Farm Bill takes wrong turn

[Windyhills]

Sorry to say congress has messed up what wasn't that bad.

After nearly three years of hard work by many NWF staff, board, members and affiliates, I am disappointed to report that the final farm bill coming out of the conference committee looks like neither the House or Senate bills and is bad news for both wildlife and global warming. As
such, NWF has made the difficult decision to oppose final passage of the bill.

While there are some positive elements to the bill that we would like to see become reality, the key problems outweighed them significantly - particularly the perverse incentives to plow up native grasslands and the resulting climate impacts. Our decision was made after close consultation with key staff across the country.

The President has signaled that he may veto this farm bill and has mentioned some of the same reasons for which we oppose. If a veto occurs, there may be an opportunity to revisit some of the bill's most troubling provisions as the White House negotiates with the Congress.

In the event Congress fails to override a veto, current farm bill programs will continue through a continuing resolution and Congress will have to take up a new re-authorization next year. In the event this happens, there will be good opportunities to fix the bill and pass legislation that NWF can support. While the odds of this occurring aren't especially good, it's the end we are working hard for right now.

Tom France
National Wildlife Federation

WASHINGTON, DC (May 12) – The National Wildlife Federation today announced its opposition to final passage of the farm bill. The House-Senate Conference Committee completed
their work on reauthorization of the farm bill last Thursday and indicated a vote on final passage
is likely in the House this Wednesday.

“This farm bill is a recipe for disaster for wildlife,” said Larry Schweiger, President and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation. “Our Congressional leaders have put forth a bill that jeopardizes wildlife, slashes investments to key conservation programs, and fans the flames of
global warming.”

The final bill includes drastic cuts in funding for the Conservation Reserve Program and Wetlands Reserve Programs and includes a permanent disaster fund for farmers that would encourage the destruction of native grasslands. Combined with last year’s ethanol mandate that
would more than double corn ethanol production, this bill establishes unprecedented opportunity for habitat destruction in the United States.

“The farm bill creates a perfect storm for the destruction of habitat and the aggravation of global warming,” said Schweiger. “We have no choice but to call on Congress to reject this farm bill and demand changes that keep this bill from becoming a conservation nightmare.”

The combination of a new permanent disaster program in the final bill and a greatly weakened “Sodsaver” provision are especially problematic for waterfowl, pheasants and other game birds that rely on healthy grassland and wetland habitat. These provisions in the bill also undermine
efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is a change from both the House and Senate versions of the bill passed last year, which included a stronger “Sodsaver” provision to deny eligibility for crop insurance and disaster bailouts to newly broken native grasslands.

“Congress is essentially giving farmers an iron clad guarantee that no matter how dry or marginal the land they break to farm, they will be bailed out if they plant crops that fail,” said Schweiger. “At a time when the Senate is considering legislation to reduce our greenhouse gas
emissions, it is foolish to promote such nearsighted practices at taxpayer expense.”

The General Accountability Office cited the availability of crop insurance and disaster payments as a key factor in decisions by farmers to bust up and plant native grassland areas, even before the new permanent disaster program was available. Every acre of native grassland that is put into
cropping releases between 45 and 54 tons of carbon dioxide.
Native grasslands are one of the most endangered ecosystems in the United States. Less than one percent of the country’s pre-settlement prairies remain and grassland birds are the fastest declining species group. Once broken out for agriculture, these systems can never be fully
restored. The financial incentives in the bill to plough native grasslands will also destroy important habitat for species that are being considered for listing under the Endangered Species Act.

“Sage-grouse populations have already been severely impacted by energy development in the West,” said Ben Deeble, National Wildlife Federation sage grouse iologist. “Without sodsaver, thousands of acres of sage-grouse habitat in Montana, Idaho, Washington, Oregon and other western states will be put to the plow and destroyed. Listing sage-grouse under the Endangered Species Act will likely be unavoidable.”

The Farm Bill also includes a 7 million acre cut in the Conservation Reserve Program cap (from 39.2 million to 32 million acres). This means approximately 3 million more acres would have to be taken out of the program before any additional marginal land can be enrolled. Already, more
than 2.6 million acres have come out of the program in recent years as commodity prices escalated and USDA-offered rental rates were kept low to convince farmers to re-enroll when their contracts expired.

“Loss of 5 million acres of Conservation Reserve Program lands back to the plow would release of around 225 million tons of carbon dioxide,” said Schweiger.

Another key conservation program, the Wetlands Reserve Program, will be cut by 25 percent, despite an enormous backlog of frequently flooded lands that farmers would like to restore to beneficial use as wetlands.

“The Wetlands Reserve Program is the most successful wetlands program in our country,” said Julie Sibbing, NWF’s Senior Program Manager for Agriculture and Wetlands Policy. “Cutting back the acres available for this program will mean thousands of lost opportunities for restoring
wetlands for wildlife and continued crop insurance and disaster bailouts for those whose land frequently floods but cannot get into the program.”

“We recognize there are some positive aspects of the bill including new tax credits for farmers, and ranchers to help conserve endangered species and a new voluntary public access program that enhances hunting opportunities on private lands,” said Schweiger. “We also know that the
farm bill is an essential vehicle for meeting the needs of the poor and providing a safety net for farmers. But America cannot afford a farm bill that increases global warming pollution, decimates wildlife habitat and undermines decades of conservation progress.”

[eaglerock814]

The American Sporting Dog Alliance opposes the Farm Bill for the reasons stated in this announcement: A serious impact on wildlife.

If the bill is amended, however, there is one good part to it. It would tighten restrictions on importing dogs from foreign countries.

An estimated 300,000 dogs are imported every year, and many of these are from "rescue" groups.

The presence of these dogs means that many American dogs die in animal shelters every year, and this also increases the political pressure for laws against dog owners - mandatory spay and neuter laws, in particular.

There also are many disease concerns about unregulated importation of foreign strays.

[ezzy333]

Could you show us who is importing the foriegn stray dogs and how many they are bringing in? Where do they get them and where do they sell them?

Ezzy

[eaglerock814]

My original posting on the Gun Dog Forum about the Santa Barbara spay/neuter issue detailed information about that state. A Border Patrol sting showed an estimated 10,000 smuggled dogs a year just at the San Diego Border Crossing to Mexico.

Another report I did here a couple of months ago, about Connectricut, detailed the Puetro Rican dogs entering that state to meei the unfulfilled demand for adoptable pets at rescue shelters. The Puerto Rican connection has a website under Save A Sato (Sato is Spanish for stray).

The U.S. Center for Disease Prevention and Control estimates that 300,000 animals are smuggled into the country every year for the pet trade.

The list of countries also includes Korea, Taiwan and Eastern Europe.

The National Animal Interest Alliance has much data on this, too.

The only two canine-to-canine cases of rabies transmission in America over the past 11 yerars were smuggled dogs from Puerto Rico and Mexico.

[ezzy333]

Your reports are not validated facts. Show us the references of the people who did the story. When was it done and how? This reeks of politics as there is no reason to bring them into this country. Show us the facts and not your reports.

Ezzy

[eaglerock814]

I have something like 100 links saved on my computer to validate everything I have written on imports of foreign dogs. By the way, it gets very old when I hear people questioning what I write when they don't have any idea what they are talking about.

Here are just a few links off the top of my head. You'll get the point.

http://www.cbp.gov/xp/CustomsToday/2006 ... uppies.xml

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10556094

http://www.spcala.com/APS/bptf.shtml

http://saveasato.org/index.php?option=c ... &Itemid=28

http://www.cwob.org/mayrescue.html

http://www.cyberdobes.com/PDF/NAIA_PAWS.pdf

http://www.animalplace.org/dogsrescues.html

http://www.naiatrust.org/resources/foreign_strays.htm

http://www.naiaonline.org/body/frommexicowithrabies.htm

http://petloverstips.com/ForTheLoveofth ... s-problems

Ezzy, I don't mind if you disagree with any opinion I express. I do mind when you call me a liar. Everything I write is thoroughly researched and documented.

[ezzy333]

Gee John,

Sorry you get tired of answering questions you have failed to answer in your posts. If it ges too bad maybe you should look for a different line of work. I did notice there are no links to this or any other forum on your site, Since you are using us to try and make some money seems like it would be the thing to do.

Ezzy

[eaglerock814]

In my original post on this topic, I cited three sources: The U.S. Border Patrol, the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention, and Save a Sato.

In all of my reports, I cite the sources for factual information. All of them can be checked out.

After your nasty post on this topic, I provided you with 10 links to verify the accuracy of what I wrote.

You have zero knowledge on this topic. You simply like to take potshots at me.

When I am able to find someone to help me design a good website, it definitely will have a links page to honor the dozens of organizations, businesses and websites that have been supportive. I don't know html language and cannot do it myself.

[ezzy333]

Eaglerock,

It would be nice if you could spend the money to have a good site. I checked your references and noticed most were dated 3 years ago and seemed to be located on the border between California and Mexico. Also some were from rescue groups who are rescueing dogs in Mexico and other countries and some are brought here for adoption. Are you wanting to stop that practice and just let those dogs die even though there is a market for them here? Has nothing been done in the past 3 years since the problem was documented and why is it just being published now? Where were you and your organization when we were needing help in Ohio with a problem where you could have made a difference? Why are you upset when someone questions you tryin to get to the facts? Why am I nasty because I ask you to verify the reports you have made on our site?

These are just some of the questions that people would like to know if they are to get involved. Few of us want toget involved when we aren't sure what the facts really are and not what you are promoting in your posts. We have all witnessed your tendency to to politicize these issues in your attempt to raise money for your organization. None of this makes us bad or nasty people and just because you get tired of anyone questioning your accuracy is not a good enough excuse to try and degrade any of us. And it sure isn't the way to increase thedonation you seek so desperately.

Ezzy

[eaglerock814]

We are a young organization that formally launched this past October (2007).

Since then, we have played a lead role in fighting H.B. 446, which affects all dog owners, and H.B. 223, which would virtually eliminate breeding purebred dogs.

Through our message board postings and email database (five volunteers plus myself building the database), we alert several thousand Ohio dog owners to new developments on this legislation.

We also have played a supportive role in helping to preserve field trials at Kildeer Plains and Indian Crek.

All of this can be documented. A search of my documents file shows that I have prepared and distributed 11 separate reports on this Ohio legislation over the past four months. I have received dozens of emails from Ohio dog owners who tell me that they have written, met with and phoned legislative committee members and their own state representaitves/senators about these bills.

We also work closely with several Ohio dog owners' organizations, such as the Ohio Valley Dog Owners, and are helping a new statewide Ohio Federation of Dog Clubs to form, and are lending that group our entire database.

In addition, we just learned that a major push is beginning for a state law mandating spaying and neutering of all dogs. We will be very active in this, too.

You ask what I have done in Ohio. There's your answer.

What have you done?

[ezzy333]

I have written to the people who are negotiating to preserve our field trial rights. I also have corresponded with them thanking them for their efforts and there success. There is still more to do but we got the first step accomplished. Have you written to express your's and your organizations appreciation for the job that has been done? Would be nice if you did. If you need the names I can get them for you.

Ezzy

[eaglerock814]

Thank you. I really am glad to see that you are involved.

I have written a letter of thanks to Tony Celebrezze this week...several other letters to the DNR...other letters to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (that is the root of the problem). I also have written several reports, and try hard to support the Associated Bird Dog Clubs of Ohio by sending out their reports to my national and Ohio field trial databases.

I owe you an apology. I have not posted these reports on this message board, because I didn't see it as a field trial site. I was mistaken, and I will start posting this material here in the future.