Ag tour helps residents understand the world of water in northern Colorado
Meagan Birely
TheFencePost.com
Drip irrigation. Those words might not mean a lot to someone living in the city, but to a farmer in Weld County, those words have become a big deal.
On Friday, the Chamber of Commerce Agricultural Committee brought farmers and city folks together to learn about the process, product, procedures and problems of sharing water.
The tour, “From Desert to Oasis: The story of how irrigation transformed the plains of eastern Colorado” took a busload of people around Weld to look at different places impacted by and using different irrigation systems.
Stephan Andrade of Evergreen said he was looking for the best ways to keep farmers farming and cities drinking water.
“We just want to see what everyone is doing in terms of best practices and how to share this limited resource we call water,” Andrade said. “You get to see firsthand what people are doing that is always helpful as opposed to just reading about it.” Read More
I just wanted to share another example of farmers and ranchers hosting tours on their places to help educate their neighbors. These types of tours are probably the best way to tell our story. The impact can be tremendous when you can stand there and physically show a consumer what you do and why you do it.
Showing posts with label Colorado. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Colorado. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Monday, August 31, 2009
Boulder's Farming Debate
Hysterics win a round in farm debate
By Vincent Carroll
Posted: 08/29/2009 01:00:00 AM MDT
The Luddites won a round this week in Boulder County.
Yes, the science-challenged activists who fear genetically modified crops succeeded in keeping GM sugar beets from being grown by six farmers on open space land — at least for the time being.
If I seem to harp on this conflict, having laid out the farmers' case some weeks ago, it's because the overall stakes are so large. Fear-mongers have retarded the adoption of GM crops elsewhere, too, even when their advantages are clear.
GM crops are mostly prohibited in Europe, for example, because of popular fear of "Frankenstein foods." Then again, Europeans used to execute witches by the thousands, too, with roughly the same degree of supporting evidence. Some things never change.
The Boulder farmers were so shocked by the raw emotion of opponents that they eventually asked commissioners to postpone a decision. Naturally the commissioners obliged. You wouldn't expect three beleaguered officials to tell the hysterics to take a hike, would you?
Never mind that county staff recommended the commission approve the applications, or that genetically modified corn is already grown on open space there. For that matter, the county already slashes rates for leaseholders willing to switch to organic farming, open space director Ron Stewart told me recently. What's next: outright payments to accelerate the transition?
Read More
It’s been an interesting debate unfolding in Boulder, CO as of late. Land that is owned by the county and being farmed by local farmers is at the center of the discussion. There are some very vocal people leading a charge that will only allow organic food to be grown on the land. The typical, un-supported arguments have been being used by the pro-organic crowd. For me, it boils down to an elitist argument. Even with the lowest cost of food in the world, many families struggle to make ends meet and have enough food to eat. There is no doubt that organic food is more expensive. So if these vocal elitists have their way, it would make food more expensive and less available to working families. As a person that has been involved in growing food all of my life so that everyone has something to eat, it would be hard for me to accept that.
By Vincent Carroll
Posted: 08/29/2009 01:00:00 AM MDT
The Luddites won a round this week in Boulder County.
Yes, the science-challenged activists who fear genetically modified crops succeeded in keeping GM sugar beets from being grown by six farmers on open space land — at least for the time being.
If I seem to harp on this conflict, having laid out the farmers' case some weeks ago, it's because the overall stakes are so large. Fear-mongers have retarded the adoption of GM crops elsewhere, too, even when their advantages are clear.
GM crops are mostly prohibited in Europe, for example, because of popular fear of "Frankenstein foods." Then again, Europeans used to execute witches by the thousands, too, with roughly the same degree of supporting evidence. Some things never change.
The Boulder farmers were so shocked by the raw emotion of opponents that they eventually asked commissioners to postpone a decision. Naturally the commissioners obliged. You wouldn't expect three beleaguered officials to tell the hysterics to take a hike, would you?
Never mind that county staff recommended the commission approve the applications, or that genetically modified corn is already grown on open space there. For that matter, the county already slashes rates for leaseholders willing to switch to organic farming, open space director Ron Stewart told me recently. What's next: outright payments to accelerate the transition?
Read More
It’s been an interesting debate unfolding in Boulder, CO as of late. Land that is owned by the county and being farmed by local farmers is at the center of the discussion. There are some very vocal people leading a charge that will only allow organic food to be grown on the land. The typical, un-supported arguments have been being used by the pro-organic crowd. For me, it boils down to an elitist argument. Even with the lowest cost of food in the world, many families struggle to make ends meet and have enough food to eat. There is no doubt that organic food is more expensive. So if these vocal elitists have their way, it would make food more expensive and less available to working families. As a person that has been involved in growing food all of my life so that everyone has something to eat, it would be hard for me to accept that.
Friday, April 4, 2008
Colorado's Confined Animal Bill
Confined animal bill corralled in committee
By MetroWest Staff
04/03/2008
K.C. Mason
DENVER — Under threat of a petition drive for a ballot question, Colorado lawmakers and state Agriculture Commissioner John Stulp are moving forward with a bill to increase regulations on confined animals that are raised for pork and veal.
Senate Bill 201, sponsored by Dist. 6 Sen. Jim Isgar, D-Hesperus, would prohibit the confinement of gestating sows or calves raised for veal in a way that does not allow the animal to stand up, lie down, and turn around without touching the enclosure’s sides.
“My concern is to avert a ballot initiative, which I feel this does,” Stulp said during testimony last week before the Senate Agriculture Committee. “This recognizes the need … to address future husbandry issues and hopefully get out ahead of the curve.” Read More
Colorado is trying to prevent a ballot measure, proposed by the HSUS, by passing a bill through the legislature. The decision not to fight it out at the ballots was due largely to the fact the HSUS has been very successful in ballot measures and also the amount of money they had committed to the measure. While ag could not have gone dollar for dollar with the HSUS, they have something more powerful than money, and that is the positive story of modern production agriculture. I only wish they would have used that more to their advantage.
By MetroWest Staff
04/03/2008
K.C. Mason
DENVER — Under threat of a petition drive for a ballot question, Colorado lawmakers and state Agriculture Commissioner John Stulp are moving forward with a bill to increase regulations on confined animals that are raised for pork and veal.
Senate Bill 201, sponsored by Dist. 6 Sen. Jim Isgar, D-Hesperus, would prohibit the confinement of gestating sows or calves raised for veal in a way that does not allow the animal to stand up, lie down, and turn around without touching the enclosure’s sides.
“My concern is to avert a ballot initiative, which I feel this does,” Stulp said during testimony last week before the Senate Agriculture Committee. “This recognizes the need … to address future husbandry issues and hopefully get out ahead of the curve.” Read More
Colorado is trying to prevent a ballot measure, proposed by the HSUS, by passing a bill through the legislature. The decision not to fight it out at the ballots was due largely to the fact the HSUS has been very successful in ballot measures and also the amount of money they had committed to the measure. While ag could not have gone dollar for dollar with the HSUS, they have something more powerful than money, and that is the positive story of modern production agriculture. I only wish they would have used that more to their advantage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)