Published: March 31, 2007 10:35 pm      

Ethanol push to impact farmers

ELKHART, Ind. — Concord Township farmer Jim Weeber sees a possible downside to America’s ethanol push.

Actually, he uses the word “bloodbath.”

Weeber was one of around 15 farmers who discussed ethanol, subsidy prices and other issues during a meeting Saturday with U.S. Rep. Joe Donnelly, D-2nd, at Hunter’s Place in Elkhart.

Donnelly has been getting local input as federal lawmakers work on the 2007 farm bill. He serves on the House Committee on Agriculture and the subcommittee on livestock, poultry and dairy.

Ethanol subsidies worry Weeber.

“Obviously, the course of our nation is to produce more ethanol,” he said during a break in the meeting. “However, the difficulty for the livestock farmer — and it doesn’t matter what kind of livestock you’re raising — if (the animals) consume grains, then to some degree the ethanol subsidy is being used to buy grain away from those livestock producers.”

With less grain on the market because of ethanol, livestock farmers pay more for it.

“It could be a potential bloodbath this year for the dairy farmer,” Weeber said. “Should the corn price increase another significant amount, where the money will come from to feed this livestock, I don’t know.”

Lynn Loucks offered another perspective. It’s nice to see high corn and bean prices, he said.

“Those dairy farmers bought $2 corn for a long time,” said Loucks, vice president of Elkhart County Farm Bureau. He also noted that grain producers’ input costs have increased “tremendously.” And high grain prices eliminate the need for a subsidy.

Donnelly asked the farmers for a ballpark figure of what the subsidy price should be for corn and beans. The suggestion was made that it be linked to production costs.

In a recent interview, Donnelly said he thinks the U.S. ag secretary is “counting on prices remaining in the neighborhood of where they are, which will make the farm bill less expensive because there will be almost no subsidy payments made.”

Immigration

“There is an expectation that comprehensive immigration reform will happen this year,” Donnelly said. “I don’t know the form of it. I don’t know what it’s going to be.”

Asked for his take on immigration, Donnelly said, “We have a law that provides a process to come into this country legally. It needs to be followed.”

Donnelly said the border needs to be secure. “I believe if you don’t have borders, you don’t have a country,” he said.

Some at the meeting saw a need to accommodate laborers who are non-U.S. residents and their employers. One farmer said he’s against illegal immigration, but added, “The reality is, we do need these workers.”

Other issues raised Saturday included:

• A legislative proposal banning horse slaughter for human consumption.

Loucks said Farm Bureau policy is that horses are livestock, and that slaughtering them for people to eat should be an option.

“If we allow the animal rights people to shut us down on that, what’s next?” dairy farmer David Blough said of the proposed ban.

• A USDA plan to limit payments. Loucks said a Farm Bureau resolution supports that restriction.

According to the farm bill proposal, if a producer has an average adjusted gross income of $200,000 or more for three tax years, that individual would not be eligible for commodity payments the following year.

“One of the things we’re going to need is for you guys to keep us up to date” as lawmakers work on the farm bill, Donnelly said. “We need to hear from you as to what makes the most sense.”

Respond: (574) 533-2151, ext. 312

scott.weisser@goshennews.com