(Continued from Pago A 10)
been ill-served by its traditional
agriculture base and we should be
done with it
As we move forward on the
1995 Farm Bill, you as farmers
need to be in contact with your
congressmen and senators about
the impact of the current budget
proposals and the effects it will
have on agriculture. We arc con
stantly reminded by legislators that
everything in Washington these
days will be “budget-driven.” The
budget committee establishes vari
ous government functions. Once
the baseline is established, com
mittees such as the Ag. committee,
can shift funds but cannot exceed
the cap they were given.
When you sort through all the
complexities of the budget num
bers for agriculture, it is clear we
are facing major budget reduc
tions. Between the House and
Senate versions of the 1995 Farm
Bill, the budget for agriculture is
projected to be slashed by between
$8 and $9 billion over the next five
years. Depending on how the cal
culations are done, some expect
the total reduction to be nearly $lO
billion. These cuts are real and
will effect the family farmers’ bot
tom lines.
There is thought of elimination
of the support price, which is our
safety net for our dairy fanners.
It’s true, we have not hit the $lO.lO
per hundred weight support price
for the past couple years, but we
haven’t felt the effects of GATT
yet There are some representa
tives saying that if they eliminate
the support price, they would in
return eliminate the assessments
Join the Scott Hrinton , Jax & Craig Finkhiner ami Daniel ct Kenneth Martin families on
the Hershey Ag/Esbenshade Mills team ...
that dairy farmers are paying. The
assessments on the support price
program were not in place in the
beginning, they were put there for
budget reduction. There are also
thoughts of elimination of (DEEP)
Dairy Export Incentive Program.
Another theme is, no bill will be
passed without the endorsement of
the Agricultural Processing and
Trade Industry. This means budget
savings which could be attained
with policy changes, that also
increase market prices such as
higher loans or acreage adjust
ments. will not be part of this bill.
Yet another theme for agricul
ture seems to be “simplicity.” No
proposal will be accepted that is
, perceived to add complexity, rules
or regulations to agricultural prog
rams. One proposal, which may be
viewed as the simplest way to app
ly cuts in agriculture, is to increase
unpaid flex acres from the current
15 percent to 35 percent in order to
meet baseline budget numbers.
Increasing the unpaid flex acres
merely reduces farm income with
out regard to fairness. If farmers
are again being required to endure
program cuts to help balance the
budget, cuts must be fairly applied.
We must be more creative than this
proposal. A program that treats all
fanners fairly, in the budget cuts,
should be the goal.
The Pennsylvania Fanners
Union has been tracking the situa
tion as it has unfolded during the
budget process, which, for all
intents and purposes, is now com
plete. The amount of the cuts agri
culture is being required to endure
is far greater than any other prog
ram funded by the federal govern
Dairy Network Partnership Begins
KUTZTOWN (Berks Co.)—At
first glance, it appears an unlikely
partnership. After all, what do a
milk marketing cooperative, a
research company, a conservation
program, and an alternative farm
ing association have in common?
Plenty, especially when the
groups involved share a common
goal.
That’s the case with Atlantic
Dairy Cooperative, the Rodale
Institute, the Chesapeake Bay
Foundation, and the Pennsylvania
Association for Sustainable Agri
culture (PASA). The four organi
zations, with funding from the
Pew Charitable Trusts, have
joined together under the Dairy
Network Partnership.
The goal? To improve water
ment. While we do not like this and
will continue to work to change the
current budget numbers, reality
must be faced. If we are going to be
asked to accept the reduced gov
ernment outlays of between $8 and
S 9 billion over the next five years,
we need to figure out what kind of
farm programs we can put together
which does the least amount of
harm to the family farmers.
With that I ask you, as farmers
and members of the Pennsylvania
Farmers Union, to call or write to
your U.S. senators and representa
tives and let them know how you
feel. If you call and write to them, it
will make a big impat on their
views on the 1995 Farm Bill.
Here are the key representa
tives: Congressman Tim Holden,
(202) 225-5546; Senator Arlen
Specter, (202) 224-4254; Senator
Rick Santorum, (202) 224-6324.
Please take a couple of minutes
and call them. It will be a good
investment of time and money for
you and your farm.
Robert Junk
President
Pennsylvania
Farmers Union
Lincuitr Famting, Saturday, July 1, IiMS-AH
quality in southeast Pennsylvania
by reducing nonpoint source
(NPS) pollution stemming from
dairy farms. The project itself rep
resents a partnership with milk
producers, cooperatives, and pro
cessors “to identify and imple
ment farming practices that arc
environmentally sound and eco
nomically viable.” Simply put, the
project plans to identify ways for
dairy farmers to further reduce
NPS pollution on the farm while
minimizing the financial burden
of such changes.
The objectives of the project are
to;
•Identify and prioritize appro
priate farming practices that will
improve water quality on dairy
farms in southeast Pennsylvania.
•Identify current barriers to and
incentives for dairy farmers to
adopt those practices.
•Develop additional incentives
to help increase the adoption of
those practices.
•Establish a network among the
key players in the dairy industry in
southeast Pennsylvania.
The project partners hope to
complete these objectives over the
next two years. Key activities will
include a conference for industry
leaders and dairy producers to be
held July 20 and 21. On farm
demonstrations, to highlight cur
rent farming practices, will be
scheduled this fall and during the
summer and fall of 1996.
In discussing the Dairy Net
work Partnership, it is important
to recognize that the majority of
dairy farmers do a good job in
terms of conservation and envir
onmental practices, both for the
MILK. IT DOES
A BODY GOOD.
dairy fanner involved and the con
sumer who seeks accountability
for the food they buy and how it is
produced.
Partnership members also rec
ognize that most changes in farm
ing practices come with some
cost, be it financial, physical, or
labor-oriented. In this regard, the
project will be looking at potential
incentives and rewards that could
be offered to dairy farmers who
adopt NPS pollution practices.
During the next few months,
project leader Kim Kroll and pro
ject associate Chari Towne will be
researching such incentives. They
will consider technical, education
al, regulatory, and economic
incentives—what can be used and
who can provide them.
Throughout the project, dairy
farmers will be called upon to help
promote the project’s goals. Many
Atlantic members, for example,
already use environmentally
sound farming practices or “best
management practices.” Such
members will be asked to share
their experiences through educa
tional meetings or on-farm
demonstrations and to show what
works and how to include such
practices on the farm.
The crux of the Dairy Network
is the partnership of the groups
involved. Yes, business objectives
and philosophies may differ, but
that does not mean the partners
cannot share common goals and
interests. Promotion of environ
mentally sound farming practices
is a responsibility of all
agriculture-based businesses. The
Dairy Network Partnership pro
vides this vehicle.