By Gene Hall

Imagine a championship boxing match. Two heavyweights come to the ring. They talk, smile, touch gloves and retreat to their respective corners. The bell rings. However, neither boxer approaches his opponent to begin the contest. Instead, they throw things at one another: the stool, the water bucket and a blizzard of insults, negative comments and outrageous claims about their own skills, most of which they decline to use in a productive way.

Now, think of that boxing ring as our nation’s capital. The fighters are our two historically great political parties. They are beating one another up at a distance. They refuse to engage on the great problems that face us—immigration reform, estate taxes, entitlement reform and the ballooning deficit.

Back on the farm, my grandfather taught me to do many things. Paw, as I called him, was patient. He taught me that results count. He offered advice, but let me know there was always more than one right way to do most jobs.

In Washington now, the political parties seem to see it only one way. They have their cheerleaders, the bases of both sides—left and right, that provide enough cover to dig in their heels. In our national politics, we’ve lost the ability to listen. The far left and the far right have a lot of anger. Let’s not forget the huge group of Americans in the middle who are pretty angry, too. They want to see progress on the pressing issues of the day—things like the economy, jobs, the deficit, national security and the safety of our people.

I think the American people are very tired of this. Right now, the Republicans are poised to do very well in the elections. But the public only approves of them slightly more than the Democrats. Eighteen months ago it was the other way around. Winning the election is the goal. It shouldn’t be. The chance to lead should be the goal. Leading is not attacking. Leading is principle and compromise. Leading is listening and sacrifice.

You’ve got to win an election to get anything done. I concede that. But if the folks send you to D.C., you also have an obligation to try and get things done. Compromise is a lost art. Some might think that locking the government down is the right thing to do. Lord knows, we’ve allowed some unfortunate legislation to pass. 

But there are some mighty big problems out there that are not going to go away. They will be difficult to solve, but there is no chance unless some elephants and donkeys get in the same room to talk about them. 

I think we have a horrible new health care system. You may disagree. But I also believe we desperately need to reform health care. I believe it could have been better if Republicans had engaged with the president. I believe that winning the election did not mean the Democrats could ignore the ideas of the minority.

Both need to enter the room with an idea of what they can give up and the principles they can’t surrender. At the end of the day, they have to be willing to get into the ring, go out and engage. They have to use their skills, their words, their beliefs and, more than anything, their ability to understand other points of view. Or, we can continue to throw the stools and insults from the corner.

I don’t think that’s what Jefferson, Madison, Adams and Franklin intended when they put this system together and bound it together with our great constitution. I can’t help but think they’d be disappointed at what it’s become.

Visit the Texas Farm Bureau website at www.txfb.org.
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook for the latest updates on this topic and many more.

By Mike Barnett

I call it the great divide in agriculture.

I'm speaking of the differences in the many methods of farming and ranching and how each method has been pitted against the other.

For example, grass fed versus grain fed beef.  It’s been ugly over the years as the merits have been debated on why one is better than the other.

Or look at the ongoing feud between organic and traditional agriculture, and/or "local" versus "industrial" agriculture. My blogging partner Gene Hall and I have been labeled as organiphobes by various individuals because of some of the posts we've written. We’re by no means anti-organic. Many Texas Farm Bureau members are organic farmers and we applaud their industry. Mostly we're defending attacks against what I fondly and repeatedly call the modern miracle of agriculture.

And the attacks are many. Much of the uproar comes from outside of our industry, by those who have the Michael Pollan view of food. I'm talking of those who maintain traditional agriculture is evil and killing our environment. It's nice to advocate what you believe. I begrudge no one for that. Doesn't mean I have to agree with them or them with me.

What bothers me is when agriculture producers attack each other. It's okay to promote the benefits of your way of farming. It goes too far, however, when one segment of agriculture promotes itself by deriding another. The stones being thrown within agriculture do our industry no good.

Many people are inspired by the food they eat. There are many who get incensed if you don't eat the way they think you should. Many farmers and ranchers are inspired by the methods they use to grow food. Many farmers and ranchers are quick to tell the world their brethren are doing it wrong.

That persnickety insistence that only “my way is right” has to stop. We're in the business of growing food, fiber and fuel. We're in the business of putting seed in the ground to nurture to harvest. We're in the business of animal husbandry for the end result of food on the plate.

There are plenty of people in this world who have a lot of different ideas about how they should eat. That spells opportunity for all of us to meet those needs using the methods that suit us best. And make money doing it. There's enough agitation from outside agriculture to keep us all busy. It’s time for the sniping and backbiting within to end.

Fight the good fight, my farmer and rancher friends. Just not with each other.

Visit the Texas Farm Bureau website at www.txfb.org.
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook for the latest updates on this topic and many more.

By Gene Hall

Celebrities don’t seem to like modern agriculture very much. Some speak out strongly, even attack the way we grow our food today. Some are eager to jump on the bandwagon of the week, endorsing the latest trendy food-related topic.

Most of this is harmless. Farmers will grow for whatever markets consumers support—organic, grassfed, local, slow food or whatever’s next. There is nothing wrong with any of that. The problem comes when the anti-agriculture propaganda machine suggests that the world can be fed that way. It can’t, unless legions of people are willing, once again, to personally take up the burden of growing their own food as their great-grandparents did.

Mike Rowe gets it. The creator, host and executive producer of the Discovery Channel’s Emmy-nominated series, Dirty Jobs with Mike Rowe, has worked as an apprentice on more than 250 jobs that a lot of people would not like to do. Many of these “dirty jobs” were on farms, working with farmers.

Rowe likes to say that everything we value in our culture comes from agriculture or mining. Think about it. It’s true. Every product sprouted from the root stock of those two industries. Rowe is all for “green,” but also talks about the power of “brown.” The soil is the source of life. The simplicity of his words contains a powerful message.

Rowe spoke to the 2009 convention of the FFA – once known as the Future Farmers of America.  He detailed that experience on his website .

Of the experience, Rowe said, “The FFA has determined that most Americans think of farmers like those actors in Colonial Williamsburg – smiling caricatures from Hee Haw and Green Acres, laboring quaintly in flannel and denim. From what I’ve seen, they’re right. Over and over I hear the same thing from farmers I’ve met on Dirty Jobs. Technical advances in modern agriculture now rival those of Silicon Valley, and today’s farms are more efficient than ever, but no one seems to have gotten the memo. No one seems to care.”

As I said, Mike Rowe gets it. But how did this working man celebrity arrive at different conclusions than those of Pamela Anderson, Gwyneth Paltrow or Alicia Silverstone?

 I have a theory. Rowe has actually worked those jobs, shoulder to shoulder with real farmers and ranchers. His view was not formed on the beaches of Southern California or in a Park Avenue apartment. He's been there and done that. To me, it adds up to credibility. 

Rowe will speak to the American Farm Bureau Federation Annual Convention in Atlanta come January. I’m betting he will take the stage to thunderous applause from grateful farmers and ranchers. In our celebrity culture of today, it takes some courage to buck the trends. I like the show. Clever and original, it stands head and shoulders above the reality drivel that passes for entertainment these days. I like Mike Rowe even more.

By Mike Barnett

You might be a redneck if your dinner ever mooed, oinked or clucked. That’s a new twist as animal activists continue to use cruelty in animals in Texas and other states as a reason for you to quit eating meat.

I never heard Jeff Foxworthy use that line. But it’s a sentiment expressed by Bryan Monell, an activist who has frequently obtained illicit employment at farms and research facilities in order to obtain undercover video footage. He mocked the work of both farmers and researchers, as reported by the Animal Agriculture Alliance, a non-profit group who communicates the important role livestock agriculture plays in our nation’s economy.

"These people are rednecks and we are superior," he reportedly said at the recent Animal Rights 2010 conference. I’ll take it for granted that he means meat eaters as well.

So just call me Bubba and give me a bucket of KFC. If eating meat makes a redneck, certify me. I guess I’ll be a card-carrying member of Rednecks ‘R’ Us. And I’ll be joined by the 97 percent of all Americans who love meat.

Monell’s statement speaks volumes of the attitude prevalent in the animal rights activist movement. If you eat meat or raise livestock, you are inferior to Monell and friends. They perceive meat lovers to be one or several steps down the social, economic and intellectual ladders in their elitist worlds.

It would be easy to say these animal rights activists are on the far edge of sanity and dismiss their thoughts as rants from the vegan crowd. That’s what agriculture has always done. To a large extent we continue to do so. And it’s put livestock agriculture in a tenuous situation. Referendums which restrict livestock production practices and are backed by the animal rights crowd have been passed in California and several other states.

These animal rights activists are gaining traction. Cruelty to animals in Texas and other states is a mask for their true intentions. They want everyone to quit eating meat. They are serious. And agriculture must take them seriously.

Here’s a list of some of the other quotes that came out of the Animal Rights 2010 Conference and the Humane Society of the United States-hosted Taking Action for Animals, two of the nation's largest animal rights events, both held in July. The list was compiled by the Animal Agriculture Alliance.

• “Owning animals is the equivalent of slavery.”—Hope Bohenic, In Defense of Animals, AR 2010
• “I have no problem with breaking and entering, destroying labs, burning buildings and busting open cages.”—Camille Hankins, Win Animals Rights and spokesperson for Animal Liberation Front, AR 2010
•  “The dog they walked last night is no different than the pig they ate for breakfast.”—Jerry Cesak, Radio Personality and Proponent of HSUS ‘Yes on Prop 2’ Campaign, TAFA
• "Any state with an initiative process is on our radar." –Jennifer Hillman, Humane Society of the United States, TAFA

Folks, let me repeat: it’s not about animal welfare. True intentions were best expressed by Gene Bauer of Farm Sanctuary, who made the following statement at the TAFA meeting: “I dream of a vegan world—that’s where I want everything to go."

Mr. Monell and all of your friends: My neck may be red according to your definition. But so is my meat. If you want to be a vegan, that’s fine with me. But don’t try to force your values upon me and my fellow Americans.

So praise the Lord and pass the pork chops. If eating meat defines who I am, then I’m proud to be a redneck!

Visit the Texas Farm Bureau website at www.txfb.org.
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook for the latest updates on this topic and many more.

By Gene Hall 

The EPA’s “endangerment finding” on carbon emissions is a potential body blow to an already struggling U.S. economy. Essentially, it does what the Obama administration, environmental lobbyists and the leadership of Congress could not do—that is, pass a law to impose Cap and Trade with draconian regulations that limit carbon emissions.

The public, in any opinion survey you want to look up, is forcefully saying we do not want this. Elected officials, understanding the need to be re-elected, have noticed. A version did pass the House, but most of Congress is praying the Senate does not act. For them, the issue is radioactive—a ticket to retirement. Why? Because it will hurt the U.S. economy by imposing strict regulations, fees and taxes on anything productive.

 This does not disturb the unelected legions at EPA. They plan to impose most of Cap and Trade via regulatory edict. Agriculture would be particularly hard hit for two reasons. First, no one has yet figured out how to raise a crop without driving machinery across a field. Second, agriculture is unique in its inability to pass along increases in the cost of production.

I have a copy of a letter to the administrators at EPA co-written by the chairman of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Dr. Bryan Shaw, and Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott. It runs most of six pages and has some pretty complex legal and scientific arguments. Previously, EPA had called upon their counterpart agencies at the state level to endorse their planned permitting process for greenhouse gases. Basically, Texas is saying “no thanks.”

In part, the letter reads, “…Texas has neither the authority nor the intention of interpreting, ignoring or amending its laws in order to compel the permitting of greenhouse gas emissions.” 

Here’s more: “In order to avoid the absurd results of EPA’s own creation, you have developed a ‘tailoring rule’ in which you have substituted your own judgment for Congress’s as to how deep and wide to spread the permitting burden. Notably absent from your rules is any evidence that they would achieve specific results…”

That’s really the point of the whole Cap and Trade jihad. No proponent has suggested that it would improve the climate. You’d think that would give them pause, but no. Words like “cost,” “benefit” and “consequences” do not seem to matter.

The letter goes into detail as to how the proposed EPA regulations run afoul of the U.S. and Texas constitutions. The regulations also have problems with the Texas Government Code. I wonder if other states are discovering similar difficulties. Shaw and Abbott say EPA has not provided the proper notice required and equate the EPA request to a “demand for a loyalty oath from the State of Texas.”

This whole mess is in the courthouse, folks. 

My opinion is that the regulatory apparatus of the U.S. government has seriously overstepped in this and other areas. There is a lot of promise in the new green energy technologies the White House has talked about, but they will only work as a legitimate response to market forces. Command and control from these unelected regulators will not—and cannot—work. This is not only wrong, but, in the view of people in a position to know, illegal.

If this power grab cannot be stopped, we will likely pay the tab with an even weaker economy that is overtaxed, overregulated and unable to create desperately needed jobs. Needless to say, we’d be less able to deal with future disaster—environmental or otherwise.

Read the entire letter . It’s a real eye opener.

Visit the Texas Farm Bureau website at www.txfb.org .
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook for the latest updates on this topic and many more.

By Dakota Fleming

The time is fast approaching of hot days when people crowd in pools and lakes. The best movies come out and teenagers flock to see them first. Family vacations are planned and many pictures are taken and memories are made. For farmers and their families, it is the time of long work hours in the heat, harvesting crops. 

Every year I follow my dad’s convoy of farm equipment to the farm that is next in line to be harvested. Let me tell you about our convoy. Up front and leading the line is our John Deere combine and when going down a Farm-to-Market Road, it almost takes both lanes. Next in line is a tractor pulling an 800 bushel grain cart holding corn, which rides on the yellow stripe of the road. Lastly is myself in the dually pickup. In most cases, I pull the combine’s header trailer—an attachment for the combine which grabs the crops and pulls them into the combine. All of this equipment has hazard lights that flash when on the road accompanied by the orange triangle Slow Moving Vehicle signs.  

But with all of the safety lights and signs, it never fails that someone just ignores us. Too impatient to wait for us to pull over to allow them to pass, they just speed up and go on by, leaving our convoy screeching to a halt at times. Well maybe not screeching to a halt as big equipment can’t really stop that fast, but as close as screeching as you can get. I have even seen cars jump into the bar ditch going 60 miles an hour to get by our convoy and lose total control. 

When people pass us with no respect, my blood gets a boiling and there is nothing more that will get me more stirred up unless it is PETA and HSUS. Farmers and ranchers aren’t trying to make you late to your job or movie when we meet on the road, we promise. We are trying to get to our jobsite just like you. We are just trying to maintain a dying lifestyle that for some is generations long. 

Now I said generations long, that means family after family after family have been taking care of the same land and traveling the same roads. As generations develop, the equipment size gets bigger and bulkier but the roads stay the same size. 

As equipment size gets bigger, the amount of impolite car drivers grows, too. This makes it hard for farmers to safely travel to the next field. It is hard enough to stay on the road when you have to move your equipment around like a ballet dancer to miss hitting mailboxes, road signs and telephone poles. Next you add cars to the list and problems really start to occur.  People in too big of a hurry on the road can cause accidents that can not only injure the person driving the vehicle, but can also damage the farm equipment.   

This type of incident happened to my family about three years ago when the convoy was coming back to the shop for fuel and servicing. The convoy was stopped waiting to turn with the blinkers indicating what we were doing. All of the sudden a man in a car came barreling up behind to pass on the left. Unfortunately, we were turning left and he collided into the back end of the grain cart in mid-turn. Thankfully, both the car driver and the tractor driver weren’t hurt but the car and the grain cart had a different story. The car’s hood was crumpled in the man’s face. The grain cart had the PTO shaft, tractor rim, auger, and rear tire damaged beyond repair where the car plowed into it.

To hopefully help prevent any more accidents from occurring, I thought up some safety tips drivers should take when they meet or follow behind any type of farm equipment on the road.

• Slow down as soon as you see farm equipment.  The flashing hazard lights mean slow down.
• Have patience.  We will move over to allow you to pass when it is safe for both car and equipment.
• Mirrors don’t always show everything.  The driver can’t always see you in their mirrors so be cautious.
• Do not stop or pass in tight spaces and expect a safe pass.  Examples of tight spots would be mailboxes, road signs or telephone poles.
• Wait for the equipment to stop and move over to let you pass.  Also, watch for hand signals to indicate for you to wait or pass. Just because they move over some doesn’t mean you can pass. They may be moving over to avoid hitting something on the road.
• Put on your blinker when you pass unexpected. This will allow the driver to stop so you can safely pass.
• When passing don’t crowd the equipment. Move over to allow the equipment adjustment space if necessary.
• Do not speed past the equipment.  Speeding up can create turbulence creating the machinery to become unstable.
• Do not slow down in front of the equipment once passed. The size of the equipment makes it hard for a sudden stop. 
• Watch for hazard lights to turn into a blinker to indicate a turn. When the blinker comes on, be patient as turning takes a lot of space—sometimes even backing up and trying the turn again.

Farmers and ranchers don’t set out to ruin your trip to wherever you are going. It is very stressful driving large equipment down the road—we would much rather be in the field. Agriculture is our livelihood and we love what we do. Please keep it safe when meeting equipment on the road; the driver is special to someone, whether they are a grandpa, a dad, a brother or a sister. 

Who knows? They could even be providing your meal you will eat tonight.

Administrator’s note: Dakota Fleming farms with her family in Bell County. She will be a freshman at Texas A&M University this fall. 

Visit the Texas Farm Bureau website at www.txfb.org.
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook for the latest updates on this topic and many more.

By Gene Hall

In one of my favorite songs, Lee Greenwood sings of his heart “drifting down a dusty Dixie road.”  I’ve been down many of those roads. In fact, dust is an inescapable part of rural life.  I grew up at the end of one of those dusty roads.  When we worked cattle, we raised some dust. Same for when we baled hay. In other agricultural pursuits, of which I don’t have direct experience, dust is part of the deal.

It’s not so much that the EPA is considering regulation of dust in agriculture.  Is anyone surprised at that? We have this great juggernaut of a regulatory apparatus, built to regulate, lavishly funded for that purpose and absolutely itching to get at it. What bothers me is that they might be thinking they can actually make this work!

The eight years of the Bush administration were little more than a speed bump for federal regulators. Now, with an administration much more friendly to the idea, they are unfettered. Make no mistake, EPA intends to regulate, and they will do so with little regard to cost, benefit or consequences. Think of the Cap and Trade bill stalled in Congress.  No problem. The unelected folks at EPA will do it by regulatory fiat. There is a feeling in farm and ranch circles that an aggressive and unchecked EPA has set out to make U.S. agriculture obsolete. This point of view is not without evidence.

Back to the “dust-up” – also not much of a surprise is the unified opposition among agricultural groups and from farm state members of Congress.  They know something the regulators apparently don’t.  It’s not possible to grow a crop – animal, vegetable, grain or cotton, without kicking up a little dust.  It’s not that farmers and ranchers have not taken steps to minimize dust in their operations.  Many dollars have been spent in the form of minimum till farming practices and dust management systems of various kinds.

A letter signed by 21 U.S. Senators, including John Cornyn of Texas, says in part:

“We respect efforts for a clean and healthy environment, but not at the expense of common sense. These identified levels will be extremely burdensome for farmers and livestock producers to attain. Whether its livestock kicking up dust, soybeans being combined on a dry day in the fall, or driving a car down the gravel road, dust is a naturally occurring event.”

The senators also correctly noted that producers could potentially be fined for not meeting the standards while still implementing good management practices on their soils.  Will farmers soon need a federal permit to plow?

The full text of the senators’ letter can be found here. 

If this effort is “successful,” EPA can move on to regulating hurricanes, tornados, flash floods and tilting at windmills. Draconian regulatory efforts to stifle the dust that’s been part of rural America since colonial times could eventually result in the offshore production of our supply of food and fiber. It will be grown in places where the citizens and their governments have not lost track of common sense.

Visit the Texas Farm Bureau website at www.txfb.org.
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook for the latest updates on this topic and many more.

By Mike Barnett

“Water will become our most valuable asset—probably the most precious commodity we’ll have available in the next 50 years.” I heard that statement from a farmer the other night as I sat in on the Texas Farm Bureau District 8 Policy Development meeting. The discussion centered on the topic of Texas water rights with regard to underground water.

That comment is so true. The Texas population is expected to surge to 35 million in the next 30 years. Water will determine where that growth will occur, or if it will occur.

You may think the water beneath your land is yours. Technically, Texas law says it is. However, groundwater districts control it. Municipalities covet it. Entrepreneurs want to sell it. And the Texas legislature and the courts will eventually decide its fate.

With all those mouths trying to drink out of the same pitcher, do you know what your rights are? Neither does anyone else, for sure. Interpretations of private property rights attached to underground water in Texas are as muddy as the Brazos River at flood stage.

The Legislature is likely to clear that stream this legislative session, making significant changes to how groundwater is managed in Texas. Cases are also being heard before the Texas Supreme Court that could define the rights of Texas property owners in regards to groundwater.

Current Texas law recognizes the landowners’ rights to water beneath their property. It also gives groundwater districts the authority to regulate it. There are two schools of thought concerning groundwater as a property right in Texas.

The first is the position generally favored by groundwater conservation districts (GCD)—that groundwater is not property until the owner physically captures it. Many GCDs like this approach because it allows them to protect historic or existing use by denying new groundwater users the right to the water. This position allows GCDs the legal right to deny a property owner the right to drill a well or pump groundwater without that property owner claiming that their groundwater has been “taken” from them. “Takings” claims could include the right of the property owner to be compensated for the loss of rights to the groundwater.

Many landowners favor the second approach because it gives them an ownership in groundwater that is protected from a “taking” by a groundwater conservation district. In fact, Texas Farm Bureau’s policy currently supports this opinion: “We believe the right to capture groundwater in place is a vested property right.” The reasoning is this: Groundwater is part of the surface estate of the property. The owner of the surface estate has a right to the groundwater, just like he has the right to sand, gravel or limestone that is part of the surface estate. Under this argument, a groundwater district cannot deny the right of the property owner to obtain a permit and pump groundwater. Under this argument, a district would have to reduce the pumping of existing users to allow new users to capture groundwater.

So who’s right? Take away the regulatory authority of the GCDs and we could have a groundwater free-for-all in Texas. Take away the protection of a “taking” of groundwater from the landowner and you have potential for abuse by GCDs. And there’s a whole host of issues in-between.

There’s an old saying that you don’t miss the water until the well runs dry. Folks, the level is getting low.

There are no easy solutions when it comes to determining Texas water rights…just lots of questions. How do you feel?

Visit the Texas Farm Bureau website at www.txfb.org.
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook for the latest updates on this topic and many more.

By Matt Felder

It’s been 19 months since I came to Texas Farm Bureau (TFB) and I have to say there’s never been a dull moment. Two years ago I would have never thought it possible to be traveling to the far reaches of the state or standing in the middle of Moscow’s Red Square covering stories.

It’s no doubt a bustling pace of excitement—this coming from a guy who crossed over from television news.

Let’s be clear. I wouldn’t change that decision for the world because it’s the world I now get to see: Russia, Estonia, Canada, Taiwan, Japan and counting.

Each year, the TFB Board of Directors makes it a point to create and maintain relationships, face to face, with their counterparts and trade officials in various countries around the world. Armed with cameras, recorders and notepads, I tagged along.

From the city streets of Japan to the fields of Canada, it’s clear that agriculture is the driving force of our planet. It’s the one necessity which ties every country on Earth to its ultimate goal—survival.

As we travel the globe, it’s occurred to me the popularity of political decisions in the U.S. waver, depending upon your location. What remains steady is the popularity of U.S. foods in countries that lack the resources to support themselves.

Don’t believe me? Try walking into a Tokyo grocery store that sells beef raised in the Lone Star State with a group of Texas cowboys. The only other person I know to cause that kind of stir in the Far East was a zipper-laden, red leather jacket toting singer—Michael Jackson—whose music was playing throughout the store.

Yes, I’ll admit Thriller is one of my all-time favorites, but back to my point.

While our relationship with many of our top foreign agriculture trade partners is harmonious today, that wasn’t always the case.

Japan. December 7, 1941 comes to my mind almost instantly. What transpired was a knock-down, drag-out battle which resulted in war—at a cost of the lives of tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers—with a country that barely measures up to the size of one of our biggest states.

Today, the story is much different. The relationship is a thriving partnership and one of the most profitable for U.S. agriculture. Japan is the third-largest foreign market for U.S. agricultural products with total agricultural exports valued at $11.2 billion in 2009.

Same goes for Mother Russia. Our two countries didn’t always play nice.

Then there is the 800-pound gorilla in the room—China, the world’s most populous country, 1 billion strong. Just recently, China became the top U.S. ag export market, importing over $10 billion in agricultural goods for us in the first half of 2010.

I’ll throw it out there just in case it’s slipped your mind. China is a communist country.

Which brings me to the question of how do we, as a country, rationalize the trading with mega-China when some of our Washington decision-makers can’t stomach the thought of opening up trade and travel with tiny communist Cuba?

In my recent visit to our nation’s capital this past March, Central Texas Congressman Chet Edwards summed up that argument best: “We’re trading with the Chinese every day. We’re not afraid to trade with the Chinese but we’re afraid to trade with Cuba?”

Yes, I know about the history with Castro, strained relationships and tense moments over the years. But who’s to say our two countries can’t mend fences. It’s been done before. Japan and Germany come to mind.

The rewards for the U.S. and Texas agriculture would be huge.

The 50-year Cuba embargo “experiment” has failed. The legislation to reverse it is printed and waiting for support.

It’s time for the double standard to end. Relationships can change. I’m not an expert but I’ve seen it firsthand.

Don’t believe me? I encourage a trip across the pond.

Visit the Texas Farm Bureau website at www.txfb.org.
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook for the latest updates on this topic and many more.

By Mike Barnett

Nature has a way of teaching lessons. If only we will listen.

I was visiting a friend in Austin this weekend, taking a dip in the pool, when we noticed a flurry of activity in the branches of one of the many live oaks dotting the landscape. Close inspection revealed two green heron chicks, big, fluffy, agile puffballs that could scurry the branches close to the nest, but were not yet ready to fly.

The not-so-tiny birds were obviously upset, crying out over and over again with a sound only described as a hiss, kuck, kuck…  Wings flapping, extreme agitation…  Hiss, kuck, kuck… Over and over again.

My friend Collene climbed out of the pool and peered up into the trees to see what was causing the commotion. On a different branch—not 10 feet from the baby herons—stood a big brown hawk, sun glinting off of his feathers—silent and staring, no hurry, no worries. The hawk patiently eyed the babies, no doubt waiting for them to tire so he could launch an attack for a tasty heron meal.

Would momma heron get back in time to save her chicks? Read on.

This situation reminds me of what conventional agriculture is experiencing today. Agriculture is a lot like those juvenile green herons, surrounded by birds of prey such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), the Environmental Working Group (EWG)… the list is fairly endless. Like the hawk eyeing a potential meal, those groups have a piercing, unwavering vision to change the way farmers and ranchers grow food, fiber and fuel for Americans and much of the rest of the world. And while agriculture squawks and hisses and ruffles its feathers to ward off danger, PETA, HSUS, EWG and a myriad of other groups sit and stalk, waiting for the right moment to move in for the kill.

The hawk/heron drama we witnessed Sunday afternoon never came to a resolution. Collene waved her arms and scared the hawk away. The momma heron came back about 10 minutes later. Would have that been in time to save her chicks? I don’t know.

Agriculture cannot allow the hawks to wear us out. There is no momma hen to save us. We have tried the squawks and the hisses far too long. It’s time to test our wings. Fly. It’s time to meet the hawks’ challenge head on.