ST. JOHNS — From conservation and wetlands to rural broadband and crop support programs, farmers, politicians, and ag leaders discussed ways to improve the 2023 Farm Bill on Tuesday.
More than 50 Michigan Farm Bureau (MFB) members and industry partners attended the listening session, as debate ranged from ARC/PLC programming, cumbersome Farm Service Agency paperwork, and the future for carbon sequestration practices.
All this is an effort to support Michigan farmers, said John Kran, national legislative counsel for MFB.
“Although the current farm bill doesn't expire for over a year, it's important we hear from members now about what changes are necessary moving forward,” Kran said.
“This best positions Farm Bureau to advocate on behalf of farmers and for our members to update our policy book ahead of the Farm Bill being written in 2023.”
Sen. Debbie Stabenow, chair of the Senate Ag Committee, has similar priorities to the last Farm Bill, according to Kyle Varner, a professional staff member for the committee who spoke during the listening session.
Those priorities include expanding risk management tools, addressing dairy safety-net programs, and offering more money for USDA conservation programming.
“How can we help grow our local food economy, expand farmers markets and help support beginning farmers?” Varner asked.
“What can we do to help strengthen small towns and rural communities, whether that's making investments in high speed internet or rural drinking water? There are lot of different aspects we can touch on.”
MFB urges members to complete a short feedback survey to help the organization better advocate for state priorities in the 2023 Farm Bill, which sets farm and food policy.
ARC versus PLC
MSU Extension's Roger Betz said deciding on which program to choose is a big concern among growers.
“Why do we need to decide on PLC and ARC at a certain period,” asked Betz, Farm Business Management educator for MSU Extension. “Why throw darts in the dark for signup every year?”
Conservation opportunities
Passage of the Inflation Reduction Act will mean $20 billion in additional funding for conservation programming over the next several years.
“I know the EQIP program is particularly popular one a lot of folks in Michigan use,” Varner said. “Nearly two-thirds of the applications for that program have been rejected over the last decade, not because they weren't qualified, but because USDA doesn't have the money.”
Wetland worries
A concern from members is a universal determination for wetland size.
Currently, the state and federal levels set different standards.
“We don’t know what the answer is,” said Caleb Stewart, chair of the MFB Farm Bill Task Force, “but we know there’s a disconnect there.”
Stewart said the handoff between FSA and the National Resources Conservation Services could be streamlined.
Dealing with dairy
Others Tuesday voiced support for Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) — with the caveat that coverage needs to expand.
“The DMC program works except for when it was first rolled out it was set up for small and medium farmers,” said Stephanie Schafer, a dairy farmer in Clinton County and MFB board director. “But I’m producing 8.5 million pounds of milk, so I maxed out at tier 1. The next tier is so darn expensive that it’s not worth it.”
Schafer recommended moving tier 1 up to 10 million pounds, a suggestion encouraged by Michigan Farm Bureau Industry Relations Specialist Ernie Birchmeier.
“We don’t farm like we did in 2014,” Birchmeier said, referencing the then Farm Bill.
Nowadays, the average dairy herd size in Michigan is 400.
Share Story
Article Tags
