A news release today from Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D., N.D.) stated that, “U.S. Senators [Heitkamp] and Susan Collins (R., ME) today introduced a bipartisan bill to support programs that help new and beginning farmers and ranchers enter and remain in the industry, build the next generation of farmers, and feed the country and the world.

“The Next Generation in Agriculture Act aims to ensure a younger generation of agriculture workers have the education and support they need to begin a career in farming and ranching. Heitkamp, a member of the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee, is pushing to incorporate the legislation into the next Farm Bill.

“The average age of a farmer is 57 years old in both North Dakota and Maine, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Across the country, the share of farmers age 65 and older has increased from 14 percent in 1945, to more than 31 percent in 2012. The percentage of new farmers has declined since 1982, and without efforts to cultivate the next generation of farmers, rural economies could suffer.”

The release indicated that, “The Next Generation in Agriculture Act would give the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) more resources to help young and beginning farmers become established in the field of agriculture. Specifically, the bill would:

 ·         Extend the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development (BFRD) program beyond 2018, and would increase the USDA’s support for the program to $30 million in fiscal years 2019-2020, $40 million for fiscal years 2021-2022, and $50 million for fiscal year 2023 and each fiscal year thereafter.

 ·         Emphasize areas of the BFRD program that would include farmers and ranchers who are looking to transition their farming operation to a young or beginning farmer.

 ·         Change the definition in the crop insurance title to define a beginning farmer and rancher as having farmed less than 10 years opposed to 5.

 ·         Create a permanent National Beginning Farmer and Rancher Coordinator and Agricultural Youth Coordinator at the USDA, and direct state USDA offices to designate an employee as the state beginning farmer and rancher coordinator.

 ·         Direct the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a next generation agriculture technology challenge competition to provide an incentive for the development of innovative technology that removes barriers to entry in the marketplace for beginning farmers and ranchers.”

The Associated Press reported yesterday that, “Industrial-scale hog producers knew for decades that noxious smells from open-air sewage pits tormented neighbors but didn’t change their livestock-raising methods to keep production costs low, the lawyer for farm neighbors told jurors in a federal lawsuit Tuesday.

“The first in a series of federal suits raising accusations of nauseating hog operations in eastern North Carolina headed to a 10-member jury after attorneys summarized the evidence presented at a three-week civil trial. The test case involved 10 neighbors of one, 15,000-hog operation producing an estimated 76 tons of waste per day.

“More than 500 neighbors in nearly two dozen lawsuits contend they have suffered for decades from open-air cesspools that afflict them with intense, putrid smells that can’t even be removed from clothing. The lawsuits targeted the hog-production division of Virginia-based Smithfield Foods, which uses strict contracts to dictate how farm operators raise livestock that Smithfield owns. Smithfield was bought in 2013 by China’s WH Group, the world’s largest pork producer.”

The AP article noted that, “Smithfield attorney Mark Anderson said it’s too soon to herald new technologies, which haven’t proven particularly effective in North Carolina. He told jurors the smells, traffic and noise don’t hurt neighbors’ ability to enjoy their own property. And before lawyers came looking for a payday, any complaints were negotiated by operators and neighbors between friendly greetings, he said.

“‘Why are they suing Smithfield? They’re suing Smithfield because Smithfield is a big company,’ said Anderson, who practices in Raleigh and New York City. Jurors should reject the plaintiffs’ ‘anti-agriculture, anti-corporation‘ rhetoric.”

A news release on Tuesday from USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) stated that, “Starting today, agricultural producers who have lost livestock to disease, resulting from a weather disaster, have an additional way to become eligible for a key U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) disaster assistance program. USDA Under Secretary for Farm Production and Conservation Bill Northey announced an administrative clarification nationwide to the Livestock Indemnity Program. In the event of disease, this change by [FSA] authorizes local FSA county committees to accept veterinarian certifications that livestock deaths were directly related to adverse weather and unpreventable through good animal husbandry and management. The committees may then use this certification to allow eligibility for producers on a case-by-case basis for LIP.

“‘This change is part of USDA’s broader effort to better serve America’s farmers, ranchers and foresters through flexible and effective programs,’ said Northey, who is in Texas today visiting with ranchers impacted by drought and wildfire. ‘America’s farmers feed our nation and much of the world, and throughout history they have known good years and bad years. But when disaster strikes, USDA is ready to step in and help.’

“LIP provides benefits to agricultural producers for livestock deaths in excess of normal mortality caused by adverse weather, disease or by attacks by animals reintroduced into the wild by the federal government. Eligible weather events include earthquakes, hail, tornadoes, hurricanes, storms, blizzard and flooding.”

The FSA update added that, “Producers interested in LIP or other USDA disaster assistance programs should contact their local USDA service center.”

Jeff Brown reported yesterday at FarmWeekNow.com that, “Illinois farmers have officially begun corn planting, according to USDA’s crop progress report released Monday afternoon. The weekly report tracked the state’s corn planting at 4 percent complete, the first measurable progress of the season.

“Last year at this time, Illinois corn planting was 30 percent complete.

“Temperatures remain well below normal, however, and FarmWeek CropWatcher Randy Anderson said most farmers in his area focused on getting caught up on other fieldwork chores.”

Mr. Brown added that, “Last week’s average statewide temperature was nearly 11 degrees below average. Soil temperatures also remain on the low side.”

Yesterday’s update also noted that in Illinois, “The percentage of the wheat crop rated poor or very poor dropped from 12 percent to 7 percent.”

Barbara Soderlin reported yesterday at The Omaha World-Herald Online that, “Melissa Young doesn’t have to get her shoes muddy or leave her Omaha corporate office job to get farm-fresh produce for her family’s dinner.

John Schwartz reported last week at The New York Times Online that, “Until recently, communities suing fossil fuel companies over the costs of climate change have been located on the coasts: cities and counties in California, and New York City. But now, the litigation has jumped inland.

“Boulder and San Miguel Counties in Colorado, along with the city of Boulder, filed a lawsuit on Tuesday against two oil companies, Exxon Mobil and Suncor Energy, the Canadian giant. The suit, filed in state court, argues that fossil fuels sold by the companies contribute to climate change, which in turn has exacerbated wildfires, droughts, severe storms and other symptoms of a warming planet that have far-ranging effects on agriculture and tourism.

“Dealing with these climate-related issues, the suit says, places a burden on local governments. ‘Our communities and our taxpayers should not shoulder the cost of climate change adaptation alone,’ said Suzanne Jones, Boulder’s mayor. ‘These oil companies need to pay their fair share.'”

The Times article noted that, “The earlier lawsuits have largely focused on the obvious link between climate change, namely rising sea levels and damage to infrastructure. This new climate suit, far from the coasts, suggests that more communities around the country might take on energy companies in court.  Each case could mean billions of dollars in damages.”

Mr. Schwartz explained, “The state-level climate lawsuits focus on the area of nuisance under common law, which allows courts to hold parties responsible for actions that interfere with the use of property.

“Attempts at the federal-court level to use nuisance in climate change litigation, in cases such as American Electric Power v. Connecticut, have been unsuccessful. In a unanimous 2011 decision, the Supreme Court said that the Clean Air Act displaced the federal common law of nuisance, leaving enforcement and regulation to the Environmental Protection Agency.

“The new wave of cases relies on the nuisance doctrine at the state level, working from the theory that state common law has not been similarly displaced. The companies, understandably, have tried to get the cases moved to federal court, with mixed success.”