USDA says no doubt climate change hurting ag

 Resize text         Printer-friendly version of this article Printer-friendly version of this article

The National Climate Assessment report announced on May 6 claims climate change is affecting every region of the U.S. and critical sectors of the economy like agriculture. The weather change is being blamed on many risk factors for farmers and ranchers as well as rural communities.

By mid-century and beyond, weather impacts will be increasingly negative on most crops and livestock, according to this third climate assessment report. USDA’s Director of the Climate Change Program Office commented on the report. Click here to read the news release from the program office. 

In a follow-up to the announcement, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack’s office released an evaluation of the situation and listed what the Obama administration and USDA have been doing to lessen the impact and prepare for the future.

“Across the country, farmers, ranchers and forest landowners are seeing an increase in risks to their operations due to fires, increases in invasive pests, droughts and floods. In the Midwest, growing seasons have lengthened, the western fire season is now longer and forests will become increasingly threatened by insect outbreaks, fire drought and storms over the next 50 years. These events threaten America’s food supply and are costly for producers and rural economies. Drought alone was estimated to cost the U.S. $50 billion from 2011 to 2013. Such risks have implications not only for agricultural producers, but for all Americans,” the Vilsack USDA news release explained.

Vilsack said, “The Obama administration continues to take steps to responsibly cut carbon pollution, slow the effects of climate change and support an expanded domestic energy economy. At USDA, we’re working closely with our nation’s farmers, ranchers and forest landowners to help them manage the negative impacts of climate change, reduce their energy costs and grow the bioeconomy to create jobs in rural America.

The Vilsack news release provided outlines of 10 programs or steps the administration is spending money on to address the impacts of climate change. The full news release with the programs outlined can be read by clicking here.



Comments (23) Leave a comment 

Name
e-Mail (required)
Location

Comment:

characters left

Tom    
Oregon  |  May, 07, 2014 at 09:12 AM

The USDA is just another example of the corruption within our government as well as the world's governments catering to the Agenda 21 scam. Certain multi national companies and corrupt politicians (The Clintons are among them) greedily seek to control world wide markets and market share by introducing climate change standards only they can afford. They will eventually have a monopolistic control once the have squeezed out the competition of smaller companies. They will also impose world wide taxes to line their elitist pockets. Don't trust any politician or entity who touts the ramifications of climate change. Hundreds of credible scientist agree climate change is a political farce.

Ken    
South Carolina  |  May, 07, 2014 at 09:14 AM

Since the average temperature has remained constant over the last 15 years, and the Arctic ice pack is 50% larger than a year ago, and since the Earth temperature normally fluctuates, there is no reason to bankrupt the US taxpayer by this con game. One study came to the conclusion that we could spend $1,000,000,000,000 dollars (one trillion) and lower the average temperature 0.07 degrees F. What a waste. Could it be that someone in Washington just wants more power and control over us?

Graybull    
Wyo  |  May, 07, 2014 at 10:15 AM

There IS absolutely NO doubt that USDA is hurting ag………..tremendously.

IndianaJohn    
NW Indiana  |  May, 07, 2014 at 11:05 AM

Still more lipstick on the Al Gore possum. A random search of; 'global warming fraud' will reveal much. That is if you can stand anymore. Oh! The morning goes on. I gotta go and get with it.

Sam    
May, 07, 2014 at 11:30 AM

They are dying to implement another TAX on the people, but it probably won't go to anything to do with climate change. This is the biggest scam I have ever seen.

Steve    
WI  |  May, 07, 2014 at 12:35 PM

When farmers here the saying from USDA we are from the government and we are here to help we all need to cringe and walk away or run,. They pretend there has never before been floods, drought , excess rain, snow, cold, and yes heat ever before in history! These events have been happening since the beginning of time and God is the only one who controls them. Farmers have adjusted to whatever weather events have happened and we will continue to adjust without the governments interference or so called help.

rockingk    
MO  |  May, 07, 2014 at 12:52 PM

We are taxed for everything else. Why not droughts and floods?

Mark    
Green Bay  |  May, 07, 2014 at 02:30 PM

So the misinformation campaign of the Obama administration continues! Ask any plant physiologist and they will tell you that plants have the ability to adapt to their environment over time. I see nothing but higher yields for agriculture with any increase in global temperatures going forward. Ken is right, global temperature has remained constant over the past 17 years.

Keith    
Ohio  |  May, 07, 2014 at 11:07 PM

If they were interested in increasing crop production they would be for increasing carbon dioxide emissions as higher levels of CO2 help plants grow faster and bigger with less nutrients. Actually it also does not increase temperature as the concept violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Heat come is from the sun and radiates outwards only. From the atmosphere to radiate to the earth is an impossibility. cloud cover just slows down the radiation outwards like a blanket. Oh, black body theory falls apart with gases. Gases including water vapor have a decreasing rate of radiation with temperature and density not an exponential increase as in classic blackbody theories.

Craig A. Moore    
Billings, MT  |  May, 08, 2014 at 08:12 AM

Still waiting for the report detailing what the dinosaurs did during their time on earth which turned the planet into a jungle.

Marc    
Indiana  |  May, 08, 2014 at 11:48 AM

Purdue University did a great study on what effect the warming of the atmosphere and increase in CO2 would do to agriculture. What a true scientific study showed was that yields would increase under these conditions, thus decreasing world hunger and slowing the deforestation of the landscape. Please notice I said SCIENTIFIC study...no use to the USDA or any other branch of the government.

Robert    
Kentucky  |  May, 08, 2014 at 11:53 AM

So it's all a conspiracy, then. What a sad commentary on many subscribers' perceptions of Climate Change. Where is the real science here? Is it a Clinton/Obama/UN political cabal that is determining public policy by using climate change as a foil? Really...? Your grand and great-grandchildren will surely thank you for your inability to see what most of the rest of the world holds clear. Such a shame....

John    
Washington  |  May, 08, 2014 at 01:07 PM

Thank you. I can't believe the amount of people that like to put their heads in the dirt at the farm. This is not conspiracy, climate change in the last 70 years has been from our use of fossil fuels and the increase in co2. Why are you believing 3% of the scientists that disagree? Is it fear? Have you looked at the facts or is it from Fox news. 11 out of the 12 comments really give farmers a bad name.

murdog    
texas  |  May, 08, 2014 at 02:25 PM

global warming scientists said new York and California would be under water by the yr 2000 back in 1970 based on their studies and wanted Nixon to start taxing then it is a scam

Jerry    
Wisconsin  |  May, 08, 2014 at 09:56 PM

Its perfectly clear to me that coal, oil and gas burn cold.

Rhondar    
May, 09, 2014 at 09:42 AM

Then why doesn't our govt. stop the GEOENGINEERING??? Look up...the chemtrails are almost constant and I think that's one reason we are in a horrible drought in Texas

Rhondar    
May, 09, 2014 at 09:55 AM

Yep ---the U.S. Air Force is spraying us. We are getting over exposed to toxins. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHm0XhtDyZA look up and see the chemtrails.....and watch your grass die from drought It also accumulates in the soil & water. She urges you to get a rain sample in a glass jar & she can tell you where to send the samples --- and it costs about 50.00. If you want to see what your levels are you can send her an email kristenmeghan@gmail.com She found out it wasn't a conspiracy theory.

Liam    
Fort Collins, Colorado  |  May, 10, 2014 at 01:30 AM

Agreed. To discount this report, and the evidence on the ground for that matter, just because the topic of climate change has become a hot button issue is simply foolish. Keep in mind that the greatest naysayers of climate change are people and corporations who are heavily invested in doing nothing, absolutely nothing, to address the issue (or even acknowledge it), specifically the fossil fuel sectors of our national and world economies. What does rural America have to lose by at least investigating this issue?

Liam Rooney    
Fort Collins, Colorado  |  May, 10, 2014 at 01:37 AM

The suspicion I see in many of these comments appears to be the direct result of the disinformation campaign put forth on Fox News and right wing radio. This issue is way too serious to trust to those narrow and heavily biased (due to fossil fuel influence) "news" sources. It's truly amazing how effective Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and similar commentators have been at discrediting the proven links between fossil fuel emissions and climate change.

steve    
new york  |  May, 10, 2014 at 11:08 AM

Liam what is the biggest factor in climate change?

Insightman    
California  |  May, 10, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Whether human-induced climate change is reality or not doesn't matter really. The believed cause of global warming (i.e., anthropogenic CO2 emissions) will continue. Go to EIA to get the facts. The fact is that in the next 30 years OECD nations (comprising 18% of the global population) will contribute little to projected increases in CO2 emissions. Relative to non-OECD nations, OECD emission increases will be essentially flat due to increased use of natural gas and the development of alternative energy. That does not mean these countries will discontinue their reliance on fossil fuels. To the contrary. There will always be reliance on cheap and abundant energy. In contrast, the non-OECD countries (mainly China and India) will be the big emitters as their economies convert to middle class. They want increased per capita quality of life. These countries will essentially double global CO2 emissions over what they are now. Much of that is due to coal usage. There is no stopping this trend as long as fossil fuels remain cheap and abundant compared to other sources. Energy, fresh water, food, and environment. It's hard to solve environmental problems when people are poor, thirsty, and hungry. OECD = Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development OECD Countries (18 percent of the 2013 world population) OECD Americas (United States, Canada, and Mexico/Chile) OECD Europe OECD Asia (Japan, South Korea, and Australia/New Zealand) Non-OECD Countries (82 percent of the 2013 world population) non-OECD Europe and Eurasia (includes Russia) non-OECD Asia (includes China and India) Middle East Africa Central and South America (includes Brazil)

Sam    
Ohio  |  May, 10, 2014 at 04:53 PM

The 3% (whereever that number came form) That I listen to dont have their hands out for goverment funding, are highly ethical, are quilified in the field, and are not Political Scientists.

maxine    
SD  |  May, 12, 2014 at 09:58 PM

It's not as if 'climate' hasn't changed before, is it? How on earth did humans survive it all??? The era when earth was all 'rain forest' with exotic animals we now find only as fossils, and the compressed 'compost' from some ancient era which we now burn as fuels intrigues me! Isn't it a bit arrogant of the 'climate change cult' to believe mere humans can change the climate more than the volcanoes, earthquakes, or tsunami's can? YES! we do need to clean up our environmen....for aesthetic reasons!... and we in the USA have already done a tremendous job of that. Given that our President has been on a spending orgy, we simply cannot afford to give other nations the money to do things better. We CAN share information with them, since it was mostly lack of such information which led us to foul the land and air in the first place. We do need to continue our clean-up, and do it wisely and honestly without hampering good businesses into oblivion.


VX Series Single Auger Vertical Mixer

The new VX Series Single Auger Vertical Mixers by Roto-Mix, offers the small to medium sized dairies, cow/calf and heifer ... Read More

View all Products in this segment

View All Buyers Guides

Feedback Form
Leads to Insight