MO-AG Logo
 

 
 


Upcoming Events




October 2, 2014
MO-AG Member Appreciation Meeting;
Boonville, MO

October 28, 2014
Professional Applicator Training;
Cape Girardeau, MO

October 30, 2014
Professional Applicator Training;
Columbia, MO

December 17-18, 2014
MO-AG Winter Convention;
Lake Ozark, MO

Facebook   Twitter

Home

Our Mission

The Missouri Agribusiness Association is committed to the agribusiness industry within the Show-Me State by offering services that will enhance the day-to-day operations of agribusinesses now and in the future.

 

MO-AG's mission simply states, "The mission of the Missouri Agribusiness Association (MO-AG) is to advocate for the business of agriculture while offering services and networking opportunities for the agribusiness community."

 

2014 Pyramid of MO-AG Program Sponsors

Click here to view the pyramid in a larger format or click here to become a sponsor. Thank you to all of our Program Sponsors!

  

MO-AG Minute

Click here to get the latest MO-AG Minute.

 

News You Can Use

Current Status of UAVs (Drones)
The FAA bans commercial use of drones no matter how seemingly benign. FAA officials say rules to address the special safety challenges associated with unmanned aircraft need to be in place before they can share the sky with manned aircraft.  Unless FAA officials receive a complaint or chance upon a news story that mentions drone flights, they have little ability to find out about violations. The ban was further undercut this month when a federal judge dismissed the only fine the FAA has imposed on a commercial drone operator. The judge said the agency can't enforce regulations that don't exist.  The FAA, which contends it controls access to the national air space, has appealed.
 
The drone industry and some members of Congress are worried the United States will be one of the last countries, rather than one of the first, to gain the economic benefits of the technology.  "We don't have the luxury of waiting another 20 years," said Paul McDuffee, vice president of drone-maker Insitu of Bingen, Wash., a subsidiary of Boeing. "This industry is exploding. It's getting to the point where it may end up happening with or without the FAA's blessing."
 
In Japan, the Yamaha Motor Company's RMAX helicopter drones have been spraying crops for 20 years. The radio-controlled drones weighing 140 pounds are cheaper than hiring a plane and are able to more precisely apply fertilizers and pesticides. They fly closer to the ground and their backwash enables the spray to reach the underside of leaves.  The helicopters went into use five years ago in South Korea and last year in Australia.
 
Jim Williams, head of the FAA's drone office, said writing rules for the U.S. is more complex than other nations. The U.S. has far more air traffic than anywhere else and a greater variety of aircraft, from hot-air balloons and old-fashioned barnstormers to the most sophisticated airliners and military and business jets. At low altitudes, the concern is a small drone could collide with a helicopter or small plane flown by a recreational pilot. Source:  AP

 

Nixon Vetoes Agriculture Legislation
Governor Jay Nixon (D) has vetoed two agriculture omnibus bills because they contain language that would transfer regulatory control of captive deer to the Department of Agriculture. The sponsors of those bills say those vetoes will be easy overrides in September.  Senator Brian Munzlinger (R-Williamstown) says the bill is worded so as not to violate the Constitution by specifying that captive deer are not wild.  "Actually if you look at the Constitution, it says, 'wildlife,'" says Munzlinger. "If you look at the (legislation's proposed) definition of 'livestock,' it says 'anything not taken from the wild,' so I think if you look at clear definitions the governor was clearly wrong in his veto of Senate Bill 506."
 
Munzlinger accuses the Governor of standing against private property rights, and the House sponsor of those bills, Representative Casey Guernsey (R-Bethany), agrees.  Guernsey says the new regulations, "literally allow unaccountable, unelected officials a power grab to confiscate and regulate private property and farmers specifically, unlike we've ever seen before in the State of Missouri."  Nixon, in his veto messages on the bills, calls it, "unfortunate," that the legislature amended the deer language to, "two pieces of legislation that otherwise contain worthy provisions advancing Missouri agriculture."
Both lawmakers believe the vetoes will be overridden in September's veto session.  Guernsey states, "We've passed and overridden the governor's veto on agriculture legislation before. This isn't the first time the governor's vetoed agriculture's priorities. I'm confident that if you look at the votes on all ten of these individual proposals, they passed out of the House and the Senate with pretty significant margins in a bipartisan fashion, so we're going to do everything we can to override the veto." Source:  Ozarkfirst.com
 
Koster Endorses 'Right to Farm' Amendment; Nixon Skeptical
Supporters of a pro-farming measure on the Aug. 5 ballot picked up an important endorsement Wednesday when Attorney General Chris Koster announced his support.  Koster, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for governor in 2016, said at a news conference at the Missouri Farm Bureau headquarters that recent attempts to restrict agricultural producers show the need for Amendment 1, called "right to farm" by supporters.  "How would you feel if voters placed a limit on how successful you could be?" Koster said.
 
The endorsement is the latest from prominent politicians. One name absent from that list is Gov. Jay Nixon, who is barred from seeking another term and said yesterday he is leaning against the measure.  "I always have a deferral position of unless I really, really am for it, then I'm not for amending the constitution," Nixon said.  Amendment 1 was submitted by lawmakers and would, if approved, add a section on farming to the state Bill of Rights. It would protect all current farming practices, requiring a much higher level of scrutiny for new and existing regulations.  Supporters hope amending the Missouri Constitution could provide a legal shield against efforts by animal welfare groups to restrict particular farming methods or by organic food advocates to prohibit genetically modified crops.  Opponents contend the proposed amendment could be cited by corporate farms to try to avoid regulations against pollution and unsanitary conditions.
 
Nixon said he doesn't think the amendment will have that big of an effect.  "I don't see the underlying problem at the level that proponents say, nor do I see the negatives of it at the same tone that the opponents say," Nixon said.  Former Lt. Gov. Joe Maxwell, vice president of outreach and engagement for the Humane Society of the United States, said he is pleased with Nixon's stand and disappointed with Koster's position. Maxwell is working with Missouri's Food for America, the umbrella opposition group, and he said he thinks opponents are finding that residents are skeptical of the measure.  "The governor is probably taking a softer position that many Missourians are waking up to, and that is to vote no if you don't know what it will do," Maxwell said.  Missouri law limits foreign ownership of farmland, with no more than 1 percent allowed to be in foreign hands. Maxwell pointed to that limit as one likely to be targeted for litigation. "Unlike the governor, I do think this will have dire effects."
 
Koster said in his news conference that the courts would have to be convinced the law limiting land ownership serves a "compelling state interest" to survive a challenge. Koster did not dismiss the likelihood that current restrictions might be challenged but said he expects that most regulations would survive that challenge.  "All rights granted to citizens, even those placed in the constitution, are subject to reasonable restrictions," Koster said. Source:  Columbia Tribune

Agency Scrutinizing Ammonium Nitrate is Scrutinized
The Chemical Safety Board (CSB) has an important job: it's charged with independently investigating major chemical accidents and making recommendations to industry, regulators and labor groups.  The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee released a scathing report on the CSB that pointed to widespread management problems.  The man at the center of lawmakers' fury is Rafael Moure-Eraso, the CSB chairman appointed by President Obama in 2010. Current and former employees and board members have pointed to Moure-Eraso's leadership as the cause of many of the management problems at the agency.  House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) told Moure-Eraso plainly: "I really believe it's time you go." 
 
The White House didn't respond to a request for comment about whether President Obama still has confidence in the chairman.  Since Moure-Eraso took over the chairmanship, at least nine investigators and employees resigned or requested to be transferred from the Washington, D.C., office, according to the House report.  U.S. EPA's inspector general -- charged with overseeing the chemical board -- reported last year that CSB had steadily fallen behind in accomplishing its objectives of releasing timely reports. In 2012, the board completed just two of the eight investigations it planned to finalize. The OIG also found that CSB had a backlog of six investigations that had been open for more than three years, including three involving fatalities.
Source:  E&E Publishing
 
MO-AG editor's note:  CSB was a lead investigating agency into the cause of the incident in West, Texas involving ammonium nitrate.  To date, CSB has not issued a definitive report as to the cause of that incident.
 
Focus on Pollinators
The White House today announced the first comprehensive pollinator initiative ever created across the federal government.  Among the directives in the memorandum are actions increasing forage on federal lands, assessing the effects of pesticides including neonicotinoids, including native seeds in post-fire restoration, landscaping federal facilities for pollinators, educating the public about pollinators, and more. All details are at http://pollinator.org/PR_whitehouse.htm.
The memorandum is the result of a nearly 20-year campaign to increase awareness and action for honey bees and other pollinators and marks a new dawn of wise land management across the country. Importantly, President Obama is joined in supporting pollinators by the bi-partisan list of 45 governors who have signed proclamations for National Pollinator Week supported by millions of constituents across the country who care about this issue. 
 
This year, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell, and 45 governors designated June 16-22 through proclamations-the most ever-as a week to celebrate and protect the nation's pollinating animals.  Pollinators, like bees, butterflies, birds and other animals, bring us one in every three bites of food and maintain our environment. Pollinators are responsible for about $16 billion in U.S. agricultural production and world-wide human food production at $190 billion. Pollinators form the underpinning of a healthy and sustainable future for food and the environment, but have shown disturbing signs of decline.  
Source:  Pollinator Partnership
 
Environmentalists Pollinator Reaction
Environmental groups have a clear message for what the Obama administration's next move should be to protect bees: suspend the use of neonicotinoids.  The White House on Friday announced the formation of a federal task force to draft a 'National Pollinator Health Strategy' prioritizing research and other efforts to help stem bee losses and protect other pollinators. While environmental groups are largely supportive of the move, they say the president is skirting taking the action he really needs to take.
 
"This gives us hope that EPA really needs to move more quickly than it has" to assess the risks of pesticides to pollinators, "but I'm reluctant to say that it's going to force EPA to do what it needs to do," Larrissa Walker, head of the Center for Food Safety's pollinator campaign, said.
Source:  Politico
 
MFC on HSUS's Front Organization
Missouri Farmers Care (MFC) released the following statement on the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)-funded Missouri's Food For America political action committee attacking Amendment #1, the Missouri Farming Rights Amendment:
 
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is trying to put a farmer face on an anti-farmer message by paying Joe Maxwell and recruiting his allies to attack Amendment #1. Amendment #1 is supported by the tens of thousands of family farmers that make up Missouri Farmers Care's member organizations, by over 1,000 family farmers that have endorsed the amendment on Missouri Farmers Care's website, and by over 1,000 family farmers that have contributed their own hard-earned funds to Missouri Farmers Care to fight for passage of the amendment. Amendment #1 is supported by family farmers and the associations that are led by family farmers because it protects all of Missouri agriculture.
 
HSUS is once again at work in Missouri using a campaign based on scare tactics and misinformation.  We believe the vast majority of Missourians will support Amendment #1 as is protects the ability of both farmers and consumers to have the maximum number of choices in how food is produced, and what kinds of food are available at supermarkets, farmer's markets, and everywhere else food is sold and consumed.  Source:  MFC

 

Register Now for the MO-AG Summer Meeting
The deadline to pre-register for the MO-AG Summer Meeting is Friday, July 11th. Please try to pre-register as we are not guaranteed to have enough food at the banquet if you do not.  You can download the brochure here and the registration here.

The other deadline that is approaching is the deadline to reserve a hotel room. Please do so by Friday, July 4th you are not guaranteed a room after this date. Hotel reservations can be made by calling 573-365-5620; mention MOAG0714 to get the below rates:
 
Rates: $127/night plus tax for Deluxe Rooms
$137/night plus tax for One Bedroom Suite
$157/night plus tax for One Bedroom Double-Bed Suite

We hope to see all of you at the Summer Meeting!

 

GAO on Ammonium Nitrate 
Gaps in the multi-agency regulation of the explosive chemical ammonium nitrate may allow unsafe facilities to operate and poor planning to persist, according to a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report. The GAO report highlighted holes in the system for tracking facilities with ammonium nitrate, lack of data sharing between oversight agencies and regulations that are outdated and ineffective. The report comes as the Obama administration's chemical safety working group prepares its status report for the president. The White House created the working group in August 2013 as a response to the April 2013 explosion at a Texas fertilizer facility.

"Last year's devastating ammonium nitrate fertilizer explosion in West, Texas, is a tragic example of what can happen when there are inadequate protections on the use of highly explosive chemicals as a result of regulatory gaps and loopholes," a group of senior congressional Democrats said in a May 21 statement. The problems identified in the GAO report are "unacceptable," said Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Reps. George Miller (D-Calif.) and Joe Courtney (D-Conn.).

The GAO report noted that OSHA's explosives and blasting regulations fail to prohibit storing ammonium nitrate in wooden bins or wooden buildings, as they were in the Texas blast. Other regulatory gaps noted in the GAO report include that ammonium nitrate isn't covered by either OSHA's process safety management standard or the EPA's risk management program.

The GAO report also faulted OSHA for conducting little outreach to the fertilizer industry, which was largely unaware that it had to comply with the agency's regulations for storing ammonium nitrate. In his written response to the GAO, OSHA chief David Michaels said that the agency and the chemical safety working group has identified ways to boost industry outreach. OSHA is "evaluating options for targeting high risk fertilizer facilities for programmed inspections," Michaels said. OSHA is actively working with the Agriculture Retailers Association (ARA) to form an alliance to better inform employers that handle ammonium nitrate. One key part of that alliance should be an agency interpretation on what is or isn't compliant under the explosive and blasting standard, Michael Kennedy, public policy counsel for the ARA.

For a copy of the GAO report, CLICK HERE  Source: BNA

 

Farming Rghts Amendment On August Ballot
"Governor Nixon understands the importance of agriculture to the state of Missouri and the urgency of this issue," Missouri Farmers Care Chairman Don Nikodim said. "The Farming Rights Amendment will protect farmers and ranchers by enshrining their right to produce the food that Missouri's economy depends on. Missouri agriculture is united in support of the Farming Rights Amendment and we are looking forward to educating voters across the state on the importance of this issue."
 
With the August 5 election date just 10 weeks away, Missouri Farmers Care is mobilizing for a summer of campaigning. "We have been working on this issue since the legislature passed this referendum with an overwhelming bipartisan majority during the 2013 session," Nikodim said. "Missouri agriculture is ready to take our case to the voters and we are confident that Missourians will protect family farmers and ranchers." A recent poll commissioned by the Missouri Liberty Project found that 69% of likely voters support Amendment 1.
Source: Missouri Farmers Care


 
Missouri Ballots and Issues
Gov. Jay Nixon referred five measures to the August primary ballot while leaving three proposed constitutional amendments for the November election.  Nixon's office said it put several measures on the August ballot because of the large number of issues referred to this year's ballot.

Here are the issues that voters will see on the ballot Aug. 5:

*  Transportation sales tax: Proposes a three-quarters-cent sales tax increase for roads and other transportation projects that is projected to raise $534 million annually for a decade. It would be the largest tax increase in state history and would help a transportation system facing declining funds.

*  Guns: Defines the right to bear arms as "unalienable" and would require the state to defend against any "infringement." It would include the keeping of ammunition and defending one's family with a firearm as constitutional rights.

*  Farming: Establishes the right to farm within the Missouri Constitution.

*  Lottery tickets for veterans: Directs the Lottery Commission to develop a new lottery ticket to benefit state veterans homes.

*  Electronic privacy: Adds electronic communications and data as things protected from unreasonable searches and seizures.
Here are the issues that voters will see on ballots Nov. 4:

*  Early voting: Permits early voting for six business days ending the Wednesday before an election.

* Budget: Gives the legislature new authority to override gubernatorial budget cuts.

* Child sex abuse: Allows evidence about prior criminal acts to be used against people facing prosecution for child sex offenses.
Source:  Associated Press

 
Organic Notches a Win in Oregon
I am saddened by the passage of Measure 15-119. This crop ban has divided our community and shows a general lack of understanding about the benefits of modern agriculture. The result is bad public policy and disrespect for private property rights.  
 
I am concerned that Jackson County lacks the resources and expertise to implement the measure. It is unfortunate that county inspectors will now be charged to police what farmers do on their private property.  Most voters are not familiar with the intricacies of biotechnology and agriculture. Yet they were tasked with making a decision based on misleading sound bites and an internet filled with fear. It's clear to me by the outcome of this vote that we farmers must do a better job engaging with the public. Consumers are more and more interested in where and how their food is raised. Farmers need to show the public how we are growing the safest products in the world. As we learned in Jackson County, if we don't tell our story others will define what we do, even if they have to twist the facts.
 
If we had to take a loss, I'm proud to have been on the side of science and the public good. As a farmer, my nature is optimism. My hope for a future of cooperation and coexistence remains strong.
Barry Bushue, President, Oregon Farm Bureau

 

Oregon Organic Legal Challenges
A ban on genetically engineered crops in Oregon's Jackson County may face lawsuits based on the state's right-to-farm law, which protects common farm practices.  Opponents say the prohibition is ripe for a court challenge under Oregon's right-to-farm law, which restricts private lawsuits and local ordinances against common farming practices.  "We believe there is a conflict there," said Scott Dahlman, executive director of Oregonians for Food and Shelter, which opposed the Jackson County ballot initiative.  "Farmers in the county who grow GMO crops, like biotech alfalfa, would have to plow them under within a year.  While there haven't been any decisions made yet, there's likely to be some legal action over the ban on genetically modified organisms.  We're going to do everything we can to defend our farmers.  The right-to-farm law is broadly worded to protect reasonable farm practices" Dahlman said.
 
The question is whether growing GMO crops would be considered a protected "generally accepted" farm practice now that Jackson County voters have declared such crops illegal.  Litigation against the GMO ban would not be surprising, said George Kimbrell, attorney for the Center for Food Safety, a non-profit that supported the ballot initiative.  However, the prohibition is "well crafted" to be congruent with the right-to-farm law and Oregon's constitution, he said.
Source: CapitolPress 


 
Cost of GMO Labeling
In a new study, Cornell University found that in New York a proposed genetically modified organisms (GMO) labeling bill could cost families as much as $800 per year.  The study evaluates additional costs passed from the industry to consumers if forced labeling is made law in New York State.  It's not only families who will be shelling out more for food. The state could also be facing millions of dollars in added costs to implement and monitor the labeling initiative. It would also account for a loss in farm income.
 
"American families deserve safe, abundant and affordable food," Claire Parker, spokeswoman for the Coalition for Safe and Affordable Food, said in a news statement.  "GMOs have been used in our food supply for more than 20 years and no study has ever shown them to be unsafe or different from foods without GMOs. Repeated studies, however, have shown that the high cost of mandatory labeling would dramatically increase the price of groceries at the checkout aisle for consumers." Source: PorkNetwork


 
Vilsack Promotes Organic Crop Insurance
Add a new crop insurance program to the spoil of riches being enjoyed by the organic industry thanks to the new farm bill.  Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack used his presentation at the Organic Trade Association's policy meeting, in Washington, D.C., to announce the creation of a pilot version of the Whole-Farm Revenue Protection program in certain states and counties as soon as 2015.  Vilsack stated "Reducing the risk that organic farmers feel will encourage them to maintain their certification and continue producing products, which is good for the rural economy and also satisfies consumer demand."  Vilsack stated that he used his trip to Mexico to push agriculture officials there to move ahead with an equivalency agreement for organic products to better facilitate trade between the two nations and also expand the market for organic products.
 
The Organic Trade Association were told to continue pushing their cause in Congress because it has bipartisan appeal.  'I love organic agriculture in particular because it's pure commercial interest at its core,' Rep. Reid Ribble (R-Wis.) told those gathered at a reception hosted by the Organic Trade Association. Source:  Politico

 

West Texas - One Year Anniversary
Regulatory gaps at the county, state and federal levels allowed the devastating explosion at a Texas fertilizer facility to happen, and weaknesses in zoning codes means it's likely that other facilities storing hazardous chemicals are dangerously close to populated areas, according to Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board officials.  The Chemical Safety Board found 1,351 facilities nationwide that store ammonium nitrate, the chemical that detonated in April 2013 at West Fertilizer Co. in West, Texas.  "Farm communities are just starting to collect data on how close homes or schools are to AN storage, but there can be little doubt that West is not alone and that other communities should act to determine what hazards might exist in proximity," lead CSB investigator Johnnie Banks said in prepared remarks.
 
The community clearly wasn't aware of the potential hazard at West Fertilizer, Banks said. The McLennan County emergency planning committee didn't have an emergency response plan for West Fertilizer, as it might have under the federal Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, because of a retail facility exemption under the law.  Meanwhile, at the state level, Texas has no fire code, and it prohibits counties under a certain population level from having them.  Furthermore, there is no regulation at the federal level stopping businesses from storing ammonium nitrate in combustible wooden bins or wood buildings without sprinkler systems, Banks said.
 
But Banks said OSHA needs to clarify its existing coverage of ammonium nitrate under the standards so that fertilizer distributors understand what they must do.  "While we believe regulations must be addressed here, I do want to commend the industry for taking recent steps to get fertilizer distributors and others to carefully handle ammonium nitrate," CSB Chairman Rafael Moure-Eraso said in prepared remarks.  Moure-Eraso applauded the Fertilizer Institute and the Agricultural Retailers Association's third-party auditing program for fertilizer retailers, called "Responsible-Ag," as well as their efforts distributing a guidance document for safe handling and storage of ammonium nitrate.
 
The CSB must complete several steps before closing its West investigation, including ammonium nitrate blast modeling and impact analysis, lab testing of the chemical, and fire code and regulatory analysis. Source:  BNA


More Lengthy, Complex OSHA Inspections
According to OSHA's FY 2014 budget proposal documents, the agency is exploring a new inspection system that could allow inspections to be rated on complexity, providing an incentive for OSHA compliance officers and area offices to focus their time and efforts on more complex inspections. This means that employers, who may not have seen much inspection activity in the past, or only general inspection activity, may soon see more and/or different types of inspections.
OSHA says it is at a crossroads concerning how it will direct its enforcement resources. The agency has always operated under the assumption that "more inspections are better," as the more establishments inspected, the greater OSHA's presence and impact. Consequently, there has always been pressure on the agency to conduct more inspections than it did in the previous years. The problem with this model, OSHA now believes, is that not all inspections are created equal. Some inspections, such as those dealing with process safety management (PSM), ergonomics, complicated electrical and machine guarding or industrial hygiene inspections dealing with unknown or unique chemicals, take more time and resources to complete than the average or typical OSHA inspection. The agency has never accounted for the resource needs of these complex types of inspections in its enforcement strategy.
 
With the burden to conduct more and more inspections with possibly fewer resources over the next several years, OSHA field personnel would find themselves forced to conduct less time-intensive, shorter inspections rather than the more complicated inspections. Under the current system, the only incentive for a compliance officer is to meet the inspection goals - there is no incentive for them to do the larger more complicated inspections. This is why in FY 2014, the agency intends to explore an inspection weighting approach in order to direct inspections to high hazard operations - including inspections of refineries and chemical plants, emerging chemical and health issues and workplace violence.

Right now, each inspection, whether it takes six months or six hours, is weighted the same. OSHA's current internal system does not take into account the wide array of resource intensive inspections performed by the agency. OSHA is not implementing the new weighting system this year, but is examining FY 2014 data to establish a solid baseline. Source: Asmark Institute

 

Blunt Condemns EPA/COE Rule
U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (Mo.) condemned the draft Clean Water Act rule released this week by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (COE). The rule would reportedly give the federal government regulatory authority over millions of acres of wetlands and streams by greatly expanding its authority over Waters of the United States.  Blunt stated "This proposed rule would have a devastating impact on Missouri farm families.  I will fight the EPA's proposal and I will keep fighting the Obama Administration's attempts to takeover Americans' private properties."
Source:  Senator Roy Blunt Press Release


 
Congress on WOTUS
The Obama administration will receive no funding to support its proposed rule to define the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act if the administration does not first provide Congress with cost estimates and other details, Rep. Hal Rogers (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, warned during a March 26 hearing.  "There will be not a penny for that program unless we know in advance the cost of putting it in place, and determine who owns what portions of those streams, and a lot more details," Rogers said.  The lawmaker's reference to "that program" was a reminder that Congress can block a rule by specifying through appropriations that no money can be spent on developing or enforcing the rule.  Rogers was addressing Jo-Ellen Darcy, assistant secretary of the Army for civil works, during a hearing of the Committee. The Corps and the EPA jointly developed the proposed rule.
 
"You don't have any idea what it would cost?" Rogers asked.  "Not at this time," Darcy said. There had been "general discussions on the cost overall," she said, but the discussions had not delved into such details as the expense of mapping affected areas and determining ownership of the areas.  The rule would not only apply to navigable rivers and their tributaries and adjacent wetlands but to intermittent or ephemeral streams and artificial channels if they can flow with water that could reach a navigable river.  The rule also would allow the EPA and the Corps to decide on a case-by-case basis whether to regulate geographically isolated water bodies and wetlands based on how they are judged to affect the physical, biological and chemical integrity of navigable waters.
 
EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, speaking March 26 during a hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said the proposed rule does not take away "a single agricultural exemption that current exists" under federal law.  Senate Democrats acknowledged the proposal would impose compliance costs but argued the costs of dirty water would be significantly higher. They also argued strongly that the EPA was well-within its authority to propose the new water regulation.  "The cost of inaction is greater than the cost of action. Many studies have shown that the cost of dirty water is far higher than the compliance costs," Sen. Barbara Boxer, who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said. Boxer added that she hasn't yet reviewed the rule.
 
Legislation known as the Defense of Environment and Property Act aims to cut back the federal government's authority to regulate wetlands.  Sen. Rand Paul, R-KY, who introduced the bill, said the legislation would rein in the EPA.  American Rivers, a non-profit environmental group, explained what it saw as drawbacks of the bill stating "It forces the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers to get specific permission from States before doing anything to control pollution or protect land and water resources - essentially disrupting the careful balance of state and federal responsibility for land and water management." Sources:  BNA & Water Online
 


Food Safety Modernization Act implementation
Margaret Hamburg fielded a flurry of questions from Republican senators anxious about the implementation of the Food Safety Modernization Act.  The FDA's commissioner opened the 90-minute hearing by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee by recounting how her agency issued no less than seven major FSMA rules last year and pleading again for more money. But the committee members were less interested in talking about FDA's funding problem and instead wanted to focus more on the regs themselves. In particular, the GOP lawmakers expressed concerns about FDA not following the letter of the law in issuing all the FSMA regulations.
 
"I have heard a number of concerns from food producers about the overly prescriptive framework considering the preventive controls for human food,' Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) Enzi said. "What concerns me even more is that it doesn't appear the FDA has adhered to the requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act by publicizing the proposed rule."

Hamburg said she had not heard the concern. "If anything," she added, "I think we have really done a remarkable job of outreach and engagement and taking comments and responding to comments. I will go back and ask some questions about that." Source:  Politico

Koster Leads
In 2008, HSUS succeeded in passing a ballot initiative in California that would ban farmers from housing egg-laying hens in enclosures that are too small for the birds to lie down, stand up or fully spread their wings. Two years later, the California legislature extended the regulation to all eggs sold in the state, effectively imposing the regulations on any state wishing to sell eggs in California.
 
Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster sued to block California's law on Feb. 3 saying it would hurt his state's egg producers, which sell about a third of their eggs in California.  Missouri attorneys said in a court filing that farmers there would face the choice of spending $120 million to bring their henhouses into compliance or having to forgo sales in California.  The lawsuit contends the law violates Constitutional provisions allowing free commerce among the states.  Officials representing Iowa, Nebraska, Kentucky, Oklahoma and Alabama recently joined it.
 
Joe Maxwell, HSUS Agriculture Director and former Missouri Lt. Governor, in an interview with Nebraska Radio Network affiliate WNAX, claimed Nebraska shouldn't complain that California requires other states to meet its standards to sell eggs in the state.  "I would expect that the governor and the Attorney General there should look at their own laws and look at which ones those in place that protect their own producers before they go out and make those broad statements.  I believe very strongly in states having the ability and a sovereign right to regulate to some degree their industry," Maxwell stated. "In this case, the evidence is clear that chickens in barren battery cages for which California has outlawed have a greater propensity to have salmonella and the state of California should have the right as it sees fit to protect its citizens."
 
In a separate news release, HSUS asserted the right of states to regulate agriculture. HSUS stated in the news release California has a right under the Constitution to regulate or eliminate "an unsafe and inhumane products from its local market, regardless of the product's place of origin."
Source:  Wall Street Journal & Nebraska Radio Network


  
 
Missouri River Lawsuit
Enduring four floods in seven years, farmers, property owners and small businesses along the Missouri River say there's no longer any flood protection. They are suing the U.S. government for failing to protect their property and not providing just compensation.  "For decades, these Missouri River residents invested their fortunes and futures in developing farms, businesses and communities on this land in reliance on the corps managing the river in a way that would deter flooding," said R. Dan Boulware, a member of the St. Joseph Bar, plaintiffs' lead counsel and a partner in the Polsinelli law firm. "Valuable farm ground is being permanently destroyed and a way of life is now threatened."
 
A lawsuit will be filed which includes more than 200 plaintiffs from Northwest Missouri, Northeast Kansas, eastern Nebraska, western Iowa and South Dakota. The suit seeks damages believed to be in excess of $250 million.  The suit alleges the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers now manages the Missouri River to preserve endangered species habitat rather than control flooding.  The claims seek compensation under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  "The Constitution essentially says that, if you are going to make people sacrifice their property for a public good, like protection of native species of wildlife, then you have to pay them just compensation," stated Benjamin Brown, a co-counsel and partner with Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll of Washington, D.C., the other legal firm representing the plaintiffs. Source:  St. Joseph News-Press

 

Examining OSHA
Business representatives painted a portrait of OSHA as a runaway agency that routinely short-circuits the rulemaking process to ram through its agenda during a recent House subcommittee hearing.
Many of its actions amount to substantive changes that evade impact analysis, public comment or clearance from other administration agencies that ordinarily serve as a check, said Brad Hammock, an attorney testifying on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.  Hammock pointed to OSHA's December 2013 memo instructing regional administrations on how to enforce the combustible dust requirement in the hazard communication regulation and its October 2013 online posting of annotated permissible exposure limits as further examples of the agency's overreach.
 
Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), the committee chairman, said these actions reflect OSHA chief David Michaels' "frustration with the rules he must follow before imposing new regulations on workplaces."
According to Walberg, Michaels has "promised to find creative solutions to adopt his policy priorities, and that is precisely what the agency is now doing."  Rep. Joe Courtney (D-Conn.) noted that it takes OSHA between 7 and 19 years to issue new standards.
 
Scott VanderWal, president of the South Dakota Farm Bureau Federation and a corn farmer in Volga, S.D., told the panel that a June 2011 OSHA memo pulled small family farms involved in grain operations-which had largely been exempted from OSHA enforcement since 1976-under the agency's purview.  "Rather than working cooperatively with industry, OSHA apparently reached the conclusion that it was preferable to penalize small farmers through enforcement," VanderWal said.  Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor Jordan Barab announced Jan. 22 that OSHA would review its farm inspection guidelines.
 
In other OSHA news, at another meeting, OSHA chief David Michaels said recently that the agency is changing the way it counts inspections to take into account the fact that "not all inspections are created equal."  Michaels said OSHA will use two systems of crediting the work of inspectors during 2014: the old system of giving each inspection equal weight-regardless of its complexity-and the new system based on "inspection units," which factors in the time and resources involved. The agency will then move fully to the new system in 2015.  Michaels also discussed OSHA's online tools to help employers switch to safer chemicals. Source: BNA

 
OSHA Addresses Fertilizer Safety in Letter
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is partnering with the Agricultural Retailers Association and The Fertilizer Institute to reach more than 7,000 agricultural retailers, distributers, producers and other facilities in the fertilizer industry to remind employers of the importance of safely storing and handling ammonium nitrate.  In the letter, OSHA provides employers with legal requirements and best practice recommendations for safely storing and handling ammonium nitrate.
 
To view a copy of the letter, CLICK HERE
Source:  OSHA News Release


Ohio Law Would Require Fertilizer Application Certification
Ohio commodity groups are supporting changes to legislation that will require one farmer per farm operation to be certified to apply fertilizer.  The bill (SB 150) has passed the Ohio Senate and was expected to be considered in the House.  "The Ohio Soybean Association (OSA) and Ohio Corn and Wheat Growers Association (OCWGA) take the issue of water quality in our state very seriously and began actively working with legislators on SB 150 since it was introduced in 2013," says farmer and OSA president Jerry Bambauer.
 
Fertilizer certification would piggyback onto the pesticide certification that farmers already go through and will not include added fees.  Last year, farmers and other agricultural organizations announced that they are investing over $1 million to support a study to investigate phosphorus use in farming.  USDA is adding another $1 million to support the research financed by the Ohio Soybean Council, Ohio Corn Marketing Program, Ohio Small Grains Marketing Program, and others. Source:  agriculture.com


Missouri AG Koster Support State Authority
Attorneys general from 21 states are urging a federal appellate court to overturn EPA's Clean Water Act nutrient rules for the Chesapeake Bay, arguing that the standards are illegal and, if left in place, could pave the way for the agency to set similar requirements in other watersheds, including the massive Mississippi River Basin.
 
"EPA's untenable interpretation of its authority under the CWA has unlawfully usurped States' traditional authority over land-use management decisions," argue State AGs Gregory Zoeller of Indiana, Chris Koster of Missouri and Derek Schmidt of Kansas in an amicus brief filed last week.  The case is being heard by Third Circuit Court of Appeals, in Philadelphia.  "Its actions have profound consequences for every state and cannot be squared with the CWA."
 
EDITORS NOTE - Missouri Agribusiness Association (MO-AG) intervened in the Mississippi River Basin lawsuit on nutrient criteria and awaits results of final appeals in court.
Source:  Politico

 

 
Corn Ethanol RFS Battle Heats Up
The EPA has proposed a rule that would result in a 1.4 billion gallon reduction in how much corn ethanol will be required under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS).  Those interested in making comments on EPA's proposed rule (EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0479) have until January 28th to do so.  Comments can be made by hitting the 'comment now' button at:
http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0479
 
Leading up to the RFS decision, the ethanol debate has escalated.  Some have suggested that more ethanol will result in more pollution from fertilizer runoff.  MO-AG's national affiliate, The Fertilizer Institute (TFI), described this as "character assassination without cause."  Going further, TFI stated "Working with farmers, the fertilizer industry has aggressively promoted best management practices to ensure that fertilizer is used in a manner that maximizes food production while protecting the environment. In fact, U.S. farmers produce 87 percent more corn than they did in 1980, using 4 percent fewer fertilizer nutrients. This speaks to agriculture's ability to improve sustainability by increasing productivity efficiently. Through the use of 4R nutrient stewardship (use of the right fertilizer source at the right rate at the right time and in the right place) farmers continue to build on past success.   "
 
The Missouri Corn Growers Association has information on the RFS issue on their website at www.mocorn.org/rfs and the National Corn Growers Association has extensive information on their website as well at http://www.ncga.com/rfs.

 

 
OSHA Focuses on Farmer-owned Grain Bins
Nebraska U.S. Senator Mike Johanns is demanding that OSHA stop harassing small, family-run farms.  Since 1976, Congress has included language in appropriations bills prohibiting OSHA enforcement actions against farmers with ten or fewer employees.  But Johanns says the agency recently violated that rule when it assessed a $132,000 fine against a Holt County, Nebraska farm-a farm with only one non-family employee-for grain bin safety violations.
 
"OSHA accused the farmer of willful violations.  Let me give you a couple of examples-failure to conduct atmospheric tests in a grain bin and failure to wear OSHA-approved gear when entering a grain bin, just to name a few.  Johanns accuses OSHA of "making up its own rules" and that "OSHA's claim that the storage of grain is not part of farming is absolutely incredible-it's absurd.  It's also a blatant overreach in violation of the law." Source:  Brownfield
 

OSHA Announces Local Emphasis Program (LEP) Targeting Fertilizer Facilities

For more information on the upcoming inspections of agricultural facilities as part of the OSHA LEP, please see OSHA's press release. CLICK HERE.  Although OSHA has issued this press release announcing the LEP, to our knowledge, the LEP itself has yet to be released.  However, in discussions we have had with OSHA staff, we believe that all agribusiness facilities are possible candidates for inspection and that all aspects of possible violations will be examined.  Areas of concerns could include:  dust-fire and breathable hazard, confined spaces, corrosiveness of fertilizer on buildings, machine guards, fall hazards, noise hazards, treated feed/seed chemical hazard in regards to employee interaction, electrical safety, and NFPA 70E (Arc Flash).  Regarding AN in particular, all of OSHA regulation 1910 could possibly be enforced including 1910.109(i).

We are uncertain as to the details and specifics regarding how OSHA will conduct its inspections and to what standards agricultural facilities will be held to in regards to AN specifically.  We have been engaging OSHA and our national affiliates on this question.  President Obama's Executive Order on chemical safety has the agencies reviewing all its policies at the same time that this LEP will conducted.

We do have reason to believe that the advisory "Chemical Advisory: Safe Storage, Handling, and Management of Ammonium Nitrate" which was sent out by the EPA, OSHA, and ATF in August 2013 will generally guide the agencies expectations of agricultural facilities.  Please CLICK HERE to review a copy of the advisory.  You may note that the advisory uses language such as "strongly recommend", "avoid", "if possible", etc.  We would especially draw your attention to these statements in the advisory:

*  We would strongly recommend that you review your facility's operations in regards to AN storage and handling and the management of combustible material such as grain dust and seeds.
 
*  Pure ammonium nitrate is stable and will explode only under extraordinary circumstances. However, the addition of combustible materials such as sugar, grain dust, seed husks or other organic contaminants, even in fairly low percentages, creates a dangerous combination and the ammonium nitrate mixture becomes far more susceptible to detonation. Avoid contamination of AN with combustible materials or organic substances such as packing materials, dust, seed, oils, and waxes.  If possible, do not co-locate AN, especially bulk AN in bins, with dust-producing organics such as grains or seeds.

*  Store AN fertilizer in separate buildings or separated by approved fire walls from organic, combustible or reactive materials, such as grains, wood or other organic materials.

*  AN should also be handled in accordance with safe practices found in NFPA 400 Hazardous Materials Code, Chapter 11.

*  AN stores should be separated from incompatible substances by using separate buildings or 1 - hour fire resistant walls, or a minimum separation distance of 30 feet.

*  AN storage areas should be equipped with an automatic sprinkler system, or have an automatic fire detection and alarm system if the areas are not continuously occupied. This is especially important when the facility in question is close to the public surrounding the facility.

*  Suitable fire control devices such as hoses and appropriate portable fire extinguishers shall be provided throughout the warehouse and loading areas. Water supplies and fire hydrants should be available.

Again, MO-AG recommends that you review this entire advisory CLICK HERE.

 

Four Rs in KC                                                                                                                            

Increased scrutiny by the EPA on farm nutrient management has The Fertilizer Institute emphasizing to growers the 4Rs for nutrient management and stewardship.  Kathy Mathers is the Institute's vice president of public affairs and tells Brownfield Ag News, "It involves the use of the right fertilizer source, the right rate, the right time, and, in the right place. And, I would be willing to bet that all of your listeners are already doing that."
 
The Fertilizer Institute, National Corn Growers Association and the American Farm Bureau recently lost their lawsuit against the EPA in federal court. The judge ruled that the agency DOES have the authority to regulate runoff going into the Chesapeake Bay. But the groups are appealing, "You know, really what is at issue ultimately is whether or not EPA has the ability to really almost go down to a farm by farm and mandate nutrient management practices."
 
Mathers says there are signs in the Upper Mississippi River Basin that the EPA may be listening, "About 60% of all fertilizer in the country is used in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. EPA right now actually has stood back a little bit and the environmental groups are suing EPA to see if it can't become a little more strict with water quality there so it's a little bit of a turnabout from what's happening in the Chesapeake Bay."
Mathers says agriculture is not a leak-less system, that they do lose some nutrients into the environment but there are things farmers can be doing to minimize those losses and make the most for their fertilizer dollar.  Brownfield interviewed Mathers at the National Association of Farm Broadcasting Convention in Kansas City.
 
Editor's note:  MO-AG has been granted intervenor status in the Upper Mississippi lawsuit. Source:  Brownfield

 

OSHA Uses Crystal Ball to Cite West Fertilizer

While ATF investigators say that ammonium nitrate was detonated in the explosion at the West Fertilizer plant, they don't know how the blast was initiated. They say the origin of the fire that preceded the explosion was in the fertilizer and seed building, but the cause of the fire has not been determined. ATF officials still consider the site a crime scene, preventing the Chemical Safety Board from conducting a thorough investigation into the cause - so we will probably never know with any certainty actually what happened. OSHA, on the other hand, seemed to have used their crystal ball to conjure up 24 violations totaling $118,000 notably during the recent shutdown of the government. OSHA's actions are reprehensible, especially considering many of the violations are based on 29 CFR 1910.109, the explosives standard which has not been proven to be applicable to an agricultural facility like West to begin with. Source: Asmark


 
MF Global Court Ruling

It's been two years since $1.6B vanished from the accounts of MF Global customers but now it appears those customers will recover what they lost. A federal bankruptcy court judge has approved a plan that would close the remaining shortfall for some 20,000 customers. The trustee overseeing the return of customer money, James Giddens, had recovered money and gradually disbursed it to clients. But in the face of a roughly $230M gap, Giddens recently petitioned Judge Martin Glenn to free up remaining funds from MF Global Incorporated's general estate.  In agreeing, the judge has cleared the way for Giddens to make customers whole possibly by the end of the year. Ahead of the judge's ruling, Giddens said it seemed inconceivable in the opening moments of the liquidation proceeding that the possibility of 100-percent return of property owed to former MF Global customers would even be considered. The judge agreed stating that nobody thought the customers would recover everything they lost.
Source: NAFB News Service


 
Prize Winning Scientist: Embrace GMOs

Dr. Marc Van Montagu is Emeritus Professor at the Institute of Plant Biotechnology Outreach at Ghent University in Belgium and is the co-recipient of the 2013 World Food Prize.  In addition to his own knowledge and expertise, Dr. Van Montagu's perspective is backed with years of scientific evidence refuting false accusations made against GM foods. He writes, "It seems to me that much of the resistance to GM foods isn't based on science, but may be ideological and political, based on fears of 'corporate profiteering' and 'Western colonialism.'"  By 2050, experts predict our world population will have increased by one-third to 9.6 billion, begging the question; will we have enough food for everyone?
 
Dr. Van Montagu says advancements in GMO technology have been met with strong opposition from "the same thoughtful people who tend to dismiss climate-change skeptics as 'anti-science.'" One has to wonder; why continue to combat GMO's when studies prove their safety, time and time again?  Under strict government regulations, GM biotechnology "offers an unparalleled safety record and demonstrated commercial success." Dr. Van Montagu worries that the industry may not reach its full potential, facing the "labeling" movement to single out modified food from other food on grocery store shelves.
Source:  Protect the Harvest


 
ANTI-GMO Measure Defeated

Following the defeat of the anti-GMO Initiative 522 in the state of Washington, BIO President and CEO Jim Greenwood stated "Just like 27 million voters in California and Oregon, Washington voters saw how this burdensome and deceptive labeling scheme would have created more state bureaucracy, imposed new costs and burdens on local farmers and businesses, and increased food prices for Washington families.  Food labels should convey valuable and accurate information to consumers.  We will continue to explore solutions that provide consumers with valuable information about the foods we eat.  One example is the GMO Answers website, where consumers' questions about GMOs and how our food is grown are asked and answered in a timely manner.  Other informational resources include statements from credible scientific groups such as the American Medical Association and the World Health Organization, among others."
Source: BIO

 

 


 


MO-AG Partners: