Archived Press Releases
For Immediate Release
June 8, 2010
Contact: Ferd Hoefner or
Jess Daniel
PH: 202-547-5754
Economic Benefits of Producing for Local and Regional Markets
Washington, D.C. June 8, 2010 - A panel of farmers told a Senate Agriculture Committee hearing room full of Congressional staffers today that mid-sized farms connected to local and regional marketing chains offer a tremendous engine for economic growth in rural communities.
“Mid-sized farms can produce at a scale and with an agility that is attractive to institutional and wholesale markets particularly when those markets are differentiating their products as local, organic, grass fed or family farm raised,” said Ferd Hoefner Policy Director at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) one of the sponsors of the briefing. “These value based supply chains provide much better income opportunities for mid-sized farmers than the raw commodity market.”
While the number of very small farms and very large farms and ranches has increased over the last decade, mid –sized farms continue to disappear. The mid-sized farmers presenting at this briefing, however, were using production methods, marketing strategies and channels that allowed them to compete and thrive.
Diana Endicott, a Kansas farmer, saw the income opportunities of marketing through a local and regional food network. She founded Good Natured Family Farms (GNFF), a cooperative alliance of more than 150 family farms in Kansas and Missouri producing a cornucopia of meats, milk, cheese, eggs, fruits and vegetables using environmentally sustainable farming practices. GNFF markets their pesticide, hormone and antibiotics free fare to 38 supermarket and institutional customers including Hen House Markets, Balls Price Chopper Supermarkets, and the Community Mercantile in Lawrence, Kansas under the Good Natured Family Farms label.
Enidicott estimates that as a regional aggregator and distributor of goods with a wholesale value of $4 million in 2009, GNFF generated more than $8.5 million in economic activity for the rural communities of its members in the form of increased employment and other multiplier effects.
Early on Endicott received a grant from the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program (SARE). SARE is one of the programs highlighted in the Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food initiative championed by USDA Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan to connect consumers with local farmers. The SARE grant allowed Endicott to build the positive relationships with super market meat managers that were essential to the cooperative’s success. SARE and the other programs in the KYF, KYF portfolio can contribute mightily to the success of mid-sized farms looking to take advantage of these new market opportunities.
Karl Kupers, sees values based local and regional marketing as a means of saving the family farm. The winner of the 2010 Business Leadership Award from the Natural Resources Defense Council, Kupers co-founded Shepherd’s Grain, an alliance of 33 family farms in the Pacific Northwest producing and milling wheat for consumers in their region. Shepherd’s Grain flours are marketed as local and sustainably produced. Many of the practices used by Shepherd’s Grain farmers to conserve soil and water and reduce the use of pesticides were developed by Kupers with the help of a SARE grant.
Shepherd’s Grain was also selected this year to receive a $300,000 working capital grant from USDA’s Value Added Producer Grant Program, another program in the KYF, KYF portfolio. Kupers urged full funding for SARE, VAPG, and Farm to School programs as these all support the development and growth of regional food systems. These programs, he said, “can play a large role in revitalizing our national economy and the rural fabric of our society, a fabric made up of not only economics but the equally important cultural/community aspect of our Nation’s
The briefing was co-sponsored by the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, Farm Aid, Organic Valley, and Heifer International US Country Program.
The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural communities.
National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition
For Immediate Release
June 3, 2010
Contact: Ferd Hoefner
PH: 202-547-5754
Final Rule for Conservation Stewardship Program Released
2010 Sign-Up Applications Extended Until June 25
Washington, D.C. June 3, 2010 – USDA today released the final rule for the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) created by the 2008 Farm Bill.
Earlier, USDA announced that farmers and ranchers wanting to enroll in CSP this year have until June 11 to get applications filed at their local USDA office. Today, however, they extended the application filing deadline to June 25.
“With just weeks to spare before the application deadline, farmers and ranchers have now been afforded the opportunity to know what the final rules of the program are before making the decision whether to apply or not,” noted Ferd Hoefner, NSAC policy director. “The bottomline is this is a strong program that producers engaged in advanced land stewardship should seriously consider.”
After filing the simple CSP application form, farmers and ranchers will also need to schedule an appointment to complete the CSP Conservation Management Tool (CMT), a set of questions related to their existing conservation baseline and new improvements they are willing to consider. The CMT process is expected to last through mid-July, at which point USDA’s Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) will rank all the proposals to determine the best offers for enrollment during this 2010 sign-up. Field visits and contract signing will occur over the late summer months.
Each year CSP will enroll 12.8 million acres of crop, pasture, range, and private non-industrial forest lands. By the fall of 2011, the new CSP will have over 38 million acres enrolled, making it at that point larger in scope than the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).
The final rule makes several important changes to the interim rule that was used for the 2009 sign-up and ranking. Special CSP payments for the adoption of “resource-conserving crop rotations” will be based on the definition used in the original Conservation Security Program (2004-2008) rather than the more expansive definition used for last year’s sign-up that included rotations consisting only of commodity program crops and did not include forages, perennials, or green manure crops.
Also, in the preamble to the final rule, NRCS has announced its intent to return another feature of the old CSP program. Cropland that has been converted to grass and is being used as pasture for grazing will now be treated as “pastured cropland” and afforded a higher payment rate that was available in 2009.
“We applaud the decision to return to the original policies with respect to resource-conserving crop rotations and pastured cropland,” said Hoefner. “These are established concepts and ensure that CSP encourages and appropriately supports more sustainable farming systems.”
While final data on the 2009 CSP sign-up is not yet available from USDA, the preamble to the final rule does note that farmer payments under CSP contracts signed so far are running at about a 63 percent/37percent split between rewards for actively managing and maintaining existing conservation activities and encouraging new, additional conservation activity, respectively.
NRCS explains: “More than 80 percent of the eligible applicants across all land uses were already meeting and frequently exceeding minimum stewardship levels on five of the eight resource concerns. Applicants in the initial CSP ranking period appear to be practicing stewardship at a fairly high level. As a result, one would expect to see conservation performance points earned for existing activities to be higher than performance points earned for additional activities.”
“The emerging information on CSP payments conforms exactly to the Farm Bill’s vision for the program and to common sense,” said Hoefner. “There have been years of pent up demand for this program since it first became law in 2002. Now, eight years later, it has had its first full-scale, nationwide sign-up and many of the best stewards have responded and been accepted into the program. Over time, as the program expands and a wider range of farms become competitive, the ratio will naturally move toward balance.”
In the final rule, however, USDA is announcing its intention to change the payment formula, away from the Farm Bill’s directive for equal treatment for managing, improving, and adopting conservation activities to unequal treatment, with new practice adoption receiving a higher payment rate, beyond the amount justified by environmental outcomes, and ongoing conservation activities receiving a lower payment rate, below the environmental outcome level.
“It is unfortunate the Department has taken it upon itself to rewrite the farm bill and to move away from payments based on natural resource and environmental outcomes,” said Hoefner. “This is a mistake, but one that can be minimized in actual program delivery by limiting the aberrations in the payment formula. We intend to press for keeping the focus on outcomes to the maximum extent possible.”
The final rule also includes a new minimum contract payment amount not included in the interim rule. The intent of the minimum contract payment is to encourage participation in the program by small acreage, high value fruit and vegetable farms who, despite the ability to provide important environmental benefits, might otherwise receive payments so small as to not justify participation. However, the final rule limits the minimum contract payment to beginning, minority and limited resource farmers only. If an annual contract payment amount would otherwise be less than $1,000, the final rule allows NRCS to increase the payment rate.
“We are glad to see the minimum contact payment in the final rule, but are very upset it has been limited in scope to just particular types of farmers,” said Hoefner. “This is unfair to the specialty crop growers, including the increasing number of farms serving the expanding fresh, local market. The limitation appears to fly in the face of the Administration’s professed interest in expanding this market and we hope they will reconsider.”
The Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) is a comprehensive working lands conservation program established by the 2008 Farm Bill to provide technical and financial assistance to farmers and ranchers to actively manage and maintain existing conservation systems and to implement additional conservation activities on land in agricultural production. CSP targets funding to:
• Address particular resources of concern in a given watershed, region, or state
• Assist farmers and ranchers to improve soil, water, and air quality
• Provide increased biodiversity and wildlife and pollinator habitat
• Sequester carbon and reduce greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate climate change
• Conserve water and energy.
The 2008 Farm Bill authorizes a new nationwide, continuous sign-up for CSP which means farmers and ranchers anywhere in the country will be able to apply for the CSP any year and at any time of the year. Periodically during the year, NRCS will rank applications and then develop contracts with those farmers and ranchers with the highest rankings until funding for that ranking period is completely allocated.
NSAC plans to update and re-issue its widely-used Farmers Guide to the Conservation Stewardship Program in the near future.
The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance of farm, rural, and conservation organizations that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural communities.
For Immediate Release: May 3, 2010
Contact: Kate Fitzgerald, 202-547-5754
41 Organizations Urge Congress to Fund Farm to School to
Improve Child Nutrition and Stimulate Farm Economies
Washington, D.C. May 3, 2010 — 41 national organizations delivered a letter to House and Senate leaders today urging them to include $50 million in mandatory funding for programs linking farmers with local schools as part of the 2010 Child Nutrition Act reauthorization. Farm to School programs have a proven track record of increasing farmers’ incomes while also improving the nutrition and food literacy of school children.
The Senate Agriculture Committee passed their version of the Child Nutrition bill on March 24, including $40 million for Farm to School. Mark-up in the House Education and Labor Committee is expected later this spring. The full Senate and House are expected to take action on the bill sometime this year.
“Farm to school programs are cost effective and should be part of a robust child nutrition reauthorization that we hope will move soon,” said Kate Fitzgerald, Senior Policy Associate at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.
Farm to school programs have been shown to improve nutrition for children that participate in the school lunch program and to lead to significant changes in their eating habits, which is particularly important at a time when the country faces an epidemic of childhood obesity.
“We know that we need to do a better job of ensuring that school food programs provide the best food possible for children. This is the rallying call of many prominent dietitians, educators, and doctors, as well as First Lady Michelle Obama. Food sourced from local farms is freshest and combined with teaching children about where their food comes from, provides children the knowledge they need to make good food choices for the rest of their lives,” Fitzgerald continued.
Farm to school programs also offers immediate and long-term economic benefits. According to a study in Oregon, every dollar school districts spent on purchases of local food stimulated an additional eighty-seven cents in economic activity.
“Farm to school increases farm sales and because the money stays locally, it generates a ripple effect throughout the area’s economy. In addition, delivering nutritious food to local schools can bring producers into neighborhoods that are now “food deserts,” creating an opportunity to expand good food choices to area stores and institutions. Farm to school is a winning idea nutritionally, economically, and environmentally,” Fitzgerald concluded.
A farm to school program was first authorized by the Child Nutrition Act reauthorization of 2004 but funds were never appropriated for the effort. In 2010, Senator Leahy (D-VT) and Representative Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) each introduced farm to school bills that include $50 million in mandatory funding for a program to be administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Representatives Farr (D-CA) and Putnam (R-FL) included $50 million for farm to school in their Children’s Fruit and Vegetable Act of 2009 (H.R. 4333) as did Senator Boxer in her Growing Farm to School Protection Act (S. 3144).
Sen. Leahy’s bill (S. 3123) was included in the Healthy, Hunger-free Kids Act of 2010 that was voted out of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee unanimously on March 24 and is waiting to go to the Senate floor. During markup in the Senate Committee, the bill reduced the funding level for farm to school to $40 million. In the House, Rep. Holt’s bill, the Farm to School Improvements Act (H.R. 4710), is waiting for consideration by the Education and Labor Committee.
The Child Nutrition Act reauthorization has been slowed in both Houses by concerns about how funding increases will be paid for. The Senate bill approved by Committee increases funding for child nutrition programs by half of the Administration’s proposed $1 billion per year and pays for the increases mainly with cuts to nutrition education programs for SNAP (formerly food stamp) participants and to a popular conservation program, the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP).
Some anti-hunger and nutrition groups are disappointed that the bill does not achieve the President’s funding goal and are reluctant to support cuts to nutrition education while a coalition of farm and environmental groups, including the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, decried the use of conservation funds that would not only cut current expenditures but reduce the baseline for programs going into the 2012 farm bill reauthorization.
The House has yet to take up consideration of child nutrition reauthorization but Rep. Collin Peterson (D-MN), Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, has said that he will not agree to cuts in farm bill programs, including cuts to EQIP, to pay for any funding increases.
Discussions of funding mechanisms continue, with attention increasingly focused on the House Ways and Means Committee and Senate Finance Committee. Closing tax loopholes were used to pay for improved food stamp benefits during the 2008 Farm Bill negotiations, and many observers have suggested a similar maneuver could be used to pay for improved school meals.
###
.
National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition
For Immediate Release
February 1, 2010
Contact: Ferd Hoefner
202-547-5754
NSAC Comments on Obama Agriculture Budget
Comments of Ferd Hoefner, NSAC Policy Director:
The Obama Administration budget for food and agriculture is a mixed bag.
In the dreadful category, the President proposes to turn his back on the widely acclaimed 2008 Farm Bill deal to ramp up support for farmers and ranchers investing in natural resource conservation and environmental enhancement.
Obama is asking Congress to whack over $500 million in the short term and over $1 billion long term from the mandatory funding for farm conservation programs in the 2008 Farm Bill.
The conservation cuts include $380 million from the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP); 770,000 acres or $70 million (and $700 million over ten years) from the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP); over 15,000 acres or $35 million from the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP); $15 million from the Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program (FRPP); $12 million from the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP), and additional amounts from the Grasslands Reserve (short and long term), and other conservation programs.
The silver lining for NSAC is that Congressional appropriators rejected proposed cuts to mandatory farm bill funding for conservation programs the past two years, with the exception of a $270 million EQIP cut, and we urge them to reject this new proposal in exactly the same fashion. Now is not the time to turn our backs on environmental improvement on the 50 percent of the continental U.S. that is agricultural land.
Turning his back on his campaign promises to fully back the new Conservation Stewardship Program, the budget President Obama submitted today proposes to start chipping away at contracts between USDA and farmers to comprehensively improve soil and water quality, use climate-friendly farming systems, improve wildlife habitat, and reduce water and energy consumption.
At his confirmation hearing, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsick had this to say about the CSP: “I recognize that this is not only an opportunity to expand income opportunities for producers but it is also great for the environment, and for water quality in particular, and it also provides jobs, rural jobs… (T)his is a job creator, it’s great for the environment, and it’s an income opportunity for marginal land. I’m very supportive of this.”
For her part, Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan at her confirmation hearing called the CSP “a jewel among many wonderful USDA programs. What I like about CSP…is that it recognizes farmers as environmental stewards and rewards their contributions to healthy food, land, water, and wildlife.”
We agree with the sentiments of then candidate Obama and the then Secretary and Deputy Secretary nominees. We strongly suspect that Congress will reject this ill-advised cut to the only comprehensive working-lands conservation program in the country.
We support the proposed cut to the per-farm cap for commodity program direct payments from $80,000 a year (married couple) to $60,000 a year, though such a change would obviously require new legislation. The proposed change to reduce the Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) caps, however, leaves us scratching our heads.
Reducing the means-test for receiving commodity production subsidies to $250,000 ($500,000 for married couples) in non-farm income is a noble sentiment, but an ineffective policy. If it were to become law, the most immediate effects would be negative – encouraging crop share landlords to switch to cash rents (and thus avoid the cap) and encouraging investors to plow back subsidies into more land and equipment (and thus reduce AGI). Ironically, both would increase farm consolidation.
The irony is further heightened by the President’s decision earlier this month to issue a final rule on commodity program payment limitation law in which he did a complete about face on his campaign promise to close the regulatory loopholes that allow mega farms to collect hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in subsidy checks. Unlike the new, ineffectual AGI proposal which would require Congressional approval and take several years to implement, the payment limit final rule required only the President’s sign off to effectively and immediately halt farm subsidy abuse.
On the plus side, sustainable agriculture farmers and researchers are cheering the near 50 percent increase proposed by the President for the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) competitive grants program. The $30 million proposed for SARE in FY 11 represents the largest proposed increase in the 22 year history of the program. Most of the increase would help fund a federal-state matching grant program to build long-term sustainability into state and land grant university agricultural programs. Winning congressional passage of the long overdue increase will be a priority of the sustainable agriculture community.
Two new proposals in the USDA budget sound promising and the local and regional food system farm and business community will be anxiously awaiting further details as they emerge.
One would build on a NSAC proposal included in the 2008 Farm Bill to set-aside 5 percent of Rural Business and Industry loans for local and regional food system enterprise development. The President’s new proposal would set-aside up to 5 percent of a wide range of rural development, marketing, and conservation programs for projects in areas in which strategic regional planning is building a stronger rural economic foundation, including the redevelopment of local and regional food and agricultural systems.
The other is a proposed $35 million for a Healthy Food Financing Initiative that would provide loans for new grocery stores to increase access to healthy foods in urban and rural food “deserts.” That proposal would also target an additional $15 million from other marketing and rural development programs to support the initiative.
– 30 –
National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition
For Immediate Release
January 6, 2010
Contact: Ferd Hoefner
202-547-5754
Obama Betrays Campaign Pledge, Keeps Subsidy Loopholes for Mega Farms
Washington, D.C. January 6, 2010 – In a complete reversal of his number one agriculture campaign platform pledge, President Obama has issued his verdict on farm subsidy loopholes – the loopholes for mega farms win and family farmers and federal taxpayers are the big losers.
Speaking of farm subsidy payment limits, candidate Obama said this in the very first issue addressed in his campaign platform: “Most importantly, Obama will close the loopholes that allow mega farms to get around the limits by subdividing their operations into multiple paper corporations. Obama will take immediate action to close the loophole by proposing regulations to limit payments to active farmers who work the land, plus landlords who rent to active farmers.”
In tomorrow’s Federal Register, USDA will publish final regulations to implement payment limitations and the “actively engaged in farming” rules that determine who is eligible for subsidies. The rule is available today on the Federal Register’s Public Inspection List.
In direct contradiction of the campaign pledge as well as the recommendations of the U.S. Government Accountability Office and the USDA Payment Limitation Commission, the new regulation keeps the current gaping “active management” loophole in place, ensuring a continuation of annual taxpayer checks of hundreds of thousands and even millions of dollars to single farming operations.
“The best chance for real reform in a generation has been punted away,” according to Ferd Hoefner, policy director for the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition. “Like other Administrations before, when push comes to shove, something is always more important to the White House politically than the fate of family farming, and they trade away subsidy reform in a heart beat. Once again, principle and sound public policy have been sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.”
Hoefner continued: “In his farm and rural campaign platform, candidate Obama noted that ‘Every president since Ronald Reagan has had the authority to close this loophole without additional action by Congress, but has failed to act.’ Sadly, we can now add one more President’s name to that wall of shame.”
The preamble to the rule to be published tomorrow notes that 73 percent of the over 5,000 public comments received specifically recommended that the active personal management loophole be closed, in keeping with the Obama campaign pledge.
The final regulation does retain some micro-reforms included by the Bush Administration in the interim rule issued last December 29. These require that contributions to “active management” be “regular and substantial” and “documented” but do not include an objective, quantifiable standard against which to measure those terms, and hence are of little practical usefulness, or as Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) noted at the time are “much about nothing.”
The final rule also fixes one significant problem with the Bush interim rule. Under the interim rule, all members of a corporation must be actively engaged in farming even if it is a small farm family corporation in which one generation is turning over control to the succeeding generation and the total payments are just a fraction of the payment limitation in any event.
The new final rule corrects for this overreach by allowing the family stockholders with majority interest to provide the labor and management provided that the total payments received by all stockholders in the family corporation equal less than one payment limitation worth of payments. (In the arcane world of payment limit law, one payment limitation worth of payments is one-half of the otherwise allowable total limit.)
“Fixing the unintended consequence of the interim rule with respect to family corporations operating relatively small farms is important, and the one good thing that can be said about the final rule,” said Hoefner. “However, the main story is that the big loopholes have been left intact and as a result the taxpayer will be forced to subsidize the destruction of family farming. This is nothing less than government sanctioned graft and fraud, with devastating social consequences for family farming and rural communities.”
Both the U.S Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the USDA Commission on the Application of Payment Limitations for Agriculture named the “actively engaged in farming” rules and more specifically the “active management” loophole as a key feature of current policy that leads to frequent abuse and weakens the integrity of the programs. In addition, GAO identified and illustrated associated schemes and devices used by unscrupulous subsidy beneficiaries to channel government payments through non-farming entities back to themselves. All of this is left intact by the new final rule.
In negotiating the 2008 Farm Bill, the principal antagonists on this issue struck a compromise outlined in the Statement of the Managers accompanying the bill that mandated USDA to rewrite the rules related to actively engaged farming definitions and to schemes and devices, and issue those new rules for public notice and comment. The compromise was completely neutral — it requires USDA to rewrite the rules, but does not say whether the Department should loosen or tighten the rules.
Though the final rule does not close the active management loophole, the preamble to the rule does say this in response to the outpouring of public comments asking for the loophole to be closed: “However, we are currently exploring whether the current definition could be amended in a manner that would be fair, equitable, and enhance program integrity. At this time, no changes were made as the result of this comment and other related comments.” It is unclear what that means, especially in light of the twelve months in which the interim rule has been under review in preparation for tomorrow’s publication of the final rule.
“Family farmers and taxpayers can only hope that this new exploration into a fair and equitable result that enhances program integrity will yield better results than this first weak-kneed effort,” said Hoefner.
– 30 –
For Immediate Release: November 3, 2009
Contact: Aimee Witteman, 202-547-5754
USDA Announces $17 Million in Awards for Beginning Farmer and Rancher Training and Mentoring Programs
Washington, D.C. November, 2009 – The U.S. Department of Agriculture today announced the recipients of the 2009 Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program awards totaling $17 million. The announcement was made by Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan on a farm in southeastern Minnesota operated by Eric and Lisa Klein, farmer members of the Land Stewardship Project, a NSAC member organization that is one of the BFRDP grant recipients.
The Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program (BFRDP) is a competitive grants program administered by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (formerly known as the Cooperative State Education and Extension Service – CSREES) at the USDA. BFRDP grants are awarded to local, state, and regionally based networks and partnerships to support financial and entrepreneurial training, mentoring, and apprenticeships for beginning farmers and ranchers, as well as “land link” programs that connect retiring with new farmers and innovative farm transfer and transition practices. BFRDP grants have a term of 3 years and cannot exceed $250,000 a year.
The BFRDP was first authorized in the 2002 Farm Bill, but it never received funding during the annual appropriations process. In the 2008 Farm Bill, BFRDP was reauthorized and now has $75 million in mandatory funding over the next five years. 25 percent of the yearly BFRDP funds are set aside for projects serving limited resource and socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, including minority, immigrant, and women farmers and ranchers, and farmworkers.
“We have been waiting for this moment for some time and are very excited that the USDA is finally able to award grants to programs aimed at helping the next generation of producers get a start on the land,” said Aimee Witteman, Executive Director of the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition. “By providing tools and assistance such as training in business planning and linking new farmers with land, programs funded by the BFRDP promise to help new farmers and ranchers become economically viable land stewards.”
The face of farming and ranching is changing. In 1978, the average age of a U.S. farmer was 50 years old. Today the average age is 57 years old. Today there are five times as many operators 75 years and older than operators under the age of 25. At the same, however, there is a growing movement of people seeking a start in agriculture, a movement that includes large numbers of immigrant and women farmers. With an estimated 400 million acres of agricultural land transferring to new owners over the next two decades, the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition and others believe now is the time to encourage the next crop of farmers and ranchers.
“We were excited to host Deputy Secretary Merrigan on a LSP farm today for the announcement of this new program to help beginning farmers,” says Adam Warthesen, Policy Organizer with the Land Stewardship Project. “Clearly this is a first step in the right direction and we look forward to continuing to help USDA ensure that community-based organizations that work directly with new farmers receive support.”
Among the 29 2009 BFRDP grant recipients are several NSAC member organizations:
Agriculture and Land-Based Training Association (ALBA), Salinas, California – awarded $515,862 over three years to build upon their outreach programs that provide educational training on organic farm production, marketing, recordkeeping, pest management and whole farm planning for farm workers and aspiring farmers who want to operate their own small farm business.
California FarmLink, Sebastopol, California – awarded $525,000 over three years to build on California FarmLink’s ten years of experience facilitating farm transitions, providing technical assistance, hosting workshops, financing farm operations, and empowering farmers to build assets through California Farmlink’s Individual Development Account program.
Land Stewardship Project, Minneapolis, Minnesota – awarded $413,820 over three years for “Collaborative Alliance of Farm Beginnings Programs – Planning and Supporting Farmer to Farmer Education in Sustainable Agriculture to work with partner organizations that are offering Land Stewardship Project trademarked “Farm Beginnings” program around the country.
Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education Service (MOSES), Spring Valley, Wisconsin – awarded $151,515 over three years for “Developing Farm Financial Knowledge of Beginning Organic and Sustainable Farmers” to produce a book, workshops, and a two-day mini conference for beginning farmers on farm financial management so they can utilize simple tools and resources to assess their financial situation.
For a complete list of grantees, please see the Press Release from USDA. http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1RD?printable=true&contentidonly=true&contentid=2009/11/0548.xml
For further information about the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program, see the NSAC Grassroots Guide to the 2008 Farm Bill http://sustainableagriculture.net/publications/grassrootsguide/farming-opportunities/beginning-farmer-development-program/ and the USDA homepage for the BFRDP http://www.csrees.usda.gov/fo/beginningfarmerandrancher.cfm
###
The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural and urban food systems and communities.
For Immediate Release
October 21, 2009
Contact:
Ferd Hoefner 202-547-5754
Washington, D.C. October 21, 2009 – Today the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) delivered a letter to Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack signed by 80 grassroots family farm organizations and nearly 7,500 individuals asking the U.S. Department of Agriculture to stop delays and move to immediate implementation of the Conservation Reserve Program Transition Option, a new opportunity for new beginning and minority farmers to access land.
The Transition Option is a new provision that NSAC helped to secure in the 2008 Farm Bill. It provides incentives for CRP landowners who do not extend their CRP contracts or re-enroll in CRP to transfer the land to beginning or minority farmers and ranchers who will use sustainable and organic grazing, cropping, and mixed cropping-grazing systems.
USDA implemented some but not all of the new 2008 Farm Bill provisions for the CRP in June with an interim final rule. Rather than implement the Transition Option immediately, however, the agency is holding up its implementation while it conducts a multi-year supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) to review policy options concerning land enrolled in the CRP.
The Farm Service Agency’s notice of intent to prepare the SEIS, issued on September 9, 2009, indicates that the SEIS will have little or no effect on the Transition Option. While the SEIS is at least marginally relevant for land that remains in the CRP, the Transition Option is only for land that is leaving the CRP, making it inappropriate to include in the SEIS. The Farm Service Agency admits as much by directing that the SEIS analyze only a single option, namely fully implementing the law as passed by Congress and signed by the President.
The 2008 Farm Bill lowered the acreage allowed in the CRP from 39.2 million acres to 32 million acres. The Farm Service Agency estimates that over 4 million acres of CRP land will be leaving the program in the next two years as CRP contracts expire. After that 2-year period, the amount of land leaving the program diminishes, making the Transition Option far less relevant.
“One of the major obstacles facing beginning and minority producers is access to land,” says Aimee Witteman, NSAC’s Executive Director. “For those who care about beginning farmers and the environment, the CRP Transition Option presents a win-win by taking land that would otherwise likely go back to corn-on-corn rotations and making it available to new farmers using sustainable practices. By delaying implementation of this option, USDA is squandering a key opportunity to support the next generation of producers and make sure millions of acres are put back into production with strong conservation parameters.”
Through the CRP Transition Option, landowners would have the option to rent or lease the land with an option to sell to beginning or minority farmers in exchange for an extra two years worth of CRP payments. To be eligible, the beginning or minority farmer or rancher must develop and commit to a plan to use sustainable grazing practices, resource-conserving cropping systems and other sustainable systems or be transitioning the land to organic production.
In addition, USDA is required to give these new farmers the opportunity to enroll conservation buffers in the Continuous CRP and the rest of the farm in the Farm Bill’s working lands conservation programs, either the Environmental Quality Incentives Program or the Conservation Stewardship Program.
“We urge Secretary Vilsack to clear away the bureaucratic barriers to implementing this program in real time, while it still counts,” said Witteman. “It has already been 17 months since the farm bill passed. Delaying this program for another year or two, at the height of its applicability, is unconscionable.”
The Transition Option was championed in Congress by Representatives Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin (D-SD) and Tim Walz (D-MN) and by Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), joined by Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Russ Feingold (D-WI), Max Baucus (D-MT), Ben Nelson (D-NE), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), and Debbie Stabenow (D-MI).
The letter delivered to the Secretary today was signed by the Center for Rural Affairs, Land Stewardship Project, Ohio Ecological Food and Farming Association, Dakota Rural Action, American Grassfed Association, Iowa Environmental Council and 75 other groups from over 30 states. A copy of the letter is here. The grassroots groups Food Democracy Now!, Slow Food USA, the Greenhorns and the Center for Rural Affairs all participated in the petition drive.
The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural and urban food systems and communities.
###
For Immediate Release: September 16, 2009
Contact: Ferd Hoefner, 202-547-5754
NSAC Applauds Three USDA Meat Marketing Actions
Washington, D.C. September 16, 2009 — USDA this week announced three meat marketing rules vital to U.S. farmer and ranchers using sustainable livestock production methods. The USDA announcements are part of its new “Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food” initiative to give increased support to sustainable local and regional farms and food systems.
In Monday’s Federal Register, the Department published an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking related to the “natural” meat label claim.
At the same time the Department shelved, at least temporarily, the “naturally-raised” meat label claim standard issued by the Bush Administration on its very last day in office.
In today’s Federal Register, UDSA has issued a proposed rule for public comment to implement the 2008 Farm Bill’s groundbreaking compromise on state-inspected meat in interstate commerce.
“On behalf of our sustainable livestock producer members as well as all those who appreciate consuming sustainably-raised meat products, we are voicing our strong support for each of these actions,” said Ferd Hoefner, NSAC’s Policy Director. “It is important that government regulations support and not foreclose economic opportunities for family farmers that help meet growing consumer demand for meat raised in a manner protective of public and environmental health. The three actions taken this week all point in the right direction.”
The voluntary “natural” label administered by USDA’s Food Safety Inspection Service refers only to meat processing methods. The natural label can currently be used on packaging if no artificial ingredients are added and the product is no more than minimally processed. It was subject to public comment in 2006, but no firm consensus emerged. NSAC supports changing the name of the label so that it is clear and obvious in its meaning and its application to processing specifically.
The voluntary “naturally-raised” label claim, if finalized, would be administered by USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) through its Process Verified Program. This label claim refers to how an animal is raised, not to how the meat is processed. Naturally-raised, according to AMS, means that an animal has not received antibiotics or hormones, and that no animal by-products have been used in animal feed.
Sustainable agriculture, family farm, and consumer organizations objected to the issuance of the label and have been urging the Obama Administration to revoke it rather than to finalize it. The groups, including NSAC, maintain that use of the label ‘naturally-raised’ is misleading due to the existence of more stringent labels such as organic and grass-fed. The “naturally-raised” label is confusing to consumers and hurtful to family farmers and ranchers doing niche marketing of meat products meeting much higher standards and consumer expectations.
The action on Monday did not revoke the confusing and lax label rushed out the door by the Bush Administration as it left office. But the announcement did effectively table the naturally-raised label claim pending completion of the comment period on the “natural” label, at which point a decision would be made about whether to proceed with it, change it, or revoke it.
“The naturally-raised label claim standard fails to satisfy the principles of transparency, clarity, and specificity to which AMS has committed in the past,” said Hoefner. “We applaud the Administration’s decision to shelve the naturally-raised label claim. We hope this will be the first step toward revoking it and issuing in its place strong, discrete label claim standards for free range, pasture-raised, no antibiotics, and no hormones added. Only then will important niche markets be protected and consumers served with understandable labels with clear meanings.”
The proposed rule to implement a program under which state-inspected meat and poultry processing plants can be eligible to ship meat in interstate commerce creates an economic opportunity for smaller meat plants and the family farm and ranch clientele they serve. Under the proposal, state-inspected plants with 25 or fewer employees could ship product across state lines for the very first time.
“Sustainable agriculture and livestock groups were strong supporters of the farm bill change to allow small-scale, state-inspected meat to be traded in interstate commerce under strong consumer protection rules,” said Hoefner. “We applaud the Administration for getting the proposed rule out in a timely manner and we will be asking our members to respond with their comments on how to ensure effective implementation of the new marketing opportunity. It will be a boon to regional marketing of high quality, sustainably-raised meat and poultry.”
There are 27 states that currently have state meat or poultry inspection programs that must meet inspection standards that are at least equal to those imposed under federal inspection. The costs of state inspection programs are borne equally by state and federal departments. Under the new farm bill provision and proposed rules, state inspectors will be federally trained, with a federal inspection employee verifying that small state-inspected plants meet federal food safety requirements. Meat produced by these local plants will carry the USDA mark of inspection and be allowed to be sold across state boundaries.
“The inability of farmers and ranchers to sell meat from state-inspected plants across state boundaries is a major barrier to the growth of local and regional food supply networks,” noted Hoefner. “The proposed change will open up new economic opportunities for farmers and new, improved choices for consumers looking for sustainably-raised meat.”
Public comments on the proposed rule must be received by FSIS by Monday, November 16, 2009.
###
The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural and urban food systems and communities.
For Immediate Release: September 15, 2009
Contact: Kate Fitzgerald, 202-547-5754
USDA Announces Initiative to Bring Farm Fresh Food to Nation’s Schoolchildren
Washington, D.C. September 15, 2009 — The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition today applauded USDA on its new local food initiative for schools. USDA Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan and Food and Nutrition Service Administrator Julie Paradis, announced today a creative program to link local farmers with school meals programs.
USDA’s school initiative provides an additional $50 million a year to help schools purchase local food, clears up food procurement rules to allow for a wide range of local, minimally processed foods to be purchased by schools, and creates USDA “tactical teams” to help schools and farmers design programs that will facilitate local purchasing.
“We applaud USDA for this creative initiative to invest in healthy students, healthy rural communities, and a healthy environment,” said Aimee Witteman, Executive Director of the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition. “This reflects a new attitude within USDA to recognize and serve the broad spectrum on American agriculture. With USDA getting its ducks in order, we now need Congress to do its part and fund Farm to School projects as it reauthorizes the Child Nutrition Act early next year.”
Today’s announcement by USDA is one in a series of new USDA initiatives known collectively as ‘Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food’ designed to build vibrant local and regional food systems that provide healthful food and build the economic base of rural communities.
The $50 million in annual funding for additional local and regional food purchases comes from the Department of Defense Fresh (“DOD Fresh”) program administered by USDA.
“The beauty of USDA’s school nutrition initiative is that it ensures that every Federal dollar invested will provide multiple benefits”, said Kate Fitzgerald, NSAC’s Senior Policy Associate.
“We know that when institutions purchase local food these dollars circulate many times in the local economy. These economic multipliers are important in rural areas where poverty is on the rise and more than one in five children are growing up in poverty,” Fitzgerald continued. “Recent studies in Michigan, Illinois and Iowa found that increasing production and purchasing of in-state fruit and vegetables would increase economic activity and create jobs.”
Child nutrition and sustainable agriculture advocates are asking the White House and Congress to back funding for the Farm to School grant program when the Child Nutrition Act is reauthorized. Originally scheduled for this year, the child nutrition bill is now more likely to be acted on next year. The Farm to School program awards grants to schools and communities to build local food supply networks and school capacity to work with fresh products as well as school gardens and hands-on, experiential nutrition education.
“Farm to school initiatives are good economic policy, good rural development policy, and good health and education policy because we know that well-nourished children learn best. It is also good environmental policy because as we source more food closer to home it reduces the carbon footprint of our food system,” Fitzgerald concluded.
###
For Immediate Release: September 1, 2009
Contact: Kate Fitzgerald, 202-547-5754
USDA Announces $18 Million Available for Value-Added Producer Grants
Important to Family Farm Viability
Washington, D.C. September 1, 2009 – The U.S. Department of Agriculture today announced the availability of $18 million for the Value-Added Producer Grant (VAPG) program. Publication of a revised VAPG Notice of Funds Available (NOFA) appears in today’s Federal Register.
VAPG competitive grants allow farmers to plan for new agricultural businesses or develop or expand existing businesses that add value to their farm product through specialized production, processing, or marketing. In addition to food and fiber processing, market differentiated products, commodity segregation, local food products, mid-tier value chains, and some on-farm energy production projects are eligible. Applications for this round of VAPG grants are due November 30, 2009.
“The long-awaited announcement of Value-Added Producer grant funds is good news for rural America,” said Ferd Hoefner, Policy Director for the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition. “Value-added businesses have proven to be an effective way to increase producers’ income and boost economic activity in their communities—especially important during these tough economic times. We are pleased USDA has revised the request for proposals to give greater weight to projects serving small and medium-sized family farms.”
The Value-Added Producer Grant (VAPG) program is a federal farm bill program administered by USDA’s Rural Business-Cooperative Service. The program makes grants to individual farmers or to producer-controlled coops, groups, businesses, and associations for conducting feasibility studies and developing business plans (for which applicants may apply for up to $100,000) or for working capital (for which applicants may apply for up to $300,000). There is a simplified application for grants of less than $50,000. Matching funds are required and must be at least equal to the amount of grant funds requested. The maximum timeframe for a VAPG grant project is 36 months—for this round of grants, projects cannot begin earlier than March 1, 2010 and cannot end later than February 28, 2013.
Important changes were made to the VAPG program during 2008 Farm Bill reauthorization that are now fully reflected in the revised funding announcement. These include priorities for beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, small and mid-sized family farms, local food, and the development of ‘mid-tier value chains’ — business relationships that are aimed at assisting mid-sized farms that want to capitalize on the demand for high quality products from farms that adhere to strong environmental and social values.
Ten percent of the available VAPG funds are set aside for projects serving beginning farmers, projects serving socially disadvantaged farmers, and projects developing mid-tier value chains. Priority will be given to small and medium-sized family farms (mid-sized farms are defined as farms with annual gross farm sales between $250,001 and $700,000, with small defined as anything less than that). In addition, the definition of value-added agricultural product now includes a product that is aggregated and marketed as a locally-produced agricultural food product (defined as within 400 miles of the end consumer or within the same state).
“The growing interest in local and regional food systems has increased the demand for exactly the kinds of business activities that VAPG can fund, such as processing and aggregating facilities” said Kate Fitzgerald, Senior Policy Analyst with the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition. “A VAPG grant can help businesses link sustainable and organic producers with nearby markets and meet a triple bottom line of increased farm and rural income, improved health and reduced carbon consumption.”
Past examples of VAPG recipients demonstrate that the program can support a diversity of projects and agricultural producers.
Kenny’s Farmhouse Cheese in Austin, Kentucky received $24,500 in 2007 to conduct a feasibility study on business expansion, improved technology, and transition to organic dairy production. Dairy farm owner Kenny Mattingly was concerned about the future of milk as a commercial commodity and whether he and his family could continue to live on the small dairy farm he took over from his father in the 1990s. After a trip to Europe where he learned about the art of cheese making, Kenny decided to get involved in value-added product marketing.
Since 1998 when he began to produce Gouda cheese on his small farm, news of Kenny’s cheese making enterprise has spread like wild fire. In less than ten years, his cheese production has increased from 3,000 to 34,000 pounds. Kenny will used his VAPG grant to conduct feasibility studies of business expansion scenarios, developing a successful business plan, improving technology and equipment on the farm, and transitioning to organic products by raising cows that feed on native grasses.
Grassland Beef, a company made up of four independently owned family farms in Monticello, Missouri used their $215,000 VAPG grant to develop a fresh market for their grassfed meat. Fresh meat is a growing market among consumers seeking healthy, environmentally responsible meat options. At the same time, selling fresh meat is more complicated than frozen meat and requires sophisticated packaging and handling strategies. Grassland Beef used their VAPG grant to develop the market for this fresh meat and to work on the technology and infrastructure for sales.
Amazing Grains! A Montana grain growers’ cooperative markets processed, millable Indian rice grass seed. They used their working capital VAPG grant in 2003 to expand their processing capacity, including hiring key staff, providing cash for inventory and other start-up costs, and providing financial resources for market identification, development, and expansion.
“It’s very encouraging to see public funding made available through Value-Added Producer Grants for projects that support farmer innovation and that help producers meet consumer demand for fresh, healthy food, produced in a sustainable manner,” says Fitzgerald.
For further information and to see an Application Guide and an application template, applicants should visit the program web site at: http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/coops/vadg.htm. In addition, applicants should contact their USDA Rural Development State Office by calling 1-800-670-6553. Please note that applicants may submit a draft of their application to their State Office for a preliminary review anytime prior to September 30, 2009 to assess whether the proposed project meets eligibility criteria.
###
For Immediate Release
August 6, 2009
Contact: Ferd Hoefner
PH: 202-547-5754
Two-Step CSP Farmer Sign-Up
Washington, D.C. August 6, 2009 – USDA Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan today announced the first farmer sign-up period for the new Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) for August 10-September 30 (see www.usda.gov). The sign-up for Fiscal Year 2009 is unique in one very important respect that farmers interested in the program should understand. For this year only, interested farmers need only to submit a basic application to the program expressing their interest in participating by the end of the fiscal year (September 30). The more detailed enrollment process can then occur after October 1 yet still count as a Fiscal Year 2009 enrollment.
“Our farmers are excited to know the new CSP has finally arrived,” said Ferd Hoefner with the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition. “We are getting the word out that applications need to be completed at the local Natural Resource Conservation Service office by September 30. The more detailed process of completing the Conservation Measurement Tool, which will be used to rank applications, and then, if accepted into the program, having a field visit from NRCS and completing the conservation plan and program contract can then occur later this fall. But the only way to get to that second more detailed step is by getting the short application completed by September 30. For interested farmers, the bottom line is to be in the initial 2009 class of participants in the new CSP, get into the office and get the application filled out now in order to have the chance to complete the other enrollment steps later in the year.”
The Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) is a comprehensive working lands conservation program designed to protect and improve natural resources and the environment for generations to come. CSP provides technical and financial assistance to farmers and ranchers to actively manage and maintain existing conservation systems and to implement additional conservation activities on land in agricultural production. CSP targets funding to:
• Address particular resources of concern in a given watershed or region
• Assist farmers and ranchers to improve soil, water, and air quality
• Provide increased biodiversity and wildlife and pollinator habitat
• Sequester carbon and reduce greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate climate change
• Conserve water and energy.
The 2008 Farm Bill authorizes a new nationwide, continuous sign-up for CSP which means farmers and ranchers anywhere in the country will be able to apply for the CSP any year and at any time of the year. Periodically during the year, USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) – the agency that administers CSP – will rank applications and then develop contracts with those farmers and ranchers with the highest rankings until funding for that ranking period is completely allocated.
The new farm bill provides sufficient funding for the program to enroll nearly 13 million acres each year. CSP acreage eligible for enrollment will be allocated to each state based primarily on the amount of agricultural land in that state relative to the national total.
- – 30 – -
For Immediate Release
July 29, 2009
Contact: Ferd Hoefner, Aimee Witteman
PH: 202-547-5754
House Rejects Food Safety Bill with Regressive Fee on Farmers
(Washington, D.C. July 29, 2009) – The House of Representatives today failed to obtain a two-thirds majority to pass the Food Safety Enhancement Act (HR 2749). The vote was 280-150, 6 votes short of the total needed to pass the bill under suspension of the rules with no debate and no amendments. The bill may now come back to the floor at a later date under regular rules allowing for amendments to be considered.
While the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition applauds Congressional efforts to make the U.S. food supply safer, it finds major flaws in the bill brought up today which works against the interests of small and mid-sized family farms, conservation and the environment, and local and alternative food systems without improving food safety.
“We appreciate Congress’ efforts to strengthen the oversight and enforcement authority of the Food and Drug Administration as well as address some of the concerns of our members and their base of small and mid-sized farmers and ranchers,” said Ferd Hoefner, Policy Director. “In particular, we applaud the common sense provisions in the bill that provide limited exemptions from traceability and registration requirements for direct farmer-to-consumer marketing and farm-to-farm sales.”
“However, this bill ultimately had great potential to economically harm family farms as a result of overreaching provisions that do nothing to advance the important cause of food safety,” continued Hoefner. “Simple, common sense amendments could fix these flaws and allow us to support passage of the bill. We hope that opportunity might now be provided.”
Among other shortcomings, the bill retains a flat registration fee of $500 per facility that will disproportionately impact small-scale producers who have invested in on-farm value-added processing to meet growing consumer demand and retain a higher share of the food dollar. The same fee would be charged whether the facility was run by a farm family with few if any employees or a multinational corporation with hundreds or thousands of employees.
The final bill also requires farmers who sell their products primarily into the wholesale market to establish expensive and unworkable electronic tracing methods unless they are granted an exemption by the FDA in the Federal Register during the implementation process. The bill does not provide specific guidance so that certified organic farmers will not have to be required to follow duplicative and potentially conflicting food safety standards since the USDA National Organic Program has long had food safety measures in place. Finally, the bill contains language that experience shows can do serious harm to wildlife and biodiversity, while failing to specify the positive role that conservation practices can play to address food safety concerns.
“We will continue to fight to get the concerns of sustainable agriculture advocates addressed as the bill hopefully comes back to the floor under regular order,” said Aimee Witteman, NSAC’s Executive Director. “We firmly believe that new food safety standards can and should be developed that are risk-based and do not work against the interests of small and mid-sized family farms, the environment, and regional food systems.”
###
For Immediate Release
July 29, 2009
Contact: Ferd Hoefner
PH: 202-547-5754
New Conservation Stewardship Program Rule Gets Ball Rolling
Washington, D.C. July 29, 2009 – USDA today published an Interim Final Rule for the 2008 Farm Bill’s Conservation Stewardship Program, a move that will allow farmer sign-up for the program to begin in August.
“Farmers and ranchers that are part of the sustainable agriculture movement have waited a long time for the promise of the last two farm bills to be fulfilled,” said Ferd Hoefner, policy director for the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition. “With today’s rulemaking, USDA is now prepared to roll out a comprehensive working lands conservation assistance program on a nationwide, continuous sign-up basis. We applaud the Obama Administration and the Natural Resources Conservation Service for getting to this point and we will be encouraging our farmer members to enroll in the program starting next month.”
The interim final rule includes information on the basic structure and procedures of the program. The details about sign-up procedures and the new Conservation Measurement Tool that will be used to evaluate farmers’ existing conservation levels and proposed additional improvements will be issued by NRCS soon, after which they will open their doors for business.
With the new continuous sign-up process in place, farmers and ranchers can apply to participate in the program at any time, starting in any year. However, to be part of the initial Fiscal Year 2009 enrollment, producers will need to apply by mid-September, a fairly short window of opportunity. Given the short time frame, USDA has decided as part of the new rule that final application, ranking, and conservation plan and contract preparation may be completed in Fiscal Year 2010 and still count as a FY 2009 enrollment, provided the initial application occurs in the next two months, the last months of this fiscal year.
“We are pleased the Administration recognizes the burden it would place on farmers and on agency staff to try to telescope the complete enrollment process into just a few weeks at the end of the fiscal year and has come up with a workable, two-step process to get around that problem,” said Hoefner. “However, there is a deeper budget issue that was not resolved by the rule. As an acreage-based program, the CSP should have ongoing flexibility to retain the acreage designated by Congress in the Farm Bill, even if year-to-year adjustments need to be made. The rule published today provides flexibility for 2009, but not for the years following. We strongly urge the Obama Administration to provide ongoing flexibility so that the full environmental promise of the program can be realized.”
The Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) is a comprehensive working lands conservation program designed to protect and improve natural resources and the environment for generations to come. CSP provides technical and financial assistance to farmers and ranchers to actively manage and maintain existing conservation systems and to implement additional conservation activities on land in agricultural production. CSP targets funding to:
· Address particular resources of concern in a given watershed or region
· Assist farmers and ranchers to improve soil, water, and air quality
· Provide increased biodiversity and wildlife and pollinator habitat
· Sequester carbon and reduce greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate climate change
· Conserve water and energy.
The 2008 Farm Bill authorizes a new nationwide, continuous sign-up for CSP which means farmers and ranchers anywhere in the country will be able to apply for the CSP any year and at any time of the year. Periodically during the year, USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) – the agency that administers CSP – will rank applications and then develop contracts with those farmers and ranchers with the highest rankings until funding for that ranking period is completely allocated.
The new farm bill provides sufficient funding for the program to enroll nearly 13 million acres each year. CSP acreage eligible for enrollment will be allocated to each state based primarily on the amount of agricultural land in that state relative to the national total.
The original 2002 Conservation Security Program will continue for all farmers and ranchers who enrolled in the program between 2004 and 2008; these producers will continue to receive their payments as scheduled. However, once all of those contracts expire in the coming years, the old CSP program will be over. Beginning in 2009, farmers and ranchers will have the opportunity to enroll in the new Conservation Stewardship Program.
Under the old 2002-enacted program, only a limited number of watersheds in each state were eligible for the program in any given year. Sign-up was limited to a several week long period during just one point in the year. Producers could choose to enroll in one of three tiers of participation, each with their own special, progressively more challenging requirements and each with a different payment limit. At the top two tiers, there was a choice of a 5 or 10 year contract. Moreover, rather than ranking proposals, all producers who achieved certain specified results could be enrolled in the program. As implemented by NRCS, the producer primarily enrolled based on existing conservation activities and achievements, with a limited number of new conservation measures included, but major new conservation practices had to be added through a special contract modification procedure in later years.
All of these features have been eliminated in the new 2008-enacted program. The new CSP is now available on a nationwide, continuous sign-up basis. Priorities will still be set by watershed, but all watersheds will be eligible each and every year. The program has been streamlined by eliminating the tiered structure and going to a universal 5-year contract term and single $40,000 payment limitation. Enrollment is also streamlined by eliminating the need for most later-year contract modifications. Instead, new conservation activities are scheduled and planned for in the original contract.
Many aspects of the new CSP remain the same as the original program, however, including the overall “green payments” philosophy of the program, the dual reward structure for existing and new conservation effort, the focus on comprehensive planning, the emphasis on continual improvement, the higher resource and environmental standards required relative to other federal working lands conservation programs, and the innovative use of resource-specific indices to measure and compensate for environmental benefits and ecosystem services.
The 2008 Farm Bill increased mandatory funding for CSP by a total of $1.3 billion over the next decade. When added to the existing budget carried over from the 2002 Farm Bill, CSP now has a 10-year funding budget of over $12 billion. In addition, the new farm bill evened out some of the existing funding, making more of it available during the 5-year term of the new farm bill than would otherwise have been the case.
Based on the terms of the new program and the funding provided, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that nearly 13 million acres a year can be enrolled. Each year an additional 13 million acres can be added, such that by the end of 2012, when the next farm bill is due to be rewritten, there could be over 50 million acres in CSP and by the end of 10 years, even if Congress does not add more money in the next farm bill, there would be about 120 million acres in the new program.
###
Contact: Ferd Hoefner
202-547-5754
For Immediate Release
May 7, 2009
Comment on Obama Agriculture Budget
Comments of Ferd Hoefner, NSAC Policy Director:
The Obama Administration is to be congratulated for sending Congress FY 2010 budget requests for modest but important increases for key rural economic development and farm credit programs during trying economic times. The sustainable agriculture community is particularly grateful for proposed increased funding for farm bill programs that help build small business and farming opportunities in rural America.
The proposed budget would increase funding for the new Rural Micro-entrepreneur Assistance Program from $4 million to $26 million, the Value-Added Producer Grants program from $19 million to $22 million, and the Rural Cooperative Development Grants program from $6 million to $17 million. Together, these programs enable rural farm and non-farm enterprises access to credit, capital, and training to help stimulate the rural economy, grow small businesses and coops, improve farm income, and foster new local and regional food systems.
On the farm credit accounts, the proposed budget would increase direct farm ownership loans, which are targeted in particular to beginning and minority farmers and ranchers, from $222 million worth of loans this year to $393 million in 2010. In addition, the new conservation loan program would be funded at a loan volume of $150 million, divided evenly between direct and guaranteed loans, while the new Beginning Farmer and Rancher Individual Development Account Program would be fully funded at $5 million. Each of these programs helps create new economic opportunities in farm country and we urge Congress to adopt them.
Sadly, on the conservation side of the budget, the Obama proposal is a close repeat of the Bush Administration’s tactic of slashing farm bill conservation program mandatory spending and redirecting the savings to other programs. The proposed request cuts over $680 million from the mandatory funding baseline for the 2008 Farm Bill. This is unacceptable. We strongly oppose this singling out of the conservation title of the farm bill for cuts and urge Congress to reject the President’s proposal.
The conservation cuts include $250 million from the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, $43 million from the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program, $30 million from the Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, and over $350 million from the Wetlands Reserve Program. The Conservation Stewardship Program, Grassland Reserve Program, Conservation Reserve Program, and several smaller programs were left unscathed. In the FY 2009 agriculture appropriations, Congress left all the farm bill conservation programs intact with the exception of a $270 million cut in EQIP.
###
For Immediate Release
May 5, 2009
Contact: Aimee Witteman, Ferd Hoefner
PH: 202-547-5754
Organic and Transitional Farmers Restored to Rightful Status in EQIP
Washington, D.C. May 5, 2009 – USDA today announced a special three-week sign-up for farmers in the process of converting to organic farming to receive technical and financial assistance through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), a move applauded by the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition and its grassroots member organizations across the country.
The organic conversion assistance was provided for by the 2008 Farm Bill but the plan went awry when the Bush Administration issued rules for the EQIP program just before leaving office which baffled state and local offices of USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). As a result, in a majority of states organic farmers and transitioning farmers were simply not being served, in contradiction of Congress’ intent in the farm bill.
“This was a wrong that needed righting, and with today’s announcement USDA is not only setting it right, but doing so in an innovative and farmer-friendly manner,” said Aimee Witteman, NSAC Executive Director. “We thank NRCS and USDA leadership for listening to the concerns of organic farmers and applaud their new initiative.”
Today’s announcement sets-aside $50 million out of the $1 billion EQIP program for a special three-week sign-up for farms converting to organic production, farms expanding their organic production, or existing organic farms who desire conservation support to reach even higher levels of environmental performance. The sign-up period begins Monday, May 11 and goes through Friday, May 29. Six core conservation practices (conservation crop rotation, cover cropping, integrated pest management, nutrient management, rotational grazing, and forage harvest management) are being made available to transitioning organic farmers on a nationwide basis. Each state may then also add a variety of “facilitating” conservation practices specific to the type of agriculture in their region.
“Obviously we would wish to have more than a very short three weeks to work with our farmer networks to get the word out and get farmers into local NRCS offices to sign up for this exciting new initiative,” said Witteman. “We will work quickly to get the word out far and wide and our member organizations with expertise in organic agriculture will be helping farmers understand their options under the new program terms.”
Organic farming has strong environmental benefits for soil and water quality, climate change mitigation, and biodiversity. In recognition of this fact, Congress retooled the EQIP program in the 2008 Farm Bill to provide a general EQIP priority for organic farming in the program overall as well as a specific EQIP subcomponent for farms converting in whole or in part to organic farming.
The new initiative addresses the special “organic conversion assistance” component of EQIP in particular. Funding under the organic conversion section of the farm bill is capped at not more than $20,000 per farm per year, and not more than $80,000 per farm in any 6-year period. Organic farmers may opt to compete in this special pool, with the tighter payment caps, or may opt instead to compete in the regular EQIP pool for which the 6-year cap is $300,000. However, under the terms of the new initiative announced today, farmers will receive higher payments, relative to conventional EQIP rates, for five of the six national core practices for organic conversion option. The higher payment rates reflect the higher management costs associated with the mandatory three-year organic transition period and the higher ongoing management costs associated with organic farming.
“We expect this program to evolve and grow over time,” said Witteman. “NRCS has made a good faith effort to address the needs of organic farmers and appears to be willing to make this program even better on an iterative basis in future years. This is a very welcomed new day.”
###
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 23, 2008
Contact: Ferd Hoefner
(202) 547-5754
Sustainable Farming Group Applauds Choice of Merrigan as USDA Deputy Secretary
###
The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition represents grassroots farm, rural, and conservation organizations from across the country that advocate for public policies supporting the long‑term economic and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources and rural communities.
For Immediate Release
January 21, 2009
Contact: Ferd Hoefner 202-547-5754
or Terry Vanderpol 320-981-0134
Bush Administration “Midnight” Rule Attempts to Lock in Place Misleading
“Naturally Raised” Livestock Label
NSAC Calls on Obama Administration to Revoke the Label Claim
WASHINGTON — January 21, 2009 – Today’s Federal Register carried a notice from the outgoing Administration establishing a new standard for a “naturally raised” livestock marketing label. While published today, the final rule is not effective until information collection provisions pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act are finished. The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition strongly opposed both the draft rule issued in 2008 and the new final rule issued today and is calling on the new Administration to revoke the rule.
“We urge President Obama and USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack to immediately revoke this last ditch favor for agribusiness from the outgoing Administration,” said Ferd Hoefner, NSAC Policy Director. “Our farmers want new USDA label claim standards to promote more sustainable livestock production alternatives, but not a misleading and ultimately unhelpful ‘naturally raised’ claim.”
Late yesterday, the White House issued a regulatory notice asking all incoming Department heads to consider extending for 60 days the effective date of regulations that have been published in the Federal Register but have not yet taken effect, so they can be reviewed on policy grounds, including a new 30-day public comment period. Since the naturally raised label claim is published but not yet effective, it could be made subject to this 60 day review by Secretary Vilsack.
The “naturally raised” label would be a new label claim under the auspices of USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service. It is different than the longstanding “natural” meat claim that refers to how the meat is processed, not how it is raised. The “natural” claim, signifying that no artificial ingredients are added during processing, is administered by USDA’s Food Safety Inspection Service. Among many other problems, having two different label claims, each with very different meanings and product attributes yet both using the same root word, would be very confusing to the consuming public.
According to the Federal Register notice, the “naturally raised” claim could be used for meat raised without growth promoting hormones and without antibiotics (with some exceptions) that have not been fed animal by-products. NSAC has long supported separate and discrete labels for all three of those issues, but has repeatedly pointed out to USDA that consumers expect “naturally raised” to refer as well to humane treatment, environmental responsibility, pasture access, and related concerns.
“The standard AMS has announced today is weak because it fails to incorporate all of the practices generally used by sustainable livestock producers and expected by consumers,” said Terry Vanderpol, Minnesota livestock producer and co-chair of NSAC’s Marketing, Food Systems, and Rural Development Committee, representing the Land Stewardship Project. “Strong markets are built on consumer trust based on clear and transparent marketing claims. Today’s announcement fails to meet that test.”
“The new label claim standard fails to satisfy the principles of transparency, clarity, and specificity to which AMS has committed in the past,” continued Vanderpol. “AMS should revoke ‘naturally raised’ and return to its original goal of issuing standards for discrete claims for no antibiotics, no added hormones, and free-range or pasture-raised.”
The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (formerly Sustainable Agriculture Coalition) is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural and urban food systems and communities.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 20, 2008
Contact: Martha Noble, (202) 547-5754
Bush Administration Leaves Rural Community Water Quality in Hands of Animal Factories Sustainable Agriculture Coalition calls on Obama Administration to Provide Effective Water Quality Protection
Washington D.C. (November 20, 2008). Martha Noble, Senior Policy Associate for the Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, made the following comments on today’s publication of EPA’s Confined Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) rule in the Federal Register:
“Today, the Bush administration issued a feeble Clean Water Act regulation for Concentrated Animals Feeding Operations (CAFOs). Under the regulation, an animal factory operation—even one with thousands of animals or in close proximity to rural community drinking water sources—can “self-certify” that it does not “propose” to discharge, with no review by a permitting authority. CAFOs with a history of pollutant discharges can avoid obtaining a Clean Water Act permit by self-certifying that the problem is solved to the CAFO’s satisfaction. Even a self-certified CAFO that subsequently discharges pollutants can recertify that it has fixed the problem and not be investigated by a regulatory authority or be made known to the public.
Rural communities will be left in the dark about the location of these “self-certified” CAFOs and will not have access to their self-serving assessments. EPA is not only ducking its responsibilities but is also stripping rural communities and smaller sustainable livestock producers of important tools for protecting themselves.
When the EPA’s 2003 regulations were challenged in court, the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Waterkeeper Alliance Inc. v. EPA, invited EPA to fashion a revised regulation that included a regulatory presumption that CAFOs of certain size, design, and operational characteristics should obtain Clean Water Act permits. Instead of fashioning this regulatory presumption, EPA is abandoning its duties to protect rural community health and the nation’s water quality. The EPA is essentially taking us right back to 1997 when the “no discharge” exemption for CAFOs unleashed a CAFO fecal flood in communities around the nation.
Fortunately, President-elect Obama’s rural and agriculture platform includes tougher environmental regulations on CAFOs, including fines for those who violate air and water quality standards. The new rule issued by EPA today makes it even more urgent for President-elect Obama to address this issue immediately after taking office. The Sustainable Agriculture Coalition urges President-elect Obama to do so.”
###
The Sustainable Agriculture Coalition represents grassroots farm, rural, and conservation organizations from across the country that advocate for public policies supporting the long‑term economic and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources and rural communities.
September 30, 2008
Contact: Ferd Hoefner
PH: 202-547-5754
SAC Rejects Proposed End Run Around the Farm Bill Deal on Payment Limitations
Washington, D.C. September 30, 2008 – The Sustainable Agriculture Coalition took strong issue with a letter from southern Senators to USDA today. The letter concerns a farm bill deal that calls for rewriting the rules that currently allow non-farmers to collect farm subsidies, often through schemes that serve as money pass-throughs to mega-farming operations.
In a letter delivered to USDA Secretary Ed Schafer yesterday, 20 U.S. Senators from southern states took issue with an earlier July appeal to the Secretary from Senators Grassley (R-IA) and Dorgan (D-ND) relating to rules to tighten the gaping loopholes that currently exist in USDA regulations concerning who is “actively engaged in farming” and thus eligible for federal farm commodity subsidies.
Both the U.S Government Accountability Office the USDA Commission on the Application of Payment Limitations for Agriculture named the “actively engaged in farming” rules as a key feature of current policy that leads to frequent abuse and weakens the integrity of the programs. In addition, the GAO identified and illustrated associated schemes and devices used by unscrupulous subsidy beneficiaries to channel government payments through non-farming entities back to themselves.
The dispute highlighted by the warring letters revolves around a deal reached in the final farm bill negotiations in May of this year. Principal investigators struck a compromise outlined in the Statement of the Managers accompanying the bill that mandates USDA to rewrite the rules related to actively engaged farming definitions and to schemes and devices, and issue those new rules for public notice and comment. As part of the compromise, the language in the Statement is completely neutral. It requires USDA to rewrite the rules, but does not say whether the Department should loosen or tighten the rules.
The Grassley-Dorgan letter from June (attached) urges USDA to take immediate action to promulgate the new regulation and to do so in a way that eliminates the abusive loopholes. The Senators also suggested particular revisions.
Yesterday’s letter from southern Senators (also attached) declares that “the 2008 farm bill does not require USDA to make any changes to the way individuals and entities are determined to be ‘actively-engaged’ in farming except in the case of a spouse.” Their letter ends with this statement: “Interjecting unnecessary changes in the operation of the farm programs will not only cause further confusion and uncertainty for our farmers but will also go well beyond the Congressional intent of this narrowly crafted provision.”
“It is simply not true that the farm bill does not require changes to actively engaged rules and schemes and devices employed to evade payment limitations,” said Ferd Hoefner, SAC Policy Director. “The Managers of the farm bill did not say how to change the rules, that is true, but USDA remains under an obligation to issue a new set of rules for public notice and comment. The working family farmers we represent strongly encourage USDA to pursue their obligations under the terms of the farm bill conference report and to ignore yesterday’s attempt to try an end run around the compromise. In our view, a deal is a deal. The only confusion and uncertainty now being injected into the debate is by those who want to renege on the deal.”