[Pollinator] FW: SIGN-ON Letter on Food Safety - Amendment Being Opposed Would Reduce Pollinator Habitat. Sign on Due c.o.b. FRIDAY, Feb 1

Thu Jan 31 12:06:45 PST 2008

TO:	Pollinator Supporters

RE:  Opportunity for ORGANIZATIONS to Sign Group Letter Opposing
House-Backed "Food Safety" Provision that Can force Specialty Crop Producers
to Eliminate Wildlife & Pollinator Habitat

DEADLINE:  Close of Business Friday, February 1 [tomorrow!].  Sorry-As Sara
indicates, the conference process determines turnaround time; and it is up
to us to be timely in response.

TO SIGN ON:  e-mail me at tom at vanarsdall.com or Sara Chieffo, Defenders of
Wildlife, who is coordinating this group effort at  SChieffo at defenders.org.
Feel free to forward to other groups.

Coevolution Institute has agreed to co-sign.

Sentence in highlighted in last paragraph of attached letter points out how
the House-backed provision [opposed by the Senate] adversely affects
pollinators & pollinator habitat:

“Hedgerows, buffers and other types of non-crop vegetation help maintain
populations of pollinators and beneficial insects."

Especially California implications.  Letter & transmittal e-mail below
provide more information.

R. Thomas (Tom) Van Arsdall, Public Affairs Representative for Coevolution
Institute/Pollinator Partnership/NAPPC
For More Information, http://www.pollinator.org 

Van Arsdall & Associates
P.O. Box 8512
Fredericksburg, VA  22404-8512
(703) 509-4746
tom at vanarsdall.com

From: SChieffo [mailto:SChieffo at defenders.org] 
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:55 PM
To: SChieffo; KDelfino; kastel at cornucopia.org; cfischer at TNC.ORG;
wildfarms at earthlink.net; rcdmonterey at yahoo.com; joemend at icta.org;
vrussell at audubon.org; fhoefner at sustainableagriculturecoalition.org; Martha
Noble; judith at fullbellyfarm.com; tom at vanarsdall.com; jkaplan at nrdc.org;
EHolst at environmentaldefense.org; sambo at cruzio.com
Cc: ADelach; FCasey; Kira Pascoe
Subject: SIGN-ON Letter on Food Safety - Due FRIDAY

Hi all,
Apologies in advance for the short turn-around time on this food safety
sign-on letter. Negotiations on the Hill on this issue are moving ahead
quickly, so I need to hear back from you by COB this Friday (2/1) if your
organization can join the letter. Also, please forward this letter onto
other groups that you think would be interested in joining this effort.

It is critical that we have a strong showing on this letter (especially from
national and CA-based groups) in order to bolster Sen. Harkin's staff who is
fighting to keep this harmful provision out of the final Farm Bill.

Please let me know if you have any questions. I worked closely with Kira
Pascoe of Community Alliance with Family Farmers (CAFF) in drafting this
letter. She has been working intensely on this issue for over a year and
CAFF has done much to raise the profile of this issue in CA and at the
national level. Please feel free to contact her directly with any specific
questions on CA impacts. She can be reached at kira at caff.org or at
530-574-1901.

Thanks!
Sara

_____________________________________
Sara Chieffo
Government Relations Associate
Defenders of Wildlife
(202) 772-0270
schieffo at defenders.org
www.defenders.org 

________________________________________
From: SChieffo 
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 5:06 PM
To: KDelfino; 'kastel at cornucopia.org'; 'cfischer at TNC.ORG';
'wildfarms at earthlink.net'; 'rcdmonterey at yahoo.com'; 'joemend at icta.org';
'vrussell at audubon.org'; 'fhoefner at sustainableagriculturecoalition.org';
Martha Noble; 'judith at fullbellyfarm.com'; 'tom at vanarsdall.com';
'jkaplan at nrdc.org'; 'EHolst at environmentaldefense.org'; 'sambo at cruzio.com'
Cc: ADelach; FCasey
Subject: Food safety & leafy greens still an issue in Farm Bill
Hi all,
The issue of trying to address food safety concerns has raised its head
again, this time in the farm bill conference. Section 10106 of the House
bill (H.R. 2419.EH) directs USDA to put out a marketing order "authorizing
the implementation of quality-related food safety programs" for all
specialty crops. Based on California's experience with leafy greens, we are
very concerned about the implications of such a broad marketing order for
wildlife habitat and water quality. Thanks in large part to Sen. Harkin, the
Senate was able to keep out similar language from its bill (despite pressure
from Sens. Stabenow and Feinstein).

As you know, the House and Senate are preparing for the farm bill conference
(conferees have yet to be formally announced) and staff discussions are
already underway. We have heard from staff on the Senate Agriculture
Committee that the House is pushing to keep this language in the conference
report. We have heard that Rep. Cardoza (a certain conferee given that he
chairs a subcommittee) is pushing this language. The good news is that at
this point Sen. Harkin and his staff are committed to fighting against this
language. To help bolster this effort, we will be sending out a sign-on
letter early next week expressing strong concern with this
provision.  Given Cardoza's active role, it is essential that we have a
strong showing on this letter from CA-based groups. Please feel free to
reach out to others concerned with this issue.

For background, I have attached the comments that Defenders submitted to the
proposed federal marketing order on leafy greens. 

Thanks,
Sara

Sara Chieffo

Government Relations Associate

 1130 17th Street N.W. Washington D.C. 20036-4604
 Tel: 202-772-0270     |    Fax: 202-682-1331
 schieffo at defenders.org  |  www.defenders.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Foodsafety_letter_13108.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 44544 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.sonic.net/pipermail/pollinator/attachments/20080131/59f0084b/attachment-0001.doc 