Agriculture

Dr. Borlaug died Saturday the 12th, at 95 years old.  In 1970, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his work on high-yield crop strains, and massive increase in food production in formerly poor and famine-prone areas like Mexico and India.  Quoting the New York Times, "Yet his work had a far-reaching impact on the lives of millions of people in developing countries. His breeding of high-yielding crop varieties helped to avert mass famines that were widely predicted in the 1960s, altering the course of history. Largely because of his work, countries that had been food deficient, like Mexico and India, became self-sufficient in producing cereal grains." 

His legacy is, like most people, complicated.  Such a massive increase in crop yields came at the price of a massive increase in the use of chemicals in crop production, for instance.  That said, I will not forget that there are litterally millions of people alive today because of his work.  In awarding Dr. Borlaug the 1970 Nobel Peace Prize, the committee stated "...more than any other single person of this age, he has helped to provide bread for a hungry world. We have made this choice in the hope that providing bread will also give the world peace."

The New York Times article reminds us that Dr. Borlaug was active into his 90s, serving on the faculty of Texas A&M University, continuing his work on crops.  Thank you sir.

HG

(H/T:  Reason Hit and Run Blog; Cafe Hayek)

You might recall a blog post last year regarding an effort to change the names of the Saline Branch Drainage Ditch and the Upper Salt Fork Drainage Ditch.  A year later, a decision has been reached and the ditches will remain ditches in name, at least for now.  The votes were 7-6 and 8-5 to keep the names so it hardly represents a mandate.  I'd be surprised if this issue doesn't come up again.  I've excerpted the two pages from the minutes of the US Geographic Names Board.

Curbing Urban Sprawl: What, Why, and How

Presentation and Discussion with Professor Brian Deal

Monday, September 15th at 7:30pm
Urbana Free Library Auditorium
210 W Green St

Land development has been increasing rapidly on the fringes of Champaign-Urbana, encroaching on some of the richest farmland in the world. Consequences include lost natural resources, increased transportation time and energy, and inadequate services. However, there are ways to reverse this trend and improve the quality of life for the citizens of our community, while preserving our resources. Learn more about urban sprawl, why we must deal with it, and how we can tackle this pressing issue.

Dr. Brian Deal is an Assistant Professor of Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Illinois. His research interests include the study of sustainability and urban land use transformation. He is the Director of the Smart Energy Design Assistance Center at UI, the Director of Research at Robert Allerton Park, and the Director of the Land use Evolution and impact Assessment Modeling (LEAM) Laboratory, an interdisciplinary laboratory dedicated to the study of the spatio-temporal dynamics of land-use change and their social, economic, and environmental consequences.

Green Tea Discussions
Sponsored by the Prairie Green Party

A different topic every third Monday of the month - same time and location. Membership meetings are on the first Monday of the month at 7:30pm in the Family Room of the Independent Media Center at 202 S Broadway in Urbana. Learn more and join the party at www.prairiegreens.org

Your 2008 Green County Board Candidates:

• Walter Pituc, District 7 - votewalter.org
• Joe Futrelle, District 8 - joefutrelle.org
• Mike Lehman, District 9 - lehmanforagreencounty.org

Please consider the environment when attending this event: Bike, Walk, Use the MTD, or Carpool

Gov. Rick Perry of Texas is fighting against the ethanol mandates.  You can argue about his motives, and about the policy itself.  But I'd like to focus on this line from a NY Times article:

LHT Inc., an infrastructure company, said it never would have spent tens of millions of dollars developing delivery pipes for ethanol without the mandated increases. “How do we get our money back?” an executive asked.

I personally hate the ethanol subsidies and usage mandates, but do feel for this exec.  He made a business decision based on the mandates, and invested huge dollars.  Should Congress reduce the mandate, LHT gets screwed. 

I know, I know, "live by the (gov't) sword, die by the (gov't) sword".  Still, gov't needs to remember that their actions don't exist in a vacuum.  People and businesses make decisions based on new laws and regs.  And once these mandates and subsidies and programs and tax credits get started, people will wail if they are taken away.  I think better not to start these things at all.

Every five years, Congress embarks on a lengthy process to reauthorize federal farm policy through legislation commonly referred to as the “Farm Bill.” The Farm Bill is one of the most closely watched pieces of legislation by Congress, media, lobbyists and rural America. Although many may not take a second glance at this legislation, you should. Why? This year the Farm Bill has the opportunity to tackle one of the most pressing issues facing the nation – obesity.

Over the past two years, a broad-based coalition of agricultural organizations have joined together to shape a Farm Bill that is more competitive, improves the quality and safety of foods and improves nutrition for all Americans, especially children. The Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance represents 120 specialty crop organizations and 350 individual specialty crops throughout the nation in their effort to raise the level of debate on nutrition.

So, what is a specialty crop?

This is a classification used to describe fruits, vegetables, potatoes, nuts, nurseries, etc. Just about everything you see in the produce section at your local grocery store. Actually, specialty crops account for nearly half of all the cash crop receipts in America and are a vital component of the agricultural economy.

Getting back to nutrition, how does the Farm Bill help combat obesity?

For the first time, Congress has the opportunity to write into law legislation that would establish a nationwide effort to include fruits & vegetable in schools in each and every state. The USDA Fruit & Vegetable Snack Program – if authorized by Congress – would allow more than 5,000 schools and 4.5 million children by incorporating healthy eating into the school lunch program. There is no more effective way to establish a routine for healthy eating than give children fruits & vegetables every day at school.

So, how is Congress reacting…

A recent editorial by The Hill - one of the top publications covering politics and policy in our nation’s capitol – sums up the efforts of the Alliance very well.  “Most notably, growers of fruits and vegetables appear to be on the verge of winning significant support for the first time. The bill approved by the House last summer includes $1.6 billion to help growers of tomatoes, oranges and other so-called specialty crops…”


This boost was made possible – in part – by the efforts of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who took her case to the floor indicated her support of the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance and their priorities. Recently, the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee passed a bill that would take the needs and priorities of specialty crop growers to even higher levels.

But, the food fight is far from over. The U.S. Senate is poised to vote on the Farm Bill very soon but there is still division on the bill as a whole. Robert Guenther, Senior Vice President for Public Policy at the United Fresh Produce Association, shared his thoughts on the future of the Farm Bill and its impacts on the nation’s specialty crop industry.


Many have voiced their concerns with the Farm Bill as a whole, but Congress has a chance to enact a program that is a true paradigm shift in nutrition policy and sets a course for health eating in our nation’s schools. Let’s hope they do just that.

Ryan McLaughlin

Ryan@zapwater.com

Zapwater Communications, Inc.

The Prairie Green Party has been sponsoring informal discussion events called "Green Teas" that revolve around many community and Green issues. There's usually a speaker brought in and discussion follows afterward. These are great and informative events that everyone is encouraged to come to!

This week's topic: Local food. The Green Tea will be on Monday October 15th, 7:30pm  at the Urbana Free Library Auditorium. Details are below. The Green Party has always believed that purchasing local food (or anything local for that matter) is usually the most ecologically and sustainable approach to living one's life. People are now paying attention to what's in their food and what goes into their bodies. The recent organic boom is evidence of this. (Note to self: buy Whole Foods stock.)

Reasons to eat locally:

Short distance from farm to dinner plate = less fossil fuel usage

Taste a whole lot better and is good for you!

Support local farmers and businesses

Come out and learn about the benefits of eating locally!

Here is the text of the flyer that we're posting around the community:

The Benefits of Eating Locally
Eric Wilson and Julie Zielinski
recently completed a month long
experiment of only eating food
grown within 100 miles of Champaign-
Urbana.  At this month's Green Tea, they
will be discussing their  experience and
where to find local ingredients.  Come and
learn how eating locally can benefit the
environment, economy, and your health.

Local snacks, drinks , and discussion
will be served.

Monday, October 15th at 7:30pm
Urbana Free Library Auditorium

Green Tea Discussions Sponsored by the
Prairie Green Party of East Central Illinois.

A different topic every third Monday of the
month - same time and location.  Membership
meetings are on the first Monday of the month
at 7:30pm in the Family Room of the Independent
Media Center.  All are welcome.

For more information, visit:
www.prairiegreens.org

An excerpt from a NYT article (currently tops on the most viewed list):

The farm bill helps determine what sort of food your children will have for lunch in school tomorrow. The school-lunch program began at a time when the public-health problem of America’s children was undernourishment, so feeding surplus agricultural commodities to kids seemed like a win-win strategy. Today the problem is overnutrition, but a school lunch lady trying to prepare healthful fresh food is apt to get dinged by U.S.D.A. inspectors for failing to serve enough calories; if she dishes up a lunch that includes chicken nuggets and Tater Tots, however, the inspector smiles and the reimbursements flow. The farm bill essentially treats our children as a human Disposall for all the unhealthful calories that the farm bill has encouraged American farmers to overproduce.

Obviously Ag is pretty important around here. Discuss…

Congressman Tim Johnson will discuss recent agriculture legislation and how the upcoming Farm Bill will affect the central Illinois farming industry on Monday, March 19 at 9 a.m. at Parkland's Tony Noel Agricultural Technology Applications Center. A continental breakfast will be provided beginning at 8:15 a.m. Please call the Parkland College Foundation at 217/351-2464 to reserve seating.

We read an impassioned plea by a poster, Racktivist, last week about land use issues being discussed by the Champaign County Board. I am reprinting it in hopes of getting both sides of the debate and clarification as to the purpose of the meeting. (The Civic Calendar said the mtg was about Township Boundary changes).

The meeting is 6:30 pm, Nov. 21, at Brookens in Urbana to comment on changes.

"This issue of preserving prime farmland by relinquishing the owner's property rights is a huge issue. How would you like to be a landowner and have your county board dictate new zoning regulations that restrict your ability to sell off home sites? Ten years ago a one acre home site was legal by right. Today the new zoning text amendments are proposing to restrict the landowner to one lot per forty acres with a maximum of four additional lots per tax parcel.

Here's an example; if you owned sixty acres you could have a minimum six, possibly more home sites. If the new regs went through, you would be limited to one home site. How can the county board even consider doing this to the citizens of this county?

Especially when you see that the loss of farm land is not a big issue outside the urban sprawl of CU. CU is the culprit, not the rural landowners.

Around 40 people attended the last Big.Small.All workshop in Urbana Tuesday evening.

Let me start with positives about the Big.Small.All visioning project. Citizens from diverse backgrounds were able to dialogue civilly about the future of Champaign County. It was pretty clear that each person cared deeply about where we're going as a community and wanted to affect the type of changes each thought was important.

Most people came with an agenda and a vested interest (I consider this a generally good thing). Farmers discussed land use with idealistic college student/urban planners. Business owners and laborers, lay people and bureaucratic experts were represented. However, minorities were definitely underrepresented, even with attempts by Frank DiNovo and staff to include every group.

Lots of talk at our table about the goal of zero waste, greenspace, and government accountability.

Two agricultural goals that will be contentious:

• “By 2030, the number of farms will be at least as large as today.”
• “By 2030, no more than 10,000 additional acres of farmland in Champaign Co. will be converted to non-agricultural uses.” (This goal has the dubious distinction of being on the list of both favorite and least favorite goals)

Chamber leaders continue to be concerned with the anti-business restrictions throughout many key objectives.

Discussion lead to the inevitable cities “merger” proposal (including Savoy”¦yikes, leave us out of it).

• “Duplicative services will be substantially eliminated and all appropriate opportunities for sharing or consolidating govt. responsibilities will be implemented.” (This is a whole thread unto itself.)

The final product is due out in January and at a price tag of $ 300,000+, it will be interesting to see what comes of this document.

For example, I talked with one prominent farmer last night about the land use restrictions promoted in the plan. Weren't farmers upset, I asked? “Not really,” he replied. “They don't think the document has the teeth to make a difference anyway.”

From a press release yesterday, covered in today's News-Gazette (but not online):

State Senate candidate Judy Myers says its time for Illinois to take the lead in the development and use of clean energy technology. At a press conference on Wednesday, the candidate for the 52nd district said she would press for tax incentives to enhance the use of E85 fuel, and increased state funding of projects at the University of Illinois that will reduce exhaust emissions around the Champaign-Urbana area.

Myers, who served in the Illinois Senate from 1997 to 2002, said she supports tax incentives for gas stations which convert their pumps to E85, or install new equipment. She also favors a $500 tax credit for drivers who purchase E85 and hybrid vehicles.

“By creating incentives for selling and purchasing E85, we won't just benefit local farmers,” Myers said. “We're moving ourselves closer to energy independence from foreign sources. For too long, America has been dependent on foreign energy for its survival. It's time to move past that, and Illinois can play a leading role.”

Champaign County Farm Bureau member Kent Krukewitt said Myers' proposal would be helpful for Illinois farmers, who produce the corn that composes the E85 fuel. The Illinois Farm Bureau endorsed Myers this year in the 52nd district State Senate race.

(DISCLOSURE: I work for Senator Judy Myers' campaign.  And I drive a hybrid vehicle, so I probably have a conflict of interest writing about this plan.)

Tom Kacich has them, and they're hardly lockstep with the the Champaign County Republican Party.

Of course, that makes the Farm Bureau's endorsement of Senator Judy Myers all the more impressive, despite Democrat spin to the contrary.

From Senator Judy Myer's website:

The Illinois Farm Bureau says Judy Myers is the right choice for voters in the race for State Senate. ACTIVATOR, the organization's political involvement fund, today formally endorsed Myers for the 52nd district open seat, currently held by retiring Sen. Rick Winkel.

ACTIVATOR trustees say Myers' six years of service in the Illinois Senate and pro-agriculture voting record were major factors in the endorsement.

“Judy Myers' experience and her history of supporting agriculture issues made the difference in our decision to support her,” said Champaign County farmer and Farm Bureau member Kent Krukewitt.

(Disclosure:  I work for Sen. Myers' campaign.  And I should have posted this yesterday, but I wasn't able to.)

In Sunday's NG, Brandon Bowersox complained about Christie's move out of downtown.  One of his reasons was this would contribute to urban "sprawl".  I also saw a few "letters" oppose the Unit 4 building plan because it was encouraging "sprawl".

Likewise, I believe the county board has been wrestling with a land-use policy, with "sprawl" reduction being one of its goals.

So what is wrong with sprawl?  Well, anti-sprawlers will contend it requires more gas and creates more pollution to get all these people back into town.  Also, cities must spend a disproportional amount to service such outlying developments (sewer, roads, fire and police protection).  And this sprawl removes farmland from production, reducing this precious resource, maybe forever.

My thoughts:

With gas over $3 per gallon, people can decide if their lot "in the country" is worth the transportation costs.  And I am not really worried Champaign county is going to become L.A. 

The cost of sewer hookup sounds like a legit argument.  Of course, a lot of housing wouldn't mind not being on the sewer system, so maybe that is not quite the waste of taxpayer dollars that opponents claim.

The other service costs seem to me to be offset by the costs of the alternative - high density.  All you need to remember is the $$$$$ tram plan.  More crime with high density?  Specialized fire service for taller buildings?  More expensive road maintenance because of the critical nature of the crowded streets in a dense community?

But my biggest beef is the "save the farmland" argument.  Who is the county board, or a city council, to tell a farmer to whom he can sell his land?  And as long as farmers are collecting millions in subsidies, seems to me taking land out of production (and putting up houses) is a good thing - reduce supply to help prices.  If the best farmland becomes scarce, land prices will make it unwise to sell it to developers.  Until then, relax and let it sprawl.

From a press release issued by Senator Judy Myers today.

As state senator, Myers served for six years on the Senate Agriculture Committee. She also sponsored more than 20 pieces of legislation aimed at helping farmers and rural families, including measures to enhance ethanol and biodiesel research and loan assistance for family farmers.

“Judy was always someone you could approach with an idea, and she wasn't afraid to listen to advice,” said Ag Team member Dave Downs, a Vermilion County farmer and co-chair of the Illinois Council for Food and Agricultural Research. “Farmers appreciated her open door policy, and her eagerness at seeking out new ideas that could help area farmers.”

(Disclosure: I work for Senator Myers' campaign.)