Sam Carter

Sam Carter

  • United States, GA, Atlanta
Sam Carter Atlanta, GA
Mar 27, 2021
in Ag Policy  
"Let's make sure our voices are not drowned out by irresponsible and unreasonable policy makers. ...Let's make sure we are not only financially incentivized, compensated properly for adoption but provided the opportunity for profit potential creation. Please, engage in this dialogue. We have to define these terms and expressions and policies with good science, common sense, reasonable solutions and measurable outcomes that are financial and environmentally beneficial."
https://georgiacorngrowersblog.com/2021/03/24/climate-smart-agriculture

Categories: Ag Policy

5 Upvotes
3 Comments
1 Repost

Post As

Post As

Viewable By

My Followers
  • Everyone

    Every person viewing AgFuse.

  • My Followers

    Members who follow me.

  • Group Members

    Select a group I follow.

Mark Smith Cumberland City, TN
Mar 27, 2021

In addition top my previous comment, consider that within the government, what is about to happen is a forgone conclusion (https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/biden-commits-to-30-by-2030-conservation-executive-orders) vis-a-vis the Biden 30 by 30 plan, and that these directives are intended to seek the least restrictive roadmap to that objective. If the government steps in and sequesters 30% of our land and water, how will we feed a world population of over 9 Billion folks (or a US population with an additional 100-200 million folks) in 2050? Consider that Britain imports the majority of its food (anywhere from 55%-80%, depending on where one collects the data) as an example of what we do not want for our children and grandchildren.

Post As

Mark Smith Cumberland City, TN
Mar 28, 2021
Post Img

Post As

Mark Smith Cumberland City, TN
Mar 27, 2021

This is a salient point - and I agree that it is one that must be addressed. It wasnt that long ago that the federal government had over 14 definitions for consequence management. It is an example I would recommend each state use to force the USDA and Secretary Vilsack to define this term. Failure to clearly identify such terminology will result in confusion in identifying the capabilities necessary for accomplishing the objective (Can you decide what needs to be done if it isnt clearly defined?). As was the case with consequence management, such varying terms will cause redundant efforts, wasted taxpayer funds, and unmet requirements which will absolutely result in a failure to meet the stated objective. In the case of agriculture, this will result in a lot of hungry folks... or worse... Again, there is a precedent for making this case; following a clearly articulated definition the next step is to identify the specific capabilities necessary to meet the stated objectives, and as the ‘commander’ of the USDA, it is Secretary Vilsacks responsibility to define it and provide the capabilities necessary to meet the objective.

Post Img

Post As