[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
SUPPLY CHAIN RECOVERY AND RESILIENCY: SMALL PRODUCERS AND LOCAL
AGRICULTURAL MARKETS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
BIOTECHNOLOGY, HORTICULTURE, AND RESEARCH
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JUNE 30, 2021
__________
Serial No. 117-11
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture
agriculture.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
46-505 PDF WASHINGTON : 2022
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
DAVID SCOTT, Georgia, Chairman
JIM COSTA, California GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania,
JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts Ranking Minority Member
FILEMON VELA, Texas AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina, Vice ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD,
Chair Arkansas
ABIGAIL DAVIS SPANBERGER, Virginia SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
ANTONIO DELGADO, New York DOUG LaMALFA, California
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia
GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN, DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina
Northern Mariana Islands TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire DON BACON, Nebraska
CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota
SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York JAMES R. BAIRD, Indiana
STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands JIM HAGEDORN, Minnesota
TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona CHRIS JACOBS, New York
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
RO KHANNA, California MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
AL LAWSON, Jr., Florida TRACEY MANN, Kansas
J. LUIS CORREA, California RANDY FEENSTRA, Iowa
ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota MARY E. MILLER, Illinois
JOSH HARDER, California BARRY MOORE, Alabama
CYNTHIA AXNE, Iowa KAT CAMMACK, Florida
KIM SCHRIER, Washington MICHELLE FISCHBACH, Minnesota
JIMMY PANETTA, California JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia
______
Anne Simmons, Staff Director
Parish Braden, Minority Staff Director
______
Subcommittee on Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research
STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands, Chair
ANTONIO DELGADO, New York JAMES R. BAIRD, Indiana, Ranking
KIM SCHRIER, Washington Minority Member
JIMMY PANETTA, California AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD,
SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York Arkansas
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois
AL LAWSON, Jr., Florida DON BACON, Nebraska
JOSH HARDER, California JIM HAGEDORN, Minnesota
J. LUIS CORREA, California CHRIS JACOBS, New York
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
MICHELLE FISCHBACH, Minnesota
JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana
Malikha Daniels, Subcommittee Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Baird, Hon. James R., a Representative in Congress from Indiana,
opening statement.............................................. 3
Panetta, Hon. Jimmy, a Representative in Congress from
California, submitted comment letter authored by Laura Batcha,
Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer, Organic Trade
Association.................................................... 46
Plaskett, Hon. Stacey E., a Delegate in Congress from Virgin
Islands, opening statement..................................... 1
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Submitted article............................................ 45
Thompson, Hon. Glenn, a Representative in Congress from
Pennsylvania, opening statement................................ 34
Witnesses
Browne, Dale K.K., Owner, Sejah Farm of the Virgin Islands,
Kingshill, St. Croix, USVI..................................... 6
Prepared statement........................................... 7
Cooper, Perri, Director, Georgia Organic Peanut Association;
Executive Director, Flint River Soil and Water Conservation
District, Americus, GA......................................... 9
Prepared statement........................................... 10
Kennedy, Tianna, Owner/Operator, Star Route Farm; Founder/
Operator, The 607 CSA; Board Member, Center for Agricultural
Development & Entrepreneurship, Worcester, NY.................. 13
Prepared statement........................................... 15
Shannon, Jonathan, niche market livestock producer, Shannon
Family Farms LLC, Crawfordsville, IN; accompanied by Kelly
Shannon, Niche Market Livestock Producer, Shannon Family Farms
LLC............................................................ 20
Prepared statement........................................... 22
SUPPLY CHAIN RECOVERY AND RESILIENCY: SMALL PRODUCERS AND LOCAL
AGRICULTURAL MARKETS
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 30, 2021
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research,
Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m., in
Room 1300 of the Longworth House Office Building and via Webex,
Hon. Stacey E. Plaskett [Chair of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Members present: Representatives Plaskett, Delgado,
Schrier, Pingree, Maloney, Carbajal, Lawson, Harder,
Kirkpatrick, Baird, Austin Scott of Georgia, Davis, Bacon,
Hagedorn, Fischbach, Letlow, and Thompson (ex officio).
Staff present: Lyron Blum-Evitts, Malikha Daniels, Ross
Hettervig, Prescott Martin III, Ricki Schroeder, Patricia
Straughn, Jennifer Tiller, and Dana Sandman.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. STACEY E. PLASKETT, A DELEGATE IN
CONGRESS FROM VIRGIN ISLANDS
The Chair. This hearing of the Subcommittee on
Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research entitled, Supply
Chain Recovery and Resiliency: Small Producers and Local
Agricultural Markets, will come to order. Welcome, and thank
you for joining today's hearing. After brief opening remarks,
Members will receive testimony from our witnesses today, and
then the hearing will be open to questions. Members will be
recognized in the order of seniority, alternating between
Majority and Minority Members, and in order of the arrival for
those Members who have joined us after the hearing was called
to order. When you are recognized you will be asked, if you are
on video, to unmute your microphone, and will have 5 minutes to
ask your questions or make a statement. If you are not
speaking, I ask that you remain muted in order to minimize
background noise. In order to get as many questions as
possible, the time will stay consistently visible on your
screen.
I want to thank my colleagues and our witnesses for joining
us today as we host this important discussion on the
consequences of, excuse me, recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic
on small producers serving local markets. I would also like to
welcome you all to the first Subcommittee hearing for the
Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research Subcommittee for the
117th Congress. I am looking forward to working with all of you
in finding ways to address our shared priorities, such as
supporting agricultural research, improving and expanding the
National Organic Program, and facilitating new developments in
agricultural technologies. This Subcommittee has jurisdiction
over a variety of very exciting and important aspects of our
food and agricultural sector, and it is an honor to serve as
Chair again.
The COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly had a lasting impact
on our agricultural communities around the country, notably
impacting small farmers and ranchers, including our small
certified organic producers. During the pandemic producers were
required to significantly adapt their business practices and
operations to meet the challenges posed by COVID-19, which
shifted how these producers were able to participate in
agricultural markets. The pandemic further caused unprecedented
interferences within supply chains, and challenges to market
access, from small producers serving local markets, local
markets which are becoming increasingly more important as a way
for producers to add value to their operations. This is true in
my own district of the U.S. Virgin Islands. Farmers in the
Territory are mostly small and local producers who are working
to recover from the supply chain disruptions. Producers from my
district are certainly seeking all opportunities to strengthen
their supply chain while serving the local community.
Each year consumers across the country purchase more and
more products from local markets. The USDA reported a farm-
level value of direct food sales totaling $11.8 billion in
2017, including sales from eight percent of U.S. farmers,
confirming significant growth in these local agricultural
markets. Farmers across the country are taking advantage of
this growing demand through a variety of alternative business
models and production practices, including direct to consumer
marketing, farmers' markets, community supported agriculture,
community gardens, and food hubs. However, in order to ensure
the success of our farmers and producers as demand for local
markets increase, it is vital to examine the impact of COVID-19
on our supply chains and facilitate economic recovery.
Our witnesses today include some of those farmers and
producers who have seen firsthand the impact of COVID-19 on
small farmers, farms servicing local communities, and I am
grateful to hear their experiences, which are crucial to
advancing our work here today as we look forward to the next
farm bill. Without objection, I would like to include an op-ed
that I wrote with the Chicago Council on Global Affairs which
addresses the need for investment in agricultural research and
infrastructure, as well as agricultural innovation, to the
record.* Agricultural research and innovation has a far
reaching impact and benefits all producers, including our
small, organic, and local producers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The article referred to is located on p. 45.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[The prepared statement of Ms. Plaskett follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Stacey E. Plaskett, a Delegate in Congress
from Virgin Islands
Good morning, and thank you to my colleagues and our witnesses for
joining me today as we host this important discussion on the
consequences of and recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic on small
producers serving local markets.
I would also like to welcome you all to the first Subcommittee
hearing for the Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research Subcommittee
for the 117th Congress. I'm looking forward to working with all of you
and finding ways to address our shared priorities--such as supporting
agricultural research, improving, and expanding the National Organic
Program, and facilitating new developments in agricultural
technologies. This Subcommittee has jurisdiction over a variety of very
exciting and important aspects of our food and agriculture sectors, and
it's an honor to serve as Chair again.
The COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly had a lasting impact on our
agricultural communities around the country--notably impacting small
farmers and ranchers, and including our small, certified organic
producers.
During the pandemic, producers were required to significantly adapt
their business practices and operations to meet the challenges posed by
COVID-19, which shifted how these producers were able to participate in
agricultural markets.
The pandemic further caused unprecedented interferences within
supply-chains and challenges to market access for many small producers
serving local markets--local markets which are becoming increasingly
more important as a way for producers to add value to their operations.
This story is true in my district of the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Farmers in the Territory are mostly small and local producers who are
working to recover from the supply chain disruptions. Producers from my
district are certainly seeking all opportunities to strengthen their
supply chain while serving the local community.
Each year, consumers across the country purchase more and more
products from local markets. The USDA reported a farm-level value of
direct food sales totaling $11.8 billion in 2017, including sales from
8% of U.S. farmers, confirming significant growth in these local
agriculture markets.
Farmers across the country are taking advantage of this growing
demand through a variety of alternative business models and production
practices, including direct-to-consumer marketing, farmers' markets,
community-supported agriculture (CSA), community gardens, and food
hubs.
However, in order to ensure the success of our farmers and
producers as demand for local markets increase, it is vital to examine
the impact of COVID-19 on our supply chains and facilitate economic
recovery.
Our witnesses today include some of those farmers and producers who
have seen first-hand the impact of COVID-19 on small farms servicing
local communities, and I am grateful to hear about their experiences--
which are crucial to advancing our work here today, and as we look
forward to the next farm bill.
The Chair. I would now like to welcome the distinguished
Ranking Member, the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Baird, for any
opening remarks he would like to give.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES R. BAIRD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM INDIANA
Mr. Baird. Well good morning, and thank you, Chair
Plaskett, for calling this hearing today. I am excited for our
Subcommittee to come together for the first official hearing of
this Congress, and, Chair Plaskett, I look forward to
developing a fruitful relationship with you as we serve on this
Subcommittee, and the very important role its jurisdiction--
especially in the areas of biotechnology, research, and
extension--plays in the current landscape of the American farm
economy, particularly in regard to the sustainability of the
industry, the profitability of our producers, and the stability
of our national food supply. And to the Members of this
Subcommittee, I thank you for committing to serve on this
panel. I value your leadership and expertise, and look forward
to serving alongside each of you.
I find today's topic to be of particular importance. We are
nearing the end of an indiscriminate pandemic that impacted
every corner of our lives. The witnesses before us have an
opportunity and an important story to tell. And like many of
the hearings held thus far in this Congress, their stories add
to the narrative that we can do better to prepare for future
emergencies. I thank our witnesses for their time and
participation in today's discussion. Of course, I regret that
we can't gather in person today, but I appreciate the work that
you have done to put in to preparing your thoughts, and look
forward to hearing more about your operations and experiences.
Our nation is home to a varied, yet immensely productive,
agricultural industry. On one hand, we have a group of
developed, larger farms that play a most critical role in the
stability of our food supply chain. Operations leverage the
efficiencies gained by economies-of-scale to provide our nation
the cheapest, safest, and most abundant food supply chain the
world has ever known. They bolster national security and
stabilize agricultural markets. On the other hand, we have a
group of smaller producers. Often they are passionately serving
niche markets, or in the beginning phases of their operations,
working to build markets and equity. Both of these groups
represent American farmers. Both represent a crucial component
of our nation's food supply chain and its security. Both
experience unique challenges that occasionally rely on policy
solutions to improve.
Beginning farmers in the United States face significant
challenges in entering production. Those without prior
experience, or land they inherit, or large sums of capital have
presented with sometimes insurmountable difficulties to begin
their operation, let alone to be competitive after they are
established. These obstacles, for some small farmers,
significantly hinder the ability to bring younger generations
into agriculture, and to diversify our nation's agricultural
production. I also think there is ample opportunity for the
Department to improve outreach and engage for those entering
into agriculture. Through today's discussion I look forward to
hearing more about these producers and how they overcame their
myriad of various challenges, including those set on or
aggravated by the COVID-19 pandemic. I also hope to hear how
we, as policymakers, can better serve small or beginning
farmers, what policies we need to work on, where we can start
over, and how we ultimately can ensure that agriculture remains
a highly desired industry.
As I said, I am excited about our work and the work ahead.
I sincerely look forward to today's testimony, and thank you
again, Madam Chair, for calling this hearing. I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you, Ranking Member. The chair would
request that other Members submit their opening statements for
the record so witnesses may begin their testimony, and to
ensure that there is ample time for questioning.
I am pleased to welcome such a distinguished panel of
witnesses to our hearing today. Our witnesses bring to the
hearing a wide range of experience and expertise, and I thank
you for joining us. Our first witness today is Mr. Dale Browne.
He and his wife, Yvette Browne, are the owners of Sejah Farm,
which is located on the Island of St. Croix in the U.S. Virgin
Islands. He raises goats, sheep, and chickens, and farms a
variety of organic produce. He is an advocate for locally-
sourced produce and meat, and supports educational programs for
young farmers, cooking with locally-sourced food, and
agritourism. He co-founded the Virgin Islands Farmers'
Cooperative with his wife.
Our next witness is Ms. Perri Cooper, who is the Executive
Director of the Georgia Organic Peanut Association. In addition
to her work there, she is the Director of the Flint River Soil
and Water Conservation District, and a beginning farmer in
Sumter County, Georgia. She has a degree in Agriscience and
Environmental System and a certificate in local food systems.
To introduce our third witness, I am pleased to yield to
our colleague on the Subcommittee, and Chairman of the
Subcommittee on Commodity Exchanges, Energy, and Credit, the
distinguished gentleman from New York, Mr. Delgado.
Mr. Delgado. Thank you, Chair Plaskett. It is my privilege
and honor to introduce our next witness, and my constituent,
Tianna Kennedy. Tianna Kennedy is the owner of The 607
Community Supported Agriculture, CSA, and Owner and farmer at
Star Route Farm, one of nearly 5,000 farms in my district. The
607 CSA is a multi-farm operation in the Northern Catskills
region. The CSA supports four vegetable farms, partners with
more than 35 additional neighboring farms and food businesses
and serves 800 families in the Catskills and New York City.
Star Route Farm is a small-scale, diversified vegetable, herb,
and small grain farm.
Ms. Kennedy also serves on my bipartisan Locally-Based
Agriculture Advisory Committee. She has an important
perspective on the role small scale farmers play in local
agricultural markets and supply chain resiliency. The COVID-19
pandemic has made even more clear that we must empower and
support our local producers to prevent supply chain
disruptions. I am proud that New York's 19th Congressional
District is represented here today by Ms. Kennedy. Ms. Kennedy,
it is good to see you. I look forward to hearing your
testimony, and learning more about how Congress can best
support you, and other farmers like you, in the future. I yield
back.
The Chair. I thank the gentleman. To introduce our fourth
witnesses, I am pleased to yield to the Ranking Member of the
Subcommittee, the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Baird.
Mr. Baird. Thank you, Madam Chair. It is my distinct
pleasure to introduce Jonathan and Kelly Shannon to testify
before us today. Jonathan and Kelly are niche market livestock
producers and live on a 10 acre farm in rural Montgomery
County, Indiana, along with their three daughters, where they
raise cattle, pigs, chickens, and goats. Jonathan and Kelly
started Shannon Family Farms in 2006, and have continually
changed their commodities that they raise to meet the needs of
their consumers. In 2016 they partnered with other farm
families in the area to form the Four Seasons Local Market,
located in downtown Crawfordsville. They did this to create
year-round opportunities to sell local products to their
community.
In addition to their work on the farm, and with the local
market, Jonathan and Kelly both have jobs off the farm, and are
actively involved in the Montgomery County Farm Bureau and the
Indiana Farm Bureau. I am honored to have both of you with us
today, and I look forward to you sharing your story with this
Committee. And with that, I yield back.
The Chair. I thank the gentleman for his remarks. We
welcome all of our witnesses today, and will now proceed to
hearing your testimony. You will each have 5 minutes, and the
timer should be visible to you on your screen, and will count
down to zero, at which point, your time has expired, please, so
that we can get to the questions for so many of our Members
which are with us both here in the hearing room and who are
with us virtually. Mr. Browne, please begin when you are ready.
Unmute and give your testimony. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Browne. Good morning, and thanks for the invite Madam
Chair.
The Chair. Mr. Browne, do you have--are you visible to----
Mr. Browne. I am visible, but I am doing both screen and
phone for the audio.
The Chair. Okay. Excellent. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF DALE K.K. BROWNE, OWNER, SEJAH FARM OF THE VIRGIN
ISLANDS, KINGSHILL, ST. CROIX, USVI
Mr. Browne. Good morning again, and I thank you, Madam
Chair, for inviting me to this hearing. My testimony is going
to be brief, but punctual. It is my pleasure to be here to
testify on the Supply Chain Recovery Resiliency: Small Producer
and Local Agricultural Markets. My testimony will reflect the
impact of natural disasters, COVID-19, and programs offered by
USDA during the pandemic on the island. And to couple with
that, the local government leadership not being totally
involved, or not being involved at all, in any of our
agricultural development. I am an advocate for the resurgence
of Virgin Islands agriculture. Developing a local food system,
and ultimately food security, is a challenge. However, it is
one I am willing to take on, and to make sure we have an
agriculture resurgence in the Territory. Diversifying our farm
over the years has helped us to negate the impact of the COVID-
19 pandemic, and this has provided an opportunity for us to
bring the awareness of local food in the Territory.
The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted, and has
taken a role in the operation of the farm, where we had to
operate in new ways, and it has created an additional burden to
our overhead costs. There also have been a sudden change in
sales value, real time decision-making, labor, productivity,
and the threats of all is more of a risk in all parts of it.
There was a loss in income to crop and livestock due to COVID-
19. Crops did not get to market as before the pandemic. Our
farm programs were halted, less patrons and closure of
restaurants, chefs unable to meet--have scheduled group dining,
catering, supermarkets not taking large quantity of produce,
all due to the pandemic. Livestock sales ceased due to the VI
Department of Agriculture abattoir extended closure due to
maintenance and the pandemic. In addition, we ceased our
livestock production, and herd of both sheep and goats were
separated to avoid any further breeding production.
The following income generation programs were halted or
lowered due to the pandemic from 2019 until present. Our
community supported agriculture, which actually we have about
20 members partaking in that agriculture program during every
season. Our Bush Cook/Chef Cook, which is a culinary event. It
is held on the farm every year. That we could not partake of.
Our CIGNA Contractual Program, which service over 2,000
employees between all three islands. We were unable to meet
that. And our youth summer program, which is Bridging the Gap.
We were unable to also meet that as well.
One thing that I have observed is that the USDA programs
which we do have, which is NRCS-EQIP programs, those programs
has changed after our drought, and it even continued during the
pandemic. Where--the changes that was there was that the--you
received a contract, and you would begin working under contract
for reimbursement. But, unfortunately, after the drought and
the hurricane we have an issue where now we are asked--or we
are told that we have to actually look for our own engineers
and complete the project at the same time. So reimbursement for
excess spending was not involved. In addition, the EQIP Program
is 90 percent reimbursement. The cost of products coming from
the mainland is higher than--by the time it gets here, so there
is no mitigation, and we have to actually foot that cost, and
remain for--the reimbursement that we are allowed by contract.
To give a simple example, in one of our contracts for a waste
management facility, $57 was the total amount, and therefore it
cost us over $400 to complete it. Reimbursement was only $57.
FSA programs are available for livestock during the drought,
but here still there are some programs that are not most
effective for a certain Territory.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Browne follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dale K.K. Browne, Owner, Sejah Farm of the Virgin
Islands, Kingshill, St. Croix, USVI
It is my pleasure to be here to testify on the ``Supply Chain
Recovery Resiliency: Small Producers and Local Agricultural Markets''.
My testimony will reflect the impact of natural disaster, [COVID]-19
and programs offered by USDA during this pandemic on our island's
agriculture.
I am an advocate for the resurgence of Virgin Islands agriculture.
Developing a local islands food system and ultimately food security is
a challenge. However, it is one I am willing to take on if ``we are
going to be part of our islands agriculture resurgence''.
Diversifying the farm over the year has help us to mitigate the
impact of [COVID]-19 pandemic and this has provided an opportunity for
us to bringing the awareness of local food in the Territory.
COVID-19 pandemic has negatively taken a toll on the farm
operation, where we had to operate in new ways, and it has also created
an additional burden to our overhead cost. There has also been a sudden
change in sale volume, where real-time decision-making, labor,
productivity, and the threats of all is at more of a risk.
There was a lost in income to crop and livestock due to COVID-19.
Crops did not get to market as before the pandemic. On farm programs
were halted, less patrons and the closure of restaurants, chefs unable
to have schedule group dining catering and supermarket not taking large
quantities of produce all due to the pandemic. Livestock sale ceased
due to the VI Department of Agriculture abattoirs extended closure due
to maintenance and the pandemic. In addition, we ceased our livestock
production and the herds of both sheep and goats (ewes and rams) were
separated to avoid any breeding.
The following income generating programs were halted or lowered due
to the pandemic from 2019 until present:
Community Supported Agriculture (CSA)
CSAs are arrangements based on a contractual agreement between a
farmer and a consumer. A CSA concept is that the consumer, often
described as a ``shareholder'' or ``member'', usually purchases up-
front a ``share'' or ``membership'' prior to the growing season.
Members can rely on fresh, local produce throughout the season. As each
crop comes in throughout the growing season, members receive their
share, often once or twice a week. The size of the shares varies in
quantity and variety. The produce is picked up by members at the farm.
Bush Cook/Chef Cook
``Bush Cook/Chef Cook'' is a local food culinary event conducted on
farm, where 20 or more restaurant, chefs, and cooks participates. The
scope of the event is based on the creativity of the participating
cooks and chefs. The participants would choose any unconventional
method of cooking preferable to their liking (coal pot, three stone,
hole in the ground or any bush style cooking).
CIGNA Health and Wellness Expo
CIGNA Health and Wellness Expo. Is a health and wellness
contractual agreement with the VI Personnel Department to provide bags
of local food for 2,000 employees with CIGNA Insurance on St. Croix,
St. Thomas, and St. John.
``Bridging the Gap'' Summer Program
``Bridging the Gap'' Summer Program is an agricultural summer camp
for age 7 to 18, which exposes its participant to the world of an
island agricultural industry within the Virgin Islands. This includes
participants from the department of labor summer workforce development.
USDA Programs
1. NRCS-EQIP--Environmental Quality Incentive Program is a
conservation program which assist farms to develop their
farm infrastructure, it is a program for well, fencing,
irrigation, and pasture improvement.
Since the 2017 Hurricanes Maria and Irma to the
Territory I have seen
changes to how the program are administered. When
contract was issued
there were no specific or engineering provided. When a
practice were com-
pleted and the request for reimbursement was required it
was then told of
the new changes or engineering requirement. If these
requirements were
given before starting, then correction would be accepted
rather than having
to do over after monies have been spent. Then later were
told we will have
[to] get your own professional engineer at you expense.
An EQIP Contract has a 90% reimbursement for practices
completed.
Therefore, a farmer will have to complete the practice
before reimburse-
ment.
Contract practice cost are calculated based on cost from
the mainland USA.
These costs are not relevant to the Territory and when
the practice are com-
pleted the farmer would have spent beyond the cost of the
practice and not
received any reimbursement for what has been spent.
Exp. Contract # EQIP 2014 74F352150GH requires the
floor construction
of a composting facility of 20\2\ to be reimbursed for
$57.00 with a roof
structure reimbursement of $270.00 thats a total of
$327.00. The actual
cost of the floor completed was $138.00 and the frame
and roof was
$400.00 that's a total of $538.00 difference of $186.00
not reimbursable.
2. FSA
Reimbursement Transportation Cost Payment Program (RTCP)
Disaster Assistance for Livestock Forage Losses (drought
and hurricanes[)]
Dale K.K. Browne,
Sejah Farm of the Virgin Islands.
The Chair. Thank you so much, Mr. Browne, during
questioning I am sure we will be able to understand some
additional issues with that. Ms. Cooper, please begin when you
are ready.
STATEMENT OF PERRI COOPER, DIRECTOR, GEORGIA
ORGANIC PEANUT ASSOCIATION; EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, FLINT RIVER
SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT, AMERICUS, GA
Ms. Cooper. Chair Plaskett, Ranking Member Baird, and
Subcommittee Members, thank you for allowing me to testify
before you today. My name is Perri Cooper. I am incredibly
lucky to work with a diverse set of agricultural stakeholders.
I have the privilege to work as the Executive Director of the
Flint River Soil and Water Conservation District in southwest
Georgia, and I am also the Director of the Georgia Organic
Peanut Association, a farmer-owned agricultural cooperative
that markets USDA-certified organic peanuts and other
agricultural products from producers in the Southeast. GOPA has
continued to grow, both in number and farmers, since
incorporation, but growth has not been without challenges.
Without a certified organic supply chain, once peanuts leave
the farm, they lose their organic associated price premium.
Certified organic production made up .06 percent of
Georgia's total peanut production last year, which is nowhere
near the volume to achieve the added value for the shelling,
blanching, and roasting facilities to go through the
certification process. Certified organic production must be
done at a smaller scale. GOPA works with one certified organic
shelling facility and one certified organic blanching facility,
which is limiting and risky. In 2019, when the cooperative
formally incorporated, the one certified organic peanut sheller
was still inoperative from Hurricane Michael in October 2018,
our first experience with issues of a limited supply chain.
This past year post-harvest processing was so bottlenecked that
we have only in the past week been able to sell the first part
of our 2020 crop. That is a long gap for us to pay farmers for
their crop without the ability to sell it.
Investment, specifically in rural infrastructure, to
support local supply chains is critical. For certified organic
supply chains, this includes support and incentives for
certification. While GOPA has been able to tap into several
local markets within Georgia, expanding into small- and mid-
scale markets, both within the Southeast and outside of peanut
producing regions, has been an obstacle. In fact, last year
GOPA's Chairman was on a plane to California to attend a
natural products expo when the event was canceled due to COVID.
GOPA also has a great demand for, but cannot serve, local
direct consumer requests. GOPA submitted an unsuccessful 2020
FMPP proposal to explore a pathway for roasting, packaging,
marketing to meet these direct consumer demands. While the
positive feedback was hopeful, reviewers didn't fully
understand the supply chain and commodity production basics. We
have seen this pattern repeat for other regional commodity
markets, such as another rejected LFPP grant in southeast
Georgia focused on small- to mid-scale blueberry supply chain
development to serve local markets. Feedback included similar
misunderstandings of small rural supply chains.
Projects focused in rural areas, specifically areas of
persistent poverty, should be a priority funding area for LAMP
programs, and geographic representation and transparency on
review panels to ensure there is rural and farmer
representation is critical. GOPA has also applied for a Value-
Added Producer Grant to expand to unmet markets. The reduced
cost-share requirement through COVID-19 relief funding made the
opportunity within reach during a time of production
bottleneck. In the regular value-added producer process
recipients have to spend money for a 50 percent reimbursement.
This can require significant cash flow that can be limiting. I
urge the Subcommittee to consider permanent reduced cost-share
requirements for this program for eligible groups, such as
socially disadvantaged and beginning farmers and small farmer
cooperatives.
GOPA also aims to continue to grow the supply to meet this
demand by providing an entry point into agriculture for new and
beginning farmers in rural areas. My husband and I wouldn't
have been able to take the leap into starting our own farm
business without the mentorship and market support we found
through the farmer network within GOPA. In 2020 GOPA received a
Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Planning Grant to
develop a formal mentorship model, and aims to provide other
direct support to member farmers.
Farmers are resilient. In the face of natural disaster,
extreme weather events, fluctuating markets, and now a global
pandemic, resilience in the supply chain is critical, and it
starts at the farm level. Small, big, conventional, organic,
local, global, this principle holds true across the board, that
without stewardship of our natural resources and building
healthy and sustainable farms, local agricultural economies
suffer, supply chains suffer. Investing in conservation
research and on-farm conservation programs is a win for all of
agriculture. Research funding through USDA NIFA, SARE,
Conservation Innovation Grants through NRCS are all critical
for the development of proven and farmer-trusted practices and
technologies that promote conservation and improve farm
profitability and efficiency.
Programs that offset costs to adopt these practices, such
as EQIP, RCPP, and CRP are also critical. My work through the
Soil and Water Conservation District has allowed me to see
firsthand the direct on-farm benefit of several of these
programs. Our supply chain should value the environmental
benefits of farms that meaningfully implement conservation
practices, and directly reward farmers for conservation and
sustainability. If there is one thing I have learned in the
last 16 months, it is that our supply chains are not virtual.
We can't farm from home. I am excited to be a part of a
community in south Georgia that aims to emerge from these
challenges stronger than before, with clear opportunities for
improvement, and I appreciate the Subcommittee's interest and
dedication to enhancing the strength and resiliency of our
local supply chains. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Cooper follows:]
Prepared Statement of Perri Cooper, Director, Georgia Organic Peanut
Association; Executive Director, Flint River Soil and Water
Conservation District, Americus, GA
Chair Plaskett, Ranking Member Baird, and Subcommittee Members,
thank you for allowing me to testify before you today.
My name is Perri Cooper and I am incredibly lucky to work with a
diverse set of agricultural stakeholders across south Georgia and to be
here representing them today.
I am the Director of the Georgia Organic Peanut Association (GOPA),
a farmer-owned agricultural cooperative that markets USDA Certified
Organic peanuts and other agricultural products from producers in the
Southeast. The cooperative's mission is to bring added value to
established farming operations, and to create new opportunities for
small, beginning, and limited-resource producers. GOPA's membership is
small, but it markets organic commodities from any farmer in the
region.
I also have the privilege to work as Executive Director of the
Flint River Soil and Water Conservation District in southwest Georgia.
The FRSWCD serves farmers, landowners, partners, and citizens by
facilitating the transfer of conservation-driven technology and
widespread implementation across southwest Georgia and beyond, acting
as a grassroots leader and local voice for stewardship of natural
resources.
After years of legwork, meetings, trials, research, and endless
discussion, GOPA was formally incorporated in the late spring of 2019.
The grower-owned and operated cooperative consists of a mix of small
farms including both experienced organic farmers and several beginning
farmers; some of these members growing organically for the first time.
These farmers recognized that, without assuming outrageous financial
risk, no single one of them could produce sufficient volume to supply
small to mid-scale niche and local markets for Certified Organic
peanuts. Rather, collective marketing would make it possible to tap
into these markets. As a result, we've been able to sell Certified
Organic peanuts to five small craft food manufacturers in Georgia, and
have continued to grow in terms of the number farmers and Certified
Organic acres since incorporation.
Growth has not been without challenges. Many of the experienced
organic row crop farmers were successfully producing Certified Organic
peanuts in the late 2000's thanks to innovative research from retired
[USDA]-ARS weed scientist Dr. W. Carroll Johnson III and breeders and
pathologists at the University of Georgia. However, once the peanuts
left the farm they lost Certified Organic status and associated price
premium because of the lack of supply chain.
In order to maintain certification integrity, each step of post-
harvest processing and value-add must also be certified. For a crop
like peanuts, which has a shell and a skin and must be dug out of the
ground, this post-harvest means buying, cleaning, shelling, blanching,
roasting, and more. Georgia, the top peanut producing state in the
country, produced over 3.2 billion pounds of peanuts last year, and the
processing supply chain is at scale to match this impressive
production, with innovative technologies and efficiencies. For
comparison, Certified Organic production made up 0.06% of this total
last year, which is in nowhere near the volume to demand the time,
work, or achieve the added value for the shelling, blanching, and
roasting facilities to go through the certification process.
Inherently, Certified Organic production must be done at a smaller
scale. Therefore, options are more limited and identifying similar
scale supply chain has been critical. GOPA works with one certified
organic shelling facility, and one certified organic blanching
facility.
This presents a risk without the added threat of the COVID-19
pandemic. Today, I am here sharing challenges specifically faced during
the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. But, in 2019, when the cooperative
formally incorporated, the one Certified Organic peanut sheller was
still decimated and in-operative from Hurricane Michael in October
2018, our first experience with the issues of a limited supply chain.
This past year, post-harvest processing was so bottle necked, in
large part due to impacts from the pandemic and subsequent reduced
capacity, that we have only in the past week been able to sell the
first part of our 2020 crop, which was harvested in October and
November of last year. That is a long gap for a small farmer-owned
start up to pay farmers for their crop without the ability to sell it.
But since the beginning, our farmers have believed that Certified
Organic is promising market and have taken on this risk, waiting on the
supply chain to catch up.
Investment specifically in rural infrastructure to support local
supply chains is critical. For Certified Organic supply chains this
includes support and incentives for certification.
This sentiment goes beyond the work of GOPA. Despite the City of
Albany in southwest Georgia named as the fourth worst hit U.S. city by
COVID on a per capita basis in April 2020, and the high rates of
poverty in the largely rural region, relief programs such as the
Farmers to Families Food Box Program did not tangibly impact the city
or surrounding area in the same way it did the urban hub of Atlanta.
This left the nonprofit arm of the FRSWCD to develop our own box
program with support from local farmers and businesses, even without
post-harvest and supply chain infrastructure. Would this small-scale
infrastructure that supports local food systems have allowed food hubs
that typically serve the more populous urban areas of the state to
reach a community in need? Or even expand the impact of our own
grassroots work to address the obvious gap?
While GOPA has been able to tap into local markets within Georgia,
peanut production is very region-specific. Craft food manufacturers
outside of this region that serve their own local communities simply
can't source local Certified Organic peanuts. And frankly, where the
southeast lags behind in Certified Organic infrastructure, other
regions have increased capacity. GOPA has seen interest to meet this
market need, which would expand GOPA's opportunities and diversify
markets. However, when marketing efforts in earnest began in 2020, the
cooperatives first full year of operation, they were soon derailed. In
fact, GOPA's chairman was on an airplane to California to attend a
natural products expo when the event was canceled. Even untapped local
markets here in the Southeast have been inaccessible in this same time.
These relationships are built organically--no pun intended--through
industry events, meetings, conferences, and workshops. The groundwork
for GOPA itself was born from an impromptu lunch meeting at a
conference for organic farmers. The importance of these person-to-
person interactions can't be overstated.
GOPA has relied heavily on digital marketing (website and Google
ads, primarily) since inception. In that time, has been inundated with
requests from individuals seeking Georgia-grown Certified Organic
peanut products. Requests in the range of 1 to 10 pound volumes of raw
and roasted nuts from local individuals looking for peanuts for their
own personal use has been significant. This is not something we are set
up to offer--again requiring post-harvest infrastructure and logistics
that do not exist for a small, Certified Organic local supply chain in
our area. GOPA has pursued some grant programs to innovate and offset
some costs associated with supply chain development and exploring new
markets. This includes a 2020 Farmers['] Market Production Program
proposal which developed a pathway for roasting, packaging and
marketing to meet these direct-to-consumer demands.
Last year, the LFPP/FMPP program under the 2018 Farm Bill Local
Agriculture Market Program received over 400 applications, highlighting
the great need for innovative programs that support local food systems.
Less than \1/4\ were funded, which did not include GOPA's proposal.
While the positive feedback was hopeful--clear project with
straightforward objectives and good management plan--the weaknesses
mentioned included overly ambitious sales goals and a confusion about
the reference of marketing rotational crops as an objective within this
particular project. Ultimately, it is difficult for the applicant to
package these proposals in succinct language.
I mentioned earlier the relatively small fraction Certified Organic
production make up in Georgia's vast and diverse agricultural
landscape. But to GOPA's small farmers, that 0.06% of the state's total
peanut production is everything. And it's growing. We've seen
incredible interest in not only Certified Organic peanut production,
but also in production of rotational crops that GOPA markets through
the cooperative. This offers not only diversified market opportunities
for established farmers, but an entry point for small and beginning
farmers, like myself.
Marketing can't happen without the production of high quality
Certified Organic peanuts. This addresses another critical aspect of
the supply chain issue--the supply. The blend of beginning and
experienced farmers that make up GOPA's membership is no coincidence.
At the root of GOPA's formation was a recognition that a specialized
skill set was critical to successful production of Certified Organic
crops, peanuts in particular, and it needed to be shared with new and
beginning farmers. In 2020, GOPA received a Beginning Farmer and
Rancher Development Planning Grant to develop a formal mentorship
model, in hopes that it would create an entry point for the many
beginning farmers that were interested in joining GOPA. GOPA doesn't
currently produce enough peanuts to supply current and emerging markets
and creating opportunity for beginning farmers and other small farmers
seeking to diversify their operations is critical to this success.
The pandemic impacted this BFRD Planning Grant and the opportunity
for growth significantly. While GOPA has grown in both acreage and
farmers each year, 2020 significantly slowed the rate of that progress.
In short, without in-person meetings, targeted outreach, and
facilitated opportunities for farmer-to-farmer learning, we haven't
been as successful in meaningfully engaging new farmers as we hoped,
despite pivoting to virtual and other limited outreach.
Each of these grant programs mentioned are key programs that offer
meaningful opportunities for small-scale local supply chains and should
be authorized in future farm bill. However, BFRDG and FMPP/LFPP
specifically can often favor projects focused on mixed specialty crops
in urban areas, leaving other commodities, rural communities and
farmers overlooked. Projects focused in rural areas, specifically areas
of persistent poverty, should be a priority funding area for BFRDG and
LFPP/FMPP. And geographic representation and transparency on BFRDG and
FMPP/LFPP review panels by ensuring there are rural and farmer
representatives is critical.
This year, GOPA has also applied for Value-Added Producer Grant,
another key program that allows farmers to generate new agricultural
products and expand marketing opportunities. The reduced cost-share
requirement through COVID-19 relief funding made the opportunity within
reach during a time of production bottle neck; I urge this Subcommittee
to consider permanent reduced cost-share requirements for this program
for certain eligible groups, including socially disadvantaged and
beginning farmers, and small farmer cooperatives.
Farmers, by nature, are resilient. In the face of natural disaster,
extreme weather events, fluctuating markets, and, now, a global
pandemic. Resilience in the supply chain is critical, and it starts at
the farm level. Small, big, conventional, organic, local, global--this
principle holds true across the board. That without stewardship of our
natural resources and building healthy and sustainable farms, local
agricultural economies and supply chains suffer. Period.
Since 2004, the FRSWCD has secured over $24 million in targeted
conservation funding through programs that directly benefit farmers and
improve economic and environmental sustainability--the foundation of a
healthy and resilient supply chain. Programs like the USDA Conservation
Innovation Grant resulted in the development of center pivot irrigation
technologies in partnership with growers, contractors and research that
improve irrigation water use efficiency, integrated them into
commercial operations, and are now adopted globally. The FRSWCD has
also successfully implemented several other research and RCPP projects,
providing direct technical assistance and on-farm implementation
funding towards proven conservation practices. For example, in
partnership with the USDA National Peanut Research Lab, the District
worked to develop a smart phone mobile app from the Peanut Lab's
desktop peanut irrigation scheduling tool, IrrigatorPro. The District
the worked with local extension to cost-share soil moisture sensor and
app adoption over 50 peanut fields in the lower Flint River Basin. This
research is imperative and benefits all farms, including small farms
that serve local food systems.
Investing in conservation research and on-farm conservation
programs is a win for all of agriculture. Research funding through USDA
NIFA, Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education, and Conservation
Innovation Grants through NRCS are critical for production of science-
backed and farmer-trusted practices and technologies that promote
conservation and improve farm profitability and efficiency. Adoption of
these programs are also key, and NRCS programs that cost-share
implementation of conservation practices, including EQIP, RCPP, and
Conservation Reserve programs are a critical component of this.
Our supply chain should also value the environmental benefits of
farms that meaningfully implement conservation practices. This includes
maintaining integrity of the National Organic Program, and ensuring the
development of any environmental markets has diverse representation and
input from stakeholders across a diversity of geography, crop, and
scale.
If there is one thing I have learned during the past 16 months, it
that our supply chains aren't virtual, we can't farm from home. I'm
excited to be a part of a community in south Georgia that aims to
emerge from these challenges stronger than before, with clear
opportunities for improvement, and appreciate this Subcommittee's
interest and dedication to enhancing the strength and resiliency of our
local supply chains and local farm economies.
Thank you.
The Chair. Thank you, Ms. Cooper. Ms. Kennedy, please
begin.
STATEMENT OF TIANNA KENNEDY, OWNER/OPERATOR, STAR ROUTE FARM;
FOUNDER/OPERATOR, THE 607 CSA; BOARD MEMBER, CENTER FOR
AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT & ENTREPRENEURSHIP, WORCESTER, NY
Ms. Kennedy. Thank you for this opportunity to share
experience as a young farmer today. I know that you all have
received a copy of the testimony, so I will just focus on a
couple of quick things. But before I do that, I also would just
like to talk about the resiliency, strength, and innovation of
all of us small-scale producers, such as the other witnesses
and myself, and in order to encourage you to adapt your
programs to our needs. My name is Tianna Kennedy. I operate a
full diet multi-farm CSA that last year served 800 families in
New York City and in the Catskills, but we also work with 50
restaurants and grocers and 21 pantries and food justice
organizations throughout New York. I also grow mixed vegetables
and small grains on 60 rented acres at Star Route Farm in
Charlotteville, New York. I have been farming in Delaware and
Otsego Counties in New York for over a decade.
My experience farming has been shaped by a lack of access
to secure farmland to grow my business. I apprenticed first for
a large vegetable operation for 3 years, but I was burdened by
student loan debt, and I was making a farmer's wages, so I
wasn't able to buy a business--my own farm right away. I helped
a second homeowner start his organic farm on his property, but
when he pivoted his business model, I lost my job and my home,
and had to start from scratch again. So finally I found a farm
partner willing to form an LLC with me, and we rented 60 acres
and broke ground on our current farm, Star Route Farm, which I
now run with Walter Riesen and Amanda Wong. But because we only
had a 10 year lease on that farm, we were unable to put in
permanent fencing, and build out an adequate wash/pack/cooler
station, so we lose about 30 percent of our vegetables to deer
annually and scale our business due to lack of cooler space and
storage space.
This past winter we were finally able to purchase our
neighbor's property with the help of Local Farms Fund
investors, but the property is an old conventional dairy, and
has a dilapidated--actually collapsed barn and farmhouse that
will take years to rebuild and transition to organic
production. However, despite all these challenges, and despite
access to land and access to capital until this year, I worked
collaboratively with other farms throughout my region to
develop creative solutions to these challenges. To mitigate
risk and create market advantage to my own farm, I convinced my
farmers' market buddies to join me in a multi-farm CSA venture
we call The 607 CSA. It now grows 30 to 50 percent annually.
The CSA serves as an integral part--proof of concept for an
organization that can fill in the logistics, gaps, and address
the needs of regional small agriculture.
Last year, before our normal season began, we were faced
with the COVID-19 pandemic. Our whole business had to change in
an instant. Within 2 weeks we had a fully operational business
with 45 local farms and food businesses home delivering to 40
Catskills towns. Though I am proud of the work that we were
able to do in scaling up to support the community, we had to
take on all of the risk, and weren't able to meet the actual
demand at hand because we lacked funding to purchase emergency
relief food from our farmers, or even to pay our staff
adequately. Everybody was volunteering time to drive food to
people's homes.
For myself, and other farm businesses who share my needs, I
want to offer these recommendations for the Committee today.
CSAs are an important piece of the puzzle, especially for young
and beginning farmers, so it would be great to support them.
Our member farmers need help with strategic planning and
identifying new opportunities. Congress could help by funding
outreach and technical assistance to regional food businesses
and organizations such as myself to formalize and scale. For
us, it is time to purchase or lease a refrigerated truck and
our own pallet jack or two, and there is not a USDA program
that allows for a lot of this kind of infrastructure
development beyond FSA microloans, so I would love to see items
like this included in programs like VAPG, the Local Food
Promotion Program, and the Regional Food Systems Partnerships.
We need streamlined access--and accessible--USDA programs.
The application process is burdensome and extremely academic.
It is its own culture. The applications are often timed during
our busiest season, June, and require burdensome funding
matches, as my colleagues have explained. The match
requirements can also exclude smaller projects and historically
underserved communities that do not have access to this sort of
funding. It would help to have USDA prioritize LAMP grant
applications that serve targeted communities, like those of
beginning farmers and BIPOC producers. To get the word out
about USDA programs, USDA needs dedicated outreach staff, and
to enter into more cooperative agreements to do outreach.
Finally, the Farmers to Families Food Box Program in the
pandemic showed what is possible when the USDA invests in
connecting farmers with food-insecure communities. We need to
continue this type of government support. The first round of
funding was successful to small farmers and small distributors,
and paid these entities a good price to sell to those in need.
In the future, more long-term programs like this could be
created. I suggest that if they are: reserve dedicated funds
for BIPOC nonprofits and food businesses; consider removing GAP
requirements so smaller producers can contribute, because,
remember, a lot of people are using rented land; and publish a
best practices guide to recruit BIPOC and young farmer
distributors for participating in the program. I want to note
that however accessible USDA programs can be, they are harder
for people that don't have the resources I do. Thank you so
much for your time.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Kennedy follows:]
Prepared Statement of Tianna Kennedy, Owner/Operator, Star Route Farm;
Founder/Operator, The 607 CSA; Board Member, Center for Agricultural
Development & Entrepreneurship, Worcester, NY
Good morning, Committee Chair Delegate Stacey Plaskett and Ranking
Member Jim Baird, the rest of the Committee and Staff. Thank you for
this opportunity to share my experiences as a young farmer, operator of
a multi-farm CSA The 607 CSA, Board member of the Center for
Agricultural Development & Entrepreneurship (CADE), and member of the
National Young Farmers Coalition.
My name is Tianna Kennedy and I operate a full-diet, multi-farm
community-supported agriculture (CSA) that serves 800 families in New
York City and the Catskills. I grow mixed vegetables and small grains
on 60 rented acres at Star Route Farm in Charlotteville, New York. I
have been farming in Delaware and Otsego Counties of New York for over
a decade. My experience farming has been shaped by a lack of access for
secure farmland to grow my business. I apprenticed for 3 years before
starting my own business, but because I was paid a farmer's wages
(minimum wage), I was unable to save enough to buy my own farm. I
helped a second-home owner start an organic farm on his property, but
he pivoted business models and, in the process, I lost my job and home.
I then formed an LLC with my current farm partner and broke land on our
current rented property, but I've been unable to put up permanent
fencing or build out a viable wash/pack/cooler station since we only
have a 10 year lease on the farm (where the landlord currently lives).
We subsequently lose 30-40 percent of vegetables to deer annually and
are unable to scale our business due to lack of cooler space. This past
winter, we were finally able to purchase our neighbor's property with
the help of Local Farm Fund investors, but the property is conventional
dairy land and comes with a collapsed barn and a run-down old
farmhouse, and will take years to rebuild and to transition to organic
production.
Despite not having secure access to land, or access to capital
until this year, I have worked collaboratively with farmers throughout
my region to develop creative solutions to the challenges we face
growing healthy food for market.
I was unable to finance our farm startup in a traditional manner
due to my debt-to-income ratio (student loan debt and farmworker
wages), so we started a CSA in 2015 to buy seeds and pay for labor in
the spring before we were able to harvest crops. To mitigate risk and
create market advantage, I convinced my farmers['] market friends to
join us in a multi-farm CSA venture we call The 607 CSA. It grows by
30-50 percent annually. It's become clear that the work of The 607 CSA
serves as an integral proof of concept for an organization that can
fill in the logistics gaps and address the needs of regional small
agriculture. We've discovered that the logistics of moving food from
field to fork are insurmountable for many small farms to manage on
their own, and so, multi-farm collaborations for aggregation and
distribution are not only a creative solution but also a necessary one
and should be supported through USDA programs.
Social Impact Metrics
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farms Supported 15 16 17 17 25 45
Families Served 101 167 212 240 453 834
(CSA Members)
Distribution Sites 14 15 17 19 21 50
Crew 0 0 0 1 2 10
Subsidized Shares 0 0 1 5 10 17k
------------------------------------------------------------------------
27 throughout the year.
Worth to Social Justice Programs.
* 2020 Survey indicates 3.2 people per share.
Last year before our normal season began, we were faced with the
COVID-19 pandemic. Our neighbors were confined to houses and grocery
store shelves were bare. Through the CSA, we put out the call to our
local farms to begin a pre-season home-delivery a-la-carte market for
our frightened house-bound Catskills community. Our whole business had
to change in an instant. Within 2 weeks we had a fully operational
business with 45 local farm and food businesses delivering to 40
Catskills towns. The work was terrifying: at the beginning we came
close to running out of personal protective equipment (PPE) and each
delivery felt like a run to Mars. We volunteered time, because we were
concerned about feeding our rural neighbors and our business model
could not support the hours of driving that entailed. We were
overwhelmed by the needs of the community, scared for our own lives,
and afraid of infecting people when dropping off produce (before we
learned the virus was airborne and unlikely to be transmitted through
touch). Though we put out calls for help to local ag nonprofits, we
received barely any funding to support our work (CADE did find us a
source of PPE, paid for the software we onboarded for this market, and
helped pay for one administrative support position for a month).
We created a program within our CSA for the wealthier members to
support those in need, which helped, but barely scratched the surface
of the demand we faced. Though I'm proud of the work we were able to
do, in trying to scale up to support the community, we had to take on
all of the risk and weren't able to meet the actual demand at hand
because we lacked funding to purchase emergency relief food from our
farmers, or to pay our staff adequately. Farmers who are meeting the
needs of the public shouldn't have to shoulder all of the burden of
transitioning to meet the need.
We feel that The 607 CSA succeeds by:
Providing a market and trucking logistics for Sustainable
Small-Scale Family Farms in a geographically disadvantaged
region. Creating a market in an otherwise unprofitable
agricultural region helps to ensure the current farmland stays
in production while providing incentive for young farmers to
set up operations.
Providing organic, nutrient-dense, full-diet, affordable
local food to over 800 Catskills and NYC residents.
Performing as a regional foodshed model promoting scale
through collaboration rather than the proven unsustainable and
expensive scaling of individual operations.
Launching a food sovereignty project in 2020 in
collaboration with local nonprofit organizations providing the
same organic, nutrient-dense food to pantries, food justice
orgs, and emergency food projects like Free Fridges in the
Catskills and NYC.
Working as an agile network, able to mobilize rapidly during
emergencies as demonstrated last spring at the onset of the
COVID-19 pandemic. The admin team, supported by the CSA's
network of farms, launched an entirely new local home-delivery
business model within a 2 week span in March 2020. The quick
start up included 42 farms and served 40 towns in Delaware,
Otsego, and Schoharie Counties.
Providing flexible employment for local residents. In 2020,
the CSA employed 27 people when many had lost other work.
Growing steadily by word-of-mouth.
Practicing inclusive decision-making. Decisions are made by
consensus between farms and CSA crew members and the admin
team's working groups informed by a series of annual surveys
and, importantly, ongoing conversations.
Making way for a Black, Indigenous, and People of Color
(BIPOC)-led future. In the interim, we are on a path towards
inclusion, listening, learning, engaging, and responding.
The 607 struggles in the following ways:
It exists in a false economy in competition with larger,
subsidized commodity farms, masking the real value of food. The
market will never allow for the margins to provide living wages
for employees, payroll taxes, health insurance, vacation, or
retirement plans.
Trucking is very expensive and warehousing is precarious.
We've maxed out our local farm storage capacities upstate, have
had to hire a third-party trucker from Vermont to take the food
from the Catskills to the city, and the future of last-mile
delivery is uncertain in the city where warehousing is
incredibly expensive, and last-mile logistics are even more so
once you get there.
The business model has evolved organically as locations and
members have requested to join. The result is a far-flung
network and inefficiency in trucking.
Unable to meet demand for food-insecure and continually
marginalized communities now that the USDA food box program has
ended. While before we were filling in the gaps, we are now
being asked to provide the bulk of the food. We have the farms,
packers, logistics, and transportation, but lack funding to
actually support production and distribution.
In order to become an organization that can scale to meet the needs
of our communities and to sustain our operations in perpetuity the CSA
needs the following:
Strategic planning to identify partners for 2021, develop
the food sovereignty projects, and consider the potential of a
new 501[(c)(3)] status. Congress could help by funding
dedicated Rural Development office staff, non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) and extension staff to conduct outreach
and provide technical assistance to regional food businesses
and organizations like ours to formalize and scale.
Vertically integrated Infrastructure--It is time to purchase
or lease a refrigerated truck and our own pallet jack (or two).
There is not a USDA program that allows for a lot of this kind
of infrastructure development beyond FSA micro loans, so I
would love to see items like these be included in programs like
the Value-Added Producer Grants (VAPG), the Local Food
Promotion Program (LFPP), and the Regional Food Systems
Partnerships (RFSP):
New e-commerce platforms.
Personal protective equipment.
Packaging and labeling materials.
Signage.
Food safety practice upgrades.
Food safety certification.
COVID-19 testing materials and services.
Dry or cold storage, as well as other equipment and
upgrades.
Hand washing equipment and materials.
Cleaning supplies.
Temperature screening equipment.
Food delivery costs (fuel and maintenance).
Expanding or restructuring processing lines.
Purchasing or leasing temporary space or holding pens.
Transportation services or equipment.
Staff time for implementing COVID-19 shifts,
protocols, etc.
Other measures to protect workers, or aid in
preventing the spread of, COVID-19, including providing for
worker transportation, housing, and childcare.
Streamlined and accessible USDA programs.
Federal programs like the VAPG and LFPP support local and
regional food projects, but they are not accessible to working
farmers. Farmers like us who have innovated creative and
practical solutions to feed our local communities do not
benefit from the programs designed to help. The application
process is burdensome and extremely academic and even with a
Master's Degree in writing, I did not succeed in securing an
LFPP when I applied in 2020. The match requirements also
exclude smaller projects and historically underserved
communities who do not have access to additional funding. I
urge Congress and the USDA to streamline applications, extend
the deadlines particularly during the growing season to winter
months, and eliminate the match requirement.
Farmers do not have dedicated grant-writing staff acculturated to
the weighted requirements and other non-explicit intricacies of
successful grant writing, nor do they have time to write multi-
page essays expounding the many virtues of their proposed
projects. They are too busy growing food, adding value to that
food, and running their businesses. Nevertheless, farmers
deserve all the security and support their well-staffed
nonprofit colleagues receive from successfully written USDA
grants as they are the people shouldering the bulk of the work
and assuming the majority of the risk. It is important to
mention that a more-streamlined/simplified granting culture
might also improve the quality of the projects and services
provided. A simplified funding protocol might allow for more
flexible deliverables, which is increasingly imperative in our
current reality. Federal funding needs to be able to quickly
adapt to new issues as they pop up including: social unrest,
political strife, weather events and natural disasters
(including pandemics) brought about by climate change. COVID-19
a great example of one such emergency, a more-flexible funding
culture, could have been adapted to address.
In addition, I urge USDA to commit to prioritizing the ranking of
all Local Agriculture Market Program (LAMP) grant applications
that are submitted by, or intend to serve, beginning farmers or
ranchers, socially disadvantaged farmers or ranchers, operators
of small or medium-sized farms or ranches that are structured
as family farms, and veteran farmers or ranchers.
I urge USDA to provide dedicated staff and enter into cooperative
agreements to help conduct additional outreach and technical
assistance for the VAPG program; train State Rural Development
office staff about the program; and support non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) and extension staff conducting outreach
and assistance for the program. Prioritize providing additional
outreach and technical assistance to underserved communities,
tribal communities, and for socially disadvantaged farmers and
ranchers.
I am a farmer, and a business owner, but am also involved in the
regional agricultural conversation: Through my work at CADE, I have
seen how Federal dollars can have a positive impact on regional food
systems:
From what information I have readily available, we have seen a
total of $1.4M invested by USDA in central NY through CADE since 2015,
and another $600,000 that has gone directly to farmers (thank you!),
which would total $2M. Here is a very broad strokes breakdown of the
$2M:
Nearly $600,000 in direct grants allocated to central NY
farmers for business development and marketing via VAPG or RBDG
since 2017, including for value-added dairy.
More than $1.3M in funding to support aggregation,
distribution, and marketing products of central NY farmers via
LFPP since 2015--which resulted in an 117% increase in sales
for agribusinesses. This includes our most recent LFPP grant
for our Emerging Markets Training Program which includes
support for Headwaters Food Hub, Common Market, and Upstate
Growers and Packers as hubs.
$100,000 for strengthening the supply chain to expand farm-
to-school local food purchasing via Food and Nutrition Program
since 2018
In this year alone, CADE received $100k for distance learning that
enabled us to support COVID rapid response. Our Farm & Food Business
Incubator which is funded through state and Federal funds, supported in
1 year 309 farm and food businesses through online workshops and one-
on-one advising and helped 11 new beginning farmers enter local/
regional production--100 percent of whom were socially disadvantaged.
In 2015, The VAPG helped develop the Lucky Dog Hub, in Hamden, New
York. With VAPG funds, CADE hired a consultant to help organize the
HUB, and bought critical infrastructure of a pallet jack and walk-in
cooler. Though Lucky Dog Farm no longer runs the hub, The 607 CSA has
taken on the role and we are still using that infrastructure today.
But while CADE succeeds, the inaccessibility to USDA programs is
even greater for ``socially disadvantaged farmers''--farmers of color
who have even less access to the matching requirements, and ability to
take the time to complete the application. USDA should actively conduct
outreach to and recruit Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC)
producers and organizations for grant review panels and USDA advisory
committees and strive to ensure that the final makeup of committees and
review panels reflects the diversity of the constituencies working in
agriculture. We ask Congress to allocate more resources to provide
technical assistance and outreach to BIPOC producers and organizations
wishing to apply for programs across the food chain like VAPG, LFPP and
RFSP.
At CADE, we are not seeing Federal money go toward building or
securing land access for the next generation of farmers and ranchers,
most especially to BIPOC beginning farmers who have the least access to
affordable, secure farmland. We would love to see Federal dollars go
towards the purchase of public and private land to be made available to
young farmers and farmers of color. Land prices are skyrocketing in the
Catskills as wealthy people flee New York City--land was prohibitively
expensive before COVID but is now much worse.
Also, CADE is working to create equity in agriculture but keeps
running up against extreme racism in communities that scare off BIPOC
beginning farmers. We need resources for culture change and public
dialogue to create safe communities for multiculturalism to exist here.
It's hard when our country's divisions and deep seeded racism is
playing out so much in rural spaces. But this kind of work is not
considered part of agriculture. USDA needs to think more holistically
to support diverse new entrants to agriculture.
The Farmers to Families Food Box Program in the pandemic showed
what is possible if USDA invests in connecting farmers with food-
insecure communities. We need to continue this type of government
support. The first round, before subsequent changes, was accessible to
small farmers and small distributors, and paid these entities a good
price to sell to those in need.
If a future, more long-term program was to be created like Farmers
to Families Food Box Program, I suggest that it:
Require that at least 20 percent of dedicated funds be
reserved for BIPOC nonprofits and food businesses, especially
those with proven experience working with BIPOC producers and
communities.
Remove the Good Agriculture Practices certificate
requirement to be a producer participating in the program, so
that smaller producers growing good, clean, nutrient-dense
food, but without resources to modernize production facilities,
might also contribute to the program.
Publish regional lists of small- and mid-sized, and
minority- and women-owned farms qualified to be subcontractors
in the program or enact a matching program across contractors
and producers.
Evaluate bid prices based on historic and reasonable costs
for a particular farm, producer, or distribution operation in
order to ensure that small and specialty farms are adequately
compensated.
Set a goal of subcontracting with small- and mid-sized, and
minority- and women-owned farms with distributing to minority-
led nonprofits as primary goals of the program, aligning all
procurement processes and messaging accordingly, and tracking
progress toward these goals.
Publish a best practices guide to recruit BIPOC and young
farmers for distributors participating in the program.
A list of The 607 CSA/Star Route Farm Food Justice Partners who are
asking The 607 CSA to take up the slack of the USDA FOOD BOX Program
(21k already donated by CSA members in 2021, but we're running out of
funds).
NYC
St. John's Bread and Life: Every day, Bread & Life serves thousands
of meals to hungry New Yorkers.
Bushwick Ayuda Mutua: A grassroots network of volunteers providing
groceries and household staples to residents in Bushwick, Brooklyn with
an emphasis on serving undocumented people, low-income families with
children and those sick or positive to COVID-19, serving 200 families a
week.
Guanabana Collective: Guanabana serves as a collective dedicated to
centering the voices of Black folks with Antillean roots including the
Greater and Lesser Antilles.
Heart of Dinner: A nonprofit organization that fundraises to
provide cooked-meals and groceries to 1,000 elderly-community of
Chinatown, Manhattan.
Woodbine: Woodbine is an experimental hub in Ridgewood, Queens for
developing the practices, skills, and tools needed to build autonomy.
Woodbine serves around a thousand people each week.
Wat Buddha Thai Thavorn Vanaram: Wat Buddha Thai Thavorn Vanaram is
a Buddhist temple in Elmhurst, Queens. We work with them to do
occasional distribution for 100 residents.
Catskills
Delaware Opportunities: A nonprofit serving Delaware County, New
York residents with emergency food and economic relief, school
supplies, and home deliveries. The CSA works with Delaware Opportunity
to provide 77 food boxes a month composed of organic: veggies, milk,
ground beef, eggs, and bread. Together we distribute to families in
Delaware County. We are actively fundraising to increase the number
served.
Pantries Organized with a generous grant from CADE Farms:
Burlington Flats Food Pantry Richfield Springs Food Pantry
Community Cupboard Unadilla Community Food Pantry
Cooperstown Food Pantry Worcester Food Pantry
Delaware Opportunity Helping Hands Food Pantry
Greater Franklin Food Pantry FDT Maryland
Loaves & Fishes Food Pantry Milford Food Pantry
Thank you for your time and your support! It's a pleasure to share
our work feeding our neighbors with you. I look forward to
participating in future USDA programs!
Tianna Kennedy.
The Chair. Thank you very much for that. And Mr. Shannon,
please begin when you are ready.
STATEMENT OF JONATHAN SHANNON, NICHE MARKET
LIVESTOCK PRODUCER, SHANNON FAMILY FARMS LLC, CRAWFORDSVILLE,
IN; ACCOMPANIED BY KELLY SHANNON, NICHE MARKET LIVESTOCK
PRODUCER, SHANNON FAMILY FARMS LLC
Mr. Shannon. Chair Plaskett and Ranking Member Baird, thank
you for allowing us to join this discussion today. Kelly and I
are both fully involved in our day-to-day operations of our
small niche livestock market in town, where those products end
up in the end-consumer's hand throughout our community and
beyond. We have submitted some written testimony. I would like
to just cover some of the highlights from there, and tell a
little bit of our story.
Kelly returned to rural Montgomery County in 2003 after
graduating college, and a year later I joined her by purchasing
our 10 acre farm, less than 1 mile from where she grew up. As
most farm families, land and profits were too tight to add more
family members to the operation, so we both took off-farm jobs.
As time passed, we were forced to find what our niche was to
make our farm profitable. At the young age of 26 we began
Shannon Family Farms, with little knowledge of our local
markets or opportunities available through the USDA. The goal
was to produce proteins for local consumers and provide buying
options for the community.
A few years later, 70 adjoining acres became available to
us. As beginning teachers on beginning teacher salaries, many
lending institutions would not even entertain a conversation
about purchasing those 70 acres, so we were not able to obtain
that land, and had to regroup and decide how will we be most
profitable on 10 acres? We had no knowledge of beginning
farmers or ranchers loans through the USDA at that time, but
would self-fund our 10 acres and become profitable. We would
become a beef, pork, poultry, and egg producer, and deal with
the end-consumer.
From 2006 to 2016 we formed our own agricultural market
through our on-farm sales, through attending farmers' markets
in surrounding areas, and working with Indiana Grown through
the Indiana State Department of Agriculture. Finally, in 2016,
we hit a roadblock with market opportunities. Based on this
dilemma, we could continue being a small producer, or expanding
into a year-round retail business model. Thankfully, there were
other like-minded producers in the community that faced some of
the same barriers, and we made an effort to find a solution to
those reduced market opportunities. Ranking Member Baird
mentioned that we started Four Seasons Local Market. That is a
cooperative of a few small producers for a year-round retail
storefront that sits on Main Street in historic downtown
Crawfordsville. We offer locally produced products from the
community and across the state. This market is vibrant, and a
weekly meeting place of local food consumers who purchase
products from local farm families.
Our official interactions with the USDA began in July 2020,
almost 14 years after we had begun our small operation. The
reason for the encounter was for the Coronavirus Food
Assistance Program during COVID-19. Why had it taken us 14
years to discover some of the economic opportunities available
to the USDA? We believe that services were mostly offered and
benefitted large row crop or large livestock operations, but
did not help small producers. Our experience both through CFAP
phases at the local FSA office were easy and beneficial.
Earlier, I mentioned partnerships with Indiana Grown. That
included the Indiana Grown for Schools network, which is a
statewide initiative to get products of local producers into
the schools. That grant was through the Indiana State
Department of Health, Indiana State Department of Agriculture,
and Purdue Extension. It funded the creation of a website and
buyer's guide so that people would have opportunity to
purchase. We have not been able to take advantage of this
opportunity, and it is our belief that the USDA could be of
assistance by incentivizing schools to use more individual
ingredients, and less prepared and pre-packaged foods.
As other livestock producers experienced during COVID, we
had a bottleneck in our processing. There are grants that have
recently been made available, including the Meat and Poultry
Inspection Readiness Grant to hopefully prevent future
bottlenecks. We have been able to give up a few of our staple
proteins, grass-fed beef and pasteurized poultry, and have had
to move and change with consumer demand. At this time,
increased e-commerce opportunities are there, but as many
others have found, we have not benefitted from high-speed
internet in our rural area. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Shannon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jonathan Shannon, Niche Market Livestock
Producer, Shannon Family Farms LLC, Crawfordsville, IN
Chair Plaskett, Ranking Member Baird, and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for inviting us to join the discussion today.
We are both involved in the day-to-day operations of our small, niche
market livestock farm where we directly market our products to the
local, end consumers of our community and beyond. Through our testimony
we will share the successes and struggles those small producers, like
ourselves, face in a new era of local food production.
Background
Small, local producers that grow and raise food, fuel, and fiber
for local communities are a vital part of what makes rural America
vibrant. Local, family-owned farms are an economic driver for many
communities throughout the United States because of the financial
reinvestment into other businesses in the region. What makes local
producers successful and able to grow is the access to plentiful
agricultural markets. Continued and increased economic opportunities
need to be readily available to small farms.
Growth of Our Farm
Kelly returned to rural Montgomery County, Indiana in 2003 after
graduating college. One year later, I joined her, and we purchased a 10
acre farm less than 1 mile from where she grew up. As most farm
families across the country, land and profits were too tight to add
more family members to the operation, so both of us took off-farm jobs,
as teachers, with the hope of finding our niche in agriculture as time
passed. At the young age of 26, we began Shannon Family Farms in 2006
with little knowledge of our local markets or opportunities through the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The goal was to produce proteins
(beef, pork, chicken, and eggs) for local consumers and provide buying
options to the community.
A few years later, 70 acres of adjoining land became available for
purchase, but with two beginning teacher salaries, local lending
institutions would not even entertain a conversation about the purchase
of those acres. With no knowledge of Beginning Farmers and Ranchers
Loans through the USDA at that time, the land was never acquired.
Consequently, we made the conscious decision to most effectively use
our 10 acres to grow our operation. This would lead to becoming a beef,
pork, poultry, and egg producer that dealt directly with the end
consumer.
From 2006 to 2016, we formed our own agricultural market through
on-farm sales, attending farmer's markets in surrounding areas, and
working with Indiana Grown through the Indiana State Department of
Agriculture. Finally, in 2016, we hit a roadblock with market
opportunities. Based on this dilemma, we were faced with continuing as
a small, seasonal operation or expanding into a year-round retail
business model. Thankfully, there were other like-minded small
producers in the community that faced the same barriers and made the
conscious effort to find a solution to reduced market opportunities.
Four Seasons Local Market was founded in October of 2016 through a
partnership of a few small producers in an effort to expand their
economic opportunities. A year round, retail storefront sits on Main
Street in historic downtown Crawfordsville, IN to offer locally
produced products from the community and across the state. This local
market is a vibrant, weekly meeting place of local food consumers who
purchase products from local family farms. The market has been blessed
with continuous growth each year. This endeavor was supported by
individual investments from each farm family.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Interactions and Support
Shannon Family Farms began their official interactions with the
U.S. Department of Agriculture and their local Farm Service Agency
(FSA) office in July 2020, almost 14 years after we began our small
operation. The reason for the encounter was to participate in the
Coronavirus Food Assistance Program (CFAP) during COVID-19 at the
recommendation of fellow local producers. Why had it taken us 14 years
to discover some of the economic opportunities available through the
USDA? We believed services were mostly offered and benefited large row
crop or large livestock operations and did not help small producers.
Our experience through both CFAP phases at the local FSA office was
easy and beneficial.
Earlier, I mentioned a partnership with Indiana Grown. The
partnership included the Indiana Grown for Schools Network which is a
statewide initiative that was the product of a 2018-2020 USDA Farm to
School Grant, received by the Indiana State Department of Health. In
partnership with the Indiana State Department of Agriculture and Purdue
Extension. This grant funded the creation of a website and the Indiana
Grown for Schools Buyer's Guide. This is a local agricultural market
our farm has not been able to take advantage of through meat sales. It
is our belief that the USDA could be of assistance in accessing this
market by incentivizing schools to use more individual ingredients, and
less prepared and prepackaged foods.
The Future of Local, Niche Market Livestock Production
The farm's economic opportunities and agricultural markets have
become throttled as the country emerges from COVID-19 and its effects
on supply chains. A major contributing factor to this decreased revenue
is access to reasonably priced, USDA inspected, processing facilities
for small producers that are available regionally. Knowing that only 9
days ago the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced $55.2 million in
competitive grant funding available through the new Meat and Poultry
Inspection Readiness Grant (MPIRG) program,\1\ that does not fix that
damage that has been done prior to now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2021/06/21/usda-
invests-552-million-grants-increase-capacity-and-expand-access.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poultry was a staple protein offered to customers of Shannon Family
Farms but has become a casualty in our product offerings due to the
local, small, USDA processor not offering poultry processing in 2021.
With the increased demand for pork and beef processing, poultry
processing was put off to the side by the processor for this year and
maybe the future. Small, local, reliable, and affordable processing
will continue to be a struggle for local producers like Shannon Family
Farms. During the COVID-19 pandemic, supply chains were strained and
prices of processing inputs, such as PPE, sanitation products, and
packaging increased. Those costs were not absorbed by the inspected
processing facilities and were passed directly on to the small producer
as evidence by our raising processing costs. It is our sincere hope
that as supply chains return to normal that those price increases can
be rolled back. Through the years, we have benefited from using a USDA
inspected processing facility as our sole processor.
With increased e-commerce opportunities quickly gaining popularity
among local food consumers and the benefit of opening other agriculture
markets through online sales, the farm yearns for reliable, rural
broadband. The USDA ReConnect Program, introduced in 2018, and multiple
additional appropriations for FY 2019, 2020, and 2021 \2\ is a step in
the right direction, COVID-19 has magnified the need for that rural
telecommunications infrastructure to reach many more local producers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://www.usda.gov/broadband.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resiliency and Change
Shannon Family Farms has prided themselves with adapting to
customer demand and maximizing return on investment from agricultural
products produced with our small amount of acreage. Local demand has
increased for cut flowers in recent years. The 2021 growing season has
seen pasture acreage at the farm converted to cut flowers rows. With
that being said, we will be exploring opportunities through the USDA to
secure and expand the future of this agricultural commodity in our
local market through grants, operating loans, microloans, and youth
loans. This is being done to replace some of the protein sources no
longer being raised because of meat processing bottlenecks.
Having new knowledge of economic opportunities for local
agricultural markets through the USDA, Shannon Family Farms continues
to look toward the future and focus on growth through various
agricultural commodities. We cannot tell you what commodity we will be
raising in 10 years, but it will mirror the demands of our consumers
and customers. It is with eternal optimism that issues facing small
producers, like ourselves, can be resolved and new, expanded
agricultural markets are opened.
Conclusion
Small, local producers are the backbone of rural communities and
must work side-by-side with larger producers to provide food, fuel, and
fiber to all consumers. Small farms that work directly with the end-
consumer can share the success and struggles directly with them. We
have cherished that relationship with our customers since 2006 but are
always looking for economic opportunities to expand local agricultural
markets especially in the post COVID-19 pandemic era. If anything was
demonstrated during the past year, it was the necessity of having local
food options available as larger store shelves were minimally stocked
or empty. Local producers are able to shorten the supply chain
tremendously when the correct tools and supports are in place. Shannon
Family Farms looks forward to future opportunities to expand our
current market options and grow with different commodity options for
consumers.
Kelly and I would like to thank you for the opportunity to
participate in this discussion on a topic that is vital to our
operation and the future generations being raised on our farm.
The Chair. Thank you very much to all of our witnesses for
those statements. At this time Members will be recognized for
questions in order of seniority, alternating between Majority
and Minority Members. You will be recognized for 5 minutes each
in order to allow us to get to as many questions as possible. I
recognize myself for 5 minutes at this time.
I wanted to ask, Ms. Kennedy, would you speak to the role
that consumers play in local agricultural markets, and how did
the change in consumer demand impact farmers' business
decisions and drive innovation in local markets during the
COVID pandemic?
Ms. Kennedy. Yes, I would love to. I think that, as Ranking
Member Baird mentioned, us small farmers usually have to find
niche markets, and so usually we are just trying to fill in the
gaps of the big guys. But during the COVID pandemic, when the
larger supply chains were threatened, and the grocery stores
were closed, we became the market. Most of my producers did not
have--I mean, the restaurants closed, and so we lost one
market, but everybody else that I knew was scaling up, and
struggling to meet demand. And so I feel like we all had to
pivot in a moment's notice to try to meet those demands to try
to feed our members, our neighbors, and people that we had
never worked with before.
Yes, during emergency moments the small-scale producers
sort of take the burden of the whole food system, but lack the
support to pivot and to make those changes, and just take all
the risk. And then this year, once the pandemic had started
easing off, everybody goes back to business as normal, and
forgets that last year they were depending on us for their
lives, so that is also a challenge, because then everybody had
scaled up, and now we have to find other avenues for the food.
The Chair. Thank you. Thank you for that.
Ms. Kennedy. Does that answer your question?
The Chair. Yes. Mr. Shannon, would you agree with what Ms.
Kennedy has just outlined?
Mr. Shannon. Madam Chair, I was sitting here shaking my
head on every point Mrs. Kennedy made, that we had record sales
through the months of March 2020 and also April 2020. Store
shelves were empty, we ramped up. Dealing with livestock, it is
a little lengthier process to ramp up. But as things came back
to normal, sales, and those consumers, had started to disappear
out of local food, but yes, we did take the brunt, and were
able to support our local community, and make sure they had
proteins in their freezers and refrigerators throughout the
pandemic.
The Chair. Thank you. Mr. Browne, thank you for joining us.
And can you speak towards the unique market access challenges
that come with farming on an island off of the mainland?
Mr. Browne. Thank you. Yes. We are in one of the most
unfortunate circumstances, and that is because our import is
almost 98 or 99 percent. So, in a time of supply, where food
was being halted during the pandemic, we saw some changes, but
we had to make changes as well, and put the protocol in place
in order to mitigate what was happening. Most of our wholesale
production was lost, and those channels that we used, such as a
supermarket, and other restaurants, were actually not taking
anything at that time.
Now, we had to actually adapt, in a way, where we had to
serve a certain amount of customers at a time, and even
though--like the other person before said, we had increased
sales, but then, as we go along, we find that it tapers off, so
we are looking over the last 6 months where it has tapered off,
where the--everything seems to be getting back to normal, and
we are now back at the same place, for instance, our local
Department of Agriculture, which actually processed meat, has
been closed for the last 6 weeks. And during the pandemic it
had been closed for almost a whole year. So we had a situation
where we had to stop our meat CSA and only deal with the
produce CSA, so customers were asking for protein, but,
unfortunately, we could not provide it because we are doing
commercial sale of protein, and not to go against the law
itself to have protein processed through some other method.
The Chair. Thank you. I have run out of time, but I want to
thank you, Mr. Browne, also for your promotion of local farming
and educating young farmers. I would love to see your written
testimony about that as well. At this time, Ranking Member
Baird?
Mr. Baird. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Shannon, in your
testimony you mentioned difficulties you faced in obtaining
capital to pursue your business plan. I have seen through my
years, time and again, the near impossibility for a beginning
farmer to begin and run an operation that was large enough to
support his family. So my question to you is: how do you
suggest and recommend young people go about this process, and
what steps should they take to prepare to try to start their
operation? Mr. Shannon?
Mr. Shannon. Thank you, sir. I was encouraged the other
day, looking through some of the USDA programs, that there are
youth loans available, and what popped into my head were my two
daughters that have an interest in agriculture, and finding out
ways of how they could add to the farm that is unique to them.
What we were really missing, starting out back in 2006, was
some succession planning, or a mentor, some guidance for young,
beginning farmers on what has worked, what has not worked. So
teaming up with that mentor that may be a seasoned farmer
looking to retire eventually, to pass that along, to give
advice and get you going on the straight and narrow to be
profitable. So I believe finding that mentor, whether that is
in your local community, anywhere across the country, having
that network of folks to give guidance.
Something else that we ran into was business essentials.
Grant writing, legalities with business entities, health
departments, accounting, Federal tax registration. All of that
could be part of the USDA stepping up and providing those
resources and guidance, whether that is through classes,
outreach, but having that so that you are prepared early on in
your career as a beginning farmer to gain that capital and make
those best choices.
Mr. Baird. If I may continue on that conversation just a
little bit with you, you mentioned the resources of the USDA,
but you also mentioned that you worked with the Indiana
Department of Agriculture, and all states have departments of
agriculture. Can you share with this Committee how you got
involved with the Indiana Grown, and how it helped you enter
into even more markets?
Mr. Shannon. Yes. We were attending a conference at one
point early on, and Indiana Grown was just in its infancy, I
believe around 2015 Indiana Grown began, and they came to
present, and the goal was to have a network of Indiana farmers,
Indiana-produced products, and share those successes and open
markets. We are in a frozen processed meat business. Indiana
Grown worked tirelessly for other producers to get them on the
shelves, but, again, frozen meat in a grocery store is
difficult. There has been much success with other local
producers getting on grocery store shelves. Indiana Grown has
put on events that we were able to attend and get our face, our
name, our store in front of consumers. So we have benefitted
from their statewide network, mentoring with other folks later
in our career, and being able to, like I said, have that story,
have our product, in front of a larger audience, and it is all
concentrated at the State House, and has a good look, a good
message, that goes out to the community and the state.
Mr. Baird. Thank you. I only have about a minute left, but
many states have programs like Indiana Grown to support state
products, so have any of the other witnesses been able to work
with their state departments of agriculture to help enter the
local markets, and if so, please feel free to comment. We have
about 40 seconds.
Mr. Browne. It is Dale Browne, if I may comment? That is
one of our biggest challenges here in the Territory, because
the Virgin Islands Department of Agriculture has become so very
dysfunctional. It is hard for us to actually use that time or
have that engagement where the Department is reaching other
markets. So we are, like, in a catch-22 position that we have
to do it ourselves totally.
Mr. Baird. Thank you, and I thank our witnesses again for
being here, and appreciate all of their efforts. And I yield
back.
The Chair. Thank you very much. Our next Member is Mr.
Delgado. Mr. Delgado? Mr. Delgado? If not, we will move to Ms.
Schrier of Washington State.
Ms. Schrier. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to our
witnesses. I want to focus on how the Federal Government can
better support small- and medium-sized family farms. Right now
we subsidize farm production in a manner that really benefits
most of the largest corporate farms in the country, and I have
heard from small- and medium-sized producers in my district in
Washington State that significant barriers exist for them to
participate in USDA purchasing programs and local markets, and
these need to be addressed. Better supporting market access for
family farms will help farmers themselves, it will shrink the
carbon footprint of agricultural production, reduce
transportation needs, and lead to healthier diets locally, in
particular in our schools.
And I know that the pandemic dramatically disrupted life
throughout the country, leaving millions struggling to feed
themselves and their families, and yet early Federal aid was
heavily weighted toward larger farms and corporations because
their scale allowed for efficient distribution in a national
program. Many specialty crop producers and smaller, family-run
operations suffered tremendously, and at a time when more
people than ever were facing hunger, small and medium farms had
nowhere to send their food.
And at a time when our food supply chains were collapsing,
local family farms were in many ways left out. That is why I
introduced several bills, including the Farmers Feeding
Families Coronavirus Response Act (H.R. 6725), the Food and
Farm Emergency Assistance Act (H.R. 7656), and the Farming
Support to States Act (H.R. 6956), to assist local growers and
producers. These bills aimed to move the management of the food
supply chains to the states, since state departments of
agriculture have existing relationships with local small and
medium farmers, provide emergency grants to assist growers and
producers in covering significant costs incurred as a result of
the pandemic. And one of the bills would have provided grants
to cover PPE and supplies to convert operations, like
refrigeration or packaging goods for individual consumers, as
opposed to restaurants.
And I am really glad to hear that my colleague, Mr. Baird,
brought up this very issue of how state departments of
agriculture can help our smaller producers. I was excited to
see the recent announcement from the USDA that it will invest
$1 billion to purchase nutritious food for state food bank
networks from local and regional producers. This announcement
mirrors many of the proposals in the bills I just mentioned,
and it is vital for those who are administering Federal
programs to have relationships with local small producers and
food banks in order to better support the local economies and
target distribution.
Now, several of you mentioned that the Farmers to Families
Food Box Program did not adequately benefit small producers,
and, Ms. Cooper, I have a question for you. Can you tell me
about your experience with the Food Box Program, and share any
insights into how the USDA can ensure small farms are able to
participate in this latest round of USDA funding, as well as
future programs, and are there some barriers at USDA that we
here should be looking to fix?
Ms. Cooper. Thanks so much. And in my written testimony, I
mentioned a little bit about the Food Box Program, and our
experience with it, and couldn't fit it into 5 minutes, but we
actually--in southwest Georgia, when you think of small food
infrastructure, there are some more urban areas in the northern
part of our state that were really well suited for this. This
wasn't true for my area, despite Albany, which is in southwest
Georgia, being a nationally recognized top three hot spot
during the pandemic on a per capita basis. Through my work with
the Soil and Water Conservation District, we actually launched
our own Food Box Program to supplement Federal and state
efforts.
So through the nonprofit arm we worked with local farmers,
and also with our network of nonprofit community garden spaces
to source local produce, and then partnered with local
restaurant businesses that had been hit by the pandemic, and,
through funds raised here locally, purchased hot meals from
those locally owned restaurants. So we had both produce boxes
and hot meals, and delivered them to folks in need, working,
again, with local businesses in our local community to
identify----
Ms. Schrier. Thank you.
That is incredibly resourceful. I appreciate that. I just
want to mention two other things. One is the heat wave hitting
the Northwest that has really worried our farmers about crop
losses, particularly the tree fruit industry and specialty
crops; and second that labor continues to be a huge challenge
for farmers in the Pacific Northwest, and we desperately need
reform, and I would encourage the Senate to pass our Farm
Workforce Modernization Act (H.R. 1603), which I wholeheartedly
supported. Thank you, and I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you so much for that. As we can see
throughout our country, hearing from Mr. Browne, you
discussing, Ms. Schrier, that farmers are on the front line of
so much of the climate issues that we have in our country, and
we have to support them to be able to overcome those and
continue producing. They are so vitally important to us. I
noted our Ranking Member, Mr. Thompson, was with us earlier,
but right now I would like to call on Mr. Scott for his
testimony. Mr. Scott of Georgia, but I always say the younger
Scott. Right?
Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. Fair enough.
The Chair. Scott the younger.
Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. Fair enough. And, thank you.
And I want to talk briefly about the supply chain, just a
little bit, and I can't talk about this without reminding the
American public that is watching, the American farmer gets a
little less than 10 of every dollar that you are spending at
the grocery store, probably even less than that right now.
The increased cost of transportation, and what is happening
with inflation at the grocery store, the American farmer is not
seeing that revenue. I went to the local grocery store this
past weekend, intending to buy steak. I passed over the steak
because it simply cost way too much. I looked at the pork, and
the pork was unbelievably high, and I ended up with $5 worth of
chicken that I paid $7 or $8 for. When we talk about supply
chain, it is not limited to the farmer. The American consumer
is feeling the brunt of this when they walk into the grocery
store, and I want you to know as the consumer that the American
farmer is not benefitting from the price increases that you are
seeing. So one of the issues, as we talk about supply chain,
that I never thought of is the issue of boxes. I think about
seed, I think about chemicals, I think about transportation,
but I got a call the other day from a farmer saying, ``Guess
what, we have a crop that is growing, and we can't get the
boxes to harvest it and put it in to transport it.'' And so I
thought I might share with you this aspect of what happens in
the supply chain.
``Do you have 11 by 12s?'' That is the size of the boxes, a
text message from a producer to a box supplier. ``I will have
some in a few days, we are out of boxes and can't get labor. I
am supposed to have some coming in from Honduras at the end of
the week.'' Having to source boxes from Honduras. ``Well, do
you have 11 by 11s?'' ``No. I am out of everything right now. I
don't know what to tell you. We are having major supply chain
and labor problems,'' and he names another company that I will
skip. ``All the crate manufacturers are out of crates, and RPC
and anchor boxes are non-existent.'' This is something that the
American farmer is just starting to feel. There were enough to
cover the producers in Florida for their fruit and vegetables,
but now, as the harvest is coming into Georgia and the other
states, we may very well see a shortage of fruit and vegetables
on the shelves because of supply chain issues with boxes. But
the American consumers' buying habits have changed.
And I want to go to Ms. Cooper from Georgia. I spent a lot
of time at the Cordele Farmers' Market when I was a much
younger man, as did most members of my family. It used to be
that you would go to the farmers' market, you would buy your
fruit and your vegetables, I should say, not your fruit. You
would shuck the corn, and cut it off the cob, put it in the
freezer and everything else, and the American consumer has
changed, but you mentioned programs, not only Beginning Young
Farmers in Georgia. We have Georgia Grown, we have Farmers'
Market Promotion Program. What can we do to influence the
consumer buying habits to encourage them to go to the farmers'
markets, and other ways that they can buy directly from the
farmer so that the farmer can get more than 10 out of the
dollar that the American consumer is spending? And I know
farmers from your area that actually carry their product all
the way to the Atlanta Farmers' Market because they don't feel
like they have the volume of customers at the local farmers'
markets there. So just looking for your input there. I know you
do a lot with organics, but obviously that is a specialty
market, and you have to have the volume of customers as well,
so any input there would be appreciated.
Ms. Cooper. Yes, sir, thank you, Congressman Scott. Yes, I
farm in Sumter County, which is a really large green bean
producing county in our state, and one thing that we observed
this past year is that these large green bean packing houses
that, like, you said, are typically sending things up to
Atlanta to serve larger urban markets, they started opening
their doors for local residents to come in and pick up a couple
pounds of green beans from the farmer down the road that had
been sending everything up to a larger urban market. And this
is true for your question, but also for peanuts, and some of
the commodity supply chains that are on a small scale in a
niche market. There just needs to be a scale-appropriate
infrastructure so that farmers don't feel that pressure to go
to these larger markets.
For peanuts we handle 2,000 pound totes, which is the
industry standard, but we get calls and e-mails all the time of
people asking, how can I get 5 pounds of raw peanuts from you,
which we can't do because we just don't have the proper
infrastructure.
Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. My time has expired, but this
is important to me, and supply chain issues are something that
we witnessed the fragility of this past year. And, Madam Chair,
while we did some things to help, I think it is very much still
there. I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you very much, Mr. Scott. At this time we
call on Congresswoman Pingree of Maine for her 5 minutes. Thank
you.
Ms. Pingree. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you to
you and the Ranking Member both for your opening remarks, and
for having this hearing today. As I think everyone before me
has said, this is a really timely hearing. Unfortunately, the
pandemic provided so many challenges, but it really showed us
the difficulties with the supply chain, but also some
opportunities for the very farmers we have with us today, and
the small- to medium-sized farmers they represent.
It is certainly been an issue that I have focused a lot of
my work in agriculture around, and I am really pleased that we
have this chance to talk about how we support more programs at
the USDA, and think about tailoring programs to the small- to
medium-sized farmer, to developing more infrastructure to
support the very concerns people are talking about today,
technical assistance, loan availability, more value-added
products, getting more from the market, as Mr. Scott said,
making sure everybody makes more than 10 on the dollar, which
is possible when you can direct retail. So there are just so
many things you all have discussed, thank you to all of the
people who are testifying for us today, because your personal
stories really bring it home to all the Members of the
Committee.
So let me just see if I can fit in a few questions here and
stop talking. To Ms. Kennedy and Ms. Cooper, you both mentioned
in your testimony that you applied for USDA Local Food
Promotion Grants but had not been successful, we all work on
supporting these programs, and then we are very discouraged
when there is either not enough money, or the programs that we
think should be serving the very needs that you have mentioned
aren't available. So could you talk a little bit about that?
And actually, before I mention that, I want to say that I
personally have been operating a small farm that has many of
the same challenges that you all do, but in particular, Ms.
Kennedy, if I could get rid of all the deer that interfere with
my ability to harvest the crop, that would be my number one pet
peeve, and you just can't buy enough fencing sometime to keep
them all out, but could you two talk a little bit about the
application process, and the challenges that you have faced, so
we can make sure we are really thinking about how the money
from those programs get to the very needs you are talking
about?
Ms. Kennedy. Sure. I would love to start, if I may. I am
also on the board of a number of nonprofit organizations that
do regional ag support here, and those organizations are
supported by USDA grants. So the grants are serving our
communities, they are just not making it all the way to the
farmers.
Ms. Pingree. Yes.
Ms. Kennedy. So the difference between the board that I am
on and my own farm is that the board has dedicated grant
writers, and a staff that is accustomed to the process, and
knows about weighted, all of the intricacies of these grants
that is a culture unto themselves, whereas the farmers that--as
you can see, we are all competent, educated people, so it is
not that it is too complicated, it is just that we are very,
very busy. We are doing ten jobs as it is, and then just
fitting in that, like, 2 days of grant writing, it just doesn't
happen a lot of the time. So part of it is just lack of time
dedicated to the kind of bureaucratic process, and part of it
is also just that the reimbursement part is a little bit--it--
the access to--it is a barrier to access. A lot of farms just
don't have the cash flow to make those matches or those
reimbursements, and so it is just not worth applying.
Yes, the nonprofit has been funded this year by $1 million,
and my farm last year, I got $5,000 for CFAP, or something like
that, so there is a huge discrepancy between what actually
makes it to the farms and what supports our nonprofit
colleagues. I think that----
Ms. Pingree. Great. Thank you, that is really helpful. Ms.
Cooper?
Ms. Cooper. Thank you so much for that question. As you
mentioned, we have applied for some programs. Specifically with
LAMP programming, just one thing that I have observed
anecdotally is that some of the more rural supply chain-focused
projects, there is just not an understanding on the review side
of what those rural economies and supply chains look like. And
even though 30 pages sounds like a lot, it is really hard to
succinctly describe what is going on in 30 pages to someone who
might not be familiar with your rural community, or what that
supply chain looks like. So, having a representative review
panel is important, and also reviewers that can critically look
at the impact directly to farmers in a meaningful way from
these programs, just to echo what my fellow witness shared.
Ms. Pingree. Great. Thank you so much. I am unfortunately
going to run out of time, but I just wanted to thank Jonathan
and Kelly Shannon. I really appreciate your testimony, and so
many of the things that you mentioned about having more locally
grown foods in our school lunch program, the real challenge
people have with lack of slaughterhouses and meat processing
capacity, loan access, and I just wish you all the success. I
won't be here for a second question round, but really, I
appreciate it. You laid out a lot of the really important
things, and good luck with your flower operation. I know there
are opportunities there as well. So thank you for being with
us, all of you, today, and thank you to our friend from the
Virgin Islands. I really appreciate it. I yield back, Madam
Chair.
The Chair. Thank you very much, Ms. Pingree. I note that
specifically Mr. Shannon, as well as Mr. Browne, talked about
the issues with loans, rather Mr. Dale Browne talked about
reimbursement, and I think that is something we really need to
work on to provide access to these farmers for the financing
that they need to be able to be successful, and support our
food supply in this country so that we can once again become
the number one producers of our own food. At this time I call
on Congressman Davis of Illinois. Five minutes to you. No smart
remarks.
Mr. Davis. Well, thank you, Madam Chair, and Ranking Member
Baird. I do have to express my displeasure, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Yes.
Mr. Davis. I thought this was going to be a field hearing
in your district, but instead we are stuck here in the----
The Chair. Why don't we do that in February? That is the
appropriate time for the Committee on Agriculture to come to
the Virgin Islands.
Mr. Davis. I like that, and let us plan that. But, thank
you for having this very important hearing today. And,
actually, I am honored to follow my friend, and co-Chair of the
House Organic Caucus, Ms. Pingree on this panel. I appreciate
the perspective that organic farmers bring to this
conversation. And as we look to move past the pandemic, and
overcome obstacles that have challenged and threatened our
supply chains, including weather and cyber security, among
others, we must identify solutions within existing programs
that strengthen our supply chains, and prioritize food security
as really a matter of national security.
I have been a major advocate of organic farmers not only
because of the consumer choice aspect, but to ensure a level
playing field for organic farmers, and also maintain consumer
confidence in the integrity of the organic label. My question
is actually for Ms. Cooper. As an organic farmer, what are some
of the biggest challenges you face, particularly as it relates
to the need for strong organic standards in the marketplace, to
live up to that commitment of possessing the USDA Organic seal?
Ms. Cooper. That is a really wonderful question, and
something that we have been really dealing with here locally.
The Peanut Cooperative is the only group of certified organic
peanut and other commodity producers in our region.
Historically organic peanuts are not produced in the Southeast
or in Georgia, and for us it has been new for the farmers, as
well as for the certifiers, and there has been a learning curve
there. I think that having certifying bodies that can work with
growers, as well as with our respected land-grant institutions
that provide recommendations for production, both in
conventional and in organic production, to understand the
system, at times there are arbitrary aspects that may work in
other regions or with other crops that specifically don't work
in the Southeast, or in peanut productions in particular.
Also, it has been very hard for us to incentivize folks to
get certified when we can't certify the supply chain. There is
just not a scale-appropriate supply chain, and folks that are
scale-appropriate, there is no incentive or support for them to
go through the certification process. That has been a huge
barrier. You cannot grow organic acreage without growing the
organic processing, the organic supply chain that follows, or
else you just lose that premium, and then there is no
incentive. And then, last, one of the things that the
cooperative aims to do through our mentorship and beginning
farmer program is to just offer the technical assistance to
growers that are going through this for the first time. We have
had both beginning farmers and experienced conventional farmers
that are interested in diversifying their market come to us
with all sorts of questions, and having targeted opportunities
for cooperative agreements, or technical assistance dollars for
folks on the ground familiar with these systems, familiar with
the process, to offer that support is really, really critical.
And we have some of that here, but certainly not enough to meet
the demand.
Mr. Davis. Well, I appreciate your comments, and you
actually answered my next question about how strong organic
standards translate into better resiliency. But we all know the
demand for organic products is going to increase in areas
mostly where they don't grow organic products or non-organic
products. And, due to this increased demand, I know that many
that are in your position are worried about foreign products
that may come into our country that do not even come close to
meeting the organic label standards that are put in place. Can
you offer just your thoughts on some of those concerns, if you
have them?
Ms. Cooper. Sure. We face that, certainly, because there is
not a lot of organic production here. There is just a limited
supply, and the difference in that supply is coming from
international markets that typically can offer things at a
cheaper price, and so then those efforts here locally, it can
be hard to compete with that. Of course, not even specific to
Georgia or the Southeast, but just in general the national
production volume is not meeting the national demand, and to
really uplift and promote the consumption and purchase of those
domestically produced products, both conventional and organic,
we have high standards of sustainability across the board, and
I am really valuing those domestically produced products--it is
very important for the industry as a whole, certainly for
organics specifically.
Mr. Davis. Well, thank you. I yield back, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you very much. At this time we call on
Salud Carbajal of California for his 5 minutes.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to all
the witnesses that took time to join us today. Local and
regional food systems are critical for both rural economies and
addressing food insecurity in the United States, which
skyrocketed during the COVID-19 pandemic. In my district, these
markets give area residents access to fresh and nutritious
foods, while supporting the local economy. Public investments
in local food systems have proven broadly successful, and need
further upscaling and technical support in order to reach more
people. Ms. Kennedy, what sort of additional investments, in
terms of funding, technical assistance, and outreach can we
include or look into to assist and expand local and regional
markets, and what lessons can we take from the success and
flexibility of smaller operations to apply to the larger food
supply chain in the United States?
Ms. Kennedy. Thank you. Thank you, Congressman. I would
like to echo my fellow witnesses, the Shannons, talking about
lack of adequate processing for slaughter and packaging of
protein. In our rural neighborhoods, there are very few
processing centers, and it becomes a bottleneck quickly, so if
we want to scale up at all in anything, whether it is dairy, or
meat, or veggies, pre-packaged for schools or institutional
work, we need those sort of mid-sized post-harvest processing
facilities. We also need support in the supply chain in terms
of trucking, and one of the other Congressmen mentioned that
trucking and boxes are very expensive. In my CSA we spend about
50 percent of our gross on trucking, and so that doesn't leave
a lot for the farmers.
Yes, if the larger ag competitors are getting subsidies in
trucking, they are getting subsidies, and they are, they have
contracts with schools to provide local school systems with
beef, none of us small farms have those. We also don't have
crop insurance. So if--we are an organic, diversified, small
crop farm, we don't get reimbursed if there is a weather event
and we lose our crops. So if all of these sorts of support that
our larger brethren are receiving, it would be really wonderful
if that were directed to the small, more resilient, more
flexible farms, such as ourselves, that can pivot on a dime,
change our models, work with whatever the situation is at hand,
and that is increasingly important in our time of uncertainty,
and in our current climate. But I think that those are some
ideas that----
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Ms. Kennedy. And certainly, as we
look to start working on the farm bill next year, we certainly
need to take into consideration your input, because we should
do more to extend those benefits to smaller companies, such as
the ones that you are referencing, and the need to ensure that
you are getting your share and support as well.
The organic industry has proven to be an economic driver in
my Central Coast district, and in the United States, however I
am aware that farmers face steep challenges and barriers when
seeking to transition to organic production and maintain
certification. Organic farming communities, and the resulting
co-benefits, depend on farmers having access to handling,
processing, and distribution infrastructure and market
opportunities. I am thankful to see that the USDA has recently
announced additional grant funding for the Value-Added Producer
Grant Program. Ms. Cooper, as a producer of value-added
products, have you been able to take advantage of that program,
and has it worked for you?
Ms. Cooper. The Value-Added Producer Grant Program in
particular, we have a pending application for that, so fingers
crossed my answer will be yes in a couple months. But,
originally it was not something that we were looking at just
because of the 50 percent reimbursement. We faced a huge
bottleneck this past year. We couldn't make sales because our
processing wasn't up to have our product ready to get it to
market, so we just didn't have the cash flow to spend $10 to
get $5 back. It just didn't work for us. So when that COVID
relief came out, and there was the ten percent cost-share
requirement, that is really what attracted us to go for it, and
hopefully it is something that will really allow us to tap into
some of our currently untapped markets.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you very much. Madam Chair, I yield
back.
The Chair. Thank you very much. And I would like to thank
and acknowledge the presence of the Ranking Member of the full
Committee, Mr. Thompson, and yield to him at this time for his
5 minutes. Thank you, sir.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GLENN THOMPSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM PENNSYLVANIA
Mr. Thompson. Well, good morning, and thank you, Chair
Plaskett and Ranking Member Baird, for holding today's hearing,
it is incredibly important. I would also like to thank our
witnesses for taking time to be here today, and their
willingness to share their stories and experiences with us. I
think everyone can agree that this past year and a half has
been unprecedented, and our small local producers have been on
the front lines working to make sure that consumers and
families maintain abundant access to safe and affordable food.
Hearing their stories is important. While not the purpose of
the hearing, I do like to think that we have an opportunity for
some oversight.
The farm bill includes several programs designed to help
beginning and small producers and develop local agricultural
markets, including the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development
Program, and the Local Agricultural Market Program. The
interactions between our witnesses, consumers, communities, and
the Department will inform where we need to go from here, and I
am most excited about that. So thanks again to Chair Plaskett
and Ranking Member Baird for calling this hearing, and to our
witnesses for being here. And my question is directed to Ms.
Kennedy.
Thank you for what you do. You talked a bit about the
Farmers to Families Food Box Program. I had a chance to,
obviously, see a lot of that in distribution, talking with
producers that were providing the foods to include in that,
whether it was dairy or meat, fruits, vegetables, and USDA was
able to deliver over 173 million food boxes to families in need
before it was abruptly ended by the Biden Administration, while
other pandemic-related assistance programs remain in place.
Now, in your testimony you mentioned the need to continue this
type of support and provided a few recommendations. So, for my
own edification, I want to check with you. Do you agree with
that decision by USDA, specifically, I guess, by Secretary
Vilsack, to terminate this program?
Ms. Kennedy. I feel like, in my experience, I wasn't really
able to access the Food Box Program, so it didn't affect my
business. I am at a scale that is a little bit smaller, so I
wasn't really considered as a producer. So, like Ms. Cooper, I
created my own food box program with my local constituency, and
we supplied our local pantries and our local food relief
organizations. I think that food relief is still needed. I
think that a program like the food box program should still
exist. I think, if I would create this new program, I would
make sure that small-scale producers could participate, and
that it is--because right now, because the Food Box Program has
ended, it is us small-scale producers that are taking up the
slack, but we don't have the funding to support our efforts.
Mr. Thompson. Yes, the Farmers to Families Food Box seemed
like it was a real win-win, right? First of all, with the
disruption of the food supply chain, because well over 60
percent of meals were eaten in restaurants prior to this
pandemic, and all of a sudden there was a processing and
packaging issue. And so this allowed, first of all, our
families who were most in need economically, especially those
who overnight were told by their governors you are not allowed
to go to work, you have to stay in your house, you can't work
your job. And for the farmers too, to be able to have a market.
Really seemed like just an effective tool. And you put on top
of that the emphasis was on fresh foods. All nutrition is
welcome, but certainly when you look at fruits and vegetables,
and dairy and meat, it was just the best of all worlds. I don't
know if any of the other witnesses have any experience, any
thoughts, on the Farmers to Families Food Boxes? Certainly,
with what time I have left, would love to hear from you as
well.
Mr. Browne. David Browne from St. Croix. Rep. Thompson,
most of these programs were not available to the Virgin
Islands, so that even made it harder for us to participate. So
these are actually missed opportunities to farms here in the
Territory. And there was nothing coming from USDA, whether
through rural development efforts or FSA, NRCS, because that is
all the programs that we have here. As in reference to the
producer grant, that is time consuming for any producer to
provide, and there is not a collective on island that can
actually help to mitigate that problem. So, therefore, we are
totally on the other side of the train as small producers.
So our local Department of Agriculture is practically
absent, and during the pandemic it was even more so. So that in
itself has put us at a disadvantage here in the Territory. And
definitely, if USDA had some of these programs to contribute to
the development of food boxes during a time of crisis, that
would be adequate. However, we are still facing both cultural
and customarily traditional foods that we try to produce
locally. And for those programs, what they were asking for, and
what was not maintained was a program to actually meet this
need. Thank you.
Mr. Thompson. Very good. Mr. Browne, Ms. Kennedy, thank you
so much for your insight. Madam Chair, my time has long
expired.
The Chair. That is all right. For the Ranking Member of the
Committee, you get leniency in more ways than one. Thank you
for being here with us. The next Member is Congresswoman
Kirkpatrick.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Thank you, Madam Chair. I really thank
you for having this hearing. I come from a multi-generational
family of ranchers in northern Arizona. We had an enormous
ranch, and ran a lot of cattle, and I just assumed as a kid it
would always be there, so it is interesting to me that times
have changed. So, anyway, my question is for Mr. Shannon.
Livestock producers who are serving multiple markets often have
a difficult time getting a market ready product produced,
requiring meat slaughtering and processing, as well as
aggregation of local meat products for sale at the wholesale
market. So can you describe some of the challenges facing local
meat producers, and how that impacts business decisions?
Mr. Shannon. Yes. Thank you for that question. One of the
biggest things that we face at this time--we have been using a
USDA inspected processor for many years, and had a great
working relationship. So, through the pandemic, slaughtering
spots were not an issue for us since we had that longstanding
relationship. Where it comes into is adequate storage after
that processing, because, of course, we cannot move all that
product within a week or so, so that storage capacity needs to
be there. And looking through COVID-19, nobody in the county or
surrounding area had that capacity to store what was being
processed to keep up with demand. So that is one of the issues
we face.
Another one, I mentioned this in my written testimony,
costs have risen because of the supply chain issues, and, of
course, those costs do not get absorbed by the processors. That
was passed right on to the local farmers and producers. We
experienced a large increase because sanitation products, PPE,
was not available, and that price was up. Those have been
passed on to us, and we are still waiting for that to be
returned or rewind to pre-COVID prices. So those are some of
adequate, reliable, and economical processing and storage are
some of our biggest issues that we face.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Thank you for your answer. Ranching is
hard enough as it is, in the best of circumstances, so thank
you for staying with it, and for what you do. We need you to be
in the business, and you have my full support in any way I can
help. I get it, like I said, from the bottom of my heart, and
it is not easy. As we saw with COVID-19, the supply chain
breakdown occurred through multiple sectors. As this Committee
works to strengthen the local food supply chain and prepare for
future disruptions, what farm bill programs do you think would
help you and the farmer members build resilience, and what
additional support could help you all strengthen the market
access? That is for Ms. Cooper. Ms. Cooper?
Ms. Cooper. Okay.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Sorry, do you want me to repeat that?
Ms. Cooper. I think I have it. Our biggest thing right now
is just the lack of rural infrastructure that is scale-
appropriate. We are in the breadbasket of our state, the heart
of agricultural production. There are amazing efficiencies and
technologies, and they are all just at a scale that is a little
bit bigger than where small farmers are, where certified
organic production is. So scale-appropriate, certainly. And
then the other biggest challenge for us is, of course, the
biggest piece of a supply chain is the supply. And while we
have so many farmers that are interested in working with us,
and we really see this as an opportunity for beginning farmers,
it is a leap.
As a beginning farmer myself, I have really been lucky to
have the mentorship and the marketing opportunity, but I lease
land, and it is a year-to-year lease, and so it is hard to make
the specialized equipment investments, and so we are also
looking at opportunities like shared equipment, and other
benefits of cooperative farming that will help bring those
farmers along, and actually build a supply as well. And that
is--Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program is really
critical for that.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Yes. Thank you so much. I mean, for my
generation, it was hard work. We didn't want to do it, so we
all went to college and became professionals. But my children
want to go back into ranching, so we will see how that all
shakes out. But, I thank you. My time is up, and I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you very much. Our next Member is Mrs.
Fischbach. Mrs. Fischbach, your time.
Mrs. Fischbach. Thank you very much. I appreciate it, and I
appreciate being able to participate in the hearing today, it
has been very informative. But I had read in some of the
written testimony about the application process for the USDA
being rather burdensome, and very heavy on paperwork, things
like that. I was wondering if maybe each of the producers could
talk a little bit about--each of the witnesses could talk a
little bit about how we might improve that process for them,
and do more outreach. I believe the Shannons talked about the
outreach, but if there was something that we could do to
improve that process? So I don't know who we want to start
with, if maybe the Shannons would like to start?
Mr. Shannon. Sure. Thank you for that question. Again, our
relationship only started last year with our local USDA office.
That process was easy. But in the past week or 2, looking
through some of the grants and programs, it comes down to a
time issue, and that has been mentioned before. Simplicity of
forms, simplicity of getting paperwork back and forth
electronically this day and age is essential. We are busy
raising livestock, kids, running businesses. There is not time
to sit up for multiple hours looking through paperwork,
gathering everything. So whether that outreach is having
someone come out, visit the farm, fill out that paperwork
alongside you while you are working and producing, but yes,
some simplification through technology, and having that
paperwork back and forth, would be beneficial.
Mrs. Fischbach. Thank you. And, Ms. Kennedy?
Ms. Kennedy. I agree with the streamlined application.
Also, the timing of the application, as I mentioned before, to
maybe winter months, when we are a little bit less busy, or at
least the vegetable producers. Also, again, just incentive. If
we have the reimbursement and matching needs, then people just
don't bother applying. So if you were to eliminate or decrease
those, then more people would apply. And I think also just
making sure there is support for people that don't have--that
can't go find these online. Rural broadband issues have also
been mentioned, so more outreach, more technical assistance on
applications, especially for BIPOC and underserved communities.
Mrs. Fischbach. And if any of the other witnesses--I don't
have everybody on my screen, so if any of the other witnesses
have something they would like to bring up?
Ms. Cooper. I would love to also echo the cost-share,
especially for smaller farmers, and in small farm businesses.
That cash flow and those cost-share requirements can be quite
burdensome. One thing that I would also just like to mention
very briefly, in Georgia there has been some effort in
different parts of our state, and with the support of our
Department of Agriculture, to create hubs for small farm
businesses to seek some professional services. I think it is
really innovative, and something that could really benefit
small farms and small farm businesses is kind of these
incubator hubs that offer some of these services, which would
be led at a local level, but could definitely benefit from
Federal support, certainly.
Mrs. Fischbach. Thank you very much. Mr. Browne, did you
have anything to add?
Mr. Browne. Dale Browne from the Virgin Islands. Most of
these programs that are spoken of by the other witnesses aren't
available to the Virgin Islands, because we only have Rural
Development, and that requires affordable housing, and the
Small Minority Producer Grant. You have FSA, that is basically
the loans, and programs that require disaster, and NRCS, which
is a [inaudible] program. So these other programs are not
available. We are basically 2 to 3 miles away from the office
itself, and that is an easy trip, however, most of these other
programs are not available in the Territory.
Mrs. Fischbach. Well, I thank everyone for their input, and
with my last 30 seconds I am just going to say that I think one
of the big things that we hear, and I hear of the regulation,
but that broadband issue, we hear about that in every single
Agriculture Committee hearing that we have because it is so
vital, and we absolutely need to make sure that we are working
on that. But I appreciate all the input from the witnesses, and
thank you all for being here today, and I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you very much, Ms. Fischbach. Now time for
Mr. Lawson of Florida.
Mr. Lawson. Thank you, Madam Chair, to you and the Ranking
Member. It is a real privilege to welcome everyone to this
Committee today. Before I ask my question, and my first
question will go to Mr. Shannon, do you all still use the
Almanac in determining climate and everything? I grew up in the
country, and when we were farming, that is one of the things
that we used was the Almanac. But I am going to ask you a
question, and someone--and everybody else could--can respond to
that, because I think the Almanac is still good today.
The question is directed to the Shannons, but anyone may
answer this, if we have the time. As you know, Congress and the
USDA support a number of programs that provide direct support
to local agricultural markets and producers. However, some
farmers have little to no knowledge of these opportunities
available there. What are some ways that Congress and USDA can
better support the outreach to these farmers? Just listening to
you all the--this morning, I thought it was incredible, the
adjustment that you had to make during the pandemic.
Mr. Shannon. Yes. To your first question, we no longer use
the Farmers' Almanac. It is just more word of mouth from more
shall we say seasoned farmers in the area that have been
around, and seen things. So, no, we don't even have a current
paper copy sitting anywhere at home anymore, and you are
exactly correct.
Mr. Lawson. Okay.
Mr. Shannon. Other witnesses here today are talking about
programs that I have never heard of in my life before, and we
have been at this 15 years, so getting that word out that these
programs are available, these opportunities are available, is
the struggle. I don't know if that is starting with the youth
loans, reaching out to high school ag classes to show them
where that is, see the opportunities there, reaching out to
kids in FFA, that those programs are available as beginning and
young farmers.
Again, someone in the county, in the local office, going
out and stopping at farms that they know are producing produce,
livestock, whatever it may be in our region, and saying, hey,
are you aware? Here is a handout, a page of what is available
to your local area. But no, there was no knowledge, and, again,
a lot of these things that are being spoken of I am going to
have to go home and look up and see if those are beneficial to
us. But that outreach is super important in a face-to-face
environment.
Mr. Lawson. That is amazing. Anyone else care to comment?
Because we say we have a lot of programs, and so it will be
interesting to see--but anyone else on the panel would like to
comment?
Mr. Browne. Well--Dale Browne, Virgin Islands. The Farmers'
Almanac, we can actually produce all year round, so it is not
really used by most farmers. For those older farmers, yes, they
will use it because there are above-ground days and below-
ground days, and if we wait on above-ground days to plant
above-ground, we won't plant anything. If we have to wait on
the below-ground days, to plant below-ground, we won't plant
anything below ground. So we can plant in any conditions once
we have adequate water supplies, and knowing the crops, and
what the crop dates to actually come to fruition.
Mr. Lawson. Ms. Cooper?
Ms. Cooper. Representative Lawson, I would like to address
your second question. We here in Georgia have an outreach arm
called Team Agriculture Georgia that specifically aims to
provide outreach to beginning and underserved producers in the
state, and convenes various arms of USDA, from NRCS, to Rural
Development, to FSA, to engage all of them collectively and
provide direct outreach. I think some of the challenges with
that are certainly funding, so that it is not just adding
additional work to folks here on the ground that are already
working really hard, and really dedicating funding to ensure
that outreach is effective. And, of course, this past year has
been really difficult for the in-person engagement, but in-
person opportunities are really invaluable.
Mr. Lawson. Okay. Thank you. Madam Chair, before I yield
back, I am going to share the Almanac with you, because it
might be before your time.
The Chair. I am not even going to respond to you. Thank you
so much, Mr. Lawson. Ms. Cooper, may I ask, the program that
you talked about in Georgia that assists underserved areas, is
that an organization that was created by the state, or by
farmers themselves, and how is that staffed and funded?
Ms. Cooper. The one I just mentioned?
The Chair. Yes. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Cooper. It is an USDA outreach arm. I am trying to
think of the technical term for it, but a local RC&D is
actually the funding body, so they have been seeking small
grants, cooperative agreements with NRCS, other opportunities
for that. It began just kind of as a coalition of the different
agencies talking to each other to identify opportunities, but
it is really that extra funding to have someone to run outreach
programs, to ramp up our website, to provide a newsletter with
upcoming grant opportunities, and that sort of thing.
Those extra resources that go into those locally led
projects to make them have some teeth and stand alone, and not
just become extra work for agencies that are already stretched
so thin I think has really made the difference. If you would
like to look it up, it is Team Agriculture Georgia, and it kind
of spells out the structure, and how it operates.
The Chair. Thank you.
Ms. Cooper. It has been really beneficial for GOPA to look
toward that as a resource.
The Chair. Thank you very much for that information. All
right. Our next Member to question is Ms. Letlow.
Ms. Letlow. Chair Plaskett, Ranking Member Baird, Members
of the Subcommittee, and witnesses, thank you for taking the
time to discuss supply chain resiliency, especially focused on
our small-scale farms. Our farmers and ranchers are the
cornerstone of food production in America. Many of our rural
communities are fueled by the perseverance of our local
agriculture producers, large and small. However, over the last
year we have all seen and experienced the impacts that the
COVID-19 pandemic had on our essential food supply chains. As
discussed here today, the farm to market sector faced many
challenges presented by the pandemic. Small produce and
crawfish farmers in Louisiana lost access to traditional direct
market opportunities, which ultimately led them to explore new
avenues for distribution and profitability.
Mr. Shannon, your testimony is one that I have often heard
across my district, a young, beginning small farmer seeking
opportunities to grow and expand into new markets. Can you
further share with the Subcommittee how Shannon Family Farms is
adapting to customer demand, and any plans to maximize on
newfound opportunities for local agriculture markets through
USDA?
Mr. Shannon. I sure can. I am going to let Kelly talk on
this one a little bit here. Again, husband and wife team, we
each have our own kind of--what we are responsible for in the
farm, so I will let her go on this one.
Ms. Letlow. Sure.
Mrs. Shannon. All right. Basically, we have continued to
explore new markets through starting with the farmers' markets,
and then just some direct to consumer with people that we knew.
Then we got together with some other farmers and developed Four
Seasons Local Market, which is where we came together with
those other farmers from our community, and decided that we
were going to put together a retail space that would be
available to our customers year-round.
Basically, in Indiana, our farmers' markets run from
basically May until October, and then close, and the question
was where do our people go after that October timeframe until
we are available the next May? And we found our customers
basically just disappeared, so I assume that they go back to
using just our basic grocery stores. By establishing Four
Seasons Local Market, we were able to draw those customers in
year-round, and create that space so that they could get local
foods provided to them without as many restraints as there are,
like, visiting the farm, or having to drive multiple places to
get things.
Ms. Letlow. Awesome. Thank you so much for sharing that. I
have a follow-up question. This past year many small businesses
were for forced to close, some temporarily and some
permanently. Mr. Shannon, you said that the Four Seasons Local
Market has had continuous growth each year. How did the
pandemic impact your operations at Four Seasons Local Market,
and what are the plans for growing the market as we near the
end of the pandemic?
Mr. Shannon. Sure, I can speak on that a little bit.
Mentioned before, record sales through March and April, and in
May, things started to come back to normal. We did benefit by a
lot of those customers sticking around, but a majority returned
to their normal buying habits as supplies increased at the
store. So our focus is how can we work together, large and
small, to give folks options in every community? And that is
what we are struggling with. We are kind of serving as an
incubator. We stepped out on a ledge, took the risk to put the
capital in to have a store. So other local producers, very
small, in our area are being able to take advantage of putting
their product into the store at a very reasonable price to get
their name out there, and try to grow that next generation of
local food producer.
So in the question of USDA, that was all self-funded, but
having those opportunities to capital-heavy investments,
starting that, and giving other people options like that, would
be very helpful.
Ms. Letlow. Wonderful. Thank you so much, Mr. Shannon and
Kelly, for sharing with me today. I yield back the remainder of
my time.
The Chair. Thank you very much, Ms. Letlow, and thank you
for getting Mrs. Shannon to give us some information as well.
Mr. Bacon, you now have 5 minutes.
Mr. Bacon. Thank you, and I am going to start off by
sharing Rodney Davis's sentiments about the Virgin Islands, it
may be the prettiest place in the world. To the panelists,
thank you all for being here. I just want to start off just by
saying America is the strongest nation in the world, and we
have lots of reasons for it. Part of it is our energy
independence, which we have to protect, but here we have just
got to restate the fact that we are so blessed to also have
agriculture independence. We can feed our entire country, and
we can feed much of the world, and our agriculture is a
national treasure that we have to protect.
So my first question is to all the panelists, or those who
want to participate. A few of you mentioned in your testimony
that you are either utilizing or looking at establishing e-
commerce as a tool to boost your sales. Of course, e-commerce
requires strong rural broadband, and many of our rural areas
lack this connection. Can any of you speak to how critical
rural broadband is, not only for e-commerce, but for the rest
of your operations as well? Thank you.
Ms. Kennedy. I would love to speak to this. I live in
Charlotteville, New York, which is in the middle of nowhere,
and we don't have broadband internet. We also don't have cell
phone service, so I am speaking to you over satellite right
now, and I run two businesses, my farm, and this CSA, which is
an e-commerce platform, via satellite. Anytime it rains, it
goes down. It is Tuesday, and the Moon is a certain color, the
satellite goes down. So it is really a huge challenge to run
both of those businesses on satellite internet, and I cannot
stress enough how important broadband is for our rural area.
Mr. Bacon. You make a great point. Thank you. I appreciate
it. Anybody else?
Mr. Shannon. Jonathan Shannon here. As more programs--
anything from our accounting to our inventory, everything is
cloud-based these days, and the struggle is finding that
reliable broadband to run those businesses. We were blessed,
through the COVID-19 pandemic, that we had an e-commerce site
set up to reach those customers that were not getting out, and
that we could make those deliveries to the doorstep. Again, all
broadband heavy requirement that is not available. We are
blessed today that we came up to town, per se, and there in the
city-owned co-working studio in the Chamber of Commerce has
allowed us to have reliable internet today to speak to you,
because that was not available at home.
Mr. Bacon. Thank you very much. Anyone else?
Ms. Cooper. I will echo the Shannons. I also had to come
into town to our little, I mentioned a small business
incubator. This is the only place I can get reliable internet.
In addition to some of the e-commerce, something that we also
face here in my work with the Soil and Water Conservation
District is implementing a lot of on-farm technologies that
really improve efficiencies. A lot of those are becoming cloud-
based, app-based, requiring broadband. So, in addition to just
basic communication, serving customers, there is also a missed
opportunity with farm efficiencies, and being able to implement
new technologies actually on the farm as well.
Mr. Bacon. Thank you so much. I have a follow-up question
for Mr. Dale Browne.
Mr. Browne, in your testimony you mentioned your work with
the Bridging the Gap Summer Program that aims to educate kids
between the ages of 7 and 18 about agriculture in the Virgin
Islands. I am a firm believer in giving our students firsthand
experiences on the farm, help them understand where their food
comes from. Can you talk a little more about your work in this
program? Thank you.
Mr. Browne. Yes, I can. Bridging the Gap has been one of
our main focus because there aren't any agricultural programs.
It is only up to recently our land-grant institutions trying to
reinstitute agriculture back into its academic format. Now,
since 1984, there has been no agricultural science part of our
land-grant institution. So we have taken it on ourselves to
actually begin, through summer programs, and through the
workforce development from our local Department of Labor, to
have students be brought in and be shown different areas, and
all aspects of island agriculture, and how we can function as
an economic development tool, and career building just as well.
Presently we have ten students to work in the office on the
farm, and eight out in the field. One of the things that we do
with these students is actually take them through different
career levels at the University of the Virgin Islands, and also
teach them the practical and the science of growing food on the
farm. Now, that is one aspect. The other aspect has been
students between 7 and 18 which engage in our summer program,
and that includes culinary, working side by side with the older
students, and also providing lunches for them that comes
directly from the farm. So they are able to actually see the
different aspects of agriculture growing, and that not all of
their food actually comes from out of the supermarket, from
abroad, and giving them that self-value that they can look at,
and choosing a career from that.
Mr. Bacon. Thank you so much for your insight. That is
outstanding. And, Madam Chair, I will yield back.
The Chair. Thank you so much. Before we adjourn today, I
invite the Ranking Member to share any closing remarks he may
have at this time.
Mr. Baird. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. I think we both
appreciate all of our witnesses here today, as well as our
Member participation. And consumers are becoming increasingly
interested in where their food comes from, and so, with the
discussions that we have had here, we may be shedding some
light on an opportunity for young farmers to get involved, and
bring them into the agricultural industry. So with that, Madam
Chair, I look forward to the opportunity to work with you in
the future.
The Chair. Thank you so much, Ranking Member Baird. As we
wrap up this first hearing of the Subcommittee on
Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research, I would first like
to thank all of our witnesses for their testimony and their
comments and answers. The expertise and knowledge shared today
is invaluable as we work to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic
and build back better. Today we heard about the importance of
local agricultural markets, the role of urban agriculture,
special steps that can be taken to improve the resiliency of
our local, national, and global food supplies.
I think that this Subcommittee hearing has shown a
tremendous level of bipartisanship, and I am really grateful to
the Ranking Member for facilitating that. All of our witnesses
showed the--even the range of issues--the range of locations
that they are all share so many similar issues in farming, and
overcoming the COVID pandemic, and I want to thank them all for
that as well. I am excited to continue to work with our panel
of witnesses, and the Members of this Committee, to make sure
that our small producers and local agricultural markets have
the tools that they need to best serve their communities.
Under the Rules of the Committee, the record of today's
hearing will remain open for 10 calendar days to receive
additional material, supplemental written responses from the
witnesses, to any of the questions posed by the Members. This
hearing of the Subcommittee on Biotechnology, Horticulture, and
Research is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:56 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
Submitted Article by Hon. Stacey E. Plaskett, a Delegate in Congress
from Virgin Islands
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[https://www.agri-pulse.com/articles/16100-opinion-reestablishing-us-
leadership-in-agricultural-rd]
Opinion: Reestablishing US leadership in agricultural R&D
06/28/21 12:01 p.m. By Rep. Stacey Plaskett \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.agri-pulse.com/authors/379-rep-stacey-plaskett.
Editor's Note: Agri-Pulse and The Chicago Council on Global
Affairs are teaming up to host a monthly column to explore how
the U.S. agriculture and food sector can maintain its
competitive edge and advance food security in an increasingly
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
integrated and dynamic world.
Over the last year, America's food and agricultural sectors have
faced robust challenges. The coronavirus pandemic has highlighted the
need for a more resilient food system, which is why I'm calling for an
investment of at least $40 billion for agricultural research and
infrastructure, as well as agricultural innovation.
The U.S. is a world leader in agricultural production, but we need
to continue to invest in research and infrastructure to both remain
competitive with our friends and neighbors around the world, and to
meet challenges to global food security. Last month, top economists
reported at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City's \2\ annual
Agricultural Symposium that while the United States' share of global
agricultural R&D investment was 20% in 1960, it declined to 8.9% in
2015. This issue was only exacerbated by the global pandemic, which
challenged our agricultural supply chains and magnified the need to
expand our agricultural research. We are currently falling behind our
peers, but with smart investments we can regain our footing as the
leader in global agriculture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://kansascityfed.org/documents/7107/the-drivers-of-us-
agricultural-productivity-growth.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. cannot reestablish our agricultural research prominence,
however, when our research facilities are aging and in dire need of
revitalization. Unlike our global partners and competitors, much of the
agriculture research in the U.S. is being done in facilities that were
built in the 1950s or 1960s. According to a recent report, 69% of the
buildings at U.S. colleges and schools of agriculture \3\ are at the
end of their useful life. We are asking an era of students to lead
cutting edge research that will feed generations well into the future
in facilities that were built for their grandparents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.aplu.org/library/a-national-study-of-capital-
infrastructure-at-colleges-and-schools-of-agriculture-an-update/file.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our land-grant university system fosters excellence in research
innovation while providing training opportunities for the global
leaders of the future. We know from research by leading economists that
U.S. public food and agriculture R&D \4\ spending from 1910 to 2007
returned, on average, $17 in benefits for every $1 invested. Our
nation's Cooperative Extension System\5\ keeps farmers in business and
transfers important agricultural and food information to people,
farmers, businesses and communities. Land-grant universities aren't
just pillars of their communities--they're pillars of our entire
country's agricultural and research systems. As the new infrastructure
proposal is developed, we need to keep Federal agricultural research
infrastructure, research, and extension delivery of agricultural
innovation as part of the package. Now is the time to invest in these
land-grant universities--our incubators for talent, outreach, and
agricultural innovation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1093/ajae/aay039.
\5\ https://pennstate.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/state-
level-cooperative-extension-spending-and-farmer-exits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key investments in these agricultural institutions will support
American jobs, develop climate-smart practices for farmers and ranchers
across the country and world, increase global food security, and help
ensure that the agricultural sciences pipeline looks like all of
America, not just one region or group.
Right now, we are presented with an opportunity to think critically
about what tools we want our agricultural researchers and students to
have going into the next decades, and I believe that with this bold
research investment, we can make strides to reposition the U.S. as the
world agricultural leader well into this century.
Congresswoman Stacey Plaskett represents the at large
district of the U.S. Virgin Islands in the United States House
of Representatives. She is an African-Caribbean attorney who
has practiced law in New York, Washington D.C. and the U.S.
Virgin Islands. Plaskett is best known for her understanding of
economic development and public-private partnerships for
growing the economy of developing areas. She is an active
community advocate in the Virgin Islands.
______
Submitted Comment Letter by Hon. Jimmy Panetta, a Representative in
Congress from California; Authored By Laura Batcha, Executive Director
and Chief Executive Officer, Organic Trade Association
June 21, 2021
Dr. Melissa R. Bailey,
Agricultural Marketing Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Docket: AMS-TM-21-0034
Federal Register Number 2021-08152
Re: Supply Chains for the Production of Agricultural Commodities and
Food Products
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on USDA's programs
and spending related to increasing durability and reliance within the
U.S. food supply chain. The Organic Trade Association (OTA) is the
membership-based business association for organic agriculture and
products in North America. OTA is the leading voice for the organic
trade in the United States, representing over 9,500 organic businesses
across 50 states. Our members include growers, shippers, processors,
certifiers, farmers' associations, distributors, importers, exporters,
consultants, retailers and others. OTA's mission is to promote and
protect organic with a unifying voice that serves and engages its
diverse members from farm to marketplace.
OTA appreciates USDA's commitment to elevating the significance and
importance of organic, and welcomes the recent USDA announcement \1\ of
an additional $20 million for organic cost-share assistance. This is an
important step to bridge the gap in previous short-falls for organic
producer assistance, but we caution against limiting organic programs
to micro funding or not prioritizing the organic opportunity within the
larger funding buckets. Proportionally, the organic sector has
historically been under-funded based on size and growth of market. USDA
has a critical opportunity at this moment to correct the course, and
meet the organic opportunity with big and bold investments in organic
programming and resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2021/06/15/usda-
announces-additional-aid-ag-producers-and-businesses-pandemic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We call on USDA to make big and bold investments in organic. The
organic industry soared to a new high of nearly $62 billion in 2020,
jumping by a record 12.4 percent (more than twice the 2019 growth rate
of organic).\2\ In 2020, almost six percent of the food sold in the
U.S. was certified organic. As a bright spot in U.S. agriculture, the
organic sector should command resources and support that are
proportionate to the growth and size of the sector, and reflect the
economic, environmental and health benefits provided to organic
farmers, businesses, and consumers. Substantial investments are needed
at orders of magnitude higher than any previous Administration has ever
offered. Increasing funding levels and removing caps on organic-
specific programs are key to supporting the organic sector's full
potential to grow and thrive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://ota.com/news/press-releases/21755.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Every dollar invested in organic agriculture drives co-benefits for
rural economic development and beyond. U.S. farms and business of all
sizes across all 50 states are choosing to participate in voluntary
market-based, federally backed, independently certified organic value
chains, representing hundreds of specialty crops and grains, livestock,
poultry, dairy, fiber, packaged goods and other value-added products.
Organic hotspots--counties with high levels of organic agricultural
activity whose neighboring counties also have a high level of organic
activity--boost median household incomes by an average of $2,000, and
reduce poverty levels by an average of 1.3 percentage points.\3\
Thriving organic farming communities and the resulting co-benefits
depend on farmers having access to handling, processing, and
distribution infrastructure and market opportunities. Organic
investments also drive climate benefits,\4\ and other economic,
environmental and health benefits for all those involved in our food
system--from the grower and the processor, to the distributor and the
consumer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://ota.com/sites/default/files/indexed_files/OTA-
HotSpotsWhitePaper-OnlineVer
sion.pdf.
\4\ https://ota.com/sites/default/files/indexed_files/
OTA%20Climate-Smart%20Ag%20com
ments_FINAL.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We offer the following specific recommendations of areas to support
supply chain resiliency of the organic sector. Our recommended funding
levels totaling $300 million represent 6% of the $5 billion in funds
announced through USDA's Build Back Better Initiative, which is
commensurate with organic's market share of the U.S. food industry.
Establish a National Organic Transition Program at USDA
Organic farming presents a promising economic opportunity for U.S.
farmers, yet less than one percent of domestic farmland is certified
organic today. Many farmers face steep challenges and barriers when
seeking to transition to organic production. The arduous 3 year
transition process is an important prerequisite to becoming eligible
for organic certification, but there is little Federal support to help
farmers through this transition. Lack of agronomic and technical
assistance, access to credit and loans, and adequate tools for managing
on-farm risk are all significant barriers farmers face during the
transition process. Given the long-term economic and environmental
benefits organic agriculture provides, USDA should wisely invest in
programs that support farmers in successfully transitioning to, and
staying in, organic production. We recommend that USDA establish a
national program to support farmers transitioning to organic that
includes the following elements.
Invest in improvements to technical assistance, risk
management, access to land, credit and capital, processing and
distribution infrastructure and market development--Financial,
policy, and programmatic improvements are needed to make
certified organic production accessible to all farmers who
chose to participate in the thriving organic market. Specific
focus on reducing financial risks, improving market and
infrastructure development, increasing access to land and
credit, providing technical assistance, and removing
disincentives to transition. Examples of these improvements are
described throughout this document.
Provide grant funding for projects that address barriers to
transition--Many organizations are actively pursuing
initiatives that can help address some of the barriers to
transitioning to and staying in organic production. USDA should
support these efforts by developing a competitive grant program
for organizations that provide programs and services that
support farmers who are transiting to organic. A portion of the
funds should be designated for programs that support socially
disadvantaged farmers with limited resources and/or are
geographically isolated. Additional details on grant programs
for technical assistance projects are described below.
Evaluate and address the various barriers associated with
transitioning to organic--USDA should conduct a needs
assessment of transitioning farmers in the U.S. across
production systems, scales, geographic regions, product types,
and demographic background of farmers. The results of the
analysis should be used to develop, publish, and implement a
plan for overcoming the key barriers.
Identify staff responsible for assisting farmers who are
transitioning to organic. Farmers need access to a designated
point-person at USDA who is able to answer technical,
programmatic, and regulatory questions about organic under all
USDA agencies, including FSA, RMA, and AMS.
Establish a USDA certified transitional program.
Certification of farms in transition can be a key aspect of
encouraging increased domestic organic production by providing
technical support and supply-chain recognition. While various
certifiers have transitional certification programs, these are
not harmonized and lack consistent oversight. Transitional
certification can prevent ``surprises'' for operations going
through the certification process, because the operation has
been inspected and audited during each year of its transition.
Furthermore, operations enrolling in a transitional
certification program will support supply chain management as
transparency in future growth of organic acreage can facilitate
appropriate business planning and contract development for
buyers and producers. The program would also help develop
transitional markets, enabling a supply-chain premium for
transitional crops that can incentivize producers to move
towards organic and can reduce the financial burden that a 3
year transition period poses. OTA submitted an application to
USDA Agricultural Marketing Service's Quality Systems
Assessment Program to establish a USDA Certified Transitional
Program. USDA made a formal announcement approving the program
in early 2017 but months later withdrew the program with no
explanation. USDA should reestablish this program, and begin
accepting applications from qualified certifiers immediately.
Allocate $50 million to support transition to organic. In
addition to providing certification cost-share assistance to
transitioning farmers, USDA should invest a minimum of $50
million across department programs to expand domestic organic
production by supporting both producers and processors.
Technical assistance, increased conservation funding for
programs such as the EQIP Organic Initiative, and direct
financial assistance should be provided to producers
transitioning to organic. For example, conventional farmers
transitioning to organic production--an entirely distinct
farming system that requires investments and learning new
techniques--should be able to qualify under the definition of
beginning farmers for USDA programs that provide grants and
assistance to that population. Additionally, support for
producers should be coupled with tax credits, low interest
loans and grants for companies to invest, retool and build
organic processing and infrastructure capacity. By supporting
transition to organic, USDA will be incentivizing farmers to
adopt climate-friendly agricultural practices, creating
opportunities for small- and medium-sized farms to thrive, and
supporting rural economic development.
Facilitate market connections between farmers and buyers.
One of the primary barriers that prevents farmers from going
through the 3 year transition process is uncertainty around
whether or not they will have a long-term contract for their
premium organic crops. USDA should facilitate links between
transitioning growers and buyers, and provide incentives for
buyers that offer long-term contracts to transitioning and
organic producers.
Market Development & Processing/Distribution Infrastructure
A significant limit to the continued growth and sustainability of
the U.S. organic industry is a gap in domestic supply of organic
ingredients and raw products. The growth of organic acreage in the U.S.
has never kept pace with demand for organic products, and increasing
amounts of imports continue to fill the gap. Overcoming barriers to the
growth in domestic organic acreage will require a multi-faceted and
regionally-oriented approach.
Organic Processing and Distribution Capacity
Invest $100 million in organic processing and
infrastructure. Investment in organic processing and
distribution infrastructure is critical to support domestic
supply chains. All processing facilities that handle organic
product are required to maintain an organic certification and
systems plan to ensure compliance with the organic regulations
and prevent commingling and contamination of organic and non-
organic product. To transition more acreage to organic and
support farmers transitioning, USDA must put an equal emphasis
on increasing processing capacity and supporting market
development opportunities to ensure a healthy organic
marketplace. USDA should establish a competitive grant program
for market and infrastructure development to expand organic
processing capacity. The program will assist companies in
retooling, refurbishing and rebuilding processing facilities to
meet organic market demand across all regions, commodities and
scales.
Organic Certification Continuity
The pandemic created supply chain disruptions such as capacity
constraints, increased demand, supply shortages, and facility closures.
Certified organic farmers and handlers need to quickly adjust to bring
on new land, processing lines and/or facilities, and storage units.
This creates a unique challenge for organic businesses because an on-
site inspection must be conducted for a person or operation seeking new
organic certification. For organic operations requesting an addition or
update to its existing certification, the new land or facility must
quickly move through the certification process, which typically
includes an on-site inspection. Certified organic products must also
meet very specific packaging and labeling requirements. Overall, this
leads to reduced flexibility and unique supply chain challenges for
organic businesses and farms when on-site inspections are not possible.
The continuity of organic inspection operations is critical to the
compliance of the organic supply chain, and the health and safety of
organic farmers, processors and inspectors must remain at the center of
all decision-making. Fortunately, there are many inspection tools and
technologies that can be used to verify organic compliance while travel
restrictions and advisories associated with the novel coronavirus are
in place.
During this unprecedented time, it is critical that USDA
support the organic marketplace by allowing accredited
certifiers to utilize emergency remote inspections when on-site
inspections are not possible.
If a farmer or business fails to pay their organic certification
fee on time, they are at risk of being issued a noncompliance by their
certifier, and having their organic certification suspended.
Certification cost-share was reduced and delayed so many operations
experiencing financial strain from the pandemic weren't able to rely on
full and timely certification cost-share assistance.
USDA should provide flexibility to operations unable to pay
their certification fees by delaying suspension of
certification if the only non-compliance is related to late
payments of certification fees.
Market Development
Purchase $100 million in organic food for nutrition
programs. Many U.S. commodities rely on USDA's purchasing power
and nutrition procurement programs for supply chain management.
However, organic food has largely been shut out of Federal
feeding programs such as the school lunch program, the Women,
Infant, and Children (WIC) program, and emergency food
assistance programs despite the fact that over 80% of U.S.
households purchase some organic products on a regulator basis.
USDA should establish a pilot program, and work with states to
increase purchases of organic food and reduce barriers to
purchasing organic food within feeding programs. USDA nutrition
programs must be modernized to meet consumer needs and demand
while also supporting climate-friendly agriculture and
reflecting the diversity of U.S. agriculture. Cost should not
be a barrier. For example, USDA should purchase both certified
organic and certified transitional to support farmers through
the transition process with a stepped-up premium. At the very
least, USDA should purchase organic food for feeding programs
in line with organic's current overall market share to ensure
equitable access. Over 15% of fruits and vegetables sold in the
U.S. are certified organic and over 8% of dairy and eggs sold
are organic. Therefore, at a minimum, Federal nutrition
purchasing should reflect the current market share for organic
products.
Increase international market development funding to $5
million annually. Organic is persistently under-funded in the
USDA market access program, receiving less than a million
dollars annually to promote organic export development despite
the fact that U.S. organic represents $62 billion in annual
sales. As a comparison, the U.S. Almond Board receives nearly
$5 million in USDA market access program funding even though
the total global almond market is worth only $11 billion.
Risk Management Tools & Access to Land, Credit and Capital
Crop Insurance Policy Improvements
Crop insurance is an important financial safety net for farms. Yet
organic and transitioning farmers face challenges in finding
appropriate crop insurance tools for their operations. Some of the
challenges and barriers include: limited availability of policies for
the crops and locations where they are growing, difficulty insuring the
full value of organic crops; inappropriate restrictions and penalties
for using legitimate organic farming practices; contradictions between
requirements for crop insurance and other USDA programs; and lack of
access to insurance agents who understand organic farming and
certification.
These challenges have systemically put organic farmers at a
disadvantage for decades. The absence of these safety nets put organic
farms at an even greater disadvantage during the pandemic, and they
experienced supply chain disruptions, revenues losses, and price
reductions on top of extreme weather-related yield reductions.
Improvements are needed to help organic and transitioning farmers
overcome barriers to fully benefit from crop insurance as a risk
management tool and farm safety net. USDA should expand or adapt policy
options that better accommodate organic crops and production systems,
and eliminate policies that penalize farms when transitioning to
organic production.
Several specific examples of policy improvements are listed below:
When farms successfully transition from conventional to organic,
they can anticipate significant increases in revenue. However, current
RMA policies on Whole Farm Revenue Protection (WFRP) coverage limit
expansion of revenue coverage to 30%. RMA should ensure that all
producers, including rapidly expanding operations and operations that
have recently obtained access to premium markets like organic, are able
to obtain coverage under this policy.
Under the Whole-Farm Revenue Protection Program, recognize
the change in farm revenue after a farm has transitioned to
organic. Eliminate the 30% cap on increased production value
under the expansion provision.
Organic farmers can obtain contract prices that far exceed two-
times the conventional price for a specific commodity. However, current
RMA policies cap the amount a producer can insure against at two-times
the conventional price election regardless of the price indicated on
the contract.
RMA should evaluate whether current caps on the Contract
Price Addendum (CPA) improperly limits the ability of an
organic producer to obtain crop insurance, and determine
whether to eliminate or raise the caps if they do limit the
organic producers' ability to obtain crop insurance with the
CPA option.
When farmers successfully transition from conventional to organic,
they currently cannot utilize their previous conventional or
transitional production histories when calculating actual production
history for their crop insurance coverage.
RMA should allow producers to utilize previous yield
history, whether conventional or transitional, with appropriate
discounts for known reductions in yields that may occur when
employing organic production practices, when calculating Actual
Production History for their organic crop insurance coverage.
Loan Program Improvements
Many USDA risk management programs administered across various
mission areas such as the Farm Service Agency, Risk Management Agency,
Natural Resources Conservation Service, etc. place unnecessary and
arbitrary caps on organic producers which minimizes their
effectiveness.
USDA should remove all caps on loans and programs for
organic producers if similar caps are not in place for
conventional producers.
Organic producers may obtain Marketing Assistance Loans for their
crops in storage, but the loan rates are not adjusted for the premium
prices that organic commodities receive in the market.
FSA should make adjusted Marketing Assistance Loans
available to organic producers with crops in storage, and
provide organic loan rates for certified organic commodities
under existing adjustment authority.
Organic farmers' crops command premiums at market, and FSA
should incorporate organic price premiums when determining loan
rates for their Farm Storage Facility Loan Program.
Organic Certification Cost-Share Improvements
The organic certification cost-share program is one of the only
avenues of Federal financial support for organic farmers, and it is
especially important for small- and medium-sized farms and for
attracting new, young farmers to organic. Last fall, USDA delayed the
release of funds and unexpectedly announced that the reimbursement rate
would be reduced to a maximum of 50% of certification costs, cutting
funding for organic farmers when they needed it most. We are pleased by
USDA's recent announcement to include $20 million in additional funding
for this program, and expanding the program to include farmers who are
transitioning to organic production. Making improvements to the
certification cost-share program is one of the most efficient and
effective ways to get money into the pockets of organic farmers. Annual
certification costs continue to rise, and failure to pay can lead to
non-compliance and potential revocation and loss of certification
status. Funding this program is essential to keeping farmers enrolled
and benefiting from organic certification.
FSA should increase the maximum reimbursement rate from $750
per certification scope to $1,500 per certification scope, and
cover 100% of the costs of certification for qualified small-
and mid-sized producers and socially disadvantaged farmers.
FSA should streamline and improve program efficiency by
setting up agreements with USDA accredited certifiers to
disburse cost-share assistance. Eligible producers could be
reimbursed directly by certifiers rather than having to apply
and submit paperwork annually through FSA.
Provide Tax Credits to Landowners Offering Long-Term Leases
Organic agriculture production relies on long-term soil-building
practices that help to manage fertility and control weeds and disease
pressures. Farmers who operate on leased land need security and
assurance that they can farm on the land long enough to reap the
economic and environmental benefits of their agricultural management
investments. Landowners should be incentivized to offer long-term
leases to organic and transitioning farmers. This policy can
particularly support socially disadvantaged farmers who may be more
likely to lease than own land.
Provide tax credits to landowners offering long-term leases.
Technical Assistance
Invest $50 million in organic technical assistance. Successful
organic and transitioning farmers need to rely on agronomists and
extension agents who are trained in organic production methods.
However, there is a large gap in technical assistance investment to
meet the needs of organic and transitioning farmers across production
systems, scales, and geographic regions. There is a lack of crop
advisors, extension agents, and other agricultural service providers
with organic management literacy to support farmers. A substantial
investment across various programs and services is critical to
expanding access for organic and transitioning farmers to organic
technical assistance. Improved technical assistance gets more organic
acres under organic management, develops more domestically-grown
organic products, and improves the environmental impact of supply
chains.
Develop a competitive grant program for organizations
providing technical assistance to transitioning farmers. Many
organizations are actively pursuing initiatives that can help
address the shortage of organic-focused technical assistance
for transitioning farmers in the U.S. USDA should support these
efforts by developing a competitive grant program for
organizations that provide regionally adapted programs and
services that support farmers transitioning to organic. A
portion of the funds should be designated for programs that
support socially disadvantaged farmers, farmers with limited
resources, and/or are geographically isolated.
Topics for funded projects should include:
Basics of organic production: weed control, nutrient
management, crop rotation, pest management
Systems thinking & long-term strategies for success in
organic production
Managing risk during transition
Organic certification process & record keeping
National Organic Program regulations
Organic marketing and profitability
On-farm & hands-on experiential learning on organic
operations
Mentoring
Farmer-to-Fa[r]mer peer learning networks
USDA's investments can help support public-private partnerships
that expand the availability of technical assistance.
Partnerships across organizations, sectors, and supply chain
participants create public goods while allowing private
businesses to strengthen their own supply chains. For example,
the Organic Agronomy Training Service (OATS), sponsored by the
Organic Trade Association, seeks to expand the network of
agronomists and technical service providers for organic and
transitioning farmers. A ``train-the-trainer'' model, OATS
provides science-based trainings for agriculture professionals
to gain competency in organic systems to better serve their
farmer clients. Over the four training events held in 2019-
2020, OATS trained 140 agricultural professionals who have
directly impacted management decisions on almost \1/2\ million
acres of organic and transitional farmland.
Expand USDA National Organic Program's Organic Integrity
Database to facilitate producer-to-producer information
exchange on organic practices and resources at a regional
level. Producer-to-producer information sharing is a highly
effective method of practice implementation. USDA's Organic
Integrity Database is a tremendous resource for organic
operation information, and could be expanded to facilitate
information exchange on organic production practices and
resources at a regional level. Extension agencies and NRCS
support show the effectiveness of such a model, and this should
be expanded to organic specific resources.
Reduce or waive industry contributions under USDA-NRCS
cooperative agreements from 50:50 to 25:75 for organic
technical assistance providers. NRCS cooperative agreements are
one way that USDA can support organic expertise within NRCS.
However, it has been difficult for stakeholders to resource the
matching funds needed to establish these positions.
Workforce Safety, Availability & Training
The pandemic caused major disruptions in the agriculture workforce
and further exposed systemic vulnerabilities. From farm to shelf, at
the forefront of our membership's mind is concern about maintaining the
safety of their workforce. In general, organic farming is more labor-
intensive. Like other food and agriculture businesses, organic farms
are challenged to protect essential workers while also facing
astronomical operational costs. We echo the concerns that have already
been raised by a majority of agriculture stakeholders for the need to
maintain a stable supply of labor. Investments in workforce training
and human capacity building are also critical.
USDA should continue to work with other Federal agencies
such as FEMA to ensure that an adequate supply of personal
protective equipment, sanitation supplies, and vaccines are
available to the food and agriculture sectors. Small businesses
are especially at a disadvantage for acquiring these resources,
so we ask that you provide them enhanced support.
Tax relief should be provided to businesses that have had to
make massive investments to their operations to protect their
workforce. In addition to purchasing supplies, business have
had to change operational dynamics to accommodate social
distancing, as well as cover costs of replacing employees who
are sick or quarantining.
The pandemic has also further exposed the vulnerability of
an agricultural workforce that is in short supply, does not
have legal status and lacks basic protections. Agricultural
workforce policies must support the health, safety and legal
standing of agricultural farmworkers, including assistance to
protect workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The organic industry is currently experiencing a decline in
well-trained and well-qualified inspectors and certification
reviewers. USDA should continue and expand efforts to develop
human capital within the organic inspector and certification
community.
USDA should explore options for improving the accessibility
and affordability of healthcare for farmers, especially
socially disadvantages farmers and new or beginning farmers and
ranchers.
Organic Standards Development
Strong standards provide the foundation for the USDA organic
program. For the organic premium to be recognized in the marketplace,
there has to be a clear distinction backed by consistent, enforceable
standards. Organic is a voluntary regulatory program for farmers and
businesses who choose to meet strict standards and market their
products under the USDA Organic seal. However, the Federal regulatory
apparatus at USDA has stifled innovation and continuous improvement
within the industry. In the past 10 years, industry has advanced 20
consensus recommendations for improvements to the organic standards,
yet USDA has not completed rulemaking on a single one of them. USDA
should work with industry to repair the public-private partnership and
advance organic standards. This is the number one challenge facing the
organic sector and without addressing it, all other assistance and
investments USDA makes in organic will be meaningless.
USDA should realign staffing and resources at the National
Organic Program to include an increased focus on organic
standards development. Currently, NOP has 63 full-time staff
yet only two are dedicated to organic standards development.
USDA should publish in the Federal Register and take public
comment on an Organic Improvement Action Plan comprised of the
backlog of NOSB recommendations that have not been implemented.
The plan must include detailed timelines, prioritization, and
implementation plans for dealing with each recommendation.
Establish a new framework for advancing Federal organic
standards to keep up with the marketplace and ensure the
credibility of the USDA Organic seal.
Improve oversight and ensure consistent enforcement of USDA
accredited third-party certification agents by including the
specific evaluation of how certifiers are interpreting and
implementing new regulations and updates to the standards.
Organic is an increasingly important part of American agriculture,
and represents one of the fastest-growing food and farming sectors in
the U.S. and the global marketplace, achieving $62 billion in annual
sales in 2020. Organic provides economic opportunities for farmers,
creating jobs and lifting rural economies, while also utilizing
sustainable farming practices proven to help mitigate the threat of
climate change. Organic also provides a safe, healthy choice to
consumers, who are increasingly seeking out the trusted USDA Organic
seal on the food and products they purchase for their families. Thank
you for providing this opportunity to comment on building a more
resilient, equitable and climate-friendly food system.
Sincerely,
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Laura Batcha,
Executive Director/CEO,
Organic Trade Association.