Archives for May, 2009
Weekly Update – May 18-22, 2009
Tuesday, May 26th, 2009
ACTION NEEDED
Organic Initiative Sign-Up Extended in Some States: The sign-up for the special $50 million in Organic Initiative funds offered through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) continues. Last week, states had the option to extend their sign-up periods beyond the initial three-week offering. To see whether a state has extended, see this list compiled by NRCS.
The Organic Initiative provides payments and technical assistance to transitioning and certified organic farmers who adopt NRCS conservation practices. This Initiative is available in every state and county. For more information about the Organic Initiative, see NSAC’s updated memo and our alert.
VAPG Reprieve: NSAC staff learned this week that USDA is currently conducting a review of the VAPG NOSA issued on May 6 which may well lead to an extension of the current application deadlines of June 22 (for beginning and socially disadvantaged farmer and rancher applicants and for mid-tier value chain projects) and July 6 (for all other applicants). We will provide further information next week.
THIS WEEK
Supplemental Appropriations Advances: On Thursday, May 21, the Senate voted 86-3 in favor of the supplemental appropriations bill that has been working its way through Congress to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As we have previously reported, both the House and Senate versions of the bills contain important supplemental funding for direct farm ownership and operating loans. Differences in those provisions and others throughout the bill will be settled in a House-Senate conference committee in June. NSAC will continue to advocate for inclusion of the much-needed credit funding.
House Energy and Commerce Committee Votes out a Climate Change Bill: On Thursday, May 21, by a vote of 33-25, the House Energy and Commerce Committee completed mark-up and approved H.R. 2454 – the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (Waxman-Markey). Only one Republican, Mary Bono (R-CA), voted to approve the bill. The bill calls for a cap-and-trade system, with most of the carbon-equivalent credits initially provided free to existing coal-fired power plants and some other major GHG emitters. But the bill has few specifics on how cap-and-trade would be implemented, including what role agricultural operations would have in providing offsets for carbon emissions from other economic sectors. The bill as approved by the Committee is intended to decrease U.S. GHG emissions by 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020.
During the mark-up, the most controversial issue concerning agriculture was the inclusion in the bill of a measure to include GHG emissions for ethanol and other biofuels that arise from indirect conversion of land. This is land conversion for food production that could occur within or outside the U.S. to replace food producing land diverted to biofuel production. The Committee defeated by a vote of 36-20 an amendment offered by Rep. Lee Terry (R-NE) to bar the use of GHG emissions from international land use changes in assessing biofuel GHG emissions.
Also introduced but then withdrawn an amendment offered by Rep. Zack Space (D-OH) that identified specific agricultural activities and practices as carbon offsets. The amendment would have covered tillage, cover cropping, conversion of cropland to grassland, increased nitrogen efficiency, and reductions in greenhouse gases from manure among others. Under the Waxman-Markey bill, before offsets are issued, EPA and a new Offsets Integrity Advisory Board will determine how much carbon will be sequestered or greenhouse gases reduced, and then issue the appropriate level of offset. Many agricultural organizations do not want to wait on those technical determinations and would prefer greater assurances that agriculture will be a prime source of offsets. Many farm groups would also prefer to have USDA making the decisions rather than EPA.
The bill has a long way to go. It has been referred to other House Committees including Agriculture, Foreign Affairs, Financial Services, Education and Labor, Science and Technology, Transportation and Infrastructure, Natural Resources, and Ways and Means. Rep. Collin Peterson (D-MN) stated earlier this week that he has “put a pitchfork in the sand” and wants full jurisdiction to amend any portion of the bill. Peterson has indicated he has major problems with the Energy and Commerce bill with respect to fuel standards, renewable energy definitions, and regulations to govern the trading of carbon derivatives.
Peterson is believed to have most Agriculture Committee Democrats and other Blue Dog Democrats not on the committee lined up with his positions, enough votes to potentially kill a bill on the floor. In light of his earlier criticisms of an EPA analysis comparing GHG emissions from corn ethanol and other biofuel production, it is likely that the House Agriculture Committee will move to provide any agricultural biofuel production and a variety of agricultural operations and practices with offset payments in climate change legislation. The Committee might also move to strike or reign in carbon derivative trading.
House Ways and Means Committee member and Democratic Caucus Chair John Larson (D-CT) has offered a carbon-tax bill and Committee member and Democratic Campaign Committee Chair Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) is championing a cap-and-dividend bill. Neither had indicated that they will push their alternatives to cap and trade when the bill moves to Ways and Means. Committee Chair Charles Rangel (D-NY) though has indicated all options are on the table. Rangel also declared this week he wants to deal with health care reform first before addressing the climate change legislation. And after action by multiple House committees, there will be battles on the House floor.
House Ag Committee Hearing on Low Carbon Fuel Standard: The House Agriculture Committee held a hearing to review low carbon fuel standard proposals on Thursday, May 21, 2009. In general, committee members and witnesses from the biofuels industry covered much the same ground and expressed similar views as the House Agriculture Conservation Subcommittee did on May 6 when it held a hearing on the proposed life cycle analysis for biofuels.
While House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN) was far more restrained than at the May 6 hearing, he expressed bewilderment at EPA’s decision to include international land use effects in its greenhouse gas emission standards for renewable fuels. Ranking member Lucas (R-OK) declared that biofuels policy “must not be hijacked by the enemies of production agriculture,” and that “we must make sure EPA only administers environmental policy set by Congress, and does not formulate its own environmental policy.”
Brian Jennings, Executive VP of the American Coalition for Ethanol, argued against EPA’s model for determining international indirect land use effects of biofuels production, calling the model “untested.” He said the model’s conclusions are not borne out by empirical observations, and that it was not developed by scientists, but by Tim Searchinger, an attorney Jennings portrayed as committed to “attacking production agriculture.” EPA’s recommendations are so discordant with reality, he said, as to “invite questions of their motives and their veracity.”
Tom Buis, CEO of Growth Energy, Bob Dinneen, President of the Renewable Fuels Association, and Carlos Riva, CEO of Verenium Corporation, also testified. They echoed Jennings’s opinion that the biofuels industry is being unfairly targeted by EPA, and that EPA’s findings have not been subjected to adequate peer review. “EPA over-read the statute [the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007], and under-read the science,” said Dinneen.
Farm to School Hearing at Centers On Disease Control: On Friday, May 15 the Ranking Minority member of the Senate Agriculture Committee Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) and Committee Chairman Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) hosted a hearing at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, entitled “Benefits of Farm to School Programs, Healthy Eating and Physical Activity for Children.”
NSAC member organization Georgia Organics managed much of the logistics for the hearing, and the star witness was Glyen Holmes, former USDA employee and now Executive Director of the New North Florida Cooperative, which has been selling bagged collard greens and sliced sweet potato sticks to more than 72 Florida school districts since 1995.
The Coop was organized in 1995 with the help of Florida A&M University as a last ditch effort by small and limited resource farmers to save their farms. Located in an economically depressed area, the farmers focused on one stable and substantial local market — schools. With one $40,000 Agriculture Marketing Service grant they were able to build the capacity to wash, cut and bag the products (creating several local jobs) and deliver them to the schools “ready to use” at a competitive price. The Coop now includes farmers in Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Arkansas and Holmes estimates that their produce has fed more than one million students.
The Director of the CDC’s Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity, Dr. William H. Dietz, buttressed Holmes’s arguments in favor of farm to school programs by pointing out that students in schools which serve locally-grown products select more fruits and vegetables for their lunches and four out of five programs studied showed that the young people ate more fruits and vegetables outside of school, too.
USDA NEWS
CSP Update and Letter: This week marked the one-year anniversary of passage of the 2008 Farm Bill, and still the landmark Conservation Stewardship Program has yet to hit the ground. The good news, however, is the revised program’s unveiling seems to be getting close. NSAC is continuing to engage with the agency to help work wrinkles out of the ground rules and hopefully ensure the program will live up to expectations when it is made available to farmers on a nationwide, continuous sign-up basis later this year. We hope to have more definitive news quite soon.
Many thanks to all 75 farm and conservation organizations who signed onto
Fruit and Vegetable Grants Available: On Friday, May 22, USDA published the Notice of Funds Availability (NOFA) for the Specialty Block Crop Grant Program. Applications must be submitted to the appropriate State Department of Agriculture. The proposal deadline is August 26, 2009. A Final Rule for the program was published on March 27, 2009.
NASS Seeking Input for 2012 Census of Agriculture: The National Agricultural Statistics Service is in the process of planning the content of the 2012 Census of Agriculture and is seeking input. Recommendations may be submitted here. Comments must be received by August 28, 2009. For Further information, you may contact Joseph T. Reilly, associate administrator of NASS at 202.720.4333 or HQ_OA@nass.usda.gov.
National Organic Program Seeking New Director: USDA’s Agriculture Marketing Service is seeking a motivated individual to be the Director of the National Organic Program. To view the job announcement, click here.
USDA Schedules Additional NAIS Listening Sessions: On Friday, May 22, USDA announced that is has scheduled additional listening sessions on the National Animal ID System. Cities and dates for the sessions are: Jefferson City, MO (June 9), Rapid City, SD (June 11), Albuquerque, NM (June 16), Riverside, CA (June 18), Raleigh, NC (June 25), and Jasper, FL (June 27). Additional information, including optional pre-registration and instructions on submitting comments if you cannot attend a listening session, are provided in the Federal Register notice.
EPA NEWS
Familiar Nominee for Number Two Spot at EPA: President Obama has nominated the chief operating officer for the National Audubon Society, Bob Perciasepe, as the EPA Deputy Administrator – the agency’s number two position. He was assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Water and in the air office during the Clinton administration. He also served as Maryland’s environment secretary from 1990 to 1993 and an assistant planning director in Baltimore before that.
DULY NOTED
NSAC Briefing on the Hill on USDA Programs in Action: NSAC intern Mark Hertel organized and presented a briefing in one of the House Agriculture Committee Hearing rooms on Wednesday, May 20, 2009. The event featured several farmers from Maryland and Pennsylvania who presented images of their farms and showed how they have benefited from some of the USDA programs NSAC has helped to create and works to strengthen. Attendees also enjoyed delicious appetizers made with ingredients from the featured farms.
Judy Gifford showed photos of St. Bridgid’s Farm near the headwaters of the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland and the happy dairy and beef cows she rotationally grazes there. Judy, a former lobbyist and Hill staffer, is an engaging champion of the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program, which awarded her a grant to develop a nutrient management plan on her farm, which she continues to follow.
Catherine and Al Renzi discussed how they have created a successful farm business on just eight acres at Yellow Springs Farm in Pennsylvania. They propagate, grow, and sell many species of unique and hard-to-find native plants, and also manage a small herd of goats. They were awarded a Value-Added Producer Grant in 2008 to assess the feasibility of producing and marketing goat cheese products, which incorporate edible native plants and honey produced on the farm.
Andy Andrews, the manager of Pennypack Farm Education Center in Pennsylvania, explained the importance of the Organic Production and Marketing Data Initiative, and illustrated how CSP has enabled the farm to plant extensive cover crops, warm season grasses and flowering plants for bees and other beneficial insects.
About forty staffers from Congressional offices, the House Agriculture Committee, and USDA attended the event. Committee staff complimented us on a very successful event, and suggested we do it again soon!
Hill Briefing on Concentration in the U.S. Seed Market: On Tuesday, May 19, the Organization for Competitive Markets (OCM) hosted a Hill briefing on the adverse impact on farmers from concentration in the U.S. seed market. Speakers included Dr. John Boyd, Jr, President of the National Black Farmers Association, Bert Foer, President of the American Anti-Trust Institute, David Domina, a Nebraska lawyer who represents farmers, Ferd Stokes, President of OCM, and Martha Noble, senior policy associate with NSAC. Rep. Marcy Kaptur’s (D-OH) staff assisted in arranging the briefing.
Topics included restrictions on rights of individual farmers’ to save seed, retaliation by Monsanto against farmers who speak out against the seed company mergers, and decreasing availability of seed lines and other aspects arising from seed market consolidation. The need for more public breeding positions at the nation’s Land Grant Universities and the need for publicly available seed was also emphasized. For more information on this issue, see the OCM website.
Weekly Update – May 11-15, 2009
Monday, May 18th, 2009
ACTION NEEDED
Sign On Now for a CSP Sign Up: NSAC is circulating a sign-on letter to Secretary Vilsack urging prompt implementation of the Conservation Stewardship Program. The letter seeks program improvements and a spring sign up for the new nationwide, continuously available CSP. The cutoff date for sign-ons is close of business on Tuesday, May 19th. If your organization has already signed on, thank you! If not, email Annette@sustainableagriculture.net to join the more than 60 farm and conservation organizations from all across the country who have already signed on.
Organic Initiative Sign-Up Extended in Some States: The brief (May 11 – May 29) sign-up for the special $50 million in Organic Initiative funds offered through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) continues. As of May 15, however, States may opt to extend their sign up period by up to two additional weeks. States will have to decide by May 22nd whether and for how long to extend their sign up. Information about which states choose to extend will be included in the next Weekly Update.
The Organic Initiative provides payments and technical assistance to transitioning and existing organic farmers who adopt NRCS conservation practices used in organic production systems and will be available in every state and county. For more detail about the Organic Initiative see this memo and our alert.
Farmers Market External Reviewers: At a meeting of the Farmers Market Consortium this week, staff of the Agricultural Marketing Service announced that they will be accepting applications for external reviewers for the Farmers Market Promotion Program. If you are interested in serving on the review panel, please contact Branch Chief, Carmen Humphrey: Carmen.humphrey@usda.gov by Friday, May 22. In particular, they are looking for farmers and economic development experts to sit on the review panel.
THIS WEEK
Farm Credit Funds Included in FY 2009 Supplemental: On Thursday, May 14, the full House and the Senate Appropriations Committee passed their own versions of the FY 2009 supplemental appropriations bill. The House voted to approve the $96.7 billion supplemental on a vote of 368 to 60 after a short debate. The 60 members who voted against the bill included 51 Democrats and 9 Republicans.
Meanwhile, the Senate Appropriations Committee unanimously approved their $91.3 billion version on the same day but with Republicans promising to offer amendments once the bill goes to the floor of the Senate next Tuesday, May 19. Given the likelihood of amendments introduced by Republicans to eliminate funding to close the Guantanamo detention center, conferencing the bill before the Memorial Day recess is growing more improbable.
Both bills include supplemental farm credit funds. The final House bill left intact the credit funding we reported on last week: $360 million in Direct Farm Ownership loans, $400 million in Direct Operating Loans, and $50 million in guaranteed non-subsidized operating loans, at an estimated cost of $71.3 million.
A Managers amendment by Agriculture Appropriations Chair Herb Kohl (D-WI) was included at the last minute in the bill reported out by the Senate Appropriations Committee. The Senate version includes the same amount as the House bill — $360 million — for Direct Farm Ownership loans, but just $225 million in Direct Operating loans and no guaranteed loan funds. Both the Senate and House would offset the additional funding from rescissions to unobligated balances from FY 2008 in a variety of rural development program accounts.
NSAC strongly backed the additional funding for direct lending and will urge the conferees to include the credit funds in the final bill to help address the growing backlog.
In addition, the Senate bill also includes language to make available $77 million to the Emergency Conservation program for flood recovery in the Midwest.
FY2010 Appropriations Testimony: On Monday, May 11, NSAC staff delivered its Senate appropriations testimony for FY 2010 to Senate Appropriations members, as well as a revised version of its House testimony to House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee members. Both testimony documents are available on the NSAC website’s homepage.
House Ag Food Safety Hearing: “One size does not fit all,” was the refrain on Thursday, May 14, 2009, when the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Horticulture and Organic Agriculture held a hearing to review food safety standards for organic agriculture. The members of the Subcommittee and witnesses at the hearing offered few specifics on how this maxim would be put into practice, however.
Subcommittee Chairman Dennis Cardoza (D-CA) argued that the standards embodied in California’s Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement should be nationalized, but he was quick to add that “one size does not fit all,” and said that standards should be tailored to accommodate organic producers. He also stated that there should be a single food safety agency. “A patchwork is unacceptable,” he said.
Jim Costa (D-CA) argued that farmers should not have to bear the brunt of the costs for needed improvements in consumer protection. Furthermore, “one size does not fit all,” he said.
David Acheson, Associate Commissioner for Foods at FDA, explained that FDA’s food safety efforts focus primarily on gathering data to assess sources of risk so that it can be determined where resources should be invested. He pointed out that large processing facilities are not the only ones that can pose threats to public health, but also said that to him, “common sense says, ‘One size does not fit all.’”
David Shipman, Acting Administrator of USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service, reminded us that “AMS is not a food safety agency,” but then proceeded to outline AMS’s involvement with “requests from producers to support their product quality control efforts for use as marketing claims.”
Joseph Pezzini, Chairman of the California Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement, testified to what he considers the benefits of the LGMA. Steve Hirsch, a member of the Ohio Produce Growers and Marketers Association, offered a somewhat more nuanced view of industry efforts at self-regulation, and argued for standards that take into account different geographical conditions and different farming practices. “My point, of course,” he added, “is that a single national, one-size-fits-all structure will not work.”
Nick Maravell, a diversified organic farmer from Maryland, discussed an important component of food safety not mentioned by other witnesses – not using pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, and parasiticides. He also discussed direct marketing to consumers or other farms as the ultimate form of accountability and traceability for the customer. Maravell noted that organic certification requires five years of records with “one up, one down” traceability for all inputs and products – a ‘field to fork’ audit trail. His testimony provided an excellent set of recommendations related to both direct marketing and organic farming.
The complete testimony of the nine witnesses at the hearing is available at http://agriculture.house.gov/hearings/statements.html.
Weekly Update – May 4-8, 2009
Tuesday, May 12th, 2009
ACTION NEEDED
Organic Initiative Funds Now Available!
First Sign up Period: May 11 – May 29
In dialogue with NSAC, USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) has reserved a special $50 million pool of funding for a new Organic Initiative under the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). The Initiative, announced on Tuesday May 5 by USDA Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan, will provide payments and technical assistance to transitioning and existing organic farmers who adopt NRCS conservation practices used in organic production systems.
The program will be available in every state and county. Sign up begins for this special pool of funds on Monday, May 11th and continues through May 29th. Given the short sign up period we’ll need all hands on deck to get the word out. An NSAC alert to producers is here. Feel free to modify it any way you like and send it out over your networks.
A number of NSAC member organizations will be providing assistance to farmers with questions about the program: Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education Service, Organic Farming Research Foundation, Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Alliance, National Center for Appropriate Technology, Center for Rural Affairs, Agriculture and Land Based Training Association, Practical Farmers of Iowa, Kansas Rural Center, Florida Organic Growers.
For more details on the Organic Initiative see this NSAC staff memo and this memo from NRCS Chief Dave White.
Value-Added Producer Grant Program Request for Proposals Issued: See story under USDA News below.
THIS WEEK
Obama Releases Full Budget – NSAC Priorities Rate Great, Bad, and Ugly: On Thursday May 7 the White House issued it full budget proposal for FY 2010. Coming one week after Congress approved its own FY 2010 budget resolution, the White House budget remains $10 billion higher than the budget Congress will actually work with in preparing its annual appropriations bills.
Great News
Several sustainable agriculture priority programs fared quite well in the new budget proposal. The new Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program created by the 2008 Farm Bill with NSAC’s strong support would see its funding rise from the $4 million provided directly by the farm bill to $26 million. We expect a request for proposals for the $4 million available in FY 09 to be out in the next month or so. If approved by Congress, the program will then grow dramatically next year, helping to spur growth in jobs through small rural business development.
Staying in the rural economic program arena, the budget included an equally impressive increase in funding for the Rural Cooperative Development Grants program, a program that provides funding to cooperative training centers. If the President prevails, the program would increase for just under $6 million a year to nearly $14 million, allowing the program to add centers and more comprehensively provide assistance on a nationwide basis.
The Value-Added Producer Grants program, while given an increase in the budget request, faired far more modestly, slated to receive $22 million rather than the $19 million available this year. VAPG has long been an NSAC priority, including our successful drive to have local food products and mid-tier value chains added as program priorities, along with a stronger priority for small and mid-sized farms and beginning and minority farmers in the 2008 Farm Bill.
The Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) on the other hand would see its funding rise above the authorized level (technically not allowed, but Congress often ignores budget rules in these situations). The President proposed $128 million for REAP next year, compared to the $60 million this year and a total combined authorized level of $85 million.
The new Beginning Farmer and Rancher Individual Development Account pilot program would be fully funded at $5 million under the President’s proposal. The IDA pilot was another NSAC 2008 Farm Bill initiative.Program guidelines are under development by USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) in hopes that Congress will follow through with full appropriations. It will be exciting to get this new initiative off the ground in a variety of pilot states.
Also at FSA, the budget request goes a long way to make up for the huge shortfall in Direct Farm Ownership Loan funding in 2009. Loan volume under the President’s request would reach $393 million in FY 10 versus just $222 million this year. Money has run out for 2009 despite a large waiting list for loans. NSAC hopes to convince Congress to add emergency funding for DFO loans in the 2009 supplemental appropriation bill (see story below).
Guaranteed ownership and operating loans were allocated modest increases in the Obama budget, though subsidized guaranteed operating loans were cut in half. In another first time request in response to the 2008 Farm Bill, the President’s budget would provide $150 million in Conservation Loans to farmers, split evenly between guaranteed and direct loans. Conservation loans was another NSAC farm bill plank, though we have reservations about one aspect of the final farm bill language which removes some otherwise applicable features that target the loans to small and mid-sized farms.
There is also good news to share related to NSAC 2008 Farm Bill priority programs that receive mandatory (direct) funding. Often in the past, the White House and Congress have used the appropriations bill to reverse or modify decisions made in the farm bill, and this year is no different (more below). But, just one year after the Senate attempted to slice funding for a variety of our priority programs (a move that we ultimately saw reversed), we can be glad that no cuts are proposed for the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program, Outreach to Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers, Organic Research and Extension Initiative, Farmers Market Promotion Program, Seniors Farmers Market Nutrition Program, and Community Food Grants. Combined that represents just over $1 billion in resources, or over $300 million not counting the CSP.
Bad News
Turning to research and extension, the news is bad to mediocre. While organic, specialty crop, beginning farmer, and minority mandatory spending would be left intact by the White House proposal, discretionary programs remain a level funding, despite very significant increases in non-agricultural research in other government agencies. This is the continuation of what is now a long-term trend, with food and agriculture research winding up at the bottom of the heap as increased science dollars flow to health, energy, and other parts of the government research efforts.
Not only would the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program remain stuck at $19 million under the Obama request, but even the larger Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) would stay constant at $201.5 million. Organic Transitions research and extension is also held constant at $1.8 million. One other level-funded program is nonetheless a bit of a bright note. The ATTRA sustainable agriculture information service program would remain at $2.6 million, but given consistent proposals to do away with the program under the Bush Administration, it is a welcome relief to see the presidential request for funding.
Ugly News
Yogi Berra might say it was déjà vu all over again — a new Administration but the same tired old strategy of balancing the agricultural funding request on the back of farm bill conservation programs. Like the preceding Administration, President Obama is proposes to slash mandatory spending for farm bill conservation programs through the backdoor of the appropriations process to the tune over $750 million. In size order, the White House wants Congress to cut the Wetlands Reserve Program by $438 million, Environmental Quality Incentives Program by $250 million, Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program by $43 million, Farmland Protection Program by $30 million, and Agricultural Management Assistance program by $5 million.
The new team uses the same excuse as the old – the farm bill increases spending for these programs unrealistically. To that tired old canard the new team adds a new wrinkle – the farm bill and the USDA regulatory process has made some of these programs less attractive, and therefore they project demand is projected to go down. Obviously this claim begs the question of why they are not fixing the problem areas through regulation and guidance rather than creating a self-fulfilling prophecies of doom.
Escaping the meat axe are the Conservation Reserve Program, Grassland Reserve Program, Chesapeake Bay Conservation Program, Agricultural Water Enhancement Program, and, as noted above, the Conservation Stewardship Program.
NRCS Organic Initiative
Wednesday, May 6th, 2009
NRCS Organic Initiative 2009:
NSAC’s Most Up-to-Date Information as of May 5, 2009
General
On May 5, 2009, NRCS announced the set-aside of $50 million for its new 2009 Organic Initiative through its Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP).
The program is administered by USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and will be available in all States and all counties through Conservation District offices. To find your local office, go to: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/about/organization/regions.html.
The Initiative will provide EQIP conservation payments to:
§ farmers just beginning to transition to certified organic production;
§ farmers already in the process of transitioning to certified organic production;
§ existing certified organic farmers who are transitioning additional acres or herds;
§ existing certified organic farmers who need to adopt additional conservation measures to fully address particular natural resource and environmental concerns; and
§ existing certified organic farmers who want to both transition additional production and adopt additional conservation measures on existing certified organic ground (a combination of the third and fourth bullet point).
Special Funding Pools
Farmer applications to this special Initiative will be treated as two separate ranking pools, one for transitioning farmers without any current certified organic production, and one for existing certified organic farmers who are either adding new transitional production or adopting new conservation measures on existing organic production. In both cases, those in these special funding pools will be competing only against others in the special pool rather than in the much, much larger general EQIP pool.
As provided by law, there is a $20,000 per year ($80,000 over 6 years) payment limit for applications within this special pool.
Producer Options
Existing organic farmers and newly transitioning farmers who have already applied for EQIP funds this year separate of this special Initiative may choose to move their application into one of the two funding pools set-aside under this Initiative or keep it within the general EQIP application pool. If farmers stay in the current general EQIP pool, their contracts are ranked with non-organic farmer contracts and have a payment limitation of $300,000 per any 6-year period (with no annual sub-limit). If farmers choose to move their applications, they will be ranked against other organic special initiative applicants, be eligible to receive the higher payment rates for the “Core 6” practice standards, and be subject to the $20,000 per year ($80,000 over six years) payment limitation.
Timing and Deadlines
This Initiative is in its pilot year. To apply for funds this year under this special $50 million pool, farmers must sign up between May 11 and May 29, 2009. The Initiative will have an initial cut-off of May 29 for ranking purposes. This timing will make these organic EQIP contracts occur at the same time that regular FY 2009 EQIP contracts are being awarded.
EQIP is a continuous sign-up program. That means farmers may submit applications to the program at any time. During the course of the year, NRCS establishes cut-off dates for ranking and award purposes. Applications that come in after cut-off dates go into the hopper for the next round.
NRCS has not yet developed a time-line for additional iterations of this special organic Initiative, and farmers should not assume that there will be another special funding pool again this year fiscal year. NSAC’s best guess is the Initiative will be repeated again in future years, but that is simply our best guess.
Funding and Allocations
The 2009 Organic Initiative is funded at $50 million. Funding to states has been determined through the regular EQIP allocation formula; as a result, not all states will receive the same amount of funds. The funds have already been sent to the states.
As of today, the amount allocated to each state for the 2009 Organic Initiative is not available electronically. If you need to know the allocation for a specific state immediately, call the NSAC office as we have a document with those numbers not yet available in the electronic version. The range is from Rhode Island and Alaska, at just over $150,000 each, to Texas and California at $4.3 and $2.8 million, respectively. Mississippi and New Mexico are the two states closest to the $1 million per state average.
If a state does not use all of the funds, but has made an active good faith attempt to reach out to farmers in the state who could make use of the program, they may be allowed to use the funds for other applicants not in the special initiative pools. If states do not make the effort, however, NRCS may re-pool the money to the national level and redistribute it to states who may have more farmers requesting more funds under the special initiative then the state was allocated originally.
Funds for technical assistance to implement the practices will be in addition to the $50 million. NRCS has set-aside $5 million for technical assistance to get this initiative started, and additional technical assistance dollars as may be needed will be drawn from regular EQIP technical assistance funding.
Individual State Conservationists can add funds from their general EQIP allocation to this special Initiative at the state level at their discretion.
Payments In General
Payments for practices will be determined based on the EQIP rates established in each state. All six “Core 6” practices (see below) will have higher payment rates than the EQIP standard rate in a particular State. “Facilitating Practices” (see below) will be paid at the standard EQIP state rate.
To find the basic rates for your state, go to your states NRCS website (you can reach it through the link in the second paragraph of this document), click on programs, then click on EQIP, then click on FY 09 EQIP Practice Descriptions and Payment Rates.
“Core 6” Conservation Practices and Payments
For the 2009 Organic Initiative, there are six “Core” practices that farmers can apply to implement. These are all available on a nationwide basis. A farmer can choose to implement any number of the following practices, and the more practices that a farmer plans to implement, the higher priority the application will be. These practices address the NRCS resource concern categories of soil quality, soil erosion, domestic animals, plant condition, water quality, and fish and wildlife. The practices are the following (link to conservation practice standard listed for each; link to job sheets are included where available):
- Conservation Crop Rotation
Code: Practice Number 328
Rate Increase: 34% bump up over regular State EQIP payment rate
NRCS Conservation Crop Rotation Practice Standard: ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/practice-standards/standards/328.pdf
- Cover Crop
Code: Practice Number 340
Rate Increase: 46% bump up over regular State EQIP payment rate
NRCS Cover Crop Practice Standard: ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/practice-standards/standards/340.pdf
- Nutrient Management
Code: Practice Number 590
Rate Increase: 30% bump up over regular State EQIP payment rate
NRCS Nutrient Management Practice Standard: ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/practice-standards/standards/590.pdf
Job Sheet: ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/practice-standards/jobsheets/590js.pdf
- Pest Management
Code: Practice Number 595
Rate Increase: 60% bump up over regular State EQIP payment rate
NRCS Pest Management Practice Standard: ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/practice-standards/standards/595.pdf
Job Sheet: ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/practice-standards/jobsheets/595js.pdf
- Prescribed Grazing
Code: Practice Number 528
Rate Increase: 2% bump up over regular State EQIP payment rate
NRCS Prescribed Grazing Practice Standard: ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/practice-standards/standards/528.pdf
- Forage Harvest Management
Code: Practice Number 511
Rate Increase: 2% bump up over State EQIP payment rate
NRCS Forage Harvest Management: ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/practice-standards/standards/511.pdf
Facilitating Practices And Payments
States that came up with practices for organic transition prior to this Initiative that are not one of the Core 6 will be able to count those practices as “Facilitating Practices” under this Initiative. In addition, states are encouraged to offer and fund implementation of additional facilitating conservation practices under this Initiative in order to address particular types of farming or particular resource needs specific to a state or region. These facilitating practices do not have rate increases associated with them, but cover a broader range of practices that count under this Initiative and may prove quite useful to particular producers or groups of producers.
States must develop their facilitating practice list quickly since sign-up begins on May 11. We would guess that most states will be posting their lists on the State NRCS website.
Conservation Activity Plan and Payment
Farmers who are transitioning to organic production are encouraged to take advantage of the opportunity to develop a conservation activity plan (CAP). A “Conservation Plan Supporting Organic Transition” CAP will provide financial assistance to pay for the conservation planning portion of the Organic Systems Plan required for organic certification. The CAP option does not apply to existing certified organic producers.
NSAC is not sure, as of this writing, what the payment amount will be for a CAP. We do know, however, that the value of the CAP payment will count against the $20,000 per year payment limit.
How the Application Process Works
Transitioning Farmers
Farmers wanting to access the funds for transition to organic production through EQIP must apply through their local District County offices. Farmers should go into the offices and speak with a staff person there.
The staff person will fill out a “screening worksheet” that determines basic eligibility and priority of the application for NRCS’ business tool, ProTracts. The screening worksheet will be available from the District County offices. See page 8 of the NRCS eDirective (attached) for an example of the screening worksheet.
In order to complete a screening worksheet, transitioning farmers must provide a “written self-certification” (i.e., a document stating their intent to transition to organic production) to develop an Organic Systems Plan (OSP) and implement one or more of the Core 6 practices and/or facilitating practices (see section below on Core 6 and facilitating practices). A template of a written self-certification is included as Attachment D in the NRCS eDirective.
For priority determination the categories are as follows:
High: Application will result in implementation of at least three of the “Core 6” conservation practices; OR, application will result in implementation of a suite of three or more “Core 6” conservation practices”; OR, application is for development of an EQIP Conservation Activity Plan (CAP) Supporting Organic Transition. (A CAP will pay for the planning part of an Organic Systems Plan.)
Medium: Application will result in implementation of at least two of the “Core 6” Management Practices.
Low: Application will not result in implementation of any of the “Core 6” Management Practices.
The application will then be ranked according to National Ranking Criteria (see page 10 of the NRCS eDirective). If a farmer is awarded a contract, s/he will be in contact with NRCS and other technical service providers to determine how to implement practices.
Organic Farmers
Existing certified organic farmers wanting to access funds to implement further conservation practices through EQIP must apply through their local District County offices. Farmers should go into the offices and speak with a staff person there.
The staff person will fill out a “screening worksheet” that determines basic eligibility and priority of the application for NRCS’ business tool, ProTracts. The screening worksheet will be available from the District County offices. See page 9 of the NRCS eDirective for an example of the screening worksheet.
In order to complete a screening worksheet, certified organic farmers will have to provide a copy of their current Organic System Plan (OSP) and agree to implement conservation practices.
For priority determination the categories are as follows:
High: Application will result in implementation of at least three of the “Core 6” conservation practices; OR, application will result in implementation of a suite of three or more “Core 6” conservation practices.”
Medium: Application will result in implementation of at least two of the “Core 6” Management Practices.
Low: Application will not result in implementation of any of the “Core 6” Management Practices.
The application will then be ranked according to National Ranking Criteria (see page 10 of the NRCS eDirective). If a farmer is awarded a contract, s/he will be in contact with NRCS and other technical service providers to determine how to implement practices.
Technical Assistance and Technical Service Providers
Information will be added in the next iteration of this document. Please check back.
General Things to Keep in Mind
NRCS District County offices received Guidance from headquarters today. This is a pilot program, and many NRCS offices have limited experience working with organic farmers. For this to be a successful Initiative, we need to be willing to work with NRCS staff and go through a learning process together. Be mindful of this.
Farmers and organizations should make sure to thank their Senators – specifically, Senators Harkin, Leahy, Tester, and Gillibrand – and Representatives for this program.
NSAC will continue to provide information as it becomes available.
Weekly Update, April 27- May 1, 2009
Monday, May 4th, 2009
SARE Earns Impressive Support: More than 220 state, regional and national food, farm, conservation and faith groups have signed on to a letter circulated by NSAC in support of increased funding for the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program (SARE). That so many organizations stepped up over a short nine day sign on period speaks to the importance of this program to the sustainable agriculture community.
The letter seeks an FY10 appropriation for SARE of $30 million, with $25 million allocated to research and education and $5 million to extension and professional development.
Increased funding will allow SARE to launch two new and important program initiatives. SARE would be able to initiate an authorized but never before funded state matching grant program to further state and local sustainable food and agriculture research projects. Increased funding would also allow SARE to move forward with a new set of long-term systems projects to investigate and develop climate friendly farming system innovations.
NSAC submitted the letter as testimony to the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee and is in the process of also delivering it to each member of the House and Senate Appropriations Committee.
NSAC Appropriations Testimony Submitted: NSAC submitted its FY 10 funding requests to the House Agricultural Appropriations Subcommittee, and will repeat the process this coming week with the Senate Subcommittee. Among the highlights are recommendations to increase SARE, Value-Added Producer Grants, and Rural Micro-enterprise Grants funding up to $30 million each, as well as requests for $5 million each for the new Beginning Farmer Individual Development Accounts (IDA) program and the Organic Data Initiative.
Reminder – Beginning Farmer Grant Proposals due May 13: A total of $17.2 million is available to fund beginning farmer projects under the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program, with applications due May 13. For more information on the application process, see http://www.csrees.usda.gov/fo/beginningfarmerandrancher.cfm.