Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The US Department of Agriculture doesn’t have natural resources conservation programs for shits and giggles. They do it to conserve natural resources for agriculture, as the words plainly suggest.

https://www.usda.gov/our-agency/about-usda/mission-areas

> Farm Production and Conservation (FPAC) is the Department’s focal point for the Nation’s farmers and ranchers and other stewards of private agricultural lands and non-industrial private forest lands. FPAC agencies implement programs designed to mitigate the significant risks of farming through crop insurance, conservation programs …

> The mission of Natural Resources and Environment is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations.

> So far there is no evidence that is the purpose, since it has never been unenrolled or utilized, even as there is talk about food crisis related to the war in Ukraine.

The US Department of Agriculture protects the interests of agriculture in the US, not the Middle East and North Africa.

The evidence that it is used for agriculture conservation is the fact that it is called agriculture conservation.



I think you need to read back for the context. You're clearly talking about a separate thing from what was being discussed.

To put it quite plainly, can you point to a time when lands were unenrolled from conservation programs in order to increase food production capacity?


We haven’t had a need to use it. Since these policies have been implemented we’ve had no dust bowls, no world wars, no famine.


There is the expected food crisis from the war in Ukraine. Still they are not allowing early unenrollment. US farmer are asking for unenrollment so they can grow crops that can be exported and reduce the expected market price increase due to lack of supply.


The USDA conserves those resources to protect American food security, not Egypt's and Lebanon's.


According to you it protects US agricultural interests. Increasing profit and keeping food prices reasonable in the US fit that description. The price control does affect US food security when such a large number already live in food insecure households.


> According to you it protects US agricultural interests.

Does it do something else? I have no clue what you're insinuating.

The prices of food are, in fact, an important part of agriculture policy. This is in conjunction with, not in lieu of, conservation policies.

US agriculture policy has done a pretty good job at this. The US has been, for a while, the country with the #1 lowest percentage of consumer expenditure on food.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: