Tag: American Farm Bureau Federation

Posted on

Water Rule Reversal a Blow to Agriculture

Water is a touchy subject, especially when it comes to our agriculture and environmental discussions these days. I have to admit that I was worried about this from day one. The Environmental Protection Agency announced it intends to reverse the Navigable Waters Protection Rule.

Water
Zippy Duvall, first elected president of the American Farm Bureau Federation in 2016, is very concerned about the EPA decision to reverse the Navigable Waters Protection Act. (Photo from fb.org)

American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall his organization is very concerned about the idea and its potential impact on the nation’s farmers.

“The American Farm Bureau Federation is extremely disappointed in the Environmental Protection Agency’s announcement that it intends to reverse the environmentally conscious Navigable Waters Protection Rule,” Duvall says, “which finally brought clarity and certainty to clean water efforts. Farmers and ranchers care about clean water and preserving the land, and they support the Navigable Waters Protection Rule. 

“Administrator Regan recently recognized the flaws in the 2015 ‘Waters of the U.S. Rule’ and pledged not to return to those overreaching regulations,” he added. “We are deeply concerned that the EPA plans to reverse the Navigable Waters Protection Rule, which puts the future of responsible protections at risk. We expected extensive outreach, but today’s announcement fails to recognize the concerns of farmers and ranchers.”

Duvall, a third-generation Georgia farmer, says this is an important moment for EPA Administrator Michael Regan and will be pivotal to his ability to earn the trust of farmers on this and other administration priorities. Duvall says the EPA boss must “keep his word” to recognize the efforts of agriculture and not return to flawed, overly-complicated and excessive regulations. 

Water
EPA Chief Michael Regan announced that his agency is planning to reverse the Navigable Waters Protection Rule put in place by the Trump Administration. (Photo from eenews.com)

“We call on the EPA to respect the statute, recognize the burden that overreaching regulation places on farmers and ranchers, and not write the term ‘navigable’ out of the Clean Water Act” Duvall says. “On this issue, and particularly prior converted croplands and ephemerals, we also urge Secretary Vilsack to ensure that we don’t return to the regulatory land grab that was the 2015 ‘WOTUS’ Rule.

Duvall adds that clean water and clarity are paramount, which is why farmers shouldn’t need a team of lawyers and consultants to farm.

From a personal perspective, why can’t we meet in the middle here? You do realize that farmers don’t get to stay in business and pass on the operation to their kids if they don’t take care of their environment?

Am I anti-environment by being concerned about farmers? I’m not. I’m saying there has to be a way to preserve the environment and still allow farmers to make money. After all, they do feed us, remember? Food doesn’t just show up at Safeway.

Posted on

Drones, FAA, and agriculture all trying to fit together

Drones might not be a topic that a lot of non-farm folks would associate with agriculture, but they are becoming a lot more popular on farms across the country. Drones have been a big topic of discussion recently between the Federal Aviation Administration and farm groups like the American Farm Bureau. This is a copy of an article I just saw in their latest email blast.

The Federal Aviation Administration should revamp its drone proposal to provide flexibility to allow farmers and ranchers who cannot access the internet to continue using drones, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation.

America’s farmers and ranchers embrace technology that allows them to be more efficient, economical and environmentally aware. Drones are an important precision agriculture tool they use to manage their crops and livestock and make important business decisions, the organization pointed out in comments to the FAA on its drone-related advanced notice of proposed rulemaking.

“Today’s farmers and ranchers are using precision agricultural devices to make decisions that impact the amount of fertilizer a farmer needs to purchase and apply to the field, the amount of water needed to sustain the crop, and the amount and type of herbicides or pesticides the farmer may need to apply,” Farm Bureau said.

drones
Drones are changing the way farmers do business every day on their operations. (Photo from technologyreview.com)

The two main problems with the proposal are: it would ground many drones that farmers and ranchers currently own that do not meet the rule’s specifications and it would prevent many farmers and ranchers from ever operating a drone because of a lack of access to broadband.

Farm Bureau had several suggestions for improvement.

FAA’s proposal would require drones to connect to the internet and transmit their remote IDs. But on the 29% percent of farms and ranches without access to the internet, this would be impossible. And while Congress, the FCC and USDA have acknowledged this problem and are working to increase connectivity for precision agriculture equipment, the proposal fails to take this challenge into account.

“Requiring drones to connect to the internet and broadcast a signal would remove one of the newest tools in the toolbox for farmers and ranchers during a time when they have already seen a drastic 50% decline in net farm income in the last four years,” Farm Bureau said.

Farm Bureau is recommending an either/or approach that would allow the drone to send a remote ID signal through an internet connection if available or broadcast a signal if the internet is unavailable.

As for the limited remote ID requirement, Farm Bureau reiterated its call for FAA to provide an alternative method for operators to signal their location when the internet is not available. Another option is removing the requirement that the drone must connect to the internet since the drone must operate within 400 feet of the ground station and cannot operate beyond visual-line-of-sight under the limited remote ID requirement.

The proposal’s lack of definitions for “internet” and “sufficient signal strength and coverage” is also problematic.

“In rural areas where internet connections drastically fluctuate, drone operators need clarity on internet connection speeds that qualify for the standard and limited remote ID requirements,” Farm Bureau said.

The group’s final recommendation was that the FAA establish a position on its Drone Advisory Committee for an agriculture, forestry and rangeland representative.

“Farmers offer a unique perspective on their use of drones because they often operate a drone in more remote areas. Many of the concerns included in these comments could have been discussed during DAC meetings if there was representation,” Farm Bureau said.