Page 77 - MFB State Annual Meeting 2018 -- RESOLUTIONS BOOK

registered, with agreement of the manufacturer, for like applications of that same crop when planted for nonfood uses. If a chemical is cleared for control of a specific pest on an edible food crop, it should also be cleared for pest control on nonfood crops.
9.3. We support:
9.3.1. Legislative solutions to ensure availability of specialty crop use
pesticides. These solutions shall include, but not be limited to, expanded Interregional Research Project #4 (IR-4) activities, tax credits to registrants who maintain these uses and reduced third-party registration liability;
9.3.2. Encouraging the EPA to re-register Monosodium Methanearsonate;
9.3.3. The use of Canadian data by the EPA for the registration of chemicals for use on minor oilseed crops; and
9.3.4. Aerial application of agricultural chemicals is a safe and effective tool for farmers, and we oppose any efforts to limit or restrict this application method.
9.4. We oppose any farmer, landowner or chemical dealer liability when anhydrous ammonia, ammonium nitrate or any other legitimate farm chemical is stolen from a farm premise. 
#342 Genomic Editing (amendment at line 1.1)
1. We support:
1.1. The use of gene editing in livestock, companion animals, and crops.
, such as CRISPR and Mutagenesis technologies;
1.2. The use of sound science in the regulation of genetically edited
products. We believe that consumers, both domestic and foreign,
deserve sound-science-based education on genomic editing;
1.3. A voluntary and uniform labeling system for products designed with
gene editing; and
1.4. Continued research of genetic modification. 
#377 Indemnification (amendment at line 2)
1. Federal and state livestock and poultry indemnification laws and regulations should be revised to reflect current market value and trends in marketing conditions and production programs in these industries. Revisions should also take into account the period of government- enforced business interruptions and economic restrictions.
2. Indemnification should be provided for losses of agricultural products when products are impounded, farms (including greenhouse, nursery, Christmas tree and other horticultural
production operations) are quarantined or movement or sales
are restricted in the public interest.
3. Producers should be compensated in these cases and not held
responsible for conditions beyond their control. We urge financial assistance for testing feed in efforts to locate the source of pesticides and residues.
4. Producers should be responsible for losses resulting from condemnations from animal drugs and pesticide residues due to negligence on their part.
5. Current law should be amended to include indemnification for losses due to the use of chemicals, drugs or vaccines which are not caused by producer negligence. There should be no retroactive liability for property owners, farmers or their agents for chemical applications made in accordance with laws in effect at the time of application.
6. We support:
6.1. State-federal funded eradication programs for plants, livestock and
poultry that provide indemnification as needed to control the spread of and eradication of serious communicable diseases. Prompt indemnity payments should be based upon current market values;
AFBF Policies – Page 21