SDFB Leader Connection
May 5, 2008
Upcoming events:
Safety & Health Network
Conference – May 13-15, Fargo
SDFB Youth Camp – June 9-11, Chamberlain
Dakota Fest – August 19-21, Mitchell
Century Farms recognition – August 28, Huron
SDFB Annual Meeting – November 21-22, Sioux Falls
National Farm-City Week – November 21-27
AFBF Annual meeting – January 11 – 14, San Antonio,
TX
Livestock Production
Op-Ed
The following opinion piece was
co-signed and submitted to print media by Scott
VanderWal, SD Farm Bureau President; Scott Jones, SD
Cattlemen’s Association President; and Dave Uttecht,
SD Pork Producers Council President.
As livestock producers in South
Dakota, we often consider ourselves “shielded” from
the activist attacks on agriculture that happen in
more populous areas. However, in recent years it’s
becoming more and more apparent that Americans no
longer have a thorough understanding of where their
food comes from or how it’s produced.
Even in South
Dakota, a state whose economy is heavily dependent
on agriculture, livestock producers are increasingly
under fire from forces with a limited understanding
of the industry. Recent media coverage of a new hog
barn in the Wagner area and the multiple ballot
issues springing up regarding animal welfare are
likely only the beginning of the uphill battle we
face in re-educating American consumers about food
production.
Recently, the Pew
Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production
released six broad recommendations resulting from
their two year study of the U.S. animal agriculture
industry. The Pew Commission took upon itself the
task of conducting a study “in the public interest”
of modern livestock production. Despite a pledge to
an open and public process, the last half of the
Commission’s work was done behind closed doors.
The
Commission has made no secret of its opposition to
contemporary animal agriculture, and is ignoring the
scientific research they funded in favor of the
opinions of commission members who believe they
should be able to determine the future of animal
agriculture in the United States. Highly respected
experts from major land grant universities, who
either made presentations to the commission or
conducted research at its request, stated that they
felt the commissioners had pre-conceived notions
about the U.S. livestock industry.
Despite what these,
and many other, so-called “experts” assert about
modern livestock production, those involved in
animal agriculture know the truth. Livestock
production makes efficient use of resources leading
to a more affordable food product for all
consumers. Improvements in livestock production
technology have helped the industry do a better job
of feeding more people.
Today, the United
States is significantly ahead of the world in
managing livestock production in an environmentally
friendly manner. More than half the agricultural
land in the United States is unsuitable for crop
production. Grazing animals on this land more than
doubles the land area that can be used to produce
food in this country and helps battle erosion,
invasive plant species and wildfires, while at the
same time providing wildlife habitat. A 2001 North
Carolina State University study showed that these
grasslands also act as a significant carbon offset,
especially when carbon dioxide levels rise.
Also, animal
feeding operations, such as confined animal feeding
operations (CAFOs), are a great source of natural
fertilizer. A 2006 EPA study found that application
of organic fertilizer (manure) to agricultural lands
increased carbon sequestration capability.
The misinformation
released by the Pew commission and touted by many
other activists is not new. It is based largely on
old data and the opinions of “experts” who know
nothing about modern animal agriculture or the
regulations that livestock producers adhere to in
order to protect the environment and the public.
One area where we
can all agree is that our country's animal
agriculture industry cannot go back to what many
people perceive as ''the good old days'' of smaller
operations. According to a University of Minnesota
study, if 1955 technology were used to produce beef
today, 165 million more acres of land would be
needed. With a growing global population that many
project will add three billion more mouths to feed
over the next 30 years, it’s imperative for those of
us in food production to use all of the tools
available to ensure safe and adequate food supplies.
Open
discussion and debate on important issues could
benefit the industry and the public. The animal
agriculture community remains interested in
fact-based, balanced discussion with our
stakeholders to address issues of public concern,
including providing a safe, abundant and affordable
food supply. We encourage you to learn more about
our industry’s efforts at
www.animalagalliance.org.
What’s with the
Blender Pump debate?
There have been many new stories the last
week about a controversy on taxing fuel from blender
pumps that dispense various mixes of ethanol.
On
April 17 the Department of Revenue and Regulation
issued a memo to fuel marketers explaining that a
“Blender Pump Tax Return” was to be used beginning
May 1. Some are claiming that the new reporting
form amounts to a tax increase.
The
Revenue Department points out that, under state law,
the motor fuel tax on gasoline is 22 cents a gallon;
the tax on E85 is 10 cents a gallon; all other
blends below E85 are taxed at 20 cents a gallon.
The tax is collected on fuel “at the rack” – before
it ever arrives at gas stations.
The
concern is what happens when a person buys fuel at a
blender pump, using a combination of E85 (taxed at
10 cents) and E10 (taxed at 20 cents). The question
is whether the consumer should pay a “blended” tax
rate or should pay 20 cents on the entire tank.
Example: You could make 100 gallons of
30% ethanol by mixing:
73 gallons of 10% ethanol taxed at 20 cents =
$14.60
27 gallons of E85 taxed at 10
cents = $ 2.70
100
gallons of
E30
$17.30
State law, however, says that 100 gallons of E30
should be taxed at 20 cents/gallon for a total $20
tax liability.
Gas
stations, wary of possible audits and potentially
expensive penalties, wanted to clarify their
responsibility for the $2.70 difference. A
hoghouse bill was brought forth late last
legislative session, at the request of fuel
marketers, to clarify the issue. The Senate Tax
committee killed that bill on a 5-3 vote.
Opponents argue that state law says that once fuel
is taxed, it cannot be taxed again. Since the two
fuels mixed in blender pumps have already been
taxed, no further tax should accrue just because it
runs through a blender pump.
The
governor has also said that current law prohibits
the further blending of E85, thus raising questions
about whether or not blender pumps are even legal.
In addition, the law says if such blending occurs,
the tax credit is lost and the fuel should be taxed
at the 22-cents-a-gallon rate that applies to
regular gasoline.
The
governor has indicated that the state will not
enforce the tax penalty on retailers using blender
pumps as long as they use the new tax forms and pay
the correct tax on fuel sold through those pumps.
We need more campers!
Please remind high school freshmen,
sophomores, and juniors who want to attend Farm
Bureau Camp that they need to submit their
applications as soon as possible. Dates for the
camp are June 9 – 11 at Thunderstik Lodge near
Chamberlain. For more information or an application
form, log onto the SDFB website at
http://sdfb.fb.org/.
Calling all Century
Farms
If there are any farms or ranches in your
neighborhood that have been in the same family for
at least 100 years with continuous ownership, that
family is eligible to apply for this year’s Century
Farms recognition.
To
qualify as a Century Farm, there must be at least 80
acres of the original SD farmland owned by the same
family for 100 years. The present owner must be
related to the original owner. This recognition is
a joint effort with the SD Department of Agriculture
and is not limited to SDFB members.
The
ceremony will be held at the SD State Fair on
Thursday, August 28.
For
an application, or for more information, go online
to:
http://sdfb.fb.org/centuryfarm/centuryfarmapp.pdf
Correction and
Clarification…
…to the April 28th item on
creation of a collegiate FB at SDSU (by Michael
Held)
Being set up similar to a
County Farm Bureau, the collegiate FB will have
delegates seated at the SDFB Annual Meeting. In
addition, the opportunity to have the college FB
represented on the SDFB Young Farmers & Ranchers
Committee will also be explored.
If you know of an SDSU student
that has an interest in ag issues in Pierre and
Washington, DC, and would be interested in the
collegiate FB at SDSU, please contact Kara Nagel at
605-494-0196.
Vegetative Treatment
Area tour in Nebraska
If you are interested in the Vegetative
Treatment System tours being hosted by the
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, you can find more
information at: http://afo.unl.edu
USDA Completing Random
Audits of Federal Grain Warehouses
USDA’s Farm Service Agency is nearing completion of
random audits of 60 federally licensed grain
warehouses in 24 states – including South Dakota –
to check on their financial condition in response to
the current market environment, characterized by
futures market price volatility and increased
margining requirements.
FSA officials said
that the federal grain warehouses were selected
randomly by the Kansas City Commodity Office’s
computer system, with a representative sampling
based upon the facility’s storage capacity (small,
medium, large); geographic location; and mix of
private and cooperative ownership. The USDA
examination “risk assessment” began late during the
week of April 14. A report of the results is
scheduled to be submitted by late May to FSA Deputy
Administrator for Commodity Operations Larry Adams.
Farm Bill more like
food bill
Most of nearly
$300 billion headed toward nutrition programs
Around two-thirds of an almost
$300 billion, five-year bill moving through Congress
is devoted to nutrition programs, most of which goes
to food stamps for the poor. That compares with 55
percent six years ago when Congress last set the
nation's agriculture priorities.
According to Maura Daly, a lobbyist for America’s
Second Harvest, rising food and energy costs plus
record home foreclosures have created a “perfect
storm” for needy families. Food banks are seeing
around a 20 percent increase in the number of people
turning to them for help.
Because of the extra assistance for food and
nutrition programs, urban House members are bringing
increased support for the farm bill. Increases for
food stamps and other nutrition programs total more
than $10 billion over the next 10 years.
Food Price Rise Result
of Complex Issues, Biofuels only Small Part
Rising food prices are drawing increased
attention worldwide. A variety of factors are
contributing to the increases, according to the Food
and Agricultural Organization (FAO) of the United
Nations. The report cites weather-related
production shortfalls, declining stock levels,
increased transportation costs, and the changing
structure of demand caused by economic growth in
emerging countries, as well as the emerging biofuels
market and the operations of financial markets.
SDFB
President Scott VanderWal points out that export
embargos, energy increases, marketing costs and the
decreasing value of the US dollar are all affecting
food prices. He adds, “The
value that farmers
receive for their products makes up only twenty to
twenty-five percent of the food dollar. There are
numerous other factors beyond commodities that are
also contributing to food prices here in the United
States.”
“The
role of biofuels has been debated, but the facts
indicate that ethanol demand is only one of many
causes contributing to higher food prices,” said
VanderWal. According to
the American Farm Bureau Federation, factors
contributing to increased food prices include labor
(40-45 percent of the food dollar), higher energy
and transportation costs (5-8 percent), packaging (
6-8 percent), profits for processors, retailers and
restaurants (4-5 percent), and other marketing costs
(20-25 percent).
“A set of short- and
long-term issues are all at play right now,” added
VanderWal. “The answer is to allow and encourage
the American farmer to respond to market signals
through increased productivity.”