The American Farm Bureau Federation announced Wednesday that they support legislative efforts by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) to stop an Environmental Protection Agency proposal to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.
 
  In a letter to Murkowski that was sent to all senators, AFBF President Bob Stallman said the EPA proposal is ill-timed because climate discussions held in Copenhagen last month did not produce a “meaningful international agreement that puts all nations on a level playing field with respect to carbon emissions.”
 
“In the absence of such an international agreement, it would be foolish for our country—from both an economic and an environmental standpoint—to undertake such regulatory action as contemplated by EPA. Administrator Lisa Jackson testified before the Senate last summer that the U.S. acting on its own cannot affect the global climate,” Stallman wrote. “Yet, it is clear that a regulatory scheme such as that contemplated under the endangerment finding would have significant negative effects on the economy.”
 
In the letter, Stallman noted a resolution passed unanimously by delegates to AFBF’s 91st annual meeting recent that not only expressed opposition to cap-and-trade legislation but that “strongly supports any legislative action that would suspend EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.”
 
Meanwhile, National Farmers Union (NFU) President Roger Johnson, in association with the 25x’25 Initiative and the University of Tennessee, addressed more than 50 House and Senate Agriculture and Environment and Public Works Committee staff; Leadership; committee staff members; and individual member office staff on the economic impact climate change policy decisions will have on the agriculture and forestry sectors.
“America’s farmers and ranchers can and want to be part of the solution to global climate change,” said Johnson. “Voluntary offsets will provide environmental and economic benefits.”
Johnson said the National Farmers Union will continue to be “supportive in the development of an agricultural offset program that will both work and be beneficial to farmers.”

He said NFU strongly believes a legislative solution, rather than EPA regulation, is the best means to address climate change.

Keith Dittrich, chairman of the Board of the American Corn Growers Association (ACGA), said cap and trade expands the market for farm production and will offer “historic opportunities from an economy that has an insatiable demand for energy.”

“By protecting the environment, it will also ensure that farmers will be able to meet the needs of feeding a growing world, not damage that ability as the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) recently stated,” Dittrich said.

While Dittrich said he understands that this legislation may potentially increase the cost of some energy products, he sees this as an investment for the future of America and stated that farmers “must understand that they should now consider themselves energy producers as well.”

Dittrich also scoffed at AFBF comments that cap and trade will downsize agriculture and the prediction that millions of acres of trees might be planted to capture a rising carbon market, stating that these “USDA predictions are most likely as inaccurate as the last Crop Production report” and that in fact farmers would be able to reap a new stream of income by sequestering carbon and trading permits.

“Farmers must decide to ‘wear the cap and trade their energy crops in for better prices’ which will happen as the country moves to a expanded renewable energy system coming from the farm,” he said.

While the American Corn Growers Association supports cap and trade, the National Corn Growers Association President Darrin Ihnen has released a statement Wednesday opposing the House legislation that was passed in June last year.

“Now, based on the recently completed economic analysis, NCGA has no choice but to oppose H.R. 2454,” Ihnen said. “The results of the Informa study indicates that every corn grower in the country will experience increased costs of production resulting from H.R. 2454. In the early years of this legislation, these higher production costs will be relatively minor. However, over time these prices will significantly increase, placing an unnecessary burden on growers.

He said that while the legislation offers opportunities to produce carbon offsets, “…this study demonstrates that not all growers will be able to participate.”

“The single greatest offset opportunity is using continuous no-till. However, not every corn grower is able to adopt no-till practices,” Ihnen said. “The ability to adopt continuous no-till production is driven by both economic and agronomic factors. Those growers unable to adopt no-till production will experience serious economic hardship resulting from H.R. 2454. This burden will fall disproportionately on growers in the northern Corn Belt.”

He also said the will result in diverting productive farmland into afforestation (newly planted forests) or perennial grasses solely to gain offset credits.

  • Share/Bookmark