Farm Bureau Policies 2022
No. 364 Wilderness Areas
No. 360 Illegal Dumping
(1) Regulations and statues that do not interfere with or erode property rights; (2) Clear criteria to delineatewhat are harmful invasive species and not defined to include beneficial non-native species; (3) Regulations that include emergency measures to allow for timely use of chemical controls; (4) Recognize and address the role of harmful invasive spe- cies as part of the consideration of endangered or threatened species determination; (5) Funding dog inspection teams used for pest detection; (6) State and federal funding adequate to develop science suf- ficient to determine long-termeffects of non-native species; (7) Development by California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), seed growers, and the seed industry of practices suchas: (a) the seed in- dustrymaking accredited seed-test results available to growers for pathogens/diseases of concern, and (b) thedevelopment anddis- semination of best management and production practices for the seed industry and growers toprevent the introduction and spread of harmful pathogens/diseases that pose a high risk to California agriculture; and (8) Allowing aggrieved parties to initiate mediation proceed- ingswithCDFA for damages resulting fromthe introduction into a county of a harmful seed-borne pathogen/disease. CDFA should ensure that existing seed complaint andmediation processes are capable of making findings related to grower losses caused by pathogen-infected seed and the responsible party pay for eco- nomic damages caused to the grower. Indemnificationof cropand livestock losses fromharmful inva- sive species should be available when it can be documented that the quarantine requirements or treatment methods are the basis for the loss. Funding for inspection services and facilities and for public education and outreach efforts should be increased. Public landsshouldbemanagedtoreduceandeliminate impacts of harmful invasive species as effectively as private lands and in coordinationwithneighboringprivatelyownedor leased land. Any efforts onpublic lands that affect theuses andprivate rights heldby public land permittees and users shall be subject to compensation and fairmarket value for the taking of these limited property rights by the introductionor proliferationof harmful invasive species. Proper incentives shouldbe provided for farmers and ranchers toeffectivelycontrol noxiousandaquaticweedsalongwithsupport for an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach. We believe federal, state and local agencies should work more closely with private landowners and industry to address harmful invasive species problems. Any harmful invasive species man- agement program that is proposed, other than actionable pests shouldnot createadditional restrictions onagricultural producers, landowners and industry. Whendetermining opportunities for biofuel crops, these crops’ potential impacts on other farmand rangelands as harmful inva- sive speciesmust be considered. (04/Rev. 2015) No. 368 Fertilizer Use The use of fertilizers, both natural and synthetic, has a long history of improving agricultural production. We support their continued economic use in all instances where safe and without significant adverse environmental impact. No. 369 Sewage Sludge Disposal With the conflicting scientific information currently available fromreputable research institutions, we urge a cautious approach on the utilization of sewage sludge as an agricultural fertilizer or soil amendment. Untilmore scientific data are accumulatedon the safety of land application of sewage sludge on California farmlands and crops and until the liability issues are resolved, and a comprehensive long-termhealth risk assessment is completed, we donot support the lessening of protections governing its use. We should insist on the development of guidelines for the land applicationof sewage sludgewhichwould include but not be lim- ited to the use of a site-specific assessment. We support theuse of a site-specific environmental assessment which carefully considers, among other things, the levels of heavy metals in the soils and water supply in the area destined for the application. Any site-specific plan must address and provide for disposal of salts without third party impacts. We cannot support the land application of any municipal or private waste solely on the basis that it is the least costly means of disposal. Generators of sewage sludge should maximize the use of their sewage sludge within their own cities and counties before seeking other users. All applications should be done in amanner whichminimizes risks to the public, the environment and the long-termviability of
We believe that properly managed land results in higher sus- tainedyields ofwater, forage, timber,minerals andenergy. Grazing and logging are important elements of the multiple-use concept. We support efforts tominimize acreage designated as wilderness. All public land designated as non-wilderness should bemanaged in accordance with federal statutes and regulations allowing and regulating continued utilization of renewable resources. Adjacent and affected landowners should be notified and local publichearingsheldprior to lands beingdesignatedaswilderness. Local governments should be involved to establish coordination with federal agencies. Users of any roads that are in or adjacent to wilderness areas including livestock,mining and forestry andhave beenpreviously permitted should be given an unconditional guarantee that such activities could continue for all time. (Rev. 2011) No. 365 Hardwood Rangelands We are opposed to the regulation of hardwood rangelands, in- cluding the requirement for Timber Harvest Plans (THPs). (1995) No. 366 Vegetative Management and Wildfire Hazards We support legislative, administrative, and educational efforts to reduce dangerous levels of fuels in the forests, brushlands and rangelands of California. We are opposed to any efforts which would restrict or discour- age use of prescribed or controlled burn programs on private land. However, we recognize that prescribed burns are only one of the tools that can be utilized. Prior to prescribed or controlled burns, fuel loads shouldbe reduced, preferably throughmechani- cal thinning, logging, and/or grazing. In addition, all public land managers must adhere to the same air quality standards, rules and regulations to which private entities are held and increased public burning should not adversely affect burning activities of private industries. We urge continued participation of state and federal agencies in controlled burning programs by providing adequate financial resources, advice, and the allocation of standby crews and equip- ment for the protection of adjoining landowners during and after controlled burns. We support efforts and policies that encourage prescribed burns as a management tool. Any comprehensive prescribed- burn programmust not only promote the safe use of prescribed burns and other forest-management tools but should also ad- equately address legal-liability standards in conjunction with regulatory requirements. We support the grantingof variances fromair-quality standards toallowgreater opportunity for prescribedburns, streamlinedper- mitting, and cooperationwith and among local, state, and federal agencies both in permitting and cooperative pre-burn projects. In addition, we support the continuation of the Vegetation Management Program (VMP) which offers cost sharing on pre- scribed burn projects carried out by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire) on non-federal lands. Fundsmade available to any agency for control and prescribed burn program purposes should be used to assist producers and landowners in cooperative programs upon lands where the ben- efits from the expenditure of such funds will provide substantial publicbenefits through the reductionof firehazards andenhance- ment and protection of range, recreational areas, wildlife habitat, timber lands andwater sheds. We recommend that the administrative regulation of the VMP and the controlled burning programs remainwith CalFire. Grazing is often themost natural, cost-effectiveway toavoid the accumulationof excessive amounts of dry grass, weeds andbrush. We urge legislation that would require that all lands controlled by governmental agencies be grazed except where the agencymakes a clear, scientifically supportable case that aparticular area should not be grazed. We support additional research todocument thepositive roleof livestock grazing in the control of wildfire hazards and to improve resource conditions. (Rev. 2019) No. 367 Harmful Invasive Species We support a comprehensive national policy addressing the introduction and management of harmful invasive species. Programs should rely on cooperative, voluntary, partnership- based efforts between public agencies, private landowners, and concerned citizens. The development and adoption of statutory policy and control measures to deal with harmful invasive species should be based on the following principles:
Illegaldumpingonbothpublicandprivatepropertyhassignificant impactson thehealthandsafetyof rural andurbancommunities. Particularly in a rural and agricultural setting, illegal dumping has severe consequences on environmental and employee safety, food safety, and with limited opportunities for enforcement of the perpetrators, is costly to landholders and the aesthetic of rural lifestyles. Weurge the continuedstrengtheningandenforcement of illegal dumping laws in California. Public agencies should consider and fund preventative mea- sures to deter illegal dumping on public and private lands. When violations do occur, fines and penalties should be suffi- cient to discourage illegal dumping on public and private proper- ties. Proceeds fromthese fines andpenalties shouldbe placed ina fund tomitigate cleanup costs for future cleanups. If the individual or entity responsible for illegal dumping can- not be identified, then public agencies should be responsible for cleaning up the dumped materials and investigate and recover costs from the responsible party. Inno case shouldprivate landowners face civil or criminal pen- alties associated with illegal dumping for which the landowner is not a responsible party. Landowners should not be responsible for the costs of cleaning upmaterial illegally dumped by others. Should the violation occur on private property, appropriate local public agencies responsible for cleanup should work with landholders to obtain access to private properties for cleaning up material illegally dumped by others. We support grants and other funds being available for cleanup of illegal dumping on private lands. (2020). No. 361 Hazardous Materials We urge the development of disposal systems which provide incentives to encourage lawful disposal of hazardousmaterials. The designated County Certified Unified Program Agency (UPA), CountyFireMarshal, or Agricultural Commissioner should coordinate inspection requirements among their agencies inorder to alleviate the overlapping multiple inspections and fees some counties are subjecting farmers to. The inspection and regulation of hazardousmaterials shouldpreferablybedirectedby theCounty Agriculture Commissioner. The designatedUPA shouldmake use of the informationprovidedon theCaliforniaElectronicReporting Service that everybusiness storinghazardousmaterials is required to file rather than requiring additional information during the inspections. The Threshold PlanningQuantity (TPQ) for propane and fertilizers should be increased to 500-gallon liquid tank stor- age, 2,000 pounds or 1,000 cu. ft. per tank. In addition, for agricul- ture operations withminimal amounts of hazardousmaterial, the inspection should occur once every four years at the discretion of the County Agriculture Commissioner. (Rev. 2020) No. 362 Underground Fuel Tanks We support legislative efforts to implement low-cost methods of onsite cleanup of leaking underground tanks and enact rea- sonable limits on the liability for the costs of cleaning up leaking underground tanks. (1989) No. 363 Agricultural By-Products Recycling We support the use of agricultural by-products that accom- plish their primary purpose and provide additional environ- mental benefits. Agricultural by-products are not industrial waste. Fruit, nut, vine and vegetable processing by-products are unusedmaterials generated from food product processing. We encourage the reuse of these products wherever possible and for such uses as animal feed, biomass fuel, soil amendments, value-added products or other recyclable or reclaimable products as may be identified. If monitoring is required, local agencies should put in place a re- sponsible program that meets the needs of good environmental stewardship in the local watershedand theneeds of the governing regulatory authority. Producers must retain the prerogative of disposing of animal waste by land application to the maximum beneficial extent. But in all cases, the effects of downstream pollution must be taken into consideration. The use of animal wastes by recycling through feedstuffs should be thoroughly researched, and not prematurely prohibited. Composting should be exempt from regulation by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) when it is on a farm, using farm-generated plant and/or animal wastematerials. (06/Rev. 2022)
28 Ag Alert January 26, 2022
Powered by FlippingBook