The U.S. Farmers and Ranchers Alliance, agricultural groups at the national, regional and state levels (including Virginia Farm Bureau) that are answering Americans’ questions about agriculture, recently responded on their Web site, http://www.fooddialogues.com, to some concerns about GMOs and biotechnology. After Proposition 37 failed in California, this is a very timely discussion.

If you’re interested in learning more about USFRA and are a producer member attending the 2012 Virginia Farm Bureau Annual Convention in Chantilly, please contact your county Farm Bureau about attending the USFRA workshop on Tuesday, Nov. 27

USFRA’s View:

Consumers have a number of questions concerning the use of biotechnology in crops. Combining science with food raises many concerns and questions and during the New York Food Dialogues, the USFRA panel discussion with tackle a number of these questions. As the event takes place, you may be challenged to provide some answers as well from your followers and consumer audience. Here’s some background on this topic from the USFRA overview of biotechnology:

USFRA supports farmers’ choices to plant and grow conventional crops, biotech crops, organic crops or a combination. Similarly, USFRA supports consumers’ choices to purchase foods they prefer. Many of our farmers plant biotech seeds for reasons such as protecting their crops from adverse weather. Some of our farmers choose organic production. All of these methods of production contribute to meeting consumer demands for food products as well as producing healthy choices for everyone and protecting the environment.

Farmers also use biotech seeds for a number of reasons – to reduce crop damage from weeds, diseases and insects as well as from adverse weather conditions such as drought or flooding. Biotech seeds often allow farmers to be more precise about their use of inputs like nutrients, pesticides and water needed to grow crops.

Safety and FDA Review

“FDA has no basis for concluding that bioengineered foods differ from other foods in any meaningful or uniform way, or that, as a class, foods developed by the new techniques present any different or greater safety concern than foods developed by traditional plant breeding.”

Since 1995, food from biotech seeds has been commercially available and has been proven safe for human and animal consumption. No other crops have been more studied or subject to greater scientific review. Biotech seeds undergo testing for safety, health and nutritional value – and regulation is overseen by The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Research shows that the current commercial crops from biotech seeds have the same nutritional properties as non-biotech seed crops and are not harmful for humans and animals to consume. In the years that farmers have grown crops from biotech seeds (since 1995), there has not been a single instance of harm to human health.

For roughly 10,000 years, farmers have been genetically altering plants and seeds through selective breeding to improve characteristics such as hardiness, yield, taste and nutrition. Today’s biotech seeds are part of this evolution – their development is sped up and more precise by inserting the genes from one plant into another in a laboratory setting.

For more information on USFRA’s view on biotechnology, visit http://www.fooddialogues.com/foodsource/topics/biotech-seeds

Lindsay Reames Assistant Director Governmental Relations

The property rights constitutional amendment wasn’t the only ballot initiative we were watching on Nov. 6.

Californians rejected Proposition 37, which would have mandated genetically modified foods (GMO) to be labeled as such and was opposed by agriculture groups.

Supporters of the measure argued that consumers have a right to know what’s in their food and that information should be made available on labels. About 60 countries around the world already require such labels, proponents stressed.

Opponents countered that labeling foods would cost families hundreds of dollars a year in higher grocery bills. They also accused the initiative of sowing fear that genetically-engineered foods are unsafe.

The proposition lost steam when local California writers such as The Los Angeles Times Alexandra Le Tellier questioned the science behind some anti-GMO research. “Is it (research) credible?” she asked. “Or is it science for the sake of fulfilling an agenda?” After noting that much of the criticism of GMO foods centered around pesticides, Le Tellier asked, “If the problem is the pesticides, then why isn’t the Proposition 37 labeling initiative about that?” Proposition 37 was defeated 53 percent to 47 percent.

This ballot intitiave was interesting to Farm Bureau because legislation calling for GMO food labeling was introduced and failed in Virginia last year, and we’re sure it will be coming back in the 2013 Virginia General Assembly.

Stay tuned to Plows and Politics and if you havent, please join the Capitol Connections Action Center (contact Kelly Pruitt at kelly.pruitt@vafb.com) for updates on this and other legislative issues.

Bob Stallman, president of American Farm Bureau Federation released a statement on Wednesday regarding the 2012 Presidential Election and the Lame Duck Session. Read it below:

“The American Farm Bureau Federation congratulates President Barack Obama on his re-election, as well as those candidates elected to serve during the 113th session of Congress. A number of important issues lie ahead of us, both for our nation, and for American agriculture. It is vital that, under the president’s leadership, all our elected officials come together in a bipartisan fashion to resolve the challenges we face.

“Farmers and ranchers, like all Americans, have a list of issues that they are relying on the administration and Congress to address. But we cannot wait until 2013 for the action to start. Serious work on the farm bill, the fiscal cliff and critical tax policy fixes all must start during the lame duck session of the 112th Congress.

“Farm Bureau also looks forward to working in a cooperative and positive manner with the Obama administration and the new Congress on issues such as turning around our economy, ensuring agriculture an adequate labor supply, pursuing a trade agenda focused on reducing barriers and expanding exports and the continued fiscal challenges we face as a nation. There are many points of view on these issues, but we also know that our elected leaders have one thing in common: each ran on a platform to make America better and improve this country for all Americans.

“We will do our part to help identify opportunities for cooperation, not only to improve the lives of Farm Bureau members and their rural communities, but for all Americans proudly served by our farm and ranch families.”

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.

Earlier this year, you may remember me informing you about Louisa County Farm Bureau providing a poultry litter spreader for rent as a service to the farmers in the county. Well, this is just one county of several that have looked at discount programs and community services at the local level. American Farm Bureau and Virginia Farm Bureau have several member discount programs that certainly are available to all counties. But, in some cases, county Farm Bureaus have carved out niches to further expand the membership advantage in their county.

While not specific to just Farm Bureau members, Tazewell County Farm Bureau in cooperation with local veterinarians and the county government sponsor a free rabies clinic every November that is available to all county citizens, and there is no limit to the number of pets. This one-day clinic is a cooperative effort in that all three parties chip in money to cover the costs of the rabies vaccination and share the workload. Two veterinarians cover eight locations across the county. The Tazewell County Farm Bureau Women’s Committee helps staff the locations and prepares the certificates. It has been going on for about five years, and turnout has been great.

A few other county Farm Bureaus such as Bland, Franklin, Montgomery, Pulaski, and Prince George offer member programs with discounts to Texas Roadhouse (yummy- my favorite!), O’Charley’s, Advance Auto Parts, Gardner’s Frozen Treats, Anderson Animal Extractions, tax preparation service, Sam’s Club and vendor fee at the farmers market. The local discount programs have been well received in those counties. The reciprocal part of the agreement is that the county Farm Bureaus promote the businesses and the discount to their respective members.

Farm Bureaus time and time again to meet their purpose and fulfill their mission that is described in the bylaws as “…working to achieve educational improvements, economic opportunity (like the examples anove), social advancement, and thereby promote the national welfare…” A big thank you goes out to all of the Farm Bureau volunteer leaders and county Farm Bureaus that worked tirelessly to get the constitutional amendment on eminent domain passed by a huge majority. If you are not actively involved in your county Farm Bureau, I encourage you to do so. New ideas are always welcome and an extra helping hand with activities is certainly welcomed. Your District Field Services Director is your local liaison to Virginia and American Farm Bureau and always ready to assist you and your county Farm Bureau.

Until next time,
Mark

We did it!!!! Thank you, Virginia Farm Bureau producer members! Without your grassroots support, the property rights constitutional amendment wouldn’t have been a reality!

The amendment – backed by almost 80 percent of voters — requires that private property be taken by the government only for a true “public use” and not given to another private landowner, such as a developer, even in the case of job creation. Exceptions would include utilities or the elimination of a public nuisance. 

The amendment ensures that property owners who have their land taken are properly compensated, including lost profits to businesses.

Andrew Smith, Trey Davis (pictured above) and the rest of the Virginia Farm Bureau Governmental Relations staff want to remind you to exercise your right to VOTE today!! And especially, VOTE YES on Question 1 to protect private property rights from eminent domain abuse!