Author: VFB Governmental Relations

Franklin County Farm Bureau Receives Ag Literacy Mini-Grant

/ VFB Governmental Relations / Leave a comment

Franklin County Farm Bureau has received one of 11 $500 mini-grants from The American Farm Bureau Foundation for Agriculture. The grants are awarded through the Foundation’s White-Reinhardt Fund for Education program to communities across the nation.
The grants are allocated through county and state Farm Bureaus and are used to create new agricultural literacy projects or expand on existing agricultural literacy efforts.
Criteria for selecting winners included: the effectiveness of demonstrating a strong connection between agriculture and education; how successfully the project enhances learner engagement in today’s food, fiber, and fuel systems; and the processes and timelines for accomplishing project goals.

Franklin County won for its “What’s in the Garden?” project which educates pre-K-5 students on how food grows from soil to table through hands-on activities, interactive labs and age-appropriate printed materials.
“The mini-grant program was developed to help Farm Bureau members provide free tools to share with educators in their communities,” said Julie Tesch, executive director of the Foundation. “Our primary overall goal is to help teach young rural and urban students about the importance of agriculture and the vital role it plays in our everyday lives.” 

The White-Reinhardt Fund for Education is a project of the Foundation in cooperation with the American Farm Bureau’s Women’s Leadership Committee. The fund honors two former committee chairwomen, Berta White and Linda Reinhardt, who were trailblazers in early national efforts to expand the outreach of agricultural education and improve agricultural literacy.

Bills Address Farm Concerns with EPA ‘Waters’ Proposal

/ VFB Governmental Relations / Leave a comment


Three bills that have bipartisan support in Congress address serious concerns voiced by the American Farm Bureau Federation about the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed “Waters of the U.S.” rule.

Issued earlier this year, the rule would give the EPA broad jurisdiction over dry land features and farming practices that historically has been relegated to individual states under the Clean Water Act.

H.R. 5078, the Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Protection Act of 2014, was introduced by Rep. Steve Southerland, R-Fla., and has been approved by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. It would prohibit the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers from implementing a rule that broadens the scope of the Clean Water Act and would effectively block the proposed “Waters of the U.S.” rule. The Senate version of this bill is S.2496.

A third bill addresses concerns about common farm practices that have been exempt from Clean Water Act regulation but could lose that status under the proposed rule.

In March the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers issued an interpretive rule to clarify how “Waters of the U.S.” would affect normal farming, ranching and forestry exemptions. AFBF analysis determined that the interpretive rule narrows the list of existing exemptions and would require compliance with otherwise voluntary U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service standards. The proposal puts the USDA in the unprecedented position of enforcing Clean Water Act compliance.


Reps. Chris Collins, R-N.Y.; Bob Gibbs, R-Ohio; Frank Lucas, R-Okla.; Collin Peterson, D-Minn.; Reid Ribble, R-Wis.; Kurt Schrader, D-Ore.; and Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., have introduced H.R. 5071, The Agricultural Conservation Flexibility Act. The bill clarifies that existing Clean Water Act exemptions for normal farming, ranching and forestry apply to all conservation activities without regard to the interpretive rule. 

The bill further states that no soil and water conservation practices will be treated as new uses of areas of navigable waters, impairments of the flow of navigable waters or reductions in the reach of those waters under recapture provisions in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The bill also clarifies that normal farming, ranching and forestry activities will be treated as such without regard to their date of commencement.

The AFBF has assembled articles and analysis relevant to the proposed rule at ditchtherule.fb.org. The organization asserts that the EPA proposal exposes U.S. farmers and ranchers to potential fines and penalties for ordinary farming activities.

AFBF President Bob Stallman called the rule “an end-run around Congress and the Supreme Court. … If more people knew how regulators could use the proposed rule to require permits for common activities on dry land or penalize landowners for not getting them, they would be outraged.”


Please check your email for the latest action alert on these bills. If you are a producer member and would like to start receiving action alerts, contact Kelly Pruitt at 804-290-1293 or kprui@vafb.com.  

AFBF President’s Bob Stallman Reports on Ditch the Rule in Ag Agenda Column

/ VFB Governmental Relations / Leave a comment
AFBF President
Bob Stallman
Americans expect straight talk from their government. If our government says something, you ought to be able to take it to the bank, as the saying goes.

The Environmental Protection Agency is not meeting that expectation. Instead of making things clear when it comes to how the proposed “Waters of the U.S.” rule would affect farmers and other landowners, the EPA is muddying the waters.

It’s Complicated
Two Supreme Court rulings have limited EPA’s and the Corps of Engineers’ authority under the Clean Water Act to waters that are navigable or have a “significant nexus” to navigable waters. EPA claims the rulings “complicated” the permitting process. The reality is not all that complicated: The agencies dislike the rulings and are simply trying to write regulations that allow them to do what the Supreme Court has said they cannot do—regulate nearly all waters.

EPA has said that it only wants to bring “clarity and consistency” to the process. That sounds reasonable. Good talking point. The only problem is the statement does not reflect what is in the proposed rule. The regulation will automatically regulate countless small and remote so-called “waters” that are usually dry and, in fact, look like land to you and me. This is far more than a “clarification.” It is a dramatic expansion of federal power. Expanding the federal government’s jurisdiction under the guise of bringing clarity and consistency to the process is the opposite of straight talk.

We Read the Fine Print
When regulators show up on farms and ranches, they won’t be looking back at talking points to decide whether farming requires an expensive federal permit. They will use the regulation. So let’s take a look at the fine print.

Ditches—The rule regulates ditches as “tributaries.” EPA claims that the rule would exclude ditches, but the so-called ditch exclusion only covers ditches dug entirely in “uplands.” The rule doesn’t define “uplands” (so much for clarity), but we know that uplands are not wetlands, and most ditches are “wetland” at some point along their length. That’s just one reason Farm Bureau believes the narrow ditch “exclusion” will be meaningless.

Farming exemptions—EPA offers assurances that all farming and ranching exemptions are being preserved under the rule. But those exemptions are extremely limited when it comes to activities in jurisdictional waters. That’s why the exemptions will not protect most ordinary farming and ranching from permit requirements if ditches and low spots in farm fields are regulated, as they will be under the proposed rule.

Under the rule, federal permits would be needed for common farming activities such as applying fertilizer or pesticides, or moving cattle, if materials that are considered pollutants would fall into regulated low spots or ditches. Farmers can’t wait for federal permits to fertilize or protect their crops from pests and diseases. Permits also would be required for activities such as plowing, planting and fencing in these new “waters of the U.S.” unless a farmer has been farming the same land for decades, raising hurdles for beginning farmers.

Landowners could be in for a rude awakening—faced with penalties or lawsuits for the very things EPA says the rule doesn’t cover. Farm Bureau is dedicated to preventing that from happening, and we thank those leaders in the House and Senate who, in a bipartisan manner, are standing up for farmers and other landowners.

We hope EPA officials will read the fine print. We have, and that’s how we know it’s time to Ditch the Rule!

VDOT Holding Rt. 460 Town Halls

/ VFB Governmental Relations / Leave a comment
The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has scheduled five town hall meetings in communities along the U.S. Route 460 corridor between Suffolk and Petersburg to discuss the current work on the U.S. Route 460 Corridor Improvements Project.

Town hall meetings are scheduled for:
Monday, July 21
Waverly – Sussex Central High School
Wednesday, July 23
Disputanta – J.E.J. Moore Middle School
Thursday, July 24
Dendron – Surry County High School
Tuesday, July 29
Ivor – Municipal Building 
Bell Avenue, Ivor VA 23866

Thursday, July 31
Suffolk – King’s Fork High School 
(pending approval)

The five town hall meetings offer residents information in an informal setting, ahead of formal hearings expected to be held this fall as part of the environmental impact statement process. Each meeting will take place from 6 to 7:30 p.m., and include a brief presentation followed by a question and answer session with project team members.

From the Field: Several County Farm Bureaus Celebrate 70th Anniversaries

/ VFB Governmental Relations / Leave a comment
From the Field is a bi-monthly column written by Mark Campbell, Farm Bureau Field Services Director for the Central District. He writes about Farm Bureau member benefits and County Farm Bureau activities.

The year was 1944, and the United States was involved in World War II. Franklin D. Roosevelt was president. The U.S. population was 138,397,345. The national debt was $204.1 billion. A stamp cost $0.03. Sunscreen was created to protect soldiers from sunburn, which later became the Coppertone Company. Gasoline was $0.21/gallon. Milk was $0.62/gallon. While World War II was a major event, life still went on at home.
Lots of things have changed since then. The U.S. population is now 318,455,000. The U.S. national debt is 17.83 trillion. A stamp now costs $0.49, and milk is $3.73/gallon. Average U.S. gasoline price is $3.59/gallon.

While many things have changed, the need for farmers to work together for the good of their industry has not changed. Several county Farm Bureaus have endured and prospered over the past seven decades. The year 1944 was a year when several county Farm Bureaus were officially created as an organization being certified by the Virginia State Corporation Commission. County Farm Bureaus have their original articles of incorporation in their file folders in county offices. I know in my district Albemarle and Cumberland are celebrating their 70thanniversaries.
Thumbing through some of these files is a step back in time. It is interesting to see when county Farm Bureaus got their official start and who the initial board of directors were. As annual membership meetings take place from August to October, some counties will celebrate 70 years of working to improve agriculture and representing their members.
Many county Farm Bureaus were organized in 1944 and earlier, but some had to be reorganized in later years. For more specific Farm Bureau history, you can refer to “The Virginia Farm Bureau Story” by J. Hiram Zigler. Read The Virginia Farm Bureau Story online at http://archive.org/details/virginiafarmbure00ziglMake plans to attend the annual membership meeting of your county Farm Bureau this year. It may just be a special anniversary party as well.
Until next time,
Mark

Madison County Farm Bureau Member Featured in Wegmans Video

/ VFB Governmental Relations / Leave a comment
https://youtube.googleapis.com/v/l5E6Axw4Io8&source=uds

In 2014, Wegmans Food Markets began to source more beef raised without antibiotics or added hormones from family farms near their stores.  They have partnered with Madison County Farm Bureau member Clay Jackson’s operation Senterfitt Farms. Above is a closer look at their partnership.