Search Results

1951–1960 of 3143 results

Michigan Agriculture Environmental Assurance Program #80

Disabled

We support the Michigan Agriculture Environmental Assurance Program (MAEAP) and its continuation and improvement. We urge the State of Michigan and the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD) to work together with the agriculture community to continue and improve the MAEAP program to foster further voluntary sustainable agricultural practices. Public Acts 1 and 2 of 2011 solidified the future of MAEAP. This program offers MAEAP-verified farms protection from civil fines, a presumption of meeting obligations for watershed pollutant loading determinations, and recognition that discharges from farm fields caused by rainfall are nonpoint source pollution. We urge all farm operators and landowners managing forests, wetlands and habitat to participate in the MAEAP program and complete as many recommendations as possible to help ensure the quality of our air, water and soil is preserved.

We applaud Michigan farmers for achieving 7,075 verifications as of October 1, 2024.

Michigan Farm Bureau members should lead the conversation on the definition of sustainable agriculture. We must put programs such as MAEAP and guidelines like the Generally Accepted Agriculture and Management Practices (GAAMPs) front and center, highlighting how farmers today are producing safe and sustainable food, fuel and fiber.

We support:

Continued efforts for MAEAP to remain a voluntary, confidential, statewide program.
MAEAP technicians being housed locally, not employed directly by MDARD, with preference for technicians being housed at local Conservation Districts.
Legislation and marketing efforts that would communicate to the general public that MAEAP- verified farms are held to the highest standard of environmental stewardship.
MDARD developing an outstanding and recognizable “Pure Michigan”-style labeling program (such as “Pure Michigan-Verified Farm”) to add value to products of MAEAP verified farms and allow the MAEAP logo to be used at point of sale.
The MAEAP program making information available about Michigan’s Water Pollution Control Tax Exemption Form which exempts pollution control structures from property tax assessments.
MFB working with MAEAP partners to develop educational and promotional materials for farm neighbors and the general public regarding the benefits of MAEAP.
All producers using MAEAP verification as the basis for projecting a positive farm image to the public.
MFB continuing to pursue greater incentives for MAEAP participation, such as additional protections from frivolous complaints.
The Michigan Groundwater and Freshwater Protection Act. This act funds groundwater and surface water programming through providing grants to fund local technicians. These technicians work with farmers to voluntarily adopt stewardship practices, which reduce nonpoint source pollution from agricultural sources. We believe funding of these technicians needs to be a top priority.
Participation in MAEAP, including information generated by assessment programs, remaining confidential. Aggregate data that would demonstrate effectiveness of the overall program could be shared.
A review of the MAEAP program, seeking new and/or alternative ways of meeting standards without compromising the basis of MAEAP verification.
Farm Bureau members participating in regional water stewardship teams.
Agriculture being the primary focus of MAEAP assistance in recognition of agriculture’s contribution to the dedicated fund.
The changes made to strengthen MAEAP and its funding through PA 118 of 2015. Program funds come from Michigan’s General Fund and the Freshwater Protection Fund.
The changes made to the Freshwater Protection Fund which require all users of industrial fertilizer (e.g., farmers, homeowners, golf courses) pay a fee into the fund.
An annual review of the Freshwater Protection Fund finances, with the report being made available to contributors.
Freshwater Protection Fund collection at the wholesale level, creating a voluntary contribution option, and exploring other fee collection mechanisms.
Recognition of the Michigan law that offers MAEAP-verified farms statutory protection in watersheds with Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL). This protection should apply to the applicable systems farms are verified in that address the pollutants listed in that watershed’s TMDL by acknowledging the farm meets the obligations for watershed pollutant loading determinations. Verification in all systems applicable to the farm should not be required in order to receive statutory protection.
Farmers who are MAEAP-verified being considered in compliance with Environmental Protection Agency regulations.

Natural Resources & Environment

Submit a Policy Idea

If you’re a Farm Bureau member and have an idea or amendment that you think should be Farm Bureau policy, we want to hear it! Our quick online form makes it easy to get involved in Farm Bureau’s policy-setting process.

Submit Policy Idea

Oil, Gas, and Mineral Rights #83

Disabled

We urge members to obtain information on oil, gas, and mineral leasing from Michigan State University Extension offices or through Michigan Farm Bureau before signing a lease. A checklist for oil, gas, and mineral leases is available on the MFB web site.

We believe wellhead and point of severance means the point at which the well is drilled or minerals are extracted. When oil, gas, and minerals are severed from the ground, everything occurring after severance is the responsibility of the lessee.

We believe government agencies, Farm Credit Services, local and state recording offices, and other state and federal chartered financial institutions should not be allowed to sever oil, gas, and mineral rights from surface rights when they resell land acquired through any land transfer. Oil, gas, and mineral rights that have been severed at foreclosure should be returned or sold to the surface property owner at fair market value.

Oil, gas, and mineral rights without activity revert to the owner of the property unless they are re-registered every 20 years by the owner of the specific rights at the register of deeds office. We believe this law should be changed to require re-registration every 10 years, and the property owner should be notified and be given the opportunity to object at the time of re-registration.

We support:

The extraction of oil, gas, and other minerals from both state-owned and private property in Michigan.
A streamlined and incentivized process for permitting of fertilizer manufacturing.
The Weights and Measures Division of the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD) studying the feasibility of regulating the oil, gas, and mineral industries for the accuracy of reported volumes of oil, gas, and minerals extracted from private property. MDARD needs to become involved in the certification of all metering and measuring.
Legislation requiring oil, gas, and mineral rights lessees to notify the landowner and royalty owner by certified mail of their intent to explore for, or develop, oil, gas, and minerals prior to beginning any operations on leased land and that proof of the notification be submitted prior to granting any permit.
Legislation requiring an escrow account or bond be filed before commencing operations providing the opportunity for landowners to appeal within 10 days of its proposed release to prevent surface waste. The escrow account or bond should be reviewed annually and adjusted accordingly, with a post-closure monitoring period of 40 years.
The continued use of hydraulic fracturing with the appropriate scientifically verified environmental safeguards.
An agricultural environmental and economic impact statement being required before the supervisor of wells issues a permit.
When an injection well damages the value of the oil, gas, and mineral rights of adjacent landowners, the affected landowners being compensated for these losses.
Gas, oil, and mineral royalties from state-owned land and all severance taxes being shared with local units of government.
A reasonable severance tax for gas, oil, and precious metals, with the priority focus of the funds being in the region where the commodity is removed.
Rights of townships granted to them under the Township Ordinance, PA 246 of 1945.
Requiring a new permit for any change in a well’s use.
Agricultural representation on the state oil and gas advisory committee.
MFB exploring alternative distribution of Natural Resources Trust Fund. Consideration should be given to maintaining and improving parks, roads and wildlife habitat on existing state lands.

We oppose:

Any deductions by the oil, gas, and mineral industries from a private lessor's share of revenue unless it is expressly provided for in the signed lease. If deductions take place, the lease must contain the definition of the deduction, specific items eligible for deductions, a clear process enabling the lessor to monitor deductions, and a maximum percentage of costs to be deducted.
Attempts to ban exploration for oil, gas, and mineral deposits.
The State burdening private royalty owners with the deduction of post-production costs. Traditionally in Michigan, oil, gas, and mineral owners’ 1/8 interest was "free of costs" because owners and developers bore the expense from the wellhead.

Natural Resources & Environment

Submit a Policy Idea

Submit Policy Idea

Private Property Rights #84

Disabled

We believe in the American free market system in which property is privately owned, managed, and operated for profit and individual satisfaction. Any erosion of that right weakens all other rights guaranteed to individuals by the Constitution.

We believe any action by the government diminishing an owner’s right to use their property, such as the Endangered Species Act or the Natural Rivers Act, constitutes a taking of that owner’s property. Government should provide for the removal of endangered species or due process and compensation to the exact degree an owner’s right to use his or her property has been diminished by government action.

We believe the Natural Rivers Act should be reviewed to ensure private property owners’ rights remain protected. We believe the following will not only strengthen private property rights, but create more widespread support and compliance with the Act:

The initial request for and final approval of a Natural Rivers Act designation must originate from the local units of government in which the river is located.
Agriculture and other industries must be fairly represented on local Natural Rivers Review Boards.
An economic impact study should be conducted to determine the effect of a Natural Rivers Act designation on local businesses and property owners.
If the local unit of government approves a Natural Rivers Act designation, the designation must be subject to review at least every five years.

We support:

Legislation requiring state and local agencies to evaluate the impact of proposed rules and regulations on private property rights and compensate the landowner for any private property rights taken.
The original description of a parcel standing and the moving of a boundary through re-measurement not being automatically considered conclusive.
The development of a process to provide notification to all adjacent landowners when a new land survey is conducted by a registered surveyor.
A property line survey for all arm’s length property sales.
The Doctrine of Adverse Possession continuing in property line disputes.
Review of all regulations and enforcement policies encroaching on the rights of property owners, including buildings, planted trees and travel ways placed too close to property lines. The presence of other trespassing does not constitute permission to enter private land.
Legislation denying claims of prescriptive easement based on intentional recreational trespass.
Developing and implementing a “purple paint law” to authorize posting of private property by using a specific paint color.
A public awareness campaign utilizing all types of media to encourage better understanding between farmers and nonfarm neighbors as population density around farms increases.
Increased and graduated fines for trespassing.

We oppose:

Any legislation allowing public access to or through private property without permission of the property owner or owner’s authorized agent.
Non-private easements (except maintenance easements) being sold, traded or otherwise transferred without consent of the current property owner. This should include all past and future transactions. Michigan law should protect the rights of the property owner.

Natural Resources & Environment

Submit a Policy Idea

Submit Policy Idea

Resource Recovery #85

Disabled

Vast quantities of all types of recoverable materials are generated daily. We support Michigan Farm Bureau taking steps to advocate reducing and recovering our waste where practical. We support immediate and long-term solutions including:

Using farm plastic recycling programs such as Clean Sweep.
Implementing recycling programs for agricultural tires and all reusable agricultural material.
Establishing grant or loan programs to facilitate purchasing equipment capable of processing agricultural and heavy-duty tires and tracks.
Adopt-a-local-roadside programs.
MFB working with universities, Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy to seek solutions for composting organic materials including, animal, plant, forest and silvicultural materials, and differentiating between agricultural and commercial composters to protect the welfare of residents as well as the integrity of agriculture.
Incentives to use biodegradable products, especially those made from renewable agricultural products.
Amendments to the bottle law requiring similar containers have a 10-cent deposit.
A state initiative that takes a portion of the State’s unreturned bottle deposit funds for the creation and maintenance of local recycling centers.
Land application of properly researched and approved materials at agronomic rates without additional state or local regulation.
Alternative uses for excess food ranging from food banks to anaerobic digesters.
The proper recycling of heavy metal and rare earth batteries.
Research into and the reuse or recycling of renewable energy components when removed from service.

We encourage agricultural representation on all established Material Management Advisory Committees required by the Material Management Act Part 115.

We oppose hauling waste into Michigan from other states and countries for disposal, including nuclear and hazardous waste.

Natural Resources & Environment

Submit a Policy Idea

Submit Policy Idea

Taxation #92

Disabled

Agricultural property in Michigan is taxed at 50 percent above the national average, which is a significant cost.

We support:

Lowering or eliminating agricultural property taxes in Michigan.
Development of legislation allowing landowners to voluntarily enroll in a program that reduces assessments on farm buildings by up to 100 percent of their current taxable value and assesses farmland, including managed woodlots/forestland, with a goal of reaching a property tax rate of $5-7 per acre. Voluntary enrollment in the program, open to every farmer, would be in exchange for temporary/long-term preservation of farmland for a contract period of approximately 20 years or more with a recapture penalty for early withdrawal or when property changes out of agricultural use.
Legislation requiring assessments on farm structures to align with the current use of the structure.
All parcels containing ag worker housing, licensed by the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development that is solely used as ag workforce housing, be eligible for the agricultural 18 mill exemption.
PA 162 of 2013 which states sales of agricultural land without a qualified agricultural affidavit on file will not be used in the sales studies for agricultural land.
Development of taxation methods to more fairly distribute municipal service costs.
Legislation to put an end to the "dark store" assessing theory, ensuring equitable, fair determinations on property tax appeal cases before the Michigan Tax Tribunal.
All agricultural single purpose structures, such as greenhouses, grain bins and silos, be assessed using a realistic accelerated depreciation schedule considering the current practical use of the structure.
A clarification that all temporary agricultural structures, which are moveable and not permanently attached or anchored to the ground, be exempt from sales and use taxes as referenced in Revenue Administrative Bulletin 2002-15 of June 2002.
The Qualified Forest Property program which exempts the pop-up tax and provides a 16 mill exemption, as long as the new owner agrees to keep up the qualified forest land agreement.
A significantly reduced tax designation or tax exempt status for land which is designated for mandatory restricted use such as wetlands, filter strips, sand dunes, natural or scenic rivers, or other restrictions on private property.
The retention of the right of local governing units to assess property for taxation purposes.
The qualified agricultural exemption shall remain in effect if the Governor or USDA issues a disaster declaration for the county.
The continued use of tax abatements and Renaissance Zones to encourage the development and expansion of agricultural facilities to enhance value-added opportunities for agriculture.
Legislation that would allow a farm to include all parcels of the farming operation together when determining the ag classification. If the total farm would qualify for PA 116, then all parcels should maintain their ag classification. Non-contiguous parcels are being reclassified to residential unless 51 percent of the parcel is farmed. Property in Northwest Michigan, and possibly in other parts of the state, cannot be farmed at 51 percent because of the topography.
Exempting PA 116 land from all special assessments excluding agricultural drainage.
Local units of government classifying equine therapy facilities, therapeutic riding facilities, equine rehabilitation facilities, and other similar equine-related businesses utilizing horses as the major component of their business as agriculture for property tax purposes.
The continuation of Proposal A in its current form, as it pertains to agriculture.
The change to the summer tax collection which provided for a lifetime deferment of summer tax for qualified agricultural land if the owner files a federal Schedule “F” Income Tax Form or comparable farm income tax filing.
The time frame for qualified agriculture property be a period of three years between the start of delinquent status to the expiration of redemption rights. We believe the private individual should have the first option to redeem delinquent property.
All assessors should follow established procedures and change the classification from agricultural to industrial and use the appropriate tax tables when considering property that changed from agriculture to commercial solar electric production.
The concept of a special assessment deferral program for landowners and encourage members to be involved in the levying of assessments and infrastructure planning in their community.

We oppose:

Assessing occupied business structures as though they were vacant.
The reduction of taxes levied on state-owned land below current levels.
The reclassification of agriculture and forest land to a residential classification when no residential structure exists.

Income Tax/Incentives

We support:

Deferment of crop insurance income to the year following the crop insurance payment to align with federal rules.
Tax credits used to create jobs and tax equity for the agricultural economy.
The concept of a beginning farmer tax credit program.
The State of Michigan providing tax incentives rather than tax the production, distribution or sale of renewable energy or fuel including but not limited to wood, cherry pits, biodiesel, ethanol, methane digester power, geo and hydro power, as well as windmill and solar power. If the majority of the energy is used for onsite purposes, the generation of the energy and associated equipment should be tax exempt.
Using federal adjusted gross income (AGI) as the base for Michigan’s income tax calculation and oppose decoupling for items such as accelerated depreciation and expensing rules (Sec. 179).
Allowing a surviving spouse who has not remarried to continue to use the age of the deceased spouse for the purpose of the determination of qualification for pension subtraction from income.
Allowing for a line item tax deduction for primary education (preschool-grade 12) expenses, such as tuition and teaching materials.

We oppose:

Reinstatement of the Michigan estate tax (often referred to as the death tax).
Any effort to tax farmer-owned cooperatives on disbursements or credits that are taxable in the hands of patrons.

County/State Taxes

We support:

PA 283 of 1909 (MCL section 224.20) be revised to indicate that all new monies generated by county boards of commissioners must be placed on the ballot in a millage election and levied only after receiving the approval of the majority of the voters.
The sale of state land to meet its obligations, and return the land to private ownership and the property tax roll.

Sales and Use Tax

We support:

The agriculture exemption from state sales and use tax based upon the use of the product.
A continuation of the agriculture sales tax exemption for the equine industry.
Supporters of the FAIR Tax providing education and analyzing the proposal’s impacts and benefits on agriculture.

We oppose:

Charging state sales tax on the federal manufacturers excise tax.
Sales tax levied on new vehicles before cash back, manufacturer incentives and rebates.
Sales tax levied on the sale of used vehicles.
Any plan which places an undue or unrealistic tax or fee which affects agriculture, such as a tax on gross receipts, a tax on personal property or a tax on assets.
Any tax on food or food additives including so called “sin taxes” on products like processed sugar.

Taxation

Submit a Policy Idea

Submit Policy Idea

Farm and Commercial Vehicles #94

Disabled

As farm suppliers and markets become fewer and farther between, distances farmers must travel for supplies, services and markets have increased substantially.

We encourage Michigan Farm Bureau members to review the Michigan Farmer’s Transportation Guidebook and use it as an educational tool for all drivers.

Vehicle Regulations

We support:

The development of State of Michigan covered farm vehicle designation to cover rented and commercially plated vehicles for use in agriculture.
Uniformity of enforcement of trucking regulations by all enforcing agencies.
MFB continuing to provide information to members regarding the proper uses of farm-plated vehicles.
A simple, low cost method for the Secretary of State to verify farm or logging connection when applying for the plate designations. Schedule F forms or EINs must not be the only methods since not all farmers and loggers have those options.
Allowing personal business to be done in the personal pick-up of a logger with a log plate designation.
MFB seeking clarification on the licensing and registration requirements for farmers and others hauling livestock, equipment, and agricultural products to markets, events or shows, and people to events or shows.
More flexibility in the waiting period to obtain a seasonal restricted license.
Specialty license plates and allowing their use on farm, agri-business, and commercial vehicles.
The continuation of permanent trailer license plates without additional fees, and allowing these plates to be transferred.
A revenue-neutral multiyear plate renewal option for all vehicles.
Earmarking part of state, local and county fines for roadway repair to be distributed back to counties through the Michigan Transportation Fund formula. City, township and village fines should be prohibited from being allocated for local law enforcement.
Minor restricted license eligibility. Licenses should not be based on taxable household income, and farm size should not be a factor. Licenses will only be considered for immediate family members.
Individuals and businesses should be able to conduct business and complete transactions with the Secretary of State in an easily accessible manner including in-person, online, or by mail.
Pickup trucks, one ton and under, that have had their beds modified should still be classified as pickup trucks.

We oppose:

The classification by a state or federal government to include implements of husbandry as commercial motor vehicles.
Any proposal requiring vehicles registered in Michigan to display license plates on both the front and rear of the vehicle.

Vehicle Size and Weights

We support the current Michigan per axle weight limits for trucks on state highways. These axle limits should be extended and consistently applied on all county roads. We support the exemption of all farm and agribusiness vehicles of any size, up to legal weight limit per axle, from no through trucks ordinance and laws. We support trailers of common dimensional size, which are currently legal on Class A roads, be allowed to operate on all roads.

We support allowing permits to be issued for hauling over width loads of double wide loads of bales.

Due to changes in moisture and weights on farm commodities, it can be very difficult to determine if the legal weight limits are being met when loading from the field or farm. We support up to a 10 percent exemption on load limits, or up to a 20 percent tolerance over the legal weight limit on axles provided the vehicle is at or below its legal gross weight, for all farm and forestry commodities loaded out of the field or farm storage. All state highways should be brought up to Class A designation as soon as possible. Until they are, the appropriate road agencies should have the authority to give seasonal permits for movement of agricultural produce. We oppose the actions by local units of government which impose reduced vehicle weight limits on roads established or maintained with state or federal road funding.

For seasonal permits, we support:

The use of sound engineering principles and criteria and collaboration with surrounding counties to determine when to apply and remove spring load restrictions on county and Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) roads.
Reasonable, standardized Frost Law permitting criteria and fees for all counties within the state.
Requiring MDOT to issue permits for the trucking of agricultural and forestry commodities at normal load limits during spring weight restrictions on the state highway system.
Prohibiting county road commissions from requiring to be named as an additional insured for liability coverage to obtain a permit.
MDOT being allowed to issue all permits which allows farm equipment to be trailered on weekends, as well as week days, on the state highway system.

Autonomous Vehicles

We support:

Development of technology to advance the use of autonomous vehicles.
The development of safety technology and mandatory enhanced safety features installed on all new vehicles including, but not limited to, braking and cautionary sensors that create a safer driving environment for all farm equipment on roadways.
Proper regulation and licensing of road bound vehicles.
We encourage Michigan Farm Bureau to monitor future developments in autonomous vehicles and regulation regarding their use.

Implements of Husbandry

Implements of husbandry have changed over time; therefore, consideration should be given to the design and functional use of the vehicle serving agricultural purposes.

We support:

Pickups, like farm tractors, being allowed to tow two wagons or trailers, provided the combination of trailers does not exceed the towing capacity of the pickup.
Implements of husbandry being operated and maintained with manufacturer’s recommendations.
MFB educating members about the safe and appropriate use of implements of husbandry on public roadways.
Current statute for size and weight provisions of implements of husbandry, and abide by the posted bridge weight limits, not exceeding the vehicle axle limits.
Clarification on the definition of “modified agricultural vehicle” and its distinction from implements of husbandry.
A permit to allow tractors and other implements of husbandry to cross the Mackinaw Bridge during oversized load crossing times.

We oppose mandating the use of electric powered agriculture equipment/implements of husbandry.

Transportation

Submit a Policy Idea

Submit Policy Idea

Wetlands Protection Act #89

Disabled

The Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy’s (MDEGLE) interpretation and enforcement of the Wetlands Protection Act saved valuable wetlands, but also placed a disproportionate burden on some landowners.

We support the changes made to the Wetlands Protection Act under PA 98 of 2013 to retain federally delegated authority of the Clean Water Act Section 404 Program. The law provided many reforms benefiting agriculture, including:

Defining and exempting agricultural drainage maintenance.
Excluding drainage structures from wetland regulation.
Exempting established and on-going farming operations.
Wetlands not being regulated if they are less than five acres and their only connection to an inland lake or stream is an agricultural drain.
Exempting cutting woody vegetation and in-place stump grinding within a wetland.
Directing MDEGLE to create a blueberry general permit with permitting flexibility, including mitigation and a blueberry assistance program.
Exempting construction of livestock crossings and fencing associated with grazing.
Not regulating temporarily obstructed drains as wetlands.
Declaring the MDEGLE’s delegated authority is limited to application of the Clean Water Act, associated rules, or court decisions and any further regulation is the responsibility of the Michigan Legislature.
Repealing Michigan’s wetland law within 160 days if the Environmental Protection Agency withdraws Michigan’s federally delegated authority for Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
Regulating a wetland if it meets the criteria in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ 1987 Delineation Manual and Regional Supplements.

We recommend the following:

The MDEGLE statewide wetland inventory should not be used for regulatory purposes. Michigan Farm Bureau is concerned the inventory includes wetlands that do not meet current wetland delineation standards.
Compatible agricultural uses should be allowed in wetlands. Wetland vegetation should be defined as obligate hydrophytes.
There should be no regulation of man-made wetlands or voluntarily established wetlands implemented as conservation practices through state or federal programs.
Application of contaminated soils and sediments to farm fields at agronomic rates should be in accordance with state and federal requirements.
County drain/water resources commissions should be the sole authority on public drains, culverts and maintenance.
Statewide standards for wetland determinations and historical function must be established to ensure uniform application at all locations.
Permits must be issued promptly.
Where application of wetland regulation results in a substantial or total loss of the value of the property, the State must fully compensate the property owner. Control and access to the property must remain with the property owner.
All prior converted wetlands should be excluded from regulation.
Cleaning up edges of fields back to the original farmed boundaries and removing barriers such as brush and trees protruding into fields should not trigger a wetland determination or disciplinary action against the farmer/landowner.
Cost-sharing or other incentives should be provided for wetlands restoration programs on farms.
A fund should be established to compensate neighboring farms for their economic loss due to unforeseen problems created by wetland restoration.
MDEGLE and Natural Resources Conservation Service should completely explain in advance and in writing landowner obligations during and after a contract for the maintenance and/or reversion of a wetland.
Creative solutions should reflect economic and environmental realities to resolve wetlands disputes.
Productive agricultural land should not be used to mitigate wetlands, especially by condemnation.
Wetland violations should be heard within the court jurisdiction where the violation has been alleged.
Government agencies should cooperate and provide a single contact for regulatory compliance to handle all issues of wetland determination, enforcement, and penalties.
MDEGLE should recognize the section of the Wetlands Protection Act finding wetlands to be valuable as an agricultural resource for producing food and fiber, including certain crops which may only be grown on sites developed from wetlands.

We oppose other states converting Michigan farmland to offset wetland mitigation.

Natural Resources & Environment

Submit a Policy Idea

Submit Policy Idea

Wildlife Management #90

Disabled

Wildlife management of all species in Michigan should be based on sound biological science that ensures a healthy balance in population, alleviates property damage, and reduces the risk of disease transmission.

We support:

The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) being the lead agency to advocate Michigan’s authority to manage federally protected species.
Michigan Farm Bureau working with MDNR, as well as other stakeholders, to ensure effective management and ecological balance that minimizes conflict.
Hunting and trapping as the primary tool to manage population for all species in the state of Michigan. Hunting regulations should provide the maximum opportunities to harvest game species. This includes, but is not limited to, reduced cost of licenses as well as creating, revising, or extending hunting seasons.
Programs, regulations, and methods that lead to increased harvest and help control wildlife species as well as reduction of agricultural damage. Adversely, we oppose programs or regulations that have a negative impact on agriculture, which includes, but is not limited to, antler point restrictions.
Decisions on baiting and feeding should be based on science with consideration given to impacts on harvest as well as ongoing disease threats. Therefore, we support baiting to increase harvest and oppose feeding outside of hunting season to limit disease transmission.
Agency culling.
Financial incentives for managing wildlife species, which includes but is not limited to, sale of game meat.
Farmers having the ability to effectively manage all wildlife species that are causing damage or putting their agricultural operation at risk. Lethal authority should be given in a timely manner, provide greatest flexibility and at low or no cost.
Increased access to processing as well as streamlined ability to donate game meat with options for free replacement license.
Investments in habitat and conservation projects that don’t negatively impact.

Natural Resources & Environment

Submit a Policy Idea

Submit Policy Idea

Waters of the United States #88

Enabled

To limit the scope of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) oversight, we support the U.S. Supreme Court’s definition of “Waters of the United States” in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, 598 U.S. 651 (2023), which states: “The [Clean Water Act’s] CWA’s use of ‘waters’ in §1362(7) refers only to ‘geographic[al] features that are described in ordinary parlance as ‘streams, oceans, rivers, and lakes’ and to adjacent wetlands that are ‘indistinguishable’ from those bodies of water due to continuous surface connection.”

We oppose changing the wording, meaning or definition of navigable waters in the CWA, the removal of the term "navigable waters" from the CWA, and any attempt to broaden the reach of the CWA. Federal CWA jurisdiction and the EPA’s power should be limited to navigable streams and flowing waterways with continuous flow 365 days a year.

The EPA has already tried to expand its oversight to include “temporary” waterways, which include areas as small as wet spots in fields and puddles in driveways. Under no circumstance should temporary waterways or any agricultural drain be considered a water of the United States. We urge the EPA to include greater farmer input in the development of future rules.

We support the county drain/water resources commissioner’s ability to make decisions and determinations about the characteristics of water under their jurisdiction to assist state or federal agencies in jurisdictional determinations.

Natural Resources & Environment

Submit a Policy Idea

Submit Policy Idea

County Road Commissions #93

Disabled

The board of county road commissioners is a unit of local government responsible for maintenance and construction of most roads within a county. Michigan is the only state in the country to utilize a county road commission structure. The three or five-member boards have six-year staggered terms and are, in most cases, appointed by the county board of commissioners.

Public Acts 14 and 15 of 2012 allows a county board of commissioners to assume the duties of the county road commission. We continue to support a system of local control selection.

We believe each county overseen by a road commission should have the option to decide if it needs a three or five-member county road commission. These should be by district, regardless of population, and representative of all areas of the county. Commission members should serve four-year staggered terms.

We support properly and consistently training road commission employees to grade and maintain local roadways to uniform grade standards.

We support county road commissions having access to state run facilities and equipment.

Transportation

Submit a Policy Idea

Submit Policy Idea