I've interviewed 12 people over the last few days, and visited with several more on the route that lead to those interviews. I've heard the personal accounts of how people across the western states are planning, working and striving to make it through this tough year, how they're recovering from the devastating fires that swept so much of the country in recent months and what their strategies are to survive what are sure to be more challenging months, and possibly years, ahead.
On a year that is setting record high temperatures combined with record low moisture, when the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) publishes its support of meatless Mondays, when other government agencies including the Forest Service are telling producers in some areas that they won't be able to graze their permits next year either as a result of a fire that burned their permits this year, when corn is shooting through the roof and politicians are continuing to support its use in ethanol production (which costs more to produce than it makes in return...wonder why we're in a budget deficit), when the USDA is reducing meat in school lunch programs, when certain species of wildlife are placed at a higher value than livestock by the public, and when over a million acres have been burned in western states alone, killing thousands of head of livestock, wiping out homes and entire operations in some cases, I saw yet again what makes our agriculture industry so unique, wonderful and powerful in my opinion: God and the farmers and ranchers themselves.
There was resilience, hope, humor and grit surrounded by a solid belief in the Lord amongst the people I spoke to. It's humbling to visit with such people, who in a matter of minutes made my family's situation this year look plumb rosy in multiple instances. There were the stories of help provided by friends, family, acquaintances and in several cases those people who use private lands for recreational and hunting vacations. There were the stories of the sheer workload being taken on by landowners to recover from the effects of 2012, and the fact that I never heard any hesitation, complaints (except for how the government fights fire, which I agree with wholeheartedly) or excuses. Instead, I heard about action, plans, ideas, innovations and answered prayers. I also heard about continued prayers for those who did have to sell out and regroup. People spoke of how good we have it today compared to the 1980's or 1930's. Miraculous moments that occurred during some of the fires were explained, as was how the western cowherd is going to be fed this winter, not if. There was a resigned willingness to dig in and survive, come what may, combined with the ever-present hope you'll always find in agriculture that the weather will become perfect starting tomorrow and the government will back off, and that prices will reach a level we all have in the back of our mind. We are, and always will be the most optimistic pessimists, or most pessimistic optimists, you'll ever meet.
I am proud to not only be a part of this industry, but to be a part of its core; which are the people who raise the food and fiber that feed and clothe the world. The fact that I get to do a part in sharing the stories, ideas and news relevant to agriculture is just a bonus, and this has been a great week on the job for me!
Showing posts with label USDA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label USDA. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
Friday, June 17, 2011
Political Issues - GIPSA Rule
As I've already mentioned we covered a number of topics while in Washington D.C. My plan is to present a number of those issues to you while they're still fresh in my mind.
Up first is the proposed GIPSA (Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration) Rule, which USDA is currently working on.
The 2008 Farm Bill required re-writing and clarification of certain aspects of the GIPSA Rule, and the USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) was the entity in charge of this rule, so they got the task of re-writing it. The GIPSA website states the goal of the regulation is to level the playing field between packers, live poultry dealers, and swine contractors, and the nation's poultry growers and livestock producers.
The result of the USDA's first draft was varied and outspoken. During the public comment period, 60,000 comments were submitted, voicing everything from strong support to rigorous opposition of the rule. I attended one of a series of USDA/DOJ public workshops on the topic, where a number of panels comprised of members of the livestock industry spoke on the issue, and where producers from across the country spoke passionately for and against it based on the impact it would have on their operation and their neighbor's operations.
Right now everyone is waiting for the USDA to release the final rule after making changes based on the 60,000 public comments. The USDA has three choices of how they can proceed upon completing the writing phase. First, they can release a final rule, period, the end. Second, they can present a proposed final rule with an additional public comment period. Third they can submit a reproposal of the entire rule. They also have the option of doing a combination of the three. For example, they can choose specific parts to be released as final, and make others open for another public comment period.
Many of the congressional delegation are in opposition of continued funding of the rule, because they don't like the idea of the USDA being able to come out with a final rule without anyone getting any additional say in the matter, especially with this being such a sensitive issue. Without funding the rule would die where it is now until the next budgeting session (I think, until sometime in the next session).
Others are in support of keeping the bill fully funded until we see what the final rule, or proposed rule is, then taking action if there is anything they're in opposition of.
The argument with that is if the rule is passed without additional comment, the only way to make changes is through a challenge or new legislation (and perhaps others), all of which can take several years. During that entire time the rule would stand as released.
You can read an outline of the original proposed rule here.
This is an important issue to all members of the livestock industry because it is a rule designed to level the marketing playing, and will have impacts (both good and bad) on all sectors . I encourage you to read up on it, and stay updated on it.
We were able to speak with USDA GIPSA Administrator Dudley Butler on the issue while in D.C., and he said, "If both sides come out a little mad and a little happy, I think will have done a good job."
Up first is the proposed GIPSA (Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration) Rule, which USDA is currently working on.
The 2008 Farm Bill required re-writing and clarification of certain aspects of the GIPSA Rule, and the USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) was the entity in charge of this rule, so they got the task of re-writing it. The GIPSA website states the goal of the regulation is to level the playing field between packers, live poultry dealers, and swine contractors, and the nation's poultry growers and livestock producers.
The result of the USDA's first draft was varied and outspoken. During the public comment period, 60,000 comments were submitted, voicing everything from strong support to rigorous opposition of the rule. I attended one of a series of USDA/DOJ public workshops on the topic, where a number of panels comprised of members of the livestock industry spoke on the issue, and where producers from across the country spoke passionately for and against it based on the impact it would have on their operation and their neighbor's operations.
Right now everyone is waiting for the USDA to release the final rule after making changes based on the 60,000 public comments. The USDA has three choices of how they can proceed upon completing the writing phase. First, they can release a final rule, period, the end. Second, they can present a proposed final rule with an additional public comment period. Third they can submit a reproposal of the entire rule. They also have the option of doing a combination of the three. For example, they can choose specific parts to be released as final, and make others open for another public comment period.
Many of the congressional delegation are in opposition of continued funding of the rule, because they don't like the idea of the USDA being able to come out with a final rule without anyone getting any additional say in the matter, especially with this being such a sensitive issue. Without funding the rule would die where it is now until the next budgeting session (I think, until sometime in the next session).
Others are in support of keeping the bill fully funded until we see what the final rule, or proposed rule is, then taking action if there is anything they're in opposition of.
The argument with that is if the rule is passed without additional comment, the only way to make changes is through a challenge or new legislation (and perhaps others), all of which can take several years. During that entire time the rule would stand as released.
You can read an outline of the original proposed rule here.
This is an important issue to all members of the livestock industry because it is a rule designed to level the marketing playing, and will have impacts (both good and bad) on all sectors . I encourage you to read up on it, and stay updated on it.
We were able to speak with USDA GIPSA Administrator Dudley Butler on the issue while in D.C., and he said, "If both sides come out a little mad and a little happy, I think will have done a good job."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)