R.Tsubin / Moment / Getty Images
By Dan Nosowitz
With industrial hemp becoming federally legal thanks to the 2018 Farm Bill, research has had to work hard to catch up after decades of prohibition.
<p>A vital part of creating a thorough picture of any crop is research institutions. Industrial hemp, not having been federally legal, had only scattered, minor ones — labs with special exemptions, that kind of thing. This week, New York Sen. Chuck Schumer announced $500,000 in federal funding for a major hemp research facility: <a href="http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2019/08/schumer-announces-funding-hemp-seed-bank-cornell" target="_blank">the country's first hemp seed bank</a>.</p>
<p>Seed banks are a vital part of modern agriculture. They are, at their core, repositories of as many of the different varieties and strains of plants as can be found — libraries, of sorts. But they're not mere hoarder stashes. Seed banks are essential resources for research. Without a properly stored and annotated selection of seeds, breeding becomes unpredictable and random. If a farmer or lab wants to create a plant with specific abilities (say, drought resistance, or tolerance of salty soil, or extra-large leaves), seed banks provide the raw material, with data explaining the origins and specifics of each seed.</p><p>Industrial hemp is fairly easy to grow, but in large part, it hasn't been grown in large enough quantities in the U.S. for farmers to know all that much about it. How does it react to certain pests? Certain pesticides? How does it grow with other crops?</p><p>It's also worth noting that industrial hemp is seen as a savior for many farmers, a wonder-crop. It grows in many different environments—Schumer wants to create an industry in chilly upstate New York, and <a href="https://modernfarmer.com/2019/03/kentucky-is-hoping-to-become-the-california-of-hemp/" target="_blank">rocky Appalachian Kentucky</a> is already one of the bigger producers — and yet could command huge prices. CBD, a controversial extract <a href="https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/11/1/18024806/cbd-oil-vape-hemp" target="_blank">about which little is known</a> but much is claimed, is mostly isolated from industrial hemp. And CBD is a <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/24/newly-legalized-hemp-industry-set-to-create-a-jobs-boom-in-the-us.html" target="_blank">billion-dollar industry</a>, and growing fast.</p><p>The seed bank will, at least in Schumer's hopes, establish New York as a center of industrial hemp research. It'll be a collaboration between the USDA's research arm and Cornell University, and located in Geneva, New York.</p>
<p> <em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://modernfarmer.com/2019/08/the-nations-first-hemp-seed-bank-will-be-in-new-york/" target="_blank">Modern Farmer</a>.</em><em></em></p>Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Pexels
By Sara Amundson
It is no secret that moving legislation over the finish line in Washington, DC, has not been easy of late. However, members of Congress did come together to pass the 2018 Farm Bill—a massive public-spending package that funds agriculture, conservation and food policy. It was signed into law by President Trump on Dec. 20, 2018, just two days before the government shutdown began. While Big Agriculture with its factory farming model is not too kind as a general rule, the Farm Bill did right by animals in several important respects.
<p>First and foremost, animal advocacy groups and concerned citizens <a href="https://blog.humanesociety.org/2018/12/breaking-news-king-amendment-is-out-of-farm-bill-congress-includes-important-protections-for-animals.html" target="_blank">successfully worked to remove an anti-animal provision</a> that Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) added to the House version of the bill. Of greatest concern to animal advocates was that Representative King's amendment would have nullified thousands of duly enacted laws concerning puppy mills, horse slaughter for human consumption and extreme confinement of farm animals. In its overreach, however, King's measure also <a href="https://www.humanesociety.org/king-sensenbrenner-elimination-act" target="_blank">threatened to undermine child labor laws and fire-safe cigarettes</a>.</p><p>King repeats messages of "pro-states' rights" rhetoric, yet the legislation he introduces year after year threatens those very liberties. Recognizing that Americans care about the humane treatment of animals, Congress wisely opted to reject his dangerous amendment.</p><p>The Farm Bill <a href="https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2018/12/18/18146068/dog-cat-meat-illegal-farm-bill-animal-cruelty" target="_blank">also incorporated</a> legislation addressing pet protection and domestic violence, and the inhumane practice of slaughtering dogs and cats for human consumption, among other things.</p><p>The <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/20/politics/paws-act-farm-bill/index.html" target="_blank">Pet and Women Safety (PAWS) Act</a> will extend current federal domestic violence protections to pets and empower people trapped in domestic violence situations to leave abusive relationships. Currently, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/20/politics/paws-act-farm-bill/index.html" target="_blank">only 3 percent of domestic violence shelters provide pet accommodations</a>, which can delay victims from leaving a dangerous environment. Pets can be a source of comfort and support, but tragically, abusers will frequently exploit the emotional bond between a victim and a pet to gain psychological control.</p><p>Congress also included elements of <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/6720/text" target="_blank">The Dog and Cat Meat Trade Prohibition Act</a> in the Farm Bill. Around <a href="https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/congress-doesnt-want-you-to-eat-your-dog-or-cat/" target="_blank">30 million dogs</a> and untold numbers of cats are victims of this brutal global industry every year, with animals often snatched off the street or stolen from loving families and subjected to unspeakable abuse only to end as someone's supper. In November, Humane Society International assisted government authorities in a <a href="https://tinyurl.com/ya2nrpuc" target="_blank">shutdown of the largest dog slaughterhouse in South Korea</a>. This bill will prevent this appalling practice from taking hold in the U.S., and strengthen the case for ending it worldwide.</p><p>There is much more to the Farm Bill, of course, and there are measures in it that give us pause. But in putting the King amendment out to pasture, and in taking up popular measures that had garnered tremendous bipartisan support, Congress has set a standard that we hope will continue in 2019. With the terrible threat of King's measure set aside, and these other priorities made law, Congress should advance a legislative agenda in 2019 that tackles other urgent challenges in humane work, based on the premise that any decent nation is good to the animals in its care. </p><p><em>Sara Amundson is the president of the <a href="https://tinyurl.com/ybl63pav" target="_blank">Humane Society Legislative Fund</a>.</em></p><p><em>This article was produced by <a href="https://independentmediainstitute.org/earth-food-life/" target="_blank">Earth | Food | Life</a>, a project of the Independent Media Institute, and was originally published by <a href="https://truthout.org/articles/animals-scored-significant-victories-with-the-2018-farm-bill/" target="_blank">Truthout</a>.</em></p>
From Your Site Articles
- Animal rights ›
- Animals, Workers and Consumers Suffer Under USDA Slaughter ... ›
- Investigation Exposes Animal Abuse at U.S. Supplier to World's ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
U.S. Department of Agriculture / Flickr / CC BY 2.0
By Dan Nosowitz
The Farm Bill, which is supposed to be passed about every five years but which has for the past few been substantially delayed, finally saw the Senate floor Thursday, where it passed by a vote of 87 to 13.
<p>One of the largest, most complex and most important pieces of legislation of the year, the Farm Bill includes legislation for environmental protections, farm subsidies, food safety, international trade and many other topics, but the majority of the funding is dominated by SNAP, better known as food stamps. The bill that passed the Senate floor on Tuesday clocks in at $867 billion.</p><p>Easily the most controversial proposal to the Farm Bill was <a href="https://modernfarmer.com/2016/12/house-republicans-want-revamp-food-stamps-affect-farmers/" target="_blank">an attempt</a> by many Republican Senators to impose new work requirements as a prerequisite for receiving SNAP benefits. Various estimates exist for exactly how many people would have lost benefits—it's likely between one and two million households—but none of that really matters, because, due to outspoken opposition from Democrats, that proposal did not make it into the final draft. Donald Trump has been vocal in his desire to cut SNAP, and the Farm Bill does not necessarily limit his ability to do so, according to the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/12/11/congresss-billion-farm-bill-is-out-heres-whats-it/?utm_term=.1f83eb84a372" target="_blank">Washington Post</a>.</p><p>Farm subsidies were also a contentious point in the Farm Bill discussions, with groups like the Environmental Working Group <a href="https://www.ewg.org/agmag/2018/04/top-8-farm-subsidy-loopholes" target="_blank">repeatedly laying out</a> the gaping loopholes that allow people to obtain subsidies despite not actually farming. Those loopholes were not closed; in fact, they were expanded, to relatives including nephews, nieces, and cousins, who can be considered performing "farm work" by doing vague "management" which may not be on the farm at all. Chuck Grassley, one of two farmers in the Senate, actually broke from his Republican party and voted against the Farm Bill because of this.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="a9321" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="CTTTS41576664030"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1072267971278635008" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Making it official with my hemp pen!🖋️ Proud to have served as conferee on #FarmBill & to fight for #Kentucky prior… https://t.co/4L2Et3RDiZ</div> — Leader McConnell (@Leader McConnell)<a href="https://twitter.com/senatemajldr/statuses/1072267971278635008">1544483580.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
<p>As expected, the Farm Bill also legalizes the national production of hemp, fully removing it from the list of controlled substances—as long as the crop contains less than 0.3 percent of THC. Advocates include Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, <a href="https://modernfarmer.com/2018/04/the-push-for-legalized-hemp-is-back-with-an-unlikely-leader/" target="_blank">a longtime supporter</a> of legalized hemp, who hopes his home state of Kentucky will become a major player in what's expected to be a billion-dollar industry. McConnell actually signed the bill with a pen made of hemp.<br></p><p>The bill is enormous, an 807-page behemoth, and everyone is still working their way through it. But the next step is for the bill to pass in the House, and after that to be signed into law by the president. It's expected to do both, as the House and the president have both voiced support for the current bill.</p><p> <em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://modernfarmer.com/2018/12/senate-approves-farm-bill-finally/" target="_blank">Modern Farmer</a>.</em><em></em></p>
Read More
Show Less
By Scott Faber
It's not hard to see the differences between the terrible, partisan House farm bill and the bipartisan Senate farm bill.
<p>Here are eight ways the Senate version—which passed in the Senate last week—is better than the House bill:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;"><strong>1. </strong>Thanks to Sen. Chuck Grassley, the Senate bill finally denies farm subsidies to city slickers. By contrast, the House bill would create new loopholes that allow even more <a href="https://www.ewg.org/agmag/2018/06/hundreds-city-slickers-wealthy-beach-bums-received-farm-payments-32-straight-years#.WzZwJthKhmA" target="_blank">city dwellers</a> to get farm payments.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;"><span></span><strong>2.</strong> The Senate bill also tightens a means test that denies farm subsidies to billionaires. The House bill would make <a href="https://www.ewg.org/agmag/2018/05/will-house-farm-bill-leave-no-billionaire-behind#.WzZx6thKhmA" target="_blank">billionaires</a> like Charles Schwab and Paul Allen eligible for farm payments again.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;"><span></span><strong>3. </strong>The Senate bill protects anti-hunger assistance programs. Meanwhile, the House bill would take food off the tables of <a href="https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/house-farm-bills-snap-cuts-work-requirements-would-hurt-people-with" target="_blank">2 million people</a>, including children and the elderly.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;"><span></span><strong>4. </strong>The Senate bill also preserves funding for voluntary conservation programs. The House bill cuts conservation programs by nearly $1 billion.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;"><span></span><strong>5.</strong> The Senate bill boosts funding for <a href="http://sustainableagriculture.net/blog/senate-chairmans-mark-local-food/" target="_blank">local food</a> programs. By contrast, the House bill <a href="http://sustainableagriculture.net/blog/tiny-but-mighty-house-farmbill/" target="_blank">cuts</a> funding for <a href="http://sustainableagriculture.net/blog/chairmans-mark-local-food-rd/" target="_blank">programs</a> that link farmers with local consumers.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;"><span></span><strong>6. </strong>The Senate bill preserves state food laws. The House bill <a href="https://www.ewg.org/agmag/2018/06/king-amendment#.WzZvaNhKhmB" target="_blank">wipes</a> hundreds of state and local food laws off the books, including state laws that help farmers market their goods.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;"><span></span><strong>7.</strong> The Senate bill preserves local pesticide laws. Meanwhile, the House bill would block cities and counties from protecting schoolyards and playgrounds from <a href="https://www.ewg.org/agmag/2018/05/house-farm-bill-increases-pesticide-risks-children-farmworkers#.WzZvdthKhmB" target="_blank">toxic pesticides</a>.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;"><span></span><strong>8. </strong>The Senate bill also protects drinking water from pesticides. By contrast, the House bill includes riders that would allow farmers to spray <a href="https://www.ewg.org/agmag/2018/05/house-farm-bill-increases-pesticide-risks-children-farmworkers#.WzZ0k9hKhmA" target="_blank">pesticides</a> into drinking water sources.</p><p>In light of these differences, it's easy to understand why the House bill passed without any support from Democrats, while the Senate bill passed with 86 votes. </p>
Read More
Show Less
Lance Cheung / USDA
By Courtney Lindwall
The hyper-partisan farm bill, narrowly passed by the House of Representatives last week, contains dangerous handouts to the chemical industry and Big Ag. If enacted in its current state, the bill would have serious ramifications for small farmers, biodiversity, public health and America's hungry.
<p>Leaders in the Senate are promising a better bill that supports sound agricultural policies. Well, senators, here are seven lowlights in the House bill that deserve special attention. Get your red pens ready!</p><h4>1. Weaker Pesticide Laws</h4><p>The farm bill would bar local governments from adopting pesticide laws that are stronger than the federal government's—something particularly concerning, considering the Trump administration's penchant for <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/nrdc/court-allows-epa-continue-delaying-toxic-pesticide-ban" target="_blank">delaying and rolling back</a> public health protections.</p><h4>2. Contaminated Drinking Water Sources</h4><p>It would repeal the <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/nrdc/trump-administration-goes-after-clean-water" target="_blank">Clean Water Rule</a>, which clarifies which waterways are covered by the Clean Water Act's pollution control and cleanup programs. The rule helps protect streams that contribute to the drinking water supplies for one-third of all Americans.</p><h4>3. More Polluted Waterways</h4><p>Companies would no longer need a permit to spray hazardous <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pesticides">pesticides</a> directly into waterways that Americans use for swimming, fishing, and drinking—even though this is precisely the sort of high-risk scenario the Clean Water Act is meant to prevent.</p><h4>4. Toxic Giveaway</h4><p>The bill would weaken restrictions on <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/david-doniger/bit-good-news-ozone-layer" target="_blank">methyl bromide</a>, a highly toxic pesticide that has caused around <a href="http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/haloxyfop-methylparathion/methyl-bromide-ext.html" target="_blank">1,000 documented human-poisoning incidents</a> and contributes in a major way to the depletion of the ozone layer. Past administrations wanted to phase out methyl bromide by 2000, allowing its use only in emergency events. The current farm bill would more broadly define what "emergency" means.</p><h4>5. Hungry Kids and Families</h4><p>The measure unacceptably targets some of the country's most vulnerable populations, such as families dealing with food insecurity. The farm bill would <a href="https://www.timesunion.com/7day-state/article/Faso-SNAP-work-requirement-is-in-House-passed-13018683.php" target="_blank">restrict the available nutritional assistance</a> under the SNAP program, commonly known as food stamps, and could cause nearly a million Americans to lose eligibility. It also would weaken low-income kids' access to fresh fruits and vegetables in their schools.</p><h4>6. Wildlife at Risk</h4><p>The Endangered Species Act currently requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service before approving a chemical that could harm protected species—a rule that helped ban DDT and bring species like bald eagles back from the brink. The farm bill trashes the requirement, putting endangered species, including pollinators like the <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/rebecca-riley/dont-poison-farm-bill-or-endangered-species" target="_blank">rusty patched bumblebee</a>, at risk of deadly pesticide exposure.</p><h4>7. Goodbye, Small Farms</h4><p>The bill eliminates the <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/allison-johnson/farm-bill-can-make-or-break-organic" target="_blank">Conservation Stewardship Program</a>, which promotes whole farm stewardship and sustainability in rural communities. To add insult to injury, it would allow mining and drilling on lands in the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program, which is supposed to help preserve agricultural lands as working farms.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Senate's Farm Bill Moves Forward—But What Is It, Anyway? ›
- Farm Bill With Huge Giveaways to Pesticide Industry Passes House ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Life- Trac / CC BY-SA 3.0
A farm bill that opponents say would harm endangered species, land conservation efforts, small-scale farmers and food-stamp recipients passed the U.S. House of Representatives 213 to 211, with every House Democrat and 20 Republicans voting against it, The Center for Biological Diversity reported.
<p>A <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/farm-bill-endangered-species-conservation-2570800489.html" target="_self">similar farm bill</a> failed to pass the House in May when it was caught in the crossfire over immigration reform, but the new bill retains its most controversial provisions. </p><p>The bill, officially titled H.R. 2, the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/agriculture" target="_self">Agriculture</a> and Nutrition Act of 2018, is a major win for the pesticide industry, which spent $43 million on lobbying this Congressional season. It would ax a requirement that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service assess a pesticide's impact on endangered species before the Environmental Protection Agency (<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/epa" target="_self">EPA</a>) approves it and relax the Clean Water Act's provision that anyone releasing <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pesticides" target="_self">pesticides </a>into waterways obtain a permit. </p><p>"This farm bill should be called the Extinction Act of 2018," Center for Biological Diversity Government Affairs Director Brett Hartl said. "If it becomes law, this bill will be remembered for generations as the hammer that drove the final nail into the coffin of some of America's most vulnerable species."</p><p>The bill would also be devastating for land conservation efforts. It would allow logging and mining in Alaskan forests, including the world's largest intact temperate rainforest, the Tongass, and get rid of the Conservation Stewardship program, which funds farmers who engage in conservation on their land, according to <a href="https://environmentamerica.org/news/ame/congress-should-reject-anti-environmental-farm-bill" target="_blank">Environment America</a>. </p><p>Democratic Representative Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, who opposed the bill, also said it favored <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/agribusiness" target="_blank">agribusiness</a> over ordinary farmers. </p><p>"The Farm Bill rewards mega-agribusinesses and Wall Street, while slashing funding for nutrition, rural agriculture development, and clean energy programs, cutting key agricultural research and development efforts critically needed to help fight invasive species like the coffee berry borer, macadamia felted coccid, and more," she said in a statement reported by <a href="http://bigislandnow.com/2018/06/21/rep-gabbard-votes-against-farm-bill-that-hurts-hawaii-farmers/" target="_blank">Big Island Now</a>.</p><p>The bill is also controversial because of proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly referred to as food stamps, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-congress-farmbill/u-s-house-oks-farm-bill-with-major-food-stamps-changes-idUSKBN1JH343" target="_blank">Reuters reported</a>. House Republicans have pushed for measures that would increase the number of recipients who must work in order to receive food stamps, including limiting states' abilities to waive those requirements in areas with poor economies.</p><p>Reuters noted that the Senate version of the 2018 farm bill does not include any changes to the SNAP program and that the House bill is unlikely to pass into law because of those provisions. </p><p>Environmental groups also prefer the Senate version of the bill. </p><p>"House Republican leaders have decided to gamble with farmers' crucial government support by attaching dangerous policy riders to the farm bill. These would put Americans' health at risk, pollute our waters, and imperil bees, monarch butterflies, and other bedrock species," Federal Affairs Director at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) Brian Siu said in a <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/media/2018/180621" target="_blank">statement</a>.</p><p>"For the most part, the Senate is pursuing a serious, bipartisan measure that would support farmers and those needing help buying food. We look forward to working with lawmakers to help pursue that approach," Siu said.</p>
Read More
Show Less
Pexels
By Shannan Lenke Stoll
The Senate Agriculture Committee just passed its version of a farm bill in a 20-1 vote Thursday. It's one more step in what has been a delayed journey to pass a 2018–2022 bill before the current one expires in September.
<p>The farm bill is a colossal piece of highly partisan legislation passed every five years. It sets federal food policy, including determining where <a href="https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/farm-commodity-policy/projected-spending-under-the-2014-farm-bill/" target="_blank">about $100 billion a year </a>in taxpayer money is spent. These allocations impact farming livelihoods, how food is grown, and what kinds of food are grown, touching everything from <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/lara-bryant/good-soil-policy-senate-farm-bill" target="_blank">climate change</a> (this Senate bill includes a program that would pay farmers for building soil and measuring soil carbon) to <a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/4/25/17262764/farm-bill-food-stamp-snap-house-republican" target="_blank">Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program</a> benefits (protected under this Senate bill).</p><p>Next, this bill will be considered by the full Senate. Because it's a strongly bipartisan measure, its chances of passage are good. Meanwhile, the House Republican version of a bill was already <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-congress-farm-bill/farm-bill-to-get-second-vote-in-u-s-house-in-june-roll-call-idUSKCN1IN06I" target="_blank">defeated in May</a>, and House leadership has said <a href="https://www.inforum.com/business/agriculture/4460200-bipartisan-senate-farm-bill-gains-momentum-20-1-committee-vote" target="_blank">it will try again with its bill on June 22</a>. Then the Senate and House will negotiate.</p><p>Why is the farm bill so important, and how does it work? In this video, the Food & Environment Reporting Network explains the bill that dictates the way we produce and eat food.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube">
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3009529abf19f398645229e87f391cd9"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/P4mQyUOE_z0?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
</p><p> <em>Reposted with permission from our media associate </em><em><a href="http://www.yesmagazine.org/planet/senates-farm-bill-moves-forward-but-what-is-it-anyway-20180614" target="_blank">YES! Magazine</a>.</em></p>
From Your Site Articles
- We Ranked All 50 States from Farm to Fork. Why We Bothered—and ... ›
- Take Climate Action By Transforming Your Lawn With Edible ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
We Ranked All 50 States from Farm to Fork. Why We Bothered—and a Taste of Our Takeaways
12 June 2018
Food
Preston Keres / USDA
By Marcia Delonge
Recently, some fellow data geeks and I spent (quite a lot of) time ranking all 50 states on the health and sustainability of their food systems, from soil to spoon.
<p><span></span>We went through the trouble for a few reasons. First, as you may have heard in bits and pieces, the state of our farms, our food supply and our dietary health is <a href="http://healfoodalliance.org/" target="_blank">not good</a>—globally, nationally, regionally and likely even in your neighborhood. As all these things are interrelated, we wanted to dig into the data to better understand what's going on. Second, when it comes to food systems, we believe that the U.S. <a href="http://foodsustainability.eiu.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/34/2017/11/Infographic-KEY-FINDINGS.pdf" target="_blank">can do better</a>. And, since innovative solutions are already popping up across the country, highlighting these as models may be key to building a healthy, sustainable and just world. Finally—call us crazy—but we just love data and (yes) food systems.</p><h3>What's the Fuss About the Food System?</h3><p>Before explaining what we did, let me refresh your memory about some of the most worrisome food system trends. Globally, you likely know that with <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/doug-boucher/world-population-growth-exponential" target="_blank">population growth</a>, <a href="https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/" target="_blank">climate change</a> and 11 percent of the world facing <a href="http://www.fao.org/state-of-food-security-nutrition" target="_blank">hunger</a>, pressures on food supplies and natural resources are intense. And although there's growing dialogue around <a href="http://teebweb.org/agrifood/home/scientific-and-economic-foundations-report/" target="_blank">transformative solutions</a> to these intertwined challenges, the United States isn't exactly leading the way.</p><p>In the past year, we as a country fell squarely in the "also ran" category in a <a href="http://foodsustainability.eiu.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/34/2017/11/Infographic-KEY-FINDINGS.pdf" target="_blank">Food Sustainability Index</a>; the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported that our <a href="https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2018/may/agricultural-research-in-high-income-countries-faces-new-challenges-as-public-funding-stalls/" target="_blank">public agricultural R&D funding</a> has been losing ground; and we withdrew from the <a href="https://www.undispatch.com/one-year-after-trump-ditched-the-paris-agreement-where-are-we/" target="_blank">Paris Agreement</a>, which addresses the growing threat of climate change (with serious implications for <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/21082017/rising-temperature-agriculture-crop-yields-climate-change-impact" target="_blank">agriculture</a>, and maybe also the <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2018/05/24/613939464/as-the-planet-warms-well-be-having-rice-with-a-side-of-co2" target="_blank">nutritional quality</a> of our food).</p><p>But you don't have to look beyond our borders to see signs of trouble. US farms are <a href="https://www.farmland.org/initiatives/farms-under-threat" target="_blank">disappearing</a>, rural communities are <a href="https://newfoodeconomy.org/rural-kansas-depopulation-commodity-agriculture/" target="_blank">struggling</a>, policy debates are putting <a href="https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/money/agriculture/2018/06/04/trade-war-tariffs-farm-iowa-economy-low-prices-dispute-interest-rates-debt-worries-crisis-1980-s/661905002/" target="_blank">farmers</a> and <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/sarah-reinhardt/what-the-failed-house-farm-bill-got-wrong-about-snap-and-work" target="_blank">eaters</a> under stress, the food system includes some of the <a href="http://foodchainworkers.org/?page_id=20" target="_blank">worst employers</a> in the country, the Gulf of Mexico <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/karen-perry-stillerman/dead-zone-2017-even-worse-than-predicted-and-thats-an-understatement" target="_blank">dead zone</a>continues to <a href="http://www.noaa.gov/media-release/average-sized-dead-zone-forecast-for-gulf-of-mexico" target="_blank">be huge</a>, and so on. Clearly, we need to seek solutions, but where to begin?</p><h3>The Not-So-Secret Ingredients in Our Scorecard</h3><p>With an eye toward opportunities, we set off to capture and crunch the numbers to provide a snapshot of the US food system. To this end, we delved into data dealing with different pieces of the problem, including farming practices, labor conditions, water quality, public health, and more. We explored data sources such as the USDA, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Census Bureau.</p><p>While we can't possibly claim to have uncovered everything, we searched until we felt we had a critical mass of information representing food systems from coast to coast. With data for 68 indicators, we looked for patterns and potential (read more about <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/FoodScoreMethods" target="_blank">our methods</a>). We aimed to standardize data to compare states with both similarities and differences (natural resources, geographies, histories, cultures, populations, etc.). Finally, we grouped data into categories representing core aspects of the food system, and we synthesized these to get a sense of which states are leading the way.</p><h3>The Report? A Mixed Bag </h3><p>All in all, our analysis revealed both strengths and weakness of U.S. food systems, distributed all across the country. To learn more and see where your state falls in the rankings—with maps, charts and stories—you should check out <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/FoodScorecard" target="_blank">our interactive scorecard</a>. Here, I'll just offer a flavor for our findings:</p><ul class="ee-ul"> <li><strong>Action abounds: </strong>On the plus side, we found that different states rank better on different aspects of food systems, meaning that all states have a role to play in leading the way to a better future. From Alaska (with a smaller ecosystem footprint from its farms) to Wyoming (with farm production supporting relatively healthy diets), and California (boasting stronger farmer-to-eater infrastructure) to Maryland (a role model for conservation agriculture), states from sea to sea show strengths.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"> <li><strong>Bright spots: </strong>In more good news, we discovered brilliant bright spots, even in states ranking lower in some aspects of our food system scorecard. For example, the <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/FoodScorecard" target="_blank">Chillinois Young Farmers Coalition</a> is devoted to improving the outlook of farming in Illinois, and <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/FoodScorecard" target="_blank">Practical Farmers of Iowa</a> has had a big hand in the recent surge of cover crop adoption—and associated conservation benefits—throughout that state.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"> <li><strong>Costly consequences: </strong>While our focus was on opportunities, our analysis also exposed some of the dangerous consequences of our current conditions, from climate change contributions to water quality challenges to health outcomes and inequities. It's also important to note that we ranked states against one another, not against some hypothetical ideal, so even top-ranking states have lots of room for improvement.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"><li><strong>Data limitations: </strong>In several cases, the ideal data we were seeking wasn't available, because it either simply didn't exist, or was difficult to access at the scales we needed. To really get a <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05328-1" target="_blank">holistic</a> understanding of the food system—one that measures needs and progress—we need more public, accessible, and transparent data.</li></ul><h3>Fighting for Food Systems That Fare Better</h3><p>If we want a food system that we can all be proud of—one that is healthy and equitable for farmers, <a href="https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/the-health-and-safety-of-americas-workers-is-at-risk/" target="_blank">laborers</a>, eaters and the environment—we have a ways to go. Fortunately, however, our new analysis revealed a lot of bright spots worth building on.</p><p>With <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/karen-perry-stillerman/will-congress-give-farmers-the-farm-bill-they-want" target="_blank">farm bill</a> season in full force, there's no better time to protect and build up the programs and investments that help make positive change possible. The <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/press/2018/house-republicans-take-aim-snap-program-disregarding-evidence-success-reducing-hunger-and#.Wx2h1opKhPY" target="_blank">draft House farm bill</a>, which failed to pass last month, likely would have had a negative impact on food systems across the country due to its utter failure to invest in healthy food access. However, just last week, Senate leaders released their proposal for a bipartisan <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/press/2018/bipartisan-senate-farm-bill-proposal-makes-evidence-based-investments-us-farmers-and" target="_blank">farm bill</a>, which defends and even boosts many critical initiatives, such as those that support <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/sarah-reinhardt/what-the-failed-house-farm-bill-got-wrong-about-snap-and-work" target="_blank">nutrition</a>, <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/sarah-reinhardt/snap-is-a-boon-to-urban-and-rural-economies-and-small-town-stores-may-not-survive-cuts?_ga=2.7605946.948712122.1528649596-911528853.1528476465" target="_blank">regional economies</a>, <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/marcia-delonge/investing-in-the-future-farmers-and-stewards-of-america" target="_blank">beginning farmers</a>, and <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/marcia-delonge/7-reasons-the-farm-bills-research-title-is-worth-fighting-for" target="_blank">sustainable agriculture research</a>. While it's clear there's a lot of work ahead, investments like these can give us confidence that we're heading in the right direction—so raise your voice and <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/tell-congress-fight-farmers-healthy-food-farm-bill#.Wx7XMkgvzmF" target="_blank">urge your senators</a> to pass a farm bill that brings us one step closer to a food system, from farm to fork, that we can be proud of.</p><p> <em><a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/author/marcia-delonge#.Wx_xCVMvzBI" target="_blank">Marcia Delonge</a> is a senior scientist in the Food & Environment Program.</em></p>
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
The farm bill's historic conservation provisions are important for preserving grassland biodiversity, like this black-footed ferret and prairie dog. USFWS Mountain-Prairie / CC BY 2.0
A farm bill with dangerous consequences for endangered species and conservation efforts failed to pass the House on Friday, The Guardian reported.
The 2018 version of the major agricultural bill was criticized by environmental groups because it would have allowed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to approve new pesticides without assessing their impact on wildlife protected under the Endangered Species Act. The bill would also have cut funding for land conservation programs by $800 million over the next ten years.
<p style="">
The vote didn't come down to environmental concerns, but green groups see its failure as an opportunity to craft a better bill.
</p><p style="">
"The House just hit the reset button on the Farm Bill," Dr. Melinda Cep, senior director of policy for the <a href="https://www.worldwildlife.org" target="_blank">World Wildlife Fund</a>'s Markets and Food program said in a <a href="https://www.worldwildlife.org/press-releases/wwf-statement-on-failure-of-house-farm-bill" target="_blank">statement</a>. "Today's failure offers Congress an opportunity to reconsider a bipartisan bill that reflects the needs of America's farmers and ranchers."
</p><p style="">
"A strong Farm Bill includes conservation incentives to give farmers and ranchers more of a free hand in protecting those American grasslands and wildlife habitats that have immense environmental value, but little productive value for agriculture," Cep said.
</p><p style="">
As Rebecca Humphries wrote for <a href="http://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/382879-why-the-farm-bill-must-focus-on-conservation" target="_blank">The Hill</a>, the farm bill has historically been the driving vehicle behind federal funding for private conservation efforts. Since 1985, Congress has added a conservation title to the bill providing financial assistance and education for farmers and ranchers to conserve parts of their lands for <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife">wildlife</a>.
</p><p style="">
The failed farm bill would have eliminated the Conservation Stewardship Program, which the <a href="http://www.youngfarmers.org/with-west-in-drought-house-farm-bill-cuts-conservation-funds-land-access/" target="_blank">National Young Farmers Coalition</a> called "the nation's largest working lands conservation program." The program provides incentives for farmers to use conservation practices like water-conserving irrigation. The coalition pointed out this would have been especially serious given <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/drought" target="_blank">drought</a> conditions in 11 Western states.
</p><p style="">
The bill lost 213 to 198 after a group of right wing Republicans, called the House Freedom Caucus, opposed the bill in an attempt to force a vote on their preferred immigration proposal, authored by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte. The bill includes calls for a border wall, additional security, a crackdown on sanctuary cities, an end to diversity lotteries, an end to visas for family members other than spouses and young children and an extension of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-conservatives-demand-immigration-vote-threaten-to-sink-farm-bill/" target="_blank">CBS reported</a>.
</p><p style="">
Democrats opposed the 2018 farm bill because it included a proposal favored by House Speaker Paul Ryan that would have imposed stricter job training and job finding requirements on food stamp recipients. Democrats said the proposal would have deprived two million people of the food aid they need and was not funded well enough to be able to provide the job training it required of recipients.
</p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
pxhere
Last week, the Republican-drafted Farm Bill, called the Agriculture and Nutrition Act of 2018 (H.R. 2), failed spectacularly on the House floor when Republicans tried to leverage the farm bill to placate conservatives' agenda on immigration. Nevertheless, H.R. 2, which generally benefits large commodity producers while compromising long-term food security, provides a helpful view into where the policy battles are being fought on the road to passage.
<p>So, good food advocates and citizens take heart and roll-up your sleeves. In this post, I read the tea leaves and provide a roadmap toward a good food bill.</p><p>The Farm Bill is an omnibus legislation, impacting food, farms, <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/conservation">conservation</a> and rural economies. The term "Farm Bill" is misleading because the legislation touches every American given the breadth of policies it encompasses. Passed every four or five years, the current <a href="https://www.congress.gov/113/plaws/publ79/PLAW-113publ79.pdf" target="_blank">2014</a> Farm Bill is set to expire this year.</p><p>Typically, a coalition of urban Democrats who support federal programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and rural Republicans who represent farmers and ranchers passed the Farm Bill. This traditional coalition fell apart during the 2014 Farm Bill, resulting in a protracted and messy legislative process. Good food advocates should take note of emerging coalitions in this farm bill cycle to help improve their chance of passing farm bill reforms in the future.</p><p>Now back to the House bill. Three key areas in the House's draft fundamentally undermine food equity, farm sustainability and environmental health. Addressing these regressive policies in the House's H.2. should be a priority for anyone focused on creating a food-secure future.</p><p><strong>Feed Food-Insecure Americans</strong></p><p>Previously known as "food stamps," SNAP makes up about 80 percent of the Farm Bill <a href="https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/farm-commodity-policy/projected-spending-under-the-2014-farm-bill/" target="_blank">cost</a>. However, SNAP spending on a per capita basis is <a href="https://www.cbpp.org/research/policy-basics-the-supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap" target="_blank">modest</a>, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP). Republicans, in an effort to drive down SNAP costs by getting people off assistance, have proposed conditioning benefits for millions of recipients on enrollment in job training programs. In other words, the proposed policy seeks to prevent vulnerable communities from having basic access to food—a morally reprehensible policy. Moreover, this proposal is based on false assumptions regarding SNAP recipients. As CBPP found, most SNAP recipients who can work, do work.</p><p>Congress should focus on developing and fully funding programs that ensure the availability of and access to healthy food for all Americans. </p><p><strong>Create a Real Farm Safety Net</strong></p><p>The House bill removes key payment limits on commodity subsidies and raises insurance payout rates on what is known as the farm safety net, benefiting large corporations.</p><p>As it is, the wealthiest producers receive the majority of federal crop insurance benefits, for which taxpayers pay <a href="http://www.farmbilllaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/FBLE_Productivity-and-Risk-Management_Final.pdf" target="_blank">62 percent of the premium cost</a> on average. Taxpayers shouldn't be underwriting wealthy producers who can mitigate their own risk. Why is it that the House is so willing to dole out taxpayer dollars to those who don't need it, but then prevents access to food for Americans under the poverty line?</p><p>Beyond that fundamental inequity, the farm safety net is a failed policy that helps perpetuate farm consolidation. <a href="https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details/?pubid=88056" target="_blank">A recent report</a> by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service detailed the "widespread and persistent" shift toward larger operations over the last three decades. The report concludes that commodity specialization (monocultures) and technology are the drivers of consolidation that take advantage of economies of scale. However, as the Open Markets Institute <a href="http://www.foodandpower.net/2018/03/29/usda-reports-on-farm-consolidation-but-ignores-the-cause/" target="_blank">points out</a>, federal policy and the decline of anti-trust enforcement have facilitated the rise of giant <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/agribusiness">agribusinesses</a>, which control farming inputs, distribution, and processing and squeeze out small and mid-sized producers. </p><p>The casualties of agricultural consolidation include devastated rural economies, water and air quality, and suppressed market innovation such as conversion to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/organic">organic</a>. This state of affairs screams for a new policy approach—not just legislative tweaks to crop insurance. Regrettably, a sea change isn't realistic for this Farm Bill given the late date. Still, advocates can demand that crop insurance be rationalized to limit federal crop insurance eligibility to farmers of modest means while creating incentives for good farming practices through reduced insurance premium rates for those that steward the land.</p><p><strong>Protect Our Environment </strong></p><p>The House bill makes several policy proposals that seriously undercut conservation on American farms. The conservation title of the Farm Bill is the third-largest portion of the legislation in terms of expenditures, following the nutrition/SNAP and crop insurance titles. Conservation funding is critical because federal regulations exempt most agricultural production.</p><p>Consequently, our society largely relies on voluntary conservation to address the serious <a href="https://www.ewg.org/farming-and-the-environment/the-case-for-conservation#.WudAndPwZmA" target="_blank">environmental harms resulting from agriculture</a> such as dirty <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/drinking-water">drinking water</a> and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/air-pollution">air pollution</a>. The House bill has proposed about $1 billion dollars in conservation cuts, largely gained by <a href="http://sustainableagriculture.net/blog/chairmans-mark-conservation/" target="_blank">merging two flagship conservation programs</a>, the Environmental Quality Incentives Program and the Conservation Stewardship Program. In the 2014 Farm Bill, Congress <a href="http://sustainableagriculture.net/blog/2014-farm-bill-acep-crp-energy/" target="_blank">used the same tactic</a> when it merged the conservation easement programs in order to cut <a href="http://sustainableagriculture.net/blog/2014-farm-bill-acep-crp-energy/" target="_blank">funding</a>. </p><p>While the conservation programs would benefit from administrative reforms to make them less complicated, easier to implement and more effective, wholesale lumping of programs to reduce funding is not thoughtful reform. Advocates should support fully funding conservation programs while making programs more accessible to small, socially disadvantaged and beginning farmers who could most benefit from financial assistance.</p><p>These three areas—nutrition, farm safety net and conservation—constitute the Holy Trinity of the Farm Bill, which should result in healthy people, healthy farm economies, and a healthy environment. Now, it's time to get to work and sow the seeds of good policy to achieve the unfulfilled promise of the Farm Bill.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="139e3" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="QM5N411576661839"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="949435384324411393" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Let's Make 2018 the Year We Rise Up and Regenerate! https://t.co/iTwkngnTQH @Greenpeace @World_Wildlife @earthhour @Sierra_Magazine</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/949435384324411393">1515198009.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
Read More
Show Less
Salmon jumping at Brooks Falls in Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska. NPS / David Jacob / CC BY 2.0
The newest version of the 2018 Farm Bill, set for a vote on Friday, includes an unprecedented provision allowing the widespread killing of endangered plants and animals with pesticides.
The bill launches the broadest attack on the Endangered Species Act in 45 years, eliminating the requirement that federal agencies analyze pesticides' harm to the nation's 1,800 protected species before approving them, greatly increasing the risk of extinctions.
<p>"House Republicans are putting salmon, killer whales and other <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife">wildlife</a> on the fast track to extinction," said Lori Ann Burd, director of the Center for Biological Diversity's environmental health program. "This is a stunning gift to the pesticide industry, with staggering implications for endangered species."</p><p>Earlier this year the National Marine Fisheries Service released a "biological opinion" showing that three widely used insecticides—<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chlorpyrifos">chlorpyrifos</a>, malathion and diazinon—are putting killer whales and 37 different <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/salmon">salmon</a> and sturgeon species on a path to extinction.</p><p>In response the pesticide industry has sought to exempt pesticides completely from the Endangered Species Act. During this session of Congress, the pesticide industry has spent more than $43 million on congressional lobbying to achieve that goal.</p><p>In addition to the attacks on endangered species, H.R. 2 weakens Clean Water Act protections from pesticides, includes a sweeping provision that would gut protections for <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/forests">forests</a>, and has 46 different provisions that would curtail public input and common-sense protections provided by the National Environmental Policy Act.</p><p>Late additions to the legislation would also roll back virtually all protections for old-growth forests in Alaska.</p><p>"This farm bill should be called the Extinction Act of 2018," said Burd. "If it becomes law, this bill will be remembered for generations to come as the one that drove the final nail in the coffin of some of America's most vulnerable species."</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="417fa" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3U400J1576663074"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="986952649735114758" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">'Sick Joke': House Agriculture Committee Advances Farm Bill Attacking Environment, Endangered Species… https://t.co/3iF4OP29an</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/986952649735114758">1524142823.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less