|
|
|
|
Conservation Security Program Win
Funding was restored for CSP; USDA releases proposed
rule after a long wait.
During conference committee debate on the agriculture appropriations bill,
which has become the omnibus bill for six other unfinished appropriations
bills, the $3.77 billion cap placed on the Conservation Security Program (CSP)
earlier this year was removed.
The conference report was approved by the House on December 8. It is still
pending in the Senate. We are anticipating a vote on the omnibus spending
bill upon their return around January 20.
Under the conference report, if passed by the Senate, the CSP will be
limited to $41.4 million for Fiscal Year 2004 as part of a compromise
between the House and Senate. The House bill eliminated funding for the
CSP, and the Senate bill called for full funding.
The news of the day, though, is that the program will not be capped in the
years following as it will be operating under entitlement status, which
means funds will be available for any qualifying farmer or rancher wanting
to participate.
Senators Tom Harkin (D-IA), Ted Stevens (R-AK), Robert Byrd (D-WV),
Robert Bennett (R-UT), and Herb Kohl (D-WI), led the effort to restore
full funding for the CSP.
Although the funding battle has been won so far, we have been fighting for
release of the proposed rules and regulations that govern implementation
of the program. According to the legislation enacting the CSP, the
Administration should have released the rule no later than February of
2003.
The proposed rule was published on the NRCS website on December 17 --
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov -- and was
to be published in the Federal Register soon after that. A 60-day public
comment period will follow.
Early analysis of the rules shows some problems, most notably offering the
initial sign-up only in selected priority watersheds across the nation.
We’ll keep you informed of how you can help.
Contact: Traci Bruckner,
tracib@cfra.org or 402.687.2100 x
1016. |
|
The Center for Rural Affairs will sponsor a series of
Town Hall meetings in Western Minnesota between March and April.
The meetings will focus on development of new agriculture marketing
approaches, preserving wildlife habitat on farmland, renewable energy,
farm program payments, micro and small business development, beginning
farmer and rancher programs, conservation, and other interests and
concerns expressed by local people.
Minnesota policymakers at the state and local levels will be invited to
the meetings to share in the discussion. Our objective is to form
committees to work with Minnesota federal policy- makers on these issues.
If you or your organization is interested in taking part, contact Kim at
541.687.1490 or at kimleval@qwest.net
.
The North Central Region Sustainable
Agriculture Research and Education program wants to receive Graduate
Student Proposals for up to $10,000 to fund sustainable agriculture
projects. Proposals are due in the Lincoln office of NCR-SARE no later
than Feb. 3, 2004. Contact Bill Wilcke at 612.625.8205 or
wilck001@umn.edu .
A new round of Producer Grant Proposals opens Jan. 16, 2004.
Projects must be environmentally sound, socially responsible, likely
profitable, and show a potential benefit to other farmers in the NCSARE
region. Roughly $400,000 will be available on a competitive basis.
Producer proposals are due in the Lincoln office by March 24, 2004. Call
the office at 402.472.7081 or email
ncrsare@unl.edu .
The complete call for proposals is available on the NCR-SARE website at
http://www.sare.org/ncrsare .
The 4th Annual Harvesting Clean Energy Conference is
the Northwest’s premiere event for agriculture and energy innovators
exploring opportunities and building partnerships to advance clean energy
production in the rural Northwest.
This year’s event is set for Jan. 20-21 at the Oregon Convention Center in
Portland, and is co-located with the NW Food Processors Association annual
convention. Register by calling 1-800-942-4978 or at
www.harvestcleanenergy.org/conference.
The Dairy Career & Business Working Group in Wisconsin is
sponsoring a Beginning Farmer Career and Business Development
Conference on Jan. 20, 2004 in Madison, Wis. Contact Gwen Garvey at
the Farm Center, 800.942.2474 for more information or to register.
Widely known soils consultant Neal Kinsey will come to
Sidney, Nebraska for a special short course, Feeding and Balancing the
Soil. His motto is “Feed the soil; let the soil feed the plant.”
The course will run from Jan. 26-28, 2004 at Western Community College.
The course is hosted by the High Plains Organic Crop Improvement
Association. To register, call Western Nebraska Community College
(800.222.9682). |
$27.8 Million in USDA Funding Helps 184
Value Adding Enterprises
On December 12, 2003 USDA awarded $27.8 million in value added grants for the
2003 cycle. The planning or working capital grants will assist farmers,
ranchers, cooperatives, and trade groups to develop new products and markets to
increase profitability.
The 184 funded projects range from $5,000 to $500,000 and include projects
that:
- Target emerging markets in mainstream grocery stores for natural and
organic pork ($350,000, Niman Ranch Pork Company, Iowa)
- Establish a soybean meal/biodiesel processing facility ($33,000, National
Trail Biodiesel Coop, Ill.)
- Develop a commercial business plan for segregating, aggregating, and
potentially processing fresh farm produce for sale to local schools ($69,400,
Community Alliance with Family Farmers, California)
Over 781 applicants submitted proposals totaling nearly $150 million,
showing the growing demand for this program.
Despite its popularity the program will likely experience severe cuts in
fiscal year 2004 as Congress resumes in January to make a decision on the
burgeoning 2004 budget package – estimated at $820 billion.
The 2002 Farm Bill included the Value Added Producer Grant program with annual
mandatory funding as opposed to being at the discretion of appropriators each
budget cycle.
The program was authorized at $40 million a year through 2007. Now it appears
the program will be demoted to a discretionary status with a $15 million
funding level.
View the list of 2003 value added grant recipients
at http://www.rurdev.usda.gov . You
can stay tuned on the
value added
program on our website. To add your name to the list receiving electronic
updates for the program, contact Kim Leval, 541.687.1490, or email
kimleval@qwest.net .
State
Corporate Farming Laws Help to Level the Playing Field State
corporate farming laws play a critical role in providing a level playing field
for family farmers and ranchers. As they come under attack in courts and
legislatures, it is critical to remember why these laws were passed in the
first place.
Corporate farm laws restrict access to government-granted advantages and
subsidies to corporate farm businesses. They allow non-farmers to invest in
agriculture as long as they are willing to operate as sole proprietorships or
general partnerships – paying taxes as individuals and taking full legal
responsibility for the operation.
That keeps them operating by the same legal rules as most family farmers and
ranchers, who in most cases don’t incorporate because the legal costs and time
burdens aren’t justified on smaller operations.
Large farms get lower tax rates by incorporating and can deduct costs that
cannot be deducted by sole proprietors and general partners. And investors who
use the corporate form of business are shielded from liability. If the
corporate farm cannot pay its bills, the owners are not personally
responsible. If it fouls the air and water, the owners are not liable for the
damages to neighbors.
Keeping everyone operating by the same legal rules gives family farmers and
beginning farmers a fairer shot at opportunity. The biggest barrier to
beginning farmers is the competition they face from large, often corporate
operations, with a long list of advantages – volume premiums for livestock,
deeper pockets, and cheaper capital. The last thing they need is the playing
field tilted even more toward their corporate competitors by repealing
corporate farming restrictions.
The same is true for more established family farms. Many are starting new
value added initiatives to survive in the 21st century. To succeed, they need
a level playing field. Corporate farm laws don’t solve all their problems, but
they make the competition a little fairer.
Corporate farming laws also promote responsibility. Investors have complained
that they are forced to accept full legal responsibility for the liabilities
of their operations in states that restrict corporate farming.
But if not them, who should be liable? Their neighbors? Local businesses?
Agriculture is more responsible when legal liability is assumed by those who
enjoy the profits and exercise the power of control.
Rural America gains nothing from constantly re-fighting old battles to weaken
corporate farming restrictions most rural people support. If the critics of
these laws want to help us move forward, its time to instead help bring rural
people together to figure out where we want to go in the 21st century and
develop a strategy to get there.
Agree or disagree? Share your opinion with
Chuck Hassebrook, chuckh@cfra.org or
402.687.2100 x 1018.
Understanding
Rural
Economic development policy defines rural as what
it isn’t – urban. Rural is much more than that.
One of the fundamental problems experienced today in the world of rural
economic and community development is attempting to understand what it means to
be rural. Most dictionaries still define rural as being in the countryside.
While this definition maintains the traditional meaning of rural, automobiles,
airplanes, and other developments have made it completely outmoded.
The countryside is broken up with urban centers dispersed throughout.
Traditional rural land uses like farming and ranching now must exist side by
side with traditional urban land uses like residential developments and
manufacturing plants.
On a deeper level, economic development policy defines rural by the term urban.
Therefore, rural is simply that which is not urban. Rural only becomes
meaningful when used with a reference like cities to associate the meaning. Thus
the simplest definition of rural economics is that which has a single urban
center with surrounding spatial land used for its benefit.
If we accept that use for the word rural, it would only go to show some places
are more rural than others. Measuring this remoteness in matter of degrees is
difficult at best. In terms of economics, it might represent factors to overcome
such as cost of transportation, technology, and distance to urban centers.
Cities sprouted up to take advantage of economies of scale. This was their
advantage. What are the advantages of being rural? As last month’s article
discussed, place is extremely important to the human psyche. We need to have
space and a sense of place. Rural atmospheres give us the ability to strive for
quality rather than quantity.
Specialization has become a trademark of rural. In economic terms, rural has the
ability to provide urban with products and labor they cannot produce themselves,
either because of specialization or because of the character of their workforce.
While rural may be becoming tougher to understand, it is also becoming more
appealing for both economic and social reasons. Next month, this column will
explore some of the advantages of rural economics.
Contact: Michael L. Holton,
michaellh@cfra.org or 402.687.2100 x
1021.
Corporate Farming Notes
USDA’s late library; Corporations surpassing
countries; and Cargill’s Excel causing concern in beef industry
The Swine Contract Library is open for business at
http://scl.gipsa.usda.gov/ . Congress
mandated this project in the Livestock Mandatory Price Reporting Act of 1999, so
it has been anything but a swift process. But, according to GIPSA, the library
is now ready “to aid in the price discovery process and provide equal access to
market information for all market participants.”
A new report from the ETC Group, formerly the Rural Advancement Fund
International (RAFI), documents corporate consolidation. The report, “Oligopoly,
Inc.,” is at http://www.etcgroup.org .
According to the report, based on 2002 statistics, 51 of the world’s 100 largest
economic entities are transnational corporations, not nations. Wal-Mart is
bigger than Sweden; Home Depot is bigger than New Zealand. Of the oil-rich
Middle East countries, only two (Saudi Arabia and Iran) are in the top 100,
compared to six of the oil companies.
Combined sales of the world’s top 500 corporations were equivalent to 43 percent
of the world’s GDP, but they employed just 1.6 percent of the world’s workforce.
Beef Magazine is concerned about Excel’s November recall of 26,600
lbs. of mislabeled ground beef. The product, produced by Excel from Sept. 2 to
Nov. 20 and sold in Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, was labeled and marketed as
“irradiated for food safety” but hadn’t undergone the irradiation process. The
industry magazine worries what the mistake says about the hazard analysis
critical control point (HACCP) monitoring system.
“While this particular recall may have nothing to do with Excel’s HAACP
procedure, though ensuring that product packaged as irradiated certainly is
irradiated should be a critical control point, the incident could fix in
consumers’ minds the question about just how much it can trust the beef industry
to police itself. Picture a consumer asking him or herself: ‘How good can a
HAACP program be when it misses a critical control point like this – for almost
three months?’”
Contact: Brad Redlin,
bradr@cfra.org or 402.687.2100 x 1010 for
more information.
|
|
Feature article:
Breaking New Ground: Carbon Management at the
Farm Scale
“Breaking new ground” is a term used by farmers
of a previous generation describing how they addressed the problem of diminished
productivity. As my neighbor stated, “We used to just break (plow) some new
ground and begin the farming process all over again. But it doesn’t work any
more. There is no more new ground to break.”
The “breaking new ground” in this article is not about turning new soil but
about turning new ideas and learning new practices to continue the productivity
of today’s soils for tomorrow’s generations.
Carbon is a much overlooked and usually underrated element of life on earth. It
is contained in most everything we eat, breathe, wear, make, and burn. In the
form of a diamond, it is precious and said to last forever, but as carbon
dioxide from smokestacks and in the air we exhale, it is considered a waste to
be disposed.
Scientists say carbon is the building block of life, and is important in all
forms, yet now it is taking much of the blame for the record increase in global
temperatures.
Recent discussions about climate change and carbon dioxide focus on how much
carbon can be sequestered (stored), what practices should be included, how will
it be measured, and how much is it worth. (To track international discussions
and agreements on global warming issues log on to
http://www.pointcarbon.com .)
Through all this, little is being discussed about what farmers need to know to
make carbon sequestration a reality. Yet without farmer participation and
cooperation, the whole carbon sequestration issue becomes mute.
Sequestering carbon will benefit society in the future, but farmers have more
immediate financial, environmental, and social needs to satisfy before adding
carbon management to the decision-making process.
To learn what factors, what knowledge and what skills farmers need to adopt
carbon sequestering practices, the Center for Rural Affairs approached the
Nebraska Environmental Trust to fund a three-year project to study the issue.
Partners who provided technical assistance, staff involvement, and added funding
included the Nebraska Sustainable Agriculture Society (NSAS), National Resources
and Conservation Service (NRCS), USDA Agriculture Research Service (ARS),
University of Nebraska Extension (UNL), and the Lewis and Clark Natural Resource
District (NRD).
Although the project was designed to measure changes in soil carbon, it will
also show how the more immediate benefits of increased soil carbon can affect
productivity and profitability. These include, infiltration rate (how fast water
enters the soil), holding capacity (how much water a soil can hold), and
residual nitrogen (how much natural nitrogen is in the soil due to bacterial
action).
Improvements in these soil characteristics will lead to reduced crop stress,
reduced erosion, and a reduced need for fertilizer.
Ten farmers were selected to be part of the project that started in the fall of
2001. Participation was based on cooperation, willingness to try new practices,
enterprise diversity, age, variable soil type, and location in the NRD district.
The learning process consisted of five workshops/tours per year followed by
farmers implementing practices on the farms. In year-one the training focused on
understanding the carbon cycle (how to gather soil carbon and how to keep it in
the soil).
Year-two workshops were devoted to understanding how soil life contributes to
the carbon sequestration process. Including carbon in the farm planning process
will be the focus of the workshops in year-three.
How Farm Decisions Are Made
From interviews and survey results, the project identified these factors that
determine how farm decisions are made.
Economics powers the farm. Without money, the farm would not be able to
exist. Decisions are made to generate cash in both the short and long term.
Farmers learned how soil carbon affects their bottom line.
The environment plays a part in decision making since it is the soil and
climate that make production possible. Understanding how crops can continue to
be grown while carbon is being sequestered will help farmers adopt crop
sequences that satisfy their needs while improving the soil environment.
Social or peer pressure often affects farmer’s decisions. By working
through a group, much of the peer pressure was minimized, and the support system
created encouraged higher adoption rates.
Farmers and ranchers all need a certain amount of control. How strong
that need for control is will influence their need to “master” their operation
or allow other systems or cycles to dictate what practices are used. The
challenge is to understand how these factors interact to produce change.
Measurable Change in Attitudes
After two years little change can be measured in the soils, but big changes can
be documented in the attitude of the farmers and the practices they adopted.
Since changes on the ground are always preceded by changes in the mind, project
staff considers the education program a success and recommends research to
address climate and agricultural differences in other parts of the state.
These changes in farmer attitudes/knowledge were identified by the surveys:
- Soil carbon is important to moisture
infiltration and holding capacity. As the carbon level of the soil increases,
the soil’s ability to capture moisture increases. As more water soaks in, less
water runs off to cause land erosion and flood damage. Capturing more rain
means less reliance on expensive irrigation water and lower pressure on
groundwater reserves. Less erosion means fewer lightweight (organic
matter/soil carbon) particles are washed away.
- As the carbon content of the soil increases
so does its ability to hold moisture. Holding moisture in the root zone means
less chance of nutrient leaching into the groundwater. It also means more
moisture availability for longer duration, making the soil more resilient to
short-term droughts.
- Tillage practices are fundamental to carbon
releases from the soil. As oxygen is introduced to the soil, bacteria combine
it with soil carbon to create carbon dioxide. The more oxygen introduced the
more the bacteria “exhale.” Tillage needs to be balanced with vegetative cover
and residue incorporation.
- Farmers showed a greater willingness to work
with the nature cycles, and were more willing to relinquish some control of
the farming process. Rather than trying to make the farm perform, participants
looked to capitalize on the resources and advantages their farms had to offer.
- As a result of the training, the surveys
showed the farmers were influenced less by peer pressure and were more
confident in their decisions. The confidence building is most likely due to a
better understanding of the soil and carbon processes. Learning with other
farmers made changing practices more acceptable since more were involved.
- Because of the project, the farmers have a
better understanding of greenhouse gasses and global warming. They gained an
understanding of the relationship between soil carbon and carbon dioxide, as
well as an appreciation for the dynamics of carbon sequestration – all things
they had never been exposed to before.
- The proof is in the practice. Each farmer was
asked to use a 40-acre plot to try new practices, however, on average, each
farmer adopted practices on an additional 122 acres per farm. Participation in
these additional acres meant they really believed in what they were doing and
considered the practices important enough to include them as part of the
whole-farm plan. This voluntary expansion is enormously encouraging.
- To reinforce the value of these practices, it
should be noted that most farmers did not limit their adoption to one
practice. A combination of practices was included to match the crop sequencing
and farms needs/goals.
- An incentive is important. Each farmer
received a financial incentive to be part of the project. After one year,
almost all the farmers said the money was important. It raised their interest,
but it was the knowledge and information gathered through the meetings/tours
that was of real value, far overshadowing the dollars they received.
Documenting changes on the land suggests changes
in attitude, but these quotes from the participating farmers reinforce the
integrity and stewardship ethic most farmers/ranchers have for each other, the
land, and a commitment to the future.
“I found it so interesting to learn about the soil, I [was thinking of retiring,
but now I] just had to keep farming to see if I could still make a difference.”
“I didn’t realize how important it was to have a strong nutrient recycling
system or what was needed to make that happen.”
“[I want to] Survive on the farm in a way that promotes the well-being of my
community.”
“[I want to] Make decisions based on dollars, future benefits, conservation, and
carbon affect on the soil.
“[The project gave me the opportunity to] Learn from other farmers in a safe
learning environment.”
“My irrigation will [help] provide the water, and the plants will add the
organic matter I need to make this a better farm.”
Contact: Martin Kleinschmit,
martink@cfra.org or 402.254.6893.
Breaking New Ground: Carbon
Management at the Farm Scale is available online (pdf file) or from the Center
for $5.00.
|
|
|
The
Beginning Farmer and Rancher
Conference: Realities and Opportunities
Mark your calendars, and plan to attend The Beginning Farmer and Rancher
Conference: Realities and Opportunities coming March 27, 2004 to Kearney,
Nebraska. The Center is partnering with USDA’s Risk Management Agency Outreach
office, University of Nebraska, and Land Stewardship Project of Minnesota to
bring a full day of networking, information, and experience on starting to farm
or ranch.
Dr. Don Jonovic, a nationally recognized farm and business planning specialist,
will serve as keynote speaker, sharing his knowledge and vast experience working
with generational farm transfer issues. His speech is titled, Surviving Family
Farming White Water. Panels of beginning farmers and others
will share real life experiences and challenges and will provide the reality of
what to expect and strive for in starting a farm or ranch.
Concurrent workshops planned so far include whole farm planning, estate
planning, risk management insurance, alternative funding sources, sharing
expenses and equipment, marketing opportunities, low input and low cost
strategies, and more.
Conference registration and
conference information are available on our
website.
Contact: Joy Johnson,
joyj@cfra.org for
more information.
|
|
Unicameral 2004:
Center Priorities
This year’s short session will be significant in
shaping the future of rural Nebraska.
A load of issues vital to the future of rural people and communities faces
the Nebraska Unicameral when it convenes on January 7, 2004. The 2004 session is
a “short session,” mandated by law to last only 60 days. Despite its short
status, the 2004 session is shaping up to be significant to the future of rural
Nebraska.
Again, the session will be dominated by budget issues. The state budget is
facing a $211 million shortfall. After tax increases and expansions over the
past three years, there is not likely to be much appetite for more revenue
raising.
The solution for filling any budget shortfall will likely come from cuts in
spending from state agencies and programs. Depending on where Governor Johanns
and the Legislature focus their budget cuts, rural people and communities could
again bear a heavy burden.
The Center’s 2004 session priorities include:
Protection of small business development funding in the state budget.
Small business development is provided $250,000 in state appropriations through
the Nebraska Microenterprise Partnership Fund.
Maintaining or increasing this funding is crucial to many rural communities.
This funding provides programs like our Rural Enterprise Assistance Project
(REAP) the ability to provide capital and assistance to those entrepreneurs
ready, willing, and able to develop rural Nebraska.
As our research has shown, most of the job creation in rural Nebraska since 1987
has been in non-agricultural self-employment and small businesses. Maintaining
this funding is crucial to the economic future of rural Nebraska.
Defending Initiative 300. Nebraska’s strongest-in-the-nation
anti-corporate agriculture law is under attack even before the session begins.
Governor Johanns, the Nebraska Department of Agriculture, the Nebraska Farm
Bureau, and the Nebraska Cattlemen all support creating a task force that will
review Initiative 300 and make their recommendations for its modification.
As we have shown the last few months in these pages (and will continue to do
so), the case for Initiative 300 remains strong.
A study of the future Nebraska agriculture, what we want it to look like, and an
evaluation of a broad range of policies to get us there are the right subjects
for a balanced legislative task force. Targeting Initiative 300 is not in the
long-term best interests of rural Nebraska.
Other issues such as school finance and school structure will also find their
way onto our legislative plate. If you would like to keep up on all legislative
news and views from the Center, please contact Jon Bailey at
jonb@cfra.org to subscribe to our free weekly
Legislative Update. For more information, call Jon at the Center’s Lyons office
at 402.687.2100 x 1013.
|
|
Come to the Center for Rural Affairs
Annual Gathering
Plans for the 2004 Annual Gathering are in full swing. This year’s event will
be held February 7 in Lyons, Nebraska, home of the Center’s new office building.
The day will begin at Lyons-Decatur Northeast Schools, 400 S 5th Street.
This year’s schedule is provided below.
- Registration, 9:00-9:30 a.m.
- Teach In I, 9:30-10:20 a.m.
- Teach In II, 10:30-11:20 a.m.
- Keynote 11:30-12:00, featuring Dan Looker, Business Editor of Successful
Farming, “Strategies for Family Farms to Thrive in the 21st Century”
- Lunch until 1:00 p.m.
- State of Rural America, 1:15-1:35 p.m.
- History of Center and our 30th Anniversary, 1:35-1:50 p.m.
- Teach In III, 2:00-2:50 p.m.
- Open House, 3:00-4:30 p.m., 145 Main Street
Teach-ins this year will cover a wide variety of topics to spark your
imagination and inform you of important issues facing our rural communities,
farms, and ranches.
We are planning the following teach-in topics:
- Drought – learn how best to cope with a dry cycle
- Tilling the Soil of Opportunity – showcasing alternative agricultural
businesses
- Non-Hormone Treated Cattle Program – learn about this program for
supplying meat to the European Union
- Youth Making A Difference – see how communities are using their greatest
asset to make a positive difference in their towns
- Working with Radio & Media – a hands-on activity workshop to help you
promote your message through the media and reach your audience
- Community Development – a look at some different models that work in rural
communities throughout the Midwest
- Wealth Transfer and Communities – find out what a community can do to
capture the wealth transfer taking place
- Retirement and Investment Planning – changing tax laws have brought new
opportunities and pitfalls for those looking ahead to their retirement
- Nebraska Unicameral Review – will discuss what is happening in the
Nebraska Unicameral and the consequences for rural people and communities
- Conservation Security Program – a look at how the program will work and at
the proposed rules and regulations
- Federal Budget & Appropriations/Commodity Organization Reform – we will
discuss efforts to gain support of agricultural organizations and federal
appropriators through grassroots resolutions
- New Homestead Act – what is happening with the law
- Business Transition – how do you prepare a business for sale?
- REAP Members Share their Story – rural entrepreneurs tell all
- Customer Service: “You Can Be a Super Star”
- Southern Cone of South America – slide show from a LEAD fellow
Our new building is located at 145 Main St, which is accessible from Highway
77. The school is located at 400 S 5th Street and is 3 blocks south of Main
Street on 5th Street.
The event is free and open to the public, with a minimal charge for the noon
lunch which will feature beef and chicken raised by family livestock producers.
To sign up, call the Center office at 402-687-2100. Pre-registration is not
required, but is strongly encouraged.
Contact: Kim Preston by phone (x 1022) or
e-mail, kimp@cfra.org.
|
