| A United Voice for Agriculture
It’s a label that I use with hesitation, but the farm lobby has become a special interest group. I hesitate because when I think of other organizations that are labeled as special interest groups, it is not always a positive impression.
I often hear farmers say that we need to work together – to present a united front when communicating with government and consumers. It makes sense because we all want the same thing – a business environment that allows us to be profitable and sustainable. Logic would suggest that if we all pulled on the same oars, we’d get across the river much faster and more efficiently. But it’s not that easy.
The number of farm organizations we’ve created is staggering. Every commodity is represented, and in some cases, we have organizations that represent subsets within a commodity classification. This is fine when the objective is to focus on productivity gains, market discovery and product promotion, but when it comes to effective lobbying, there are too many voices making too much noise. The media has difficulty sorting through it all and governments at all levels are confused by mixed signals.
So again, a more united approach to conveying our needs to policy makers would seem to make sense, but the issues work against us. Ethanol and biofuels is a good example. Corn and oilseed producers see ethanol and biofuels as an enormously positive development – new demand that will reset the value for the crops we grow. Food is cheap and taken for granted, but energy is a different kettle of fish. There are detractors, but there is no denying that biofuels with a “greenish tinge” produced domestically and sustainably by farmers has carved a strong toe-hold in North America. This sector may look very different in 10 years, but it’s not going away. As the global economy climbs out of the doldrums, energy prices will rally again and the biofuel sector will become more vibrant.
The problem is that not all farmers are supportive of the ethanol and biofuel dream. Many livestock producers see the growth in biofuels as a government supported initiative that is putting them out of business due to drastically higher feed costs. They are not going to march shoulder to shoulder with crop producers to urge for more government support for corn ethanol or soybean oil biodiesel – they don’t see it being in their best interest. And so we have an issue that divides us and precludes a united voice from agriculture.
There are many other examples. Some commodity groups that rely on exports advocate for freer trade while others want to protect their domestic markets from imports with protectionist measures. Organic producers are not interested in advocating for more streamlined crop protection/animal health product registration. Large scale labor intensive operations see human resource regulations as a major issue, but this is not a red button topic on smaller farmers where hired help is not required.
I think those on the receiving end of messages from agriculture, namely media, consumers and government, would welcome a unified and single voice that represents the best interests of our sector. But I don’t think we are able to provide it. We are not all cut from the same cloth and our interests have diverged. This presents a major challenge. I fear we have created a world where we will be viewed as a series of micro-special interest groups under the umbrella of the larger special interest group called agriculture. In this scenario, we end up competing with each other to have our voices heard. Is there an alternative?
What do you think? Click on Reply to This Topic at the top of the page to join the discussion.
| | Author : JoAnn Alumbaugh | | Date Posted : 10/22/2009 7:34:41 AM | |
|
|
| | | Re:A United Voice for Agriculture | Report this Message | Reply to this Message | This is a hard situation. Everyone wants more for there cause. My opinion is for the gov. to start removing its self from all programs. Not just ag. The farm bill we had I believe in 2000 or2001 was the best every, it was going to wean all of us from gov. programs then the changed it to double the payments instead of elimenating them.
I am on all sides of this being a corn, soybean, & cattle producer and allso am invester in two ethenol plants.
It seems the more the gov is involved the more regulation there will be. | | | | Date Posted : 10/23/2009 7:47:29 AM | |
|
|
| | Re: Re:A United Voice for Agriculture | Report this Message | Reply to this Message | First of all, the current "bio fuels" as we know them are a complete scam. It is another liberal scheme to force people to do things that don't work in order to try things that might work or to try things that make the tree huggers feel they are saving the planet. We need to have grown ups start writing energy policy that allows as to use OUR OWN fossil fuels of which we have PLENTY. They need to let American farmers get back to doing what they do and that is to raise the most efficient crops in the world.
Don't get me wrong, I made a lot of money off of higher grain prices, but it is still a policy of FOOLS to use biofuels. All it does is short change our food supply and it costs ALL OF US in the long run, just like everything else the liberal idiots in D.C. try to do.
| | | | Date Posted : 10/23/2009 10:12:35 AM | |
|
|
| | | Re:A United Voice for Agriculture | Report this Message | Reply to this Message | | The beef industry has been fractured by those subsets for many years. Alberta Beef Producers have recently been hamstrung by such a subset that have managed to lobby the Alberta Government into legislating that the ABP's checkoff fees collected on cattle sales be made refundable. This end run has shaken up the industry and it remains to be seen if the desired results will occur. On the one hand, the government has grown impatient with the infighting and has stepped into the industry with regulation and policy which fall under the ABP and CCA's mandates. On the other, this action has driven a wedge between the different sectors of the beef industry. Don't think for a minute that those refundable check-off dollars aren't going to be spent on achieving competitive advantages - even between neighbors. If unity in agriculture is what we need, I'm not confident having our governments oversee our industry. You think $3.00 per head was expensive, wait until government decides what it costs. | | | | Date Posted : 10/29/2009 12:58:37 PM | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|