Govt refuses rice price guarantee, but will help cut farmers' costs

[Thai at Heart]

The price should be 25,000 a ton

I vote for 50,000 baht a ton and keys to brand new Toyota Fortuner just for agreeing to

be a Thai rice farmer......

The poor farmers got 12, 000 to 15 , 000 baht a metric ton last year. ..they made 100% profit.(cost 6, 000 baht per ton)..so they must have money saved up...time for them to learn ..if the market price for rice isn't high enough..don't grow rice..

For this to get back to sustainability it needs to get to a point where they are using only 4500 bahts worth of input but the sale price stays put, and the market puts up with the requisite reduction in volume.

Grwoing more and more at ever increasing cost with reducing margin because it needs more and more fertiliser is NOT THE ANSWER.

[Thai at Heart]

Fertilizer use

The use of chemical fertilizers in Thailand started to increase exponentially in the 1970s;

between 1961 and 2004 fertilizer use increased more than 100 times, an spectacular increased

from 18 thousand tonnes in 1961 to 2 million tonnes in 2004. But in spite of this massive

increase in chemical fertilizer use, the yield of rice and maize increased barely 1 time

(doubling in 45 years) (Figure 1). This indicates a tremendous loss of fertilizers into the

environment due to their imbalance use and poor management. Moreover, the total area

dedicated to cereal crops also doubled during this period, reaching almost 12 million hectares

in 2005.

http://www.greenpeace.to/publications/GPSEA_agrochemical-use-in-thailand.pdf

Fertilizer use increased 100 times, while rice and maize yield increased only about

1 time, from 1961 to 2007 in Thailand

So I ask again. Who exactly has benefitted from all of this effort to grow ever increasing amounts of rice in order to become the largest rice exporter. Seems it has been great business for fertiliser manufacturers and exporters. A lot less so for farmers.

[mikemac]

The Government is this instance has its head screwed on right , the rice farmers are living in yesteryear, subsidies never helped anyone, except to place a false level on costs, the government would be advised to stick to non populist policies, however, government assistance to reduced fuel, fertilizer, electricity and water charges would reduce running costs and not effect the product price in the marketplace, this I might add is for all farmers not just rice farmers, corruption is the evil boogie in these schemes so strict , enforced guidelines would need to be followed , I have my doubts on that score

Rice farmers in Thailand have been screwed forever. Just look at the yields and look at the fertiliser usage. It would be a national disgrace anywhere else.

Let's not get into who has shares in companies producing feed stock for fertilisers.

......................................."Rice farmers in Thailand have been screwed forever. Just look at the yields and look at the fertiliser usage. It would be a national disgrace anywhere else."...........................................

Not too sure I understand what you mean there, what has fertilizer usage got to do with being screwed ? Are you saying they are being sold dodgy fertilizer ? If so it is one of the best conspiracy theories I have heard for a while.

And I don't blame you for not wanting to get into who has shares in these shady companies, don't want to be opening that big ol' can of worms.

They have been allowed to continue using outmoded, incorrect practices, with no fallow periods, with recommeneded use of ever increased amounts of fertilisers being the solution.

When they should have been learning better rotation, ploughing, sowign, harvesting techniques to reduce the amount of fertiliser needed, the companies have been ever chasing enormous volumes of product to the detriment of quality. Hence, the ever increasing need for more and more fertiliser.

There are some places that are so absoultely marginal, they should never even be attempting to grow rice at all. But the massive use of fertilisers has allowed production but at very low yields. THey need to start weaning farmers off fertilisers to bring costs down, and focus on natural ways to increase yields but then reduce the number of crops per year in some places. If they can grow 20 tonnes at 3USD per tonne cost across 2 crops, that can turn out better than 25 at 5USD per tonne cost, if the sale price is 6

This is the issue. Growing what you can at the best margin, and this endless chase of volume using inorganic fertilisers and multiple crops which just serves to deplete everything in the soil has to stop.

Who benefits from this extra volume? Certainly not the farmers.

Does anyone think anyone in Bangkok thinks that there is an inherent benefit in reducing fertilisers and pesticide consumption? This is a multibazillion baht business, and it will not be dismantled. Will not.

Interesting stuff.

I will ask my wife's family, who have been growing rice in Surin province for many years what they think about the fertilizer situation. Will let you know the results.

[Redhawk]

No learning curve here and by the way is not everything better than before?! No corruption now, only over 60 Mio. trustworthy and honest people led by the most intelligent and intellectual man the country has ever seen. I always thought military men were to defend?! As long I see new Toyatos in front of new homes and daily cigarette and liquor consum is still high it can't that much bad! The people still do not see the wolf in the herd of the sheeps! :-)

[jingjoke]

Did the farmers learn nothing from the Thaksin rice sheme in which they didn't get paid anything until the coup? There's no guarantee in farming, supply and demand determines the prices, are Thai farmers actually that ding-dong? If your not smart enough to make a decent profit, quit the business.

Yes...and the price of the rice in Cambodja and Vietnam is much cheaper and the same quality...Maybe try to explain them that Thailand in not the center of the world and nobody is waiting to pay "double"...

Possibly the Government ought to arrange tours to Cambodia and Vietnam to compare methodology. Best for farmers to hear from other farmers.

Edited September 27, 2014 by jingjoke

[stoli]

The Government is this instance has its head screwed on right , the rice farmers are living in yesteryear, subsidies never helped anyone, except to place a false level on costs, the government would be advised to stick to non populist policies, however, government assistance to reduced fuel, fertilizer, electricity and water charges would reduce running costs and not effect the product price in the marketplace, this I might add is for all farmers not just rice farmers, corruption is the evil boogie in these schemes so strict , enforced guidelines would need to be followed , I have my doubts on that score

Rice farmers in Thailand have been screwed forever. Just look at the yields and look at the fertiliser usage. It would be a national disgrace anywhere else.

Let's not get into who has shares in companies producing feed stock for fertilisers.

......................................."Rice farmers in Thailand have been screwed forever. Just look at the yields and look at the fertiliser usage. It would be a national disgrace anywhere else."...........................................

Not too sure I understand what you mean there, what has fertilizer usage got to do with being screwed ? Are you saying they are being sold dodgy fertilizer ? If so it is one of the best conspiracy theories I have heard for a while.

And I don't blame you for not wanting to get into who has shares in these shady companies, don't want to be opening that big ol' can of worms.

They have been allowed to continue using outmoded, incorrect practices, with no fallow periods, with recommeneded use of ever increased amounts of fertilisers being the solution.

When they should have been learning better rotation, ploughing, sowign, harvesting techniques to reduce the amount of fertiliser needed, the companies have been ever chasing enormous volumes of product to the detriment of quality. Hence, the ever increasing need for more and more fertiliser.

There are some places that are so absoultely marginal, they should never even be attempting to grow rice at all. But the massive use of fertilisers has allowed production but at very low yields. THey need to start weaning farmers off fertilisers to bring costs down, and focus on natural ways to increase yields but then reduce the number of crops per year in some places. If they can grow 20 tonnes at 3USD per tonne cost across 2 crops, that can turn out better than 25 at 5USD per tonne cost, if the sale price is 6

This is the issue. Growing what you can at the best margin, and this endless chase of volume using inorganic fertilisers and multiple crops which just serves to deplete everything in the soil has to stop.

Who benefits from this extra volume? Certainly not the farmers.

Does anyone think anyone in Bangkok thinks that there is an inherent benefit in reducing fertilisers and pesticide consumption? This is a multibazillion baht business, and it will not be dismantled. Will not.

ThaiAtHeart

I always hear from environmentalists about rotating crops, and in practice in agricultural areas that can do this, it is very good for the soil. What do you suggest for Thailand? Rice one year, rubber trees the next year, then coconuts, followed by mangoes for one year. It does not work that way. Being from the wine country in Northern California I am used to those without knowledge suggesting that they should not grow grapes every year, but suggest they rotate their crops. Ridiculous. Stop and think, please. Or become a farmer, using your methods. Let me know how that works.

[SoilSpoil]

Here in Bangkok the price of fruits and veggies are completely out of whack. Much higher than in Europe or even Singapore. Weird that this can happen in an agricultural society.

[slapout]

The Thai farm population have been ignored in schooling for soil suitability and usuage, assisment for fertilizer, peesticides,, etc.T^he fertilizer (china product) has been tested and shown to be substandard, as has the pesticides. The market for farm product is the samee people pushing the overpriced substandard products which are promissed to increase production.

Throw in the fact that 40 or 50 rai will allow a family7 of 6 or more to survive but not imp-rove their lifestyle and when the children become of age it sure cannot support 2 or 3 more framlies.The potential farm labor source is rduced, farm size is reduced due to death of parents thus a chance to obtain a better life style is decreased further.

Thai farmers must form coops where they have bargining power to purchase what they need, quality product, when needed, at a fair price aqnd can set aq fair price ob farm product.Combined with this they must have diversied crops to protect from single crop dependency. This reqiresw larger farm units, educated young farmers and most important a labor market for those who cannot find employment in the farm sector.

[nong38]

Giant step in the right direction, a return to reality.

[khaowong1]

I have run and managed several business's in my life and have never seen 40 or 50 percent profits. 10 to 15 percent is more like it.

[Trouble]

The Government is this instance has its head screwed on right , the rice farmers are living in yesteryear, subsidies never helped anyone, except to place a false level on costs, the government would be advised to stick to non populist policies, however, government assistance to reduced fuel, fertilizer, electricity and water charges would reduce running costs and not effect the product price in the marketplace, this I might add is for all farmers not just rice farmers, corruption is the evil boogie in these schemes so strict , enforced guidelines would need to be followed , I have my doubts on that score

So it is populist policy if the government buys the rice at an inflated price and not populist policy to subsidize the production costs? Either way the government is using government funds to help the farmer whether on the front end of production on on the back end when he sells the rice. I understand the predicament the rice farmer is in but when government steps in to help out it generally ends up being a fiasco as they artificially change the economics of supply and demand and end up with a bigger problem than they had in the beginning. Happens everywhere.

[Thai at Heart]

The Government is this instance has its head screwed on right , the rice farmers are living in yesteryear, subsidies never helped anyone, except to place a false level on costs, the government would be advised to stick to non populist policies, however, government assistance to reduced fuel, fertilizer, electricity and water charges would reduce running costs and not effect the product price in the marketplace, this I might add is for all farmers not just rice farmers, corruption is the evil boogie in these schemes so strict , enforced guidelines would need to be followed , I have my doubts on that score

Rice farmers in Thailand have been screwed forever. Just look at the yields and look at the fertiliser usage. It would be a national disgrace anywhere else.

Let's not get into who has shares in companies producing feed stock for fertilisers.

......................................."Rice farmers in Thailand have been screwed forever. Just look at the yields and look at the fertiliser usage. It would be a national disgrace anywhere else."...........................................

Not too sure I understand what you mean there, what has fertilizer usage got to do with being screwed ? Are you saying they are being sold dodgy fertilizer ? If so it is one of the best conspiracy theories I have heard for a while.

And I don't blame you for not wanting to get into who has shares in these shady companies, don't want to be opening that big ol' can of worms.

They have been allowed to continue using outmoded, incorrect practices, with no fallow periods, with recommeneded use of ever increased amounts of fertilisers being the solution.

When they should have been learning better rotation, ploughing, sowign, harvesting techniques to reduce the amount of fertiliser needed, the companies have been ever chasing enormous volumes of product to the detriment of quality. Hence, the ever increasing need for more and more fertiliser.

There are some places that are so absoultely marginal, they should never even be attempting to grow rice at all. But the massive use of fertilisers has allowed production but at very low yields. THey need to start weaning farmers off fertilisers to bring costs down, and focus on natural ways to increase yields but then reduce the number of crops per year in some places. If they can grow 20 tonnes at 3USD per tonne cost across 2 crops, that can turn out better than 25 at 5USD per tonne cost, if the sale price is 6

This is the issue. Growing what you can at the best margin, and this endless chase of volume using inorganic fertilisers and multiple crops which just serves to deplete everything in the soil has to stop.

Who benefits from this extra volume? Certainly not the farmers.

Does anyone think anyone in Bangkok thinks that there is an inherent benefit in reducing fertilisers and pesticide consumption? This is a multibazillion baht business, and it will not be dismantled. Will not.

ThaiAtHeart

I always hear from environmentalists about rotating crops, and in practice in agricultural areas that can do this, it is very good for the soil. What do you suggest for Thailand? Rice one year, rubber trees the next year, then coconuts, followed by mangoes for one year. It does not work that way. Being from the wine country in Northern California I am used to those without knowledge suggesting that they should not grow grapes every year, but suggest they rotate their crops. Ridiculous. Stop and think, please. Or become a farmer, using your methods. Let me know how that works.

You do realise that there are places in Thailand that produce 4 crops per year of there is water. They require enormous amounts of fertiliser.

What is farming? First to feed yourself, then to feed the country, then to make money.

If the farmers can make a living and feed themselves with 2 crops, what is the point in chasing a third or fourth if it can only be achieved by using excessive fertiliser.

This gets to be even more of an issue since rice requires enormous amounts of water and irrigation.

Of course a poorly informed farmer will grow rice if that is what he is encouraged to grow.

As for becoming a farmer, I worked in agricultural exports for 10 years where we provided an out of season crop that earned 3 times rice per hectare.

If they would stop growing one rice crop they could double their earning. I don't beleive that the title of largest rice exporter is useful if ur farmers continue to be living hand to mouth.

They need to grow less rice and diversify.

[Leung Falang]

The Government is this instance has its head screwed on right , the rice farmers are living in yesteryear, subsidies never helped anyone, except to place a false level on costs, the government would be advised to stick to non populist policies, however, government assistance to reduced fuel, fertilizer, electricity and water charges would reduce running costs and not effect the product price in the marketplace, this I might add is for all farmers not just rice farmers, corruption is the evil boogie in these schemes so strict , enforced guidelines would need to be followed , I have my doubts on that score

Rice farmers in Thailand have been screwed forever. Just look at the yields and look at the fertiliser usage. It would be a national disgrace anywhere else.

Let's not get into who has shares in companies producing feed stock for fertilisers.

......................................."Rice farmers in Thailand have been screwed forever. Just look at the yields and look at the fertiliser usage. It would be a national disgrace anywhere else."...........................................

Not too sure I understand what you mean there, what has fertilizer usage got to do with being screwed ? Are you saying they are being sold dodgy fertilizer ? If so it is one of the best conspiracy theories I have heard for a while.

And I don't blame you for not wanting to get into who has shares in these shady companies, don't want to be opening that big ol' can of worms.

They have been allowed to continue using outmoded, incorrect practices, with no fallow periods, with recommeneded use of ever increased amounts of fertilisers being the solution.

When they should have been learning better rotation, ploughing, sowign, harvesting techniques to reduce the amount of fertiliser needed, the companies have been ever chasing enormous volumes of product to the detriment of quality. Hence, the ever increasing need for more and more fertiliser.

There are some places that are so absoultely marginal, they should never even be attempting to grow rice at all. But the massive use of fertilisers has allowed production but at very low yields. THey need to start weaning farmers off fertilisers to bring costs down, and focus on natural ways to increase yields but then reduce the number of crops per year in some places. If they can grow 20 tonnes at 3USD per tonne cost across 2 crops, that can turn out better than 25 at 5USD per tonne cost, if the sale price is 6

This is the issue. Growing what you can at the best margin, and this endless chase of volume using inorganic fertilisers and multiple crops which just serves to deplete everything in the soil has to stop.

Who benefits from this extra volume? Certainly not the farmers.

Does anyone think anyone in Bangkok thinks that there is an inherent benefit in reducing fertilisers and pesticide consumption? This is a multibazillion baht business, and it will not be dismantled. Will not.

"They have been allowed" indicates some belief that government should CONTROL farming as a communist country might. My wife's family still farms and I agree the methods are outmoded, but isn't it their right to fail?

Surely the government could use demo projects to show a better way, but in the end, capitalism will show the way if the government gets out of the way. Laos and Vietnam have been featured in recent photos with primitive but effective machines. A transition to industrialization needs to occur, and the government can help that with proper policies including education.

Rice farmers cannot compete with industrial mechanization and methods especially when they plant one crop per year in most areas which requires 3 months of work during a 6 month period. Most are lazy and just follow the crowd. Most of their children want to "get out" as soon as possible-anywhere but the farm with the drinking and gambling and general laziness.

[Cake Monster]

Seconds out ! Round 2

[Rimbuman]

Did the farmers learn nothing from the Thaksin rice sheme in which they didn't get paid anything until the coup? There's no guarantee in farming, supply and demand determines the prices, are Thai farmers actually that ding-dong? If your not smart enough to make a decent profit, quit the business.

Yes...and the price of the rice in Cambodja and Vietnam is much cheaper and the same quality...Maybe try to explain them that Thailand in not the center of the world and nobody is waiting to pay "double"...

Part of Thai double pricing policies ?

[robblok]

Here in Bangkok the price of fruits and veggies are completely out of whack. Much higher than in Europe or even Singapore. Weird that this can happen in an agricultural society.

Strange.. been in Europe recently (last month) and can't say the prices were lower. I buy my stuff at the fresh market here and its not that expensive. Sure its expensive if you want things that are out of season.

Can you tell me what you think is expensive that is farmed in Thailand and not imported ?

[Bkungbank]

It's a wise moved not to control the price and let on market to decide, farmers can do many thing in rice feild like raising snake head fishs and frogs for as these two animal can be found in fire feild already to increase income and for the farmer family consumtion .

Need data sharing which I think easy for village headman to let the farmer know actual rice in market and grade, type,timing.

This data sharing to avoind rice over flow market to control best price for farmer. As product over flow the price go down.

Don't care about Veitnam rice as Thai rice already have great reputation in world market for it's good smell and quality consumer don't care about paying higer price as they can get good and healty rice. Products labeling are important to inrease the value of the products itself, Thai rice don't have dump price with India and Veitnam as it need to stand up value in it.

[gchurch259]

Did the farmers learn nothing from the Thaksin rice sheme in which they didn't get paid anything until the coup? There's no guarantee in farming, supply and demand determines the prices, are Thai farmers actually that ding-dong? If your not smart enough to make a decent profit, quit the business.

What you are saying has merit, however the big problems seems to be the middle men. We produce Mangos and we get from 12 to 25 THB for kilo at the farm. Sometimes less. The only thing the middle man says is too many Mangos produced and drives the price down.

The problems is you go into a market and the prices for Mangos stays the same, has nothing to do with too many produced, just how much the middle man keeps.

[gchurch259]

I have a friend in Issan whose family has raised Rice for years. Their biggest problem is the continual flooding that kills the rice. So, if the government wants to help, then control the flooding. Of course their land is in a low area as is many more paddies. Thailand does not seem to want the terraced rice paddies in the hill country, just the flat land paddies.

[billd766]

There is too much rice in Thailand as it is.

This is a good move and should force many farmers to turn to other crops.

Some things are expensive, so why not farm those instead?

It will help bring prices down and they can still make more than they get from rice.

Garlic, Chilli, potatoes even.

How about fish ponds and fresh water prawns to subsidize their income?.... why are they just sticking their hands out??

The Shin governments have turned these farmers into an economic burden.

I wonder what they will think when their crops fail over the coming 2 years what with this very dry rainy season, very low reservoirs nationwide and El Nino next year meaning low rainfall... Rice is heavily reliant on water. They should be taking action NOW!

Growing alternative crops seems like a good plan but what crops can you grow on rice paddy land that

1 You know will give you more profit than rice

2 crops that will grow on overfertilised rice paddy

3 crops that you actually know something about

4 crops that you can harvest twice a year to get enough money to live on

5 crops that don't need as much irrigation as rice

6 and most important. What will you live on between changing out your rice crop for something else.

Where we live the land is sloping and no real access to any real full time water supply so my wife rents out the land to a guy who grows man saparang as neither of us are farmers.

Galic and chilli are OK to grow but potatoes are more tricky. Fish is probably OK if you can keep the water in the fishpond and it doesn't evaporate. Prawns I have no idea.

At the end of the day it will mostly depend on the type of land and access to water.

[Thai at Heart]

The Government is this instance has its head screwed on right , the rice farmers are living in yesteryear, subsidies never helped anyone, except to place a false level on costs, the government would be advised to stick to non populist policies, however, government assistance to reduced fuel, fertilizer, electricity and water charges would reduce running costs and not effect the product price in the marketplace, this I might add is for all farmers not just rice farmers, corruption is the evil boogie in these schemes so strict , enforced guidelines would need to be followed , I have my doubts on that score

Rice farmers in Thailand have been screwed forever. Just look at the yields and look at the fertiliser usage. It would be a national disgrace anywhere else.

Let's not get into who has shares in companies producing feed stock for fertilisers.

......................................."Rice farmers in Thailand have been screwed forever. Just look at the yields and look at the fertiliser usage. It would be a national disgrace anywhere else."...........................................

Not too sure I understand what you mean there, what has fertilizer usage got to do with being screwed ? Are you saying they are being sold dodgy fertilizer ? If so it is one of the best conspiracy theories I have heard for a while.

And I don't blame you for not wanting to get into who has shares in these shady companies, don't want to be opening that big ol' can of worms.

They have been allowed to continue using outmoded, incorrect practices, with no fallow periods, with recommeneded use of ever increased amounts of fertilisers being the solution.

When they should have been learning better rotation, ploughing, sowign, harvesting techniques to reduce the amount of fertiliser needed, the companies have been ever chasing enormous volumes of product to the detriment of quality. Hence, the ever increasing need for more and more fertiliser.

There are some places that are so absoultely marginal, they should never even be attempting to grow rice at all. But the massive use of fertilisers has allowed production but at very low yields. THey need to start weaning farmers off fertilisers to bring costs down, and focus on natural ways to increase yields but then reduce the number of crops per year in some places. If they can grow 20 tonnes at 3USD per tonne cost across 2 crops, that can turn out better than 25 at 5USD per tonne cost, if the sale price is 6

This is the issue. Growing what you can at the best margin, and this endless chase of volume using inorganic fertilisers and multiple crops which just serves to deplete everything in the soil has to stop.

Who benefits from this extra volume? Certainly not the farmers.

Does anyone think anyone in Bangkok thinks that there is an inherent benefit in reducing fertilisers and pesticide consumption? This is a multibazillion baht business, and it will not be dismantled. Will not.

"They have been allowed" indicates some belief that government should CONTROL farming as a communist country might. My wife's family still farms and I agree the methods are outmoded, but isn't it their right to fail?

Surely the government could use demo projects to show a better way, but in the end, capitalism will show the way if the government gets out of the way. Laos and Vietnam have been featured in recent photos with primitive but effective machines. A transition to industrialization needs to occur, and the government can help that with proper policies including education.

Rice farmers cannot compete with industrial mechanization and methods especially when they plant one crop per year in most areas which requires 3 months of work during a 6 month period. Most are lazy and just follow the crowd. Most of their children want to "get out" as soon as possible-anywhere but the farm with the drinking and gambling and general laziness.

Not when it is set up in the way that it has.

Companies have been given the right to control the farmer. In that position someone has an obligation to educate and advise the farmer of his possible mistakes and provide help.

U think subsistence farmers shouldnt be provided with advice. Tragedy is, they have been receiving the wrong advice. And loom at the results. Millions still living in rural poverty, who burn fields because their granddaddy did it. now there is progress.

Edited September 28, 2014 by Thai at Heart

[lvr181]

How about just taking the time to see how other countries have dealt with similar problems of fluctuating incomes for primary producers? And see if this can be applied to the rice farmers or rubber farmers etc? I know this means learning from a farang country but look how others have dealt with similar problems.

I am not going to reprint a "scheme" online here but will give an online reference i.e. http://www.nzica.com/News/Archive/2013/April/The-Income-Equalisation-Deposit-scheme.aspx

Live and learn Thai Government and farmers. Find a way this can be done instead of reasons why it cannot.

[englishoak]

How about just taking the time to see how other countries have dealt with similar problems of fluctuating incomes for primary producers? And see if this can be applied to the rice farmers or rubber farmers etc? I know this means learning from a farang country but look how others have dealt with similar problems.

I am not going to reprint a "scheme" online here but will give an online reference i.e. http://www.nzica.com/News/Archive/2013/April/The-Income-Equalisation-Deposit-scheme.aspx

Live and learn Thai Government and farmers. Find a way this can be done instead of reasons why it cannot.

That would be a loss of face, it has to be done... the Thai way

[robblok]

How about just taking the time to see how other countries have dealt with similar problems of fluctuating incomes for primary producers? And see if this can be applied to the rice farmers or rubber farmers etc? I know this means learning from a farang country but look how others have dealt with similar problems.

I am not going to reprint a "scheme" online here but will give an online reference i.e. http://www.nzica.com/News/Archive/2013/April/The-Income-Equalisation-Deposit-scheme.aspx

Live and learn Thai Government and farmers. Find a way this can be done instead of reasons why it cannot.

That would be a loss of face, it has to be done... the Thai way

And that plan is worked out far to good that would be only 1 study trip and one that they really should work on.