22.04.2015 Views

Summer - Northern Plains Resource Council

Summer - Northern Plains Resource Council

Summer - Northern Plains Resource Council

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Much work remains<br />

on Farm Bill: Big Ag<br />

trying to dominate<br />

land and water<br />

Popular headlines praise the<br />

Senate’s bipartisanship in<br />

passing the 1,000-page 2012<br />

Farm Bill. Here’s what the Senate<br />

and House Agriculture Committees’<br />

versions of the Farm Bill mean for<br />

Montana’s farmers, ranchers, and<br />

consumers (so far).<br />

Direct payments to farmers are<br />

ended, though most of those funds<br />

have merely been rechanneled<br />

through other programs. The<br />

House Ag Committee and full<br />

Senate versions vary widely, with<br />

the Senate’s version directed more<br />

toward closing loopholes and limiting<br />

commodity payments, and the<br />

House Ag Committee version leaving<br />

loopholes “that allow mega farms<br />

with reasonably good accountants<br />

and lawyers to collect unlimited<br />

payments,” according to the National<br />

Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.<br />

The Environmental Quality<br />

Incentives Program (EQIP), a<br />

program seen as a target for budget<br />

cuts, was re-funded and expanded.<br />

This program provides<br />

incentives to farmers and<br />

ranchers making a living<br />

on a family scale.<br />

However, organic<br />

farmers are eligible<br />

for only a fraction of<br />

the payments that other<br />

farmers, and even confined<br />

animal feeding operations, can<br />

receive.<br />

Very large cuts to the Supplemental<br />

Nutritional Assistance Program<br />

(SNAP, formerly the Food Stamp<br />

program) in the House bill will cause<br />

two to three million Americans to lose<br />

food assistance in these hard times.<br />

Meatpacker monopoly<br />

Neither version of the Farm Bill<br />

does much at all to address the<br />

meatpacker monopoly in livestock<br />

markets. Monopolistic conditions<br />

leave ranchers with no real market for<br />

selling and leave consumers with little<br />

choice as to what they put into their<br />

mouths. Whatever ranchers are paid,<br />

What's next?<br />

As this edition of The <strong>Plains</strong><br />

Truth is going to press, the<br />

August recess approaches and<br />

time ticks toward the Farm<br />

Bill’s September 30 expiration<br />

date. There are abundant<br />

differences between the House<br />

and Senate versions of the<br />

bills that call for citizens to be<br />

heard.<br />

The Western Organization of<br />

<strong>Resource</strong> <strong>Council</strong>s will send an<br />

email Action Alert to help you<br />

make your voice heard… watch<br />

your In-box.<br />

it is less than they would be paid in a<br />

competitive marketplace.<br />

<strong>Northern</strong> <strong>Plains</strong>’ Agriculture Task<br />

Force members have fought for<br />

years to loosen the stranglehold that<br />

producers of technology, seed, and<br />

institutional knowledge have over the<br />

farmers and ranchers making a living<br />

by producing food. A handful<br />

of companies sell the inputs<br />

farmers and ranchers need,<br />

and a mere handful<br />

buy what farmers<br />

and ranchers<br />

produce.<br />

In an ongoing effort<br />

to undermine familyscale<br />

producers and to restrict<br />

information available to consumers,<br />

the House language pressures Ag<br />

Secretary Vilsack to agree officially<br />

with the World Trade Organization’s<br />

declaration that country-of-origin<br />

labeling for meat is a fair trade<br />

impediment.<br />

Additionally, GIPSA (Grain<br />

Inspection, Packers and Stockyards<br />

Administration) rules that address<br />

contract fairness are also under attack.<br />

And Big Ag is pushing for a rider in<br />

the House bill to abolish the already<br />

weak approval process for genetically<br />

modified crops.<br />

– Kelsey Miller<br />

This radiant star could be yours!<br />

Look for a color photograph of this quilt in your mailbox in September. This<br />

handsome “radiant star” quilt was hand-sewn by Donna Yarger of Circle.<br />

It will be raffl ed off to support the work of our Agriculture Task Force.<br />

We will draw the winning ticket at the <strong>Northern</strong> <strong>Plains</strong> Annual Meeting in<br />

November. Tickets will be available for $10 each or three for $25.<br />

If you want to see it in person, stop by our Home on the Range, 220 South<br />

27th Street, Billings. We will also display it at some of our upcomng events.<br />

Montana’s Public Service<br />

Commission (PSC) has<br />

denied a NorthWestern<br />

Energy petition for a three-year waiver<br />

from the “community provision” of<br />

the state’s renewable energy standard.<br />

The Commission on June 1 instead<br />

granted the utility a one-year waiver,<br />

and reiterated its obligation to meet<br />

the requirements by 2013.<br />

The state’s renewable energy standard,<br />

enacted by the Legislature in 2005,<br />

requires all regulated public utilities<br />

in the state to acquire at least 15% of<br />

their retail electrical sales from new<br />

renewable sources, such as wind and<br />

solar, by the year 2015. It also requires<br />

a certain portion of that energy come<br />

from small projects that are at least<br />

partially locally owned, community<br />

renewable energy projects (CREPs).<br />

This is the community provision.<br />

NorthWestern is on track to meet the<br />

overall target by 2015, but has fallen<br />

short in its attempt to procure the<br />

required 44 megawatts from CREPs.<br />

In its findings, the PSC stated that<br />

NorthWestern had not fully justified<br />

that it had taken “all reasonable steps”<br />

to acquire those energy projects into<br />

– Kelsey Miller<br />

Board grants NorthWestern<br />

one-year ‘community’ waiver<br />

2013 and 2014. It did, however,<br />

acknowledge that the utility faced<br />

circumstances beyond its control in<br />

2011 when two projects it had sought<br />

to bring on-line fell through. In its<br />

ruling, the PSC said that, despite the<br />

setbacks in 2011, the utility could have<br />

been planning on compliance in 2013<br />

and 2014. As some noted, planning<br />

for compliance would have been far<br />

more prudent for NorthWestern<br />

than spending resources in a fruitless<br />

attempt to have this section of the law<br />

repealed by the 2011 Legislature.<br />

“Planning for power generation is a<br />

lengthy process,” said PSC Vice Chair<br />

Gail Gutsche. “NorthWestern Energy<br />

is responsible for taking all reasonable<br />

steps and making adequate preparation<br />

to comply with the CREPs standard.<br />

The bar is high, and they failed to<br />

meet it for 2013 and 2014.”<br />

The utility now has until the end<br />

of 2013 to fulfill its community<br />

provision requirements. If it is not<br />

able to comply, it will face a penalty<br />

of $10 per megawatt-hour, paid for by<br />

NorthWestern’s shareholders (rather<br />

than its ratepayers).<br />

– Clayton Elliott<br />

The <strong>Plains</strong> Truth <strong>Summer</strong> 2012 Page 13

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!