BREATHING IN POOR LIBERAL POLICY

For every action taken there are consequences. Yesterday, and I’m sure more days to come, we in north central Idaho will be experiencing the consequences…POOR LAND MANAGEMENT!

As you can tell by the pictures the air quality isn’t good. At harvest time there is dust in the air, usually in the evening but by morning it is cleared out. Not the case with wildfire smoke being held in by a weather system change.

The cause for the smoke…lighting activated fires in public lands. The same public lands that are poorly mismanaged by environmental activist driven liberal policies whose demographics are in the rural regions of L.A., San Francisco, New York City, Chicago, Boston, etc.

Are you getting the picture or is it too smoky to see through?

For years the environmental activist organizations and zealots have preyed on the emotions of city folk to “have passion for mother earth and care for the land” by sending a $10 or more donation to stop logging.

And Liberal lawmakers like Diane Feinstein are leading the charge. I wonder if she is out camping in a tent in our area to experience the fruits of her labor?

By not allowing logging to take place on public lands to remove dead trees, make clearings to help stop fires, and to manage the land has made for one heck of a fuel supply that we are inhaling and will be for weeks.

Senator Dianne Feinstein and her Husband Richard Blum have purchased a new home for 16.5 Million at the corner of Lyon and Vallejo st in San Francisco.

I’m sure that Senator Feinstein, her cronies in Congress, and the liberals and activists that support these poor policies make sure that their yards are watered and beautiful. I’m sure that after the lawn is mowed and weeds are pulled the refuse doesn’t just stay there. Why is my back yard any different?

Why should public lands be any different? Why can’t our government utilize the sale of the trees to help take some pressure off of us tax payers in more ways than one?

The answer is definitely clearer than the smoke invested air I am seeing and breathing…BIG MONEY!

Over $2 trillion is spent annually worldwide on environmental activism. Do you think these bloated back east elected officials care about me and my family in a town of 369 people in north central Idaho? Or do you think they care about the bundles of dollars their rich activist friends with townhouses in Manhattan think?

Not only do we need to clear the air on this issue, but we need to clean house. We need better policies that actually work regarding public land management. We need common sense policies instead of the kind driven by activist monies.

I’m sure that there is concern on the other side’s part to care for the environment and those that live in it…just not us humans that pay their way. Maybe if I was a three horned snail darter or painted lady toad strangler they would pay attention to my plea. It's down right unAmerican!  

Dust in the Wind

Yesterday I woke up at 4am to make a meeting in Spokane, Washington (3 hours away) with the Environmental Protection Agency. I live in District 10 which is headquartered in the Pacific Northwest's farming community of Seattle (I am starting with sarcasm early today). As a stakeholder and farmer these are things that need to be done that take time away from my family and real job of farming.

The meeting is part of a mandatory 5 year review and deemed a listening session to take comments back to the EPA director in Washington, D.C. regarding agriculture dust. I did not stutter my writing...agriculture dust.

I want those in agriculture to know that they were well represented at the meeting by farmers, ranchers, organizations, and researchers. There were folks on the phone as well that had gathered in Boise to take notes and provide comments. How effective we will be is up to the whim of the EPA Director.

The gist of dust regulation is to examine the existing 24 hour standards for PM 10, or "coarse" particle pollution. PM 10 is for particles 10 micronmeters in diameter and smaller that had been set at 150 micrograms per cubic meter of air since 1987. The EPA is also looking at standards for PM 2.5 which is fine particles. All of this is under the clean air act and I am sure you understood completely what you just read.

The background information was presented to us by the EPA person brought in for this meeting from back east. He went through his PowerPoint presentation and explained the different formulas and procedures that are used for calculating days that violate the standards. (Now I am keeping things simple and not naming names because we have to work the problem at this point.)

Unless you are a scientist that studies air and calculates whether the EPA's standards are being met, you will have a glassy look in your eyes like the majority of people representing ag had. The "alternative standards" that EPA is looking at is called "the 98th percentile form."

Their fact sheet defines that as: "Using that form, an area would meet the standard if the 98th percentile of 24-hour PM 10 concentrations in a year, averaged over three years, was at, or below, the level of the standard. EPA staff also have concluded that the science could support revising the standard, in a range of 65 to 85, but only if the form of the standard is also changed." Now I am sure that this cleared things up for you. Don't feel bad, it took several times for everyone to understand it too.

The skinny of things is that EPA needs to review air standards every 5 years. There is a cutoff date for scientific studies to be used for review purposes. However, the one thing that was very clear to me, like a summer day in north Idaho, was the science is not conclusive.

Everyone there heard dozens of times from the EPA person heading the meeting and their expert standing by on conference call use the terms "What if," "Not conclusive," and "Uncertain." And we are talking about the science they are using to do the regulations and proposed revisions.

The science, along with the 98th percentile garnered chuckles from the crowd and eye rolling to be envied by a hot tempered mother cow that just gave birth. What I took from the dialogue exchanged was EPA wants to cut the standards in half, add a complicated formula, and more cities would have fewer days of violations.

My math skills are not the greatest, but I did learn in Kindergarten that if you make half the money you did before, things would be tougher to do than easier. EPA math, I gathered from that meeting, states otherwise. Are you getting a warm and fuzzy feeling yet?

The head EPA person also stated that we have to go through this regulatory process. There are procedures in place to ensure that things are done by the book regarding air standards. But what about the EPA? Are they supposed to follow proper protocol?

Is the EPA following the highest law of the land, the Constitution? Have their rules been proposed, debated, and passed by Congress or is it the whim of one person? I also heard the term executive order! That is a lot of control over tens of millions of people to be based upon inconclusive science by one person.

The ag people around the table asked unanimously to keep the standards where they are. When common senses was brought up by the EPA person, I asked him to add economic impacts as consideration for clean air instead of health as the only factor.

And if health is the only factor, what about the kids and people that would be malnourished or die in just our country alone if agriculture was not able to create some dust. What about suicide rates climbing even higher in rural areas when a farmer is told to close the doors after 100+ years of operation and can't handle it? Is that a health concern?

Common sense tells me that farming is an industry like no other, dirt is involved. It takes dirt to grow food to eat or feed animals that also live on dirt. In Idaho, the highest percentage of road miles are gravel which creates dust. Will the federal government sue my local highway district because there is not enough money to pave all of those road miles they are in charge of to limit dust? I think less regulation would be the common sense approach.

I am proud to say that I and others like me represented not only agriculture at the table, but the rest of the population and America. We asked tough questions and were direct in saying leave the standards where they are. How is that for common sense?

Rising Food Costs

While at the Commodity Classic an article came out in the Tampa Tribune about the rising costs of food prices on March 5th. The article was in the business section and had two great pictures. The first was a farmer from Montana talking to a John Deere representative with a combine in the background. The second picture was USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack. The sub headline was "Average food bill could increase by $20 a month."

Into the article starting at the fourth paragraph it stated "Companies like Sara Lee and McDonald's have warned they could raise prices this year due to higher commodity costs. And some economists are warning that higher prices could add more than $20 to the average monthly food bill for a family of four."

The next paragraph reads "At the farm level, prices have nearly doubled in recent years according to USDA figures." Has the mental picture been painted yet? All of the statements are pointing to the rich farmer raking in the dough.

The article goes on highlighting the different commodities and their increase in prices like soybeans rising from $6.43 in 2006 to $11.70 at the end of last year (an increase of 45%). Wheat prices increased from $4.26 to $5.70 (25% increase) since 2006, and corn prices went up from $2 to $5.66 since 2005 (a 65% increase).

Now to the headline: "Energy costs cited as food prices rise." Energy costs? Who would have thought that. The first paragraph reads "An Iowa farmer for 44 years, Daryl Haack offers one way to help explain why food prices are rising so much lately: Look at your local gas prices."

The second paragraph reads: "There's only about six cents worth of corn in that $3.50 box of cereal," Haack said. "But there's energy and fuel used before and during every step on the way from my farm to that grocery shelf."

Despite the headline citing energy costs as being the culprit for higher food costs, the Tampa Bay Tribune took the article to the farm. They wanted to show that farmers are the ones that are making all of the money instead of the actual cause.

I don't raise corn or soybeans due to my climate and hills that make me rely on a leveling combine. I would get the combine stuck or slide into the Clearwater River 1,500 feet below trying to get them harvested. But I do raise wheat.

According to the Wheat Foods Council a bushel of wheat (60 pounds) can make 90 one pound loaves of whole wheat bread. WOW! But using the wheat prices previously stated in 2006 a loaf had $.05 worth of wheat and in December 2009 the same loaf had $.06 worth of wheat. The difference of a penney!

The Wheat Foods Council also shows that one bushel of wheat makes approximately 42 pounds of flour. In 2006 that flour would have had $.10 worth of wheat and last year $.14 worth. I don't see anywhere a doubling of prices, do you?

These are the kinds of tactics that agriculture runs into every day. The media and activists use all kinds of mistruths to make their point instead of looking at the real issues. Why do they want to keep attacking small family businesses?

That's right, small family businesses. That's what each farmer is. Searching the internet for small business definitions I tried the SBA website and gave up after five minutes of looking (that’s government efficiency for you.)

However I did find two alternative definitions on Wikipedia. The first stated that a small business employs less than 100 people. The second definition stated “For SEC purposes, small businesses are defined as domestic companies with revenues of under $25 million, and not investment companies. Subsidiaries of larger companies do not qualify as small businesses.” That one is directly from the SEC.

I don’t know about you, but I am definitely a small business. I work on my farm with my wife and a hired man. At times I might have an extra person helping along with the boys. And I am definitely not even close to $25 million in revenues. And guess what, 90% of the farmers in the United States would be in that category.

If the media and activists are upset about “Big Businesses” and “Big Oil” why are they picking on small businesses and family farms? Are you ready for my conspiracy theory? It is for control of land and water!

The control of land and water has been battled over since the Garden of Eden. Wild animals fight over it, individuals have fought over it, and countries have fought over it. And there are people that are upset because a minority of the population loves and cares for it every day.

The article did write “Farmers, meanwhile, say they’re not rolling in profits, as costs for their fuel and supplies are surging just as quickly.”

“Whoever thought Egypt would blow up like it has,” said Erik Younggren, a fourth-generation wheat farmer in Northwest Minnesota, and vice president of the National Association of Wheat Growers who came to Tampa for the trade show. He has to buy fuel up front, he said, before knowing what price he’ll get for wheat in a year during harvest time. “I get up every day and check the news in Libya now.”

I know Erik and he did not come down for the trade show. He came down for the NAWG annual meeting and the tradeshow is visited during a break in meetings. Even in quoting a person, the media has an agenda. Not once did the Tampa Tribune cite the crisis in the Middle East or energy as the cause for food prices to rise, that was farmers. You mean to tell me that hicks understand more about what is happening in our country than our sophisticated city cousins?

Farmers pay the transportation costs both ways. I also have to pay for my wheat to get it out of the field and all the way to Portland, Oregon where it is then shipped around the world. One might wonder how much energy is used after the wheat leaves the field? But no, those with agendas don’t want to get at the heart of the problem, it might lead to the public demanding drilling for oil or calling for nuclear and hydro energy sources to help solve the problem in the United States. And for them that would be unpopular.

The Commodity Classic

This last week I was at the Commodity Classic (CC) in Tampa, Florida. No, I did not see the NFL negotiations taking place, but I did witness some great things. The CC is the host for the annual meetings of the National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG), National Corn Growers Association (NCGA), the American Soybean Association (ASA), and the National Sorghum Producers (NSP).

As the newest executive board member of the Idaho Grain Producers Association (IGPA) I attended committee meetings and the annual meeting of NAWG. This is where the member states make policy and set budgets for the coming year. I also witnessed former IGPA president Wayne Hurst take over as the NAWG President. I wish him the greatest success.

While there I also presented at the PrecisionAg Works booth. This is the second year I have done that and enjoy telling growers and anybody that will listen about the benefits that precision ag brings to farms and the environment. It is always great seeing the folks that promote precision ag like Paul Schrimpf (Meister Media), Bob Wanzel, Kim McCloskey, Elliot Knowels, and Dan Bellinger. These are great people that do a wonderful job for agriculture.

Seeing people that you know everyday at the conference is a great experience. A person might not see them very often, but it is always a pleasure when you do. One such person is Doug Jones who is the executive director of Growers for Biotechnology and a former Idaho Legislator and House Agriculture chairman. Doug and I serve on the Idaho Technology Council's Governmental Affairs committee.

It is also great to reconnect with people from previous functions like Marcia Taylor of DTN/Progressive Farmer. Marcia was on the review committee during my Eisenhower Fellowship interview and was a moderator for a breakout session at the CC dealing with Succession Planning. I also reconnected with Pam Fretwell of the Farm Journal Agriculture Foundation whom I met at the 2009 InfoAg convention in Springfield, Illinois.

This year provided a neat experience of connecting with Facebook friends. These are people that have much in common that I have not met. Stacy and Troy Hadrick are a great spokescouple for agriculture and were the highlight of a breakout session titled "Discovering Your Influential Power." I was able to get a picture of them with Flat Andy and you can connect with them at their website Advocates for Agriculture.

However it is the new people that you meet that really makes the CC a great event. I am thankful to Marcia Taylor for introducing me to Dan Miller (Senior editor) and Jack Odle (Publisher) of DTN/Progressive Farmer. I was introduced to Jay Vroom (President and CEO) of CropLife America by Elliot Knowels and had a great conversation. And by a chance meeting I chatted with Greg Vincent, editor of AgWeb.

Outside of connecting with people was Friday's General Session. This is an event that is attended by a few thousand farmers and agriculturalists. It started off by moderator and comedian Mark Mayfield interviewed each association's president about various issues. Then the highlight...U.S. House of Representatives Agriculture Committee Chairmain Frank Lucas (OK) and USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack each spoke. What a great opportunity to listen and learn from the top people in agriculture about issues not only about agriculture, but America as well.

Finally, my most cherished moment was what took place after a breakout session highlighting the "Future of Wheat" sponsored by Bayer Crop Science. Former USDA Secretary Clayton Yeutter spoke about the future of wheat and what the climate for agriculture will be like. I took his picture and posted it on Facebook and received a few comments, one being from his assistant, Jim Moseley. The Honorable Jim Moseley was the chairman of the committee for my interview with the Eisenhower Fellowship. To have a mentor like Jim is just awesome.

Where is all of this leading? The CC brings out the top people in agriculture and provides a great opportunity to meet and learn from them. These people are working hard to promote agriculture and to provide a better climate for the industry; from associations to media to companies.

The ability to listen and learn about almost any topic you are interested in cannot be underestimated and are hosted by these top people those of us in ag see each month or daily in magazines, websites, or alerts. Not only that, but to mingle and talk to them is very easy.

To me CC stands for Commodity Connections instead of Classic. I might have more contact with some than others throughout the year and some connections are just brief, but to have the ability to contact someone that is an expert in a certain area is invaluable. This is what makes agriculture such a great industry, we understand that we are all in it together and work hard for everyone to be successful, especially the farmer on the ground.

The information that is available is second to none and the ability to sit in on your commodity organizations committees or annual meeting is a great learning experience. Also, the importance of the organizations fun night centered around the PAC (Political Action Committee) is very important.

All in all, it was a great time and "Vacation." As far as "vacations" go, I pretty much just see four walls but in different rooms and buildings. Now back to the reality of farm life and snow.

Obama's Promise

Last week I was in Washington, D.C., the land of milk and honey. I am the newest member of the Idaho Grain Producers Association (IGPA) executive board and we were attending the National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) winter meeting.

Farmers and friends from different states were doing their job in committees and on the full board to prepare for the annual convention in March at the Commodity Classic in Tampa, Florida.

Both organizations are working on their policies for all issues concerning wheat farmers. This is how the troops work in the trenches of politics. We are preparing for "battle" with another Congress and are looking towards another Farm Bill.

While back there the newspaper that was delivered to my door was the Wall Street Journal. I can't afford to purchase a subscription (I am too cheap), but try to read it any chance I get. On the front page was a teaser block highlighting an article about the President's "Mandates on Regulation Review" on page A3.

The article "Obama Launches Rule Review, Pledging to Spur Jobs, Growth" came as a surprise to most of us attending NAWG. Quoting the WSJ: ...Mr. Obama said he intends to issue an executive order initiating a review to "make sure we avoid excessive, inconsistent and redundant regulation" focusing on rules that "stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive." WOW!

This is great news for agriculture I am sure (insert sarcasm here.) Will my farm or farms around the country be considered a "business?" And who gets to decide which rules and regulations are "excessive"? Is this just another great press op speech, or just a ploy to relax the Republican controlled House?

I can think of a couple of agencies that have excessive rules and regulations. The first one is the Environmental Protection Agency. I will say it here, They Don't Like Agriculture! The rules they have made since their creation in the Nixon administration has targeted agriculture which 99% consists of family businesses.

The EPA exploits anything to do with water, emissions (dust), and animals. The endangered species act seems to be their "weapon of choice," but they use all of the tools in their bag. The intent from Congress is butchered when it get into the hands of EPA "surgeons."

The second agency is the United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). Their charter is to provide technical assistance to farmers and ranchers to incorporate better conservation practices on an operation.

I experienced firsthand how they "help" farmers by going through the Conservation Security Program (CSP). They did everything humanly possible to keep me out! I was successful in appealing through the labyrinth of bureaucracy and have one, if not the only, 2007 CSP contract in the U.S.

The third agency I will pick on is the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). As some of you know I am into Unmanned Air Vehicles and believe that there is a future for commercial use. Quoting a friend who has spent over 20 years on the "Hill": "...I have dealt with all agencies in DC, but this was the rudest one I have ever encountered!"

Following the FAA rules that cover commercial flights I would have to: 1) Have a pilot’s license with instrument rating,  2) Pass a flight physical, and 3) be in a full sized aircraft following the UAV. I am talking about something that would weigh less than 20 pounds and has a wing span of eight feet; the size of a goose.

If "Little Johnnie" were to purchase a hobby helicopter, put a camera on it, and knock on your door to see if you want your gutters checked, he could not take any money from you. I applaud "Little Johnnie" for his entrepreneurial spirit, but if he takes a penny he is now a law breaker.

In Lewiston, Idaho last fall, two little kids less than eight years old were hassled by the city for selling pumpkins off of their front porch. This is ludicrous and wrong. We are over regulated by bullies with tenure that "we" employ! 

What about the teenager that wants to make some money for college and learn a good work ethic? He/she has to wait until  their 16th birthday and can only work so many hours in a week. Why not let that person who wants to do something other than play video games get a jump start on life?

When I was growing up there were more hay jobs than kids. We did "dummy blocks" (small square bales weighing around 70 pounds) and it was a great way to make money in rural America. Now the attitude is that mommy and daddy will just give me money, maybe even Uncle Sam.

On the other hand, not all agency employees do this. I have a great relationship with these people from the local to federal levels. Actions of people are the same whether in government or in everyday life, it gets magnified when it happens to you. They are people.

I am hopeful that something good will come out of the President's comments and executive order. I am hopeful that Congress will hold the President to his words. And, I am hopeful that agencies will utilize common sense and consult with those of us in the "public" that normally don't get consulted with.

Agencies were created to help the public, to protect them, to ensure that some protections for things were Incorporated into everyday life and business. But, am I not part of the "public"? Are small businesses, farmers, and ranchers part of the "public"? It is a shame that parts of the public are harassed and shunned because of bureaucrats or agencies with an agenda. I just wonder if that will happen with "Re-Publics?"