A3B-Lancaster Farming, Saturday, October 31, 1987
| FARM FORUM our readers write j
(Continued from Page A3l)
Editor:
The loss of farmland in Pennsyl
vania is reaching a critical level.
Each year, thousands of acres of
prime agricultural land are lost in
our state as farms are converted to
other uses.
Some people do not realize the
impact of this situation. Less
acreage available for agncuhural
production would be a detriment to
a state whose number one industry
is agriculture and agri-business. In
fact, one out of every five workers
in this state is employed by the
agricultural industry an enorm
ous contribution to our economic
vitality.
On November 3,* the voters of
the Commonwealth will be asked
to decide whether the state should
issue a $lOO million bond to sup
port a program targeted at conserv
ing prime agricultural areas. If the
bond referendum is approved by
the voters, the $lOO million in
funds would be allocated to coun
ties to use toward the purchase of
development rights on prime
farmland.
Fanners in designated farming
areas who wish to participate in the
program would be offered the
monetary difference between the
market price of the land if sold for
farming and the price if it were
sold for development. In return,
the farmer would hand over only
the development rights to the land
for 25 years or perpetuity. The
farm owner would retain all legal
ownership to the land and would
be free to sell the land at any time.
However, the new owner would be
bound by the development restric
tion held by the county. It should
be emphasized that this would be a
voluntary program and that no land
owner would be forced to
participate.
The need for this program is
clear if we are lo protect and pre
serve the scenic and productive
qualities of Pennsylvania’s rural
landscape. For nearly 20 years, the
state has been genuinely interested
in saving farmland. In 1969, Gov
■cmor Raymond Shafer appointed a
committee to come up with recom
mendations for conservation of
agricultural areas and every gover
nor and General Assembly since
the completion of that study has
worked on developing a farmland
conservation program. In 1981, the
General Assembly passed the
Agricultural Area Security Act
(Act 43) which provided for a
farmland conservation program,
but funding to implement the prog
ram was not included. This
referendum is intended to provide
that funding.
As a major supporter of ag-land
preservation, I encourage all Pen
nsylvanians, not just farmers and
rural residents, lo support the
referendum on the November bal
lot. 1 am hopeful that thcciii/cns of
this Commonwealth will realize
that only by protecting our rich and
fertile lands can we hope to pre
serve the beauty and bounty o(
Pennsylvania agriculture
Noah Wenger
PA Slate Senator
Editor:
On November 3, Pennsylvania
voters will be asked to approve a
program to finance the purchase of
development rights of farmland.
Agricultural conservation ease
ments would be purchased for 25
years or in perpetuity on-large
tracts of mainly Class I and 11
prime farmland.
I urge everyone to vote for this
program because urbanization is
rapidly and permanently destroy
ing prime farmland (a proportion
ally small area of land) when
building homes and businesses
elsewhere is economically feasi
ble. Since 1960, Pennsylvania has
lost almost half its farms and the
current annual loss is 90,000 acres
of all types of farmland. Also,
urbanization destroys four square
miles of prime farmland and eight
square miles of other types of land
in the United States every day.
Agricultural zoning on marginal
and prime farmland hasn’t been
adequate at controlling the loss.
Voting for this program will
help to keep food prices down.
Currently, two-thirds of Pennsyl
vania’s food is from out of state.
When farmland disappears,
increased trucking raises food
prices and food quality suffers.
Prime farmland costs the least to
farm, produces food at the lowest
cost and this reflects in lower food
prices for consumers.
Another benefit of this program
is the preservation of Pennsylvani
a’s number one industry—
agriculture/agribusiness which
employs 20 percent of Pennsylva
nia’s workforce. Also, farmers will
feel more secure, and they would
improve their land and buildings
for themselves and future farmers.
Other benefits are the preserva
tion of wildlife habitat, open space
and the visual appeal of pictur
esque farmland.
Twelve other states, including
New York, New Jersey and Mary
land, have farmland preservation
programs. Pennsylvania’s prog
ram would cost less than $lO per
resident and would include all the
benefits listed here and more.
Please vote for farmland preserva
tion at the November 3 election.
Reuben Weaver 111
Ephrata
Editor:
To date I have read many arti
cles concerning the “farmland
referendum.” Everyone from
Extension Service officials, lo
conservation district officials, to
voters leagues, toTarm organiza
tions, to associations of boroughs,
commissioners, township supervi
sors, chamber of business and
industry and so on are supporting
the referendum.
I have read many times how
important we are as farmers that
my head is starting to swell! But I
wonder why I have to keep work
ing harder and longer! Everyone
says we must save our farmland
(and I agree), so we don’t have to
ship food because of the cost it
would involve and, of course, so
we have fresh food. All of the
above mentioned groups don’t
want the consumer to have to pay
higher prices for food, but the far
mer shall work harder and sell
cheaper. Did you read what’s
going lo happen lo milk m the next
three years? “I feel important.”
I think the farmer ought to
receive higher prices for his pro
ducts so he can be competitive
with businesses and developers or
whoever thinks he needs to buy our
farms. We’re important according
to all these informative articles,
but let’s not give the farmer more
money for his products. It will cost
100 much at the supermarket.
Richard Barczcwski of Univer
sity of Delaware says times have
been bad for the farmer and things
don’t look good for the next sever
al years. No, we don’t need a $lOO
million,bond, but we need prices
for our goods so we can be
competitive!
We just came through with
RCMA. I thought the farmers were
trying to help themselves and keep
the government out, somewhat at
least. Now we are hit with this on
our ballot. Sounds like a case of
“the government has regulated my
farm business so badly that I am
not sure just who does own it. I
have been suspected, inspected,
examined and re-examined,
informed, reformed and
misinformed.”
“But I still pay the taxes!”
What happens to the farms taken
by immanent domain? I have been
reading too much of it lately. It
must be stopped! Seems like these
two things arc fighting against
each other.
When Representative Samuel
Morris introduced the farmland
preservation bill he also intro
duced HB 440. This is the one I
have been wanting to sec take
priority and be publicized and put
on the ballot. This would change
the total tax structure. My rep
resentative tells me this is one of
hundreds that have been intro
duced in the last 10 or 15 years. He
says HB 440 probably will not
come up for a vote, but the subject
of the bill probably will be consid
ered seriously either this year or
The Lancaster County Poultry Association’s annual banquet mixed pleasure with
business on Thursday night. New board members were elected. Milton Landis, right,
and Jay Irwin, left, welcome new board members Roger Garber and J. Doug
Wolgemuth.
fc#///
Good Grief! What is Charlie Brown and his gang doing in the pumpkin patch? What
ever the reason, Whitney Rossi of Lititz found it great fun to join them In the patch at
Stauffers of Kissel Hill, Lititz. The store sold almost 90 tons of pumpkins grown by
Lancaster County farmers.
next. I hope all you groups men
tioned in the first paragraph and
others get in the act and write many
articles concerning this like you do
the farmland referendum.
I read several limes one in every
five jobs in Pennsylvania is ag
related. I think there are too many
ag-relatcd jobs already and the far
mer pays for this in everything he
buys, but the farmer shall sell
cheap. Won’t this referendum, if it
passes, create more ag-related
jobs. Guess I’ll have to work hard
er and longer to help pay the eight
hour guy.
Yes, there are many good rea
sons for preserving farmland, but
keep government out and let us be
competitive with every other busi
ness or developer.
As the saying goes, “If someone
wants something bad enough (a
new car, TV, boat), he will get the
money for it.
If someone wants food bad
enough they will get the money for
it also.
An old man (dead many years)
once said, “Half the people in this
world are here to devil the other
half.” He should be living now!
Hilda M. Blatt
Jonestown
P.S. I think I will run out and enroll
in a real estate class!
■*' M
x.
>
. I > *
\ *
Editor:
A vote “YES” on Nov. 3 for
approval of a referendum to raise
funds to support “Pennsylvania
Farmland Preservation” will be a
move in the right direction.
Lancaster County, especially,
needs to maintain a good balance
of farming and industry to con
tinue the present healthy economy.
Many a farmer, and his family,
needs to be encouraged and helped
in numerous ways to continue
farming and preserve the farm for
future generations. The AGRI
CULTURAL CONSERVATION
EASEMENT PROGRAM pro
vides help to that end. Eastern
Pennsylvania is famous for its high
producing fertile soil, neat farm
buildings and scenic beauty. The
area as a whole cannot afford to
lose these assets.
Let us back up Senator Noah
Wenger who sponsored the bill
and most of our elected officials
favoring approval of the referen
dum such as: Gov. Casey, Lt. Gov.
Singel, Sec. of Agri. Wolfe, Lan
caster County Commissioners and
many numerous organizations as
well. Our VOTE also is needed.
Let us give “PENNSYLVANIA
AGRICULTURAL LAND PRE
SERVATION” a good send off on
Nov. 3 with a “YES” VOTE.
Harold C. Herr
Kirkwood