Agriculture News
The farm bill, hemp legalization and the status of CBD
Brookings | Posted on January 2, 2019Typically, cannabis is not part of the conversation around farm subsidies, nutritional assistance, and crop insurance. The new Farm Bill does not create a completely free system in which individuals or businesses can grow hemp whenever and wherever they want. There are numerous restrictions. Hemp cannot contain more than 0.3 percent THC, per section 10113 of the Farm Bill.Second, there will be significant, shared state-federal regulatory power over hemp cultivation and production. Under section 10113 of the Farm Bill, state departments of agriculture must consult with the state’s governor and chief law enforcement officer to devise a plan that must be submitted to the Secretary of USDA. A state’s plan to license and regulate hemp can only commence once the Secretary of USDA approves that state’s plan. In states opting not to devise a hemp regulatory program, USDA will construct a regulatory program under which hemp cultivators in those states must apply for licenses and comply with a federally-run program.
Judges side with Trump administration on packer rules
Meating Place (free registration required) | Posted on January 2, 2019USDA was not “arbitrary and capricious” in withdrawing an interim final rule that would have made it easier for farmers and ranchers to sue meatpackers on claims of unfair treatment in business contracts, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled. The appellate judges denied a petition to review brought by the Organization for Competitive Markets, which contends that USDA has violated a congressional mandate given in the 2008 farm bill to publish a regulation outlining criteria around contracting practices by June 2010.OCM, on behalf of two poultry growers and a cattle rancher, filed the lawsuit late last year after USDA, under the new Trump administration, withdrew an interim final rule — known as the Farmer Fair Practices Rules — implemented at the end of the Obama administration in 2016. That interim final rule would have made it easier for farmers and ranchers to prevail in cases where they claim packers treat them unfairly in contracts because it would have essentially eliminated the need for proof of competitive harm. Implementation of the Farmer Fair Practices Rules would have represented a change in USDA’s regulatory approach and would have conflicted with the courts’ historic interpretations of the Packers and Stockyards Act (PSA).In its ruling, the panel of appellate judges wrote, “USDA explained that it was withdrawing the interim final rule and taking no further action on the proposed regulations because the proposed regulatory change of course would generate protracted litigation, adopt vague and ambiguous terms, and might prevent innovation and foster vertical integration that would hinder new market entrants. … These are legitimate regulatory and substantive concerns.”
The most pampered pets of the moment might be our backyard chickens
USA Today | Posted on January 2, 2019When it came time to decorate the new Amish-built house on her 26-acre property near Lansing, Michigan, Danielle Raad went all out. She painted the interior walls a lustrous eggshell blue, and spent hours hand-stenciling one with an intricate pattern. She lined rooms with handmade art, including her own work and that of her kids. She brought in vintage objects such as a chandelier and a painted shelf. Her mother added items covered in decoupaged roses.Raad put her father in charge of prettying up the outside, which features barn-red siding, white picket fencing, flower boxes and a scarecrow. Eventually Raad, 35, had the house just right, and it was ready to be occupied. But two years later, she still hasn't spent the night in it – and she doesn't plan to. It was for her chickens.
House resolution aims to prevent ERS, NIFA move
Meating Place (free registration required) | Posted on January 2, 2019On Dec. 20, members of Congress introduced H.R. 7330, the Agricultural Research Integrity Act of 2018, in the U.S. House of Representatives, which would block the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) moves to relocate the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service (ERS) and National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) and realign ERS under the chief economist. The proposed bill would amend the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 first announced in August by U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue.Several scientific organizations and members of the broader research and statistical stakeholder community welcomed the resolution's introduction."This bill would ensure that ERS is fully funded and fully functional, necessary to understanding the impacts of the new farm bill that will spend some $850 billion over the next eight years on programs that touch more than 40 million Americans," said Susan Offutt, ERS administrator under presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
Dairy farming is dying. After 40 years, I’m done.
The Washington Post | Posted on December 27, 2018After 40 years of dairy farming, I sold my herd of cows this summer. The herd had been in my family since 1904; I know all 45 cows by name. I couldn’t find anyone who wanted to take over our farm — who would? Dairy farming is little more than hard work and possible economic suicide. A grass-based organic dairy farm bought my cows. I couldn’t watch them go. In June, I milked them for the last time, left the barn and let the truckers load them. A cop-out on my part? Perhaps, but being able to remember them as I last saw them, in my barn, chewing their cuds and waiting for pasture, is all I have left. My retirement was mostly voluntary. Premature, but there is some solace in having a choice. Unlike many dairy farmers, I didn’t retire bankrupt. But for my wife and me, having to sell our herd was a sign — of the economic death not just of rural America but also of a way of life. It is nothing short of heartbreaking to walk through our barn and know that those stalls will remain empty. Knowing that our losses reflect the greater damage inflicted on entire regions is worse.
Does a state have a right to tell farmers in other states how to grow their food?
The American Spectator | Posted on December 27, 2018Thirteen states suing Massachusetts filed a brief petitioning the U.S. Supreme to hear their case this week. “This case affects every producer, distributor, and consumer of eggs, pork, and veal in the country, and it implicates fundamental constitutional principles of horizontal federalism and interstate comity,” the brief filed on Wednesday reads. “The Court should hear it.”The brief pertains to whether the Bay State’s animal cruelty law impinges on the rights of other states under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause. A 2016 state ballot question, which passed by a greater than 3-to-1 margin, prohibits Massachusetts businesses from selling pork, shelled eggs, or veal from “any farm owner or operator … knowingly confining any breeding pig, calf raised for veal, or egg-laying hen in a way that prevents the animal from lying down, standing up, fully extending its limbs, or turning around freely.”The litigation concerns not Massachusetts regulations pertaining to in-state farmers but prohibitions on Massachusetts restaurants or stores buying products from out-of-state farmers who do not abide by Massachusetts law. Farmers impacted by laws passed beyond their state borders regard edicts as coastal states invested in agriculture more as consumers than producers dictating to heartland states more economically dependent on farming how they should conduct their business.
California water board backs plan to increase river flows
Capital Press | Posted on December 24, 2018A state board on Wednesday approved a contentious proposal to boost water flows through a Central California river, a move that would increase habitat for salmon but deliver less water to farmers and cities such as San Francisco. The plan under consideration by the Water Resources Control Board would alter management of the Lower San Joaquin River and three tributaries to address what environmental groups say is a crisis in the delta that empties into San Francisco Bay.The board voted to study a last-minute agreement among several key water agencies to voluntarily curtail their water usage and pay into a fund for habitat improvements. But the board members declined to delay their decision on a mandate, noting it won't be immediately enforceable and can be adjusted.
Elanco Animal Health plans to restructure
Watt AgNet | Posted on December 24, 2018Elanco Animal Health is in the process of restructuring, in an effort to streamline its international operations.In a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Elanco stated that its board of directors on December 10 authorized a restructuring program that will shift its focus and resources to priority areas.The proposed restructuring reflects a change from having a physical location to a distribution model in certain countries, in connection to Elanco’s recent spinoff from that of parent company Eli Lilly & Company and initial public offering (IPO), according to the SEC filing.The SEC filing further stated that as part of Elanco’s ongoing efforts in connection with its separation from Eli Lilly & Company, the board authorized the write-off of certain assets that will not be utilized in the business on an ongoing basis.
New rules limiting clean water protections ignore stream science
High Country News | Posted on December 21, 2018The Trump administration announced plans to cut back the number of wetlands and creeks protected under the Clean Water Act, which regulates water pollution in the U.S. The new rules would leave about half the nation’s wetlands and all of its ephemeral streams — those waterways, common in the West, that flow only after rainfall or snowmelt — without federal safeguards. The proposed guidelines, which will almost certainly face years of lawsuits, are a stark departure from how previous administrations have interpreted the act — and a sharp divergence from research on how to protect clean water. The Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers argued that the new rules were informed by science. But the agencies did not conduct a new scientific assessment of which waterways the Clean Water Act should cover; instead, they relied on a comprehensive report prepared by the EPA in 2015. That report, on how streams and wetlands are connected to downstream waters, highlights the importance of the very waterways the new guidelines would leave unprotected.The regional example I’ve used is the Pacific Northwest. They have a very different attitude toward rivers than anywhere else in the U.S., and I think it’s because of the focus on salmon. They get it — a salmon can’t survive without a watershed. It needs to migrate upstream, it needs spawning habitat, it needs rearing habitat. They’ve made the connection between a particular fish that everybody is excited about and the whole watershed.Even though there are these national rules, and even if they go into effect, there are things you can do locally to protect your local river. If people feel strongly about this, I would encourage them to become active in, or form, local watershed groups. Then you get the immediate benefits of a clean, healthy river. So adopt a river, and care for it.
Lost markets take toll on Idaho dairies
Capital Press | Posted on December 21, 2018Efficiencies of scale usually give large dairies an edge in weathering downturns in the market. But that’s not the case for Box Canyon Dairy of Wendell and others in Idaho that have lost their market entirely. Box Canyon is set for a complete herd dispersal sale on Dec. 14. The owners declined to comment, but the sale will include 17,000 head — 9,000 milking and dry cows and 8,000 heifers — according to the Toppenish Livestock Commission in Washington state, which is handling the sale.“They lost their market,” Rick Naerebout, CEO of Idaho Dairymen’s Association, said.The brokerage Box Canyon was selling milk to let the owners know in early fall it would no longer be able to return the value of the milk. The broker would still buy the milk but at distressed prices. There isn’t a viable market for the dairy’s milk, and all the other processors are full, he said.“They had to make the tough decision to disperse their herd. It was a shock to the entire industry,” he said.