ASHEVILLE, N.C. – Sustainable is high on the list of 21st century buzzwords, with increased interest among consumers in the environment and how they relate to it.

Hundreds of businesses and farms in North Carolina have developed in recent years to meet that demand.

But language in the Farm Act (SB 513) currently up for debate in the State Assembly could broaden the definition of sustainable agriculture to include farms that some, including Rochelle Sparko, policy director at the Carolina Farm Stewardship Association, argue do not meet expectations of what sustainable means.

"We have a lot of hard working, smaller-scale farmers in the state who have done the hard work by building trust by being transparent about their practices with their consumers and consumers now understand sustainable agriculture to mean something," Sparko states.

Today the House is expected to vote on a version of the act, but before the vote, Rep. John Ager, a Buncombe County Democrat, is expected to introduce an amendment that would remove the broad definition of sustainable agriculture from its language.

The Senate voted on a different version of the act earlier this year.

Supporters of the broad definition say it opens up additional opportunities with larger retailers for farmers.

Sparko says larger, factory farms are recognizing the opportunity sustainable living offers their bottom line, and are trying to unfairly profit from it.

"The reason I would imagine why they're doing that is because there is so much interest in the trust and transparency that the other farmers have built up, and they want to find a way to capitalize on that because it's created market share," she states.

Sparko adds that a true definition of sustainable agriculture should involve the production of food, fiber or other plant or animal products using farming techniques that protect the environment, public health, communities and animal welfare.





get more stories like this via email

With Montana lawmakers looking at a large budget surplus, a group of hunters, scientists and landowners is asking them to consider creating a trust for land stewardship and restoration. The Montana Citizens Elk Management Coalition has proposed a $200 million program, to be known as the Montana Legacy Trust.

Craig Jourdonnais, a member of the coalition and a former biologist for the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, said now is the right time to set up the trust, especially because the state doesn't have a permanent funding source to fill this need.

"There's an opportunity now, with the budget surplus being maybe even at a historic level, that we can make a proposal for a permanent trust that would go directly toward increasing and enhancing productivity of the land here in Montana," Jourdonnais urged.

Gov. Greg Gianforte has proposed the more than $1 billion surplus go to tax cuts and infrastructure spending. The Montana Citizens Elk Management Coalition has been meeting this year to consider how to better manage the state's elk population, both for hunters and landowners.

Sen. Jeff Welborn, R-Dillon, spoke at the coalition's August symposium and has expressed interest in the Montana Legacy Trust proposal.

The coalition estimates the $200 million investment would yield between $4 million and $8 million in interest each year, which could be used to fund the program. Jourdonnais noted the idea has precedents. Wyoming's Wildlife and Natural Resource Trust was started in 2006. It partners with organizations, agencies and local residents.

"This template has been in place, and it's been incredibly productive, and this would be an opportunity for Montanans to really invest back into Montana," Jourdonnais contended.

Jourdonnais believes the program could have long-term benefits for the state.

"I have 11 grandkids, and I can look at this program and go, 'Man, there's opportunity here for them as well,' " Jourdonnais added.

The 2023 legislative session begins Jan. 2.

Seeds from trees located within Utah's national forests are helping repopulate forests with similar makeups that may have been impacted by climate change or burned by wildfires. The initiative is headed by the U.S. Forest Service. However, regulations dictate where a tree's seed can be taken and planted.

Terry Holsclaw, a silviculturist for the Forest Service in Utah, said while the program aims to repopulate forests and prepare for the future, genetics plays a big role in determining where collected seeds can go.

"A conifer such as Engelmann Spruce seed that we collect here could be used on the Manti-La Sal National Forest just north of us or on the Dixie just south of us, but not much more than an extent beyond that," Holsclaw said.

Holsclaw said over time, trees and the seeds they produce have developed niches for specific locations based on a number of environmental factors that will give them the best chance of not only survival, but reproducing, as well.

Holsclaw said the National Forest Management Act of 1976 requires the Forest Service to participate in reforesting efforts for regions across the United States. He said the program has been a success for the most part. Areas selected for re-forestation are determined based on a number of factors, areas impacted by wildfires being one of the biggest.

Holsclaw said difficulties for re-foresting efforts come from tending to the record number of acres burned by fires in recent years, but he also cites budget and staffing issues that add to the backlog of reforestation efforts the agency is facing.

"So with the number of acres that we do have as a backlog, the next step is ensuring we have enough seed to be able to deal with the backlog," he said. "You have to understand, too, that the seeds we collect, there is a shelf life for that seed."

According to Holsclaw, the agency is addressing existing needs as well as preparing for future events. While the shelf life may be long for some seed species, it is not the same for every one. He said as seeds get older they begin to degenerate.

Tribal representatives from across the Northwest are flying into Washington, D.C. this week to discuss how mine waste in British Columbia is threatening their way of life.

With plans in the Canadian province for doubling the number of mines, tribes say waste already affects waterways downstream in the U.S.

Richard Janssen Jr. is the Department Head of Natural Resources for the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, and is in D.C. this week. He said selenium waste from mines near the Elk River north of Montana has a detrimental effect on waterways.

"We're not against mining at all," said Janssen. "What we are against - mining that contaminates our waters, waters of the U.S, waters of our sister tribes, affecting our fish that were here long before us, affecting our way of life, our culture."

Janssen said he plans to meet with Montana's congressional delegation and members of the Environmental Protection Agency and Interior Department.

Tribes from Alaska, Idaho and Washington will also be in D.C.

Teck Resources, which operates mines near the Elk River, said in a statement that it's engaged in a long-term plan to reverse selenium levels, and has invested more than $1 billion in water quality over the past decade.

Erin Farris-Olsen - regional executive director of Northern Rockies, Prairies and Pacific region for the National Wildlife Federation - said Canada isn't being a good neighbor on this issue, and should do more to ensure the industry is properly regulated.

Farris-Olsen also noted that some of the dams holding back toxic tailings from mines are taller than the Seattle Space Needle, and could fail.

She took an aerial tour of the mines to the north of Glacier National Park.

"Seeing this pristine ecosystem that is valued so highly by our government and our community, both local and abroad," said Farris-Olsen, "and to know that just right on the other side of a few mountains is this giant operation that really has such a destructive potential when expanded."

Janssen said part of the goal of this week's meetings is to ensure tribal nations have a seat at the table on discussions about the transboundary impacts of mines. He also said it's important to spread awareness about this issue.

"Boundaries don't stop water flowing," said Janssen. "Boundaries don't stop the selenium coming down from those mines. And so, we're just hoping to get more of a focus on this area, because I just don't think many people know what's happening."