by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
Agrimarketing : Crop Life America
CropLife America Supplement AgriMarketing 29 Ag Handlers Exposure Task Force. Helped defeat the first statewide ballot initiative of biotech food labeling (in OR) by a 71-29 margin. 2003 CLA chartered a new Strategic Oversight Council to provide leadership for issues management, consolidating the functions of its former policy council structure into one body. CLA continued its commitment to safe agriculture and food supply through chemical industry security and food safety forums, as homeland security took center stage on Capitol Hill. After much negotiation with activist groups and EPA, it finalized the industry's pesticide fees legislation. The legislation allows EPA to continue its work in registering pesticides while also being held accountable to certain performance measures. In close cooperation with USTR and major farm and food groups, they tackled a number of international trade issues and state ballot initiatives around this crop technology. 2004 The newly-created Strategic Oversight Council (SOC) and the CropLife America Board successfully implemented a complete restructuring of CLA and the issue management process. CLA designates five key issue areas of concentration: opposition research and media monitoring; biomonitoring; challenging unfounded claims of the pro-organic lobby; communications outreach to members and the public; and, addressing conservation issues in the U. S. and abroad. CLA formed a coalition that successfully addressed the "fee-for- service" issue for speeding up the registration and re-registration process for pesticides at EPA, resulting in the passage of the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA). 2005 Many of the public policy challenges that CLA faced in 2005 were related to the "Pre- cautionary Principle" as advanced by European environmental philosophy. Anti-technology activists were using this belief to try to make public policy through the court system. Their goal was to attain outright bans of the industry's products and technology. CLA was fully engaged in modern- izing efforts involving the Endangered Species Act and in the regulatory debate regarding the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination system permitting of the Clean Water Act and pesticide use. CLA conducted its first legislative rally on Capitol Hill for CLA Board members. The suc- cessful "Doing a World of Good" communications outreach program was unveiled and helped acquaint policy makers and the public with the many societal benefits of pesticides for production agriculture and pest control applications. 2006 The SOC strove to prioritize the issues of most concern to CLA members. In all issue areas, emphasis was placed on maintaining a close dialogue with member companies and the policy makers who shape the ground rules under which the industry operated. To keep in touch with the opinion of member company employees, CLA conducted an industry-wide survey of employee perception of the current and emerging issues confronting the industry. The Food Quality Pro- tection Act observed its 10-year anniversary of passage and EPA completed its decade-long review of some 10,000 pesticide residue limits. 2007 CLA helped engineer passage of the reauthor- ization of PRIA II, the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act first passed in 2004. EPA was strongly encouraged by CLA and member companies to fulfill its pledge to propose a recycling rule that would make it mandatory for all pesticide manufacturers and distributors to fund a free recycling program for pesticide containers. CLA followed its compre- hensive member company employee survey of 2006 with a second polling to assess progress in providing in- creased member value. CLA worked closely with the Agribusiness Security Working Group and the Department of Homeland Security to protect agri- cultural interests in promulgation of the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standard rule. AM
January February 2008