<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.newrules.org" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/">
<channel>
 <title>Agriculture Rules</title>
 <link>http://www.newrules.org/newrules</link>
 <description>Most recently updated Rules</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Locally Grown Labeling - Vermont</title>
 <link>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/placeoforigin-labeling/locally-grown-labeling-vermont</link>
 <description>To protect its citizens from deceptive advertising, the state of
Vermont implemented a law in 2008 that says that labels like &amp;quot;local&amp;quot;
and &amp;quot;locally grown&amp;quot; may be applied only to food and other goods that
originate in Vermont or within 30 miles of where they are being sold.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/placeoforigin-labeling/locally-grown-labeling-vermont&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/placeoforigin-labeling/locally-grown-labeling-vermont#comments</comments>
 <pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:01:23 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>smitchell</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2891 at http://www.newrules.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Bio-Based Products Purchasing - Iowa</title>
 <link>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/biobased-products/biobased-products-purchasing-iowa</link>
 <description>A 1998 Iowa law required state agencies to give soy-based hydraulic
fluid a purchasing preference. In April 2000, this law was amended to
include a preference for greases and other industrial lubricants as
well as hydraulic fluids. Soy is still the raw material of choice. In
addition, the new law also removes two prerequisites for the purchasing
preference: one said that the lubricant must be within the agency&#039;s
budget, and the other that the lubricant must be consistent with the
manufacturer&#039;s specifications for the equipment.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/biobased-products/biobased-products-purchasing-iowa&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/biobased-products/biobased-products-purchasing-iowa#comments</comments>
 <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:34:17 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2430 at http://www.newrules.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Farm Policy Reform Act</title>
 <link>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/supply-management/farm-policy-reform-act</link>
 <description>During the 1980&#039;s farm crisis the idea of a supply management system
for agriculture was proposed by Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Rep. Bill
Alexander (D-AK). In 1985 they introduced the Farm Policy Reform Act
(S.1083). Title I of the Act required the Secretary of Agriculture to
conduct referendums (in 1985, 1989, 1993, and 1997) to determine by
majority vote if a mandatory supply management program should be in
effect for the succeeding four-year program period. If the referendum
failed, the Secretary would determine the farm program for the
succeeding four-year period.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/supply-management/farm-policy-reform-act&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/supply-management/farm-policy-reform-act#comments</comments>
 <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:36:52 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2063 at http://www.newrules.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Protecting Contract Growers - Iowa Producer Protection Act</title>
 <link>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/protecting-contract-growers/protecting-contract-growers-iowa-producer-protection-act</link>
 <description>Historically, Minnesota led the way to protect contract growers,
setting guidelines on contract cancellation, requiring a mediation
clause in contracts between growers and processors, and assigning
parent company responsibility for contracts of subsidiaries. There is
still a dearth of legislation and case law in this area, however, and
new legislation is still focused on the basics: contract readability
and a 3 day right to review (MN), contract leins to give producers the
first priority to be paid (IA), and banning confidentiality on
production contracts (IA).&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/protecting-contract-growers/protecting-contract-growers-iowa-producer-protection-act&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/protecting-contract-growers/protecting-contract-growers-iowa-producer-protection-act#comments</comments>
 <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:33:16 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2062 at http://www.newrules.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Contract Growers Protections - Minnesota</title>
 <link>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/protecting-contract-growers/contract-growers-protections-minnesota</link>
 <description>Bills on parent company liability failed in Iowa and South Dakota ( SD 1997 S.B 202, vetoed by governor in 1997 see &lt;a href=&quot;http://newrules.org/agri/sdcontract.html&quot;&gt;SD Contractor liability)&lt;/a&gt;.
Minnesota passed a law in 1990 (see link to Statute below) that assigns
liability to the corporation that owns the processor for any unpaid
debts due to growers.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/protecting-contract-growers/contract-growers-protections-minnesota&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/protecting-contract-growers/contract-growers-protections-minnesota#comments</comments>
 <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:31:51 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2061 at http://www.newrules.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Contract Growers Protections - Kentucky</title>
 <link>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/protecting-contract-growers/contract-growers-protections-kentucky</link>
 <description>Kentucky&#039;s Division of Water recently finalized regulations on
concentrated animal feedlot operations (CAFOs) which include integrator
liability. The KY law is the first of its kind in the country. Under
the regulations, integrators must apply for a state permit (KPDES) even
if they own animals kept by a farmer under contract. If the permit is
violated, it is the integrators who are liable for consequences. The
regulations were to go into effect August 24, 2000, but last June the
Farm Bureau and other groups challenged the rule in court by arguing
that it was pre-empted by another Kentucky law that precludes the state
from passing legislation stricter than federal standards. They were
granted a temporary restraining order specifically on the integrator
liability provision.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/protecting-contract-growers/contract-growers-protections-kentucky&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/protecting-contract-growers/contract-growers-protections-kentucky#comments</comments>
 <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:30:27 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2060 at http://www.newrules.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Price Reporting and Disclosure - Iowa</title>
 <link>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/price-reporting-and-disclosure/price-reporting-and-disclosure-iowa</link>
 <description>RELATING TO PRACTICES INVOLVING THE MARKETING OF LIVESTOCK CONCERNING
PACKERS, BY PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION OF CERTAIN PURCHASE
INFORMATION AND CONTRACTING, AND PROVIDING PENALTIES AND EFFECTIVE
DATES.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/price-reporting-and-disclosure/price-reporting-and-disclosure-iowa&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/price-reporting-and-disclosure/price-reporting-and-disclosure-iowa#comments</comments>
 <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:24:41 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2059 at http://www.newrules.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Price Reporting and Disclosure - South Dakota</title>
 <link>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/price-reporting-and-disclosure/price-reporting-and-disclosure-south-dakota</link>
 <description>The price discrimination provision of SB 95 was overturned in a July 1999 case&lt;a href=&quot;http://24.230.151.131/opinions/DSD/1999/1999dsd023.htm&quot;&gt; &lt;/a&gt;brought
by the American Meat Institute (AMI), an industry trade group. The law
was interpreted as extending uniform pricing to other states &amp;quot;for
livestock purchased for slaughter in this state,&amp;quot; thereby interfering
with interstate commerce.&amp;quot; The price disclosure/reporting provision
remains in effect, harmonized with the national price reporting
legislation passed in 1999.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/price-reporting-and-disclosure/price-reporting-and-disclosure-south-dakota&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/price-reporting-and-disclosure/price-reporting-and-disclosure-south-dakota#comments</comments>
 <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:20:58 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2058 at http://www.newrules.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Price Reporting and Disclosure - Nebraska</title>
 <link>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/price-reporting-and-disclosure/price-reporting-and-disclosure-nebraska</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
A BILL FOR AN ACT relating to livestock; to adopt the Competitive Livestock Markets Act; and to declare an emergency.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/price-reporting-and-disclosure/price-reporting-and-disclosure-nebraska&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/price-reporting-and-disclosure/price-reporting-and-disclosure-nebraska#comments</comments>
 <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:19:01 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2057 at http://www.newrules.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Price Disclosure Law - Federal</title>
 <link>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/price-reporting-and-disclosure/price-disclosure-law-federal</link>
 <description>In October 1999 Congress passed price reporting legislation as part of
its 1999 Agricultural Appropriations bill. The provision follows the
lead of several states in requiring meatpackers to report the prices
they pay to producers. The goal is to help restore competition to
livestock markets. Price reporting had previously been voluntary,
leading some producers to report only the lowest paid prices, thereby
artificially depressing the market.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/price-reporting-and-disclosure/price-disclosure-law-federal&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/price-reporting-and-disclosure/price-disclosure-law-federal#comments</comments>
 <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:16:41 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2056 at http://www.newrules.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Family Farm Tax Break - Georgia</title>
 <link>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/local-food/family-farm-tax-break-georgia</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
Prior to 1999, Georgia levied ad valorem taxes for some agricultural
commodities, such as fruit and nut trees and livestock. Legislation
passed in 1998 relieved small scale farmers of this additional burden.
For other crops, such as ornamental trees and shrubs, the possibility
of ad valorem taxation was eliminated.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The legislation is noteworthy not because of the tax impact- farmers
will save about $ 2.5 million a year, or an average of less than $
20,000 per Georgia county- but because it targets those tax cuts to a
well defined &amp;quot;family farm&amp;quot; scale agriculture. 
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/local-food/family-farm-tax-break-georgia&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/local-food/family-farm-tax-break-georgia#comments</comments>
 <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:03:06 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2055 at http://www.newrules.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>WIC Farmers&#039; Market Nutrition Act</title>
 <link>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/local-food/wic-farmers-market-nutrition-act</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
The WIC Farmer&#039;s Market Nutrition Program (FMNP) is a small program
but a significant program because it acknowledges the role of farmers&#039;
markets in sustaining small farmers and local communities.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The
Farmers&#039; Market Nutrition Program (FMNP) is associated with the Special
Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children,
popularly known as WIC, which is administered in cooperation with the
States by the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) of USDA. WIC provides
supplemental foods, health care referrals and nutrition education at no
cost to low-income pregnant, breastfeeding and non-breastfeeding
post-partum women, and to infants and children up to 5 years of age,
who are found to be at nutritional risk.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/local-food/wic-farmers-market-nutrition-act&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.newrules.org/agriculture/rules/local-food/wic-farmers-market-nutrition-act#comments</comments>
 <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:00:31 -0600</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2054 at http://www.newrules.org</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
