Action Alert!

 

If the thought of getting a commercial driver’s license (CDL) to haul a load of calves to the sale barn or drive a tractor on the highway from one field to another makes you uneasy, or if you are alarmed by the thought of the Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers regulating farm ponds and ditches, then we need your help! Federal agencies need to hear from you by the end of June!

Issue #1: Application of commercial trucking regulations to farmers and ranchers

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), an arm of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), is taking a close look at how farm trucks and farm equipment, as well as the farmers who operate them, are regulated under federal safety laws.

Several months ago regulators in Illinois began arguing that farmers hauling grain under crop share agreements are “for hire” carriers, putting them in the same category as drivers hauling for Yellow Freight or J.B. Hunt. The debate rose all the way to FMCSA in Washington, D.C. but the discussions have gone far beyond crop share agreements. Officials are also looking at implements of husbandry, such as tractors and combines, and questioning whether CDLs should be required of farmers when driving equipment on public roads for short distances. 

Of most concern to MFB is the distinction between intra- and interstate commerce since a strict interpretation of FMCSA guidance will mean virtually every farmer will need a CDL, medical cards and more even if they only drive a short distance using pick-ups with trailers. 

FB Action: Since learning about the guidance document, MFB has been in close contact with AFBF and other State Farm Bureaus to coordinate our response. We have also met with Missouri Department of Transportation staff to discuss the potential impacts at the state level. 

FMCSA is only allowing a 30 day comment period, which we believe is insufficient. MFB and Kansas Farm Bureau are working with lawmakers to push for an extension of the June 30 deadline. AFBF and MFB will submit comments.

Member Action: We strongly urge farmers to read the guidance document, found at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-05-31/pdf/2011-13035.pdf, and submit comments by June 30.

Please direct comments to FMCSA Administrator Anne Ferro and specify Docket No. FMCSA-2011-0146. Letters may be faxed (202-493-2251) or mailed [Docket Management Facility, (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Ground Floor, Room 12-140, Washington, DC 20590]. Comments may also be submitted electronically at www.regulations.gov.

Issue #2: Expansion of EPA’s Clean Water Act authority

In May, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) proposed draft Guidance that would expand their Clean Water Act (CWA) regulatory authority. The proposed Guidance will be used by the EPA and the Corps to reinterpret the term “waters of the United States.” EPA has indicated this increased regulation will affect the implementation of all programs authorized under the CWA.

 In recent years environmental and wildlife organizations and their allies on Capitol Hill have pushed to broaden the scope of the Clean Water Act and the regulatory reach of the EPA and Corps. One bill, the “Clean Water Restoration Act,” would have expanded the federal government’s jurisdiction to over 314,000 farm ponds in Missouri alone. That piece of legislation was defeated in large part due to Farm Bureau’s grassroots opposition to the bill.

Fast forward to 2011—the private property rights threat is still present except this time federal agencies are bypassing Congress and the formal rulemaking process to put in place “guidance” for their field staff across the country to use.

FB Action: AFBF asked for an extension of the public comment period, which ends July 1, but to date it does not appear EPA will allow more time. AFBF and MFB will be submitting comments.

Member Action: We strongly urge farmers and landowners to submit comments by the July 1 deadline. EPA needs to hear that the impact on farms and ranches will be far-reaching, burdensome and extremely costly. A sample letter is below for your use.

Comments should be sent to: Water Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC, 20460. The proposed guidance is referred to as Docket No. EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0409. Comments may also be submitted electronically to owdocket@epa.gov. Please make sure to put in the subject line Docket No. EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0409.

If you have any questions, please contact the MFB Legislative Department at (573) 893-1410 or send an email to Garrett Hawkins at ghawkins@mofb.com. Thank you in advance for your rapid response!

Sample Letter

Water Docket

Environmental Protection Agency

Mail Code 2822T

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20460

Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0409

RE: Comments on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Guidance Regarding Identification of Waters Protected by the Clean Water Act, Docket No. EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0409

To Whom It May Concern:

As a farmer and landowner from (insert location), I oppose the “Guidance Regarding Identification of Waters Protected by the Clean Water Act (CWA)” as proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 

 

While I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Guidance, this process falls far short of a normal notice-and-comment rulemaking.  It deeply concerns me that the agencies are essentially expanding their regulatory reach under the CWA without affording farmers and ranchers from around the country, and others impacted, a formal opportunity to provide meaningful comment on the effects of such action. 

As a result of this Guidance agency field staff will have an expanded list of options they can use to support a determination that wet or even dry land on my property is a “water of the United States”  Ditches, ponds, and other wet features are commonplace on agricultural land and now face the threat of federal regulation. 

Establishing regulatory controls over virtually all waters will come at a monumental cost to farmers and landowners, from the expenditure of time and money to obtain permits to potential land use controls that negatively affect agricultural production.  These impacts must be given more thorough consideration. 

There is no doubt the EPA and the Corps intend to and will have a significant impact on CWA permitting and enforcement nation-wide because the Guidance broadly expands the scope of the agencies’ CWA jurisdiction.  I oppose this effort and urge the EPA and Corps to refrain from moving forward with a final Guidance.

Sincerely,

Front Lines

Did you read the March/April issue of "Show Me" magazine?  All the way through?  Because besides having great photographs of the YF&R Conference and a list of our sponsors (please support!) it also contained a heart breaking story-- on the very last page.  And while I'm certainly not breaking any news headlines in summarizing the story here for you, this story begs to be repeated.  And honored.

On January 5th Staff Sergeant Robert W. Pharris was killed in Afghanistan by a roadside bomb.  And though 268 soldiers have been tragically killed in this way in the war on Terror, you may wonder why such news would appear on the MFB YF&R blog.  The reasons is this; Pharris was a member of the Missouri Agri-business Development Team (ADT)-- his assignment was teaching Afghan farmers about sheep and goats.

A resident of Seymour, MO, Pharris raised sheep and goats on his own 36 acre farm.  This experience recommended him for a placement on the 13 member ADT. The article, written by Chris Fennewald, reports that Pharris was enthusiastic about making a big impact in his reconstruction mission. 

Imagine what an impact raising food will have.

Visit Early and Often

Passing along a little bit of news from the Promotion and Education Newsletter. 

The American Farm Bureau Foundation and Pioneer Hi-Bred have joined together to create an on-line ag literacy game.  The program, called My American Farm, teaches concepts in all the core subjects while sharing the message of agriculture.  This website targets 3-5 graders and it lots of fun!

But there is a way to participate in helping MOFB, even if you are no longer in grade school!  There is a contest among all state Farm Bureaus to see whose website link receives the most hits during the contest period.  So play the game (often!), but get there via http://www.mofb.org/ and help Missouri win money to use for an exhibit!

And that's how it's done

Farmers are outstanding people.

But you knew that.

But why are they outstanding today? you ask.  Because with only a few hours notice 750-1200 people convened on the capital steps for the "Stand Up for Agriculture Rally." 

HSUS managed to gather 100 people.  Some say that estimate is generous (see this You Tube video).  This is even more embarrassing to the Humane Society, since the county in which Jefferson City is located approved Prop B.

Based on statements from policy makers, FB President Blake Hurst reports "Stand Up for Ag" as "one of the best rallies they've seen at the State Capitol."

(photograph from HumaneWatch.org)

If you  haven't yet, you can still contact the governor at http://governor.mo.gov/contact.

Listen Up Folks!

Okay, we talk about it all the time, but here is a chance for action!  Wednesday the MO House voted 85-71 to approve SS/SCS/SBs 113 & 95, bills to amend Propsition B.  (To read the bill, google SS/SCS/SBs 113 & 95 or try this link.)  The bill also passed by the Senate and is headed to Governor Nixon.  Please get involved and let our Governonr know we support this bill and urge him to sign it into law. Please call or send e-mail ASAP urging Governor Nixon to sign SS/SCS/SBs 113 & 95 into law!  Call at this number, 573-751-3222 or go online to http://governor.mo.gov/contact.

Pass this information on to your friends, post it to your facebook page, e-mail it out-- be an agvocate!!!

From the Chair

This week's post comes from YF&R Chairman Jason Gerke.  If you're needing a little inspiration this week, here it is!

Earning trust by communicating our shared values

Here in 2011, the realities and challenges facing farm families of our generation are like none ever seen before. I am not talking about the challenge of good old fashion hard work, or the hard economic realities of trying to make a living at the mercy of Mother Nature. No, I’m talking about new challenges that threaten to put us out of business through referendum or regulation before we even get an honest chance to go broke farming on our own.

Yes, we face a lot of issues today.   From increased exposure to nuisance suits, to an Environmental Protection Agency that has run amuck, to an activist culture that seeks to manipulate emotions to further their animal rights agenda.

The good news is that the opportunity exists for us to overcome these challenges. But to do so -- if we as producers intend to stay in business -- we will have to engage in public conversation on food production and agriculture. We must earn trust by communicating our shared values.

Let me give you an example of what I’m talking about. A couple years ago, Harris Interactive surveyed consumers on behalf of AFBF to gauge support of farmers and their production practices. Consumers were asked if they agree or disagree with the following statement, “Farmers and Ranchers in my state treat their farm animals humanely.”

On the bright side, a majority -- 57 percent -- agreed or strongly agreed with the statement. Only 9 percent disagreed or strongly disagreed.

Now I’m no math major, but what that tells me that 34 percent of respondent were still riding the fence as “Not sure.” They didn’t have enough information to have an opinion!

But there is hope. Those same consumers were exposed to information and messages about modern food animal production. When asked again later if they agreed or disagreed with the statement that “Farmers and Ranchers in my state treat their animals humanely.” This time, 72 percent of them agreed or strongly agreed. That’s a 15 point swing in our favor.

Now let’s take a look at a real world example. Think bake to the November 2010 ballot initiative known in Missouri as Prop B. Despite the passage of Prop B, there were several positive “take-aways.” We know the referendum limiting the number of dogs a breeder can own passed by a slight 51 to 49 margin state wide. But a closer look at the county by county results shows that in most of the state, the measure failed by a 60 to 40 margin on average.

This was due in no small part to the efforts of Farm Bureau members who took time to reach out to their neighbors, family members, civic groups and even media, to explain why Prop B would do little to protect dogs but would put good producers out of business. Although the initiative just barely passed, we discovered just how effective reaching out can be. If only we could have started sooner and reached a little further.

As we look to tell the story about agriculture and the value of technology in our industry, we have a real opportunity to establish trust through increase transparency with the one-third or more of our neighbors who just don’t have enough information to even have an opinion.

Make communications a part of your business

Communications needs to be a part of your business planning and budget. Just as you consider a new tractor or investment in genetics a necessity on the farm, a communication plan is becoming mandatory if you want to farm in the future.

It’s up to us to connect and show those that would listen about our way of life. Too often we get that mixed up. We try and educate before a connection has even been made. Too often we try to sell folks our products before letting them know we care about them or their views.

To connect with others, simply speak from experience – become a storyteller. Don’t sell facts and science. Share your values. For example, it’s not about how many pounds you weaned this year. Talk instead about how you had to miss another Anniversary dinner out with your spouse because one of your heifers was calving and needed extra care.

It comes down to this -- advocating for agriculture means providing a reasoned alternative to the activists’ message. We need to give consumers permission to eat again.

Go ahead and make a case for using technology in farming because it supports your VALUES. Tell those who will listen that you believe in the sound practices you are using and why they are used.

It is up to us

I’m reminded of the story about a young man who was determined to win the heart of the girl he wanted marry, but was to shy and afraid of rejection to pursue her directly. He began what can only be called “campaigning” for her affection and sent a small gift and messages of love to her house every day for a month. By the end of the month, the young lady was madly in love…. with the U-P-S man who delivered the packages!!

Too often we’ve been to shy, to proud or to busy to communicate with our consumers. And those with opposing view points are only too happy to deliver a story about modern agriculture for us.

Don’t let our neighbors and other consumers fall for the activists just because they are the ones doing the talking. We have to take the message to them ourselves. We have to get over our shyness --- make our own connection --- and build trust in agriculture once again.

By Jason Gerke