Digging into the farm bill

Re “Farm bill affects more than land and furrows,” Dec. 2

The farm bill also matters to wildlife. Beginning in 1985, such legislation has contained several conservation programs designed to maintain or enhance native plants and habitat. Most programs were intended primarily for soil conservation, but they also provided grasslands useful for animals. President Bush has threatened to veto the 2007 farm bill because it is too expensive. The bill’s budget continues to be dominated by huge subsidies for grotesque overproduction of major commodity crops (few of which, ironically, are fit for direct human consumption; instead they’re fed to animals confined on feed lots or are ultra-processed into food additives). If those subsidies were reduced or eliminated, there would be plenty of room to continue or enhance the conservation programs while reducing the bill’s overall price tag. Shifting spending away from commodity subsidies could also benefit nutritional programs and specialty crops grown in California, such as fruits, nuts and vegetables.

Matt Johnson

Arcata

The writer is an associate professor of wildlife management at Cal State Humboldt.

--

I was disappointed that the discussion of huge subsidies to large agribusiness farmers did not include the fact that because of these subsidies, we are putting poor farmers in other countries out of business. In Mexico, for example, the poor are having a hard time buying tortillas, a staple in their diet, because the U.S. is sending subsidized corn to their market. I am doubly disappointed with our senators for going along with this welfare for agribusiness.

Jeanne Whitesell

Huntington Beach