Thai farmers growing 4 million rais of rice paddies despite advised against it

[apetley]

Growing or not is a business decision. And if a bad decision is made, farmers should be allowed to suffer the consequences, as does those in any other business.

Yeah. And let's be done with socialism once for all. Everyone get a gun and if they can't aim right, be allowed to suffer the consequences.

I think your analogy is a bit off base. The farmers, who have been growing rice for a couple of years now, .....should understand that last year's rainfall was inadequate to fill the reservoirs and dams with sufficient water to allow them to grow more than one crop. They were told this in no uncertain terms.

If anything, they might try and approach the present government or whatever you want to call it, and sit down with them and discuss the problem. P.M. Prayut is aware of their problem, but they have been warned of the folly of trying for 2 or 3 crops during a drought season.

Where I live the military has physically stopped some rice farmers from planting their rice crop but is allowing the massive sugarcane crop to continue. Funny how there is enough water for that.

The reason for that is because - Sugarcane is a crop that requires much less water than rice.

Not according to this.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/S2022E/s2022e02.htm

This is the problem that occurs when you rely too much on literature such as that you provided in the FAO link and not really understanding the farming system as a whole. There is a very big difference between a crop's physiologic need for water and the agronomic use of water. In the later case (agronomic use), rice fields are flooded to control weeds. By flooding the fields, weed competition is minimized. That amount of water used to flood the field is not needed by the rice plant but is there anyway for a different purpose. So while the FAO article may be correct, it is out of context because it only refers to the physiological water requirement.

Agree entirely with what you say but here's what a family member said this morning when I pushed them on the issue. His immediate response was that rice uses more water. Then he thought about it and said that sugarcane needed watering more often but with less. His final conclusion......'about the same......maybe'.

You also have to consider that the growing period of rice (90 to 150 days) is much shorter than that of sugarcane (270 to 360 days).

True, perhaps that why he said 'maybe' :-)

[Robby nz]

Thank you for the post.

From what I could see in the pictures what you are looking at is often referred to as AWD (Alternative wetting and drying of the paddy) by the Rice Institute, The last picture in particular would suggest that it was taken on a farm using SRI methods (System of Rice Intensification). This is far more encompassing than just AWD and offers many benefits than just the application of AWD.

Under SRI some of the advantages that have been demonstrated include water saving of up to 40%, increased productivity, lower costs due to less seed, fertilizer and pesticides.

The obvious question is why has this not been more widely promoted in Thailand - look at the lower costs and come to your own conclusions. What is clear is that the uptake of SRI in Thailand's competitors and traditional markets is much higher than in Thailand, hence some of Thailand problems in the international market.

There are some useful videos in English on utube by the Seventh Day Adventists (no I am not trying to promote them - I am a Buddhist)

IMO some rich bandits like, that a lot of farmers going bankrupt, caused of their loans they have to selling their fields.

To invite effective methods in planting and harvesting you need bigger fields to use also big machines, it's just that simple.

Many small farms have their rice harvested using combines. In case you have not noticed, there are many roaming combine harvesters that do contract harvesting. Owning a combine harvester is not the only option.

No farmers that I know of on the central plains own their own harvester just to harvest their own paddy.

All harvesting is done by contractors, that some contractors also have their own paddy does not change the fact that they are contractors and earn most of their income from contracting.

It is not economical for a farmer to own expensive machinery to only harvest their own crops, that goes for sugar cane as well.

Very few farmers here even own a tractor as the working up of the paddy is done on contract.

Normally the only machines a rice farmer owns are a pump with a motor to drive it, a scrub bar and a sprayer, although most of the spraying is also done on contract.

[kieran2698]

Barely worth growing rice these days so don't really understand why so many do it for so little return.

The obvious worth is the rice. Can you understand why people grow their own vegetables rather than just go to Tesco?

[billd766]

There is a reason why they are called RICE Farmers. Care to guess what that reason is? Another question is "What will they do if the did not plant rice?"

Many are planting cassava.is what they

It grows fine without irrigation.

It also sells for a good price, unlike rice.

That is what they do!

That is what is mostly grown on the slopes around here with some sugar cane which is also not irrigated.

[kieran2698]

Grow potatoes,rice needs to much water

And potatoes need cool weather, there are not so many places you can grow potatoes and in those that you can only in the winter between the rice crops.

[ericnoodeeka]

Lets take a little bit of a closer look at why we are in the situation we are in now.

In 2011 there was extensive flooding particularly in the CP river basin culminating in the runoff reaching BKK.

This was made worse by the dams being full and water having to be released at the peak of the rains,. So :

"During 2011 the dams were full, up to the operational limit, and dam operators had to release water at the wrong time. Latest news is that they decided to operate at a lower level, give less priority to agricultural and energy use, in favour of downstream flood protection. Hence a lower risk for dam breaks," Tjitte Nauta, Deltares' integrated water management specialist for Southeast Asia, said."

Right, now it had been decided that the dams should be kept at a lower level so they could be managed better in a flood situation, but this was unfortunately taken to extremes.

Does anyone else remember PT wanting to take the dams down to 30% level before the 2012 rainy season then Yingluck going to ask the advice of His Majesty who said they should never be let to get below 50%

Well the weather people had been telling them that the rains were not going to come to the same intensity as global weather patterns had changed and the country was looking at a drought cycle, but in spite of this the dams were allowed to drop to low levels.

The weather people have been proved to be correct and the rains and floods did not come and the dams have never recovered so we see the situation we have today and we are really not into the driest time of the year as yet.

So a matter of priorities as per the highlighted quote above.

That does not however change the fact that there is a drought situation because of lack of rain, but better dam management could alleviate the situation to a large extent.

i have to agree with this, im in sakon nakhon, i went to look at one of our small reservoirs near the phu pan mountains, its nearly empty, i have never seen it so low, and its only febuary.i was fishing in there last year, now i can walk across it.

we went to loei last week and i can walk to laos without getting my feet wet, is unbelievable.

Edited February 5, 2015 by ericnoodeeka

[Alwyn]

There is a reason why they are called RICE Farmers. Care to guess what that reason is? Another question is "What will they do if the did not plant rice?"

Well how about this for a novel view? "There is a reason they are called rice FARMERS. Care to guess what it is? What will they do if they don't plant rice? Plant something else. Water melons is a quick crop for example

You are correct in that Rice Farmers do not necessarily plant only rice. Some of them plant soybean after rice to augment their income and also to enrich the soil as soybeans are nitrogen-fixing plants (adds nitrogen nutrient which rice plants can later extract from the soil). But what is your point here? We are talking about irrigated rice cultivation.

I cannot find your ridiculous reply "Your understanding of this is very simplistic. Using your own analogy, then You would have no problem going to a dermatologist to give you a heart transplant... Both of them ARE doctors as well." Did you realise how stupid it was and delete it?

Anyway, back to this comment of yours and you ask me what is my point? You made the initial comment asking what can a rice farmer do if they don't plant rice? Because (your words) they are RICE farmers and (my words) can only plant rice. You asked the question and I answered it, that is my point. I really don't understand your point as you now answer your first question by saying how farmers plant other crops too... The article - not YOU - is talking about irrigated rice cultivation. You asked a simple question by pointing out that RICE farmers can't do anything but farm rice, then you say they do grow other crops.. They can plant crops that are not so water intensive such a cassava or sweet corn. I am confused by your comments and posts as you ask a question, whine when somebody answers it and then you go on to answer your own question later...

[Alwyn]

There is a reason why they are called RICE Farmers. Care to guess what that reason is? Another question is "What will they do if the did not plant rice?"

Well how about this for a novel view? "There is a reason they are called rice FARMERS. Care to guess what it is? What will they do if they don't plant rice? Plant something else. Water melons is a quick crop for example

Some planting water melons after the rice and having good business, selling so much as possible local and the rest to a wholesale dealer.

Exactly! You answered toybits question for him. Sweetcorn is not water intensive, cassava.. Lot's of other crops are there - in fact the King did a lot of research about this on the farmers behalf! Why toybits thinks that rice farmers can only grow rice is a mystery to me

[roo860]

Yet here North of Chiang Mai, some villages have plenty of irrigation-water & are preparing the fields for planting, while in ours the klongs are bone-dry & there seems no point in trying.

Bad news for my wife's fish-ponds.

And for my rice pudding!!

[Oziex1]

If it is truly important that the water is not used on an off season crop then just telling them is not enough, once again no enforcement or education.

[lucky11]

There is a reason why they are called RICE Farmers. Care to guess what that reason is? Another question is "What will they do if the did not plant rice?"

Plant sugar cane instead - as advised.

[Fat Haggis]

Growing or not is a business decision. And if a bad decision is made, farmers should be allowed to suffer the consequences, as does those in any other business.

Yeah. And let's be done with socialism once for all. Everyone get a gun and if they can't aim right, be allowed to suffer the consequences.

I think your analogy is a bit off base. The farmers, who have been growing rice for a couple of years now, .....should understand that last year's rainfall was inadequate to fill the reservoirs and dams with sufficient water to allow them to grow more than one crop. They were told this in no uncertain terms.

If anything, they might try and approach the present government or whatever you want to call it, and sit down with them and discuss the problem. P.M. Prayut is aware of their problem, but they have been warned of the folly of trying for 2 or 3 crops during a drought season.

Where I live the military has physically stopped some rice farmers from planting their rice crop but is allowing the massive sugarcane crop to continue. Funny how there is enough water for that.

The reason for that is because - Sugarcane is a crop that requires much less water than rice.

Not according to this.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/S2022E/s2022e02.htm

This is the problem that occurs when you rely too much on literature such as that you provided in the FAO link and not really understanding the farming system as a whole. There is a very big difference between a crop's physiologic need for water and the agronomic use of water. In the later case (agronomic use), rice fields are flooded to control weeds. By flooding the fields, weed competition is minimized. That amount of water used to flood the field is not needed by the rice plant but is there anyway for a different purpose. So while the FAO article may be correct, it is out of context because it only refers to the physiological water requirement.

Agree entirely with what you say but here's what a family member said this morning when I pushed them on the issue. His immediate response was that rice uses more water. Then he thought about it and said that sugarcane needed watering more often but with less. His final conclusion......'about the same......maybe'.

You also have to consider that the growing period of rice (90 to 150 days) is much shorter than that of sugarcane (270 to 360 days).

same with Tapioca, generally we harvest ours between 12-14 months

[German Viking]

If half the people on this thread had any idea about farming in Thailand they should put forth any good ideas or shut the he11 up!

In the district were I live the alternate crops are corn for some and tapioca and watermelon for many this year with some paddie being left fallow.

The problem is not teach them, the would says good idea, but would'nt follow your advices like to grow no rice now, samesame and not really different, this is a problem with their mindset, culture etc., caused they did the same for generation.

A lot still not realize that somethings change and not only the climate, the most will not change until the desaster appears, but then is it to late.

Read up on "Natural Selection" of Charles Darwin.

This will be happen soon rule No. 1 in evolution only the strong survive.

[trogers]

Problems in Agriculture here (like in building and other manual trades) come from lack of vocational education, lack of investment and an unwillingness to change.

Problems are exacerbated at the moment by the well documented policies of the previous government. This water shaortage excuse is a crock. It's simply an excuse to cover the fact the govt is now sat on more rice than it can sell. In one foul swoop, the previous govt. screwed up the entire world rice commodity markets. This is what happens when you aim for popularity at the cost of common sense and economic nous.

Farming here is like stepping back 60+ years in time, if they dont change now, by investing and (as another poster pointed out) setting up cooperatives and trying to organise and drag their industry into the 21st century then the whole industry here will fail and be even further reduced to a subsistence based model. AEU is HERE. Will Thailand compete or fall by the wayside ?

Thailand has so much arable land. Use it with wisdom and foresight dear farmers.....

Didnt the govt a few years ago give all the farmers credit cards to use for investment in their farms ? It wouldnt suprise me if the the card debt remained long after the investments..ie flat screen TV and smart phone, had been sold off. Farmers want, and deserve better lives and standard of living but they have to understand that in the beginning this means massive change.

Unfortunately is for the most farmers to late already, to change.

They do not understand the difference between investment and consumption. Like giving a fisherman a boat and net which he sells. Enjoy his life for a short period, and then lie under a coconut tree bemoaning his poverty.

[German Viking]

There are water conservation techniques farmers can use. One of these techniques uses a very simple devise - a short length of perforated PVC pipe. Now, can the farmers politely ask those people in the cities to reduce their water consumption? NO? Well then, F#$K You!!! (said the farmer).

Thank you for the post.

From what I could see in the pictures what you are looking at is often referred to as AWD (Alternative wetting and drying of the paddy) by the Rice Institute, The last picture in particular would suggest that it was taken on a farm using SRI methods (System of Rice Intensification). This is far more encompassing than just AWD and offers many benefits than just the application of AWD.

Under SRI some of the advantages that have been demonstrated include water saving of up to 40%, increased productivity, lower costs due to less seed, fertilizer and pesticides.

The obvious question is why has this not been more widely promoted in Thailand - look at the lower costs and come to your own conclusions. What is clear is that the uptake of SRI in Thailand's competitors and traditional markets is much higher than in Thailand, hence some of Thailand problems in the international market.

There are some useful videos in English on utube by the Seventh Day Adventists (no I am not trying to promote them - I am a Buddhist)

IMO some rich bandits like, that a lot of farmers going bankrupt, caused of their loans they have to selling their fields.

To invite effective methods in planting and harvesting you need bigger fields to use also big machines, it's just that simple.

Many small farms have their rice harvested using combines. In case you have not noticed, there are many roaming combine harvesters that do contract harvesting. Owning a combine harvester is not the only option.

I was long time not in rice growing areas, but in Isaan in the middle of nowhere hardly to find, anyway only a combine harvester is not more as 1/3 of the solution to reduce the costs.

I general they have to found cooperatives(minimum 1000 rais) to be able to invest in other machines for cultivation too, bigger tractors, bigger ploughs etc. to make it more effective, also bring the prices down for fertilizer, seeds etc, caused of the bigger amounts of everything.

The most important thing ,somebody with a real eduction in agriculture should manage this cooperative.

I would install the 4 fields management, with this I would reduce the use of fertilizer minium 50%.

http://scholar.google.de/scholar?q=water+management+agriculture+thailand&hl=de&as_sdt=0,5&as_vis=1

https://www.google.de/search?q=agriculter+management+thailand&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=Y1vTVL6pOpDkaqXugUg#q=agriculture+management+thailand

[toybits]

There is a reason why they are called RICE Farmers. Care to guess what that reason is? Another question is "What will they do if the did not plant rice?"

Plant sugar cane instead - as advised.

Sugar cane is a long term investment (up to one year). Furthermore, some rice fields get flooded during the rain months which could be a problem if you are planting sugarcane. Furthermore, areas like Ayuthaya have fewer cane sugar processing facilities. These farmers may have to take their sugarcane to Kanchanaburi province to have their cane milled. So it is not simply changing crops but also considering the downstream process.

[German Viking]

Growing or not is a business decision. And if a bad decision is made, farmers should be allowed to suffer the consequences, as does those in any other business.

Yeah. And let's be done with socialism once for all. Everyone get a gun and if they can't aim right, be allowed to suffer the consequences.

I think your analogy is a bit off base. The farmers, who have been growing rice for a couple of years now, .....should understand that last year's rainfall was inadequate to fill the reservoirs and dams with sufficient water to allow them to grow more than one crop. They were told this in no uncertain terms.

If anything, they might try and approach the present government or whatever you want to call it, and sit down with them and discuss the problem. P.M. Prayut is aware of their problem, but they have been warned of the folly of trying for 2 or 3 crops during a drought season.

Where I live the military has physically stopped some rice farmers from planting their rice crop but is allowing the massive sugarcane crop to continue. Funny how there is enough water for that.

The reason for that is because - Sugarcane is a crop that requires much less water than rice.

Not according to this.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/S2022E/s2022e02.htm

This is the problem that occurs when you rely too much on literature such as that you provided in the FAO link and not really understanding the farming system as a whole. There is a very big difference between a crop's physiologic need for water and the agronomic use of water. In the later case (agronomic use), rice fields are flooded to control weeds. By flooding the fields, weed competition is minimized. That amount of water used to flood the field is not needed by the rice plant but is there anyway for a different purpose. So while the FAO article may be correct, it is out of context because it only refers to the physiological water requirement.

Agree entirely with what you say but here's what a family member said this morning when I pushed them on the issue. His immediate response was that rice uses more water. Then he thought about it and said that sugarcane needed watering more often but with less. His final conclusion......'about the same......maybe'.

You also have to consider that the growing period of rice (90 to 150 days) is much shorter than that of sugarcane (270 to 360 days).

The Khmer empire in Angkor had every year 3 rice harvests, caused they had a very good water management.

They got very rich while exporting rice.

[German Viking]

Barely worth growing rice these days so don't really understand why so many do it for so little return.

The obvious worth is the rice. Can you understand why people grow their own vegetables rather than just go to Tesco?

I will start to plant vegetables again in my garden behind the house like my grandmother and my mother did, but not to save money.

I like to eating healthy things not conterminated bull$hit with a lot of pesticides, insecticides, funghicides and to much fertilizer and almost no taste.

[German Viking]

Lets take a little bit of a closer look at why we are in the situation we are in now.

In 2011 there was extensive flooding particularly in the CP river basin culminating in the runoff reaching BKK.

This was made worse by the dams being full and water having to be released at the peak of the rains,. So :

"During 2011 the dams were full, up to the operational limit, and dam operators had to release water at the wrong time. Latest news is that they decided to operate at a lower level, give less priority to agricultural and energy use, in favour of downstream flood protection. Hence a lower risk for dam breaks," Tjitte Nauta, Deltares' integrated water management specialist for Southeast Asia, said."

Right, now it had been decided that the dams should be kept at a lower level so they could be managed better in a flood situation, but this was unfortunately taken to extremes.

Does anyone else remember PT wanting to take the dams down to 30% level before the 2012 rainy season then Yingluck going to ask the advice of His Majesty who said they should never be let to get below 50%

Well the weather people had been telling them that the rains were not going to come to the same intensity as global weather patterns had changed and the country was looking at a drought cycle, but in spite of this the dams were allowed to drop to low levels.

The weather people have been proved to be correct and the rains and floods did not come and the dams have never recovered so we see the situation we have today and we are really not into the driest time of the year as yet.

So a matter of priorities as per the highlighted quote above.

That does not however change the fact that there is a drought situation because of lack of rain, but better dam management could alleviate the situation to a large extent.

i have to agree with this, im in sakon nakhon, i went to look at one of our small reservoirs near the phu pan mountains, its nearly empty, i have never seen it so low, and its only febuary.i was fishing in there last year, now i can walk across it.

we went to loei last week and i can walk to laos without getting my feet wet, is unbelievable.

The problem on the mekong create the chinese, with their dams and they will build more.

They just give a damn what is happend to the ppl downstreams.

Anyway the mekong hit back already and filling the upper dams about 3 times quicker with sediments as calculated.

Som nam na

[German Viking]

There is a reason why they are called RICE Farmers. Care to guess what that reason is? Another question is "What will they do if the did not plant rice?"

Plant sugar cane instead - as advised.

Yes good idea and destill Rum, to produce more lazy drunkhards and criminals, a new no future generation.

[German Viking]

Not according to this. This is the problem that occurs when you rely too much on literature such as that you provided in the FAO link and not really understanding the farming system as a whole. There is a very big difference between a crop's physiologic need for water and the agronomic use of water. In the later case (agronomic use), rice fields are flooded to control weeds. By flooding the fields, weed competition is minimized. That amount of water used to flood the field is not needed by the rice plant but is there anyway for a different purpose. So while the FAO article may be correct, it is out of context because it only refers to the physiological water requiremen

Agree entirely with what you say but here's what a family member said this morning when I pushed them on the issue. His immediate response was that rice uses more water. Then he thought about it and said that sugarcane needed watering more often but with less. His final conclusion......'about the same......maybe'.

You also have to consider that the growing period of rice (90 to 150 days) is much shorter than that of sugarcane (270 to 360 days).

same with Tapioca, generally we harvest ours between 12-14 months

I saw never Tapioca growing, but maybe you mean Casava(Manioc).

[German Viking]

There is a reason why they are called RICE Farmers. Care to guess what that reason is? Another question is "What will they do if the did not plant rice?"

Plant sugar cane instead - as advised.

Sugar cane is a long term investment (up to one year). Furthermore, some rice fields get flooded during the rain months which could be a problem if you are planting sugarcane. Furthermore, areas like Ayuthaya have fewer cane sugar processing facilities. These farmers may have to take their sugarcane to Kanchanaburi province to have their cane milled. So it is not simply changing crops but also considering the downstream process.

This is another problem just to produce another crops, is in general not a solution you have to check the logistic in advance.

For example in my region in germany the farmers was growing sugar beets to produce sugar.

All the sugar mills in a circle of 50 km are closed already, caused of these sitiuation a lot of farmer stopped already to planting sugar beets and rented out the field to other farmers, they got bigger invested in better and bigger harvest and loading machines and still continue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGDbGTBJ9uw

[Fat Haggis]

I'm just going by what my wife and all her friends call it.. but yep, cassava, we still have to wait 12-14 months for the roots to be big enough to harvest, we've just harvested 8 rai this week, well my wife did whilst I'm out in the Middle East.

We also dry a lot of it after it's been chopped up, but sod that for a game of soldiers, better price but more hard work, and there's only so much you can chop without going doo lally!!

[German Viking]

I'm just going by what my wife and all her friends call it.. but yep, cassava, we still have to wait 12-14 months for the roots to be big enough to harvest, we've just harvested 8 rai this week, well my wife did whilst I'm out in the Middle East.

We also dry a lot of it after it's been chopped up, but sod that for a game of soldiers, better price but more hard work, and there's only so much you can chop without going doo lally!!

Tapioca is made of Cassava I remember, when they served a real sweat dessert with little white balls, looked like milch with this sweat little balls inside looked like puddind made of tapioca.

This is a very common dessert in east and southeast asia

I remember years ago when I had visit several times Isaan a small town they had grown also casava.

I time I was there the entire April the dried the casava on a big place outside the City.

The whole april +40 C to +45 C in the shadow, on the way to the lake outside minimal 3 times a day I had to pass this place, this was smelling like hell.

https://www.google.de/search?q=tapioca+pudding+thailand&biw=1366&bih=633&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=77TTVI7pK8u9UZT1gyA&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tapioca

[kieran2698]

Barely worth growing rice these days so don't really understand why so many do it for so little return.

The obvious worth is the rice. Can you understand why people grow their own vegetables rather than just go to Tesco?

I will start to plant vegetables again in my garden behind the house like my grandmother and my mother did, but not to save money.

I like to eating healthy things not conterminated bull$hit with a lot of pesticides, insecticides, funghicides and to much fertilizer and almost no taste.

Which is the very same reason many Thais continue to grow their own rice even though there is a very low financial reward, because they can be assured of the quality. My family do not sell any of their rice, they give it to family and eat it, it is really not that much work to cultivate 20 rai of rice but it feeds the whole extended family and we can all feel comfortable that no chemicals have been used.

[German Viking]

Barely worth growing rice these days so don't really understand why so many do it for so little return.

The obvious worth is the rice. Can you understand why people grow their own vegetables rather than just go to Tesco?

I will start to plant vegetables again in my garden behind the house like my grandmother and my mother did, but not to save money.

I like to eating healthy things not conterminated bull$hit with a lot of pesticides, insecticides, funghicides and to much fertilizer and almost no taste.

Which is the very same reason many Thais continue to grow their own rice even though there is a very low financial reward, because they can be assured of the quality. My family do not sell any of their rice, they give it to family and eat it, it is really not that much work to cultivate 20 rai of rice but it feeds the whole extended family and we can all feel comfortable that no chemicals have been used.

Hopefully all working in the field and not only a handful and the rest appears only to the thanksgiving party and asking for their cut like it is often happend, unfortunately.

[kieran2698]

Barely worth growing rice these days so don't really understand why so many do it for so little return.

The obvious worth is the rice. Can you understand why people grow their own vegetables rather than just go to Tesco?

I will start to plant vegetables again in my garden behind the house like my grandmother and my mother did, but not to save money.

I like to eating healthy things not conterminated bull$hit with a lot of pesticides, insecticides, funghicides and to much fertilizer and almost no taste.

Which is the very same reason many Thais continue to grow their own rice even though there is a very low financial reward, because they can be assured of the quality. My family do not sell any of their rice, they give it to family and eat it, it is really not that much work to cultivate 20 rai of rice but it feeds the whole extended family and we can all feel comfortable that no chemicals have been used.

Hopefully all working in the field and not only a handful and the rest appears only to the thanksgiving party and asking for their cut like it is often happend, unfortunately.

Unfotunately there's only a handfull who can and obviously those who can't don't need to ask so its not exactly the same as you feared but same same. But it really isn't that much work, Luke if you broke it down into how much work for one years rice for one person I find it encouraging that it actually takes so little.