees 

Mango Trees (Florida)* 

Millet*

Nursery 

Oats 

Onions 

Peaches

Peanuts (APH, GRP*)

Pears

Pecan Revenue* 

Peppers

Plums 

Popcorn 

Potatoes 

Prunes 

Raisins 

Rapeseed 

Rice (APH) 

Rye 

Safflower

Soybeans (APH, CRC**, GRP*, IP*, RA**)

Stonefruit

C California Apricots

C California Nectarines

C California Peaches

Sugar Beets 

Sugarcane 

Sunflowers

Sweet Corn for Canning 

Sweetpotatoes*

Table Grapes

Tobacco

Tomatoes (Canning and Processing) 

Walnuts

Wheat (APH, CRC**, GRP*, IP*)

* Crops/crop programs which are currently insured under pilot programs of limited scope and duration.

** Crops/crop programs which were submitted and approved undersection 508(h) of the FCI Act. 

APH = Actual Production History; CRC = Crop Revenue Coverage; GRP = Group Risk Plan;

IP = Income Protection; RA = Revenue Assurance

(Bold print = 48 specialty crops/48 specialty crop-plan combinations); (70 total crops/90 total crop-plan combinations)
31

Appendix table 4 -- Crops Insured Under 1999 Crop Insurance Programs

Almonds 

Apples

Avocado (Revenue*, APH*) 

Avocado Trees (Florida)* 

Barley (APH, IP*) 

Blueberries*

Cabbage* 

Canola

Cherry (Dollar)* 

Citrus

C Grapefruit

C Lemons

C Limes

C Mandarins

C Murcotts

C Oranges

C Tangelos

C Tangerines 

Citrus Tree (Texas)

Corn (APH, CRC**, GRIP**, GRP*, IP*, RA**) 

Cotton (APH, CRC**, GRP*, IP*)

Crambe* 

Cranberries

Cultivated Wild Rice* 

Dry Beans

Dry Peas 

ELS Cotton 

Figs

Flax

Florida Fruit Tree* 

Forage (APH, GRP*) 

Forage Seeding

Fresh Market Sweet Corn 

Fresh Market Tomatoes

Grain Sorghum (APH, CRC**, GRP*, IP*)

Grapes

Green Beans for Canning 

Green Peas

Hybrid Corn Seed

Hybrid Grain Sorghum Seed

Macadamia Nuts 

Macadamia Trees 

Mango Trees (Florida)* 

Millet*

Mustard* 

Nursery 

Oats 

Onions 

Peaches

Peanuts (APH, GRP*)

Pears

Pecan Revenue* 

Peppers

Plums 

Popcorn 

Potatoes 

Prunes 

Raisins

Rangeland (GRP)*

Rapeseed

Rice (APH, CRC**) 

Rye

Safflower

Soybeans (APH, CRC**, GRIP**, GRP*, IP*, RA**)

Stonefruit

C California Apricots

C California Nectarines

C California Peaches

Sugar Beets 

Sugarcane 

Sunflowers

Sweet Corn for Canning 

Sweetpotatoes*

Table Grapes

Tobacco

Tomatoes (Canning and Processing) 

Walnuts

Watermelons*

Wheat (APH, CRC**, GRP*, IP*, RA**)

Winter Squash*

* Crops/crop programs which are currently insured under pilot programs of limited scope and duration.

** Crops/crop programs which were submitted and approved under section 508(h) of the FCI Act.

APH = Actual Production History; CRC = Crop Revenue Coverage; GRIP = Group Risk Income Protection; GRP = Group Risk Plan;

IP = Income Protection; RA = Revenue Assurance

(Bold print = 55 specialty crops/56 specialty crop-plan combinations); (78 total crops/103 total crop-plan combinations)
32

Appendix table 5 -- Crops Insured Under 2000 Crop Insurance Programs

Almonds 

Apples

Avocado (Revenue*, APH*) 

Avocado Trees (Florida)* 

Barley (APH, IP*) 

Blueberries*

Cabbage* 

Canola

Cherry (Dollar)* 

Chile Peppers* 

Citrus

C Grapefruit

C Lemons

C Limes

C Mandarins

C Murcotts

C Oranges

C Tangelos

C Tangerines 

Citrus Tree (Texas)

Clams*

Corn (APH, CRC**, GRIP**, GRP, IP*, RA**)

Cotton (APH, CRC**, GRP, IP*)

Crambe* 

Cranberries

Cultivated Wild Rice* 

Dry Beans

Dry Peas 

ELS Cotton 

Figs

Flax

Florida Fruit Tree* 

Forage (APH, GRP*) 

Forage Seeding

Fresh Market Beans* 

Fresh Market Sweet Corn 

Fresh Market Tomatoes

Grain Sorghum (APH, CRC**, GRP, IP*)

Grapes

Green Beans for Canning 

Green Peas

Hybrid Corn Seed

Hybrid Grain Sorghum Seed

Macadamia Nuts 

Macadamia Trees 

Mango Trees (Florida)* 

Millet*

Mint* 

Mustard* 

Nursery 

Oats 

Onions 

Peaches

Peanuts (APH, GRP)

Pears

Pecan Revenue* 

Peppers

Plums 

Popcorn 

Potatoes

Processing Cucumbers* 

Prunes

Raisins 

Rangeland (GRP)* 

Rapeseed

Rice (APH, CRC**) 

Rye

Safflower

Soybeans (APH, CRC**, GRIP**, GRP, IP*, RA**)

Stonefruit

C California Apricots

C California Nectarines

C California Peaches 

Strawberries*

Sugar Beets 

Sugarcane 

Sunflowers

Sweet Corn for Canning 

Sweetpotatoes*

Table Grapes

Tobacco

Tomatoes (Canning and Processing) 

Walnuts

Wheat (APH, CRC**, GRP*, IP*, RA**)

Winter Squash*

* Crops/crop programs which are currently insured under pilot programs of limited scope and duration.

** Crops/crop programs which were submitted and approved under section 508(h) of the FCI Act.

APH = Actual Production History; CRC = Crop Revenue Coverage; GRIP = Group Risk Income Protection; GRP = Group Risk Plan;

IP = Income Protection; RA = Revenue Assurance

(Bold print = 59 specialty crops/60 specialty crop-plan combinations); (83 total crops/108 total crop-plan combinations)
33

Appendix table 6 -- Crops Insured Under 2001 Crop Insurance Programs

Almonds 

Apples

Avocado (Revenue*, APH*) 

Avocado Trees (Florida)* 

Barley (APH, IP*) 

Blueberries*

Cabbage* 

Canola

Cherry (Dollar)* 

Chile Peppers* 

Citrus

C Grapefruit

C Lemons

C Limes

C Mandarins

C Murcotts

C Oranges

C Tangelos

C Tangerines 

Citrus Tree (Texas)

Clams*

Corn (APH, CRC**, GRIP**, GRP, IP*, RA**)

Cotton (APH, CRC**, GRP, IP*)

Crambe* 

Cranberries

Cultivated Wild Rice* 

Dry Beans

Dry Peas 

ELS Cotton 

Figs

Flax

Florida FruitTree* 

Forage (APH, GRP) 

Forage Seeding

Fresh Market Beans* 

Fresh Market Sweet Corn 

Fresh Market Tomatoes

Grain Sorghum (APH, CRC**, GRP, IP*)

Grapes

Green Beans for Canning 

Green Peas

Hybrid Corn Seed

Hybrid Grain Sorghum Seed

Macadamia Nuts 

Macadamia Trees 

Mango Trees (Florida)* 

Millet*

Mint* 

Mustard* 

Nursery

Navel Oranges (Citrus $)*

Oats 

Onions 

Peaches

Peanuts (APH, GRP)

Pears

Pecan Revenue* 

Peppers

Plums 

Popcorn 

Potatoes

Processing Cucumbers* 

Prunes

Raisins 

Rangeland (GRP)* 

Rapeseed

Rice (APH, CRC**) 

Rye

Safflower

Soybeans (APH, CRC**, GRIP**, GRP, IP*, RA**)

Stonefruit

C California Apricots

C California Nectarines

C California Peaches 

Strawberries*

Sugar Beets 

Sugarcane 

Sunflowers

Sweet Corn for Canning 

Sweetpotatoes*

Table Grapes

Tobacco

Tomatoes (Canning and Processing) 

Walnuts

Wheat (APH, CRC**, GRP, IP*, RA**)

Winter Squash*

* Crops/crop programs which are currently insured under pilot programs of limited scope and duration.

** Crops/crop programs which were submitted and approved under section 508(h) of the FCI Act.

APH = Actual Production History; CRC = Crop Revenue Coverage; GRIP = Group Risk Income Protection; GRP = Group Risk Plan;

IP = Income Protection; RA = Revenue Assurance

(Bold print = 60 specialty crops/61 specialty crop-plan combinations); (84 total crops/109 total crop-plan combinations)
34

Appendix table 7 -- Agricultural Commodities Insured Under 2002 Crop Insurance Programs

Almonds 

Apples

Avocado (Revenue*, APH*) 

Avocado Trees (Florida)* 

Barley (APH, IP*) 

Blackberries*

Blueberries* 

Cabbage* 

Canola

Cherry (Dollar)* 

Chile Peppers* 

Citrus

C Grapefruit

C Lemons

C Limes

C Mandarins

C Murcotts

C Oranges

C Tangelos

C Tangerines 

Citrus Tree (Texas)

Clams*

Corn (APH, CRC**, GRIP**, GRP, IP*, RA**)

Cotton (APH, CRC**, GRP, IP*)

Crambe* 

Cranberries

Cultivated Wild Rice* 

Dry Beans

Dry Peas 

ELS Cotton 

Figs

Flax

Florida Fruit Tree* 

Forage (APH, GRP) 

Forage Seed (Alfalfa)* 

Forage Seeding

Fresh Market Beans* 

Fresh Market Sweet Corn 

Fresh Market Tomatoes

Grain Sorghum (APH, CRC**, GRP, IP*)

Grapes

Green Beans for Canning 

Green Peas

Hybrid Corn Seed

Hybrid Grain Sorghum Seed

Livestock (Swine)* ** (LGM, LRP)

Macadamia Nuts 

Macadamia Trees 

Mango Trees (Florida)* 

Millet*

Mint* 

Mustard* 

Nursery

Navel Oranges (Citrus $)*

Oats 

Onions 

Peaches

Peanuts (APH, GRP)

Pears

Pecan Revenue* 

Peppers

Plums 

Popcorn 

Potatoes

Processing Cucumbers* 

Prunes

Raisins 

Rangeland (GRP)* 

Rapeseed 

Raspberries*

Rice (APH, CRC**) 

Rye

Safflower

Soybeans (APH, CRC**, GRIP**, GRP, IP*, RA**)

Stonefruit

C California Apricots

C California Nectarines

C California Peaches 

Strawberries*

Sugar Beets 

Sugarcane 

Sunflowers

Sweet Corn for Canning 

Sweetpotatoes*

Table Grapes

Tobacco

Tomatoes (Canning and Processing) 

Walnuts

Wheat (APH, CRC**, GRP, IP*, RA**)

Winter Squash*

* Crops/crop programs which are currently insured under pilot programs of limited scope and duration.

** Crops/crop programs which were submitted and approved under section 508(h) of the FCI Act.

APH = Actual Production History; CRC = Crop Revenue Coverage; GRIP = Group Risk Income Protection; GRP = Group Risk Plan;

IP = Income Protection; RA = Revenue Assurance; LGM=Livestock Gross Margin; LRP=Livestock Risk Protection

(Bold print = 62 specialty crops/63 specialty crop-plan combinations); (88 total crops/114 total crop-plan combinations)
35

Appendix table 8 -- Agricultural Commodities Insured Under 2003 Crop Insurance Programs

Almonds 

Apples

Avocado (Revenue*, APH*) 

Avocado Trees (Florida)* 

Barley (APH, IP*) 

Blackberries*

Blueberries* 

Cabbage* 

Canola

Cherry (Dollar)* 

Chile Peppers* 

Citrus

C Grapefruit

C Lemons

C Limes

C Mandarins

C Murcotts

C Oranges

C Tangelos

C Tangerines 

Citrus Tree (Texas)

Clams*

Corn (APH, CRC**, GRIP**, GRP, IP*, RA**)

Cotton (APH, CRC**, GRP, IP*)

Crambe* 

Cranberries

Cultivated Wild Rice* 

Dry Beans

Dry Peas 

ELS Cotton 

Figs

Flax

Florida Fruit Tree* 

Forage (APH, GRP) 

Forage Seed (Alfalfa)* 

Forage Seeding

Fresh Market Beans* 

Fresh Market Sweet Corn 

Fresh Market Tomatoes

Grain Sorghum (APH, CRC**, GRP, IP*)

Grapes

Green Beans for Canning 

Green Peas

Hybrid Corn Seed

Hybrid Grain Sorghum Seed

Livestock (Swine)* ** (LGM, LRP)

Macadamia Nuts 

Macadamia Trees 

Mango Trees (Florida)* 

Millet

Mint* 

Mustard* 

Nursery

Navel Oranges (Citrus $)*

Oats 

Onions 

Peaches

Peanuts (APH, GRP)

Pears

Pecan Revenue* 

Peppers

Plums 

Popcorn 

Potatoes

Processing Cucumbers* 

Prunes

Raisins 

Rangeland (GRP)* 

Rapeseed 

Raspberries*

Rice (APH, CRC**) 

Rye

Safflower

Soybeans (APH, CRC**, GRIP**, GRP, IP*, RA**)

Stonefruit

C California Apricots

C California Nectarines

C California Peaches 

Strawberries*

Sugar Beets 

Sugarcane 

Sunflowers

Sweet Corn for Canning 

Sweetpotatoes*

Table Grapes

Tobacco

Tomatoes (Canning and Processing) 

Walnuts

Wheat (APH, CRC**, GRP, IP*, RA**)

Winter Squash*

* Crops/crop programs which are currently insured under pilot programs of limited scope and duration.

** Crops/crop programs which were submitted and approved under section 508(h) of the FCI Act.

APH = Actual Production History; CRC = Crop Revenue Coverage; GRIP = Group Risk Income Protection; GRP = Group Risk Plan;

IP = Income Protection; RA = Revenue Assurance; LGM=Livestock Gross Margin; LRP=Livestock Risk Protection

(Bold print = 62 specialty crops/63 specialty crop-plan combinations); (88 total crops/114 total crop-plan combinations)
36

Appendix table 9 -- Active Pilot Risk Management Programs for the 2003 Crop Year

Following are the 30 active pilot programs currently available byRMA and approved insurance providers, along 

with the plan of insurance as appropriate and the year they were introduced. The 24 pilot programsthat include 

specialty crops are shown in bold print. Thislisting does not include private productssubmitted undersection 

508(h) of the Act. Details on these pilot programs can be found at the RMA web site: 

http://www.rma.usda.gov/pilots/.

Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR plan of insurance) - 1999 

Apple Pilot Quality Option - 2001

Avocados (Revenue plan) - 1998 

Avocados (APH) - 1999

Avocado/Mango Trees (Tree Based Dollar Amt. ofIns.) - 1998 

Blueberries (GYC)- 1995

Cabbage (GYC) - 1999 

Cherry (Fixed Dollar) - 1999

Citrus Fruit [Navel Oranges] (Fixed Dollar) - 2001 

Corn Rootworm Integrated Pest Management- 1998 

Coverage Enhancement Option - 2000

Crambe (APH) - 1999

Cultivated Clams (Aquaculture Dollar) - 2000

Cultivated Wild Rice (GYC) - 1999

Florida Fruit Trees (Tree Based Dollar Amt. of Ins.) - 1996

Forage Seed (APH) - 2002

Fresh Market Beans(Dollar Amt. ofIns.) - 2000 

Income Protection plan of insurance (IP)- 1996 

Mint (APH) - 2000

Mustard (APH) - 1999

Onion Pilot Stage Removal Option - 2000 

Pecan (Pecan Revenue plan) - 1998

Processing Chile Peppers(Fixed Dollar) - 2000 

Processing Cucumbers (Fixed Dollar) - 2000 

Rangeland (Group Risk Plan) - 1999 

Raspberry/Blackberry (Fixed Dollar) - 2002 

Strawberries (Fixed Dollar) - 2000 

Sweetpotatoes (APH) - 1998

Winter Squash [including pumpkins] (Dollar Amt. of Ins.) - 1999

Expansion of Pilot Programs- As a general rule, expansion of a pilot program during the pilot period is considered 

only ifsuch expansion will provide different program experience (such as different crop types or practicesthan the 

original pilot program) than may be gained from the original pilot program.

Summary ofBusiness - Summaries ofthe insurance experience ofthese pilot programs and other crop insurance 

programs can be found at the RMA web site at: http://www.rma.usda.gov/data/.
37

Appendix table 10 -- Underserved States Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002

$ millions

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

BUP* CAT** Total BUP CAT Total BUP CAT Total BUP CAT Total BUP CAT Total

CT 13.71 30.78 44.49 26.77 45.09 71.86 25.52 32.05 57.57 32.71 35.54 68.25 33.58 41.52 75.10

DE 12.11 7.44 19.55 14.30 7.51 21.81 16.62 9.30 25.92 21.20 8.75 29.95 26.77 8.52 35.29

ME 14.54 21.50 36.04 23.66 22.69 46.35 25.74 22.34 48.08 27.10 25.10 52.20 26.42 24.79 51.21

MD 38.16 27.14 65.30 47.39 42.33 89.72 53.73 51.42 105.15 62.89 41.54 104.43 81.17 46.82 127.99

MA 24.59 26.85 51.44 36.05 24.33 60.38 28.25 20.83 49.08 27.40 14.40 41.80 27.18 15.57 42.75

NV 1.11 0.46 1.57 1.08 0.50 1.58 0.75 0.83 1.58 0.49 3.06 3.55 11.33 2.77 14.10

NH 1.49 1.59 3.08 2.38 1.42 3.80 2.72 1.32 4.04 3.64 4.27 7.91 3.98 5.01 8.99

NJ 3.32 25.24 28.56 4.17 36.75 40.92 6.56 43.39 49.95 15.81 46.40 62.21 14.70 51.42 66.12

NY 21.74 60.94 82.68 40.75 73.79 114.54 45.38 75.96 121.34 95.68 78.31 173.99 102.16 78.80 180.96

PA 49.54 29.90 79.44 60.50 50.72 111.22 101.06 61.09 162.15 119.36 67.44 186.80 159.88 62.34 222.22

RI 0.47 0.42 0.89 0.63 1.53 2.16 0.46 1.50 1.96 0.38 0.97 1.35 0.63 1.04 1.67

UT 2.88 2.01 4.89 3.39 2.45 5.84 4.24 2.58 6.82 5.37 2.10 7.47 6.35 1.71 8.06

VT 0.82 3.97 4.79 1.73 3.21 4.94 2.28 3.14 5.42 5.72 2.64 8.36 7.72 2.96 10.68

WV 5.52 3.26 8.78 6.82 2.83 9.65 9.54 2.28 11.82 9.24 3.08 12.32 8.88 3.82 12.70

WY 39.20 6.19 45.39 43.26 8.96 52.22 46.17 9.50 55.67 40.20 4.75 44.95 46.04 5.18 51.22

Total 229 248 477 313 324 637 369 338 707 467 338 806 557 352 909

BUP* = Buyup (Additional Coverage): A level of coverage greater than catastrophic risk protection (CAT). 

CAT** = Catastrophic Risk Protection (CAT): The minimum level of coverage offered by RMA.

Insurance Liabilities
38

ME

MA

NH

NY

RI

VT

WY

Appendix table 11 -- Number of Policies with Earned Premium in Underserved States, 

1998-2002

1998

BUP* CAT** Total BUP

1999

CAT Total BUP

2000

CAT

Number

Total BUP

2001

CAT Total BUP

2002

CAT Total

CT 87 188 275 129 203 332 128 210 338 192 187 379 207 165 372

DE 451 293 744 532 336 868 598 404 1,002 633 331 964 713 286 999

130 408 538 189 441 630 198 407 605 214 366 580 241 355 596

MD 1,335 1,422 2,757 1,842 1,646 3,488 2,044 1,719 3,763 2,161 1,345 3,506 2,622 1,146 3,768

179 332 511 263 385 648 284 433 717 349 407 756 344 382 726

NV 5 12 17 9 17 26 4 19 23 5 12 17 42 10 52

10 84 94 29 84 113 37 71 108 46 67 113 61 56 117

NJ 91 496 587 147 566 713 281 810 1,091 303 814 1,117 422 722 1,144

495 2,466 2,961 823 2,579 3,402 805 2,652 3,457 1,392 2,467 3,859 1,666 2,478 4,144

PA 2,655 2,352 5,007 3,475 2,554 6,029 5,884 4,016 9,900 5,975 4,008 9,983 8,018 3,806 11,824

5 32 37 11 35 46 12 41 53 17 32 49 21 23 44

UT 115 257 372 168 290 458 187 270 457 225 238 463 290 209 499

27 319 346 82 305 387 85 292 377 144 228 372 247 292 539

WV 337 280 617 449 276 725 573 231 804 624 186 810 592 175 767

1,715 694 2,409 1,856 729 2,585 1,802 715 2,517 1,874 505 2,379 2,161 637 2,798

Total 7,637 9,635 17,272 10,004 10,446 20,450 12,922 12,290 25,212 14,154 11,193 25,347 17,647 10,742 28,389

BUP* = Buyup (Additional Coverage): A level of coverage greater than catastrophic risk protection (CAT). 

CAT** = Catastrophic Risk Protection (CAT): The minimum level of coverage offered by RMA.
39

Appendix table 12 -- Specialty Crops Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002

Crop

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-2002

$

millions % Chg

$

millions % Chg

$

millions % Chg

$

millions % Chg

$

millions % Chg

Overall

% Chg

Almonds 386.44 - 364.77 -6 326.52 -10 281.13 -14 284.07 1 -26

Apples 263.57 - 264.14 0 291.97 11 352.56 21 319.63 -9 21

Avocados 10.47 - 11.18 7 12.28 10 33.89 176 39.11 15 274

Avocado Trees / Mango 

Trees 3.76 - 3.72 -1 3.50 -6 6.30 80 5.91 -6 57

Blueberries 9.83 - 13.18 34 15.74 19 20.37 29 22.44 10 128

Cabbage 0.00 - 3.08 - 17.23 459% 11.37 -34 13.42 18 336

Canola / Rapeseed 55.47 - 68.93 24 107.04 55 116.02 8 125.89 9 127

Cherry 0.00 - 39.70 - 47.92 21 50.29 5 52.76 5 33

Chile Peppers 0.00 - 0.00 - 4.07 - 4.83 19 4.51 -7 11

Citrus 341.56 - 273.49 -20 331.28 21 442.97 34 441.77 0 29

Citrus Trees (In Texas) 57.30 - 55.93 -2 63.22 13 64.53 2 64.29 0 12

Crambe 0.00 - 1.18 - 1.45 23 0.94 -35 0.05 -95 -96

Cranberries 109.41 - 104.47 -5 74.11 -29 27.61 -63 37.11 34 -66

Cultivated Wild Rice 0.00 - 5.00 - 5.30 6 0.94 -82 5.62 498 12

Dry Beans 219.99 - 271.91 24 238.02 -12 201.12 -16 278.61 39 27

Dry Peas 14.66 - 12.34 -16 12.90 5 16.16 25 26.45 64 80

Figs 4.76 - 4.91 3 4.68 -5 4.08 -13 5.20 27 9

Florida Fruit Tree 145.25 - 153.78 6 697.28 353 831.78 19 1085.93 31 648

Fresh Market Beans 0.00 - 0.00 - 16.23 - 16.77 3 25.30 51 56

Fresh Market Sweet Corn 16.38 - 23.25 42 28.48 23 32.61 15 27.15 -17 66

Fresh Market Tomatoes 86.87 - 106.10 22 115.93 9 126.06 9 117.36 -7 35

Grapes 432.30 - 494.86 14 512.59 4 564.49 10 535.40 -5 24

Green Beans for Canning 9.69 - 13.36 38 16.64 25 16.40 -1 19.74 20 104

Green Peas 22.00 - 28.77 31 33.51 16 27.01 -19 31.44 16 43

Macadamia Nuts 0.00 - 11.54 - 15.02 30 13.09 -13 18.77 43 63

Macadamia Trees 62.33 - 82.11 32 80.42 -2 78.51 -2 64.27 -18 3

Millet 2.10 - 2.80 33 2.35 -16 5.43 131 4.33 -20 106

Mint 0.00 - 0.00 - 5.18 - 6.12 18 7.17 17 38

Mustard 0.00 - 0.64 - 0.73 13 0.92 26 7.29 696 1036

Nursery 802.68 - 2369.23 195 2351.08 -1 2598.93 11 2978.23 15 271

Navel Oranges (CA $ 

Citrus) 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.78 - 31.04 3879 3879

Onions 59.64 - 89.25 50 98.76 11 100.18 1 99.10 -1 66

Peaches 18.67 - 25.38 36 38.42 51 44.46 16 49.13 11 163
40

Appendix 12 -- Specialty Crops Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002 - Continued

Crop

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-2002

$

millions % Chg

$

millions

%

Chg

$

millions % Chg

$

millions % Chg

$

millions % Chg

Overall

% Chg

Pears 35.15 - 34.55 -2 37.05 7 45.09 22 48.17 7 37

Pecans 19.60 - 20.74 6 24.22 17 24.44 1 29.86 22 52

Peppers 20.73 - 26.20 26 26.58 1 38.06 43 40.00 5 93

Plums 16.72 - 17.19 3 20.86 21 22.16 6 21.90 -1 31

Raspberries / 

Blackberries 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 - 1.09 - -

Stonefruit 67.38 - 68.59 2 72.52 6 77.02 6 76.20 -1 13

Strawberries 0.00 - 0.00 - 36.74 - 49.90 36 63.56 27 73

Sweet Corn for Canning 39.38 - 43.90 11 43.97 0 53.27 21 58.85 10 49

Sweetpotatoes 9.41 - 22.27 137 23.27 4 27.42 18 23.32 -15 148

Table Grapes 125.40 - 126.52 1 140.06 11 158.86 13 154.77 -3 23

Tomatoes for Canning / 

Processing 170.87 - 254.77 49 223.32 -12 222.87 0 267.12 20 56

Walnuts 40.39 - 46.65 15 53.32 14 52.84 -1 54.94 4 36

Winter Squash 0.00 - 0.30 - 0.77 159 1.01 31 1.25 24 321

Total Liabilities 4358.35 - 6453.56 32.5 7287.36 11.5 7750.54 6.4 8642.52 11.4 98
41

-

Appendix table 13 – Specialty Crops Number of Insured Policies, 1998-2002

Crop

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-2002

Overall

Number % Chg

%

Chg Number

%

Chg Number

%

Chg Number

%

Chg Number

%

Chg

Almonds 2838 - 3219 13 3232 0 3130 -3 3063 -2 8

Apples 3275 - 3752 15 3508 -7 3552 1 3546 0 8

Avocados 285 - 357 25 370 4 1054 185 1209 15 324

Avocado Trees / Mango Trees 269 - 262 -3 249 -5 258 4 228 -12 -15

Blueberries 257 - 367 43 403 10 410 2 393 -4 53

Cabbage 0 - 55 0 168 205 158 -6 180 14 227

Canola / Rapeseed 4575 - 6309 38 7683 22 8026 4 7132 -11 56

Cherry 0 - 855 0 1075 26 1189 11 1260 6 47

Chile Peppers 0 - 0 0 49 0 49 0 43 -12 -12

Citrus: 6503 - 6742 4 6721 0 7009 4 6672 -5 3

Citrus Trees (In Texas) 1197 - 1145 -4 1114 -3 1080 -3 1050 -3 -12

Crambe 0 - 98 0 117 19 89 -24 6 -93 -94

Cranberries 519 - 592 14 583 -2 563 -3 547 -3 5

Cultivated Wild Rice 0 - 56 0 49 -13 55 12 47 -15 -16

Dry Beans 10252 - 11034 8 9270 -16 8877 -4 10067 13 -2

Dry Peas 1500 - 1572 5 1606 2 1770 10 2254 27 50

Figs 58 - 65 12 63 -3 63 0 67 6 16

Florida Fruit Tree 1390 - 635 -54 4813 658 4972 3 5031 1 262

Fresh Market Beans 0 - 0 0 99 0 105 6 105 0 6

Fresh Market Sweet Corn 128 - 392 206 718 83 770 7 768 0 500

Fresh Market Tomatoes 328 - 373 14 390 5 411 5 365 -11 11

Grapes 5018 - 6015 20 6101 1 5677 -7 5624 -1 12

Green Beans for Canning 539 - 601 12 676 12 636 -6 656 3 22

Green Peas 2381 - 2453 3 2782 13 2085 -25 2176 4 -9

Macadamia Nuts 0 - 33 0 33 0 35 6 37 6 12

Macadamia Trees 33 - 35 6 39 11 38 -3 39 3 18

Millet 403 - 572 42 502 -12 782 56 640 -18 59

Mint 0 - 0 0 64 0 63 -2 59 -6 -8

Mustard 0 - 81 0 109 35 112 3 503 349 521

Nursery 1588 - 2697 70 3348 24 3555 6 3825 8 141

Navel Oranges (CA $ Citrus) 0 - 0 0 0 0 15 0 482 3113 3113

Onions 565 - 796 41 716 -10 704 -2 669 -5 18

Peaches 836 - 994 19 949 -5 952 0 944 -1 13

Pears 756 - 804 6 781 -3 823 5 834 1 10

Pecans 151 - 207 37 195 -6 184 -6 198 8 31

Peppers 39 - 62 59 82 32 98 20 118 20 203

Plums 688 716 4 694 -3 648 -7 637 -2 -7
42

Appendix 13 – Specialty Crops Number of Insured Policies, 1998-2002 - Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-2002

% % % % % Overall

Crop Number Chg Number Chg Number Chg Number Chg Number Chg % Chg

Potatoes 2495 - 2814 13 2802 0 2687 -4 2851 6 14

Raisins 2057 - 2332 13 2495 7 1933 -23 1899 -2 -8

Raspberries / 

Blackberries 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0

Stonefruit 1692 - 1254 -26 1932 54 19116 889 1777 -91 5

Strawberries 0 - 0 0 179 0 148 -17 207 40 16

Sweet Corn for 

Canning 2579 - 2646 3 2657 0 2542 -4 2412 -5 -6

Sweetpotatoes 181 - 268 48 329 23 338 3 316 -7 75

Table Grapes 444 - 470 6 464 -1 468 1 499 7 12

Tomatoes for 

Canning/Processing 797 - 958 20 844 -12 739 -12 733 -1 -8

Walnuts 758 - 1185 56 1192 1 1128 -5 1101 -2 45

WinterSquash

Total Policies

0

58,139

- 31

66,906

0

15

103

73,513

232

10

118

90,354

15

23

118

74,504

0 281

-18 28
43

Appendix figures 1-4 -- Underserved States Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Figure 1. Connecticut - Liabilities

Million $

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Million $ 

40.00

35.00

30.00

25.00

20.00

15.00

10.00

5.00

0.00

Figure 2. Delaware - Liabilities

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

Million $

60.00

Figure 3. Maine - Liabilities

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

Million $

140.00

Figure 4. Maryland - Liabilities

BUP*

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CATTotal

BUP

CAT**

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP 

CAT

CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

Total

BUP

CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CATTotal 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CATTotal 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total
44

Appendix figures 5-8 -- Underserved States Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002 – Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

Million $

70.00

Figure 5. Massachusetts - Liabilities

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Million $ 

16.00

14.00

12.00

10.00

8.00

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00

Figure 6. Nevada - Liabilities

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Million $

10.00

9.00

8.00

7.00

6.00

5.00

4.00

3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00

Figure 7. New Hampshire - Liabilities

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

Figure 8. New Jersey - Liabilities

Million $

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CATTotal

BUP

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CATTotal

BUP

CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CATTotal

BUP

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CATTotal

BUP

CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total
45

Appendix figures 9-12 -- Underserved States Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002 – Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

200.00

180.00

160.00

140.00

120.00

100.00

80.00

60.00

40.00

20.00

0.00

Figure 9. New York - Liabilities Million $

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0.00

50.00

100.00

150.00

200.00

Million $

250.00

Figure 10. Pennsylvania - Liabilities

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

Figure 11. Rhode Island - Liabilities Million $

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

9.00

8.00

7.00

6.00

5.00

4.00

3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00

Million $ Figure 12. Utah - Liabilities

BUP*

CAT** 

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CATTotal 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP

CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CATTotal 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP

CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total
46

Appendix figures 13-16 -- Underserved States Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002 – Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

Figure 13. Vermont - Liabilities

Million $

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

Million $

14.00

Figure 14. West Virginia - Liabilities

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

Million $ Figure 15. Wyoming - Liabilities

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

1,000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

Figure 16. Underserved States - Total 

Liabilities Million $

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CATTotal

BUP

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CATTotal

BUP

CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CATTotal

BUP

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CATTotal

BUP

CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total
47

Appendix figures 17-20 -- Number of Policies with Earned Premium in Underserved States, 

1998-2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

Figure 17. Connecticut - Policies with 

Earned Premium

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

Figure 18. Delaware - Policies with Earned 

Premium

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Figure 19. Maine - Policies with 

Earned Premium

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

4,000

3,500

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

Figure 20. Maryland - Policies with Earned 

Premium

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total
48

Appendix figures 21-24 -- Number of Policies with Earned Premium in Underserved States, 

1998-2002 – Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

Figure 21. Massachusetts - Policies with 

Earned Premium

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Figure 22. Nevada - Policies with Earned 

Premium

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Figure 23. New Hampshire - Policies with 

Earned Premium

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

Figure 24. New Jersey - Policies with 

Earned Premium

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

CAT

Total
49

Appendix figures 25-28 -- Number of Policies with Earned Premium in Underserved States, 

1998-2002 – Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

4,500

4,000

3,500

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

Figure 25. New York - Policies with Earned 

Premium

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

Figure 26. Pennsylvania - Policies with 

Earned Premium

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Figure 27. Rhode Island - Policies with 

Earned Premium

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Figure 28. Utah - Policies with Earned 

Premium

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total
50

Appendix figures 29-32 -- Number of Policies with Earned Premium in Underserved States, 

1998-2002 – Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Figure 29. Vermont - Policies with Earned 

Premium

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

Figure 30. West Virginia - Policies with 

Earned Premium

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Figure 31. Wyoming - Policies with 

Earned Premium

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

Figure 32. Underserved States - Total 

Policies with Earned Premium

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total

BUP*

CAT** 

Total BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total 

BUP CAT

Total
51

Figure 33. Almonds - Liabilities

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

-15%

-20%

-25%

-30%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure34.Apples- Liabilities

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

-15%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pctchg

Appendix figures 33-40 -- Specialty Crops Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

Figure 35. Avocados - Liabilities

300%

250%

200%

150%

100%

50%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 36. Avocado Trees/Mango Trees -

Liabilities

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 37. Blueberries - Liabilities

140%

120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 38. Cabbage - Liabilities

500%

400%

300%

200%

100%

0%

-100%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 39. Canola/Rapeseed - Liabilities

140%

120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 40. Cherry - Liabilities

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002
52

Figure 41. Chile Peppers - Liabilities

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 42. Citrus - Liabilities

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

-20%

-30%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 43. Citrus Trees - Liabilities

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 44. Crambe - Liabilities

40%

20%

0%

-20%

-40%

-60%

-80%

-100%

-120%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 45. Cranberries - Liabilities

40%

20%

0%

-20%

-40%

-60%

-80%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 46. Cultivated Wild Rice - Liabilities

600%

500%

400%

300%

200%

100%

0%

-100%

-200%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Appendix figures 41-48 -- Specialty Crops Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002 - Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

Figure 47. Dry Beans - Liabilities

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 48. Dry Peas - Liabilities

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

-40%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002
53

Figure 49. Figs - Liabilities

30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 51. Fresh Market Beans - Liabilities

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 52. Fresh Market Sweet Corn -

Liabilities

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

-40%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Appendix figures 49-56 -- Specialty Crops Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002 - Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

Figure 50. Florida Fruit Tree - Liabilities

700%

600%

500%

400%

300%

200%

100%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 53. Fresh Market Tomatoes -

Liabilities

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 54. Grapes - Liabilities

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

Figure 55. Green Beans for Canning -

Liabilities

Figure 56. Green Peas - Liabilities

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

-20%

-30%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002
54

Appendix figures 57-64 -- Specialty Crops Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002 – Continued

Figure 57. Macadamia Nuts - Liabilities

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 58. Macadamia Trees - Liabilities

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

-20%

-30%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 59. Millet - Liabilities

150%

100%

50%

0%

-50%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 60. Mint - Liabilities

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 61. Mustard - Liabilities

1200%

1000%

800%

600%

400%

200%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 62. Nursery - Liabilities

300%

250%

200%

150%

100%

50%

0%

-50%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 63. Navel Oranges - Liabilities

5000%

4000%

3000%

2000%

1000%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 64. Onions - Liabilities

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002
55

Figure 67. Pecans - Liabilities

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 68. Peppers - Liabilities

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Appendix figures 65-72 -- Specialty Crops Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002 - Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

Figure 65. Peaches - Liabilities

200%

150%

100%

50%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 66. Pears - Liabilities

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 69. Plums - Liabilities

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 70. Potatoes - Liabilities

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 71. Processing Cucumbers -

Liabilities

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 72. Prunes - Liabilities

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

-15%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002
56

Figure 75. Stonefruit - Liabilities

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 76. Strawberries - Liabilities

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 78. Sweetpotatoes - Liabilities

200%

150%

100%

50%

0%

-50%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 79. Table Grapes - Liabilities

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 80. Tomatoes for

Canning/Processing - Liabilities

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Appendix figures 73-80 -- Specialty Crops Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002 - Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

Figure 73. Raisins - Liabilities

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

-40%

-60%

-80%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 74. Raspberries/Blackberries -

Liabilities

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 77. Sweet Corn for Canning -

Liabilities

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002
57

Figure 81. Walnuts - Liabilities

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 82. W inter Squash - Liabilities

350%

300%

250%

200%

150%

100%

50%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Appendix figures 81-82 -- Specialty Crops Insurance Liabilities, 1998-2002 - Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002
58

Figure 85. Avocados - Policies with Earned

Premium

400%

300%

200%

100%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 86. Avocado Trees / Mango Trees -

Policies with Earned Premium

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

-15%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 87. Blueberries - Policies with

Earned Premium

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 89. Canola / Rapeseed - Policies with 

Earned Premium

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Appendix figures 83-90 -- Specialty Crops Number of Insured Policies, 1998-2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

Figure 90. Cherry - Policies with Earned 

Premium

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 83. Almonds - Policies with Earned 

Premium

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 84. Apples - Policies with Earned 

Premium

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 88. Cabbage - Policies with Earned 

Premium

250%

200%

150%

100%

50%

0%

-50%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002
59

Figure 95. Cranberries - Policies with

Earned Premium

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 96. Cultivated Wild Rice - Policies

with Earned Premium

20%

10%

0%

-10%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Appendix figures 91-98 -- Specialty Crops Number of Insured Policies, 1998-2002 -

Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

Figure 91. Chile Peppers - Policies with 

Earned Premium

0%

-5%

-10%

-15%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 92. Citrus - Policies with Earned 

Premium

6%

4%

2%

0%

-2%

-4%

-6%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 93. Citrus Trees (Texas) - Policies 

with Earned Premium

0%

-5%

-10%

-15%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 94. Crambe - Policies with Earned 

Premium

50%

0%

-50%

-100%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 97. Dry Beans - Policies with Earned 

Premium

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

-15%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 98. Dry Peas - Policies with Earned 

Premium

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002
60

Figure 99. Figs - Policies with Earned 

Premium

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 100. Florida Fruit Tree - Policies with 

Earned Premium

800%

600%

400%

200%

0%

-200%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 101. Fresh Market Beans - Policies

with Earned Premium

8%

6%

4%

2%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 102. Fresh Market Sweet Corn -

Policies with Earned Premium

600%

500%

400%

200%

100%

0%

-100%

300%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Appendix figures 99-106 -- Specialty Crops Number of Insured Policies, 1998-2002 -

Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

Figure 103. Fresh Market Tomatoes -

Policies with Earned Premium

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

-15%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 104. Grapes - Policies with Earned 

Premium

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 105. Green Beans for Canning -

Policies with Earned Premium

30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 106. Green Peas - Policies with 

Earned Premium

20%

10%

0%

-10%

-20%

-30%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002
61

Figure 107. Macadamia Nuts - Policies with

Earned Premium

15%

10%

5%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 108. Macadamia Trees - Policies

w ith Earned Premium

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 109. Millet - Policies with Earned

Premium

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

-40%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 110. Mint - Policies with Earned

Premium

0%

-2%

-4%

-6%

-8%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 113. Navel Oranges - Policies with 

Earned Premium

4000%

3000%

2000%

1000%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 114. Onions - Policies with Earned

Premium

50%

40%

30%

10%

0%

-10%

-20%

20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Appendix figures 107-114 -- Specialty Crops Number of Insured Policies, 1998-2002 -

Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

Figure 111. Mustard - Policies with Earned 

Premium

600%

500%

400%

300%

200%

100%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 112. Nursery - Policies with Earned 

Premium

150%

100%

50%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002
62

Figure 115. Peaches - Policies with Earned

Premium

25%

20%

15%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 116. Pears - Policies with Earned

Premium

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 117. Pecans - Policies with Earned

Premium

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 118. Peppers - Policies with Earned

Premium

250%

200%

150%

100%

50%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 121. Processing Cucumbers -

Policies with Earned Premium

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 122. Prunes - Policies with Earned

Premium

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Appendix figures 115-122 -- Specialty Crops Number of Insured Policies, 1998-2002 -

Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

Figure 119. Plums - Policies with Earned 

Premium

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 120. Potatoes - Policies with Earned 

Premium

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002
63

Figure 127. Sweet Corn for Canning -

Policies with Earned Premium

4%

2%

0%

-2%

-4%

-6%

-8%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 128. Sweetpotatoes - Policies with

Earned Premium

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 129. Table Grapes - Policies with

Earned Premium

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Figure 130. Tomatoes for

Canning/Processing - Policies with Earned 

Premium

30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg

Appendix figures 123-130 -- Specialty Crops Number of Insured Policies, 1998-2002 -

Continued

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998- 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002 2002

Figure 123. Raisins - Policies with Earned 

Premium

20%

10%

0%

-10%

-20%

-30%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Figure 124. Raspberries/Blackberries -

Policies with Earned Premium

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

1000%

800%

600%

400%

200%

0%

-200%

Figure 125. Stonefruit - Policies with Earned

Premium

Figure 126. Strawberries - Policies with 

Earned Premium

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

-40%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002
64

Figure 131. Walnuts - Policies with Earned

Premium

60%

40%

20%

0%

-20%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002

Appendix figures 131-132 -- Specialty Crops Number of Insured Policies, 1998-2002 -

Continued

Figure 132. W inter Squash - Policies with 

Earned Premium

300%

250%

200%

150%

100%

50%

0%

Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg Pct chg 

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-

2002