Arable farmer is fishing behind the net in fauna damage

17.236.875 euros. That is the amount that the Fauna Fund must have in the account to compensate for the fauna damage for 2015. More than 85 percent of the money goes to grassland owners. Not surprising, because geese especially cause a lot of damage here. Are arable farmers unintentionally missing out?

The damage caused by geese throughout 2015 is more than one euro per Dutch person. A total of 17.236.875 euros was paid out as compensation. Especially for grassland damage. This is evident from published data from the fund. This amount is expected to be even higher in 2016. In the first six months, EUR 16,3 million was compensated. 2,5 million euros can probably be added to that, writes the NRC. A difference of 1,57 million euros compared to 2015.

Since 2012, the Fauna Fund has dealt with a total of just under 23.000 damage reports from farmers. It mainly concerns damage to crops. Usually it is grassland. 86 percent of the damage amount is intended for this 'crop'. With 5 percent, perhaps strikingly, damage to pears comes at two and winter grain at 4 percent at three. The remaining 5 percent is divided among 75 other crops. The Fauna Fund also compensates damage to animals, although this is very sporadic.

The NRC put all reports in a map of the Netherlands. This immediately shows that geese follow the water. The Frisian lake area in particular is a goose damage hotspot. Millions have been paid out in compensation in recent years. Parts of North Holland - along the Markermeer - also suffer a lot of damage, just like the Veluwe. Arable areas in Flevoland, North Brabant and Zeeland hardly light up.

Wim van Werven, agricultural appraiser at Wiberg Appraisals from Kamperveen, endorses the conclusion drawn by the NRC. 'You naturally find geese near water. Meadow areas are often located in the vicinity of water, which makes them attractive to geese. This is where you see the most damage. It's a natural thing.'

Van Werven can only speculate about the truth behind the huge difference between the 86 percent grass damage and 4 percent grain damage. 'Perhaps not all farmers know how to report damage?', he suggests. 'When it comes to incidental damage, you see that this is not always reported. This also has to do with the 'treatment amount' of 300 euros that the reporting center uses. The grain price therefore also has a small influence on the settlement.' Just to reimburse the reporting costs, you already have to harvest almost 2 tonnes less from a hectare at the current wheat price.

Grassland owners in foraging areas benefit from automatic claims handling. Compensation for the substantial annual damage. Aren't arable farming colleagues disadvantaged? In practice it is known what damage geese can cause to grain and other (arable) crops. According to the appraiser, this is a little too short-sighted. 'Farmers who have their land in designated foraging areas are obliged to leave the geese alone. They therefore do not have to take deterrent measures, which is the case with arable farmers. This does not apply to newly sown grassland. In return for housing the geese, they have automatic claims settlement.'

Fauna damage is a recurring theme for agricultural entrepreneurs. Is the problem increasing? Van Werven does not dare say it with his current experience. 'The geese population is experiencing a historic increase, which means that the damage is also expected to increase. The compensation scheme sometimes has minor policy changes. This also differs per province, but is broadly fixed. The procedure is open to every entrepreneur, but it remains a calculation whether this is interesting.'

© DCA Market Intelligence. This market information is subject to copyright. It is not permitted to reproduce, distribute, disseminate or make the content available to third parties for compensation, in any form, without the express written permission of DCA Market Intelligence.