The 2012 Farm Bill is a Climate Bill

[roberte]

The Farm Bill is a Climate Bill
Don Carr

Climate Change activists should be concerned about proposed cuts to farm bill conservation programs, which would be the carbon emissions equivalent of adding 2 million cars a year to America’s roads.

As a possible 2012 farm bill looms, the ag committee leaders and their industrial agriculture lobby remoras are sorting through the smoking ruins of the 2011 secret farm bill process. They hope to come up with a unified position from which to begin deliberations on a new farm bill. Sadly, one thing they’ve all agreed to cut is 7 million acres from the Conservation Reserve Program. The CRP is administered through the U.S. Department of Agriculture and pays farmers to keep highly erodible land out of production.

While many recognize that putting land into conservation programs leads to cleaner water, healthier soil and robust wildlife habitat, few realize that CRP land also plays a major role in fighting climate change. According to the USDA, one acre of protected land sequesters 1.66 metric tons of carbon every year, carbon that would otherwise end up in the atmosphere. The 7 million acres about to be cut from the Conservation Reserve Program have been putting 11.6 million metric tons of carbon into the soil every year.

The Environmental Protection Agency says that this amount of carbon is equivalent to the annual emissions of 2 million passenger vehicles. All that stored carbon will be sent back into the atmosphere if those 7 million acres are plowed under to plant more industrial-scale corn for ethanol and livestock feed.

A recent poll conducted by Iowa State University Extension and Outreach found that 68 percent of Iowa farmers surveyed say climate change is occurring; many of those same farmers likely experienced the devastating weather events of the past few years. So you’d think that there would be a clarion call from agriculture to have the federal government do whatever it takes to protect farmers against climate change. Instead, taxpayers have to pick up the rapidly increasing insurance tab after climate-related disaster strikes.

And had industrial agriculture lobbyists not help scuttle climate change legislation, farmers would be collecting payments today via carbon credits for their conservation practices.

The main impetus for cutting conservation acres is the mad rush to plant every available inch of ground –whether it’s highly erodible land or a golf course – to capture high prices for corn propped up by Washington’s misguided corn ethanol mandate.

http://www.ewg.org/agmag/2012/01/the...-climate-bill/

[Gardener5]

Cuts have to be made everywhere including the crp program. If environmentalists want they can pay farmers not to plant but they would rather taxpayers do it. The following line is actual scary to me" So you’d think that there would be a clarion call from agriculture to have the federal government do whatever it takes to protect farmers against climate change." Hmm whatever it takes that could entail a lot!

[roberte]

Originally Posted by Gardener5

The following line is actual scary to me" So you’d think that there would be a clarion call from agriculture to have the federal government do whatever it takes to protect farmers against climate change." Hmm whatever it takes that could entail a lot!

The full para:

A recent poll conducted by Iowa State University Extension and Outreach found that 68 percent of Iowa farmers surveyed say climate change is occurring; many of those same farmers likely experienced the devastating weather events of the past few years. So you’d think that there would be a clarion call from agriculture to have the federal government do whatever it takes to protect farmers against climate change. Instead, taxpayers have to pick up the rapidly increasing insurance tab after climate-related disaster strikes.

[Mulligan Man]

Very few farmers in IA experienced a devastating weather event in the last few years.

[roberte]

Originally Posted by Mulligan Man

Very few farmers in IA experienced a devastating weather event in the last few years.

So, it has to be "devastating".....

http://www.iowafarmertoday.com/app/blog/?p=1365

http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu.../Crops_GEC.pdf


http://www.iowafarmbureau.com/articl...rticleID=35638

http://articles.cnn.com/2008-06-21/u...crops?_s=PM:US

http://www.supportfarmers.com/coalit...es.cfm?page=49


And there are a few other states that are considered the 'nation's breadbasket'.....

[Gardener5]

Originally Posted by roberte

The full para:

A recent poll conducted by Iowa State University Extension and Outreach found that 68 percent of Iowa farmers surveyed say climate change is occurring; many of those same farmers likely experienced the devastating weather events of the past few years. So you’d think that there would be a clarion call from agriculture to have the federal government do whatever it takes to protect farmers against climate change. Instead, taxpayers have to pick up the rapidly increasing insurance tab after climate-related disaster strikes.

First off we don't know floods and drought that are occuring in the US are from mademade climate change and two we don't know not farming erodable acres would change anything.

[roberte]

Originally Posted by Gardener5

First off we don't know floods and drought that are occuring in the US are from mademade climate change and two we don't know not farming erodable acres would change anything.

Not what the experts say......

Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and
Disasters to Advance Climate Change
Adaptation (SREX)


A changing climate leads to changes in the
frequency, intensity, spatial extent, duration,
and timing of extreme weather and climate
events, and can result in unprecedented
extreme weather and climate events. Changes
in extremes can be linked to changes in the mean,
variance, or shape of probability distributions, or all
of these (Figure SPM.3). Some climate extremes (e.g.,
droughts) may be the result of an accumulation of
weather or climate events that are not extreme
when considered independently. Many extreme
weather and climate events continue to be the
result of natural climate variability. Natural variability
will be an important factor in shaping future
extremes in addition to the effect of anthropogenic
changes in climate.

http://www.ipcc-wg2.gov/SREX/images/...hure_FINAL.pdf

[Mulligan Man]

Originally Posted by roberte

So, it has to be "devastating".....

It's your word.

Nothing in these links are new or widespread.

[roberte]

Originally Posted by Mulligan Man

It's your word.

Nothing in these links are new or widespread.

Actually, it is their word; the Iowa farmers in that poll.

Thanks for hilighting the issue of how climate change is directly effecting our nation's food supply and how deniers are attempting to discredit those working to mitigate those effects.

[Gardener5]

Originally Posted by roberte

Actually, it is their word; the Iowa farmers in that poll.

Thanks for hilighting the issue of how climate change is directly effecting our nation's food supply and how deniers are attempting to discredit those working to mitigate those effects.

Just because one doesn't take every claim as gospel that all bad weather is caused by manmade climate change doesn't mean they are dening the truth. Natural diasters have occured for thousands of years to try to tie every one to climate change is a bit of a stretch.