Way to go, Pennsylvanians! In 2009, Pennsylvania’s commonwealth and county governments invested $50 million in farmland protection. With that kind of help, Pennsylvania and its residents were able to preserve over 21,500 acres of farmland on 232 farms. That brings the state’s all-time total to 425,000 acres of protected farmland – more than any other state in the nation.
Within Pennsylvania, significant all-time farmland protection milestones were also crossed this year in Berks, Bucks, Franklin and Lancaster counties.
Pennsylvanians farmland protection success illustrates what can be accomplished when governments, organizations and active citizens work together to save the land that sustains us.
Pennsylvania is one of only a handful of state governments with a Bureau of Farmland Protection. The state’s well-funded purchase of agricultural easement program is run through county governments with local ties that recognize the important role of agriculture in their communities, and the threat of development to their longstanding sense of place. And active citizens and non-profit groups, like the Pennsylvania Farmland Preservation Association* and Lancaster Farmland Trust, work at the grassroots to organize and educate agricultural landowners and their neighbors on how to secure a bright future for farmers and farmland.
We are proud of the progress that Pennsylvania has made and will continue our efforts to make this kind of success a reality in communities across the nation.
If you are interested in the history of farmland protection, particularly how agriculture land trusts are able to protect our nation’s working lands, listen to this recent interview on An Organic Conversation featuring our former president and a leader in the farmland protection movement, Ralph Grossi.
Or visit American Famland Trust’s Pennsylvania state page
*Pennsylvania is the only state to have an association of county programs that have come together for the mutual benefit of farmland protection.
About the Author: Jim Baird is Mid-Atlantic Director for the American Farmland Trust
On Monday, President Obama released his FY 2011 Budget Proposal.
At a time when we most need to invest in protecting our natural resources and keeping them healthy for the future, the President’s proposed budget would cut hundreds of millions of dollars (nearly 20%) from key farmland preservation, conservation, and water quality programs that were promised under the 2008 Farm Bill. I am concerned that it is penny-wise now, but will be very pound foolish for America’s future.
Slashing these programs will do nothing significant to address our nation’s budget problems while it will dramatically reduce our ability to protect the resources that supply abundant food and a healthy environment.
Despite the administration’s rhetorical desire to support conservation and agriculture, and address such issues as climate change and renewable energy, reductions of over one-half a billion dollars in mandatory conservation program spending will make it much more difficult for farmers and ranchers to make changes necessary to protect our air, land and water.
Farmers like Jim Andrew, who reversed soil erosion on his farm through no-till planting and is the first farmer in the U.S. to qualify for Tier III, the highest performance level under the Conservation Security Program (CSP)- one of the crucial conservation programs to be cut under the President’s budget.
On a more positive note, the administration is building on new programs for farmers by developing local and regional food systems through new programs under the 2008 Farm Bill; and during the last year, USDA has moved forward in conservation and environmental programs.
However, we simply must address loss of farmland, and the potential of farms and ranches to maximize their production of environmental benefits like cleaner water and air, sequestering carbon, renewable energy, and more. This is a critical time to invest even more cost-share money, not less. We look forward to working with members of Congress and the administration to highlight our concerns, reexamine the President’s budget and recalibrate the priorities for agriculture.
Read the President’s proposed budget for the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Protection Agency in full.
 About the Author: Jon Scholl is President of American Farmland Trust. Prior to AFT, he served as Counselor to the Administrator for Agriculture Policy at the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Jon and his family operate a corn and soybean farm in McLean County, Illinois.
 Typically farm bills set U.S. agriculture and food policy for five to ten year periods. And ever since the most recent bill was signed in 2008, AFT has been working to help finalize the details of its’ implementation.
So in between farm bills, you sometimes think the next one is a long way over the horizon. House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN) quickly brought us back to reality when he announced that his committee will hold 2012 Farm Bill hearings starting in March, and that agriculture will have to live within a “baseline bill” —the money currently available in the federal budget.
I was really excited to see that Chairman Peterson also said he expects more focus on a revenue-based safety net. As many of you will remember, the ACRE program that AFT and the National Corn Growers worked so hard to include in the 2008 Farm Bill, is a revenue-based safety net, and one of our great successes in that effort.
I’m proud to say that the ACRE program has gotten off to a successful start this year, too!
Former Congressman Charlie Stenholm echoed some of Chairman Peterson’s words this week too, noting that agriculture won’t escape budget cuts and “telling reporters he expects lots of discussion on ways to improve agricultural programs while cutting spending…direct payments are endangered.”
Here at AFT, were keeping all of this in mind and are starting to plan our part in advancing the direction of U.S. farm and food policy to best serve producers and consumers. We’ll keep you posted as the 2012 Farm Bill gets rolling, and I hope you’ll look forward to getting involved with our efforts in the months ahead.
About the Author: Jon Scholl is President of American Farmland Trust. Prior to AFT, he served as Counselor to the Administrator for Agriculture Policy at the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Jon and his family operate a corn and soybean farm in McLean County, Illinois.
 Last week, The Los Angles Times ran an op-ed that should be of interest to all those involved in the countless farm and food related debates happening across the nation.
Titled “The Facts about Food and Farming,” the piece is an excellent examination of the farm policy debate that is useful for thoughtful people whether they come at issues from a conventional agriculture viewpoint, or those who advocate for a different production model.
By laying down a few ground rules for these debates, author Russ Parson identifies the pitfalls of both sides and shows that real reform will only be achieved by constructive conversations, not finger-pointing. He states,
“But the issues we’re facing are not going to go away, and they are too important to be left to the ideologues. What I’d like to see happen in the next decade is a more constructive give-and-take, the start of a true conversation”
Russ is right. Farm and food issues are not going away. In fact, they are becoming increasingly urgent—and complex. The positive side of this development is the growing number of people becoming involved in these issues. The downside is that many of these people have already decided what they believe is right and are not willing to openly engage, listen, or much less compromise.
But it is compromise and constructive conversations that we need the most. Just as “issues facing agriculture today are much more complicated than lining up behind labels such as ‘local’ and ‘organic,’” it is also true that many new ideas are needed to meet the new challenges we face. Or as Parson says:
“Just because you’ve always farmed a certain way does not mean that you are owed the right to continue farming that way in the future…. What’s past is past. Over the last 50 years, American farmers performed an agricultural miracle, all but eliminating hunger as a serious health issue in this country. But that battle has been won, and though those gains must be maintained, the demands of today — developing a system that delivers flavor as well as quantity and does it in an environmentally friendly way –are different.”
Everyone eats; therefore everyone (whether they are interested or not) is affected by farm and food policy. At AFT, we have worked hard to be the vital link between the diverse interests debating the issues surrounding those policy decisions. Celebrating our 30th year in 2010, and having worked on six federal farm bills, we know that real change happens when you bring diverse groups together and find solutions that highlight the best of all parties. And it comes from real action, like continued work on improving the
In short, there is too much effort ahead to begin every conversation with yelling and shouting. For AFT at least, 2010 will be a year for constructive engagement designed to achieve meaningful action…or, as Mr. Parson says in his article’s tag-line:
“Let’s not join one of the armed camps deeply suspicious of one another shouting past each other.”
Read Russ’ full article, The Facts About Food and Farming
About the author: Dennis Nuxoll is Senior Director of Government Relations for American Farmland Trust
 On the outskirts of Wenatchee, a city in the heart of central Washington where golden hills surround endless miles of irrigated fruit orchards, a large apple-shaped sign reads, “Apple Capital of the World.” In a region that ships over 100 million boxes of apples a year around the nation and the world, education has been the key to helping growers—especially the valley’s many Latino orchard employees and managers—reduce their use of pesticides.
Apple and cherry grower Jesus Limón, who worked his way up the ranks at a fruit company in order to purchase his own Wenatchee Valley orchard, participated in a Latino orchard employee education program—funded by an EPA grant administered by American Farmland Trust—that teaches growers in Spanish about integrated pest management (IPM).
“You get hooked on it,” Limon says about the natural techniques for identifying and eliminating orchard pests. Since the 1970s, researchers have been exploring safer and more ecologically sound ways to manage pests like insects and plant diseases. IPM includes sustainable methods such as scouting for pests, weather monitoring, disruptions to a pest’s life cycle, and ways to reinforce a pest’s natural enemies.
The Wenatchee-region IPM classes—taught initially by pest management consultant Naná Simone and then by Leo Garcia and other IPM experts at Wenatchee Valley College—were integral in helping Limón reduce the use of pesticides in his orchard, which he then converted to 100 percent organic over a three-year period. “Knowledge is the best thing you can acquire,” Limón says. “The classes helped me tremendously because I couldn’t depend on the conventional sprays anymore.”
Limón’s conversion of his orchard to organic had a domino effect on the farms around him. “This guy just became organic and then the next guy and next guy,” Limón says, pointing to neighboring apple orchards. The program’s classes were such a success not only because the Spanish language instruction helped growers understand the complexities of IPM more quickly, but also because they were taught right in the student’s orchards and fit around the schedule of the farmers.
“This is a much better way to get people to change,” Limón says. “This program got us away from [conventional chemicals] without forcing us. Trying to work with the farmer is better than being the mean guy on the block. If the EPA knew what this program really did for us, they would do more programs like it.”
Limón proudly points to wooden hawk boxes he installed on poles lining the rows of his apple trees. After two years, he finally got a family of hawks to move into his orchard. The hawks scare away birds that like to peck apples and cherries off the trees. This natural approach to managing wildlife is also an outgrowth of learning about IPM, Limón says. “I liked learning about how the bug populations worked. Once you start putting the pieces together, you see everything: the mice, the snakes, the cougars.”
When it comes to the effects of a climate change / clean energy bill on the U.S. agriculture sector, it seems that there is a new study every couple of weeks- and the yays and the nays both appear to have all the statistics to demonstrate why they are correct and the other side is wrong.
To help address this confusion, we commissioned a team of Kansas State University (KSU) researchers to complete an analysis and comparison of six key economic studies that looked at the effects of the House clean energy bill on farmers and ranchers.
Reviewing all the significant studies as of December 1, 2009, the KSU team sought to identify common findings as well as compare various assumptions and methodologies. This is the first time this type of study has been done; therefore the results give the most accurate picture to date, of how agriculture will fare from the House Climate Bill.
Dr. Bill Golden, Dept. of Agricultural Economics at KSU and the team’s leader summarizes their findings:
“Overall, the research suggests U.S. agriculture has more to gain than lose with the passage of H.R. 2454. The bill specifically exempts production agriculture from emissions caps, provides provisions to ease the transition to higher fertilizer prices, and, fosters the development of carbon offset markets which will likely enhance agricultural revenues.”
This conclusion is underscored by the EPA’s recent announcement of an endangerment finding confirming greenhouse gasses as pollutants dangerous to human health and welfare that should be regulated under the Clean Air Act.
Couple these items with scientific projections of the ill-affects of climate change on agriculture and farmers have a real impetus to be a part of the solution to solving our climate crisis.
The study can be viewed here:
Or on our website at http://www.farmland.org/reports.
Listen to Dr. Bill Golden on KSU Radio or AFT’s Dennis Nuxoll on Brownfield
 A new study by the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture is out to disprove the myth that local food is more expensive than its non-local counterpart…in Iowa, at least.
After examining Iowa-grown vegetables, eggs and meat, the study concludes that local food does in fact have very competitive prices compared to non-local super-market varieties. Rich Pirog, Leopold Center associate director and project collaborator sums it up like this:
“We found that during peak season, produce items at farmers’ markets were very competitive and in several cases lower than prices for the same non-local items found at supermarkets.”
Critics of local food claim higher prices make it unfeasible for many Americans to purchase it.
However, local food – especially when purchased directly from farmers, through farmers markets, farm stands, CSA’s etc- can be a crucial boost to farmer’s bottom lines. For American Farmland Trust, improving the economic viability of farmers is a key step towards keeping the land in agriculture.
This study demonstrates a real opportunity for Iowa farmers to sell beyond local food enthusiasts – who are willing to pay higher prices – to their neighbors who may be more price conscious.
In the meantime, it appears that in the peak season of Iowa produce, buying local may keep a little change in your pocket- and some in your farmers’ pockets too.
To learn more about the study, visit the Leopold Center’s Study homepage.
 Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack Holding AFT's 'No Farms No Food' Bumpersticker In the midst of many newsworthy debates over national security, the ability to feed ourselves is often overlooked.
In America, unwise urban sprawl is eating up our nation’s farmland at a rate that puts the future of our food security at risk – a staggering 78% of vegetables and 67% of our dairy products, are produced in areas threatened by development.
What happens when we pave our last farm? What happens when food goes the way of oil and Americans become reliant on another set of foreign imports?
There are no alternatives to food, we either have it or we don’t. And if we don’t, we jeopardize our ability to feed ourselves-fundamental to our very existence. America is blessed to have fertile land that can produce enough food for us and millions of others around the world. That is rare, and we should not sacrifice this security to short-sighted development that takes our resources for granted.
In a recent article in the New York Times, the author discusses the idea of “agro-imperialism,” in which some countries are buying up farmland from more fertile countries, because their own land cannot sustain their bourgeoning populations. 
Thanks to our farmland, the US has not had to participate in this global “land grab.” But, our land is a finite resource and if we do not treat it as such, we too will be looking elsewhere to produce the food we need to survive.
I am reminded of the story of how the Romans ended their rival Carthaginians by sowing salt into their fields; no strangers to food shortages, the Romans understood that without farmland there is no civilization.
Lets not recreate what the Romans did to the Carthaginians, to ourselves.
America has long been self sufficient, growing much of our own food right here on American soil. This is not universal and not something we can take for granted. We must protect our farmland – our productivity and national security depend on it.
About the Author: Jon Scholl is President of American Farmland Trust. Prior to AFT, he served as Counselor to the Administrator for Agriculture Policy at the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Jon and his family operate a corn and soybean farm in McLean County, Illinois.
 This week, Jim Baird, Mid-Atlantic Director of American Farmland Trust (center, with plaque), donated 945 nutrient credits worth over $4,000 to the Lancaster Farmland Trust, a big step in our long-term goal of helping farmers reduce nutrient run-off into the Chesapeake Bay.
The credits were generated by three Lancaster County farmers who participated in our Best Management Practices (BMP) Challenge, which helps farmers test fertilizer reductions by insuring any loss of yield that occurs in the process. The program allows farmers to improve their environmental stewardship, while eliminating the biggest obstacle in their path – loss of profits.
Jim Baird describes the BMP Challenge:
“The BMP Challenge is an innovative tool that allows farmers to improve their environmental impact on their land without compromising their ability to compete economically. The success of farmers like these who are willing to do their part, in Pennsylvania and other states, demonstrates that you don’t need hard-and-fast regulations to expand agriculture’s role in cleaning up regional waterways-an important fact for everyone to remember as federal agencies develop a new strategy for restoring the health of the Chesapeake Bay and the creeks, streams and rivers that feed it”
By participating in the BMP Challenge these farmers generated nitrogen credits that were certified through the Department of Environmental Protection’s Nutrient Trading Program. Now, these credits can be purchased by a third party that doesn’t meet it’s water pollution standards, giving farmers an added income stream for their stewardship.
This process has the additional benefit of keeping the land in agriculture, as Karen Martynick, executive director for the Lancaster Farmland Trust, explains:
“We are really excited that American Farmland Trust is engaging farmers through the BMP Challenge in Lancaster County. The nutrient credits generated by the project could provide another source of income for our farmers, and it’s one more piece of the puzzle in preserving agriculture as a way of life in Lancaster County.”
Learn more about American Farmland Trust’s BMP Challenge and about our work helping farmers play an active role in cleaning up the Chesapeake Bay.
|
Double Your Impact this Holiday Season!
Connect to American Farmland Trust
|
