| Directions l American Farm Bureau l Farm Bureau Bank l Privacy Policy l Contact Us l Help l Site Map |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The Voice of Louisiana Agriculture
Welcome to the Louisiana Farm Bureau Federation
Welcome to the Louisiana Farm Bureau Federation
The Voice of Louisiana Agriculture
2009 LFBF POLICY BOOK
Click here to download a PDF version of the 2009 LFBF Policy Book
Click here to download a PDF version of the 2009 LFBF Policy Book
STATE AND LOCAL AFFAIRS
Purpose of Farm Bureau Federation 101
(hereinafter referred to as Farm Bureau)
Farm Bureau is a free, independent, nongovernmental, voluntary organization of American farm and ranch
families united for the purpose of analyzing their problems and formulating action to achieve educational
improvement, economic opportunity, and social advancement, thereby promoting the growth of our country and the
quality of our national life. Farm Bureau is local, national, and international in its scope and influence and is
nonpartisan, non-sectarian, and nonsecret in character.
Farm Bureau and Its Aims 102
1. Farm Bureau is a statewide voluntary organization of farm families and individuals interested and involved in the
agricultural economy. Its organization specifically represents the various segments of the agricultural industry.
2. Its main purpose is to identify, analyze, and propose solutions for farm problems at local, state, and national
levels. In union, it seeks the strength and joint promotion of the well-being of farm people, of agriculture as a
whole, and of each commodity segment, in particular.
3. Among Farm Bureau’s specific aims are the following:
(a) The furtherance of democratic processes of home rule and individual freedom and rights.
(b) The reflection and transmission of farmers’ basic ideals of government and of their views of local, state, and
national policies to both farm and nonfarm groups.
(c) The provision of a two-way channel for the promotion of broader understanding of political, economic, and,
specifically, agricultural issues and techniques.
(d) The provision for developing, centralizing, and giving effect to Farm Bureau policy.
(e) The attainment of higher net income for the farmer and the general improvement of his standard of living.
(f) The enlargement of opportunity for youth.
(g) The provision of opportunity for the development of farm and civic leadership.
(h) The development of full member responsibility in Farm Bureau and public policy.
4. Farm Bureau’s Philosophy of Government
(a) We believe in a constitutional government guaranteeing American citizens freedom and liberty, including
freedom of speech, press, religious worship, peaceful assembly, the right to own property, and freedom from
unwarranted search or seizure.
(b) We protest federal preemption of decision by the federal government in state legislative fields where state action
is not prohibited by federal statutes.
(c) We believe that the Legislative, Judicial, and Executive Departments of the federal government must be kept
separate as the Founding Fathers intended. We deplore encroachment on, or transfer of, the traditional powers
from any branch of the government to the other.
(d) We believe in our competitive system in which supply and demand are primary determinants of prices in the
marketplace.
(e) We further believe that the philosophy of our government must continue to embody the rights of a citizen to build
and accumulate assets during his lifetime and to transfer to his family, title to such assets at his death, free from
unwarranted and excessive federal and state levies, such as inheritance taxes and other taxes and assessments.
We believe such rights of an American citizen are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the United
States.
(f) We believe that thriftiness, ability, industriousness, and maximum productivity are vital factors in sustaining the
unequaled standard of living of American citizens.
(g) We further believe that candidates for public office should make their views known on issues which affect the
future of the livelihood of their constituents.
(h) We believe that individuals are responsible for their own acts so they also have a responsibility to speak for
themselves and their interests through effective organizations of their own creation and choice.
5. Membership Participation
An active, participating, informed membership is the keystone of an effective Farm Bureau. Projects and
programs in which all membership can take part should be developed by the membership, based on the needs,
ideas, interests, and problems of farm families, and designed to help achieve educational improvement, economic
opportunity, and social advancement.
Such a program of transmitting farmers’ ideas into projects of action demands trained, well-equipped, dedicated,
voluntary leadership. To equip and motivate this leadership requires a program of leadership training and
recognition.
6. Policy Development and Implementation
(a) Farm Bureau should continue to improve the procedure necessary to develop policies and recommendations in
order that more members can take part in building sound policies. We urge parish Farm Bureaus to place more
emphasis on the resolutions process.
(b) The basic objective of policy implementation is to win support for Farm Bureau policies by our members and the
general public alike. The key to this objective lies in continuous effort by parish Farm Bureaus to accomplish this
purpose.
(c) We urge development of, and participation in, active commodity committees on the state and parish levels.
Marketing 201
1. Trade Development and Marketing Association
(a) The importance of an expanded marketing program to serve the needs of farmers and ranchers has become
apparent not only for the best interest of farmers, but also for the best interest of our entire national economy.
(b) We support a positive program that would result in farmers operating their own voluntary marketing associations
rather than having the government or others assume this responsibility.
(c) We recommend continued study of marketing problems. When feasible ways are found to aid the members in
solving marketing problems, we recommend that the procedures be implemented through the Farm Bureau
Marketing Association.
(d) We recommend that the State Board – when the need arises – expand the services of the Marketing Association
at the request of interested commodity groups. The objectives of the Association will be:
(1) To expand markets for members.
(2) To improve the bargaining power of farmers and ranchers.
(3) To advise growers on economic facts and conditions affecting marketing.
(4) To furnish growers with pertinent information concerning the supply-and-demand situation for agricultural
products.
(e) We further recommend that membership in the Marketing Association be limited to members of Farm Bureau.
2. Use of Marketing Orders
We support marketing orders as an adequate method of providing price protection for farmers. However, we
oppose establishment of monopolies in the marketing, grading, transporting, storing, or processing of agricultural
products.
3. Agricultural Products
(a) We support the establishment of processing and marketing facilities where feasible.
(b) We request that all agricultural products entering the state be subject to the same inspections as produce grown
in Louisiana and urge that these provisions be enforced.
(c) We recommend that Farm Bureau work with the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry (LDAF) to
develop a promotional program using radio, television, newspapers, displays, and road signs to encourage the
public, restaurants, superstores, and other businesses to buy Louisiana-grown products with an emphasis on
quality rather than price.
(d) We urge Louisiana educational facilities to give Louisiana food producers and processors an opportunity to bid
on food service contracts.
4. Market Information
(a) We support a communication system between grain and livestock farmers to provide information to
Louisiana farmers on the availability of Louisiana-grown grain, hay, and cottonseed.
(b) We recommend that the LSU Agricultural Center (AgCenter) and the LDAF continue to provide a Louisiana farm-
retail fluid milk pricing series.
(c) We oppose prison farms selling their produce to local markets in direct competition with fruit and vegetable
farmers throughout the state.
(d) We support the rights of native wineries to sell their products wholesale and retail in Louisiana.
Research and Extension 202
1. Louisiana Cooperative Extension Service (Extension Service)
(a) To further the cooperative effort between Farm Bureau and the Extension Service, we urge that parish Farm
Bureaus actively support and participate in the full implementation of parish extension advisory committees and
other areas of mutual benefit.
(b) We urge local Farm Bureaus to encourage police juries or parish councils and school board to continue to
increase financial support for the Extension Service, the vocational agricultural program, and other needed local
agricultural programs.
(c) We urge support of Extension Service leadership at all levels to obtain adequate funding of this vital service, with
particular emphasis on increased local support.
(d) We urge that no further funding cuts be made on the federal, state, and local levels affecting the research and
educational purposes of the Extension Service.
(e) We request that complimentary rodeo tickets be given to exhibitors if a rodeo is held in conjunction with the LSU
State Livestock Show and that Farm Bureau take an active role in keeping the show at the Lamar Dixon Expo
Center or any other facility that could be utilized.
2. Research Work
(a) We support adequate appropriations for agricultural research work by the Louisiana Agricultural Experiment
Station (Experiment Station).
(b) We support a strong swine research facility within the Experiment Station.
(c) We recommend that LSU increase the amount of research on aquaculture. We urge that continued research be
done in crawfish farming, marketing, and use of crawfish by-products.
(d) We urge the Experiment Station to continue to conduct studies of methods to prevent aflatoxin.
(e) We recommend that the AgCenter continue its work on controlling and preventing noxious weeds in
pasturelands.
(f) We urge the Experiment Station to publish research results based upon maximum profit potential, as well as
maximum production potential.
(g) We urge whatever action necessary to prohibit public funds for agricultural research and grants being used for
agricultural research in foreign countries that leads directly to increased competition against U.S. commodities.
(h) We urge Farm Bureau to work toward getting the agricultural research stations throughout the state to continue
further research to use compost urban waste on all cropland and pastureland to improve the organic matter content
of our soils and at the same time promote good will with our city friends who are customers for our farm products.
(i) We support measures to expedite soil testing at the soil testing facilities at LSU.
(j) We request that the Experiment Station continue its research efforts on pesticides to control external parasites on
livestock in Louisiana.
(k) We request that the AgCenter develop a Best Management Practice (BMP) conducive to the enhancement of the
fire ant population in sugarcane fields.
(l) We request that the AgCenter continue its research efforts on the handling of cotton module covers, as well as
on modules in the field and at the gin.
(m) We urge the State of Louisiana to develop a comprehensive school of veterinary technology.
(n) We urge the AgCenter to maintain the position at the Hill Farm Research Station Mastitis Lab and continue
mastitis research with special emphasis on statewide monitoring of Mycoplasma mastitis.
(o) We urge that research be conducted on the feasibility of a sugar mill establishing an ethanol production facility
at its location.
(p) We recommend increased funding at the Iberia Parish Research Facility for sugar cane research.
3. Contact Committees
We realize that maximum utilization of agricultural research funds, facilities, staff, and results have a direct
relationship to the adaptability of research findings to farmers’ needs. We support contact committees of farmers
for all commodities to counsel with research heads and staff regarding present projects, new findings, needed work,
and other approaches to expanded and coordinated research. We support new enterprises through research and
development.
4. Animal Diseases
(a) We support the eradication of brucellosis. To have an effective program, qualified personnel must be used to
administer and enforce regulations. We support the practice of calfhood vaccination. We support the efforts by the
LDAF to maintain Louisiana as a brucellosis-free state.
(b) We recommend that the Louisiana Board of Animal Health strictly enforce brucellosis program regulations and
recommend that any producer not complying with these regulations be brought before the Board.
(c) We urge strict enforcement of the law prohibiting garbage feeding to swine in order to prevent hog cholera and
trichinosis.
(d) We recommend that Farm Bureau oppose any parish or state ordinance or law that would restrict the sale,
distribution, or possession of antirabies vaccine only to licensed veterinarians.
(e) We support the EIA regulations developed by the Louisiana Board of Animal Health to eradicate this disease in
Louisiana horses.
(f) We urge the LDAF to maintain comprehensive programs and policies to protect livestock from foot-and-mouth
disease, Scrapie, and BSE (mad cow disease).
(g) We urge LDAF to implement regulations that will prevent the introduction of exotic Newcastle disease in
Louisiana.
(h) The Equine Coggins test has been in effect for 25 years and was very effective in ridding our state of this
disease. Therefore, we request that this test be required every five years instead of its present one-year term for
equine within the state.
Farm Products and Equipment 203
1. Agricultural Chemicals
(a) We urge the continuation of the program under which the LDAF fairly and impartially tests all farm chemicals and
insecticides to determine if they meet the specifications of the manufacturer's label.
(b) We recommend that the registration of pesticides and fungicides for so-called "minor uses," including
horticulture crops, be streamlined.
(c) We support the enforcement of the law regarding aerial application of pesticides by the LDAF.
(d) We request LDAF to take two sealed samples when testing on-farm pesticides: one for the Department's use
and the other to be retained by the farmer.
(e) We support additional funding from USDA and the LDAF for the Extension Service to conduct Pesticide
Applicator Training programs.
(f) We support legislation which will relieve farmers of liability for groundwater contamination by fertilizer or farm
chemicals provided that state and federal labeling requirements are followed.
(g) We support the continuation of a disposal program for outdated pesticides.
(h) We support the continued use of Furadan.
(i) We urge Farm Bureau to make all efforts to keep all Triazine formulations labeled as they are at the present time.
(j) We recommend that the LDAF reevaluate the amount of liability coverage required for commercial pesticide
applicators. We also recommend that aerial applicators carry a minimum of $500,000 of crop liability coverage
when applying herbicides.
(k) We recommend that Farm Bureau consult with our legislators and request that farmers in the U.S. have an
opportunity to purchase the herbicide, "Dalapon M," from Russia or South America.
(l) We are opposed to proposed EPA regulations which would establish "zero tolerance" drift for aerial and ground
applications of pesticides. These regulations would require the establishment of large buffer zones within fields
which could not be protected from pests.
(m) We request that Farm Bureau work with AFBF regarding educational programs targeted toward the urban
community in order to prevent misuse of pesticides and ultimately preserve their use for agricultural purposes.
(n) Pesticides are an essential tool of agricultural production. We support reasonable, common sense regulation of
their use. We support an expanded program to inform and educate the public on the need for agricultural
chemicals and the protection against their misuse.
(o) We support the National Association of the State Departments of Agriculture in their efforts to minimize the
difficulties imposed on American farmers by the Worker Protection Standards.
(p) We oppose any curtailment of the safe and proper use of agricultural chemicals and drugs unless research and
scientific data determine that injury to health and well-being would result. We also request reevaluation of
previously canceled pesticides based on current scientific data. We urge pesticide companies to pursue
registration of products that would address the changing needs for agricultural crop protection.
(q) In order to maintain profitability in agricultural production, we urge Monsanto to reduce the technology fees.
(r) We urge the Louisiana State Police, the Louisiana Department of Motor Vehicles, and all local law enforcement
agencies to recognize excavators and dozers owned by federally designated farms and ranches as “farm
equipment.” Furthermore, for the purposes of movement of said equipment on state highways, the agricultural
exemption for CDL licenses and over-width permits shall apply.
2. Agricultural Seed
(a) We urge that present laws in seed be enforced and that the facilities of the state seed lab continue to be
maintained and upgraded to provide the best possible testing and analysis in the shortest length of time.
(b) We recommend that certified seed tags show the germination percentage, official vigor test, date of testing, and
crop year. We support a standardized vigor test for bulk seed.
(c) We recommend that all certified, registered, and breeder cotton and rice seed show cold test data on the seed
tag.
(d) We request that it become mandatory that all seed companies list the seed count per pound of all grains on their
packaging.
(e) We recommend that LFBF pursue getting the EPA to require a terminator gene be put in all seeds of GMO
variety.
3. Food Packaging and Advertising
(a) We urge the LDAF to enforce existing laws regulating false advertising.
(b) We support legislation and enforcement which would require all retail outlets for beef and beef products to print
on the package that the product is made from imported beef. Restaurants that use imported meat and meat
products should display a notice on each menu or at each ordering point to that effect.
(c) We recommend that when the term "domestic beef" is used in a description of beef, the amount of U.S. meat be
a minimum of 100%.
4. Production Practices
We support a program through the Farm Services Agency (FSA) for winter cover crops to help prevent erosion to
croplands and to provide winter grazing for livestock.
We request that LFBF Board of Directors request legislation authorizing the Louisiana Department of Agriculture
and Forestry to be the state entity to implement policies on care and handling of livestock, equine, and poultry and
prohibiting political subdivisions from enacting or enforcing ordinances or regulations that are more restrictive than
rules promulgated by the Department. Furthermore, ordinances or regulations by municipalities pertaining to land
use or to human health or safety shall not be considered to constitute livestock, equine, and poultry care and
handling.
5. Bulk Fuel Storage
We recommend that Farm Bureau monitor regulations and fees imposed on fuel storage tanks by the Department
of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and EPA and oppose additional fees and regulations placed on them.
6. Farm Implement Dealerships
We support the practice of dealer-owned and operated implement stores and recommend this be continued
whenever possible. Any hearings held on manufacturer-owned implement stores should be monitored.
7. Bulk Feed Samples
We recommend that the LDAF increase the number of bulk feed samples taken for testing to prevent
contaminated feeds from being fed to livestock.
8. Diesel Fuel Dye
We request an alternative method other than dye be used to differentiate diesel fuel used in off-road and farm
equipment.
9. Horse Rendering Plants
We urge Congress to pass legislation to allow horses to be processed at rendering plants in the United States.
10. Port Security
We request that LFBF work with the U.S. ports in Louisiana that handle agricultural commodities to establish Port
Security Plans that allow non-TWIC card drivers to enter the port to deliver commodities with an escort or by the
driver wearing a vest for visual identification and monitoring while in the port.
Communications and Transportation 204
1. Rights-of-Way Problems
The rights of landowners are often abused by the agencies that have the right of expropriation in obtaining land
for various purposes. More consideration should be given in the future to preserving precious farmland.
(a) We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to monitor state expropriation laws and recommend changes in them
when necessary to protect landowners and tenants. The law should mandate that authorities with expropriation
powers work with landowners by providing adequate notice and maintaining the rights-of-way.
(b) We recommend that all new pipelines be placed and existing pipelines be maintained at least four feet below the
surface and marked as to their location. We also recommend that in pipeline construction through agricultural and
wetland areas, equal consideration be given to the preservation of agricultural land as well as wetlands. We also
recommend that underground telephone lines be placed and maintained at least four feet below the surface.
Landowners and/or farmers should not be liable for costs of repair if telephone lines are laid at depths of less than
four feet.
(c) We support the passage of new laws which prohibit the granting to third parties of any rights to utilize portions of
an existing easement, rights-of-way, or servitude for purposes not provided for or intended to be used in connection
with the specific granting language of an easement, rights-of-way, or servitude agreement.
(d) We support regulations which would prohibit the granting of utility servitudes, easements, or rights-of-way by
local governing authorities to nonpublic entities.
(e) We oppose FCC regulations that give them the power to overrule local and state zoning laws regarding the
placement of tall towers.
(f) We request the Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD) to do a better job of maintaining the
rights-of-way of interstate highways and request that they conform with the state of Louisiana beautification laws on
all highways.
(g) We urge the State Board to activate a study committee as needed to work with representatives from DOTD,
electric, telephone, and water utilities and other interested parties to improve maintenance of rights-of-way. The
committee's objectives should include improved highway visibility, harvest of timber on the rights-of-way, reduce
power outages, return land to owner as rights-of-way are changed, guidelines for loggers and landowners, and
easier access to all utilities for maintenance.
(h) We support legislation which would require all pipeline owners and utilities to maintain a GPS identification and
location system to ensure accurate location of lines to better facilitate the Louisiana One Call system used by
farmers. In the case of lines that are dangerous if damaged, the utility representatives should be onsite during the
digging operation.
(i) We recommend that LFBF work to establish requirements that farmers be paid the full value for crops damaged
or destroyed by any company with right of way rights on a farmer’s crop land.
2. Rights-of-Way Easement
(a) Easement rights-of-way obtained by public or private sectors shall not be committed to any new or
additional purpose either during their original usage or after abandonment without consent or the
owner of the land underlying the easement.
(b) We oppose federal legislation that would deny or postpone the reversionary property rights or interests
of underlying or adjacent property owners to railroad, utility, or road rights-of-way that are no longer
being used for the purpose for which the rights-of-way were granted.
(c) We oppose any legislation that will permit utility rights-of-way, including railroad rights-of-way, to be
used for recreational purposes without permission of adjoining landowners.
(d) We request that Union Pacific and other railroads not be allowed to close crossings if the
crossing is the only access a landowner has to his property or if it would adversely affect
the farm operator.
(e) We request that Farm Bureau encourage Union Pacific and other railroads to clean and maintain
the culverts under their tracks so that drainage is not impeded.
(f) We support regulation of railroad crossings by the PSC.
(g) Farmers and landowners should not be liable for accidents at railroad crossings on their
property and should not be required to maintain the railroad right-of-way adjacent to crossings
on their property.
3. Rails to Trails
We oppose provisions of the National Trail System Act which permit rail property which is no longer being used
for rail service or when rail use is discontinued to be donated, sold, and/or used for trails or other recreational
purposes. When a railroad is abandoned, the rights-of-way should be returned or sold to the adjacent property
owners.
We support the concept of rail banking to preserve rights-of-way for future use, provided authorizing legislation
accomplishes the following:
(a) Require railroads to provide timely personal notice to each landowner before each proposed abandonment.
(b) Require railroads to reveal to each landowner before abandonment the full and complete legal basis on which
the railroad has claimed its right to occupy the corridor. If the railroad's right is less than fee simple ownership, the
railroad should be required to disclose to each landowner that its occupancy right will be extinguished upon
abandonment.
(c) Permit and encourage every landowner to participate in the abandonment proceeding and to offer reasons for or
against rail banking or trail use.
(d) Permit rail banking without interim trail use, and permit landowners to retain abandoned railroad corridors for
nontrail uses that will preserve the opportunity for restored rail use in the future.
(e) Require the Surface Transportation Board (STB) to consider all comments by landowners, to make specific
findings concerning the effects of proposed interim trail use on the safety, health, security, and privacy interests of
landowners and neighboring residents, and, based thereon, to make a determination of suitability for trail use
before issuing a Certificate of Interim Trail Use (CITU) or a Notice of Interim Trail Use (NITU).
(f) Require the STB to impose conditions to protect the safety, health, security, and privacy interests of landowners
where necessary or appropriate before issuing a CITU or a NITU.
(g) Create a predictable, objective, bright-line standard that abandonment is deemed to be consum-mated no later
than nine months after issuance of authority to abandon by STB.
(h) Require STB to supervise, monitor, and enforce its orders and conditions on rail banked land or to empower
state and local governments to do so without preemption by federal authorities.
(i) Create a procedure for reinstatement of rail service on rail banked corridors.
(j) Provide a clear and simple procedure to compensate landowners for their interest in land that is taken as a result
of rail banking order.
If not repealed altogether, the National Trails System Act should be amended to allow only those railroad rights-
of-way which have a realistic probability of being used again for a railroad to be approved for interim use as
recreational trails. The National Trails Act should be amended to require:
(a) A locally elected governmental entity to assume responsibility for the project and hold public hearings outlining a
plan for long-term maintenance. There should be input from citizens and con-tiguous landowners before the
property is transferred to any group.
(b) The entity receiving certification for trail use of a rail corridor to be held responsible for liability, rights-of-way
fencing, taxes, control of noxious weeds, maintenance of the rights-of-way, and other such costs which were
required of the railroad and should also be responsible for compensating the owners of the rights-of-way for use of
the property easement.
(c) That railroads provide timely personal notice to each landowner before each proposed abandonment.
(d) That railroads reveal to each landowner, before abandonment, the full and complete legal basis on which the
railroad has claimed its right to occupy the corridor. If the railroad's right is less than fee simple ownership, the
railroad should be required to disclose to each landowner that its occupancy right will be extinguished upon
abandonment. In cases where the railroad owns the rights-of-way in fee simple, however, selling to adjoining
landowners is appropriate and proper.
(e) Opportunity for every landowner to participate in the abandonment proceeding and to offer reasons for or
against rail banking or trail use.
(f) Opportunity for rail banking without interim trail use. Landowners should be allowed to retain rail-road corridors
for nontrail uses that will preserve the opportunity for restored rail use in the future.
(g) The STB to consider all comments by landowners, to make specific findings concerning the effects of proposed
interim trail use on the safety, health, security, and privacy interests of landowners and neighboring residents and,
based thereon, to make a determination of suitability for trail use before issuing a CITU or a NITU.
(h) Procedures granting the STB authority to accept or reject rail banking agreements entered into between the
railroad and trail sponsor.
(i) Local governing body approval of the recreational trail project before the STB can accept the rail-banking
agreement between the railroad and the trail sponsor.
(j) The STB to impose conditions to protect the safety, health, security, and privacy interests of land-owners, where
necessary or appropriate, before issuing a CITU or a NITU.
(k) Creation of a predictable, objective, bright-line standard that abandonment is deemed to be consummated no
later than nine months after issuance of authority to abandon by STB.
(l) The STB to supervise, monitor, and enforce its orders and conditions on rail-banked land or to empower state
and local governments to do so without preemption by federal authorities.
(m) Creation of a procedure for reinstatement of rail service on rail-banked corridors.
(n) A clear and simple procedure to compensate landowners for their interests in land that is taken as a result of a
rail banking order.
(o) We urge Farm Bureau to sponsor legislation to regulate any recreational trail developed under the National
Trails Act. The regulations governing these trails must ensure the property rights of landowners and ensure a safe
and useful trail. We suggest that Farm Bureau use the Kansas Farm Bureau Recreational Trails Act as a guide for
our legislation.
(p) We urge that if the proposed bike path is built along the Mississippi River levee from Baton Rouge to New
Orleans that it is at the bottom of the levee.
4. Federal, State, and Parish Roads
(a) Farm Bureau should urge state officials, including local senators and representatives, to obtain funding for the
building, overlaying, and other maintenance needed on state roads.
(b) We recommend that when parish and state roads are updated and widened, adequate consideration be given to
drainage. We also support additional funding for the parish road fund.
(c) We urge the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development to prioritize funds for road and highway
development.
(d) We request the PSC to require area railroad companies to properly maintain drainage culverts in order to
comply with state and local drainage programs.
(e) We request DOTD to continue to paint double yellow lines at intersections of state and parish roads and to place
caution lights where needed. We also encourage DOTD and local governments to maintain all road signs and
request them to place the signs far enough back on the rights-of-way to facilitate safe movement of farm
equipment. White lines should be painted on the edge of the travel lane as a safety precaution.
(f) We urge police juries, parish councils, levee boards, and DOTD to do a better job of supervising roadwork crews
in order to better maintain highways and parish roads, especially farm-to-market roads.
(g) We recommend that DOTD use materials equal in quality for the construction of both road surfaces and
shoulders to insure safety on our state roads.
(h) We recommend that private individuals be allowed to utilize the forages along the state and federal highways for
hay.
(i) We urge DOTD to post caution signs along those highways highly used by farm machinery.
(j) We recommend that if Highway 90 becomes part of Interstate 49, special consideration should be made to allow
farm implements to cross the Wax Lake outlet bridge.
(k) We request that frontage (service) roads be constructed from Morgan City to Lafayette.
(l) We request that left-turn lanes be constructed on Highway 90 between Morgan City and Lafayette.
(m) We urge DOTD to construct a permanent bridge over Bayou Plaquemine on Louisiana Highway 91 north of
Estherwood.
(n) In order to increase safety on Highway 90, we request that DOTD reestablish the 55-mph speed limit between
Morgan City and Lafayette.
(o) We urge that harvest-season permits allowing maximum weight limits of 100,000 pounds be acquired for all
commodities on federal highways.
(p) We support the continued availability of 100,000-pound permits for farm trucks.
(q) We recommend informing our membership on the current federal highway use tax provisions as they apply to
agriculture. This should be done through the Louisiana Farm Bureau News, news-letters, and letters to parish
presidents.
(r) We request that the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development trim tree limbs overhanging
highways in order to facilitate the transport of large farm equipment.
(s) We urge DOTD to place a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 402 and Highway 1.
5. Telephone Service
(a) We urge the Public Service Commission (PSC) to support local parish Farm Bureaus' efforts to reduce the
number of telephone exchanges within parishes in order to improve local service.
(b) We recommend that the dead zones experienced by cellular phone users be eliminated.
Electric Companies 205
1. We oppose the rate structure used by electric companies whereby customers pay demand charges on
agricultural facilities for 12 months of the year when the facilities may actually be used only one to three months of
the year.
2. We oppose Louisiana PSC rate increases that recoup the speculative ventures normally financed by stock-
holders, such as nuclear plants.
3. We request that utility companies work with farmers to insure that farm equipment can be moved without
disturbing the utility line.
4. We urge that Farm Bureau seek the cooperation and support of the utility companies in upgrading the quality and
quantity of service in rural areas.
5. We support open board meetings to the membership of each respective rural electric cooperative, notification
and public hearings prior to any rate change, and each cooperative having the option to be regulated by its
respective board of directors or the PSC, subject to the conditions set forth in the Act.
6. We support the prevention of duplication of electric service within 300 feet of existing utility power lines.
7. We support the reenactment by the PSC of the orders and rules which deal with the definition of territory of
electric utilities and duplication of electric services.
Taxation and Finance 206
1. Agricultural Taxation
(a) We support maintaining use value taxation of agricultural, horticultural, forest, and marshlands.
(b) We believe it to be unfair and inequitable to allow all registered voters to vote in property tax elections, and we
should work to correct this situation.
(c) We request the reinstatement of exemptions for all agricultural equipment.
(d) We recommend that state and local governing bodies include a “sunset” provision in all special-purpose tax
legislation which will terminate the tax upon completion of the project.
(e) We support the appropriate changes in state law that excludes borrowed capital in computing the corporate
franchise tax.
(f) We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to study homestead exemption and alternative methods of taxation
and that the State Board be given authority to support lowering the homestead exemption if deemed appropriate.
(g) We support only those increases in local property taxes that are fair to farm landowners and recommend that the
use of such increased revenue be clearly defined and dedicated by a vote of the people.
(h) We recommend that the State Board study the possibility of placing a minimum valuation on all property so that
the homeowner still maintains some protection and all homeowners make a contribution when they vote on taxes.
(i) We oppose parish and/or municipal governing authorities from levying taxes or user fees without a vote of the
people. In addition, we oppose water use taxation.
(j) We recommend that Farm Bureau help educate taxpayers concerning “use” tax and penalties for nonpayment of
Louisiana sales tax when purchasing from out-of-state dealers.
(k) We request Farm Bureau to contact the appropriate government/administration officials to voice our opposition
to the current federal and state tax audit process and to pursue a change in the system whereby an individual will
be “innocent until proven guilty.”
(l) We support a sales tax exemption on new and/or used farm equipment that is either leased or rented.
(m) We request that Farm Bureau support legislation which would include utility farm vehicles (for example: John
Deere Gators, Kawasaki Mules; etc.) in the sales tax exemption definition of farm equipment and allow Farm Bureau
staff to seek to further define this exemption legislatively, if necessary.
(n) We support the continued implementation of the graduated sales tax exemption on all farm equipment.
(o) We request that Farm Bureau support legislation to exempt equipment used for aerial application of chemicals,
fertilizer, and seeds from sales tax.
(p) We oppose the imposition of franchise taxes on utilities by parish police juries or councils in unincorporated
areas.
(q) We oppose franchise taxes on cotton gins and cotton warehouses.
(r) We urge the Louisiana Department of Revenue to inform fuel distributors that off-road diesel is not subject to
state or local sales tax and does not require an exemption certificate.
(s) We request legislation if needed to allow local taxing entities to suspend the collection of sales tax on propane
and/or natural gas farm equipment using these fuel sources.
(t) We urge LFBF work through legislative means to have line “B” of RS 47:305:37 deleted, this would place all
parishes under the same eligibilities. (In any parish having a population of more than one hundred twenty thousand
persons but less than one hundred forty thousand persons based on the latest Federal decennial census.)
2. We strongly oppose ad valorem taxes at the state level and recommend that this source of tax revenue be
reserved for local governing bodies.
Natural Resources 207
1. Flood Control
(a) We support reasonable flood control through coordination among federal and state agencies and private
organizations.
(b) We oppose the federal takeover of the Atchafalaya Basin and urge that the Agency Management Group adopt a
flood control plan which will relieve a flood situation as soon as possible and minimize private property damage.
(c) We support retention and consolidation of levee districts as recommended by the 2006 Regular Session of the
Legislature. However, we oppose any future consolidation of levee districts.
(d) We recommend that the mayor and city council for East Baton Rouge Parish develop a more suitable plan for
flood control in the parish that occurs from heavy rains and backwater.
(e) We oppose the construction of the Darlington Reservoir and strongly support the abolishment of the Amite River
Basin Drainage Commission. We oppose any additional funding for either of these projects.
(f) We urge the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps of Engineers) to dredge all flood control-drainage canals
associated with the Corps of Engineers’ levee system in Louisiana when such work is supported by the parish Farm
Bureau in the affected area.
(g) We recommend that guidelines be established regarding pumping water and building levees in one parish that
might affect bordering parishes.
(h) We request that Farm Bureau urge the Governor, the legislature, the Louisiana Congressional Delegation, and
state and federal natural resource management agencies to take the necessary steps to enhance and maintain
freshwater and sediment flows in Louisiana’s coastal wetlands. This is an attempt to sustain a healthy marsh system
and sustain the availability of freshwater resources vital to the economic viability of agriculture in our coastal
parishes. Any projects undertaken in a particular parish should have the consideration of the impact the project
would have on adjoining parishes. Drainage improvements within a parish to address local flooding problems can
proceed at any time after downstream improvements have been made.
(i) We request that the Corps of Engineers continue to maintain Locks 1, 2, and 3, as well as the Pearl River
Navigation Canal and Levee System.
(j) We request that the Corps of Engineers allow recreational users of the Pearl River Navigation Canal System and
that the users of Locks 1, 2, and 3 be allowed access to the docks at these locations.
2. Irrigation and Drainage
(a) We endorse a coordinated program of the Department of Public Works (DPW) and the Corps of Engineers in
developing a plan to control salt water intrusion from the Gulf of Mexico into streams used for irrigation in Louisiana.
In implementing a program to supply fresh water for irrigation purposes, we urge that these agencies coordinate
efforts to assure that drainage networks be maintained during heavy overflow from reservoirs to provide an
adequate supply of fresh water.
(b) Because of the importance of a permanent, adequate supply of fresh water to the economy of Louisiana and the
necessity of assuring an even larger supply to take care of future growth, we urge work with other organizations in
the development of all feasible water resource development projects and encourage funding of the chloride
research program for the Red River for use in municipal water systems and irrigation.
(c) We offer encouragement and assistance to LSU in the expansion of research on the problem of irrigation,
including the Red River.
(d) We oppose the effort by local governing bodies in parishes adjacent to the Red River to remove funds from the
Red River Waterway Commission.
(e) We encourage the Red River Valley Association to develop programs for reducing or eliminating the salt content
from the River.
(f) We urge the engineers of the DPW, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service, and all commissions, committees, and boards to make public as soon as practical, the results of their
studies and research and provide background information on which their decisions are based.
(g) We urge that Farm Bureau resist the efforts of various organized groups to stop needed watershed and
drainage projects in Louisiana.
(h) We urge the DPW, the Corps of Engineers, and the appropriate levee districts to work toward improving the
overall drainage in all parishes that are drained by the Atchafalaya Floodway. We also request better protection by
federal and state agencies of land from backwater flooding, especially if this backwater flooding is caused and can
be stopped by drainage systems and structures in place, by modifying or changing current rules and regulations, or
by scheduled maintenance of these systems. We request that work in this area be expedited because of flooding
problems in most parishes that are drained by the Atchafalaya Floodway.
(i) We recommend that the Corps of Engineers conduct an updated study on the problem of draining water from
behind all levee systems, as well as levee districts, in Louisiana.
(j) We oppose the inclusion of streams in the scenic rivers system which are important for drainage of agricultural
land areas.
(k) We support the continuation of the Aquatic Plant Research and Control Program.
(l) In principle, we support the clearing and dredging of the Tensas River when funds become avail-able since the
Corps of Engineers and the Madison Soil Conservation District both have endorsed this action to improve drainage.
We support the efforts of the Tensas River Basin Technical Steering Committee in developing a plan of work for
addressing ecological and socio-economic issues in the Tensas River Basin of Northeast Louisiana.
(m) We feel that landowners should be compensated at fair market value for erosion on their property caused by
government actions.
(n) We recommend that the Bayou Lafourche Siphon Freshwater Diversion Restoration Project in Louisiana conduct
extensive research on the impact this project would have on the agricultural industry along Bayou Lafourche before
its approval and commencement. We request that the proper governmental agencies keep the citizens of all
affected parishes informed of all proposals concerning the Bayou Lafourche Siphon Project.
(o) We request a study of the ways to enhance the surface water supplies in Louisiana.
(p) We request that consideration be given to high water during times of excessive rains in the Mermentau Basin.
We support maintaining the fresh water integrity of the Mermentau Basin. We also request that Farm Bureau work
with our congressional delegation to secure the necessary authority for the Corps to repair breaches in levee
systems and structures and to maintain these systems and structures to prevent saltwater intrusion into our
freshwater basins.
(q) We request that Farm Bureau assist in getting Cancienne Canal dredged.
(r) We request that Farm Bureau facilitate a meeting between Pointe Coupee, West Baton Rouge, Iberville,
Assumption, and other affected parishes to the south to discuss a solution to the drainage problems faced by Pointe
Coupee Parish and others.
(s) We request that Farm Bureau seek modifications in parish water treatment systems’ use of salt for water
softening due to salt contamination of streams and designate every stream used by agriculture as a designated
agricultural-use stream.
3. Water Diversion
(a) We oppose any action to divert water from the Mississippi River, Sabine River, Toledo Bend Reservoir, and all
aquifers within the state to other states for any reason until all present and future needs for water in Louisiana have
been studied and ample safeguards made to assure Louisiana first priority to water from these sources.
(b) We are opposed to any national or regional plan, except fresh water diversion projects, to divert water from the
Mississippi River if such changes affect the natural flow of the river and its tributaries or result in salinity, pollution,
navigation hazards, or damage to wildlife, fishing, industry, and agriculture in Louisiana.
(c) We request that the appropriate state or federal agency initiate a comprehensive study to evaluate the viability
of moving water from the Red River through existing natural and man-made channels into the Mermentau Basin for
agricultural use and wetland benefits.
4. Coastal Wetlands
(a) The Corps of Engineers should establish as a primary mission the enhancement, restoration, and maintenance
of viable coastal wetlands. The relationship between the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and
farmers in providing technical assistance in joint soil and water conservation projects should serve as a successful
model. Assistance to private wetlands land-owners through incentives such as cost-share and technical assistance
programs should replace the often adversarial role of federal agencies that frequently discourage positive wetlands
enhancement projects.
(b) Coastal wetlands deterioration in Louisiana has been caused primarily by the secondary effects of various
channelization projects. Federal wetlands policy must address this issue and provide an adequate long-term
remedy to this major cause of wetlands loss. The permit process must direct and allow for corrective measures to
be taken in areas which have been detrimentally affected by the aforementioned channelization projects.
(c) Coastal wetlands policy should clearly establish that major losses of wetlands in coastal Louisiana are
attributable to human activity benefiting national interests.
(d) Environmentally sound exploration and development of oil and natural gas reserves in coastal Louisiana should
be encouraged. Current federal permitting policies and regulations have greatly hindered the oil and gas industry
and have significantly reduced the economic return from private wetlands in South Louisiana.
(e) Currently both the Fish & Wildlife Services (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) evaluate
the impact of proposed coastal projects on fisheries resources. We recommend that the FWS should be the federal
agency that evaluates the impact of proposed coastal projects on fisheries and wildlife resources.
(f) The concept of mitigation banking should be established in coastal wetlands permitting; however, where
mitigation projects are available on permit applicant’s land, such sites/projects should be given first consideration.
(g) Mitigation should only be required where convincing, adverse environmental damage can be documented.
Wetlands protection, enhancement, restoration, and maintenance projects should never require mitigation. Such
projects should be encouraged through cost-share/incentive programs sponsored through USDA or the Corps of
Engineers.
(h) We support the full funding and implementation of coastal restoration and coastal protection measures.
5. Coastal Zone Management
(a) We recommend that Farm Bureau represent the interests of agriculture in matters relating to coastal zone
management. We support the efforts of Vermilion, Cameron, and Calcasieu parishes and their efforts to form and
fund a tri-parish coastal protection authority with the possibility of eventually including Iberia parish and other
eastern components.
(b) We recommend that the Louisiana plan to implement the Nonpoint Source Pollution Program in the coastal zone
area come under the direction of the Commissioner of Agriculture and the LDAF, as established in Executive Order
EWE 93-14. Specifically, we recommend that:
(1) The present boundaries of the current coastal zone be retained.
(2) Implementation of the Coastal Zone Management Plan by agricultural producers should be voluntary. Emphasis
should be placed on education, technical assistance, and BMPs, as recommended by the AgCenter.
(3) Agricultural producers should not be subject to any civil penalties or any other enforcement mechanisms
concerning noncompliance of Coastal Zone Pollution Control Regulations.
(c) We support a well-funded program to control erosion of our coastal marshes and wetlands. We support the
continuation of the Farm Bureau Coastal Activities and Wetlands Advisory Committee. We oppose any and all shell
dredging near Vermilion Bay or any barrier island that exists off Louisiana waters. The barrier islands and shell
reefs are critical to the protection and restoration of the Louisiana Gulf Coast and the maintenance of productive
estuaries for our fisheries resources.
6. Salt Water Intrusion
Since Section 8(g) of the O.C.S. Lands Act, as amended in 1978, makes funds available to states impacted by
offshore oil and gas operators, we recommend that 50 percent of all future Section 8(g) funds be used in parishes
and counties of impacted areas to protect against further erosion and land loss. Because the loss of our marshes
and wetlands by erosion is having an adverse impact on national economic development, we support an effort to
have the Secretary of Agriculture include private landowners in soil conservation practices under existing USDA
programs.
7. Soil Typing Survey
We recommend that the NRCS and the Corps of Engineers continually reclassify land with respect to overall
improvements in order for landowners to be eligible for all benefits realized from improved farmland.
8. Air and Water Pollution
We generally support clean air and water and urge Farm Bureau to work with state and federal pollution control
agencies in the interest of agriculture in Louisiana. We are opposed, however, to the proposed modifications to the
Clean Air Act as being too stringent to be workable.
9. Hazardous Waste Disposal
We support the proper storage and disposal of hazardous waste. We also recommend that Farm Bureau
continue to assist parish Farm Bureaus in averting any development of improper hazardous waste disposal sites
which would adversely affect its future.
10. Sanitary Landfills
We support sound, environmentally safe methods of recycling waste in lieu of landfill disposal facilities. However,
we recommend that sanitary landfills be kept open and maintained until acceptable alternative methods are
available.
11. Land Use
(a) We oppose any federal land use planning. We believe that land use planning can best be accomplished at the
parish or comparable level of government and by private landowners. We are also opposed to government
agencies restricting the use of prime agricultural land.
(b) We urge that agricultural interests be alert to parish and community land use planning activities and seek to
have input with regard to the importance of agriculture and any proposed restrictions on the use of agriculturally
oriented property. We strongly recommend that a farmer or rural land-owner whose land is used for farming
purposes be added to all land use planning committees or boards.
12. Land Ownership
(a) We support the maintenance of the private property rights of U.S. citizens to make whatever use of their property
they want as long as it does not adversely affect the property rights of others.
(b) We recommend that individuals or groups filing suits or securing injunctions which would deprive the landowner
of the use of his property be required to post a bond sufficient to cover any income or use lost as a result of the suit
or injunction if the court decides in favor of the landowner.
(c) We support those provisions of the mineral code, particularly the Louisiana Abandoned Oilfield Waste Site Law
that requires the cleanup of drilling sites and waste pits in an attempt to restore the surface to its original condition.
(d) We recommend that Farm Bureau study the quick-taking provisions in the expropriation statutes and offer
possible solutions to landowners.
13. Wildlife and Fisheries
(a) We recommend that the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) work closely with farmers to
control damage from wildlife to crops and livestock.
(b) We support state funding for a predator control program in Louisiana.
Because of the overpopulation of alligators in certain areas of the state, we request that the Department of Wildlife
and Fisheries increase the number of tags per acre and decrease the number of live releases that offset egg
removal in order to help control the population. We further request that additional personnel be assigned to speed
up the process of determining the overpopulation.
(c) We support the LDWF “Operation Game Thief.”
(d) Catfish and crawfish farmers suffer severe losses because of the double-crested cormorant and ibis; therefore,
we request the LDWF to seek an exception to protective regulations in order for damaged producers to protect their
fish.
(e) We oppose the taking of any agricultural land, including forestland in production or out of production, for the
black bear or any other endangered or threatened species as designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. We
urge that the black bear habitat not be expanded any further at all.
(f) We recommend that Farm Bureau renew efforts to request LDAF to provide additional qualified trappers to assist
landowners on a statewide basis and in a timely manner with the control and elimination of nuisance animals, and in
particular beaver, nutria, coyotes, feral hogs and domestic hogs not in captivity.
(g) We oppose the use of gill nets but oppose state legislation which bans the use of other types of nets for
commercial fishermen. We support a limited-entry program for out-of-state fishermen in order to preserve
Louisiana water for Louisiana fishermen.
14. Property Rights
(a) We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to monitor and protect the property rights of land-owners and
farmers.
(b) We support the landowner notifying the tenant farmer in a timely manner of his intentions to sell the land well in
advance of the proposed sale which would take the land out of cultivation. Before the land is developed the
landowner must financially compensate the tenant farmer for his crop and investments or reach a mutual agreement
for financial compensation with the tenant farmer for his crop and investment where a written lease is not present.
We urge Farm Bureau to be actively engaged in the work of the Legislative Study Committee that will propose
legislation relative to the problems addressed in House Bill 454 of the 2009 Legislative Session.
(c) We request that LFBF work to increase the communication between landlords, tenant farmers, and land
surveyors, and others having legitimate business on the leased premises and seek ways to help limit tenant farmers’
liability when these groups enter their rented land. We also request that efforts be made to allow tenant farmers to
collect for damages to crops and equipment that result from such activity.
(d) We recommend that seismic and/or exploration companies boring, breaking, or puncturing the soil to a depth
greater than 25 feet be required to obtain a $25,000 surety bond. Upon depositing the bond with the parish council,
the company may be granted a rights-of-way permit contingent upon an approved plan by the company to backfill all
drilled or excavated holes with the original soil or some approved substitute from the base of the hole to the original
surface level.
(e) We oppose the expansion of the right of expropriation to any entity, agency, or person not already having such
rights under state law.
(f) We recommend legislation that under certain circumstances will give private individuals the ability to separate
mineral interests from land in perpetuity in order to compete with federal and state agencies and departments
having this authority in selling or transferring tracts of real estate.
(g) We recommend that entities having the right of expropriation be prohibited from taking privately owned land to
be given or sold to another private entity.
(h) We request changes to make private companies liable for legal expenses in expropriation of land by private
entities if they lose their case.
15. Environmental Issues
(a) We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to make available to farm operators information concerning the
disposal, recycling, and reuse of used farm supplies such as empty containers, oils, etc.
(b) Prior to closure, we recommend that it be mandatory for a property seller to disclose any prior use of the
property, such as a landfill or hazardous waste dump, which may affect its future use.
(c) We support voluntary, incentive-based programs for the agricultural industry in addressing environ-mental
issues.
(d) We support legislation to allow the burning of one day’s use of properly rinsed and cleaned farm use containers
and seed bags.
(e) We oppose any legislation that would restrict a farmer’s right to agricultural burning.
(f) We urge that timber dealers be legally responsible for cleanup of tree tops and debris that interfere with drainage
of creeks, streams, and ditches.
(g) We urge farmers to refrain from burning and spraying lands in close proximity to schools which may be disruptive
to school children during school hours from 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
(h) We recommend continued support of voluntary participation in Operation Quackback in conjunction with the
Louisiana Rice Growers and Extension Service.
(i) We request Farm Bureau to pursue state and national legislation that would require retail outlets to use
biodegradable bags at the point of purchase in an effort to reduce the pollution problem plaguing our state as a
result of the use of plastic bags.
(j) We request Farm Bureau to encourage sugarcane growers to have at least one certified burn manager on each
sugarcane farming operation.
(k) We request Farm Bureau to support legislation to continue landowners’ legal rights to sue parties to recover
damages for pollution to surface and ground water with the following provisions:
(1) Notification to DEQ and DNR of lawsuits filed to recover damages to groundwater.
(2) Mandate that court-awarded damages for groundwater contamination be completed by landowners as rendered
by the court and under the supervision of DEQ and the court.
(3) Cleanup plan developed by landowner and DEQ be implemented timely within six months of court decree.
(4) Court-awarded damages be deposited with the landowners, subject to oversight by the Court.
Education and Youth 208
1. Education
(a) We support adequate teacher salaries from permanent, dedicated funds to maintain and improve our Louisiana
educational system.
(b) We recommend that a percentage of lottery revenues be devoted strictly to classroom instruction.
(c) We support recertification of teachers on a recurring basis by rewarding those teachers who submit to such a
program with substantial increases in their present salary structure. We also support efforts to index salaries so
that teachers who teach beyond 12 years would continue to receive adjustments to their salary up to 30 years.
(d) We support efforts to strengthen student testing programs and recommend that this apply to all graduating
students.
(e) While we support standardized tests for students, we oppose the disproportionate emphasis placed on the
results of these so-called “high-stakes” tests that puts undue pressure on administrators, teachers, and students.
This results in students being taught primarily to prepare for the tests rather than basic skills.
(f) We oppose any effort to tie education reform to a comprehensive tax increase.
(g) We support the teaching of respect and patriotism in all schools.
(h) We support “Agriculture in the Classroom” (AITC) and other educational programs which can develop an
understanding of economics, supply and demand, and the sources of food, fiber, pharmaceuticals, and other life-
sustaining items and recommend that these programs be made available to all students. We also recommend that
teachers receive training to make them agriculturally literate.
(i) We encourage all agricultural organizations and businesses to provide financial support to the Louisiana
Foundation for Agriculture in the Classroom in order to further the education of the youth and teachers of Louisiana
about the agricultural industry.
(j) We recommend that our Congressional delegation be contacted to encourage the continued funding of the USDA
AITC program under the new administration.
(k) We support free textbooks and transportation for all children in accredited state public or private schools
regardless of when the school was organized.
(l) We support tax-deductible status for private school tuition and educational school vouchers.
(m) We encourage all levels of government to recognize the right of private groups to organize and operate
educational institutions and the importance of maintaining conditions which permit such institutions to operate.
2. Higher Education
(a) We request that Louisiana residents be given first consideration over out-of-state students for admission to state
medical schools, vet schools, student aid, and on-campus jobs. Students majoring in agriculture should be given
first consideration for jobs in university ag departments.
(b) In an effort to offset budget cuts, we recommend that the boards of supervisors for the state universities exercise
their authority to raise the tuition fees for foreign college students to the extent that reflects the total actual cost of
the education.
(c) We support a continuing agricultural program at state-run universities outside the land-grant universities.
(d) We oppose the current state legislative policy of using higher education funding for political leverage and
support funding higher education at the highest level possible.
(e) We recommend that a committee of two or three people be appointed to work with the appropriate people from
the Board of Regents, the BESE Board, and others involved to further reform the way college credits are transferred
from university to university (and from two-year colleges) so that accredited courses will be accepted from one
university to another within the state.
(f) We recommend that Farm Bureau urge the legislature to support land-grant universities and provide more funds
to help farmers and ranchers receive the services they need.
3. Vocational Education
(a) We support the inclusion of FFA/vocational agricultural programs in our public school systems. We recommend
that FFA/vocational agricultural education be fully funded on a 12-month basis. We urge that Farm Bureau work
with the Louisiana Agriculture Teachers’ Association to solve the problem of providing leadership for the Agricultural
Education/FFA Program in Louisiana.
(b) We recommend that all 4-H activities conducted with the local school system continue to be classified co-
curriculum under BESE regulations and that agriscience programs be classified as intra-curriculum. We recommend
that all parish school boards be encouraged to adjust student schedules to allow them the opportunity to participate
in these activities.
(c) We support training courses in agricultural equipment operation and repair in technical colleges. These classes
would also include instructional information on safety standards which should be followed on farming operations.
(d) We support a two-track educational curriculum in the high-school system that includes both a college
preparatory and a vocational preparatory alternative.
(e) We support the Louisiana School for the AgriSciences (LaSAS) and the establishment of similar agriscience-
focused schools in the state.
(f) We urge continued funding for 4-H county agents and other personnel involved in programs for our youth as we
regard these activities as being among the most beneficial to students in both grammar and high school.
(g) We support the continuance of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Act and the funding thereof to
secure programs of agricultural education in our state.
4. Food Animal Veterinarians
(a) We request that the state fund Act No. 809, which was previously passed by the state legislature, and which
provides for loans to eligible applicants who are Louisiana residents and will obtain doctor of veterinary degrees
which will qualify them to be food animal veterinarians.
(b) We urge an increase in LSU Veterinary School class size with more emphasis to be placed on food animal
practice.
(c) We urge the restructuring of entrance criteria to place more weight on actual prior clinical experience.
(d) We urge that the Louisiana Veterinary Medical Association be allowed to nominate one applicant from each of
their nine districts and that this nomination be used to enhance their chances for admission to the LSU Veterinary
School.
Safety 209
1. In view of the excellent safety record in those states which place a major emphasis on driver education in the
schools, we recommend that driver’s training be established and funded by the state in all public junior high and
senior high schools.
2. We recommend that rural citizens be given good road conditions equal to others around the state through the
use of painted white lines, speed limit signs, caution lights when necessary, and stop signs at intersections on farm-
to-market roads. Further, guardrails on new bridges should be a minimum of 30 feet apart.
3. We urge all railroads to keep weeds mowed at all crossings and maintain weed control of rights-of-way.
Crossings should be adequately maintained. We urge state and local governing bodies to enforce these rules in
the interest of safety. We urge that arms, bells, and lights at all railroad crossings on state and parish highways be
installed and maintained and urge legislation to assure that this is accomplished.
4. We request Farm Bureau to research the possibility of having laws that regulate railroads from blocking public
roads to apply to private roads as well.
5. Violations of OSHA can be costly to farmers. We urge that information continue to be provided to farmers
regarding their obligations and responsibilities.
6. We recommend that the LSU Firemen Training Program continue to offer educational programs between local fire
departments and/or districts and local water districts on the proper utilization of fire fighting equipment, especially
fire hydrants of different size standards.
7. We encourage and support the use of slow-moving vehicle emblems and favor ongoing programs to inform the
motoring public of their responsibility to reduce speed and be cautious when approaching and overtaking vehicles
displaying this emblem.
8. We support the strict enforcement of the law requiring pulpwood haulers to secure their loads to prevent logs
from falling on the roadways.
9. We request that Farm Bureau make specialized harvest safety signs available to all farmers. We also request
that they work with DOTD to make these signs available statewide and easily recognizable by all drivers.
State Government 210
1. Labor-Management Relations
(a) We oppose unionization of farm labor.
(b) We oppose agricultural labor relations legislation.
(c) We oppose the repeal of the Louisiana Right-to-Work Law. We also oppose any attempt to weaken the Right-to-
Work Law by passage of the agency shop concept.
2. Louisiana Welfare Program
We urge the Welfare Department to insist that employable persons return to the labor force instead of remaining
on welfare rolls.
3. Public Institutions in Agriculture
We oppose public institutions going into commercial agriculture as unfair competition to local producers.
We recommend full funding for the LSU Ag Center (LSUAC) at the July 1, 2008 funding level of the state
appropriations and encourage the Governor, state legislators, and the Board of Regents to support and take action
to meet this request.
4. Worker’s Compensation
(a) We support the Louisiana Worker’s Compensation Corporation but urge that Farm Bureau continue to work for
equitable worker’s compensation laws.
(b) We oppose the increase of worker’s compensation payment benefits until such time as adequate safeguards are
incorporated to prevent abuse of the law.
(c) We support an exemption in state law that would allow employees to sign a waiver to opt out of worker’s
compensation coverage that is otherwise required.
5. Unemployment Compensation
(a) We strongly support the current exemptions provided for agricultural employers with regard to having to pay
unemployment taxes and request Farm Bureau to work toward increasing these exemptions. We also support
putting a ceiling on unemployment compensation for part-time or temporary workers.
(b) We support allowing farm operators and corporation stockholders to have the option of whether to pay
unemployment insurance premiums on themselves even though they pay the premium on their employees. If such
persons are required to pay premiums, they should be eligible to receive payments under certain circumstances
other than dissolving the corporation.
(c) We support the exemption for farmers from paying unemployment insurance on full-time college students.
6. Insurance Laws
(a) We oppose Louisiana statutes which allow intra-family lawsuits.
(b) We support the continued efforts of the state legislature and/or local police juries to expand local fire stations in
each parish. This gives more fire protection to the rural community and helps to lower fire insurance for individuals
living outside fire districts.
(c) We recommend that borrowers not be required to purchase insurance from the institution which issued the loan.
Instead, we recommend that borrowers have the option to purchase required insurance from the company of their
preference.
(d) We support the repeal of the direct-action statute against insurance companies.
(e) We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to support tort reform legislation to return to a fairer judicial system
for all landowners and citizens of the state.
(f) We urge the strict enforcement of the law requiring the revocation of the license plate, as well as the driver’s
license, of any individual driving without liability insurance.
(g) We request continued support for the state police and local law enforcement agencies’ efforts in checking
motorists for liability insurance coverage.
(h) We support the reduction of the underlying costs of automobile insurance for individuals complying with the laws
of the state of Louisiana. In order to accomplish this, we recommend the examination of proposals – such as limiting
the rights of individuals to recover damages if they have not complied with the financial responsibility law, tort
reform, enhanced enforcement of the financial responsibility, pure no-fault insurance, and any other relevant
proposals – to determine the most effective methods to reduce the underlying costs of automobile insurance
coverage.
(i) We oppose class-action suits.
(j) We request that LFBF address the serious liability problems regarding farm equipment and implements on public
highways. LFBF and its insurance companies should explore all laws regarding this issue and work with the
legislature to improve protection to our farmers.
7. State Game Laws
(a) We urge that all efforts of any group to add any species of egrets to the list of legal game birds in Louisiana be
actively resisted because they are essential in the control of flies and other pests among cattle.
(b) We recommend that state wildlife enforcement agents be required to respect the personal and private rights of
landowners as stated in the Constitution. We also recommend that state wildlife enforcement agents be required to
use headlights when driving on public roads after dark.
(c) We oppose the infusion and/or relocation into the state of any wild animals not native to Louisiana.
8. Weights and Measures
(a) We urge the Department of Weights and Measures of the LDAF to continue to make preseason checks and
seasonal checks for accuracy of scales and weighing procedures at all major points of sale and weight stations
throughout the state.
(b) We support additional funds if necessary for increased inspection to provide more frequent and accurate testing
for agricultural commodity scales.
(c) We recommend that DOTD upgrade bridges on all roads to comply with allowable load limits.
9. Litter Laws
(a) We urge stronger and more aggressive enforcement of existing litter laws, particularly on parish roads and rights-
of-way where litter causes drainage problems. We recommend the fine for littering be a minimum of $100 and a
maximum of $500 on highways and parish roads. The fine for littering and/or dumping on private property should
be no less than $1,000 per violation. A penalty should be levied against the driver of the vehicle from which litter
was dumped or thrown. We recommend that parish Farm Bureaus urge state and local agencies to aggressively
enforce litter laws along public rights-of-way.
(b) We support a program using state and local prisoners to pick up litter on all highway rights-of-way. Salvageable
items should be recycled to help defer the costs.
10. Recycling
(a) We support a statewide recycling program.
(b) We recommend that use of nonreturnable glass bottles be prohibited.
(c) We request that farmers and ranchers be relieved from liability from the pickup of waste oil by recyclers.
11. Agricultural Law Enforcement
(a) We recommend continuing steps to see that all laws presently under the jurisdiction of the Com-missioner of the
LDAF be enforced as intended; and, in particular, we demand continuing action to force all feed and fertilizer
companies to comply with laws regulating the sale of feed and fertilizer and to assess penalties for all ingredients
found to be deficient. We also oppose any efforts to weaken the penalties and standards of the present Louisiana
fertilizer law.
(b) We recommend no clemency to elevator operators convicted of fraud.
(c) We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to support the "Crime Stoppers" program for farm theft.
This program should represent a coalition of agriculturally related interests and businesses and should be
coordinated with the LDAF Enforcement Division.
(d) We recommend that the bond requirement for grain dealers and rice mills be increased from the current $50,000
to a larger amount based on the volume of grain handled.
(e) We request that Farm Bureau work with parish governing authorities on problems landowners experience with
the placement of unauthorized advertisements and political campaign signs on their property.
(f) We recommend that the LDAF continue to investigate the proper labeling of BASA fish.
(g) We request that Farm Bureau seek legislation, if necessary, to exempt poultry growers from any fee associated
with the general CAFO permit developed and implemented by DEQ.
12. Trespass Laws
We continue to support trespass laws which benefit Louisiana farmers.
We support vigorous prosecution of off-road vehicles trespassing on private land and the selling of those
vehicles at public auction with proceeds going to local law enforcement agencies.
13. Louisiana Preference Act
We recommend continued support for the LDAF seven-percent preference for Louisiana-produced commodities
to state institutions.
14. Tax-Exempt Bonds
We support the concept of selling tax-free bonds for the benefit of the agricultural industry. We support having a
portion of the money generated from these sales made available for production loans.
15. State Election Laws
(a) We oppose any change in state or local election laws which would allow a candidate to be elected to office
without receiving a majority of the votes cast in the election.
(b) We recommend working with the Secretary of State to revise the voting dates in Louisiana. Due to the high cost
of holding elections, we strongly recommend a reduction in the number of elections and also recommend that local
and state elections be coordinated with national elections.
(c) We recommend that Farm Bureau give priority to seeking the establishment of two voting dates: one in
November and the other in April. All state, parish, and local tax, millage, and bond issue elections should be held
only on these dates to reduce costs and increase voter turnout.
16. Occupational License Taxes
We oppose the licensing or taxing of farmers and others in the agricultural community.
17. Agricultural Vandalism
We support prosecution to the fullest extent of the law of anyone, particularly animal rights activists and
environmental activists, who is involved in sabotage and vandalism of farms and ranches and research facilities.
18. Unfunded Mandates
We request Farm Bureau to take appropriate action to prevent both state and federal governments from
mandating programs and regulations to parishes and municipalities and not providing the necessary funds to carry
out their mandates. We further recommend that this request be given high priority.
19. Initiative and Referendum
We oppose any legislation that would establish initiatives or referendum in the laws of the State of Louisiana.
20. Expropriation Proceedings
(a) Because a new concept in the expropriation process called "Quick Take" is being proposed by some parish
governing bodies, we urge Farm Bureau to keep all parish Farm Bureau organizations informed on this issue and
work to get this provision defeated.
(b) We request that Farm Bureau support any and all bills introduced in the Louisiana Legislature that remove the
rights of expropriation or condemnation from the Louisiana Airport Authority.
21. LDAF Budget
We request that Farm Bureau help to restore funding that was cut from the LDAF budget.
22. State Projects
We request that Farm Bureau not take a formal position on the proposed Bunkie syrup mill.
We urge the Governor to support a comprehensive hurricane protection and restoration plan.
We request that Farm Bureau support a soybean processing industry.
Fuel Supplies 211
1. We recommend that agriculture be given high priority for energy needs in the event of shortages and rationing.
2. We support a move to provide for conservation of gas and oil supplies to insure continued availability in the
future and recommend that conservation and proper use of energy should be a high educational priority for federal,
state, and local governments. We also recommend that Farm Bureau staff research possible closures of old fuel
injection systems and make this information available to the Farm Bureau membership.
3. We encourage privately financed research on the use of agricultural and aquacultural commodities as sources of
energy and as petroleum replacements.
4. We encourage an ethanol program, and we a support a renewable fuels program with emphasis on a federal
renewable fuels standard. We also support and encourage the use of biodiesel and support exploring efforts to
make renewable fuels available to Louisiana farmers.
5. We support the use of ethanol-enriched fuels in all vehicles.
6. We support the labeling of all retail pumps showing additives added by all manufacturers, distributors, or dealers.
7. We request that Farm Bureau support through the legislative process a program by utility companies to purchase
electricity from renewable sources at an equitable rate and that there be mandatory legislation that utility companies
purchase a percentage of their usage from renewable resources.
8. We urge the creation of a Louisiana Renewable Energy Commission.
Law and Order 212
We support efforts that would make restitution of damages to a landowner possible under both a criminal or civil
proceeding.
Promotion and Research Checkoffs 213
1. We recognize the right of producers to promote increased research, sale, and consumption of products they
produce. Such programs must be initiated and controlled by producers of the commodity involved. We are
opposed to any checkoff proposed when the federal or state government has administrative or veto power over the
program. Checkoff programs must meet the following requirements:
(a) Funds collected must be used for research, education, market development, and promotion. No funds should
be used for legislative or political purposes. However, we recommend special consideration for the rice industry to
allow the Louisiana Rice Research Board and the Louisiana Rice Promotion Board to support a national legislative
producer organization. We further recommend that no more than five percent of the total rice checkoff funds be
used for legislative purposes on a national basis only.
(b) Referendum
The program must be approved by a majority of producers voting in a well-publicized referendum.
(c) Time Limit
Programs should have a time limit not to exceed five years in length with continuation of programs after that time
requiring a majority of producers voting in a well-publicized referendum.
(d) Collection
The assessment will be made on all producers at the first point of sale.
(e) Refund
Any producer must have the right to a refund upon request with the exception of the dairy, cotton, and rice
industries because of their unique situations.
(f) Administration
A producer board should have 100-percent control of administering the program. Farm Bureau should participate
in naming the board to the extent that Farm Bureau has commodity interests in terms of membership of that
particular commodity.
(g) Audit
An annual certified audit must be made and published.
(h) Annual Report
Administrators of the checkoff funds must be required to provide producers with a meaningful annual statement on
income, expenses, funds, balance, and a progress report on achievement.
(i) We support agriculture on the highways which includes bumper stickers on farm vehicles to get our agricultural
promotion message to the public.
2. Beef Promotion
(a) We support the 50-cent Louisiana beef checkoff. We urge that the other states also increase their checkoff for
in-state promotion.
(b) We support the continued research and development of a "Certified Louisiana Calf" program.
3. Pecan Promotion
We request Farm Bureau to actively support passage of the Pecan Marketing Order.
4. Commodity Promotion
(a) We request all state and federal agencies domiciled within the state to use domestic commodities in all food
programs when available, and we request the Farm Bureau Women's Committee to continue their efforts to promote
all commodities through a planned program.
(b) We urge the Farm Bureau Women's Committee to continue its promotion of Louisiana agricultural products.
Rural Development 214
1. Rural Development Commission
(a) We recommend that Farm Bureau work actively with Louisiana's Rural Development Commission to
improve the infrastructure of rural areas to enhance living and working conditions in farming communities. We urge
that emphasis be placed on attracting small industries to provide economic diversification; in particular, those
industries that can further process agricultural products.
(b) We request that at least one seat on any parish planning commission be filled by a Farm Bureau parish
board member or someone to represent the rural community.
2. Rural Health Services
(a) We support the Family Practice Division of the LSU School of Medicine so that additional doctors can be
trained and placed in rural areas.
(b) We support the efforts of the Louisiana Rural Health Care Authorities to provide health care to under-
served rural areas of Louisiana.
(c) We urge the state legislature to protect our rural health care providers during this challenging time of
health care in Louisiana.
3. Rural Fire and Water Districts
We support the establishment of rural fire and water districts and recommend that each water district
provide an adequate water supply for fire protection service.
4. Rural Drainage Systems
Because the Department of Health and Hospitals' current requirements seem burdensome concerning
sewer treatment structures in rural residences, we request a reevaluation of standards concerning sewerage
drainage.
Right-to-Farm Legislation 215
1. We support the concept of right-to-farm legislation.
2. We recommend that an exclusion from noise ordinances be given for all production and sustainable
agricultural practices.
Pest Control and Eradication Programs 216
1. We urge the USDA and other appropriate federal agencies to support an effective fire ant program, including
providing matching funds for state funds to be spent on such program, and we recommend that aerial spraying be
used to help control fire ants whenever chemicals are approved by the EPA, except in sugar cane-producing areas.
2. We favor continued publicity regarding the danger of fire ants and support the efforts of the Commissioner of
Agriculture to secure an effective pesticide for controlling fire ants. We also support research to discover new
methods of controlling and eradicating fire ants and recommend that an integrated pest management program be
studied and supported if it is found effective.
3. In light of the increasing population of Formosan termites and their potential to impose an economic impact
on commercial sugar cane production, we request that Farm Bureau support funding of the Louisiana Formosan
Termite Initiative and work with the AgCenter and the American Sugar Cane League in providing research on
Formosan termite control.
4. We recommend that parish mosquito and rodent control services be extended to small businesses and farms.
5. We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to pursue securing funding for the tallow tree eradication
program in Louisiana.
6. We recommend that Farm Bureau continue its strong support for the Boll Weevil Eradication Program.
7. We recommend continued research for the effective control of horse fly and horn fly infestation of cattle.
8. We recommend that the LDAF increase funding for the control of beavers in Louisiana.
9. We request Louisiana Farm Bureau Federation work with Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries to develop a
program to control the feral hog population.
Poultry Study Committee 217
We support the Louisiana Poultry Task Force established within the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and
Forestry.
Louisiana Agricultural Round Table Advisory Group 218
We support the Louisiana Agricultural Round Table Advisory Group which serves as the focal point to unify the
agricultural industry in Louisiana.
Homeland Security 219
We request that Farm Bureau inform its membership about the rules and regulations established by Homeland
Security that need to be followed to comply with the law.
Policy Recommendations 220
Farm Program, National Affairs, and International Affairs shall be recommendations to the American Farm
Bureau Federation (AFBF). Standard Operating Procedures for the Federation and Commodity Conference
recommendations shall be recommendations to the Farm Bureau Board of Directors. Standard Operating
Procedures for the Insurance Companies shall be recommendations to the appropriate Farm Bureau Insurance
Companies Boards of Directors. Local, state, and federal agencies shall be apprised of Farm Bureau policy as the
need arises.
Boards and Commissions 221
We request that LFBF actively pursue legislation that will allow growers that deliver commodities to the Port of
Greater Baton Rouge to serve on the Greater Baton Rouge Port Commission and also to increase farmer
representation on the Commission by increasing the number of representatives nominated by LFBF.
We request that LFBF always submit full-time farmers for new appointments to sit as their representatives on the
Baton Rouge Port Commission. Of the two positions, one should be primarily a grain farmer, and the other primarily
a cane farmer.
We believe that only the Boards and Commissions that have direct authority to allocate or dispense funds be
subject to financial disclosure of its members.
FARM PROGRAMS
FOLLOWING ARE LFBF'S POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS TO AFBF. THESE STATEMENTS, IN ADDITION TO THE
REFERENCED AFBF POLICIES, CONSTITUTE OUR POLICIES AND POSITIONS ON ISSUES RELATIVE TO
NATIONAL FARM PROGRAMS. SEE THE REFERENCED SECTIONS OF THE POLICIES FOR 2009 ADOPTED AT
THE 90TH ANNUAL MEETING OF AFBF IN JANUARY 2009.
National Farm Policy 301
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 230)
Improving net farm income is Farm Bureau's most important goal. We will support programs of an innovative
nature that increase net farm income.
The Food Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 (FCEA) continues to move the U.S. toward a market-based,
export-competitive agriculture. We support maintaining commodity program support funding and oppose shifting
funding into conservation or disaster programs.
We oppose all reductions in farm program spending to farmers until all other government programs have
equaled the same percentage of cuts farmers have sustained. Any new government farm program must be
accompanied by regulatory and tax relief for farmers. Producers should be compensated for added costs due to
government regulations.
We recommend that any future farm policy legislation should be linked to a reduction of global tariff rates before
any reduction in domestic subsidies is enacted. Currently, access to world markets remains limited due to continued
trade barriers and internal farm policies of foreign countries. Therefore, it is necessary for American farmers to
receive program payments to offset these limitations.
We support the U.S. government developing a domestic food policy that provides a program for U.S. agriculture
that maintains its competitive position in the global marketplace and preserves domestic markets and long-term
profitability for U.S. producers.
We support increasing the loan rates within the marketing loan programs and non-marketing loan programs for
the various commodities. This should only be done in a manner that will allow commodities to be sold at competitive
prices in the world market while at the same time maintaining adequate income support to producers.
We recommend that FSA allow farmers to apply for LDP payments but wait until after the grain has been
shipped and accurate weights determined before collecting 100 percent of the payment. We also request that
producers be able to apply for LDPs simultaneously when certifying acreage. If the producer provides no other
notification, the LDP rate would be locked in at the date of sale; therefore, no producer's beneficial interest would be
lost. We recommend that producers be allowed the option of an interest-free deferment on LDPs until the next
calendar year, when selling multiple years' production in one year.
We oppose the use of loan origination fees for government nonrecourse loans. We oppose program service
fees that are applied to deficit reduction. We are strongly opposed to any type of mandatory production, acreage
control, or marketing quotas for crops that had production flexibility contracts and continue to receive direct
payments.
We vigorously support a viable domestic sugar program with nonrecourse loan rates set at a level no lower than
present values with no market price cap. We support a loan rate increase greater than the three-quarter cent
increase achieved in the 2008 Farm Bill. We support sugar marketing allocations being tied to the grower and
landowner. When a farmer moves from one mill to another, we support maintaining a provision to permit the
appropriate amount of mill marketing allocation for sugar cane base acres being processed by another sugar mill.
We support maintaining Farm Bill provisions that permit sugarcane base acres that are permanently lost to non-
agricultural use to be transferred to acreage in Louisiana capable of producing and delivering sugarcane to a
processor in Louisiana. We support market balancing programs within the Farm Bill Sugar Title, such as the Sugar
to Biofuel Program included in the 2008 Farm Bill, to offset surplus sugar in the U.S. market in order to keep
domestic sugar production at adequate levels.
We support the continuation of adequate government funding of the FSA.
We recommend that when the opportunity presents itself, Farm Bureau should actively pursue an increase in
the support levels for all commodities. We support maintaining the current fruit and vegetable planting prohibition in
the next farm bill.
We support the continued efforts of the Commissioner of the LDAF and the State Ratification Committee to
establish a National Dairy Equity Act.
We support the strict enforcement by FSA county committees of the non-agriculture determination of land, and
the conserving use provisions related to the control of noxious weeds and erosion on idled farm land.
Agricultural Exports 302
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 245)
We support a system that would provide compensation by increased loan rates or other means for agricultural
export losses due to deliberate currency devaluation by competitive agricultural exporting countries in lieu of trade
tariffs.
The trade embargo between Cuba and the United States should be lifted immediately for food; in particular, rice,
along with medicine, only if the trade agreement specifies that U.S. sugar imports from Cuba are not allowed to
increase above Cuba's current import levels. We strongly oppose any resumption of trade with Cuba unless these
conditions are met.
We oppose farm commodities being made a part of trade sanctions with other nations. An embargo should not
be declared without the consent of Congress unless the U.S. is in danger of armed conflict at home or abroad, and
then the President should have the sole authority. We also oppose limitations on farm product purchases in
connection with loans and credits to other nations.
We oppose provisions which allocate the financing of PL 480 sales on the basis of the per capita gross national
incomes of the potential recipients. We urge that all PL 480 business be in actual grain from the United States and
not in the form of cash to foreign countries. We support funding USDA’s PL 480-Title I Program at levels no lower
than the fiscal year 2006 level.
We urge the effective implementation of export promotion programs which use surplus U.S. commodities as
incentives.
We recommend that certain specialty meat products for export have to meet only the inspection standards of the
importing nation.
We urge expanded trade with Japan for all agricultural products. We recommend that Farm Bureau support
legislation that requires Japan to remove restrictions on the importation of all U.S. agricultural commodities.
We support sanction reform legislation that would require Congress and the Administration to conduct a
thorough analysis on the impact that sanctions could have on farmers and ranchers before considering the
imposition of sanctions.
We urge the USDA to continue to seek acceptance of rice varieties containing Liberty Link traits in all markets.
Agricultural Imports 303
Reference AFBF Policy No. 246)
We oppose the importation of any agricultural commodities and related products when they are in direct
competition with our domestic production, thereby lowering farm prices.
We support the interests of our individual commodity producers and recommend immediate relief through
appropriate measures from the adverse effects on domestic prices resulting from the dumping of imports.
We support the Administration's authority to retaliate against countries that use unfair trade practices through
the use of such retaliatory measures as the Super 301 Petition and expanded Export Enhancement Program.
A temporary increase in import quotas of any commodity or other measures which have the effect of lowering
domestic prices should be opposed.
We support legislation that provides reasonable, annual growth rate limits on imported textiles.
We support implementation of import safeguard provisions to protect the domestic cotton industry from large
amounts of imported cotton textile products from China and other foreign countries.
We oppose the importation of sugar in the form of "stuffed molasses" or any other form that circumvents trade
agreements, congressional intent, or USDA regulations.
We support tariffs on crawfish and shrimp imported into the U.S. and any other assessments and fees for
promotion and regulating imports.
We oppose increasing the 1.532 million ton sugar import threshold to provide room for additional Tariff Rate
Quota (TRQ) imports within the U.S. sugar program.
We request that USDA increase efforts to track and quantify U.S. imports of sugar-containing products (SCP)
and pursue changes so SCP are counted as part of the TRQ.
We support programs to utilize surplus quantities of sugar into non-food uses.
We support significantly increased sampling and inspections of imported food products at point of entry.
Imported food products should be subject to the same or equivalent inspection, sanitary, quality, labeling and
residue standards as domestic products.
Trade Negotiations and Agreements 304
(Reference AFBF Policy Nos. 248, 249, and 250)
Important provisions of the World Trade Organization (WTO) have been ignored, thus eroding the viability of the
agreement. We oppose disproportionate penalties against production agriculture for the loss of any revenue due to
the signing of the WTO agreement.
We support the concept embodied in the U.S. proposal that all trade-distorting government subsidies be
subjected to progressive and substantial reductions worldwide. The time-frame for this phase-out and the program
coverage will depend on what other countries are prepared to undertake.
We support that fair trade must require the WTO to have labor and environmental standards equal to those
imposed on the U.S. producer.
We support harmonization of labor standards internationally that U.S. producers have to abide by under OSHA
in the U.S.
We support national and international uniformity in pesticide usage and residue standards.
We support the objectives of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in providing social labor and environmental
reforms and standards based on U.S. regulations through the SPS Agreement.
We support the coupling of these trade objectives as part of all future U.S. agricultural trade negotiations.
We will oppose any unilateral, bilateral, or multilateral action by the U.S. to eliminate import restrictions and
subsidies without commitments of equal proportions by other countries based upon comparable support prices for
those countries using support prices. We oppose inclusion of sugar in bilateral and regional trade agreements
and support negotiating sugar trade as part of multilateral trade negotiations in the WTO. Countries affected by the
WTO, however, must function at the same program level costs prior to increased or decreased commitments of
equal proportion. We support Farm Bureau leadership advocating a "fair-market" concept for moving American
commodities into markets instead of only advocating a "free-market" concept.
We support a "REQUEST/OFFER" solution to the Aggregate Measurement of Support (AMS) instead of the
"FORMULA" approach in negotiations during WTO trade talks.
We support U.S. trade negotiations that eliminate export subsidies, reduced interest rates, and other methods of
support provided by STEs to circumvent their trade obligations.
We support the philosophy of the "dollarization" of Latin America to give the U.S. producer an equitable position
in international trade.
Failure to achieve substantial and progressive reductions in equally important foreign trade barriers and
subsidies would result in continuing our support for:
1. The retention, expansion, and aggressive use of the EEP targeted at all subsidized European Community
(EC) exports that compete with U.S. products in world markets;
2. The retention of the U.S. Meat Import Act;
3. The retention of domestic farm programs supported by Farm Bureau;
4. The establishment of vigorous export programs for raw and value-added U.S. agricultural products to gain a
greater share of the world market; the strengthening of programs to aid foreign customers in the financing of the
CCC's revolving fund; the making available of Export-Import Bank funds to agricultural export sales;
5. The use of aggressive, agricultural market-development programs utilizing sales missions, innovative barter
programs, and expanded funding for overseas promotion programs; and
6. The expanded use of PL 480 and GSM 102 and 103 as a food aid and market development tool.
We support TRQs that provide the same protection as provided by Section 22 import quotas of the Agricultural
Adjustment Act.
Commodity support prices in the U.S. should only be reduced when it can be assured that the multilateral
reductions are being made on a basis and in a manner which is both fair and equitable to U.S. producers. We
recommend that all future U.S. trade negotiations oppose reductions in U.S. agricultural commodity loan rates,
program payments, and other support mechanisms until negotiating countries reduce their support levels to a rate
equal to that provided to U.S. producers. We recommend that all foreign export subsidies be properly identified and
completely eliminated.
Discretion should be urged upon the government not to seek indiscriminate proliferation of bilateral trade
agreements which might interfere unduly with the workings of a market-oriented agriculture.
We recommend that Farm Bureau work with Congress to initiate the development of a reciprocal trade
agreement with U.S. beef trading partners.
We recommend more research on the effects NAFTA has had on all agricultural commodities. We request that
import-sensitive commodities be exempted from bilateral and regional trade agreements.
We urge that no additional sugar access, above the current U.S. sugar TRQ, be provided to countries as part of
the Free Trade of the Americas Agreement (FTAA), Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), or other
free trade agreements.
We oppose the CAFTA in its present form.
The EC and Japan should be pressured to increase their imports from the developing economies. This would
improve trade balances and the opportunity for U.S. farm export income.
We support the use of long-term equitable agreements between the U.S., Japan, and other countries without
maximum limits on the quantities of U.S. exports and agricultural commodities.
Through input received by the commodity-specific advisory committees, we recommend that Farm Bureau
monitor ongoing trade negotiations and take appropriate actions in the best interests of Louisiana agriculture.
We support greater utilization of the blue box trade category for U.S. agricultural programs.
U.S. forestland owners face formidable competition from Canada's provincial treasuries. Canada's provinces
subsidize lumber production by selling timber to Canadian lumber companies at noncompetitive prices for a fraction
of the timber's market value. Artificially low provincial timber prices, minimum harvesting restrictions, and other
practices encourage overharvesting and overproduction in Canada to the detriment of U.S. industry, forestry
landowners, and loggers. Subsidized Canadian lumber imports unfairly compete with U.S. lumber companies,
affecting thousands of jobs and driving down the value of forestlands. Currently, the U.S.-Canadian Softwood
Lumber Agreement has expired and should be renegotiated. U.S. trade laws should be fully enforced so that
forestry landowners and U.S. manufacturers don't suffer from Canadian subsidies. If allowed to continue, Canada's
unfair timber pricing practices will severely undermine the value of U.S. forestlands and the associated industrial
infrastructure.
Since foreign subsidies are not addressed in bilateral free trade agreements, we support greater emphasis on
multilateral negotiations in the WTO to achieve a level playing field for all agricultural producers.
Role of the USDA 305
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 462)
We recommend that Farm Bureau adopt as a high priority an effort to direct the structure, role, and function of
USDA to meet the future needs of farmers and ranchers with safeguards so that USDA will not become a threat to
farmers' and ranchers' ability to produce or infringe on their right to own and use private property.
We recommend that LFBF study the impact to agriculture that will occur if USDA-APHIS is moved under the new
Office of Homeland Security. If it is determined that the APHIS move will harm agriculture, LFBF should support
changes to alter the proposal so the agency maintains its functions to protect U.S. crops from all animal and plant
pests.
We recommend that USDA provide toll-free telephone service in county office service centers.
Natural Disaster Programs 306
(Reference AFBF Policy Nos. 230, 415, and 329)
We recommend that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) work with the LDAF to provide
farmers with immediate assistance after hurricanes/natural disasters to provide items such as feed, hay, water,
electricity, and fuel to prevent death of livestock, poultry, and aquaculture and the loss of agricultural crops and
commodity inventories.
We strongly recommend that property owners/tenants be allowed to return to their property as soon as possible
in order to protect it from further destruction.
We support the appropriation of funds to compensate producers for disaster-related crop losses as long as it
does not adversely affect current farm programs.
We recommend that Farm Bureau seek new avenues of relief from disaster programs that address the problem
of prevented plantings as a result of adverse weather conditions. Farm Bureau supports quality-reduction
payments being mandatory in any future disaster legislation. We recommend that Farm Bureau support the use of
producer-established yields rather than parish or state average yields for the basis of disaster assistance. We
support the ability to correct a sweet potato crop yield derived from a crop insurance loss determination with a
proven yield in cases when the crop insurance yield determination unfairly increases a farmer’s yield and
disqualifies the farm from adhoc disaster assistance. We oppose requiring crop insurance to be eligible for any
disaster assistance. We oppose disaster payments being made in the form of increased levels of coverage for
those producers carrying crop insurance with eligible losses.
We support using average crop prices in disaster loss payment calculations instead of crop insurance prices in
counties or parishes where crop insurance is not available.
We request FSA Ag Credit to establish uniform guidelines and eligibility requirements to cover production and
disaster loans to farmers and recommend that financial records or tax returns from the previous year be adequate
to establish a need.
FSA Ag Credit disaster loans should be governed by the following principles:
1. Any interest subsidy should be recaptured if the farm is voluntarily sold during the term of the loan;
2. All lending institutions which provide agricultural funding should make every effort to reamortize or extend
agricultural loans on an individual basis in order to assist farmers affected by natural disasters to stay in business.
3. Borrowers should not be allowed to use the proceeds from a disaster loan for expansion; and
4. The final decision on the loan should be left to the local FSA Ag Credit county committees.
We strongly support a provision in FSA Ag Credit emergency loan procedures that would delete the requirement
that the loan be secured by hard collateral or first mortgage for farmers in business less than five years. We further
recommend that FSA Ag Credit emergency loan regulations delete the requirement that there be no other source of
financing before FSA Ag Credit eligibility is established.
We recommend that FSA use accurate weather information obtained from multiple sites in each parish when
administering disaster aid programs.
We also recommend that the Extension Service work with FSA in establishing multiple rainfall collection sites in
the agricultural production areas of a parish to reflect a more accurate report on rainfall data.
Agricultural loans under the Small Business Administration (SBA) should be granted the same emergency credit
provisions available to FSA Ag Credit borrowers under the agricultural debt restructuring programs.
We support restructuring the current permanent disaster program in the farm bill to determine losses on an
individual crop instead of making loss determinations on a whole farm basis. Funding for this program should be
obtained from the crop insurance program. The buy-up insurance programs should be utilized to cover the
production risks not covered by the disaster program.
Crop Insurance 307
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 329)
We recommend that the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) study committee continue to review all
aspects of the Federal Crop Insurance Program, including abuses, and make recommendations on ways to improve
the entire program so that it will be equitable to all producers. We support self-insured crop insurance programs.
A restructured federal crop insurance law will recognize that eventually the crop insurance program will replace
the need for disaster assistance. Savings resulting from elimination of disaster programs can be redirected to a
premium credit to the producers.
We favor the development of insurance to address individual risks.
We strongly support the concept of costs-of-production insurance and the development of such policies for all
commodities.
We recommend that the Risk Management Agency use the same criteria – dry weight yields – for determining
losses as is used for determining the APH.
We support the implementation of crop insurance replant coverage for cotton.
We request that the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) use all available technology and information
sources in establishing acreage yield and production estimates and that this improved information be used in a
more current system to calculate T-yields.
We support changes in the method used to calculate sweet potato production to stop unmarketable field-
damaged potatoes from being counted in production totals and loss determinations. We support transitioning the
pilot sweet potato crop insurance program into a permanent program to permit crop insurance to be offered to all
sweet potato producers.
We support a sweet potato crop insurance policy that insures the pack-out yield of No. 1 fresh sweet potatoes.
Farm Service Agency 308
(Reference AFBF Policy Nos. 462 and 458)
1. We recommend that Extension Service personnel again be allowed to serve as ex-officio members of FSA
state and county committees.
2. We recommend that no less than five FSA state committeemen represent Louisiana.
3. We favor the current individual office structure presently used by parish FSA, NRCS, and Rural Development
agencies.
4. We recommend that a member in a policymaking position in a farm organization not be prohibited from
serving as an FSA committeeman.
5. We recommend that July 15 be established as the uniform FSA and crop insurance final crop reporting date
for sugarcane.
6. We recommend that FSA certify actual farm sugar yields.
7. We recommend that April 15 be established as the uniform FSA and crop insurance final crop reporting date
for wheat and oats.
Agricultural Reports 309
(Reference AFBF Policy Nos. 455 and 462)
We encourage the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) Cotton Division to send cotton classification data
directly to farmers, if requested. We urge classing offices to maintain their emphasis on timely, accurate, and cost-
effective service.
We request that a report be developed and printed annually which shows a comparison of subsidies received by
foreign competitors on per-unit commodity production and that imported farm-related equipment subsidies be
included in the report.
Commodity Promotion 310
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 456)
The safeguards should provide:
1. Only those persons who contribute monies to the respective programs shall be eligible to serve on the
boards which administer such programs.
2. The program should allow a listing of the contributors to the program for recognition and also a listing of
noncontributors for the purpose of education by a contact committee.
3. We oppose a mandatory referendum conducted every five years on the cotton checkoff; however, we do
support the right to petition for a referendum by a substantial percentage of farmers.
Conservation Programs 311
(Reference AFBF Policy Nos. 462, 228, 227, 521, 226, and 232)
We recommend that a greater priority be established in and ranking and funding of NRCS funds for local county
projects and that soil and water conservation districts be allowed to control and allocate a greater percentage of
NRCS funds. We recommend that the NRCS, in cooperation with the soil and water conservation districts,
reevaluate the federal EQIP Program so prior participation will be considered a negative factor in priority ranking.
We support making certain precision agricultural practices that benefit conservation eligible for EQIP funding.
Emphasis should be directed at the most critical resource problems. Programs should be directed locally by elected
soil and water conservation district supervisors.
We recommend that funds be increased according to increasing costs and made available to carry out practices
offered in the program. Greenhouse and specialty crop operations should be included. We recommend including
drainage practices under EQIP. We recommend that composting of agricultural waste be considered an approved
EQIP practice. We support additional staffing options for local soil conservation districts that handle greater
workloads for additional EQIP projects.
We support funding the Conservation Stewardship Program at the levels determined in the 2008 Farm Bill and
recommend that the program be implemented as soon as possible.
Drainage districts should be exempt under the commenced determination portion of the Food Security Act of
1985.
We recommend the provision of adequate local, state, and federal funds to finance soil mapping and publication
of soil survey information.
Agricultural Credit 312
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 415)
We recommend that all farmers be treated equally regardless of income, race, color, sex, and creed. We will
oppose all efforts to limit access to the money market by major credit suppliers, to limit competition, or to artificially
set interest rates by government edict.
We oppose a moratorium on farm foreclosures.
We strongly support the establishment of a federal tax-exempt bond program, along with any needed federal
regulatory changes, to provide American farmers with funding to purchase property and facilities, thereby enabling
them to capture additional value from the sale of their commodities by funding greater vertical integration.
1. FSA Ag Credit
We support:
(a) Adequate funding for the full crop year, as well as competent supervision.
(b) Expediting loan processing to allow farmers ample time to make planting decisions, FSA Ag Credit direct
and 90/10 guaranteed loan applications being approved or disapproved within 30 days, and approved loans being
funded within 30 days.
(c) The Food Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 credit provisions and oppose any attempts to weaken
them.
(d) Any funds provided by FSA Ag Credit to purchase farmland being loaned only to citizens of the U.S.
(e) Farmer-elected committee persons being involved in the approval process of FSA Ag Credit agricultural
loans.
(f) Measures being taken to stop FSA Ag Credit from lending monies to agricultural operations that are too
far gone and have no hope of recovery.
(g) Changing the maximum years of eligibility under the FSA Guaranteed Loan Program to ten consecutive
years.
2. Small Business Administration
We urge the SBA to assist their borrowers with debt restructuring and loan guarantees.
3. Commercial Banks
We encourage lenders to use their flexibility to restructure existing distressed agricultural loans wherever
possible.
Banking regulations should provide the opportunity for credit-worthy borrowers to be able to move to
another lender when banks are closed. The federal government should extend its special guarantee program that
guarantees credit-worthy farmers and ranchers the option to move to another lender if their lender is closed by the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or a state regulatory agency.
4. Farm Credit System
We recommend continued supportive efforts for the Farm Credit Program. We should take the lead in
developing a long-term plan for its survival. We further recommend that the elected boards and their membership
have complete decision-making authority over any restructuring or possible mergers. Any changes in the system
should adhere to the following principles:
(a) Protection of the value of member-borrower stock.
(b) Pursuit of meaningful and effective restructuring of member-borrower loans and not forgiving debt.
(c) Prompt infusion of federal government capital as needed.
NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
FOLLOWING ARE LFBF'S POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS TO AFBF. THESE STATEMENTS, IN ADDITION TO THE
REFERENCED AFBF POLICIES, CONSTITUTE OUR POLICY AND POSITIONS ON ISSUES RELATIVE TO
NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS. SEE THE REFERENCED SECTIONS OF THE POLICIES FOR 2009
ADOPTED AT THE 90TH ANNUAL MEETING OF AFBF, JANUARY 2009.
Judiciary 401
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 106)
Congress should enact the legislation necessary to curb the ever-increasing powers of federal judges and the
Justice Department which usurp the powers of state and local governments.
Elections 402
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 103)
We oppose the redrawing of state legislative districts to achieve specific percentages of any group of
voters.
National Security 403
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 178)
We support the selective service registration system to ensure an adequate and immediate manpower source.
In the event that our military defense manpower becomes dangerously low, there should be no delay in reinstating
the draft. We support all efforts to strengthen the National Guard and Reserves.
We oppose any legislation or action that would permit the unionization of any branch of the U.S. Armed Services.
Eminent Domain 404
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 535)
Compensation should be paid for any damages which result from loss of or reduction of access to navigable
waters.
We believe the property owner should also receive the value of the property to the individual operation plus the
consideration of the production ability of the property.
We support establishment of a civilian review board, independent of government agencies, to which property
owners could appeal condemnation decisions before initiating proceedings in the courts.
We support legislation that protects privately owned agricultural land and facilities.
Fiscal and Monetary Policy 405
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 418)
The goal of monetary policy should be general price level stability. Should the Federal Reserve System fail to
maintain sound discretionary monetary policies, we will support legislation to instruct the Federal Reserve System to
achieve a specified rate of growth in the stock of money consistent with real economic growth, productivity, and
general price level stability.
Taxation 406
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 439)
1. Income Tax
We oppose increases in federal income tax or any other taxes from being made retroactive. We support:
(a) A federal tax amnesty program with the yield of such a program to be applied against the national debt.
(b) Carry-forward of the full value of unused investment or other tax credits earned prior to tax reform.
(c) The exemption of CCC generic certificates from Form 1099B filing requirements.
(d) Legislation to allow for the full tax deduction of IRA contributions when used as a retirement plan even
though the spouse is already participating in a retirement plan.
We oppose:
(a) A mandatory requirement for a contemporaneous mileage log on vehicles.
(b) The recapture of depreciation of installment sales as ordinary income in the year of sale for depreciated
assets.
2. We support reform or repeal of the current estate tax.
Bonding and Bankruptcy 407
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 416)
When anyone files for bankruptcy and a trustee is appointed, the trustee should be required to cooperate with
any party who has a financial interest in the bankruptcy.
We support an amendment to the federal bankruptcy law to protect the interests of landlords in cases where a
tenant files for bankruptcy.
Water Issues 408
(Reference AFBF Policy Nos. 548-550)
1. Permitting
(a) We oppose any single agency having final authority in matters of wetlands determinations. We
strongly recommend the LFBF Board of Directors request the Commissioner of Agriculture and Forestry to appoint
a task force including-but not limited to-farmers, landowners, and appropriate representatives from our institutions
of higher education that would review and make recommendations regarding water issues on agricultural lands. We
further recommend that LFBF support legislation during the 2010 legislative session that would request the Corps of
Engineers to work with this commission on all wetland issues impacting agriculture. We oppose the inclusion of the
term wetlands in the definition of navigable waters of the U.S.
(b) Permit requests to the Corps of Engineers will be acted upon and applicants notified of their decision
within 30 days of application.
(c) Permits not acted upon in the time frame stated will automatically be granted.
(d) Private landowner permit procedures/policies should not be more restrictive than those utilized for public
lands.
(e) Burden of proof shall be upon the agency, organization, or individual objecting to the landowners’
proposed use of their property. Permits should be modified, delayed, or denied only if the permit-ting agency can
prove with conclusive evidence that the proposed activity will cause adverse impact.
(f) The three alternatives used in sequencing – avoidance, minimizing impact, and mitigation – shall have
equal value.
2. Federal Agency Authority
(a) We urge Congress to pass laws restricting the Department of Interior, EPA, and Corps of Engineers’
authority under the CWA and Section 404 permits.
(b) We request congressional oversight and overview of federal agencies that write rules and regulations
impacting production agriculture.
(c) We support finalization and implementation of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s proposed counterpart
regulations to modify and delineate consultations for EPA pesticide registrations.
(d) We strongly oppose any stricter interpretation of regulations concerning the Clean Water Act and the
Clean Air Act.
Grain Standards and Pricing 409
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 356)
We urge the continuation of state and federal grain inspection employing only highly qualified personnel. We
also recommend a system of periodic checks on all grain inspection.
We recommend that FSA use the actual loan value determined by sampling in determining loans regarding on-
farm stored commodities.
Energy 410
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 403)
We urge that the U.S. negotiate agreements individually with Mexico and other nations for the purchase of oil
and gas.
We request that an environmental impact statement be made prior to the diversion of hydrocarbons from
intrastate pipelines to interstate pipelines.
We request legislation to increase the production of ethanol, biodiesel, wind, and solar energy and remove the
restrictions on domestic production of oil, natural gas, and coal.
Farm Labor 411
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 135)
We recommend that DOL officials be restricted from entering a farm without first contacting the farmer and
having the appropriate legal instruments to do so.
We support efforts to reform the H-2A program by curtailing the DOL and immigration schedule to a maxi-mum
of 30 days for securing visas.
We oppose mandatory ergonomic standards for production agriculture and the agricultural processing industry.
We strongly recommend that AFBF remain committed to legislative reform of the H-2A foreign agricultural worker
program and support legislation that replaces the Adverse Effect Wage Rate (AEWR) with a market-based wage
rate that does not increase workers' private right of action against agricultural employers. We recommend that a
long-term legislative solution be found to solve the 66,000 cap on the H-2B program.
We oppose all attempts to restrict or repeal the Farm-Related CDL Exemption.
We oppose all attempts to alter or repeal the Agricultural Overtime Exemption.
Railroads 412
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 127)
We support the necessary legislation to prove that in case of repair, discarded materials, including ties and rails,
be properly disposed of within a reasonable time from railroad rights-of-ways.
We support legislation at the state and national level to prevent railroads from closing crossings if the
crossing is the only access a landowner has to his property or if it would adversely affect the farm operations.
Rural Utilities 413
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 402)
We urge efforts on the part of both private companies and rural electric cooperatives to reach agreements that
will be in the best long-term interest of all concerned. Duplication of services is not in the public interest.
We recommend that charges for running electrical lines to a farm be lowered and that the owner be reimbursed
for additions to these lines, without a time limitation on reimbursement.
Farm Machinery 414
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 150)
Because the American farmer is unable to pass on his increased costs of production, we urge Farm Bureau to
request AFBF to: (1) make an inquiry regarding the pricing of all farm equipment and parts by the larger manu-
facturers to see if they are in line with the costs of production of these products, and (2) provide a list of allied com-
panies which might sell the same parts as larger companies at a lower price.
Health 415
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 152)
We support:
1. Every possible effort to effect cost management while providing accessible high-quality health care.
2. The development of legislation that will lead to changing our present health care delivery system through the
following:
(a) Cost incentive/rewards (providers, insurance companies, and consumers).
(b) Protection against monopolies.
(c) Periodic review of regulations.
3. The development and implementation of programs to provide incentives for consumers to practice wellness
and disease prevention.
4. Residency programs to provide postgraduate family physician training away from major metropolitan-based
medical training centers.
5. Privately funded optional care delivery systems such as health maintenance organizations.
6. Legislation to require the use of the generic as well as the trade name on prescription drugs.
7. Closer working relationships between organization of family physicians, medical societies, and health
agencies.
8. A requirement that drug manufacturers label all inert as well as active ingredients contained in medicines.
9. Third-party payer recognition for payment of outpatient treatment and preventive measures.
10. "Certificate-of-need" funding legislation to curb the over building of hospital rooms.
11. Federal government incentives to the private sector for providing long-term health care.
We oppose:
Federal government interference with private enterprise by subsidizing professional medical services.
Safety 417
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 161)
We urge that harvest-season permits allowing maximum weight limits of 100,000 pounds apply to federal
highways, and we strongly recommend that LFBF work to have AFBF adopt this policy.
Vocational Training 418
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 146)
We urge vocational education departments to regularly reevaluate and improve their programs of study to
provide up-to-date and modernized vocational educational programs and promote the development of urban
agriculture. We further request the state to provide the necessary financial assistance for this endeavor.
Special work permits should be granted to allow special wage rates to be paid to students under work-
experience programs.
Cooperative Extension Service 419
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 457)
Frequent consultations on matters of common interest have proved beneficial to many state Farm Bureaus and
Extension Service leaders. We recommend continuation of this practice.
We support the concept of area specialists.
We support the 4-H Club program and oppose lowering the traditionally high standards for 4-H projects.
We urge the full annual funding of our land-grant universities.
Freedom of Information Act 420
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 105)
We oppose any additional Freedom of Information laws on the federal level and request that AFBF notify states
if any such legislation is proposed.
USDA Census Survey 421
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 455)
We recommend that the federal government focus on net farm income, not gross farm income. We oppose any
census that reports only gross farm income.
Environmental Regulations 423
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 504)
We recommend that AFBF strongly oppose EPA on requiring emission control mechanisms on non-road diesel
engines.
Animal Agriculture 424
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 301)
We recommend that AFBF develop and provide educational programs and materials to the state Farm Bureaus
to assist in informing the public on animal agriculture.
Federal Bailout Program 425
The new public, private partnership created under the Federal Bailout Program is inherently vulnerable to
waste, fraud, and abuse. We recommend strict accountability and oversight for the disbursement and payback of
these funds.
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES FOR THE FEDERATION SHALL BE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE LFBF
BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES FOR THE INSURANCE COMPANIES SHALL BE RECOMMENDATIONS TO
THE APPROPRIATE FARM BUREAU INSURANCE COMPANIES BOARDS OF DIRECTORS.
Membership 501
1. We recommend that Farm Bureau continue its nonmember insured check beginning on February 1 in order
to assist in the membership drive.
2. We recommend that the State Office continue sending out the first membership billing notice and that all
returns be sent to the parish offices. We recommend that parish participation be optional.
3. We recommend that the membership letter sent to new members on the Group B list be re-worded and
delete “having overlooked payment of dues” and of “not renewing the dues” as these members were not previously
billed nor have they paid dues in the past.
4. We recommend the continuation of the current Farm Bureau membership dues structure.
5. We recommend that the last two weeks of February continue to be designated to emphasize membership
acquisition.
6. We request the State Board to continue enforcing the language in the Bylaws requiring that an individual's
membership be written in the parish in which he resides or farms.
7. We recommend that LFBF utilize cost effective correspondence, such as appropriate mailing selection and
the use of email, due to higher postage and the wide acceptance of digital communication.
Annual Meeting 502
1. We recommend that the State Board continue to be authorized to select convention sites ten years in
advance and further recommend that the convention not be scheduled during the 4th of July.
2. We recommend that the annual meeting continue to be held in one hotel under one roof if possible and ask
that the State Board check into a system to guarantee parking for Farm Bureau members attending the annual
meeting. However, the Farm Bureau may go back to its rotation system throughout the state, if necessary, even if it
means using more than one hotel.
3. We request that products utilizing Louisiana farm commodities be served at all Farm Bureau functions.
4. We recommend that the State Board continue to monitor the feasibility of allowing agriculturally related
vendors to set up booths at the Farm Bureau convention with proceeds used to offset the cost of the convention.
5. Letters should continue to be sent to parish presidents prior to convention notifying them of resolution
subcommittee assignments and the time of the resolutions and commodity conference sessions.
6. Resolutions to be considered by the voting delegates should be submitted to the State Office by June 1.
These resolutions should be compiled in a packet and mailed to each parish office prior to the convention.
7. Letters should also be mailed to each member of the commodity committees giving them the time of the
commodity conferences.
8. We recommend that major commodity conferences always be scheduled to avoid conflict of producer
participation when possible.
9. We request that any recommendations regarding existing or new policies provided by Farm Bureau staff be
sent to parish presidents upon request prior to the annual convention.
10. We recommend that the disposition of all resolutions submitted by the parishes and acted upon by the
resolutions subcommittees continue to be made available to the Resolutions Committee and again at the open
session of voting delegates.
11. We request that the Resolutions Committee reports continue to retain the language that was deleted in the
text of the resolutions and that it be denoted by a strike-through.
12. We request that an audited financial statement be made available to parish presidents, upon request, prior
to the convention.
13. We recommend that candidates for statewide offices who are invited to address the convention delegates
be invited to a session to be designated by the State Board.
14. We request that the Awards Book and rules be sent to the parishes in the fall following the annual
convention. We recommend that a Scrapbook Workshop/Idea Exchange be held at the State Secretary Conference
where a representative from each of the 13 categories would present and explain goals, give examples, and answer
questions from the parishes.
15. We recommend that the Area Field Services Directors continue to review the program areas awarded each
parish in their district to recognize any oversights.
16. We recommend that the Field Services Directors meet with the parish secretaries and/or Awards Book
Committees as soon as possible before next year’s convention to review any additions, deletions, changes, etc., to
the Awards Book and YF&R Award of Merit.
17. We recommend that the parish that wins the President's Trophy continue to make their scrapbook available
for viewing at the convention so other parishes can learn from their experience.
18. We request that under the "Policy Development" section of the Awards Book, the requirement to develop at
least two policies on parish, state, and national issues be changed to only one.
Qualifications and Terms of Office for State Officers, 503
State Board Members and Voting Delegates
1. State officers, State Board members, and voting delegates must be actively engaged in agricultural
production.
2. Farm Bureau officers shall not receive any salary for offices held without the approval of the voting delegates.
3. We request that the vote tally of candidates for each office be announced after each election.
Commodity Committees 504
1. Chairmen of all commodity divisions are urged to attend necessary Board meetings, and their expenses for
such attendance will be paid.
2. We request that all commodity divisions mail an agenda with their meeting notices so that important or critical
proposals can be discussed, studied, and approved by the respective parish committees and boards.
3. Notification of commodity committee meetings will be mailed to parish presidents and commodity committee
chairmen seven days prior to date of meeting.
Youth Program 505
1. We require all parish Youth Program contestants to be from Farm Bureau families and that no contestant be
a professional. If selected as the winner, especially as queen, we request that Farm Bureau activities precede any
other activity. Parishes shall continue to formulate the rules for the individual parish contests provided these rules
are not in conflict with state rules.
2. We recommend the continuation of the Youth Conference. We urge that the major emphasis be placed on
good government, careers in agriculture, and other topics of interest to youth.
Louisiana Farm Bureau News 506
Membership dues to the Farm Bureau shall include a subscription to the Louisiana Farm Bureau News.
Farm Bureau Meetings and Correspondence 507
1. We recommend that the Farm Bureau Federation, its committees, program departments, and service
departments hold all meetings within the state, whenever possible, in an effort to utilize the resources of the state
and allow the state to benefit from the monies spent. This is not inclusive of incentive trips or those meetings held in
conjunction with out-of-state committees or boards.
2. A schedule of Farm Bureau meetings and activities should be provided to the parishes. A schedule should
also be sent to the AgCenter and LDAF in order to avoid scheduling conflicts.
3. We recommend that when the State Board makes a decision affecting a particular parish, said parish shall be
notified prior to its release to the news media.
4. We recommend that the minutes of the Federation Board meetings reflect the vote on each action taken
when the vote is not unanimous.
5. We recommend that a copy of the Farm Bureau "Legislative Report" continue to be sent to the parish offices
for their personnel to make it available to their respective board members.
6. We recommend that LFBF offer each parish the option of receiving all federation correspondence through e-
mail to eliminate all unnecessary paper mailing.
American Farm Bureau Convention Delegates 508
State voting delegates to the AFBF convention should be the elected officers. Additional delegates and
alternates should be selected from the State Board.
Leadership Conference 509
We recommend that Leadership Conferences be held bi-annually on a rotating basis within each Farm Bureau
district. We also recommend that all insurance agency managers be invited to attend the Leadership Conference.
Voting Eligibility at Commodity Conferences 510
Eligibility for voting at commodity conferences is restricted to active producers or any representative of an active
producer who is a member of Farm Bureau and a resident of the parish he is appointed to represent.
Young Farmers and Ranchers Committee 511
1. We encourage each parish Farm Bureau to establish a Young Farmers and Ranchers Advisory Committee
so that young farm families or individuals can more actively participate in Farm Bureau.
2. We recommend that a Leadership Conference for Young Farmers and Ranchers be held each year and that
it be held in North Louisiana at least every three years, contingent on the availability of accommodations.
3. We support the 35-year maximum age limit for participation in the Young Farmers and Ranchers Program.
4. We recommend that the state Farm Bureau and state Young Farmers and Ranchers Committee take a more
active part in the organization, reactivation, and retention of parish Young Farmers and Ranchers Committees.
5. We request that Farm Bureau support the use of computers in all contests so we can easily down-load
Young Farmers and Ranchers applications from the Farm Bureau website to be able to apply for them, print them
out, and turn them into the State Office.
Incoming WATS Line 512
We recommend that the incoming Federation WATS line be used only by State Board members, parish
presidents, state Women's Executive Committee and district directors, state Young Farmers and Ranchers officers
and district directors, state commodity committee chairmen, and state AITC Committee officers and district
directors.
Use of Farm Bureau Name 513
The Farm Bureau name shall not be used in connection with any undertaking that is not owned or licensed by
Farm Bureau and without the approval of the voting delegates.
Farm Bureau Insurance 514
1. We recommend that informational sessions regarding Farm Bureau programs and activities be included in
the insurance agents' statewide meetings. We further recommend that all agents be invited to attend these
sessions which will be administered by the Farm Bureau State Board of Directors.
2. We recommend that the district sales managers meet with the parish president and the agency manager at
least once a year to discuss problems, solutions, and accomplishments of the parish insurance operation.
3. We recommend that insurance agents, agency managers, sales staff, and other service departments be
allowed to select meeting sites – whether in state or out of state – that meet their needs with regard to objective,
accommodations, and costs.
4. We recommend that the Farm Bureau Insurance Companies continue their attempts to find solutions to add a
general environmental policy to the umbrella policy.
5. We recommend that LFBF ask AFBF to look into the possibility of consolidating the Farm Bureau Insurance
Companies in each state to reduce the potential risks to each individual company.
6. We recommend that the study committee, which was appointed, continue to look at the services being
offered by the Louisiana Farm Bureau Insurance Companies, including homeowners, automobile, liability, etc., in an
effort to diversify risks and lower premiums.
Agricultural Tourism 515
We recommend that Farm Bureau support a statewide program for Agri-Tourism.
Farm Bureau Services 516
1. We recommend that the Public Relations Department continue to develop multimedia materials for the parish
Farm Bureaus to promote the organization and its activities. We also request that these materials be updated
annually.
2. We recommend that a professional team with members from Farm Bureau and the LDAF be established to
respond to critical issues which arise in the news media.
3. As urban populations become larger, the need to tell agriculture's story of the economic impact of this sector
of our economy on the entire state becomes more critical. Farm Bureau should develop a plan to inform the
nonfarming public of the farmer's role in society. Farm Bureau should act as a catalyst for pro-farmer groups such
as the LDAF, agricultural service companies, agricultural chemical companies, seed companies, fertilizer
companies, farm equipment companies, and energy companies to formulate and distribute appropriate information
to the news media for telling that story.
4. We request that each parish Farm Bureau appoint a media "watchdog" to monitor public discussion of
agriculture. Discussion may be – but is not limited to – advertising, television or radio, newspaper ads, or editorials.
The role of monitor may be performed by an individual or committee. In the event that agriculture is inaccurately
represented, we recommend that the monitor work with the Farm Bureau Public Relations staff to formulate a
response or rebuttal. That response would then be distributed to the public through local "Letters to the Editor"
news columns under the name of the parish Farm Bureau.
5. We request that Farm Bureau continue to maintain its website for the purpose of members advertising used
equipment for sale.
6. We support the Farm Bureau Seasonal Specialties Program.
7. We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to make safety clinics for farm workers available to the parishes.
These clinics should provide instructions on the proper use of both farm equipment and chemical utilization in order
to improve the work environment for the farm worker and to assist in lowering insurance premiums through improved
loss experience.
8. We recommend that Farm Bureau look into the possibility of establishing a cellular telephone group structure
for Farm Bureau members.
9. We encourage all people involved in agri-business to join Farm Bureau.
10. We request that the LFBF Board recommend to the AFBF Board that the date for announcing the winners
of the Program Idea Exchange Contest be moved up in order to take advantage of airfare specials.
11. We recommend the State Board consider financial assistance of a floating amount designated for travel,
based on the size and scale of the program and the degree of participation by the parish, to any parish that has
developed a program and has been selected to represent Louisiana and display their idea at the AFBF convention.
12. We recommend continuing the workshop-idea exchange session at the Secretaries' Conference that is
devoted to Federation secretarial tasks, such as convention, scrapbook, recordkeeping, etc.
Parish Presidents' Correspondence 517
We recommend that resolutions submitted by parish Farm Bureaus be acknowledged by letter and that the
parish be notified of the action taken by the State Board.
Political Action Committee 518
1. We recommend that the AgriPac Board of Directors make an annual report to the Farm Bureau voting
delegate body on the activities and progress of AgriPac.
2. We recommend that a copy of the AgriPac Bylaws and Operating Procedures be sent to each parish Farm
Bureau.
3. We recommend that Farm Bureau members have the opportunity to make a voluntary contribution to AgriPac
at the time of payment of annual dues.
4. We recommend that a newsletter or brochure explaining the benefits of AgriPac be enclosed with the
membership billing.
5. We request that LFBF contact parish presidents before mailing AgriPac checks directly to legislators, in case
the parish president would like to deliver the check personally.
Financial Statements and Audits 519
We recommend that all audited financial statements of the Louisiana Farm Bureau Federation and Affiliated
Companies be available at the State Office to any parish president within ten days of receipt of a written request for
such information by a parish president. Copies of confidential financial information shall not be removed from the
State Office.
Parish Financial Advisory Team 520
We recommend that the Farm Bureau Board of Directors continue to make available to the parishes the
services of the Parish Financial Advisory Team (PFAT). The purpose of the PFAT will be to review the financial
conditions and activities of the parish and to make recommendations on procedures to be implemented to improve
the financial condition of the parish.
Farm Bureau Voting Delegate List 521
We recommend that a list of voting delegates to the state convention be given to candidates for statewide Farm
Bureau offices upon the request of the candidate. We further recommend that use of the list be restricted for the
candidate's personal contact, letter, phone call, or other communication to the voting delegates, soliciting their
support for the candidate requesting the list.
Any other use of such list, including dissemination to other individuals or groups of individuals, however
constituted, should be considered a breach of trust with respect to the Farm Bureau organization and immediately
reported to the delegates whose names appear on the list and to the Board of Directors for whatever action may be
appropriate.
COMMODITY DIVISION
CONFERENCES
RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE COMMODITY DIVISIONS ARE SUBMITTED TO THE LOUISIANA FARM
BUREAU BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR APPROVAL AND ACTION. THEY DO NOT REPRESENT POLICY
DECISIONS OF THE VOTING DELEGATES.
Beekeepers Recommendations 600
1. Bees are valuable not only for the production of honey, pollen and wax, but as pollinators of many
agricultural crops. We recommend continuation of an education program to inform the general public. We also
recommend fea
Purpose of Farm Bureau Federation 101
(hereinafter referred to as Farm Bureau)
Farm Bureau is a free, independent, nongovernmental, voluntary organization of American farm and ranch
families united for the purpose of analyzing their problems and formulating action to achieve educational
improvement, economic opportunity, and social advancement, thereby promoting the growth of our country and the
quality of our national life. Farm Bureau is local, national, and international in its scope and influence and is
nonpartisan, non-sectarian, and nonsecret in character.
Farm Bureau and Its Aims 102
1. Farm Bureau is a statewide voluntary organization of farm families and individuals interested and involved in the
agricultural economy. Its organization specifically represents the various segments of the agricultural industry.
2. Its main purpose is to identify, analyze, and propose solutions for farm problems at local, state, and national
levels. In union, it seeks the strength and joint promotion of the well-being of farm people, of agriculture as a
whole, and of each commodity segment, in particular.
3. Among Farm Bureau’s specific aims are the following:
(a) The furtherance of democratic processes of home rule and individual freedom and rights.
(b) The reflection and transmission of farmers’ basic ideals of government and of their views of local, state, and
national policies to both farm and nonfarm groups.
(c) The provision of a two-way channel for the promotion of broader understanding of political, economic, and,
specifically, agricultural issues and techniques.
(d) The provision for developing, centralizing, and giving effect to Farm Bureau policy.
(e) The attainment of higher net income for the farmer and the general improvement of his standard of living.
(f) The enlargement of opportunity for youth.
(g) The provision of opportunity for the development of farm and civic leadership.
(h) The development of full member responsibility in Farm Bureau and public policy.
4. Farm Bureau’s Philosophy of Government
(a) We believe in a constitutional government guaranteeing American citizens freedom and liberty, including
freedom of speech, press, religious worship, peaceful assembly, the right to own property, and freedom from
unwarranted search or seizure.
(b) We protest federal preemption of decision by the federal government in state legislative fields where state action
is not prohibited by federal statutes.
(c) We believe that the Legislative, Judicial, and Executive Departments of the federal government must be kept
separate as the Founding Fathers intended. We deplore encroachment on, or transfer of, the traditional powers
from any branch of the government to the other.
(d) We believe in our competitive system in which supply and demand are primary determinants of prices in the
marketplace.
(e) We further believe that the philosophy of our government must continue to embody the rights of a citizen to build
and accumulate assets during his lifetime and to transfer to his family, title to such assets at his death, free from
unwarranted and excessive federal and state levies, such as inheritance taxes and other taxes and assessments.
We believe such rights of an American citizen are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the United
States.
(f) We believe that thriftiness, ability, industriousness, and maximum productivity are vital factors in sustaining the
unequaled standard of living of American citizens.
(g) We further believe that candidates for public office should make their views known on issues which affect the
future of the livelihood of their constituents.
(h) We believe that individuals are responsible for their own acts so they also have a responsibility to speak for
themselves and their interests through effective organizations of their own creation and choice.
5. Membership Participation
An active, participating, informed membership is the keystone of an effective Farm Bureau. Projects and
programs in which all membership can take part should be developed by the membership, based on the needs,
ideas, interests, and problems of farm families, and designed to help achieve educational improvement, economic
opportunity, and social advancement.
Such a program of transmitting farmers’ ideas into projects of action demands trained, well-equipped, dedicated,
voluntary leadership. To equip and motivate this leadership requires a program of leadership training and
recognition.
6. Policy Development and Implementation
(a) Farm Bureau should continue to improve the procedure necessary to develop policies and recommendations in
order that more members can take part in building sound policies. We urge parish Farm Bureaus to place more
emphasis on the resolutions process.
(b) The basic objective of policy implementation is to win support for Farm Bureau policies by our members and the
general public alike. The key to this objective lies in continuous effort by parish Farm Bureaus to accomplish this
purpose.
(c) We urge development of, and participation in, active commodity committees on the state and parish levels.
Marketing 201
1. Trade Development and Marketing Association
(a) The importance of an expanded marketing program to serve the needs of farmers and ranchers has become
apparent not only for the best interest of farmers, but also for the best interest of our entire national economy.
(b) We support a positive program that would result in farmers operating their own voluntary marketing associations
rather than having the government or others assume this responsibility.
(c) We recommend continued study of marketing problems. When feasible ways are found to aid the members in
solving marketing problems, we recommend that the procedures be implemented through the Farm Bureau
Marketing Association.
(d) We recommend that the State Board – when the need arises – expand the services of the Marketing Association
at the request of interested commodity groups. The objectives of the Association will be:
(1) To expand markets for members.
(2) To improve the bargaining power of farmers and ranchers.
(3) To advise growers on economic facts and conditions affecting marketing.
(4) To furnish growers with pertinent information concerning the supply-and-demand situation for agricultural
products.
(e) We further recommend that membership in the Marketing Association be limited to members of Farm Bureau.
2. Use of Marketing Orders
We support marketing orders as an adequate method of providing price protection for farmers. However, we
oppose establishment of monopolies in the marketing, grading, transporting, storing, or processing of agricultural
products.
3. Agricultural Products
(a) We support the establishment of processing and marketing facilities where feasible.
(b) We request that all agricultural products entering the state be subject to the same inspections as produce grown
in Louisiana and urge that these provisions be enforced.
(c) We recommend that Farm Bureau work with the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry (LDAF) to
develop a promotional program using radio, television, newspapers, displays, and road signs to encourage the
public, restaurants, superstores, and other businesses to buy Louisiana-grown products with an emphasis on
quality rather than price.
(d) We urge Louisiana educational facilities to give Louisiana food producers and processors an opportunity to bid
on food service contracts.
4. Market Information
(a) We support a communication system between grain and livestock farmers to provide information to
Louisiana farmers on the availability of Louisiana-grown grain, hay, and cottonseed.
(b) We recommend that the LSU Agricultural Center (AgCenter) and the LDAF continue to provide a Louisiana farm-
retail fluid milk pricing series.
(c) We oppose prison farms selling their produce to local markets in direct competition with fruit and vegetable
farmers throughout the state.
(d) We support the rights of native wineries to sell their products wholesale and retail in Louisiana.
Research and Extension 202
1. Louisiana Cooperative Extension Service (Extension Service)
(a) To further the cooperative effort between Farm Bureau and the Extension Service, we urge that parish Farm
Bureaus actively support and participate in the full implementation of parish extension advisory committees and
other areas of mutual benefit.
(b) We urge local Farm Bureaus to encourage police juries or parish councils and school board to continue to
increase financial support for the Extension Service, the vocational agricultural program, and other needed local
agricultural programs.
(c) We urge support of Extension Service leadership at all levels to obtain adequate funding of this vital service, with
particular emphasis on increased local support.
(d) We urge that no further funding cuts be made on the federal, state, and local levels affecting the research and
educational purposes of the Extension Service.
(e) We request that complimentary rodeo tickets be given to exhibitors if a rodeo is held in conjunction with the LSU
State Livestock Show and that Farm Bureau take an active role in keeping the show at the Lamar Dixon Expo
Center or any other facility that could be utilized.
2. Research Work
(a) We support adequate appropriations for agricultural research work by the Louisiana Agricultural Experiment
Station (Experiment Station).
(b) We support a strong swine research facility within the Experiment Station.
(c) We recommend that LSU increase the amount of research on aquaculture. We urge that continued research be
done in crawfish farming, marketing, and use of crawfish by-products.
(d) We urge the Experiment Station to continue to conduct studies of methods to prevent aflatoxin.
(e) We recommend that the AgCenter continue its work on controlling and preventing noxious weeds in
pasturelands.
(f) We urge the Experiment Station to publish research results based upon maximum profit potential, as well as
maximum production potential.
(g) We urge whatever action necessary to prohibit public funds for agricultural research and grants being used for
agricultural research in foreign countries that leads directly to increased competition against U.S. commodities.
(h) We urge Farm Bureau to work toward getting the agricultural research stations throughout the state to continue
further research to use compost urban waste on all cropland and pastureland to improve the organic matter content
of our soils and at the same time promote good will with our city friends who are customers for our farm products.
(i) We support measures to expedite soil testing at the soil testing facilities at LSU.
(j) We request that the Experiment Station continue its research efforts on pesticides to control external parasites on
livestock in Louisiana.
(k) We request that the AgCenter develop a Best Management Practice (BMP) conducive to the enhancement of the
fire ant population in sugarcane fields.
(l) We request that the AgCenter continue its research efforts on the handling of cotton module covers, as well as
on modules in the field and at the gin.
(m) We urge the State of Louisiana to develop a comprehensive school of veterinary technology.
(n) We urge the AgCenter to maintain the position at the Hill Farm Research Station Mastitis Lab and continue
mastitis research with special emphasis on statewide monitoring of Mycoplasma mastitis.
(o) We urge that research be conducted on the feasibility of a sugar mill establishing an ethanol production facility
at its location.
(p) We recommend increased funding at the Iberia Parish Research Facility for sugar cane research.
3. Contact Committees
We realize that maximum utilization of agricultural research funds, facilities, staff, and results have a direct
relationship to the adaptability of research findings to farmers’ needs. We support contact committees of farmers
for all commodities to counsel with research heads and staff regarding present projects, new findings, needed work,
and other approaches to expanded and coordinated research. We support new enterprises through research and
development.
4. Animal Diseases
(a) We support the eradication of brucellosis. To have an effective program, qualified personnel must be used to
administer and enforce regulations. We support the practice of calfhood vaccination. We support the efforts by the
LDAF to maintain Louisiana as a brucellosis-free state.
(b) We recommend that the Louisiana Board of Animal Health strictly enforce brucellosis program regulations and
recommend that any producer not complying with these regulations be brought before the Board.
(c) We urge strict enforcement of the law prohibiting garbage feeding to swine in order to prevent hog cholera and
trichinosis.
(d) We recommend that Farm Bureau oppose any parish or state ordinance or law that would restrict the sale,
distribution, or possession of antirabies vaccine only to licensed veterinarians.
(e) We support the EIA regulations developed by the Louisiana Board of Animal Health to eradicate this disease in
Louisiana horses.
(f) We urge the LDAF to maintain comprehensive programs and policies to protect livestock from foot-and-mouth
disease, Scrapie, and BSE (mad cow disease).
(g) We urge LDAF to implement regulations that will prevent the introduction of exotic Newcastle disease in
Louisiana.
(h) The Equine Coggins test has been in effect for 25 years and was very effective in ridding our state of this
disease. Therefore, we request that this test be required every five years instead of its present one-year term for
equine within the state.
Farm Products and Equipment 203
1. Agricultural Chemicals
(a) We urge the continuation of the program under which the LDAF fairly and impartially tests all farm chemicals and
insecticides to determine if they meet the specifications of the manufacturer's label.
(b) We recommend that the registration of pesticides and fungicides for so-called "minor uses," including
horticulture crops, be streamlined.
(c) We support the enforcement of the law regarding aerial application of pesticides by the LDAF.
(d) We request LDAF to take two sealed samples when testing on-farm pesticides: one for the Department's use
and the other to be retained by the farmer.
(e) We support additional funding from USDA and the LDAF for the Extension Service to conduct Pesticide
Applicator Training programs.
(f) We support legislation which will relieve farmers of liability for groundwater contamination by fertilizer or farm
chemicals provided that state and federal labeling requirements are followed.
(g) We support the continuation of a disposal program for outdated pesticides.
(h) We support the continued use of Furadan.
(i) We urge Farm Bureau to make all efforts to keep all Triazine formulations labeled as they are at the present time.
(j) We recommend that the LDAF reevaluate the amount of liability coverage required for commercial pesticide
applicators. We also recommend that aerial applicators carry a minimum of $500,000 of crop liability coverage
when applying herbicides.
(k) We recommend that Farm Bureau consult with our legislators and request that farmers in the U.S. have an
opportunity to purchase the herbicide, "Dalapon M," from Russia or South America.
(l) We are opposed to proposed EPA regulations which would establish "zero tolerance" drift for aerial and ground
applications of pesticides. These regulations would require the establishment of large buffer zones within fields
which could not be protected from pests.
(m) We request that Farm Bureau work with AFBF regarding educational programs targeted toward the urban
community in order to prevent misuse of pesticides and ultimately preserve their use for agricultural purposes.
(n) Pesticides are an essential tool of agricultural production. We support reasonable, common sense regulation of
their use. We support an expanded program to inform and educate the public on the need for agricultural
chemicals and the protection against their misuse.
(o) We support the National Association of the State Departments of Agriculture in their efforts to minimize the
difficulties imposed on American farmers by the Worker Protection Standards.
(p) We oppose any curtailment of the safe and proper use of agricultural chemicals and drugs unless research and
scientific data determine that injury to health and well-being would result. We also request reevaluation of
previously canceled pesticides based on current scientific data. We urge pesticide companies to pursue
registration of products that would address the changing needs for agricultural crop protection.
(q) In order to maintain profitability in agricultural production, we urge Monsanto to reduce the technology fees.
(r) We urge the Louisiana State Police, the Louisiana Department of Motor Vehicles, and all local law enforcement
agencies to recognize excavators and dozers owned by federally designated farms and ranches as “farm
equipment.” Furthermore, for the purposes of movement of said equipment on state highways, the agricultural
exemption for CDL licenses and over-width permits shall apply.
2. Agricultural Seed
(a) We urge that present laws in seed be enforced and that the facilities of the state seed lab continue to be
maintained and upgraded to provide the best possible testing and analysis in the shortest length of time.
(b) We recommend that certified seed tags show the germination percentage, official vigor test, date of testing, and
crop year. We support a standardized vigor test for bulk seed.
(c) We recommend that all certified, registered, and breeder cotton and rice seed show cold test data on the seed
tag.
(d) We request that it become mandatory that all seed companies list the seed count per pound of all grains on their
packaging.
(e) We recommend that LFBF pursue getting the EPA to require a terminator gene be put in all seeds of GMO
variety.
3. Food Packaging and Advertising
(a) We urge the LDAF to enforce existing laws regulating false advertising.
(b) We support legislation and enforcement which would require all retail outlets for beef and beef products to print
on the package that the product is made from imported beef. Restaurants that use imported meat and meat
products should display a notice on each menu or at each ordering point to that effect.
(c) We recommend that when the term "domestic beef" is used in a description of beef, the amount of U.S. meat be
a minimum of 100%.
4. Production Practices
We support a program through the Farm Services Agency (FSA) for winter cover crops to help prevent erosion to
croplands and to provide winter grazing for livestock.
We request that LFBF Board of Directors request legislation authorizing the Louisiana Department of Agriculture
and Forestry to be the state entity to implement policies on care and handling of livestock, equine, and poultry and
prohibiting political subdivisions from enacting or enforcing ordinances or regulations that are more restrictive than
rules promulgated by the Department. Furthermore, ordinances or regulations by municipalities pertaining to land
use or to human health or safety shall not be considered to constitute livestock, equine, and poultry care and
handling.
5. Bulk Fuel Storage
We recommend that Farm Bureau monitor regulations and fees imposed on fuel storage tanks by the Department
of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and EPA and oppose additional fees and regulations placed on them.
6. Farm Implement Dealerships
We support the practice of dealer-owned and operated implement stores and recommend this be continued
whenever possible. Any hearings held on manufacturer-owned implement stores should be monitored.
7. Bulk Feed Samples
We recommend that the LDAF increase the number of bulk feed samples taken for testing to prevent
contaminated feeds from being fed to livestock.
8. Diesel Fuel Dye
We request an alternative method other than dye be used to differentiate diesel fuel used in off-road and farm
equipment.
9. Horse Rendering Plants
We urge Congress to pass legislation to allow horses to be processed at rendering plants in the United States.
10. Port Security
We request that LFBF work with the U.S. ports in Louisiana that handle agricultural commodities to establish Port
Security Plans that allow non-TWIC card drivers to enter the port to deliver commodities with an escort or by the
driver wearing a vest for visual identification and monitoring while in the port.
Communications and Transportation 204
1. Rights-of-Way Problems
The rights of landowners are often abused by the agencies that have the right of expropriation in obtaining land
for various purposes. More consideration should be given in the future to preserving precious farmland.
(a) We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to monitor state expropriation laws and recommend changes in them
when necessary to protect landowners and tenants. The law should mandate that authorities with expropriation
powers work with landowners by providing adequate notice and maintaining the rights-of-way.
(b) We recommend that all new pipelines be placed and existing pipelines be maintained at least four feet below the
surface and marked as to their location. We also recommend that in pipeline construction through agricultural and
wetland areas, equal consideration be given to the preservation of agricultural land as well as wetlands. We also
recommend that underground telephone lines be placed and maintained at least four feet below the surface.
Landowners and/or farmers should not be liable for costs of repair if telephone lines are laid at depths of less than
four feet.
(c) We support the passage of new laws which prohibit the granting to third parties of any rights to utilize portions of
an existing easement, rights-of-way, or servitude for purposes not provided for or intended to be used in connection
with the specific granting language of an easement, rights-of-way, or servitude agreement.
(d) We support regulations which would prohibit the granting of utility servitudes, easements, or rights-of-way by
local governing authorities to nonpublic entities.
(e) We oppose FCC regulations that give them the power to overrule local and state zoning laws regarding the
placement of tall towers.
(f) We request the Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD) to do a better job of maintaining the
rights-of-way of interstate highways and request that they conform with the state of Louisiana beautification laws on
all highways.
(g) We urge the State Board to activate a study committee as needed to work with representatives from DOTD,
electric, telephone, and water utilities and other interested parties to improve maintenance of rights-of-way. The
committee's objectives should include improved highway visibility, harvest of timber on the rights-of-way, reduce
power outages, return land to owner as rights-of-way are changed, guidelines for loggers and landowners, and
easier access to all utilities for maintenance.
(h) We support legislation which would require all pipeline owners and utilities to maintain a GPS identification and
location system to ensure accurate location of lines to better facilitate the Louisiana One Call system used by
farmers. In the case of lines that are dangerous if damaged, the utility representatives should be onsite during the
digging operation.
(i) We recommend that LFBF work to establish requirements that farmers be paid the full value for crops damaged
or destroyed by any company with right of way rights on a farmer’s crop land.
2. Rights-of-Way Easement
(a) Easement rights-of-way obtained by public or private sectors shall not be committed to any new or
additional purpose either during their original usage or after abandonment without consent or the
owner of the land underlying the easement.
(b) We oppose federal legislation that would deny or postpone the reversionary property rights or interests
of underlying or adjacent property owners to railroad, utility, or road rights-of-way that are no longer
being used for the purpose for which the rights-of-way were granted.
(c) We oppose any legislation that will permit utility rights-of-way, including railroad rights-of-way, to be
used for recreational purposes without permission of adjoining landowners.
(d) We request that Union Pacific and other railroads not be allowed to close crossings if the
crossing is the only access a landowner has to his property or if it would adversely affect
the farm operator.
(e) We request that Farm Bureau encourage Union Pacific and other railroads to clean and maintain
the culverts under their tracks so that drainage is not impeded.
(f) We support regulation of railroad crossings by the PSC.
(g) Farmers and landowners should not be liable for accidents at railroad crossings on their
property and should not be required to maintain the railroad right-of-way adjacent to crossings
on their property.
3. Rails to Trails
We oppose provisions of the National Trail System Act which permit rail property which is no longer being used
for rail service or when rail use is discontinued to be donated, sold, and/or used for trails or other recreational
purposes. When a railroad is abandoned, the rights-of-way should be returned or sold to the adjacent property
owners.
We support the concept of rail banking to preserve rights-of-way for future use, provided authorizing legislation
accomplishes the following:
(a) Require railroads to provide timely personal notice to each landowner before each proposed abandonment.
(b) Require railroads to reveal to each landowner before abandonment the full and complete legal basis on which
the railroad has claimed its right to occupy the corridor. If the railroad's right is less than fee simple ownership, the
railroad should be required to disclose to each landowner that its occupancy right will be extinguished upon
abandonment.
(c) Permit and encourage every landowner to participate in the abandonment proceeding and to offer reasons for or
against rail banking or trail use.
(d) Permit rail banking without interim trail use, and permit landowners to retain abandoned railroad corridors for
nontrail uses that will preserve the opportunity for restored rail use in the future.
(e) Require the Surface Transportation Board (STB) to consider all comments by landowners, to make specific
findings concerning the effects of proposed interim trail use on the safety, health, security, and privacy interests of
landowners and neighboring residents, and, based thereon, to make a determination of suitability for trail use
before issuing a Certificate of Interim Trail Use (CITU) or a Notice of Interim Trail Use (NITU).
(f) Require the STB to impose conditions to protect the safety, health, security, and privacy interests of landowners
where necessary or appropriate before issuing a CITU or a NITU.
(g) Create a predictable, objective, bright-line standard that abandonment is deemed to be consum-mated no later
than nine months after issuance of authority to abandon by STB.
(h) Require STB to supervise, monitor, and enforce its orders and conditions on rail banked land or to empower
state and local governments to do so without preemption by federal authorities.
(i) Create a procedure for reinstatement of rail service on rail banked corridors.
(j) Provide a clear and simple procedure to compensate landowners for their interest in land that is taken as a result
of rail banking order.
If not repealed altogether, the National Trails System Act should be amended to allow only those railroad rights-
of-way which have a realistic probability of being used again for a railroad to be approved for interim use as
recreational trails. The National Trails Act should be amended to require:
(a) A locally elected governmental entity to assume responsibility for the project and hold public hearings outlining a
plan for long-term maintenance. There should be input from citizens and con-tiguous landowners before the
property is transferred to any group.
(b) The entity receiving certification for trail use of a rail corridor to be held responsible for liability, rights-of-way
fencing, taxes, control of noxious weeds, maintenance of the rights-of-way, and other such costs which were
required of the railroad and should also be responsible for compensating the owners of the rights-of-way for use of
the property easement.
(c) That railroads provide timely personal notice to each landowner before each proposed abandonment.
(d) That railroads reveal to each landowner, before abandonment, the full and complete legal basis on which the
railroad has claimed its right to occupy the corridor. If the railroad's right is less than fee simple ownership, the
railroad should be required to disclose to each landowner that its occupancy right will be extinguished upon
abandonment. In cases where the railroad owns the rights-of-way in fee simple, however, selling to adjoining
landowners is appropriate and proper.
(e) Opportunity for every landowner to participate in the abandonment proceeding and to offer reasons for or
against rail banking or trail use.
(f) Opportunity for rail banking without interim trail use. Landowners should be allowed to retain rail-road corridors
for nontrail uses that will preserve the opportunity for restored rail use in the future.
(g) The STB to consider all comments by landowners, to make specific findings concerning the effects of proposed
interim trail use on the safety, health, security, and privacy interests of landowners and neighboring residents and,
based thereon, to make a determination of suitability for trail use before issuing a CITU or a NITU.
(h) Procedures granting the STB authority to accept or reject rail banking agreements entered into between the
railroad and trail sponsor.
(i) Local governing body approval of the recreational trail project before the STB can accept the rail-banking
agreement between the railroad and the trail sponsor.
(j) The STB to impose conditions to protect the safety, health, security, and privacy interests of land-owners, where
necessary or appropriate, before issuing a CITU or a NITU.
(k) Creation of a predictable, objective, bright-line standard that abandonment is deemed to be consummated no
later than nine months after issuance of authority to abandon by STB.
(l) The STB to supervise, monitor, and enforce its orders and conditions on rail-banked land or to empower state
and local governments to do so without preemption by federal authorities.
(m) Creation of a procedure for reinstatement of rail service on rail-banked corridors.
(n) A clear and simple procedure to compensate landowners for their interests in land that is taken as a result of a
rail banking order.
(o) We urge Farm Bureau to sponsor legislation to regulate any recreational trail developed under the National
Trails Act. The regulations governing these trails must ensure the property rights of landowners and ensure a safe
and useful trail. We suggest that Farm Bureau use the Kansas Farm Bureau Recreational Trails Act as a guide for
our legislation.
(p) We urge that if the proposed bike path is built along the Mississippi River levee from Baton Rouge to New
Orleans that it is at the bottom of the levee.
4. Federal, State, and Parish Roads
(a) Farm Bureau should urge state officials, including local senators and representatives, to obtain funding for the
building, overlaying, and other maintenance needed on state roads.
(b) We recommend that when parish and state roads are updated and widened, adequate consideration be given to
drainage. We also support additional funding for the parish road fund.
(c) We urge the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development to prioritize funds for road and highway
development.
(d) We request the PSC to require area railroad companies to properly maintain drainage culverts in order to
comply with state and local drainage programs.
(e) We request DOTD to continue to paint double yellow lines at intersections of state and parish roads and to place
caution lights where needed. We also encourage DOTD and local governments to maintain all road signs and
request them to place the signs far enough back on the rights-of-way to facilitate safe movement of farm
equipment. White lines should be painted on the edge of the travel lane as a safety precaution.
(f) We urge police juries, parish councils, levee boards, and DOTD to do a better job of supervising roadwork crews
in order to better maintain highways and parish roads, especially farm-to-market roads.
(g) We recommend that DOTD use materials equal in quality for the construction of both road surfaces and
shoulders to insure safety on our state roads.
(h) We recommend that private individuals be allowed to utilize the forages along the state and federal highways for
hay.
(i) We urge DOTD to post caution signs along those highways highly used by farm machinery.
(j) We recommend that if Highway 90 becomes part of Interstate 49, special consideration should be made to allow
farm implements to cross the Wax Lake outlet bridge.
(k) We request that frontage (service) roads be constructed from Morgan City to Lafayette.
(l) We request that left-turn lanes be constructed on Highway 90 between Morgan City and Lafayette.
(m) We urge DOTD to construct a permanent bridge over Bayou Plaquemine on Louisiana Highway 91 north of
Estherwood.
(n) In order to increase safety on Highway 90, we request that DOTD reestablish the 55-mph speed limit between
Morgan City and Lafayette.
(o) We urge that harvest-season permits allowing maximum weight limits of 100,000 pounds be acquired for all
commodities on federal highways.
(p) We support the continued availability of 100,000-pound permits for farm trucks.
(q) We recommend informing our membership on the current federal highway use tax provisions as they apply to
agriculture. This should be done through the Louisiana Farm Bureau News, news-letters, and letters to parish
presidents.
(r) We request that the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development trim tree limbs overhanging
highways in order to facilitate the transport of large farm equipment.
(s) We urge DOTD to place a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 402 and Highway 1.
5. Telephone Service
(a) We urge the Public Service Commission (PSC) to support local parish Farm Bureaus' efforts to reduce the
number of telephone exchanges within parishes in order to improve local service.
(b) We recommend that the dead zones experienced by cellular phone users be eliminated.
Electric Companies 205
1. We oppose the rate structure used by electric companies whereby customers pay demand charges on
agricultural facilities for 12 months of the year when the facilities may actually be used only one to three months of
the year.
2. We oppose Louisiana PSC rate increases that recoup the speculative ventures normally financed by stock-
holders, such as nuclear plants.
3. We request that utility companies work with farmers to insure that farm equipment can be moved without
disturbing the utility line.
4. We urge that Farm Bureau seek the cooperation and support of the utility companies in upgrading the quality and
quantity of service in rural areas.
5. We support open board meetings to the membership of each respective rural electric cooperative, notification
and public hearings prior to any rate change, and each cooperative having the option to be regulated by its
respective board of directors or the PSC, subject to the conditions set forth in the Act.
6. We support the prevention of duplication of electric service within 300 feet of existing utility power lines.
7. We support the reenactment by the PSC of the orders and rules which deal with the definition of territory of
electric utilities and duplication of electric services.
Taxation and Finance 206
1. Agricultural Taxation
(a) We support maintaining use value taxation of agricultural, horticultural, forest, and marshlands.
(b) We believe it to be unfair and inequitable to allow all registered voters to vote in property tax elections, and we
should work to correct this situation.
(c) We request the reinstatement of exemptions for all agricultural equipment.
(d) We recommend that state and local governing bodies include a “sunset” provision in all special-purpose tax
legislation which will terminate the tax upon completion of the project.
(e) We support the appropriate changes in state law that excludes borrowed capital in computing the corporate
franchise tax.
(f) We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to study homestead exemption and alternative methods of taxation
and that the State Board be given authority to support lowering the homestead exemption if deemed appropriate.
(g) We support only those increases in local property taxes that are fair to farm landowners and recommend that the
use of such increased revenue be clearly defined and dedicated by a vote of the people.
(h) We recommend that the State Board study the possibility of placing a minimum valuation on all property so that
the homeowner still maintains some protection and all homeowners make a contribution when they vote on taxes.
(i) We oppose parish and/or municipal governing authorities from levying taxes or user fees without a vote of the
people. In addition, we oppose water use taxation.
(j) We recommend that Farm Bureau help educate taxpayers concerning “use” tax and penalties for nonpayment of
Louisiana sales tax when purchasing from out-of-state dealers.
(k) We request Farm Bureau to contact the appropriate government/administration officials to voice our opposition
to the current federal and state tax audit process and to pursue a change in the system whereby an individual will
be “innocent until proven guilty.”
(l) We support a sales tax exemption on new and/or used farm equipment that is either leased or rented.
(m) We request that Farm Bureau support legislation which would include utility farm vehicles (for example: John
Deere Gators, Kawasaki Mules; etc.) in the sales tax exemption definition of farm equipment and allow Farm Bureau
staff to seek to further define this exemption legislatively, if necessary.
(n) We support the continued implementation of the graduated sales tax exemption on all farm equipment.
(o) We request that Farm Bureau support legislation to exempt equipment used for aerial application of chemicals,
fertilizer, and seeds from sales tax.
(p) We oppose the imposition of franchise taxes on utilities by parish police juries or councils in unincorporated
areas.
(q) We oppose franchise taxes on cotton gins and cotton warehouses.
(r) We urge the Louisiana Department of Revenue to inform fuel distributors that off-road diesel is not subject to
state or local sales tax and does not require an exemption certificate.
(s) We request legislation if needed to allow local taxing entities to suspend the collection of sales tax on propane
and/or natural gas farm equipment using these fuel sources.
(t) We urge LFBF work through legislative means to have line “B” of RS 47:305:37 deleted, this would place all
parishes under the same eligibilities. (In any parish having a population of more than one hundred twenty thousand
persons but less than one hundred forty thousand persons based on the latest Federal decennial census.)
2. We strongly oppose ad valorem taxes at the state level and recommend that this source of tax revenue be
reserved for local governing bodies.
Natural Resources 207
1. Flood Control
(a) We support reasonable flood control through coordination among federal and state agencies and private
organizations.
(b) We oppose the federal takeover of the Atchafalaya Basin and urge that the Agency Management Group adopt a
flood control plan which will relieve a flood situation as soon as possible and minimize private property damage.
(c) We support retention and consolidation of levee districts as recommended by the 2006 Regular Session of the
Legislature. However, we oppose any future consolidation of levee districts.
(d) We recommend that the mayor and city council for East Baton Rouge Parish develop a more suitable plan for
flood control in the parish that occurs from heavy rains and backwater.
(e) We oppose the construction of the Darlington Reservoir and strongly support the abolishment of the Amite River
Basin Drainage Commission. We oppose any additional funding for either of these projects.
(f) We urge the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps of Engineers) to dredge all flood control-drainage canals
associated with the Corps of Engineers’ levee system in Louisiana when such work is supported by the parish Farm
Bureau in the affected area.
(g) We recommend that guidelines be established regarding pumping water and building levees in one parish that
might affect bordering parishes.
(h) We request that Farm Bureau urge the Governor, the legislature, the Louisiana Congressional Delegation, and
state and federal natural resource management agencies to take the necessary steps to enhance and maintain
freshwater and sediment flows in Louisiana’s coastal wetlands. This is an attempt to sustain a healthy marsh system
and sustain the availability of freshwater resources vital to the economic viability of agriculture in our coastal
parishes. Any projects undertaken in a particular parish should have the consideration of the impact the project
would have on adjoining parishes. Drainage improvements within a parish to address local flooding problems can
proceed at any time after downstream improvements have been made.
(i) We request that the Corps of Engineers continue to maintain Locks 1, 2, and 3, as well as the Pearl River
Navigation Canal and Levee System.
(j) We request that the Corps of Engineers allow recreational users of the Pearl River Navigation Canal System and
that the users of Locks 1, 2, and 3 be allowed access to the docks at these locations.
2. Irrigation and Drainage
(a) We endorse a coordinated program of the Department of Public Works (DPW) and the Corps of Engineers in
developing a plan to control salt water intrusion from the Gulf of Mexico into streams used for irrigation in Louisiana.
In implementing a program to supply fresh water for irrigation purposes, we urge that these agencies coordinate
efforts to assure that drainage networks be maintained during heavy overflow from reservoirs to provide an
adequate supply of fresh water.
(b) Because of the importance of a permanent, adequate supply of fresh water to the economy of Louisiana and the
necessity of assuring an even larger supply to take care of future growth, we urge work with other organizations in
the development of all feasible water resource development projects and encourage funding of the chloride
research program for the Red River for use in municipal water systems and irrigation.
(c) We offer encouragement and assistance to LSU in the expansion of research on the problem of irrigation,
including the Red River.
(d) We oppose the effort by local governing bodies in parishes adjacent to the Red River to remove funds from the
Red River Waterway Commission.
(e) We encourage the Red River Valley Association to develop programs for reducing or eliminating the salt content
from the River.
(f) We urge the engineers of the DPW, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service, and all commissions, committees, and boards to make public as soon as practical, the results of their
studies and research and provide background information on which their decisions are based.
(g) We urge that Farm Bureau resist the efforts of various organized groups to stop needed watershed and
drainage projects in Louisiana.
(h) We urge the DPW, the Corps of Engineers, and the appropriate levee districts to work toward improving the
overall drainage in all parishes that are drained by the Atchafalaya Floodway. We also request better protection by
federal and state agencies of land from backwater flooding, especially if this backwater flooding is caused and can
be stopped by drainage systems and structures in place, by modifying or changing current rules and regulations, or
by scheduled maintenance of these systems. We request that work in this area be expedited because of flooding
problems in most parishes that are drained by the Atchafalaya Floodway.
(i) We recommend that the Corps of Engineers conduct an updated study on the problem of draining water from
behind all levee systems, as well as levee districts, in Louisiana.
(j) We oppose the inclusion of streams in the scenic rivers system which are important for drainage of agricultural
land areas.
(k) We support the continuation of the Aquatic Plant Research and Control Program.
(l) In principle, we support the clearing and dredging of the Tensas River when funds become avail-able since the
Corps of Engineers and the Madison Soil Conservation District both have endorsed this action to improve drainage.
We support the efforts of the Tensas River Basin Technical Steering Committee in developing a plan of work for
addressing ecological and socio-economic issues in the Tensas River Basin of Northeast Louisiana.
(m) We feel that landowners should be compensated at fair market value for erosion on their property caused by
government actions.
(n) We recommend that the Bayou Lafourche Siphon Freshwater Diversion Restoration Project in Louisiana conduct
extensive research on the impact this project would have on the agricultural industry along Bayou Lafourche before
its approval and commencement. We request that the proper governmental agencies keep the citizens of all
affected parishes informed of all proposals concerning the Bayou Lafourche Siphon Project.
(o) We request a study of the ways to enhance the surface water supplies in Louisiana.
(p) We request that consideration be given to high water during times of excessive rains in the Mermentau Basin.
We support maintaining the fresh water integrity of the Mermentau Basin. We also request that Farm Bureau work
with our congressional delegation to secure the necessary authority for the Corps to repair breaches in levee
systems and structures and to maintain these systems and structures to prevent saltwater intrusion into our
freshwater basins.
(q) We request that Farm Bureau assist in getting Cancienne Canal dredged.
(r) We request that Farm Bureau facilitate a meeting between Pointe Coupee, West Baton Rouge, Iberville,
Assumption, and other affected parishes to the south to discuss a solution to the drainage problems faced by Pointe
Coupee Parish and others.
(s) We request that Farm Bureau seek modifications in parish water treatment systems’ use of salt for water
softening due to salt contamination of streams and designate every stream used by agriculture as a designated
agricultural-use stream.
3. Water Diversion
(a) We oppose any action to divert water from the Mississippi River, Sabine River, Toledo Bend Reservoir, and all
aquifers within the state to other states for any reason until all present and future needs for water in Louisiana have
been studied and ample safeguards made to assure Louisiana first priority to water from these sources.
(b) We are opposed to any national or regional plan, except fresh water diversion projects, to divert water from the
Mississippi River if such changes affect the natural flow of the river and its tributaries or result in salinity, pollution,
navigation hazards, or damage to wildlife, fishing, industry, and agriculture in Louisiana.
(c) We request that the appropriate state or federal agency initiate a comprehensive study to evaluate the viability
of moving water from the Red River through existing natural and man-made channels into the Mermentau Basin for
agricultural use and wetland benefits.
4. Coastal Wetlands
(a) The Corps of Engineers should establish as a primary mission the enhancement, restoration, and maintenance
of viable coastal wetlands. The relationship between the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and
farmers in providing technical assistance in joint soil and water conservation projects should serve as a successful
model. Assistance to private wetlands land-owners through incentives such as cost-share and technical assistance
programs should replace the often adversarial role of federal agencies that frequently discourage positive wetlands
enhancement projects.
(b) Coastal wetlands deterioration in Louisiana has been caused primarily by the secondary effects of various
channelization projects. Federal wetlands policy must address this issue and provide an adequate long-term
remedy to this major cause of wetlands loss. The permit process must direct and allow for corrective measures to
be taken in areas which have been detrimentally affected by the aforementioned channelization projects.
(c) Coastal wetlands policy should clearly establish that major losses of wetlands in coastal Louisiana are
attributable to human activity benefiting national interests.
(d) Environmentally sound exploration and development of oil and natural gas reserves in coastal Louisiana should
be encouraged. Current federal permitting policies and regulations have greatly hindered the oil and gas industry
and have significantly reduced the economic return from private wetlands in South Louisiana.
(e) Currently both the Fish & Wildlife Services (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) evaluate
the impact of proposed coastal projects on fisheries resources. We recommend that the FWS should be the federal
agency that evaluates the impact of proposed coastal projects on fisheries and wildlife resources.
(f) The concept of mitigation banking should be established in coastal wetlands permitting; however, where
mitigation projects are available on permit applicant’s land, such sites/projects should be given first consideration.
(g) Mitigation should only be required where convincing, adverse environmental damage can be documented.
Wetlands protection, enhancement, restoration, and maintenance projects should never require mitigation. Such
projects should be encouraged through cost-share/incentive programs sponsored through USDA or the Corps of
Engineers.
(h) We support the full funding and implementation of coastal restoration and coastal protection measures.
5. Coastal Zone Management
(a) We recommend that Farm Bureau represent the interests of agriculture in matters relating to coastal zone
management. We support the efforts of Vermilion, Cameron, and Calcasieu parishes and their efforts to form and
fund a tri-parish coastal protection authority with the possibility of eventually including Iberia parish and other
eastern components.
(b) We recommend that the Louisiana plan to implement the Nonpoint Source Pollution Program in the coastal zone
area come under the direction of the Commissioner of Agriculture and the LDAF, as established in Executive Order
EWE 93-14. Specifically, we recommend that:
(1) The present boundaries of the current coastal zone be retained.
(2) Implementation of the Coastal Zone Management Plan by agricultural producers should be voluntary. Emphasis
should be placed on education, technical assistance, and BMPs, as recommended by the AgCenter.
(3) Agricultural producers should not be subject to any civil penalties or any other enforcement mechanisms
concerning noncompliance of Coastal Zone Pollution Control Regulations.
(c) We support a well-funded program to control erosion of our coastal marshes and wetlands. We support the
continuation of the Farm Bureau Coastal Activities and Wetlands Advisory Committee. We oppose any and all shell
dredging near Vermilion Bay or any barrier island that exists off Louisiana waters. The barrier islands and shell
reefs are critical to the protection and restoration of the Louisiana Gulf Coast and the maintenance of productive
estuaries for our fisheries resources.
6. Salt Water Intrusion
Since Section 8(g) of the O.C.S. Lands Act, as amended in 1978, makes funds available to states impacted by
offshore oil and gas operators, we recommend that 50 percent of all future Section 8(g) funds be used in parishes
and counties of impacted areas to protect against further erosion and land loss. Because the loss of our marshes
and wetlands by erosion is having an adverse impact on national economic development, we support an effort to
have the Secretary of Agriculture include private landowners in soil conservation practices under existing USDA
programs.
7. Soil Typing Survey
We recommend that the NRCS and the Corps of Engineers continually reclassify land with respect to overall
improvements in order for landowners to be eligible for all benefits realized from improved farmland.
8. Air and Water Pollution
We generally support clean air and water and urge Farm Bureau to work with state and federal pollution control
agencies in the interest of agriculture in Louisiana. We are opposed, however, to the proposed modifications to the
Clean Air Act as being too stringent to be workable.
9. Hazardous Waste Disposal
We support the proper storage and disposal of hazardous waste. We also recommend that Farm Bureau
continue to assist parish Farm Bureaus in averting any development of improper hazardous waste disposal sites
which would adversely affect its future.
10. Sanitary Landfills
We support sound, environmentally safe methods of recycling waste in lieu of landfill disposal facilities. However,
we recommend that sanitary landfills be kept open and maintained until acceptable alternative methods are
available.
11. Land Use
(a) We oppose any federal land use planning. We believe that land use planning can best be accomplished at the
parish or comparable level of government and by private landowners. We are also opposed to government
agencies restricting the use of prime agricultural land.
(b) We urge that agricultural interests be alert to parish and community land use planning activities and seek to
have input with regard to the importance of agriculture and any proposed restrictions on the use of agriculturally
oriented property. We strongly recommend that a farmer or rural land-owner whose land is used for farming
purposes be added to all land use planning committees or boards.
12. Land Ownership
(a) We support the maintenance of the private property rights of U.S. citizens to make whatever use of their property
they want as long as it does not adversely affect the property rights of others.
(b) We recommend that individuals or groups filing suits or securing injunctions which would deprive the landowner
of the use of his property be required to post a bond sufficient to cover any income or use lost as a result of the suit
or injunction if the court decides in favor of the landowner.
(c) We support those provisions of the mineral code, particularly the Louisiana Abandoned Oilfield Waste Site Law
that requires the cleanup of drilling sites and waste pits in an attempt to restore the surface to its original condition.
(d) We recommend that Farm Bureau study the quick-taking provisions in the expropriation statutes and offer
possible solutions to landowners.
13. Wildlife and Fisheries
(a) We recommend that the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) work closely with farmers to
control damage from wildlife to crops and livestock.
(b) We support state funding for a predator control program in Louisiana.
Because of the overpopulation of alligators in certain areas of the state, we request that the Department of Wildlife
and Fisheries increase the number of tags per acre and decrease the number of live releases that offset egg
removal in order to help control the population. We further request that additional personnel be assigned to speed
up the process of determining the overpopulation.
(c) We support the LDWF “Operation Game Thief.”
(d) Catfish and crawfish farmers suffer severe losses because of the double-crested cormorant and ibis; therefore,
we request the LDWF to seek an exception to protective regulations in order for damaged producers to protect their
fish.
(e) We oppose the taking of any agricultural land, including forestland in production or out of production, for the
black bear or any other endangered or threatened species as designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. We
urge that the black bear habitat not be expanded any further at all.
(f) We recommend that Farm Bureau renew efforts to request LDAF to provide additional qualified trappers to assist
landowners on a statewide basis and in a timely manner with the control and elimination of nuisance animals, and in
particular beaver, nutria, coyotes, feral hogs and domestic hogs not in captivity.
(g) We oppose the use of gill nets but oppose state legislation which bans the use of other types of nets for
commercial fishermen. We support a limited-entry program for out-of-state fishermen in order to preserve
Louisiana water for Louisiana fishermen.
14. Property Rights
(a) We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to monitor and protect the property rights of land-owners and
farmers.
(b) We support the landowner notifying the tenant farmer in a timely manner of his intentions to sell the land well in
advance of the proposed sale which would take the land out of cultivation. Before the land is developed the
landowner must financially compensate the tenant farmer for his crop and investments or reach a mutual agreement
for financial compensation with the tenant farmer for his crop and investment where a written lease is not present.
We urge Farm Bureau to be actively engaged in the work of the Legislative Study Committee that will propose
legislation relative to the problems addressed in House Bill 454 of the 2009 Legislative Session.
(c) We request that LFBF work to increase the communication between landlords, tenant farmers, and land
surveyors, and others having legitimate business on the leased premises and seek ways to help limit tenant farmers’
liability when these groups enter their rented land. We also request that efforts be made to allow tenant farmers to
collect for damages to crops and equipment that result from such activity.
(d) We recommend that seismic and/or exploration companies boring, breaking, or puncturing the soil to a depth
greater than 25 feet be required to obtain a $25,000 surety bond. Upon depositing the bond with the parish council,
the company may be granted a rights-of-way permit contingent upon an approved plan by the company to backfill all
drilled or excavated holes with the original soil or some approved substitute from the base of the hole to the original
surface level.
(e) We oppose the expansion of the right of expropriation to any entity, agency, or person not already having such
rights under state law.
(f) We recommend legislation that under certain circumstances will give private individuals the ability to separate
mineral interests from land in perpetuity in order to compete with federal and state agencies and departments
having this authority in selling or transferring tracts of real estate.
(g) We recommend that entities having the right of expropriation be prohibited from taking privately owned land to
be given or sold to another private entity.
(h) We request changes to make private companies liable for legal expenses in expropriation of land by private
entities if they lose their case.
15. Environmental Issues
(a) We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to make available to farm operators information concerning the
disposal, recycling, and reuse of used farm supplies such as empty containers, oils, etc.
(b) Prior to closure, we recommend that it be mandatory for a property seller to disclose any prior use of the
property, such as a landfill or hazardous waste dump, which may affect its future use.
(c) We support voluntary, incentive-based programs for the agricultural industry in addressing environ-mental
issues.
(d) We support legislation to allow the burning of one day’s use of properly rinsed and cleaned farm use containers
and seed bags.
(e) We oppose any legislation that would restrict a farmer’s right to agricultural burning.
(f) We urge that timber dealers be legally responsible for cleanup of tree tops and debris that interfere with drainage
of creeks, streams, and ditches.
(g) We urge farmers to refrain from burning and spraying lands in close proximity to schools which may be disruptive
to school children during school hours from 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
(h) We recommend continued support of voluntary participation in Operation Quackback in conjunction with the
Louisiana Rice Growers and Extension Service.
(i) We request Farm Bureau to pursue state and national legislation that would require retail outlets to use
biodegradable bags at the point of purchase in an effort to reduce the pollution problem plaguing our state as a
result of the use of plastic bags.
(j) We request Farm Bureau to encourage sugarcane growers to have at least one certified burn manager on each
sugarcane farming operation.
(k) We request Farm Bureau to support legislation to continue landowners’ legal rights to sue parties to recover
damages for pollution to surface and ground water with the following provisions:
(1) Notification to DEQ and DNR of lawsuits filed to recover damages to groundwater.
(2) Mandate that court-awarded damages for groundwater contamination be completed by landowners as rendered
by the court and under the supervision of DEQ and the court.
(3) Cleanup plan developed by landowner and DEQ be implemented timely within six months of court decree.
(4) Court-awarded damages be deposited with the landowners, subject to oversight by the Court.
Education and Youth 208
1. Education
(a) We support adequate teacher salaries from permanent, dedicated funds to maintain and improve our Louisiana
educational system.
(b) We recommend that a percentage of lottery revenues be devoted strictly to classroom instruction.
(c) We support recertification of teachers on a recurring basis by rewarding those teachers who submit to such a
program with substantial increases in their present salary structure. We also support efforts to index salaries so
that teachers who teach beyond 12 years would continue to receive adjustments to their salary up to 30 years.
(d) We support efforts to strengthen student testing programs and recommend that this apply to all graduating
students.
(e) While we support standardized tests for students, we oppose the disproportionate emphasis placed on the
results of these so-called “high-stakes” tests that puts undue pressure on administrators, teachers, and students.
This results in students being taught primarily to prepare for the tests rather than basic skills.
(f) We oppose any effort to tie education reform to a comprehensive tax increase.
(g) We support the teaching of respect and patriotism in all schools.
(h) We support “Agriculture in the Classroom” (AITC) and other educational programs which can develop an
understanding of economics, supply and demand, and the sources of food, fiber, pharmaceuticals, and other life-
sustaining items and recommend that these programs be made available to all students. We also recommend that
teachers receive training to make them agriculturally literate.
(i) We encourage all agricultural organizations and businesses to provide financial support to the Louisiana
Foundation for Agriculture in the Classroom in order to further the education of the youth and teachers of Louisiana
about the agricultural industry.
(j) We recommend that our Congressional delegation be contacted to encourage the continued funding of the USDA
AITC program under the new administration.
(k) We support free textbooks and transportation for all children in accredited state public or private schools
regardless of when the school was organized.
(l) We support tax-deductible status for private school tuition and educational school vouchers.
(m) We encourage all levels of government to recognize the right of private groups to organize and operate
educational institutions and the importance of maintaining conditions which permit such institutions to operate.
2. Higher Education
(a) We request that Louisiana residents be given first consideration over out-of-state students for admission to state
medical schools, vet schools, student aid, and on-campus jobs. Students majoring in agriculture should be given
first consideration for jobs in university ag departments.
(b) In an effort to offset budget cuts, we recommend that the boards of supervisors for the state universities exercise
their authority to raise the tuition fees for foreign college students to the extent that reflects the total actual cost of
the education.
(c) We support a continuing agricultural program at state-run universities outside the land-grant universities.
(d) We oppose the current state legislative policy of using higher education funding for political leverage and
support funding higher education at the highest level possible.
(e) We recommend that a committee of two or three people be appointed to work with the appropriate people from
the Board of Regents, the BESE Board, and others involved to further reform the way college credits are transferred
from university to university (and from two-year colleges) so that accredited courses will be accepted from one
university to another within the state.
(f) We recommend that Farm Bureau urge the legislature to support land-grant universities and provide more funds
to help farmers and ranchers receive the services they need.
3. Vocational Education
(a) We support the inclusion of FFA/vocational agricultural programs in our public school systems. We recommend
that FFA/vocational agricultural education be fully funded on a 12-month basis. We urge that Farm Bureau work
with the Louisiana Agriculture Teachers’ Association to solve the problem of providing leadership for the Agricultural
Education/FFA Program in Louisiana.
(b) We recommend that all 4-H activities conducted with the local school system continue to be classified co-
curriculum under BESE regulations and that agriscience programs be classified as intra-curriculum. We recommend
that all parish school boards be encouraged to adjust student schedules to allow them the opportunity to participate
in these activities.
(c) We support training courses in agricultural equipment operation and repair in technical colleges. These classes
would also include instructional information on safety standards which should be followed on farming operations.
(d) We support a two-track educational curriculum in the high-school system that includes both a college
preparatory and a vocational preparatory alternative.
(e) We support the Louisiana School for the AgriSciences (LaSAS) and the establishment of similar agriscience-
focused schools in the state.
(f) We urge continued funding for 4-H county agents and other personnel involved in programs for our youth as we
regard these activities as being among the most beneficial to students in both grammar and high school.
(g) We support the continuance of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Act and the funding thereof to
secure programs of agricultural education in our state.
4. Food Animal Veterinarians
(a) We request that the state fund Act No. 809, which was previously passed by the state legislature, and which
provides for loans to eligible applicants who are Louisiana residents and will obtain doctor of veterinary degrees
which will qualify them to be food animal veterinarians.
(b) We urge an increase in LSU Veterinary School class size with more emphasis to be placed on food animal
practice.
(c) We urge the restructuring of entrance criteria to place more weight on actual prior clinical experience.
(d) We urge that the Louisiana Veterinary Medical Association be allowed to nominate one applicant from each of
their nine districts and that this nomination be used to enhance their chances for admission to the LSU Veterinary
School.
Safety 209
1. In view of the excellent safety record in those states which place a major emphasis on driver education in the
schools, we recommend that driver’s training be established and funded by the state in all public junior high and
senior high schools.
2. We recommend that rural citizens be given good road conditions equal to others around the state through the
use of painted white lines, speed limit signs, caution lights when necessary, and stop signs at intersections on farm-
to-market roads. Further, guardrails on new bridges should be a minimum of 30 feet apart.
3. We urge all railroads to keep weeds mowed at all crossings and maintain weed control of rights-of-way.
Crossings should be adequately maintained. We urge state and local governing bodies to enforce these rules in
the interest of safety. We urge that arms, bells, and lights at all railroad crossings on state and parish highways be
installed and maintained and urge legislation to assure that this is accomplished.
4. We request Farm Bureau to research the possibility of having laws that regulate railroads from blocking public
roads to apply to private roads as well.
5. Violations of OSHA can be costly to farmers. We urge that information continue to be provided to farmers
regarding their obligations and responsibilities.
6. We recommend that the LSU Firemen Training Program continue to offer educational programs between local fire
departments and/or districts and local water districts on the proper utilization of fire fighting equipment, especially
fire hydrants of different size standards.
7. We encourage and support the use of slow-moving vehicle emblems and favor ongoing programs to inform the
motoring public of their responsibility to reduce speed and be cautious when approaching and overtaking vehicles
displaying this emblem.
8. We support the strict enforcement of the law requiring pulpwood haulers to secure their loads to prevent logs
from falling on the roadways.
9. We request that Farm Bureau make specialized harvest safety signs available to all farmers. We also request
that they work with DOTD to make these signs available statewide and easily recognizable by all drivers.
State Government 210
1. Labor-Management Relations
(a) We oppose unionization of farm labor.
(b) We oppose agricultural labor relations legislation.
(c) We oppose the repeal of the Louisiana Right-to-Work Law. We also oppose any attempt to weaken the Right-to-
Work Law by passage of the agency shop concept.
2. Louisiana Welfare Program
We urge the Welfare Department to insist that employable persons return to the labor force instead of remaining
on welfare rolls.
3. Public Institutions in Agriculture
We oppose public institutions going into commercial agriculture as unfair competition to local producers.
We recommend full funding for the LSU Ag Center (LSUAC) at the July 1, 2008 funding level of the state
appropriations and encourage the Governor, state legislators, and the Board of Regents to support and take action
to meet this request.
4. Worker’s Compensation
(a) We support the Louisiana Worker’s Compensation Corporation but urge that Farm Bureau continue to work for
equitable worker’s compensation laws.
(b) We oppose the increase of worker’s compensation payment benefits until such time as adequate safeguards are
incorporated to prevent abuse of the law.
(c) We support an exemption in state law that would allow employees to sign a waiver to opt out of worker’s
compensation coverage that is otherwise required.
5. Unemployment Compensation
(a) We strongly support the current exemptions provided for agricultural employers with regard to having to pay
unemployment taxes and request Farm Bureau to work toward increasing these exemptions. We also support
putting a ceiling on unemployment compensation for part-time or temporary workers.
(b) We support allowing farm operators and corporation stockholders to have the option of whether to pay
unemployment insurance premiums on themselves even though they pay the premium on their employees. If such
persons are required to pay premiums, they should be eligible to receive payments under certain circumstances
other than dissolving the corporation.
(c) We support the exemption for farmers from paying unemployment insurance on full-time college students.
6. Insurance Laws
(a) We oppose Louisiana statutes which allow intra-family lawsuits.
(b) We support the continued efforts of the state legislature and/or local police juries to expand local fire stations in
each parish. This gives more fire protection to the rural community and helps to lower fire insurance for individuals
living outside fire districts.
(c) We recommend that borrowers not be required to purchase insurance from the institution which issued the loan.
Instead, we recommend that borrowers have the option to purchase required insurance from the company of their
preference.
(d) We support the repeal of the direct-action statute against insurance companies.
(e) We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to support tort reform legislation to return to a fairer judicial system
for all landowners and citizens of the state.
(f) We urge the strict enforcement of the law requiring the revocation of the license plate, as well as the driver’s
license, of any individual driving without liability insurance.
(g) We request continued support for the state police and local law enforcement agencies’ efforts in checking
motorists for liability insurance coverage.
(h) We support the reduction of the underlying costs of automobile insurance for individuals complying with the laws
of the state of Louisiana. In order to accomplish this, we recommend the examination of proposals – such as limiting
the rights of individuals to recover damages if they have not complied with the financial responsibility law, tort
reform, enhanced enforcement of the financial responsibility, pure no-fault insurance, and any other relevant
proposals – to determine the most effective methods to reduce the underlying costs of automobile insurance
coverage.
(i) We oppose class-action suits.
(j) We request that LFBF address the serious liability problems regarding farm equipment and implements on public
highways. LFBF and its insurance companies should explore all laws regarding this issue and work with the
legislature to improve protection to our farmers.
7. State Game Laws
(a) We urge that all efforts of any group to add any species of egrets to the list of legal game birds in Louisiana be
actively resisted because they are essential in the control of flies and other pests among cattle.
(b) We recommend that state wildlife enforcement agents be required to respect the personal and private rights of
landowners as stated in the Constitution. We also recommend that state wildlife enforcement agents be required to
use headlights when driving on public roads after dark.
(c) We oppose the infusion and/or relocation into the state of any wild animals not native to Louisiana.
8. Weights and Measures
(a) We urge the Department of Weights and Measures of the LDAF to continue to make preseason checks and
seasonal checks for accuracy of scales and weighing procedures at all major points of sale and weight stations
throughout the state.
(b) We support additional funds if necessary for increased inspection to provide more frequent and accurate testing
for agricultural commodity scales.
(c) We recommend that DOTD upgrade bridges on all roads to comply with allowable load limits.
9. Litter Laws
(a) We urge stronger and more aggressive enforcement of existing litter laws, particularly on parish roads and rights-
of-way where litter causes drainage problems. We recommend the fine for littering be a minimum of $100 and a
maximum of $500 on highways and parish roads. The fine for littering and/or dumping on private property should
be no less than $1,000 per violation. A penalty should be levied against the driver of the vehicle from which litter
was dumped or thrown. We recommend that parish Farm Bureaus urge state and local agencies to aggressively
enforce litter laws along public rights-of-way.
(b) We support a program using state and local prisoners to pick up litter on all highway rights-of-way. Salvageable
items should be recycled to help defer the costs.
10. Recycling
(a) We support a statewide recycling program.
(b) We recommend that use of nonreturnable glass bottles be prohibited.
(c) We request that farmers and ranchers be relieved from liability from the pickup of waste oil by recyclers.
11. Agricultural Law Enforcement
(a) We recommend continuing steps to see that all laws presently under the jurisdiction of the Com-missioner of the
LDAF be enforced as intended; and, in particular, we demand continuing action to force all feed and fertilizer
companies to comply with laws regulating the sale of feed and fertilizer and to assess penalties for all ingredients
found to be deficient. We also oppose any efforts to weaken the penalties and standards of the present Louisiana
fertilizer law.
(b) We recommend no clemency to elevator operators convicted of fraud.
(c) We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to support the "Crime Stoppers" program for farm theft.
This program should represent a coalition of agriculturally related interests and businesses and should be
coordinated with the LDAF Enforcement Division.
(d) We recommend that the bond requirement for grain dealers and rice mills be increased from the current $50,000
to a larger amount based on the volume of grain handled.
(e) We request that Farm Bureau work with parish governing authorities on problems landowners experience with
the placement of unauthorized advertisements and political campaign signs on their property.
(f) We recommend that the LDAF continue to investigate the proper labeling of BASA fish.
(g) We request that Farm Bureau seek legislation, if necessary, to exempt poultry growers from any fee associated
with the general CAFO permit developed and implemented by DEQ.
12. Trespass Laws
We continue to support trespass laws which benefit Louisiana farmers.
We support vigorous prosecution of off-road vehicles trespassing on private land and the selling of those
vehicles at public auction with proceeds going to local law enforcement agencies.
13. Louisiana Preference Act
We recommend continued support for the LDAF seven-percent preference for Louisiana-produced commodities
to state institutions.
14. Tax-Exempt Bonds
We support the concept of selling tax-free bonds for the benefit of the agricultural industry. We support having a
portion of the money generated from these sales made available for production loans.
15. State Election Laws
(a) We oppose any change in state or local election laws which would allow a candidate to be elected to office
without receiving a majority of the votes cast in the election.
(b) We recommend working with the Secretary of State to revise the voting dates in Louisiana. Due to the high cost
of holding elections, we strongly recommend a reduction in the number of elections and also recommend that local
and state elections be coordinated with national elections.
(c) We recommend that Farm Bureau give priority to seeking the establishment of two voting dates: one in
November and the other in April. All state, parish, and local tax, millage, and bond issue elections should be held
only on these dates to reduce costs and increase voter turnout.
16. Occupational License Taxes
We oppose the licensing or taxing of farmers and others in the agricultural community.
17. Agricultural Vandalism
We support prosecution to the fullest extent of the law of anyone, particularly animal rights activists and
environmental activists, who is involved in sabotage and vandalism of farms and ranches and research facilities.
18. Unfunded Mandates
We request Farm Bureau to take appropriate action to prevent both state and federal governments from
mandating programs and regulations to parishes and municipalities and not providing the necessary funds to carry
out their mandates. We further recommend that this request be given high priority.
19. Initiative and Referendum
We oppose any legislation that would establish initiatives or referendum in the laws of the State of Louisiana.
20. Expropriation Proceedings
(a) Because a new concept in the expropriation process called "Quick Take" is being proposed by some parish
governing bodies, we urge Farm Bureau to keep all parish Farm Bureau organizations informed on this issue and
work to get this provision defeated.
(b) We request that Farm Bureau support any and all bills introduced in the Louisiana Legislature that remove the
rights of expropriation or condemnation from the Louisiana Airport Authority.
21. LDAF Budget
We request that Farm Bureau help to restore funding that was cut from the LDAF budget.
22. State Projects
We request that Farm Bureau not take a formal position on the proposed Bunkie syrup mill.
We urge the Governor to support a comprehensive hurricane protection and restoration plan.
We request that Farm Bureau support a soybean processing industry.
Fuel Supplies 211
1. We recommend that agriculture be given high priority for energy needs in the event of shortages and rationing.
2. We support a move to provide for conservation of gas and oil supplies to insure continued availability in the
future and recommend that conservation and proper use of energy should be a high educational priority for federal,
state, and local governments. We also recommend that Farm Bureau staff research possible closures of old fuel
injection systems and make this information available to the Farm Bureau membership.
3. We encourage privately financed research on the use of agricultural and aquacultural commodities as sources of
energy and as petroleum replacements.
4. We encourage an ethanol program, and we a support a renewable fuels program with emphasis on a federal
renewable fuels standard. We also support and encourage the use of biodiesel and support exploring efforts to
make renewable fuels available to Louisiana farmers.
5. We support the use of ethanol-enriched fuels in all vehicles.
6. We support the labeling of all retail pumps showing additives added by all manufacturers, distributors, or dealers.
7. We request that Farm Bureau support through the legislative process a program by utility companies to purchase
electricity from renewable sources at an equitable rate and that there be mandatory legislation that utility companies
purchase a percentage of their usage from renewable resources.
8. We urge the creation of a Louisiana Renewable Energy Commission.
Law and Order 212
We support efforts that would make restitution of damages to a landowner possible under both a criminal or civil
proceeding.
Promotion and Research Checkoffs 213
1. We recognize the right of producers to promote increased research, sale, and consumption of products they
produce. Such programs must be initiated and controlled by producers of the commodity involved. We are
opposed to any checkoff proposed when the federal or state government has administrative or veto power over the
program. Checkoff programs must meet the following requirements:
(a) Funds collected must be used for research, education, market development, and promotion. No funds should
be used for legislative or political purposes. However, we recommend special consideration for the rice industry to
allow the Louisiana Rice Research Board and the Louisiana Rice Promotion Board to support a national legislative
producer organization. We further recommend that no more than five percent of the total rice checkoff funds be
used for legislative purposes on a national basis only.
(b) Referendum
The program must be approved by a majority of producers voting in a well-publicized referendum.
(c) Time Limit
Programs should have a time limit not to exceed five years in length with continuation of programs after that time
requiring a majority of producers voting in a well-publicized referendum.
(d) Collection
The assessment will be made on all producers at the first point of sale.
(e) Refund
Any producer must have the right to a refund upon request with the exception of the dairy, cotton, and rice
industries because of their unique situations.
(f) Administration
A producer board should have 100-percent control of administering the program. Farm Bureau should participate
in naming the board to the extent that Farm Bureau has commodity interests in terms of membership of that
particular commodity.
(g) Audit
An annual certified audit must be made and published.
(h) Annual Report
Administrators of the checkoff funds must be required to provide producers with a meaningful annual statement on
income, expenses, funds, balance, and a progress report on achievement.
(i) We support agriculture on the highways which includes bumper stickers on farm vehicles to get our agricultural
promotion message to the public.
2. Beef Promotion
(a) We support the 50-cent Louisiana beef checkoff. We urge that the other states also increase their checkoff for
in-state promotion.
(b) We support the continued research and development of a "Certified Louisiana Calf" program.
3. Pecan Promotion
We request Farm Bureau to actively support passage of the Pecan Marketing Order.
4. Commodity Promotion
(a) We request all state and federal agencies domiciled within the state to use domestic commodities in all food
programs when available, and we request the Farm Bureau Women's Committee to continue their efforts to promote
all commodities through a planned program.
(b) We urge the Farm Bureau Women's Committee to continue its promotion of Louisiana agricultural products.
Rural Development 214
1. Rural Development Commission
(a) We recommend that Farm Bureau work actively with Louisiana's Rural Development Commission to
improve the infrastructure of rural areas to enhance living and working conditions in farming communities. We urge
that emphasis be placed on attracting small industries to provide economic diversification; in particular, those
industries that can further process agricultural products.
(b) We request that at least one seat on any parish planning commission be filled by a Farm Bureau parish
board member or someone to represent the rural community.
2. Rural Health Services
(a) We support the Family Practice Division of the LSU School of Medicine so that additional doctors can be
trained and placed in rural areas.
(b) We support the efforts of the Louisiana Rural Health Care Authorities to provide health care to under-
served rural areas of Louisiana.
(c) We urge the state legislature to protect our rural health care providers during this challenging time of
health care in Louisiana.
3. Rural Fire and Water Districts
We support the establishment of rural fire and water districts and recommend that each water district
provide an adequate water supply for fire protection service.
4. Rural Drainage Systems
Because the Department of Health and Hospitals' current requirements seem burdensome concerning
sewer treatment structures in rural residences, we request a reevaluation of standards concerning sewerage
drainage.
Right-to-Farm Legislation 215
1. We support the concept of right-to-farm legislation.
2. We recommend that an exclusion from noise ordinances be given for all production and sustainable
agricultural practices.
Pest Control and Eradication Programs 216
1. We urge the USDA and other appropriate federal agencies to support an effective fire ant program, including
providing matching funds for state funds to be spent on such program, and we recommend that aerial spraying be
used to help control fire ants whenever chemicals are approved by the EPA, except in sugar cane-producing areas.
2. We favor continued publicity regarding the danger of fire ants and support the efforts of the Commissioner of
Agriculture to secure an effective pesticide for controlling fire ants. We also support research to discover new
methods of controlling and eradicating fire ants and recommend that an integrated pest management program be
studied and supported if it is found effective.
3. In light of the increasing population of Formosan termites and their potential to impose an economic impact
on commercial sugar cane production, we request that Farm Bureau support funding of the Louisiana Formosan
Termite Initiative and work with the AgCenter and the American Sugar Cane League in providing research on
Formosan termite control.
4. We recommend that parish mosquito and rodent control services be extended to small businesses and farms.
5. We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to pursue securing funding for the tallow tree eradication
program in Louisiana.
6. We recommend that Farm Bureau continue its strong support for the Boll Weevil Eradication Program.
7. We recommend continued research for the effective control of horse fly and horn fly infestation of cattle.
8. We recommend that the LDAF increase funding for the control of beavers in Louisiana.
9. We request Louisiana Farm Bureau Federation work with Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries to develop a
program to control the feral hog population.
Poultry Study Committee 217
We support the Louisiana Poultry Task Force established within the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and
Forestry.
Louisiana Agricultural Round Table Advisory Group 218
We support the Louisiana Agricultural Round Table Advisory Group which serves as the focal point to unify the
agricultural industry in Louisiana.
Homeland Security 219
We request that Farm Bureau inform its membership about the rules and regulations established by Homeland
Security that need to be followed to comply with the law.
Policy Recommendations 220
Farm Program, National Affairs, and International Affairs shall be recommendations to the American Farm
Bureau Federation (AFBF). Standard Operating Procedures for the Federation and Commodity Conference
recommendations shall be recommendations to the Farm Bureau Board of Directors. Standard Operating
Procedures for the Insurance Companies shall be recommendations to the appropriate Farm Bureau Insurance
Companies Boards of Directors. Local, state, and federal agencies shall be apprised of Farm Bureau policy as the
need arises.
Boards and Commissions 221
We request that LFBF actively pursue legislation that will allow growers that deliver commodities to the Port of
Greater Baton Rouge to serve on the Greater Baton Rouge Port Commission and also to increase farmer
representation on the Commission by increasing the number of representatives nominated by LFBF.
We request that LFBF always submit full-time farmers for new appointments to sit as their representatives on the
Baton Rouge Port Commission. Of the two positions, one should be primarily a grain farmer, and the other primarily
a cane farmer.
We believe that only the Boards and Commissions that have direct authority to allocate or dispense funds be
subject to financial disclosure of its members.
FARM PROGRAMS
FOLLOWING ARE LFBF'S POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS TO AFBF. THESE STATEMENTS, IN ADDITION TO THE
REFERENCED AFBF POLICIES, CONSTITUTE OUR POLICIES AND POSITIONS ON ISSUES RELATIVE TO
NATIONAL FARM PROGRAMS. SEE THE REFERENCED SECTIONS OF THE POLICIES FOR 2009 ADOPTED AT
THE 90TH ANNUAL MEETING OF AFBF IN JANUARY 2009.
National Farm Policy 301
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 230)
Improving net farm income is Farm Bureau's most important goal. We will support programs of an innovative
nature that increase net farm income.
The Food Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 (FCEA) continues to move the U.S. toward a market-based,
export-competitive agriculture. We support maintaining commodity program support funding and oppose shifting
funding into conservation or disaster programs.
We oppose all reductions in farm program spending to farmers until all other government programs have
equaled the same percentage of cuts farmers have sustained. Any new government farm program must be
accompanied by regulatory and tax relief for farmers. Producers should be compensated for added costs due to
government regulations.
We recommend that any future farm policy legislation should be linked to a reduction of global tariff rates before
any reduction in domestic subsidies is enacted. Currently, access to world markets remains limited due to continued
trade barriers and internal farm policies of foreign countries. Therefore, it is necessary for American farmers to
receive program payments to offset these limitations.
We support the U.S. government developing a domestic food policy that provides a program for U.S. agriculture
that maintains its competitive position in the global marketplace and preserves domestic markets and long-term
profitability for U.S. producers.
We support increasing the loan rates within the marketing loan programs and non-marketing loan programs for
the various commodities. This should only be done in a manner that will allow commodities to be sold at competitive
prices in the world market while at the same time maintaining adequate income support to producers.
We recommend that FSA allow farmers to apply for LDP payments but wait until after the grain has been
shipped and accurate weights determined before collecting 100 percent of the payment. We also request that
producers be able to apply for LDPs simultaneously when certifying acreage. If the producer provides no other
notification, the LDP rate would be locked in at the date of sale; therefore, no producer's beneficial interest would be
lost. We recommend that producers be allowed the option of an interest-free deferment on LDPs until the next
calendar year, when selling multiple years' production in one year.
We oppose the use of loan origination fees for government nonrecourse loans. We oppose program service
fees that are applied to deficit reduction. We are strongly opposed to any type of mandatory production, acreage
control, or marketing quotas for crops that had production flexibility contracts and continue to receive direct
payments.
We vigorously support a viable domestic sugar program with nonrecourse loan rates set at a level no lower than
present values with no market price cap. We support a loan rate increase greater than the three-quarter cent
increase achieved in the 2008 Farm Bill. We support sugar marketing allocations being tied to the grower and
landowner. When a farmer moves from one mill to another, we support maintaining a provision to permit the
appropriate amount of mill marketing allocation for sugar cane base acres being processed by another sugar mill.
We support maintaining Farm Bill provisions that permit sugarcane base acres that are permanently lost to non-
agricultural use to be transferred to acreage in Louisiana capable of producing and delivering sugarcane to a
processor in Louisiana. We support market balancing programs within the Farm Bill Sugar Title, such as the Sugar
to Biofuel Program included in the 2008 Farm Bill, to offset surplus sugar in the U.S. market in order to keep
domestic sugar production at adequate levels.
We support the continuation of adequate government funding of the FSA.
We recommend that when the opportunity presents itself, Farm Bureau should actively pursue an increase in
the support levels for all commodities. We support maintaining the current fruit and vegetable planting prohibition in
the next farm bill.
We support the continued efforts of the Commissioner of the LDAF and the State Ratification Committee to
establish a National Dairy Equity Act.
We support the strict enforcement by FSA county committees of the non-agriculture determination of land, and
the conserving use provisions related to the control of noxious weeds and erosion on idled farm land.
Agricultural Exports 302
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 245)
We support a system that would provide compensation by increased loan rates or other means for agricultural
export losses due to deliberate currency devaluation by competitive agricultural exporting countries in lieu of trade
tariffs.
The trade embargo between Cuba and the United States should be lifted immediately for food; in particular, rice,
along with medicine, only if the trade agreement specifies that U.S. sugar imports from Cuba are not allowed to
increase above Cuba's current import levels. We strongly oppose any resumption of trade with Cuba unless these
conditions are met.
We oppose farm commodities being made a part of trade sanctions with other nations. An embargo should not
be declared without the consent of Congress unless the U.S. is in danger of armed conflict at home or abroad, and
then the President should have the sole authority. We also oppose limitations on farm product purchases in
connection with loans and credits to other nations.
We oppose provisions which allocate the financing of PL 480 sales on the basis of the per capita gross national
incomes of the potential recipients. We urge that all PL 480 business be in actual grain from the United States and
not in the form of cash to foreign countries. We support funding USDA’s PL 480-Title I Program at levels no lower
than the fiscal year 2006 level.
We urge the effective implementation of export promotion programs which use surplus U.S. commodities as
incentives.
We recommend that certain specialty meat products for export have to meet only the inspection standards of the
importing nation.
We urge expanded trade with Japan for all agricultural products. We recommend that Farm Bureau support
legislation that requires Japan to remove restrictions on the importation of all U.S. agricultural commodities.
We support sanction reform legislation that would require Congress and the Administration to conduct a
thorough analysis on the impact that sanctions could have on farmers and ranchers before considering the
imposition of sanctions.
We urge the USDA to continue to seek acceptance of rice varieties containing Liberty Link traits in all markets.
Agricultural Imports 303
Reference AFBF Policy No. 246)
We oppose the importation of any agricultural commodities and related products when they are in direct
competition with our domestic production, thereby lowering farm prices.
We support the interests of our individual commodity producers and recommend immediate relief through
appropriate measures from the adverse effects on domestic prices resulting from the dumping of imports.
We support the Administration's authority to retaliate against countries that use unfair trade practices through
the use of such retaliatory measures as the Super 301 Petition and expanded Export Enhancement Program.
A temporary increase in import quotas of any commodity or other measures which have the effect of lowering
domestic prices should be opposed.
We support legislation that provides reasonable, annual growth rate limits on imported textiles.
We support implementation of import safeguard provisions to protect the domestic cotton industry from large
amounts of imported cotton textile products from China and other foreign countries.
We oppose the importation of sugar in the form of "stuffed molasses" or any other form that circumvents trade
agreements, congressional intent, or USDA regulations.
We support tariffs on crawfish and shrimp imported into the U.S. and any other assessments and fees for
promotion and regulating imports.
We oppose increasing the 1.532 million ton sugar import threshold to provide room for additional Tariff Rate
Quota (TRQ) imports within the U.S. sugar program.
We request that USDA increase efforts to track and quantify U.S. imports of sugar-containing products (SCP)
and pursue changes so SCP are counted as part of the TRQ.
We support programs to utilize surplus quantities of sugar into non-food uses.
We support significantly increased sampling and inspections of imported food products at point of entry.
Imported food products should be subject to the same or equivalent inspection, sanitary, quality, labeling and
residue standards as domestic products.
Trade Negotiations and Agreements 304
(Reference AFBF Policy Nos. 248, 249, and 250)
Important provisions of the World Trade Organization (WTO) have been ignored, thus eroding the viability of the
agreement. We oppose disproportionate penalties against production agriculture for the loss of any revenue due to
the signing of the WTO agreement.
We support the concept embodied in the U.S. proposal that all trade-distorting government subsidies be
subjected to progressive and substantial reductions worldwide. The time-frame for this phase-out and the program
coverage will depend on what other countries are prepared to undertake.
We support that fair trade must require the WTO to have labor and environmental standards equal to those
imposed on the U.S. producer.
We support harmonization of labor standards internationally that U.S. producers have to abide by under OSHA
in the U.S.
We support national and international uniformity in pesticide usage and residue standards.
We support the objectives of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in providing social labor and environmental
reforms and standards based on U.S. regulations through the SPS Agreement.
We support the coupling of these trade objectives as part of all future U.S. agricultural trade negotiations.
We will oppose any unilateral, bilateral, or multilateral action by the U.S. to eliminate import restrictions and
subsidies without commitments of equal proportions by other countries based upon comparable support prices for
those countries using support prices. We oppose inclusion of sugar in bilateral and regional trade agreements
and support negotiating sugar trade as part of multilateral trade negotiations in the WTO. Countries affected by the
WTO, however, must function at the same program level costs prior to increased or decreased commitments of
equal proportion. We support Farm Bureau leadership advocating a "fair-market" concept for moving American
commodities into markets instead of only advocating a "free-market" concept.
We support a "REQUEST/OFFER" solution to the Aggregate Measurement of Support (AMS) instead of the
"FORMULA" approach in negotiations during WTO trade talks.
We support U.S. trade negotiations that eliminate export subsidies, reduced interest rates, and other methods of
support provided by STEs to circumvent their trade obligations.
We support the philosophy of the "dollarization" of Latin America to give the U.S. producer an equitable position
in international trade.
Failure to achieve substantial and progressive reductions in equally important foreign trade barriers and
subsidies would result in continuing our support for:
1. The retention, expansion, and aggressive use of the EEP targeted at all subsidized European Community
(EC) exports that compete with U.S. products in world markets;
2. The retention of the U.S. Meat Import Act;
3. The retention of domestic farm programs supported by Farm Bureau;
4. The establishment of vigorous export programs for raw and value-added U.S. agricultural products to gain a
greater share of the world market; the strengthening of programs to aid foreign customers in the financing of the
CCC's revolving fund; the making available of Export-Import Bank funds to agricultural export sales;
5. The use of aggressive, agricultural market-development programs utilizing sales missions, innovative barter
programs, and expanded funding for overseas promotion programs; and
6. The expanded use of PL 480 and GSM 102 and 103 as a food aid and market development tool.
We support TRQs that provide the same protection as provided by Section 22 import quotas of the Agricultural
Adjustment Act.
Commodity support prices in the U.S. should only be reduced when it can be assured that the multilateral
reductions are being made on a basis and in a manner which is both fair and equitable to U.S. producers. We
recommend that all future U.S. trade negotiations oppose reductions in U.S. agricultural commodity loan rates,
program payments, and other support mechanisms until negotiating countries reduce their support levels to a rate
equal to that provided to U.S. producers. We recommend that all foreign export subsidies be properly identified and
completely eliminated.
Discretion should be urged upon the government not to seek indiscriminate proliferation of bilateral trade
agreements which might interfere unduly with the workings of a market-oriented agriculture.
We recommend that Farm Bureau work with Congress to initiate the development of a reciprocal trade
agreement with U.S. beef trading partners.
We recommend more research on the effects NAFTA has had on all agricultural commodities. We request that
import-sensitive commodities be exempted from bilateral and regional trade agreements.
We urge that no additional sugar access, above the current U.S. sugar TRQ, be provided to countries as part of
the Free Trade of the Americas Agreement (FTAA), Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), or other
free trade agreements.
We oppose the CAFTA in its present form.
The EC and Japan should be pressured to increase their imports from the developing economies. This would
improve trade balances and the opportunity for U.S. farm export income.
We support the use of long-term equitable agreements between the U.S., Japan, and other countries without
maximum limits on the quantities of U.S. exports and agricultural commodities.
Through input received by the commodity-specific advisory committees, we recommend that Farm Bureau
monitor ongoing trade negotiations and take appropriate actions in the best interests of Louisiana agriculture.
We support greater utilization of the blue box trade category for U.S. agricultural programs.
U.S. forestland owners face formidable competition from Canada's provincial treasuries. Canada's provinces
subsidize lumber production by selling timber to Canadian lumber companies at noncompetitive prices for a fraction
of the timber's market value. Artificially low provincial timber prices, minimum harvesting restrictions, and other
practices encourage overharvesting and overproduction in Canada to the detriment of U.S. industry, forestry
landowners, and loggers. Subsidized Canadian lumber imports unfairly compete with U.S. lumber companies,
affecting thousands of jobs and driving down the value of forestlands. Currently, the U.S.-Canadian Softwood
Lumber Agreement has expired and should be renegotiated. U.S. trade laws should be fully enforced so that
forestry landowners and U.S. manufacturers don't suffer from Canadian subsidies. If allowed to continue, Canada's
unfair timber pricing practices will severely undermine the value of U.S. forestlands and the associated industrial
infrastructure.
Since foreign subsidies are not addressed in bilateral free trade agreements, we support greater emphasis on
multilateral negotiations in the WTO to achieve a level playing field for all agricultural producers.
Role of the USDA 305
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 462)
We recommend that Farm Bureau adopt as a high priority an effort to direct the structure, role, and function of
USDA to meet the future needs of farmers and ranchers with safeguards so that USDA will not become a threat to
farmers' and ranchers' ability to produce or infringe on their right to own and use private property.
We recommend that LFBF study the impact to agriculture that will occur if USDA-APHIS is moved under the new
Office of Homeland Security. If it is determined that the APHIS move will harm agriculture, LFBF should support
changes to alter the proposal so the agency maintains its functions to protect U.S. crops from all animal and plant
pests.
We recommend that USDA provide toll-free telephone service in county office service centers.
Natural Disaster Programs 306
(Reference AFBF Policy Nos. 230, 415, and 329)
We recommend that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) work with the LDAF to provide
farmers with immediate assistance after hurricanes/natural disasters to provide items such as feed, hay, water,
electricity, and fuel to prevent death of livestock, poultry, and aquaculture and the loss of agricultural crops and
commodity inventories.
We strongly recommend that property owners/tenants be allowed to return to their property as soon as possible
in order to protect it from further destruction.
We support the appropriation of funds to compensate producers for disaster-related crop losses as long as it
does not adversely affect current farm programs.
We recommend that Farm Bureau seek new avenues of relief from disaster programs that address the problem
of prevented plantings as a result of adverse weather conditions. Farm Bureau supports quality-reduction
payments being mandatory in any future disaster legislation. We recommend that Farm Bureau support the use of
producer-established yields rather than parish or state average yields for the basis of disaster assistance. We
support the ability to correct a sweet potato crop yield derived from a crop insurance loss determination with a
proven yield in cases when the crop insurance yield determination unfairly increases a farmer’s yield and
disqualifies the farm from adhoc disaster assistance. We oppose requiring crop insurance to be eligible for any
disaster assistance. We oppose disaster payments being made in the form of increased levels of coverage for
those producers carrying crop insurance with eligible losses.
We support using average crop prices in disaster loss payment calculations instead of crop insurance prices in
counties or parishes where crop insurance is not available.
We request FSA Ag Credit to establish uniform guidelines and eligibility requirements to cover production and
disaster loans to farmers and recommend that financial records or tax returns from the previous year be adequate
to establish a need.
FSA Ag Credit disaster loans should be governed by the following principles:
1. Any interest subsidy should be recaptured if the farm is voluntarily sold during the term of the loan;
2. All lending institutions which provide agricultural funding should make every effort to reamortize or extend
agricultural loans on an individual basis in order to assist farmers affected by natural disasters to stay in business.
3. Borrowers should not be allowed to use the proceeds from a disaster loan for expansion; and
4. The final decision on the loan should be left to the local FSA Ag Credit county committees.
We strongly support a provision in FSA Ag Credit emergency loan procedures that would delete the requirement
that the loan be secured by hard collateral or first mortgage for farmers in business less than five years. We further
recommend that FSA Ag Credit emergency loan regulations delete the requirement that there be no other source of
financing before FSA Ag Credit eligibility is established.
We recommend that FSA use accurate weather information obtained from multiple sites in each parish when
administering disaster aid programs.
We also recommend that the Extension Service work with FSA in establishing multiple rainfall collection sites in
the agricultural production areas of a parish to reflect a more accurate report on rainfall data.
Agricultural loans under the Small Business Administration (SBA) should be granted the same emergency credit
provisions available to FSA Ag Credit borrowers under the agricultural debt restructuring programs.
We support restructuring the current permanent disaster program in the farm bill to determine losses on an
individual crop instead of making loss determinations on a whole farm basis. Funding for this program should be
obtained from the crop insurance program. The buy-up insurance programs should be utilized to cover the
production risks not covered by the disaster program.
Crop Insurance 307
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 329)
We recommend that the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) study committee continue to review all
aspects of the Federal Crop Insurance Program, including abuses, and make recommendations on ways to improve
the entire program so that it will be equitable to all producers. We support self-insured crop insurance programs.
A restructured federal crop insurance law will recognize that eventually the crop insurance program will replace
the need for disaster assistance. Savings resulting from elimination of disaster programs can be redirected to a
premium credit to the producers.
We favor the development of insurance to address individual risks.
We strongly support the concept of costs-of-production insurance and the development of such policies for all
commodities.
We recommend that the Risk Management Agency use the same criteria – dry weight yields – for determining
losses as is used for determining the APH.
We support the implementation of crop insurance replant coverage for cotton.
We request that the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) use all available technology and information
sources in establishing acreage yield and production estimates and that this improved information be used in a
more current system to calculate T-yields.
We support changes in the method used to calculate sweet potato production to stop unmarketable field-
damaged potatoes from being counted in production totals and loss determinations. We support transitioning the
pilot sweet potato crop insurance program into a permanent program to permit crop insurance to be offered to all
sweet potato producers.
We support a sweet potato crop insurance policy that insures the pack-out yield of No. 1 fresh sweet potatoes.
Farm Service Agency 308
(Reference AFBF Policy Nos. 462 and 458)
1. We recommend that Extension Service personnel again be allowed to serve as ex-officio members of FSA
state and county committees.
2. We recommend that no less than five FSA state committeemen represent Louisiana.
3. We favor the current individual office structure presently used by parish FSA, NRCS, and Rural Development
agencies.
4. We recommend that a member in a policymaking position in a farm organization not be prohibited from
serving as an FSA committeeman.
5. We recommend that July 15 be established as the uniform FSA and crop insurance final crop reporting date
for sugarcane.
6. We recommend that FSA certify actual farm sugar yields.
7. We recommend that April 15 be established as the uniform FSA and crop insurance final crop reporting date
for wheat and oats.
Agricultural Reports 309
(Reference AFBF Policy Nos. 455 and 462)
We encourage the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) Cotton Division to send cotton classification data
directly to farmers, if requested. We urge classing offices to maintain their emphasis on timely, accurate, and cost-
effective service.
We request that a report be developed and printed annually which shows a comparison of subsidies received by
foreign competitors on per-unit commodity production and that imported farm-related equipment subsidies be
included in the report.
Commodity Promotion 310
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 456)
The safeguards should provide:
1. Only those persons who contribute monies to the respective programs shall be eligible to serve on the
boards which administer such programs.
2. The program should allow a listing of the contributors to the program for recognition and also a listing of
noncontributors for the purpose of education by a contact committee.
3. We oppose a mandatory referendum conducted every five years on the cotton checkoff; however, we do
support the right to petition for a referendum by a substantial percentage of farmers.
Conservation Programs 311
(Reference AFBF Policy Nos. 462, 228, 227, 521, 226, and 232)
We recommend that a greater priority be established in and ranking and funding of NRCS funds for local county
projects and that soil and water conservation districts be allowed to control and allocate a greater percentage of
NRCS funds. We recommend that the NRCS, in cooperation with the soil and water conservation districts,
reevaluate the federal EQIP Program so prior participation will be considered a negative factor in priority ranking.
We support making certain precision agricultural practices that benefit conservation eligible for EQIP funding.
Emphasis should be directed at the most critical resource problems. Programs should be directed locally by elected
soil and water conservation district supervisors.
We recommend that funds be increased according to increasing costs and made available to carry out practices
offered in the program. Greenhouse and specialty crop operations should be included. We recommend including
drainage practices under EQIP. We recommend that composting of agricultural waste be considered an approved
EQIP practice. We support additional staffing options for local soil conservation districts that handle greater
workloads for additional EQIP projects.
We support funding the Conservation Stewardship Program at the levels determined in the 2008 Farm Bill and
recommend that the program be implemented as soon as possible.
Drainage districts should be exempt under the commenced determination portion of the Food Security Act of
1985.
We recommend the provision of adequate local, state, and federal funds to finance soil mapping and publication
of soil survey information.
Agricultural Credit 312
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 415)
We recommend that all farmers be treated equally regardless of income, race, color, sex, and creed. We will
oppose all efforts to limit access to the money market by major credit suppliers, to limit competition, or to artificially
set interest rates by government edict.
We oppose a moratorium on farm foreclosures.
We strongly support the establishment of a federal tax-exempt bond program, along with any needed federal
regulatory changes, to provide American farmers with funding to purchase property and facilities, thereby enabling
them to capture additional value from the sale of their commodities by funding greater vertical integration.
1. FSA Ag Credit
We support:
(a) Adequate funding for the full crop year, as well as competent supervision.
(b) Expediting loan processing to allow farmers ample time to make planting decisions, FSA Ag Credit direct
and 90/10 guaranteed loan applications being approved or disapproved within 30 days, and approved loans being
funded within 30 days.
(c) The Food Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 credit provisions and oppose any attempts to weaken
them.
(d) Any funds provided by FSA Ag Credit to purchase farmland being loaned only to citizens of the U.S.
(e) Farmer-elected committee persons being involved in the approval process of FSA Ag Credit agricultural
loans.
(f) Measures being taken to stop FSA Ag Credit from lending monies to agricultural operations that are too
far gone and have no hope of recovery.
(g) Changing the maximum years of eligibility under the FSA Guaranteed Loan Program to ten consecutive
years.
2. Small Business Administration
We urge the SBA to assist their borrowers with debt restructuring and loan guarantees.
3. Commercial Banks
We encourage lenders to use their flexibility to restructure existing distressed agricultural loans wherever
possible.
Banking regulations should provide the opportunity for credit-worthy borrowers to be able to move to
another lender when banks are closed. The federal government should extend its special guarantee program that
guarantees credit-worthy farmers and ranchers the option to move to another lender if their lender is closed by the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or a state regulatory agency.
4. Farm Credit System
We recommend continued supportive efforts for the Farm Credit Program. We should take the lead in
developing a long-term plan for its survival. We further recommend that the elected boards and their membership
have complete decision-making authority over any restructuring or possible mergers. Any changes in the system
should adhere to the following principles:
(a) Protection of the value of member-borrower stock.
(b) Pursuit of meaningful and effective restructuring of member-borrower loans and not forgiving debt.
(c) Prompt infusion of federal government capital as needed.
NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
FOLLOWING ARE LFBF'S POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS TO AFBF. THESE STATEMENTS, IN ADDITION TO THE
REFERENCED AFBF POLICIES, CONSTITUTE OUR POLICY AND POSITIONS ON ISSUES RELATIVE TO
NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS. SEE THE REFERENCED SECTIONS OF THE POLICIES FOR 2009
ADOPTED AT THE 90TH ANNUAL MEETING OF AFBF, JANUARY 2009.
Judiciary 401
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 106)
Congress should enact the legislation necessary to curb the ever-increasing powers of federal judges and the
Justice Department which usurp the powers of state and local governments.
Elections 402
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 103)
We oppose the redrawing of state legislative districts to achieve specific percentages of any group of
voters.
National Security 403
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 178)
We support the selective service registration system to ensure an adequate and immediate manpower source.
In the event that our military defense manpower becomes dangerously low, there should be no delay in reinstating
the draft. We support all efforts to strengthen the National Guard and Reserves.
We oppose any legislation or action that would permit the unionization of any branch of the U.S. Armed Services.
Eminent Domain 404
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 535)
Compensation should be paid for any damages which result from loss of or reduction of access to navigable
waters.
We believe the property owner should also receive the value of the property to the individual operation plus the
consideration of the production ability of the property.
We support establishment of a civilian review board, independent of government agencies, to which property
owners could appeal condemnation decisions before initiating proceedings in the courts.
We support legislation that protects privately owned agricultural land and facilities.
Fiscal and Monetary Policy 405
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 418)
The goal of monetary policy should be general price level stability. Should the Federal Reserve System fail to
maintain sound discretionary monetary policies, we will support legislation to instruct the Federal Reserve System to
achieve a specified rate of growth in the stock of money consistent with real economic growth, productivity, and
general price level stability.
Taxation 406
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 439)
1. Income Tax
We oppose increases in federal income tax or any other taxes from being made retroactive. We support:
(a) A federal tax amnesty program with the yield of such a program to be applied against the national debt.
(b) Carry-forward of the full value of unused investment or other tax credits earned prior to tax reform.
(c) The exemption of CCC generic certificates from Form 1099B filing requirements.
(d) Legislation to allow for the full tax deduction of IRA contributions when used as a retirement plan even
though the spouse is already participating in a retirement plan.
We oppose:
(a) A mandatory requirement for a contemporaneous mileage log on vehicles.
(b) The recapture of depreciation of installment sales as ordinary income in the year of sale for depreciated
assets.
2. We support reform or repeal of the current estate tax.
Bonding and Bankruptcy 407
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 416)
When anyone files for bankruptcy and a trustee is appointed, the trustee should be required to cooperate with
any party who has a financial interest in the bankruptcy.
We support an amendment to the federal bankruptcy law to protect the interests of landlords in cases where a
tenant files for bankruptcy.
Water Issues 408
(Reference AFBF Policy Nos. 548-550)
1. Permitting
(a) We oppose any single agency having final authority in matters of wetlands determinations. We
strongly recommend the LFBF Board of Directors request the Commissioner of Agriculture and Forestry to appoint
a task force including-but not limited to-farmers, landowners, and appropriate representatives from our institutions
of higher education that would review and make recommendations regarding water issues on agricultural lands. We
further recommend that LFBF support legislation during the 2010 legislative session that would request the Corps of
Engineers to work with this commission on all wetland issues impacting agriculture. We oppose the inclusion of the
term wetlands in the definition of navigable waters of the U.S.
(b) Permit requests to the Corps of Engineers will be acted upon and applicants notified of their decision
within 30 days of application.
(c) Permits not acted upon in the time frame stated will automatically be granted.
(d) Private landowner permit procedures/policies should not be more restrictive than those utilized for public
lands.
(e) Burden of proof shall be upon the agency, organization, or individual objecting to the landowners’
proposed use of their property. Permits should be modified, delayed, or denied only if the permit-ting agency can
prove with conclusive evidence that the proposed activity will cause adverse impact.
(f) The three alternatives used in sequencing – avoidance, minimizing impact, and mitigation – shall have
equal value.
2. Federal Agency Authority
(a) We urge Congress to pass laws restricting the Department of Interior, EPA, and Corps of Engineers’
authority under the CWA and Section 404 permits.
(b) We request congressional oversight and overview of federal agencies that write rules and regulations
impacting production agriculture.
(c) We support finalization and implementation of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s proposed counterpart
regulations to modify and delineate consultations for EPA pesticide registrations.
(d) We strongly oppose any stricter interpretation of regulations concerning the Clean Water Act and the
Clean Air Act.
Grain Standards and Pricing 409
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 356)
We urge the continuation of state and federal grain inspection employing only highly qualified personnel. We
also recommend a system of periodic checks on all grain inspection.
We recommend that FSA use the actual loan value determined by sampling in determining loans regarding on-
farm stored commodities.
Energy 410
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 403)
We urge that the U.S. negotiate agreements individually with Mexico and other nations for the purchase of oil
and gas.
We request that an environmental impact statement be made prior to the diversion of hydrocarbons from
intrastate pipelines to interstate pipelines.
We request legislation to increase the production of ethanol, biodiesel, wind, and solar energy and remove the
restrictions on domestic production of oil, natural gas, and coal.
Farm Labor 411
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 135)
We recommend that DOL officials be restricted from entering a farm without first contacting the farmer and
having the appropriate legal instruments to do so.
We support efforts to reform the H-2A program by curtailing the DOL and immigration schedule to a maxi-mum
of 30 days for securing visas.
We oppose mandatory ergonomic standards for production agriculture and the agricultural processing industry.
We strongly recommend that AFBF remain committed to legislative reform of the H-2A foreign agricultural worker
program and support legislation that replaces the Adverse Effect Wage Rate (AEWR) with a market-based wage
rate that does not increase workers' private right of action against agricultural employers. We recommend that a
long-term legislative solution be found to solve the 66,000 cap on the H-2B program.
We oppose all attempts to restrict or repeal the Farm-Related CDL Exemption.
We oppose all attempts to alter or repeal the Agricultural Overtime Exemption.
Railroads 412
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 127)
We support the necessary legislation to prove that in case of repair, discarded materials, including ties and rails,
be properly disposed of within a reasonable time from railroad rights-of-ways.
We support legislation at the state and national level to prevent railroads from closing crossings if the
crossing is the only access a landowner has to his property or if it would adversely affect the farm operations.
Rural Utilities 413
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 402)
We urge efforts on the part of both private companies and rural electric cooperatives to reach agreements that
will be in the best long-term interest of all concerned. Duplication of services is not in the public interest.
We recommend that charges for running electrical lines to a farm be lowered and that the owner be reimbursed
for additions to these lines, without a time limitation on reimbursement.
Farm Machinery 414
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 150)
Because the American farmer is unable to pass on his increased costs of production, we urge Farm Bureau to
request AFBF to: (1) make an inquiry regarding the pricing of all farm equipment and parts by the larger manu-
facturers to see if they are in line with the costs of production of these products, and (2) provide a list of allied com-
panies which might sell the same parts as larger companies at a lower price.
Health 415
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 152)
We support:
1. Every possible effort to effect cost management while providing accessible high-quality health care.
2. The development of legislation that will lead to changing our present health care delivery system through the
following:
(a) Cost incentive/rewards (providers, insurance companies, and consumers).
(b) Protection against monopolies.
(c) Periodic review of regulations.
3. The development and implementation of programs to provide incentives for consumers to practice wellness
and disease prevention.
4. Residency programs to provide postgraduate family physician training away from major metropolitan-based
medical training centers.
5. Privately funded optional care delivery systems such as health maintenance organizations.
6. Legislation to require the use of the generic as well as the trade name on prescription drugs.
7. Closer working relationships between organization of family physicians, medical societies, and health
agencies.
8. A requirement that drug manufacturers label all inert as well as active ingredients contained in medicines.
9. Third-party payer recognition for payment of outpatient treatment and preventive measures.
10. "Certificate-of-need" funding legislation to curb the over building of hospital rooms.
11. Federal government incentives to the private sector for providing long-term health care.
We oppose:
Federal government interference with private enterprise by subsidizing professional medical services.
Safety 417
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 161)
We urge that harvest-season permits allowing maximum weight limits of 100,000 pounds apply to federal
highways, and we strongly recommend that LFBF work to have AFBF adopt this policy.
Vocational Training 418
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 146)
We urge vocational education departments to regularly reevaluate and improve their programs of study to
provide up-to-date and modernized vocational educational programs and promote the development of urban
agriculture. We further request the state to provide the necessary financial assistance for this endeavor.
Special work permits should be granted to allow special wage rates to be paid to students under work-
experience programs.
Cooperative Extension Service 419
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 457)
Frequent consultations on matters of common interest have proved beneficial to many state Farm Bureaus and
Extension Service leaders. We recommend continuation of this practice.
We support the concept of area specialists.
We support the 4-H Club program and oppose lowering the traditionally high standards for 4-H projects.
We urge the full annual funding of our land-grant universities.
Freedom of Information Act 420
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 105)
We oppose any additional Freedom of Information laws on the federal level and request that AFBF notify states
if any such legislation is proposed.
USDA Census Survey 421
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 455)
We recommend that the federal government focus on net farm income, not gross farm income. We oppose any
census that reports only gross farm income.
Environmental Regulations 423
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 504)
We recommend that AFBF strongly oppose EPA on requiring emission control mechanisms on non-road diesel
engines.
Animal Agriculture 424
(Reference AFBF Policy No. 301)
We recommend that AFBF develop and provide educational programs and materials to the state Farm Bureaus
to assist in informing the public on animal agriculture.
Federal Bailout Program 425
The new public, private partnership created under the Federal Bailout Program is inherently vulnerable to
waste, fraud, and abuse. We recommend strict accountability and oversight for the disbursement and payback of
these funds.
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES FOR THE FEDERATION SHALL BE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE LFBF
BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES FOR THE INSURANCE COMPANIES SHALL BE RECOMMENDATIONS TO
THE APPROPRIATE FARM BUREAU INSURANCE COMPANIES BOARDS OF DIRECTORS.
Membership 501
1. We recommend that Farm Bureau continue its nonmember insured check beginning on February 1 in order
to assist in the membership drive.
2. We recommend that the State Office continue sending out the first membership billing notice and that all
returns be sent to the parish offices. We recommend that parish participation be optional.
3. We recommend that the membership letter sent to new members on the Group B list be re-worded and
delete “having overlooked payment of dues” and of “not renewing the dues” as these members were not previously
billed nor have they paid dues in the past.
4. We recommend the continuation of the current Farm Bureau membership dues structure.
5. We recommend that the last two weeks of February continue to be designated to emphasize membership
acquisition.
6. We request the State Board to continue enforcing the language in the Bylaws requiring that an individual's
membership be written in the parish in which he resides or farms.
7. We recommend that LFBF utilize cost effective correspondence, such as appropriate mailing selection and
the use of email, due to higher postage and the wide acceptance of digital communication.
Annual Meeting 502
1. We recommend that the State Board continue to be authorized to select convention sites ten years in
advance and further recommend that the convention not be scheduled during the 4th of July.
2. We recommend that the annual meeting continue to be held in one hotel under one roof if possible and ask
that the State Board check into a system to guarantee parking for Farm Bureau members attending the annual
meeting. However, the Farm Bureau may go back to its rotation system throughout the state, if necessary, even if it
means using more than one hotel.
3. We request that products utilizing Louisiana farm commodities be served at all Farm Bureau functions.
4. We recommend that the State Board continue to monitor the feasibility of allowing agriculturally related
vendors to set up booths at the Farm Bureau convention with proceeds used to offset the cost of the convention.
5. Letters should continue to be sent to parish presidents prior to convention notifying them of resolution
subcommittee assignments and the time of the resolutions and commodity conference sessions.
6. Resolutions to be considered by the voting delegates should be submitted to the State Office by June 1.
These resolutions should be compiled in a packet and mailed to each parish office prior to the convention.
7. Letters should also be mailed to each member of the commodity committees giving them the time of the
commodity conferences.
8. We recommend that major commodity conferences always be scheduled to avoid conflict of producer
participation when possible.
9. We request that any recommendations regarding existing or new policies provided by Farm Bureau staff be
sent to parish presidents upon request prior to the annual convention.
10. We recommend that the disposition of all resolutions submitted by the parishes and acted upon by the
resolutions subcommittees continue to be made available to the Resolutions Committee and again at the open
session of voting delegates.
11. We request that the Resolutions Committee reports continue to retain the language that was deleted in the
text of the resolutions and that it be denoted by a strike-through.
12. We request that an audited financial statement be made available to parish presidents, upon request, prior
to the convention.
13. We recommend that candidates for statewide offices who are invited to address the convention delegates
be invited to a session to be designated by the State Board.
14. We request that the Awards Book and rules be sent to the parishes in the fall following the annual
convention. We recommend that a Scrapbook Workshop/Idea Exchange be held at the State Secretary Conference
where a representative from each of the 13 categories would present and explain goals, give examples, and answer
questions from the parishes.
15. We recommend that the Area Field Services Directors continue to review the program areas awarded each
parish in their district to recognize any oversights.
16. We recommend that the Field Services Directors meet with the parish secretaries and/or Awards Book
Committees as soon as possible before next year’s convention to review any additions, deletions, changes, etc., to
the Awards Book and YF&R Award of Merit.
17. We recommend that the parish that wins the President's Trophy continue to make their scrapbook available
for viewing at the convention so other parishes can learn from their experience.
18. We request that under the "Policy Development" section of the Awards Book, the requirement to develop at
least two policies on parish, state, and national issues be changed to only one.
Qualifications and Terms of Office for State Officers, 503
State Board Members and Voting Delegates
1. State officers, State Board members, and voting delegates must be actively engaged in agricultural
production.
2. Farm Bureau officers shall not receive any salary for offices held without the approval of the voting delegates.
3. We request that the vote tally of candidates for each office be announced after each election.
Commodity Committees 504
1. Chairmen of all commodity divisions are urged to attend necessary Board meetings, and their expenses for
such attendance will be paid.
2. We request that all commodity divisions mail an agenda with their meeting notices so that important or critical
proposals can be discussed, studied, and approved by the respective parish committees and boards.
3. Notification of commodity committee meetings will be mailed to parish presidents and commodity committee
chairmen seven days prior to date of meeting.
Youth Program 505
1. We require all parish Youth Program contestants to be from Farm Bureau families and that no contestant be
a professional. If selected as the winner, especially as queen, we request that Farm Bureau activities precede any
other activity. Parishes shall continue to formulate the rules for the individual parish contests provided these rules
are not in conflict with state rules.
2. We recommend the continuation of the Youth Conference. We urge that the major emphasis be placed on
good government, careers in agriculture, and other topics of interest to youth.
Louisiana Farm Bureau News 506
Membership dues to the Farm Bureau shall include a subscription to the Louisiana Farm Bureau News.
Farm Bureau Meetings and Correspondence 507
1. We recommend that the Farm Bureau Federation, its committees, program departments, and service
departments hold all meetings within the state, whenever possible, in an effort to utilize the resources of the state
and allow the state to benefit from the monies spent. This is not inclusive of incentive trips or those meetings held in
conjunction with out-of-state committees or boards.
2. A schedule of Farm Bureau meetings and activities should be provided to the parishes. A schedule should
also be sent to the AgCenter and LDAF in order to avoid scheduling conflicts.
3. We recommend that when the State Board makes a decision affecting a particular parish, said parish shall be
notified prior to its release to the news media.
4. We recommend that the minutes of the Federation Board meetings reflect the vote on each action taken
when the vote is not unanimous.
5. We recommend that a copy of the Farm Bureau "Legislative Report" continue to be sent to the parish offices
for their personnel to make it available to their respective board members.
6. We recommend that LFBF offer each parish the option of receiving all federation correspondence through e-
mail to eliminate all unnecessary paper mailing.
American Farm Bureau Convention Delegates 508
State voting delegates to the AFBF convention should be the elected officers. Additional delegates and
alternates should be selected from the State Board.
Leadership Conference 509
We recommend that Leadership Conferences be held bi-annually on a rotating basis within each Farm Bureau
district. We also recommend that all insurance agency managers be invited to attend the Leadership Conference.
Voting Eligibility at Commodity Conferences 510
Eligibility for voting at commodity conferences is restricted to active producers or any representative of an active
producer who is a member of Farm Bureau and a resident of the parish he is appointed to represent.
Young Farmers and Ranchers Committee 511
1. We encourage each parish Farm Bureau to establish a Young Farmers and Ranchers Advisory Committee
so that young farm families or individuals can more actively participate in Farm Bureau.
2. We recommend that a Leadership Conference for Young Farmers and Ranchers be held each year and that
it be held in North Louisiana at least every three years, contingent on the availability of accommodations.
3. We support the 35-year maximum age limit for participation in the Young Farmers and Ranchers Program.
4. We recommend that the state Farm Bureau and state Young Farmers and Ranchers Committee take a more
active part in the organization, reactivation, and retention of parish Young Farmers and Ranchers Committees.
5. We request that Farm Bureau support the use of computers in all contests so we can easily down-load
Young Farmers and Ranchers applications from the Farm Bureau website to be able to apply for them, print them
out, and turn them into the State Office.
Incoming WATS Line 512
We recommend that the incoming Federation WATS line be used only by State Board members, parish
presidents, state Women's Executive Committee and district directors, state Young Farmers and Ranchers officers
and district directors, state commodity committee chairmen, and state AITC Committee officers and district
directors.
Use of Farm Bureau Name 513
The Farm Bureau name shall not be used in connection with any undertaking that is not owned or licensed by
Farm Bureau and without the approval of the voting delegates.
Farm Bureau Insurance 514
1. We recommend that informational sessions regarding Farm Bureau programs and activities be included in
the insurance agents' statewide meetings. We further recommend that all agents be invited to attend these
sessions which will be administered by the Farm Bureau State Board of Directors.
2. We recommend that the district sales managers meet with the parish president and the agency manager at
least once a year to discuss problems, solutions, and accomplishments of the parish insurance operation.
3. We recommend that insurance agents, agency managers, sales staff, and other service departments be
allowed to select meeting sites – whether in state or out of state – that meet their needs with regard to objective,
accommodations, and costs.
4. We recommend that the Farm Bureau Insurance Companies continue their attempts to find solutions to add a
general environmental policy to the umbrella policy.
5. We recommend that LFBF ask AFBF to look into the possibility of consolidating the Farm Bureau Insurance
Companies in each state to reduce the potential risks to each individual company.
6. We recommend that the study committee, which was appointed, continue to look at the services being
offered by the Louisiana Farm Bureau Insurance Companies, including homeowners, automobile, liability, etc., in an
effort to diversify risks and lower premiums.
Agricultural Tourism 515
We recommend that Farm Bureau support a statewide program for Agri-Tourism.
Farm Bureau Services 516
1. We recommend that the Public Relations Department continue to develop multimedia materials for the parish
Farm Bureaus to promote the organization and its activities. We also request that these materials be updated
annually.
2. We recommend that a professional team with members from Farm Bureau and the LDAF be established to
respond to critical issues which arise in the news media.
3. As urban populations become larger, the need to tell agriculture's story of the economic impact of this sector
of our economy on the entire state becomes more critical. Farm Bureau should develop a plan to inform the
nonfarming public of the farmer's role in society. Farm Bureau should act as a catalyst for pro-farmer groups such
as the LDAF, agricultural service companies, agricultural chemical companies, seed companies, fertilizer
companies, farm equipment companies, and energy companies to formulate and distribute appropriate information
to the news media for telling that story.
4. We request that each parish Farm Bureau appoint a media "watchdog" to monitor public discussion of
agriculture. Discussion may be – but is not limited to – advertising, television or radio, newspaper ads, or editorials.
The role of monitor may be performed by an individual or committee. In the event that agriculture is inaccurately
represented, we recommend that the monitor work with the Farm Bureau Public Relations staff to formulate a
response or rebuttal. That response would then be distributed to the public through local "Letters to the Editor"
news columns under the name of the parish Farm Bureau.
5. We request that Farm Bureau continue to maintain its website for the purpose of members advertising used
equipment for sale.
6. We support the Farm Bureau Seasonal Specialties Program.
7. We recommend that Farm Bureau continue to make safety clinics for farm workers available to the parishes.
These clinics should provide instructions on the proper use of both farm equipment and chemical utilization in order
to improve the work environment for the farm worker and to assist in lowering insurance premiums through improved
loss experience.
8. We recommend that Farm Bureau look into the possibility of establishing a cellular telephone group structure
for Farm Bureau members.
9. We encourage all people involved in agri-business to join Farm Bureau.
10. We request that the LFBF Board recommend to the AFBF Board that the date for announcing the winners
of the Program Idea Exchange Contest be moved up in order to take advantage of airfare specials.
11. We recommend the State Board consider financial assistance of a floating amount designated for travel,
based on the size and scale of the program and the degree of participation by the parish, to any parish that has
developed a program and has been selected to represent Louisiana and display their idea at the AFBF convention.
12. We recommend continuing the workshop-idea exchange session at the Secretaries' Conference that is
devoted to Federation secretarial tasks, such as convention, scrapbook, recordkeeping, etc.
Parish Presidents' Correspondence 517
We recommend that resolutions submitted by parish Farm Bureaus be acknowledged by letter and that the
parish be notified of the action taken by the State Board.
Political Action Committee 518
1. We recommend that the AgriPac Board of Directors make an annual report to the Farm Bureau voting
delegate body on the activities and progress of AgriPac.
2. We recommend that a copy of the AgriPac Bylaws and Operating Procedures be sent to each parish Farm
Bureau.
3. We recommend that Farm Bureau members have the opportunity to make a voluntary contribution to AgriPac
at the time of payment of annual dues.
4. We recommend that a newsletter or brochure explaining the benefits of AgriPac be enclosed with the
membership billing.
5. We request that LFBF contact parish presidents before mailing AgriPac checks directly to legislators, in case
the parish president would like to deliver the check personally.
Financial Statements and Audits 519
We recommend that all audited financial statements of the Louisiana Farm Bureau Federation and Affiliated
Companies be available at the State Office to any parish president within ten days of receipt of a written request for
such information by a parish president. Copies of confidential financial information shall not be removed from the
State Office.
Parish Financial Advisory Team 520
We recommend that the Farm Bureau Board of Directors continue to make available to the parishes the
services of the Parish Financial Advisory Team (PFAT). The purpose of the PFAT will be to review the financial
conditions and activities of the parish and to make recommendations on procedures to be implemented to improve
the financial condition of the parish.
Farm Bureau Voting Delegate List 521
We recommend that a list of voting delegates to the state convention be given to candidates for statewide Farm
Bureau offices upon the request of the candidate. We further recommend that use of the list be restricted for the
candidate's personal contact, letter, phone call, or other communication to the voting delegates, soliciting their
support for the candidate requesting the list.
Any other use of such list, including dissemination to other individuals or groups of individuals, however
constituted, should be considered a breach of trust with respect to the Farm Bureau organization and immediately
reported to the delegates whose names appear on the list and to the Board of Directors for whatever action may be
appropriate.
COMMODITY DIVISION
CONFERENCES
RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE COMMODITY DIVISIONS ARE SUBMITTED TO THE LOUISIANA FARM
BUREAU BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR APPROVAL AND ACTION. THEY DO NOT REPRESENT POLICY
DECISIONS OF THE VOTING DELEGATES.
Beekeepers Recommendations 600
1. Bees are valuable not only for the production of honey, pollen and wax, but as pollinators of many
agricultural crops. We recommend continuation of an education program to inform the general public. We also
recommend fea