Legislative Measures Could Change the Face of US Agriculture
7 September 2012 The United States is at an interesting impasse in 2012. With the expiration of myriad legislative measures including the Farm Bill and PRIA, a Congress that has passed legislation at historic lows and a presidential election, agriculture is facing a variety of issues that could potentially impact the way farmers apply crop protection products.
Crop protection advocacy groups are working with legislators and government entities to ensure the viability of the industry in the coming years with the passage of the Farm Bill and regulations involving application techniques and spray drift.
2012 FARM BILL
Lawmakers on the US House Ag Committee recently passed a version of the Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act of 2012 (FARRM), also known as the Farm Bill, that specifically addresses duplicate pesticide permits.
The House included language in the Farm Bill taken directly from House Bill 872, also known as the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act, which was introduced to exempt US farmers and retailers from submitting National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits if the pesticide was already registered. HR872 originally passed the House in March 2011 and is currently awaiting passage from the Senate.
“Duplicative and costly regulations are stifling growth for American agribusinesses by essentially forcing them to obtain permits for something they are already in compliance with,” said Jeff Sands, Director of Public Policy, Agricultural Retailers Association.
Crop protection advocacy groups are rallying behind the legislative addition. However, Congress is in recess in August, which leaves limited room for floor debate on issues such as budget cuts.
“The Farm Bill will not be exempt from any deficit reduction techniques and given the economic climate of the country, cuts are just part of the territory,” says Sands. “Each food or agricultural entity has different funding concerns in each title. The most crucial thing Congress must do in levying cuts to various programs is to make sure that the approach is balanced and the funding levels are equitable.”
The Senate version of the bill contains a proposed $23 billion in cuts over the next 10 years, including the phase out of direct payments or farmer subsidies, a program that alone costs $5 billion per year. The House’s version of the Farm Bill has a recommended $35 billion in cuts but does not eliminate direct payments.
The sentiment among many crop protection advocacy groups is that it is unlikely the Farm Bill will be completed by Sept. 30, 2012.
According to the groups, it is likely that Congress will extend the current bill for a year, and this means deeper cuts likely would be made as spending continues.
“It just gets worse if nothing is done,” says Jeff Blackwood, director of government relations, The Fertilizer Institute. “The Congress baseline will go down next year. The pie gets smaller.”
CLEAN WATER ACT AND DRIFT REDUCTION
Legislators are looking to redefine the US Environmental Protection Agency’s jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act. The Clean Water Act dictates which waterways are under EPA jurisdiction.
Past guidance handed down from the Supreme Court does not clarify to what “navigable waters” refer. This means small waters such as rivers or tributaries and wetlands could be under EPA watch.
However, a new proposal (H.R. 4965) would require the Supreme Court to hand down rules versus guidance about navigable waters. H.R. 4965 was being debated in the House at press time.
“It would define how the EPA is going to use what it has heard from Congress and what is its interpretation of Supreme Court about where the line of jurisdiction lies,” says Rebeckah Adcock, senior director government affairs, CropLife America. “In general, the private sector believes this issue procedurally has no business being done by guidance.”
A strict interpretation of “navigable waters” under the Clean Water Act would make it almost impossible for both aerial and ground applicators to receive approval because of spray drift.
“If you can’t apply pesticides around water, it’s going to make pesticide applications more difficult,” says Mary Kay Thatcher, American Farm Bureau.
This, in turn, negatively affects pesticide permits.
“You’re going to see a lot more permits necessary,” says Dr. Susan Ferenc, president, the Council of Producers & Distributors of Agrotechnology (CPDA). “The suggested buffer zone will greatly affect applicators as pesticide general permits (PGP) butt up against jurisdiction.”
As spray drift and US waterways are coming to the forefront, the US crop protection industry and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are looking to address Drift Reduction Technology (DRT).
A new Drift Reduction Technology voluntary verification program is about to launch which will list nozzles and their ratings in a 1, 2 or 3 starred method after extensive testing following guidelines set by the EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP).
This provides a standard method of validation, additional information for decision making about nozzle types and more options for applicators to manage drift, said Jay Ellenberger, Deputy Director, EPA Office of Pesticide Program’s Field and External Affairs Division at the CPDA spring conference.
With 1 million pounds of pesticides applied per year, the certification program is a step toward environmental stewardship. About 1% to 10% applied pesticides drift from their target site, Ellenberger said.
In turn, about 2,500 claims drift-related incidents per year are reported to departments of agriculture in the United States.
The program will initiate in August 2012 with the confirmation of final test protocol, website launch and additional communications. New labels addressing DRT will be used beginning spring 2013.
The United States is at an
interesting impasse in
2012. With the expiration
of myriad legislative measures
including the Farm
Bill and PRIA, a Congress
that has passed legislation at historic lows
and a presidential election, agriculture
is facing a variety of issues that could
potentially impact the way farmers apply
crop protection products.
Crop protection advocacy groups
are working with legislators and government
entities to ensure the viability of
the industry in the coming years with the
passage of the Farm Bill and regulations
involving application techniques and
spray drift.
2012 FARM BILL
Lawmakers on the US House Ag Committee
recently passed a version of the
Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk
Management Act of 2012 (FARRM), also
known as the Farm Bill, that specifically
addresses duplicate pesticide permits.
The House included language in the
Farm Bill taken directly from House Bill
872, also known as the Reducing Regulatory
Burdens Act, which was introduced
to exempt US farmers and retailers from
submitting National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits
if the pesticide was already registered.
HR872 originally passed the House in
March 2011 and is currently awaiting
passage from the Senate.
“Duplicative and costly regulations
are stifling growth for American agribusinesses
by essentially forcing them
to obtain permits for something they are
already in compliance with,” said Jeff
Sands, Director of Public Policy, Agricultural
Retailers Association.
Crop protection advocacy groups are
rallying behind the legislative addition.
However, Congress is in recess in August,
which leaves limited room for floor
debate on issues such as budget cuts.
“The Farm Bill will not be exempt
from any deficit reduction techniques and
given the economic climate of the country,
cuts are just part of the territory,”
says Sands. “Each food or agricultural
entity has different funding concerns in
each title. The most crucial thing Congress
must do in levying cuts to various
programs is to make sure that the approach
is balanced and the funding levels
are equitable.”
The Senate version of the bill contains a
proposed $23 billion in cuts over the next
10 years, including the phase out of direct
payments or farmer subsidies, a program
that alone costs $5 billion per year. The
House’s version of the Farm Bill has a recommended
$35 billion in cuts but does not
eliminate direct payments.
The sentiment among many crop
protection advocacy groups is that it is
unlikely the Farm Bill will be completed
by Sept. 30, 2012.
According to the groups, it is likely that
Congress will extend the current bill for
a year, and this means deeper cuts likely
would be made as spending continues.
“It just gets worse if nothing is done,”
says Jeff Blackwood, director of government
relations, The Fertilizer Institute.
“The Congress baseline will go down
next year. The pie gets smaller.”
Get The Newsletter Today!
