Farm bill passage critical for conservation (complete article from source)
Source: The Alpena News, by Tom Carney
July 23, 2007
At a recent media summit, representatives from a number of conservation groups discussed their recommendations as Congress considers renewing the farm bill, which expires this year.
The farm bill is one of the most multi-layered and wide-reaching pieces of legislation one can find. Its 10 different “titles,” or sections, illustrate the degree to which the farm bill extends into so many areas of American life. They include, commodity programs, conservation, trade, nutrition, credit, rural development, research, forestry, energy and in case legislators forgot something, “miscellaneous.”
Specific areas addressed in the titles give an even better picture of the diversity and scope of the farm bill. For example, the bill concerns such varied subjects as “fairness in international trade,” the ability of rural areas to receive broadband Internet service, Food Stamps, and the Conservation Reserve Program.
As its name suggests, the CRP is one of the programs found in the farm bill’s title II, conservation. And since the recent media summit was organized by the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership the discussion centered on recommendations for programs within that title. And as its name suggests, the TRCP attempts to bring together both individual grassroots groups and larger conservation organizations in an effort to ensure the continuation of the hunting and fishing traditions that were so dear to America’s 26th president. It keeps an eye on and tackles the larger issues that ultimately concern all sportsmen and women. In that manner, the TRCP is probably the closest thing to a national consortium for hunters’ and anglers’ concerns as you’re going to find.
For two years, representatives of 15 conservation organizations met as the Agriculture and Wildlife Working Group of the TRCP to study the 2002 Farm Bill and to make recommendations for the 2007 version.
Some of their findings might be surprising:
? Administered by the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, the past three farm bills have shaped more conservation programs for a longer period of time than any other suite of legislation. The Farm Bill’s annual budget for the conservation title alone is more than $5 billion, which is two-and-a-half times larger than that of the entire U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
? The ramifications of a U.S. without the Farm Bill Conservation Title: 13.5 million fewer pheasants, 2.2 million fewer ducks, 40 million fewer acres of wildlife habitat, 450 million additional tons of topsoil disappearing every year and an additional 170,000 miles of unprotected streams.
The proposals backed by the AWWG support seven Farm Bill Conservation Title programs. (For a complete discussion and the AWWG’s recommendations: www.trcp.org. Click on the “Growing Conservation in the Farm Bill” link.)
The AWWG also noted and made recommendations for other “Farm Bill Conservation Priorities” among which are some in the area of “biofuels, bio mass and other energy sources.”
Any discussion of the Farm Bill must be framed within the context of other realities, such as the war in Iraq, budget demands and globalization. Such context adds a complexity, one that revolves around our nation’s dependence on foreign oil, the need to develop alternative fuel sources and the notion that corn-based ethanol is not going to be the best way to go in the long run.
As best as I understand it, those concerns play out something like this: Currently, farmers can make more per acre by putting their land into corn than into CRP. While corn-based ethanol seems to be the wave of the future, experts already agree that by the time the U.S. reaches major production of that fuel, the negative effects will outpace the positive. Ethanol can also be made from other grains and from “biomass” sources such as corncobs, cornstalks, wheat straw, rice straw, switchgrass, and vegetable and forestry waste. But the technology for the production of such fuel sources on a grand scale just isn’t there yet.
The challenge then is to construct and promote the Conservation Title programs in such a manner that encourages landowners to consider more ecologically friendly alternatives to planting corn over every inch of every available acre.
According to TRCP Director of Communications Tim Pink, the AWWG’s work “doesn’t address corn at all, but some of its proposals would have as an effect the movement from corn to switchgrass fuels.”
In a statement prepared for this summit, Sen. Tom Harkin, chair of the Agricultural, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, said the Conservation Title, “has the potential to be the centerpiece of our national conservation policies on agricultural land, and I will work to restore funding and redirect the program to achieve that goal.”
Charles F. Conner, the deputy secretary of Agriculture called “a conservation-based Farm Bill ... one of the most important items remaining on President Bush’s agenda over the rest of his term.”
For information on the Farm Bill: www. usda.gov. Click on the “Farm Bill” link under “Spotlights.”
For an overview of the Farm Bill’s reach on a regional level: www.healthylakes.org. On the left side under “Policy,” click on the link for the “Farm Bill.” Then, to get to the page for downloading the information, click on “Great Lakes Restoration and the Farm Bill.”
The timeline is to have this bill in front of the president by August, so the time for contacting senators and representatives is now.
Click here for complete article from The Alpena News
|
