Negotiations Begin For 2012 Farm Bill

[Tim Smith]

The farm bill is one of the most important conservation instruments involving the federal government.

Private lands conservation initiatives such as set-asides, CREP and buffer zones are probably the single most critical mechanism in the US for protecting inland fisheries from non-point source pollution and keep riparian zones and wildlife corridors intact in agricultural landscapes.

We'd do well to keep an eye on this process and find more ways to cooperate with farmers to keep our rivers clean.

As Senate Launches Farm Bill Hearings,

Sportsmen Promote Conservation Programs

TRCP and partner groups unite in support of private-lands measures that

conserve

fish and wildlife habitat, enhance public access, boost local economies

WASHINGTON - As the Senate Agriculture Committee prepares to hold its first

hearing in preparation for the 2012 Farm Bill, the Theodore Roosevelt

Conservation Partnership and its sportsmen-conservation partners underscore

the need to continue investing in successful private-lands conservation

programs in the wide-ranging legislation.

Senate Agriculture Committee Chair Debbie Stabenow will convene the field

hearing tomorrow at Michigan State University in East Lansing.

"Opportunities for Growth: Michigan and the 2012 Farm Bill" will focus on

the upcoming Farm Bill reauthorization and review agriculture as well as

energy, conservation, rural development, research and forestry policies

affecting Michigan.

"Farm Bill programs such as the Conservation Reserve Program, Wetlands

Reserve Program and Open Fields help farmers and landowners run economically

sustainable operations and secure valuable fish and wildlife habitat," said

Dave Nomsen, vice president of government affairs for Pheasants Forever and

Quail Forever and member of the TRCP Agriculture and Wildlife Working Group.

"America's continued investment in these effective programs will guarantee a

future for hunting, fishing and other recreational opportunities on the

nation's farms, ranches and forest lands."

Agricultural- and private-lands conservation remains a cornerstone of the

TRCP's policy work, and the efforts of the TRCP and its partner

organizations were instrumental in the inclusion of and improvements to

vital conservation programs in the 2008 Farm Bill. The TRCP's farm policy

work is guided by the

<http://www.trcp.org/issues/agriculture/the-agriculture-and-wildlife-working

-group> Agriculture and Wildlife Working Group, formed by the TRCP to

provide recommendations to Congress and the administration on conservation

programs in the 2008 bill. Composed of representatives from the nation's

leading sportsmen's groups, the AWWG currently is developing recommendations

for the 2012 Farm Bill.

"Funding will be in short supply during the important deliberations to come,

and some of the most critical Farm Bill programs fail to have baseline

funding or could be consolidated," said Brad Redlin, director of

agricultural programs for the Izaak Walton League of America and member of

the AWWG. "The TRCP Agriculture and Wildlife Working Group is deeply

invested in assuring a successful Farm Bill for both the nation's private

landowners and its sportsmen, and we will be providing specific counsel to

the Senate later this spring and in the summer."

TRCP partner organizations Ducks Unlimited and the Izaak Walton League of

America have submitted testimony for the Saturday hearing about the

importance of conservation programs.

"While Congress debates critical budget issues, it is important to be

remember that conservation programs like CRP and WRP generate far more

economic activity than they cost," said Dan Wrinn, director of public policy

for Ducks Unlimited and AWWG member. "Hunters and anglers spend billions of

dollars every year pursuing their passions, generating thousands of jobs and

billions in local, state and federal taxes. Without adequately funded Farm

Bill conservation programs, many of these jobs and revenues will be at

risk."

"The Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program, or Open Fields,

was established in the 2008 Farm Bill due in part to the dedicated efforts

of sportsmen-conservationists with support from leaders like Senator Debbie

Stabenow and Senator Pat Roberts," said Tom Franklin, TRCP director of

policy and government relations. "Access to hunting and fishing is a growing

problem for sportsmen, in Michigan and across the country, and Open Fields

demands reauthorization and full funding to meet its potential for providing

new outdoor opportunities for citizens and a much-needed economic boost to

rural communities."

The Farm Bill is a vital part of U.S. private-lands conservation endeavors.

Millions of acres of fish and wildlife habitat and the hunting and fishing

opportunities they provide have been conserved and enhanced through Farm

Bill programs. The TRCP Agriculture and Wildlife Working Group is committed

to ensuring that the 2012 Farm Bill authorizes and strongly funds

conservation programs and builds on a conservation legacy that secures

America's hunting and fishing heritage.

[3wt]

Why don't we advocate getting anything worthwhile out of the travesty called the "farm-bill" and let them stand on their merit, rather than porking them in with one of the golden calves of corporate welfare.

[Outside Bend]

Why don't we advocate getting anything worthwhile out of the travesty called the "farm-bill" and let them stand on their merit, rather than porking them in with one of the golden calves of corporate welfare.

I've always thought conserving grasslands and wetlands, reducing sedimentation of our nation's streams, and things of that nature were pretty meritous. I like quail, I like ducks, I like being able to fish and float in clear streams, and I'd like at some point to hand those experiences off to future generations. I don't mind that federal monies are spent to turn barren, denuded agriculture landscapes back into functioning streams and riparian areas, as the photo below illustrates.

To me, that's success.

And frankly, I like the idea of giving farmers an incentive not to cultivate fencerow to fencerow, and all the way to the stream bank. I'll admit it sounds odd to pay farmers for not growing commodities, but they're being paid to protect a resource- they being paid, in essence, to conserve topsoil.

There's certainly a cost to the Farm Bill and its programs, and there are certainly some giveaways that don't need to be in there. But there are also costs associated with inaction, and that side of the equation is frequently left out. You can defund CRP/WRP and other conservation measures, but that may mean you have to pay a higher water bill so municipal treatment plants can mitigate increased sediment, pesticide, and nutrient loads. You can defund the programs, but it may translate into poorer water quality, reduced hunting and fishing opportunities, increased food prices (more fertilizer needed when topsoil is stripped away), etc.

I think we agree in part, we should look at each of the constituent programs of the Farm Bill and figure out what's a valuable, what's a giveaway to one corporate interest and another, and whether the latter group is genuinely necessary. But I couldn't get behind a wholesale elimination of the Farm Bill- the good stuff in it is simply too good.

[Justin Spencer]

Farm subsidies primarily go to the big agriculture companies growing wheat, cotton, corn, soybeans and rice. These are a joke as these are the guys making the most money anyway. Small farmers growing fresh fruits and veggies see little of that money. In a world where it seems like we want to see government downsized, billion of dollars in govt. handouts go to these "corporate farmers" every year, and (correct me if I'm wrong) it seems to be the republican party that pushes for these subsidies year after year.

I found it interesting when in Jamaica a few months ago that much of the sugar cane is on govt. land. The govt. brought in machinery to help with harvest and processing but found that it cost too many jobs, and killed the local economy even though it made it cheaper and easier to grow the crop. You no longer see those machines and the jobs are back, helping everyone in the area.

I think technology plays a big role in our jobless rate as it takes fewer people to do the same things we have always done. Higher population along with more efficiency and you get more unemployment. Unfortunately people are now spoiled by handouts and we have to bring in foreigners (or hire illegal aliens) to pick citrus and do jobs that "we" are too good for.

Bigger is not always better, and the subsidies the farm bill provides gives incentives for going bigger and growing the same old things that give us the almighty high fructose corn syrup, and ethynol.

If we are going to give handouts keep it for things that enhance the world around us such as CRP, not for things that give us obesity and heart disease.

[flytyer57]

Vicki "Hartzler and her husband own a farm equipment business and a farm where they grow corn and soybeans. She received more than $770,000 in farm subsidies over the past 15 years, according to the Environmental Working Group, a Washington advocacy group that collects and analyzes farm subsidy data."

"GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, an outspoken critic of farm payments, listed between $15,000 and $50,000 in farm income as one source of revenue on her personal financial disclosure statement last year, citing a Bachmann family farm in Independence, Wis., as an asset.

That farm, which was owned by her father-in-law, received more than $250,000 in subsidies over the past 15 years, according to the Environmental Working Group."

Farm Bill?

[3wt]

I'm not really against funding conservation efforts. Just that teh farm bill as has been pointed out, is wrought with dirty givaways that we can't and shouldn't afford. Let the meritous measures stand on their own two feet, and gut the farm bill of the nonsense.

Just my opinion. I just can't in good conscience defend the farm bill just for conservation's sake.

I don't really care if it's republicans or democrats profitting, it should end.

[Tim Smith]

I'm not really against funding conservation efforts. Just that teh farm bill as has been pointed out, is wrought with dirty givaways that we can't and shouldn't afford. Let the meritous measures stand on their own two feet, and gut the farm bill of the nonsense.

Just my opinion. I just can't in good conscience defend the farm bill just for conservation's sake.

I don't really care if it's republicans or democrats profitting, it should end.

The Farm Bill as a whole is definitely a pork farm.

But the parts that promote conservation work are "good" pork. They change the economic landscape to make it easier to contribute to the public good by conserving and protecting habitat. Farmers use it for the same reasons they hypocritically access completely ridiculous economic incentives...it adds to (or at least doesn't badly hurt) their bottom line.

These are the kinds of government functions that make sense. It's very difficult for the private sector to do this kind of work (although the WWF ecocertifications accomplish some of the same things). If it doesn't get done here it won't get done.

You can bet the budget hawks won't touch the pork in the Farm Bill though, because like that reptile who tried to take down the MDC, the ag industry is their constituency.

[Wayne SW/MO]

Why don't we advocate getting anything worthwhile out of the travesty called the "farm-bill" and let them stand on their merit, rather than porking them in with one of the golden calves of corporate welfare.

Farm subsidies have always been part of our national security and they always should be. I'm not saying that some isn't excessive, but stand alone would invite a disaster. Beyond air and water, food is right up there with things we can not do without for very long. It's also one of those things we can't depend on foreign markets to provide.

Farming is a gamble, always has been and always will be. If you let the food supply become unstable, prices will reflect it and the damage to the population will start at the bottom. subsidies are meant to stabilize the market and if they fail don't blame the farmer, blame the politician who is out of his element in trying to manage them.

[Tim Smith]

Farm subsidies have always been part of our national security and they always should be. I'm not saying that some isn't excessive, but stand alone would invite a disaster.

So how is it a disaster if each individual part of the Farm Bill is evaluated for it's contribution? How is there a connection between passing good legislation and passing the Farm Bill as a block?

[hank franklin]

CRP is one of the good gov't programs. Ask any resource scientist. Corporate ag welfare is ridiculous. Price subsidies are OK but in this market it's all out of whack. Unfortunately the survival of CRP probably depends on the survival of big corporate ag. Horse trading at the highest levels.

Viewed from this perspective the true cost of CRP is exponentially greater, because you gotta pay off the big boys to survive.

My somewhat cynical .02