The Pennsylvania Farmers Union recently sent a letter to Sen. Elder Vogel (R-Beaver), Majority Chair of the Senate Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee and prime sponsor of Senate Bill 994, saying they were concerned the bill “may divert attention and resources away from helping farms across the state to establish necessary conservation practices.”
They went on to say, “The technologies supported through Senate Bill 994 are far more expensive than other nutrient reduction practices, practices that also control sediment - the biggest contributor to pollution in the Chesapeake Bay.”
The PA Farmers Union joins many others, including the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, the PA Municipal Authorities Association and PennFuture, in opposing this legislation.
The text of the letter follows--
“The Pennsylvania Farmers Union, a membership organization, is committed to enhancing the quality of life of family farmers throughout our Commonwealth. Our 600 members include farmers, foresters, horticulturalists, consumers, farm organizations and cooperatives.
“In regard to SB 994 (TMDL parameter credits bill), we are concerned the bill may divert attention and resources away from helping farms across the state to establish necessary conservation practices. The technologies supported through SB 994 are far more expensive than other nutrient reduction practices, practices that also control sediment - the biggest contributor to pollution in the Chesapeake Bay.
“There is substantial scientific research demonstrating the source and impacts of sediment, phosphorus and nitrogen loading in the Bay watershed. After sediment, phosphorous from chemical fertilizers on agricultural and other heavy use land is what is most greatly impacting our watersheds, much more so than nitrogen from manure which appears to be the sole emphasis of the practice promoted by this bill.
“We all know there is no easy answer to improving our watersheds. But, as a farmer member organization committed to sustainable practices, we do know it will take all of us, working together, to have the greatest impact. SB 994 and its emphasis on a practice that does not support a comprehensive, diverse and holistic approach to improving water quality seems counterproductive when so many important strides are being made by farms across the Commonwealth to steward our watersheds.
“We strongly believe that funding streams must remain at 100% for current and future programs that will help all farmers – we want smaller farms to have the same access to money for best management practices and not all the funds to be directed to one type of technology. While we understand the current draft of the legislation says that the program's funds can’t be taken from conservation programs or funds already appropriated, it doesn’t prevent funds from being moved to this program in future budget/appropriations processes and this is of great concern to our farmer members.”
Sincerely, Hannah Smith-Brubaker Executive Vice-President
A copy of the letter is available online.
