Thursday, June 13, 2013

Ag Today Wednesday, June 12, 2013




Senate opens tough immigration debate [Sacramento Bee]
With an overwhelming vote, the Senate on Tuesday launched debate on an ambitious overhaul of the nation's immigration laws, as Republicans, most of whom have not yet embraced the effort, declined to stand in the way of bringing it to the floor. But continuing doubts within the GOP about some of the bill's central elements, particularly on border security, could doom the effort….To become law, the bill also would have to get through the Republican-controlled House. Speaker John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, said Tuesday that passing an immigration bill into law would be "at the top" of his chamber's accomplishments this year. He also hinted he might be willing to let a bill come to the floor even if most of his GOP caucus does not support it.

Editorial: California ag needs reform bill most of all [Bakersfield Californian]
The U.S. needs immigration reform first and foremost because it's the right thing to do, both for the undocumented, working immigrants it would most affect and the nation's agriculture industry. By extension, that also means U.S. consumers. About half of the country's farm labor force is illegal, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and California, by far the nation's leading state for agriculture, is particularly dependent on such workers. Hewing strictly to the law as it exists now would wipe out whole industries, which ought to be proof enough that any sort of reform must accept this reality….The importance of reform is, in a general sense, fairly obvious. But in those places where agriculture is king -- and ironically that's where much of the opposition of House Republicans lies -- it is beyond dispute.

Farm bill reforms would mean change for Sacramento Valley rice growers [Chico Enterprise Record]
Sacramento Valley rice farmers will likely see the end of crop subsidy payments and a new age of crop insurance under versions of a federal farm bill working their way through Congress….Growers of commodities including rice, corn, soybeans, wheat and cotton have received program payments in the past, and have been expecting the shift to crop insurance. The federal government would pay about two-thirds of insurance costs. "The Senate did its job well," so far this year, said Tim Johnson, president of the California Rice Commission….The California Farm Bureau Federation is also pleased programs for specialty crops have been retained in the current bills, including fruits, vegetables and nuts. About half of the nation's production comes from California, said Josh Rolph, director of federal policy for the California Farm Bureau.

Commentary: Farm bill would be a disaster for conservation, California [Sacramento Bee]
The farm bills now before Congress will affect all Californians and every aspect of the American food and farming system. Their priorities are all wrong, especially when it comes to protecting natural resources. Both the Senate and the House are proposing to slash vital conservation programs that help farmers better protect the air, water, soil and wildlife habitat on their farms….But it's not enough to maintain current funding levels. Conservation resources must be targeted more effectively to reach more farmers and reduce water pollution. Our organization, the Environmental Working Group, has found that just 2 percent of funding over the past four years in California's most important farm bill conservation program – the Environmental Quality Incentive Program , or EQIP – is going directly to farmers to develop and implement nutrient and pest management plans that help them reduce the use of fertilizer and pesticides on their farms.

Review of Gaviota Coast Plan begins [Santa Maria Times]
It took the Gaviota Planning Advisory Committee three years to develop the Gaviota Coast Plan, the draft document that will guide development along the coast from Vandenberg Air Force Base to Goleta. The Santa Barbara County Planning Commission, which took its first swing at the document Tuesday, hopes it doesn’t take that long to give their stamp of approval and pass it on to the Board of Supervisors….Portions of the plan walk a fine line between property rights and public access. The area’s farmers and ranchers are looking to retain their operations without additional restrictions that the new plan could impose. They’re also looking to keep a vast network of public trails proposed by the plan off their property.

Op-Ed: Separating the biotech wheat from the chaff [Wall Street Journal]
…As a North Dakota wheat producer, the first thing I want you to know is that GM wheat doesn't put anyone at risk….So the biggest question is not whether the GM wheat found in Oregon is safe—we know with confidence that it is—but rather how it got there in the first place….And let's not discount the possibility of mischief: The enemies of biotech crops are thrilled by this discovery. Last week, Monsanto Co., which developed the GM wheat, refused to rule out the possibility of sabotage. This episode teaches us two important lessons. The first is that we have an outstanding system of food regulation in the U.S., and what appears to be an isolated event in Oregon has moved from a local farmer to a state researcher to the USDA for verification testing. The second is that we have nothing to fear from biotech wheat.

Ag Today is distributed to county Farm Bureaus, CFBF directors and CFBF staff, for information purposes, by the CFBF Communications/News Division, 916-561-5550; news@cfbf.com. Some story links may require site registration. To be removed from this mailing list, reply to this message and please provide your name and e-mail address.

No comments:

Post a Comment