[Senate Hearing 111-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011
----------
TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 2010
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:01 a.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Herb Kohl (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Kohl, Harkin, Brownback, Cochran, Bond,
and Collins.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Office of the Secretary
STATEMENT OF TOM VILSACK, SECRETARY
ACCOMPANIED BY:
DR. KATHLEEN MERRIGAN, DEPUTY SECRETARY
DR. SCOTT STEELE, BUDGET OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR HERB KOHL
Senator Kohl. Good morning.
Today, we begin our hearings on the fiscal year 2011 budget
for the Department of Agriculture.
We'd like to welcome Secretary Vilsack. He's accompanied by
Dr. Kathleen Merrigan, Deputy Secretary; and Dr. Scott Steele,
the USDA Budget Officer. We thank you all for being here.
Last year this subcommittee worked in a bipartisan manner
that produced effective and efficient results. With an adequate
budget request and allocation, there was much collaboration
across the aisle. We were able to provide USDA with much-needed
increases in programs, like food safety, which had long been
underfunded. And we were rewarded for our bipartisan
cooperation by getting our bill out nearly on time, which, as
everyone knows, was a welcome change.
This year, the numbers are a little different, but I'm
hopeful the process will be much the same. The President's
budget proposes $21.5 billion for discretionary programs at
USDA for fiscal year 2011. This is actually a decrease from
last year, and I am pleased that USDA is showing fiscal
restraint.
It is incumbent upon this subcommittee to review all these
proposals with three priorities in mind. First, we need to
produce a bill that protects important gains made last year.
Second, we need to ensure that programs vital to people's
health, safety, and livelihoods are adequately funded. And
third, we need to do so in a way that shows fiscal restraint
and responsible austerity.
Briefly, here are a few of the major increases in the
budget, as I see them: The WIC program, which we consider
essential, receives funding necessary to provide assistance to
roughly 10 million low-income women, infants, and children. The
Food Safety and Inspection Service budget receives an increase
smaller than those of the past several years, but nevertheless
an increase in order to maintain the safety of our food supply.
The Farm Service Agency receives a large increase in order to
pay for much-needed information technology upgrades which allow
farmers to continue receiving assistance. There is a small
increase in agricultural research funding. The Foreign
Agricultural Service receives a significant increase for export
trade activities. Finally, we have additional welcome emphasis
on healthy local food production.
All of these increases, however, are more than offset by
decreases in other programs, like conservation, research, rural
development, and others. Further, the budget proposes to reduce
multiple farm bill programs that this subcommittee has worked
to protect, and which will certainly raise opposition. None of
these options are off the table, and everyone needs to be aware
of that.
Clearly, we all have to tighten our belts. We'll certainly
work to ensure that the Department has all of the funding
necessary to serve the American people. While we have been able
to provide some necessary increases over the past several
years, we will be taking a long hard look at the budget, the
proposed increases and new initiatives, as well as the proposed
decreases.
We all look forward to working, again, with Senator
Brownback in a close bipartisan manner. We need to produce a
bill that is a reflection of the importance of the USDA, but
also a reflection of the need to slow spending growth.
So, Secretary Vilsack, we welcome you, again, for being
here and look forward to your statement.
Before that, we'd like to ask Senator Brownback for his
statement.
Senator Brownback.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR SAM BROWNBACK
Senator Brownback. Thank you very much, Senator Kohl.
Appreciate the hearing.
Welcome, Secretary Vilsack, good to have you here. We had a
good process last year that worked successfully and quickly,
and--kind of the way the place is supposed to, which was pretty
amazing in and of itself, and I give that applause to the
chairman. I look forward to working with you on this year's
budget. I noted, in a cursory review of it, you've worked to
reform your budget, cutting some places, putting higher
priority on others, which is the way I think we ought to look
at things. If you've got a high priority, put the money there,
but don't just ask for more money; get it from somewhere else
in the budget. We may have some questions with you about where
you got it, and have some suggestions as to other places that
you may get it from, but I applaud that route of going.
I've got two suggestions to you that we're going to be
working on. One is on the agriculture development budget. And
here, this is one that's going on in another committee, but I
really think you've--you're the one that's got the expertise on
it. You're seeing a lot of agriculture development work
starting in other sectors of the budget, particularly AID, and
I think you're the one with the primary expertise--or you and
the land grant university system. I would really--and we're
going to be pushing this in other sectors, as to ways that we
can see that budget fit better together.
Gates Foundation and others are really stepping up in this
field. They stepped up in the health field on developing
countries, and together we've had a huge drop in AIDS deaths
overseas. Malaria is getting more under control, not completely
by any means. And this is the best foreign policy tool we've
got, when you save somebody's life. The next step in that is
agriculture development, and to see it to development. And this
is a historic role that places like Iowa State, K State,
Missouri, Wisconsin, others have played for many years. But,
you've got, I think, the best connection to them, and I'd
really like to see us--what we can do on that.
And the final one that I think is key--and you've--got it
in my opening statement here--is the next generation on
biofuels. There's just no question that this is a big deal for
us in farm country. I was at an ethanol plant the other day
that's feeding wet distiller's grain. They can sell at 30 cents
cheaper than if you have to dry it. They're taking the
CO2 straight to an oil field for recharge purposes.
I was at NREL in Golden, Colorado, where they're working on the
cellulosic ethanol. They believe they can make it as price
effective with grain ethanol by 2012. And I think that's going
to really help us in agriculture, having a grain stream and a
cellulosic stream probably under the same plant. And I can't
think of a bigger thing for us to work on for market
development and share than this next generation on biofuels,
bio-based products.
I had a group the other day--a PCA--hand me a some
ChapStick that was made out of soy oil. I had a guy a few years
ago hand me a blue rock, a skeet, that was made out of
cornstarch. You know, just little widgets, little tiny market
segments, but all of them add up, all of them add to renewable
uses, and they're good products.
And I just--I really think that's one that, if we're going
to serve the farmers in rural areas of this country, I'd--there
is not a better place for us to invest time and effort and
focus and research dollars. And you've got the lion's share of
that, even though other areas are working on it. And I really
hope we can working with you on those.
Chairman, I look forward to the comments and the questions.
Senator Kohl. Thank you, Senator Brownback.
And now we turn to you, Mr. Secretary, for your statement.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF SECRETARY THOMAS VILSACK
Secretary Vilsack. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. And,
to the members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear today.
As the chair indicated, I'm here with Deputy Secretary
Merrigan and Mr. Steele in an effort to educate the
subcommittee on our priorities.
Let me say that we started this budget process with four
frames in mind. The first frame is a recognition of the
economic difficulties the country currently faces, which is
reflected in our continuation of support programs like SNAP and
WIC, our food assistance programs, which make up 70 percent of
our budget. We will continue to provide the nutritional
assistance necessary to take care of America's families.
As was mentioned by both the chair and Senator Brownback,
we also recognize the fiscal challenge that this country faces,
and that the Senate and House face in putting a budget
together, which is why we made an effort to try to propose a
budget with reductions in discretionary spending recognizing
full well that there are difficult and tough choices that have
to be made by this subcommittee, by this Congress. We laid out
what we believed would be the appropriate choices, but are
certainly open to working with this subcommittee and the House
committee on thoughts and ideas that you all have.
I will tell you that we were also struck by the state of
the rural economy. While the country has faced a recession for
the last 2 years, I think I can make the case that rural
America has faced a recession for a number of decades. If you
take a look at the statistics, what you'll see is, in rural
America, there is a higher poverty rate; a higher unemployment
rate; a loss of population, with over 50 percent of rural
counties having lost population in the last decade. The facts
are fairly clear that they are less educated, in terms of
college educated and high school educated individuals, living
in rural America. And there is a graying of rural America, an
aging of rural America. All of which is reflected also in
statistics relative to farms, where we saw a 30 percent
increase in the number of farmers over the age 75, and a 20
percent decrease in the number of farmers under the age of 25.
For that reason, we are proposing and suggesting a slightly
different direction as it relates to rural development. We
believe that we need to focus less on individual community and
project-by-project efforts, and focus more on recognizing that
smaller communities are part of a regional economy, and looking
for ways in which we can bolster the regional economy in order
to create greater activity. Now, we think that this is a
strategy that--a number of communities have banded together in
other parts of the country and are seeing positive results.
We think this rural strategy and this regional strategy
should be focused on five basic pillars. First of all, a
continuation of the efforts that this Congress appropriated, in
terms of expansion of broadband to all parts of America, both
rural and remote areas, and the opportunities that presents.
Second, as Senator Brownback indicated, a real focus on
biofuels and bio-based products and the energy potential that
can be created in our farm fields, recognizing that this needs
to be not just focused in one part or one region of the
country, but, as our Biofuels Task Force report indicates, an
opportunity for us to have regional economic opportunity in all
parts of the country by using a variety of feedstocks to create
biofuels and bio-based products. This can happen in all parts
of the country, and it actually can create greater energy
security for this country, promote national security, and also
significantly help the rural economy.
We think there is also a need for us to continue an effort
to link local production and local consumption of farm
products, creating opportunities for schools, hospitals,
prisons, and the like, to be able to purchase locally produced
food in order to keep the wealth in the region and in the
community. The establishment of the ecosystem markets under the
2008 farm bill creates an extraordinary opportunity for us to
focus on water, carbon, and habitat protection as another
alternative income source for farm families across the country.
And finally, an aggressive effort in forest restoration and
private land conservation. We see this budget, in terms of
conservation, as actually historic, in the sense that we will
propose extending conservation programs to over 305 million
acres, an increase of about 10 percent, also focusing those
acres in programs that really matter, in terms of creating more
habitat, which, in turn, will create more hunting and fishing
opportunities, which is often an overlooked economic
opportunity in rural America.
These five pillars, we believe, can create higher incomes,
better-paying jobs, and attract young people to stay and to
come to rural communities. We'd like the opportunity to prove
that case to you with the proposal that we have set forth in
our budget.
This process will be aided by our focus on research and
development. Recognizing the need for competitive grants, we
have maintained the formula funding for our research efforts,
but have suggested that there needs to be a real competition
for other research dollars. And so, we have proposed a record
amount of competitive grants, focused in four or five major
areas: the energy area, as was mentioned; the need for us to
continue to look for ways in which we can increase productivity
and protection of crops and animals from disease and pests and
invasive species; a focus on food safety; a focus on obesity
and nutrition; and finally, a focus on the capacity of
agriculture to adapt and mitigate to changing climates.
Given the First Lady's Let's Move Initiative, we believe
the last frame reflected in our budget stems from the
centerpiece of her Let's Move effort--the legislative
centerpiece--which is the reauthorization of child nutrition
proposals. An opportunity to substantially expand efforts in
the school lunch and school breakfast programs gives us an
opportunity to add more fruits and vegetables in the diets of
our young people, responding to the very serious obesity
epidemic we now face, as well as a strategy for dealing with
the fact that we still, yet today, in this rich and powerful
country, have hungry children.
We also recognize the responsibility that we have at USDA
to provide the safest and most abundant and most affordable
food supply. And so, there is continued emphasis on food
safety, with a focus on increased prevention; better
surveillance and risk assessment; and more rapid response,
recall, and recovery. While there is a small budget increase in
food safety, there has been a tremendous amount of effort and
focus on the regulatory side of food safety, in an effort to
better utilize the resources that Congress has provided.
PREPARED STATEMENTS
We believe this is a good budget, a strong budget, a budget
that has elements of reform and responds to the challenges that
we face in rural America. And we look forward to the
opportunity to answer your questions.
[The statements follow:]
Prepared Statement of Thomas Vilsack
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of this subcommittee, I
appreciate the opportunity to appear before you as Secretary of
Agriculture to discuss the administration's priorities for the
Department of Agriculture (USDA) and provide you an overview of the
President's 2011 budget. I am joined today by Deputy Secretary Kathleen
Merrigan and Scott Steele, USDA's Budget Officer.
I don't need to tell you that the American people have been
struggling through the most serious economic recession since the Great
Depression. Families have been forced to make difficult decisions in
the face of unprecedented job losses. The immediate effects of being
unemployed are felt deeply by the unemployed and their families. We
have seen more and more Americans relying on USDA to help put food on
the table.
The challenges facing rural communities for decades have grown more
acute, which is why the Obama administration is committed to new
approaches to strengthen rural America. Rural Americans earn less than
their urban counterparts, and are more likely to live in poverty. More
rural Americans are over the age of 65, they have completed fewer years
of school, and more than half of America's rural counties are losing
population.
This year, President Obama took steps to bring us back from the
brink of a depression and grow the economy again. But with the
unsustainable fiscal policies over the past decade, it's time to get
our fiscal house in order.
The President has announced the 3-year, non-security discretionary
spending freeze for the remainder of his term. This is a freeze on the
bottom line rather than an across-the-board freeze on all line items in
the budget, which provides the flexibility to achieve high priority
goals by reducing funding for lower priority, duplicative, or non-
performing programs. USDA's proposed fiscal year 2011 budget is a
reflection of that policy, essentially freezing funding for on-going
discretionary programs at the fiscal year 2010 level. When limits
placed on select programs and efforts to eliminate earmarks and one-
time funding are taken into account, USDA's total discretionary budget
authority is reduced by over $1 billion. The decrease is primarily due
to reductions in one-time funding such as earmarks, supplementals,
rescissions, and targeted program reductions. However, USDA's total
budget authority request pending before this subcommittee proposes a
total of $129.6 billion in 2011, up from $119.3 billion in 2010,
primarily due to an anticipated increase in nutrition assistance
program participation and mandatory expenditures for crop insurance.
The discretionary appropriation request for this subcommittee is $21.5
billion, which is comparable to the $21.7 billion enacted for 2010.
The 2011 budget request supports the administration's vision for a
strong rural America through the achievement of four strategic goals.
Achievement of these goals will ensure that all of America's children
have access to safe, nutritious, and balanced meals; create new
economic opportunities for increasing prosperity; strengthen
agricultural production and profitability through the promotion of
exports with a specific emphasis on biotechnology while responding to
the challenge of global food security; and ensure the Nation's national
forests and private working lands are conserved, restored, and made
more resilient to climate change, while enhancing our water resources.
With the help of this subcommittee and the funding provided by the
Recovery Act, USDA has been able to achieve significant accomplishments
over the past year. Some of these accomplishments include:
--SNAP has improved the diets of more than 38 million low-income
people now served by the program;
--The financial distress of over 2,600 producers in 47 States has
been relieved through direct farm operating loans. Nearly 20
percent of beginning farmers and socially disadvantaged
producers obtain at least part of their credit needs from USDA;
--Critical rural infrastructure improvements have been made that will
provide nearly 1 million Americans with improved access to safe
drinking water, improve facilities for 655 communities,
including many that provide healthcare service and educational
opportunities, and create 84,000 housing opportunities for
families. USDA has made investments to improve watershed and
flood control on 37,000 acres in 36 States. These actions have
created thousands of jobs, while investing in projects that
will provide benefits for years; and,
--USDA has made available $2.5 billion to expand and enhance the
Nation's access to broadband services. USDA has taken a
particular interest in addressing the needs of unserved and
underserved rural areas. Broadband projects will support anchor
institutions--such as libraries, public buildings and community
centers--that are necessary for the viability of rural
communities. USDA announced initial awards of $54 million in
December 2009. A second USDA announcement of $310 million was
made on January 25, 2010. A third USDA announcement of $277
million was recently made on February 17, 2010. The second
solicitation of applications was published in the Federal
Register on January 22, 2010; applications are being accepted
through March 15, 2010. This funding will open the door to new
businesses that serve global as well as local customers as well
as improve the educational and medical opportunities for rural
residents.
ENSURING THAT ALL OF AMERICA'S CHILDREN HAVE ACCESS TO SAFE,
NUTRITIOUS, AND BALANCED MEALS
A major priority for the Department is ensuring a plentiful supply
of safe and nutritious food, which is essential to the well-being of
every family and the healthy development of every child in America. A
recent report by the Department showed that in over 500,000 families
with children in 2008, one or more children simply do not get enough to
eat. There is a growing body of evidence demonstrating that children
who eat poorly or who engage in too little physical activity do not
perform as well as they could academically, and that improvements in
nutrition and physical activity can result in improvements in academic
performance. Too many children also have poor diets and gain excessive
weight. Recent data shows that the prevalence of obesity has increased
over 10 percent, to a level of 17 percent for children between 6 and 19
years of age. There is also a paradox that hungry children are
disproportionately prone to obesity. Having poor access to healthy food
contributes significantly to both of these problems.
Nutrition Assistance
The budget fully funds the expected requirements for the
Department's three major nutrition assistance programs--the National
School Lunch Program, WIC, and SNAP--and proposes $10 billion over 10
years to strengthen the Child Nutrition and WIC programs through
reauthorization.
School lunch participation is estimated to reach a record-level
again in 2011, 32.6 million children each day, up from about 32.1
million a day in 2010. This is consistent with the increase in the
school age population.
The reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Programs presents us
with an important opportunity to combat child hunger and improve the
health and nutrition of children across the Nation. The 2011 budget
proposes a historic investment of $10 billion in additional funding
over 10 years to improve our Child Nutrition Programs and WIC. It is
designed to significantly reduce the barriers that keep children from
participating in school nutrition programs, improve the quality of
school meals and the health of the school environment, and enhance
program performance. Funding will be used to improve the quality of the
National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs, increase the number of
kids participating, and ensure schools have the resources they need to
make program changes. With this investment, additional fruits,
vegetables, whole grains, and low-fat dairy products will be served in
all school cafeterias and an additional one million students will be
served through school lunch programs in the next 5 years. Improving
these programs directly supports the First Lady's ``Let's Move''
campaign aimed at achieving the ambitious national goal of solving the
challenge of childhood obesity within a generation so that children
born today will reach adulthood at a healthy weight.
To ensure USDA makes progress to decrease the prevalence of obesity
among children and adolescents, and to improve the quality of diets,
the budget includes an increase of $9 million. The increase will allow
USDA to strengthen systematic review of basic, applied, and consumer
research that provides the information necessary to answer questions
about diet, health, education, and nutrition-related behaviors. This
will ensure that that USDA and other Federal agencies can describe the
best nutritional behaviors and develop the best ways of communicating
this information to help Americans improve their diets. The increased
funding will also be used to create more effective nutrition education
interventions for schools and communities, and broaden and maintain
tools and systems that Americans can use to adopt more healthful eating
and active lifestyles, in particular reducing overweight and obesity.
The 2011 budget includes an increase of $50 million for research
through AFRI that will focus on identifying behavioral factors that
influence obesity and conducting nutrition research that leads to the
development of effective programs to prevent obesity. AFRI funding will
also focus research on addressing the micronutrient content of new food
crops and improving the nutritional value of staple crops, fruits and
vegetables through plant breeding leading to greater access to healthy
foods.
The budget includes $7.6 billion for WIC, which will support the
estimated average monthly participation of 10.1 million in 2011, an
increase from an estimated 9.5 million participants in 2010. The
request is $351 million above the 2010 appropriation and supports a
robust contingency fund. Highlights include expanding the breastfeeding
peer counseling program, doubling the size of the breastfeeding
recognition program, supporting Management Information Service
improvements and program research and evaluation, and providing a $2
increase in the value of the fruit and vegetable voucher for children.
WIC administrative activities are also funded, which will facilitate
continued implementation of the revised WIC food packages, required to
be implemented at the beginning of fiscal year 2010. The changes in the
food packages bring recipient diets into better conformance with the
Dietary Guidelines for Americans and feeding recommendations for small
children. Fruits, vegetables and whole grains were added to the WIC
packages, mostly for the first time. Fruit and vegetable consumption is
expected to increase significantly via the new cash value vouchers
recipients will receive, improving nutritional intake, improving long-
term eating habits, and improving the economics for our fruit and
vegetable producers. Recipients will use their new vouchers to purchase
fresh, frozen or canned fruits and vegetables year round.
Participation in SNAP is estimated to be about 40.5 million
participants per month in 2010, and is projected to increase to 43.3
million in 2011. The budget estimates a total of $80.2 billion is
needed in 2011 to fund all expected costs and includes a $5 billion
contingency fund recognizing the uncertainty USDA faces in estimating
actual participation. The Recovery Act increased SNAP benefits $80 a
month for a family of four and will continue until the statutory cost
of living adjustments (COLA) eclipse the Recovery Act benefit levels.
For 2011, we need to continue to support America's families as they
recover from the current economic crisis many of them find themselves
in. Fortunately, SNAP is working as it should with participation
increasing as the people in need increase. However, changes need to be
made to ensure that participants are treated fairly and equitably and
that the resources being delivered foster economic mobility. For these
reasons, we are proposing to improve the accessibility to SNAP. The
main legislative proposal for SNAP would establish a common, national
asset allowance for means test of $10,000 for programs government-wide.
Programs with asset limits currently treat assets inconsistently and
without regard of the need to allow and encourage families to save
toward self-sufficiency. SNAP asset limits have been held for decades
at $2,000 for most households and $3,000 for households with elderly.
In addition, a second proposal would exclude lump sum tax credits to
prevent disruption in eligibility and benefits in the wake of new and
refundable tax credits, and the administrative churning this creates. A
third proposal would extend the Recovery Act provision that waives time
limits for Able-Bodied Adults Without Dependents (ABAWDs) for an
additional fiscal year. In total, these changes to SNAP would add $462
million to recipient benefits and SNAP program costs in 2011 with a 5-
year total of $4.5 billion.
The budget also includes increased funding for staffing needed to
strengthen USDA's ability to simplify and improve the nutrition
assistance programs, enhance capacity to improve nutritional outcomes,
and encourage healthy and nutritious diets and expand an obesity
prevention campaign through efforts supported by the Food and Nutrition
Service.
Food Safety
Protecting public health is one of the most important missions of
USDA. Foodborne illness is recognized as a significant public health
problem in the United States. These illnesses can lead to short and
long-term health consequences, and sometimes death. I am firmly
committed to taking the steps necessary to reduce the incidence of
food-borne illness and protect the American people from preventable
illnesses. Over the past year, we have striven to make improvements to
reduce the presence of deadly pathogens and we continue to make
improvements. At USDA, about 8,500 inspectors work in approximately
6,300 slaughtering and processing establishments, import houses, and
other federally regulated facilities to ensure that the Nation's
commercial supply of meat, poultry, and egg products is safe,
wholesome, and correctly labeled and packaged. A major focus is
implementing the recommendations of the President's Food Safety Working
Group (FSWG) in accordance with three core food safety principles:
--Preventing harm to consumers;
--Conducting analyses needed for effective food safety inspections
and enforcement; and,
--Identifying and stopping outbreaks of foodborne illness.
The budget includes $1 billion for the Food Safety and Inspection
Service to fully fund inspection activities and implement
recommendations of the FSWG and other initiatives aimed at improving
USDA's public health infrastructure. This includes an increase of $27
million to further implement recommendations of the FSWG and strengthen
our public health information infrastructure. Increased funding will be
used to enhance FSIS' ability to collect, analyze and present food
safety data necessary for improving inspection practices. Additionally,
FSIS will hire more epidemiologists to improve investigations of
foodborne illness and outbreaks in coordination with State officials to
develop ``trace back'' tools and improve record-keeping. These
improvements will decrease the time necessary to identify and respond
to foodborne illness outbreaks, which will better protect consumers by
improving our capability of identifying and addressing food safety
hazards and preventing foodborne illness.
USDA research continually works to meet the evolving threats to the
Nation's food supply and focuses on the reduction of the hazards of
both introduced and naturally occurring toxins in foods and feed. As
part of an integrated food safety research initiative, the budget
proposes an increase of $25 million, including $20 million for AFRI and
$5 million for the Agricultural Research Service. This initiative will
strengthen surveillance and epidemiology programs, develop improved
methods for controlling food pathogens in the preharvest stage, develop
innovative intervention strategies to eliminate pathogens and
contaminants, and improve technologies for ensuring postharvest safety
and quality.
Minimizing the Impact of Major Animal and Plant Diseases and Pests
The budget includes $875 million in appropriated funds for the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) to protect
agricultural health by minimizing major diseases and pests. APHIS
activities that contribute to this goal include pest and disease
exclusion, plant and animal health monitoring, response to outbreaks of
foreign plant and animal threats, and management of endemic pests and
diseases. Of note, the 2011 budget includes $11 million to continue
efforts initiated with emergency funding to address the light brown
apple moth (LBAM). This is an increase of $10 million compared to 2010.
The LBAM is an invasive pest that attacks a wide variety of plants of
agricultural or horticultural significance. APHIS estimates the pest
could cause annual production losses up to $1 billion if allowed to
spread.
ASSISTING RURAL COMMUNITIES TO CREATE PROSPERITY
The economic downturn has impacted many sectors and areas of the
Nation, including rural America. At this time, there remains high
poverty in sparsely populated rural areas, which is reflected in higher
mortality rates for children, higher unemployment, and declining
populations. Since the beginning of the economic slowdown, rural
residents have experienced a greater decline in real income compared to
other parts of the Nation. Some factors contributing to this include
lower rural educational attainment, less competition for workers among
rural employers, and fewer highly skilled jobs in the rural
occupational mix. It is not surprising that over 51 percent of rural
counties lost population and that a majority of farm families rely on a
significant amount of off-farm income to meet their needs. However, an
energetic and creative citizenry is looking for new ways to spur rural
economic activity to create prosperity and strengthen the economic
foundations of their communities.
After a year as the United States Secretary of Agriculture, I have
reached the conclusion that we must overhaul our approach to economic
development in rural America. During the past year, at the instruction
of President Obama, I worked on the elements of a new rural economy
built on a combination of the successful strategies of today and the
compelling opportunities of tomorrow. The framework of the new effort
recognizes that the rural economy of tomorrow will be a regional
economy. No one community will prosper in isolation. Further, USDA must
help create economic opportunities in America's rural communities by
expanding broadband access, promoting renewable energy, increasing
agricultural exports, taking advantage of ecosystem markets,
capitalizing on outdoor recreation, pursuing research and development,
and linking local farm production to local consumption. The common goal
is to help create thriving rural communities where people want to live
and raise families and where the children have economic opportunities
and a bright future.
The 2011 budget will assist rural communities to create prosperity
so they are self-sustaining, economically thriving, and growing in
population. With the assistance of the committee, we have already taken
important steps in this effort. With funding from the Recovery Act, we
supported farmers and ranchers and helped rural businesses create jobs.
Investments were made in broadband, renewable energy, hospitals, water
and waste water systems, and other critical infrastructure that will
serve as a lasting foundation to ensure the long-term economic health
of families in Rural America.
This budget includes almost $26 billion to build on this progress
and focuses on new opportunities presented by producing renewable
energy, developing local and regional food systems, capitalizing on
environmental markets and making better use of Federal programs through
regional planning.
Facilitating the Development of Renewable Energy
On February 4, 2010, the President laid out his strategy to advance
the development and commercialization of a biofuels industry to meet or
exceed the Nation's biofuels targets. Advancing biomass and biofuel
production that holds the potential to create green jobs, which is one
of the many ways the Obama administration is working to rebuild and
revitalize rural America. In support of this effort, USDA's budget
includes funding for a variety of renewable energy programs across the
Department. These programs help ensure that farmers and ranchers are
able to capitalize on emerging markets for clean renewable fuels and
help America achieve energy independence and reduce greenhouse gas
emissions.
The 2008 farm bill provided significant mandatory funding to
support the commercialization of renewable energy. The 2011 budget
builds on this investment by providing an increase of $17 million in
budget authority to support $50 million in loan guarantees for the
Biorefinery Assistance Program. The budget also maintains the budget
authority for the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) at $39.3
million. The budget allocates most of the funding to grants rather than
loans, because grant applicants will be able to more efficiently
leverage greater amounts of private sector investment.
The Department will also focus additional research investments on
the production of energy crops and the development of renewable energy
processing. The 2011 budget includes an increase of $33 million for a
comprehensive research program in alternative and renewable energy
within the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) competitive
grant program. This will advance the development of dedicated,
bioenergy feedstocks, and feedstock production. The budget also
proposes an increase of $10 million for in-house research for the
establishment of regional biofuels centers dedicated to the development
of energy feedstocks and bioenergy feedstock production systems for
different regions across the Nation.
Developing Local and Regional Food Systems
With the growing interest among consumers in eating healthy foods
and knowing where their food comes from, promoting local and regional
food systems can offer win-win solutions for all involved.
USDA's ``Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food'' Initiative will work to
reduce the barriers to local and regional food production, such as the
lack of local meat processing and packing capacity, and promote
opportunities to increase local and regional food production and
purchasing, such as supporting school purchases of local and regional
foods.
There exists great potential to create new economic opportunities
for rural America by strengthening local and regional food systems.
Currently, many communities across America have limited access to
healthy foods, which can contribute to a poor diet and can lead to
higher levels of obesity and other diet-related diseases, such as
diabetes and heart disease. Most often, these communities are also
economically distressed and less attractive to grocery stores and other
retailers of healthy food.
To address this problem, the Departments of Agriculture, Health and
Human Services, and Treasury will implement the Healthy Food Financing
Initiative to provide incentives for food entrepreneurs to bring
grocery stores and other healthy food retailers to underserved
communities. Under this initiative, over $400 million will be made
available in financial and technical assistance to community
development financial institutions, other nonprofits, public agencies,
and businesses with sound strategies for addressing the healthy food
needs of communities. For USDA, the budget includes about $50 million
in budget authority for loans, grants, and technical assistance to
support local and regional efforts to increase access to healthy food,
particularly for the development of grocery stores and other healthy
food retailers in urban and rural food deserts and other underserved
areas.
Capitalizing on Environmental Markets
As America's farms and forests hold a tremendous potential for
sequestering carbon, improving water quality, and preserving
biodiversity the budget requests the resources necessary to conduct
government-wide coordination activities that will serve as the
foundation for the establishment of markets for these ecosystem
services.
Through the Office of Ecosystem Services and Markets and the Office
of the Chief Economist, the Department will establish technical
guidelines that outline science-based methods to measure the
environmental services benefits from conservation and land management,
pursuant to the 2008 farm bill.
USDA conducts research that contributes to the development of
climate change mitigation and adaptation tools and technologies, and
USDA outreach and extension networks make them available to farmers,
ranchers, and land managers. The 2011 budget includes an increase of
$50 million within AFRI for global climate change research to develop
mitigation capabilities and adaptive capacities for agricultural
production. The budget also proposes an additional $5.4 million for ARS
to conduct research that will increase the resilience of crops so they
can thrive in variable and extreme environments, as well as focus on
mitigating the effects of climate change by ensuring the availability
of water through improved management.
Regional Innovation Initiative
In addition to these priorities, the 2011 budget maintains support
for USDA's key rural development programs, including $12 billion for
single family housing loan guarantees and nearly $1 billion in
guarantees for business and industry loans. These programs not only
provide needed assistance to rural families and the capital needed to
create jobs, they also create the foundation needed to improve rural
markets and communities which is essential for long-term economic
growth.
In order to utilize the Federal Government's assets more
effectively, USDA's Rural Innovation Initiative will promote economic
opportunity and job creation in rural communities through increased
regional planning among Federal, State, local and private entities. By
creating a regional focus and increasing collaboration with other
Federal agencies, USDA resources will have a larger impact, enabling
greater wealth creation, quality of life improvements, and
sustainability.
To support this initiative, USDA requests authority to set aside up
to 5 percent of the funding within approximately 20 existing programs,
approximately $280 million in loans and grants, and allocate these
funds competitively among regional pilot projects tailored to local
needs and opportunities. This will encourage regional planning and
coordination of projects that are of common interest throughout self-
defined regions. This approach will also support projects that are more
viable over a broader region than scattered projects that serve only a
limited area. It will also help build the identity of regions, which
could make the region more attractive for new business development, and
provide greater incentives for residents to remain within their home
area.
Broadband
Although funding for broadband under the Recovery Act will end in
2010, USDA will continue to make broadband loans and grants under the
authorities provided by the 2002 farm bill, as amended by the 2008 farm
bill. The 2011 budget provides $418 million in loans and grants for
this purpose.
PROMOTE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION AND BIOTECHNOLOGY EXPORTS AS AMERICA
WORKS TO INCREASE FOOD SECURITY
We will also give priority to promoting the production of food,
feed, fiber, and fuel, as well as increased exports of food and
agricultural products, as we work to strengthen the agricultural
economy for farmers and ranchers. America's farmers and ranchers are
the most productive and efficient in the world and the U.S.
agricultural sector produces $300 billion worth of farm products
providing a major foundation for prosperity in rural areas as well as a
critical element of the Nation's economy.
The Department provides a strong set of financial safety net
programs to ensure the continued economic viability and productivity of
production agriculture, including farm income and commodity support
programs, crop insurance and disaster assistance, as well as other
programs. The farm safety net is critically important and provides the
foundation for economic prosperity in rural America. For 2011, USDA
estimates that roughly $17 billion in total direct support will be
provided to farm producers and landowners through a variety of
programs.
Recognizing the need to reduce the deficit, the budget proposes to
better target direct payments to those who need and can benefit from
them most as well as cap total payments paid to larger operations. For
2011, legislation will be proposed to build on reforms made by the 2008
farm bill by reducing the cap on direct payments by 25 percent and
reducing the Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) payment eligibility limits for
farm and non-farm income by $250,000 over 3 years. The savings from
these proposals will impact approximately 30,000 program participants,
which is about 2 percent of the 1.3 million total program participants,
and will over time comprise less than 2 percent of the total direct
support the Department expects to provide annually to farm producers
and landowners.
The Federal crop insurance program is an important part of the farm
safety net. It allows producers to proactively manage their risks
associated with losses from weather, pests and diseases, and financial
risks associated with price fluctuations. The stability provided by
crop insurance has become an important factor used by commercial banks
to determine the credit worthiness of their agricultural borrowers.
The budget also reflects savings expected to be achieved through
reforms in the Federal crop insurance program the changes we are
proposing will help protect farmers from higher costs, rein in costs
for taxpayers, improve access to crop insurance and provide greater
protection from crop losses. Negotiations are currently underway with
the crop insurance industry to restructure the contract that governs
their delivery of the crop insurance program. The proposed new Standard
Reinsurance Agreement (SRA) includes six primary objectives, which will
(1) maintain producer access to critical risk management tools; (2)
realign administrative and operating subsidies paid to insurance
companies closer to actual delivery costs; (3) provide a reasonable
rate of return to the insurance companies; (4) equalize reinsurance
performance across States to more effectively reach under-served
producers, commodities, and areas; (5) enhance program integrity; and
(6) simplify provisions to make the SRA more understandable and
transparent.
These objectives align with RMA's primary mission to help producers
manage the significant risks associated with agriculture. By achieving
these six objectives, the new SRA will ensure financial stability for
the program and the producers it serves, while increasing the
availability and effectiveness of the program for more producers and
making the program more transparent. The new agreement will also
provide insurance companies with greater flexibility for their
operations and financial incentives to increase service to underserved
producers and areas, while ensuring that taxpayers are well-served by
the program.
National Export Initiative
Agricultural trade contributes directly to the prosperity of local
and regional economies across rural America through higher commodity
prices and increased sales. USDA estimates that every $1 billion worth
of agricultural exports supports 9,000 jobs and generates an additional
$1.4 billion in economic activity. At the same time, however, foreign
trade barriers limit exports, thereby reducing farm income and
preventing job growth in the agricultural sector.
USDA has an important role in expanding export opportunities for
our food and agricultural products. As part of the administration's
National Export Initiative, the budget proposes increased discretionary
funding of $54 million to enhance USDA's export promotion activities.
The initiative includes increases of $34.5 million to supplement
funding for the Foreign Market Development Program--commonly known as
the Cooperator Program--and $9 million for the Technical Assistance for
Specialty Crops Program. This funding will be in addition to that
provided to the programs by the Commodity Credit Corporation and will
double the level of funding available to the programs in 2011.
Increased funding of $10 million is also requested for the Foreign
Agricultural Service, which will be used to expand export assistance
activities, in-country promotions, and trade enforcement activities to
remove non-tariff trade barriers, such as unwarranted sanitary and
phytosanitary standards and technical barriers to trade imposed on U.S.
commodities by other countries.
Research To Improve Agricultural Productivity
For 2011, the budget provides almost $800 million for research
aimed at improving agricultural productivity and protecting agriculture
from pests and disease that limit the productive capacity of
agriculture. The proposed research will improve genetic resources and
cultivars that will lead to improved germplasm and varieties with
higher yields, improved disease and pest resistance, and resilience to
weather extremes such as high temperature and drought. The budget also
funds several initiatives to support research on breeding and germplasm
improvement in livestock which will enhance food security and lead to
the development of preventive measures to combat diseases and thereby
increase production. The budget also includes a 56 percent increase for
the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) programs
aimed at helping farmers and ranchers adopt practices that are
profitable and beneficial to communities. As part of this increase, the
2011 budget proposes funding for the Federal-State Matching Grant SARE
Program to assist in the establishment and enhancement of State
sustainable agriculture research, education and extension programs. The
matching requirement will leverage State or private funds and build the
capabilities of American agriculture in becoming more productive and
sustainable.
As the world population grows and the demand for food with it, we
must look to new technologies for increasing production, including
biotechnology. Biotechnology can expand the options available to
agricultural producers seeking solutions to a variety of challenges,
including climate change. However, prudent steps must be taken to
ensure that biotech products are safely introduced and controlled in
commerce. For 2011, the budget requests $19 million, an increase of 46
percent, to strengthen USDA's science-based regulatory system for
ensuring the safe introduction and control of biotechnology products.
This includes preventing regulated genetically engineered products from
being co-mingled with non-regulated products and to ensure the safe
introduction of biotechnology products. USDA will also continue to
provide technical input for the development of science-based regulatory
policies in developing countries. By promoting consistency between the
domestic regulatory system and the import policies of our trading
partners, the likelihood of the United States being the supplier of
choice improves as markets for these products grow.
Increasing Global Food Security
Recent estimates from the United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization suggest that more than one billion people around the world
are chronically hungry, many of them children.
A productive agricultural sector is critical to increasing global
food security. USDA plays a major role in helping American farmers and
ranchers improve the efficiency of agricultural production, including
the safe use of biotechnology and other emergent technologies. New
technologies and production practices can enhance food security around
the world by increasing the availability of food as well as providing
developing nations tools for increasing their self reliance and giving
them greater control over their production decisions.
For 2011, the budget includes approximately $2.1 billion in
emergency and non-emergency foreign food assistance programs carried
out by USDA and USAID, and capacity building programs. Through the
McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition
Program, which is administered by the Foreign Agricultural Service,
USDA will assist an estimated 5 million women and children in some of
the world's poorest countries.
In support of agricultural reconstruction and stabilization
activities in Afghanistan, USDA is increasing the number of
agricultural experts serving in Afghanistan from 14 to 64 in 2010. The
work of these courageous individuals is essential for stabilizing
strategic areas of the country, building government capacity, ensuring
the successful management of assistance programs, and addressing the
issue of food insecurity. It is estimated that as much as 80 percent of
the Afghan population relies on agriculture for wages and sustenance.
Consistent with these efforts, the Department has established a
priority for increasing the number of Afghan provinces in which women
and children are food secure from 10 to 14 by the end of 2011, ensuring
food security for 41 percent of the country's provinces by the end of
2011.
An important means to assist developing countries to enhance their
agricultural capacity is by providing training and collaborated
research opportunities in the United States, where participants can
improve their knowledge and skills. The 2011 budget provides increased
funding for the Cochran and Borlaug Fellowship Programs, which bring
foreign agricultural researchers, policy officials, and other
specialists to the United States for training in a wide variety of
fields. Under our proposals, as many as 600 individuals will be able to
participate in these programs and bring this knowledge home with them
to benefit their respective countries.
In addition, the Department is working with other Federal partners
to reduce global food insecurity and increase agriculture-led economic
growth in developing countries. These combined efforts will not only
ensure that the world's children have enough to eat, but will improve
national security as well. By promoting strong agricultural systems in
the developing world, we will eliminate some of the primary causes that
fuel political instability and diminish the economic vitality of
developing nations.
ENSURING PRIVATE WORKING LANDS ARE CONSERVED, RESTORED, AND MADE MORE
RESILIENT TO CLIMATE CHANGE, WHILE ENHANCING OUR WATER RESOURCES
USDA plays a pivotal role in working with farmers and ranchers to
protect and restore private working lands, while making them more
resilient to threats and enhancing our natural resources. USDA partners
with private landowners to help protect the Nation's 1.3 billion acres
of farm, ranch, and private forestlands.
The budget includes record levels of support for conservation
programs, bringing total funding to about $6 billion, which includes $5
billion in mandatory funding for the conservation programs authorized
in the 2008 farm bill and nearly $1 billion in discretionary funding
for other conservation activities, primarily technical assistance. This
level of funding supports cumulative enrollment of more than 304.6
million acres in farm bill conservation programs, an increase in
enrollment of about 10 percent over 2010.
The budget will accelerate the protection of our natural resources
by strategically targeting funding to high priority program areas. This
includes an increase of $25 million to implement the Strategic
Watershed Action Teams initiative that will target identified
watersheds for a period of 3 to 4 years with the intent of reaching 100
percent of the landowner base in each watershed eligible for farm bill
conservation program assistance. The additive effect of planned and
applied conservation practices would hasten environmental improvement
while keeping production agriculture competitive and profitable.
Research
Underlying the achievement of all of the Department's goals is a
strong research program. Research fuels the transformational change
that rural America needs to excel. To help bring about this change, I
have launched the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA),
which will be a key element in providing the knowledge and technical
advances that will lead to increased productivity, more abundant food
supplies, improved nutrition, safer food, and a cleaner environment.
Agricultural research ultimately leads to increased profitability
for farmers, reduced food costs and greater choice for consumers, and
improved management of the natural resource base. To get more out of
our research, the Department must focus its research and development
components on making sure we do our very best job not just to increase
productivity but also to make sure that we protect what it is they are
growing and raising. The National Institute is going to have a more
focus, in part on improving productivity and also being able to figure
out how we can do a better job of protecting crops and animals from
pests and disease. The more we produce, the healthier we produce, the
better off we will be. If you conduct more research that will enable
farmers to be more productive and improve the protection of their crops
from pests and disease, in concert with protecting the market through
food safety, we will be able to expand domestic markets and increase
export markets.
As I have highlighted a few of the most significant research
initiatives, I would like to point out that the 2011 budget proposes
the largest funding level ever for competitive research with $429
million for AFRI, an increase of $166 million over 2010. AFRI is the
Nation's premier competitive, peer-reviewed research program for
fundamental and applied sciences in agriculture. It is broad in scope
with programs ranging from fundamental science to farm management and
community issues.
The budget also maintains formula funding for research and
extension at 1862, 1890 and 1994 land-grant institutions, schools of
forestry and schools of veterinary medicine at the 2010 level, thereby
maintaining the research infrastructure needed to meet our research
goals. These important capacity building programs will allow
institutions to sustain the matching requirement that many of these
programs have, thereby allowing Federal funds to leverage non-Federal
resources. All of these institutions are also eligible to apply for
AFRI funding to enhance their research efforts.
Management Initiatives
The budget also includes a number of management initiatives that
will improve service delivery, ensure equal access to USDA programs,
and transform USDA into a model organization.
As part of a government-wide effort to improve service delivery and
IT security, the Department will continue to implement improvements to
address vulnerabilities to aging IT systems used for delivering
billions of dollars in farm, conservation, and rural development
program benefits that will result in more reliable, customer-focused
service to producers.
Ensuring that the Department and its programs are open and
transparent is a priority for USDA. Therefore, USDA is proposing to
expand the Office of Advocacy and Outreach, which was established by
the 2008 farm bill, to improve service delivery to historically
underserved groups and will work to improve the productivity and
viability of small, beginning, and socially disadvantaged producers.
In support of my commitment to improve USDA's handling of civil
rights matters, the budget includes funding to ensure that USDA has the
staffing and resources necessary to address its history of civil rights
complaints and seek resolution to claims of discrimination in the
Department's employment practices and program delivery. To demonstrate
this commitment, USDA under my leadership has been aggressively
pursuing resolution to several pending discrimination lawsuits against
the Department. Most notably, USDA and the Department of Justice
reached a settlement of outstanding claims of discrimination by Black
farmers in the Pigford case. Resolution of this litigation is evidence
of the commitment to resolving all of the large civil rights cases at
USDA, including those involving Hispanic, Native American, and women
farmers.
As USDA's workforce interacts directly with the public we serve
every day, the Department's employees are some of our most valuable
assets. To enhance the Department's human resource capabilities, USDA
will focus on improving leadership development, labor relations, human
resources accountability, and veterans and other special employment
programs. Investing in our employees will create an environment that is
more responsive to the Department's broad constituency.
There is no doubt that these tough times call for shared sacrifice.
The American people have tightened their belts and we have done so as
well. We made tough decisions, but this budget reflects our values and
common sense solutions to the problems we face. It makes critical
investments in the American people and in the agricultural economy to
set us on a path to prosperity as we move forward in the 21st century.
I would be pleased to take your questions at this time.
______
Prepared Statement of Phyllis K. Fong, Inspector General
I want to thank Chairman Kohl and Ranking Member Brownback for the
opportunity to submit testimony about the Department of Agriculture's
(USDA) Office of Inspector General's (OIG) fiscal year 2011 budget
request. My statement will summarize a number of the most important
oversight projects and investigations we performed in fiscal year 2009
and 2010 to date and present the key elements of the President's fiscal
year 2011 budget request for OIG.
During this period, we issued a total of 78 audit reports regarding
USDA programs and operations. We obtained $131 million in potential
monetary results by reaching management decision with USDA on our
recommendations. In that time period, we reported 866 convictions and
$179 million in potential monetary results as a result of OIG
investigations.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Audit monetary impacts are derived from funds put to better use
and questioned/unsupported costs, as established by Congress in the
Inspector General Act of 1978. The components of our investigative
monetary results include fines, recoveries, restitutions, claims
established, and administrative penalties, among others.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My statement will begin with an overview of our work to assess and
improve the Department's American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
(Recovery Act) programs and operations, cover our most significant
recent audit and investigative activities, and conclude with a summary
of the President's fiscal year 2011 budget request for OIG.
OIG OVERSIGHT OF USDA'S RECOVERY ACT ACTIVITIES
The Recovery Act provided USDA with $28 billion in additional
funding for an array of programs and activities. Among the USDA
programs funded by the Recovery Act are farm loans, watershed
protection, nutrition assistance, wildfire management, capital
improvements and maintenance, and rural development. With the
subcommittee's leadership, the Recovery Act also provided OIG with
$22.5 million to oversee the USDA programs funded by the Act; these
funds are available through fiscal year 2013.
In response to this call for additional oversight, in 2009 OIG
modified its audit and investigative programs, added staff to handle
the additional workload, and reprioritized its current work. Along with
expanding the scope of audits already in process, we added 54
additional audits that were specifically designed to address Recovery
Act programs.
Our approach to auditing Recovery Act-funded programs involves
three phases that will be implemented over the next several years. In
the first phase, we are reviewing USDA agencies' documented internal
control procedures relating to Recovery Act programs. In the second
phase, through field reviews, we are evaluating program delivery,
reviewing participants' eligibility, and ensuring Recovery Act funds
are being used for their intended purposes. In the third phase, we will
evaluate program performance measures and how accomplishments and
results are reported by USDA agencies.
As of April 1, 2010, we have issued 12 audits regarding the
Department's Recovery Act programs and operations. Our audits addressed
USDA's internal controls over loan and grant processing, management of
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), actions taken in
response to prior audit recommendations, aquaculture grants, and Forest
Service (FS) contracting and grants management. We have also issued
another six audits relevant to USDA's Recovery Act activities that were
in process when the Act was passed. These audits examined programs that
subsequently received Recovery Act funding, such as the rehabilitation
of flood control dams, broadband loans and grants, nutrition
assistance, and rural development. At present, we have 34 Recovery Act
audits in process, with 10 additional audits scheduled to start in the
coming months.
We have also developed a new reporting process to provide USDA
agency managers with prompt feedback regarding the use of Recovery Act
funds; these ``fast reports'' convey issues to program managers as soon
as they are identified. Fast reports are then consolidated and issued
in a formal, audit report at a later date. As of April 1, 2010, we have
issued 30 fast reports addressing matters such as business and industry
loans, contract issuance and management, Recovery Act reporting,
housing loans, nutrition assistance, farm operating loans, water and
waste disposal grants and loans, and floodplain easements. For example,
the fast report we issued concerning SNAP found the budgetary estimate
for SNAP had increased significantly since the original estimate
included in the Food and Nutrition Service's Recovery Act Plan. The
change was not consistently or timely reported on Recovery.gov and
associated agency Web sites.\2\ The Department agreed to work with the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Recovery Accountability
and Transparency Board to establish a process for changing estimates
reported on these public Web sites.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The original estimate totaled more than $19.8 billion through
fiscal year 2013. This amount increased to $65.8 billion through fiscal
year 2019 when estimated for the fiscal year 2011 budget.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our Investigation Division has been working to ensure the integrity
of Recovery Act programs by investigating allegations of potential
fraud, preparing to conduct investigations, and implementing a
whistleblower allegation program. To accomplish these goals, we
developed a two-phase approach. As part of the first phase, we are
increasing fraud awareness training for Federal, State, and local
officials involved in the disbursement and administration of Recovery
Act funding from USDA.
In the second phase, we are assessing complaints and referrals OIG
has received to ascertain if criminal investigations should be opened.
As of April 9, 2010, OIG had received 31 referrals relating to USDA
Recovery Act contract awards and 20 complaints to our hotline. Our goal
is to expeditiously evaluate any concerns raised about USDA's Recovery
Act activities and expenditures and ascertain if there is potential
criminal activity or, alternatively, administrative issues. As of April
9, 2010, we had identified no criminal activity in our reviews of
Recovery Act referrals and complaints.
GOAL 1: STRENGTHEN USDA'S SAFETY AND SECURITY MEASURES FOR PUBLIC
HEALTH
One of OIG's most important goals is to protect public health and
ensure the wholesomeness of the food reaching both U.S. consumers and
consumers in foreign markets. In fiscal year 2009 and the first half of
fiscal year 2010, we completed several important oversight projects
related to food safety. We also completed work related to other USDA
activities potentially affecting public safety, such as assessing the
ongoing rehabilitation of aging dams throughout the country.
Evaluating Food Safety Controls Prior to Slaughter of Cattle
In 2008, when videos came to light documenting the abuse of cattle
awaiting slaughter at a meat packing company in Chino, California, the
Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) oversaw the company's recall
of approximately 143 million pounds of raw and frozen beef products--
the largest recall in U.S. history. OIG's audit of conditions at the
slaughter facility determined there was not a systemic failure ofFSIS'
inspection process, but that plant personnel acted deliberately to
bypass required inspections.
OIG investigators continue to work closely with the U.S. Attorney's
Office and FSIS to investigate the events that took place at this
facility. Meanwhile, in 2009, OIG audit's work on this beef recall led
to three major audits concerning the quality of beef processed in the
United States.
Evaluating the Recall
Given the unprecedented size and scope of this beef recall, OIG
evaluated whether FSIS effectively oversaw the recall, verifying if the
packing company contacted beef distributors, retrieved the potentially
contaminated meat, and properly disposed of it. We also assessed
whether FSIS had implemented corrective actions in response to
recommendations OIG made in two prior reports on the agency's recall
process.
While FSIS had generally taken appropriate actions in response to
our prior recommendations, we found that FSIS needs to improve how it
evaluates the success of its recalls. To determine if a recall has been
successful, FSIS samples and follows up with distributors who have
received potentially adulterated beef. The agency, however, had no
procedures to replace sampled distributors who were found not to have
actually purchased any of the recalled beef. The size and completeness
of the sample is important because FSIS depends on statistical
projections to support its overall conclusions concerning a recall's
effectiveness.
In this recall, 41 percent of the companies FSIS contacted had not
received the recalled product and therefore should not have been used
to evaluate the recall--some were out of business, some did not sell
meat at all, and others never purchased any of the recalled beef. We
also found that FSIS needs to implement written procedures to ensure
that all of its district offices follow a standardized and
statistically valid process for evaluating recalls. FSIS agreed with
OIG's recommendations to strengthen agency procedures to evaluate
recalls.
Evaluating Controls Over Residues in Cattle
Another public food safety issue facing the United States is the
contamination of meat with residual veterinary drugs, pesticides, and
heavy metals. ``Residue'' of this sort finds its way into the food
supply when producers bring animals to slaughter plants while they have
antibiotics or other drugs in their system. When the animals are
slaughtered, traces of the drugs remain in these animals' meat when
shipped to meat processors and retail supermarkets, and eventually
purchased by consumers. In cooperation with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
FSIS inspectors are required to sample and test animal carcasses to
verify that beef is not contaminated with harmful residue.
Our March 2010 report found that the National Residue Program is
not accomplishing its mission of monitoring the food supply for harmful
residues. For example, FSIS, FDA, and EPA have not established
thresholds for many dangerous substances (e.g., copper or dioxin),
which has resulted in meat with these substances being distributed in
commerce. To address these serious shortcomings in the National Residue
Program, FSIS, EPA, and FDA need to take steps to improve how they
coordinate with one another.
Acting on its own initiative, FSIS can strengthen the National
Residue Program by requiring slaughter plants to increase their
controls when processing dairy cattle and bob veal calves. Our analysis
shows that plants handling these animals were responsible for over 90
percent of residue violations. The agency can also do more to focus on
repeat violators-producers who have a history of bringing to slaughter
animals with residue in their system. FSIS agreed with our findings and
recommendations.
Purchasing Ground Beef for Federal Nutrition Assistance Programs
The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) purchases ground beef
products for use in Federal nutrition programs. Our newly released
audit found that the agency had significantly improved its procedures
to ensure that contracted ground beef suppliers comply with purchasing
requirements. However, our audit found that further improvements are
still needed. AMS has not made a formal determination as to whether
ground beef suppliers should be required to obtain bonding or insurance
to safeguard the Department against possible monetary losses resulting
from major product recalls. The agency needs to strengthen its criteria
to hold suppliers accountable for their non-conformances and to
properly track non-conformances to ensure that ground beef suppliers
meet eligibility requirements for continued program participation. In
addition, AMS needed to strengthen its controls over the selection of
product samples for laboratory testing and the laboratory testing
process itself. This would provide increased assurance that ground beef
products purchased for Federal programs meet quality and safety
standards. AMS officials agreed with OIG's findings and
recommendations.
Overseeing the National Organic Program
The public's interest in environmental concerns and food produced
with fewer pesticides and chemicals has led to increased focus on
USDA's National Organic Program. Over the past decade, the organic
industry has grown between 14 and 21 percent annually. In 2008, it sold
more than $24.6 billion in agricultural products. Administered by AMS,
the National Organic Program is responsible for ensuring that when
consumers purchase foods labeled ``USDA organic,'' those foods meet
uniform standards.
Our recent audit of the National Organic Program found that program
officials need to improve their process for handling complaints and
taking appropriate enforcement actions. For example, AMS did not take
enforcement action against a farming operation that marketed nonorganic
mint under USDA's organic label for 2 years. Other farming operations
continued to improperly market their products as organic while AMS
considered enforcement action, which in some cases took as long as 32
months.
Organic products must originate from farms or operations certified
by agents accredited by USDA. These certifying agents grant organic
certification upon determining that an operation's procedures comply
with regulations. We found that AMS did not ensure that its certifying
agents consistently enforced the requirements of the organic program so
that products labeled as organic meet a uniform standard. AMS officials
agreed with OIG's findings and recommendations.
OIG has also investigated criminal schemes to defraud the National
Organic Program. In February 2010, as a result of a joint investigation
involving OIG agents, the owner of an organic commodities company in
Texas was sentenced to 24 months imprisonment and ordered to pay
$520,000 for falsely certifying that conventionally grown crops (grain
sorghum, beans) were organic.
Rehabilitating Aging Dams To Address Public Safety
Since the 1940s, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
has assisted in the construction of more than 11,000 dams, many of
which have reached (or will soon reach) the end of their planned design
lives and need rehabilitation. Congress appropriated over $159 million
from fiscal years 2002 to 2007 to assist dam owners in rehabilitating
these structures, most of which are owned by local governments and
utilities.
Our 2009 audit found that instead of first coordinating with State
dam agencies, NRCS selected dams for assessment as they were
volunteered by their owners, regardless of the potential threat to life
and property or their proximity to the end of the planned design life.
Six years after the program was initiated, NRCS had not assessed 1,345
of 1,711 high-hazard dams (79 percent) and has spent $10.1 million to
assess and rehabilitate lower hazard dams. (The failure of a lower-
hazard dam is unlikely to result in loss of life.) NRCS lacks authority
to compel owners to take any particular action, even in the case of a
dangerous high-hazard dam. NRCS officials agreed with OIG's findings
and recommendations.
OIG Investigations: Food Safety
OIG considers investigations involving food safety our highest
priority due to the potential impact on the health and well-being of
the American public. In our food safety investigations, we typically
see various schemes such as product tampering, adulteration, the
falsification of documents, smuggling, and inhumane slaughter. Within
the last year, we completed a number of noteworthy food safety
investigations as illustrated by the following two cases.
The first involves a Texas food company that schemed to defraud
several Middle Eastern food companies as well as the U.S. military,
which relies on these companies to provide food to its troops in Iraq
and Afghanistan. The owner of this food company forged USDA export
certificates and Halal certificates and directed his employees to wipe
expiration dates off the products and stamp new dates on them. In July
2009, the owner pled guilty to charges that he conspired to defraud the
Government. He was sentenced to serve 24 months in jail and ordered to
pay $3.9 million in restitution to the Federal Government.
The second significant OIG food safety investigation involved the
seizure of smuggled duck and other meat/poultry products aboard cargo
ships at Port Elizabeth, New Jersey. The importer attempted to
illegally bring the products into the United States by not listing them
on the ship's manifest, thereby avoiding USDA inspection. A multi-
agency investigation found that the food products originated from
China, which was prohibited from exporting poultry to the United
States. The owner of the American import company ultimately pled guilty
to conspiracy in February 2010. To date, this investigation has
resulted in Federal fines in excess of $6.7 million being imposed on
several companies and their owners.
Animal Fighting Investigations
Animal fighting is a crime that has gained national attention
recently due to several high-profile investigations. OIG has been
involved in investigating animal fighting for several years because of
the effect these activities have on animal health, as well as human
public health and safety concerns. The animals used in these illegal
activities can introduce diseases into the United States. Individuals
participating in animal fighting operations are also often implicated
in illegal activities involving firearms, drugs, contraband, gambling
and, in some instances, public corruption. In fiscal year 2009 and the
first half of fiscal year 2010, our animal fighting investigations
resulted in 405 individuals being convicted and monetary results of
approximately $223,000.
An OIG investigation disclosed that the former sheriff in Luray,
Virginia, was accepting campaign contributions to protect an illegal
cockfighting and gambling operation at the local sportsman's club. He
was also using his position to conduct other improper activities, such
as misusing inmate labor for personal gain. Due to OIG's investigation,
the sheriff resigned from his position and was ultimately sentenced in
December 2009 to 19 months imprisonment, 2 years of supervised release,
forfeiture of $75,000 to the Federal Government, and approximately
$5,000 in other monetary penalties. The sportsman's club was also fined
and several associated individuals received prison terms ranging up to
18 months.
GOAL 2: STRENGTHENING USDA'S PROGRAM INTEGRITY AND IMPROVING THE
DELIVERY OF BENEFITS
OIG has also completed a number of projects intended to ensure that
USDA programs are reaching the people who most need and are eligible
for program benefits. These projects range from audits verifying the
accuracy of payments made to farmers to investigations resulting in the
prosecution of individuals who defraud SNAP.
Determining the Accuracy of Financial Assistance to Peanut Producers
From 2002 through 2007, the Farm Service Agency (FSA) provided more
than $1 billion in financial assistance to peanut producers. FSA
determines how much assistance is needed based on weekly average peanut
prices published by the National Agricultural Statistics Service
(NASS). Even very small changes in peanut prices can result in
significant changes in the amount of assistance provided--a penny one
way or the other equals roughly $33 million a year. Our March 2009
audit found that NASS' peanut prices are not based on reliable market
data. Since there is no public commodity market for peanuts, NASS
solicits price data from peanut buyers. Their participation is
voluntary and confidential by law, and NASS does not verify the data
they provide. Without mandatory and verifiable price reporting, FSA has
no assurance that its program payment rates depending on NASS'
published prices correspond to a true market price. FSA officials
generally agreed with OIG's recommendations.
Improving USDA's 2008 Disaster Relief Response
The Disaster Relief and Recovery Supplemental Appropriations Act of
2008 provided USDA with extensive supplemental funding for disaster
relief assistance to individuals and communities affected by the
hurricanes and flooding in the Midwest and South (primarily) that year.
Due to the efforts of this subcommittee and your counterparts in the
House, the Act provided OIG with $5 million in supplemental no-year
funding for oversight of the Department's emergency relief activities.
Our disaster relief oversight program has focused on whether USDA
agencies have implemented the internal control improvements regarding
emergency benefits that OIG recommended after assessing their response
to the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes. That experience demonstrated that
management controls regarding emergency assistance eligibility and
program oversight are vital to prevent the waste or misuse of USDA
disaster funding. OIG's audit program for USDA disaster relief
activities programs is assessing the Department's short-term emergency
relief assistance and its longer-term rebuilding efforts. We are
currently reviewing aspects of USDA 2008 disaster relief operations,
such as the Emergency Watershed Protection Program and the Emergency
Conservation Program.
Ensuring That All Farm Loan Recipients Are Treated Fairly
A provision in the 2008 farm bill required OIG to review how FSA
was processing foreclosures to ``socially disadvantaged'' farmers
(i.e., women and minorities) to ensure that all loan recipients were
being treated fairly and in conformity with the law. By analyzing FSA's
actions at critical points in the foreclosure process, we found that
FSA generally followed its established process in servicing and
foreclosing loans to socially disadvantaged borrowers and that the
agency's decisions conformed to applicable laws and regulations. We did
find a few instances where FSA did not technically conform to
prescribed timeframes for some policies and procedures; however, there
was no statistically significant difference between how socially
disadvantaged borrowers were treated compared to the rest of the
population.
OIG Investigations: USDA Benefit and Farm Programs
Ensuring the integrity of benefits provided by USDA programs is the
hallmark of the investigative work we do. OIG investigations of
criminal activity in USDA's nutrition assistance programs resulted in
250 convictions and over $44 million in monetary results in fiscal year
2009. I would like to highlight for the subcommittee several noteworthy
OIG investigations regarding USDA benefit programs that achieved
significant sentencings and/or restitution orders in fiscal year 2009.
--An Illinois store owner and employee conspired with at least five
additional retail grocery stores to illegally exchange SNAP
benefits for cash. Together, the owner and his employee were
sentenced to 83 months of incarceration and ordered to pay $6.3
million in restitution to USDA.
--An Oklahoma entity receiving Child and Adult Care Food Program
benefits made false statements and claims on monthly meal
reimbursement records to fraudulently obtain additional meal
reimbursements. The director was sentenced to 41 months
imprisonment and ordered to pay $1.6 million restitution to the
U.S. Government.
--Kentucky business owners fraudulently used the same collateral to
secure two bank loans guaranteed by USDA's Rural Business
Cooperative Service. In February 2009, the owners pled guilty
to bank fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering and were
sentenced to 27 months and 30 months imprisonment,
respectively. They were ordered to pay $4.5 million in
restitution to USDA and two other entities.
In fiscal year 2009, OIG also completed several investigations into
fraudulent activities involving FSA and Risk Management Agency (RMA)
programs. These are some of the most complex investigations we conduct,
as they often involve large monetary amounts and voluminous
documentation. In this area, OIG found that:
--A Florida farming entity received over $1 million in fraudulent
crop insurance payments. The OIG investigation resulted in the
corporation being ordered in March 2009 to pay $1.1 million in
restitution to USDA. The farmer was ordered to pay in excess of
$460,000 in taxes and penalties to the Internal Revenue
Service.
--A Missouri farmer made false statements to obtain loans, convert
collateral, and commit bank fraud. In September 2009, the
farmer pled guilty to all charges and was sentenced to 9 months
incarceration and ordered to pay $550,000 to the Federal
Government.
GOAL 3: OIG WORK IN SUPPORT OF USDA'S MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT
INITIATIVES
OIG continuously monitors risks to USDA programs to assist the
Department in identifying and correcting programmatic concerns, and to
improve overall Department management.
Enhancing the Integrity of the Federal Crop Insurance Program
RMA oversees private companies that sell crop insurance policies to
American farmers. The total liability for this insurance has increased
markedly in recent years--from 2005 to 2009, total liability increased
from $35 billion to approximately $91 billion. OIG found that RMA needs
to take a number of steps to strengthen its oversight of this industry.
Above all, it needs a comprehensive, systematic, and well-defined
strategy for improving the integrity of the crop insurance program,
including a strategy that coordinates the various activities being
conducted by the different RMA divisions. In order to use RMA's limited
compliance resources as effectively as possible, the strategy should
focus those resources on program vulnerabilities, which we recommended
RMA determine by performing a risk assessment. We identified steps RMA
can take to strengthen its oversight of the crop insurance companies
that are responsible for much of the day-to-day operations of the
program. Such steps include improving the agency's review of large
insurance claims and holding the private insurance companies
responsible when RMA finds that they made errors while processing
claims. We continue to work with RMA officials on corrective actions to
address OIG's recommendations.
Strengthening the Security of USDA Information Technology
Over the last decade, USDA has improved its information technology
(IT) security, but many longstanding weaknesses remain. In 2009, the
Department implemented its Cyber Security Assessment and Management
System to provide it with current agency security information and
enhance the Department's oversight capabilities. USDA still needs to
take steps to address a number of security weakness, such as developing
a Department-wide plan for addressing IT security vulnerabilities,
updating software, addressing vulnerabilities, deploying both
encryption and the Federal Desktop Core Configuration, and using
standard security settings. With such a large and diverse Department,
ensuring that all agencies comply with these standards will take time
and resources. The Office of the Chief Information Officer is
continuing to work towards these goals.
Financial Statements for Fiscal Years 2008 and 2009
Pursuant to the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 and OMB
guidance, Federal OIGs are responsible for annual audits of
departmental and agency financial statements to obtain reasonable
assurance that the financial statements are free of material
misstatements. USDA's fiscal year 2008 and 2009 consolidated financial
statements received an unqualified opinion, as did the fiscal year 2008
and 2009 financial statements for five other USDA entities.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Rural Development, Commodity Credit Corporation, FS, Food and
Nutrition Service, and Federal Crop Insurance Corporation. NRCS
received a disclaimer of opinion, but this did not change the opinion
for the consolidated statements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OIG Investigations
In order to promote integrity of departmental operations and
activities, OIG has responsibility to investigate incidents of severe
misconduct and potential criminal activity by USDA personnel. The
following OIG investigations involving former USDA personnel resulted
in sentencings in fiscal year 2009:
--A former FS employee in Wisconsin was found to have misused
purchase card convenience checks and misappropriated almost
$320,000 over a 4-year period. In May 2009, she was sentenced
to 12 months incarceration and ordered to pay $320,000 in
restitution to the Federal Government.
--In December 2009, a former FSIS employee was sentenced in the
Southern District of Mississippi to 11 months in prison and 3
years of probation for threatening and pointing an assault
rifle at OIG agents. OIG agents had been sent to interview the
former employee after he made threatening phone calls to the
FSIS Regional Director. The individual pled guilty to one count
of assaulting, resisting, or impeding Federal employees.
goal 4: improving usda's stewardship of natural resources
USDA provides leadership to help America's private landowners and
managers conserve their soil, water, and other natural resources. Our
goal in auditing these activities is to increase the efficiency and
effectiveness with which USDA exercises stewardship over natural
resources.
Encouraging Farmers and Ranchers To Become Good Stewards of the Land
NRCS' Conservation Security Program (CSP) provides financial
assistance to producers who meet the very highest standards of
conservation and environmental management. OIG assessed NRCS' CSP
administration for one fiscal year in which the agency was authorized
$259 million in financial assistance for prior year contracts and new
signups for conservation practices, as well as technical assistance to
develop conservation plans. Of the approximately 4,400 contracts for
the new signups with first year payments totaling $51 million, we
sampled 75 contracts that totaled $11.8 million. We found that half (38
of 75) were given to participants who did not qualify for the program.
NRCS relied on applicants to provide accurate information, but did not
confirm key information that would help verify producer qualifications.
Agency officials agreed with OIG's recommendations and we continue to
work with NRCS on appropriate corrective actions.
Forest Service
Employing approximately 30,000 employees and overseeing 193 million
acres comprising 175 National Forests and Grasslands, the U.S. Forest
Service (FS) is the largest USDA agency. In fiscal year 2008, FS spent
more than $5.8 billion managing and protecting America's natural
resources. Because FS is an extremely decentralized agency that has a
history of weak internal controls, OIG devotes a significant percentage
of its resources to overseeing its operations. The following are brief
descriptions of several of our more noteworthy oversight reviews
pertaining to FS operations.
Purchasing and Maintaining the Aircraft FS Needs To Fight Fires
We reviewed FS' plans for purchasing new aircraft for its
firefighting program, and found that FS did not present the best case
possible to justify buying new aircraft. With an average age of more
than 50 years, more than half of the 44 airtankers available under
contract in 2004 were grounded for safety concerns. By 2012 the
remaining 19 airtankers will begin to be either too expensive to
maintain or no longer airworthy. FS will probably have to purchase
replacement aircraft--at a cost of up to $2.5 billion--rather than
lease airtankers, as it has done in the past. FS agreed with our
recommendations to: (1) collect current aviation performance data to
determine how new aircraft will improve its firefighting performance;
(2) use aviation firefighting performance measures that directly
demonstrate the cost impact of its aging airtanker fleet; and (3)
formally establish an integrated team to take charge of developing the
agency's budget document.
Improving How FS Uses Contracted Labor Crews To Fight Fires
Since FS relies on contractors to fulfill many of its firefighting
responsibilities, we assessed how effectively and efficiently FS is
deploying these resources. We found that FS needs to analyze its
mobilization data from previous seasons to identify trends in how
firefighting labor crews are used in conjunction with other resources
(i.e., aircraft operations, fire engine crews). Analyzing this data
would greatly improve FS' ability to identify more effective deployment
strategies, especially during severe fire seasons when FS' resources
are most taxed. We continue to work with FS to obtain agreement on the
corrective actions.
Evaluating How FS Plans To Replace Its Critical Personnel as They
Retire
FS could face a significant shortage of qualified firefighters as
its workforce ages and firefighters face mandatory retirement. As of
2009, approximately 26 percent of FS' critical firefighters were
eligible to retire. Unless adequate replacements are available, the
nation could face losses to its natural resources and firefighters
could be at increased risk of harm. We concluded that FS has not taken
the necessary steps to ensure it has a sufficient number of qualified
staff to meet its future wildland fire management responsibilities. FS
officials agreed with OIG's findings and recommendations.
OIG INVESTIGATIONS
In the case of each fatality of an officer or employee of the FS
that occurs by a wildfire entrapment or burnover, OIG is required by
law to conduct an independent investigation.\4\ Thus, when five FS
firefighters fighting the Esperanza Fire died due to a burnover in
October 2006, OIG investigated the circumstances of their deaths. Our
investigation found that there was no evidence of any criminal
wrongdoing involved in the accident.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 7 U.S.C. 2270(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OIG's Wildland Fire Investigation Team will continue to work with
FS to ensure that there is transparency and established procedures for
handling future investigations of this sort.
OIG'S FISCAL YEAR 2011 BUDGET REQUEST
Before concluding, I would like to address key elements of the
President's fiscal year 2011 budget request for OIG. We are very
grateful for the support of the administration and of the Congress
particularly the Members of this subcommittee--during this budget
process. Your ongoing support and interest in our work has enabled us
to consistently provide constructive oversight for a wide array of
USDA's extensive programs and operations.
Over the last 5 fiscal years, the total appropriation available for
OIG was approximately $413 million. The potential dollar impact of
OIG's audits and investigations for this same period was $1.36 billion,
resulting in cost savings and recoveries of approximately $3.29 for
every dollar invested in our oversight work.
We respectfully ask that you support the President's fiscal year
2011 request of $90.3 million for OIG. This appropriation would be an
increase of $1.6 million over our fiscal year 2010 level and would
provide:
--$1 million for 2011 mandatory pay costs;
--$162,000 to support investigator training, which includes required
Federal law enforcement training, training peer counselors for
Critical Incident Stress Management, and continuing legal
training to maintain the current professional standards set for
OIG staff;
--$394,000 to support the Council ofInspectors General on Integrity
and Efficiency (CIGIE, or the Council).
Pay cost increases are needed to maintain current staffing levels
to enable OIG to carry out important oversight work in areas such as
food safety, program integrity, and departmental management.
Approximately 86 percent of OIG's budget is dedicated to personnel
compensation. The remaining 14 percent is expended for contract
services and rental fees (7 percent); travel (5 percent); and supplies,
equipment, and telecommunications (2 percent). This leaves very limited
flexibility to OIG managers to absorb mandatory pay increases.
The President's request provides funds to support CIGIE, which is
an organization of 69 Federal IGs established by the Congress via the
IG Reform Act of 2008.\5\ As authorized by the Congress, the Council's
mission is to address integrity, economy, and effectiveness issues that
transcend individual agencies and increase the professionalism of the
IG workforce. USDA OIG is a member of the Council and serves as its
first elected Chair. To fund CIGIE's activities and responsibilities
and fulfill its legislative mission under the IG Reform Act, the
administration has included $394,000 in the budgets of 15 OIGs,
including USDA OIG. Your support for this request is essential to
funding this newly established Council.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Public Law 110-409.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We would be pleased to provide the subcommittee's Members and staff
with any additional information you may require to fully consider the
President's fiscal year 2011 budget request for our office.
This concludes my written statement. I want to again thank the
Chair and Ranking Member for the opportunity to submit testimony for
your consideration.
Senator Kohl. Thank you very much for that fine statement.
DAIRY FARMERS
Mr. Secretary, last year dairy farmers in my State of
Wisconsin, and as well as all around the Nation, experienced
the worst downfall in prices in history, as you know. We were
able to provide some direct assistance to dairy farmers in our
bill last year. Can you please update us on what USDA has done
to implement the assistance we provided, other things you have
done to stabilize the dairy sector, as well as your outlook for
the coming year?
Secretary Vilsack. Mr. Chairman, the dairy outlook is, I
think, much better than it was last year when we were faced
with record low prices. There has been a slight rebound in
prices, and our hope is that that will continue.
We took aggressive steps last year, in the form of
increasing price support, encouraging an expansion of the Dairy
Export Incentive Program to spur exports and to allow us to be
more competitive. We focused on, as you know, rapidly
implementing the support and assistance that Congress provided
at the tail end of the year, distributing roughly $270 million
of the $290 million in cash, that was provided by Congress in
the appropriation to farmers, pursuant to a formula that tried
to mirror the MILC payment structure, with a few modifications
to ensure an equitable distribution of those resources among
all dairy farmers. The balance of the $350 million has been
used in purchasing cheese, in an effort to make sure that all
of the dairy farmers throughout the country have been helped
and assisted through this effort.
I think it's fair to say that we got the resources out, and
in a relatively quick period of time. The cheese purchases have
recently been concluded. And so, at this point, we have
eliminated or utilized all of the resources that Congress has
provided, with the exception of the small percentage of the
cash payments to make sure that, if we made a mistake on a MILC
calculation or payment calculation, that we can correct that
mistake.
Senator Kohl. Thank you Mr. Secretary.
WIC ARRA FUNDS
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provided
funding to support increased WIC participation. According to
this budget, not all of this funding has been yet allocated.
Will you use your transfer authority to obligate any of the
remaining funds from the Recovery Act for other nutrition
programs, or will these funds be returned to the Treasury?
Secretary Vilsack. Mr. Chairman, we are watching very
carefully the resources provided under the Recovery Act, in
terms of nutrition assistance. We are hopeful that we are
making the right set of decisions.
I will say that with SNAP we've seen a rather dramatic
increase in the numbers. We haven't necessarily seen that same
corresponding increase in some of the other programs. And we
are working with States to make sure that, with the tough
budget situations that States face, that they aren't reducing
their administrative assistance and help to get the information
out about these programs. So, we are cautious about
transferring resources from one program to another until we are
confident that the trends we're seeing in SNAP are not all of a
sudden going to be recognized in WIC or some of the other
programs.
Obviously, our goal is to make sure that we do as much as
we possibly can with this nutrition assistance. And the reason
for it is not just to make sure that people have adequate
resources to buy groceries, but also the economic stimulus that
these items represent. For every dollar we spend in the SNAP
program, for example, we know there's $1.84 in economic
activity. We know it has helped to retain jobs in grocery
stores and trucking facilities and processing facilities around
the country. So, we're going to be very careful about how we
manage these resources. Our budget does request additional
resources for WIC; it does focus on additional resources for
breastfeeding, because we know that that leads to a healthier
start for our youngsters. We will continue to monitor this.
WIC BUDGET
Senator Kohl. Just to follow on, the budget includes, as
you know, a big increase for the WIC program, because this
program, as you know, is volatile, as well as essential. Do you
believe the budget is sufficient to cover the demand for the
WIC program, given the recent history of unforeseen food costs,
as well as other problems?
Secretary Vilsack. I do, Mr. Chair, in part because the
rather dramatic increases we've seen in food costs are not
being reflected in the numbers we're seeing for food increases
this year. There has been a moderation of those increases,
number one. On the other hand, we changed the WIC package to
include more nutritious choices and options. And so, we're
obviously focused on making sure that we keep an eye on the
cost of the package, because we want to encourage more
nutrition.
Frankly, what we're also focusing on is expanding the 27
States that are making electronic benefit transfer cards
available to WIC participants. We see this as a way of
encouraging participation and making it easier on families to
be able to utilize these resources in an effective way without
having any stigma attached to it.
Today, 50 percent of America's infants are engaged in the
WIC program. So, it is obviously a very important program for
the nutritional need of America's children.
Senator Kohl. Can you say that again? Fifty percent----
Secretary Vilsack. Yes sir.
Senator Kohl [continuing]. Of America's children?
Secretary Vilsack. Infants, the infants----
Senator Kohl. Yes.
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. Fifty percent of the
infants born in the United States are in the program.
SNAP STATE ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Senator Kohl. Okay. Mr. Secretary, as you are aware,
Congress recently approved additional funding to cover the
costs of State administrative expenses for the SNAP program.
Because of budget constraints, some States have chosen to use
these funds for other programs. I outlined this problem to you
in a recent letter signed by the ranking member and myself.
What is the Department doing to make sure that these funds are
only being used for SNAP? Are there any repercussions to States
for using these funds on other programs?
Secretary Vilsack. Mr. Chairman, I had the opportunity to
visit, informally, with a number of the Nation's Governors
during the recent National Governors Association meeting here
in Washington, to reinforce the message that we are here to
help, but we want to make sure our help is focused and directed
in the proper manner. We have also recently sent correspondence
to the Nation's Governors on the important role that SNAP is
playing, and on making sure that, despite the difficult choices
that they have to make, that they don't misuse these resources.
And we are keeping an eye on it.
We are focused on a couple of States, in particular, who
have had some significant difficulties with the administration
of the SNAP program. Decisions that were made to outsource some
of the administrative activities have not done as well as they
had anticipated. And so, we are working with those States to
make sure that they are focused.
We're also focused on States where the participation rate
has been less than, I would say, optimal. There are States
that, still today, 50 percent of those who qualify for SNAP are
not participating. So, we're encouraging and trying to incent,
recognizing the difficulties and circumstances that Governors
face. Having been in that situation for 8 years in Iowa, 6 of
the 8 years, while Governor I had less money than I had the
year before. So I am somewhat sympathetic, but understand our
responsibility is to make sure those resources are used
appropriately.
Senator Kohl. Did you say there are States that are
eligible for SNAP, but they don't participate?
Secretary Vilsack. Well, they participate, but they don't
actively and aggressively promote the program. So, as a result,
in a number of States, a little over 50 percent of the people
who are eligible to participate in SNAP are, in fact,
participating. It's one of the reasons why we're constantly
looking for ways in which we can assist folks with categorial
eligibility.
In our budget proposal, we're taking a look at the asset
tests. We're taking a look at extending some of the provisions
of the Recovery Act that are working pretty well to provide
that floor, that nutritional floor that SNAP and the nutrition
assistance programs provide. We have seen an increase,
obviously, in the numbers in SNAP. We now have more than 38
million Americans participating in the program. But, if all of
America participated, I think you would see even more
significant numbers.
Senator Kohl. Thank you.
Senator Brownback.
Senator Brownback. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
ETHANOL
There have been proposals kicking around on the Hill to up
the percentage of ethanol in some of the fuel mixtures from 10
percent to 15 percent. I don't know of a better way to move up
ethanol than do something like that. Is there--has the agency
been able to look at that, or weigh in on that debate,
Secretary?
Secretary Vilsack. Senator, we have. As you probably know,
the EPA is currently considering adjusting the E10 rate to as
much as E15. They are in the process of working with the
Department of Energy in a series of tests that are being
conducted on a variety of engines. I believe that there's an
indication that, in the later-model vehicles, E15 would work
without significant problems. In some of the older vehicles it
may be a little bit more difficult. And so, they're trying to
figure out precisely where that cutoff point is.
Second, when we put together the Biofuels Task Force
report, recognizing that we wanted to make sure that this
industry was a national industry and not necessarily a regional
industry, we recognized that there were some deficiencies in
our strategy. One deficiency was that there really wasn't
adequate distribution, and that's why it's important, I think,
for us to set up regional efforts so that we can have regional
distribution systems so that this fuel doesn't have to travel
long distances to get to where it can be used.
Second, we saw an overlapping of our research efforts.
Department of Energy was focused on what really wasn't its core
competency, and we were focused on things that weren't our core
competency at USDA. So, we have separated the research
responsibilities, with USDA focused on feedstocks, Department
of Energy focused on conversion efficiency. We're also looking
at ways in which we can focus on the near term, things that
could be implemented within the next 10 years, with the
Department of Energy looking at more of the longer-term
attitude.
So, there is a comprehensive look at this, and we are going
to work as hard as we possibly can to get to that 36-billion-
gallon threshold that you all have set.
Senator Brownback. When--is EPA going to make a ruling on
this sometime fairly soon, or----
Secretary Vilsack. I think that they are waiting on a
completion of the Department of Energy testing. The last time I
checked, there was still some testing to be done on some of the
older vehicles. I would anticipate and hope that we would see
this relatively soon. I think we got positive news, from a
ethanol and biofuel industry standpoint, with the RFS2,
reflecting that virtually--the corn-based ethanol and biodiesel
would be able to qualify under the new RFS2.
So, we're moving aggressively forward. We're looking at
ways in which we can use both Recovery money and our regular
program money to encourage this distribution system for
biorefineries. We're trying to accelerate the energy title of
the farm bill provisions so we can make the resources available
to really jumpstart this industry. We see this as a critical
component, as I said earlier, a critical pillar to a new
revitalized rural economy. And we absolutely need this,
Senator. We need this and a lot more. And we need, I believe, a
regional approach, in terms of how we invest these resources so
we get the biggest bang for the buck.
Senator Brownback. Well, I'd sure urge you to put your
shoulder in on this--on the EPA, on that percentage, because I
don't know anything that could quicker move us up than a move
like that would. And your voice, and your strength on this, and
your speaking for rural America, could be a key piece of that,
if you can.
METHANE RESEARCH
Also, we are having difficulties--some people are looking
at methane within livestock operations. It--I think it would be
a worthwhile thing for the Department to invest in methane-to-
electricity research--collection-gathering type of systems.
They have them in dairies--in confined dairies. They aren't,
off of large cattle operations, because of the collection and
the dirt that's involved in it, instead of a confined facility.
We need help in that field. If--in your electricity--or,
excuse me, when you're looking at the biofuels sector, if you
can see--that piece of it would be very helpful, as well.
Secretary Vilsack. I'd say a couple things in response to
that comment, Senator. First, one of the reasons we wanted to
focus our competitive research dollars was to be able to
advance areas that had great significance so that our National
Institute of Food and Agriculture would become the equivalent
of the National Institutes of Health, in terms of its ability
to leverage additional resources. One of the areas we think we
should be leveraging more dollars competitively is in this
energy area.
Second, we entered into a memorandum of understanding with
the dairy industry. The dairy industry and the retail community
have combined together to commit to reducing their carbon
footprint by a significant amount, and one strategy for doing
that is expanded use of digesters. And so, we are in the
process of working with the dairy industry to figure out how we
can use our grant programs more effectively to allow dairy
operations to utilize this digester capacity. The problem there
is that the smaller dairies are often not included because it's
cost prohibitive. So, how can we help those smaller dairies?
And then, finally, I have been and I have seen farms--hog
operations, in particular--where there has been a rather
phenomenal thing taking place, in terms of large hog operations
essentially converting the methane produced in their pit to
electricity, and doing it with solar-powered technology. It's
happening in North Carolina, and it's happening in a number of
other parts of the country.
Senator Brownback. We need some help with that in the large
feed-yard cattle operations. It's just a different setting,
it's not a----
Secretary Vilsack. Right.
Senator Brownback [continuing]. Confined unit. And yet, as
you might guess, the methane production is fairly substantial
with it. So, you'd--it's something to watch.
AGRICULTURE EXPO
Just a final thought would be--I'm a big person that, if
you show people or if you provide an opportunity for people to
see something, they really--their imagination catches on and
things start to happen. I've pushed, for some time, that we
would a new products expo where you would--the USDA--maybe
USDA, with Department of Energy, or with NREL--would host a
``bring your latest gismo out of what you're doing with
agriculture renewable products.'' Maybe it's like a Detroit
auto show, where you--the latest and greatest comes out, and
maybe you want to host it in a great Midwestern city of--like,
Kansas City, maybe, or something like that. I don't know what--
the Kansas side of Kansas City--but, you know, in that area
anyway. But, I think you would really get a lot of interest.
And I think you'd--there'd be a lot of people looking at it.
Just as these things--they start to tend to tell people a
different narrative of what future that can be different. And I
think it also helps attract human capital into our industry,
which is at the root of what we need to do. We need to attract
more people into the industry. And to do that, you've got to
sell some excitement with it. And I think these things can be
very exciting. So, I hope you'd consider doing that.
Secretary Vilsack. Positive suggestion. I won't commit to
the Kansas part of it, because I've got a Wisconsin chair, I've
got a Missouri friend, Mississippi probably could make a case
for it, and I know--Senator Harkin's not here, and I'm sure
he'd be--his interest would be piqued in having it in Des
Moines. Mine would be, too, frankly.
Senator Brownback. Thanks, Secretary.
Senator Kohl. Thank you, Senator Brownback.
Senator Bond.
Senator Bond. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you, Mr. Secretary. I agree with my friend from
Kansas. You ought to go to an ag show. It just so happens that
the Danforth Plant Science Center, the NIDUS Center, which is
coming up with all of these wonderful ag developments, has
their annual ag show--it's an international ag show--the last
week in May. And I hope that you will be there, because they
are doing tremendous things, particularly in biofuels. And I
would be--be happy to provide you information, if some of your
staff wants to attend. And my colleagues are welcome to come,
too.
I would agree strongly with what the Senator from Kansas
said about ag development. We found--as a result of requests
from the president of Afghanistan, and our commanding general
at the time, now Ambassador Eikenberry--that providing
agricultural tools can totally switch around the area. The
State Department was unable to send ag development specialists,
but the Missouri National Guard went with ag specialists,
working with a land grant college--in 1 year they brought
reasonably modern ag practices that were much more productive
and lucrative than poppy farming--and poppy production in
Nangarhar, in 1 year, went from the second highest in the
Nation to almost zero. And there are now at least 10 other
States, backed up by land grant colleges--they can provide a
very valuable resource in what--Secretary Clinton and I
strongly believe smart power is the only way to establish
stability in many of these countries. So, that is an area where
the USDA can help.
I commend you and thank you for the significant increase to
$425 million for competitive grants through ag and food
research. I think NIFA has--is developing wonderful things for
improving nutrition, making much greater availability of food
for a growing population, lessening the use of chemical
pesticides, and improving agricultural energy.
But, one of the problems we see in the developing area is
biotech. Many of the experts in the area say, ``This is a
tremendous industry, but it's being strangled by regulation.''
And right now, we've seen roundup-ready alfalfa--been 3 years
since the court order. They go back for an EIS. It's likely
going to be 4 years before they get a final EIS. So, this has
been tested, tested, and retested. And in order for farmers and
consumers to realize the benefits of agrobiotechnology, it's
essential the USDA continue to implement a timely--a science-
based, but timely approval process.
I'd like to hear your thoughts on that; and if there are
things that we can do legislatively to help you clear away the
underbrush so we can bring these new products to market, I
would be very happy to join with my colleagues to provide you
all the help you need.
AFGHANISTAN AGRICULTURE
Secretary Vilsack. Senator, first of all just a brief
comment about Afghanistan. I went to Afghanistan in January to
visit with 64 USDA workers who were over there working with
National Guard troops, as you mentioned, and with the Afghan
farmers. And I agree with you----
Senator Bond. Oh, it's----
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. There is----
Senator Bond [continuing]. Huge.
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. A tremendous opportunity.
The Afghan Agriculture Minister is a person, I think, of good
integrity. He's got a framework in place focused on increasing
agriculture productivity, regenerating agribusiness in
Afghanistan, making sure the natural resources are protected,
and change management to his own operation. There's a lot of
work yet to be done there, but I think you're going to continue
to see----
Senator Bond. Okay.
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. A USDA presence there.
BIOTECHNOLOGY
As it relates to biotechnology, let me, first of all, say
that, when I came into office, I was confronted with an
inspector general's report suggesting that the Department did
not have a strategy for promoting biotechnology, not only
within the United States, but around the world.
Senator Bond. Right.
Secretary Vilsack. We have spent the last 7 or 8 months
focusing on developing such a strategy, that includes continued
promotion of a science-based and rules-based system; using
public diplomacy, pointing out the benefits of biotechnology,
in terms of its capacity to increase productivity, less
reliance on natural resources, and on chemicals and protection
of the environment. So, we're in the process now of
implementing that strategy.
We are also focused on our own rulemaking process, which we
began a number of years ago, in this effort. We got quite a bit
of comments from people from all parts of the spectrum.
NUTRITION GUIDELINES
Senator Bond. Mr. Secretary, I--time's running out. I just
want to add one final thought. I support the First Lady's Let's
Move campaign, but as one who shops in a rural grocery store
and sees people going through with food stamps for the SNAP
program, with obese children and parents, and baskets full of
empty-calorie food, have you thought about implementing the
same kind of guidelines you have for WIC, school lunch, to SNAP
to say that you have to use it to buy milk, fruits, vegetables?
Secretary Vilsack. Senator, we have looked at this. The
complexity is in the fact that there are now, on average,
50,000 different items in a grocery store. And using the
technology to be able to adjust the EBT card makes it difficult
to do what you've asked to be done.
What we are looking at is creating a set of incentives. We
have a program now in which we are encouraging States to look
at point-of-sale incentives, where, instead of a dollar being
credited to your EBT card for vegetables and fruit purchases,
the grocer would get the dollar, but you, the person with the
card, would only be charged 80 cents. So, that would extend
their card a bit, as a way of encouraging and incenting fruits
and vegetable purchases. We're going to see. We've got about
$20 million of incentive grants for pilots, to see how this is
going to work, if it's going to work. And that's how we're
approaching it right now.
I will say our principal focus this year on fruits and
vegetables is trying to make sure that we get more of them in
our school lunch and school breakfast programs.
Senator Bond. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and apologize for running over.
Senator Kohl. Thank you very much, Senator Bond.
Senator Cochran.
Senator Cochran. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I
appreciate your leadership of this subcommittee.
And, Mr. Secretary, welcome. We appreciate your dedicated
service as Secretary of Agriculture. I know you have a couple
of hot-button issues in our State, we've always got one or two.
Don't want you to get bored in your job.
FARMERS LAWSUITS
One of these is the implementation of judgment in the
minority farmers lawsuit, which had been pending for some
years. There is now a directive that funds be paid to those who
were shown to have been discriminated against in the
administration of Department of Agriculture programs over a
period of years. I wonder if you could just give us a status
report on what the administration is doing to settle these
claims, and what the outlook is. What's the request, if any,
for specific settlement payments in this bill?
Secretary Vilsack. Senator, thank you for asking that
question. When I came into office, on a bipartisan basis, the
former Agriculture Secretaries that I talked to encouraged me
to focus time and attention and resources on trying to get
these cases settled. As you know, there are cases involving
Black farmers, women farmers, Hispanic farmers, and Native
American farmers. They are all different, in terms of where
they are in the court process.
The Pigford case, which is the Black farmer case, was
probably the most mature case. We had a class-action
certification. We had had a settlement of the case. Late filers
came in. Congress essentially, in the farm bill, reopened this
matter, but did not put sufficient resources to actually get it
settled. I encouraged the President and the administration to
fix a dollar amount that would actually be real, which they
did. The President submitted in his budget last year, and has
submitted in a recent supplemental request, $1.25 billion that
would be distributed in somewhat the same way that the first
tranche of resources were distributed.
You'd have two tracks, a speedy track, which would require
less proof of claim, but a lower dollar amount that you would
be entitled to, with debt relief; and a more complicated track,
that would allow you to get up to $250,000. That process
requires Congress to appropriate the resource. We've made the
request, and we're going to continue to work with Congress to
make sure that that is followed through, and hopefully done by
the end of this month.
The other cases, we have encouraged the Department of
Justice, and it has responded, to begin the process of
discussing negotiations. In the Keepseagle case, which is the
Native American case, there are numbers being discussed.
There's a fairly wide gap between the parties at this point,
but we're continuing to have conversations to narrow that gap.
In the other two cases, the Love and Garcia case, we're in the
process now. They are complicated because they're not yet
certified as class action, so, in a sense, they're individual
cases, tens of thousands of individual cases.
Candidly, to get these cases settled, in my view, one of
two things has to happen. Either there has to be an
understanding and agreement on a dollar amount that lawyers
representing an adequate number of plaintiffs will agree with
the Department of Justice on, or Congress has to essentially
direct a process for USDA to go through for a rapid evaluation
of the claims so that we'd get a sense of what the potential
liability could be in those other three cases. We are very
committed to trying to get these cases settled and closing this
rather sordid chapter of USDA history.
Senator Cochran. Well, we appreciate your insights and
sharing with us the status of these programs, and your efforts
to help resolve this in a fair way, and one that's consistent
with the judgments of the courts that have rendered decisions
on that subject.
FOREIGN CATFISH
In our State, we have been advised, by some of our
aquaculture catfish farmer constituents, that the Department
hasn't been doing much to support them in their effort to get
inspection of foreign fish that are imported into the country,
some of it labeled as if it's catfish from Mississippi--it
doesn't say ``Mississippi,'' but it borrows the name--and in
other ways is making it difficult to compete, because they're
not going through the inspection processes and other safeguards
that are required of our domestic producers. And so, we've got
a problem there. And folks are not only angry about it, but
they're going out of business.
I drove through the delta the other day and noticed some
bulldozers just pushing down the impoundments, and I found out
that that person, the landowner involved, is going to try to
make money growing soybeans again. And maybe that's, you know,
a good decision, based on the fact that we do have this
difficult competitive situation.
What is the status of implementation of the inspection
programs for foreign fish coming in? And do you have any
encouragement that I can pass on to my fish farmers down in
Mississippi?
Secretary Vilsack. Senator, again, thanks for asking that
question. One of the things that I've tried to do as Secretary
is occasionally walk down the various long hallways at the USDA
building and pop into someone's office and just sit down and
find out what they're up to. Not long ago, I happened into the
office of the fellows who are working on the catfish
regulations, and over the next 45 minutes, I found out how
complicated this issue is.
First, we had to determine the intent of Congress, from the
legislation that was passed, as to whether or not Congress
intended a narrow definition or an expansive definition. There
are 39 different varieties of catfish, I found out from my
brief visit with those fellows. And they are, as you indicated,
raised in a number of parts of the world in different
conditions and circumstances.
Following that conversation, we did put together a rule,
and we submitted that to OMB. And at the current time, that is
where the process is. OMB is in the process of reviewing that
rule. So, we have made our determination as to what we think is
appropriate, but, in light of the process that we have to
follow, folks have to sign off on that. We're encouraging OMB
to do that as quickly as possible.
We recognize this is a complicated circumstance, because
you've got safety issues, you've got consumer information
issues, you've got the economic development capacities of folks
who are raising these fish in America. You also, obviously,
have relationships with other countries that get complicated,
based on decisions that we make here.
Let me just simply say, from USDA's perspective, we are
concerned about safety, and ought to be; that's our number one
concern. We are also concerned about making sure the consumers
have the right information to make the right and more informed
choices as they go shopping, that they are getting what they
are paying for and what they think they are getting. We are
also interested in making sure that what we do is consistent
with the science-based systems that we are advocating in
trading relationships throughout the world. So, those are the
three criteria that we used in developing our rule.
Senator Cochran. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Kohl. Thank you, Senator Cochran.
Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman,
Senator Brownback, I want to start by thanking you both for
your leadership of this subcommittee.
IRRIGATION FUNDING
Mr. Secretary, recently I met with a group of potato
growers from Maine who expressed to me their difficulty in
securing funds for important irrigation projects in my State.
It's my understanding that there are two USDA potential
sources for irrigation projects. One is the Environmental
Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). And the second is the
Agricultural Management Assistance Program. Unfortunately, our
potato farmers have had difficulty in securing funding from any
of these programs on an ongoing basis. And let me explain why
it's important.
In 2007, the need for irrigation funding was greatly
increased when the State of Maine established low-flow rules
for streams and rivers. These rules were the result of a
collaborative process between agricultural stakeholders and
environmental groups, and they developed significant new
environmental standards for minimum flow levels. Everyone
worked together in a collaborative process, and it was
understood, at the time, that NRCS would provide the resources
to assist in implementing these rules. They're particularly a
problem in the months of July and August, when irrigation is
most needed for the crop. Thus, the potato industry is in
desperate need of funds to establish irrigation ponds and
purchase efficient irrigation equipment.
Now, there are local meetings that are held to decide how
to allocate part of the NRCS funds, but those meetings are
inevitably scheduled, it seems, during either planting or
harvesting times. And thus, the farmers are unable to leave
their farms to participate.
So, my first request would be for you to encourage those in
charge of the program in our region to schedule those
allocation meetings at a time when the farmers can attend.
The second issue is, the director of the program has
discretion with some of the funding, and yet is putting it to
other uses. This is an ongoing problem. When the Maine Potato
Board came to see me recently, it was their number one issue.
And I worked with the chairman last year on a colloquy urging
the Department to help us. Unfortunately, nothing really has
changed.
So, I want to ask you, personally, to help us resolve this
irrigation problem that has been created by my farmers, working
in a very collaborative way with environmental groups, to come
up with minimum flow standards. But, it has created a need for
more irrigation.
Secretary Vilsack. Senator, first of all, I've just
instructed the staff to make sure that the meetings are
scheduled at a more convenient time for the farmers. That is an
absolutely fair request, and I'm not quite sure why that hasn't
been done, but we will certainly try to rectify that
immediately.
I have been advised that $750,000 of EQIP money was made
available, and resources under the Agricultural Management
Assistance Program of about $258,000 was made available. The
total AMA allocation for Maine was made exclusively available
for potato growers in one county. I may get this wrong, is it
``Arrows''----
Senator Collins. It's Aroostook.
Secretary Vilsack. Aroostook.
Senator Collins. Where I'm from.
Secretary Vilsack. Okay, well, that's where all that money
went.
Senator Collins. Good.
Secretary Vilsack. The rest of the resources, the $750,000
of EQIP money, was available statewide for irrigation
management. And as a result of the meetings that have taken
place, NRCS in Maine has established an initiative in which it
intends to fund, each year for the years 2010, 2011, and 2012,
an additional $750,000 per year available statewide.
We will make sure that those resources are, obviously,
strategically focused and make sure that people have input as
to where they are to be spent.
Senator Collins. Thank you. It is an important issue. We
did receive some funding, but this year the State--the
conservationist, the head of NRCS, has allocated the AMA
irrigation funds for other purposes. So, we look forward to
working with you.
Mr. Chairman, I know my time is expired. I would ask that I
be permitted to submit, for the record, a question on our dairy
industry, which is still facing tough times. But, I want to
thank the Department for the work that you've been doing to try
to provide some assistance.
And also, an issue that Senator Snowe and I have written to
you about--new regulations being promulgated by the Food Safety
and Inspection Service that have a big impact on a chicken
producer in Maine. We're just asking that the full rulemaking
process be followed so that we can have the opportunity for
input.
Secretary Vilsack. Mr. Chairman, can I just make----
Senator Kohl. Go ahead.
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. Two quick comments to
Senator Collins?
We have met with the Maine business that has concerns about
the ready-to-eat, not-ready-to-eat products. And we had a good
meeting with them.
And second, we do have a dairy council that we have
established to take a look at long-term strategies for
moderating the severe ups and downs of the dairy industry so
there can be greater predictability. That group will meet by
conference call in March, and they'll have their first in-
person meeting in Washington, DC, in April. Our hope is that
they can report to us by the end of this year with
recommendations.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you, Mr. Secretary for your hard work.
Senator Kohl. Thank you very much, Senator Collins.
Senator Harkin.
Senator Harkin. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
And, again, thank you, Mr. Secretary, for your great
leadership, and that of your Deputy Secretary. It is good to
see our Budget Officer here again, as it is every year for a
long time, Mr. Steele.
First of all, let me just, again, congratulate you and
thank you for the tremendous emphasis that you have put on
child nutrition. That is long overdue, and I can sense a
refocusing of the Department's efforts in this area under your
leadership. That extra billion dollars a year for 10 years is
truly, as you said in your statement, an historic proposed
investment, improving the quality of the food that kids get in
schools, improving their nutritional level, and getting more
kids included, of course, in the programs.
We had a good meeting with the First Lady, and I know we're
all going to be working together--this subcommittee, and other
committees I'm on, the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Committee, and the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry
Committee--to make this a coordinated effort. So, I thank you
for having that in the budget.
In the WIC program, the increase in the fruit and vegetable
vouchers--again, that is something long overdue. So, I'm glad
you're addressing that also.
On food safety, as you know, the--we have a food safety
bill, that the House has passed--we have it about ready to go.
I'm sure you've looked at it, at least what the House has done.
We'll be tracking closely with the House; there'll be a few
differences that we'll have to work out. I'm hopeful that we'll
have that food safety bill on the Senate floor soon. If not
this work period, it definitely will be at the top of the list
as soon as we come back after Easter. And so, I hope to have
that done and to the President's desk perhaps by late May,
something like that.
That bill is FDA, and USDA's Food Safety and Inspection
Service is equally critical--focusing not just on diseases, but
also better food safety pathogen controls. You've addressed
that also in your statement, and I appreciate that.
Regarding the Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food initiative,
again, I've sensed, in the last few years, a growing interest
in this effort, in Iowa and in other States. In fact--more and
more often, young people are getting involved in agriculture,
not with 10,000 acres but smaller enterprises, where they're
growing for local markets, fruits, and vegetables, livestock or
poultry, that kind of thing, and are filling niche markets. It
may not be a full-time occupation, but it's something that
they're doing with their families. And they may have other
sources of income. I sense this as a very big--a growing
movement all over the country. So, to the extent that you have
focused on that, and are focusing on local processing, local
meatpacking, local projects that can build off of that, it
generates income, it's good for the rural economy, and people
will tend to stay in those local communities. So, again, I
commend you for your focus on local food initiatives and urge
you to continue to really push that Know Your Farmer, Know Your
Food effort.
CONSERVATION FUNDING
Okay, those are all the good things. Now let me get to a
couple of other things that I'm not quite so happy with, Mr.
Secretary. And I say that all in good friendship and
admiration. One has to do with conservation.
We worked very hard, on the 2008 farm bill, Mr. Chairman,
to strike balances. It was a long process, but we had
overwhelming support for the bill here and in the House. In
fact, it took overriding two Presidential vetoes to get it
done, but we did so with overwhelming vote. You, yourself, Mr.
Secretary, have pointed out a number of conservation efforts--
the Mississippi River Basin initiative, the Coral Reef
Conservation initiative are examples that show--and I know,
personally--I know your commitment to conservation that you had
as Governor of the State of Iowa. But, I'm disappointed in the
budget, on conservation.
Last fall, in just 56 days, USDA received 21,300
applications for the Conservation Stewardship Program, covering
an estimated 33 million acres. But, we could only enroll 12.8
million acres for 2009 under the farm bill--so, the demand is
there. The demand is there, but we couldn't meet it all. In the
EQIP program, at the end of 2009, USDA had on hand, but didn't
have the funding for, 54,329 applications. So, again, the
demand is there. And as we keep reading in the paper, whether
we pick it up and read about the Chesapeake Bay and what's
happening there, or we look at the water quality in Iowa and
other States, we just can't back off of all the great strides
we've started to make in conservation.
Farmers want to carry, but, you know, when a farmer is
faced with a cost-price squeeze--well, that additional few
acres of land that maybe was being devoted to conservation--
well, maybe a farmer is pressured to plant that land to corn or
beans or wheat, or something like that, or to cut back other
conservation efforts to make ends meet. So, the pressure's
become great on farmers. They want to be conservationists. You
know that as well as I do. They just need some help. They're
willing to put in their own labor, they're willing to put their
own money into it, but they need some help from the Federal
Government.
And the estimate I have is that the budget cuts will
eliminate conservation that would be carried out on about 4
million acres of land.
So, please talk to me about that, Mr. Secretary. I know
there are budget problems, but it just seems to me that this is
one area where we can't back off--I'm concerned deeply about
it.
Secretary Vilsack. Well, Senator, first of all, let me
acknowledge the fact that you have been a champion of
conservation for as long as you've been in this body, and have
certainly led the effort in the 2008 farm bill, and in previous
efforts to try to get people's attention focused on
conservation as if it were, in a sense, a commodity.
Senator Harkin. Commodity.
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. As significant.
You know, I haven't been in Washington very long, so I
don't quite understand the way Washington thinks, at times.
Last year, we basically funded enough resources to enroll
roughly 277 million acres--almost 277.5 million acres--in our
conservation programs totally. The budget we submitted this
year will cover almost 305 million acres, an increase of over
27 million acres. So, I think we are continuing to try to look
for ways in which we can enhance conservation.
Now, I can understand there's a difference between
authorized levels and appropriated levels, but we believe that
this budget actually appropriates more money to conservation
than the previous year. So, more money and more acres.
One of the challenges that we have is to manage these
programs properly. And NRCS has been under a cloud of an audit
for the last couple of years, because it didn't do all it
needed to do, in previous years, in making sure that people
were applying properly and that people were getting resources
for the right type of conservation. So, we want to make sure
that, as we increase and ramp up some of these programs, that
we do it in a way that we manage the resources effectively and
that we don't continue to be under this cloud of an audit. It
will take a couple of years for us to fix this problem,
because, frankly, we tried to do too much too soon, and didn't
have enough people. So, we're in the process of trying to make
sure we do this properly so that we can respond to taxpayers
that we're spending their money wisely.
So, I think our budget is a constructive one. And I think
it is furthering the interests of conservation. It may not be
as much as folks would like to spend, but, given the fiscal
realities, we thought we did a pretty good job of balancing.
Senator Harkin. Well, I understand what you said. But, in
the farm bill we put that money in there, including funds for
technical assistance and personnel to carry it out, and we paid
for it. It was fully offset. And that's why, I think, we got so
many votes for the farm bill. We fully offset it. It was fully
paid for. So, again, yes, you're increasing, but you're
``here'' and the farm bill is ``here,'' so there's a--there is
a gap there, a reduction from what we enacted. Now, if you're
saying that you want to make sure that you have the people in
place and everything to make sure that the programs work, well
I can understand that, too, I guess. But, I'm just worried
about whether or not we're going to be able to get these people
signed up in the numbers that we had laid out and fully paid
for in the farm bill. You think we'll be okay on that this
year, that we'll have--be able to sign up the 12.8 million
acres again this year--in the CSP, for example?
Secretary Vilsack. I think we'll probably, candidly, be
closer to 12 million, but we'll probably see a significant
increase in EQIP. So, it kind of depends on which program folks
sign up for.
I will say, Senator, our goal is not to undercut the
conservation efforts. I think the worst thing that could happen
would be for folks to learn that people who weren't entitled to
money for conservation were getting money. And we want to make
sure that we do this right. And if you read the audit of NRCS,
as I have, you realize that there were some serious issues that
had to be addressed, and are being addressed, and they were
fairly comprehensive.
So, I don't want to, with resources, not properly manage
those resources. I think I have a responsibility to do that.
Senator Harkin. Right.
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. So, we are trying to ramp
this up in a way that is manageable.
Senator Harkin. Thank you.
BIOREFINERY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Next is on the whole area of the Biorefinery Assistance
Program, section 9003 of the farm bill. Again, there is a lot
of strong support for that. I know you've been a supporter of
biofuels. But, the budget is $245 million in 2010, $150 million
was authorized for 2011, but your budget only calls for $17
million. Why such a low budget figure for the Biorefinery
Assistance Program?
Secretary Vilsack. Senator, we have a significant amount of
carryover to take from the previous year. There has not been
as--well, let me back up.
In order for this to work, I think there had to be a
strategy, there had to be a holistic and comprehensive approach
to how you build this industry. When credit became difficult,
when prices collapsed and there was a challenge in the ethanol
industry, because of a very tough year last year, there was
sort of a slowing down of interest in this area.
That's one of the reasons why the President did two things:
He instructed us to put together a strategic plan for the
biofuels industry and to accelerate, as best we could, the
other components of the energy bill that you all put together
in the 2008 farm bill. Because all of them have to, sort of,
work in concert. You have to have the resources available to
farmers to incent them to produce the feedstocks. You have to
have resources available to biorefineries that can be
retrofitted to become more efficient. You have to have a
broader expanse of opportunity, not just in one region of the
country, but all across the country. You have to have
coordinated research that increases the efficiency of what
we're currently doing and develops new feedstocks so we can
meet the 36 billion gallon threshold.
And so, as a result of all of that, we are trying to
coordinate all of these resources. So, with the carryover and
coordinated resources, we think we're going to have a much
stronger and more viable biofuels industry, and we are already
seeing signs of interest picking up. The uncertainty about the
RFS2 also had issues, which we've now cleared up. And Senator
Brownback and I had a conversation, before you came, about E15
and the important role that could play in stimulating
additional growth. So, there were a lot of moving pieces in
2009, some of those pieces have come into place. I think you're
going to see more aggressive effort this year. And I think
you'll see us do a better job, in terms of resources, in the
future. But, at the present time, we think the carryover plus
that amount is enough to, probably, meet the demand, and
especially using some of the loan guarantee assistance.
ETHANOL
Senator Harkin. Did you--did you state earlier anything
about the timeframe on when we're going to see the RFS2 come
out?
Secretary Vilsack. Well, it's----
Senator Harkin. It's not your Department, but----
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. It's come out, in the sense
that the EPA has indicated that corn-based ethanol is alive and
well, meeting the threshold of 20 percent; soy diesel,
biodiesel alive and well, meeting the threshold. So, that was a
positive indication and sign.
Senator Harkin. But the--upping the percentage of ethanol
that can be blended----
Secretary Vilsack. The blend rate is----
Senator Harkin [continuing]. Blend rate----
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. Still--as I explained to
Senator Brownback, Senator, the Department of Energy is
currently doing testing on older vehicles to determine the
impact of E15 on those older vehicles. They're fairly confident
that the newer vehicles can take E15, but they want to make
sure they know what the cutoff point is. And as they are
figuring that out, we, obviously, are figuring out ways in
which we can provide assistance and help through rural
development for the kind of blender pumps that I think
ultimately we'll have to have. Because I think somebody will
drive into a gas station and want E15, somebody will want E85,
and somebody will want E10, and you have to be able to have the
pumps to be able to meet that. And so, that's part of our
effort to try to build this industry, is to create rural
development resources to make that happen.
Senator Harkin. Very good.
Secretary Vilsack. And I should say we're using rural
development resources from the Recovery Act to essentially
promote those kinds of gas stations that have capacity to do
E85. And once we get a read from EPA on whether it's E10 or
whatever it is, then we can move forward on the appropriate
distribution systems.
Senator Harkin. Very good.
Mr. Chairman, thank you. I have a couple questions, one
dealing with crop insurance. I'll just--I'll submit it in
writing.
Senator Kohl. Sure.
Senator Harkin. I'm a little concerned about----
Senator Kohl. Yeah.
Senator Harkin [continuing]. Some of the cuts in the
underwriting and in the administrative and operating--A&O, as
they call it, expenses for crop insurance. I'm just--I'm
concerned about that, but I won't take any time here. I'll just
submit it in writing.
Secretary Vilsack. Senator, if I can just clarify--staff's
just given me--so that you know--in terms of the biorefinery,
we believe we have loan guarantee authority up to $900 million.
So, there's discretionary money, and there's mandatory money.
What you referred to, I think, was the discretionary money that
we're adding on--in addition to the mandatory resources. So, in
biorefinery--we have $900 million of guarantees, which is a
fairly significant amount, I think. And I would like the
opportunity to comment about the crop insurance----
Senator Harkin. Well----
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. If I could----
Senator Harkin [continuing]. Go right ahead.
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. If that's----
Senator Harkin [continuing]. I just didn't want to take----
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. All right----
Senator Harkin [continuing]. Any more time. But----
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. I----
Senator Harkin [continuing]. If you have something you want
to add.
Secretary Vilsack. I mean this is a very important issue.
Senator Harkin. Yes.
CROP INSURANCE
Secretary Vilsack. And it's one that I think folks have to
understand.
When crop insurance was first devised, it was not a product
that people were aware of. It was a new product. And so, there
had to be a way in which it could be incented so that people
would think about it and purchase it. It wasn't the thing that
was mandated, it wasn't a--it was a choice.
And so, there were efforts to try to encourage agents and
companies to get into this business. Over the course of time--
--
Scott, do you have that chart?
Mr. Steele. Yes.
Secretary Vilsack. Over the course of time the profits for
both the agents and the companies have grown rather
significantly. And, in fact, in the last couple of years--and
this is the chart. You, obviously, can't see it very well, but
this is the chart. This is where it started, and this is where
it is today. And you've seen a dramatic increase in profits in
the last couple of years, in part because agents are paid based
on the value of the policy, as opposed to the number of
policies they sell. And the companies have done a pretty good
job; they've gotten about a 16 percent return on their money.
So, what we're proposing is a change that would adjust the
A&O so that agents would be paid for the number of policies
they sell. I mean, the reality is that most bankers today
require crop insurance as a condition of loans. So, it's not
all that difficult to sell this product.
And on the profit side, we think a 12 percent return is a
fair return, and so there's a slight adjustment. Now, why do we
say that? Because we had a study done, by an independent
research group, that suggested that 12 percent would be a
pretty good return. I would take 12 percent on my money.
And then, second, the GAO was very critical of this
program, so we tried to respond to the concerns of GAO, to the
independent study, to the fact that, today, there are 200,000
fewer policies being written than there were in 2000. So, the
profits have doubled in the last couple of years, for 200,000
fewer policies. So, we think, you know, there has to be some
adjustment; there has to be a fair balance between the need for
this product, which is a very important risk-management tool,
and the need for farmers to have it, and also the taxpayers to
be treated fairly.
And finally, some of the resource is going to be used to
expand access to the product in some parts of the country where
it has been very difficult to get crop insurance at all. So,
it's an effort to try to spread the opportunity and the risk
management tool in other parts of the country.
Senator Harkin. Well, I appreciate your explanation. I may
want to just get some more elaboration on that. But, you make a
strong argument. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary Vilsack. Thank you.
Senator Harkin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Kohl. Thank you, Senator Harkin.
NATIONAL ANIMAL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM
Mr. Secretary, after the discovery of mad cow disease in
North America nearly a decade ago, there was great interest in
developing a system to trace diseased animals that move in
commerce. This was considered vital to protect the livestock
sector against catastrophic market collapse in the event of a
serious disease outbreak. Since then, there have been
substantial Federal investments to develop a National Animal
Identification System, as you know.
However, on February 5th of this year, USDA announced an
abrupt about-face, in the nature of goals of this system. This
revised system will be national, only to the degree that
animals pass into interstate commerce, leaving much of the
responsibility to States and Native American tribes. Rather
than taking the lead, USDA will be a collaborator, assisting
States and tribes to create diverse localized responses.
So, Mr. Secretary, what assurance can you provide that, in
the face of the next widespread animal disease discovery, this
system will increase consumer confidence, mitigate economic
impacts of the outbreak, and maintain market access of U.S.
products--U.S. producers in global markets? What is your
timetable for development and implementation of this new
system? How will costs be borne among the Federal Government,
States, and tribes? How do you plan to assist these States and
tribes that are not able to assume the additional costs of
development and implementation of a diverse State-centric
system? And, as you know, the dairy sector has developed a
fairly sophisticated identification and animal tracking system
already. How will your proposal affect dairy farmers or alter
the system they already have in place, Mr. Secretary?
Secretary Vilsack. Mr. Chairman, we had a series of
listening sessions throughout the country, on animal
identification. There were 15 in all, I attended 2 of the 15,
and read comments from the other 13. A wide range of concerns
about the former system, starting with confidentiality and
privacy and how the Federal Government was going to dictate the
technology, the cost, and the fact that there were differences
between various types of livestock. Greater acceptance of this
program among sheep, among hogs, goats, and the poultry
industry; great resistance from the beef industry, to the point
that less than 35 percent of operators were, essentially,
participating, if you will, in this system. So, we really
didn't have the kind of cooperation and participation that we
thought we would have.
Congress, and many Members of Congress, began to express
concerns about the resources that were being allocated to this
program, and were suggesting that--Chairman Peterson, I think,
suggested the time had come to basically pull the plug on this.
So, a lack of confidence in Congress, and a lack of confidence
on behalf of the cattle industry in particular, led us to
think, ``Is there a way in which we could get greater
participation?''
We're still taking advantage of the things we learned from
the resources that we've spent, and not disrupting what perhaps
the poultry industry or the hog industry had developed, and not
disrupting what we had learned from other disease management
strategies.
We felt that the one way to do this would be to have a
partnership between the Federal Government and State
governments to focus on where the real issue is, which is
cattle and livestock that pass in interstate commerce, and work
with the States to develop a strategy that would focus on low-
cost technology that would get the job done, have a higher rate
of participation, and therefore, allow us to do a better job of
traceability, which is really what this is all about, and
encourage a more rapid response if there is, in fact, an
outbreak.
So, we are in the process of meeting with State ag
commissioners and secretaries this month. We start this process
with our team meeting with those folks, and we will begin to
develop sort of a standard for how this could work.
Recognizing that, once the standard's put in place, it
would probably likely focus on lower-cost technology; it would
address the concerns that were expressed by those who were just
local producers and local consumers, that they didn't know why
they had to participate in a program, when all they were going
to do was slaughter it for their own use or for their
neighbors' use; deal with the issue of confidentiality by
ensuring that Federal Government wasn't going to be having this
massive database of information about people that would be used
for purposes other than traceability; and work with folks, in
terms of the more difficult issues of liability; providing
Federal resources to help purchase the low-cost technology; and
see whether or not we could get significantly greater
participation.
There may very well be decisions made by these
commissioners that what's working in poultry and what's working
in pork may continue, and we would be supportive of that. They
may decide that they want ear tags, they may decide that
there's some other technology that makes sense for them in
their State; we'll help pay for that.
What we think will happen at the end of this is that
there'll be greater cooperation between State and Federal
Government; there'll be greater participation on behalf of
those in all sectors; and we'll have a better job of promoting
traceability, and, at the end of the day, will probably reduce
the cost overall to the Federal Government.
If we continued down the road we were on, we'd continue to
have participation in some, but not all, of livestock, and we
would continue to be confronted with the notion that when only
30 to 35 percent of people participate, it means 60 to 65
percent of the folks aren't participating, and that means that
you really don't have a traceability system, and you don't have
the capacity to really do what you need to do to preserve the
market. So, we wanted to try something different.
Senator Kohl. How will this affect the dairy sector?
Secretary Vilsack. Well, I think it depends on the
individual State. I mean, the reality is that if animals are
crossing State lines, there's going to have to be a system to
make sure that we can track them back to the State of
Wisconsin. For example, if they go from Wisconsin to Iowa, then
we'll have a system that will allow us to track them back to
Wisconsin. Then, within Wisconsin, you can decide how far back
you want to go from that point. You may want to go back to the
case with Wisconsin, where there's been great cooperation and
participation in the system, you may want to continue that. You
can do that.
But, the State's going to be the one that's going to make
that decision, the producers within that State will have a
greater say in it, and the technology will be something that
producers will be satisfied that it's reasonable and that
they're not being dictated to.
NEW INITIATIVES
Senator Kohl. All right. Mr. Secretary, the budget proposed
a number of initiatives, including the Healthy Food Financing
Initiative, and enhancements for organic and sustainable
agriculture production. Could you please walk us through these
initiatives? For example, how much of this involves a real
increase in spending and how much is simply a redirection of
funds from existing programs?
Mr. Secretary, I'd like your thoughts on this. I'd also
like to hear from Deputy Merrigan, if she has any additional
comments.
HEALTHY FOOD FINANCING INITIATIVE
Secretary Vilsack. Mr. Chairman, I'll give you a general
overview and then ask the Deputy to provide more specifics.
As we began the process of taking a look at how to better
link local production and local consumption, one of the things
we found out was that there were many communities, both rural
and in inner-city America, that did not have access to a
grocery store that would allow them to have access to fruits
and vegetables and healthy food choices. There was a plethora
of convenience stores located in these areas that provided an
opportunity for processed food and more expensive food, but not
a grocery store.
So, one of the things we wanted to focus on was a way in
which we could respond to that challenge. And so, we began a
process of looking at States and cities that had been
addressing this aggressively such as the State of Pennsylvania
and the city of Philadelphia, as an example. And what we
learned was that, with additional resources and the use of
market tax credits, we could creatively and innovatively
respond to the fact that there were places where people would
go miles and miles and miles without access to a grocery store,
that we could do this in an innovative and creative way, and we
could increase the nutritional opportunities that these folks
have, and also create business opportunities and rural economic
development. A community without a grocery store has a very
difficult time attracting any other kind of opportunity.
What we also found was, when a grocery store located, it
created enough traffic that other business wanted to collocate,
so that you could create some momentum in these communities.
So, working with the Treasury Department, the Health and
Human Services Department, the First Lady's initiative, and
USDA, we put together a $50 million proposal, part of which
would be used to help create that innovative and creative
approach to getting that grocery store located. And it may not
even be a fixed facility, it may be a mobile facility. We just
need to be creative about this.
We also wanted to focus our efforts on a continuation of
farmers markets, community-supported agriculture, and we wanted
to create our rural development resources with enough
flexibility that if somebody wanted to build a small processing
facility or a slaughter facility or a mobile slaughter facility
or a cold storage warehouse so that you could aggregate enough
product to be able to provide a school or hospital with a
steady supply of good quality food, locally produced, we ought
to be able to look at ways in which we could do that.
So, all of this is designed to use new money, but also to
redirect some existing resources in what we think might be a
more effective way.
But, I want the Deputy, who's worked a lot on this and
knows more of the details about it, to amplify, if that's all
right.
Dr. Merrigan. Thank you, sir.
The Secretary did a great job talking about Healthy Food
Financing Initiative, which we're doing in cooperation with
Treasury and HHS. We have a variety of strategies to deal with
the food deserts that were identified by the Economic Research
Service, as mandated by the 2008 farm bill. We're excited about
that.
KNOW YOUR FARMER, KNOW YOUR FOOD
In terms of the Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food
Initiative, which Senator Harkin mentioned, great excitement
across the country about that. I was in Kansas City a couple
months ago, there was a lot of action going on there around
local, regional, with your healthcare and your farmers working
in cooperatives. I'm on my way to Madison this month. I was at
Iowa State not that long ago.
But, the Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food Initiative is not
a program in and of itself. It doesn't have staff, it doesn't
have its own budget. The concept is to use existing USDA
authorities, we've got a lot of resources, we've got a lot of
people, and make sure that we're really following through on
some initiatives in the 2008 farm bill, in particular. For
example, the Business and Industry Loan Guarantee Program,
which Congress had asked that there be 5 percent of that money
set aside for local food promotion, when Secretary Vilsack and
I got into the Department and got down into the details, we
found out that nobody had applied for that money. Our question
naturally was, ``Well, why not?'' Are we doing enough to get
the word out that this money is available? And so, part of Know
Your Farmer, Know Your Food is really trying to better utilize
existing resources within the Department. It's also about
having a national conversation, particularly with young people,
about where we want American agriculture to go. And that's all
been positive.
NATIONAL ORGANIC PROGRAM
In terms of organic, we will be having an inspector general
report coming out, probably this week, that will look at some
longstanding problems in the National Organic Program. These
are problems that we're getting ahead of now, and, for that
reason, we've asked for a $3.1 million increase in the
regulatory program. We believe that this is the age of
enforcement.
We're instituting new initiatives, like residue testing,
unannounced inspections on farms. We really want to increase
the rigor of this program. At the same time, we want to fund
organic initiatives around the Department, really just small
increases in pots that are already there. For example, Market
News, trying to find out more about what's going on in organic
dairy in the marketplace. So, we've just asked for a small
amount of money increase there.
So, there's a variety of footholds in the Department for
organic, but no huge new program. Again, it's getting USDA,
which is a very big-tent organization, finding a way for the
different kinds of production schemes to have a home within our
different agencies.
KNOW YOUR FARMER, KNOW YOUR FOOD
Senator Kohl. Deputy, you talk about Know Your Farmer, Know
Your Food Initiative. We all know it's gaining in popularity
through expanding farmers markets, and other means also. Would
you speak a bit to the economic efficiencies of reduced
transportation costs and the ability for rural communities to
keep more of the wealth it generates in those local
communities. And are there other new challenges in food safety
or other problems, due to this shift in marketing, that we
should be made aware of?
Dr. Merrigan. Well, Secretary Vilsack and I are always on
the road, saying that nobody gets a pass in food safety. Food
safety is not a size-relevant thing. Whether you're a little
guy or the big guy, we all have to do better. But, because one
of the emphases in Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food is to get
more institutional purchasing of locally grown, regionally
grown food, maybe that's our school system, there are new
relationships there, and there are questions about what food
safety certifications need to be put in place; what are the
concerns about liability; how contracts should be written. And
that's one of the reasons that we have a Farm to School team
that's going around the country trying to figure out where Farm
to School has been successful, and where it has failed. There
are 43 States now that have a foothold in Farm to School. Get
the lessons learned and document that so that other
institutions can follow. Get that roadmap in place.
In terms of its potential for rural economic development,
we think it's great. As we know from our NASS Survey data,
there is a real uptick in small farms, those that are grossing
$10,000 and less. We also know that there's that disappearing
middle of family farmers that are just not finding ways to make
ends meet. We think that if we can build stronger local and
regional ag systems, those smaller farmers will graduate into
the middle-sized farms, and those middle-sized farms that are
trying to find a way to survive in a differing, evolving
agricultural climate, that they'll be able to do so.
And so, again, it's a lot of strategies. It may be helping
fund a mobile flash-freezing processing van that will help
small farmers; it might be about helping augment cold storage;
it might be facilitating the development of a farmer
cooperative, so they can aggregate materials, so they can
actually satisfy an institutional buying request. So, again, a
variety of strategies. And again, no food safety concerns that
I'm aware of, at this point.
Senator Kohl. Thank you very much, Deputy Merrigan.
Senator Brownback.
Senator Brownback. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just wanted to follow from the opening comments I made, and
then Senator Bond hit it, as well.
GLOBAL AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENT
There's a chart you have, Secretary, on agriculture
development as a percentage of total development assistance.
And it's what I was mentioning to you earlier about how this
has fallen off substantially. We had a big investment in
agriculture development, globally, in the 1980s. It was, I
guess, trendy but not sufficient enough to grab on. And then
the--you can see how much it's fallen off, by this chart here--
and then you have it.
This recent uptick, I'm told, is Millennium Challenge
funding--accounts funding, which is good. But, again, I think
it's outside of the wheelhouse. So, you're the one that's got
the expertise in this field; USDA and the land grant system is
the one that knows it. And I just--my hope is that, as Gates
gets into this more, as Millennium Challenge gets into this
more, as AID focuses on this area more, as we look at ways that
we stabilize countries around the world via agriculture
development--like Iraq and Afghanistan, to name two--and as, I
think, there's more of a focus on Africa--that it's USDA and
it's the land grant system that's in there doing this, because
that's where the expertise is.
This is very good investment for foreign affairs, in my
estimation, for the United States. And where I--it seems like
we're kind of in the--betwixt and between on how we're actually
going to do this, who is going to do it. And I would hope that
maybe the funding goes through Millennium Challenge, or the
funding goes through AID, but it ends up working through the
expertise that you have, and the expertise that's at the land
grant universities.
And it would be my hope, as well, that the overall number
would go up, because this is--we're a long ways down the road
of--we give a lot of development assistance, we give a lot of
food aid, in places around the world, but, you know, these are
ones that, over the longer period of time, have been very
successful in many places around the world. We're still hard-
stretched in some places. And there's a concentrated set of
countries, particularly sub-Sahara Africa countries, that the
picture--as I've looked at this over 20 years, it's narrowed
in, a narrower set, when we can--we can deal with a lot of
these problems. And I'm hopeful you can tackle that and deal
with it.
Secretary Vilsack. Senator, this is a very important aspect
of our job at USDA. And as part of our strategic vision for the
Department, we realize that we have to do a better job of
providing assistance to deal with food insecurity issues across
the globe.
We have a one-government approach to this. And so, the
State Department, USAID, and USDA have an interagency task
force, if you will, that had been put together to promote
global food security, the Global Hunger and Food Security
Initiative. And it is focused on, first of all increasing
resources, as the President indicated during the G20 meeting
last year, and which I indicated a commitment to when I
traveled to Italy for the first G8 Agriculture Ministers
meeting on food security ever. It is targeted, in terms of its
impact on the countries in sub-Saharan Africa and some of the
poor countries, such as Haiti is another targeted area, even
before the earthquake. And it is focused on three fundamental
approaches; first of all, increasing agricultural productivity
in these countries. And that involves USDA providing
opportunities for greater exchanges through the Borlaug and
Cochran fellowships, which we've requested additional resources
for. It is working with agricultural ministries, like we are in
Afghanistan and Iraq and Pakistan, to address specific issues
that we have expertise on that we can share. It is designed to
promote a science-based approach, in terms of biotechnology,
and the benefits that that could potentially have in increasing
crop production in drought areas, with drought-resistant crops
and other strategies, more appropriate use of fertilizer, a
better understanding of soil conditions, things of that nature.
Second, even if you grow the food, it doesn't necessarily
mean it gets to the people who need it; and therefore, it
doesn't necessarily create economic opportunity for those
farmers. So, we need to also focus on creating greater access,
and that deals with developing market strategies, developing
regulatory structure and legal frameworks that allow this to
happen, and the infrastructure, both the storage facilities to
avoid post-harvest loss, transportation facilities, and the
like.
And then, finally, even if it's available, even if it's
accessible, it may not be properly utilized. And so, therefore
it goes into an education effort to make sure that there's
proper refrigeration, proper handling, proper cooking of the
food so that it's safe for people to consume. When you do all
of that, you really do create a much more vibrant agricultural
economy. And in these countries that are fragile and are food
insecure, that is absolutely the first thing that has to
happen.
We are doing pretty significant work in Afghanistan. And,
you know, I know time doesn't permit me to go into great detail
about it, but I think we are seeing some results from that.
Senator Brownback. Well, I--one other thing that you didn't
mention, and it's not in your area, but I think it's just
critically important, is that--the structure of the government
in those countries. We--we've seen places--and particularly--I
know I can look at examples in sub-Sahara Africa, where we put
quite a bit of money in over a lot of years. And I've traveled
these places and you meet with the leadership and they kind of
ask the question, ``Where'd the money go?'' And that's why I
like the Millennium Challenge account approach, where they go--
there's a--a key piece of this is about governance, on how you
govern. And when places like China and India went to a more
open-market sector, and away from the way they were doing it,
systems and things started to flourish.
So, I would hope that we learn our lessons, too, from our
past engagement, when we put a fair amount of money in this, is
that it does matter whether a country is willing to help itself
and structure itself in a way that these dollars can take hold.
It's like whether it can take root or not, or are we going to
just throw some money in here. And I would kind of hold it
back, say, ``We're ready to do this, but you've got to change
these two things before we're going to put this--we're ready to
do it, and we want to do it.'' But, otherwise, I think we may
repeat some past problems, where we poured money into some
countries and we don't have a whole lot to show for it.
Secretary Vilsack. Well, that precise discussion took place
in Afghanistan, with reference to Minister Rahimi and his
efforts at developing this framework, part of which is change
management. His own ministry has to operate effectively. And we
made a commitment of resources, but it was conditioned on those
resources being used to bolster his capacity to actually do the
work that needs to be done, and to understand the core
competencies that a ministry requires. So, there is a concerted
effort, in that country and in all countries, to make sure that
we have the regulatory structures, the government structure and
framework that's actually going to make this work. And that's
certainly what we're focused on at USDA.
SPENDING CUTS
Senator Brownback. One final thought. And I really
appreciate your time and your knowledge of your subject and
your agency. Last year, when we went through the process,
chairman, on the floor we had a number of amendments proposed
by individuals suggesting different cuts in places within USDA.
Our office is going to go back through and look those over to
see if there were some good suggestions there of things that we
should look at cutting and maybe putting that in other places,
or even have a pruned-down budget even further. Because I think
we owe it to the taxpayer, in these times of, you know, record
deficits, to say, ``What is it we can do to get this number
down?'' We need to do our functions, we need to do them well,
but we also--with a $1.5 trillion deficit, we've just got to
get--we've got to get the numbers down. And so, we're going to
go back through and look at some of the suggestions our
colleagues put in, last year, for possibilities to get the
budget number down further.
And I appreciate it, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you, Secretary, for your time.
RESEARCH PROGRAMS
Senator Kohl. Thank you very much, Senator Brownback.
Mr. Secretary, I'm pleased to see that the budget continues
the growth we began last year on the competitive Agriculture
Food and Research Initiative, known as AFRI. As you know, I'm a
strong supporter of this program. However, in order to pay for
the unprecedented increase that the budget proposes in AFRI, a
large number of other research programs are eliminated,
including formula funds.
As I said, I'm pleased to see the beginning of the long-
term growth for AFRI. Its mission, however, is different from
that of formula programs. Formula programs are, by their
nature, more flexible and able to rapidly respond to emerging
research needs which require more immediate action than a long-
term research contract. Can you respond to this concern?
Also, Mr. Secretary, I've heard from Senator Byrd, who has
expressed concern about proposed elimination of ongoing ARS
work in West Virginia. We'll be submitting some questions for
the record on behalf of Senator Byrd. I'd just like to know--
you to know that I'm going to submit those, and would
appreciate a response.
Secretary Vilsack. Very good, Mr. Chairman. Let me see if I
can respond. Our understanding of what we proposed on the
formula funding is that we maintained the funding that was
included in last year's budget, that basically it's the same
formula funding as the previous year.
We recognize the concerns that the subcommittee expressed
about the need to maintain formula funding, and we tried to
respect that with status quo formula funding. We did eliminate
some of the programs that were specifically designated, or
earmarked, if you will, by members of the subcommittee, as is
consistent with our practice, and refocus those resources into
a more competitive circumstance. We honestly think that we will
get a bigger bang and a better bang for our buck if we do this.
We want research that's actually going to move the dial. We
want research that's focused on key priorities that this
Congress, this administration, this country needs to focus on.
As it relates to ARS, we appreciate Senator Byrd's
concerns. Our view is that, before we begin spending additional
resources on ARS facilities, that we really need to take a step
back and do a strategic overview of precisely what facilities
we have, what condition they're in, and prioritize the
maintenance and expansion and new construction projects. We'd
like a year to be able to do that, and we'd like a small amount
of money to be able to do that, so that we can come back to
this subcommittee with a thoughtful and strategic approach to
improvements, to construction to these labs. We recognize the
important role they play. We just, again, want to make sure
we're using taxpayer dollars wisely.
FSIS BUDGET
Senator Kohl. All right, Mr. Secretary, I appreciate that.
Mr. Secretary, the FSIS budget request asks for a much
smaller increase than in recent years, but it does include
significant performance measures. This includes a goal of
decreasing total illnesses from all FSIS regulated foods by
more than 17 percent between fiscal year 2009 and fiscal year
2010, as well as additional decreases in the following years.
Is FSIS on track to meet these goals?
Secretary Vilsack. We think they are, Mr. Chairman. I think
it's appropriate for me to say that there is a need for better
data collection so that we have a better understanding of
precisely what causes the difficulties and illnesses that
Americans experience, and at what part in the food chain those
difficulties are experienced. One of the things that we would
like to do is to increase data collection. We'd like to use
additional resources to focus on better data collection so that
we could focus on trend lines, establish baselines by which we
then can make better risk assessment and better decisions,
relative to where there may be problems.
We think we need to strengthen our capacity to respond to
multiple jurisdictional illnesses that cross State lines, which
is why we have proposed additional resources for strengthening
our public health programs. We think there needs to be expanded
research efforts on identifying pathogens that we may not even
be aware of today, that could potentially cause problems. We're
obviously continuing to focus on improving the HACCP program
with particular focus on improving surveillance of pathogens,
and expanded sampling that's necessary to do that.
And finally, we want to focus on our school food programs
to make sure that they are not creating difficulties for our
school children, in terms of unsafe food. We're doing a top-to-
bottom review of those programs. We will be looking at our
inspection and procurement programs. We'll also have an
independent set of eyes at the National Academy of Sciences
take a look at some of those programs. We want to improve a
notification system between the Federal Government, State, and
school districts.
And so, there's an awful lot of work going on within FSIS.
It isn't always necessarily about additional resources; it's
about making sure that you're focusing your time and attention
on the things that matter. And we want to make sure that we get
a regulatory structure in place with the resources that we
have.
STATE INSPECTION PROGRAMS
Senator Kohl. What about State-inspected meat programs, are
they going to be continuing to receive your attention and
funding?
Secretary Vilsack. You know, that is a question I will have
to get back to you on, unless the Deputy's going to----
Dr. Merrigan. We're----
Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. Bail me out here.
Dr. Merrigan [continuing]. In rulemaking, hopefully soon to
come out with a final rule, on the interstate meat. I know
that's something that Wisconsin is desperately waiting for, and
we've certainly had a lot of comments. I think it's a great way
to facilitate some of the niche markets. It's very important,
for the smaller plants, for opportunities there. And we're
looking forward to publication of the final rule. We did get a
lot of comments, and we're trying to fine tune the proposal so
everyone will be ready to embrace it.
Secretary Vilsack. I would also say, Mr. Chairman, that one
area that we are focused on relative to State inspections is a
continued effort to promote more frequent and better
inspections of schools. As you know, there is a requirement
that there be two inspections per year, of schools. Not all the
schools in America are up to that standard. We continue to
press States to make sure that they are encouraging that to
happen. We recognize, again, they are under a substantial
financial stress. We don't want this to be a casualty of that.
ELECTRIC LOAN PROGRAM
Senator Kohl. All right. Mr. Secretary, USDA is the
principal source of funding to improve the availability of
electric power throughout rural America. Rural areas face
unique challenges in accessing adequate power at affordable
costs because of the high cost to extend electric power to
rural household, farms, and communities due to the lower
customer density, as well as the remote locational aspects.
This budget cuts the electric power program level by more
than 30 percent, even though the subsidy costs for this program
are small. It further stops the use of these funds for the
construction, acquisition, or improvement of fossil-fueled
electric generating plants, unless those funds are for carbon
sequestration systems. We all support cleaner energy,
particularly in rural America, but this budget proposes drastic
changes in the USDA electric program.
Mr. Secretary, the planning horizon for large power
projects is years. How will these proposed program changes
affect the electric power supply to rural areas in the near
term? And what assurance can you provide that rural areas will
not be harmed, such as with higher electric rates and
unreliable power availability, as a result of these proposed
changes, Mr. Secretary?
Secretary Vilsack. Mr. Chairman, we are obviously
encouraging farmers and ranchers across the country to take a
look at their own facilities to determine whether or not they
can be embracing more renewable energy opportunities. It's one
of the reasons for the REAP Program. We've seen a tremendous
interest in REAP; millions of dollars being spent to do audits
of operations and, I think, there's a growing recognition that
there is money to be made and money to be saved through
renewable energy. So, we obviously wanted to send a positive
message about renewable energy. The President has been very
clear about his priorities in this area.
I would say that it isn't always necessarily a budget that
is reflective of support that could be provided to an industry.
One of the things that we are looking at, which I know the RECs
have asked us look at, is this notion of how we use our
security position to enhance expansion. We have circumstances
today, where we made loans to RECs, where the value of the
assets that they have, have substantially appreciated since the
time of our loan, which means that our loan is over-secured, if
you will.
The question is, is there any way in which we can take a
look at that over-security concept to determine how we might be
able to provide additional resources without necessarily
spending additional dollars? These are the kinds of things that
we need to be looking at to make sure that, in these fiscally
difficult times, we're stretching the resources as effectively
as we can. So, we're looking at ways in which we can help the
RECs particularly in this way. We haven't yet made a decision
on it, but we are looking at it.
Senator Kohl. So, the assurances that I'm looking for here
this morning are forthcoming, but not----
Secretary Vilsack. Well, you know, I don't want to mislead
the chair. I'm not in a position today to tell you that all of
the demands are necessarily going to be met. I can tell you
that I think there is a growing demand on the renewable side,
which is why our budget reflects that. It's also consistent
with the President's comments to the world, to the globe. And I
think there are perhaps other strategies that we could utilize
that would supplement for additional resources. But, we
recognize and appreciate the importance of affordable power.
BROADBAND
Senator Kohl. On broadband, Mr. Secretary, for the last
several years, substantial funding has been provided annually
to extend broadband service throughout rural America. In
addition, the Recovery Act made a substantial investment to
strengthen the program with funds that must be obligated by
this September. This budget seeks additional funding for
broadband loans for fiscal year 2011. Mr. Secretary, please
describe the progress you are making extending broadband
service to remote, unserved, and underserved rural areas. By
the end of this year, how much of rural America do you think
will still be without adequate broadband service? Do you expect
to obligate all of the Recovery Act funds for this by this
September? And with the abundance of funding already provided
for this program, can you justify an additional $400 million in
fiscal year 2011?
Secretary Vilsack. Mr. Chairman, I think it's fair to say
that the tremendous work that Congress and the President did in
the Recovery Act in creating opportunities for broadband
expansion represent a significant downpayment, but by no means
a balloon payment, on the need for expanded broadband access in
the United States.
We've seen literally thousands of applications for these
resources, far in excess of the resources that were made
available in the Recovery Act. I believe we are on track to
obligate our resources by September 30 from the Recovery Act,
but there will still be significant demand after those
applications have been approved and funds are provided.
What we are trying to do with this is to emphasize,
particularly in rural communities, the importance of having
this technology. It isn't just simply expanding broadband, it's
making sure that people in rural communities understand how
best to utilize it. Whether it's distance learning, or
telemedicine, or business expansion by expanding markets from
local to global markets, or the opportunities for farmers and
ranchers to have realtime information. There is a need for
additional education for people to understand that this is a
tool that they ought to have, if they have to pay a
subscription fee or whatever, they ought to be willing to make
that investment, because it will return that investment.
I would say that, as I said earlier in my earlier comments,
it is a linchpin, a pillar of a new rural economy that we have
to construct in this country. Without that technology,
businesses, farmers, ranchers, communities will not be able to
succeed in the 21st century.
So, I think we have to continue to invest. I think we have
to be wise about our investments. We have to make sure that
folks understand how to utilize the resource, that they have
the financial wherewithal and the technological expertise to
utilize it properly in communities, and that we need to look
for projects that will benefit not just a single community, but
a region, a group of communities, multiple communities from
resources.
We're seeing projects for example, my home State recently
received an award in which 12 counties, 90,000 people, will be
impacted by this. I think it was something like 30,000 small
business operations and farms and activities in this area would
be benefited. So, it's an enormous opportunity here. So, I
would encourage the subcommittee to look strongly at continuing
to invest in this very important technology.
Senator Kohl. You've made the point, and I agree with you,
that broadband is absolutely essential to future of rural
America. When do you imagine that we'll have full broadband
service, as well as, as you pointed out, the ability of
individuals to know how to use it?
Secretary Vilsack. Senator, I'm not sure I can give you a
specific date. I will tell you that I think we have a ways to
go. I know my State, when I left as Governor, we had roughly 90
percent of the State covered, but that didn't necessarily mean
that it was being fully utilized and fully appreciated. And
that took 5 or 6 years of hard work on the part of our utility
companies and on the part of our small telephone companies to
make that happen in the State regulatory structures.
So, there's a lot of work yet to be done here, but I think
we need to accelerate. I would say that a continued investment
is an indication, from this Congress and this administration,
of the importance of it and the need to continue to look for
ways to leverage these resources. And part of our challenge,
candidly, is that there are places where you may have 300 or
400 people, but the investment will be multiple millions of
dollars. And so, it becomes very difficult to be able to
explain to people why a subsidy of $50,000 or $60,000 or
$70,000 per customer can be warranted, which is why we're
looking at lower-cost strategies to at least get people further
ahead in the technology arena than they are, whether it's
satellite or other strategies that may be perhaps a little bit
less expensive than broadband, but can still provide access to
the Internet, can still provide some distance learning
opportunities. And so, it's conceivable that, at the end of
this process, if we have resources left over from the
applications with the Recovery Act, that we'll put a small
amount of money out there for these communities that just
cannot justify a $50,000 subsidy, but we could justify a
satellite operation or a tower or some kind of antenna system.
FOOD BANKS
Senator Kohl. All right.
Mr. Secretary, according to a Feeding America study, more
than 37 million people receive emergency food each year through
food banks and other agencies. This is an increase of 46
percent since 2006. With the current economic situation not
improving for many Americans, what is the Department doing to
help food banks make sure people have access to food?
Secretary Vilsack. Well, the Recovery Act provided us a
tremendous shot in the arm, and we got those resources out as
quickly as possible. We'll continue to use our commodity
purchasing capacity. It's a little bit limited, based on
activities that have taken place prior to this year, but we
will continue to look for ways in which we will provide help
and assistance.
EMERGENCY FOOD ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Senator Kohl. The budget includes a small increase for the
Emergency Food Assistance Program. Do you believe this increase
is sufficient?
Secretary Vilsack. The answer to that question, Senator,
depends, in part, on how well and how quickly the economy
recovers. We expect and anticipate that we're going to see a
steady increase in economic activity, as we have seen in the
last couple of months, with our stock market being stabilized
and the housing market being somewhat stabilized. Our hope is
that that help will be reflected in job growth at some point.
And then, when that happens, there'll be less demand and less
pressure. But, in the meantime, we want to provide some
resources that will allow us to respond. Whether this is enough
or not, it somewhat depends on where we are 6 months from now
or 9 months from now. Our hope is that it is enough, but I'm
not going to say that we wouldn't come back here, at some point
in time, and tell you we need more.
SCHOOL FOOD SERVICE EQUIPMENT
Senator Kohl. Mr. Secretary, this subcommittee provided
grants, through the stimulus bill, for the purchase of school
food service equipment. Can you please provide an update on the
status of those funds?
Secretary Vilsack. Over 5,000 schools received assistance
from those resources. And I will say that part of the child
nutrition reauthorization effort is also focused on continuing
to provide additional resources for equipment. The reason for
this is, a lot of schools are not in a position to take full
advantage of more nutritious food, because they don't have the
capacity to prepare it or deal with it. They may have a fryer,
but they may not have something that can steam or cook
vegetables, for example.
So, we have to continue to look for ways to provide
resources and help, both on the equipment side and the
technological side, and training of school food personnel. So,
that's part of what we're proposing, in terms of our
reauthorization effort.
HUNGER-FREE COMMUNITY GRANTS
Senator Kohl. Mr. Secretary, last year we provided funding
for Hunger-Free Community grants, as authorized in the farm
bill. What is the status of those funds?
Secretary Vilsack. We asked for additional resources in
that area; I think it's a $3 million increase. There is a real
opportunity here for us to encourage more innovative and
creative strategies. We are particularly concerned--again, back
to children--particularly concerned about the summer months,
when our feeding programs just, frankly, don't get enough
resources and assistance, and there are a lot of youngsters who
don't get adequately fed.
So, we're encouraging, through the grant program, through
our reauthorization efforts, to try to find additional
resources to incent more creative and thoughtful approaches.
How can we take resources and utilize them so that we go to
where children are, for example, in the summer? Are there
programs where we can identify where youngsters are, as opposed
to compelling youngsters to come to a central location for a
congregate meal type of activity? Is there a way in which
ballparks, swimming pools, playgrounds, where kids will
normally and traditionally congregate, and could we figure out
some kind of mobile strategy that would meet those needs? How
do we continue to provide backpack opportunities during the
weekends when there is a snowstorm and school's out for week
because people can't get to school, what do we do for those
youngsters?
So, we want to incent and encourage communities to focus on
creative strategies. They're going to need resources and
incentives to do that, which is why we're asking for additional
resources.
Senator Kohl. Very good.
I'd like to thank everybody here today for attending.
Secretary Vilsack, we appreciate your participation
particularly, with your assistance Dr. Merrigan, and Dr.
Steele.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Before we recess this subcommittee hearing, Senator Tim
Johnson has asked that his statement be made part of the
record.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Tim Johnson
Thank you, Chairman Kohl and Ranking Member Brownback, for holding
today's Agricultural Appropriations Subcommittee hearing on the
President's proposed fiscal year 2011 budget. Secretary Vilsack, thank
you for coming to the Hill today to discuss USDA's funding proposal.
Mr. Secretary, I appreciate your working to implement Country of
Origin Labeling according to Congressional intent, and look forward to
reviewing USDA's rules regarding agricultural competition as authorized
by the 2008 farm bill. I am hopeful that together, we can make some
meaningful improvements for independent producers. The President's
fiscal year 2011 budget contains some very good things, including a
substantial investment in nutrition as with the proposed increase for
the Commodity Supplemental Food Program and investment in child
nutrition and WIC.
The budget, however, also includes some questionable funding cuts,
including the elimination of the Resource, Conservation and Development
program. While the conservation funding included in the budget allows
for a 10 percent increase in acreage enrollment over 2010 levels, I am
concerned for the proposed reductions in acreage or funding which may
impact conservation programs in the future.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for your time this morning and I look
forward to working with you on priorities of importance to South
Dakota.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Kohl. We'd like to request that all members submit
any questions for the record within 1 week, which is March 9.
Secretary Vilsack, also like to request that USDA respond to
those questions within 4 weeks, which would be Tuesday, April
6. We look forward to working with each of you as we continue
this appropriations process.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Herb Kohl
HEALTHY FOOD FINANCING INITIATIVE
Question. The Budget proposes an appropriation of $35,000,000 under
the Office of the Secretary plus a reserve of $16,280,000 from other
agencies for the USDA component of a multi-departmental Healthy Food
Financing Initiative that would total in excess of $400,000,000. The
goal of this initiative is laudable. Improvement in accessibility of
healthy foods to many populations will help combat obesity and other
health problems tied to improper diet.
This initiative is described as ``multi-year'' in nature. Do you
foresee that this program will operate indefinitely or do you have a
specific timeframe in which you expect to meet the program's
expectations? What measurements will you use to determine program
effectiveness?
Answer. Through the new multi-year Healthy Food Financing
Initiative and by engaging with the private sector, the administration
will work to eliminate food deserts across the country within 7 years.
With the first year of funding, the administration's initiative will
leverage enough investments to begin expanding healthy food options
into as many as one-fifth of the Nation's food deserts and create
thousands of jobs in urban and rural communities across the Nation.
The objectives of the initiative are to increase access to healthy
and affordable food choices in struggling urban and rural communities,
and help reduce the high incidence of diet related diseases; create
jobs and economic development; and establish market opportunities for
farmers and ranchers. As a result, measurements of program
effectiveness will include the number of new grocery stores and other
healthy food retail outlets built in food deserts, the number of people
previously living in food deserts who are served by the new retailers,
and other such output measures. It is going to take a lot longer,
possibly decades to have definitive data on improved diets, better
health and reduced obesity. USDA plans to involve evaluators in the
initiative to ensure proper measurements of program effectiveness and
overall success of the initiative.
Question. Please describe how USDA will coordinate this initiative
with other departments and please explain the specific functions the
other departments will employ in carrying out this initiative.
Answer. Each of the three agencies brings a particular expertise
and set of resources to the Healthy Food Financing Initiative.
Specifically:
The Department of Agriculture specializes in improving access to
healthy foods through nutrition assistance programs, creating business
opportunities for America's farmers, and promoting economic development
in rural areas. USDA's proposed funding level of $50 million will
support more than $180 million in public and private investments in the
form of loans, grants, promotion, and other programs that can provide
financial and technical assistance to enhance access to healthy foods
in underserved communities, expand demand and retail outlets for farm
products, and increase the availability of locally and regionally
produced foods. USDA has a solid track record of supporting successful
farmers markets, and has also invested in grocery stores and creating
agricultural supply chains for them, such as in the People's Grocery
project in Oakland, CA.
The Treasury Department will support private sector financing of
healthy foods options in distressed urban and rural communities.
Through the New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) and financial assistance to
Treasury-certified community development financial institutions
(CDFIs), Treasury has a proven track record in expanding access to
nutritious foods by catalyzing private sector investment. The Healthy
Food Financing Initiative builds on that track record, with $250
million in authority for the NMTC and $25 million for financial
assistance to CDFIs devoted to helping finance healthy food options.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) specializes in
community-based efforts to improve the economic and physical health of
people in distressed areas. HHS will dedicate up to $20 million in
Community Economic Development program funds to the Healthy Food
Financing Initiative. Through the CED program, HHS will award
competitive grants to Community Development Corporations to support
projects that finance grocery stores, farmers markets, and other
sources of fresh nutritious food. These projects will serve the dual
purposes of facilitating access to healthy food options while creating
job and business development opportunities in low-income communities,
particularly since grocery stores often serve as anchor institutions in
commercial centers.
Question. Since this initiative will combine the efforts of a
number of different USDA agencies and mission areas, how will you
ensure that proper coordination will occur and who or which agency will
be ultimately responsible for this initiative?
Answer. USDA will establish an internal coordination mechanism.
Leadership for the initiative within USDA is currently assigned to Ann
Wright, Deputy Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs,
and Cheryl Cook, Deputy Under Secretary for Rural Development. They are
assisted by staff throughout the Department.
Question. Please provide an explanation of specifically what each
USDA agency involved with this initiative will do to carry it out at
both the headquarters and field level.
Answer. The Agricultural Marketing Service, Rural Development, and
the Office of the Secretary will work together to ensure that expertise
within USDA is appropriately leveraged to carry out the initiative. AMS
has considerable knowledge and expertise enhancing food access for low
income populations and improving retail market access for small and
mid-sized producers. Rural Development has significant expertise
funding and supporting infrastructure development for purposes of
economic development.
Together, the two agencies, working in concert with the Office of
the Secretary will make funding available to provide:
--Technical assistance to grantees to help them with facility, and
distribution logistics, and food marketing;
--Grants, loans, and loan guarantees in support of business and
infrastructure development and investment; and
--Administrative support of HFFI and project evaluation.
Each agency will work through its existing programs to carry out
the program. There will be no reprogramming of funds:
Rural Development
Rural Development's Community Facility Grant Program supports the
success of rural communities by providing loans and grants for the
construction, acquisition, or renovation of community facilities or for
the purchase of equipment for community projects.
The Business and Industry loan program is designed to help new and
existing businesses in rural areas gain access to affordable capital.
The Rural Business Enterprise Grant Program provides grants for
rural projects that finance and facilitate development of small and
emerging rural businesses.
The Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program provides loans and
grants to support new and existing rural micro businesses by providing
funds to microenterprise development organizations for micro lending
and technical assistance.
The Intermediary Relending Program (IRP) provides loans to local
organizations that relend to rural businesses.
The Rural Business Opportunity Grant Program provides grants for
training and technical assistance to support economic development.
Agricultural Marketing Service
The Farmers Market Promotion Program provides grants to support the
development of farmers markets and other farm to consumer marketing
businesses. Money from this program can be spent to equip farmers
markets with electronic benefit transfer equipment so credit cards and
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits can be
redeemed at the markets.
The Wholesale, Farmers and Alternative Market Development Program
provides technical assistance to create or upgrade markets and
marketing facilities.
Question. Since the USDA initiative envisions the use of Rural
Development funds to enhance food accessibility in urban areas, how do
you reconcile the requirement and underlying objective that rural
development programs are enacted to serve ``rural'' America?
Answer. Programs that serve rural America do not necessarily need
to be located in rural areas. In the case of the Healthy Food Financing
Initiative, rural areas are expected to benefit from the increased
demand for agricultural commodities. In addition, all America will
benefit from a healthier citizenry and stronger economy in both rural
and urban areas.
Question. How will you prioritize areas in the Nation to
participate in this initiative and, more to the point, how will you
determine where factors such as crime rates and lack of security are
the dominant forces that determine success or failure of businesses
such as full service grocery stores? What effect will lack of security
or similar factors play in your determination where to make Federal
investment?
Answer. The administration has set an ambitious goal for the
initiative--to eliminate food deserts across the country in 7 years. To
accomplish this goal, the initiative will inevitably need to fund
projects in areas of the Nation that suffer from high crime rates and
lack of security. Agencies providing assistance under the initiative
will draw upon past work they have funded in communities with similar
characteristics and study and apply the lessons learned from similar
initiatives such as the Pennsylvania Fresh Food Financing Initiative to
ensure best practices are being applied to the selection and
implementation of projects. In addition, the agencies will
strategically invest in projects in the initial years that will further
the knowledge and practice of ensuring successful projects in these
communities. It is worth noting that crime and lack of security have
not stopped fast food establishments from thriving in food deserts and
other deprived areas.
Question. Since a main (if not the primary) underlying purpose of
this initiative is to improve the diets of Americans who might
otherwise have to rely on food items from less than full-service
grocery stores where it is more common to find items of convenience
rather than high nutritional value, is the Department also looking at
other changes to improve the nutritional intake of Americans. For
example, do you think the SNAP program should be reformed to restrict
benefit use to disallow items of low nutritional quality?
Answer. By most standards, almost all American diets are in need of
improvement. Given interest in using Federal nutrition assistance
programs to promote healthy choices, some suggest that SNAP recipients
should be prohibited from using their benefits to buy foods with
limited nutritional value. However, there are serious problems with the
rationale, feasibility and potential effectiveness of this proposal.
First, there are no clear standards for defining foods as good or
bad or healthy or not healthy. Foods contain many components that can
affect health, and diets contain many foods. As a result, it is
challenging to determine whether and the point at which the presence or
absence of desirable nutrients outweighs the presence of nutrients to
be avoided in ruling a food in or out.
Second, there are operational issues. Implementation of food
restrictions would increase program complexity and costs. The task of
identifying, evaluating and tracking the nutritional profile of every
food available would be substantial. The burden of identifying which
products met Federal standards would fall on an expanded bureaucracy or
on manufacturers and producers asked to certify that their products
meet Federal standards.
Third, restrictions may be ineffective in changing the purchases of
participants. About 70 percent of all SNAP participants who receive
less than the maximum benefit allotment are expected to purchase a
portion of their food with their own money. There is no guarantee that
restricting the use of SNAP benefits would affect food purchases other
than substituting one form of payment (cash) for another (SNAP
benefits).
Finally, there is no strong research-based evidence that SNAP
participation contributes to poor diet quality. Recipients are no more
likely than higher income consumers to choose foods with little
nutritional value; thus the basis for singling out SNAP recipients and
restricting their food choices is not clear.
USDA believes the better approach is nutrition education about
healthy eating and physical activity to foster real behavior change.
Incentives rather than restrictions that encourage purchases of certain
foods or expanded nutrition education to enable participants to make
healthy choices are more practical options and likely to be more
effective in achieving the dietary improvements that promote good
health. The Healthy Incentive Pilot program, established by the farm
bill and supported with $20 million in 2009 will explore this question.
The President's fiscal year 2011 budget proposes $6 million to expand
this effort.
OFFICE OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES MARKETS
Question. The Budget includes an increase of $2,021,000 for the
Office of Ecosystem Services Markets, as authorized under section 2709
of the 2008 farm bill. It is stated that the purpose of this request is
to expand the Department's efforts to develop technical guidelines to
quantify environmental services provided by America's farmers,
ranchers, and forest landowners. Since this request is for the
expansion of Departmental efforts, please provide information on the
activities (including funding levels) currently underway that serve
this purpose.
Answer. The Office of Environmental Markets (OEM), originally
established in December 2008 as the Office of Ecosystem Services
Markets, builds on and will complement a strong foundation within USDA
to assess the environmental services provided by conservation and land
management actions. Ongoing USDA efforts include: the work of the
Climate Change Program Office within the Office of the Chief Economist
established the only set of comprehensive farm-level greenhouse gas
estimation guidelines used in the Government's Voluntary Greenhouse Gas
reporting Registry; efforts to assess the conservation and
environmental benefits of USDA actions through the Conservation Effects
Assessment Program; and monitoring resource conditions through programs
including the National Resources Inventory (NRI) and the Resource
Conservation Assessment (RCA).
OEM is currently active in a project called Farm of the Future that
demonstrates how landowners are accelerating their environmental
performance and receiving a positive return on their investment by
participating in environmental markets. In addition, OEM is leading a
series of inter-Departmental dialogues that brings together senior
leadership from across the Federal family to discuss coordination for
the development of performance metrics and overall infrastructure for
environmental markets at a national level. In 2010, the OEM intends to
conduct an assessment of existing science-based technical guidelines
and develop recommendations on national guidelines for greenhouse
gases, water quality, biodiversity and wetlands.
OEM will provide preliminary recommendations for integrating
carbon, water, wetlands and biodiversity values on the same landscape.
OEM also intends to assess existing registries and other reporting
mechanisms and develop initial recommendations to the Secretary for a
national, integrated registration process. OEM is well positioned to
build on existing information and move in a new direction that expands
the Department's work to build the infrastructure for a robust
marketplace.
Question. While section 2709 of the 2008 farm bill directs the
Secretary to issue guidelines regarding this effort, it does not call
for the establishment of a separate office. Why do you feel this is
necessary? Why can't these functions be carried out under the Office of
the Chief Economist, the Economic Research Service, the Natural
Resources Conservation Service, or some other appropriate agency?
Answer. All these agencies you mention play a critical role in
developing information to study and support environmental markets
including the necessary research. To be effective and increase
communication between all of the relevant parties, these efforts must
be coordinated and having a central organization to coordinate this
work across USDA and the Federal Government as well as with the private
sector requires an office with a specific focus. The Office of
Environmental Markets (OEM) is the entity that will coordinate across
Federal and private sector lines all these critical elements.
Question. Please provide a description of the types of services
markets that you envision as coming under the purview of this activity
and please explain how they will generate additional income to
participants.
Answer. The four environmental markets that USDA will potentially
be focusing on may include greenhouse gases (carbon trading); water
quality trading: (nutrients, sediment, and temperature) conservation
banking (species and habitat); and wetland banking. The Department,
through the Office of Environmental Markets and the Climate Change
Program Office, will potentially work to develop guidelines for these
markets consistent with the guidance provided in section 2709 of the
2008 farm bill. Environmental markets may offer a cost effective
alternative for regulated communities to meet their environmental
obligations by purchasing environmental benefits from landowners who
apply enhanced conservation actions on their operations. These
conservation solutions could be applied at a fraction of the cost of
technological options and typically include additional environmental
benefits as well. Landowners would potentially have the option of
engaging in environmental markets by offering new commodities such as
water quality, habitat and other environmental benefits as part of
their suite of products for sale.
OFFICE OF TRIBAL RELATIONS
Question. The Office of Tribal Relations was created in fiscal year
2010 with initial funding of $1,000,000. Please describe the activities
and accomplishments of this Office during the current fiscal year and
those that are planned for fiscal year 2011.
Answer. The Office of Tribal Relations serves as the USDA central
point of contact for all 564 federally recognized tribal governments.
The Director of the Office of Tribal Relations (OTR) serves as the
Senior Advisor to the Secretary for Tribal Affairs. Interim staff
members have been detailed into the office from around the Department
to begin operations, and the hiring of permanent staff is under way. In
fiscal year 2010, OTR has participated in the White House Tribal
Nations Conference of November 2009 and led the development of USDA's
Action Plan for Tribal Consultation and Collaboration. As part of the
development of the Action Plan, OTR participated in a number of
meetings and venues seeking consultative input from tribal leaders. OTR
is now leading efforts of the Department's Native American Working
Group to implement the Action Plan.
Planned activities for fiscal year 2011 include: finalization and
adoption of a new USDA Departmental Regulation on Tribal Consultation;
launch of USDA Employee Education and Training initiative relating to
tribal consultation and collaboration; launch of a reporting and
accountability structure to track tribal consultation and collaboration
activities throughout the Department; participation in numerous
consultation activities throughout the Department; and launch of
regional consultative venues to more fully engage tribal leadership in
consultation and collaborative activities.
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ECONOMIST
Question. One of the functions of the Chief Economist relates to
the work of the Climate Change Program Office (CCPO), which coordinates
the Department's climate change activities and generally represents the
Department on issues and policies relating to this phenomenon. Since
agricultural production is extremely sensitive to changes in weather
patterns and the consequences of extreme weather events, please
describe ongoing efforts of CCPO and policy implications of the
Department that work to achieve protection to American producers and
agricultural production around the world.
Answer. The Climate Change Program Office (CCPO) within the Office
of the Chief Economist (OCE) provides syntheses and assessment of the
implications of climate change on agricultural and forested systems. In
2008, OCE released The Effects of Climate Change on Agriculture, Land
Resources, Water Resources, and Biodiversity. Since then, OCE has
followed up with shorter reports and brochures designed to make this
information available to farmers, ranchers, forest land owners, and the
general public. OCE/CCPO has responsibilities for coordinating the
Department's research program on climate change to ensure that the
Department's research is providing answers to the most pressing
questions related to climate change and is leading efforts to develop a
USDA Strategic Plan for Climate Change Research. A goal will be to
provide credible, validated, and effective climate change science and
technology and to make this information easily available to internal
and external USDA customers and stakeholders on scales relevant to
decisionmaking.
Question. Were there any outcomes of the Climate Change Summit 2009
in Copenhagen, or other national or international meetings in the past
year, that have affected the operations of CCPO or the Department?
Answer. Several meetings on climate change in 2009 will affect the
work of CCPO and the Department. The 15th Conference of the Parties
(COP 15) to the Framework Convention on Climate Change produced a new
international agreement--the Copenhagen Accord. Under this Accord, the
United States has pledged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 17
percent from 2005 levels by 2020--contingent on domestic legislation.
In addition, a series of preparatory meetings were held in 2009 prior
to COP 15. These included meetings in Bonn, Bangkok, and Barcelona.
Land use issues for developed and developing countries were central
to these negotiations. CCPO led USDA's involvement in the negotiations
and ensured that USDA technical expertise were applied to the issues
of: how to address emissions from deforestation and forest degradation
in developing countries, how to include agricultural mitigation
opportunities in new agreements or arrangements, and how to account for
forest carbon in reporting systems.
At COP-15, USDA made a series of announcements related to climate
change actions domestically and internationally, including the Global
Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases and a Memorandum of
Understanding with the Innovation Center for U.S. Dairy to work
together to reach a 25 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions
while benefiting dairy farmers.
OFFICE OF BUDGET AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS
Question. For many years, this subcommittee has enjoyed an
excellent working relationship with the Office of Budget and Program
Analysis (OBPA) that in our view has been mutually beneficial to both
the Congress and the Department. Last year, a reorganization of the
Department occurred in which the status of OBPA was apparently reduced
and the agency placed under the Assistant Secretary for Administration.
The Committee continues to be concerned that many of the functions of
OBPA that have been instrumental over the years for sound and useful
exchanges of information between the Committee and the Department have
lost, to a degree at least, their vitality and depth of purpose. Are
all reports requested in appropriations acts or reports being
coordinated and reviewed by OBPA, and if not, please explain.
Answer. OBPA continues to review all reports requested in the
Appropriations Acts.
Question. Please identify any categories of information or policy
recommendations that are not being reviewed by OBPA that were prior to
the reorganization.
Answer. Under the delegations of authority OBPA is assigned
responsibility for a range of budget, legislative and regulatory
analysis, process and reporting functions. These delegations of
authority have not been changed as part of the Departmental Management
reorganization.
Question. Please identify Departmental positions that have
management authority over OBPA who did not have such authority prior to
the reorganization.
Answer. Since the reorganization, the Assistant Secretary for
Administration and the Chief Financial Officer has management authority
over OBPA.
OFFICE OF ADVOCACY AND OUTREACH
Question. The Budget proposes a substantial increase in funding for
the Office of Advocacy and Outreach, from the fiscal year 2010 enacted
level of $1,700,000 to $7,009,000 for fiscal year 2011. Of this
increase, $4,000,000 is a transfer from the Rural Housing Service
account for carrying out a Farm Worker Program. Please describe the
activities and accomplishments of the Farm Worker Program in fiscal
year 2010.
Answer. The budget request is a $1.3 million increase for the
Office of Advocacy and Outreach. Four million dollars is provided
through RHS in 2010 for the 14204 program to fund farm worker job
stability, safety and training demonstration projects. This funding
will be used to assist agricultural employers and farmworkers by
improving the supply, stability, safety, and training the of
agricultural labor force. USDA plans to assist with: agricultural labor
skills development; the provision of agricultural labor market
information; transportation; short-term housing; workplace literacy;
health and safety instructions; and other supportive services.
An interim Farm Worker Program Leader has been assigned to the
position while the selection for a permanent Supervisory Leader is
underway. The interim leader has developed a plan of operations for the
program within the Office of Advocacy and Outreach. The program leader
is working on emergency assistance for farm workers in the devastated
Florida freeze zone, meeting with Farm Worker organizations and Faith
Based Organizations to discuss potential USDA assistance, and
developing a Federal Emergency Humanitarian Farm Worker Aid Plan. The
Farm Worker Program Leader chairs the Farm Worker subcommittee of the
USDA Deputy Secretary Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food initiative.
Other activities of the Farm Worker Program scheduled for 2010
include: administer funding as available of section 2281 of the Food,
Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990, low-income and
migrant seasonal farm worker funding; work with USDA, Federal, State,
local agencies, as well as, Faith Based Organizations, Farm Workers
Organizations and other CBO's to provide emergency humanitarian aid to
Farm Workers in disaster areas; maintain external communication with
CBO's, Farm Worker Organizations, Faith Based Organizations,
educational institutions and others to keep abreast of emerging topics,
trends, and community needs to assist in appropriate USDA response to
Farm Worker issues; and provide internal leadership and council to USDA
agencies on Farm Worker issues, as well as, compare community needs
with USDA programs and make recommendations for program modifications
or development.
Question. To what extent does the Farm Worker Program duplicate the
mission of NIFA extension and education programs?
Answer. The Farm Worker Coordination Program was established to
meet the needs of the farm workers that are not currently being
addressed in USDA and to better coordinate existing USDA programs and
activities to assist this community. NIFA Extension is managed by
individual State educational institutions which are not always
consistent nationwide in addressing the needs of farm workers. The Farm
Worker Coordination Program will provide leadership to USDA agencies
and others to provide consistency in program delivery. The program will
also provide leadership in the modification of existing programs and
development of new programs that benefit Farm Workers, especially those
that assist farm workers to become farm operators or owners. This
program will work in conjunction with NIFA Extension as well as all the
other USDA agencies.
Question. To what extent has the centralization of program outreach
activities for various USDA agencies into the consolidated Office of
Advocacy and Outreach resulted in savings in the appropriations
accounts of the affected agencies? Will the requested increase in
funding for this Office result in even further savings in fiscal year
2011?
Answer. The program outreach activities of USDA agencies have not
been centralized in the Office of Advocacy and Outreach (OAO). Congress
established the OAO in the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008
and established duties which included establishing and monitoring goals
and objectives of the Department to increase participation in programs
by small, beginning, or socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers;
assessing effectiveness of Departmental outreach programs; developing
and implementing a plan to coordinate outreach activities; providing
input on agency programmatic and policy decisions; measuring outcomes
of programs and activities of the Department on small farms and
ranches, beginning farmers and ranchers, and socially disadvantaged
farmers and ranchers; and recommending new initiatives to the
Secretary. As a result of these activities, USDA anticipates more
effective, coordinated and focused outreach across the USDA agencies,
who will continue to maintain their own outreach programs. The 2008 Act
also transferred several USDA programs residing in other agencies to
OAO, which has already begun efforts to increase access and utility of
these programs to small, beginning, and socially disadvantaged farmers
and ranchers.
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER BUDGET
Question. In fiscal year 2010, an increase of nearly $44,000,000
was provided to the Office of the Chief Information Officer for IT
security upgrades. In view of recent breaches of USDA IT information
systems, the Congress believed this investment was necessary to protect
the integrity of Departmental security. Please describe how these funds
have been used.
Answer. The fiscal year 2010 Appropriation for the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Office of the Chief Information
Officer (OCIO) included nearly $44,000,000 in new funding to support
our strategy to improve information technology security. The increase
in funding is being used in support of the following three initiatives:
--Nearly $17.2 million to Conduct Network Security Assessments to
analyze the state of USDA's network to identify
vulnerabilities;
--Nearly $14.3 million to Procure and Deploy Tools for enhanced
monitoring and detection; and
--Nearly $12.3 million to establish an Agriculture Security
Operations Center to monitor and protect USDA's systems.
A summary of activities through early February, 2010, addressing
each of the three initiatives in turn, is provided below for the
record.
[The information follows:]
Conduct Network Security Assessments.--The purpose of this
initiative is to gain a comprehensive understanding of how USDA
computers and networking equipment are interconnected and the existing
vulnerabilities of that equipment. Nearly $17 million has been
allocated for this initiative. The following paragraphs provide an
overview of key projects.
The Vulnerability Assessment project is underway. We shall complete
11 assessments by the end of fiscal year 2010. Currently, we have
completed assessments of three USDA agencies and staff offices: the
Foreign Agriculture Service (FAS), Washington Communications and
Telecommunications Services (WCTS), and the National Information
Technology Center (NITC). An assessment of the Food Safety and
Inspection Service (FSIS) is currently under way and one for the
International Technology Services (ITS) is ramping up. The 11
assessments represent USDA networks carrying 80 percent or more of the
Department's total network traffic. We are documenting the methods and
tools involved to create a repeatable process that we can apply
regularly to ensure our knowledge remains current and improve our
internal processes.
The Network Modeling and Performance project is in acquisition
phase. We plan to complete implementation of the project in the 4th
quarter fiscal year 2010. Once completed, we shall have a comprehensive
network inventory, including diagrams showing the interconnections.
This shall help identify the most economical and effective placement of
security devices to protect data connections within and external to
USDA networks. With these devices we can identify and analyze patterns
at key points in the network to thwart attacks and prevent data
leakage.
The Security Management Sensors and Console project is in
acquisition phase. We have identified our core requirements and are in
the process of selecting suitable vendors to install the sensors and
console. We shall have our security management sensors deployed to 12
locations within USDA to protect network traffic. We plan to complete
the acquisition and begin implementation in the 4th quarter fiscal year
2010 and complete implementation in the 1st quarter fiscal year 2011.
Collectively the sensors will analyze and protect our networks from
vulnerabilities and report centrally to a management console at the
Agriculture Security Operations Center.
Procure and Deploy Security Tools.--Acquiring and deploying a
number of security tools will help us defend against exploits of
vulnerabilities as well as maintain a near real-time understanding of
the health our networks and the devices attached to them. Nearly $14
million has been allocated for this initiative. The following
paragraphs provide an overview of key projects.
The Endpoint Security project is in the operations phase. This
project installs a piece of software on each end user desktop, laptop
and server within USDA. It allows us to examine reports centrally, and,
ultimately, manage end user computers connected to our networks. As of
the first part of February 2010, we have installed the software on over
70,000 devices; the remaining devices will be completed in the 3rd
quarter of fiscal year 2010. Currently, the software where deployed
allows us to identify the status of patching and compliance with the
Federal Desktop Core Configuration. We have been using the data to
identify commercial software vulnerabilities and plan the remediation
efforts.
Our Whole Disk Encryption (WDE) project is in the operations phase.
Full implementation is expected by 4th quarter fiscal year 2010. By
encrypting the entire hard drive we nearly eliminate the possibility
that unauthorized users will gain access to sensitive government
information from lost or stolen equipment. As of the first part of
February 2010, we have installed WDE on over 36,000 laptops. WDE is
fully implemented on laptops across 18 agencies and staff offices. We
are continuing our efforts to implement WDE across the remaining
agencies and staff offices.
The Email Security project is in the acquisition phase. This
project enhances our Enterprise Mail Solution to increase our capacity
so that we can inspect all email passing through our email gateway to
allow for a broader protection against data loss and malicious
attachments. When completed, we will have a capability to classify data
across departmental systems based on key indicators or data patterns.
The Email Security project will be operational in the 3rd quarter
fiscal year 2010.
The ASOC Information Technology Service Management (ITSM) project
is in the development phase. ITSM will provide USDA with the capability
to record IT security incidents Department-wide and enable a more
robust analysis of incident trends and patterns. ASOC is modeling its
ITSM after the one in use at the Department of Justice's Security
Operations Center. ITSM will be operational in the 3rd quarter fiscal
year 2010.
The Data Loss Prevention project is in the pilot phase. We are
evaluating a number of commercial products to determine the best
solution to preventing costly leaks of data to outside the USDA
networks. Once completed, we shall analyze the results of the pilot to
determine the most economical and effective way to acquire a solution
that can be deployed across the entire USDA network. The pilot will be
completed in 3rd quarter fiscal year 2010.
There are several other projects where we are in either the
evaluation or acquisition phase regarding products to support functions
such as computer forensics and file protection. These proactive
measures shall reduce our exposure to vulnerabilities and provide a
greater control of the health of our systems.
Establish the Security Operations Center.--The new Agriculture
Security Operations Center (ASOC) is ramping up operations and has
taken responsibility for the ongoing IT security operations functions
of USDA. This fiscal year alone the ASOC has responded to 75 percent
more incidents in the first 4 months as compared to the same timeframe
last fiscal year. This higher incident rate is an indication that USDA
is evolving to a more mature and proactive stance regarding security
monitoring and incident handling. Approximately $12 million has been
allocated for this initiative.
We have completed the organizational design of the ASOC and have
begun staffing its critical positions with talented Federal employees.
In the meantime, we have obtained a number of contractor services to
support our daily operations while we complete our staffing. The new
organization is active in issuing guidance to our component agencies
and staff offices to address their IT security needs in the face of
increasing exposure to complex technologies and social networking. The
ASOC is overseeing the execution of all the initiatives and projects
listed above to ensure the citizens of the United States that waste and
duplication are eliminated and that the results address the greatest
risk to the security of Federal information assets entrusted to the
care of the Department of Agriculture.
IT SECURITY RISKS
Question. To what extent have security risks been resolved and if
any still exist, what plans do you have to resolve those problems?
Answer. New security risks are always appearing, and the methods to
mitigate them entail balancing conflicting business requirements with
resources which are not unlimited. The result always includes some
residual risk and our challenge is to reduce that residual risk to an
acceptable level. The USDA's strategy is to employ a risk management
framework based on the guidance of the National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST) in its Series 800 of Special Publications. We
have established the ASOC to ensure operational security incidents are
quickly identified and promptly remediated.
One principal source of risk to USDA IT assets is the difficulty in
identifying and centrally reporting specific vulnerabilities which come
from the misconfiguration and/or out-of-date software installed on our
computers. Our Endpoint Protection solution readily identifies in near
real-time specific devices which are out of date and allows us to bring
these devices in compliance with the latest recommendations. The
solution provides an infrastructure that allows us to extend the
capabilities to accommodate future monitoring requirements.
An additional source of risk stems from the disparate environments
housing our application servers. These environments are spread
throughout the Nation, do not have uniform access controls (both
logical and physical), nor uniform environmental controls, and hinder
disaster recovery efforts. By consolidating our application servers
into a small number of Enterprise Data Centers we greatly reduce the
variation among environments and ensure that all USDA servers benefit
from common security controls.
Another risk comes from multiple points of entry into the USDA
network. USDA is following OMB guidelines and embracing the Trusted
Internet Connection model; still, USDA has a significant portion of its
workforce that is highly mobile, and connectivity for these workers
ranges the full spectrum of broadband technologies. By consolidating
the number and type of connections we limit the points of attack, and
can consolidate our monitoring and mitigation efforts.
A final risk that merits mentioning is our overseas operations.
Adequately securing overseas installations has been a continuing
challenge for the USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS). We are
mitigating this risk by moving all FAS overseas end user support into
the Department of State's OpenNet to take advantage of its existing
security controls and experience with this operating environment.
Simultaneously, we are consolidating their data operations into our
Enterprise Data Center, to provide a more robust security
infrastructure and operational model.
These examples highlight key operational risks to USDA.
Identifying, evaluating and tracking these risks in the light of new
guidance and internal reviews shall be the focus of our initiative to
develop a Governance, Risk Management and Compliance System. This
system will streamline the execution of USDA's risk management
framework to ensure we continue to reduce the residual risk to an
acceptable level.
E-GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES AND LINES OF BUSINESS
Question. USDA participates in 31 e-Government initiatives and
Lines of Business. To what extent are USDA customers using the e-
Government options open to them to inquire about USDA programs or to
make application for assistance? What sort of growth rate has there
been in such use among USDA customers over the last several years?
Answer. USDA participates in 31 e-Government initiatives and Lines
of Business (LoBs). Seven of these initiatives and LoBs are customer-
facing and provide measurable services that provide a means for the
public to inquire about USDA programs or make applications for
assistance. The remaining 24 initiatives and LOBs are internal facing
and/or support other Federal agencies. A brief description of the
services provided by each of the seven customer-facing initiatives is
provided immediately below for the record.
[The information follows:]
BUSINESS GATEWAY
By creating access to consolidated compliance information, Business
Gateway directly benefits USDA's ``customers'' (e.g., farm owners, food
industries, and agricultural chemical producers), all of whom are
subject to complex compliance requirements across multiple agencies.
The Business Gateway initiative comprises two Web sites:
Business.gov and Forms.gov. USDA posts agency forms on Forms.gov so
customers do not have to search multiple Web sites to find forms they
need to apply for government assistance. Links to program-related Web
pages are posted on Business.gov to allow customers to search for
information on government programs from a central location. Customers
find a synopsis of programs on Business.gov and are able to ``click-
through'' to USDA Web pages to find more information if they desire. A
summary of customer activity on these Web sites for fiscal years 2008
through the present is provided in the table below.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of USDA Number of Number of
Fiscal year forms times forms customer click-
available were accessed throughs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008............................................................ 563 268,496 12,643
2009............................................................ 546 407,801 13,612
2010 (to date).................................................. 546 249,320 6,924
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-AUTHENTICATION
E-authentication is a public-private partnership that enables
citizens, businesses, and government employees to access online
government services using credentials issued by trusted third-parties,
both within and outside the government.
The e-authentication initiative provides a single, centralized
authentication service for Web-based applications across USDA, serving
USDA employees and customers as well as other Federal agencies. USDA's
e-authentication service represents USDA's implementation of the E-
Authentication Presidential Initiative.
The number of applications protected by USDA's e-authentication
service and the number of users who own an e-authentication credential
grows each year. USDA employees and customers use this service to
authenticate themselves by entering a user name and password. Once a
user is authenticated, he or she is authorized to access multiple
individual applications protected by the service. A summary of USDA's
use of the e-authentication service is provided in the table below.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average number
Number of Web of active Average number of Average number of
Fiscal year applications users \1\ (per authentications \1\ authorizations \1\
protected month) (per month) (per month)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007................................... 256 -268,000 -1,648,000 -6,398,800
2008................................... 289 -310,000 -1,828,000 -7,096,800
2009................................... 335 -350,000 -2,129,000 -7,167,000
2010 (to date)......................... 365 -435,000 -2,143,000 -7,182,400
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes USDA employee and customer accounts.
E-RULEMAKING
USDA's 14 rule-making agencies completed migration to the Federal
Docket Management System (FDMS) on December 8, 2006. As a result, all
USDA Federal Register rules, proposed rules, and notices are available
for public comment on e-rulemaking's Regulations.gov. This initiative
increases the transparency of USDA's rulemaking process. A summary of
the rules and proposed rules made posted by USDA to Regulations.gov and
the number of comments received from the public in response from
calendar year 2007 to the present is provided in the table below.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Number of Number of
rules and notice public
Calendar year proposed rules documents comments
posted by USDA posted by USDA received
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007............................................................ 300 843 7,133
2008............................................................ 317 868 13,272
2009............................................................ 339 915 28,986
2010 (to date).................................................. 115 332 24,791
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-TRAINING
AgLearn is USDA's implementation of the E-Training Presidential
Initiative. E-training and AgLearn provide a single, USDA-wide learning
management system that replaces seven legacy, agency-specific systems
and widespread manual tracking of training. USDA employees are the
primary users of AgLearn, but the resource is also available to select
customers and contractors. A summary of USDA's use of AgLearn is
provided in the table below.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Number of different
active users Number of courses Total course
Fiscal year (employees and active courses completed by completions by
customers) available at least one all users
user
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008............................................ 131,247 11,216 3,614 \1\ 900,935
2009............................................ 134,957 14,423 5,684 778,564
2010 (to date) \2\.............................. 120,030 14,552 4,295 323,994
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Information Security Awareness and Privacy courses were separate. These were merged for 2009 and forward.
\2\ Through February 2010.
In addition to the metrics presented above, USDA also uses AgLearn
to deliver mandatory annual civil rights and cyber security training.
AgLearn is USDA's official system of record for processing Standard
Form (SF) 182, which allows USDA to track training requests and
associated costs. In an average month in fiscal year 2009, nearly 2,000
SF-182 forms were processed using AgLearn. This represents an increase
of 100 percent over fiscal year 2008.
GOVBENEFITS.GOV
GovBenefits.gov provides a self-service tool for citizens to get
information about agency benefit programs, which reduces the need for
traditional channels such as call centers and mail. Citizens are able
to search for program descriptions on GovBenefits and follow links to
USDA Web pages where they can gather more information. The table below
provides a summary of the number of USDA benefits programs listed on
GovBenefits.gov, the number of times citizens viewed those benefits
descriptions, and the number of referrals to USDA Web pages that
resulted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of USDA
benefits Number of page Number of
Fiscal year programs on views referrals to
GovBenefits USDA Web pages
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008............................................................ 34 650,000 109,000
2009............................................................ 34 1,198,321 360,275
2010 (to date).................................................. 34 330,128 100,422
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GRANTS.GOV
Grants.gov provides a single location to publish grant (funding)
opportunities and application packages, and provides a single site for
the grants community to apply for grants using common forms, processes,
and systems. Since May 2006, USDA has offered the option to apply
electronically to 100 percent of its discretionary grants and
cooperative agreements to applicants through the Web site. The number
of unique grant opportunities posted by USDA varies by year, but
customer usage (submission of electronic applications) has increased
each year. The table below demonstrates this increase in usage from
fiscal year 2007 through the present.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Number of
grant electronic
Fiscal year opportunities submissions
posted received
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007.................................... 144 6,614
2008.................................... 143 7,821
2009.................................... 136 10,786
2010 (to date).......................... 18 2,303
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECREATION ONE-STOP
Recreation One-Stop consolidates information about Federal
recreation areas from disparate sources (databases, Web sites, and
publications) by standardizing data and interfacing recreation-related
computer systems. The initiative provides information for planning
visits to Federal recreation sites and making campground/tour
reservations through a customer friendly recreation portal
(Recreation.gov).
The National Recreation Reservation Service gives the public a
customer-friendly recreation portal (www.recreation.gov) with
information for planning visits to thousands of Federal recreation
sites.
Information related to the public's use of the Recreation.gov Web
site was requested from the Managing Partner, Department of the
Interior. As of this response no statistic information has been
received from the Managing Partner.
GAO GREENBOOK REPORT
Question. What has the Department done to comply with the
recommendations included in the October, 2009, GAO report?
Answer. The Greenbook Departmental Reimbursable Programs are
operated for the general benefit of the Department and its agencies.
The centralization of these programs avoids the duplication of efforts
and costs that would otherwise be incurred if each of the USDA agencies
tried to address these program needs on their own. As noted in USDA's
comments on the GAO report, the Department has already taken steps to
document and provide a more formal process for the annual budget
review. USDA issued formal budget requirements for the fiscal year 2011
Greenbook budget. The fiscal year 2011 Greenbook budget guidance
provided specific requirements for performance measures and analysis of
benefits of Greenbook activities. Based on the budget submissions, this
is an area that will be developed more fully to measure the value of
the individual activities to USDA and its agencies and Staff Offices.
In 2009 an interagency review board was formed. The Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Administration Management chaired the board.
Consisting of representatives appointed by seven USDA mission area
Under Secretaries, the board was charged with reviewing the fiscal year
2011 budgets for the Greenbook reimbursable activities. Board members
held a series of budget review meetings, in which reimbursable program
managers presented their budget requests and responded to questions
from board members. The board completed its review and submitted its
recommendations via the Chief Financial Officer to the Assistant
Secretary for Administration for use in making the final funding
decisions.
The Department plans to continue building on the progress that was
made in 2009 in developing the Greenbook budgets. While working with
its agencies, USDA will issue guidelines for decision-making related to
activities added to or removed from the Greenbook. These guidelines
will strengthen the oversight of the activities and require that
decisions made during the budget process are documented.
OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS
Question. The Budget proposes to relegate the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights to be absorbed within the Office
of Civil Rights, as was directed as part of last year's Department
reorganization. Given the high profile cases of civil rights that are
still pending and the stated intent of the Department to reverse any
history of discrimination at USDA, why did the USDA take this action
which will leave the perception that ``civil rights'' is now being
relegated to a position of lesser rank than the other Sub-Cabinet
posts?
Answer. As part of the reorganization of the staff offices and
administrative services of the Department, numerous functions have been
consolidated under the Assistant Secretary for Administration in an
effort to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the Department.
The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights has been
realigned into Departmental Management in order to enhance civil rights
leadership to USDA employees, applicants and customers and to provide
more effective enforcement of civil rights programs. Including the
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights in the new
Departmental Management will also improve necessary focus,
communication, and coordination with the new Office of Advocacy and
Outreach and the Office of Human Resource Management.
PENDING CIVIL RIGHTS CASES
Question. Please provide information regarding the status of
pending civil rights claims including the number of cases pending
during the past two fiscal years, the number that have been closed
during that period, and the number of new cases filed. Also, please
indicate the Department's ability to manage and reduce the number of
pending cases during fiscal year 2011.
Answer. During fiscal year 2008, 1,264 new civil rights program
claims were filed and 1,621 program claims were closed. As of September
30, 2008, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights
(OASCR) had a pending inventory of 806 program claims. During fiscal
year 2009, 1,326 program claims were filed with OASCR and 1,079 program
claims were closed, for a final inventory of 1,053 program claims.
The Department has the ability to reduce the number of pending
cases during fiscal year 2011. The OASCR's Programs Directorate has
been staffed to manage the complaints that are less than 2 years old.
The Civil Rights Program Complaints Task Force manages the inventory of
complaints that are more than 2 years old. Under the reorganization, a
Program Adjudication Division was formed and staffed with seven
adjudicators; plans include hiring three more adjudicators. In
addition, the Program Investigation Division staff has been increased
from 5 to 15 investigators.
Question. Please distinguish the status and categorization of the
claims under Pigford II, Garcia, Keepseagle, and Love petitions.
Answer. While there are distinctions in the legal posture of the
large civil rights cases, the Department remains committed to resolving
each of these important cases. The Justice Department has reached out
to the plaintiffs in cases all of these cases regarding discussions
towards a meaningful settlement process. The Secretary has repeatedly
made clear that he is committed to resolving all of the large civil
rights cases quickly and fairly as he believes it is time to move past
this sad chapter of USDA's history so that USDA can focus on helping
all farmers be successful.
In Re Black Farmers Discrimination Litigation (Pigford II) is a
collection of cases that were filed in the United States District Court
for the District of Columbia by African American farmers or African
Americans who allegedly attempted to farm pursuant to section 14012 of
the 2008 farm bill. A settlement agreement was signed by the parties on
February 18, 2010. The plaintiffs will file a motion for preliminary
approval of the settlement agreement within the next 15-18 days. Also,
funding for $1.15 billion needs to be secured.
Marilyn Keepseagle, et al. v. Tom Vilsack, is pending in the U.S.
District Court for the District of Columbia. To date, a class has been
certified for injunctive relief. Discovery has been completed and there
are several motions pending including a motion for class certification
for economic damages. The litigation has been stayed pending settlement
discussions between the parties. Guadalupe Garcia, et al. v. Tom
Vilsack, and Rosemary Love, et al. v. Tom Vilsack, are also pending in
the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Attempts to
certify these cases as class actions have been rejected by the courts
including a recent denial of a writ of certiorari by the U.S. Supreme
Court. The district court has stayed litigation pending settlement
discussions between the parties.
Question. In addition to the claims that are part of the Pigford II
category, there are a number of similar claims by African American
farmers (the so-called ``non-Pigford'' claims) that are not part of the
negotiated settlement announced in February, 2010, but which still are
requested some form of relief. Does the Department intend to pursue
some settlement for these claims or support action by the Congress
should legislation to provide relief move forward, or is it the opinion
of the Department that these claims are without merit justifying
further relief or settlement?
Answer. The Department intends to address the ``non-Pigford''
claims. The Department has identified hundreds of potentially
meritorious claims involving actions for which the 2-year statute of
limitations (SOL) under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act has expired.
The Department has developed a plan to resolve the complaints should
Congress pass legislation extending the SOL.
DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT REORGANIZATION
Question. Last year, USDA executed a Departmental reorganization
which, among other things, placed the Chief Information Officer (CIO)
and the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) under the Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Administration. Under current law, both the CIO and CFO
are required to report directly to the Secretary of Agriculture. How
have you determined that the reorganization is in compliance with
current law when it, in fact, relegated these two offices to positions
where they would not report directly to the Secretary?
Answer. I charged the USDA staff offices with ensuring that all
USDA mission areas are equipped to achieve optimal results in the most
efficient and effective manner possible. By optimizing and streamlining
the various operations, we can improve quality of services and
communications, streamline processes and improve transparency to our
customers. Ultimately, effective USDA management means effective
results for taxpayers and the people USDA serves.
Prior to reorganization the USDA Office of General Counsel (OGC)
reviewed the proposed reporting relationships. OGC stated that the
Chief Financial Officers Act only requires that the CFO ``report
directly to the head of the agency regarding financial matters, not for
all purposes.'' Accordingly, we believe that the requirements of the
CFO Act may be met, consistent with the proposed organizational chart,
as long as the CFO is given periodic opportunities to brief the
Secretary on internal controls, budget execution and financial systems
improvement projects. Similarly OGC stated that they find no legal
impediment in the Clinger-Cohen act to having the CIO report to the
Assistant Secretary for Administration, as long as he is given periodic
opportunities to brief the Secretary directly on information resources
management projects.
CONSOLIDATION OF GSA LEASED SPACE
Question. In fiscal year 2010, $6,342,000 was provided as one-time
cost for consolidation of GSA leased space. Please provide the status
of this consolidation.
Answer. GSA awarded the lease on behalf of USDA on November 12,
2009. The new leased facility, Patriots Plaza III, is located at 355 E
St., SW, Washington, DC. This is a newly constructed building that
requires build out and furnishing before USDA takes occupancy.
With GSA as the lead USDA is currently completing its final review
of conceptual space plans and build out requirements. Final plans will
be complete by the end of the 2nd quarter, fiscal year 2010. Final
drawings for the space layout are expected to be complete by the 3rd
quarter, fiscal year 2010. Build out of the space is expected to
complete by the 2nd quarter, fiscal year 2011.
USDA plans to complete all moves to the new facility by the 3rd
quarter, fiscal year 2011. This meets the time lines originally
scheduled for the lease consolidation project.
GLOBAL RESEARCH ALLIANCE
Question. I understand the United States has been working with
other members of the Food and Agriculture Organization to coordinate
agricultural research through a so-called Global Research Alliance,
with a focus on the needs in developing countries struggling to become
food secure and to address the challenges of climate change. Please
provide the status on the creation of this international collaboration
on research, including the structure and governing principles of the
research effort. Please identify the countries involved and those that
have pledged financial support to carry out this initiative.
Answer. The Global Research Alliance (GRA) was proposed in
September 2009, by New Zealand and has been under development in
partnership with the United States and other countries since then. At
the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December
2009, 21 countries endorsed a joint Ministerial Statement on the
Establishment of a GRA on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases. This statement
notes the following points: Agriculture plays a vital role in food
security, poverty reduction and sustainable development; the
agricultural sector is particularly vulnerable to climate change
impacts and faces challenges in meeting the world's increasing food
demands; the agricultural sector contributes about 14 percent of global
greenhouse gas emissions but has opportunities to contribute to
emissions reductions and carbon sequestration; agriculture could reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and increase carbon sequestration by improving
agricultural systems' efficiency and productivity; and that underlining
the need for food security, the GRA is established to help reduce
greenhouse gas emissions intensity, increase soil carbon sequestration
and contribute to overall mitigation. The statement further asserts
that the GRA seeks to understand greenhouse gas emissions from
agriculture, improve measurement and estimation of greenhouse gas
emissions and carbon sequestration, develop ways to reduce emissions
and increase carbon sequestration, mitigate greenhouse gases while
sustaining or enhancing productivity and resilience as climate changes,
transfer new knowledge and technology to farmers and land managers
worldwide, and build scientific capacity in developing countries via
partnerships.
The structure and governing principles of the GRA are still not
established and are currently under discussion among the member
countries. On April 7-9, 2010, senior government officials representing
countries that have endorsed the Copenhagen Ministerial Statement will
meet in Wellington, New Zealand to create a roadmap to guide the first
12-month goals of this alliance, with specific objectives to agree on
structure and governance principles, agree on principles for the
functioning of scientific research groups, identify elements to go into
a draft charter, and agree on future meetings. A government team with
representatives from various USDA agencies is currently developing the
U.S. position on issues to be discussed at the April meeting in New
Zealand.
Countries that have endorsed the creation of the GRA are:
Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Denmark, France,
Germany, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico,
Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,
United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, and Vietnam. Canada, New
Zealand, and the United States have pledged financial support.
LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DATA PILOT PROJECT
Question. Does ERS currently have the legislative authority to
undertake the proposed Administrative Data Pilot projects, in lieu of
the legal obstacles that currently exist?
Answer. Yes, ERS has the legislative authority to undertake the
proposed Administrative Data Pilot project. As a principal statistical
Agency, ERS' mission includes the collection and analysis of a variety
of data for statistical purposes. This pilot project is part of a
cross-cutting initiative sponsored and developed by the Interagency
Council on Statistical Policy (ICSP). [The ICSP is chaired by OMB's
Chief Statistician and has the heads of the 13 principal statistical
agencies as its members. The ICSP serves as an opportunity for
information exchange between agencies and as a mechanism for agencies
to participate in shared activities.]
The other lead agencies, with whom ERS has a tradition of
partnering, are the U.S. Bureau of the Census (Census) and the National
Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), who have explicit authorities to
acquire and use administrative records for statistical purposes. ERS'
contribution to this proposed partnership includes subject matter
expertise, a strong connection to the research community whose
expertise we likely will want to employ, and a strong connection to
USDA policy agencies that would benefit from the substantive results of
the project.
Question. Has ERS worked with other government agencies in
preparation for the Administrative Data Pilot Projects to ensure, that
if funded, there will be appropriate participation to determine their
effectiveness?
Answer. This pilot is part of a cross-cutting initiative sponsored
and developed by the Interagency Council on Statistical Policy (ICSP).
ERS, the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), and Census will
collaborate on the initiative. Census will develop the infrastructure
for ERS to study the health and nutrition outcomes for low-income
households participating in food assistance programs and for NCHS to
examine the relationships between health, and Medicare and Medicaid
enrollments. ERS is already collaborating with NCHS and the Census on
other data-linkage activities.
Question. Is it anticipated that the main Federal agencies
participating in the Administrative Data Pilot Projects will be USDA
agencies? What other main Departments and Agencies are expected to
participate?
Answer. Through collaboration with the Interagency Council on
Statistical Policy (ICSP), of which the National Agricultural
Statistical Service is also a member, the project will benefit the
entire Federal statistical system by addressing some long-standing
barriers to greater incorporation of administrative data in statistical
programs. Another USDA agency that will likely participate in the
proposed project is the Food and Nutrition Service, which administers
USDA's domestic nutrition assistance programs and through which
administrative data would be solicited.
FUNDING FOR THE STATISTICAL COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE (SCOP) INITIATIVE
Question. How was the funding request level determined for the
Statistical Community of Practice (SCOP) proposal?
Answer. SCOP is one of two cross-cutting initiatives in the
President's fiscal year 2011 budget to support the Federal statistical
system. These costs were based upon current costs for similar
activities that are ongoing in individual statistical agencies. The
funding request represents the combined costs of staffing a SCOP
project management office at ERS that will be responsible for providing
statistical system-wide support to build a platform to pilot cloud
access to publicly available data, acquire software for interagency
group purchases, support and manage the individual SCOP projects, and
manage and maintain FEDSTATS, the dissemination platform for SCOP. Each
individual SCOP project will be led by a representative from one of the
Federal statistical agencies and staffed by representatives from other
interested agencies. Those agencies will contribute financially if
there are costs specific to the project (e.g., the purchase of
software). However, there will be the need for support for background
research and in some cases for the evaluation of existing software and
the adaptation or development of new software to meet the needs of
specific aspects of data collection, processing, and/or dissemination.
The goal is to identify and/or develop Government-owned solutions that
can be shared across the Federal statistical system, resulting in cost
savings, process efficiencies and improvements across the survey life
cycle.
Question. Since the SCOP will be voluntary and self-selected, how
will ERS recruit participants?
Answer. Since the initiative is the product of work sponsored by
the Interagency Council on Statistical Policy (ICSP), the initial
participants will come from that community. The ICSP is chaired by
OMB's Chief Statistician and includes the heads of 13 principal
statistical agencies. The ICSP sponsors information exchange among the
agencies and serves as a mechanism for the agencies to participate in
shared activities. Members of the SCOP task force have met several
times during the development of SCOP to brief the ICSP members on
progress, to receive feedback from them, and to request formal
participation from interested agencies. The ICSP is expected to serve
as the Governing Board for SCOP. A number of the specific projects
proposed for SCOP were a direct result of a strategic planning activity
conducted by the ICSP. In addition, statistical data quality expertise
will be channeled through SCOP to support the Data.gov effort within
OMB. All statistical agencies will share in the benefits of SCOP
project deliverables, e.g., analytical software tools.
Question. Are there other statistical agencies within the
government participating in this effort? If so, is ERS the lead agency?
Answer. Under the guidance of the Interagency Council on
Statistical Policy (ICSP), the ERS CIO has been working with an
interagency task force that includes representatives from the OMB
Statistical and Science Policy Office and 9 of the 12 other principal
Federal statistical agencies. These include the Bureau of Economic
Analysis, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, the Census Bureau, the Energy Information Administration,
the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), the National
Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the National Center for Health
Statistics (NCHS), and the Statistics of Income Division at IRS. The
ERS CIO is the project lead; as such he has also met with senior staff
in the OMB E-gov program to ensure that the required documentation is
available for SCOP to acquire E-gov recognition as a recognized Line of
Business. Five statistical agencies have officially signed on to be
active participants in SCOP (Census, ERS, NASS, NCES and NCHS); based
on feedback from other agencies, we fully expect the list to grow.
duration of the national household food purchase and acquisition survey
Question. How long is it anticipated that the National Household
Food Purchase and Acquisition Survey will take to complete?
Answer. The National Household Food Purchase and Acquisition Survey
(FoodAPS) is being planned and executed over several years. The
contract to carry out a pilot survey was awarded in September 2009. A
full scale survey would be carried out over fiscal year 2011 and 2012.
Resultant data will be used to understand the determinants of food
purchases and acquisitions. The proposed Community Access to Local
Foods Initiative will build on this data collection effort to fund data
development and to provide staff to carry out research and evaluation
using the data. The initiative supports research to understand how the
local food environment influences acquisitions of healthy food in low-
income households. It will provide the baseline for monitoring the
outcomes of policies and programs such as the Healthy Food Financing
Initiative.
Question. Is this survey anticipated to be a one-time event, or
something that will be continually updated?
Answer. The FoodAPS survey will be a recurring data investment.
Currently, the Federal Statistical Agencies do not collect detailed
price and quantity for food purchases and acquisitions. This survey is
designed to address that gap. The initiative will also support on-going
research on Community Access.
Question. Will the funding request fully fund the survey, or will
there be additional dollars required in future years?
Answer. The initiative should not require increased levels of
annual funding over the foreseeable future.
NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS SERVICE
Question. Will the NASS annual county estimates program funding
increase be used at all to fund third-party work, for example, to
continue State or local cooperative agreements?
Answer. A vast majority of the funding will be used to fully
implement a probability based survey design, for improved data
collection follow-up. This data collection is conducted through an
agreement with the National Association of State Departments of
Agriculture (NASDA). NASDA employs over 3,000 local interviewers who
collect virtually all of the data used for NASS estimates.
Question. How long will it take NASS to develop the rotational
organic agriculture data series, if funding is provided?
Answer. The requested funding would allow NASS to implement a 3-
year rotational organic agriculture data series. Planning and
preparation of the survey would take place the first year; the data
would be collected in the second year; and analysis and publication
would be done in the third year.
Question. How much funding at NASS is currently being used to
gather data on organic agriculture?
Answer. The 2008 farm bill provided $1 million in mandatory
funding, and provided the basis for the initial 2008 Organic Production
Survey, which was conducted in fiscal year 2009. An additional $250,000
was appropriated in fiscal year 2010 to aid in completing analysis and
publication of this new data series. The additional request in fiscal
year 2011 will provide a total of $750,000 annually for organic
agriculture statistics and allow NASS to conduct an organic agriculture
survey on a 3-year cycle.
Question. If the TOTAL survey has been inactive since 1998, but
funds have remained in the budget to fund it, as evidenced by their
proposed elimination this year, what has NASS been doing with these
funds?
Answer. The TOTAL survey is funded under the Census of Agriculture.
This is a cyclical funding source which varies by year and only
includes the necessary appropriations to complete the cyclical
activities for that fiscal year. The cyclical activities include such
items as the planning, conducting, analysis, and summary of the
quinquennial Census of Agriculture and associated follow-on studies.
The $4.0 million reduction in fiscal year 2011 are the funds that would
have been used to conduct the TOTAL survey.
Question. What effect will the elimination of any activities
described above have on NASS?
Answer. A comprehensive review was completed to determine the
priority of each survey within the overall existing program. Eliminated
programs were identified as lower priority items which could offset
requested funding in support of higher priority administration goals.
CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING
Question. Please provide a list of all congressionally directed
spending in fiscal year 2010, including gross to location and net to
location. Please provide detailed information on how any funding beyond
a 10 percent difference was used, by project.
Answer. There are no funding differences beyond 10 percent. The
information is submitted for the record.
[The information follows:]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congressionally directed project Gross amount NTL amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Animal Vaccines, Greenport, NY.......... $1,518,000 $1,366,200
Aquaculture Fisheries Center, Stuttgart, 519,000 467,100
AR.....................................
Aquaculture Initiatives, Harbor Branch 1,597,000 1,437,300
Oceanographic Institute, Stuttgart, AR.
Arthropod-Borne Animal Diseases Research 1,500,000 1,350,000
Laboratory, Manhattan, KS..............
Biomass Crop Production, Brookings, SD.. 1,250,000 1,125,000
Biomedical Materials in Plants, 1,700,000 1,530,000
Beltsville, MD.........................
Bioremediation Research, Beltsville, MD. 111,000 99,900
Biotechnology Research and Development 3,500,000 3,150,000
Center, Headquarters...................
Catfish Genome, Auburn, AL.............. 819,000 737,100
Center for Agroforestry, Booneville, AR. 660,000 594,000
Cereal Disease, St. Paul, MN............ 290,000 261,000
Computer Vision Engineer, Kearneysville, 400,000 360,000
WV.....................................
Crop Production and Food Processing, 786,000 707,400
Peoria, IL.............................
Dairy Forage Research Center, Madison, 2,500,000 2,250,000
WI.....................................
Dale Bumpers Small Farms Research 1,805,000 1,624,500
Center, Booneville, AR.................
Diet Nutrition and Obesity Research, New 623,000 560,700
Orleans, LA............................
Endophyte Research, Booneville, AR...... 994,000 894,600
Forage Crop Stress Tolerance and Virus 200,000 180,000
Disease Management, Prosser, WA........
Formosan Subterranean Termites Research, 3,490,000 3,217,590
New Orleans, LA........................
Foundry Sand By-Products Utilization, 638,000 574,200
Beltsville, MD.........................
Human Nutrition Research, Boston, MA.... 350,000 315,000
Human Nutrition Research, Houston, TX... 300,000 270,000
Improved Crop Production Practices, 1,293,000 1,163,700
Auburn, AL.............................
Livestock-Crop Rotation Management, 349,000 314,100
University Park, PA....................
Lyme Disease, 4 Poster Project, 700,000 630,000
Headquarters...........................
Medicinal and Bioactive Crops, 111,000 99,900
Washington, DC.........................
Mosquito Trapping Research/West Nile 1,454,000 1,308,600
Virus, Gainesville, FL.................
National Bio and Agro Defense Facility, 1,500,000 1,350,000
Manhattan, KS..........................
National Center for Agricultural Law, 654,000 588,600
Beltsville, MD (NAL)...................
National Corn to Ethanol Research Pilot 360,000 324,000
Plant, Headquarters....................
North Carolina Human Nutrition Center, 1,000,000 900,000
Headquarters...........................
Northern Great Plains Research 543,000 488,700
Laboratory, Mandan, ND.................
Northwest Center for Small Fruits, 275,000 247,500
Headquarters...........................
Pacific Basin Agricultural Research 700,000 630,000
Center Staffing, Hilo, HI..............
Phytoestrogen Research, New Orleans, LA. 1,750,000 1,575,000
Potato Diseases, Beltsville, MD......... 61,000 54,900
Poultry Diseases, Beltsville, MD........ 408,000 367,200
Seismic & Acoustic Technologies in Soils 332,000 298,800
Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, MS...
Sorghum Research, Little Rock, AR....... 135,000 121,500
Soybean Genomics, St. Paul, MN.......... 200,000 180,000
Subtropical Beef Germplasm, Brooksville, 1,033,000 929,700
FL.....................................
Termite Species in Hawaii, New Orleans, 200,000 180,000
LA.....................................
Tropical Aquaculture Feeds, Oceanic 1,438,000 1,294,200
Institute, Hilo, HI....................
Water Management Research Laboratory, 340,000 306,000
Brawley, CA............................
Water Use Reduction, Dawson, GA......... 1,200,000 1,080,000
Wild Rice, St. Paul, MN................. 303,000 272,700
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GREENBOOK CHARGES
Question. Please provide a list of all Greenbook charges assessed
to ARS during fiscal years 2009 and 2010. From where did the funding
come to pay for these charges?
Answer. These costs are funded from a 10 percent indirect cost
assessment to cover administrative and program management costs
associated with conducting nationwide research programs and funds set
aside from lapsed salaries within the agency. The final determination
of the Greenbook charges for fiscal year 2010 has not been completed.
The fiscal year 2009 information is submitted for the record.
[The information follows:]
ARS FISCAL YEAR 2009 GREENBOOK
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agency programs Amount funded
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Postal Service Mail Postal Code P005............... $255,000
Unemployment Compensation \1\........................... 427,000
Workers Compensation \1\................................ 3,592,506
Transit Subsidy......................................... 430,204
National Archives Records System........................ 78,521
GSA HSPD-12 Lincpass Maintenance........................ 142,088
OPM Federal Employment and Administrative Law Judges 41,793
Service................................................
Consolidated Fed Funds Report and Fed Audit 11,520
Clearinghouse..........................................
Small Business Certification............................ 1,505
FEMA Emergency Preparedness............................. 19,087
Government-wide Council Activities...................... 43,137
Flexible Spending Accounts FSAFEDS...................... 158,599
E-Gov Initiatives....................................... 585,438
USDA Tribal Liaison..................................... 915
Advisory Committee Liaison Services..................... 15,919
Faith-Based Initiatives & Neighborhood Partnerships..... 22,126
Hispanic-Serving Institutions National Program.......... 118,168
1890 USDA Initiatives................................... 198,721
USDA 1994 Program....................................... 47,529
Diversity Council....................................... 42,039
Visitors Center......................................... 21,962
Honor Awards............................................ 6,556
TARGET Center........................................... 75,965
Drug Testing Program.................................... 1,900
Sign Language Interpreter Services...................... 18,930
Sign Language Interpreter Agency Specific Service \1\... 43,616
Emergency Operations Center............................. 180,693
Labor and Employee Relations Case Tracking and Reporting 5,900
System.................................................
Continuity of Operations Planning....................... 149,144
Personnel and Document Security......................... 143,347
Federal Biobased Products Preferred Procurement Program. 28,681
Radiation Safety \1\.................................... 624,704
Retirement Processor Web Application.................... 27,698
Preauthorized Funding................................... 213,062
Financial Management Improvement Initiative............. 250,660
E-Gov Initiatives--HSPD12............................... 1,047,528
E-Gov Initiatives--Content Management................... 75,198
Enterprise Network Messaging............................ 345,827
USDA Enterprise Contingency Planning Program............ 44,116
USDA IT Infrastructure Security......................... 150,396
E-Gov Enablers-Cyber Security........................... 79,860
---------------
Total............................................. $9,767,558
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Cost centers assessed based on actual usage.
ARS ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
Question. Has ARS considered the possibility of including a general
fund to pay for all administrative costs and estimated Greenbook
charges? If not, what concerns would ARS have with such a proposal?
Answer. No, ARS has not considered the possibility of including a
general fund for all administrative and program management costs and
estimated Greenbook and Working Capital charges. ARS assesses 10
percent on any program increases appropriated to the agency to finance
administrative and program management costs associated with conducting
nationwide research programs. This way of budgeting accounts for the
full cost of running the program, ensuring transparency and
accountability. In addition to diminishing full cost account and
transparency, a centralized administrative expenses account may not
accurately reflect the cost of administering the program. Costs
associated with the Greenbook and Working Capital Fund are not
finalized until after the beginning of the fiscal year.
CLASSICAL PLANT BREEDING
Question. What level of ARS funding is used for classical plant
breeding research?
Answer. The ARS funding for classical plant breeding research for
fiscal year 2010 is $74,193,800.
ORGANIC RESEARCH
Question. What level of ARS funding is used for organic research?
Answer. In fiscal year 2010, ARS invested $17,234,600 in research
that directly addresses organic agriculture problems. The ARS
investment in research that does not have specific organic agriculture
research objectives but which indirectly benefits the organic industry
is $40,951,300.
REGIONAL BIOFUELS FEEDSTOCKS RESEARCH
Question. What are the proposed locations of the Regional Biofuels
Feedstocks Research and Demonstration Centers? How were those locations
chosen?
Answer. The five proposed Regional Biomass Research and Development
Centers will be research networks within the following five agro-eco
regions:
Southeast--spans the Southern Coastal Plains and Piedmont areas
(includes FL, GA, SC, AL, MS, LA, AR, NC, TN, KY, eastern TX, and HI);
Central-Eastern--covers the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest and eastern Great
Plaines (includes NE, ND, SD, KS, OK, MN, IA, MO, WI, IL, MI, IN, OH,
KY, TN, PA, DE, MD, and VA);
Northern-Eastern--spans the Northern Coastal Plains (includes MN,
WI, MI, NY, VT, NH, ME, MA, CT, RI, PA, OH, DE, MD, and WV);
Western--spans the relatively dry Southwest and Western States (NM,
AZ, CA, NV, UT, CO, MT, WY, ID, and western TX);
Northwestern--encompasses the Northwest and northern Great Plaines
(includes WA, OR, ID, MT, eastern CO, WY, CA, AK, and western ND and
SD).
Each Regional Center will be composed of a network of ARS and
Forest Service laboratories, scientists, and their partners within that
region. Each of the centers will be organized in a ``hub'' and
``spoke'' fashion with at least one ``hub'' and many ``spokes'', all of
which contribute to the Regional Center's performance. ``Hubs''--single
laboratories within Regional Centers will help to coordinate the
Center's work and relationships so as to maximize effectiveness and
prevent duplication of efforts. These hubs were chosen based on the
expertise each possesses for regionally adapted bioenergy feedstocks
and the kinds of agricultural production systems suited to that region.
WORLD FOOD PRIZE
Question. What amount of funding is in ARS's base budget for the
World Food Prize? What reasoning is provided for ARS being the USDA
lead agency to support this Foundation?
Specifically, how was this amount determined and for what will it
be used? Since the World Food Prize is related to international food
security, do you believe it would be better suited within the Foreign
Agricultural Service?
Answer. Presently, there are no funds in the ARS base budget to
support the World Food Prize Foundation (WFP). Conference Report 109-
255, accompanying the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill for fiscal
year 2006, directed the Secretary to report ways in which the
Department can participate in support of WFP and appropriated $350,000
for such efforts. In response to the directive, the Secretary
designated ARS to support and partner with WFP and transferred the
$350,000 appropriated for these efforts to ARS. No funding was
appropriated in subsequent years for support of WFP.
The fiscal year 2011 budget, request for $750,000 builds upon the
established relationship with ARS and the World Food Prize Foundation
to relieve world hunger. The proposed funding will be used to support
activities such as travel costs for distinguished participants;
preparation of publications, brochures, and other materials;
participation of students and teachers in the Youth Institute; and
related staff and administrative support costs.
AGRICULTURE AND FOOD RESEARCH INITIATIVE
Question. Please provide a specific list of all research
initiatives and funding goals for those initiatives proposed within the
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI), including those within
base funding.
Answer. The information is submitted for the record.
[The information follows:]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
2011
Initiative President's
budget
proposal
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Childhood Obesity Prevention plus Improving National $74,908,900
Nutrition and Health...................................
Sustainable Bioenergy................................... 73,272,600
Global Food Security.................................... 28,309,040
Food Safety............................................. 39,963,000
Global Climate Change................................... 104,909,000
Foundational Programs Listed Below:
Plant Health and Production and Plant Products-- 35,000,000
Including Colony Collapse Disorder of Honey Bees..
Animal Health and Production and Animal Products-- 30,000,000
Animal Health and Production.......................
Food Safety, Nutrition, and Health.................. 6,000,000
Renewable Energy, Natural Resources, and Environment 11,482,460
Agriculture Systems and Technology.................. 10,000,000
Agriculture Economics and Rural Communities-- 15,000,000
Economics of Markets and Agricultural Prosperity
for Small and Medium-sized Farms...................
---------------
Total........................................... 428,845,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question. Is there any assurance that research programs that have
been eliminated in the budget, with the justification that they will be
included in the proposed AFRI increase, will be protected at the levels
they currently receive?
Answer. While the specific section 406 funding mechanism and
programs are not part of the 2011 budget request, AFRI will continue to
emphasize food safety and climate change (include water issues). In
addition, research and education supporting organic agriculture is
conducted through a mandatory funded grants program, and expanded
Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education activities. I will have
NIFA provide additional details for the record.
[The information follows:]
Water issues will be addressed in multiple Challenge Area programs.
Impacts on water use, distribution, quality and quantity will be
addressed in the Bioenergy, Global Climate Change, and Global Food
Security integrated and research program. Especially important is the
usage of water for the expanded bioenergy crop production and continued
availability of high quality water for food production. Basic research
will continue through the Agricultural Water Science Foundation program
also. The fiscal year 2010 funding for Water Quality was $12,649,000.
The AFRI programs for the three Challenge Areas will increase funding
by over $96 million.
The AFRI Food Safety Challenge Area Program will continue to
provide funding for research, education, and extension efforts to
improve the safety of the U.S. food supply through new and improved
rapid detection methods, epidemiological studies, and improved food
harvesting and processing technologies. Several basic research programs
will address issues related to plant diseases and pathogen
interactions, animal health, and the use of nanotechnology use to
ensure food safety. The Food Safety Area will increase funding by
$19,963,560. The section 406 Food Safety funding in fiscal year 2010
was $14,596,000.
The application of Integrated Pest Management will be a focus in
the Global Food Security Challenge programs looking at a system
approach in pest management and expand to potential partnerships with
other agencies addressing appropriate national and international
application of IPM principles and practices. Section 406 related IPM
funding for fiscal year 2010 was $12,903,000. Foundational Pest and
Beneficial Insects in Plant Systems Foundation program funding is at $6
million and the Global Food Security Challenge IPM program area is at
$5 million and an increase in the Global Food Security Challenge area
of over $13 million.
Organic agricultural production and management systems have been
and will continue to be supported through many of the AFRI programs.
Basic research through the Small and Medium-Sized Farms and Rural
Communities and Economics of markets and Development programs can
support research on the expansion of organic agriculture with a focus
related to land use and economics of rural communities. The Global Food
Security Challenge Programs can support integrated efforts both
nationally and related to international food security issues. Since
many organic producers market locally, regional food security efforts
may be researched to address ``food deserts''. The Nutrition and Health
Challenge programs address behavioral factors that can address
providing highly nutritious food especially to children and could
include improvements in nutritional value in organic crops. Section 406
Organic Transition Program funding in fiscal year 2010 was $5 million.
Potential related funds from AFRI from the two Foundational Programs
are $10 million and $5 million from the Global Food Security Challenge
Program.
SECONDARY EDUCATION, 2-YEAR POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION, AND AGRICULTURE IN
THE K-12 CLASSROOM
Question. What level of funding requests was received by USDA for
Secondary Education, 2-Year Postsecondary Education, and Agriculture in
the K-12 Classroom (SPECA) grants in fiscal year 2009 and 2010?
Answer. USDA received requests for Secondary Education, 2-Year
Postsecondary Education, and Agriculture in the K-12 Classroom (SPECA)
grants totaling $2,986,906 in fiscal year 2009 and $2,434,403 in fiscal
year 2010.
HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTION CHALLENGES GRANTS
Question. What level of funding requests was received by USDA for
Higher Education Institution Challenges Grants in fiscal year 2009 and
2010?
Answer. USDA received requests for Higher Education Institution
Challenge grants totaling $15,205,883 in fiscal year 2009 and
$20,600,489 in fiscal year 2010.
FOOD EMERGENCY RESPONSE NETWORK (FERN)
Question. The FSIS budget proposes to decrease funding for FERN
laboratories, but the FDA budget restates the importance of these
laboratories. Did FSIS consult with FDA in making this budget decision,
and how do the two agencies work together on this initiative?
Answer. No, the Department did not consult with FDA prior to making
this budget decision. However, we continue to work closely with FDA to
further develop and manage FERN. FSIS has primary responsibility for
funding and overseeing Cooperative Agreements with non-Federal
laboratories that assist FERN in building surge capacity for responding
to microbiological foodborne emergencies, while FDA supports
Cooperative Agreement activities related to chemical and radiological
emergencies. Joint activities include laboratory training, proficiency
testing, surveillance testing, method validation studies, and
coordination of responses to exercises and events. We have made
considerable investment in the States in building capacity to respond
to foodborne emergencies through its Cooperative Agreements. The level
proposed for Cooperative Agreements in fiscal year 2011 is the same as
for fiscal year 2009.
For the fiscal year 2011 President's budget, the administration is
proposing to redirect FSIS funding from FERN in order to offset costs
to support one of the key findings of the President's Food Safety
Working Group which is to develop more timely estimates of pathogen
prevalence. This $10 million increase above the fiscal year 2010 level
will allow FSIS to improve surveillance of foodborne pathogens of
human-health concern in FSIS-regulated products through significant
expansion of Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point regulatory
sampling, and conducting an additional traditional baseline study.
Accurate, timely prevalence estimates for pathogens are critical for
evaluation of existing prevention policies and the development of new
regulatory strategies.
INTERSTATE SHIPMENT PROGRAM
Question. Please provide an update on the status of the FSIS State
Meat Inspection rule.
Answer. The Department is working to implement the farm bill
provision to allow the interstate shipment of meat and poultry products
for certain small and very small establishments. The proposed rule was
published in the Federal Register on September 16, 2009.
The Department held two public teleconference meetings on the
proposed regulations, on October 27 and November 5, 2009, and accepted
public comments on the proposed rule through December 16, 2009. We are
taking into consideration these public comments and will then move
forward with the final rule.
FSIS SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Question. Will the budget adequately fund all FSIS pay costs,
including required within grade increases, benefits, and other required
salary increases? If not, what amount is necessary to ensure that the
salaries of FSIS employees are fully covered?
Answer. The President's fiscal year 2011 budget fully funds FSIS
salary needs including funding for continuation of inspection
operations without interruption. I am committed to ensuring that we
have the staffing, the training, the lab support, oversight and other
resources that are necessary to ensure the safety of the food supply.
HUMANE SLAUGHTER
Question. The Committee has received a proposal to redirect funding
previously set aside for Humane Animal Tracking in order to fund a
position whose sole responsibility will be to oversee FSIS efforts on
enforcement of the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act. Has FSIS considered
this and what would the cost of such a position be? Further, the
Committee has received a request to fund a specific team of FSIS
employees whose job description would require them to perform
undercover investigations of slaughter facilities to ensure compliance
with the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act. Again, is this something FSIS
has considered, and what would the approximate cost be?
Answer. The Department has funded a position whose primary
responsibility will be to oversee FSIS efforts on enforcement of the
Humane Methods of Slaughter Act. FSIS used the additional $2 million
provided in fiscal year 2009 for 24 additional positions to further
boost its humane handling oversight and verification inspection
activities. One of these positions is a headquarters-based Humane
Handling Coordinator, whose primary responsibility will be to provide
consistent oversight of field-level humane handling activities. The
other 23 positions--5 PHVs, 1 Supervisory Consumer Safety Inspector, 13
Consumer Safety Inspectors, and 4 Food Inspectors--were assigned to
specific plants where the employee will conduct on-line or off-line
activities. As of March 14, 2010, 22 of these positions had been
filled, including the Humane Handling Coordinator position, and 2 were
still in the hiring process.
We've recently become aware of the suggestion for an undercover
investigative team and have not yet estimated the cost for such a team.
Since the events at the Hallmark/Westland establishment in 2008, FSIS
has made numerous efforts to strengthen and improve its verification
and enforcement related to the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act. FSIS
conducted covert humane slaughter surveillance operations in nine
establishments across the United States within 4 months of the Humane
Society's Hallmark/Westland video release and determined that all of
these establishments were in compliance. FSIS can conduct covert
surveillance operations under existing surveillance and investigation
allocations. Moreover, FSIS instructed PHVs and other inspection
program personnel to vary from day-to-day the time during their tour of
duty that they perform their activities to verify that animals are
treated humanely. In April 2009, FSIS issued Notice 21-09, which
reminded inspection program personnel to conduct humane handling
activities randomly throughout their shift.
PUBLIC HEALTH DATA COMMUNICATION INFRASTRUCTURE
Question. Is the funding requested for the Public Health Data
Communication Infrastructure Funding one-time funding, or will
additional investments be required in immediate outyears?
Answer. Reliable connectivity to information systems and
applications is critical to the accomplishment of FSIS' inspection,
investigative, and food defense responsibilities. The backbone that
underpins these systems and applications must be expanded to support
the increased requirements of PHIS in both the installed base and for
additional users. Provision of additional telecommunications support
will subsume $2.3 million of the $8.0 million requested. These are on-
going costs.
In addition, the Agency will spend an additional $5.7 million to
support the on-going costs for the migration to and operation of the
Department's two Enterprise Data Centers (EDCs). These costs will
increase as PHIS is brought on-line. Front-line personnel will benefit
from the increase in the number of centralized mission critical
applications available under the EDCs. Interoperability of Agency
systems with other governmental and non-governmental systems will also
increase demand for EDC-hosted applications, which will in turn,
increase the Agency's costs for support of those systems. While the
Agency has received additional funding for the EDCs in fiscal year 2010
and 2011, the Agency's contribution to the overall EDC support will
rise as we move from the implementation to the maintenance and
operations phase with increased user demand. The requested funds are
therefore intended to be a baseline increase.
The third major element is to increase the number of FSIS employees
with daily access to computers. The request includes $5 million to
purchase 3,600 computers, as part of a longer-term plan to move towards
one-computer per employee. Much of the agency's frontline workforce is
highly mobile, making it difficult to share computers across multiple
sites when access to real-time applications are required. Likewise, the
agency has not had the systematic ability to turnover computers at the
work sites of its existing computer users, to enhance workforce
productivity. Shortening technology lifecycles and the increasing
complexity of FSIS applications has led to an agency-wide computer
strategy that includes both increasing the installed base and
refreshing the computers to the existing users. The requested funds are
therefore intended to be a baseline increase to support the agency's
over 10,000 employees and partners.
COST SHARING
Question. Many APHIS programs ensure containment, reduction, and
elimination of animal and plant pests and diseases that could do huge
harm to production agriculture in the United States. Typically, these
program resources reflect cost sharing between APHIS and program
collaborators (generally States and tribes). However, a consistent
theme in this budget is the proposed reduction in Federal contributions
to program costs, forcing States and tribes to assume larger burdens.
Mr. Secretary, does this decision reflect conversations and
agreements you have reached with your partners?
Will your collaborators have adequate time to adjust their budgets
to maintain needed levels of program performance?
In those States already facing severe budget shortfalls, will you
provide this subcommittee assurance that needed levels of program
services will continue?
Answer. While there may not have been agreement to the level of
contributions for each pest and disease program, it is reasonable to
expect all parties to contribute some level of resources towards these
cooperative programs that, in most cases, have been in place for
several years.
The Agency's budget request is presented more than 6 months in
advance of when it will become effective, which allows time for program
partners to develop their spending plans in the coming year. The Agency
will continue to conduct the pest and disease programs based on the
total available resources and on the highest priorities for the
program.
USE OF ANTIBIOTICS
Question. There continues to be vocal debate on the non-therapeutic
use of antibiotics in the livestock sector. Some contend that the
practice places human health at risk due to a concern that the
consumption of related food products results in antibiotic resistance
to certain strains of bacteria. On the other hand, it is argued that
the use of antibiotics in livestock is so minimal that there is no such
effect.
What is the current science in regard to this issue?
Is there any evidence that the use of antibiotics for livestock has
any influence on human health through food products from such animals?
Since there is obviously some effect in the use of antibiotics (or
else the industry would not use them in the first place) is it not
logical to assume that there is some residual effect in humans? If not,
what is being done to educate consumers that the use of antibiotics
poses no threat to human health?
Answer. Current science is largely assessing the effect of
antimicrobial use and the antibiotic resistance, also known as
antimicrobial resistance or drug resistance. APHIS and ARS, FDA, and
CDC continue to work collaboratively on antimicrobial issues. The
question of whether antibiotic use in animals has any effect on human
health requires the consideration of the organism involved, the
antibiotic in question, and various other mitigating factors in food
production. The FDA continues to do risk assessments for various
antibiotics used in animals and their potential to harm human health.
In some cases the FDA has found that certain uses of antibiotics result
in unacceptable increased risks to human health and have withdrawn
approvals for specific antibiotic uses. In other cases the risk
assessment has indicated that there is not an increased risk associated
with the use of specific antibiotics in certain animals.
Antibiotics are used in animals for purposes of treatment of
clinical disease, disease prevention and growth promotion. Concern for
antibiotic resistance relative to use of antibiotics in animals is
primarily related to the transmission of organisms from animals to
people, especially through food. In some cases these organisms may
harbor genes that make them resistant to the effects of certain
antibiotics. When these resistance genes occur and people require
treatment for that infection, they may not respond optimally to
treatment.
APHIS' focus for the antibiotic use and resistance issue has been
to survey livestock populations to estimate the types and levels of use
for various commodities/animals and to evaluate the prevalence of
resistance. APHIS reports on findings from the on-farm sampling through
reports and in peer reviewed publications in the professional
literature. The Web site address to access the reports is http://
www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/ceah/ncahs/nahms/. These reports are also made
available to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the agency
responsible for the approval process of antibiotic use in animals.
Information regarding the use of antibiotics in animals is available to
the public on the following FDA Web site: http://www.fda.gov/
AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/AntimicrobialResistance
FARM LOANS
Question. Mr. Secretary, in the face of deteriorating credit
conditions for rural farmers this Committee increased Farm Service
Agency ownership and operating loan levels for fiscal year 2010. Now it
appears even those increased levels will not be sufficient to meet
fiscal year 2010 credit demand. Adequate credit is essential to help
rural areas recover from this deep recession. But, this budget cuts
farm loan program levels for fiscal year 2011.
What evidence do you have that this request will be sufficient to
meet the credit needs for agricultural producers?
Answer. At the time the fiscal year 2011 budget was being
formulated, economic forecasts indicated that farm prices would rebound
in fiscal year 2010 and agriculture would continue to be somewhat
insulated from the credit crisis faced primarily by the non-agriculture
sectors of our economy. Based on these assumptions--and given that 2009
funding was augmented by $173 million of stimulus funds and $810
million of supplemental funds provided adequate funding to satisfy a
large increase in credit applications for fiscal year 2009--a
determination was made that fiscal year 2009 obligation levels would be
sufficient for fiscal year 2010 and subsequently for fiscal year 2011.
We will continue to monitor the agricultural credit markets and,
pursuant to the 2010 Conference Report, keep the Committee informed of
the farm credit needs.
Question. What tools do you have to increase program levels during
the year if your estimates for fiscal year 2011 turn out to be low?
Answer. The last several appropriations acts included language that
allowed FSA to make adjustments to program levels by moving funds from
program areas with less demand to those with greater demand, with
Committee consent. This flexibility proved useful in the past when
demand changed significantly from forecasts, which are made many months
in advance. The Department also has authority to interchange up to 7
percent of funds provided to FSA for farm loans should the need arise.
CCE COMPUTER MODERNIZATION
Question. Mr. Secretary, the budget includes $35,000,000 under
Conservation Operations for CCE computer modernization and upgrades.
Will this activity require funding beyond fiscal year 2011? If so, what
is the anticipated overall cost?
Answer. The Common Computing Environment (CCE) infrastructure was
implemented in 2000 to provide a common information technology (IT)
platform for the three Service Center Agencies (the Farm Service
Agency, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, and Rural
Development). Since 2000, the system has not undergone a system-wide
refresh resulting in outdated equipment and processes and therefore,
the 2011 budget includes funding to reduce vulnerabilities and improve
system performance by initiating a refresh and right-sizing initiative.
This initiative will be an on-going effort to ensure that system
components are replaced and configuration changes are made to support
current and future program delivery.
In addition to the funding requested under NRCS Conservation
Operations, USDA is also requesting funding under FSA and RD. The
details of this funding request are provided in the accompanying table.
As this is an on-going initiative, its total overall cost will be
driven by the length of time that USDA continues to operate the CCE.
According to the business case developed for this investment, after
2011, total annual funding to maintain the investment and to support a
regular refresh cycle according to industry standards will be
approximately $62 million.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
Agency 2011
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FSA..................................................... $36,000,000
NRCS.................................................... 35,000,000
RD...................................................... 12,000,000
---------------
Total............................................. 83,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
STRATEGIC WATERSHED ACTION TEAMS
Question. The budget includes $25,000,000 for the implementation of
strategic watershed action teams. Please explain how you envision this
new initiative to be carried out.
Answer. NRCS envisions deploying Strategic Watershed Action Teams
(SWATs) consisting of five to seven people (approximately 35 teams or
175 FTEs), for a period of 3 to 5 years in a specified geographic
location. These teams will include Soil Conservationists, technicians
and specialists and will be identified based on the needed technical
expertise in each watershed. The number of teams deployed for each
watershed will depend on the analysis of natural resource and
socioeconomic data of the region and will be decided based on a formula
that NRCS will develop.
The development and deployment of SWATs will greatly improve the
environmental cost effectiveness of NRCS technical and financial
assistance programs. By significant planning, education, and program
implementation assistance, the technical assistance teams will enhance
the Agency's capability to strategically invest in conservation and
better target the Agency's financial and technical assistance programs.
The goal of deploying the SWATs will be to reach every eligible
landowner in a targeted watershed and provide them with the technical
assistance to assess their natural resource conditions and offer
resource planning and program help. Emphasis in resource assessment and
planning will be placed on those resource conditions that are of
priority interest in the selected watershed.
The SWATs will help NRCS work more closely and effectively with the
U.S. Forest Service (FS) in that Agency's efforts to also adopt a
landscape-scale approach to natural resource management. This will
leverage the strengths of each agency's technical skills and natural
resource programs to conserve and restore forestland, grassland, and
working farmland.
During fiscal years 2010 and 2011, NRCS will coordinate with FS and
other stakeholders and partners to identify high-priority watersheds in
order to enhance conservation on a landscape scale across land
ownerships. Smaller critical watersheds within these high-priority
watersheds would be identified for the deployment of SWAT, using
natural resource and socioeconomic data.
WATER AND WASTEWATER DISPOSAL GRANTS FOR NATIVE ALASKAN VILLAGES
Question. This Committee has been concerned about the growing
unobligated balances of grants to Native Alaskan Villages. The
Secretary was directed to: obligate the funds; and develop a plan to
streamline the grant process and reduce the paperwork burden on rural
Alaskan communities and Native Alaskan Villages. That plan was due to
the Committee 90 days after enactment of the fiscal year 2010
appropriations bill. Please explain why delivery of the plan has been
delayed.
Answer. The selection of an independent third party contractor that
is responsible for developing a final work plan to address processing
delays was recently completed in January 2010. In the next few days, a
preliminary plan for analyzing the use of all unobligated balances will
be submitted to Congress.
Prior to fiscal year 2006, Water and Waste Disposal Program funding
for Native Alaskan Villages was provided to an intermediary. Some
technical disruptions in delivering the program occurred, requiring the
agency to takeover review of grant applications and head coordinated
efforts to aid Alaskan residents prepare applications is the largest
single reason why a significant amount of the appropriated funds remain
unobligated.
The preliminary report provides detailed background on the program
and how the significant amount of unobligated balances was created, and
the approach to resolve application processing delays. This report
indicates that a final report will be submitted to Congress in August
of 2010. Until then, discussions are ongoing.
Question. Please provide a status report including the obligations
history, applications backlog, and estimated demand for fiscal year
2011.
Answer. This information will be included in the final report.
Question. What process improvements are you considering to enhance
the efficiency and effectiveness of this program?
Answer. The final report will provide a thorough analysis of the
application, approval, and tracking process; dialogue with other
agencies regarding their roles in the process; stakeholder input; and
third party contractor review.
Question. What is the expected timeframe for implementation of
these changes?
Answer. This information will be included in the final report.
SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING GUARANTEED LOAN PROGRAM
Question. The Committee is aware that funding for the single family
housing guaranteed loan program ($12 billion appropriated for fiscal
year 2010 plus carryover funds from the Recovery Act) will be exhausted
in April. It is taking time for private sector lenders to unwind from
the current recession and begin providing normal levels of housing
lending. In the meantime this program is one of only a few that is
offering necessary credit for homebuyers.
When did you realize and formally notify this Committee that funds
would be exhausted so early in the fiscal year?
Answer. The Department is still assessing, evaluating options, and
preparing status report required by the 2010 Conference report.
Question. What actions are you taking to supplement this credit
shortfall for the last 5 months of fiscal year 2010?
Answer. The administration is pleased that it will be able to fully
obligate all Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program funds that
were appropriated for this program in fiscal year 2010. We are
currently evaluating various options to ensure assistance is provided
to rural homeowners.
Question. This budget proposes several significant changes to the
program including adding an annual fee and implementing a ``direct
endorsement'' program. The annual fee will eliminate program costs to
the government. Please explain why you are proposing an annual fee
rather than increasing the up-front fee which could generate the same
result.
Answer. Program costs to the government can be eliminated either by
increasing the up-front fee or by instituting an annual fee. The annual
fee was proposed to achieve consistency with FHA, and to maintain up-
front costs at current levels.
Question. Please describe the effects on borrowers of an annual fee
versus an up-front fee in which both alternatives generate zero subsidy
cost.
Answer. The 2011 budget requests a loan level of $12 billion
supported by establishing a fee structure that will eliminate the
subsidy cost for all new purchases. The annual fee that USDA is
proposing would eliminate the need for an annual appropriation to pay
for the cost of loan subsidies. The up-front fee on new purchase loans
will remain 2 percent, but an annual fee of 0.15 percent will be added
to both new and refinanced loans. In addition, the up-front fee for
refinanced loan guarantees will be increased to 1 percent. The annual
fee would apply to all loans, regardless of the income of the borrower.
This is the same as for the one-time fee that is assessed up-front, and
can be incorporated in the loan amount. The annual fee would, instead,
be applied directly to the borrower's monthly payment. The two fees,
combined, would be lower than the fees charged by HUD and VA. Low-
income borrowers constitute about 30 percent of USDA's single family
guaranteed loan borrowers. The annual fee included in the 2011 budget
proposal is estimated to be 1/15 of 1 percent. It is anticipated that
it would have minimal impact on the ability of low income borrowers to
qualify for loans.
The annual fee will be capped at 0.5 percent and in fiscal year
2011 is expected to be 0.15 percent of the guaranteed principal loan
amount. On a $100,000 loan, the annual fee will be $150. This results
in an additional monthly payment of $12.50. This is a nominal increase
and should be affordable.
Question. Under a direct endorsement program the Agency's role in
loan underwriting is minimized while the responsibilities for
maintaining credit quality are shifted to the private sector guaranteed
lenders. Please elaborate on the need for a direct endorsement program
at this time.
Answer. Direct endorsement will streamline the loan making process
and achieve a measure of consistency with the other Federal Housing
programs. Some private sector lending partners have repeatedly
requested direct endorsement capabilities. Also, this will make the
Agency more efficient and allow the single family housing staff to
focus more on single family housing direct loans.
Question. How do you reconcile this request with your proposal to
reduce (by $6 million) resources to monitor guaranteed lender
performance?
Answer. Significant Information Technology gains related to
maintaining portfolio compliance, safety, and soundness are being made
through investment of Recovery Act administrative funding in 2010.
These gains will be applied to many of Rural Development's programs,
including the section 502 guaranteed loan program. The projected $6
million reduction is supported through gains that will be realized in
fiscal year 2010, reducing the need for these Information Technology
investments in fiscal year 2011.
Along with these Information Technology gains, efforts and
investment towards monitoring section 502 guaranteed lenders and
portfolio performance and compliance will increase in 2011. This is
necessary due to the growth of the program and the level of new lender
participation. We are proactively working internally and with the
Office of Inspector General to ensure that robust portfolio quality
control procedures continue to evolve and be implemented to protect the
safety and soundness of the program.
Question. What assurance can you provide that the current excellent
portfolio credit quality and low default history will be maintained?
Answer. We expect the current excellent portfolio credit quality
will be maintained. The intent is to limit direct endorsement to
lenders that have demonstrated strong program knowledge and
responsibility. Only well performing lenders would be given direct
endorsement capabilities, and they would be closely monitored on a post
closing basis. Lenders with direct endorsement would have to submit
their loans through Rural Development's automated underwriting system.
Loans receiving an ``accept'' from the automated underwriting system
have demonstrated better performance than loans which are manually
underwritten.
OUTREACH
Question. I know that you share our commitment to improving access
to the child nutrition programs for families that have long suffered
material hardships and those experiencing new difficulties as a result
of the recession. Children are especially vulnerable to the effects of
the recession. The SNAP program has an aggressive outreach component
that is not matched in the school meals programs. Parents that are
recently unemployed may not realize that their children are eligible
for free or reduced price meals. Others may not realize that they can
sign up at any point in the school year. What has USDA already done to
make sure that eligible families are enrolled for free or reduced price
school meals and what are your plans to engage schools in outreach
campaigns for the upcoming school year?
Answer. The Department recognizes the importance of getting program
information to families suffering from economic hardship, and we have
taken several steps to ensure children have access to the healthy meals
they need. In response to the recent economic problems, we have
targeted outreach about the availability and importance of free and
reduced price school meals to unemployment insurance applicants. We
issued a policy memorandum on February 27, 2009 (SP 15-2009) describing
ways to assist families during an economic downturn. This memo
encouraged schools to reach out to families whose circumstances may
change during the school year by reminding them that they may apply for
free or reduced price meal benefits at any time.
On September 3, 2009, through coordination with the Department of
Labor's Employment and Training Administration, we distributed two
letters through the listserv of the National Association of State
Workforce Agency Administrators. The first letter was directed to State
Workforce Agency Administrators, and asked that they further distribute
and/or post the second letter to Unemployment Insurance applicants, to
make them aware of their potential eligibility for free school meals.
We have also issued a policy memorandum to all State agencies,
Extending Categorical Eligibility to Additional Children in a
Household, on August 27, 2009 (SP 38-2009, CACFP 08-2009, SFSP 07-
2009). Under this memorandum, effective immediately, all children in a
family are considered categorically eligible for free meals either
through direct certification with SNAP, the Food Distribution Program
on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) and the Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families (TANF) program, or through free and reduced price applications
with case numbers for these programs. This means that when school
districts have information on a family's composition, either through
the free and reduced price application or school enrollment records,
they should certify all children in a family for free meals if there is
a SNAP, FDPIR or TANF case number for at least one family member on an
application, or if one family member is directly certified through
SNAP, FDPIR or TANF. We will soon issue additional guidance to States
on this eligibility extension.
We are also working to encourage more schools to conduct Direct
Certification matches more frequently and to do it better. More
effective direct certification is a vital tool to increase the number
of children certified as eligible for free lunches and breakfasts. FNS
published a report titled ``Direct Certification in the National School
Lunch Program: State Implementation Progress'' in November 2009 to
assess the effectiveness of State and local efforts to conduct direct
certification of children for free school meals. The report found that
the 2008-2009 median direct certification rates of SNAP-participant
children were 72 percent. This shows that local educational agencies
have increased their use of direct certification from a rate of 69
percent reported in the previous year.
DIRECT CERTIFICATION
Question. Automatically enrolling poor children for free school
meals based on participation in other means-tested programs is an
important component of improving access to the school meals programs
and reducing the administrative burden of running them. I am concerned,
however, that your recent report on State direct certification
performance shows that as many as 3.5 million children who could have
been directly certified were not, and a good portion of those children
may have missed out on free meals. Congress has already taken steps to
try to improve direct certification rates, most recently providing
$22,000,000 in the fiscal year 2010 agriculture appropriations
legislation for grants to improve direct certification. I would like to
hear what USDA is doing to improve State performance. Specifically,
what steps have you taken to distribute the grant funds? What
improvement steps are you asking of these States? What support are you
providing to share best practices and support improvement efforts?
Answer. The Department recognizes the importance of using direct
certification to enroll eligible children to receive free school meals
and is working aggressively to develop a request for application
(RFA)--describing qualification criteria, the application process,
allowable uses of funds, etc.--so that States can begin applying for
the grants as soon as possible. We are developing the RFA based not
only on the best practices described in the report you referenced, but
on input obtained directly from eligible States during conference calls
that FNS is conducting specifically to discuss this grant opportunity.
In addition, FNS will continue to publicize this grant opportunity
during conference calls, webinars, and stakeholder meetings such as the
School Nutrition Association meeting in July.
NATIONAL EXPORT INITIATIVE
Question. The budget request for the Foreign Agricultural Service
includes an increase of over $53,000,000 for the National Export
Initiative. This is quite a large increase for FAS. How will the
initiative be carried out?
Answer. I have the honor of being appointed by President Obama as a
member of the Export Promotion Cabinet, which has been charged with
providing the President a comprehensive plan within 180 days to carry
out the goals of the National Export Initiative (NEI). The plan will
identify the resources and strategy for effective implementation of
NEI.
The NEI includes a proposed increase of $53.5 million in
discretionary funding for the Foreign Agricultural Service for 2011 to
promote exports of U.S. food and agricultural products. This enhanced
funding would stimulate increased agricultural exports through new
trade promotion and marketing activities; expanded grants to improve
market access for specialty crop exports; and expanded cost-share
activities with agricultural market development groups.
The funding requested for FAS would be invested in three areas.
First, $10 million is provided for enhanced export assistance by FAS.
It would support expanded foreign market development activities at
selected FAS overseas posts; strengthen trade facilitation services of
FAS personnel in key countries; facilitate the participation of a
greater number of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) at foreign
and domestic trade shows; increase resources targeted at removing
sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) and technical barriers to trade; and
strengthen outreach activities to a broader array of SMEs.
For the Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC) Program,
funding would be increased by $9 million to double the overall size of
the program. Grants under TASC aim at breaking down SPS and technical
barriers to foreign markets that prohibit or impede the export of U.S.
specialty crops. Examples of TASC projects include technical seminars,
study tours, field surveys, pest and disease research, and pre-
clearance programs. Increased funding would enable FAS to support a
wider range of entities promoting U.S. exports of specialty crops and
horticultural crop products.
Increased funding of $34.5 million would be provided for the
Foreign Market Development (Cooperator) Program, which would double
total funding for that program as well. Increased resources for the
Cooperator Program would support an expansion in the range of
agricultural products benefiting from the existing program and export
marketing promotions to include, for example, new or non-traditional
uses of U.S. agricultural commodities and new foreign markets.
Question. Do you foresee this requiring funding beyond fiscal year
2011?
Answer. The President has announced a plan to double total U.S.
exports in 5 years. During that period, it is clear that promoting
export growth and developing long-term trading relations will require
an extended commitment for the President's goal to be accomplished.
CAPITAL SECURITY COST SHARING
Question. Over the past several years we have provided funding for
Capital Security Cost Sharing. This budget does not include funds for
that activity. Is the State Department no longer assessing FAS for
capital security?
Answer. The State Department continues to assess Foreign Service
agencies for contributions to the costs of building new, more secure
diplomatic facilities, and funding of $9.9 million for that purpose is
included in the 2011 FAS budget. However, no increase in funding is
requested in 2011 because the amount of FAS' annual contribution has
now leveled off. The original plan was for the Capital Security Cost
Sharing program to be phased in gradually over a number of years, with
annual funding increases requested during that phase-in period. The
phase-in period is now completed with the 2010 budget. There may be
periodic adjustments in the amount of annual agency contributions in
future years based on changes in the number of personnel overseas and
construction costs, but no adjustment is anticipated to be made during
2011.
AGRICULTURAL RECONSTRUCTION AND STABILIZATION
Question. The budget includes $14,600,000 to fund agricultural
reconstruction and stabilization activities. Please explain how these
funds will be used. What countries besides Afghanistan will benefit?
Answer. In Afghanistan these funds will be used by USDA to help
support the implementation of the U.S. commitment to rebuilding that
country by providing agricultural experts who serve as advisors to key
ministries and work with rural farmers throughout the country.
Additional funding to support these efforts will be provided by the
Department of State.
These agricultural experts serve on civilian-military command units
throughout the country. The experts' work is essential for stabilizing
strategic areas of the country, building government capacity, and
raising confidence in the government. They will help to ensure the
successful management of assistance programs, to develop economic
opportunities and jobs in agriculture, and address food insecurity.
Consistent with these efforts, USDA has established a high priority
performance goal of increasing the number of Afghan provinces
designated as food secure from 10 to 14 provinces by the end of 2011.
Other countries that will benefit include Iraq, Haiti, and Pakistan,
although others may be added later.
VETERINARY MEDICAL LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAM
Question. Over the last several years this subcommittee has
provided a funding for USDA to implement the Veterinary Medical Loan
Repayment Program. I am happy to see that progress is being made. Some
concerns have been raised about the time line that State Animal Health
Officials were given to apply for a ``shortage designation''.
Have you heard similar concerns? Is the Department doing anything
to address this issue? How many State Animal Health Officials have
submitted applications for the ``shortage designation''?
Answer. On July 9, 2009, the National Institute of Food and
Agriculture (NIFA) published an interim final rule and request for
comments on this program.
The rule clearly stated the intent was to solicit nominations of
shortage areas, and spelled out in detail the procedure to be followed.
The rule also explicitly stated the agency's intention to solicit
nominations for a period of 60 days. Insofar as this interim final rule
was published approximately 6 months prior to actually calling for
nominations, we believe that the 60 day response period is sufficient
and reasonable. I will have NIFA provide additional details for the
record.
[The information follows:]
The period for submitting shortage area nominations ended on March
8, and we received 249 nominations from 48 States and the Republic of
Marshall Islands. We did not receive any complaints with respect to the
time we allowed for nominations from any of the State Animal Health
Officials (SAHO).
All States submitted nominations except Massachusetts and Hawaii
(and DC). We contacted the SAHO of Massachusetts and Hawaii and both
indicated that this was not a priority concern for them. Neither
indicated that the compressed timeline was a factor.
There was considerable effort made to ensure eligible entities were
informed and engaged. All Chief Animal Health Officials received
information and reminders about the nomination process both leading up
to and after release of the Federal Register notice soliciting
nominations. The National Assembly of State Animal Health Officials
(NASAHO) and the United States Animal Health Association (USAHA), both
with memberships comprising the authorized respondents to this
solicitation, were very helpful sending out notices and reminders to
respond by the deadline.
Although the intention was to solicit nominations for a period of
60 days, we determined that a period of 45 days was necessary to allow
for sufficient time to review and certify shortage areas prior to the
opening of the VMLRP application period on April 30. Given that this
was the first year of implementation, we were prepared to allow a grace
period to those that needed extra time to submit their nominations.
LIMITATIONS ON FARM BILL PROGRAMS
Question. Section 726 would impose limitations on a number of 2008
farm bill programs in order to achieve savings to pay for increases in
discretionary spending. Among these is language to not allow for the
enrollment of more than 192,982 acres in the Wetlands Reserve Program
in fiscal year 2011. According to USDA documents, this language would
achieve discretionary savings of $116,386,000. However, estimates of
the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which will control Congressional
budget scorekeeping, often differ from those of OMB.
Given this potential discrepancy, does USDA intend for us to
increase the acreage limitation to comport with CBO scorekeeping, if
necessary, or will Congress receive a budget amendment to account for
either the need for lower spending or additional savings in mandatory
programs?
Answer. USDA believes the projected discretionary savings resulting
from limiting enrollment for the Wetlands Reserve Program is an
accurate estimate. Therefore, USDA does not anticipate submitting a
budget amendment to Congress concerning this issue.
Question. Similarly, if intervening congressional action (such as
the reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act, or other actions
requiring budgetary adjustments) further reduces the availability of
mandatory funds in programs identified for savings in the 2011
appropriations bill, will the administration provide guidance on how
the subcommittee should make adjustments through other reductions?
Answer. The 2011 budget represents a judicious allocation of
conservation resources. It reflects a strategic targeting of high
priority programs and current workforce and workload capacity, while
including efforts to ensure financial integrity and cost effectiveness.
At this time, USDA believes that the current budget proposal is the
best allocation of resources and looks forward to working with the
Committees on obtaining funding for these important programs.
Question. The budget proposes to eliminate language in the 2010 Act
relating to activities of the Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations
account. The reason provided for this termination is ``in order to
permit the Secretary the flexibility needed to carry out programs in
the most efficient and effective manner''. However, elsewhere in the
President's budget, the entire Watershed and Flood Prevention
Operations account is eliminated. How does the elimination of an entire
program strengthen the Secretary's ``flexibility'' to carry it out?
Answer. With the elimination of the Watershed and Flood Prevention
Operations (WFPO) Program, which has been heavily earmarked in recent
years, the Secretary will have the ability to use merit-based criteria
to prioritize projects in other programs within those watersheds
without the pre-selection of watershed projects. The WFPO program
benefits are highly localized and the Agency anticipates that those
projects not yet completed will continue to receive local support from
project sponsors.
CONTRACTING AND ACQUISITION WORKFORCE TRAINING
Question. Section 729 proposes an appropriation of $6,500,000 to
support a Government-wide Contracting and Acquisition Workforce
Training initiative. What efficiencies and what savings to the
Department will result as a consequence of the appropriation?
Answer. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Memorandum M-09-25,
Improving Government Acquisition, dated July, 29, 2009 promotes
``building the skills of the acquisition workforce and recruiting new
talent so as to negotiate more favorably priced contracts and manage
contract costs more effectively''.
In order to meet these objectives, USDA proposes to (1) improve
training and development for new hires through an acquisition workforce
intern program; (2) enhance skills and training for current acquisition
workforce regardless of level; and (3) implement knowledge management
initiatives to increase contracting efficiencies throughout USDA.
USDA has at least one acquisition workforce employee in virtually
every county in the United States. Provision of mandatory training
requires a substantial amount of logistical and training funds. Many of
the existing acquisition employees are insufficiently trained due to a
lack of funding. Effective training will address critical proficiency
gaps and enhance the quality of contract award/management which often
translates to cost savings.
An effective knowledge management program will increase efficiency
in understanding best practices; more effectively define customers and
business partners; and ultimately provide the right information to the
right individual(s) at the right time. An effective knowledge
management program will reduce the risk of time and money spent
unsuccessfully obtaining information.
An intern program at USDA would help develop the acquisition
workforce, as well as facilitate improvements in attracting and
retaining talented, proficient employees. An intern program will
counteract USDA's high retirement rate and increase the percentage of
agency 1102's with bachelor's degrees. The USDA intern program will
include several key components as follows:
--Training will allow USDA to enhance the knowledge of its
acquisition workforce to award and administer higher quality
and more economical contracts. Soft skills training such as
communication, leadership, and interpersonal skills will
improve workforce effectiveness.
--Rotational assignments will support intern development and maximize
the fit of the right intern with the right agency.
--FAC-C certification will validate understanding of specific
competencies and expedite workforce ability to obtain warrant
levels, and expand the pool of contracting officers with the
knowledge and warrant to award procurements.
--Promotions will provide interns with a structured promotion
schedule to maintain morale and productivity and bolster
retention, thereby minimizing cost and inefficiencies due to
employee attrition.
Question. Since this is a government-wide initiative, what
consequences will result if less than the fully requested amount is
provided?
Answer. The inability to fully fund the initiative to improve
USDA's acquisition workforce would have a detrimental impact on USDA's
acquisition workforce. In recent years unsettling trends gained
momentum and these trends could continue if insufficient funding is
provided for training and improvement programs. Consequences would
involve the widening of the human capital gap with mass retirement of
an aging workforce and high turnover rate of employees within USDA.
Acquisition workforce employees frequently transfer from one Federal
agency to another. Employees may also be lost to private industry, who
may offer better salaries and benefits. Knowledge gaps will widen
leading to more costly and less effective contracts.
GREENBOOK CHARGES AND MISCELLANEOUS AGENCY ASSESSMENTS
Question. Mr. Secretary, we continue to hear concerns from research
centers, universities, and other parties who work with USDA on a
cooperative basis that assessments charged by USDA are harming their
ability to continue research and other activities as envisioned in the
original cooperative agreements. For example, certain research centers
who engage with ARS under specific cooperative agreements are
discovering that the funding levels described in Congressional acts and
reports for those locations are reduced far below the customary 10
percent reduction for net-to-location adjustments. In addition, the
Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) reported in October, 2009,
that Greenbook charges have increased from $5,400,000 in 1999 to
$61,200,000 in 2009, with a peak of $76,000,000 in 2007.
Can you please provide a listing of USDA programs, projects, or
activities involving non-Federal cooperators that are reduced through
assessments not related to the purposes described by the Congress,
including the amounts (in the aggregate by program) and purposes of
such assessments?
Answer. Programs are affected for a variety of reasons. In addition
to the traditional assessments that pay for services provided by the
Department, programs can be reduced based on statutory direction as is
the case with the Small Business Innovation Research Program and the
Biotechnology Risk Assessment Programs. In addition, there are
statutory authorities that make assessments permissive such as the case
with NIFA programs where statutory authority allows up to 4 percent of
program funding to be assessed to pay agency costs for program
management and oversight. In addition, there could be assessments to
fund Department-wide costs, such as e-Government charges, or agency
specific assessments to support program management and oversight.
The following table provides a summary of agency programs involving
non-Federal cooperators that are reduced for these types of program
costs.
The information is submitted for the record.
[The information follows:]
LIST OF PROGRAMS, PROJECTS OR ACTIVITIES INVOLVING NON-FEDERAL COOPERATORS THAT ARE REDUCED THROUGH ASSESSMENTS
FISCAL YEAR 2009
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
Agency/program 2009 enacted Assessments available
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agricultural Research Service: \1\
Salaries and Expenses....................................... $3,323 $332 $2,991
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service:
Salaries and Expenses....................................... 4,963 852 4,111
Food Safety and Inspection Service: \2\
Salaries and Expenses....................................... 59,170 1,773 57,397
National Institute of Food and Agriculture: \3\
Research and Education Activities........................... 691,524 54,919 636,605
Extension Activities........................................ 474,250 20,786 453,464
Integrated Activities....................................... 56,864 2,842 54,022
Natural Resources Conservation Service: \4\
Conservation Operations..................................... 11,693 1,437 10,256
Watershed Operations........................................ 5,276 465 4,811
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ARS has a long-standing policy of applying a 10 percent indirect cost assessment on increases in
appropriated program funds to finance administrative and program management costs associated with conducting
nationwide research programs. This policy is documented in REE Policies & Procedures 329.5 entitled,
Assessment of Indirect Program Support Costs and Indirect Research Costs.
\2\ Agency met States for Cooperative Agreements up to 50 percent of State Meat and Poultry Inspection costs as
authorized by the Federal Meat and Poultry Act, as amended (21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), specifically section 301
of the FMIA (21 U.S.C. 661) and the Poultry Products Inspection Act, as amended (21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.),
specifically section 5 of the PPIA (21 U.S.C. 454) Agency redirected funding for FERN Cooperative Agreements
to mission critical needs, including salary and benefits, frontline travel and Cooperative Agreements with
State MPI programs.
\3\ Set-aside for Agency administration costs. Unless otherwise stipulated in law, most NIFA programs are
assessed up to 4 percent to pay agency administrative costs. This includes costs for the grants review and
approval process, documentation and management, funds disbursements, and post-award grants monitoring,
including site visits and final close-out activities. Section 1469 of the National Research, Teaching and
Policy Act of 1977, as amended, provides specific statutory authority to pay for administrative costs set-
aside for the Current Research Information System (CRIS). Funds are set aside from the Hatch Act and Evans-
Allen formula programs for partial support of CRIS. The amount set aside is based on the approved multi-State
Hatch project that supports operational costs each year set-aside for Peer Panel Costs. NIFA has statutory
authority for setting aside funds for the costs associated with convening peer panels for the purpose of
reviewing and evaluating proposals submitted to competitively awarded programs. Section 1469 of the National
Research, Teaching and Policy Act of 1977, as amended, provides this authority.
\4\ Adjustments include about $2 million for Technical Assistance costs. The program authorizations for carrying
out these programs are under: Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act of 1935, Public Law 74-46 (16
U.S.C. 590a-590f) and the Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act of 1977 and Watershed Protection and Flood
Prevention Act (16 U.S.C. 1001-1005 and 1007-1009).
Question. If agencies which are funded through a general salaries
and expenses appropriation require funds to be set aside for various
administrative purposes, why does the budget not specifically identify
those items and provide for them by a specific appropriations amount,
thereby making assessments against actual research or other activities
unnecessary?
Answer. As you know, some agencies in the Department have separate
program, and salaries and expenses appropriations, while others have
one appropriation. Having separate appropriations for program
activities and salaries and expenses is one approach that has merit.
However, due to certain statutory requirements, some assessments
against programs, projects or activities may occur even within agencies
that have a separate salaries and expenses account. These statutory
set-asides include a requirement to set aside 2.5 percent of extramural
research and development funds to be used for the Small Business
Innovation Research Program (Small Business Research and Development
Enhancement Act of 1992, Public Law 102-564, as amended). In addition,
all biotechnology research projects are required to set aside 2.0
percent of funds to support the Biotechnology Risk Assessment program
(section 1668 of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of
1990, Public Law 101-624, as amended).
Question. Please describe any adverse consequences that would
result from a prohibition against further agency assessments and,
instead, provide a specific appropriation to cover the items for which
those charges are currently being assessed.
Answer. It is difficult to assess the impacts of your proposal
without the specifics of what the prohibition would entail. However, in
general eliminating the ability to charge assessments would limit
agencies' flexibility to respond to unforeseen events or other changes
that occur during the fiscal year. In addition, it would be difficult
to accurately identify needed administrative costs a year and a half in
advance. Finally, historically salaries and expenses accounts have not
kept pace with needed program delivery costs, leading to the
possibility that the appropriate management and oversight of program
delivery would be at risk.
FARM SERVICE AGENCY (FSA) AUTOMATED SYSTEMS
Question. Mr. Secretary, the precarious status of FSA's automated
systems has been evident for several years. In the face of systems
outages, the Agency has had to take the unprecedented step of rationing
access by FSA employees. These automated systems support commodity
programs, credit and farm loans, farm operations, conservation, and
agriculture disaster relief, and systems instability is untenable.
In fiscal year 2010, this Committee provided funding to begin a
multi-year information technology stabilization and modernization
initiative. This budget requests continuation of that initiative,
seeking $38,300,000 for the continued implementation of the MIDAS
system, $20,000,000 for conversion of FSA software from obsolete legacy
systems, and $36,000,000 to replace outdated hardware components in
local offices.
Mr. Secretary, what progress has been made toward stabilizing and
modernizing FSA's automated systems?
Answer. As of the end of fiscal year 2010, FSA will have completed
the Stabilization activities that secure Web-based platform systems and
adapted ``best practices'' and technology to the current environment to
significantly lower the risk of future stoppages. These Stabilization
activities enable FSA to improve the existing network by acquiring and
using monitoring and management tools, methodologies and processes that
promote optimal and efficient system performance. The result is a
significant step towards achieving success in all future modernization
efforts. Additional progress has also been made in the Modernize and
Innovate the Delivery of Agricultural Systems (MIDAS) initiative. For
example, FSA used ARRA funding to release the major acquisition
solicitation that was essential to start system implementation work,
continue program management and governance support, and continue
business process streamlining activities that leverage industry ``best
practices'' to reduce process errors and ongoing costs.
The fiscal year 2011 budget proposal includes the necessary
resources to move ahead on schedule with IT modernization for FSA. It
will support the continuation of the MIDAS project as planned along
with necessary conversion of software for supporting activities to
facilitate transition of FSA IT from the obsolete legacy system. In
addition, the budget provides for a needed refreshment and upgrade of
the Common Computing Environment to support the continued modernization
process for FSA and the other service center agencies.
Question. Is this budget request sufficient to ensure against
catastrophic system collapse, and to maintain adequate service levels
through fiscal year 2011?
Answer. Yes, FSA has a plan in place to continue transforming and
modernizing its IT environment and program delivery processes for 2011
and beyond. The 2011 budget requests $95.3 million for FSA IT Systems.
This includes $38.3 million for the second installment of a multi-year
request for MIDAS, $20 million for the continued conversion of legacy
system processes to Web-based applications, $36 million to ``refresh''
the hardware on FSA's portion of the Common Computing Environment
(CCE), and $1 million for IT staffing.
Question. Will you please provide a detailed schedule and funding
needs estimate to complete the task?
Answer. FSA efforts to modernize aging IT systems, when completed,
will work in concert with all of FSA's modernization initiatives to
successfully operate and maintain daily our IT infrastructure while
ensuring the viability of our payment processes moving forward. FSA
will use the Web to provide information which employees need to deliver
farm programs and provide a modernized, Web-based public face to their
customers in support of open government.
The Stabilization initiative began in fiscal year 2007. As of the
end of fiscal year 2010, FSA will have completed the Stabilization
activities that secure Web-based platform systems and adapted ``best
practices'' and technology to the current environment to significantly
lower the risk of future stoppages. These Stabilization activities
enable FSA to improve the existing network by acquiring and using
monitoring and management tools, methodologies and processes that
promote optimal and efficient system performance.
For Stabilization, no additional cost above our base requirements
is needed. The original fiscal year 2007 Stabilization Project estimate
did not include requirements for operational costs in fiscal year 2010
through fiscal year 2012. In our fiscal year 2010 budget request, FSA
included requirements and received funding for operational costs in
fiscal year 2010. These operational costs for Stabilization are
considered base requirements and are included in our fiscal year 2011
President's budget totaling $20.4 million.
The cost breakout and task schedule for Stabilization are provided
in the tables below.
STABILIZATION PROJECT AND OPERATIONAL EXPENSES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actual Actual Actual Actual
Funding source fiscal year fiscal year fiscal year fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S&E Base.................... ............ ............ ............ \1\ $5,189,2 \2\ $27,232 $20,400,000
10
S&E Increase................ ............ ............ ............ ............ 20,400,000 ............
Base Carryover.............. ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............
Common Computing Environment ............ $24,585,000 ............ ............ ............ ............
(CCE)......................
Emergency Supplemental...... ............ ............ $37,500,000 ............ ............ ............
Recovery Act (ARRA)......... ............ ............ ............ 9,126,345 21,873,655 ............
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................. ............ 24,585,000 37,500,000 14,315,555 42,300,887 20,400,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Stabilization Operational Expenses for fiscal year 2011 and beyond will be covered from within the S&E
base.
Total Stabilization Project Costs (fiscal years 2007-2010): $118,701,442.
\1\ The $5,189,210 in the S&E base for Stabilization was provided for fiscal year 2009 only to expedite
contracting until ARRA funds were available. The only funds designated for Stabilization in fiscal year 2009
were ARRA funds.
\2\ In fiscal year 2010, FSA made a conscious decision to use $5,161,978 from the fiscal year 2009 S&E base to
cover other critical infrastructure operational needs, which left $27,232 in the base for Stabilization
expenses.
STABILIZATION TASK SCHEDULE FISCAL YEAR 2007 THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2012
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiative/Task Fiscal year 2007 Fiscal year 2008 Fiscal year 2009 Fiscal year 2010 Fiscal year 2011 Fiscal year 2012
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stabilization Investment Tasks:
eAUTH Performance Start............. End............... .................. .................. .................. ..................
Enhancements.
Site B Disaster Recovery Start............. End............... .................. .................. .................. ..................
Management Study.
Data Base Performance .................. Start & End....... .................. .................. .................. ..................
training.
ITS Independent Verification Start............. End............... .................. .................. .................. ..................
and Validation (IV&V)
Management Study.
Application Performance Start............. .................. End............... .................. .................. ..................
Monitoring.
Network Server Management... Start............. End............... .................. .................. .................. ..................
Certification & Start............. End............... .................. .................. .................. ..................
Accreditation Management.
Technical Performance Start............. End............... .................. .................. .................. ..................
Training.
IV&V Gartner Management .................. Start & End....... .................. .................. .................. ..................
Study.
Project Closeout and .................. .................. Start & End....... .................. .................. ..................
Migration Management.
Security Performance .................. Start & End....... .................. .................. .................. ..................
Training.
Security Operations .................. Start............. End............... .................. .................. ..................
Monitoring Enhancements.
Application Build and Test .................. Start............. End............... .................. .................. ..................
Performance Management.
Application Availability and Start............. End............... Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To
Performance Lab. Operations. Operations. Operations. Operations
Application Performance Start............. .................. End............... Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To
Testing. Operations. Operations. Operations
Data Base Management........ Start............. End............... Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To
Operations. Operations. Operations. Operations
Application Process Flow Start............. .................. End............... Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To
Management. Operations. Operations. Operations
Application Middleware .................. Start............. End............... Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To
Performance Upgrade. Operations. Operations. Operations
Enterprise Data Management.. .................. Start............. End............... Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To
Operations. Operations. Operations
Enterprise Reporting .................. Start............. .................. End............... Migrated To Migrated To
Performance Capability. Operations. Operations
Application Process Flow .................. Start............. End............... Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To
Management Reposi- tory. Operations. Operations. Operations
IT Infrastructure Start............. .................. End............... Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To
Architecture Management. Operations. Operations. Operations
End to End User Performance Start............. .................. End............... Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To
Monitor. Operations. Operations. Operations
Hosting and Network Start............. End............... Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To
Management. Operations. Operations. Operations. Operations
Hardware/Software & Telecom Start............. .................. End............... Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To
Performance Enhancements. Operations. Operations. Operations
System Center & Service Start............. .................. End............... Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To
Oriented Monitoring. Operations. Operations. Operations
Problem Detection .................. Start............. End............... Migrated To Migrated To Migrated To
Performance Monitoring. Operations. Operations. Operations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Modernize and Innovate the Delivery of Agricultural Systems
(MIDAS) program is designed to transform the FSA delivery of farm
program benefits, on behalf of the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC),
into a 21st century business model. MIDAS will streamline FSA business
processes and develop a modernized long-term IT system and architecture
to meet the needs of our customers, USDA, and other stakeholders.
The total implementation cost for MIDAS is estimated to be $304.7
million. In fiscal year 2006, fiscal year 2007 and fiscal year 2008,
FSA utilized $2,716,000 of Salary and Expense funds for pre-planning
and project office set up. These pre-planning costs were not part of
the $304.7 million estimate.
This amount has not changed and is consistent with previous reports
submitted to Congress. MIDAS is currently on track. With enactment of
the current fiscal year 2011 request, a total of $159.9 million will
have been provided for this project to date (see table below).
Therefore $144.8 million is needed to fund the remaining costs of
MIDAS.
See the cost table below for MIDAS funding.
MIDAS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actual Actual Actual Actual
Funding source fiscal year fiscal year fiscal year fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S&E Base.......................... $40,000 $40,000 $676,000 $1,000,000 $2,600,000 $49,500,000
S&E Increase...................... ........... 636,000 1,324,000 ........... 46,900,000 39,300,000
Base Carryover.................... ........... ........... ........... ........... 1,600,000 ...........
Recovery Act (ARRA)............... ........... ........... ........... 5,600,000 13,400,000 ...........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... 40,000 676,000 2,000,000 6,600,000 64,500,000 88,800,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total MIDAS Project Costs... 304,700,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The table below identifies MIDAS's schedule until fiscal year 2014.
MIDAS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiative/Task Fiscal year 2006 Fiscal year 2007 Fiscal year 2008 Fiscal year 2009 Fiscal year 2010 Fiscal year 2011 Fiscal year 2012 Fiscal year 2013 Fiscal year 2014
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MIDAS INVESTMENT TASKS:
Pre-planning and project Start........... ................ End............. ................ ................ ................ ................ ................ ................
office set up.
Acquisition and Planning-- ................ ................ ................ Start & End..... ................ ................ ................ ................ ................
Software and SI
acquisition.
Task Order 1--Planning.... ................ ................ ................ ................ Start & End..... ................ ................ ................ ................
Task Order 2--Proof of ................ ................ ................ ................ Start........... End............. ................ ................ ................
Concept and System Design
Complete.
Task Order 3--Initial ................ ................ ................ ................ ................ Start........... ................ End............. ................
Deployment.
Task Order 4--Full ................ ................ ................ ................ ................ ................ Start........... ................ End
Deployment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stabilization and MIDAS are just pieces of a larger FSA
Modernization picture. Stabilization served as a necessary first piece
to transform the IT environment to support the various initiatives of
FSA's modernization plan. MIDAS is a significant piece that modernizes
FSA's Farm programs; however, it is intertwined with several other
modernization efforts. Currently, FSA is identifying funding needs and
developing funding estimates for fiscal year 2012 to continue the
journey to fulfill FSA Modernization. These efforts include
--Enterprise wide modernization either by assuming a lead role or
partnering with USDA/agencies across the Federal Government
including Budget and Performance Management Systems (BPMS), Web
Based Supply Chain Management (WEBSCM) and Financial Management
Modernization Initiative (FMMI); and,
--Acquisition and management of geo-spatial data and imagery in a way
that maximizes efficient collection and manipulation of
information while enhancing agricultural benefits
administration and program monitoring. FSA intends to enhance
such program capabilities as assembly, storage, transfer,
manipulation, and display of geo-spatial data.
--Full modernization of all FSA program delivery including Farm
Loans, and also Commodity Operations, not just Farm Programs.
All these efforts are required to move FSA's IT environment from
one reliant on old/unsupported technology, isolated business processes
using paper and manual operations, and limited online service and
functionality to an open and portable 21st century environment that
provides IT services, support, delivery and operations for the delivery
of essential farm business management information and program benefits
to farmers and ranchers. FSA will also transform the IT environment and
infrastructure to deliver quick response solutions, such as farm bill
requirements, when asked.
SECTION 719 OF THE PROPOSED 2011 ACT/FARM BILL IMPLEMENTATION
Question. Section 719 would permit the use of CCC funds provided in
the 2008 farm bill for various program benefits to also be used for
salaries and related expenses to carry out those programs. Please
provide information on a program by program basis indicating the
amounts of funding that would be transferred for this purpose.
Answer. The Recovery Act provides authority for USDA to use funds
provided for certain farm bill programs for administrative expenses
associated with implementing the programs. This authority expires at
the end of September 2010. The 2011 budget requests similar authority
to allow USDA to continue implementing these farm bill programs. The
information provided below reflects the amounts apportioned for program
implementation in fiscal year 2010. Actual obligations may be less.
[The information follows:]
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES TAKEN FROM PROGRAM LEVELS AUTHORIZED IN THE 2008
FARM BILL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative
Program expense
estimates
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Market Access Program................................... $4,980,000
Foreign Market Development Cooperator Program........... 1,530,000
Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops Program........ 1,000,000
Emerging Markets Program................................ 1,350,000
Quality Samples Program................................. 330,000
Local and Regional Purchase Pilot Program............... 1,550,000
Food for Progress....................................... 3,300,000
Marketing Loss Assistance Asparagus..................... 96,000
Voluntary Public Access Program......................... 175,000
Farmers Market Protection Program....................... 682,000
Specialty Crop Block Grants............................. 637,000
Plant Pest and Disease Management....................... 10,000,000
National Clean Plant Network............................ 485,000
---------------
SUBTOTAL.......................................... 26,115,000
===============
Additional CCC Spending\1\:
Feedstock Flexibility............................... 50,000
Biomass Crop Assistance Program..................... 3,000,000
---------------
SUBTOTAL.......................................... 3,050,000
===============
TOTAL............................................. 29,165,000
===============
Recap by Agency:
Farm Service Agency................................. 3,321,000
Foreign Agricultural Service........................ 14,040,000
Agricultural Marketing Service...................... 1,319,000
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.......... 10,485,000
---------------
TOTAL............................................. 29,165,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Mandatory funding is provided ``as such sums as are necessary''.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Tom Harkin
WOMEN, INFANTS AND CHILDREN (WIC) PROGRAM
Question. WIC is a sound investment, not only because of the
extraordinary benefits for participants, but also because it is one of
the most cost-efficient benefit programs. One of the reasons that WIC
continues to be able to serve all eligible applicants is because
Congress and the Department of Agriculture have taken seriously the
responsibility to control the program's costs.
USDA just released a report that found that WIC is paying $127
million more annually for infant formula under the contracts that are
currently in place than under previous contracts, after adjusting for
inflation. The Economic Research Service at USDA attributed nearly
three quarters of the increase to increases in the inflation-adjusted
price of infant formula (the remainder reflect lower rebate bids). The
report concluded that the increase in infant formula price is largely
explained by the introduction into formulas of two long-chain
polyunsaturated fatty acids, which were followed by wholesale price
increases of some 7 to 30 percent above the prices of what had
previously been standard formulas.
Please explain whether the Department agrees with the details of
the ERS report regarding the principal causes of price increases for
infant formula in recent years (above the rate of inflation). Is the
increased cost of infant formula in the WIC program a concern to you,
and if so, what will be the response of the Department?
Answer. While I have not personally reviewed the conclusions of the
ERS report you mention, I am confident that their analysis is rigorous
and sound.
The Department is always concerned about costs which impact the WIC
Program's ability to serve the greatest number of eligible persons
within the funds made available to it. FNS continually monitors program
costs, market trends, and developments in an effort to ensure WIC pays
competitive prices for all eligible foods and infant formula in
particular. FNS also reviews State agency rebate solicitations to
ensure the solicitations comply with Federal requirements established
to maintain an even playing field for formula manufacturers, thereby
fostering competition.
NRCS OIG AUDIT REPORT
Question. Please detail all actions taken to respond to the Office
of Inspector General audit report of November 13, 2008. Do you believe
the actions taken thus far will adequately address the issues raised in
the OIG report? Why or why not?
Answer. NRCS has taken numerous actions since the OIG audit report
was issued in 2008 to improve the condition of financial information.
While many actions have been completed, they have not yet been
sufficient in scope to produce a clean audit opinion. Some of the
actions planned but not yet completed will take more time and require
more dedicated resources to complete. Information on actions completed
to date is provided below for the record.
[The information follows:]
Training:
--Ensured all employees who prepare agency financial statements
attend mandatory training presented by the U.S. Department of
Treasury.
--Provided 2-day training which included a checklist reference guide
to State personnel on evaluating and reviewing the validity of
open obligations.
--Developed and delivered training on the review and proper recording
of accruals, the accounting for reimbursable agreements, and
the review of cardholder transactions.
--Ensured all employees completed required OCIO Information
Technology Services User Authorization Access Training Program.
Policy and Procedures:
--Reviewed, updated and issued interim policy and procedures to
ensure balances were valid, delivered orders were accrued in
accordance with policy, and obligations were properly recorded
on a timely basis.
--Issued draft policy for reimbursable agreements and unfilled
customer orders.
--Instituted a process effective December 22, 2008, to ensure general
ledger account relationship tests over Fund Balance with
Treasury are performed on a routine basis.
--Reviewed and updated current change control policy and procedures
related to testing and approving application changes prior to
migration to production.
--Reinforced the need for supervisors to adhere to policy and
procedures over reviewing purchase cardholder transactions.
--Instituted procedures for management review of the monthly
statements for fleet card purchases. In addition to monitoring
activities, periodically sampled fleet card purchases during
OMB Circular A-123 testing cycle to ensure proper use and the
reasonability of the amount charged.
--Reaffirmed guidance regarding the transfer of USDA Officer of the
Chief Information Office (OCIO) information technology
equipment at the State offices to the OCIO inventory listing
and monitored for compliance.
--Developed and deployed a Web-based tool to assist State and
Headquarters personnel in a 100 percent review of open
obligations. On-going monitoring is conducted to ensure
compliance with policy and procedures. In fiscal year 2009,
this activity was performed quarterly. In fiscal year 2010,
NRCS plans to perform this activity three times.
Reviews:
--Conducted reviews of 20 States in fiscal year 2009 to ensure
compliance with the open obligation review.
--Reviewed and ensured appropriate segregation of duties and
established guidelines and procedures for reviewing Co-Lab
project roles are performed on a periodic basis (Co-lab is a
collaboration system that NRCS uses to support software
development and maintenance).
--Completed a review of the property systems to ensure bulk purchases
are properly classified.
Accountability:
--Developed a standardized certification statement that all allowance
holders are required to certify each quarter.
--Developed an inventory of all leases. Received and classified all
leases prior to signing in order to ensure proper accounting
treatment. This inventory is compared to the information in the
USDA Corporate Property and Information System to ensure
completeness.
--Instituted a management review process and approval of agency
financial statements.
Security:
--Modified the security tables in the USDA Foundation Financial
Information System (FFIS) to ensure appropriate segregation of
duties.
--Revised the WebTCAS (Agency time reporting system) Risk Assessment
to account for all NIST SP 800-30 (Risk Management Guide for
Information Technology Systems) control areas and revised the
WebTCAS System Security Plan to account for all NIST SP 800-18
(Guide for Developing Security Plans for Federal Information
Systems) control areas.
Despite the actions that NRCS has taken thus far, there are still
challenges we are working to overcome. These include the following:
--Turnover in key financial management positions.
--Insufficient documentation of policy and procedures for financial
management activities that reflect the large number of
accounting standards and requirements promulgated in the past
decade.
--Inadequate numbers of staff with appropriate skill level in
financial and administrative organizations at both Headquarters
and State organizations. Shortages are most acute in accounting
and involve developing policy, procedures and processes in
accounting operations at headquarters and State offices,
controls over financial reporting through OMB Circular A-123,
Appendix A, and support for the annual financial statement
audit.
--Lack or inadequacy of Agency program systems to correctly capture
financial information without labor-intensive work-arounds.
NRCS has recently taken steps with regard to each of these barriers
as follows:
--Recruited for a new CFO; selection process is underway.
--The Accounting Officer position was recently vacated and will be
advertised soon.
--The Agency is currently recruiting qualified individuals for
lateral reassignment to perform high-risk functions described
in the audit report.
--NRCS leadership has procured the support of a firm to evaluate and
recommend an appropriate organization for financial and
administrative functions.
--Training has been developed and delivered to employees with
responsibilities in financial and administrative functions.
--The Agency is investing in a strategic initiative to streamline the
program, administrative and financial components of the
financial assistance programs (including mandatory funds). This
initiative will streamline and automate business processes
using role-based technology to most efficiently capture
financial transactions with the necessary internal controls.
--The Agency is considering the centralization of certain
administrative/financial functions to ensure standardization,
accuracy and completeness of financial reporting.
--The Agency has procured support for audit remediation support that
will begin in April 2010. The audit remediation contract will
focus on the weakness/risk that were initiatives in the audit.
The contractor will work with States on an individual basis to
focus the efforts under this contract including the hands-on
training of personnel and clean-up of the Agency's financial
records with regard to all the weaknesses and deficiencies
noted in the audit report.
Question. If you believe the Department is not now capable of
carrying out the conservation programs at the mandatory funding levels
provided in the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008, what further
changes in management will be necessary for the Department to take to
properly carry the programs out as required by law, and by what date
would you expect to have made all necessary management changes?
Answer. NRCS is currently working diligently to address management
and financial concerns raised by its most recent stand-alone audit.
The Agency has experienced expanded programmatic and administrative
responsibilities with expanded and new programs in the recent farm
bills. However, the workforce needed to effectively carry out the
expanded responsibilities has not increased at a comparable level.
To improve the efficiency and business management of the Agency,
the following actions are taking place:
--Implementing a conservation streamlining process that includes more
effective and efficient automated processes for managing
financial assistance programs. NRCS estimates this initiative
will reduce the administrative and clerical burdens on field
staff by over 80 percent once fully implemented. The 2011
budget includes a $5 million in to accelerate this process;
--Improving internal controls in program databases;
--Updating program policies to reflect current statues and
regulations;
--Developing a managerial cost account methodology that clearly
defines and aligns the Agency's funding with performance; and
--Conducting a workforce planning assessment to identify staffing
needs (i.e. positions and locations) and to better allocate
human resources.
In addition to the actions listed above the 2011 budget includes
the following initiatives for the Agency:
--$25 million for the implementation of Strategic Watershed Action
Teams (SWATs) that will be deployed to high-priority watersheds
and landscapes to focus program assistance to more effectively
address resources concerns. The development and deployment of
SWATs will greatly improve the environmental cost effectiveness
of the Agency's programs. By significant planning, education,
and program implementation assistance, the technical assistance
teams will enhance the Agency's capability to strategically
invest in conservation and better target the Agency's financial
and technical assistance programs.
--$35 million for the agency's share of the modernization and upgrade
to the Common Computer Environment (CCE) for the Service Center
Agencies (NRCS, Farm Services Agency (FSA) and Rural
Development (RD). The funding will be used to replace outdated
components of the CCE (reducing system vulnerabilities and
improving performance and effectiveness of the infrastructure
and allow for the first system-wide refresh since the system
was implemented in 2000).
It is anticipated that it will take 3 to 5 years to complete these
actions.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Byron L. Dorgan
MANDAN ARS
Question. Secretary Vilsack, I was disappointed that the
President's fiscal year 2011 budget proposed a $543,000 cut in
biofeedstock research at the Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory
in Mandan, North Dakota. Bioenergy feedstock research is a priority for
your Department and for the Congress. In fiscal year 2010 for example,
Congress redirected money to this area and in your fiscal year 2011
budget, you requested a $10 million increase for biofuels feedstock
research. Can you explain why you cut the bioenergy feedstock funding
at the Mandan ARS when it matches USDA's high priority research
mission?
Answer. The ARS fiscal year 2011 budget proposed to terminate all
congressionally earmarked projects appropriated in fiscal year 2010,
including the $543,000 earmarked for the Northern Great Plains Research
Laboratory in Mandan, North Dakota. The proposed elimination of ARS
earmarks and the redirection of these funds will offset the cost for
new and expanded research initiatives, including the establishment of
five Regional Biofuels Feedstocks Research and Development Centers.
SMITH-LEVER
Question. Congress established the Cooperative Extension Service
through the Smith-Lever Act of 1914. North Dakota has extension offices
in 52 counties and on Fort Berthold Indian Reservation. Smith Lever
funding is critical to our State in providing educational assistance
and technical support to North Dakota rural communities. These funds
are necessary in order to serve long term, short term and emergency
needs in rural America. What steps are being taken by USDA to increase
Smith Lever funding?
Answer. The fiscal year 2011 President's budget request sustains
support for the Smith-Lever 3(b) and (c) formula at the fiscal year
2010 appropriated level. However, increased funding for AFRI will
substantially support extension activities through growth in both
extension focused awards and integrated research and education awards.
The budget also seeks a funding increase for the Sustainable
Agriculture Research and Education program, which is a critical element
of extension delivery at the regional, State, and local levels. In
addition, the 2008 farm bill provides funding for the Beginning Farmers
and Ranchers Program, Organic Agriculture Research and Extension
Initiative, and Specialty Crop Research Initiative which will support
extension activities.
TRIBAL COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY FACILITY PROGRAM
Question. Congress established the Tribal Colleges and Universities
Essential Community Facilities Program to help our Nation's tribal
colleges and universities (TCU) address long overdue and high-priority
infrastructure and facilities needs. The USDA's fiscal year 2011 budget
proposes to eliminate entirely this vitally needed program for American
Indians. Can you explain your reasoning for eliminating this program? I
understand that USDA offers some competitive programs that could also
offer a potential source of funding for TCUs. If the Department sees
this as a viable alternative for these institutions, please provide an
analysis of the success that TCU's have had in competing for general
USDA programs and for land-grant programs.
Answer. The reason the program is proposed for elimination in the
2011 budget is that the tribal colleges and universities can compete
for community facility funding without a specific set-aside. From 2001
through 2009, TCUs received about $38 million in grants under the set-
aside, compared to about $229 million in grants, direct loans and loan
guarantees that all tribal entities received under the community
facility program, which shows that the TCU set-aside is only a modest
portion of the assistance USDA is providing to meet the needs of
American Indians. Further, tribes are eligible for several other USDA
Rural Development programs, such as the business and industry
guaranteed loan program and the rural business enterprise grant
program.
RURAL UTILITIES SERVICE LOAN AND GRANT PROGRAMS
Question. What is the Rural Utilities Service doing to ensure that
the Broadband Initiatives Program promotes broadband deployment in
unserved or underserved areas?
Answer. With over 60 years of successful telecommunication
financing experience, RUS will continue to strive to ensure that it
provides loan and/or grant resources to eligible projects. Under our
Broadband Initiatives Program (BIP), RUS has established an objective
scoring process which incents applicants to bring the most robust
service to the most rural and unserved areas. In fact, RUS gives
priority to unserved and highly rural areas. RUS will rely heavily upon
the information submitted by the applicant to prove the need for
broadband service. To further validate this information, RUS will post
all proposed service territory maps on broadbandusa.gov and allow
incumbent providers to comment on whether these areas are unserved or
underserved through Public Notice Responses (PNRs) received during a
30-day comment period. RUS will rely upon these comments, along State
broadband maps (where available), and both RUS and Rural Development
Field Staff to validate the information when necessary.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Dianne Feinstein
FOOD SAFETY
Question. I have been encouraged to see this administration's
commitment to improving the safety of our food supply, and I commend
you and Secretary Sebelius for forming the Food Safety Working Group. I
know that you share my belief that there is much room for improvement
in this area, and I would encourage you to examine these important
issues with a very critical eye.
Specifically, I am concerned about the chemical intensive
production practices that are used to clean and prepare our meat, and I
am concerned about the persistent presence of pathogens even after
these chemical and antimicrobial processes have been applied.
According to FSIS Directive 7120.1, industrial strength chemicals
such as chlorine and ammonia, as well as carbon monoxide, and other
complex chemical compounds can be used in the production and processing
of meat products. What is even more shocking is that there is no
requirement to label most of the additives on this list.
Why doesn't the USDA require that all processes and processing
agents be labeled on the packaging of meat products so that consumers
will know exactly what they are consuming? Have you conducted any
research that concludes that consumers do not want to know that these
processing aids have been used on their meat products?
Answer. Under a Memorandum of Understanding between the agencies,
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is responsible for determining whether or not
substances are safe for use in meat and poultry products, and USDA's
Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is responsible for
determining the suitability of their intended use.
FSIS strives to have consistent labeling policies with FDA. For
example, FDA does not require processing aids to be declared on the
label. Processing aids are ingredients that are present in a meat or
poultry product in an insignificant amount and that have no functional
or technical effects in the finished meat or poultry product.
We have not conducted consumer research on processing aids. We do
continually review our labeling policies and strive to ensure that
consumers are not misled by information either on or missing from food
packages.
Question. Have you started any reviews, or taken any other steps to
begin reevaluating the safety of all products that are currently listed
as Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS) using modern scientific
standards?
Answer. To conduct a review of GRAS substances would be very
expensive, and we are not aware of any evidence that unsafe ingredients
have been allowed for use in food by FDA or FSIS. The FDA is
responsible for determining whether or not substances are safe for use
in meat and poultry products, and issues GRAS notices regarding these
substances. GRAS determinations are based on scientific data showing
that, under the proposed conditions of use by industry, the substance
is safe. Based on these findings, FSIS determines whether the proposed
conditions of use by industry are suitable.
Question. While the Food Safety Inspection Service is testing meat
products for the presence of the deadly E. coli O157:h7, what other
pathogens are inspectors looking for? Why are the tolerance levels for
these other pathogens, such as Salmonella which also has the potential
to cause debilitating illnesses significantly higher than the tolerance
levels for E. coli O157? When is the agency going to develop pathogen
reduction activities and set performance goals for non-O157:H7 Shiga
toxin producing escherichia coli (STEC)?
Answer. The Department is continuing its intensive efforts targeted
at reducing the incidence of foodborne illness and the prevalence of
foodborne pathogens in the meat, poultry and processed egg supply.
Inspection program personnel sample for a variety of foodborne
pathogens, including Salmonella, E. coli O157:H7, Listeria
monocytogenes, and they will soon sample for Campylobacter.
Reducing the prevalence of Salmonella is a priority of the
President's Food Safety Working Group (FSWG) as part of its first core
principle of preventing harm to consumers. As part of the FSWG
recommendations, we are in the process of finalizing revised
performance standards for use in reducing the prevalence of Salmonella
in turkeys and young chickens. Our goal, as part of FSWG, is that 90
percent of all poultry establishments meet the new standards by the end
of 2010. Performance standards assess the plant's process control by
testing for the presence of the pathogen in product. By revising
current performance standards, we will have a means to measure whether
food safety improvements are occurring in the products it regulates.
Currently FSIS is collaborating with USDA's Agricultural Research
Service to develop a laboratory test for non-O157 Shiga toxin-producing
E. coli (STEC).
CITRUS
Question. I remain very concerned about the citrus industry in
California. The Asian Citrus Psyllid has now been found in five
counties and the pest is quickly approaching the major citrus producing
regions of my State. Although no cases of citrus greening have yet been
reported, producers believe that unless a resistant citrus strain is
identified or dramatic action is taken to stop the spread of the
psyllid that it is only a matter of time before this catastrophic
disease infects our citrus trees.
In your effort to stop the spread of the Asian Citrus Psyllid, how
are you engaging the Mexican government, and what efforts are you
taking to help prevent or slow the pest's movement north across the
border? Have you engaged the Government of Belize in similar efforts?
To what extent do you believe these efforts will help citrus growers in
California?
What research is being done to help identify resistant citrus
varieties and how soon do you expect these varieties to be made
available for commercial use?
The Asian Citrus Psyllid infestation has been particularly hard on
citrus nurseries because of the extended latency period of the
Huanglongbing disease. What resources are you dedicating to help
protect the existing citrus nursery stock in California, and have you
been able to identify any ways to provide an earlier diagnosis of the
Citrus Greening disease?
Answer. Protecting agriculture from pest and diseases remains a
priority for the Department. Like you, we are also very concerned about
the potential for citrus greening (CG) to spread to additional citrus
producing States like California. To protect California and other
States, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is
conducting survey and regulatory activities for both the Asian citrus
psyllid (ACP) and CG. In addition, APHIS is working with State and
industry cooperators to implement control measures aimed at suppressing
ACP populations and preventing or slowing the spread of CG. APHIS is
working closely with the Mexican government to delimit and suppress ACP
populations along the United States-Mexico border. APHIS spent $800,000
in fiscal year 2009, and is spending $1.7 million in fiscal year 2010,
to assist the Mexican government with these activities along the
border.
While APHIS is not conducting suppression activities in Belize, the
Agency is coordinating efforts with its government as well. APHIS,
Mexico, and Belize recently developed a tri-national strategic and
operational plan to address citrus diseases. This plan established
harmonized protocols that each country will use for survey, regulatory,
and control activities and will help enhance coordination of
protection, response, and recovery from ACP and CG.
APHIS is coordinating research efforts on ACP and CG with the
Agricultural Research Service, the National Institute of Food and
Agriculture, universities, and industry stakeholders. The areas being
investigated include survey and detection methods, diagnostic tools,
control tools (biological and chemical), as well as the development of
citrus varieties resistant to CG. Research and development of resistant
varieties started more than a year ago, and APHIS, along with its
stakeholders and partners, recognizes the importance that such
varieties could play in successfully mitigating the effects of ACP and
CG on U.S. citrus production. However, we are not able to specify a
timeframe for when the varieties may be available for commercial use.
APHIS also recognizes the concerns of the nursery industry about
the impact the detection of CG in California could have on the State's
ability to move its products. APHIS' current quarantine restrictions on
areas with CG prevent any host plants from being moved out of the
quarantine area. To protect California (and other States), APHIS is
working to improve strategies for early detection of citrus diseases.
Current efforts include protocols that intensify sampling for CG as
soon as ACP is detected in an area. APHIS also is working to prevent or
slow the spread of ACP from the areas currently affected in California,
which do not include citrus or nursery stock producing areas at this
time.
Additionally, the California Department of Food and Agriculture is
conducting ACP suppression efforts. APHIS is spending $14.5 million on
Citrus Health Response Program activities in California and continues
to review the current regulatory response to ACP and CG while research
into new detection and treatment methods continues.
ORGANIC
Question. I have been encouraged to see that the administration is
committed to improving the organic industry in our country, and the
inclusion of $10.1 million for the National Organic Program in the
President's budget was an important step to ensure the integrity of
USDA's organic label. However, I am concerned that the President's
fiscal year 2011 budget cuts funding for competitive organic research
programs by $5 million. With these cuts, funding for organic research
amounts to only 1.3 percent of the total budget for the National
Institute of Food and Agriculture.
This proposed reduction in dedicated organic research funding
appears to be at odds with the administration's commitment to support
the growth and development of organic agriculture.
Can you please explain this decision to reduce the level of organic
research funding in your fiscal year 2011 proposed budget?
Answer. In efforts to streamline program delivery, the National
Institute of Food and Agriculture proposes to eliminate funding of $5
million for the Organic Transition Program (OTP). In fiscal year 2011,
$20 million in mandatory funding through the Organic Agriculture
Research and Extension Initiative is available for research on
organics. Programs such as the Specialty Crop Research Initiative,
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative, and Sustainable Agriculture
Research and Education Programs also support organic activities. These
competitive programs as well as State and local governments, and
private sources, could be used to support aspects of OTP deemed to be
of priority at State and/or local levels.
Question. I am also concerned that some producers are taking
advantage of the USDA Organic label, and that the current standards,
oversight and enforcement options at the National Organic Program are
not strong enough. What reassurances can you give me that the National
Organic Program is actively seeking out producers that are cheating the
system and penalizing them for their actions? With the additional
funding in the fiscal year 2011 budget, how do you intend to improve
enforcement of NOP standards in the coming year?
Answer. The National Organic Program continues to actively work to
enforce NOP regulations in the United States and internationally. The
NOP is working closely with accredited certifying agents to verify and
enforce organic standards. We are conducting market surveillance of
organic labels and the organic market to ensure proper labeling. NOP
has begun taking steps to resolve compliance and enforcement cases more
quickly by increasing staff, establishing standard operating
procedures, and enhancing use of tracking and monitoring systems. In
addition, NOP is planning to develop an administrative sanctions policy
to specify when civil penalties or other sanctions are warranted;
implement a more efficient system for tracking and resolving
complaints; strengthen oversight of certifying agents and operations;
publish a program manual to serve as a guide for certifying agents on
NOP regulations; and develop a quality manual to comply with
international accreditation norms.
Internationally the National Organic Program has conducted
extensive audits of certifiers and certified operations in Europe
(United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, Germany, Netherlands, Austria, and
Switzerland) South and Central America (Bolivia, Brazil, Argentina,
Chile, Costa Rica, and Peru), Australia, and Canada through the course
of accreditation audits of certifiers based in those countries.
Protocols for auditing large international certifying agents now
include site reviews of certified operations outside of the certifiers'
home country of operations.
With the funding increase in fiscal year 2011 the National Organic
Program will continue to improve compliance with program regulations
and will enhance the integrity of the organic label. Of the $3.111
million funding increase requested for fiscal year 2011, $2.11 million
will provide the resources needed to accelerate the review and
amendment, as required, of the program standards and regulations to
reflect industry and consumer expectations through a transparent and
participatory process; improve the consistency in certifier application
of the standards, explore statutory authority to strengthen compliance,
ensure label integrity, and respond to requests for international
equivalency agreements.
PESTICIDES
Question. Environmental, public health, and farming groups have all
contacted me to express concerns about the EPA's review of pesticide
use. I understand that there are concerns about pesticide drift and the
impact of these pesticides on endangered species. It is my hope that
you will be engaging with the EPA on this matter to ensure that the
concerns of all parties can be addressed.
What is USDA doing to ensure that pesticides can be used by farmers
in a safe way?
Answer. The Agricultural Research Service (ARS) conducts research
on technologies to minimize spray drift by investigation of spray-drift
management, maximizing field deposition and targeted spraying to
minimize spray drift. Technologies and application guidelines are
developed to ensure that the right amount of pesticide is applied to
the right location at the best time. More precision of application
ensures reduced losses to the atmosphere and waterways, thus reducing
economic losses to the farmer, fostering more sustainable production
and ensuring that the demands of a growing population for food, fiber,
feed and fuel can be met while improving environmental quality. ARS and
the Forest Service are actively supporting EPA's efforts to advance
Drift Reduction Technology.
In addition to ARS, the National Institute of Food and Agriculture
(NIFA) engages in promoting the safe application of pesticides through
numerous activities. After the passage of the Food Quality and
Protection Act (FQPA) in 1996, a number of Integrated Pest Management
(IPM) programs were developed by the Cooperative State Research,
Education and Extension Service (now the National Institute of Food and
Agriculture or NIFA), with an emphasis on the development and
implementation of safer alternative pest management practices and
strategies. These programs include the Regional IPM Centers, the
Extension IPM Coordination and Support Program, the Pest Management
Alternatives Program, the Regional IPM Program, the Crops at Risk
Program, the Risk Avoidance and Mitigation Program, and the Methyl
Bromide Transitions Program. All of these programs encourage the use of
IPM strategies, which provide a sustainable approach to managing pests
by combining biological, cultural, physical, and chemical tools in a
way that minimizes economic, health, and environmental risks. In
addition, the Pesticide Safety Education Program, managed jointly by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and NIFA, supports
educational programs for pesticide applicators in the proper use of
pest management technologies.
Because these programs encourage and support the use of IPM and
best management practices, and the judicious use of more selective and
carefully timed pesticides, the risks from pesticide drift to natural
enemies, pollinators, endangered species, wildlife and human health are
minimized. Projects supported by many of these programs have documented
significant reductions in pesticide use.
I will have ARS and NIFA provide additional information for the
record.
[The information follows:]
DepositScan, a portable scanning system that was developed at
Wooster, Ohio, to enable farmers to optimize equipment settings,
techniques, and practices; train applicators to accurately apply
chemicals on targets; and accelerate manufacturers' processes for new
pesticide formulations and pesticide spraying equipment. The software
for DepositScan is available to the public without charge, and can be
downloaded from the Web site: http://ars.usda.gov/mwa/wooster/atru/
depositscan.
Assessments of methods that can be used to test potential drift
reduction technologies (DRTs).--In cooperation with the U.S. EPA Office
of Pesticide Programs, this work at College Station, Texas, included
testing protocols for ground and aerial DRTs, and assessments of
various spray nozzles and the droplet sizes produced. This is critical
in providing the aerial application industry with scientifically sound
information, protocols, and new technology to assure ongoing compliance
with evolving regulatory requirements.
New spray nozzles improve herbicide application efficiency.--New
spray technologies developed at College Station, Texas, allow herbicide
applicators to optimize the efficiency of sprays so that effective weed
control can be achieved with a minimum amount of glyphosate. The work
clearly showed that rotary atomizer and electrostatic nozzles provide
superior herbicide efficacy and permit reduced amounts of liquid spray
applications, thus reducing application costs and environmental
impacts.
Optimizing pesticide application rate technology for nursery
production.--Various adjustments of air-assisted sprayers developed by
ARS scientists at Wooster, Ohio, resulted in one-half the usage of
pesticides for pest and disease controls in nursery shade tree plants.
By using the half-rate technology, growers safeguarded the environment
due to pesticide applications and reported savings of over $200-$500
per acre.
Developing ways to prevent devastating soybean disease.--Small
droplet applications designed at Wooster, Ohio, to improve coverage can
effectively treat the target area if air-assistance is used to help
provide extra energy to penetrate down to the plants' lower leaves,
where the potentially devastating Asian soybean rust fungus can hide.
Applicators will know the importance of matching the application
equipment parameters with the pesticide choice to provide the most
efficacious applications.
Increased efficiency and safety through drip applications.--
Researchers at Bushland, Texas, and Parlier, California, have developed
surface and subsurface drip and microdrip irrigation technologies that
minimize weeds in cropping systems. Drip irrigation minimizes water
that would support weed growth, eliminates the need for aerial sprays,
lessens runoff, reduces worker exposure, and cuts the use of herbicides
and tillage otherwise needed for weed control.
Artificial wetlands that capture pesticides.--Researchers at
Oxford, Mississippi, and Tifton, Georgia, have developed constructed,
artificial wetland systems to capture agricultural drainage waters and
reduce nutrient levels and allow time for the dissipation and decay of
pesticides. This research helps to determine the fate and transport of
nutrients and pesticides and helps to establish design parameters for
wetlands. This information is also valuable in predicting how climate,
soils and management affect the cycling of these contaminants.
Sensor for smart application of pesticides.--Researchers at
Lincoln, Nebraska, and Bushland, Texas, have developed active light
reflectance sensor technologies for use in precision agriculture on
sprinkler systems. The sensors are designed to detect the health or
stress of growing crops and when connected to control systems, can
direct on-the-go variable rate herbicide, fungicide, pesticide or plant
growth regulator applications; or can map specific crop attributes or
conditions while crop scouting. Active sensor use for management of
crop inputs such as pesticides and nutrients can improve efficiency and
profitability, while enhancing environmental quality.
Contributions to interagency technical and financial assistance to
growers and U.S. EPA.--ARS' Office of Pest Management Policy works with
the four regional Integrated Pest Management Centers (funded by the
USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture) and grower
representatives to provide information to EPA on how pesticides are
used and to help determine how they can be used safely for workers and
the environment. The Pest Management Centers' Crop Profiles and Pest
Management Strategic Plans, produced in cooperation with the EPA,
support pesticide Registration Review efforts and identify pesticide
alternatives. The Natural Resources Conservation Service provides
information on the use of conservation practice standards and
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) techniques in the local Field Office
Technical Guide (FOTG). The Window Pesticide Screening Tool (WIN-PST)
is used to assist with site specific management of pesticide use at the
farmer level. Financial assistance is provided by the Environmental
Incentive Program (EQIP) and Conservation Security Program (CSP) which
encourages farmers to use conservation practices and IPM techniques
that reduce the risk of degrading natural resources and follow label
instructions. The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
implements procedures to ensure that staff applying pesticides have
taken appropriate training and certification classes specific to their
State requirements and any special pesticide requirements.
NIFA and other USDA agencies are currently involved in discussions
with EPA concerning their review of pesticide use and the forthcoming
draft National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Program (NPDES)
general permit. EPA has encouraged Federal agency comment on the draft
permit. We are encouraged that the use of IPM strategies is anticipated
to be among the requirements for obtaining an NPDES general permit.
The Regional IPM Centers promote the development and implementation
of IPM strategies by facilitating collaboration across States,
disciplines, and purposes. They serve as focal points for regional pest
management information networks, collaborative team building, and
broad-based stakeholder participation. The end result is increased
coordination of IPM research, education and extension efforts and
enhanced responsiveness to critical pest management challenges. The
four Regional IPM Centers serve the needs of the north central,
northeastern, southern and western regions of the United States.
The Extension IPM Coordination and Support Program supports
regional, State, and local efforts in advancing the goals of the
National Roadmap for IPM by addressing priority needs associated with
the coordination, design, development, implementation, and evaluation
of Extension IPM programs. The program helps agricultural producers and
other pest managers adopt alternative pest management practices through
training, demonstration, and evaluation of methods and strategies.
The Pesticide Safety Education Program, managed jointly by EPA and
NIFA, supports educational programs for pesticide applicators in the
proper use of pest management technologies. Extension programs at land
grant institutions, in conjunction with State regulatory agencies that
certify and license applicators, provide these education programs.
The Pest Management Alternatives Program supports the development
and implementation of pest management alternatives when regulatory
action, voluntary action by the registrant, or other circumstances
results in the unavailability of certain pesticides or pesticide uses.
Through these grants, new pest management tools and techniques are
developed to address critical pest problems identified by pest managers
and other stakeholders. This program works with the Regional IPM
Centers to identify and address regional priorities established by
stakeholders.
The Regional IPM Program is managed by the Regional IPM Centers and
supports the development and implementation of new and modified IPM
tactics and systems, their validation in production systems, and the
delivery of educational programs to pest managers, advisors, and
producers. The program builds stakeholder partnerships to address
critical pest management needs in each region.
DAIRY
Question. I understand that USDA is nearing the completion of the
Dairy Economic Loss Assistance Program that was authorized and funded
by this subcommittee last year to assist dairy producers who have
struggled as a result of last year's record low prices.
Since the implementation of this program, what steps has the
Department taken to address the long term problems in the dairy
industry and avoid similar collapses in the coming years? Do you
believe that any of the supply management proposals will be able to
stabilize the dairy market, or does the Department believe that other
alternatives would be more appropriate?
When will the Department endorse a specific plan to stabilize the
volatile dairy market?
Answer. Since payments were initiated under the Dairy Economic Loss
Assistance Program, USDA continues to operate the Milk Income Loss
Contract (MILC), the Dairy Export Incentive and the Dairy Product Price
Support programs as authorized under the 2008 farm bill. Dairy
producers may elect to enroll in the Risk Management Agency's Livestock
Gross Margin for Dairy Cattle Insurance Policy to provide protection
against volatility in milk prices and feed costs. The Department
continues to reduce its inventory of surplus nonfat dry milk through
barter and other arrangements in order to provide nutritious and
wholesome foods to low-income families and bring dairy product markets
into better balance.
In addition, we have taken steps to move forward with the USDA
Dairy Industry Advisory Committee, which will have its first formal
meeting April 13-15, 2010. We will be looking to this diverse group of
17 individuals to provide insights regarding the issues of farm milk
price volatility and dairy farmer profitability. As you suggest, supply
management likely will be a topic that this subcommittee addresses.
USDA eagerly awaits the recommendations of the Dairy Industry Advisory
Committee and their insights regarding measures to reduce volatility in
dairy markets.
WOMEN, INFANTS AND CHILDREN (WIC) PROGRAM
Question. The WIC program purchases infant formula at a substantial
discount to provide to low-income mothers and children. Under the
program, a competitive bidding process is used in which manufacturers
offer discounts (rebates) to a State WIC program in exchange for being
the sole formula provider in that State.
USDA recently released a report that found that the WIC program is
paying $127 million more annually for infant formula under the
contracts that are currently in place than under previous contracts.
Considering that the program now spends about $800 million each
year on infant formula, that is a significant increase. The report says
that the main reason for the increase is that WIC is providing more
expensive formulas with certain fatty acids. Can you please explain
this trend?
Answer. During 2002 and 2003, manufacturers introduced an infant
formula that was supplemented with the fatty acids docosahexaenoic acid
(DHA) and arachidonic acid (ARA). Manufacturers' advertisements claim
the additional nutrients support the mental development and visual
acuity of infants. The wholesale price of the formula was more than the
non-enhanced formulas. Since the introduction of the DHA/ARA-enhanced
infant formula, manufacturers have mostly phased out the production of
non-enhanced formulas. In addition, manufacturers have submitted bids
for infant formula rebate contracts using the DHA/ARA-enhanced infant
formula. As a result of formula availability and contract requirements,
WIC State agencies are issuing the enhanced infant formulas on a
regular basis.
Question. Does USDA have any authority that would prevent WIC from
having to pay more if new, even more costly, formulas are introduced?
Answer. USDA does not have authority that prevents WIC from having
to pay more for new and more costly formula. The State agencies
contract with infant formula manufacturers and accept the bid that
provides the lowest net cost for the formula the manufacturer has
determined meets contract requirements. If the infant formula
manufacturer adds a new, more costly formula after the contract has
been awarded, State agencies have the discretion to deny its inclusion
to the State agency's allowable food list and thus not pay for the more
costly formula during the life of the contract, which is typically 3-5
years.
The Department is always concerned about costs which impact the WIC
Program's ability to serve the greatest number of eligible persons
within the funds made available to it. USDA continually monitors
program costs, market trends, and developments in an effort to ensure
WIC pays competitive prices for all eligible foods and infant formula
in particular. We review State agency rebate solicitations to ensure
the solicitations comply with Federal requirements established to
maintain an even playing field for formula manufacturers, thereby
fostering competition.
It is worth noting that it is FDA that determines the regulatory
requirements for infant formulas and determines if a product may be
marketed in the United States. Due to the array of infant formulas that
are produced and in order to ensure infant formula rebate solicitations
remain competitive, WIC Program regulations require State agencies to
issue rebate solicitations for an infant formula that is suitable for
routine issuance to the majority of generally healthy, full-term
infants. The infant formula manufacturer determines the formula that
best meets this requirement. The lowest bidder is awarded the contract,
and the formula that the manufacturer bid is considered the Primary
Contract Brand infant formula. The Primary Contract Brand formula is
considered the formula of first choice and all other infant formulas
are considered alternative formulas.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Richard J. Durbin
MARKET ACCESS PROGRAM
Question. The administration recently announced its intent to
increase U.S. exports through a National Export Initiative. But while
the administration's fiscal year 2011 budget invests in a number of
programs aimed at export promotion, it proposes a 20 percent reduction
in funding for the Market Access Program (MAP). MAP has played an
important role in making our products competitive overseas. The program
effectively leverages public and private resources to establish and
build export markets abroad and increase farmer profitability. Overseas
markets are critical for agricultural producers in Illinois and across
the country. I am pleased that this administration is committed to
eliminating trade barriers and boosting U.S. agricultural exports, and
believe MAP, a program with a proven track record, can contribute to
that goal. Are there specific concerns with MAP's effectiveness to date
that led to the proposal to scale back even while renewing the
commitment to expand exports of U.S. products?
Answer. The fiscal year 2011 budget proposes a series of
adjustments in the funding levels for USDA's market development
programs to provide a better balance among them and to reflect the
changing nature of agricultural trade competition. While the requested
2011 MAP funding is reduced from $200 million in 2010, to $160 million,
that level provides program funding nearly 80 percent above 2001.
At the same time, the proposed budget includes increases in 2011 to
double annual funding for the Foreign Market Development (Cooperator)
Program and Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC) Program to
address long-term barriers to export growth. The budget also includes
an increase of $10 million for the Foreign Agricultural Service to
expand its exporter assistance efforts, trade missions, in-country
promotions, and trade enforcement activities to remove non-tariff trade
barriers, such as unwarranted sanitary and phytosanitary standards.
Annual funding for the Cooperator program has remained relatively
stagnant since the early 1980s, which has tended to discourage new
organizations from participating and new types of activities from being
undertaken. The proposed increase in TASC program funding reflects the
growing importance of specialty crops for U.S. agricultural trade
growth and the contribution the program has made in resolving numerous
trade barriers.
MC GOVERN-DOLE PROGRAM
Question. The McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and
Child Nutrition Program reduces child hunger and promotes education by
providing meals to vulnerable children at schools in the world's
poorest countries. The Program was developed to expand and improve upon
a $300 million pilot program known as the Global Food for Education
Initiative, which was created by President Clinton in 2000. Although
the McGovern-Dole Program was authorized by Congress in the 2002 farm
bill and reauthorized in 2008, it has never received the level of
funding provided for the GFEI pilot program. I was pleased the
administration's fiscal year 2010 budget provided a significant boost
in funding to the McGovern-Dole Program. I understand the budget
constraints that may have influenced the decision to flat fund the
program in fiscal year 2011. What plans does the Department have to
ensure the future growth of this very important program?
Answer. USDA believes the McGovern-Dole International Food for
Education Program is a crucial tool for improving education, nutrition,
health, and the general food security of women and children worldwide
and requested a doubling of the budget in 2010. We continue to improve
the program through increased monitoring and evaluation, improved
indicators, and increased collaboration with host country governments.
CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIPS
Question. The administration's budget directs NRCS dollars to
programs that ``focus on addressing the needs of priority landscapes in
the most need of protection, and emphasize partnering with local
constituents to efficiently implement programs and initiatives.'' I'd
like to highlight a great conservation partnership that has developed
in Illinois. The Illinois Department of Natural Resources has been
working with organizations that specialize in landscape and habitat
restoration to help private landowners restore vital watersheds
throughout central and southern Illinois. What is the Department doing
to encourage more of these partnerships, particularly those that serve
to multiply benefits by using the technical assistance and expertise of
State agencies and qualified private organizations?
Answer. The Cooperative Conservation Partnership Initiative (CCPI),
established in section 2707 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act
of 2008, gives the NRCS legal authority to enter into partnership
agreements with eligible entities, including State agencies and
qualified private organizations, to enhance conservation outcomes on
agricultural and nonindustrial private forest lands. In 2010 NRCS will
offer CCPI through the Mississippi River Basin Healthy Watershed
Initiative (MRBI) and the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Initiative (CBWI).
Through these initiatives, NRCS and its partners will provide technical
assistance to help landowners and operators voluntarily implement
conservation systems to address resource concerns in priority
watersheds.
Federal, State, and Local partners are critical to the
implementation of the CBWI and have been engaged through State
Technical and partner meetings. In many cases, partners, especially
Conservation Districts, are able to provide both technical and or
financial assistance that complements the goals of the CBWI. For 2010,
three locations in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed have been chosen as
Showcase Watersheds (Conowago PA, Upper Chester MD, and Smith Creek
VA). The objective of the Showcase projects is to reduce nutrient
loading into waterways while demonstrating and documenting the
effective voluntary implementation of priority conservation practices
and ``Cooperative Conservation Partnerships''. These watersheds will be
the locations for increased outreach activities (with potential
interaction with every farmer in the watershed). In addition, the U.S.
Geological Survey and other scientific partners will provide water
quality monitoring services to watch for potential in-stream responses
from the increased conservation efforts.
In 2010, Environmental Protection Agency received $475 million for
the inter-agency Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) to address
regional issues that affect the Great Lakes, such as invasive species,
habitat and wildlife protection and restoration, non-point source
pollution, and contaminated sediment. As a Federal partner in the GLRI,
NRCS will receive $34 million in fiscal year 2010, to purchase
conservation easements and implement conservation systems in priority
watersheds in the Great Lakes. Through GLRI, NRCS will also partner
with the Great Lakes Commission to support the Great Lakes Basin
Program for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control. The Great Lakes Basin
Program will provide financial assistance, information and education,
and technical assistance to partner agencies, landowners, and operators
to protect and improve water quality in the Great Lakes Basin by
reducing soil erosion and improving sediment control.
The Agricultural Water Enhancement Program (AWEP) also provides an
excellent opportunity for partnership with State and local entities.
Under AWEP, NRCS enters into partnership agreements with eligible
entities that want to promote ground and surface water conservation or
improve water quality on agricultural lands. After the NRCS Chief has
announced approved AWEP project areas, eligible producers submit
applications for financial and technical assistance to implement water
enhancement activities. AWEP will be offered in 2010.
On March 12, 2010, USDA announced the Sage-Grouse Initiative.
Sixteen million dollars in Environmental Quality Incentives Program
(EQIP) and Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program (WHIP) funds will be used
to assist private landowners with implementing conservation practices
that address the many threats to sage-grouse habitat. This funding will
be available in all 11 States that have sage grouse populations:
California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon,
South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. By providing a focused
effort across multiple States, NRCS can ensure funds are prioritized
consistently to provide the highest potential of improving the quality
of sage-grouse habitat. There will be close collaboration of many
stakeholders, including the State fish and wildlife agencies, in this
effort to ensure that NRCS activities complement efforts already
underway.
FOOD SAFETY
Question. The National School Lunch program provides a valuable
service to our Nation, by ensuring that over 32 million children each
day are well fed and ready to learn. With so many of our Nation's
youngsters relying on this program, we must take necessary steps to
ensure that the food they are consuming is safe. While USDA and FDA
both work hard to ensure the safety of our food supply, in the past
some school kids have been served--and even sickened by--products that
should never have been consumed because they were recalled. In a report
on this issue, GAO recommended that changes to Federal agencies'
procedures could reduce the risk of school children consuming recalled
food. I understand that USDA and FDA are finalizing a Memorandum of
Understanding that will provide for specific notification to the USDA's
Food and Nutrition Service, Agricultural Marketing Service, and Farm
Service Agency during FDA investigations that may involve commodities
intended for school meal programs. Can you give me an update on the
status of the MOU?
Answer. The health and safety of the children we serve each day in
our school nutrition programs is of the utmost importance to us. The
Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS),
and Farm Service Agency (FSA) work closely with the regulatory
agencies, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Food Safety and
Inspection Service (FSIS) to provide interlocking rings of protection
against foodborne illness. FNS, AMS, and FSA are strengthening the
bonds with FDA by drafting an MOU on communications during food safety
investigations and recalls. USDA is working closely with FDA to create
an MOU that meets the needs of all agencies involved. A final MOU is
expected by the end of the fiscal year.
FNS closely monitors data from the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), the FDA, and other sources to ensure we are reducing
the impact of foodborne illness in schools to the greatest extent
possible. Illnesses linked to recalled foods in schools are very rare,
and there is no evidence of any cases of foodborne illness being
attributed to recalled USDA commodity food that was served at schools
in the last 10 years. The primary cause of foodborne illness in schools
is norovirus, which recently was characterized and published by FNS in
the Journal of Environmental Health. That article described the
analysis of CDC foodborne illness outbreak data and showed that
norovirus was confirmed as being responsible for over 60 percent of
outbreaks in schools (Venuto et al., Journal of Environmental Health,
2010. Available at http://www.fns.usda.gov/fns/safety/pdf/
JEH_2010.pdf). Food is generally contaminated with norovirus by
infected food handlers, and FNS has launched an educational campaign to
address this issue with food service workers in the National School
Lunch Program.
FNS and FDA are working together on other fronts as well. We have a
joint research project to address improper cooling of foods in schools,
another frequently cited cause of foodborne illness outbreaks.
IMPORTS OF DOGS
Question. I worked to include language in the 2008 farm bill to
prevent the import of underage, unhealthy dogs destined for resale in
the United States. The final bill, signed into law in June 2008,
provides USDA APHIS with new enforcement authority and requires that
dogs imported to the United States for resale be at least 6 months of
age, properly vaccinated, and in good health. Please provide an update
on the status of USDA's regulations for enforcement of the farm bill's
puppy import restrictions.
Answer. As mandated by the 2008 farm bill, APHIS is coordinating
with the Department of Health and Human Services' Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, the Department of Commerce's Chief Counsel for
Regulations, and the Department of Homeland Security's Customs and
Border Protection to develop appropriate dog import regulations and
enforcement strategies. APHIS anticipates that the proposed rule will
be published in the Federal Register and available for comment by the
summer of 2010.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Tim Johnson
ANIMAL DISEASE TRACEABILTY
Question. Many farmers and ranchers in South Dakota were very
pleased to hear that USDA recently scrapped the proposed National
Animal Identification System, as it was seen to be invasive and
burdensome. We've heard USDA estimates that a new animal disease
traceability system would take roughly 18 months to complete--how will
you involve farmers and ranchers in the program's development and
ensure transparency?
Answer. We are committed to ensuring transparency and openly
working with States, tribes, and producers in the new approach for
animal disease traceability. In keeping with the spirit of the
listening sessions we held last year, we are holding a forum March 18-
19, 2010, in Kansas City, Missouri, with States and tribes to discuss
the new approach and to discuss their ideas for achieving a workable
animal disease traceability framework.
APHIS also established a working group to develop regulations
related to animal disease traceability. The working group consists of
Federal, State, and tribal animal health officials who assess options
for the animal disease traceability framework, provide input to the
Agency, and review feedback received from stakeholders, such as
ranchers and farmers. Input and feedback can be provided through local
animal health officials, and by contacting the USDA area veterinarian
in charge, State veterinarian, or tribal animal health officials.
Contact information for State veterinarians is available on USDA's
animal disease traceability Web site at: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/
traceability.
USDA will also establish a Secretary's Advisory Committee on Animal
Health to provide feedback to the Department. Membership on this
Advisory Committee will be completed in a transparent manner, with a
call for nominations that will be published in the Federal Register. In
addition, if States, tribes, and industry need species working groups,
USDA will establish these groups under the Advisory Committee on Animal
Health. Upon publication of the proposed rule, APHIS will offer a
comment period of 90 days for comments and feedback from farmers,
ranchers, and other interested parties. APHIS will also ensure timely
updates to the Agency's traceability Web site to honor our commitment
to transparency.
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN LABELING
Question. Thank you for your work in implementing Country of Origin
Labeling. As you know, this has been a substantial priority for me
since 1992. USDA conducted a survey to ascertain how COOL was being
implemented in accordance with Congressional intent. When will the
results of that survey be released?
Answer. Since the COOL Final Rule went into effect, USDA has been
carrying out compliance activities through conducting in-store retail
reviews. In calendar Year 2009, COOL compliance reviews were performed
in 3,871 retail stores where approximately 1.16 million item types
(e.g., U.S. Choice Strip Steak, company branded strip steak, bin of
tomatoes, package of carrots, Tilapia fillet, etc.) were evaluated. By
this summer, we plan to have completed a total of 12,700 reviews.
We are currently in preparations to post information related to our
compliance-related activities on the USDA Web site late this spring. We
will ensure this information is provided to you at that time.
``ACTIVELY ENGAGED'' FARMER
Question. I am disappointed to see that USDA's rules on farm
program payment limits do not include a stronger interpretation of what
it means to be an ``actively engaged'' farmer. Will USDA revisit this
definition?
Answer. For more than 20 years, Congress and USDA have worked to
ensure that farm program benefits only go to farmers who are actively
engaged in farming. For 2009-12, new requirements were placed on the
contributions of active personal labor and/or active personal
management by the partners, stockholders, and members of some types of
legal entities in the determination of actively engaged in farming.
These changes include:
--Each of the partners, stockholders, or members must make a
contribution of active personal labor and/or active personal
management to the farming operation that must be performed on a
regular basis, be identifiable and documentable, and separate
and be distinct from the contributions of any other partner,
stockholder, or member of the farming operation;
--The contribution of the partners, stockholders and members must be
significant and commensurate; the legal entity will make
contributions to the farming operation that are at risk for a
loss, with the level of risk being commensurate with the
claimed share of the farming operation; and
--The failure of any partner, stockholder, or member to meet this
requirement will result in a reduction of payments to the
payment entity commensurate with the ownership share held by
that interest holder.
On an on-going basis, USDA examines the definitions and parameters
we use for a wide variety of programs. Likewise, staff continually
reviews our actively engaged regulations to determine whether changes
in those regulations are needed to prevent farm program payments going
to non-farmers. Given the changing structure of agriculture--including
how operations are run and their financial and ownership structures--we
are evaluating options to best ensure that our programs are equitable
and efficient to all, while at the same time taking into account a wide
variety of viewpoints.
VETERINARY MEDICAL LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAM
Question. I am glad to see USDA has implemented the Veterinary
Medical Loan Repayment Program. I am concerned, however, that the
timeline to turn in shortage area nominations has been too compressed.
What outreach has USDA undertaken to ensure that every State has ample
opportunity to participate in this program, and has USDA received
complaints from State Animal Health Officials about the timeline?
Answer. On July 9, 2009, the National Institute of Food and
Agriculture (NIFA) published an interim final rule and request for
comments on this program.
The rule clearly stated the intent of was to solicit nominations of
shortage areas, and spelled out in detail the procedure to be followed.
The rule also explicitly stated the Agency's intention to solicit
nominations for a period of 60 days. Insofar as this interim final rule
was published approximately 6 months prior to actually calling for
nominations, we believe that the 60 day response period is sufficient
and reasonable. I will have NIFA provide additional information for the
record.
[The information follows:]
The period for submitting shortage area nominations ended on March
8, and we received 249 nominations from 48 States and the Republic of
Marshall Islands. We did not receive any complaints with respect to the
time we allowed for nominations from any of the State Animal Health
Officials (SAHO).
All States submitted nominations except Massachusetts and Hawaii
and the District of Columbia). We contacted the SAHO of Massachusetts
and Hawaii and both indicated that this was not a priority concern for
them. Neither indicated that the compressed timeline was a factor.
There was considerable effort made to ensure eligible entities were
informed and engaged. All Chief Animal Health Officials received
information and reminders about the nomination process both leading up
to and after release of the Federal Register notice soliciting
nominations. The National Assembly of State Animal Health Officials
(NASAHO) and the United States Animal Health Association (USAHA), both
with memberships comprising the authorized respondents to this
solicitation, were very helpful sending out notices and reminders to
respond by the deadline.
Although the intention was to solicit nominations for a period of
60 days, we determined that a period of 45 days was necessary to allow
for sufficient time to review and certify shortage areas prior to the
opening of the VMLRP application period on April 30. Given that this
was the first year of implementation, we were prepared to allow a grace
period to those that needed extra time to submit their nominations.
CONSERVATION TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
Question. I've heard many times from conservation groups that a
crucial piece of conservation program implementation is an adequate
focus and dedication to technical assistance to ensure producers are in
compliance with program requirements. What are your thoughts on
technical assistance, and will you place additional emphasis on this?
Answer. The successful delivery of conservation technical
assistance is inherently a field-based activity. Since 2002, increased
administrative workload associated with increased financial assistance
programs has reduced the amount of time field staff can spend in the
field during the planning process. At the same time the financial
assistance funding has increased, the number of NRCS FTE's has remained
relatively stable. To streamline the business processes required to
support conservation planning and contract development, NRCS is
designing a mobile conservation planning tool that will be a critical
part of our delivery model in the future. NRCS envisions having field
staff in the field, working with clients 65 to 80 percent of the time.
Web-based applications will integrate Geographic Information System
services and mobile computing so that planning and contract development
will occur simultaneously as the planner is working in the field.
The streamlining effort and next generation tools will: (1) make
participation in USDA's conservation programs easier for customers and
the delivery of programs less complex for employees; (2) increase
efficiencies by streamlining and integrating processes across business
lines, and (3) ensure the continued science-based delivery of
technically sound conservation products and services.
NRCS envisions deploying Strategic Watershed Action Teams (SWATs)
consisting of five to seven people (approximately 35 teams or 175
FTEs), for a period of 3 to 5 years in a specified geographic location.
These teams will include Soil Conservationists, technicians and
specialists and will be identified based on the needed technical
expertise in each watershed. The number of teams deployed for each
watershed will depend on the analysis of natural resource and
socioeconomic data of the region and will be decided based on a formula
that NRCS will develop.
The development and deployment of SWATs will greatly improve the
environmental cost effectiveness of NRCS technical and financial
assistance programs. By significant planning, education, and program
implementation assistance, the technical assistance teams will enhance
the Agency's capability to strategically invest in conservation and
better target the Agency's financial and technical assistance programs.
The goal of deploying the SWATs will be to reach every eligible
landowner in a targeted watershed and provide them with the technical
assistance to assess their natural resource conditions and offer
resource planning and program help. Emphasis in resource assessment and
planning will be placed on those resource conditions that are of
priority interest in the selected watershed.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nelson
RURAL MICROENTERPRISE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Question. I worked to get the Rural Microenterprise Assistance
Program (RMAP) into the 2008 farm bill (The Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act, Public Law 110-246), which was signed into law on in June
of 2008. Unfortunately 20 months later we are still waiting for USDA to
roll out this new initiative.
With small business making up 90 percent of all rural businesses
and over one-million rural businesses containing 20 or fewer employees;
Congress supported the creation of RMAP, and provided mandatory funding
for the initiative. Because we wanted to address the financing needs of
small rural businesses, particularly the small firms with less than 10
employees that have always had a difficult time securing affordable and
flexible financing.
The current economic slowdown has made it even more difficult for
these businesses. The reasons: banks are no longer willing to provide
capital for expansion, for working capital or for equipment. The
situation is even more dire for start-up businesses that do not have a
track record and must depend on ``character lending.'' The start-ups
and micro businesses are on the chopping block for private credit even
with a good business plan and/or record of success. While the
Department published a proposed rule on RMAP last fall, we have seen
nothing since. When can we expect the program to be implemented?
Answer. We anticipate that an interim rule will be published in
April 2010 and that the Notice of Funds Availability (NOFA) will follow
shortly thereafter.
Question. Can you provide a timetable for issuing a publication of
a final rule, Notice of Fund Availability, application deadlines and
loan and grant awards?
Answer. We anticipate publication of the Interim Rule in April,
2010 and that a NOFA will follow very shortly thereafter. Applications
could be accepted as early as May with the first awards being made in
August.
Question. The budget proposes a reduction of $1.65 million in
microenterprise assistance grants. A number of Members expressed
concern in a letter to the Department November 23, 2009 that the
proposed rule did not adequately address need to ensure that the
government's investment in this program was protected through technical
assistance to borrowers nor did the rule seem to fully grasp the
importance of helping those entities and organizations with community
need but without the capacity to implement a program authorized under
RMAP right this second. What is the view of the Department on technical
assistance activities authorized under RMAP?
Answer. The Department fully realizes the importance of technical
assistance to micro-borrowers and potential micro-borrowers. We also
recognize the subcommittee's position regarding the expansion of the
microenterprise development industry into areas without immediate
capacity. Upon receipt of the November 23rd letter the Department
internally addressed each of the subcommittee's concerns in developing
the interim rule. The rule is currently under review.
In that same letter, we also commented on the proposed rule
regarding loan rates and loan loss reserves. In our view the statute is
clear in mandating 1 percent loans to intermediaries. The rule proposed
a different and in our view more confusing approach. The proposed rule
also required borrowers to fund from their own resources the loan loss
reserve. This requirement will serve to limit participation of
organizations with limited resources. Our suggestion was to fund that
out of the Federal loan.
Question. What is the Department's view on these issues?
Answer. We agree that the rate structure in the proposed rule was
not straight-forward. This issue has been addressed in the interim
rule. We believe that the interim rule is much simpler.
Regarding the Loan Loss Reserve Fund (LLRF), we fully understand
the subcommittee's position regarding lowering the cost of program
participation by funding the LLRF with Federal funding.
RESEARCH
Question. The scarcity of food and the disappearance of fuel have
the potential to be major crises that could develop across the world.
Certainly research in Agriculture has the potential to mitigate the
impact of these possible shortages.
While we have seen significant sums of research funding through the
National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, DOE's
Office of Science, we have not had the same investment in agricultural
research. The proposed $1.35 billion in discretionary spending for the
National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) is the same level as
last year.
Recognizing agricultural research can address these challenges and
find solutions--by addressing water quality and quantity issues;
adapting to climate change and the effect it has on agriculture and
forestry; increasing food production for a raising population with
reduced inputs; and promoting renewable fuels to replace dependence on
foreign fossil fuels--how do you anticipate utilizing the fund that are
available to promote these activities?
What can be done in the future to get Agricultural research the
recognition it deserves to grab a greater share of the overall Federal
budget?
Answer. We have taken a critical step toward giving agricultural
science the recognition it deserves by substantially increasing funding
for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative competitive grant
program which is focused on high priority issues where science and
education can solve real problems in agriculture--improving food
safety, reducing childhood obesity, adapting and mitigating climate
change, expanding biofuels, and addressing world hunger. NIFA will
focus resources on larger, longer programs to create substantial
impacts in addressing critical issues facing the long-term viability of
agriculture. By working with the best and brightest scientist across
the Nation, and continuing to foster collaborations with other science
agencies, we hope to reposition agricultural research within the
Federal science enterprise.
INTERNATIONAL FOOD SECURITY
Question. Continuing on the importance of food scarcity and
security, could you elaborate on your plans for international food
security?
Answer. USDA is participating in a ``whole-of-government'' approach
to a global food security initiative called ``Feed the Future.'' The
U.S. strategy will:
--Address the underlying causes of hunger with a comprehensive
approach by focusing on agricultural productivity, linking
farmers to markets, and reducing under-nutrition;
--Invest in country-led plans and tailoring assistance to the needs
of individual countries through country-led consultations and
investment plans;
--Improve strategic coordination through participation of all
stakeholders to ensure efficiency, effectiveness, and
accountability;
--Leverage the strengths of multilateral institutions to deliver
resources effectively, increase resources, and promote
inclusive policy dialog; and
--Make long-term, sustained and accountable investments and use
benchmarks and targets to measure progress toward meeting the
initiative's goals.
USDA's role will be to leverage the wealth of knowledge and
expertise it possesses to support the U.S. initiative in areas of (1)
basic agricultural research, (2) adaptive research that takes
scientific innovation and output to farmers and processors, and (3)
capacity building to ensure sustained country ability to build and
maintain agricultural statistics systems; enhance capabilities with
Ministries of Agriculture; link farmers to markets; conduct policy and
market analysis; and create and oversee modern food safety standards
and regulations. USDA will not have the lead for the U.S. Government
for agricultural development activities.
INTERNATIONAL FOOD SECURITY
Question. Many of our universities have long worked on agricultural
production around the world. What do you see as the partnership role
between these universities and USDA in addressing the issues of
international food security?
Answer. Global food security is one of USDA's Research, Education,
and Economics agencies' Challenge Areas and it is addressed in part
through the NIFA's partnership with land grant and other public
universities. USDA international activities and outreach often involve
and rely upon expertise and experience of academic personnel from our
universities. For instance, because of their experience and expertise
in Haitian soils and agriculture, researchers from Auburn University
(Alabama), the University of Florida, and Virginia Tech University were
in the group that was there to set up soil fertility evaluations and
recommendations when recent earthquake there occurred. NIFA's 2010
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) will have a request for
application on Global Food Security and will award grants for research,
extension, and education in this area to universities and other
research institutions. Also, it is anticipated that much of USDA's
research, education, and outreach commitment to the Global Research
Alliance for Agricultural Greenhouse Gases will be accomplished through
grants to U.S. universities. In addition to reducing greenhouse gases
from agriculture, this research will improve international food
security. It is further anticipated that leading scientists from
universities will participate in the research groups of the Alliance
and provide input and expertise for many of the Alliance's activities.
NIFA's International Programs section also administers funds awarded to
U.S. universities in the area of international agricultural production
and food security. For instance, in 2008, 23 institutions received
grants to enhance capabilities of U.S. universities to conduct
international collaborative research, extension, and teaching through
the competitively awarded International Science and Education Grants
program. The projects will enhance the international content of
curricula, provide faculty with the opportunity to work outside the
United States to bring lessons learned back to the classroom, promote
international research partnerships, enhance the use and application of
foreign technologies in the United States and strengthen the role that
colleges and universities play in maintaining U.S. competitiveness.
Question. While DOE has made huge investments in biofuels, their
investments in renewable it is towards non-grain cellulosic ethanol.
These priorities ignore the years of success made by grain ethanol and
the efficiency gains made by the industry that will continue to
drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve the
profitability in the first generation of biofuels. What steps is USDA
taking to ensure the continued success of grain based biofuels and the
expansion of cellulosic biofuels in order for farmers and ranchers to
be a part of their expansion and rural communities can benefit from
their development?
Answer. Much of the interest in non-grain cellulosic ethanol,
including USDA's guaranteeing of a loan to Range Fuels under the
Biorefinery Assistance Program is driven by the realization that grain
ethanol alone cannot met the Nation's renewable energy standard of 36
billions of renewable fuel by 2022--four times the 2008 level--without
significant impacts on U.S. exports of grain, land usage, a food
prices. Cellulosic ethanol production currently limited to small pilot
projects. Although there are several commercial sized plants under
development, grain ethanol production is expected to remain viable into
the foreseeable future, at least for as long as it continues to receive
the Government's subsidy through tax credits. USDA fully appreciates
the benefits that grain ethanol has provided to many rural communities,
and will continue to conduct research to increase yields to keep
abreast of the market potential for both grain ethanol and bio-diesel.
USDA also understands that there are potential benefits for cellulosic
ethanol and other renewable fuels that also need to be tapped through
its research. In addition, USDA administers a number of 2008 farm bill
programs that support the commercialization of advanced fuels.
NATIONAL DROUGHT MITIGATION CENTER
Question. With USDA reorganizing its research priorities the
National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC) was not included in the
Department's fiscal year 2011 budget. Based at the University of
Nebraska--Lincoln, NDMC helps people and institutions develop and
implement measures to reduce societal vulnerability to drought. By
stressing preparation and risk management over crisis management, the
Center provides valuable research that is utilized by all levels
government and the agriculture sector to lessen the impact of drought.
While we will work to provide funding for the Center through our
work in Congress, what can be done to protect the valuable work of the
NDMC and ensure its funding for years to come?
Answer. Mitigation and adaptation to climate change will be one of
the focus areas of the Requests for Applications in the Agriculture and
Food Research Initiative competitive grants program in 2010 and
anticipated in 2011, where the NDMC should be well positioned to
compete.
TRADE
Question. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has again targeted the
Market Access Program for a 20 percent reduction. While the budget
proposes an additional $53.5 million for Department of Agriculture
export promotion activities, of which $34.5 million is for the Foreign
Market Development program, I am concerned about any reduction in
funding for programs that assist farmers and ranchers to gain access in
foreign markets and help their products overcome the inherent biases
and barriers that can block access to the market.
I would like to hear more about the Department's efforts in helping
agriculture keep up with the fluctuations in the market. What steps is
it taking to help overcome new regulations and barriers that our
international partners are putting up to our agricultural products?
Answer. As tariff barriers declined with the emergence of the World
Trade Organization (WTO), there has been a dramatic increase in non-
tariff barriers to trade such as unnecessarily restrictive and
scientifically unjustified regulations to protect human, animal and
plant health, and technical barriers to trade (TBTs). In spite of the
WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) and TBT Agreements, countries have
increasingly erected SPS and technical barriers as a means to protect
domestic industries in the face of quickly growing global trade.
High priority SPS and TBT issues for USDA include restoring the
Russian market for poultry, the Turkish market for biotech cotton and
soybeans, the Japanese beef market, and harmonizing international
standards for maximum residue levels for pesticides and veterinary
drugs.
Within the Department, FAS provides overall leadership on trade
issues. In Washington, FAS assesses the trade implications of foreign
regulations, and coordinates strategies to address priority trade
barriers. Overseas, FAS and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service (APHIS) address border-entry problems affecting U.S. exporters,
and provide valuable information on foreign regulations. APHIS
negotiates international standards related to plant and animal health--
the most effective way to prevent new trade barriers in those sectors.
The U.S. Office for Codex Alimentarius, housed in the Food Safety
mission area, promotes science-based regulations and standards around
the world, while the Food Safety and Inspection Service technical
programs ensure that foreign governments recognize the U.S. food safety
systems for meat, poultry, and egg products. Agricultural Marketing
Service verification programs provide the ability to certify to many
foreign government trade requirements. USDA capacity building programs,
conducted by several agencies, train foreign governments in science-
based regulatory decisionmaking to prevent new barriers to trade.
RURAL UTILITIES SERVICE
Question. The President's fiscal year 2011 Budget has proposed to
cut the Rural Utility Service (RUS) Electric Loan program by $2.5
billion and prevent RUS lending for peaking natural gas plants, as well
as environmental upgrades to existing power plants.
While the shape of future energy legislation is a bit uncertain;
what is for sure, is our Nation's utilities will need to begin to move
towards cleaner and more efficient means for energy. My concern is by
cutting this loan program and placing restrictions on lending, we are
hindering our small rural utilities from securing the funds necessary
to help them to make the transition to cleaner burning fuels and
renewable wind power, to help them mitigate the potential costs of any
future energy legislation.
At this time of energy transition, why does the Department feel it
is necessary to lessen the capabilities of the Electric Loan Program;
especially if it actually saves the government money by bringing loan
repayments into the treasury and reduces ratepayers energy costs by
spurring the development of efficiencies and renewable.
Answer. The budget request for the RUS Electric Program reflects
the level that will be needed to finance borrower requests since the
agency is not currently financing base load generation projects. The
budget request also reflects the President's commitment not to provide
subsidies for fossil fuels. Restricting the use of RUS electric loans
to non-fossil fuel projects will increase the emphasis on moving
towards cleaner and more efficient means of energy and spurring
technological development.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Jack Reed
SNAP
Question. Mr. Secretary, thank you for your work and commitment to
ensure that all Americans have access to safe, nutritious foods and
particularly for your support of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP). The increase in participation over the last year is
clearly a sign of the tough economic times we face, but it is also a
result of USDA's and your efforts to encourage eligible individuals to
apply for benefits. In addition, the temporary benefit increase
provided under the Recovery Act has helped participants and has
provided an economic lift, since each dollar in benefits increases GDP
by $1.73, according to economist Mark Zandi.
In Rhode Island, where unemployment is just under 13 percent, SNAP
benefits have been a life-line for thousands of families who have been
out of work for months. Nonetheless, it has at times been difficult for
individuals to get enrolled in the program, particularly in States like
mine, where State resources have been stretched to the breaking point.
Indeed the State of Rhode Island was sued and entered into a settlement
agreement last year over its failure to process applications within the
statutory time lines. As you know, the Recovery Act, as well as the
fiscal year 2010 Defense Appropriations Act, provided administrative
funding to help States with SNAP enrollments.
Can you comment on how the States have used these funds? Are they
investing in personnel, in equipment? Have they been effective in using
these resources to expedite the enrollment process? How are you
evaluating their performance and how is USDA encouraging them to use
their additional administrative funding wisely?
Answer. States are required to report on how they spend ARRA funds
to administer SNAP. ARRA reporting is done in a manner that is similar
to how States report spending regular SNAP administrative funds.
According to those reports, it is clear that States are overwhelmingly
spending ARRA funds on staffing to address the increased workload
resulting from the rising SNAP caseloads. In fact, our reports show
that in 2009, over 80 percent of the ARRA funding was used to hire and
maintain staff. Early reports for 2010 indicate a similar trend. We
also know that many States have taken this opportunity to use ARRA
funding to update work environments to better handle the increase in
demand for this critical nutrition program.
Rhode Island received $471,124 as a result of ARRA in fiscal year
2009 and an additional $476,014 in fiscal year 2010. In addition, Rhode
Island received $1,501,575 from the Department of Defense (DOD)
appropriations in fiscal year 2010. Rhode Island reported that they
used their fiscal year 2009 ARRA funds for staff overtime to clear
application backlogs and to purchase new telephone systems to lay the
groundwork for a statewide call center model to improve customer
service and increase efficiency. Finally, they also developed automated
noticing and recertification packages to alleviate staff of
administrative tasks so that their time could be spent on other
certification related activities. The State plans to use fiscal year
2010 funds to further support a call center model. Early indications
are that Rhode Island intends to use their DOD money to hire additional
staff.
USDA works with State partners to ensure that they understand the
purpose of both ARRA and Department of Defense appropriations funding.
In addition to both the ARRA and regular administrative cost reporting
requirements, USDA evaluates State performance through multiple
mechanisms including participation rates, management evaluations,
quality control error rates, timeliness measures and continuous
monitoring and oversight by the regional office.
We recognize the workload pressures faced by States. USDA offers
technical assistance to encourage States to wisely spend ARRA funds in
ways that maximize quality customer service for SNAP applicants and
participants. Additional guidance was issued to State agencies on March
15, 2010, to help ensure that States are using the ARRA administrative
funds for their intended purposes. Over 7 million more people have been
enrolled in SNAP over the past year. We believe that the ARRA funding
has been instrumental in enabling State agencies to respond to this
increased need.
RURAL DEVELOPMENT--RURAL DEFINITION
Question. Mr. Secretary, although some may not consider Rhode
Island to be a rural or agricultural State, it does have rural
communities and agriculture. As a result, it has benefited (and done
good things) with rural development funding through USDA. Regrettably,
as the result of new statutory requirements and institutional bias,
States like Rhode Island have found it difficult to access funding that
had traditionally been available to them. If this trend continues, I am
concerned that my constituents will view USDA Rural Development in the
same way they view the Bureau of Reclamation: an agency that their tax
dollars support but which provides them with no direct benefit.
I appreciate your efforts, as well as those of Chairman Kohl, last
year to restore the eligibility of several communities in my State, as
well as Massachusetts and Connecticut, which had been deemed ineligible
for rural development grants and loans under an administrative ruling,
even though these communities had long histories of participating in
these programs. Under the 2008 farm bill, USDA is charged with
developing an equitable definition of rural communities.
Can you provide an update on that process and the steps that you
are taking to ensure equity for communities in States like mine?
Answer. The confusion that has existed in the Northeast relates to
the fact that there are many villages and boroughs in the Northeast and
these terms are not defined in either the 2008 farm bill or prior
legislation. The long standing policy of allowing villages and boroughs
to be considered eligible on the same basis as a town has been restored
through an Administrative Notice sent to Rural Development field staff.
This policy appears to be the best approach to providing equity for
Northeastern States.
As for the changes in the definitions of rural and rural areas that
were included in the 2008 farm bill, they involve a considerable amount
of area mapping that has yet to be done. Further, regulations will need
to be developed with regard to the discretionary authority given to the
Under Secretary for Rural Development to make a determination on
whether certain areas are ``rural in character.'' This work is not
likely to be completed before next year. In the interim, the Under
Secretary of Rural Development will accept, as provided by law, the
petition of a unit of government in areas described in the farm bill
language for such a determination and will act accordingly.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Mark Pryor
ADMINISTRATION'S FUNDING OF CATFISH INSPECTIONS
Question. The President's budget recommends $5 million for catfish
inspection needs in 2011. This is a decrease of $10.3 million from 2010
levels. The budget cited the ``investment to date and the need for
considerable stakeholder engagement and regulatory development before
the adoption and implementation of a catfish inspection program'' as
justification for the decrease. This Congress approved the last farm
bill in June of 2008 and provided 180 days for the administration to
complete its rulemaking process and implement the rule for catfish
import inspections. Can you tell the subcommittee where we are in the
rulemaking process, which is now over a year and a half overdue, and
explain why the administration is seeking fewer resources for
implementation?
Answer. We believe that the $5 million requested for catfish
inspection is adequate to meet essential program needs in fiscal year
2011. The draft proposed rule is currently under review. In the
meantime, we are working diligently in order to develop the foundation
needed to assume catfish inspection responsibilities upon
implementation of a final rule.
POULTRY IMPORTS (CHINESE CHICKEN)
Question. Last year, with the help of USDA, Congresswoman DeLauro,
and members of the Appropriations Committee, we included food safety
language in the fiscal year 2010 Agriculture Appropriations bill to
provide additional safety measures for certain imported poultry
products from China. This language was important for food safety, trade
relations, and import quality assurances. Since passage last fall, the
administration has been corresponding with the Chinese government to
implement the measures provided by Congress.
Can you please bring the Committee up to speed on how things are
progressing with the implementation of section 743 of the fiscal year
2010 Appropriations bill? Is the Chinese government participating in
discussions with USDA and USTR?
Answer. The Department has moved forward on implementation of
section 743 of the fiscal year 2010 Agriculture Appropriations Act. A
report on the actions taken was submitted to the Committee on February
22, 2010. We have provided China with clear instructions to complete
the equivalence process, and will work with them to get the necessary
information in order to act on their application.
ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSED CUTS TO FARM BILL SAFETY NET
Question. Budget proposed making significant cuts to the safety net
provisions of the 2008 farm bill. The 2008 farm bill was essentially a
contract between the Federal Government and domestic agriculture
producers. During the farm bill debate, significant concessions were
made by farmers and significant constraints on support programs were
placed on farmers. For example, there was the elimination of the three-
entity rule for direct attribution, income restrictions, payment
limits, and cuts to direct payments. Now, the administration wants to
go several steps further in their budget proposal by adding additional
income restrictions, payment limits, and payment reductions.
Do you view the 2008 farm bill as a contract between the Government
and Agriculture producers? Why does the administration propose such
drastic changes to policies negotiated by Congress that are currently
the law through the life of the 2008 farm bill?
Answer. I agree that the 2008 farm bill contains an implicit
``contract'' set by the scope of programs in the farm bill. Rather than
viewing the President's budget proposals as a drastic change in this
underlying ``contract,'' however, I see this as the next step in a
series of changes that have occurred over time. Specifically, we are
recommending that the Direct Payment limit and the Adjusted Gross
Income (AGI) payment eligibility criteria be reduced beginning with the
2011 program (crop) year. More specifically:
--The Direct Payment limit would be reduced to $30,000 per program
year for individuals and applicable entities, down from the
current limit of $40,000, and
--The non-farm and farm AGI criteria would each be reduced by
$250,000 over a 3-year period--with the non-farm AGI declining
to $250,000 and the farm AGI declining to $500,000.
The Department provides a strong set of financial safety net
programs to ensure the continued economic viability and productivity of
production agriculture, including farm income and commodity support
programs, crop insurance and disaster assistance, as well as other
programs. The farm safety net is critically important and provides the
foundation for economic prosperity in rural America. For 2011, USDA
estimates that roughly $17 billion in total direct support will be
provided to farm producers and landowners through a variety of
programs.
Recognizing the need to reduce the deficit, the budget proposes to
better target direct payments to those who need and can benefit from
them most as well as cap total payments paid to larger operations. The
savings from these proposals will impact approximately 30,000 program
participants, which is about 2 percent of the 1.3 million total program
participants, and will over time comprise less than 2 percent of the
total direct support the Department expects to provide annually to farm
producers and landowners.
USDA estimates that these changes would save the government roughly
$2.3 billion over 10 years. By focusing farm program payments to those
most in need, and working to reduce the additional $12 trillion in debt
that has accumulated since the beginning of the decade, we are working
to ensure that Federal funds are being spent wisely.
ADMINISTRATION'S PROPOSED CUTS TO DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY
Question. Budget proposed to eliminate 100 percent of funding
($2.97 million) for the DRA to administer Rural Community Advancement
Program (RCAP) funds for the region. Why did the administration decide
to cut (RCAP) funding to the Delta region in their 2011 Budget?
Answer. This funding has been provided in recent appropriation acts
as a grant to the Delta Regional Authority (DRA) for purposes that can
be funded under RCAP, with no more than 5 percent used for
administration. No other regional authority or entity receives such a
grant from USDA. While the administration supports regional planning
and coordination, it proposes to do so under a competitive process. DRA
can compete for USDA funding as can other eligible entities within the
Delta region.
Question. How is the administration committed to improving the
economic condition of the Delta Region?
Answer. The President's 2011 budget supports $24 billion in loans,
grants and technical assistance to be provided through USDA's Rural
Development programs. The Delta region is expected to receive a fair
share of this assistance, much of which will be allocated among the
States based on established formulas. USDA's programs have historically
reached deep in to the Delta to serve this purpose. USDA is committed
to having a strong presence in the Delta region and will continue to
commit resources to worthy projects and infrastructure there.
OUACHITA NATIONAL FOREST TRAIL MANAGEMENT PLAN (ATVS)
Question. In late January, the Ouachita National Forest announced a
new trail management plan to go into effect in the coming weeks. This
plan, which apparently changed dramatically after the last comment
period, has agitated constituents in the region (Mena/Polk County) that
have built economic engines off the National Forest through recreation
opportunities provided by the Forest Service. Now the Forest Service is
proposing dramatic cuts to the status quo, and these cuts will
undoubtedly cause economic harm to the region, which is already
struggling tremendously due to the declining demand for forest
products. I've sent you a couple of letters recently with some of my
colleagues expressing some concern over the plans, and I hope you will
commit to working with me to minimize economic harm to these
communities.
Are you aware of the recent letters that I've sent you regarding
the Ouachita National Forest? Will you commit to working with me on
this issue?
Answer. I am aware of recent letters from you and your colleagues
regarding the Ouachita National Forest. As we continue to put the
Nation back on the path of economic recovery, job creation remains one
of my top priorities. Plans for Ouachita National Forest Trail
Management are currently under review by a regional team that will
address all administrative appeals. And in the meantime, the Chief of
the Forest Service plans to visit the sites to understand the impacts
first hand in late March. We look forward to working with you on this
issue.
RURAL BROADBAND--RURAL UTILITIES SERVICE (RUS)
Question. When Congress appropriated funds for broadband in the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, priority was placed on unserved
and underserved areas. Ensuring that tax payers funds are not going
towards projects with sufficient broadband service is a priority for
me. However, I have heard reports of projects awarded that overbuild
private investment. So far, RUS has awarded projects in 18 States, with
at least 3 States (Iowa, Alaska, and North Dakota) receiving multiple
project awards.
What measures has RUS taken to ensure that grants and loans are
going to truly unserved and underserved areas?
Answer. The Rural Utilities Service is responsible to ensure that
projects funded under the Broadband Initiatives Program (BIP) meet the
requirements of Recovery Act. To do so, RUS has established an
objective scoring process which incents applicants to bring the most
robust broadband service to the most rural and unserved areas. In fact,
RUS gives priority to unserved and highly rural areas. RUS will rely
heavily upon the information submitted by the applicant to prove the
need for broadband service. To further validate this information, RUS
will post all proposed service territory maps on broadbandusa.gov and
allow incumbent providers to comments on whether these areas are
unserved or underserved through Public Notice Responses (PNRs) received
during a 30-day comment period. RUS will rely upon these comments,
along with State broadband maps (where available), and both RUS and
Rural Development Field Staff to validate the information when
necessary.
Question. Does RUS need additional resources in order to conduct
diligent and vigorous oversight of the BIP program and its award
grantees?
Answer. At the current time, RUS has sufficient resources in its
headquarters and field staff to provide oversight of the BIP program
and its award grantees.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Robert C. Byrd
APPALACHIAN FARMING SYSTEMS RESEARCH CENTER
Question. I am deeply concerned by the Administration's decision to
eliminate funding for the operation of the Appalachian Farming Systems
Research Center (AFSRC) in Beaver, West Virginia. The AFSRC supports 55
full time equivalents and 6 part-time positions in Raleigh County, West
Virginia, a historically low-income, high-unemployment area of the
country. As I am sure you are aware, the AFSRC has operated in West
Virginia for more than 30 years and is dedicated to designing
management practices that sustain productivity and profitability for
small scale farmers and to delivering improved soil, water, and air
quality. Further, the AFSRC infuses millions into the economy of
southern West Virginia, an economically disadvantaged area.
Mr. Secretary, you personally outlined five goals for the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA), one of which is to create wealth in
rural communities so that they are self-sustaining, repopulating, and
thriving economically.
Why has the administration proposed to eliminate the AFSRC when its
primary mission is to support small scale farmers in rural communities
across the country?
Answer. As do all of ARS' 106 locations, the Agricultural Research
Service (ARS) Appalachian Farming Systems Research Center (AFSRC)
contributes to a wide range of research topics, including work that is
relevant to the five goals recently outlined for USDA. However, despite
some degree of relevance to assorted topics, the work of the Center
could be done more effectively at other ARS locations where a larger
concentration of researchers would be more conducive to achieving the
various research missions.
The work pertinent to USDA constituents will continue at other ARS
locations with similar focus on small farms research. The proposed
closure of the AFSCR will offset the cost of higher priority programs
and projects in service of USDA constituents.
Question. The Agriculture Research Service has identified five
research priorities, one of which is Global Food Security. The AFSRC is
working to develop management strategies for cattle, sheep, and goat
production on terrain not suitable for cultivated row crops, as a way
to diversify and support local food production. It has been shown that
locally produced livestock contributes significantly to food
availability for the United States and the world populations. In
addition, locally produced livestock provides alternative resources for
meat should concentrated livestock production systems in the United
States become compromised.
Do you believe that the AFSRC contributes to the agency's Global
Food Security mission?
Answer. The AFSRC has conducted collaborative research on pasture
based animal production systems. ARS recognizes the regional
contribution of this research but considers the largest impact to be
gained from conducting research on grass fed cattle to be complete.
Question. How does eliminating the AFSRC align with your personal
goal of having America lead the world in sustainable crop production
and biotech crop exports?
Answer. The ARS fiscal year 2011 budget proposes an increase of
$61.5 million for high priority program initiatives, including $9
million for expanded research on crop breeding and protection to
enhance sustainable production. This high priority research directly
supports the USDA goal of having America lead the world in sustainable
crop production by focusing research on providing a continuous supply
of improved plant varieties with protection from emerging diseases,
insects, and damaging environmental conditions. The proposed funding
increases are offset by the termination of $53.3 million in
Congressionally earmarked projects and other lower priority programs
and projects, including the $8.2 million for the Appalachian Farming
Systems Research Center at Beaver, West Virginia.
Question. Food Safety is a second research priority for the
Agriculture Research Service. The AFSRC is working to discover pasture
plant materials that can help maintain sheep and goat health, thus
decreasing the need to administer pharmaceutical products. These
efforts will produce safer meat products for consumers and reduce
pharmaceutical residues entering soil and water resources. Meeting
livestock nutritional needs, while preventing chemical and biological
contamination of water resource, provides a significant contribution
toward food safety.
Mr. Secretary, do you believe that the AFSRC contributes to the
agency's Food Safety mission?
Answer. Food Safety is a research priority for the Agricultural
Research Service. However, the research conducted at the AFSRC is only
peripherally related to USDA Food Safety goals. Medicinal plant
research to produce safer meat products for consumers and reduce
pharmaceutical residues entering soil and water resources is not
considered a food safety priority. No significant amount of the
location's appropriation is used for such research, and the location's
scientists are not among those with primary responsibility to lead or
conduct work under ARS' multi-location food safety National Program.
Question. How does eliminating the AFSRC align with your personal
goal of having America's children and the world's children have access
to safe, nutritious and balanced meals?
Answer. The ARS fiscal year 2011 budget proposes an increase of
$61.5 million for high priority program initiatives, including crop
production, food safety, and human nutrition. These critical
investments will focus on the availability of high quality, safe,
nutritious food for children and adults. New and expanded research in
these high priority initiatives will be financed by the termination of
$53.3 million in congressionally earmarked projects and other lower
priority programs and projects, including the $8.2 million for the
Appalachian Farming Systems Research Center at Beaver, West Virginia.
Question. Climate Change is a third research priority for the
Agriculture Research Service. The AFSRC develops systems that improve
small-acreage farm productivity and sustainability within the
Appalachian region. This technology is applicable to hill-land
environments world-wide. However, these production systems are already
resilient to climatic variability. The grazing systems designed for
small-acreage farms accommodate soil, plant, and animal resources are
already capable of adapting to varied weather patterns.
Further, the AFSRC has developed the technology to apply biochar
(produced from charring poultry litter or plant residues from the
biofuels industry) to improve the production capability of soil and
increase carbon sequestration. The results are improvements to the
chemical and physical attributes of soil, including sequestering
chemical and biological contaminants of ground water and improving
plant productivity through hospitable rooting environments.
Mr. Secretary, do you believe that the AFSRC contributes to the
agency's Climate Change mission?
Answer. Much ARS research across the Nation has relevance to
climate change, in terms of research on soil and tillage management,
soil carbon, or breeding crops or livestock for tolerance to weather
extremes and variability. The AFSRC's mission is not directed to
climate change research. No significant amount of the location's
appropriation is used for such research, and the location's scientists
are not among those with primary responsibility to lead or conduct work
under ARS' multi-location climate change National Program. Although the
Center conducts limited work on the application of biochar to soil as a
way to modify soil condition and sequester carbon, it is not central to
the overall research on land management for small farms and is not a
leading site for this topic nationally.
Question. How does eliminating the AFSRC align with your personal
goal of ensuring that private working lands are conserved, restored and
made more resilient to climate change and are managed to enhance water
resources?
Answer. Although much of ARS' nationally coordinated research on
livestock production has implications for water resources, and water
quality is mentioned in the Center's mission statement in the small
farms context, the AFSRC is not among the ARS locations that have a
research project contributing significantly to the ARS National Program
on water resources.
Question. The administration and Congress are working every day on
ways to create and preserve jobs in communities across the country.
Eliminating the AFSRC will not only result in a direct loss of nearly
60 jobs in Raleigh County, West Virginia, but countless others across
the country, as important assistance to small acreage farmers,
independent family farm operators, and sheep and goat producers is no
longer available.
Mr. Secretary, do you believe that eliminating the AFSRC will
contribute to the efforts of the Congress and the administration to
create and sustain jobs in the United States?
Answer. The fiscal year 2011 USDA budget continues to make critical
investments in long-term sustainable job creation and economic growth,
while maintaining discretionary spending at the fiscal year 2010 level.
The fiscal year 2011 budget proposes significant investments to: (1)
increase access to broadband and continue business creation; (2)
facilitate sustainable renewable energy development; (3) develop
regional food systems; (4) capitalize on climate change opportunities;
and (5) generate and retain jobs through recreation and natural
resource restoration, conservation, and management. These critical
investments are being financed by the reduction or elimination of
congressionally earmarked projects and other lower priority programs.
Question. How does eliminating the AFSRC align with your personal
goal of enabling the USDA's constituents to understand and appreciate
what the agency can do for them every day in every way because USDA
employees are engaged, valued, and productively serving the people of
America and the world?
Mr. Secretary, in summary, I am greatly disturbed that the
administration is seeking to eliminate a deeply rooted Federal
operation that clearly meets many of your stated goals for the USDA,
particularly when the overall USDA budget proposes a $20 million
increase for Salaries and Expenses. I want you to know that restoring
funding for the operation of the AFSRC will be among my highest
priorities for fiscal year 2011. It is my hope that between now and the
formulation of the fiscal year 2012 President's budget request that you
will avail yourself the opportunity to visit the AFSRC. I have no doubt
that you would find that this outstanding facility clearly aligns with
the research priorities of Agriculture Research Service and your
personal vision for the agency. I look forward to hearing from you
after your visit to the AFSRC and our future discussions in this
regard.
Answer. The work pertinent to USDA constituents will continue at
other ARS locations with similar focus on small farms research. The
proposed closure of the Appalachian Farming Systems Research Center
will offset the cost of higher priority programs and projects in
service of USDA constituents.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Sam Brownback
INTERNATIONAL FOOD AID
Question. As you may know, the GAO reports that 65 percent of food
aid funding goes to administration and transportation of food aid
commodities. Section 737 of the 201 agriculture appropriations bill
requires a consensus report from the Secretaries of Agriculture, State,
and Transportation on changes that could be made to the food aid
programs. Specifically, we asked that you and your colleagues look at
the potential savings and efficiencies for long-term commodity
procurement contracts, increased use of pre-positioning, longer term
shipping contracts, and adoption of more commercial standards in
contracting. What is the status of this report? Have you engaged the
Departments of State and Transportation on this?
Answer. Representatives from the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), and the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID) have met three times to collect the
information outlined in section 737 of the fiscal year 2010 agriculture
appropriations act. USDA, DOT, and USAID are preparing a draft response
that should be ready for submission to Congress in May 2010.
FOOD AID PILOT PROJECTS
Question. Last year, I held numerous meetings with food aid experts
and asked them to tell me what changes they would make to the existing
food aid programs. Expert after expert told me that micronutrient
fortification was the single greatest improvement we could make. So in
fiscal year 2010, we included $10 million to develop new micronutrient
fortified food aid products for use in the McGovern-Dole Food for
Education Program. What is the status of this pilot program? Can you
provide the Subcommittee with information on how USDA envisions this
will be carried out?
Answer. FAS plans to announce the opening of solicitations for
proposals for this pilot project in March 2010. FAS will consider a
range of products in various locations that meet the micronutrient
needs of a variety of program beneficiaries and that ship well and have
a good shelf life. The $10 million in funding will be used to develop,
monitor, and evaluate the new products. Their purchase and shipping
will be covered by McGovern-Dole program appropriations. FAS hopes to
identify new products that can become a regular part of the McGovern-
Dole program through this pilot program.
FOOD AID QUALITY
Question. Over the past few years there have been some issues with
the quality of the commodities provided by the United States for
international food aid programs. These issues have been highlighted in
GAO oversight investigations. In response to this the USDA entered into
a contract with SUSTAIN, a nonprofit organization whose mission is to
improve nutrition in developing countries through innovative
applications of food science and technology. In 2008, SUSTAIN published
a food aid quality study for the Department that developed new product
specifications for food aid to meet U.S. commercial food industry
quality standards.
--Please address the following question in GAO's September 2009
report: ``How have U.S. Agencies implemented SUSTAIN's
recommendations on updating specifications and improving
nutritional standards of U.S. food aid?''
--New authority and obligations were included in the 2008 farm bill
for USDA to utilize Title II funds to address and resolve food
aid quality issues. Directives on implementation of food aid
quality reforms were reiterated and reaffirmed in fiscal year
2010 agriculture appropriations act. Please address whether the
Department believes there are any limitations in law that are
preventing them from moving forward with implementation of food
aid quality reforms.
--In communications to committee staff in September 2009, USDA stated
it was working to complete an ``Independent Government
Estimate'' for the statement of work of the implementation of
SUSTAIN's recommendations. Please provide a schedule for when
the award will be issued and implementation of the statement of
work completed.
Answer. USDA's Farm Service Agency contracted with Sharing Science
and Technology to Aid in the Improvement of Nutrition (SUSTAIN) in
October, 2007 to develop methods that would standardize and harmonize,
in a consistent format, the specification language used in USDA foreign
food assistance commodity acquisitions. The components of this contract
included:
--A review of existing department commodity specifications used to
obtain food aid commodities;
--Recommendations to achieve maximum standardization and
harmonization among the specifications; and
--Recommendation of a post-production commodity sampling and testing
regime based upon sound scientific standards and similar to
commercial practices exercised by food suppliers.
SUSTAIN completed all requirements of this contract in June 2008.
Most of SUSTAIN's recommendations have been incorporated into FSA
commodity purchase announcements, as appropriate. SUSTAIN's recommended
post-production commodity sampling and testing regime (a minimum of 5
samples per lot to a maximum of 20 samples per lot) was not adopted as
the additional value to be achieved was not deemed to justify the
considerably higher procurement cost that would result. FSA, partnering
with the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration,
ensures that contractors perform sampling and testing protocols and
institute tests necessary to substantiate that the supplies or services
furnished under the contract conform to established requirements. In
addition, contract provisions currently specify that the contractor
shall have in place a quality control system consistent with the
standards and specifications of the contract.
Presently, FSA does not believe there are any statutory
restrictions that would prevent the Department from moving forward with
implementation of food aid quality reforms. Because FSA has implemented
most of SUSTAIN's recommendations, FAS and FSA at this time do not
believe that a statement of work for the implementation of SUSTAIN's
recommendations is needed. Therefore, there is no schedule for
completion of a statement of work and no award for an additional
contract will be issued.
AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT
Question. Spending on agriculture development as a percentage of
the United States total official development assistance has dropped
from 20 percent in 1980 to around 5 percent today. Interestingly, most
of this assistance comes from USAID and not USDA. What has the
experience in Afghanistan and Iraq taught you about USDA's capabilities
to assist with agricultural development?
Answer. Since 2003, USDA has effectively deployed over 120
agricultural experts to Iraq and Afghanistan. These experts have been
recognized by the Department of State and Department of Defense for the
skills and professional expertise provided to both countries to help
reconstruct the physical and institutional infrastructure of the
agricultural sectors. USDA has responded to requests for technical
assistance from the Governments of Iraq and Afghanistan by reaching out
to all USDA agencies which have a wealth of expertise in the areas of
strategic planning, extension and education, land and water resources
management, and animal inspection and food safety. In addition, USDA
has drawn from U.S. land grant universities to support capacity
building efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Question. Beyond your work in Afghanistan and Iraq, how does USDA
tap its vast pool of expertise and its relationships with the land
grant universities to assist in agricultural development globally?
Answer. USDA collaborates with land-grant institutions to provide
technical assistance around the world to help other nations address
economic transitions, natural disasters, minimal resources, and decades
of neglect and mismanagement. The partnership between USDA and U.S.
land grant universities has been instrumental in helping countries
around the world acquire the agricultural knowledge they need to
achieve food security. Through a comprehensive, multidisciplinary
approach that integrates research, teaching, and extension, USDA and
its university partners have improved the quality of life for millions
of people at home and abroad.
Question. What do you believe the role of USDA should be in
international agricultural development?
Answer. Although USDA does not have the lead in the U.S. Government
for agricultural development activities, USDA agencies contribute to
global agricultural development by providing agricultural capacity
building and technical assistance in an array of areas such as natural
resource management and conservation, plant and animal health, and
farming techniques. USDA can support technical assistance activities
within developing countries through the short and long-term assignments
of personnel from USDA agencies, State departments of agriculture, and
land grant universities.
USDA has a longstanding role in framing U.S. Government policy on
global food security with the Department of State and the U.S. Agency
for International Development. USDA also has a long tradition of
technical assistance and capacity building to help other countries
develop a productive agriculture sector in cooperation with host
governments, producers, and markets. USDA's expertise and institutional
resources, which serve as a reference for other countries and are among
the most sophisticated in the world, have been deployed to help
countries strengthen food security since the United States first
engaged in foreign assistance. USDA's institutional ties with
agribusiness, land grant universities, extension services, and
agricultural research centers are fully utilized in providing
international technical assistance for agricultural and rural
development. USDA's market development programs leverage additional
private-sector engagement in addressing food security.
WHEAT STEM RUST
Question. I am very concerned about the impact that cereal rust,
especially Ug99, will have on world hunger. Since 1999, Ug99 stem rust
has moved throughout East Africa to Yemen, and in 2007, was found in
Iran. The African stem rust--Ug99--has defeated nearly all major genes
for resistance currently deployed in the United States and around the
world. The wheat growers tell me that over 75 percent of wheat acreage
in India, Pakistan and Afghanistan, representing 20 percent of world
production, is planted to susceptible varieties; areas that all of us
on this subcommittee are concerned about.
First, how have you used the $1.5 million the subcommittee provided
to ARS in last year's appropriation bill?
Answer. The goals of the USDA Ug99 Action Plan for the United
States are:
--Cereal Stem Rust Assessment and Pathology;
--Detection and Identification;
--Monitoring and Reporting;
--Germplasm Enhancement, Gene Discovery, and Development of Molecular
Markers;
--Regional Variety Development, Evaluation, and Implementation;
--Disease Management;
--Communication and Outreach.
Details on how Appropriations were used are provided for the
record.
[The information follows:]
Congress appropriated $1.5 million in fiscal year 2009 for Wheat
Stem Rust (Ug99). The focus was on Action Plan goals 1-5. Funding was
distributed as follows:
ARS Cereal Disease Laboratory, St. Paul, Minnesota--ARS cereal rust
disease experts at the laboratory are the world experts on
characterizing stem rust pathogens and are the only authorized
laboratory in the United States to work with Ug99. The Cereal Disease
Laboratory was provided $666,700. A portion of the new funds is being
used to handle expanded demands to identify resistant wheat and barley
germplasm and characterize unknown rust pathogens. New funding has been
used to identify and verify emerging rust biotypes, culture and
conserve live rust pathogens from foreign sources, and accurately
identify host-plant resistance in seedlings, and adult plant resistance
genes in collaborative research with U.S. wheat and barley breeders. A
specific cooperative agreement has been established to partner with the
University of Minnesota in pathogen screening and resistance breeding
in wheat and barley.
ARS Manhattan, Kansas, was provided $166,700 to combine three or
more highly effective Ug99 resistance genes into hard winter wheat
elite lines and deliver those to regional breeders and to identify
resistance genes in wild relatives of wheat and move those genes into
regional germplasm. A cooperative agreement was established with the
wheat genetics program at Kansas State University. The ARS Manhattan
location serves the Southern Great Plains Region that produces winter
wheat, which is prone to stem rust overwintering and can serve as a
source of stem rust spores for the central and northern Great Plains.
ARS Raleigh, North Carolina, was provided $333,300 to accelerate
breeding of Ug99 resistant winter wheat varieties in the Southeast,
genotype parent lines for regional breeders for adult plant resistance
to Ug99 and develop breeder-friendly DNA markers, partner with the
international centers CIMMYT and ICARDA in screening international
nurseries for Ug99 resistance, and coordinate screening of wheat lines
for U.S. breeders in Eastern Africa. The ARS Raleigh location serves
the Gulf Coast and Southeastern Region, another winter wheat region
(principally soft red winter wheat) which is prone to stem rust
overwintering, and can serve as a source of stem rust spores for the
Mississippi River Valley, the Upper Midwest, and the East Coast.
The ARS Small Grains and Potato Germplasm Research Unit, Aberdeen,
Idaho, was provided $194,400 to identify Ug99 resistance genes in land
races of the National Small Grains Collection and to support East
African screening, to expand molecular marker analysis of the
collection for rust resistance, and to enhance capacity of the
repository to ensure that resistant accessions are readily available
for U.S. wheat and barley breeders. The ARS Aberdeen location serves
the Western Region that produces western white wheat and barley.
The ARS Wheat Genetics Unit, Pullman, Washington, was provided
$138,900 to expand germplasm evaluation for western white wheat and
barley for stem and stripe rust resistance, expand genotyping for wheat
and barley breeders in the West and for the National Small Grains
Repository for stem rust resistance introgression, and to establish a
specific cooperative agreement with Washington State University for
barley resistance gene mapping.
An additional $1.0 million was appropriated in fiscal year 2010 for
Wheat Steam Rust (Ug99). The focus is on Action Plan goals 4-5. This is
in keeping with Congressional intent that the new funds be used for
development of stem rust resistant varieties, and for the overriding
need to get disease resistant varieties developed and deployed in the
most vulnerable regions of the United States. Emphasis has been placed
on U.S. regions that are most prone to stem rust development and
overwintering. In addition, we are emphasizing the protection of the
majority wheat market in the United States, that is, winter wheat (70
percent of all wheat grown in the United States). Ug99 protection of
barley is also targeted because Ug99 also attacks barley and can
overwinter on barley. Fiscal year 2010 funding was distributed as
follows:
The Southern Great Plains Region
ARS Manhattan, Kansas, was provided $270,000 to strengthen
identification of new sources of Ug99 genetic resistance for deployment
into hard red and white winter wheat. A combination of controlled
conditions and field research is focused on incorporating adult-plant
resistance into adapted genotypes in partnership with regional wheat
breeders. Portions of the funding are being used for specific
cooperative agreements with wheat breeding programs at Texas A&M
University, Oklahoma State University, Kansas State University, and
Colorado State University, to support development of new Ug99-resistant
wheat varieties.
ARS Lincoln, Nebraska, was provided $88,000 to develop Ug99-
resistant winter wheat and barley for the Great Plains. A portion of
the funds is being used for a specific cooperative agreement with the
University of Nebraska wheat breeding program.
The Gulf Coast and Southeastern Region
ARS Raleigh, North Carolina, was provided $259,000 to expand
identification, genotyping, and incorporation of adult-plant resistance
in soft red winter wheat and winter barley, including field locations
in Louisiana, Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia. A portion of the
funding will support specific cooperative agreements with wheat and
barley breeding programs at Louisiana State University, University of
Georgia, North Carolina State University, and Virginia Tech University.
The Northern Plains Region, which produces principally hard red
spring wheat and some barley, would be the primary ``recipient'' of
stem rust spores produced from the more southern States:
ARS Fargo, North Dakota, was provided $250,000 to identify and
breed Ug99 resistant genes from the wild relatives of wheat into
commercial wheat varieties, enhance genotyping for developing barley
germplasm with resistance to Ug99 for all U.S. barley breeding
programs, and to deploy Ug99 resistant genes into wheat and barley,
particularly for the Northern Plains. A portion of the funds will be
used for a specific cooperative agreement with the barley and wheat
breeding programs at North Dakota State University.
The Western Region
ARS Small Grains and Potato Germplasm Research Unit, Aberdeen,
Idaho, was provided $133,000 to accelerate efforts to develop Ug99-
resistant wheat and barley. This includes strengthening support for the
National Small Grains Collection to conserve accessions with cereal
rust resistance and to introgress stem rust resistance into western
barley germplasm.
Question. If Ug99 continues to spread, what will its impact be on
world food supplies?
Answer. The United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO)
estimates that 29 countries in East and North Africa, the Near East,
and Central and South Asia--which account for 37 percent of global
wheat production--have been affected by Ug99 or are at immediate risk.
ARS research in collaboration with the international wheat research
centers, CIMMYT and ICARDA, indicates that over 80 percent of the
world's wheat production is vulnerable to Ug99. Pakistan consumes 22
million tons of wheat annually and 35 percent of its citizens live
below the poverty line. Wheat varieties grown in Pakistan and
Afghanistan are completely vulnerable to Ug99 as are many varieties
grown in India. Ug99 losses have already caused at least a 30 percent
decrease in yield in Kenya. Small farmers who cannot afford fungicide
treatments especially suffer from Ug99 losses. Further spread of Ug99
would significantly reduce world grain supplies and could lead to grain
speculation and higher grain prices.
Question. How much will wheat production around the world suffer
and what will be its impact on world hunger needs?
Answer. Wheat represents approximately 30 percent of the world's
production of grain crops, and the impact of Ug99 losses will be
especially severe where wheat or barley is a major food staple. On
average, each person in the world consumes 68.2 kilograms of wheat each
year, about 630 calories per day per person, or one-half to one-third
of the minimal energy requirements of most adults. In North Africa and
in West and Central Asia, wheat provides more calories than all other
grains combined. Nearly one-half of the world's wheat production this
year will be harvested in developing countries. Currently, Middle
Eastern and North African countries consume over 150 percent of their
own wheat production and are heavily dependent on imports. In Sub-
Saharan Africa wheat is the number one urban food staple.
TRADITIONAL PRODUCTION AGRICULTURE
Question. There is a growing perception among traditional
agriculture that USDA is willing to disparage conventionally produced
food to promote local production--creating a good food, bad food
distinction and distorting the perceptions of consumers across the
country.
How is the agency prepared to defend traditional production?
Is there any effort to include traditional production in the Know
Your Farmer, Know Your Food initiative? If not, why not?
Answer. USDA supports agriculture through every agency in our
Department in a myriad of ways. USDA does not support nor does it
maintain any ``good food/bad food'' distinction. USDA continues to
defend U.S. farmers and agricultural products domestically and
overseas, while working to provide valuable safety net assistance to
farmers, sustain current markets, and promote new markets. USDA
utilizes its authorities to help keep our farmers on the farm and
sustain our rural communities, while helping them provide Americans and
persons around the world with a safe, affordable, and abundant food
supply. Two recent efforts will serve to highlight USDA's work on
behalf of traditional production agriculture. First, since February
2009, USDA expedited implementation of 2008 farm bill programs that had
not been implemented by the last administration, including the
Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP), Livestock Forage Disaster Program
(LFP), Supplemental Revenue Assistance Payments (SURE) Program, and
Emergency Assistance for Livestock Honey Bees, and Farm-Raised Fish
(ELAP). To date, more than $480 million has been disbursed to farmers
and ranchers under these major disaster programs. Notably, USDA
implemented the Dairy Economic Loss Assistance Program (DELAP) in only
60 days and has efficiently disbursed more than $270 million in
assistance to dairy farmers in dire need. Second, USDA is actively
working to support President Obama's National Export Initiative to help
rebuild the economy by increasing export opportunities. This year
alone, despite the sharp global economic downturn, USDA estimates that
agricultural exports will reach $100 billion. Production agriculture
will not only benefit from the National Export Initiative, it will also
benefit from a more informed and engaged consumer population.
The Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food initiative is designed to
benefit all of American agriculture by facilitating a much-needed
national conversation about food, food production, and all that farmers
do to provide our food supply. One of the main goals of the initiative
is to better link consumers to the farmers they rely on for every meal.
An informed consumer that understands the capital investments and the
weather and other risks associated with farming is more likely to
support--or even act as an advocate for--traditional agriculture,
compared to a consumer who has lost touch with agriculture. The
initiative also seeks to foster new opportunities for all types of
farmers by supporting new markets created by the demand for local and
regional products. This will benefit rural communities as USDA
strengthens the link between rural economies and agriculture and helps
rural areas become economically sound, vibrant places to live. Examples
of existing operations that serve as a model for the Know Your Farmer,
Know Your Food effort include Illinois corn producers selling to a
tortilla company in Chicago and a group of Pacific Northwest wheat
farmers who have tripled their sales in the past 3 years by cooperating
under a brand label to produce flour that constitutes a personalized
product which can be easily traced back to its producers. We are taking
an inclusive approach to the Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food effort,
and look for successful examples and insights from all over
agriculture.
CROP INSURANCE
Question. You're in the middle of the renegotiation of the Standard
Reinsurance Agreement (SRA) on crop insurance. As you know, the latest
draft proposes significant additional reductions from the industry
creating what most believe will be a significant deterioration of the
quality of products available to producers and potentially the number
of companies willing to offer crop insurance tools. How does USDA see
the system functioning as a part of the farm safety net if companies
cannot continue to offer crop insurance products to producers?
Answer. Under the new SRA, insurance companies can expect to earn a
reasonable rate of return, receive more stable payments, and have more
protection in bad years. Although some consolidation has occurred in
the Property and Casualty insurance industry generally, crop insurance
companies have fared proportionately better--a trend that is expected
to continue under the new SRA. In fact, in early March 2010 we expect
to welcome Occidental Fire and Casualty Company of North Carolina as
the newest participating company to sign the SRA. I believe the
imminent signing of Occidental, and the continued interest of
additional insurance companies, shows that this agreement is still a
very attractive business proposition that will serve the crop insurance
industry well for many years to come.
The changes that USDA has proposed in the most recent draft of the
SRA are justified for a variety of reasons. Administrative & Operating
(A&O) subsidy payments for 2006 were $959 million, a level that
motivated Congress to reduce the subsidy rate in the 2008 farm bill and
to direct USDA to seek further reductions through the renegotiation of
the SRA for 2011. Since 2006, there has been a 65 percent increase in
A&O subsidy payments to the insurance companies with no commensurate
increase in the number of policies sold.
Managing risk is critical for all producers and every farmer and
rancher deserves access to this important national program. However,
geographical differences in loss patterns have resulted in dramatic
differences in the concentration of companies and agents in the Corn
Belt States compared with most other parts of the country. The draft
SRA contains a number of features that are designed to expand the
availability of crop insurance to places where there are currently few
companies and agents selling policies, while ensuring that a high level
of service will be maintained for those who have come to depend on it.
The draft SRA rebalances the program's underwriting performance to
level the playing field across the United States. In addition, it seeks
to expand the availability of crop insurance by providing insurance
companies with additional financial incentives to service those areas,
producers, and operations that lack the product availability and
quality service that many of the Corn Belt States currently enjoy. The
draft agreement will provide the non-Corn Belt States with higher
reference prices which will lead to higher A&O subsidies for these
lesser-served States. Additionally, the draft SRA contains a provision
to give back a portion of the Net Book Quota Share to those insurance
companies that sell and service the lesser-served States. Together,
these provisions will provide financial incentives for companies to
foster enhanced service in lesser-served areas.
HEALTHY FOOD FINANCING INITIATIVE
Question. As a part of the First Lady's ``Let's Move!'' campaign to
address childhood obesity, the President's budget includes a $400
million government-wide request for the Healthy Food Financing
Initiative. USDA's part of this initiative is $50 million in direct
appropriations that will support more than $150 million in loans,
grants, and market promotion programs. I agree that far too many of our
youth lead sedentary lifestyles and live in areas where less nutritious
food is the first choice for a snack because fruits and vegetables are
not easily found.
Would you provide additional information on the overall initiative
and USDA's specific role?
Answer. The Healthy Food Financing Initiative will promote a range
of interventions that expand access to nutritious foods, including
developing and equipping grocery stores and other small businesses and
retailers selling healthy food in communities that currently lack these
options. Residents of these communities, which are sometimes called
``food deserts'' and are often found in economically distressed areas,
are typically served by fast food restaurants and convenience stores
that offer little or no fresh produce. Lack of healthy, affordable food
options can lead to higher levels of obesity and other diet-related
diseases, such as diabetes, heart disease, and cancer.
Through the new multi-year Healthy Food Financing Initiative and by
engaging with the private sector, the administration will work to
eliminate food deserts across the country within 7 years. With the
first year of funding, the administration's initiative will leverage
enough investments to begin expanding healthy food options into as many
as one-fifth of the Nation's food deserts and create thousands of jobs
in urban and rural communities across the Nation.
USDA's proposed 2011 budget includes a funding level of $50 million
that will support more than $150 million in public and private
investments in the form of loans, grants, and promotion, and other
programs designed to create healthy food options in food deserts across
the country. Of that:
--$35 million in fiscal year 2011 discretionary funding is to remain
available until September 30, 2012 for the Secretary to use for
financial and technical assistance.
--$15 million in funds shall be made available for technical or
financial assistance and shall come from a set aside of up to
10 percent of the funds made available through programs
outlined in the budget request.
Of the $50 million requested for USDA's component of the Healthy
Food Financing Initiative, $15 million would be made available for
technical or financial assistance and would come from a list of
relevant programs outlined in the budget request. These funds would
remain in the respective agencies and within the designated programs
and would not be transferred to any other account. The program dollars
set aside for the HFFI would be used to support strategies for
addressing the healthy food needs.
HFFI projects may require a combination of grants, loans and/or
technical assistance, so this effort will require close coordination
among USDA agencies to ensure that dollars are leveraged and used
wisely. Coordination will occur throughout the process of announcing
and selecting projects and where appropriate may include the use of
consolidated solicitation and application processes to ensure the most
worthy projects are identified and funded.
The Agricultural Marketing Service, Rural Development, and the
Office of the Secretary will work together to ensure that expertise
within USDA is appropriately leveraged. AMS has considerable knowledge
and expertise enhancing food access for low income populations and
improving retail market access for small and mid-sized producers. Rural
Development has significant expertise funding and supporting
infrastructure development for purposes of economic development.
Together, the two agencies, working in concert with the Office of
the Secretary, will make funding available to provide:
--technical assistance to grantees to help them with facility design,
and distribution logistics, and food marketing;
--grants, loans, and loan guarantees in support of business and
infrastructure development and investment; and
--administrative support of HFFI and project evaluation.
Question. I understand that the Department of Treasury and the
Department of Health and Human Services are also involved in this
initiative, can you speak briefly to their role and how their programs
are expected to complement USDA's efforts?
Answer. Through the joint initiative, which was included in the
President's budget for 2011, Treasury, USDA, and HHS would make
available more than $400 million in financial and technical assistance
to community development financial institutions, other nonprofits, and
businesses with sound strategies for addressing the healthy food needs
of communities. The initiative will make available a mix of Federal tax
credits, below-market rate loans, loan guarantees, and grants to
attract private sector capital that will more than double the total
investment. Federal funds will support projects ranging from the
construction or expansion of a grocery store to smaller-scale
interventions such as placing refrigerated units stocked with fresh
produce in convenience stores.
Each of the three agencies brings a particular expertise and set of
resources to the Healthy Food Financing Initiative. Specifically:
--The Department of Agriculture specializes in improving access to
healthy foods through nutrition assistance programs, creating
business opportunities for America's farmers, and promoting
economic development in rural areas. USDA's proposed funding
level of $50 million will support more than $150 million in
public and private investments in the form of loans, grants,
promotion, and other programs that can provide financial and
technical assistance to enhance access to healthy foods in
underserved communities, expand demand and retail outlets for
farm products, and increase the availability of locally and
regionally produced foods. USDA has a solid track record of
supporting successful farmers markets, and has also invested in
grocery stores and creating agricultural supply chains for
them, such as in the People's Grocery project in Oakland, CA.
--The Treasury Department will support private sector financing of
healthy foods options in distressed urban and rural
communities. Through the New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) and
financial assistance to Treasury-certified community
development financial institutions (CDFIs), Treasury has a
proven track record in expanding access to nutritious foods by
catalyzing private sector investment. The Healthy Food
Financing Initiative builds on that track record, with $250
million in authority for the NMTC and $25 million for financial
assistance to CDFIs devoted to helping finance healthy food
options.
--The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) specializes in
community-based efforts to improve the economic and physical
health of people in distressed areas. HHS will dedicate up to
$20 million in Community Economic Development program funds to
the Healthy Food Financing Initiative. Through the CED program,
HHS will award competitive grants to Community Development
Corporations to support projects that finance grocery stores,
farmers markets, and other sources of fresh nutritious food.
These projects will serve the dual purposes of facilitating
access to healthy food options while creating job and business
development opportunities in low-income communities,
particularly since grocery stores often serve as anchor
institutions in commercial centers.
Question. I am concerned that the budget request asks the Committee
to eliminate any legal requirements regarding ``eligibility, area
served, and size of loan'' when funding this program without a clear
explanation of why this is necessary.
Answer. Food deserts exist in both rural and urban areas.
Successfully addressing the multi-faceted problem of food deserts will
take a concerted effort by all sectors of society and requires the
unique combination of financial and technical assistance proposed in
the Healthy Food Financing Initiative. The statutory requirements of
several of the programs included in the initiative include several
provisions that would impede the initiative, for example, limitations
to rural areas, or areas less than a certain level, and loan limits
below those necessary to serve large projects in urban areas. Rather
than asking for a broad repeal of these limitations, USDA is asking for
the discretionary authority to eliminate them only for the HFFI.
Question. Would you explain the intent of this request and provide
examples of how USDA's current authority prohibits full implementation
of the Healthy Food Financing Initiative as envisioned?
Answer. The community facility programs are limited rural
communities and towns of less than 20,000 population and the business
and industry loan program is limited to rural areas of less than
50,000. The statutory limit on the loans to intermediaries under the
Intermediary Relending Program is $2 million, regardless of the number
of ultimate recipients they serve, and the statutory limit on loans to
rural microentrepreneurs under the Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance
Programs is $50,000. While these limits may be adequate to serving
projects in rural areas, they would preclude reaching out to urban
areas that can best be served by larger projects, such as the recently
constructed grocery store that is now serving the Anacostia area of
Washington, DC.
Question. Under what circumstances would the Department overlook
eligibility requirements when making grants and loans?
Answer. Projects under the HFFI would be expected to meet other
statutory and regulatory requirements for the programs used to provide
financing. In short, they would need to show that they are competitive
with other applications for these programs, except for those
requirements that would be waived.
SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING LOANS
Question. Because traditional home loans are increasingly difficult
to secure, USDA's single family housing guaranteed loan program has
become an attractive alternative for those seeking to purchase a home
in rural America. I understand USDA has been guaranteeing around $2
billion worth of loans per month--a staggering amount. The fiscal year
2010 appropriations bill provided funding to guarantee $12 billion in
single family housing loans.
Would you provide an update on this program? Is current funding
sufficient to meet demand in fiscal year 2010?
Answer. Like all of the Rural Development programs, funding is not
determined by demand. These are discretionary programs with a set level
of funding as provided by Congress. In 2010, RD will obligate the full
funding level provided by Congress in the 2010 appropriations. We
should note that there is frequently a greater demand than available
funding for below market financing. Just as there can be a backlog in
the Water and Wastewater program, so can there be a backlog in any of
the RD programs, including 502 Guarantees.
Fiscal year 2010 has had some specific challenges that have
aggravated demand lately. Due to this strong demand arising from the
housing and economic crisis, and the success of our program across the
country, the private sector remains reluctant to make home loans absent
Government backing. Also, in some areas the Rural Development SFH
guaranteed program is the only financing available. Until the crisis,
the guaranteed loan program historically obligated about $3 billion
each fiscal year. The crisis pushed obligations to a record $6.9
billion in fiscal year 2008 and to another record $16.2 billion during
fiscal year 2009. The $16.2 billion obligated in fiscal year 2009
included substantial funding from the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) which provided about $10 billion for
the program.
The guaranteed loan program received almost $12 billion in program
level from the fiscal year 2010 appropriations bill. In addition, ARRA
funding in the amount of $1.1 billion carried over from fiscal year
2009. We are continuing to monitor the level of demand for the program
and will keep the committees informed of the status.
Question. To help ease the burden on the program and give the
Department authority to guarantee more loans, the budget request
includes a proposal to charge an annual 0.5 percent fee to lenders,
which is consistent with the operation of HUD's FHA loan program. This
fee will make the single family housing program essentially a ``no
cost'' program allowing the Department to guarantee loans without
appropriated funds supporting the loan level.
Do you expect lenders to pass this fee on to borrowers? If so, do
you have an estimate for how much the monthly payment for borrowers
will increase?
Answer. We expect lenders to pass the annual fee on to borrowers,
the same way as is done for FHA loans. The annual fee will be capped at
0.5 percent and in fiscal year 2011 is expected to be 0.15 percent of
the guaranteed principal loan amount. On a $100,000 loan, the annual
fee will be $150. This results in an additional monthly payment of
$12.50. This is a nominal increase and should be affordable.
Question. In addition to the fee proposal, the budget also includes
language that will allow lenders to directly issue loan guarantees on
behalf of USDA. This proposal is consistent with FHA and VA loan
programs. Why are you seeking this change now?
Answer. Direct endorsement will streamline the loan making process
and achieve a measure of consistency with the Federal housing programs.
Some private sector lending partners have repeatedly requested direct
endorsement capabilities. Also, this will make the agency more
efficient and allow the single family housing staff to focus more on
single family housing direct loans.
Question. USDA's loan portfolio is much stronger and has a lower
default percentage than traditional loans and loans guaranteed by other
government agencies. We would like to maintain the Department's
outstanding record. Does giving a 3rd party authority to issue these
loans put USDA's portfolio at risk? What does USDA plan to do to make
sure this change does not put the portfolio at risk?
Answer. We expect the current excellent portfolio credit quality
will be maintained. The intent is to limit direct endorsement to
lenders that have demonstrated strong program knowledge and
responsibility. Only well performing lenders would be given direct
endorsement capabilities, and they would be closely monitored on a post
closing basis. Lenders with direct endorsement would have to submit
their loans through Rural Development's automated underwriting system.
Loans receiving an ``accept'' from the automated underwriting system
have demonstrated better performance than loans which are manually
underwritten.
REGIONAL INNOVATION INITIATIVE
Question. The budget request unveils a new program called the
Regional Innovation Initiative. Funding for this program comes from a 5
percent tap to existing rural development, Agricultural Marketing
Service, Natural Resources Conservation Service, and forestry programs
which are not under the jurisdiction of this subcommittee. Through
these taps the Department expects to generate $280 million in loans and
grants for this initiative. The goal of the initiative is to ``promote
economic opportunity and job creation in rural communities through
increased regional planning among Federal, State, local and private
entities.''
While I recognize that regional planning can be beneficial, I am
concerned that the budget and your testimony lacks sufficient details
describing how this program will be implemented, especially since the
budget proposes to redirect 5 percent of programs that are either
generally oversubscribed or not under the jurisdiction of this
subcommittee. Does USDA currently have sufficient authority to allow
the inclusion of these regional innovation grants and loans in the
programs you propose to tap?
Answer. USDA has a series of programs that are already oriented
toward regional economic development. These programs include broadband
loans administered by the Rural Utilities Service, the Community Food
System Program administered by NIFA, and the Rural Business Opportunity
Grant (RBOG) program. USDA has expertise with regional economic
development, but we believe our overall economic development activities
can be better targeted toward the goals of this initiative.
RBOG is one example of an oversubscribed regional economic
development program. Created in the 1996 farm bill, this program
provides grants to nonprofit organizations, public bodies, and tribes
for strategic technical assistance, training, and planning activities
that promote ``best practices'' in sustainable rural economic
development. The 2009 RBOG program yielded dozens of regional
applications, including 21 multi-State applications. Because of our
funding level, Rural Development simply couldn't fund most of these
applications. We believe that this program holds great promise for the
early steps in regional economic development of planning and
collaboration.
RBOG grantees will be just one of a variety of regional
organizations that USDA has supported through the Rural Development
Mission Area. Others include Empowerment Zones, Enterprise Communities,
and Champion Communities; Rural Economic Area Partnership, or REAP,
zones; the Delta Regional Authority, and the Appalachian Regional
Commission; and organizations with cooperative agreements with Rural
Development around certain priority areas, such as food systems or
economic diversification in regions dominated by a National Forest.
Rural Development will focus additional outreach and technical
assistance on these groups, as well as monitoring for results under the
Department's commitments to OMB's High Priority Performance Goals
process.
In addition, Rural Development already has undertaken two
significant efforts toward the Department's larger regional strategy.
First, a team has been assembled in headquarters to begin reviewing all
Rural Development programs, starting with those identified for
inclusion in the regional provisions of the President's 2011 budget, to
ensure that agency regulations and application evaluation criteria do
not disadvantage applicants seeking financing of a regional project.
Where necessary, the Administrators of Rural Housing Service, Rural
Utilities Service, and Rural Business--Cooperative Service will propose
regulatory modifications.
Second, Rural Development's 47 State directors have been tasked
with developing more active working relationships with other Federal
and State partners to assist in recruiting regional projects, beginning
with the food system arena, where an existing statutory set-aside of 5
percent of budget authority in the Business and Industry Loan Guarantee
program offers priority to projects that benefit rural, tribal, or
urban food deserts. The Rural Development State Director might defer to
a HUD financing strategy for a grocery store in an urban food desert,
but still finance a produce distribution facility or meat processing
facility in a rural area that would help supply the new urban grocery
store as well as other surrounding retail outlets. With most other
Federal agencies appointing multi-State regional representatives, Rural
Development also has grouped its State directors into four regions
coinciding with those of the Regional Rural Development Centers under
the National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
To the extent that authority already exists, the initiative is
designed to utilize the statutory authorities for on-going programs. In
the case of grants for regional planning activities, the Rural Business
Opportunity Grant (RBOG) program would be utilized because the
statutory authority for that program to grant to conduct ``regional,
community, and local economic development planning and coordination,
and leadership development.''
Question. For loan and grant purposes, how do you intend to define
areas that are ``engaged in regional innovation''?
Answer. The areas are to be self-defined based on the documentation
of an applicant's participation in regional planning activities.
Question. How do you plan to measure success for this program?
Answer. The work will be done by the Community and Economic
Development staff in Rural Development, initially as part of the OMB
High Priority Performance Goal process, with additional staff support
from other USDA agencies and eventually other Departments with programs
offering regional opportunities. The 2011 budget proposal provides this
work will be done by the Office of Regional Innovation, which would be
housed within Rural Development.
Rural Development will apply the existing standards and scoring
criteria of the RBOG regulation to applicants in 2010. The process for
selecting grant recipients will be competitive and transparent. In
addition, the Notice of Funds Availability (NOFA) asks all applicants
to demonstrate: clear regional leadership; evidence of broad
participation, including demographic diversity within the region; and
evidence of broad collaboration among Federal, State, and local
government agencies, private for-profit and non-profit firms,
universities, and philanthropic organizations, including both their
participation in and financial support of the project. The NOFA
recruits applications focused on economic opportunities in rural
America: addressing end users in regional broadband projects; regional
food system projects; regional renewable energy projects; projects
demonstrating innovative use of natural resources to expand business
opportunities; and projects designed to attract new equity capital into
rural areas.
There are program performance measures already established for each
of the programs included in the initiative, for example, the number of
jobs created or saved. It is anticipated that these measures will show
high program performance in areas with regional innovation than those
without such activities. Other measures may also be developed and
program participants will be required to participate in the monitoring
of performance.
SNAP
Question. Currently, 38 million people participate in the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), a record high level
of participation driven primarily by the poor economy and unemployment.
The budget proposal suggests that the final participation number for
fiscal year 2010 will be more than 40 million participants with an
unemployment rate of 10.1 percent. For fiscal year 2011, the Department
estimates that 43 million people will participate in the program and
unemployment will be 9.5 percent, a drop of 0.6 percent from the
previous year's estimate. Given that unemployment is usually a strong
indicator of SNAP participation and that the Department estimates
unemployment will drop in fiscal year 2011, what is driving the
participation estimate up by 3 million participants to more than 43
million people? Is there an underlying factor that is not explained by
the unemployment rate?
Answer. SNAP participation is driven to a large extent by the
national unemployment rate. However, the relationship between the two
elements contains an inherent lag with SNAP participation growth
lagging increases in the unemployment rate. Therefore, a decline in
SNAP participation may not occur until well after the end of the
recession and drop in unemployment.
VOLUNTARY PUBLIC ACCESS AND HABITAT INCENTIVE PROGRAM
Question. What is the status of the Voluntary Public Access and
Habitat Incentive Program?
Answer. The Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program
regulation is currently under review. Our plan is to have this
regulation published in the Federal Register later this spring.
DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS
Question. Mr. Secretary, the President recently submitted a request
for $1.150 billion to settle discrimination claims brought by Black
farmers. Unfortunately there are similar claims of discrimination by
other groups (women, Native Americans, and Hispanics).
What can you tell us about these other claims?
Will they be settled in the near future?
What is the potential liability of the Federal Government?
What is being done to prevent future discrimination?
Answer. I am committed to trying to resolve all farmers' claims of
discrimination, including the claims of women (Love), Native Americans
(Keepseagle), and Hispanic (Garcia) farmers.
U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) are currently reviewing all available options in order to
establish a path forward that will resolve all of the major cases
pending before USDA. We are currently involved in confidential
settlement discussions involving these cases. Consequently, all
litigation has been stayed. Because of the confidential nature of the
discussions, it is difficult for me to offer specifics on potential
liability.
All farmers and all of USDA's customers should be treated fairly
and equally. I remain absolutely committed to that principle and have
made it a top priority for the Department. On April 21, 2009, I
published a civil rights statement that noted, ``This is a new day for
Equal Employment Opportunity, program delivery, and civil rights in
USDA. I intend to lead the Department in correcting its past errors,
learning from its mistakes, and moving forward to a new era of
equitable service and access for all.'' As we work to resolve all of
the major cases pending before USDA, I will be guided by those
commitments and will seek a just and equitable outcome for the various
groups of individuals who believe they have suffered from
discrimination.
To prevent future disparate treatment, USDA is undertaking several
proactive measures which should decrease the filing of discrimination
complaints. These measures include an independent assessment of program
delivery, increased emphasis on outreach to socially disadvantaged and
small and beginning farmers through the establishment of the Office of
Advocacy and Outreach, reviewing findings of discrimination by the
Office of Human Resources Management to determine if adverse actions
are warranted and increased training for employees in civil rights.
In April 2009, USDA published a Request for Proposals to obtain an
independent analysis of access to program delivery at the Farm Service
Agency, Rural Development, Natural Resources Conservation Service, and
the Risk Management Agency. After approximately 7 months of field
interviews of USDA employees as well as gathering feedback from USDA
customers, a thorough report will be provided to the USDA that lists
specific recommendations and methodologies the Department can adopt to
ensure programs are delivered equitably and fairly. These
recommendations will ensure that access is afforded to all
constituents, including socially disadvantaged farmers, ranchers, and
rural America.
The Office of Human Resources Management under Departmental
Management has been delegated responsibility for the establishment of
an initiative to review all settlement agreements and decisions in
program, individual, and employee complaints of discrimination. This
initiative will ensure the highest level of accountability and fiscal
responsibility is maintained within the USDA.
Key components of the initiative are as follows:
--Review of all settlement agreements and decisions finding liability
against the Agency in program, individual, and employee
complaints of discrimination.
--Investigations or inquiries to determine responsibility for the
actions or inactions leading to Agency liability.
--Appropriate administrative actions to correct future conduct.
--Increased awareness of individuals in decision-making positions to
make responsible decisions.
--Improvements in programs to ensure that all services are available
in a nondiscriminatory manner.
--Hold USDA personnel accountable and responsible for their actions.
This last mandate will ensure that USDA employees at all levels
will be held accountable for ensuring that all USDA applicants,
customers, constituents, and stakeholders, as well as employees, are
provided equal access to USDA opportunities, programs, and services.
The initiative to review settlement agreements and decisions in
program, individual, and employee complaints of discrimination will be
instrumental in improving civil rights and making USDA a model
department.
Additionally, all employees are required to take annual EEO
training, in conjunction with the Department issuing the annual notice
on discrimination. Finally, the Secretary and Assistant Secretary for
Civil Rights have regularly given speeches and issued correspondence
regarding civil rights, EEO, diversity, and the consequences of
violating the civil rights of individuals, employees, and USDA
customers.
The 2008 farm bill authorized the creation of the Office of
Advocacy and Outreach'' (OAO), which was established under the
Assistant Secretary for Administration on November 3, 2009. This action
brought together outreach, advocacy and scholarship programs which were
scattered throughout the USDA. The Office is in the process of
obtaining staff, implementing grant and scholarship programs, and
assembling two Advisory Committees--the Small and Beginning Farmer and
Rancher Advisory Committee and the Minority Farmer Advisory Committee
are being assembled. The Office is also developing accountability
systems such as a receipt for services and the Program Participation
Initiative that will track service to landowners by race, ethnicity and
gender.
OAO will work with all USDA agencies to develop a comprehensive
Departmental Outreach Plan to guide future activities of USDA. OAO is
also charged with conducting a review of all rules and regulations in
USDA to assess barriers to full participation in USDA programs by
underserved groups.
The creation of OAO as a distinct entity in the Department will
place heightened emphasis on making USDA programs accessible to all.
The mission of OAO is ``to increase access to programs of the
Department and increase the viability and profitability of small farms
and ranches, beginning farmers or ranchers, and socially disadvantaged
farmers or ranchers.''
Finally, I have directed all USDA political appointees to receive
civil rights training. The Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights is
providing the same civil rights training to senior managers in the
field offices at the Farm Service Agency, Natural Resources
Conservation Service, and Rural Development, especially in those States
where USDA agencies report significant numbers of program
discrimination complaints. In a video-taped message to training
participants, I emphasized the importance of implementing USDA's civil
rights policy and reminded attendees of their responsibility to ensure
USDA constituents have full and equitable access to USDA programs and
services. The civil rights training includes a historical perspective
of civil rights at USDA, employment and program complaint processing,
dispute resolution, civil rights compliance, and diversity. To date,
trainings have been conducted in New York, Texas, Louisiana New Mexico,
Florida and Oregon.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Thad Cochran
CATFISH INSPECTION PROGRAM
Question. Secretary Vilsack, the administration's budget request
recommends a decrease of $10.3 million for the catfish inspection
program under the Food Safety Inspection Service. The farm bill was
very clear that regulations for this program be completed within 18
months of passage of the farm bill. Can you elaborate on this budget
request and inform the subcommittee when you expect the Department of
Agriculture to both release the regulations and begin implementation of
this program?
Answer. We believe that the $5 million requested for catfish
inspection is adequate to meet essential program needs in fiscal year
2011. The draft proposed rule is currently under review. In the
meantime, FSIS is working diligently in order to develop the foundation
needed to assume catfish inspection responsibilities upon
implementation of a final rule.
Question. In the President's budget request for the Catfish
Inspection Program, the administration notes a ``need for considerable
stakeholder engagement.'' What is the Department doing to engage
stakeholders?
Answer. Upon publication of the proposed rule, USDA will seek
public comments on the proposed rule. In addition, USDA plans to hold
three public meetings on the proposed rule, which will likely take
place in Arkansas, Mississippi, and Washington, DC. We are developing
significant outreach and communication plans for both domestic and
foreign stakeholders to commence once the proposed rule is published.
THE FOOD, CONSERVATION, AND ENERGY ACT OF 2008
Question. Mr. Secretary, the administration's fiscal year 2011
budget submission includes proposals that require opening up and
amending the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008. I have
concerns about the implications of amending a farm law that was 2 years
in development and which still has not been fully implemented. I would
like to know your thoughts about the possible undermining of confidence
in farm policy and the adverse impact on the rural economy that would
result if Congress makes significant changes to farm law before its
scheduled expiration?
Answer. I feel that the President's budget proposals regarding
``payment limits'' and ``Adjusted Gross Income'' criteria actually
strengthen confidence in U.S. farm policy, rather than undermine it. By
focusing farm program payments to those most in need, and working to
reduce the additional $12 trillion in debt that has accumulated since
the beginning of the decade, we are working to ensure that Federal
funds are being spent wisely.
The Department provides a strong set of financial safety net
programs to ensure the continued economic viability and productivity of
production agriculture, including farm income and commodity support
programs, crop insurance and disaster assistance, as well as other
programs. The farm safety net is critically important and provides the
foundation for economic prosperity in rural America. For 2011, USDA
estimates that roughly $17 billion in total direct support will be
provided to farm producers and landowners through a variety of
programs.
Recognizing the need to reduce the deficit, the budget proposes to
better target direct payments to those who need and can benefit from
them most as well as cap total payments paid to larger operations. The
savings from these proposals will impact approximately 30,000 program
participants, which is about 2 percent of the 1.3 million total program
participants, and will over time comprise less than 2 percent of the
total direct support the Department expects to provide annually to farm
producers and landowners.
PIGFORD II SETTLEMENT
Question. Mr Secretary, in regards to the Pigford II settlement,
thousands of the farmers that have claims against the USDA are from
Mississippi. I hope this settlement will resolve these claims in a fair
way that is consistent with the court rulings rendered in these cases.
I am told that under the settlement agreement, between 4.1 percent and
7.4 percent of the appropriated funds will be spent on attorney's fees.
Can you tell me how USDA derived these percentages?
Answer. Subject to court approval, the parties have agreed to a
range of attorneys' fees that will be not less than 4.1 percent but not
more than 7.4 percent of the total amount of funds available for the
settlement minus any money spent to implement the non-judicial claims
process established in the agreement. Although the agreement permits
plaintiffs to move for a fee award of 7.4 percent, the Agreement
expressly provides that the Secretary can respond to plaintiffs' fee
petition and argue to the Court that the Fee Award should be limited to
4.1 percent. The parties arrived at this structure through arms-length
negotiation.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Susan Collins
DAIRY
Question. I would like to stay on the topic of dairy and speak
about cattle health. The health of cattle also can suffer during these
economically challenging times for dairy farmers. Less income means
less money spent on preventative care and waiting longer to take care
of a sick animal. This not only can affect the farmer's bottom line,
but it also may affect human health.
What is the USDA doing to ensure the health of our Nation's dairy
cattle?
Answer. APHIS conducts a variety of activities to protect the
health, quality, and marketability or our Nation's animals. These
activities include surveillance to quickly identify diseased animals,
and emergency response capabilities that allow for the Agency to
provide leadership, strategies, and resources for effective emergency
response and management. These activities help to minimize exposure of
animals to diseases that negatively impact producers.
APHIS also assists States and producers with developing approaches
for disease management of cattle herds by providing technical
assistance. For example, APHIS has provided assistance to States and
producers in developing and implementing their Johne's disease
management, testing, and monitoring strategies for use in controlling
the disease in cattle herds. APHIS also remains vigilant in protecting
herds from economically significant animal diseases, such as
brucellosis and tuberculosis, through effective control and eradication
programs.
NOT-READY-TO-EAT POULTRY PRODUCTS
Question. On December 21 of last year Senator Snowe and I sent a
letter (attached) to you regarding our concerns about the process for
new regulations being promulgated by USDA's Food Safety and Inspection
Service (FSIS) for certain Not-Ready-to-Eat poultry products without
employing the traditional rulemaking process as outlined in the
Administrative Procedures Act (APA). This important issue affects a
number of producers across the country, including Barber Foods, a Maine
company employing 750 people.
It is my understanding that FSIS will make a significant change in
agency policy on regulation of Not-Ready-to-Eat poultry products which
appear Ready-to-Eat. Specifically, FSIS is considering a change which
would declare Salmonella to be an adulterant and would require non-
detectable levels of Salmonella in Not-Ready-to-Eat poultry products
which appear Ready-to-Eat.
A change in agency policy to regulate the presence of Salmonella in
these products as an adulterant would reverse the long-standing policy
of FSIS and establish a new precedent. Under the APA, changes to long-
standing agency policies are to be made through formal rulemaking
procedures.
Let me be very clear that the safety of our Nation's food supply is
of paramount importance, and I am not commenting on the merits of the
regulation change. I encourage FSIS to take all necessary steps to
improve the safety of our food supply. Even the most important policy
goals, however, must be implemented in accordance with the procedures
established by law.
Since I have yet to receive a response to my letter, I wanted to
take this opportunity to ask you what specific steps FSIS is taking to
make sure any regulatory change for Not-Ready-to-Eat poultry products
which appear Ready-to-Eat are made in accordance with APA requirements?
Answer. The problem of Salmonella in not-ready-to-eat (NRTE)
stuffed poultry that appears to be ready-to-eat (RTE) is longstanding.
There is a history of consumers purchasing the product, treating it as
though it were RTE, and then getting sick. For more than a decade we
have worked with companies making these NRTE products to identify and
implement strategies that will result in a safer product.
Unfortunately, despite our efforts, the problem persists.
We are committed to ensuring that any decisions about these
products will be made in an open and transparent manner. Accordingly,
please be assured that as USDA moves forward in this effort, we will
provide ample opportunity for industry and, indeed, all interested
parties to comment on any actions that FSIS tentatively determines are
necessary to protect the public health. Ample time will also be allowed
for the companies involved to implement any actions that FSIS may
decide to require. We must all be aware, however, that while we work
with companies to identify actions likely to be most effective, people
continue to risk becoming ill from these products.
congressionally direct spending
Question. For all congressionally direct spending, please provide
for each: a funding history, all ultimate funding recipients, a
statement of goals and accomplishments, any assessments made on funding
amounts and how those funds were used.
Answer. The information is submitted for the record.
[The information follows:]
Special Research Grants
ADVANCING BIOFUEL PRODUCTION, TEXAS
The research under this project is being conducted at Texas A&M
University and Baylor University. The goal of the proposed project is
to enhance understanding of crop composition on bioenergy conversion,
using sorghum as a model dedicated energy crop. Understanding the
composition of this crop and its effect on conversion efficiency is
crucial to the development of alternative energy sources. From the
Texas A&M University sorghum program, biomass samples from different
sorghum types grown under different agronomic practices were produced,
dried, ground, and provided to Baylor University personnel. Samples
continue to be analyzed for potential conversion to biofuels. The
analysis focuses on the sugar composition using a protocol developed
specifically for the analysis.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $148,950; for fiscal year 2009,
$140,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $300,000. The total amount
appropriated is $588,950.
Research activities to complete the objectives began in 2008.
Samples of sorghum have been produced and are currently being analyzed
to address the original objectives to analyze water-soluble materials
in sorghum, investigate the optimal conversion technology and operation
conditions for conversion into biofuel, and evaluate the existing
germplasm and continued breeding programs to develop sorghum varieties.
The NIFA National Program Leader has had discussions with the
principal investigator from Texas A&M University. A site visit to
Baylor University is planned for 2010.
ADVANCED GENETIC TECHNOLOGIES, KENTUCKY
This research focuses on developing the infrastructure needed to
initiate advanced genetic technologies used in the study of
agriculturally relevant plants, animals, and microbes. The research
will integrate the modern laboratory methods of large-scale DNA
sequencing with computational methods to interpret DNA sequences and
identify genes and key features of genomes. Pilot studies will be
conducted to obtain sequences from an important symbiont of tall
fescue, the most widely planted forage grass in the United States, and
also from an important horse parasite. Other pilot studies will be
invited and pursued as appropriate.
The results of this research will enhance techniques of genetic
analysis, and through such techniques, increased understanding of
genomes of plants, fungal symbionts of plants, and animal parasites.
The techniques developed by this research will enable genome sequencing
for numerous microorganisms that are pathogenic or symbiotic with
agricultural plants and livestock in the local environment. The project
will support the training of students and post-docs for work in the
life science and computer science.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2001, and the
following amounts have been appropriated: in fiscal year 2001,
$473,955; in fiscal year 2002, $600,000; in fiscal year 2003, $670,613;
in fiscal year 2004, $600,436; in fiscal year 2005, $644,800; in fiscal
year 2006, $638,550; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008,
$480,612; in fiscal year 2009, $452,000; and fiscal year 2010,
$650,000. The total amount appropriated is $5,210,966.
The research is being conducted at the agricultural experiment
station maintained by the University of Kentucky.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
The submitting institution conducts a peer review of the proposal prior
to submission.
AEGILOPS CYLINDRICA (JOINTED GOATGRASS), WASHINGTON
The purpose of this initiative is to investigate the biomass and
bioproduct potential of plants that are typically classified as weeds
when they invade land used for growing crops. Weedy plants have traits
that allow them to compete successfully for resources and to grow
rapidly. An issue related to biomass production is whether traits
derived from weedy plants might be used to augment production of
biomass crops and/or whether weedy plants might be developed into
biomass crops. The goal with Aegilops cylindrica, or jointed goatgrass,
is to determine whether the robust growth of jointed goatgrass-wheat
hybrids might make these hybrids or related plants that carry some of
their traits useful in dryland areas. These hybrids are annuals and
almost completely sterile so if the hybrids themselves were used as a
biomass crop, there would not be a significant control problem. Three
other weedy plants also will be investigated. Research on a hybrid
poplar will determine whether it is possible to reroute significant
amounts of carbon from the phenylpropanoid pathway that generates
lignin precursors to other phenolic compounds that might be used as
high-value biofuels. The ability to divert carbon from lignin into a
valuable commodity would be especially useful in lignified biomass
crops like poplar, which is an invasive tree well suited to the Pacific
Northwest. Arundo donax, or giant reed, is an invasive and fast-growing
grass, and various photosynthetic parameters will be investigated to
determine why light harvesting or carbon allocation is so efficient.
There is a good control plan in place for experimental plantings that
rely on water limitation and herbicide application to eliminate the
plant when necessary. Lactuca serriola, or prickly lettuce, will be
evaluated to determine if it is possible to increase the quantity or
quality of the latex compounds in the sap. There have been recent
advances in gene mapping in this plant, and the focus may be on the
weed itself but an alternative might be to take the genes responsible
for isoprenoid polymerization to latex and move them into an alternate
plant.
Previous work with jointed goatgrass focused on controlling
invasion into wheat fields. The research has been a success. Scientists
developed cultural practices to suppress this weed and combined these
practices with a technology to allow elimination of jointed goatgrass
by application of a herbicide during cultivation of a herbicide-
resistant wheat developed for this project. Now that goatgrass can be
controlled, progress has been made by gathering hybrids and probable
parental plants from several locations for fiber analysis and by
producing better defined crosses in greenhouses to generate the needed
amount of hybrid seed for field testing. Preliminary experiments with
giant reed have shown an impressive growth rate and extremely high rate
of carbon dioxide assimilation. Prickly lettuce species and biotypes
have been surveyed for latex quality and quantity; and matings have
been carried out to develop populations for mapping productivity
traits, and genetic markers are being screened. The research on poplar
continues with cloning high capacity genes for using the
phenylpropanoid pathway to reroute carbon flux to aromatic monomers.
The initial work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1994.
The appropriation for fiscal year 1994 was $329,000; for fiscal years
1995 1997, $296,000 each year; $346,000 for fiscal year 1998; $360,000
each year in fiscal years 1999 and 2000; $359,208 in fiscal year 2001;
$367,000 in fiscal year 2002; $380,511 in fiscal year 2003; $340,976 in
fiscal year 2004; $355,136 in fiscal year 2005; $351,450 in fiscal year
2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007; $261,159 in fiscal year 2008; and
$245,000 per year in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. Total appropriations
are $5,188,440.
This work is being carried out at Washington State University.
This project has been previously peer reviewed for scientific merit
and adherence to the program objectives by a panel of scientists and
producers. Senior agency scientists have reviewed the overall grant
annually. Progress toward the new objectives was evaluated based on a
progress report and during a site visit in the fall of 2009.
AGRICULTURAL DIVERSIFICATION, HAWAII
Diversified agriculture offers new opportunities and includes
specialty fruits that open a variety of new markets. The overall
objective of this project is to provide scientific and outreach support
services that enable Hawaii entrepreneurs to increase their revenues or
profits from growing and selling specialty fruits.
Highlights of work that have been accomplished include establishing
a private sector oversight committee to review program activities,
research on identification of new products, risk analysis, market
analysis, and provision of business guidelines for growing and selling
new crops. Since project inception, there has been a two- and one-half
fold increase in the number of farms growing tropical specialty fruit
crops and a three-fold increase in the value of the crops produced on
these farms.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: for
fiscal years 1988-1989, $156,000 per year; for fiscal years 1990-1993,
$154,000 per year; for fiscal year 1994, $145,000; for fiscal years
1995-2000, $131,000 per year; for fiscal year 2001, $130,712; for
fiscal year 2002, $128,000; for fiscal year 2003, $127,168; for fiscal
year 2004, $113,327; for fiscal year 2005, $112,096; fiscal year 2006,
$218,790; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $162,852; and
for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $153,000 per year. A total of
$3,157,945 has been appropriated.
Research is being conducted at the University of Hawaii's College
of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources on the island of Oahu, and
other Hawaiian islands.
Evaluation of this project is conducted annually based on the
annual progress report and discussions with the principal investigator.
It has been determined that progress in the development of new
agricultural opportunities and use of decision-making tools for farmers
and entrepreneurs is satisfactory.
AGRICULTURAL ENTREPRENEURAL ALTERNATIVES, PENNSYLVANIA
This research is focused on key areas with entrepreneurial growth
potential and will expand into two new areas with considerable growth
potential. Such areas include bio-based energy, green buildings and
organic foods. This research will determine the most effective methods
designed to increase small farm profitability by improving farmers'
business management, marketing, and production practices; and to
identify barriers to marketing local foods in Pennsylvania.
To date, this project has hired a Research Associate whose
appointment began in August 2009. This project has also completed the
following: prepared and beta tested an agriculture and natural
resources green business case study for entrepreneurship students;
established a sustainable entrepreneurship research project design;
gathered content to develop an agricultural focused entrepreneurship
extension and outreach train-the-trainer program.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $248,250; for fiscal year 2009,
$233,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $248,000. The total amount
appropriated is $729,250.
This work is being carried out at Pennsylvania State University
Research station.
Annual proposals for funding are peer reviewed for relevance and
scientific merit. The National Institute of Food and Agriculture agency
contact is also in regular contact with the principal researcher at
Pennsylvania State University to discuss progress towards meeting
project objectives.
AGRICULTURAL MARKETING, ILLINOIS
The University of Illinois developed an electronic infrastructure
and marketing resource called MarketMaker which was to be used to
assist and educate livestock farmers on marketing strategies for value-
added meat products. It has developed into a tool that can benefit
everyone in the food supply chain, from farmers, to processors,
distributors, retailers, and the consumer looking for unique food
products. The goal for this stage of development will include the
continued geographic expansion of MarketMaker but will also build
greater participation from businesses beyond the farm gate.
Current progress includes the following: Build awareness among non-
farm food related enterprises--Project investigators and State partners
are in the early stages of a campaign to educate and inform food
processors, wholesalers, distributors and food retailers on the use
MarketMaker to acquire attribute specific food products and identify
potential supply chain partners. To extend the outreach of the project,
the investigators have targeted organizations such as the National
Restaurant Association, the American Association of Meat Processors,
the Seafood Products Association, and the Food Marketing Institute.
Solicit Food Industry Feedback--Food industry leaders and decision-
makers have been invited to identify the types of information about
other food related enterprises that they would find most useful.
Conversations with WalMart, Sysco Corp, and C.H. Robinson are ongoing
and are providing valuable feedback that will guide the further
expansion of the current MarketMaker data base. Key Food Industry
decision-maker interviews--The MarketMaker team will continue to
solicit feedback from industry experts to arrive at the optimum extent
of information that would aid food supply chain decision makers.
Investigators will identify key food industry decision-makers, with
input from the Advisory Board. Interviews will focus on collecting data
on (1) food categories and characteristics most important for their
business; (2) search capabilities most important to their business; and
(3) strategies for training personnel to use MarketMaker in their
industry. Identify Key Metrics to Determine the Commercial Readiness of
Farmers--Industry interviews will also allow investigators to inventory
standards of performance that are expected from farmers in such areas
as post harvest handling, packaging standards and food safety
standards. This information will become the basis for developing a
curriculum for ``Commercial Ready Farming Practices''. This curriculum
will be implemented by the land grant partners. Design New Business
Registration Templates--This information will be integrated into a new
online registration template used to create profiles for the individual
business. The farmer/producer portion of the data base already includes
expanded profiles that identify products produced, forms of sale,
marketing attributes, and other types of information that help the user
filter out the farmers that best fit their needs. Newly designed
templates for registering will allow for the creation of equally rich
profiles for food manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, restaurants
and food retailers. Other business profiles in the data base currently
only include the kinds of cursory information that can be purchased
through business data brokers.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant, with an amount of $186,684; and for fiscal years 2009
and 2010, $176,000 per year. The total amount appropriated is $538,684.
The work is being conducted at the University of Illinois.
The agency evaluates the merit of research proposals as they are
submitted. The principal investigators and project managers submit
annual reports to the agency to document impact of the project. Agency
evaluation of the project includes peer review of accomplishments and
proposal objectives and targeted outcomes. Additionally, progress
reports to the Current Research Information System (CRIS) are being
monitored for satisfactory accomplishments and timelines.
AGRICULTURE ENERGY INNOVATION CENTER, GEORGIA
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $1,000,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
AGRICULTURE SCIENCE, OHIO
This program has focused on research on emerging diseases of
plants, animals, zoonotic diseases, and foodborne diseases.
Specifically, these diseases have included influenza virus, severe
acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus, aster yellows
phytoplasma, and sudden oak death. In 2009, work was done to determine
the molecular basis for interspecies transmission of H3N2 viruses
between swine and turkeys. This program also looked to determine if
soybean rust and new strains of stem rust of wheat have arrived in
Ohio, and to develop protocols for sampling for invasive crop diseases
and assessing the accuracy of risk assessment models for emerging high-
impact crop diseases.
Progress continues on research involving influenza viruses, SARS
coronavirus, soybean rust, and sudden oak death. Educational materials
have been developed to assist soybean growers in the identification of
soybean rust in infected plants, and staff training continues for
biosafety laboratory containment. Polyclonal antibodies specific for
the soybean rust pathogen have been developed and several volatiles
have been identified from infected trees that attract insects; chemical
characterization is in progress.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2003, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2003 was $496,750; for fiscal year 2004,
$444,363; for fiscal year 2005, $542,624; for fiscal year 2006,
$564,300; $0 in fiscal year 2007; $407,130 in fiscal year 2008;
$382,000 in fiscal year 2009; and $450,000 in fiscal year 2010. The
cumulative total amount appropriated is $3,287,167.
This work is being done at the Food Animal Health Research Program
laboratories and clinics at the Ohio Agricultural Research and
Development Center and the Department of Plant Pathology, all located
at The Ohio State University in Wooster, Ohio.
The fiscal year 2009 proposal was institutionally peer-reviewed at
the Ohio State University. In addition, a NIFA National Program Leader
reviewed the proposal and determined that the research project was
appropriate and addresses important opportunities for better
understanding new and emerging plant and animal disease threats.
Furthermore, the feasibility, budget, time-frame, and facilities for
the project were adequate. The National Program Leader noted that these
ongoing research projects outline a program which builds upon
established resources and responds to National research needs in
emerging plant and animal diseases.
AGROECOLOGY/CHESAPEAKE BAY AGROECOLOGY, MARYLAND
The objective of this grant is to preserve farm and forest land in
the Chesapeake Bay region and prevent farmland conversion to housing.
The research focuses on: the management and selection of hull-less
barley cultivars in Maryland that can be used as a feedstock for fuel
ethanol production; investigating a variety of native plant species for
use as high-value niche crops for small farms and nurseries; and
assessing State forestland through the collection of information on
forest type, past management history, age, volume, forest structure,
and species diversity.
This grant has completed some objectives to provide alternative
high value crops to maintain farmland and provide cover crops to reduce
nutrient runoff.
Fiscal year 2009 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant. In fiscal years 2009 and 2010, funds appropriated were
$499,000 per year. A total of $938,000 has been appropriated.
The work is being carried out at the Wye Research and Education
Center in Queenstown, Maryland, and throughout the State.
Fiscal year 2009 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant. An evaluation is planned for the summer of 2010.
AIR QUALITY, TEXAS AND KANSAS
This research and technology-transfer initiative was created to
form a Federal/State partnership that is: (1) characterizing odor,
odorous gases, particulate matter, and greenhouse gases from open-lot
concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs); (2) developing and
evaluating cost-effective abatement measures; (3) providing a sound,
scientific basis for specific air pollution regulations, including
appropriate emission factors for particulates, odor, and odorous gases
for the Southern Great Plains; (4) determining the potential impact of
these air contaminants on animal health and productivity with
inferences related to human health concerns; and (5) providing
technology transfer to the public and agricultural producers. The
project is no longer working on animal health and productivity and has
begun measuring emissions of greenhouse gases. The following are the
most recent accomplishments to date by objective.
Objective 1. Emissions Characterizations for Abatement Measures and
Receptor Impacts.--A value of 20 percent surface moisture content of
feedlot pen surfaces was determined to be a critical threshold for
reducing particulate matter emissions, and time of day was found to be
a critical parameter for applying the water to the pen surface. Average
12-month dry deposition of inorganic nitrogen was found to be almost
three times as large as wet deposition. These relationships will be
very useful in constructing process-based emissions models for
particulate matter and gaseous emissions.
Objective 2. Process-Based Emissions Models.--A nitrogen mass
balance was constructed for cattle in commercial feedyards. Less than
10 percent of the fed nitrogen was retained by the cattle and 30-35
percent of the nitrogen was available to be lost to the atmosphere as
ammonia in winter and almost double that amount in summer. Feeding
distiller's grains, a co-product of ethanol from corn, generated higher
emissions of ammonia nitrogen which was proportional to increased
protein content in the ration.
Objective 3. Dispersion Modeling, Regulation, and Emissions
Factors.--Scraping manure from the feedyard pens reduced reactive
volatile organic carbon emissions significantly. Emission factors for
these organics was a factor of 10 times lower than values used by some
State regulatory agencies. Scraping also significantly reduced
emissions of carbon dioxide and methane. EPA methodology for estimating
feedlot emissions of methane from volatile solids was determined and
compared to more direct emissions measurements.
Objective 4. Technology Transfer.--Investigators produced 4
refereed journal articles, 17 scientific presentations, 5 news
articles, 5 fact sheets, 2 eXtension webinars, and 6 graduate student
theses. The project Web site was consolidated and improved. The project
team received the Vice Chancellor's Award in Excellence-Research for
their work on this project.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2002, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2002 was $640,000, $869,313 in fiscal
year 2003; $894,690 in fiscal year 2004; $1,065,408 in fiscal year
2005; $1,558,260 in fiscal year 2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007;
$1,160,817 in fiscal year 2008; and $1,090,000 per year in fiscal years
2009 and 2010. A total of $8,368,488 has been appropriated.
Research is being conducted within the Texas A&M University System
with the lead being at the Agricultural Research and Extension Center
at Amarillo and participation at West Texas A&M University. Kansas
State University also participates in the project as well as
participation by the Agricultural Research Service in Bushland, Texas.
A comprehensive program review was completed in August 2008 with an
independent peer review team. The review team reported satisfactory
progress on all but one of the five objectives. The review team felt
that progress on the technology transfer objective could be much better
given the maturity of the project. A number of very helpful
recommendations were given by the review team to the project directors.
The project directors have since met and have laid-out a very
comprehensive plan to address the review team's recommendations. The
2008 review has created a broader group of participants on the advisory
committee. The program officer thoroughly reviewed the most recent
proposal and progress updates and participated in the research planning
meeting for the 2010 fiscal year.
ANIMAL SCIENCE FOOD SAFETY CONSORTIUM, ARKANSAS, IOWA, AND KANSAS
The Food Safety Consortium researchers provide information to
consumers by supporting one of the largest food safety Web sites. The
Food Safety Consortium will continue to improve the safety of American
meat and poultry products, provide U.S. consumers with safer products
and help the United States maintain a major role in the international
market.
The original goal of this research was to assess the potential
threats to beef, pork, or poultry during the production of the live
animal and during processing, distribution, and consumption, in
addition to developing sampling and testing strategies to rapidly
identify any contaminants and determine the distribution of the
contaminants in the food supply. To date promising results were
obtained in continuing work with two natural proteins termed
bacteriocins and produced by two beneficial bacteria belonging to the
genus Bacillus. Preliminary studies indicate a potential mechanistic
action of these new Bacillus candidates involving rapid activation of
innate host immune mechanisms in chickens and turkeys. In addition to
these findings, another research group determined whether combinations
of organic acids would inhibit Salmonella Typhimurium biofilm formation
using an assay based on adherence to titer plate wells. At lower
concentrations organic acids disrupted biofilm formation while higher
concentrations led to bacterial death.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
year 1989, $1,400,000; fiscal year 1990, $1,678,000; fiscal year 1991,
$1,845,000; fiscal years 1992-1993, $1,942,000 per year; fiscal year
1994, $1,825,000; fiscal years 1995-1996, $1,743,000 per year; fiscal
year 1997, $1,690,000; fiscal years 1998-2000, $1,521,000 per year;
fiscal year 2001, $1,631,403; fiscal year 2002, $1,598,000; fiscal year
2003, $1,603,509; fiscal year 2004, $1,444,427; fiscal year 2005,
$1,432,448; fiscal year 2006, $1,417,680; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal
year 2008, $1,056,552; fiscal year 2009, $939,000; and fiscal year
2010, $1,000,000. The total appropriation was $32,494,019.
Research is being conducted at the University of Arkansas at
Fayetteville, Iowa State University, and Kansas State University.
This program was reviewed and approved based on the proposal
submission and Current Research Information system (CRIS) reports by
NIFA staff in September 2009.
APPLE FIRE BLIGHT, MICHIGAN AND NEW YORK
This research is on fire blight in apple trees. Fire blight is a
bacterial disease that can kill spurs, branches, and sometimes entire
trees. The management of this disease is difficult because there are
limited control options available. This research project is designed to
develop fire blight resistant varieties, evaluate biological and
chemical control methods for disease management, and develop an
education and extension program to help growers improve their ability
to manage fire blight in their orchards.
To date, new genes have been identified that show promise for their
ability to make apple trees resistant to fire blight. These genes are
now incorporated into apple trees that are significantly resistant to
fire blight in the field. Additionally, a novel material, kasugamycin,
has been shown to have good potential for controlling fire blight in
areas where streptomycin resistance has developed. This is now being
used by growers on a trial basis and will be further tested this year.
An integrated pest management strategy is being developed and deployed.
Fiscal year 1997 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this project, with an appropriation of $325,000. Each year that
this grant has been appropriated, the total has been split equally
between New York and Michigan. For fiscal years 1998 through 2000,
$500,000 per year; in fiscal year 2001, $498,900; in fiscal year 2002
$489,000; in fiscal year 2003, $491,783; in fiscal year 2004, $456,292;
in fiscal year 2005, $479,136; in fiscal year 2006, $495,000; in fiscal
year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $368,403; and in fiscal years 2009
and 2010, $346,000 per year. A total of $5,795,514 has been
appropriated.
This research project is being conducted as a collaborative program
at agricultural experiment stations maintained by Michigan State
University and at the New York State Agriculture Experiment Station of
Cornell University, located in Geneva, New York.
Senior agency technical staff conducts a merit review of the
proposal submitted by the performing institution each year. The
investigators have developed improved techniques for transferring
resistance genes into apples and have been able to accelerate flowering
in transgenic trees to be able to make evaluations after 2 years,
rather than 4 to 5 years. The researchers have made progress toward
effective biological control of the bacterium that causes the disease,
as well as understanding the genetic basis for disease development.
AQUACULTURE, CALIFORNIA, FLORIDA, AND TEXAS
The objective of this grant is focused on shell fish aquaculture to
ensure the sustainability of the hard clam aquaculture industry in
Florida through evaluation of stock hybridization, stocking densities,
and an initial assessment of soil characteristics in Florida.
Objectives also focus on developing new technologies to advance United
States marine finfish aquaculture by improving the efficiency and
economic viability of recirculating aquaculture systems for maturation
and spawning of marine fish broodstock.
Accomplishments from this directed research include but are not
limited to: generation of a computer model and new design
specifications for marine broodstock maturation systems and new water
quality monitoring tests and protocols that have led to the successful
spawning of southern flounder producing more than 600,000 viable eggs
and juveniles. These eggs and juveniles were provided to the Texas
Parks and Wildlife fish hatchery system along with juvenile flounder to
a commercial grower for industry development. The University of Texas
determined that juvenile flounder could be successfully reared in 10
parts per 1,000 salinity but had reduced survival at 0.5 parts per
1,000. Digestive enzymes in larval southern flounder were also measured
during development in order to select an appropriate feeding regimen.
Cultured Mercenaria mercenaria and wild Mercenaria campechiensis were
spawned and single-parent crosses accomplished. Allozyme marker
analysis indicated parental clams in two crosses were hybrids. Grow-out
trials indicated hybrid weights and growth were higher than parental
stocks. A laboratory challenge was conducted exposing two families to
salinities of 15 or 25 parts per 1,000 and hypoxic or normoxic
conditions at 32 degrees Centigrade. In the lab challenge, survival
analysis indicated that the Mercenaria mercenaria x Mercenaria
campechiensis crosses performed better under stressful conditions than
did parents or reciprocal crosses. About 248,000 hybrid seed were
planted in 2008 for replicated comparison of stocks, density, and gear.
Experimental clams are sampled every four months and will be harvested
in late summer. Ten commercial growers planted 190,000 seed clams on
commercial leases in three counties for site comparison. Additionally,
in March 2008, a total of 1,017,000 seed was transferred to Cedar Key
for continued culture. The clam husbandry project is still underway.
Work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2006 with an
appropriation of $594,000; $0 in fiscal year 2007; $442,878 in fiscal
year 2008; and $416,000 per year in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. The
total amount appropriated is $1,868,878.
The University of Florida, Gainesville, in collaboration with
commercial producers in the Cedar Key area in Florida, is conducting
the clam research. Research on marine finfish is being conducted at the
Mote Marine Laboratory and Aquarium in Sarasota, Florida, the
Department of Marine Science of the University of Texas in Port
Aransas, Texas, and at the Hubbs-Sea World Research Institute in San
Diego and Carlsbad, California.
The Agency's National Aquaculture program staff review the project
annually upon submission of proposals with details on all proposed
studies. Programmatic review of the fiscal year 2009 proposal concluded
that the methodology and experimental design were sound. Additionally,
the Agency held a post-award management workshop in December 2009 that
included reporting on progress and accomplishments and focus on
performance, relevancy, and quality.
AQUACULTURE, IDAHO AND WASHINGTON
The original goal of the program was to improve and expand trout
aquaculture at the regional and national levels through improved animal
health management, improved water quality management, improved product
quality, and new product development. Past research has led to vital
information on the immune system of trout and new diagnostic methods
that will help in the early detection of disease organisms affecting
the rainbow trout industry; the identification of genetic disease-
resistance markers in rainbow trout which will aid in the development
of genetic vaccines for the rainbow trout industry; the development of
disease diagnostic tools for other salmonids; improved processing
technologies for rainbow trout and improved trout production systems to
reduce effluents from trout farm; water re-use systems for less-costly
and flow-through aquaculture facilities with more environmentally
friendly performance due to new engineering techniques; Hepatopoietic
Necrosis Virus resistance loci in a rainbow X cutthroat cross have been
identified and mapped; and a rickettsial-like bacterial sequence
associated with strawberry disease lesions in rainbow trout has been
identified. Research on other species has led to: both imidacloprid and
carbaryl were found to be efficacious in controlling burrowing shrimp
at the rates tested; and ultrasound can be used to measure egg diameter
in mature female sturgeon and to predict appropriate caviar harvest
times. Recent findings from this program include but are not limited
to: Black soldierfly pre-pupae were grown with and without omega-3 and
omega-6 fatty acids by altering their diets. Black soldierfly pre-pupae
enriched with omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids do not undergo
significant oxidation even after 12 months of storage at room
temperature. These findings suggest that this insect could easily be
stored for several months at room temperature without becoming rancid,
a characteristic that is beneficial to the feed industry if this
product is to be considered as a potential feed ingredient for
aquaculture diets as well as diets for various other animals. The
mechanism of immune-stimulated muscle wasting in fish may be somewhat
different than that in mammals. Selection of strains based on increased
levels of immunity may be detrimental to muscle growth. These results
may also imply that management practices such as long-term feeding of
immunostimulant-containing diets may ultimately reduce production
efficiency. Differential expression of heat shock proteins in rainbow
trout tissues was determined, as well as differential capacity of
rainbow trout embryos to up-regulate heat shock proteins expression in
response to heat shock. Partial results of these studies did show that
older embryos showed greater tolerance to heat shock than younger
embryos. Rainbow trout should be fed a low level of soybean meal during
early feeding to improve utilization of higher levels of soybean meal
in grow-out, and this information challenges current dogma. Findings
from this research have also identified important patterns in consumer
response to mass media reporting on farmed salmon and aquaculture in
general. People often use simple decision rules, leading a large
percentage of the population to avoid farmed seafood products under the
belief that these products are not natural or are contaminated. Media
analysis shows that news stories rarely convey the science in a
complete way. The research is leading to recommendations for both
science reporting and health advisories regarding seafood.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2001, and the
appropriation was $284,373. The fiscal year 2002 appropriation was
$600,000; in fiscal year 2003, $769,963; in fiscal year 2004, $688,911;
in fiscal year 2005, $763,840; in fiscal year 2006, $756,360; in fiscal
year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $563,031; and in fiscal years 2009
and 2010, $529,000 per year. A total of $5,484,478 has been
appropriated.
Washington State University, the University of Idaho, and the
Pacific Shellfish Institute in Washington are conducting the research.
The proposals are reviewed by the agency's National Aquaculture
Program staff upon submission. The last agency review concluded that
significant progress had been reported on research objectives under
this program. The Principal Investigators were leading authorities in
this area of research and were well aware of the complexity of the
industry and the implications of their research. The proposal was well
written and objectives were clearly stated. The experimental design and
scientific approach appeared to be sound. Literature and justifications
for research were provided. The Agency conducted a post-award workshop
in December 2009 that included reporting on progress and
accomplishments with a focus on performance, quality, and relevancy.
AQUACULTURE, LOUISIANA
The original goal of the research was to provide science-based
information that specifically addressed the needs of the aquaculture
industry in Louisiana and the southern region. The program funded by
the Aquaculture, Louisiana grant has resulted in increased crawfish
production from research on new winter baits, the use of square-mesh
traps, improved pond-draining and stocking schedules, and increased
reproduction capacity and improved predictability of reproduction from
short-term feeding of adult crawfish prior to burrowing. Studies were
completed that evaluated bait type, trap soak-time, and crawfish escape
from traps made from square-mesh welded wire. Research from this
program has also demonstrated that chitosan produced from crawfish
shells offers the potential to reduce off-flavor in processed channel
catfish. Disease control has been enhanced through the development of
new vaccines for channel catfish. Genetic maps have been developed for
commercial strains of channel catfish and research on cryopreservation
technologies has led to improved gene banking of commercially important
aquaculture species. The use of ultrasound for classification of
ovarian condition of catfish, including industry-scale use in
cooperation with commercial farms, was standardized and validated.
Spawning of catfish in greenhouse tanks prior to the natural spawning
season has been documented as well as reproductive conditioning of koi
carp in heated broodstock ponds. Research examined the utilization of
ultrasound technologies to determine the state of ripeness of channel
catfish eggs and demonstrated that channel catfish can be induced to
spawn early by using warm well water without affecting reproductive
performance. New processing technologies have led to improved quality
and safety of cultured aquatic species and new feed formulations have
led to reduced production costs. Energy analysis of alligator
operations showed two major areas where significant savings could
occur: water heating; and feed production. Results from recent crawfish
trials conducted in artificial burrows provided possible cause/effect
relationships observed in crawfish ponds where production relies solely
on natural recruitment to populate ponds. Possible causes of
reproductive impairment were identified to improve the understanding of
population dynamics in crawfish ponds. High-throughput cryopreservation
technologies for blue catfish sperm is now available for application
and, with continued work with commercial hatcheries, will become
available for commercialization. Characterization of larval development
of the Fat Sleeper, a marine baitfish, will aid in the identification
of morphological changes prior to these larvae accepting live or
artificial feed items. Soluble and insoluble proteins from catfish skin
were isolated and studied. Freeze-dried soluble and insoluble
hydrolysate catfish skin powders were shown to have desirable
functional and rheological properties. Protein hydrolysates made from
catfish skin can be converted into a high-value protein powder food
ingredient. Applications of this food ingredient include incorporation
into muscle tissue products by injection, tumbling, and coating. The
majority of Vibrio vulnificus isolates from Gulf oysters were of the
environmental type versus the clinical type, and there was a seasonal
variation in the genotypes identified. The study may help guide future
control measures to focus more specifically on seasons that tend to
accumulate the clinical-type Vibrio vulnificus.
Research conducted under this program continues as initiated under
the Aquaculture General program in fiscal years 1988 through 1991. The
work supported by the current program began in fiscal year 1992, and
the appropriation for fiscal years 1992-1993 was $390,000 per year;
$367,000 in fiscal year 1994; $330,000 each year in fiscal years 1995-
2000; $329,274 in fiscal year 2001; $322,000 in fiscal year 2002;
$327,855 in fiscal year 2003; $313,141 in fiscal year 2004; $329,344 in
fiscal year 2005; $325,710 in fiscal year 2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007;
$243,285 in fiscal year 2008; $188,000 in fiscal year 2009; and
$150,000 in fiscal year 2010. A total of $5,655,609 has been
appropriated.
The research is being conducted at Louisiana State University.
The agency's National Aquaculture Program Staff review proposals as
they are submitted to the agency with details of proposed research
studies. The proposed research is consistent with national goals and
objectives outlined by the Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture, National
Science, and Technology Council (JSA-NSTC) Strategic Plan for
Aquaculture Research and Development. The Agency conducted a post-award
management workshop in December 2009 that included reporting on
progress and accomplishments with a focus on performance, quality and
relevancy.
AQUACULTURE, MISSISSIPPI
The fiscal year 2009 research funded under the Aquaculture
Research, Stoneville, Mississippi Special Research grant was focused on
practical feeding and nutritional requirements of channel catfish.
Specific objectives outlined in the fiscal year 2009 proposal include:
(1) evaluate effects of lysine supplementation on lysine-deficient
diets on growth, feed efficiency, and lysine utilization in channel
catfish; (2) determine clearance times for yellow pigments in channel
catfish; and (3) compare satiate and restricted feeding on production
characteristics of pond-raised channel catfish x blue catfish hybrids.
The anticipated impact will be a reduction in feed cost and an increase
in profit for catfish producers. Research funded under this program has
had significant impact on the profitability of the pond-raised channel
catfish industry in the United States. Researchers involved in this
program work closely with the catfish industry providing practical
solutions to improve the feeding efficiency of catfish production
systems.
Past research conducted under this program has resulted in improved
feed formulations and efficiency and improved water quality and disease
resistance strategies for commercial channel catfish culture. Past
results, include but are not limited to, research that has shown that
dried distiller's grains with solubles plus supplemental lysine can
replace about 35 percent of soybean meal, and cottonseed meal plus
supplemental lysine can replace about 50 percent of soybean meal in the
diet without significantly affecting fish growth, feed efficiency, and
processing yield. A combination of distiller's grains, cottonseed meal,
and supplemental lysine can totally replace soybean meal. However, a
dietary level of 30 percent distiller's grains appears to increase the
fillet fat level because of the high fat content in distiller's grains.
Another study examined the use of high-protein finishing diets to
improve processing yield of pond-raised channel catfish using a
multiple-batch cropping system. Results showed that there were no
significant differences in the amount of feed fed, net production,
final weight per fish, feed conversion, processing yield, and body
composition of fish fed low protein diets and finished with high
protein diets compared with fish fed diets containing various levels of
protein throughout the growing season. Based on results from this
study, it appears that finishing with high protein diets does not
appear to be beneficial to improving processing yield of pond-raised
catfish. Another recent project concluded that there were no
significant differences in weight gain, feed conversion ratio,
survival, and processing yield of fish fed diets containing various
levels of canola meal up to 50 percent. Comparisons between channel
catfish and blue catfish concluded that, regardless of dietary protein
levels, blue catfish had higher whole-carcass weight, nugget, and total
meat yield and higher fillet moisture and protein but lower fillet
yield and fillet fat than channel catfish. Results of this program are
quickly disseminated to the industry having an almost immediate impact
on production costs due to close linkages with the channel catfish
industry.
The program was initiated in fiscal year 1980. Grants have been
awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal years 1980-1981,
$150,000 per year; fiscal year 1982, $240,000; fiscal years 1983-1984,
$270,000 per year; fiscal year 1985, $420,000; fiscal years 1986-1987,
$400,000 per year; fiscal year 1988, $500,000; fiscal year 1989,
$588,000; fiscal year 1990, $581,000; fiscal year 1991, $600,000;
fiscal years 1992-1993, $700,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $658,000;
fiscal years 1995-1997, $592,000 per year; fiscal year 1998, $642,000;
fiscal years 1999-2000, $592,000 per year; fiscal year 2001, $590,698;
fiscal year 2002, $579,000; fiscal year 2003, $582,191; fiscal year
2004, $520,908; fiscal year 2005, $516,832; fiscal year 2006, $511,830;
fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $385,284; and fiscal years 2009
and 2010, $361,000 per year. A total of $14,637,743 has been
appropriated.
The research is being conducted at the Thad Cochran National
Warmwater Aquaculture Center and Delta Branch Experiment Station of the
Mississippi State University Agricultural and Forestry Experiment
Station located in Stoneville, Mississippi.
The agency's National Aquaculture Program staff review proposals
with details of planned research studies that are submitted to the
agency. The Agency conducted a post-award management workshop in
December 2009 that included reporting on progress and accomplishments
with a focus on performance, quality and relevancy.
AQUACULTURE, NORTH CAROLINA
The objective of the grant is to improve the production efficiency
of the North Carolina warm water fish culture industry through
understanding the fundamental mechanisms controlling growth and feed
intake, and establishing methods to improve production efficiency and
environmental sustainability of hybrid striped bass in recirculating
water aquaculture systems.
Past research conducted under this program has lead to information
on: certain plasma proteins in hybrid striped bass that were correlated
with specific growth rates; a biofiltration study that suggested that
wood chips would be a cost-effective alternative to the more-expensive,
conventional plastic media; growth uniformity that can be achieved in
yellow perch by controlling temperature and photoperiod of grow-out
systems; nutritional requirement determinations for optimum growth and
development for Southern flounder and hybrid striped bass; selection of
families of hybrid striped bass for production traits including
survival, growth, and dress-out weight; determining that increasing the
percentage of female Southern flounder in a grow-out system will
significantly reduce production costs; partial compensatory growth was
observed in hybrid striped bass food fish grown in ponds and tanks
during the re-alimentation period when fish were fed daily following
periods of feed deprivation and pond total phosphorus concentrations
was 32 percent lower in the compensatory growth treatments than control
ponds; and many genes in hybrid striped bass are activated in
association with the transition of oocytes from primary to secondary
growth. Recent accomplishments include but are not limited to: ovaries
in early atresia produce a choriolysin, which is related to the
hatching enzyme involved in hatching fish embryos so that females
initiating atresia can be identified and induced to reproduce before
they become un-spawnable. Leptin expression was restricted to the liver
in striped bass and hybrid striped bass while in mammals leptin is
expressed predominantly in adipose tissue. Both tissues are important
lipid stores for their respective groups. The principal investigators
found that Insulin-like Growth Factor-I is a strong corollary to
predict growth and that ghrelin, a major appetite stimulatory hormone,
may partially drive the growth hormone secretory dynamics and
hyperphagic response observed with compensatory growth feeding
protocols for hybrid striped bass. Results from studies using chemicals
to reduce effluents from hybrid striped bass ponds strongly suggest
that chemical treatment of pond effluents to achieve Environmental
Protection Agency compliance is not feasible.
Work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1997, and the
appropriation was $150,000. The project was not funded in fiscal years
1998 and 1999. The fiscal year 2000 appropriation was $255,000; for
fiscal year 2001, $299,340; for fiscal year 2002, $293,000; for fiscal
year 2003, $291,096; for fiscal year 2004, $260,454; for fiscal year
2005, $277,760; for fiscal year 2006, $321,750; for fiscal year 2007,
$0; for fiscal year 2008, $242,292; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$227,000 per year. The total amount appropriated for this program is
$2,844,692.
The research is being conducted at North Carolina State University
at the North Carolina State aquaculture research facilities in Aurora
and Plymouth, North Carolina.
The agency's National Aquaculture Program staff reviewed the
project upon submission to the agency with details of all proposed
research studies. The proposed research was consistent with the Joint
Subcommittee on Aquaculture's Strategic Plan for Research and
Development. The Agency conducted a post-award management workshop in
December 2009 that included reporting on progress and accomplishments
with a focus on performance, quality and relevancy.
AQUACULTURE PRODUCT AND MARKETING DEVELOPMENT, WEST VIRGINIA
The original goal of this research was to develop sound marketing
strategies for aquaculture products, improve the economic efficiency of
aquaculture production systems, and improve the quality and variety of
aquaculture products coming from West Virginia and the Appalachian
region. Research funded under this program has lead to the development
of software designed to simulate raceway production of trout that will
provide a way for growers to determine how to better-manage their
systems; commercial fish meal-free diets that may provide an effective
strategy to reduce the levels of contaminants in farm-raised rainbow
trout; West Virginia fee-fishing opportunities that can contribute to
the productivity of the tourism industry by providing tourists with
more to see and do with respect to outdoor activities; information on
watercress that can be grown in the effluent stream from trout raceway
systems and that may effectively remove nitrogen and phosphorus
discharged into streams; the use of impaired waters, such as mine
discharge ponds, utilizing different feeds and the use of different
strains or species of fish that may open opportunities for small fish
farms in the Appalachian region; aquaponics systems that can utilize
flow-through systems and that cool-season food and ornamental plants
can be produced and grow well in this system; and plant production that
can be maintained year-round providing a reliable income source and
that can be used to grow cool-season crops through the summer when they
are less-available and can command a higher price. New protein and
lipid recovery technologies designed for semi-industrial applications
that will allow protein and lipid recovery in sufficient quantities for
development of marketable, value-added food products from aquaculture
products from West Virginia has lead to the development of basic
parameters for protein and fish oil recovery and design for an
industrial-scale bio-reactor system for processing fish by-products
and/or whole, gutted fish. This has resulted in the submission of two
patent applications filed by West Virginia University with the United
States Patent and Trademark Office.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
year 1998, $600,000; $750,000 for each of fiscal years 1999 and 2000;
$748,350 for fiscal year 2001; $733,000 for fiscal year 2002; $735,190
for fiscal year 2003; $671,017 for fiscal year 2004; $705,312 in fiscal
year 2005; $742,500 in fiscal year 2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007;
$521,325 in fiscal year 2008; $489,000 in fiscal year 2009; and
$550,000 in fiscal year 2010. A total of $7,995,694 has been
appropriated.
The work is being carried out at the University of West Virginia in
Morgantown along with a number of cooperators.
Proposals with details of planned research studies are submitted to
the agency for critical review by the agency's National Aquaculture
Program staff. The proposed research was consistent with national goals
and objectives outlined in the National Science and Technology
Council's Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture under the Strategic Plan
for Aquaculture Research and Development. The Agency conducted a post-
award management workshop in December 2009 that included reporting on
progress and accomplishments with a focus on performance, quality and
relevancy.
ARMILLARIA ROOT ROT, MICHIGAN
This project has objectives to find resistance to Armillaria root
rot of cherry by conventional breeding techniques and to develop a
management strategy for Armillaria root disease, primarily host plant
resistance. The nurseries in infected field plots have already been
established, but the outcome of the experiment will be 5 to 8 years in
the future. Within the large screening program, some epidemiological
work on strain distribution and on the efficacy of sanitation measures
will be done. Analysis of integrated pest management possibilities,
particularly biological control and chemical control are underway.
Basic research is being conducted on the fungal pathogen itself, in the
evaluation of genetic factors that help the Armillaria fungus develop
rhizomorphs that grow from one tree to the next and are important in
protecting the fungus from sunlight.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2002, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2002 was $160,000; in fiscal year 2003,
$158,960; in fiscal year 2004, $142,156; in fiscal year 2005, $149,792;
in fiscal year 2006, $149,490; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year
2008, $111,216; and in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $104,000 per year.
The total amount appropriated is $1,079,614.
This work is being carried out at Michigan State University.
The submitting institution conducts a peer review of the proposal
prior to submission. Senior agency technical staff conducts a merit
review of the proposal prior to making a funding recommendation. The
agency may conduct an on-site review in 2010.
ASPARAGUS PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES, WASHINGTON
The original goals of this research were to reduce production and
consumer costs and increase the annual asparagus supply. To date this
research has proven the concept of new harvesting technologies to
reduce field labor costs, developed new reduced-labor processing
technologies, investigated new packaging processes to improve quality
and shelf life of fresh-packed asparagus, and began investigations into
the economic and social impact of reduced-labor asparagus production.
Reduced production costs will increase the national and global
competitiveness asparagus growers.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2001. The
amount appropriated for fiscal year 2001 was $224,505; for fiscal year
2002, $260,000; for fiscal year 2003, $278,180; for fiscal year 2004,
$248,525; for fiscal year 2005, $248,000; for fiscal year 2006,
$245,520; for fiscal year 2007, $0; and fiscal year 2008, $183,705; and
for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $173,000 per year. The total amount
appropriated is $1,861,435.
The work is being conducted at Washington State University's
agricultural experiment stations in Prosser and Pasco and at Michigan
State University's experiment station in East Lansing.
The performing institution conducts a peer review of each proposal
and submits an annual progress report to the agency each year. Progress
has been made in achieving the research objectives. Senior agency
technical staff reviews each proposal to assess quality. The findings
of these reviews indicate progress in achieving the project's
objectives.
AVIAN BIOSCIENCE, DELAWARE
The objective of the grant is to improve production efficiency,
animal health, environmental compatibility, and food safety in poultry
systems. A key goal of the University of Delaware Center for Avian
Biosciences (Center) is to strengthen the interfaces between recognized
and growing programs to enhance their visibility and effectiveness.
Since its inception in 2006, and continued efforts in 2009, the Center
has made significant contributions in the field of avian biosciences.
Some of the significant highlights include: developed foam-based humane
emergency mass depopulation alternative for floor-reared poultry
broilers and turkeys; improved in-house compositing of poultry
carcasses infected with highly pathogenic avian viruses; interacted
with Federal agencies and legislators and provided scientific
information for adoption/endorsement of the technology by the U.S.
poultry industry; made numerous training presentations on Avian
Influenza controls and eradication efforts; developed avian influenza
rapid diagnostic assays; received recognition for two University of
Delaware laboratories as leading labs in avian influenza surveillance
and detection in wild birds and poultry; sponsored numerous conferences
and workshops; established significant domestic and international
linkages in animal health. This Center continues to build partnerships
with the industry, appropriate State and Federal agencies, other
organizations, centers, and universities in research, teaching and
outreach efforts. Furthermore, undergraduate and graduate educational
programs in avian biosciences are flourishing under faculty mentorship
in avian bioscience disciplines.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2006 with an
appropriation of $99,000; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008,
$74,475; in fiscal year 2009, $94,000; and in fiscal year 2010,
$150,000. A total of $417,475 has been appropriated.
This work is being carried out at the University of Delaware in
Newark, Delaware.
The agency thoroughly evaluated the current year and previous year
progress in May of 2009. The agency evaluation is in agreement with the
project description as being 40 percent research and 60 percent applied
in nature. Subsequent conversations and email exchanges between the
Project Director and our liaison suggest that the project is
progressing well.
BABCOCK INSTITUTE, WISCONSIN
The original goal of the Institute was to cultivate links between
the dairy industry of the United States and those in the rest of the
world through mutually beneficial research and programs that are
scientific, educational, and commercial in nature. This involves
research collaboration and scientific exchange, world market and dairy
trade analysis, and education and training programs. The Institute is
still dedicated to its original goal. The Babcock Institute has
completed studies of the Indian and Mexican dairy sectors as part of
its series of dairy ``country/regional studies'' designed to help
United States firms and policymakers develop strategies and policies to
exploit export opportunities and accommodate actions of foreign dairy
companies and governments in exporting countries. Mexico is the largest
market for U.S. exporters of dairy products. In 2008, Mexico purchased
U.S. dairy products valued at $935 million. Babcock is developing links
with Southeast Asia. In 2009, the Director participated in a Trade
mission to Japan and China to promote Wisconsin as a site for foreign
investment and learn more about export opportunities and technical
collaborations. Babcock is collaborating with the China Agricultural
University in Beijing to increase the exchange of scientific
information between the United States and China. Visitors from China
toured the Babcock Institute to learn ways to help improve the quality
and safety of dairy products in China. Babcock is building ties to
current and future dairy leaders in Mexico through links with the main
agricultural campus at Queretaro, Mexico's leading private University,
commonly known as Monterrey Tec, the large Alpura processing
cooperative, and the national Holstein Association. Partnerships have
resulted in research to help improve the flavor of United States-
produced Hispanic cheeses, which continue to be a substantial growth
area in the United States, but are routinely criticized for poor flavor
and functional characteristics. Babcock is funding research through
sub-grants to study methods to improve animal/dairy products
production. This includes feed evaluation to improve animal nutrition,
which will improve the nutritional value of the dairy products and
enhance dairy yields. Studies on the microbiology and chemistry of
artisanal cheeses are also ongoing. The Institute has reached out to
international and domestic producer groups with multilingual technical
publications and CDs, multilingual electronic outreach through the Web,
and international short courses and consulting services. Institute
staff members continue to work closely with county extension agents to
create practical training materials for Spanish-speaking dairy
employees, including calf care and herdsmanship modules for the Dairy
Worker Training series, and with University of Wisconsin--Madison
professors to create educational CDs for U.S. and international farmers
and dairy industry professionals. Recently developed CDs include
Artificial Insemination Techniques, Milking Skills, and Brucellosis
Prevention. Babcock also produces the Dairy Update series, which brings
University of Wisconsin research findings to the agricultural
community. The institute provided training to improve the quality and
safety of dairy products to dairy farmers, producers, scientists, and
students from Europe, Central and South America, Southeast Asia, and
the Middle East. Training of young scientists in the United States in
dairy science and cheese making is ongoing.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
years 1992 and 1993, $75,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $250,000;
fiscal years 1995-1998, $312,000 per year; fiscal year 1999, $400,000;
fiscal year 2000, $510,000; fiscal year 2001, $598,680; fiscal year
2002, $588,000; fiscal year 2003, $596,100; fiscal year 2004, $536,814;
fiscal year 2005, $564,448; fiscal year 2006, $594,000; fiscal year
2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $442,878; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$416,000 per year. A total of $7,310,920 has been appropriated.
The work of the Babcock Institute is carried out at the University
of Wisconsin--Madison College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and
throughout the world.
The Babcock Institute undergoes two independent reviews each year,
internally at the University of Wisconsin prior to submission of the
proposal, and by technical staff at NIFA prior to approval for release
of funds. In addition, the Institute was included in a review of the
Department of Dairy Science at the University of Wisconsin in May,
2004. The 2009 proposal was reviewed by the NIFA National Program
Leader.
BARLEY FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT, IDAHO AND MONTANA
The original goal of this research was to use results from
significant earlier investment in barley genetics and molecular
genetics to assemble appropriate genetic packages, with traditional
crossing and selection techniques, to develop and release more
economically productive barley varieties to western barley growers.
These researchers have focused on unique attributes of barley as a crop
and a valued product. A major development this year has been the
acceptance of barley varieties developed by this project by major
brewing companies, including Coors-Miller and Anhauser-Busch. The new
varieties performed well in brewing quality tests. Farmers will benefit
because the project's new varieties are significantly more reliable for
them than varieties they were growing before, which were bred in and
for Canada. Barley farmers in Montana, Idaho, and similar regions can
now grow varieties that have a good market and reduced risk of crop
failure, two characteristics that are critical for farm income and
rural development. In addition, the researchers report a technical
breakthrough this year toward a practical and economically feasible on-
farm ethanol production from barley straw. After natural in-field
freezing, fructan components in the straw can be isolated,
concentrated, and fermented by a specific yeast to create biofuel.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2006 with an
appropriation of $727,650; $0 in fiscal year 2007; $547,143 in fiscal
year 2008; $514,000 in fiscal year 2009; and $547,000 in fiscal year
2010. The total amount appropriated is $2,335,793.
Research is being conducted at Montana State University and the
University of Idaho.
Each annual proposal is reviewed by senior agency technical staff.
This research has been productive based on germplasm releases and peer-
reviewed journal articles and other publications.
BEEF IMPROVEMENT RESEARCH, MISSOURI AND TEXAS
The original goal of this program was to enhance production
efficiency in beef cattle production systems. Since 2006, the Missouri
group research has focused on measuring residual feed intake among
animals, its relevance to feed costs differences among animals, and
benefit of selecting for residual feed intake in reducing production
costs in the feedlot. The research has shown that selecting progeny
from sires that were tested to be efficient compared to those testing
inefficient reduced production costs in the feedlot by an estimated $60
per head. The Texas researchers selected 105 Brahman bulls, 120 Brahman
heifers, and 38 Bonsmara heifers based on phenotypic measure of
residual feed intake including reproductive performance. The next phase
of this study included breeding high and low efficiency Brahaman
females to high and low efficiency Hereford bulls to develop high and
low efficiency F1 females. With these animal populations in hand, the
project staff is now pursuing to determine the biological basis for
genetic and phenotypic variation in feed efficiency of growing and
mature cattle; examining behavioral and physiological responses in
cattle with divergent feed efficiencies; develop technologies to reduce
the cost and increase the accuracy of measuring feed efficiency in
cattle, especially on pasture; examine relationships between feed
efficiency and fertility in gestation cows, growing heifers, and bulls;
and develop producer education programs to enhance adoption of these
technologies. Ultimately, a significant reduction in feed input costs
and environmental impacts of beef production systems are the desired
target.
The work supported under this grant began in fiscal year 2006, and
the appropriation for fiscal year 2006 was $990,000; in fiscal year
2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $737,799; and in fiscal years 2009 and
2010, $693,000 per year. A total of $3,113,799 has been appropriated.
This work is being carried out at the Departments of Animal
Sciences at Texas A&M University and the University of Missouri--
Columbia.
The agency evaluated the initial proposal in May of fiscal year
2006. In September 2006, the National Program Leader responsible for
the grant oversight visited the Texas facilities. The project was
reviewed again in 2008. The Missouri project was reviewed by the
National Program Leader in fiscal year 2006. No site visit for the
Missouri project has been conducted. However, the project progress and
the current project were thoroughly reviewed in spring of 2008 and
spring of 2009.
BIOACTIVE FOODS AND RESEARCH FOR HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY, MASSACHUSETTS
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an appropriation of $525,000. Since this is a new
grant, no information is available regarding the program's research
goals and objectives.
BIODESIGN AND PROCESSING RESEARCH CENTER, VIRGINIA
The Biodesign and Bioprocessing Research Center researchers are
working to develop processes for producing high value polymers from
poultry and dairy processing in Virginia, optimize biogas and acid
production potential and nutrient recovery from dairy manure, and
conduct a proof-of-concept study to produce high-yield hydrogen from
polysaccharides and water through a novel enzymatic method.
The project has been investigating ways to toughen agricultural by-
product proteins from poultry and dairy processing by eliminating the
diffusible glycerol component and ways to stabilize the protein against
biodegradation for longer life. It has been discovered that choice of
the correct protein structure through processing can stabilize the
protein to microbial attack and more efficiently tailor product life.
Current studies are also focusing on self-assembly protein structures
from wheat and corn protein that could serve as templates for high
performance materials. Results so far show that these proteins can form
fibers similar to silk, hair, and collagen. Studies have been conducted
to explore a novel attached culture system for growing the alga
Chlorella as a biodiesel feedstock, using dairy manure wastewater as
the growth medium. Among the various supporting materials tested for
algal attachment, the best performance in terms of biomass yield, ease
of harvest and physical robustness was observed with polystyrene foam.
The algal culture removed 61-79 percent total nitrogen and 62-93
percent total phosphorus from the dairy manure wastewater under
different culture conditions. A patent application has been filed based
on this technology. The project also produced high-yield hydrogen from
cellulosic materials. In addition, they have increased the hydrogen
production rate by 10x fold through optimization. The next 10-fold
increase in reaction rate will greatly enhance the chances for
commercialization of the technology. The results of these
investigations have been disseminated at numerous national and
international conferences throughout the World. The Center has provided
opportunities for training of a large number of graduate students in an
effort to produced skilled work force for the bio-industry of the
future.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2006. The
appropriation for fiscal year 2006 was $940,000; for fiscal year 2007,
$0; for fiscal year 2008, $701,058; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$868,000 per year; A total of $3,377,058 has been appropriated.
The research is conducted at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University.
A progress report for fiscal year 2009 has been evaluated, and it
has been determined that progress toward accomplishing the project
objectives is on-going.
BIOENERGY PRODUCTION AND CARBON SEQUESTRATION, TENNESSEE
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $1,000,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
BIOMASS-BASED ENERGY RESEARCH, MISSISSIPPI AND OKLAHOMA
This project is focused on the conversion of cellulosic biomass,
such as switchgrass, to liquid fuels using a gasification-fermentation
process. Specifically, the project will: (1) assess the feedstock
potential of agricultural and forestry crops; (2) establish critical
parameters in maintaining syngas quality; (3) advance bioreactor
designs and enhance enzyme activities; (4) investigate potential
valuable products that complement ethanol production; and (5) determine
the full cost of system components including production, harvesting,
storage, processing, and waste disposal. The project has developed a
new high-yielding switchgrass cultivar that has demonstrated
significantly higher yields than the best standard variety.
Correlations between gasifer performance parameters and biomass
properties have improved the understanding of operational variables and
increased syngas quality. Preliminary estimates suggest that at least
three units of energy are produced for one energy unit of input.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2001, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2001 was $900,016; for fiscal year 2002,
$960,000; for fiscal year 2003, $1,142,525; for fiscal year 2004,
$1,022,929; for fiscal year 2005, $1,014,816; for fiscal year 2006,
$1,188,000; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $893,700;
and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $839,000 per year. The total amount
appropriated is $8,799,986.
The work is being carried out at Oklahoma State University, the
University of Oklahoma, and Mississippi State University.
Evaluation of this project is conducted yearly based on annual
progress reports and discussions with the principle investigators over
the course of the year. This project is making progress in accordance
with the mission of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
BIOTECHNOLOGY, NORTH CAROLINA
The original goal of this research was to improve the
competitiveness of wood production in the southern United States, to
better manage invasive pathogens of ornamental trees, and to increase
the distribution of elite hardwood trees in natural forest settings.
Researchers are planning on using biotechnology and genetics to address
optimal ways to generate both transgenic and non-transgenic Populus
clones that are better adapted as biomass feedstock under varying
environmental conditions. Recent accomplishments include the
development of field sites at Oxford and Williamsdale, North Carolina.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2001, and the
following amounts have been appropriated: in fiscal year 2001,
$284,373; in fiscal year 2002, $306,000; in fiscal year 2003, $304,011;
in fiscal year 2004, $272,383; in fiscal year 2005, $286,688; in fiscal
year 2006, $284,130; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008,
$211,509; and in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $199,000 per year. The
total amount appropriated is $2,347,094.
The research is being conducted at North Carolina State University
and various sites in the southern Appalachians and elsewhere in the
southeastern United States.
Senior agency technical staff conducts a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
The submitting institution conducts a peer review of the proposal prior
to submission.
BOVINE TUBERCULOSIS, MICHIGAN AND MINNESOTA
The original goal of this program is to focus on the issues of
spatial epidemiologic relationships involved in the transmission of
tuberculosis among the deer population, survivability of the organism
in the environment, and the other wild or domestic hosts that may exist
for this organism, as well as the pathogenesis of the disease in
pigeons. Tuberculosis infected deer have been found to be the source of
infection for other wild animals and domestic cats. New approaches to
TB diagnosis and detection, through more rapid, reliable diagnostic
tools and novel and more efficient surveillance techniques, are needed
to reduce the significant costs associated with TB control and
eradication programs. A risk assessment model for herd tuberculosis
status was developed and correctly classified 95 percent of the
simulated case herds as tuberculosis positive. This risk model
accurately predicts the likelihood of a beef herd being correctly
identified as tuberculosis positive or negative. Incorporating these in
to a risk-based surveillance program will enhance current TB
surveillance programs. This will decrease both the economic and
psychological costs of TB, and accelerate TB control and eradication.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2000 with an
appropriation of $170,000; for fiscal year 2001, $324,285; for fiscal
year 2002, $318,000; for fiscal year 2003, $345,738; for fiscal year
2004, $309,165; for fiscal year 2005, $352,160; for fiscal year 2006,
$352,440; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $262,152; for
fiscal year 2009, $246,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $346,000. The
cumulative total amount appropriated is $3,025,940.
This work is being conducted at the College of Veterinary Medicine
at Michigan State University in East Lansing, Michigan.
Each proposal submitted to NIFA has been institutionally peer-
reviewed at Michigan State University. During the review of the fiscal
year 2009 proposal, the NIFA National Program Leader determined that
the research objectives were clearly described and placed in lucid and
logical context with the objectives of the prior grant cycle.
BRUCELLOSIS VACCINE, MONTANA
The original goal of this program is to develop vaccine delivery
systems and novel Brucella vaccines for bison. This will be
accomplished by conducting research to design and develop new subunit
and live Brucellosis vaccines that will effectively protect bison and
cattle against Brucellosis.
Progress to date includes a better understanding of the bison
immune response which shows the dynamics of bison immunity and the
importance of studying bison mucosal immune responses to assist in the
development of new generation Brucella vaccines. Reagents have been
developed to detect immune responses of bison, and an oral delivery
system for a bison vaccine has been optimized. The investigator
continues to work toward vaccine development, and has identified
possible candidates for the brucellosis vaccine. Results from the bison
and mouse vaccination studies are promising due to protective efficacy
which was obtained in both animal systems. Thus, the development of a
subunit vaccine for brucellosis appears to be feasible once analyses'
discerning the protective epitopes using a DNA vaccine approach has
been completed. Further work was also done to characterize the new
vaccine candidates.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1999. The
appropriation for fiscal year 1999 was $150,000; for fiscal year 2000,
$425,000; for fiscal year 2001, $494,909; for fiscal year 2002,
$485,000; for fiscal year 2003, $489,796; for fiscal year 2004,
$438,398; for fiscal year 2005, $440,448; for fiscal year 2006,
$435,600; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $324,711; and
for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $305,000 per year. The total amount
appropriated is $4,303,862.
This work is being done at Montana State University's Department of
Veterinary and Molecular Biology in Bozeman, Montana.
Each fiscal year, the submitted proposal for this program is peer-
reviewed by the institution prior to submission, and subsequently
reviewed by a NIFA National Program Leader.
CATALOGING GENES ASSOCIATED WITH DROUGHT AND DISEASE RESISTANCE, NEW
MEXICO
This research will use computational tools to investigate changes
in gene expression that occur during drought and diseases stresses in
plants grown in the American Southwest. The researchers propose to link
DNA sequence information to gene expression patterns with particular
interest in those genes that affect plant metabolism. They will also
set up plant metabolite extraction methods and gas chromatography and
mass spectrometry analysis methods to quantify key metabolites. Based
on gene expression data, the researchers predict that certain
metabolites in Capsicum chili and Phaseolus beans will be altered in
response to disease and drought. They will test these predictions using
root samples collected from treated resistant and susceptible or
tolerant genotypes. Research on the molecular genetics of drought
stress and the impact of drought on disease stress is crucial as water
supplies and quality become more restricted.
In 2009, these researchers focused on the development of a process
for green chemistry extraction of commercially valuable red pigments
from chili peppers. This will be a new process that may be patented.
They have also discovered that not all orange-colored chili peppers are
high in beta-carotene, since red and yellow pigments can mix in the
fruit to create orange color. Chili breeding programs should verify
whether or not there is a link between color and vitamin content in
their material, before proceeding with visual selection based on color.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $186,684; and for fiscal years 2009
and 2010, $176,000 per year. A total of $538,684 has been appropriated.
The research will be conducted at New Mexico State University.
The submitting institution conducts a peer review of the proposal
prior to submission. Senior agency technical staff conducts a merit
review of the proposal prior to making a funding recommendation.
CENTER FOR ONE MEDICINE, ILLINOIS
The original goal of this program, was to educate a new cadre of
health professionals who understand the determinants and contributing
factors for human, animal, and ecosystem health as well as how public
health policy is developed and how it affects the health of all three
objectives. To understand disease processes that occur at the interface
of human and animal activities and their effects on the environment and
to improve our society's preparedness and response to natural and
intentional exposures of biological, chemical, and physical agents.
Fiscal year 2009 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant. An amount of $235,000 was appropriated in fiscal year
2009 and $500,000 in fiscal year 2010. A total of $735,000 has been
appropriated.
The work is being carried out at the University of Illinois, at
Urbana-Champaign.
The fiscal year 2009 proposal was institutionally peer-reviewed at
the Center for One Medicine. In addition, a NIFA National Program
Leader reviewed the proposal.
CENTER FOR RURAL STUDIES, VERMONT
The original goal was to create a database and analytical
capability for rural development programming in Vermont. Past
accomplishments include maps to target child hunger and rural
development opportunities, applied research to inform the development
of retail areas, an ``Economic Handbook for Vermont Counties,'' and
strategies for using the Internet.
The Center has assisted local officials with e-mail, streaming
video, software installation and utilization, and accessing information
from Web sources. It has developed databases useful for local planners
and school boards and indicators to help local officials interpret data
and apply for State and Federal grants. It worked with the Vermont
Council on Rural Development to assess the need for broadband Internet
service and facilitated community-level solutions for service in more
than 47 towns. It has developed training materials for town clerks on
Web site design, e-Government, and e-security.
In 2008, the Center updated the ``Vermont Indicators Online,''
collaborated with the U.S. Census Bureau to ensure access to Census
Bureau data, assisted Vermont data users, and maintained a Census
Bureau data portal for State residents. The VIO had 24,000 Web site
visits, and 60,000 pages of data were accessed that year. The Center
also developed the ``Vermont Geography Portal'' to make spatial
information and a mapping application widely available. In addition,
the Center developed a GIS educational curriculum for municipal
officials and K-12 educators. Also in 2008, the Center developed
methods to use spatial data to identify population clusters in the
State and analyze them community-by-community.
In 2009, the Center surveyed over 400 Vermont farmers on land and
development issues related to farmer decisions to purchase or sell land
or to change the way they farm. Almost 80 percent reported that local
boards had some degree of understanding of agricultural issues and
operations. The Center addressed the issue of extending broadband to
rural Vermont and developed a database of over 4,800 households and
businesses that want broadband access and services. Focusing on farm
business incubation, the project supported 15 operations over 3 years
that now report an average net farm income increase from $18,000 to
$21,000 over 1 year. The Center completed a study of a local food e-
commerce portal to assist in marketing fresh products. Farmers will
help design and test an e-commerce portal in fiscal year 2010.
Workshops for women farmers helped expose producers to new
opportunities through the Internet. The Center continued to enhance and
maintain the Vermont Indicators Online (VIO) Web site and the Vermont
Housing Data Web site. The project funded two rounds of business
workshops for food product entrepreneurs and provided technical
assistance to a State farm-to-school program, with VT FEED. Other
activities included maintaining and updating the Vermont Planning
Information Center, a clearinghouse of information for municipal land
use officials, and launching a community-based participatory research
partnership with Smart Growth Vermont to determine indicators of health
for Vermont downtowns, including food systems and regional landscape
date.
The grant was initiated in fiscal year 1992. Appropriated amounts
are: fiscal years 1992-1993, $37,000 per year; fiscal year 1994,
$35,000; fiscal years 1995-1998, $32,000 per year; fiscal years 1999-
2000, $200,000 per year; fiscal year 2001, $199,560; fiscal year 2002,
$240,000; fiscal year 2003, $337,790; fiscal year 2004, $302,206;
fiscal year 2005, $348,192; fiscal year 2006, $361,350; fiscal year
2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $261,159; fiscal year 2009, $245,000; and
fiscal year 2010, $350,000. Total appropriations are $3,282,257.
The work is being carried out through the University of Vermont.
Parts of the research and application are done in association with
county planning commissions and local governments and business
organizations.
The agency evaluates the merit of research proposals as they are
submitted. The principal investigators and project managers submit
annual reports to the agency to document impact of the project. Agency
evaluation of the project includes peer review of accomplishments and
proposal objectives and targeted outcomes.
CHILDHOOD OBESITY AND NUTRITION, VERMONT
The objective of this grant is to increase physical activity
behavior in preschool children enrolled in daycare centers by:
increasing the exercise self-efficacy of daycare staff, increasing
their knowledge and changing attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions about
preschool physical activity, and increasing the availability and
utilization of high quality physical activity materials.
This research looks at physical activity behavior as one
intervention. Formative data on daycare centers and daycare providers
were collected in 2004 through three focus groups to see how staff
perceived physical activity for children, what they felt the barriers
to children getting more activity were and how they felt about their
own activity. Focus groups gave positive feedback that physical
activity for children was important to daycare providers. A key result
was that the day care setting was a very favorable environment for
promotion of physical activity with perceived advantages to social,
cognitive, behavioral and health issues. In addition, there was a
strong appreciation of the child care provider's role in promoting,
facilitating, or teaching physical activity skills during active play
times. Both modeling and leadership were seen as important to obtaining
the benefits of physical activity in this environment. While child care
providers showed a strong appreciation of their role in promoting,
facilitating, or teaching physical activity during active play times,
the level of engagement in physical activity in their own lives varied
widely, suggesting that this will be a challenging direction for
intervention in comparison to other skills directly related to child
care work. Barriers to physical activity in day care settings to
include indoor and outdoor space available, access to open land and
play or exercise equipment were explored. In 2005 and 2006, two mail
surveys were implemented and sent to Vermont daycare center directors
and to daycare staff. Survey responses helped researchers identify
training needs; training content, format, location and incentives;
barriers to staff involvement in modeling or leading active play; and
supporters or reinforcers for active play. In 2006 and 2007, the
feasibility of using SenseWear Armbands to measure physical activity
was determined in two different daycare centers. In 2008, the physical
activity of 61 children from seven daycare centers was measured via
direct observation and objectively using the SenseWear Armbands.
Results showed that children spent a total of 58 percent of their day
sedentary; 36.8 percent in moderate activity; 4.4 percent in vigorous
activity and 0.7 percent in very vigorous activity. Children were about
twice as active when they played outside as compared to inside for
moderate or vigorous activity and the quality of their play or level of
energy expended 10 percent higher when they were engaged in teacher-led
activities. This evidence supports current work to train providers to
provide more teacher-directed, structured physical activity to
preschool children.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2003 with an
appropriation of $149,025; for fiscal year 2004, $133,209; for fiscal
year 2005, $190,464; for fiscal year 2006, $198,990; for fiscal year
2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $112,209; for fiscal year 2009,
$169,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $250,000. A total of $1,202,897 has
been appropriated.
Research is being conducted at the University of Vermont and State
Agricultural College, Burlington.
The project underwent a peer review process in June 2009 in
accordance with USDA guidelines and is also evaluated through annual
reports. The project materials have also been reviewed by the
Institutional Review Board and by State daycare leaders. Finally, any
data that are published would be evaluated through the peer review
process.
CITRUS CANKER AND GREENING, FLORIDA
The original goals of this research were to evaluate potential
materials that could delay or interfere with the bacterial infection
processes on susceptible host material, characterize aspects of canker
and HLB and ACP biology, ecology, and epidemiology that might be
manipulated to reduce infection or to predict more effectively where
infection has taken place, and to develop mechanisms within the host
plants that will increase their resistance to infection and disease
development. Researchers are attempting to introduce additional
resistance mechanisms derived from the pathogen or from plants with
resistance to other similar bacterial diseases. Educational objectives
of this project focus on development and delivery of current
information on the organism, the disease, and efforts to eliminate it.
Educational programs will be designed for commercial citrus producers,
harvesters, and those who work in contact with citrus trees which may
be exposed to the disease; homeowners with citrus planted in their
yards; the general public who seeks information on the eradication
effort and its necessity; and regulators and policy makers who are
interested in science-based actions and policies.
This program began in fiscal year 2001. Funds have been
appropriated as follows: fiscal year 2001, $4,739,550; fiscal year
2002, $490,000; fiscal year 2003, $486,815; fiscal year 2004, $447,345;
fiscal year 2005, $470,208; fiscal year 2006, $495,000; fiscal year
2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $1,295,865; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$1,217,000 per year. The total amount appropriated is $10,858,783. This
project was funded only for citrus canker through 2007. Citrus greening
was added to the objectives in 2008 although funding levels did not
increase.
The research is being conducted at the University of Florida
research and education facilities located at Lake Alfred, Bradenton,
Immokalee, and Homestead; and in South Texas.
Senior agency technical staff evaluates the project every year. In
addition, the University of Florida operates this project as an
internal competitive grants program that seats an independent panel of
experts to review the research and extension proposals. The agency
worked with the program director to develop a request for applications
and provided input into the development of a peer-review process. A
review of the research supported by this project was undertaken in 2006
by the National Citrus Research Council, and an agency technical
specialist was in attendance. There was no recommendation for change of
direction, and the community wants to stay the course with the current
objectives, while increasing public outreach, particularly on the
option of transgenic oranges. In 2011, the Agricultural Research
Service is leading a national research coordination effort. This
special grant funded research projects and new request for applications
will be reviewed in the context of the total national research and
extension effort on citrus diseases.
COMPETITIVENESS OF AGRICULTURE PRODUCTS, WASHINGTON
This research identifies international marketing opportunities for
Northwest firms in the forest products and food products sectors by
providing information on markets and product technologies that can open
higher-valued international markets to U.S. exporters. Foreign
purchasers need information on the advantages of U.S. products, and
U.S. exporters need information on the substantially different quality
and service requirements for serving foreign markets.
The International Marketing Program for Agricultural Commodities
and Trade (IMPACT) program of Washington State University implements
this research and provides a central and stable core of knowledgeable
experts who can guide small export businesses in navigating these
markets successfully.
The Center for International Trade in Forest Products (CINTRAFOR),
located within the College of Forest Resources at the University of
Washington, provides the research knowledge in marketing and product
conversion to be competitive in the world market.
The most recent accomplishments of IMPACT and CINTRAFOR are:
For 2008
IMPACT Center developed a cost effective algal cultivation process
for converting cull potato starch to omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty
acids (omega-3 PUFA), more specifically, docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). A
patent for the process is currently pending. The enriched algal biomass
that is created in the process also has auxiliary uses as feed
additives that can be fed to dairy cows to enrich the nutritional value
of milk or to other animals to increase the value of the respective
animal products. In addition to the clear impact of providing a supply
source for omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids that can have positive
health effects on humans, as well as providing for nutritionally
enhanced milk products, the process also provides for a valuable
alternative market outlet for cull potatoes that might otherwise have
limited value in the market place for potato producers.
CINTRAFOR, manages the United States-China Build (USCB) program and
promotes the benefits of wood frame construction to construction
professionals in China. This program also provides U.S. wooden building
materials manufacturers the opportunity to participate in trade
missions to China where they can meet with potential customers in three
different cities to showcase their products and services. Since the
start of the program, over 100 U.S. companies and over 2,800 Chinese
construction industry professionals have participated in USCB programs
in China. This program has resulted in over $32.4 million in new export
sales to China while creating almost 350 new jobs within the forest
products sector in the United States.
For 2009
The IMPACT Center funds a variety of projects applying advances in
science and technology to improve the competitiveness of food and
agricultural systems in today's global market.
IMPACT Center scientists are investigating polices for mitigating
production and trade effects from invasive species outbreaks in
livestock--e.g., mad cow disease or foot and mouth disease--and
plants--e.g., apple maggot. Other projects include exploring the phase
out of organophosphate pesticides on the apple industry, enhancing wine
exports, profitability in the organic sector, and assessment of agri-
tourism.
Research has demonstrated that losses from a foot and mouth
outbreak in the United States could range over $270 billion, but that
this can be dramatically reduced with improved traceability in the
livestock system. Other projects can improve export success for
existing industries, solve phytosanitary and barriers to trade issues,
or develop alternative revenues through organic production and agri-
tourism.
CINTRAFOR manages the highly successful United States-China Build
program for the Evergreen Building Products Association.
In 2009, CINTRAFOR organized two sales missions to China where 17
U.S. companies made technical presentations to the 678 Chinese
construction professionals who attended the six seminars.
Following the conclusion of the two sales missions, the U.S.
companies reported that they had obtained total sales of $22,441,000 as
a result of their participation in the United States-China Build
program. It is estimated that the increase in U.S. exports resulting
from these two sales missions led to the creation of 252 new jobs.
The work began in fiscal year 1992. The appropriation for fiscal
years 1992-1993 was $800,000 each year; fiscal year 1994, $752,000;
fiscal years 1995-1998, $677,000 each year; fiscal years 1999-2000,
$680,000 each year; fiscal year 2001, $678,504; fiscal year 2002,
$665,000; fiscal year 2003, $675,580; fiscal year 2004, $604,413;
fiscal year 2005, $646,784; fiscal year 2006, $672,210; fiscal year
2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $500,472; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$469,000 per year. A total of $11,800,963 has been appropriated.
Both programs--IMPACT and CINTRAFOR--were formally reviewed by an
external review team with a representative from NIFA in August 2004.
Both were found to be satisfactorily achieving their goals.
On-site reviews are conducted annually of the University of
Washington component of the project through annual meetings of the
project's Executive Board and attended by NIFA and the Washington State
University component through the grant competition evaluation where the
NIFA project director is involved.
The original goal of this research was the application of leading-
edge information technologies, including high-performance computing, to
advance agricultural sciences and quickly bring research results to
farmers and the general public. Spatially balanced, complete-block
experimental designs have been created for 15 treatments and
replications in agronomic crops and recently extended to vineyards; a
hyperspectral soil data base has been developed; a real-time nitrogen
management model, Adapt-N, has been linked to a Web interface; using
widely dispersed rain gauge data and radar-based precipitation
estimates, high resolution precipitation estimates are now generated
and provided daily to farmers using a Web interface; economic
investment models accommodate stochastic events, such as climate change
and insect infestations; and data-mining techniques are used to make
weather event predictions that are spatially and temporally explicit.
Additionally, this project has supported six graduate student theses
and generated more than 30 peer-reviewed scientific papers.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2003. The
appropriation for fiscal year 2003 was $248,375; for fiscal year 2004,
$221,684; for fiscal year 2005, $239,072; for fiscal year 2006,
$236,610; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $176,754; and
for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $131,000 per year. The total amount
appropriated is $1,384,495.
Research is conducted at Cornell University's Theory Center, at
various Cornell University laboratories, and in experiment station and
producer fields. With extension of the Adapt-N nitrogen tool, work is
also being conducted in Iowa.
The project is subject to a thorough institutional peer review
during preparation of the grant proposal. Submitted proposals undergo
merit review by one or more agency scientists. In 2004, an agency-led
on-site review of the research was conducted. The review team
encouraged broader marketing of their activities and eventual
development of one or two signature projects that fully exploit the
computational resources available. The principal researcher and other
institutional representatives met with agency staff in 2008 to review
project progress.
cool season legume research, idaho, north dakota, and washington
The original goals of this project were to improve efficiency and
sustainability of cool season food legumes through multi-disciplinary
research directed at high priority issues affecting cool season food
legumes. The program was to develop new and strengthen regional
collaborative approaches in research and technology transfer. While the
overarching goals remain the same, specific objectives are revised
annually and prioritized through consultation among researchers,
industry representatives, and farmers. In one outcome, phenolic and
flavenoid compounds have been tracked to assess antioxidant activity to
help explain the cancer prevention properties of pulse legumes.
Extracts of specific legumes have been confirmed to inhibit cancers of
the colon, liver, stomach, and tongue. Compounds are being isolated
from green and yellow pea, lentil, and chickpea and their activity is
being confirmed. Processing of the legume seed with steam appears to
improve the appearance, texture, and retention of antioxidant activity.
This research has complemented work done to investigate the retention
of antioxidant capacity in extruded products made from legume flours.
Extruded snacks containing 65 percent of lentil or dry pea, along with
selected natural food ingredients and potato starch, were prepared in
the laboratory and sent to a certified laboratory in Canada to
determine the glycemic index (GI) using human subjects. These legume-
based foods offer great alternatives for populations suffering from
health problems, such as type two diabetes, obesity, colon cancer, and
heart disease.
Cool season food legume trials across the northern plains provided
critical information for producers about high yielding legume varieties
with good quality traits. These data will help decision makers improve
yields 5 to 10 percent and benefit the industry with a better quality
end product.
Lentil and pea selections for adaptation, agronomic, quality,
disease tolerance are ongoing. Several mapping populations are now in
development or are in use to more quickly identify powdery mildew
resistance. Other genetic markers have been identified to improve
efficiency of breeding for resistance to Fusarium and Aphanomyces fungi
and of high-yielding pea cultivars. These new methods have increased
throughput, accelerating powdery mildew resistance screening of 24
cultivars, 17 lines, and 582 accessions of pea. No immune genotypes
were found, but a range of susceptibility was identified. Leveillula
taurica, the chickpea powdery mildew pathogen was also identified for
the first time in the Pacific Northwest. Pea seed treatments fungicides
were found to reduce root rot incidence and severity and increase
yield.
The critical weed-free period for chickpea and lentil and the
associated yield losses has been shown to vary across cultivars are now
better understood. These data will help growers with decisions on
herbicide use, application timing and may result in a better return on
herbicide inputs or less herbicide being used.
A system has been launched to track the movement of the winged pea
aphid into the Palouse region of Washington and Idaho using
geospatially referenced insect traps. It is expected that this system
will result in reduced insecticide use and the associated environmental
and public health benefits and reduced production cost.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1991 with
appropriations for fiscal year 1991 of $375,000; fiscal years 1992-
1993, $387,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $364,000; fiscal year 1995,
$103,000; fiscal years 1996 through 2000, $329,000 per year; fiscal
year 2001, $328,276; fiscal year 2002, $321,000; fiscal year 2003,
$333,816; fiscal year 2004, $536,814; fiscal year 2005, $564,448;
fiscal year 2006, $558,360; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008,
$416,067; fiscal year 2009, $235,000; and fiscal year 2010, $350,000. A
total of $6,904,781 has been appropriated in the life of the project.
This research is being conducted at agricultural experiment station
locations in Idaho, Washington, and North Dakota. The funds are awarded
competitively among scientists from the participating States.
The project is evaluated annually by an advisory panel of
university and industry experts. Proposals are peer reviewed at the
performing institutions and by senior agency technical staff. An on-
site review of the project was conducted by a senior member of agency's
technical staff in 2004. A strategic planning session was held in
February 2006 in Spokane, Washington, to assess current research needs
for cool season pulse crops. The current research priorities are based
on the conclusions from that meeting. The next external peer review
panel and program review by the Industry Research Committee will be
held in February of 2010. The research priorities identified at that
workshop will be reflected in the program application for 2010.
COTTON INSECT MANAGEMENT AND FIBER QUALITY, GEORGIA
The objectives of this project are to improve the quality of cotton
produced in Georgia and other southeastern States and to test a new
experimental gin. This research focuses on areas that integrate levels
of biological organization such as population ecology and the biology
and ecology of transgenic organisms in agroecosystems, along with the
more traditional pest management tactics to sustain cotton production
in Georgia and the southeastern region. Substantial progress has been
made toward achieving the overall project goals including maintaining
fiber quality, understanding the biology and ecology of emerging pests,
improving sampling of emerging pests and establishing management
thresholds, improving management tactics for emerging insect pests, and
continuing surveillance of the farmscape for shifts in pests. A cotton
entomologist has been hired and is currently establishing a laboratory.
Several studies have been completed evaluating recommended thresholds
and assessing the possibility of using variable thresholds depending on
the phenology of the crop. Another study has been conducted examining
the possible use of barrier crops, such as grain sorghum and Sudan
grass, to reduce colonization of cotton fields and limit crop damage.
Work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2006 with an
appropriation of $489,060; $0 in fiscal year 2007; $368,402 in fiscal
year 2008; and $346,000 per year in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. The
total amount appropriated is $1,549,463.
This research is being conducted primarily at the Coastal Plain
Experiment Station located at Tifton, Georgia. However, collaborative
work has expanded several of the studies into other States in the
Southeast.
Each of the annual project proposals was subjected to peer review
performing institution's peer review and was reviewed by senior agency
technical staff. Results of this project have been presented at the
Beltwide Cotton Research Conferences, meetings of the Entomological
Society of America, and at numerous regional meetings of growers and
commodity groups.
CRANBERRY/BLUEBERRY DISEASE AND BREEDING, NEW JERSEY
The work is focused on identification and monitoring of insect
pests on blueberries and cranberries; the identification, breeding, and
incorporation of superior germplasm into horticulturally desirable
genotypes; identification and determination of several fungal fruit-
rotting species; identification of root-rot resistant cranberry
genotypes; and identification of human health benefits from cranberry
and blueberry consumption. Overall, research has been focused on the
attainment of cultural management methods that are environmentally
compatible, while reducing blueberry and cranberry crop losses.
This project involves insects and diseases having major impacts on
New Jersey's cranberry and blueberry industries, but the findings are
being shared with experts in Wisconsin, Michigan, and New England.
Over 75 blueberry selections with wild blueberry accessions
resistant to secondary mummy berry infections have been moved into
advanced testing. The biology and seasonal life history of spotted
fireworm on cranberries has been determined. A pheromone trap-based
monitoring system for cranberry fruitworm was developed and further
refined for commercialization. Blueberry fruit volatiles attractive to
blueberry maggots were identified and tested in the field. Researchers
have planted over 4,500 cranberry progeny for evaluation. Seven major
fruit-rotting fungal species were identified, and their incidence in 10
major cultivars of blueberry and cranberry were determined. It is
likely that resistance to fruit rot is specific to fungal species.
Investigators have developed a product that is ready for field testing
which uses current season remote sensing data to predict the incidence
of fruit rot in cranberry.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
year 1985, $100,000; fiscal years 1986 and 1987, $95,000 per year;
fiscal years 1988 and 1989, $260,000 per year; fiscal year 1990,
$275,000; fiscal years 1991 to 1993, $260,000 per year; fiscal year
1994, $244,000; fiscal years 1995 to 2000, $220,000 per year; fiscal
year 2001 $219,516; fiscal year 2002, $216,000; fiscal year 2003
$234,466; fiscal year 2004 $209,755; fiscal year 2005, $352,160; fiscal
year 2006, $643,500; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $479,619;
for fiscal year 2009, $451,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $550,000. A
total of $6,785,016 has been appropriated.
This research is being conducted at the New Jersey Agricultural
Experiment Station.
This project is evaluated annually based on the annual progress
report and discussions with the principal investigator. It has been
determined that progress in the development of new agricultural
opportunities and use of decision-making tools for farmers and
entrepreneurs is satisfactory. The agency conducted an on-site
evaluation of the project in April 2006. In addition, evaluation of
this project is conducted annually based on the annual progress report
and discussions with the principal investigator. It has been determined
that progress in the development of new agricultural opportunities and
use of decision-making tools for farmers and entrepreneurs is
satisfactory.
CRANBERRY/BLUEBERRY, MASSACHUSETTS
The original goal of this research was to use molecular genetics to
reduce dependence on chemical pesticides in cranberry production. An
additional goal was to use molecular genetic techniques to identify
potential biological control agents that could be used to further
decrease dependency on the use of synthetic pesticides in cranberry
production. Good progress has been made toward achieving both of these
goals. Molecular markers have been developed that differentiate between
early and late emerging dodder populations. These markers have been
used to identify field populations of the different strains, and trials
have been initiated to determine the best timing of herbicide
applications to provide complete control of dodder. Field samples have
been taken from both wild and cultivated cranberry, and various strains
of Actinomycete fungi have been isolated. These organisms will be
evaluated under greenhouse and field conditions for the ability to
suppress the growth of fungi pathogenic to cranberry and blueberry.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1999, and the
appropriation for fiscal years 1999 and 2000 was $150,000 per year; in
fiscal year 2001, $174,615; in fiscal year 2002, $172,000; in fiscal
year 2003, $170,882; in fiscal year 2004, $153,091; in fiscal year
2005, $151,776; in fiscal year 2006, $158,400; in fiscal year 2007, $0;
in fiscal year 2008, $118,167; in fiscal year 2009, $111,000; and in
fiscal year 2010, $160,000. A total of $1,669,931 has been
appropriated.
Research is being conducted at a University of Massachusetts
Research and Extension Center.
A site visit was made by senior agency technical staff in July
2003, and a merit review was conducted in April 2007. It was determined
that the investigators are making progress toward the achievement of
their stated objectives. In addition, evaluation of this project is
conducted annually based on the annual progress report and discussions
with the principal investigator.
CROP INTEGRATION AND PRODUCTION, SOUTH DAKOTA
The objectives of this grant are to develop crop alternatives for
which there is no governmental commodity support but which would be
economically sustainable in no tillage conditions of South Dakota,
North Dakota, and Nebraska. The research is designed to develop
production management systems for alternative crops in western
Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota that are nitrogen producing
and that also fit into a no tillage dry land crop rotation system.
Researchers have focused on examining characteristics of
alternative crops relative to their potential to improve cropping
systems. The factors evaluated included the ability of the crop to
reduce nitrogen needs, disrupt pest cycles, and produce products with
adequate economic return. The information from this research will be
used to assess the nutritional and economic viability of these crops as
food, feedstuffs, forage, energy, or green manure sources. Nebraska
researchers have initiated beef feedlot feeding trials. Some swine
ration research using pulse crops and oilseed meals as feed ingredients
are being conducted; this presents a large potential market for pulse
crops, particularly these corps that do not meet the food grade
standard.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2002, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2002 was $200,000; for fiscal year 2003,
$273,213; for fiscal year 2004, $268,407; for fiscal year 2005,
$294,624; for fiscal year 2006, $297,000; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for
fiscal year 2008, $223,425; for fiscal year 2009, $258,000; and for
fiscal year 2010, $400,000. A total of $2,214,669 has been
appropriated.
The research is being conducted in South Dakota, North Dakota, and
Nebraska under semiarid conditions.
A peer review of the proposal was conducted by the submitting
institution, and senior agency science staff conducted a critical
review of the proposal. In 2008, an on-site review was conducted by
senior agency technical staff.
CROP PATHOGENS, NORTH CAROLINA
This research will elucidate the genomics of high consequence
fungal plant pathogens and produce algorithms for tracking and mapping
the spread of crop pathogens, with the specific intent to determine if
the spread is natural or appears to be unusual. The study is directed
toward identifying regions of DNA diagnostic to the sub-species level,
as well as for pathogenicity, survival, and toxin production of three
high-consequence fungal pathogens: Mangaporthe oryzae, Aspergillus
flavus, and Rhizoctonia species.
Progress to date includes building phylogenetic relatedness maps of
several highly damaging plant pathogens and performing the systematic
work needed to turn this knowledge into accurate diagnostic tools. The
research on Rhizoctonia is develop DNA markers and microarray
technology to discern Rhizoctonia species from other biota in soils.
This project began in fiscal year 2003 with an appropriation of
$198,700; for fiscal year 2004, $177,944; for fiscal year 2005,
$250,976; for fiscal year 2006, $321,750; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for
fiscal year 2008, $240,306; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$225,000 per year. A total of $1,639,676 has been appropriated.
The research is being conducted at North Carolina State University.
The submitting institution conducts a peer review of the proposal
prior to submission. Additional merit review is conducted annually by
senior agency technical staff prior to making a funding recommendation.
DAIRY AND MEAT GOAT RESEARCH, TEXAS
The objective of this grant focuses on defining the population
structure of goats in Texas and the Southeastern United States with an
ultimate aim of determining the genetic make-up, breed identification,
semen preservation, and embryo collection and storage.
In 2006, the researchers focused on capacity building in artificial
insemination and embryo transfer technologies at the International Goat
Research Center at their institution. The overall objectives for the
2008 project were: (1) to quantify genetic diversity within and among
15 goat breeds located in Texas and the southeastern United States; and
(2) to clarify the evolutionary genetic relationships among the 15 goat
breeds. However, in fiscal year 2009, the focus of the project changed
to defining the underlying molecular mechanisms that impact goat
fertility. The investigators have standardized techniques for cell
culture and biochemical analysis of cellular proteins by western
blotting and immunoreactivity. The National Program Leader overseeing
the progress of this project is satisfied with the progress and expects
the project objectives to be completed within the project duration.
Grants have been awarded through appropriated funds as follows:
$100,000 per year for fiscal years 1983-1985; $95,000 per year for
fiscal years 1986-1988; no funds were appropriated in fiscal year 1989;
$74,000 for fiscal year 1990; $75,000 per year for fiscal years 1991-
1993; $70,000 for fiscal year 1994; $63,000 per year for fiscal years
1995-2000; $62,861 for fiscal year 2001; $63,000 for fiscal year 2002;
$62,591 for fiscal year 2003; $56,664 for fiscal year 2004; $99,200 for
fiscal year 2005; $148,500 in fiscal year 2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007;
$111,216 in fiscal year 2008; $94,000 in fiscal year 2009; and $200,000
in fiscal year 2010. A total of $2,230,032 has been appropriated thus
far.
Research is being conducted at Prairie View Agricultural and
Mechanical University in Texas.
The current project was thoroughly reviewed at the time of
submission in 2009. The project progress is being monitored
continuously.
DAIRY FARM PROFITABILITY, PENNSYLVANIA
The objective of this grant is to identify and develop improved
dairy management practices that will help producers sustain and improve
the profitability of their operations by: improving the reliability and
enhancing the performance of next-generation anaerobic digesters by
developing psychrotolerant and acidotolerant microbial consortia
derived from acidic bogs; develop innovative sensing systems with
Internet enabled remote monitoring and process control to reduce
operator management requirements; defining digester designs based on
current best practices and next-generation digester enhancements,
building on the innovations developed in the first two objectives; and
assessing the dairy farm-level performance and profitability of these
digester designs for different dairy farm types and sizes and different
policy scenarios.
To date, current progress is focusing on the following four
objectives:
--Use the Profitability Assessment Dairy Tool (PA Dairy Tool) and the
Income Over Feed Cost (IOFC) Tool to identify bottlenecks that
limit dairy farm profitability on at least 50 farms over 2
years. (http://www.das.psu.edu/dairy/pa-tool and http://
dairyalliance.psu.edu/resources/income-over-feed-cost-tool/)
Uniqueness of the Pennsylvania Dairy Tool
Several features of the Pennsylvania Dairy Tool are novel and
innovative including:
--an overall, big picture assessment of an operation's
profitability combined with drill-down specificity at the
basic management level,
--minimal data input to generate results,
--unbiased assessment of the factors limiting revenue generation on
the dairy operation,
--simple color-coded results that immediately focus the attention
of the user on the most critical management areas,
--useable across herds of different sizes, different breeds,
different management styles, and different regions,
--estimation of revenue loss from each operational management area,
--the ability to estimate revenue losses against both industry
benchmarks and the dairy operator's goals,
--the ability to build a database to assess farm management changes
and dairy profitability.
--Determine relationships between operational and capital efficiency
and overall return on assets of high profit--greater than 4
percent--level farms.
--Identify strategic changes that will result in improvement in IOFC,
cows per worker, milk sold per worker, internal herd growth
(IHG) and asset turnover ratio in order to increase overall
farm profitability--using data from objective 2 and high profit
level herds.
--Teach dairy producers and advisors about strategies--objective 3--
for improving farm profitability through ongoing training with
Dairy Profit Teams, a series of webinars, and quarterly
newsletters.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2001. The
appropriations amount to the following: fiscal year 2001, $284,373;
fiscal year 2002, $294,000; fiscal year 2003, $496,750; fiscal year
2004, $444,363; fiscal year 2005, $468,224; fiscal year 2006, $495,000;
fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $372,375; fiscal year 2009,
$349,000; and fiscal year 2010, $372,000. In total, this research has
received $3,576,085.
The work is being carried out at the Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, Pennsylvania.
The productivity of the research team has been documented through
the publication of many scientific papers in peer reviewed journals,
Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture publications, and others.
Additionally, the agency closely reviews each year's proposals and
works with the project director to correct any deficiencies.
Additionally, progress reports to the Current Research Information
System (CRIS) are being monitored for satisfactory accomplishments and
timelines.
DELTA RURAL REVITALIZATION, MISSISSIPPI
The objective of the grant is to support basic and applied research
relevant to efforts to expand economic development opportunities for
farms, families, communities, and residents of the Mississippi Delta
region, increase adult literacy, and address healthy living issues.
The project has progressed through several phases. Phase I research
produced a baseline assessment of economic, social, and political
factors that enhance or impede the region's progress. Phase II research
evaluated the potential for entrepreneurship and small business
creation and assessed the availability and use of information
technology in the Delta. In the current phase, major new applied
research efforts have been launched.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
year 1989, $175,000; fiscal year 1990, $173,000; fiscal years 1991-
1993, $175,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $164,000; fiscal years 1995-
2000, $148,000 per year; fiscal year 2001, $204,549; fiscal year 2002,
$201,000; fiscal year 2003, $203,668; fiscal year 2004, $182,914;
fiscal year 2005, $244,032; fiscal year 2006, $247,500; fiscal year
2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $186,684; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$176,000 per year. A total of $3,747,430 has been appropriated.
The research is being carried out by the Southern Rural Development
Center, housed at Mississippi State University, and sub-contractors.
The Southern Rural Development Center Director is the project director,
and he has established collaborations with the Mid-Delta Developers'
Association, the Delta Council's Adult Literacy Program, the Delta
Regional Authority, the Delta Data Center, the Mississippi Development
Authority, and regional Chambers of Commerce.
Proposals are submitted for internal review, evaluation, and merit
review within the agency as they are received. The principal
investigators and project managers submit periodic updates to the
agency to document progress and impacts. For the current phase of the
project, a team prioritized research questions so that the research
investment interfaces closely with regional needs and supports outreach
education.
DESIGNING FOODS FOR HEALTH, TEXAS
The objectives of the grant are to: (1) optimize the health
promoting bioactive compounds through genetics; (2) assess the health
benefits of these compounds; (3) isolate, purify and characterize the
bioactive compounds; and (4) develop technologies for pre/post-harvest
and processing.
The interdisciplinary team of scientists has expertise in the areas
of breeding, pre- and post-harvest physiology, nutrition, chemistry,
biochemistry, biotechnology, biomedical sciences, and molecular
genetics. This inter-disciplinary research team provided need-based
outcomes evolved from stakeholders. Integrating efficient drip
irrigation, nitrogen and potassium fertilizer strategies will lead to
optimal quality and yield of high cash-value vegetable crops in
southwest Texas.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1999, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 1999 was $250,000; for fiscal year 2000,
$318,750; for fiscal year 2001, $561,761; for fiscal year 2002,
$690,000; for fiscal year 2003, $819,638; for fiscal year 2004,
$1,342,035; for fiscal year 2005 $1,611,008; for fiscal year 2006,
$1,980,000; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $1,474,605;
and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $1,385,000 per year. The total
appropriation was $11,817,797.
Research is conducted at the Vegetable and Fruit Improvement Center
and other research centers within the Texas Agricultural Experiment
Station of the Texas A&M University System. Some research is conducted
at the University of Houston, Victoria, and the University of Arizona.
The 2009 proposal was reviewed in September 2009 by NIFA staff who
determined the faculty and facilities were adequate for completion of
the proposed project.
DETECTION AND FOOD SAFETY, ALABAMA
The goal of this project was to reduce the incidence of food-borne
illness through the use of sensor chips that assess the safety of food
items as they moved through the food chain. Work in 2001 was aimed at
developing a hand-held sensor that will allow food processors to detect
the presence of bacterial pathogens and toxins in food within 100
seconds. Laboratory tests in 2003 demonstrated faster response times
while detecting as few as 300 Salmonella cells in 1 milliliter of
liquid. Test kits have also been commercialized for detecting a
livestock feed constituent that transmits bovine spongiform
encephalopathy, commonly referred to as ``mad cow disease.''
Furthermore, investigators have demonstrated capability with radio-
frequency identification tags and have patented and licensed several
new approaches to sensing pathogens, including Salmonella and anthrax
that promise the capability to detect a single bacteria or spore. Tests
with patented magneto-strictive particle sensors in 2005 confirm one-
cell sensitivity. A new, more sensitive Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent
Assay (ELISA) test strip for anthrax has been prototyped. A patent
application has been submitted for a new micro-fluidic device that can
bring a single bacteria cell or spore in contact with a nano-scale
sensor. At this point in 2008, one spin-off company has been
established and four other companies are selling commercialized
products resulting from this work. Recently, a sixth licensed
technology dramatically improves the software diagnostic capability of
off-the-shelf electronic noses used in defense and in the food
industry.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1999 under
the Food Safety, Alabama grant. The appropriation for fiscal year 1999
was $300,000; for fiscal year 2000, $446,250; for fiscal year 2001,
$519,854; for fiscal year 2002, $608,000; for fiscal year 2003,
$1,117,688; for fiscal year 2004, $1,000,065; for fiscal year 2005,
$1,091,200; for fiscal year 2006, $1,134,540; and for fiscal year 2007,
$0. In fiscal year 2008, the project was renamed the Detection and Food
Safety, Alabama grant with an appropriation of $1,861,875; and for
fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $1,748,000 per year. The total amount
appropriated for this program is $11,575,472.
Research is conducted at the Auburn Research Center for Detection
and Food Safety, Auburn University.
The project is subject to a thorough institutional peer review
during preparation of the grant proposal. Each project proposal
receives merit review by one or more agency scientists. All food safety
special-grant projects were reviewed at an investigator-attended
workshop held at agency offices in August 2005. The project's principal
investigator provided a seminar for agency personnel in 2009. It was
noted that the project is proceeding according to its projected time
line.
DROUGHT MITIGATION, NEBRASKA
The objective of the grant is to reduce the risk to agriculture and
society associated with drought: promoting and conducting research on
drought mitigation and preparedness technologies; improving
coordination of drought-related activities and actions within and
between levels of government; and assisting in the development,
dissemination, and implementation of appropriate mitigation and
preparedness technologies in the public and private sectors.
The work supported by this grant received an appropriation of
$200,000 per year in fiscal years 1995 through 2000; $199,560 in fiscal
year 2001; $196,000 in fiscal year 2002; $223,538 in fiscal year 2003;
$200,808 in fiscal year 2004; $211,296 in fiscal year 2005; $219,780 in
fiscal year 2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007; $372,375 in fiscal year 2008;
$469,000 in fiscal year 2009; and $600,000 in fiscal year 2010 for a
total appropriation of $3,892,357.
The research is conducted at the University of Nebraska--Lincoln.
The National Drought Mitigation Center in Lincoln, Nebraska, is
recognized around the world as a leader in research, education, and
outreach for drought. The Center also hosts preparation of the Drought
Monitor--a product used to determine drought relief in USDA.
An on-site review of the project was conducted in 2005, and a
follow-up review was conducted at the NIFA National Water Conference in
February 2006. Since then, the project leaders have conducted informal
meetings with the National Program Leader assigned to this project in
Washington, DC. The project also is reviewed each year when the
proposal is submitted for funding. The project was reviewed as part of
a Programmatic Review conducted by the National Institute of Food and
Agriculture in 2009.
EFFICIENT IRRIGATION, NEW MEXICO AND TEXAS
The objective of the grant is to increase the efficiency of
agriculture and urban landscape irrigation and encourage the
development of efficient water markets in the Rio Grande Basin.
Modeling technology aids are helping irrigation district managers
understand likely financial outcomes of changes in water-delivery rates
to agricultural, municipal, and industrial users. Data being gathered
from rehabilitation projects for irrigation districts with leaking
canals and pipelines and inefficient pumping facilities are estimated
to save 61,275 acre-feet of water per year. Significant reductions in
sugarcane water use are possible using efficient application methods
that improve uniformity of distribution and optimum scheduling,
including amount and timing of water application. Substantial water
savings have been facilitated in vegetable and citrus production in the
Lower Rio Grande Valley using soil moisture monitoring, various
cultural practices on crop water use, and irrigation recommendations.
The potential water savings may reach 19,528 million gallons per year,
assuming 50 percent of landscapes in El Paso are irrigated with
recycled water. Several chili pepper cultivars were found to be more
salt tolerant than others; this indicates that recycled water may be
used for irrigating chili peppers and freshwater can be saved for more
sensitive crops. Soil salinization in urban green spaces is being
studied in El Paso. This study is expected to establish soil assessment
and handling guidelines for construction of sports fields and irrigated
urban landscapes. Such guidelines will help improve water-use
efficiency and wise use of fiscal resources.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2001, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2001 was $1,185,386; for fiscal year
2002, $1,176,000; for fiscal year 2003, $1,490,250; for fiscal year
2004, $1,342,035; for fiscal year 2005, $1,488,000; for fiscal year
2006, $1,658,250; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008,
$1,235,292; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $1,160,000 per year.
The total amount appropriated is $11,895,213.
Texas A&M University and New Mexico State University jointly
conduct this research through the Water Resources Institute at Texas
A&M University.
An agency scientist conducts a merit review of the proposal
submitted in support of the appropriation on an annual basis. A
conference of the co-investigators was held in August 10-13, 2009. The
site review involved a series of presentations by project leaders that
described project objectives and accomplishments for the previous year.
The site visit review of this project allowed the agency scientists to
ensure that objectives of the project were coordinated with the other
three projects in the basin. The research team is a multi-disciplinary
group including, but not limited to economists, engineers, plant, soil,
and atmospheric scientists. Agency scientist(s) intend to participate
in a similar conference in 2010 to continue evaluating its progress.
EMERALD ASH BORER, OHIO
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $550,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH, NEW YORK
The objectives of this research are (1) Improve estimates of the
magnitudes of biogeochemical fluxes of Nitrogen (N), (P), and sediments
from the New York portion of the Susquehanna River basin into the
Susquehanna, and ultimately to the impaired Chesapeake Bay; (2) Assess
controls on nutrient pollution, particularly N, in rural landscapes
with a mixture of forested and agricultural land uses; (3) Evaluate the
importance of agricultural sources of nutrient pollution in the context
of all sources in the watershed; and (4) Assess the effects of climate
variability and climate change on fluxes of N, P, and sediment from the
rural landscape.
There are three main research areas for the project. Research
activities on Agricultural Biogeochemistry are being conducted at the
Harford Animal Science Teaching and Research in Cortland County, New
York. Research on Atmospheric Deposition is being conducted at the
Connecticut Hill Game Management Area in New York State. Integrated
modeling of nutrient and sediment sources and sinks across spatial
scales is being done at Cornell University. Each of the three research
areas has collected the essential background and historical information
for their respective sites and established specific monitoring
activities.
At the Harford Animal Science Teaching and Research Center, ongoing
and historical data available include water quality from 15 wells, soil
test results and crop yields, manure and fertilizer applications
records for 20 years, nutrient inputs via animal feed, animal densities
and field management. Data to be collected for this project include:
repair and sampling of wells monthly for a year; analysis of dissolved
organic nitrogen, nitrate, ammonium, monthly storm events, and surface
samples from drainage creeks and nearby streams; analysis for
sediments, nitrite, nitrate, ammonium, total dissolved nitrogen,
soluble reactive phosphorus, total dissolved phosphorus, and
particulate nitrogen and phosphorus; and monitoring deposition of
ammonia and ammonium along gradients away from the farm site, using
both bulk deposition measurements and passive samplers for ammonia gas
in the atmosphere.
At the Connecticut Hill Atmospheric and Precipitation Chemistry
Research and Monitoring Facility, historical data available include a
30-year record of wet and dry nitrogen deposition, comparative studies
of dry deposition of nitrogen and sulfur species between measurements
through the fall season versus inferentially measured estimates, and
isotopic studies of wet and dry deposition to understand the sources of
nitrogen deposition, and the impact of changing emissions of sulfate
and nitrate on wet and dry deposition of sulfur, nitrogen, and acidity.
The work supported under this grant began in 1991 with an
appropriation of $297,000; $575,000 per year in fiscal years 1992-1993;
$540,000 in fiscal year 1994; $486,000 per year in fiscal years 1995
through 1999; $400,000 in fiscal year 2000; $399,120 in fiscal year
2001; $391,000 in fiscal year 2002; $392,433 in fiscal year 2003;
$350,917 in fiscal year 2004; $372,992 in fiscal year 2005; $369,270 in
fiscal year 2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007; $275,061 in fiscal year 2008;
and $258,000 per year in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. The total amount
appropriated is $7,883,793.
The last evaluation showed progress in producing a series of
creative spin-up efforts emphasizing field and laboratory studies by
individuals or groups of Cornell faculty that have led towards a better
understanding of the sources and sinks of nutrients and sediments in
the Susquehanna River Basin. The program has also been successful in
integrating models of nutrient and sediment sources and sinks across
spatial scales. The program has also made progress towards evaluating
the importance of atmospheric deposition and agricultural sources of
nutrient pollution in the context of all sources in the watershed. The
Cornell community has the broad expertise in the disciplines required
to achieve their goals. The program is designed to foster creative new
research and integrate the results with current research at Cornell
into an overall, comprehensive effort. The Susquehanna River Basin has
proven to be an ideal laboratory for better understanding of the
factors that control nitrogen fluxes from rural landscapes with mixed
agriculture and forest lands.
ENVIRONMENTAL RISK FACTORS/CANCER, NEW YORK
The objectives of the grant are to evaluate the scientific
information on pesticides, other chemicals, and diet, and the
relationships of these to breast cancer risk. As a result of the
proposed work, health professionals, extension educators, community
leaders, and the public will increase their understanding of the
relationship between overweight and obesity and breast cancer risk and
will improve their capacity to take an environmental approach to breast
cancer risk reduction through obesity prevention in communities.
Focus group data of over 200 study participants showed the
proportion of participants meeting walking goals increased from 38 to
65 percent over 10 weeks with the greatest relative step increase by
those who walked least at baseline. Ninety-three percent reported
positive dietary changes. In the current project year, the proposed
intervention and data collection objectives have been met; the
intervention, Small Steps are Easier Together, has been implemented in
five new worksites and three comparison worksites and pre- and post-
intervention data have been collected from all sites. In addition,
information on the environmental approach for obesity prevention
developed and implemented by this research was disseminated at multiple
scientific and professional meetings, reaching 525 researchers, health
professionals, educators and community leaders.
The work supported by this grant began in 1997, and in fiscal years
1997-1999, $100,000 was appropriated per year; fiscal year 2000,
$170,000; fiscal year 2001, $226,501; fiscal year 2002, $222,000;
fiscal year 2003, $220,557; fiscal year 2004, $197,826; fiscal year
2005, $217,248; fiscal year 2006, $214,830; fiscal year 2007, $0;
fiscal year 2008, $159,873; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $150,000
per year. A total of $2,228,835 has been appropriated.
The work is done at Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.
A university peer review of the project was last completed in May
2009. In addition, this project has undergone continuous evaluations by
the agency and project researchers. Conclusions from these have
informed planning efforts for the education component including the
streamlining of the environmental intervention, e.g. Small Steps are
Easier Together for easy local application by community educators with
minimal assistance.
ENVIRONMENTALLY SAFE PRODUCTS, VERMONT
The objectives of the grant are to develop new applications for
``waste'' products that may lead to novel products or approaches to
solving environmental problems including the development of an
environmentally friendly wood finish, coating formulation system, the
development of a deicer from by-products of the cheese whey production
process, the use of iron slag wastes as absorptive materials to capture
phosphorous in agricultural runoff to then be used in horticultural
applications, and the use of waste products as energy sources to
improve efficiency of greenhouse operations.
Five prototype wood coating mixes were formulated and have been
optimized for maximum performance in industrial settings. The chemical
characteristics of the formulations have been analyzed, and the coating
materials have been applied on experimental wood samples. A workshop
has been built which is designed for this project. The safe wood
finishes perform better in terms of water resistance, drying time, and
pencil scratch hardness compared with the same type of commercial
products. The analyses on mold resistant properties and ultraviolet
resistance of the prototypes have been completed. A U.S. patent
application for formulation and production of the environmentally safe
wood finish products was filed in July 2002. Commercial application
trials have been carried out at two of Ethan Allen Furniture
operations. An organic salt, potassium acetate, has been produced
through a two-stage fermentation process at lab scale, and work is
ongoing to optimize the process. This by-product of the cheese making
process serves to reduce road ice and is biologically degradable in the
environment. Other by-products of the cheese manufacturing process,
whey protein and lactate, are being evaluated as coatings and nutrient
sources for biocontrol fungi, respectively. Whey protein-based wood and
paper adhesives have been developed with much improved strength. Scaled
up studies on the plywood adhesives were performed. Analyses on
functional properties of the adhesives were conducted. A peer-reviewed
manuscript on the findings of this project has been submitted to
Journal of Polymer Sciences.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2000. The
appropriation for fiscal year 2000 was $200,000; for fiscal year 2001,
$245,459; for fiscal year 2002, $240,000; for fiscal year 2003,
$243,408; for fiscal year 2004, $745,575; for fiscal year 2005,
$740,032; for fiscal year 2006, $742,500; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for
fiscal year 2008, $335,634; for fiscal year 2009, $188,000; and for
fiscal year 2010, $250,000. The total amount appropriated is
$3,930,608.
This work is being carried out in the College of Agricultural and
Life Sciences, the University of Vermont.
Evaluation of this project is conducted annually based on the
annual progress report and discussions with the principal investigator
and colleagues, as appropriate. The review is conducted by the NIFA
staff who has determined that this research is in accordance with the
mission of the agency.
EXPANDED WHEAT PASTURE, OKLAHOMA
The goal of this research was to discover and disseminate
scientific information that decreases production risk and improves
profitability of feeder cattle and grain production from dual purpose
winter wheat. This work has already shown how the use of feed
supplements can increase net profit from cattle grazing on wheat
pasture. The study has identified management practices, for example,
date of planting, cultivar selection, grazing intensity, and date of
cattle removal, that produce the optimum grain yield and cattle gain. A
decision support microcomputer model, titled ``Wheat and Wheat/Stocker
Production Planner'' has been developed for use by producers and
extension educators as a decision aid to help producers assess income
risk in the operation. Wheat cultivars called GRAZEnGRAIN that maintain
high grain yields after being grazed have been identified. Studies were
conducted to further develop supplementation strategies for growing
cattle on wheat pasture, characterize the physiological basis for
differences in finishing performance of feeder cattle off wheat pasture
and determine the effects of wheat breeding practices, varietal
improvement, and cultural and management practices on productivity of
the wheat/stocker cattle enterprise. Data evaluating adipose tissue
development indicate that steers grazing winter wheat pasture will gain
at a greater rate and start to deposit more intramuscular fat at a
younger age compared with steers grazing dormant native rangeland.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1989, and
appropriations were as follows: fiscal year 1989, $400,000; fiscal year
1990, $148,000; fiscal year 1991, $275,000; fiscal years 1992-1993,
$337,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $317,000; fiscal years 1995-2000,
$285,000 per year; fiscal year 2001, $292,355; fiscal year 2002
$286,000; fiscal year 2003, $307,985; fiscal year 2004 $275,366; fiscal
year 2005, $272,800; fiscal year 2006, $319,770; fiscal year 2007, $0;
fiscal year 2008, $238,320; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $223,000
per year. A total of $5,962,596 has been appropriated.
Large replicated pasture studies are being conducted at wheat
pasture research units near the Oklahoma State University campus, at
the Wheat Pasture Research Unit, 596 acres near Marshall, Oklahoma,
which is 30 miles west of the Oklahoma State University campus, and the
Sparks Beef Research Center, an Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment
Station facility near campus. As a component of the Oklahoma
Agricultural Experiment Station wheat breeding program, breeding
nurseries have been established at Marshall using a graze-plus-grain
management system. In addition, small-plot wheat variety performance
tests are conducted at about 18 locations across the State either on
Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station facilities or on private farm
land.
Senior agency technical staff reviewed the annual project proposal
and progress reports and concluded that the project was appropriately
focused and addressing the stated objectives. A comprehensive review
including site visit is still under consideration for 2010.
EXPERT INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM
The objective of this project is to streamline the exchange of pest
management information within and between Federal and State government
agencies, research scientists, extension educators, agricultural
industries, commodity groups, and agricultural producers. The Expert
Pest Management Information Decision Support System has been moved to a
Web-based system, with access to all of the originally proposed
databases now complete. This system has now been seamlessly integrated
into the agency's Regional Integrated Pest Management Centers
Information System at www.ipmcenters.org. Semi-automated updating of
the databases is now in place as a cooperative effort among the
agencies responsible for collecting the information. The Center for
Integrated Pest Management maintains the databases for the Pipeline,
CropLife Pesticide Use Data, Crop Profiles, Pest Management Strategic
Plans, Crop Timelines, the NIFA Food Quality Protection Act Research
Projects Database, the NIFA Contacts Database, the aggregated National
Agriculture Statistics Service Pesticide Use Data, a new Interagency
Integrated Pest Management Projects Database and a new Proposal/Project
Management System. The latter is used by the Regional Integrated Pest
Management Centers to track and seamlessly manage all Request for
Applications for which they have responsibility, from Request for
Applications publication, through proposal submission and review, to
project reporting locally and dynamically into the Interagency
Integrated Pest Management Projects Database.
This work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1995, and
appropriations were as follows: in fiscal year 1995, $172,000; in
fiscal year 1996, $177,000 from this special grant plus $21,000 from
Research, Extension, and Education Evaluation Funds and $40,000 from
the Pesticide Impact Assessment Program; in fiscal year 1997, $165,425;
in fiscal years 1998-2000, $177,000 per year; in fiscal year 2001,
$176,611; in fiscal year 2002, $177,000; in fiscal year 2003, $175,850;
in fiscal year 2004, $158,062; in fiscal year 2005, $156,736; in fiscal
years 2006 and 2007, $155,430 per year; in fiscal year 2008, $153,915;
in fiscal year 2009, $154,000; and in fiscal year 2010, $156,000. Total
amount appropriated is $2,725,459.
The bulk of the work is carried out on the campus of North Carolina
State University in Raleigh, which collaborates with agricultural
scientists at land-grant universities throughout the United States. The
Center for Integrated Pest Management at North Carolina State
University manages the Web server where the pest management information
system is located.
Over the past 4 years, the Web development aspect of the project
has been evaluated annually. Currently, the annual review of the
project and goals is by a Web development committee composed of the
directors and Information Technology staff of the Regional Integrated
Pest Management Centers. Several key components of the project received
favorable reviews during a formal comprehensive review of the
Integrated Pest Management Centers in February of 2008. For 2009, the
project was competitively awarded and was reviewed prior to submission
by three independent reviewers and an external review panel.
FLORICULTURE, HAWAII
The original goals of this research were to develop and
commercialize high yielding, disease and insect resistant floral
cultivars of anthurium, orchids, protea, flowering ginger, bird of
paradise, heliconia, ti leaves and other exotic tropical flower and
foliage varieties; address current technical constraints; and implement
effective marketing strategies.
More than 100 new anthurium hybrids are in individual plant
selection stage and eight selections in tissue culture are in advance
testing on cooperator farms. Protea resistant to the fungal pathogen,
Phytophthora cinnamomi, were obtained from South Africa, and this
germplasm is being incorporated into protea breeding lines. Seventeen
new resistant, tissue-culture propagated protea hybrids were released
to the public for a total of 101 new cultivars released since 1999.
Seventeen new Leucospermum hybrids were released since 2003. Tests
continue for Phytophthora cinnamomi resistance and extended vase life.
The orchid breeding program was intensified in 2004, and 39 crosses
have been germinated to date. Research on light enhancement has
shortened the production period for orchid flowering by four to six
weeks. Research was also focused on the development of post-harvest
handling practices and addressed quarantine issues. A post-harvest hot
air treatment was developed and proved effective in controlling
nematode and bacterial infections in anthurium plants and will
significantly reduce production costs. Studies determined effective
controls for a new pest, pink hibiscus mealybug. Over 4,400 Protea
cuttings were released to Hawaii growers; 15 new anthurium hybrids are
being evaluated on grower-cooperator farms; several new dendrobium
orchids are being tested for both potted and cut flower varieties. Nine
commercial orchid nurseries were assessed for fusarium diseases;
Fusarium proliferatum, F. oxysporum, F. solani, and F. subglutinans
were the most common pathogens. Most recently, a series of water and
fertilizer management audits at large nurseries found improper usage of
water and fertilizers. Results of an irrigation experiment on Anthurium
showed a substantial increase in flower yield by 35 percent and also an
increase in the proportion of large flowers size from 45 percent to 70
percent with several short pulses of fertigation compared to current
farm practices, resulting in a net revenue gain of approximately
$200,000 per acre each year. Additionally, composts using macadamia nut
shells and rubber chips as ingredients were demonstrated to be
appropriate alternative potting media for potted palms compared with
more expensive potting media sold commercially. Using controlled-
release fertilizers with a shorter time-release rate enabled faster
movement of nutrients into the potting media was shown to facilitate
faster intake by plants. Also it was found that a coir-cinder mixture
was an adequate potting media for dendrobium and oncidium orchids due
to its better water holding capacity; thus, lower the rate of
fertilizer release. These research results were presented at a national
conference and an abstract was published in HortScience.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1989 and the
following amounts have been appropriated: in fiscal year 1989,
$300,000; fiscal years 1990-1993, $296,000 per year; fiscal year 1994,
$278,000; fiscal years 1995-2000, $250,000 per year; fiscal year 2001,
$249,450; fiscal year 2002, $400,000; fiscal year 2003, $397,400;
fiscal year 2004, $354,894; fiscal year 2005, $352,160; fiscal year
2006, $348,480; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $259,173;
fiscal year 2009, $243,000; and fiscal year 2010, $300,000. A total of
$6,166,557 has been appropriated since fiscal year 1989.
This research is being conducted by the College of Tropical
Agriculture and Human Resources at the University of Hawaii--Manoa at
locations in Honolulu and Hilo, and by the College of Agriculture,
Forestry and Natural Resource Management at the University of Hawaii at
locations in Hilo, with input from the floral crops industry on the
islands of Hawaii and Maui.
Each individual project proposal goes through a national peer merit
review managed by the applicant institution. Each proposal is peer
reviewed and ranked, and funding is provided only to the highest ranked
projects. Project accomplishments and proposed research objectives are
reviewed annually. In addition, project expenditures are monitored to
ensure that spending is consistent with approved project budgets and
with Federal regulations. Research results are also reviewed by members
of the Hawaii floriculture industry to ensure that priorities
identified by the industry and reflected in the request for proposals
are being addressed and progress toward achieving objectives are on
schedule. As new objectives are identified, they will be reviewed by
research administrators and members of the Hawaii floriculture
industry.
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE, IOWA, MISSOURI, NEVADA,
WISCONSIN
The objectives of the grant are: (1) to provide information to help
public decision makers evaluate farm policy options; and (2) to enhance
capacity to conduct quantitative analysis of agricultural policy
issues.
The institutions maintain large econometric models and datasets
which are regularly updated to analyze farm and trade policy
alternatives and the impacts of various programs on several sub-sectors
of the agricultural economy. During the past year, the Food and
Agriculture Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) at Missouri included an
annual 10-year outlook for agriculture--prepared every year since 1984,
agricultural policy scenarios requested by Congress at will,
Congressional briefings, and Congressional testimony. The final
projections for domestic and world agricultural markets are found in
FAPRI 2009 U.S. and World Agricultural Outlook. Each publication is
posted on their Web site (www.fapri.missouri.edu).
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
years 1984-1985, $450,000 per year; fiscal years 1986-1987, $357,000
per year; fiscal year 1988, $425,000; fiscal year 1989, $463,000;
fiscal year 1990, $714,000; fiscal years 1991-1993, $750,000 per year;
fiscal year 1994, $705,000; fiscal years 1995-1996, $850,000 per year;
fiscal year 1997-2000, $800,000 per year; fiscal year, 2001, $947,910;
fiscal year 2002, $1,000,000; fiscal year 2003, $1,515,088; fiscal year
2004, 1,364,899; fiscal year 2005, $1,536,608; fiscal year 2006,
$1,595,880; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $1,191,600; fiscal
year 2009, $1,139,000; and fiscal year 2010, $1,339,000. The total
amount appropriated is 22,700,985.
The program is carried out at the Center for Agriculture and Rural
Development, Iowa State University, and the Center for National Food
and Agricultural Policy, University of Missouri.
Each year Iowa State University and the University of Missouri
publish the Food Agriculture Policy Institute U.S. and World
Agriculture Outlook which is assessed annually. A formal evaluation of
this program has not been conducted.
FOOD AND FUEL INITIATIVE, IOWA
The objectives of this grant focus on: (1) discovery of new value-
added food safety compounds in co-products to enhance economic
development opportunities; (2) Mycotoxin monitoring in co-products for
food and feed safety and mitigation strategies; and (3) economic
analysis, risk assessment and communication.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $297,900; $280,000 in fiscal year
2009; and $298,000 in fiscal year 2010. A total of $875,900 has been
appropriated.
This research is conducted at Iowa State University.
The submitted proposal for this new project was critically reviewed
in the summer of 2009 by the National Program Leader of NIFA and was
found to be scientifically sound.
FOOD MARKETING POLICY CENTER, CONNECTICUT
The objectives of the grant are the analysis of private strategies,
public policies, and food system performance to enhance economic
welfare; and, the development of food safety and related policies to
provide guidance for the control of safety risks and for significant
reduction of safety risks in the global food system.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1988. The
appropriations amount to the following: fiscal year 1988, $150,000;
fiscal year 1989, $285,000; fiscal year 1990, $373,000; fiscal years
1991-1993, $393,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $369,000; fiscal years
1995-1998, $332,000 per year; fiscal years 1999-2000, $400,000; fiscal
year 2001, $493,911; fiscal year 2002, $484,000; fiscal year 2003,
$486,815; fiscal year 2004, $581,548; fiscal year 2005, $579,328;
fiscal year 2006, $573,210; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008,
$426,990; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $401,000 per year. The total
amount appropriated for this project to date is $8,911,802.
Project work is being carried out at the University of Connecticut
and also at the University of Massachusetts and at cooperating
universities via the visiting fellows program.
Annual proposals for funding are peer reviewed for relevance and
scientific merit. The NIFA contact is also in regular contact with the
principal researcher at the key institution to discuss progress towards
meeting project objectives.
FOOD SAFETY, MAINE AND OKLAHOMA
The objectives of this project is to discover ways to improve the
safety and security of the Nation's food supply at all steps from farm
or ranch production through processing. The project will focus on
E.coli monitoring in cattle, L. Monocytogenes virulence, oregano as an
inhibitor of food borne pathogens, and the tracing of staphylococcal
enterotoxin along with a recombinant genetic method for detecting
prions in meat or meat by-products.
Researchers have demonstrated that injection of 0.1 percent
solution of ammonium hydroxide significantly affects aerobic and
anaerobic microbial populations in beef loins. Protocols have
successfully been developed for the detection of the various soy
products' DNA using the lectin gene with Real-time Polymerase chain
reaction. E. coli O157:H7 has been found to persist in young growing
spinach for up to two weeks, and the leaf morphology for spinach has
been found to play a role in bacterial colonization.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2002 with an
appropriation of $400,000; for fiscal year 2003, $620,938; for fiscal
year 2004, $555,702; for fiscal year 2005, $551,552; for fiscal year
2006, $546,480; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008,
$407,130; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $382,000 per year. A
total of $3,845,802 has been appropriated.
The research is being conducted at Oklahoma State University,
Agricultural Experiment Station in the Food and Agricultural Products
Research and Technology Center. The sensor technology proof of concept
research will be completed in Orono, Maine, at the Sensor Research and
Development Corporation.
An agency evaluation was conducted in 2009. The Project Director
met with the National Program staff at NIFA via a series of
teleconferences and gave a summary of the status of the project and
also presented the data that has been compiled to date.
FOOD SAFETY, TEXAS
The objective of the grant is to develop a national and
international Electron Beam Food Research Center that will conduct
applied research focusing electron beam technology on food applications
and agriculturally related products. Specifically, the Center will host
research projects from industry, government, and academia, while
conducting outreach, training, and education in the science and
technology of electron beam-based irradiation.
To date, the Center has completed studies on the usage of electron
beams to inactivate viruses on cantaloupes and pathogens in lettuce and
spinach, and a provisional patent has been obtained for the use of E-
beam for the treatment and disinfection of municipal wastewater. In
addition, the researchers are using e-beam irradiation to develop novel
vaccines for Salmonella in poultry. A Salmonella vaccine patent has
been submitted in collaboration with USDA-Agricultural Research Service
scientists for use by poultry breeders, growers, and in hatcheries. E-
beam irradiation can be used to replace formalin, which is currently
used in vaccine production. Formalin has been classified as
``reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen''; Therefore, this
technology will likely improve the safety of vaccines. This has public
health implications and could be used to improve the safety of human
vaccines. In addition, use of the vaccine in live chickens will improve
the health of the chickens, thus reducing the need for antibiotics and
may result in lower levels of Salmonella contamination in poultry meat.
Experiential short courses in food safety have been conducted
periodically and have provided hands-on training for food industry
workers and other food science and food safety professionals. In 2009,
this research included scientists from Mexico, France, and India.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2003, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2003 was $198,700; for fiscal year 2004,
$177,944; for fiscal year 2005, $187,488; for fiscal year 2006,
$198,000; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $74,475; and
for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $69,000 per year. A total of $974,607
has been appropriated.
Currently, all related research has been conducted at the Institute
of Food Science and Engineering in the Texas A&M University Electron
Beam Food Research Facility, College Station, Texas.
The last Agency evaluation of this project was conducted in
December 2009. It was concluded that the investigators are qualified to
carry out the objectives involving applied research on food and
agriculturally related products and that the findings of the research
will result in food safety and public health benefits.
FOOD SAFETY RESEARCH CONSORTIUM, NEW YORK
The objective of this grant is to conduct and coordinate food
safety research that provides critical new knowledge on foodborne
pathogens and leads to the development of new and innovative food
safety tools and intervention strategies by developing and applying
molecular characterization and epidemiological methods to provide an
improved understanding of the transmission, evolution, and ecology of
selected bacterial foodborne pathogens, including Salmonella and L.
monocytogenes.
Strain collections, subtyping and characterization methods, and
protocols will be made broadly available to facilitate application of
the methodologies developed. Over the last project year, researchers
have made major progress on two specific projects. Previous research
has shown that L. monocytogenes isolates can be grouped into three
genetic lineages, which seem to differ in their ability and likelihood
to cause human disease. Researchers have also tested the hypothesis
that L. monocytogenes lineages may exhibit different stress-related
phenotypes.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2001 with an
appropriation of $284,373; for fiscal year 2002, $800,000; for fiscal
year 2003, $894,150; for fiscal year 2004 $800,250; for fiscal year
2005, $892,800; for fiscal year 2006, $990,000; for fiscal year 2007,
$0, for fiscal year 2008, $737,799, for fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$693,000 per year. A total of $6,785,372 has been appropriated.
This research will be conducted at Cornell University in Ithaca,
New York, in the Departments of Food Science and Computer Science.
An agency evaluation was conducted by NIFA staff in September 2009
upon receipt of the proposal and Current Research Information System
(CRIS) reports. NIFA staff determined the proposal was sound and the
facilities and faculty were adequate to complete the project
successfully.
FOOD SECURITY, WASHINGTON
The objectives of this grant are to enhance the Pacific Northwest
(PNW) spring wheat breeding material; develop and test facultative
wheat varieties that can be planted in the late fall, winter, or early
spring; develop innovative intervention to control microbiological
pathogens associated with food processing; and develop new packaging
and processing methods to prevent microbiological contamination of
processed foods.
The work began in fiscal year 2002 with an appropriation of
$400,000; $447,075 in fiscal year 2003; $399,628 for fiscal year 2004,
$397,792 in fiscal year 2005; $394,020 in fiscal year 2006; $0 in
fiscal year 2007; $293,928 in fiscal year 2008; and $276,000 per year
in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. A total of $2,884,443 has been
appropriated.
Research is being conducted at laboratories at the College of
Agriculture, Human, and Natural Resources, Washington State University.
Proposals for projects are developed by Washington State University
and are reviewed by peers at the College of Agriculture, Human, and
Natural Resources. They are then submitted to NIFA and are reviewed by
National Programs Leaders. NIFA staff also monitors the progress of the
project through semi-annual conference calls and through review of
annual accomplishments. Selection of recipients of small grants awarded
by the project is made by scientists at Washington State University. It
is anticipated that NIFA staff will conduct an evaluation in 2010.
FORAGES FOR ADVANCING LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION, KENTUCKY
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $473,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
FORESTRY RESEARCH, ARKANSAS
The objective of the grant is to develop alternative forest
management strategies for achieving multi-resource objectives; i.e.,
production of timber, wildlife, recreation, and other values of the
forest on private industrial and non-industrial forest lands and public
lands. Progress has been made in several areas such as development of
intensive fiber farming systems as alternatives to soybeans for
Mississippi Delta farmers, and discovery of the nutrient needs of
predators of the beetle so predators can be grown and studied in
artificial cultures.
A major accomplishment in 2008 follows:
The Arkansas Forest Resources Center conducted bio-fuel research to
determine the most efficient alternative bio-fuel and feed-stocks in a
variety of locations around the State of Arkansas. Portable bio-
refinery work proceeds as a component of this research. Results
indicated that large volumes of cellulosic biomass from forest residue
and agronomic biomass crops are compatible with growing sites in
Arkansas and can provide large volumes capable of providing fuel feed
stocks. Forest based feed stocks--residuals and slash--could produce as
much as 900,000,000 gallons of ethanol a year. This is a replacement of
10 percent of the total gasoline consumption in the State.
A major accomplishment in 2009 follows:
Issues surrounding cellulosic-based biomass feedstock production
are complex and require sound science-based information from which to
base management decisions. Scientists implemented studies on cellulosic
biomass production systems to assess biomass yields, determine
investment potentials, and evaluate impacts on selected environmental
services. Successful establishment of different cellulosic biomass
production systems was influenced by local environmental factors
associated with each treatment immediately following planting.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: 1994
$470,000; 1995 $523,000; 1996 $523,000; 1997 $523,000; 1998 $523,000;
1999 $523,000; 2000 $523,000; 2001 $521,849; 2002 $512,000; 2003
$508,672; 2004 $455,298; 2005 $461,280; 2006 $456,390; 2007 $0; 2008
$339,606; 2009 $319,000; 2010 $319,000; Total $7,501,095.
The Arkansas Forest Resources Center is administered through the
School of Forest Resources on the campus of the University of Arkansas
at Monticello. Individual studies are being conducted at the University
of Arkansas, Fayetteville; University of Arkansas at Monticello; and
several locations across the State.
A review was conducted in 2001. The review team found no adverse
conditions on research capability, and that infrastructure is adequate;
projects were progressing as scheduled. A review will be scheduled in
2010.
FRESH PRODUCE FOOD SAFETY, CALIFORNIA
The objectives of this grant are to establish a clearinghouse for
research related to produce safety, and to support studies focused on
developing solutions that mitigate risks associated with the Nation's
produce supply.
Eleven research projects have been awarded, and each will
specifically address reducing the food safety risks associated with
growing and harvesting fresh produce.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $521,325; $704,000 in fiscal year
2009; and $750,000 in fiscal year 2010. A total of $1,975,325 has been
appropriated.
The research is being conducted at the University of California,
Davis.
A summary of completed work was submitted, reviewed, and approved
by National Program staff in November 2009.
GENOMICS FOR SOUTHERN CROP STRESS AND DISEASE, MISSISSIPPI
The objective of this grant is to determine how southern crops and
livestock respond to stress from pests and the environment, in order to
provide basic and applied knowledge to breeding programs. The research
will use genomics tools for identification of pathogen and stress
resistance in southern agricultural crops including, but not limited
to, cotton, rice, soybeans, corn, sweet potatoes, forestry, and in
livestock, including poultry.
Researchers have been constructing the genome maps of
agriculturally important plants and animals, using experimental data to
provide more accurate blueprints for identifying key genes involved in
production. This work is continually ongoing as more and more genome
sequence data becomes available. It makes the genome sequences much
easier for researchers worldwide to interpret, use, and turn into
valuable products. Researchers are also continually improving the
encyclopedia of all gene functions for all agriculturally important
species; the encyclopedia is called AgBase and is available at
www.agbase.msstate.edu. AgBase provides information that has a digital
code and is used to reverse-engineer the molecular components of
cellular machines. It is used by researchers worldwide to derive
knowledge, and thus value, from their massive genomics data sets.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2002. The
appropriation for fiscal year 2002 was $640,000; for fiscal year 2003,
$715,320; for fiscal year 2004, $640,200; for fiscal year 2005,
$882,880; for fiscal year 2006, $1,128,600; for fiscal year 2007, $0;
for fiscal year 2008, $849,015; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$797,000 per year. A total of $6,450,015 has been appropriated.
Research is being conducted at Mississippi Agriculture and Forestry
Experiment Station sites. Collaboration will be encouraged with
researchers at Historically Black Colleges and Universities in the
State. Alcorn State University and the Mississippi University for Women
have participated in summer programs through this project. The
researchers also collaborate with the European Bioinformatics
Institute.
The project is managed as a competitive grants program. Each
application is reviewed by an external, nationally recognized panel of
reviewers. Only projects with superior recommendations are funded.
GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM
The objectives of the grant are to build institutional frameworks
for developing and disseminating geographic and related information to
local decision-makers and to promote collaborative and innovative
transfer of geographic information system (GIS) technologies to State
and local governments and others in the public and private sectors.
In fiscal year 2009, administration of this project was transferred
to Pennsylvania State University from the University of Wisconsin.
Accomplishments in fiscal year 2008 common to all sites include:
technical assistance in GIS implementation; pilot project
demonstrations; data automation and database development; consultation
and advice for local and tribal government; software evaluation and
development; model development; software and GIS application training;
satellite telecasts; educational video production; public conference
and other professional presentations; technical and lay audience
publications; and provision of information and technical resources
through the RGIS Web site. The RGIS Web site will be maintained by the
Chesapeake Penn State University site www.ruralgis.org.
All sites contribute and participate in the two annual coordinating
committee meetings; regional GIS meetings and conferences; preparation
and distribution of the project bulletins; helping to update and
maintain the project Web site; and coordination and guiding development
of education modules. The project provided several bulletins and
education modules for the Cooperative Extension's eXtension community
of practice called Map@Syst.
A few examples of project impacts by site are detailed below:
Chesapeake--Pennsylvania State University.--Developed a Web
application that allows farmers to create maps necessary to meet
regulatory requirements of the Pennsylvania Nutrient Balance Sheets;
Initiated development of the Pennsylvania One Stop, an online
application that provides farmers with the ability to develop their own
conservation and nutrient management plans; Designed a method to assess
drought vulnerability for Pennsylvania applicable at the field scale
using local soils, climatic conditions, and crop management factors;
Evaluated LiDAR data for use in riparian buffer assessment for streams
by improving channel morphology data, characterization of buffer
vegetative conditions, and to quantify stream shading conditions; and
Expanded an educational program called FARMSAFE where FFA students and
their teachers develop Farm Emergency Response Maps for farmers. They
learn about farm safety and geospatial technologies. Currently 26
school districts are participating and using curriculum developed by
this center.
South--South Georgia Regional Development Center.--Developed models
and maps of lands in south Georgia suitable for both development and
agriculture uses, including land use for bio-energy, land areas in
which there is suitability for both uses, and land in proximity to
residential and commercial enterprises where it is prone to loss as a
prime source of food and energy crops; Developed a first-of-its-kind
geospatial database template to assist the Georgia Department of
Community Affairs with gathering complete, topologically sound land use
reporting from 16 regional development centers across the State; and
Refined and disseminated the Well and Septic Tank Referencing and
Online Map (WelSTROM) resource for the mapping and data collection of
private wells and septic systems as the installations occur.
Tribal Technical Center (TTC)--Southwestern Indian Polytechnic
Institute.--The Tribal Technical Center has not yet provided a report
for 2008 RGIS activities. Key personnel left the project at the
beginning of the project and considerable time elapsed before they were
replaced. It is only in recent months that RGIS-TTC has begun to make
substantive progress toward project goals. In order to allow RGIS-TTC
sufficient time to meet 2008 goals, TTC requested and received a 1-year
no-cost extension to the overall RGIS grant. During the spring 2010
business meeting, members of the consortium will evaluate TTC progress
and provide a recommendation to the 2008 grant administrative unit--
University of Wisconsin--Madison. It is hoped that TTC will have
sufficient progress at this time to justify disbursement of the entire
funds allocated for their purposes. If, however, it appears at that
time that RGIS-TTC will not be able to expend the funds toward project
goals, RGIS Administration will submit a request to USDA to reallocate
funds.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
year 1990, $494,000; fiscal year 1991, $747,000; fiscal years 1992 and
1993, $1,000,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $1,011,000; fiscal year
1995, $877,000; fiscal year 1996, $939,000; fiscal years 1997 through
1999, $844,000 per year; fiscal year 2000, $850,000; fiscal year 2001,
$1,022,745; fiscal year 2002, $1,199,000; fiscal year 2003, $1,390,900;
fiscal year 2004, $1,431,504; fiscal year 2005, $1,702,272; fiscal year
2006 $1,783,980; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $1,328,634;
and fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $1,248,000 per year. A total of
$21,805,035 has been appropriated. This project was funded under
research Federal Administration through fiscal year 2004. In fiscal
year 2005, these funds were awarded as a Special Research Grant.
The National Consortium for Rural Geospatial Innovations in America
is administratively centered at Pennsylvania State University at
University Park and functions as one of the Chesapeake Centers.
The South Georgia Center in Valdosta, Georgia, works in affiliation
with the South Georgia Regional Development Center.
The Mid-South Center, in Fayetteville, Arkansas, works in
affiliation with the University of Arkansas.
The Pacific Northwest Center works in affiliation Central
Washington University and the Yakima Nations.
The Great Plains center in Grand Forks, North Dakota, works in
affiliation with the University of North Dakota.
Native American communities are being reached through the
Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute Tribal Technical Center in
Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Beginning in 1995, the program was externally reviewed by local
advisory committees and qualified professionals inside and outside of
government with comments and suggestions sent to the agency to assist
with the merit reviews. A 2-day review of the program was conducted in
November 2002 by the NIFA personnel in conjunction with a satellite
training broadcast of Geographic Information Systems technologies to
tribal colleges. In December 2003, an independent group of peers did a
comprehensive review of project activities over the last 5 years. The
program was found to be making progress towards objectives and
producing useful documents for their clientele. In fiscal year 2006,
the project conducted a stakeholder survey to assess the achievement
and impacts of RGIS directly.
GLOBAL CHANGE AND UV MONITORING, COLORADO
The objective of this grant is the establishment of a
climatological network to monitor ultraviolet radiation at the surface
of the earth.
Instruments have been deployed and are currently in operation at 36
monitoring sites across the 50 United States and Canada. Data are
available within 24 hours of measurement, via the Web, and are used by
many Federal agencies and university researchers. In 2009, the
project's Web site increased its capability to provide users with
graphical displays for some data. Some project funds are expended each
year to partially support studies by researchers across the country to
address plant, animal, and ecological impacts from ultraviolet
exposure. This, of course, represents a small fraction of all the
scientific studies being conducted with these data by the broader
scientific community. The lead scientist is developing an integrated
impact assessment model that couples climate, radiation, crop models,
and local weather conditions to predict and understand climate-crop
interactions. Recent model results demonstrate geospatially dispersed
effects of combined ultraviolet radiation and temperature increases on
the productivity of cotton cropland across the United States. Model
results for corn crops will be available by the middle of 2010.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1992, and the
appropriation for fiscal years 1992-1993 was $2,000,000 per year;
fiscal year 1994, $1,175,000; fiscal year 1995, $1,625,000; fiscal year
1996, $1,615,000; fiscal year 1997, $1,657,000; fiscal years 1998-2000,
$1,000,000 per year; fiscal year 2001, $1,430,845; fiscal year 2002,
$1,402,000; fiscal year 2003, $2,235,375; fiscal year 2004, $2,000,129;
fiscal year 2005, $1,984,000; fiscal year 2006, $2,162,160; fiscal year
2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $1,610,646; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$1,408,000 per year. A total of $28,713,155 has been appropriated.
Colorado State University manages the operating network, which
includes fully instrumented sites across the continental United States,
and in Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, and New Zealand. Ultraviolet
radiation effects work is conducted at collaborator laboratories across
the United States. Isolated experiments on ultraviolet effects are
conducted at various university and government laboratories across the
country.
The agency has assigned two technical staff to continuously monitor
activities in the global change research program. Agency staff
scientists are in contact with the principal researchers on a monthly
basis. A review of the Ultraviolet Radiation Monitoring Program by a
panel of technical experts from outside the Department was completed in
April 2001, and their report is available. Agency staff met with
program staff in January 2002 to discuss implementation of review panel
recommendations. In 2004, the project's principal researchers developed
a 5-year strategic plan for monitoring and research, which has been
reviewed and approved by agency technical staff; this plan is updated
annually to keep it current. Each year, the project's principal
researchers meet with the agency administrator and other staff to
evaluate project objectives, approaches, and impacts. In 2008, funds
were awarded to the institution competitively though a request for
applications and a peer-review process.
GRAIN SORGHUM, KANSAS AND TEXAS
The objective of the grant is to identify and use germplasm to
develop grain sorghum cultivars that both mature earlier and produce
more grain.
In 2009, research in this project has improved understanding of the
mechanisms of drought tolerance in sorghum. Field research with
genetically diverse sorghum lines under different conditions revealed
that leaf temperature and slow wilting are the best measurable
indicators of superior end-of-season yields under drought stress. These
traits are known to be related to plant water use efficiency.
Researchers are using the technique of association mapping with these
same lines, to identify the genes that help sorghum use water
efficiently. Breeders will then be able to use these genes in marker-
assisted breeding to develop sorghum lines that are even more drought
tolerant.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1997, and the
appropriation for fiscal years 1997-2000 was $106,000 per year; for
fiscal year 2001, $105,767; for fiscal year 2002, $104,000; for fiscal
year 2003, $139,040; for fiscal year 2004, $124,262; for fiscal year
2005, $135,904; for fiscal year 2006, $728,640; for fiscal year 2007,
$0; for fiscal year 2008, $548,136; for fiscal year 2009, $515,000; and
for fiscal year 2010, $1,000,000. A total of $3,824,749 has been
appropriated.
The research is conducted at Kansas State University, Texas Tech
University, and Texas A&M University.
The project is subjected to peer review by the recipient
institution, as well as review by senior agency technical staff. In
addition, stakeholder input was obtained through formal and informal
methods. The project was reviewed as part of the agency review of the
Kansas State University Agronomy Department.
GRASS SEED CROPPING FOR SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE, IDAHO, OREGON, AND
WASHINGTON
The objectives of this grant are to: develop sustainable grass seed
cropping systems that optimize economic seed production with maximum
energy and resource conservation and maintain or improve environmental
quality; develop economic utilization of grass seed production by-
products in agriculture; and develop maximum genetic and biological
potential of seed.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1994 with an
appropriation of $470,000; fiscal years 1995-2000, $423,000 per year;
fiscal year 2001, $422,069; fiscal year 2002, $414,000; fiscal year
2003, $454,030; fiscal year 2004, $406,587; fiscal year 2005, $450,368;
fiscal year 2006, $445,500; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008,
$332,655; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $313,000 per year. A total of
$6,559,209 has been appropriated.
The research is conducted at State agricultural experiment stations
in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington.
Additional work is expected to address some of the most difficult
issues, such as breeding new cultivars to address changing needs and
developing markets for the unburned crop residue. That work is now
underway.
This program is subject to an annual comprehensive evaluation by a
team of peer scientists, industry representatives, and farmers. The
results are used to guide research for the next year. Each proposal
undergoes merit review at the performing institution and is reviewed by
senior agency technical staff. The program was subjected to a
comprehensive review in December of 2000, which focused on the program
objectives and priorities. A site visit and review of progress was
conducted in 2003.
HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING, UTAH
The objective of this grant is to extend the use and applications
of high performance computing to the agricultural research community by
producing a virtual, scalable infrastructure for agricultural
researchers, and developing a new parallel approach to population
genetics and phylogeography on this infrastructure.
During 2006, Utah State University organized and sponsored a
national symposium on high performance computing for the agricultural
research community with a technical and educational program; a similar
meeting was held in 2009. Researcher-focused seminars and workshops
were held in 2008 and 2009 to help faculty and graduate students
develop knowledge and skills related to high-performance computing and
to help them initiate projects. Investigators have completed testing of
a regional climate model for snowpack, and the simulation and analysis
of climate impacts on agricultural water use have been completed.
The work supported by this grant began in 2006 under the Advanced
Computing Research and Education grant with an appropriation of
$539,550; and in fiscal year 2007, $0. In fiscal year 2008, the project
was renamed High Performance Computing with an appropriation of
$521,333; in fiscal year 2009, $525,000; and in fiscal year 2010,
$263,000. A total of $1,848,883 has been appropriated for this program.
The program is carried out at Utah State University.
The project is subject to a thorough institutional peer review
during preparation of the grant proposal. Submitted proposals undergo
merit review by one or more agency scientists. The principal researcher
meets annually with agency staff wherein project objectives, plans, and
accomplishments are discussed. An agency scientist made an on-site
visit to the project in 2009.
HUMAN NUTRITION, LOUISIANA
The objective of this grant is to understand differences in fat
storage and how this information can be applied to terminating the
current fattening of America.
Previous work evaluated the effects of high and low protein diets
in normal and overweight men and women at both low and high levels of
physical activity and energy intake using gene expression and muscle
metabolism, in vitro to explore the metabolism, and genetic basis of
the responses to intakes of these diets. Weight gain with the low
protein diet was significantly less than with higher protein diets, but
the fat storage was identical between the groups. These results are
noteworthy in that from a nutritional point of view it means that
interpreting weight changes in people with different protein intakes is
not simple and suggests that additional measures may be needed to
adequately interpret such data. Currently, this research has two
projects underway. The first, the study of variability of food intake
in dietitians is based on a demonstration of corrective signals for
feeding that operate over 3- to 4-day intervals in relatively sedentary
women. The second, the study of the interaction of dietary fat and
carbohydrates examines whether a high fat diet enhances liver fat and
decreases insulin sensitivity over 3- to 4-day intervals and if this
effect is exaggerated by the type of monosaccharide, such as fructose
or glucose, in the diet.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1991, and the
appropriation for fiscal years 1991-1993 was $800,000 per year; for
fiscal years 1994-2000, $752,000 per year; for fiscal year 2001,
$750,346; for fiscal year 2002, $800,000; for fiscal year 2003,
$794,800; for fiscal year 2004; $711,776; for fiscal year 2005,
$706,304; for fiscal year 2006, $698,940; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for
fiscal year 2008, $526,290; and for fiscal year 2009, $494,000; and for
fiscal year 2010, $526,000. A total of $13,672,456 has been
appropriated.
Research is conducted at the Pennington Biomedical Research Center,
a unit of the Louisiana State University.
A scientific and independent peer-review was conducted by a panel
of three reviewers from the Pennington Biomedical Research Center,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and two external reviewers according to the
USDA guidelines on May 20, 2009. In addition, progress is evaluated
through the review of annual reports by NIFA National Program Leaders.
HUMAN NUTRITION, NEW YORK
The objective of the grant is to support new multi-investigator
collaborative research projects that integrate approaches in genomics,
nutritional biochemistry, and human metabolism to address fundamental
questions in human nutrition and health. Research focuses on the use of
stable isotope approaches to understand human nutrient dynamics at the
whole body and cellular level in healthy humans.
Work on the current human nutrition research projects that focus on
the key nutrients calcium, iron and choline began in fiscal year 2009.
Studies to measure calcium, vitamin D, related hormones and bone
turnover markers in pregnant teens to determine how these factors are
associated with fetal bone growth and maternal bone loss across
pregnancy are nearing completion. Researchers have found that vitamin D
insufficiency is prevalent in minority adolescents and their newborns
at delivery and that suboptimal vitamin D status is associated with a
significantly lower birth weight in the newborn infant. Maternal
vitamin D insufficiency was also found to have a significant negative
impact on fetal bone growth. These results are being written for
publication. Human nutrition studies of choline requirements during
pregnancy are completing data collection. Analysis of the data is
underway.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
year 1989, $450,000; fiscal years 1990-1991, $556,000 per year; fiscal
years 1992-1993, $735,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $691,000; fiscal
years 1995 through 2000, $622,000 per year; fiscal year 2001, $620,632;
fiscal year 2002, $609,000; fiscal year 2003, $571,163; fiscal year
2004, $546,755; fiscal year 2005, $580,320; fiscal year 2006, $574,200;
fiscal year 2007, $0; and fiscal year 2008, $402,165; and fiscal years
2009 and 2010, $377,000 per year. A total of $12,113,235 has been
appropriated.
Research is being conducted at Cornell University, New York.
The proposal that was received for fiscal year 2009 was subjected
to independent peer review as required by the Cornell University
Agricultural Experiment Station. The process followed guidelines issued
by that office and entailed complete review of the proposal by two
Cornell faculty members external to the Division of Nutritional
Sciences. The proposal that is being prepared for fiscal year 2010 is a
continuation that is subject to an internal review by NIFA staff.
HYDROPONIC PRODUCTION, OHIO
The objective of the grant is to expand hydroponic production
technology with new growers and new crops using energy efficient
greenhouses and Internet decision support tools and have year-round
availability of locally grown, high-quality vegetable and floriculture
crops for all consumers.
Significant progress has been made in the areas of economic
analyses to enable producers to make fiscally sound decisions on choice
and operation of production facilities, cropping patterns, and
marketing decisions. This information has been provided to the user
community in easily accessible formats, including demonstration
greenhouses at Toledo, printed information, Web-based information, and
conferences. There is continuous, ongoing testing and demonstration of
improved technology including determination of the economic feasibility
of using the new technology systems. A Web-based grower information
system with interactive decision model for growing hydroponic tomatoes,
which is available at www.oardc.ohiostate.edu/hydroponics/drake/
index.php, was developed and is continuously updated and modified.
Demonstration and outreach activities are assisting growers in
expanding markets and marketing organizations for hydroponic-grown
crops; refining Internet decision support tools; designing and
demonstrating new, economical, energy efficient production systems;
investigating the feasibility of new crops for hydroponic production
methods; and conducting research on and demonstrating safe, effective
integrated pest management practices for hydroponic production systems.
Vegetable growers in Ohio and abroad were provided with technical,
cultural, and marketing support through one-on-one consultations and
site visits, telephone and e-mail communications, a monthly greenhouse
newsletter, a Web site, as well as through support for the grower-led
organization, the Great Lakes Hydroponic Association.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1998, and the
following amounts have been appropriated: in fiscal year 1998,
$140,000; in fiscal years 1999 and 2000, $200,000 per year; in fiscal
year 2001, $99,780; in fiscal year 2002, $100,000; in fiscal year 2003,
$99,350; in fiscal year 2004, $178,938; in fiscal year 2005, $178,560;
in fiscal year 2006, $177,210; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year
2008, $132,069; and in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $124,000 per year. A
total of $1,753,907 has been appropriated.
The research is being conducted by the Food, Agricultural, and
Biological Engineering, the Ohio State University Agricultural Research
Center, Wooster, Ohio; the Ohio State University Extension Commercial
Business Enhancement Center, Bowling Green, Ohio; and at the Toledo
Botanical Garden, Toledo, Ohio.
Each year, the performing institution conducts an internal peer
review of the proposal. In addition, the agency conducts a merit review
of each new proposal. To date, satisfactory progress towards
accomplishing project goals and objectives has been made.
IMPROVED DAIRY MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, PENNSYLVANIA
The objective of this grant is to research new technologies and
management practices that will help Pennsylvania dairy operations
become more profitable and sustainable.
Feed represents the largest and most variable cost for dairy
producers. Therefore, the productivity and profitability of every
commercial dairy farm depends on the efficient use of feed, with the
goal of achieving the highest output of milk with the minimum input of
feed. New feeding strategies are needed to improve feed efficiency in
dairy cattle. To this end, the research in this project seeks a better
understanding of the natural biological rhythms in dairy cattle. This
information will enable researchers to test different feeding regimens
and find ways to produce more milk with less feed. In addition to
improved productivity and profitability, enhanced feed efficiency has
the potential to decrease the production of greenhouse gases by dairy
cattle and thus lessen their local, regional and global contributions
to climate change.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1992, and the
appropriation for fiscal years 1992 and 1993 was $335,000 per year;
fiscal year 1994, $329,000; fiscal years 1995-2000, $296,000 per year;
fiscal year 2001, $397,124; fiscal year 2002, $389,000; fiscal year
2003, $397,400; fiscal year 2004, $354,894; fiscal year 2005, $352,160;
fiscal year 2006, $348,480; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008,
$259,173; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $243,000 per year. A total of
$5,759,231 has been appropriated.
This research is being carried out at the Pennsylvania State
University.
The submitted proposal for this new project was critically reviewed
by the National Program Leader of NIFA in the summer of 2009.
IMPROVED FRUIT PRACTICES, MICHIGAN
The objective of this grant is to reduce the chemical contamination
of the environment during protection from pests in fruit production and
improve production practices for beans and beets through multi
disciplinary research, including genetic resistance, pesticides, and
the development of new nonchemical production methods.
Field studies are being conducted to determine optimum nitrogen
application rates for sugar beet. This project has played a crucial
role in the development, registration, and expanded use of mating
disruption products for Michigan apples and peaches. The use of this
technique has greatly improved the control of codling moth, a key pest
of apples. The technique involves spraying a chemical that interferes
with moth mating. The spray does not leave toxic residue on the fruit
and does not harm beneficial organisms. Use of the technique has
reduced fruit injury and provided increased revenues of $20 to $100 per
acre. To reduce costs of application and effectiveness of the technique
to control key fruit pests, pheromone delivery and application
technologies are being developed. Reducing the reliance on broad
spectrum pesticides in the production of fruit has been a focal point
of this project. By incorporating reduced risk control options into
their integrated pest management programs, Michigan apple producers
have been able to reduce insecticide and miticide use by an average of
28 percent. This includes a 20 percent and 37 percent reduction in the
use of organophosphate and carbamate compounds, respectively. Insect
trapping technologies are now finding application to protect Michigan's
cherry crop. Traps provide an alternative to insecticide use. Using
traps on the crop has saved the industry as much as $700,000 per
growing season.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1994. The
appropriation for fiscal year 1994 was $494,000; for fiscal years 1995
2000, $445,000 per year; for fiscal year 2001, $444,021; for fiscal
year 2002, $239,000; for fiscal year 2003, $237,447; for fiscal year
2004, $211,743; for fiscal year 2005, $210,304; for fiscal year 2006,
$209,880; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $156,894; and
for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $147,000 per year. A total of
$5,167,289 has been appropriated.
Research is conducted by Michigan State University at several of
its field stations and in grower orchards and fields.
This project has been subjected to a comprehensive review each
year. The annual proposals are peer reviewed at the performing
institution before submission to the agency, and the proposal is then
reviewed by senior agency technical staff.
INCREASING SHELF LIFE OF AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES, IDAHO
The objective of this grant is to develop a bio-electronic detector
platform for the detection of staphylococcal microorganisms and
enterotoxins, which can be applied in food processing and distribution
systems and that can serve as a model for the development of a sensor
with broader applications to other pathogens and food contaminants.
A micro-electronic test chip has been specifically designed and
manufactured for this purpose; transistor parameters have been defined.
The electronic test structure fabricated allows surface chemistry data
to be acquired along with deoxyribonucleic acid binding data. Initial
experiments captured both live and formalin killed staphylococcus
aureus from pure cultures. Data obtained using the test chip provide
information for the design of an intelligent electronic micro-device.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Ultra Low Power
technology was used to create maximum sensitivity. The transistor
circuits were completed. The fabrication run was completed, and
processes for chip cleaning and surface modifications and encapsulation
were developed. Three electronic sensor platforms have been evaluated
in food systems. A hand-held, sensitive, enzyme-linked immunomagnetic
electrochemistry biosensor has been developed and tested for detection
of microorganisms and toxins in food and water. Silica nanospring mat
electronic biosensors were fabricated and found useful in sequence
specific detection of deoxyribonucleic acid. The third platform is
nanowire-based field effect transistor devices for label free and
ultra-sensitive electronic biodetection. Conjugated gold nanoparticle
technology has been explored to knock down genes for improving shelf-
life of meat through pre-harvest regulation or post-harvest fatty acid
oxidation.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2002. The
appropriation for fiscal year 2002 was $640,000; $789,833 in fiscal
year 2003; $706,805 in fiscal year 2004; $822,368 in fiscal year 2005;
$854,370 in fiscal year 2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007; $642,471 in
fiscal year 2008; and $603,000 per year in fiscal years 2009 and 2010.
A total of $5,661,847 has been appropriated.
The primary research is conducted at the University of Idaho
Research Park in Post Falls and in the Department of Microbiology,
Molecular Biology, and Biochemistry, and Department of Chemical and
Materials Engineering on the Moscow campus of the University of Idaho.
Limited supplementary works, including microchip fabrication and some
tests, are conducted at the chosen collaborators' locations.
An agency scientist conducts a merit review of the proposal
submitted in support of the appropriation on an annual basis. A review
of the proposal for fiscal year 2009 was conducted on June 25, 2009.
The research team is a multi-disciplinary group consisting of molecular
biologists, electronic designers, organic chemists, solid state
physicists, microbiologists, material engineers, and food scientists.
The feasibility of a successful completion of the proposed tasks is
good.
INFECTIOUS DISEASE RESEARCH, COLORADO
The objective of this grant is to initiate, conduct, and promote
research activities that have impacts on trade issues; use a
multidisciplinary, integrated approach to monitor for diseases;
prioritize critical research needs through stakeholder advisory groups;
and provide outreach and graduate student training.
The investigators have contributed to the diagnosis and preventive
policy for several economically important diseases such as Vesicular
Stomatitis, Bovine Tuberculosis, Johne's Disease, Brucellosis, Bovine
Spongiform Encephalopathy, Foot and Mouth Disease, and Bovine Viral
Diarrhea. Research results have been made available directly to the
stakeholders for immediate implementation through an advisory group, as
well as a Web site. Antimicrobial drug use and antimicrobial resistance
research has been conducted to investigate appropriate methods to
evaluate antimicrobial resistance through time. Furthermore, industry,
international, veterinary, and traditional students from diverse
disciplines have received advanced short-term or long-term training in
animal diseases, health and food safety.
The work has been underway since 1999 with an initial appropriation
of $250,000. Since that time appropriations have been made as follows:
$255,000 for fiscal year 2000; $299,340 for fiscal year 2001; $640,000
for fiscal year 2002; $745,125 for fiscal year 2003; $667,041 for
fiscal year 2004; $777,728 for fiscal year 2005; $808,830 for fiscal
year 2006; $0 for fiscal year 2007; $608,709 for fiscal year 2008;
$572,000 for fiscal year 2009; and $650,000 in fiscal year 2010. A
total of $6,273,773 has been appropriated.
The work is being conducted on the campus of Colorado State
University located at Fort Collins by the College of Veterinary
Medicine and Biomedical Sciences.
The NIFA National Program Leader from the agency hosted a meeting
with the Project Director in Washington, DC in March 2007 and has met
with him at various professional meetings on a regular basis since
then. In addition, the project advisory committee conducted a program
review in February-March 2005. The progress and accomplishments were
found to be consistent with the goals of the project. The fiscal year
2010 proposal was institutionally reviewed by Colorado State
University, as well as by a NIFA National Program Leader.
INITIATIVE TO IMPROVE BLUEBERRY PRODUCTION AND EFFICIENCY, GEORGIA
The objective of this grant is to develop a variety of blueberry
cultivars with high fruit quality with regards to flavor, storage, and
shipping.
In the first year of the project, field trials were established on
University of Georgia research farms and at grower test sites. The
trials consisted of standard cultivars and advanced selections from the
University of Georgia blueberry breeding program. The field trials
included both rabitteye and southern highbush selections. Various fruit
and plant attributes were evaluated.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $223,425; and $209,000 per year for
fiscal years 2009 and 2010. A total of $641,425 has been appropriated.
A merit review of the application was conducted in 2010.
INLAND MARINE AQUACULTURE, VIRGINIA
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $400,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
INSTITUTE FOR FOOD SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, ARKANSAS
The objective of the grant is to provide a mechanism for the
University of Arkansas to utilize its multidisciplinary research
expertise to offer an integrated approach to developing and
disseminating scientific information associated with production, value-
added processing, safety, nutritional value, packaging, storage, and
distribution of food products.
The Institute for Food Science and Engineering seeks to strengthen
existing partnerships and develop new partnerships and alliances with
the State, regional, national food industry, government, and academic
institutions, while providing an appropriate balance of fundamental and
applied research in program areas that are critical to the food
processing industries in Arkansas, the region, and the Nation. New
production, processing, and packaging technologies are developed and
promoted to enhance product quality and ensure safety throughout the
food chain from production to consumption. Technology transfer efforts
assist the food industry in developing value-added, high-quality
products that are safe, appealing, and healthy. Appropriate technology
transfer methods are used to communicate research findings, developing
a nationally and internationally recognized industry outreach program.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1996. The
appropriation for fiscal years 1996 and 1997 was $750,000 each year;
$950,000 for fiscal year 1998; $1,250,000 each year for fiscal years
1999-2000; $1,247,250 for fiscal year 2001; $1,222,000 in fiscal year
2002; $1,214,057 for fiscal year 2003; $1,086,551 for fiscal year 2004;
$1,110,048 for fiscal year 2005; $1,107,810 for fiscal year 2006; $0
for fiscal year 2007; $825,183 for fiscal year 2008; and $775,000 per
year for fiscal years 2009 and 2010. The total appropriation was
$14,312,899.
This project was evaluated in September 2009 by NIFA staff and the
reviews indicated that the faculty and facilities were adequate, and
the proposal was sound.
INTEGRATED ECONOMIC AND TECHNICAL ANALYSIS OF SUSTAINABLE BIOMASS
ENERGY SYSTEMS, INDIANA
The objective of this grant is to conduct economic and
environmental analyses to assist Indiana and the Midwest in producing
and using renewable energy and how biomass production and conversion
affects the economy, environment and ecosystems of the region.
The original goal of this research is to conduct economics and
environmental analyses. The economic analysis is using three different
economic modeling tools that capture the uncertainty in oil price and
other economic variables and simulation of the impacts of different
biofuels policy options and oil prices on ethanol production. The
policies being considered are the fixed biofuel subsidy, a variable
subsidy that fluctuates with the price of oil, the Renewable Fuel
Standard, and greenhouse gas policies. This project is also examining a
model used to simulate global impacts of domestic and European Union
biofuels programs. Technology options include cellulose conversion via
biochemical processes and via thermochemical processes. The economic
analyses are under development by building spreadsheet models for each
of the major technology paths and policy options. The environmental
analysis will include data collection and analysis of field trials
using big bluestem, miscanthus, switchgrass, sorghum, and corn grown in
rotation with soybean and continuous corn. All experimental treatments
have been established at the primary experimental site including
transplanting Miscanthus rhizomes and removal of residues from corn and
sorghum residue removal treatments. All monitoring equipment has been
installed and calibrated to study grain and total above ground dry
matter yields as a function of nitrogen fertilizer rate and dissolved
organic carbon content in drainage water and weekly assessment of
greenhouse gas emissions. Compositional analysis of all plant issues
has been initiated.
Fiscal year 2009 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant. An amount of $188,000 per year was appropriated in
fiscal years 2009 and 2010. The total appropriation is $376,000.
The work is being carried out at Purdue University and at the
Purdue University Water Quality Field Station.
Fiscal year 2009 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant. An agency evaluation will be conducted when the
proposal for fiscal year 2010 is submitted.
INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT
The objective of this grant is to develop new approaches for
managing critical pest problems in agricultural production systems and
urban environments. Integrated pest management systems are developed to
enhance or maintain profitability, protect human health and the
environment, manage invasive pest species, and serve as a replacement
for management tools lost as a result of regulatory action, pest
resistance, and other factors.
The investment of research grant funds in these projects has
resulted in the development of many new pest management tools and a
reduction in the economic, health, and environmental risks associated
with agricultural production. Recent examples of contributions made by
this research program include the development of new management
approaches for peach brown rot, rice stink bug, and grape berry moth.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1981, and the
following amounts have been appropriated: in fiscal year 1981,
$1,500,000; in fiscal years 1982-1985, $3,091,000 per year; in fiscal
years 1986-1989, $2,940,000 per year; in fiscal year 1990, $2,903,000;
in fiscal year 1991, $4,000,000; in fiscal years 1992 and 1993,
$4,457,000 per year; in fiscal year 1994, $3,034,000; in fiscal years
1995-2000, $2,731,000 per year; in fiscal year 2001, $2,724,992; in
fiscal year 2002, $2,725,000; in fiscal year 2003, $2,707,288; in
fiscal year 2004, $2,438,527; in fiscal year 2005, $2,419,488; in
fiscal years 2006 and 2007, $2,395,800 per year; in fiscal year 2008,
$2,379,228; in fiscal year 2009, $2,379,000; and in fiscal year 2010,
$2,415,000. A total of $85,841,123 has been appropriated since fiscal
year 1981.
Researchers from all land-grant universities are eligible to
compete for this funding. In fiscal year 2009, the following 15
institutions received funding from this competitive grants program:
Clemson University, Cornell University, Idaho State University,
Louisiana State University, Michigan State University, Montana State
University, North Carolina State University, Ohio State University,
Oregon State University, Purdue University, the University of Florida,
the University of Georgia, the University of Massachusetts, the
University of Maine, and Washington State University.
The agency has established a comprehensive annual process to
identify meritorious projects through a competitive process that
evaluates relevance to stakeholder needs and technical merit. All
proposals undergo technical and merit review at the institutional and
regional levels. All proposals are reviewed by a panel of experts to
identify those that are both highly relevant and technically sound.
Senior agency technical staff evaluates proposals and make
recommendations based on the evaluation of the peer review panel. The
agency's technical staff also reviews annual and final reports to
evaluate accomplishments and to determine whether project objectives
are being achieved. The program was reviewed by an external panel in
February 2006 as part of a broader stakeholder review of the agency's
Regional Integrated Pest Management Centers program.
INTEGRATED PRODUCTION SYSTEMS, OKLAHOMA
The objectives of this grant are to develop organic production
techniques for crops in Oklahoma, and to characterize changes in market
prices at regional terminal markets and develop potential market
opportunities.
Recent work includes a project to determine activity and
effectiveness of organic pesticides for managing harlequin bugs on
brassica crops. Three studies were conducted on the use of cucurbit
crop planting systems following a rye cover crop for their impact on
weed control. Another study was conducted on corn gluten meal for weed
control in southern peas. Cultivar trials were conducted with 18
cultivars of tomatoes grown under certified National Organic Program
protocols. Twelve cultivars of cantaloupe were also grown in a soil
fertility study comparing conventional synthetic fertilizers with
organic poultry litter fertilizers. In another study, the effectiveness
of conventional versus organic vegetable production systems was
examined. Results of these studies have been published in journals and
Oklahoma State University variety trial publications and presented at
field days.
Work supported by this grant started in fiscal year 1984, and the
appropriations were: fiscal year 1984, $200,000; fiscal year 1985,
$250,000; fiscal year 1986, $238,000; fiscal years 1987-1989, $188,000
per year; fiscal years 1990-1991, $186,000 per year; fiscal year 1992,
$193,000; fiscal year 1993, $190,000; fiscal year 1994, $179,000;
fiscal years 1995-1998, $161,000 per year; fiscal years 1999-2000,
$180,000 per year; fiscal year 2001, $179,604; fiscal year 2002,
$176,000; fiscal year 2003, $231,486; fiscal year 2004, $206,773;
fiscal year 2005, $205,344; fiscal year 2006, $252,450; fiscal year
2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $187,677; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$177,000 per year. A total of $4,983,334 has been appropriated.
This research is being conducted at the Wes Watkins Agricultural
Research and Education Center at Lane, Oklahoma. This facility is
operated by the Oklahoma State Agricultural Experiment Station.
Each of the annual project proposals was subjected to peer review
by the performing institution and was evaluated by senior agency
technical staff.
INTERNATIONAL ARID LANDS CONSORTIUM, ARIZONA
The objective of this grant is to develop an ecological approach to
multiple-use management and sustainable use of arid and semi-arid
lands.
The Consortium has conducted research and development, educational
and training initiatives, demonstration projects, workshops and other
technology transfer activities applied to the development, management,
restoration, and reclamation of arid and semi-arid land in North
America, the Middle East, and elsewhere in the world. All activities
are supported by member institutions through their ongoing applied
research and demonstration projects. The IALC was authorized by
Congress in 1990. During the past 20 years, the IALC has funded 91
research projects, 30 demonstration projects, 11 special initiatives;
administered a successful 7-year IALC-USAID (U.S. Agency for
International Development) cooperative agreement in Central Asia and
the Middle East; and sponsored 20 undergrad and grad students through
the IALC Peace Fellowship program. Selected project topics over the
past 20 years include: conservation; water quality; irrigation; GIS
(Geographic Information System) and remote sensing; ecology;
agriculture; wildlife management; rangeland management; wastewater; and
biodiversity. IALC outputs from projects include: journal articles;
books; doctoral dissertations; presentations; Web sites; and many
others. Most IALC projects have taken place in the Southwestern United
States and in the Middle East. Four highlights from the fiscal year
2008-2009 projects funded by NIFA include: (1) Fire in Chihuahuan
Desert Grasslands: Effects on Soil Biota and Nutrient Cycling; (2) Pine
Expansion in Arid Land: Fire Effects on Safe Site Abundance; (3) Post-
Fire Vegetation Recovery: Impacts of Restoration and Environment; and
(4) Runoff, Flood, and Non-sewage Wastewater for Native Tree
Propagation: Anaerobic Sewage Treatment for Sustainable Water
Reclamation in Jordan.
The International Arid Lands Consortium was incorporated in 1991.
Funds were appropriated to the Forest Service in 1993. Additional funds
were received during each of the years that followed. For fiscal years
1994-1998, $329,000 per year; for fiscal years 1999 and 2000, $400,000
per year; for fiscal year 2001, $493,911; for fiscal year 2002,
$484,000; for fiscal year 2003, $513,640; for fiscal year 2004,
$581,549; for fiscal year 2005, $579,328; for fiscal year 2006,
$573,210; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $426,990; and
for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $401,000 per year. Total appropriations
are $6,899,628.
Research is currently being conducted at the University of Arizona;
South Dakota State University; Texas Agricultural and Mechanical
University, Kingsville; New Mexico State University; University of
Illinois; Nevada's Desert Research Institute; and several research and
higher education institutions in Israel, Jordan, and Egypt.
The National Program Leader for Rangeland and Grassland Ecosystems
communicates regularly with the project director and attended the Board
of Directors meeting held in spring 2009. The research conducted under
this grant is progressing satisfactorily and is in accordance with the
mission of the agency.
INVASIVE PLANT MANAGEMENT, MONTANA
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $270,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
IR-4 MINOR CROP PEST MANAGEMENT
The objectives of the grant are to obtain and maintain regulatory
clearances of effective crop protection agents for high value,
specialty food crops and for minor uses on major crops with special
emphasis on lower risk chemicals and uses that are compatible with
integrated pest management programs; to support research to enhance the
development and registration of bio-pesticides for use in food and non-
food pest management programs; and to support research on crop
protection products that will expand their uses on ornamental crops to
allow management of new and important pest species.
Since the program began, data generated by IR-4 has contributed to
the approval of over 8,400 food-use and over 10,800 ornamental pest
management product clearances and registrations. The IR-4 program
supported clearances accounting for approximately 50 percent of all
pest management registration packets approved by the EPA between 2001
and 2004. From 1999 through 2004, IR-4 data packages contributed to the
registration of 3,780 food-crop products and 3,520 ornamental products,
which are 46 percent and 32 percent, respectively, of all IR-4
supported registrations. During calendar year 2008, the EPA reviewed a
record 41 chemistries for IR-4 Food Use Program tolerance petitions.
The agency also eliminated the remaining backlog of IR-4 petitions
making 2008 one of the most productive years for IR-4. Permanent
pesticide tolerances on these were established on 241 chemicals that
could result in 999 new specialty crop use registrations, many of which
are considered reduced risk. IR-4 Ornamental Horticulture Program data
supported seven new registrations and one registration amendment as
well as four registrations in California. These IR-4 supported
successes impacted 3,095 ornamental plant species. The Biopesticide
Program funded 29 research projects to provide data to support
expansion on a number of biopesticide registrations. IR-4's efforts
supported 18 new or modified products which could provide 128 new
biopesticide uses. IR-4 continued the crop group update by submitting a
proposal to EPA to expand the tree nut crop group. In 2008, the IR-4
food crop program consisted of 573 field trials associated with 92
studies. The IR-4 Ornamental Horticulture program established 1,323
trials with greenhouse and field ornamental crops in support of company
registrations decisions. All food use studies are conducted in
compliance with Federal Good Laboratory Practice Standards. The IR-4
Quality Assurance Unit conducted 157 field and 73 analytical in-life
inspections; and audited 651 field data books, 84 analytical summary
reports, and 97 final or amended reports. In 2008, the Food Use Program
submitted 151 data packages, involving 36 chemicals, and the Ornamental
Horticulture Program submitted 12 data packages to registrants.
Grants have been awarded from appropriated funds as follows:
Program redirection in fiscal year 1975, $250,000; fiscal years 1976-
1980, $1,000,000 per year; fiscal year 1981, $1,250,000; fiscal years
1982-1985, $1,440,000 per year; fiscal years 1986-1989, $1,369,000 per
year; fiscal year 1990, $1,975,000; fiscal year 1991, $3,000,000;
fiscal years 1992-1993, $3,500,000 per year; fiscal year 1994,
$6,345,000; fiscal years 1995-1997, $5,710,000 per year; fiscal years
1998-2000, $8,990,000 per year; fiscal year 2001, $8,970,222; fiscal
year 2002, $10,485,000; fiscal year 2003, $10,673,171; fiscal year
2004, $9,549,325; fiscal year 2005, $11,145,120; fiscal years 2006 and
2007, $10,677,150 per year; fiscal year 2008, $11,367,864; fiscal year
2009, $12,000,000; and fiscal year 2010, $12,180,000. A total of
$187,881,002 has been appropriated.
Field work is performed at locations that meet specific EPA
requirements for appropriate geographic distribution of locations for
regulatory data collection. The majority of IR-4 field research is
conducted at 28 Field Research Centers in the following 20 States:
California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Maine,
Maryland, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York,
North Carolina, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and
Wisconsin. In addition, the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) has
cooperating IR-4 field research sites in California, Georgia, South
Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, and Washington. IR-4 laboratory analyses
are being conducted at Agricultural Experiment Stations in California,
Florida, Michigan, and New York with assistance from State Agricultural
Experiment Stations in Hawaii, North Carolina, and Washington. The ARS
laboratories in Georgia, Maryland, and Washington also cooperate with
the processing of residue sample analysis. Protocol development, data
assimilation, writing petitions, and registration processing are
coordinated through the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station.
Funding applications are reviewed by senior agency technical staff.
The findings of these reviews indicate progress in achieving the
objective of providing safe and effective pest management alternatives
for specialty crops growers. In May 2003, the agency sponsored a peer
review of the project, which consisted of a science panel composed of
representatives from the USDA, the EPA, commodity groups, the food
processing industry, the crop protection industry, and land-grant
universities. The review committee was asked to examine past IR-4
accomplishments, review the current organizational structure,
operations and program, and help chart future directions for the
program. The review panel report was issued in July 2003 with specific
comments and recommendations for each of the above areas. The report
ranked the IR-4 program as outstanding in carrying out its mission of
facilitating the registration of new pest management products for
specialty crops. A strategic planning conference was held in December
2008 to focus on future needs and opportunities. Participants believe
that maintaining and enhancing the core objectives of the Food Use,
Ornamental Horticulture, and Biopesticide programs is essential. An
external peer review was conducted in May 2009.
JOINT UNITED STATES/CHINA BIOTECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND EXTENSION, UTAH
The objective of this grant is to establish joint programs between
the United States and China in agricultural biotechnology and related
areas. Joint research programs will focus on animal models for the
study of infectious diseases, natural bioactive compound development,
and cellular communication networks; and agriculturally relevant crops
and forages; livestock cloning and genetics; water resources; and
climate change.
A collaborative project on sheep genomics between Utah State
University and Yunnan University in Kunming has resulted in the
training of graduate and post-graduate students with joint publications
as outcomes.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $446,850; $420,000 in fiscal year
2009; and $210,000 in fiscal year 2010. A total of $1,076,850 has been
appropriated.
The research is being conducted at Utah State University and at
cooperating institutions in China.
Senior agency technical staff conduct a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
The submitting institution conducts a peer review of the proposal prior
to submission.
LEOPOLD CENTER HYPOXIA PROJECT, IOWA
The objective of this grant is the development of performance-based
strategies for improving land management in the Upper Mississippi River
basin by optimizing agricultural production on specific landscapes,
facilitating land use change to create ecological buffers and water
retention areas, and diversifying land use to increase production of
perennials for bio-based and energy crops.
Demonstration sites for this project have been established and
results of water quality improvement are being analyzed. One key issue
is developing management alternatives for producers. To that end, the
project continues to explore alternative methods to reduce nutrient
losses from agriculture.
The work is being carried out through the Leopold Center for
Sustainable Agriculture at Iowa State University in Ames, Iowa.
The project was initiated in fiscal year 2004. The appropriation
for fiscal year 2004 was $223,673; for fiscal year 2005, $222,208; for
fiscal year 2006, $219,780; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year
2008, $112,209; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $105,000 per year.
A total of $987,870 has been appropriated for this project.
A programmatic review of this project is expected to be conducted
in 2010. The most recent review was conducted by a NIFA National
Program Leader who visited the campus at Iowa State University and met
with project officials in fiscal year 2006. The Project leader met with
the National Program Leader responsible for oversight of this project
in 2008.
LIVESTOCK AND DAIRY POLICY, NEW YORK AND TEXAS
The objective of this grant is to provide timely and comprehensive
analysis of numerous policy and technological changes affecting
livestock and dairy farmers and agribusinesses and advise them and
policymakers promptly of possible outcomes.
The program continues to provide timely assessments and evaluations
of provisions and proposed changes in agricultural policies, the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and the North American Free
Trade Agreement; various income and excise tax measures; and
alternative pricing measures for milk. Work on most projects continues
under Project 576. Accomplishments under various sub-projects of
Project 594 include econometric models of price transmission processes
in U.S. dairy markets. Both institutions maintain extension outreach
programs to disseminate results of their analysis throughout the United
States. They have organized a national Dairy Markets and Policy
Extension Committee to advise and assist them in this effort. This
committee was especially helpful to USDA in educating farmers about
proposed milk marketing order changes last year.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
year 1989, $450,000; fiscal year 1990, $518,000; fiscal years 1991-
1993, $525,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $494,000; fiscal years 1995-
1998, $445,000 per year; fiscal year 1999 and 2000, $475,000 per year;
fiscal year 2001, $568,746; fiscal year 2002, $558,000; fiscal year
2003, $600,074; fiscal year 2004, $894,690; fiscal year 2005, $892,800;
fiscal year 2006, $990,000; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008,
$737,799; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $693,000 per year. A total of
$12,395,109 has been appropriated.
The research is being conducted at Cornell University and Texas A&M
University.
A formal evaluation of this project has not been conducted. Annual
proposals for funding, however, are peer reviewed for relevance and
scientific merit. The NIFA contact is also in regular contact with
principal researchers at each institution to discuss progress toward
project objectives.
MAPLE RESEARCH, VERMONT
The objective of the grant is to investigate several novel maple
sap vacuum tubing collection systems in order to develop a cost-
effective system that maximizes sap yield.
Research funded by the USDA Special Grants for Maple since 2005 has
focused on the effects of sap processing technology on maple syrup
chemistry and quality. Initial studies during the spring seasons of
2006 and 2007 examined the impacts of air injection of maple sap and
concentrate on maple syrup chemical composition and flavor. In general,
air injection, either of sap or concentrate, results in production of
maple syrup that is significantly lighter in color, but with relatively
few other changes of consequence. In 2008, as a result of producer
desires to reduce energy consumption by further increasing reverse
osmosis concentration, researchers compared the effects of boiling 8
degree Brix and 21 degree Brix sap concentrate. In addition to the
initial ``sweetening'' boil, during the 2009 production season
researchers were able to complete five test boils in two identical
syrup evaporators with the different levels of sap concentrate.
Laboratory analyses of syrup produced in these experiments are ongoing;
however, it appears that for color grade, trends found in the 2009
season are similar to those observed in 2008, although syrup is
produced at a considerably faster rate at higher concentrations.
Work under this project began in fiscal year 1985. Annual
appropriations in support of this project are as follows: fiscal year
1985, $100,000; fiscal years 1986 and 1987, $95,000 per year; fiscal
years 1988 and 1989, $100,000 per year; fiscal years 1990-1993, $99,000
per year; fiscal year 1994, $93,000; fiscal years 1995-1997, $84,000
per year; fiscal years 1998-2000, $100,000 per year; fiscal year 2001,
$119,000; fiscal year 2002, $120,000; fiscal year 2003, $149,025;
fiscal year 2004, $133,209; fiscal year 2005, $131,936; fiscal year
2006, $137,610; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $97,314;
$155,000 in fiscal year 2009; and $165,000 in fiscal year 2010. The
total appropriation was $2,739,094.
This research is being conducted at the Proctor Maple Research
Center at the University of Vermont in Burlington.
The proposal was evaluated by NIFA Staff in September 2009.
Approval was granted based on the quality of the proposal, the
facilities, faculty, and previous Current Research Information System
(CRIS) reports.
MEADOWFOAM, OREGON
The objective of this grant is to increase the productivity and
profitability of meadow foam as an oilseed crop by developing new
varieties that out-yield previously grown varieties. Four new
experimental varieties were developed in 2008-2009 and planted for
further increase and yield evaluation.
Breeding and genetics, weed management, and other research
activities are being carried out in field, greenhouse, and laboratory
facilities managed by the Department of Crop and Soil Science at Oregon
State University, Corvallis. Assessment of herbicidal activity of
glocosinolate derivatives is conducted at the Columbia Basin
Agricultural Research Center, Pendleon, Oregon.
The work supported by this grant began in 1999, and the
appropriation for fiscal years 1999-2000 was $300,000 per year; for
fiscal year 2001, $299,340; for fiscal year 2002, $293,000; for fiscal
year 2003, $293,083; for fiscal year 2004, $262,442; for fiscal year
2005, $259,904; for fiscal year 2006, $257,400; for fiscal year, 2007,
$0; for fiscal year 2008, $191,649; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$180,000 per year. A total of $2,816,818 has been appropriated.
Evaluation of this project is conducted annually based on the
annual progress report and discussions with the principal investigator
as appropriate. In the fall of 2006, a discussion on progress was held
with the Oregon Meadowfoam Oilseed Growers Association. The evaluation
is conducted by the National Program Leader for Agricultural Materials
who has determined that research is progressing and is in accordance
with the mission of the agency.
MICHIGAN BIOTECHNOLOGY CONSORTIUM
The objectives of the grant are to increase the utilization of
agricultural raw materials; to develop bioprocessing technology to
manufacture products from agricultural raw materials; to reduce
agricultural surpluses; and to reduce the need to import foreign
petroleum, thereby decreasing environmental costs of agricultural
products and processes.
Recent accomplishments include identification of a bacterium,
Actinobacillus succinogenes, capable of utilizing both hexose and
pentose sugars simultaneously for the production of succinic acid,
demonstration that this organism is capable of converting hydrolyzed
raw starch efficiently to succinic acid in a clean-not-sterile
environment, and demonstration that biomass-derived sugar streams,
generated through pre-treatment and hydrolysis of corn fiber, can serve
as sugar sources in succinic fermentations. Additional goals for this
project include: optimizing the physical, chemical and mechanical
properties of cellulose in the form of nanowhiskers and microfibrils as
reinforcement in polymer matrix nanocomposites; developing a
biodegradable, thermoplastic cellulose polymer based on environmentally
benign processing techniques; developing a commercially viable process
for the production of succinic acid from bio-based feedstocks; and
identifying new commercially attractive biobased technologies. Six
promising technologies for new biobased products have been identified
and further research on these technologies is being initiated.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1989, and the
following amounts have been appropriated: in fiscal year 1989,
$1,750,000; in fiscal year 1990, $2,160,000; in fiscal year 1991,
$2,246,000; in fiscal years 1992-1993, $2,358,000 per year; in fiscal
year 1994, $2,217,000; in fiscal year 1995, $1,995,000; in fiscal years
1996 and 1997, $750,000 per year; in fiscal years 1998-2000, $675,000
per year; in fiscal year 2001, $723,405; in fiscal year 2002, $481,000;
in fiscal year 2003, $623,918; in fiscal year 2004, $558,684; in fiscal
year 2005, $554,528; in fiscal year 2006, $549,450; in fiscal year
2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $409,116; and in fiscal years 2009 and
2010, $384,000 per year. A total of $23,277,101 has been appropriated.
This research is being conducted on the campus of Michigan State
University and at the Michigan Biotechnology Institute. Technology
demonstrations are occurring throughout the United States.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
The submitting institution conducts a peer review of the proposal prior
to submission.
MIDWEST CENTER FOR BIOENERGY GRASSES, INDIANA
The objective of this grant is to optimize bioenergy crops for
their end-use production as biofuels by (1) exploring grass genetics
for improved feedstock quality and quantity; (2) optimizing biomass
architecture for end-use production; (3) developing cropping systems
for plant production, sustainability, and cost efficiency; and (4)
developing direct-conversion technologies for scalable and distributive
hydrocarbon refineries.
Researchers have already engaged growers, ethanol producers, and
implement companies to work with the research center to test and grow
feedstocks and produce and assess the resulting ethanol. Test plots to
determine soil characteristics and long-term sustainability have been
established.
Fiscal year 2009 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant. An amount of $188,000 per year was appropriated for
fiscal years 2009 and 2010. A total of $376,000 has been appropriated.
The research is being conducted by Purdue University at regional
Purdue Agricultural Centers and at Purdue University's Water Quality
Field Station.
Evaluation of this project is conducted yearly based on annual
progress reports and discussions with the principle investigators over
the course of the year. This project is making progress in accordance
with the mission of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
MIDWEST POULTRY CONSORTIUM, IOWA
The objective of the grant is to conduct poultry research based on
current and projected needs of the poultry system in the Midwest.
The Midwest Poultry Consortium priorities for the poultry industry
in the Midwest are improving efficiency and sustainability of poultry
production through integrated, collaborative research and technology
transfer. This project has focused on identifying biomarkers for
beneficial traits, mechanisms of muscle growth, and practices to reduce
malodorous compounds; as well as developed new vaccines and food
products. It has also developed new regional collaborative approaches
in research and technology transfer involving land-grant and other
universities, the Federal Government, and the private sector on
priority areas of local needs and problems of regional/national scope.
Research projects supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2002
with an appropriation of $400,000. This was followed in fiscal year
2003 with $695,450; in fiscal year 2004, $626,283; in fiscal year 2005,
$682,496; in fiscal year 2006, $675,180; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in
fiscal year 2008, $502,458; and in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $471,000
per year. The total amount appropriated is $4,523,867.
Research is conducted by member States of the Midwest Poultry
Consortium Research, which are: Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,
Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio,
South Dakota, and Wisconsin. Experts in other States collaborate on
projects.
The progress under each project is reported yearly and found to be
satisfactory. An annual merit review of projects is provided by staff.
MILK SAFETY, PENNSYLVANIA
The objective of this grant is to improve the safety of pasteurized
fluid milk, addressing critical control points from pre-pasteurization
contamination of milk from the distribution system to the consumer.
Researchers have gathered preliminary data that uses a general
approach to identify single nucleotide polymorphisms which may lead to
a rapid, cost effective method of differentiating E. coli O157:H7
strains. A bioreporter-based diagnostic test for detection of organic
toxicants such as benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, trichloroethylene,
and xylene directly from milk and milk products was developed. The
molecular beacon-based real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction assays for
detection of foodborne pathogens, including Campylobacter jejuni,
Escherichia coli O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes, Salmonella,
Staphylococcus aureus, and bioterrorism agent Bacillus anthracis, were
developed.
Grants have been awarded for milk consumption and milk safety from
funds appropriated as follows: fiscal years 1986-1989, $285,000 per
year; fiscal year 1990, $281,000; fiscal year 1991, $283,000; fiscal
year 1992, $284,000; fiscal year 1993, $184,000; fiscal years 1994-
1998, $268,000 per year; fiscal year 1999, $250,000; fiscal year 2000
$297,500; fiscal year 2001, $374,175; fiscal year 2002, $600,000;
fiscal year 2003 $745,125; fiscal year 2004, $667,041; fiscal year
2005, $703,328; fiscal year 2006, $780,120; fiscal year 2007, $0;
fiscal year 2008, $586,863; fiscal year 2009, $771,000; and fiscal year
2010, $821,000. A total of $10,108,152 has been appropriated.
This research is conducted at the Pennsylvania State University,
State College, Pennsylvania.
This project was evaluated in April 2009 by NIFA staff using
Current Research Information System reports and the submitted proposal.
This review by staff concluded that the Pennsylvania State University
faculty and facilities are adequate for the successful completion of
this project.
MINOR USE ANIMAL DRUGS
The objective of this grant is to facilitate the registration
process for therapeutic compounds in minor food and fiber animal
species. This cooperative effort between State, Federal and industry
personnel will obtain minor and specialty animal drug clearances i.e.
tolerances, exemptions, and registrations. The activities will include
determining and prioritizing minor use needs and data requirements,
reviews, analyzes and evaluations of minor use research proposals;
developing and assembling data for minor use drug registrations; and
preparing and submitting petitions for drug registrations.
Currently, data generated through this project has led to improved
animal health and welfare due to new applications of drugs for minor
species that are made available. This project will facilitate the safe
and efficacious use of drugs to improve the health and welfare of minor
animal species and facilitate use of drugs for minor uses in major
animal species.
Fiscal year 2009 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant. However, this grant was previously funded starting in
fiscal year 1982 through fiscal year 2006 with appropriations totaling
$10,803,443. The fiscal years 2009 and 2010 appropriations are $429,000
per year for appropriations totaling $858,000.
The work is being carried out at Cornell University, the University
of Florida, the University of California--Davis, and Iowa State
University.
The fiscal year 2009 proposal was institutionally peer-reviewed at
Cornell University, the University of Florida, the University of
California--Davis, and Iowa State University. In addition, a NIFA
National Program Leader reviewed the proposal and determined that the
research project was appropriate and addresses important opportunities
for better understanding of the need to obtain minor and specialty
animal drug clearances. Furthermore, the feasibility, budget, time-
frame, and facilities for the project were adequate. The National
Program Leader noted that these ongoing research projects outline a
program which builds upon established resources and responds to
national research need for data on safe and effective drugs, such as
are available for cattle, swine, and poultry.
MOLLUSCAN SHELLFISH, OREGON
The objectives of this grant are to establish a repository for
molluscan shellfish germplasm, to establish breeding programs for
commercial production of molluscan shellfish, and to establish a
resource center for industry researchers and other interested parties
in the United States and abroad.
The program has developed improved strains of oysters which have
been evaluated by industry collaborators in Alaska, Washington, Oregon,
and California. Several commercial oyster hatcheries have used the
breeding program's broodstock to produce billions of spat for the west
coast oyster industry and foreign markets. A repository has been
established to conserve genetic materials from oyster lines with a
redundant, second repository to protect the selected lines of oysters
developed by this program and is co-administered and funded in
partnership with industry collaborators.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1995 with an
appropriation of $250,000; in fiscal year 1996, $300,000; in fiscal
years 1997-2000, $400,000 per year; in fiscal year 2001, $399,120; in
fiscal year 2002, $391,000; in fiscal year 2003, $392,433; in fiscal
year 2004, $350,917; in fiscal year 2005, $348,192; in fiscal year
2006, $361,350; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $269,103;
and in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $253,000 per year. A total of
$5,168,115 has been appropriated.
The work is being conducted by Oregon State University at their
Hatfield Marine Science Center located in Newport, Oregon, in
cooperation with commercial shellfish producers in California, Oregon,
Washington, and Alaska.
The agency's National Aquaculture Program staff review the project
annually as the proposals are submitted to the agency with details of
planned research studies. The proposed research is consistent with the
National Aquaculture Research and Development Strategic Plan. The
Agency conducted a post-award management workshop in December 2009 that
included reporting of progress and accomplishments with a focus on
quality, performance, and relevancy.
MULTI-COMMODITY RESEARCH, OREGON
The objective of this grant is to provide agricultural market
research and analysis to support Pacific Northwest producers and
agribusinesses and to identify potential value-added markets and
product opportunities in the Pacific Rim countries.
A couple examples of current work includes:
Marketing and Trade Economics.--The reinstatement of State
slaughter and processing inspection programs could provide new
opportunities for processing facilities and livestock producers in
terms of value-added meat products and sales. For these and other
reasons, ongoing work and surveys are being undertaken to assess
interest in a State-Federal meat inspection program in Oregon and
Washington.
Value-added Product Development.--A number of value-added projects
were initiated over the past year, including product development
activities, ingredient formulation, and shelf-life studies. There have
been several ongoing laser technology projects to explore the benefits
of laser scoring on fruits to increase infusion of high fructose corn
syrup (HFCS) to produce a shelf stable product. An example is work on
blueberries where laser scoring followed by HFCS infusion provided a
superior quality dehydrated product. However, preliminary test results
of laser-scored frozen raspberries showed that laser scoring does not
significantly improve the infusion rate, the dehydration rate, or the
weight loss of the laser-scored raspberries compared to control
raspberries. This is probably due to the more delicate skin of the
raspberries compared to the harder outer core of blueberries.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1993. The
appropriations amount to the following: fiscal year 1993, $300,000;
fiscal year 1994, $282,000; fiscal years 1995-2000, $364,000 each year;
fiscal year 2001, $363,199; fiscal year 2002, $356,000; fiscal year
2003, $397,400; fiscal year 2004, $354,894; fiscal year 2005, $353,152;
fiscal year 2006, $349,470; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008,
$260,166; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $244,000 per year. In total,
this research project has received $5,688,281.
The work is being carried out at Oregon State University in
Corvallis, and at the Food Innovation Center in Portland, Oregon.
NIFA conducted a merit review of the project in May 2001, as it
evaluated the proposal submitted that year. This project was also
assessed in 2005 in preparation for an external review of agricultural
markets and trade as a portion of the Office of Management and Budget
Performance Assessment Rating Tool. Furthermore, reports have been
submitted to the Current Research Information System to reflect
accomplishments for 2006, 2007, and 2008. Additionally, progress
reports are being monitored for satisfactory accomplishments and
timelines.
NATIONAL BEEF CATTLE GENETIC EVALUATION CONSORTIUM, COLORADO, GEORGIA,
AND NEW YORK
The objective of this grant is to develop and implement improved
methodologies and technologies for genetic evaluation of beef cattle to
maximize the impact genetic programs have on the economic viability,
international competitiveness, and sustainability of United States beef
cattle producers, and to provide consumers with affordable and healthy
beef products, and to develop one national system for the genetic
evaluation for all breeds of beef cattle.
An outcome of this project is that producers will be able to alter
nutrient composition of beef--for example, fatty acid composition, iron
content, and others--through selection, which will enhance its
nutritional value, thus improving human health. To achieve this
outcome, Iowa State University researchers will determine nutrient
composition of beef samples and evaluate any influence these nutrient
components have on tenderness/sensory characteristics. For adaptation,
researchers are developing phenotypic--reproduction and stayability--
and Deoxyribonucleic Acid resources on populations of cattle at large
ranches located around the United States. Stayability will be defined
as the probability a female stays in the herd through three
pregnancies. Cattle health is an important component to profitability.
Over 2 years, 1,600 calves from a single large ranch will be owned by
and fed at a cooperating feedlot. Data on incidence of disease,
behavior, such as flight speed and chute behavior, and growth and
carcass traits as well as Deoxyribonucleic Acid samples will be
collected by Colorado State University. It is anticipated that 80
percent of the calves will be identified back to their sire through
Deoxyribonucleic Acid parentage testing. Whole genome scans will be
done on the sick calves and a representative sample of those identified
as not being sick in the feedlot growing phase of the study. The
National Beef Cattle Genetic Evaluation Consortium is involved in
producer education through workshops and symposium and train-the-
trainer educational events.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2001. The
appropriation for fiscal year 2001 was $284,373; for fiscal year 2002,
$343,000; for fiscal year 2003, $667,632; for fiscal year 2004,
$671,018; for fiscal year 2005, $779,712; for fiscal year 2006,
$871,200; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $655,380; for
fiscal year 2009, $615,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $655,000. The
total amount appropriated is $5,542,315.
Research is conducted at the three universities involved in the
consortium: Colorado State University, Cornell University, and
University of Georgia and three affiliates--Iowa State University,
Kansas State University and University of Kentucky--which are
collaborating in enhancing the national genetic evaluation system that
producers widely use for making genetic improvements in their beef
herds. Additionally, they collaborate with United States beef cattle
breed associations and many purebred and commercial beef cattle
operations in the United States.
The proposal was peer-reviewed at the university prior to
submission. A merit review was conducted by the agency prior to
funding. The NIFA National Program Leader meets on a yearly basis with
the project director and co-project directors to discuss and evaluate
progress. It is concluded that this project is making progress.
NATIONAL CENTER FOR SOYBEAN BIOTECHNOLOGY, MISSOURI
The objective of this grant is to integrate basic and applied
research to develop superior soybean cultivars that will help U.S.
farmers maintain global competitiveness.
Researchers on have used the technique of fluorescence in-situ
hybridization to create a karoytype of all soybean chromosomes. It has
been difficult for researchers to map the physical locations of genes
onto soybean chromosomes because soybean chromosomes are small, and all
about the same size and shape. The new karyotype makes it possible for
researchers to distinguish each distinct pair of soybean chromosomes.
The results of this research were presented at an international
conference in 2009 and will be submitted for publication in 2010. Using
the new information from the karyotype, researchers have already
detected a chromosome translocation in wild soybeans that is not
present in domestic soybeans. This finding is of significance to
soybean breeders who are working with wild soybeans to broaden the
narrow genetic diversity of cultivated soybeans. It will help to
predict and work around the loss of fertility that is often a barrier
in crosses between wild and cultivated soybeans. Researchers are using
information from the newly available soybean genome sequence to
identify genetic markers for important, hard-to-select soybean traits.
This year, they have identified quantitative trait loci, a type of
linked genome markers, for Asian soybean rust and for soybean cyst
nematode. They are particularly excited about the nematode resistance
gene because it appears to be a different gene from the nematode
resistance presently used in soybean breeding throughout the United
States. The availability of different resistance genes will help
protect this valuable crop.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2004. The
appropriation for fiscal year 2004 was $894,690; for fiscal year 2005,
$940,416; for fiscal year 2006, $977,130; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for
fiscal year 2008, $734,820; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$690,000 per year. A total of $4,927,056 has been appropriated.
Research is conducted at the University of Missouri at Colombia.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
The submitting institution conducts a peer review of the proposal prior
to submission.
NEMATODE RESISTANCE GENETIC ENGINEERING, NEW MEXICO
The objective of this grant is to provide an alternative approach
for the control of plant parasitic nematodes and insects through the
use of molecular biology to transfer pesticide resistance to plants.
Previous accomplishments include enhancing the genetic expression
of natural pesticides, development of genetic constructs with improved
effectiveness, adaptation of genetic promoters for specific crop
plants, and molecular characterization of targeting sequences. Recent
work has focused on development of engineered nematode resistance,
development of molecular tools for rapid and highly accurate pest
detection, and development of resistance genes to viral plant
pathogens. Continuing work includes: cloning of a collagenase gene for
nematode resistance from the model nematode C. elegans and creating
transgenic plants that express this novel collagenase; development of
transgenic plants that express novel Bt toxins which have shown promise
as nematode resistance genes; development of molecular identification
technology for rapid high accuracy identification of pests. Results of
this research have been used to differentiate endemic and exotic
species of fire ants, differentiate specific strains of alfalfa weevil
which are morphologically indistinguishable but have different
behaviors in the field, identify the occurrence of Pierce's disease, a
highly important disease of grapes, in New Mexico, and for the
continued development of genes that confer broad spectrum resistance to
multiple plant viruses. During the coming year, researchers will focus
on developing additional sequences that can be used to distinguish
these and other hard to differentiate Meloidogyne species. This assay
will be valuable for rapid identification of nematodes in the field,
especially for Meloidogyne spp. that cannot be identified beyond the
genus level using morphological characteristics of juveniles.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1991, and the
following amounts have been appropriated: in fiscal years 1991-1993,
$150,000 per year; in fiscal year 1994, $141,000; in fiscal years 1995-
2000, $127,000 per year; in fiscal year 2001, $126,721; in fiscal year
2002, $147,000; in fiscal year 2003, $146,045; in fiscal year 2004,
$130,227; in fiscal year 2005, $138,880; in fiscal year 2006, $137,610;
in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $223,425; and in fiscal
years 2009 and 2010, $209,000. A total of $2,820,908 has been
appropriated.
Research is being conducted at New Mexico State University and at
collaborating universities in the region.
Project proposals are subjected to peer review at the submitting
institution and merit review by senior agency technical staff.
NEVADA ARID RANGELANDS INITIATIVE
The objectives of this grant are: (1) healthy rangelands for
multiple uses; (2) improved campus-based range management education
programs; (3) healthy economies at the ranch, community, and county
level; and (4) public land decisionmaking models that value and support
public inputs.
The project initiated a mini-grant program that is stakeholder-
driven, integrated with Cooperative Extension as well as Federal and
State agencies, and peer and stakeholder reviewed to address critical
issues for the multiple uses of the Nevada arid rangelands and support
for rural economies. Considerable progress has been made in invasive
weed management, fuel load reduction, fire management and restoration
of Great Basin rangelands; assessment of pinyon-juniper expansion;
restoration of sagebrush, woodland, and riparian ecosystems; rangeland
management/wildlife interactions including sage grouse and pygmy rabbit
habitats, persistence of native plant species, disease transfer between
bighorn and domestic sheep; the production of water efficient
alternative crops such as native seed; and policies that affect the
sustainability of agriculture and rural economies.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2000, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2000 was $255,000; fiscal year 2001,
$299,340; fiscal year 2002, $400,000; fiscal year 2003, $521,588;
fiscal year 2004, $467,227; fiscal year 2005, $480,128; fiscal year
2006, $498,960; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $365,424;
fiscal year 2009, $376,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $500,000. A total
of $4,163,667 has been appropriated.
Research is conducted at the University of Nevada Main Station
Field Lab in Reno; the Gund Range Research Ranch outside of Austin in
Eureka County, Nevada; Bureau of Land Management allotments near Elko
and Winnemucca; and at selected ranches and other often remote offsite
locations. Part of the project helps to fund student exchange with
Turkmenistan.
NIFA expects to conducts a site visit in 2010. The institution
conducts a mini-grant program that sends the proposals out for peer and
stakeholder review and provides funding for the highest quality
relevant projects that address the most critical issues facing their
stakeholders. They instituted an annual review process where the
project investigators provide a written and oral presentation regarding
the progress the project is making toward obtaining its goals and plans
for continuation. The NIFA National Program Leader for Rangeland and
Grassland Ecosystems is in close contact with the project director and
several of the mini-grant project directors for this research.
NEW CENTURY FARM, IOWA
An objective of this grant is to improve the cost-effectiveness of
producing biofuels, bioenergy, industrial chemicals, and biobased
products from corn and soybeans, and alternative cellulosic feedstocks
such as corn grain fiber, corn cobs, corn stover, switch grass, and
other sources of biomass. Another objective is to develop microbial co-
products that are desired by the monogastric (swine and poultry) and
ruminant livestock feed industry.
Progress to date has demonstrated opportunities to improve the
energy and water balances in dry-grind ethanol plants and to produce a
high-protein feed product for non-ruminants by cultivating the fungal
organism Rhizopus microsporus on excess thin stillage. The fungi remove
waste products from yeast fermentation. Waste products include
glycerol, lactic, and acetic acids. Their removal resulted in the
ability to recycle recovered water and enzymes. This greatly reduced
energy input into the ethanol process by avoiding the need for
evaporating thin stillage. A provisional patent has been filed for five
strategies to recover corn germ, during or after fermentation to
improve ethanol yield, recover edible oil, and improve quality of
ethanol feed coproducts. Laboratory-scale work has shown that
oleaginous yeast grows well and accumulates oil when cultivated on
glycerol, a byproduct of biodiesel production; therefore, the glycerol
byproduct serves as a feedstock for biodiesel.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $223,425; $282,000 in fiscal year
2009; and $350,000 in fiscal year 2010. A total of $855,425 has been
appropriated.
The research is conducted at Iowa State University.
A report of progress in fiscal year 2009 has been evaluated, and it
has been determined that progress is being made.
NEW CROP OPPORTUNITIES, KENTUCKY
The objective of this grant is to develop, demonstrate, and assist
in the adoption of more profitable production and marketing systems for
horticultural crops and specialty grains.
Accomplishments include the establishment of a Web site to provide
information to farmers and extension agents about the Center's
research, and to provide information on additional crops. The Web site
now includes profiles of 123 crops with production, marketing, and
budget information to help farmers determine if a particular crop is
right for them. The Web site also offers links to decision aids
available through the University of Kentucky's Department of
Agricultural Economics, crop budgets, and price reports from farmers
markets and produce auctions around the State. Kentucky's farmers
markets have grown steadily for the past 5 years, and growers
throughout the State use the New Crops price reports as guidelines for
pricing their produce and value-added products. The State's farmer's
market vendors totaled more than 2,000 in 2009. Training sessions have
been offered around the State to help extension agents learn how to aid
farmers in their counties who want to try new crops. Sweet sorghum
research led to the release of the male-sterile hybrid KN Morris. In
2009, more than 1,000 pounds of KN Morris seed was sold. This indicates
that more than 300 acres and over 100 producers are growing the
variety. A recent budget for sweet sorghum estimated that net profits
of more than $2,500 per acre are possible. In addition, the sweet
sorghum improvement project has produced and distributed seed of
several varieties for which there is a demand for small quantities
worldwide, primarily for ethanol research. Breeding triple-null soybean
cultivars was among the original New Crops research projects in 2000.
In 2009, the Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Seed Commodity
Committee approved the release of KY04-ns-309, a soybean with a black
seed coat and yellow cotyledons that is a triple seed lipoxygenase
null. Evaluation of flax and chia as potential new crops for Kentucky
began in 2006. A patent is being pursued for development of early
flowering chia (Salvia hispanica) varieties. Research has included
projects on improved production techniques that will benefit organic
vegetable, fruit and grain farmers, and a training session on organic
production and irrigation was offered to extension agents in 2009.
Research has also included projects on conventional produce, as well as
floriculture and nursery crops. Flowering dogwood research has saved
producers $3,250 per acre. Eight years ago, the value of all
horticulture cash receipts in Kentucky was $78.6 million. Kentucky's
vegetables, fruit, nursery and greenhouse industries have grown
steadily, and current industry sales trends point toward 2009 gross
sales of approximately $115 to $120 million.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2000, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2000 was $595,000; for fiscal year 2001,
$723,405; for fiscal year 2002, $735,000; for fiscal year 2003,
$737,177; for fiscal year 2004, $659,088; for fiscal year 2005,
$724,160; for fiscal year 2006, $752,400; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for
fiscal year 2008, $559,059; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$525,000 per year. The total amount appropriated is $6,535,289.
The work is being conducted at the University of Kentucky, its
research centers in Eastern and Western Kentucky, at arboreta and
botanical gardens, and on cooperating farms across the State.
A peer review of the proposal has been conducted by the submitting
institution. Additionally, senior agency technical staff conducted a
critical review of the proposal prior to awarding the grant. Based on
the peer review, the agency's review, and the grantee progress reports,
the project has been successful in meeting its objectives of developing
and assisting in the adoption of more profitable production and
marketing systems for horticultural crops and specialty grains.
NEW SATELLITE AND COMPUTER-BASED TECHNOLOGY FOR AGRICULTURE,
MISSISSIPPI
The objective of this grant is to evaluate site-specific
technologies and develop recommendations for management decisions
related to fertilization, pest control, and other cultural practices
for agricultural crop production in the mid-South.
Yield monitors and variable-rate fertilizer applications have been
evaluated, both operationally and economically, and are being
commercially adopted by farmers. Research projects have resulted in new
decision support systems and have led to new agricultural production
systems that are being marketed by small businesses. Thirteen invention
disclosures, and an equal number of patent applications, are in process
at the institution.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1997 under
the former project title Advanced Spatial Technologies with an
appropriation of $350,000; for fiscal year 1998, $600,000; for fiscal
years 1999-2000, $1,000,000 per year; for fiscal year 2001, $997,800;
for fiscal year 2002, $978,000; for fiscal year 2003, $982,572; for
fiscal year 2004, $879,778; for fiscal year 2005, $935,456; for fiscal
year 2006, $926,640; and for fiscal year 2007, $0. In fiscal year 2008,
$697,086 was appropriated under the current project title New Satellite
and Computer-Based Technology for Agriculture; and in fiscal years 2009
and 2010, $654,000 per year. The total amount appropriated is
$10,655,332.
The research is being conducted on various Mississippi Agricultural
Experiment Station facilities and farmer fields around the State.
The project is subject to a thorough institutional peer review
during preparation of the grant proposal. In addition, individual
experiments comprising the project are subject to a year-end assessment
of progress by project staff. Submitted proposals undergo merit review
by one or more agency scientists. A comprehensive review by a panel of
outside experts was conducted following the 2001 crop season. This
review provided suggestions to strengthen and sharpen the focus
beginning with the 2002 fiscal year, including establishment of an
advisory board. A strategic planning effort to identify priorities and
improve management was initiated and now guides the focus of current
work. To better delineate initiation-completion cycles for individual
experiments, beginning in fiscal year 2007, individual experiments have
been reviewed and funded in total at initiation, rather than allocating
continuation funding on an annual basis.
OIL RESOURCES FROM DESERT PLANTS, NEW MEXICO
The objectives of this grant are to examine the expression patterns
of 12 putative wax synthases in the wild plant of the mustard genus of
oilseeds, and to use bioinformatics approaches to identify numerous
candidate genes for wax and oil synthesis in other species such as
grapes, rice poplar trees, and others.
The expression of industrial oils in plants through genetic
engineering has proven difficult due to several characteristics of the
oil-producing process in plants. The genes for specialty oils are
difficult to isolate, and successful expression of desired oils
involves complex interactions of several metabolic pathways and
biochemical support components.
This research began in fiscal year 1989 with a $100,000 grant under
the Supplemental and Alternative Crops program. Grants have been
awarded under the Special Research Grants program as follows: for
fiscal year 1990, $148,000; for fiscal years 1991-1993, $200,000 per
year; for fiscal year 1994, $188,000; for fiscal years 1995-1996,
$169,000 per year; for fiscal years 1997-2000, $175,000 per year; for
fiscal year 2001, $174,615; for fiscal year 2002, $196,000; for fiscal
year 2003, $223,538; for fiscal year 2004, $200,808; for fiscal year
2005, $211,296; for fiscal year 2006, $208,890; for fiscal year 2007,
$0; for fiscal year 2008, $186,684; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$176,000 per year. A total of $3,827,831 has been appropriated.
The research is being conducted by the Plant Genetic Engineering
laboratory at New Mexico State University at Las Cruces.
The project is evaluated by senior agency technical staff based on
the annual progress report. A site visit was made in April 2005.
Progress in the metabolic engineering of target organisms was
determined to be satisfactory and meets the mission of the agency.
ORGANIC CROPPING, OREGON
The objectives of this grant are to develop a fertilizer calculator
for cover crop systems; investigate biological pest management
strategies to encourage beneficial predator; screen onion and broccoli
varieties for suitability in organic systems; and identify weed control
strategies for forage systems and cereal crop systems.
Accomplishments to date include establishing plots, collecting data
and disseminating information on organic cereal crops, an organic
fertilizer calculator for cover crops, vegetable variety trials, and
beneficial ground beetle activities.
The project began in fiscal year 2008 with an appropriation for of
$148,950; in fiscal year 2009, $140,000; and in fiscal year 2010,
$149,000. A total of $437,950 has been appropriated.
The work is being carried out at Oregon State University and on
working farms in the State.
Fiscal year 2008 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant so NIFA has not conducted an evaluation of this project.
ORGANIC CROPPING, WASHINGTON
The objective of this grant is to address multiple areas of
interest identified by the organic industry including organic seed
protection and production, understory management in tree and vine
crops, organic weed control for annual crops, organic pest and nutrient
management, and analysis of economic and marketing trends.
Organic seed treatments were tested for their ability to control
soil-borne diseases in vegetables, and several show promise. After
evaluating vegetable varieties, several new varieties were released.
Research on integrating organic grain and livestock production in
dryland farming is being conducted on two organic farms has shown that
after alfalfa take-out, organic grains yielded similarly to the
conventional local average as long as the alfalfa was successfully
taken out. Integration of organic crops with livestock was economically
successful in 2008 both for livestock producers adding a grain
component and for grain producers adding a livestock component. Results
have been shared in 29 presentations at conferences and field days and
on the Web site of Washington State University's Center for Sustaining
Agriculture and Natural Resources. Five scientific journal articles and
three non-refereed reports have been published. The systems, methods,
and products evaluated by this program are used not only by certified
organic and transitional organic farmers but also increasingly by
conventional producers as economic, environmental, safety, and market
pressures increase. Several of these subprojects have the potential to
advance sustainable agriculture on a national scale. New wheat
varieties will be developed and selected in organic systems and will be
available to wheat growers throughout the United States. Organic
vineyard management techniques will be relevant to growers in other
regions of the country with similar wet growing conditions. Organic
seed treatment results will be relevant to all growers regardless of
location. Orchard management for nitrogen and cover crops will be
relevant to orchard growers with similar dry growing conditions.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2003, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2003 was $124,188; for fiscal year 2004,
$223,673; for fiscal year 2005, $359,104; for fiscal year 2006,
$355,410; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $264,138; for
fiscal year 2009, $248,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $264,000. A total
of $1,838,513 has been appropriated.
The work is being carried out at university research farms,
laboratories, greenhouses, and other facilities at Washington State
University, and on the farms of cooperating growers in Washington
State.
Annual proposals and progress reports are reviewed by senior agency
technical staff. The research is addressing industry needs and shows
good stakeholder involvement and responsiveness.
ORGANIC WASTE UTILIZATION, NEW MEXICO
The objective of this grant is the qualification of the effects of
applying dairy-derived compost as a soil amendment, relating nutrient
availability, plant growth, irrigation requirements, and heavy metal
uptake when compared to applications of raw dairy waste.
Compost application regarding soil fertility, plant growth, water
retention, and salinity is on-going. The new composting technology has
little to no investment in specialized equipment materials for the bio-
reactor process cost less than $35.00/unit, produces no odors or
commonly associated insects problems, amenable to scaling up, reduces
volatilization and leaching of nutrients to minimal amounts, reduces
the composting time cycle up to 75 percent, reduces water usage by a
factor of 6, and results in a low salinity 2-3 mS/cm\2\, nutrient rich,
high-microbial-biodiversity compost. Standards for the use of compost
for land reclamation are being developed in collaboration with State
agencies.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1996, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 1996 was $150,000; for fiscal years 1997-
2000, $100,000 per year; for fiscal year 2001, $99,780; for fiscal year
2002, $100,000; for fiscal year 2003, $99,350; for fiscal year 2004,
$88,475; for fiscal year 2005, $93,248; for fiscal year 2006, $92,070;
for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $74,475; and for fiscal
years 2009 and 2010, $69,000 per year. A total of $1,355,398 has been
appropriated.
This work is being carried out in New Mexico under the direction of
Waste-management Education and Research Consortium: A Consortium for
Environmental Education and Technology Development in collaboration
with Canon Consulting. Other collaborators include the Composting
Council, N-Viro in Ohio, Plains Electric, and McKinley Paper in New
Mexico.
This project has been evaluated based on the annual progress report
and discussions with the principal investigator in the winter of 2009.
The NIFA National Program Leader for Animal Manure Management has
reviewed the project and determined that progress is satisfactory and
that the research is conducted in accordance with the mission of this
agency.
PEACH TREE SHORT LIFE RESEARCH, SOUTH CAROLINA
The objective of this grant is to find a long-term solution to a
disease syndrome known as Peach Tree Short Life by development and
testing of Guardian rootstocks. These rootstocks have been introduced
in 22 States and their performance has been good for the most part.
However, they report an unacceptable amount of genetic variation in
seedlings produced by clones of the original resistant parents. The
investigators are using molecular marker-assisted techniques to improve
the seedling selection process. Practical field strategies for control
of the infectious nematodes, based on non-chemical and biological
methods are also being developed. The efficacy of a wide variety of
fungicides with different modes of action was determined under lab
conditions for control of Armillaria tabescens. A replicated research
trial investigating pre-plant practices to manage Armillaria root rot
was established on a commercial replant site near Ridge Spring, South
Carolina.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
year 1981, $100,000; fiscal years 1982 to 1985, $192,000 per year;
fiscal years 1986 to 1988, $183,000 per year; fiscal year 1989,
$192,000; fiscal year 1990, $190,000; fiscal years 1991 to 1993,
$192,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $180,000; fiscal years 1995 to
2000, $162,000 per year; fiscal year 2001, $178,606; fiscal year 2002,
$175,000; fiscal year 2003, $260,297; fiscal year 2004, $232,619;
fiscal year 2005, $264,864; fiscal year 2006, $275,220; fiscal year
2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $207,537; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$195,000 per year. A total of $5,511,143 has been appropriated.
This research is being conducted at the South Carolina Agricultural
Experiment Station.
The last agency evaluation of this project was a merit review
completed in April 2005. This evaluation concluded that the evaluation
of peach rootstocks with resistance to peach tree short life is of
continued importance in managing this disease. Integrated management
practices are currently being evaluated. Results with ``BY520-9'' have
been so encouraging that a program has been implemented with commercial
nurseries to provide peach growers this rootstock on an experimental
basis, while testing progresses in the southeastern United States.
Guardian Brand ``BY520-9'' is not resistant to ring nematodes, but
peach trees on this rootstock thrive for many years in nematode-
infested soil.
PERENNIAL WHEAT, WASHINGTON
The objectives of this grant are the development of perennial wheat
lines, to test promising lines for agronomic and grain quality
characters, and to develop a management system for their use on
erodible land in the Pacific Northwest.
Results indicate that there is no relationship between grain yield
and regrowth among wheat lines exhibiting a perennial habit. The
significance of this data is that it should be possible to develop
perennial wheat lines that yield as much as annual wheat.
The research began in fiscal year 2003, and the appropriation for
fiscal year 2003 was $149,025; for fiscal year 2004, $133,209; for
fiscal year 2005, $140,864; for fiscal year 2006, $139,590; for fiscal
year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $104,265; and for fiscal years
2009 and 2010, $98,000 per year. A total of $862,953 has been
appropriated.
This research is conducted at the Washington State University
research farm and on fields of participating farmers.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
The submitting institution conducts a peer review of the proposal prior
to submission. A site review was conducted in 2003, which found the
project to be well organized and managed.
PEST MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES
The objective of this grant is the development and implementation
of pest management alternatives when regulatory action by the
Environmental Protection Agency, voluntary action by the registrant, or
other circumstances results in the unavailability of certain pesticides
or pesticide uses.
These activities have pertained to pesticides identified for
possible regulatory action under the Food Quality Protection Act of
1996. Through these grants, new pest management tools and techniques
are being developed to address critical pest problems identified by
pest managers and other stakeholders. This program has initiated a
process to address regional priorities established by these
stakeholders.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
years 1996 through 2000, $1,623,000 per year; fiscal year 2001,
$1,619,429; fiscal year 2002, $1,619,000; fiscal year 2003, $1,608,477;
fiscal year 2004, $1,448,404; fiscal year 2005, $1,436,416; fiscal
years 2006 and 2007, $1,421,640 per year; fiscal year 2008, $1,412,046;
fiscal year 2009, $1,412,000; and fiscal year 2010, $1,434,000. A total
of $22,948,052 has been appropriated.
All State agricultural experiment stations, all colleges and
universities, other research institutions and organizations, Federal
agencies, private organizations or corporations, and individuals are
eligible to compete for this funding. This research is currently being
carried out by State agricultural experiment stations and other
research organizations located in several States.
Each new request for applications and all submitted project
proposals are evaluated annually by a regional panel for relevancy and
a national panel for scientific merit. Reviews are held annually to
evaluate the progress and scope of this program. The conclusions
continue that the program is on course and making good progress. The
projects supported by this special research grant program have
consistently provided key knowledge needed in developing new approaches
to pest management.
PHYTOPHTHORA RESEARCH, GEORGIA
The objective of this grant is to reduce the loss of vegetable
crops due to Phytophthora capsici, evaluating efficacy and economics of
the following practices: Remediation of infected sites, containment of
Phytophthora and limit spread, development and testing of new control
measures including soil treatments, rotational crops, and testing and
treating water sources used for irrigation.
Information on preventive and containment measures will be
distributed and recommendations will be demonstrated with research
plots on grower farms. Integrated management practices are being moved
into the farm sector and on-going monitoring techniques are being
developed.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2006 with an
appropriation of $255,420; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year
2008, $189,663; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $178,000 per year.
A total of $633,083 has been appropriated.
The research is being conducted at facilities operated by the
University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental
Sciences in Tifton, Georgia.
The project proposal will be peer reviewed at the submitting
institution where it will be evaluated for technical quality and
relevance to regional goals by experts with the scientific knowledge
and technical skills to conduct the proposed research work. The
reviewers will read and make comments that will be incorporated into
the proposal by the project director. The agency national program staff
with expertise in plant pathology will evaluate the submitted proposal.
Progress reports will be submitted each year. Additional merit review
is conducted annually by senior agency technical staff prior to making
a funding recommendation.
PHYTOPHTHORA RESEARCH, MICHIGAN
The objective of this grant is to reduce the loss of vegetable
crops due to Phytophthora capsici by: developing new techniques to
prevent Phytophthora contamination of irrigation sources because the
disease can spread through water; identifying and developing
Phytophthora-resistant varieties; developing new techniques for
Phytophthora control, including soil additives, mulches, crop rotation
and water management; testing fungicides, biological controls and other
new agents that might control Phytophthora; conducting on-farm research
trials and hands-on grower workshops; and investigating the Fraser fir
as a host to the Phytophthora capsici that historically has only
affected vegetable crops.
Five surface water sites used for vegetable irrigation were
monitored for Phytophthora in two regions of the State. Phytophthora
was recovered from all five sites from mid-June to mid-August. Nearly
4,000 acres of vegetable production were impacted by our findings. In
response, six wells have been drilled and will be used as a source of
clean irrigation water that is free of Phytophthora. Using clean
irrigation water will protect Michigan's vegetable crops and reduce the
spread of Phytophthorato clean fields. Research was also focused on
developing Phytophthora-resistant varieties. The fruit of 31 cucumber
cultigens were screened for resistance to Phytophthora. None of the 31
cultigens exhibited complete resistance, however, six were identified
that reduced spore production. Fruit from a variety of cucurbit crops
was tested for age-related loss in susceptibility to Phytophthora. For
those crops with age-associated increase in resistance, protection by
fungicides will be most critical at the early stages of fruit
development. Efforts was also directed toward the development of new
techniques for Phytophthora control, including soil additives, mulches,
crop rotation and water management. Field experiments were conducted on
a commercial farm to test the effects of cover crops and raised plant
beds on the management of Phytophthora. The cover crops including
oilseed radish, brown mustard, and oriental mustard, provided some
control of the disease but would need to be combined with other
management tools. In some regions of the State where vegetable and
Christmas tree production occur in the same regions, growers will need
to be especially aware of this pathogen's ability to infect vegetables
and Fraser fir as our current research identifies Fraser fir as a host
of Phytophthora capsici. Resources were also focused on testing
fungicides, biological controls and other new agents that might control
Phytophthora. Twenty-five products, including three biopesticides,
three reduced-risk, and five experimental fungicides, were tested alone
and in combination in six field trials during 2006 for management of
Phytophthora on squash, cucumber, and bell peppers with up to 75
percent increased yield compared to controls. The original objectives
were expanded to integrate control techniques and then to conduct on-
farm research trials and hands-on grower workshops. Fungicide and water
management trials were conducted on commercial farms and 21
presentations were made to growers.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2006 with an
appropriation of $495,000; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year
2008, $368,403; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $346,000 per year.
A total of $1,555,403 has been appropriated.
The work is being conducted at Michigan State University with field
research and demonstration plots with commercial growers in Michigan.
The project proposal is peer reviewed at the submitting institution
where it is evaluated for technical quality and relevance to regional
goals by experts with the scientific knowledge and technical skills to
conduct the proposed research work. The reviewers read and make
comments that will be incorporated into the proposal by the project
director. Senior agency technical staff evaluate the submitted proposal
and also conduct merit reviews. Progress reports are submitted each
year.
PHYTOSENSORS FOR CROP SECURITY AND PRECISION AGRICULTURE, TENNESSEE
The objective of this grant is to develop a biodetection system
that can sense and report the presence of plant pathogens prior to
symptom appearance and spread. The project will combine state-of-the-
art technologies in biotechnology and photonics to produce crop plants
that can be used as early warning sentinels for the detection of plant
diseases.
Current research has focused on developing this biodetection
system, showing proof-of-concept, and initiated preliminary studies of
the biodetection system. Research work is underway to reach this goal.
In 2009, the proposed work has resulted in seven publications with two
additional manuscripts in preparation.
Fiscal year 2009 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $700,000; and for fiscal year 2010,
$1,000,000. A total of $1,700,000 has been appropriated.
The work is being carried out at the University of Tennessee at
Knoxville.
The agency has not evaluated this project, since fiscal year 2009
is the first year that funds were appropriated for this research.
PIERCE'S DISEASE, CALIFORNIA
The objective of this grant is to control Pierce's Disease, through
the development of resistant grape clones, supplemented with integrated
management methods.
Recent research has revealed both conventional and transgenic
approaches to creating grapevines with resistance to the causative
agent. Other research is exploring new and conventional methods to
controlling the sharpshooter vectors. Other supported research has
identified proteins contributing to the pathogenicity and virulence of
the causative agent.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2001, and the
amount appropriated was $1,895,820; in fiscal year 2002, $1,960,000; in
fiscal year 2003, $2,235,375; in fiscal year 2004, $2,013,053; in
fiscal year 2005, $2,071,296; in fiscal year 2006, $2,188,890; in
fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $1,630,506; in fiscal year
2009, $1,531,000; and in fiscal year 2010, $2,000,000. The total amount
appropriated is $17,525,940.
The research is being carried out by the University of California
Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Funds are awarded
competitively to scientists in California and from other universities
in the United States with pertinent expertise in research on Pierce's
disease.
The agency evaluated the project in August 2009. In December 2009,
senior agency technical staff also evaluated individual research
projects competitively awarded in 2009. Research projects from this
grant are addressing the research objectives for scientific advances to
control Pierce's disease and are integrated and complementary with
other research programs on Pierce's disease.
POLICY ANALYSES FOR A NATIONAL SECURE AND SUSTAINABLE FOOD, FIBER,
FORESTRY AND ENERGY PROGRAM, TEXAS
The objective of this grant is to conduct quantitative policy
analysis of food, farm, fiber, forest, and international economies. The
model estimates the aggregate economic impacts of exogenously specified
bio-fuel production on all endogenous variables in the model, including
price, utilization by category, regional acreage planted and harvested,
and production for each crop for each year simulated dynamically
starting with historically data and simulating into the future as far
as the 2030/31 crop year.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $148,950; in fiscal year 2009,
$140,000; and in fiscal year 2010, $200,000. A total of $488,950 has
been appropriated.
The research will be conducted at Texas A&M University and Auburn
University.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant so NIFA has not conducted an evaluation of this project.
However, the principal investigator and the National Program Leader
maintain regular contact.
POTATO CYST NEMATODE, IDAHO
The objectives of this grant are to develop an understanding of
potato cyst nematode reproduction, evaluate bio-fumigants to eradicate
nematodes and cysts, and evaluate the use of microbial, fungal and
plant bio-control approaches to reduce the level of viable cysts in the
field.
Thus far, reproduction research has involved developing
informational resources on nematode production, equipping facilities
for processing and collecting cysts, and developing protocols for
producing new generations of cysts from field harvested nematodes. This
project has facilitated establishing contacts with research programs in
Scotland and Northern Ireland, leveraging the understanding of this
pest and how to manage it as we deal with issues of global food
security. The rearing protocol has been established and cysts are being
produced for use in controlled studies. Isolation and identification of
potential microbial and fungal bio-control agents of G. pallida have
been isolated from field samples that could explain the initial low
hatching rate of the field cysts. Eleven fungal species and four
bacteria were isolated from the field derived G. pallida cysts, based
on DNA sequence evaluation. These microbes may have value as biological
control agents. Initial successes have been achieved on the cyst
viability question. Staining techniques are being perfected, but
initial results indicate that shorter staining periods, as little as 2
days may be sufficient without contributing to nematode mortality due
to the test. Extracts from Brassica juncea and Sinapsis alba seed meal
is being evaluated as potential biofumigants to control G. pallida.
Hatching and viability studies indicate that the extracts do affect
nematode egg and juvenile viability, but studies on cysts will be
conducted in 2010. Potato germplasm screening for potential resistance
to G. pallida has been initiated in association with Agricultural
Research Service potato breeders in Idaho and Washington. Several
potential candidate genotypes were identified with most being products
of interspecific crosses with wild potato relatives. A second study
using germplasm from the National Plant Germplasm System is currently
underway to evaluate less adapted genotypes as potential sources of
resistance to G. pallida. The research program is providing G. pallida
cysts and facilities for work by other G. pallida related programs. The
research program facilitated Agricultural Research Service weed host
studies which resulted in the identification of one nightshade species
that could serve as an alternative host for G. pallida. The program
supplied cysts and laboratory facilities for diffusate fractionation
studies that resulted in the potential isolation of a fraction that
induces a higher rate of hatching. This work could lead to the
development of a method to induce hatching of G. pallida in the field
without an adequate host. G. pallida cysts and DNA from J2 juveniles
was sent to Agricultural Research Service researchers in New York for
molecular studies of G. pallida. To facilitate eradication efforts by
the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service in southern Idaho, G.
pallida cysts were supplied to serve as controls in viability studies
for potential deregulation of fumigated G. pallida fields. One
additional project was efficacy testing of several fumigants on G.
pallida cysts. Field trials were conducted under controlled conditions
and found all tested fumigants to be effective.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $372,375; and $349,000 per year in
fiscal years 2009 and 2010. A total of $1,070,375 has been appropriated
in the 3 years of the project.
An evaluation of this project has not been conducted since funds
were first appropriated and provided late in fiscal year 2008.
POTATO BREEDING RESEARCH PROGRAM
The objective of this grant is to improve production and quality of
potatoes for processing and fresh market by breeding new potato
varieties that are high yielding, disease and insect resistant, and
adapted to the growing conditions in their particular areas, both for
fresh market and processing.
Potato breeders must provide farmers with outstanding levels of
performance in more different traits than perhaps any other crop. A
farmer typically needs a potato variety with resistance to 6 to 10
diseases and pests, and 3 to 5 types of tolerance to stresses such as
drought, heat, and frost, and adaptation to sustainable and region-
specific production practices; and even more qualities for processing
or cooking quality and tuber appearance. In the northeastern region,
grower demand for three promising experimental varieties outstripped
seed production capacity, and adoption of two specialty varieties by
small-scale fresh market growers increased. An advanced variety with
good late blight and nematode resistance is ready for use as a parent,
to reduce use of pesticides and reduce growers' loss to pests. Area
planted to a recent release, the heat-necrosis resistant variety Harvey
Blackwell, increased significantly this year. The North Central region
has a large number of novelty potatoes, over 100 selections, in
advanced trials. In the Northwest region, three new varieties were
released. One of these uses 10 to 25 percent less water than standard
older varieties and is expected to replace the older varieties over
much of the acreage. An earlier release, Alturas, requires only half
the nitrogen of standard varieties; this variety was grown on 14,000
acres this past year, with a total savings to producers of about $1.7
million. A molecular marker was developed and is in use to select for
resistance to a prevalent virus that is difficult to detect visually.
In the Western region, about 60 percent of production acres and a
similar percentage of certified seed acres were planted to varieties
developed by this project.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
year 1983, $200,000; fiscal year 1984, $400,000; fiscal year 1985,
$600,000; fiscal years 1986 and 1987, $761,000 per year; fiscal year
1988, $997,000; fiscal year 1989, $1,177,000; fiscal year 1990,
$1,310,000; fiscal year 1991, $1,371,000; fiscal years 1992 and 1993,
$1,435,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $1,349,000; fiscal years 1995-
1998, $1,214,000 per year; fiscal years 1999 and 2000, $1,300,000 per
year; fiscal year 2001, $1,446,810; fiscal year 2002, $1,568,000;
fiscal year 2003, $1,573,704; fiscal year 2004, $1,408,640; fiscal year
2005, $1,496,928; fiscal year 2006, $1,482,030; for fiscal year 2007,
$0; for fiscal year 2008, $1,104,216; for fiscal year 2009, $1,037,000;
and for fiscal year 2010, $1,436,000. A total of $30,369,328 has been
appropriated.
The work is being conducted at State agricultural experiment
stations in Idaho, Oregon, Washington, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota,
North Dakota, New York, Maine, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina,
Ohio, Florida, New Jersey, Colorado, Texas, and California.
The agency publishes a request for proposals each year for this
project. Funds are awarded after a national-level scientific peer
review. Comments from these agency-managed reviews have resulted in
increased collaboration among States and among stakeholder groups, and
improved technical quality of the research.
PRECISION AGRICULTURE, ALABAMA
The objective of this grant is to evaluate and demonstrate the
utility of geospatial applications to crop and forest production in
Alabama.
Research has begun to develop improved relationships between
dynamic soil processes and soil hydraulic properties; develop and
evaluate variable-rate application technologies, e.g., fertilizer,
pesticides; improve sub-stand-level management in forestry operations;
and develop precision irrigation technologies. Adoption of precision
agriculture tools and technologies has increased in Alabama, with
demonstrated economic savings of $2 to $8 per acre for spraying
operations. In 2009, there was a 15 percent increase in the adoption of
subsurface drip irrigation, which provides yield benefits over rain-fed
crops.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $445,857; and for fiscal years 2009
and 2010, $419,000 per year. A total of $1,283,857 has been
appropriated.
The research will be conducted at Auburn University, on experiment
station farms, and in producer fields in Alabama.
The project is subject to a thorough institutional peer review
during preparation of the grant proposal. Submitted proposals undergo
merit review by one or more agency scientists.
PRECISION AGRICULTURE, KENTUCKY
The objective of this grant is to develop and evaluate precision
agriculture technologies and provide producers with guidelines for
adoption. Research focuses on agricultural practices and forestry and
natural resources.
Mini-grants are awarded that address both economic and
environmental issues related to soil variability and the application of
precision technologies. To date, more than 80 research papers have been
produced that highlight advances in nitrogen management, soil mapping,
Global Positioning System use and performance, crop yield monitoring
sensors and mapping, remote sensing platforms, variable-rate
technologies, wildlife tracking, delineating field management zones,
and economics-based decision support systems.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1999. The
appropriation for fiscal year 1999 was $500,000; for fiscal year 2000,
$850,000; for fiscal year 2001, $748,350; for fiscal year 2002,
$733,000; for fiscal year 2003, $737,177; for fiscal year 2004,
$659,088; for fiscal year 2005, $674,560; for fiscal year 2006,
$668,250; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $502,458; for
fiscal year 2009, $471,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $671,000. A total
of $7,214,883 has been appropriated.
The research is conducted at the Kentucky Agriculture Experiment
Station, University of Kentucky laboratories, and selected producer
field locations.
This project is composed of mini-grants within the institution,
each of which is peer reviewed, and the combined proposal is subjected
to the institution's project approval process. Submitted proposals
undergo merit review by one or more agency scientists. This program has
not been subjected to on-site review by the agency.
PREHARVEST FOOD SAFETY, KANSAS
The objective of this grant is to identify means to control E. coli
O157 at the farm level through research to develop and validate
improved methods for the detection of E. coli O157:H7 in cattle feces
and environmental samples, to improve the understanding of the natural
ecology of E. coli O157 in cattle operations, and to identify and test
on-farm intervention strategies for control of E. coli O157.
Researchers have completed a study to determine the effects and
interactions of distillers grain and dry-rolled corn supplementation of
steam flaked corn-based finishing diets on fecal shedding of E. coli
O157:H7. Their findings indicate that distillers grain, with or without
dry-rolled corn supplementation, has no effect on fecal E. coli O157:H7
shedding. Other research results suggest that using pre-evisceration
carcass testing to reduce the effect of high shedders within a truck
load of animals may be effective. The researchers have recently
developed a multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) method to detect
six major virulence genes of E. coli O157:H7, which has strengthened
the identification protocol for isolates from fecal and food samples.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1996 with
appropriations through fiscal year 2000 of $212,000 per year; for
fiscal year 2001, $211,534; for fiscal year 2002, $208,000; for fiscal
year 2003, $206,648; for fiscal year 2004, $184,903; for fiscal year
2005, $191,456; for fiscal year 2006, $199,980; for fiscal year 2007,
$0; for fiscal year 2008, $150,936; $142,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
$500,000 for fiscal year 2010. A total appropriation of $3,055,457 has
been appropriated.
The research is being conducted at Kansas State University, College
of Veterinary Medicine, in the Department of Diagnostic Medicine/
Pathiobiology.
An agency evaluation was conducted in November 2009 and the work
was found to be progressing satisfactorily.
PRESERVATION AND PROCESSING RESEARCH, OKLAHOMA
The objective of the grant is to identify the major limitations for
maintaining quality of harvested fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, herb
and spice crops, and prescribe appropriate harvesting, handling and
processing protocols to extend shelf life and enhance marketability for
horticultural commodities.
The focus has been to maintain and improve profitability of
integrated production and postharvest handling systems to assure an
economic market niche for Oklahoma producers and food processors. Crop
biosensors developed earlier in this project are being commercialized
in Oklahoma for precision agriculture applications, and efforts to
improve precision and expand utility of new generation sensors are
underway. A systematic approach to develop complementary cropping,
harvesting, handling, and processing operation has resulted in
development of improved handling systems for cucurbit, tree fruit, and
nutraceutical crops. Non-destructive processing systems for partial oil
reduction of tree nuts have been developed to extend shelf life and
lower the calorie content for the raw or processed product. A new food
drying and extraction facility started operations in Oklahoma. Systems
for maintenance of high active ingredients in sage, pepper, and
watermelon crops are under development to extend efforts toward
profitable value-added extraction of foods, and expansion of marketing
opportunities for current and potential Oklahoma horticultural crops.
This work has been underway since 1985. Funds have been
appropriated as follows: fiscal year 1985, $100,000; fiscal year 1986,
$142,000; fiscal year 1987, $242,000; fiscal years 1988 and 1989,
$267,000 per year; fiscal year 1990, $264,000; fiscal year 1991,
$265,000; fiscal year 1992, $282,000; fiscal year 1993, $267,000;
fiscal year 1994, $251,000; fiscal years 1995-2000, $226,000 per year;
fiscal year 2001, $225,503; fiscal year 2002, $221,000; fiscal year
2003, $222,544; fiscal year 2004, $199,814; fiscal year 2005, $198,400;
fiscal year 2006, $247,500; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008,
$184,698; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $174,000 per year. A total of
$5,550,459 has been appropriated.
This work is being conducted at the Oklahoma State Agricultural
Experiment Station, in conjunction with ongoing production research at
the Wes Watkins Agricultural Research and Extension Center and the
South Central Agricultural Research Laboratories.
An agency scientist conducts a merit review of the proposal
submitted in support of the appropriation annually. Last review of the
project was conducted on June 25, 2009. The specific researches
progressed well and the results were satisfactory.
PROTEIN PRODUCTION FOR RESEARCH TO COMBAT VIRUSES AND MICROBES,
CONNECTICUT
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $500,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
PROTEIN UTILIZATION, IOWA
The objective of this grant is to utilize industrial enzymes in
enhancing the value of soybean by creating new protein products.
To date, microscopic observations have shown that High Pressure
Processing was efficient in releasing oil from soybean aggregates.
Adding methanol was equally effective, offering the potential for
incorporating EAEP with biodiesel production. Researchers evaluated
strategies to produce high-protein feed and determined the potential of
the skim milk fraction as a food source. Membrane filtration produced
protein that could be spray-dried and had greatly reduced content of
anti-nutritional factors. Researchers discovered hydrolyzing soy sugars
with a-galactosidase increased sweetness and decreased bitterness of
protease-modified soy protein. Industry partners adopted this
hydrolysis procedure in their processing plant to produce hydrolysate,
and their potential customer, an adhesives compounder, utilized the
product in adhesives. The hydrolysate was compatible with non-phenol
formaldehyde resins. Polyamine-epichlorohydrin can be used in soy
adhesive systems as the primary reactant or as a crosslinker.
Researchers discovered that chemical treatment of EAEP proteins with a
reducing agent improved growth parameters in broiler chicks.
This project began in fiscal year 2001 with an appropriation of
$189,582; $186,000 for fiscal year 2002; $422,238 for fiscal year 2003;
$671,018 for fiscal year 2004; $804,512 in fiscal year 2005; $836,550
in fiscal year 2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007; $623,604 in fiscal year
2008; $586,000 in fiscal year 2009; and $600,000 in fiscal year 2010.
The total appropriation was $4,919,504.
Research is being conducted at Iowa State University in Ames, Iowa,
and Genencor International in Rochester, New York.
The last agency evaluation of the project was September 2009. Work
toward the project objectives appeared to be adequate and progressing
according to the projected timetable.
RANGELAND ECOSYSTEMS DYNAMICS, IDAHO
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $300,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
REGIONAL BARLEY GENE MAPPING PROJECT, OREGON
The objective of the grant is to establish a cooperative project
from molecular genetics to breeding that will locate and use new genes
to add value, maximize grain quality, and ensure a more productive and
competitive barley industry.
A multi-institutional approach has been taken, with research being
conducted at institutions in 17 States. Experimental lines developed by
these researchers are being grown and tested in Colorado, Idaho,
Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Ohio, Oregon, Washington, and Wisconsin.
The first major accomplishment of this research was a barley linkage
map that was the considered the best crop plant linkage map at that
time. The map laid the foundation for breeders and statistical
geneticists to produce the first comprehensive genomic analysis of
agronomic and quality traits in a crop of economic importance.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
year 1990, $153,000; fiscal year 1991, $262,000; fiscal years 1992-
1993, $412,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $387,000; fiscal years 1995-
1998, $348,000 per year; fiscal year 1999, $400,000; fiscal year 2000,
$425,000; fiscal year 2001, $586,706; fiscal year 2002, $760,000;
fiscal year 2003, $755,060; fiscal year 2004, $675,988; fiscal year
2005, $682,496; fiscal year 2006, $675,180; fiscal year 2007, $0;
fiscal year 2008, $502,458; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $471,000
per year. A total of $9,422,888 has been appropriated.
Research is being conducted in numerous State agricultural
experiment stations. In recent years, research has been conducted at
experiment stations in Oregon, Colorado, Washington, Montana, Idaho,
North Dakota, Minnesota, New York, Virginia, Oklahoma, Utah, Wisconsin,
and California.
Senior agency technical staff conduct a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
The submitting institution conducts a peer review of the proposal prior
to submission. The research supported by this project is competitively
awarded by a panel formed by the National Barley Improvement Committee;
panel members include researchers, growers and industry. Researchers
supported by this project regularly report their results for peer
scrutiny at the annual International Conference on the Status of Plant
and Animal Genome Research, which is co-organized by this agency.
REGIONALIZED IMPLICATIONS OF FARM PROGRAMS, MISSOURI AND TEXAS
The objective of this grant is to provide the farm community,
agribusiness groups, and public officials information about farm,
trade, and fiscal policy implications by developing regionalized models
that reflect farming characteristics for major production regions of
the United States.
Aggregate level impacts as well as those for all 102 representative
farms were analyzed. The financial conditions of these farms over the
next 5 to 7 years are presented in the 2009 Food and Agricultural
Policy Research Institute (FAPRI)--United States and World Agricultural
Outlook Baseline data.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1990 and the
appropriation for fiscal year 1990 was $346,000; in fiscal years 1991-
1993, $348,000 per year; $327,000 in fiscal year 1994; $294,000 per
year in fiscal years 1995 through 2000; $293,353 in fiscal year 2001;
$287,000 in fiscal year 2002; $317,920 in fiscal year 2003; $536,814 in
fiscal year 2004; $759,872 in fiscal year 2005; $851,400 in fiscal year
2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007; $633,534 in fiscal year 2008; and
$595,000 per year in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. A total of $8,350,893
has been appropriated.
Research is being conducted by the Texas A&M University and the
University of Missouri at Columbia.
A formal evaluation of this project has not been carried out;
however, the NIFA representative is in frequent communication with the
principal investigator concerning policy analysis procedures and
studies.
RENEWABLE ENERGY AND PRODUCTS, NORTH DAKOTA
The objectives of this grant are to: determine the potential yield
of selected perennial grass varieties for biomass and biofuel
production, evaluate weed control strategies for biomass crops, examine
the impacts of corn-based ethanol production on markets and
communities, and analyze the availability of nanofibers from crop
residues to be used for biocomposites.
Biomass production plots were seeded at four sites in May 2008.
Initial yields on the dryland sites were lower than expected, but
switchgrass yields at an irrigated site were 26 percent higher than
projected. A total of 4 pre-emergent and 23 post-applied herbicides
have been evaluated for efficacy on switchgrass, quackgrass, and smooth
bromegrass. Switchgrass yield increased two-fold after glyphosate was
applied to an old stand to control cool season grassy weeds. Of these,
nine were chosen for further evaluation of weed control in an
established switchgrass field. Herbicides for most effective control
for quackgrass and smooth bromegrass were identified. Additional
experiments included evaluating potential biomass yield from kenaf,
sunnhemp, sorghums, and millets. Initial results found sorghum and
kenaf have the potential to produce above 10 tons per acre of dry
matter in one season and could be used as annual feedstocks for
cellulosic ethanol production. Sugargbeet pulp is being used as a
feedstock for ethanol production using yeast and E. coli K011. A
solids-fed batch approach has shown that loadings up to 12 percent
solids resulted in maximum yields. A pre-pilot scale pretreatment
facility capable of processing 300 pounds of wheat straw feedstock per
hour has been developed and is in the testing phase. Samples of
cellulose nanofibers and of nanocomposite materials based on these
fibers have been produced. A transportation model has been developed to
optimize shipment of biomass from producing regions to preselected
biofuel-producing plants in the northern plains region and ethanol from
processing plants to blending locations. The model includes over 184
biomass producing regions, approximately 25 predetermined processing
plants and several blending locations. In addition, the model contains
several feedstock storage areas where biomass is converted into pellets
for shipments. An empirical model has been developed to determine the
optimal number, location, and size of cellulose ethanol plant. The
optimal number of plants was determined to be 10 in North Dakota with
an optimal size of production capacity of 110 million gallons.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $744,750; $939,000 in fiscal year
2009; and $1,000,000 in fiscal year 2010. A total of $2,683,750 has
been appropriated.
The research is conducted at North Dakota State University, and the
nanofiber research is conducted in collaboration with Michigan State
University and Michigan Biotechnology Institute.
Fiscal year 2008 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant. The report of progress for fiscal year 2009 has been
evaluated, and progress is being made.
RICE AGRONOMY, MISSOURI
The objective of this grant is to increase yield and quality of
rice, reduce the cost of production, and protect the environment in the
rice producing area in the upper Mississippi River Delta Region.
The research has found that growing rice with pivot irrigation
required a higher level of management for irrigation, fertilizer, and
weed control than conventional flood irrigated rice. Possible
advantages to the system are the ability to grow rice in fields
unsuitable for flooding. This type of rice production may have a
positive impact on air quality because of reduced methane emissions and
help conserve energy. Rice production without flooding has the
potential to reduce methane gas production. By reducing irrigation
water use with center pivot systems compared to flooding less
electricity was consumed for pumping. Additionally, the research has
yielded particularly useful information about the efficacy and
environmental impact new pest control systems, sustainable irrigation
and fertilization practices, and the systematic interplay between new
practices. Results were communicated to growers and rice industry
officials through electronic media, as well as the Delta Research
Center field day in September 2009.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2003, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2003 was $198,700; fiscal year 2004,
$177,944; fiscal year 2005, $212,288; fiscal year 2006, $247,500;
fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $184,698; and fiscal years 2009
and 2010, $174,000 per year. A total of $1,369,130 has been
appropriated.
The work is conducted at the University of Missouri's Delta
Research Center in Portageville.
The annual proposals were peer reviewed at the institution and by
senior agency technical staff. An onsite review is planned for 2011.
RUMINANT NUTRITION CONSORTIUM, MONTANA, NORTH DAKOTA, SOUTH DAKOTA,
WYOMING
The objective of this grant is to enhance economic development in
the four-State area of Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming
by strengthening and capturing value from the ruminant livestock
industry.
To date, five 15 large research trials have been initiated.
Extensive collaborations have been established among researchers,
making all of these projects multi-investigator and multi-
institutional. While the progress reports for these projects are not
yet available, excellent research outcomes are expected from all five
projects.
This grant began in fiscal year 2002 with an appropriation of
$400,000. In fiscal year 2003, the appropriation was $447,075; in
fiscal year 2004, $447,345; in fiscal year 2005, $470,208; in fiscal
year 2006, $489,060; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008,
$465,717; and in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $563,000 per year. A total
of $3,845,405 has been appropriated to support this project.
This work is being carried out at South Dakota State University,
North Dakota State University, Montana State University, the University
of Nebraska, and the University of Wyoming.
This project was last reviewed by agency National Program Leaders
in 2008. The results of the evaluation revealed that the research is
timely, well-designed, and addresses issues of local, regional, and
national importance.
RURAL POLICIES INSTITUTE, NEBRASKA, IOWA, AND MISSOURI
The objective of the grant is to create a new model for providing
timely, unbiased estimates of the impacts of policies and new policy
initiatives on rural people and places. That model was developed.
Policy analysis research and dissemination activities expanded in
response to emerging issues in rural America. Rural Policies Institute
(RUPRI) facilitates panels of researchers who collaborate on topical
areas and form the fabric of its research capacity.
In fiscal year 2009, RUPRI expanded its capacity to provide support
to Federal programs and initiatives including developing regional
approaches to rural development, economic targeting analysis, and
collaborations across agencies to enhance rural innovation, nutrition
and wellness, and food systems analysis. It continued the interactive
mapping application that allows USDA to visualize investments in
relation to economic, social, and demographic indicators. It expanded
its capacity to conduct policy analyses in emerging rural development
issues, including broadband deployment and adoption, implications of
climate change and energy independence, and the urban-rural
interdependence import for policy framing. It joined discussions about
the collaboration between philanthropy and government in rural and
regional development and begun research on wealth creation in rural
America. With the Aspen Institute, it convened meetings around food
systems, ecosystem services, and alternative energy. It continued its
communications and outreach efforts, working with State capitols,
public interest groups, trade associations, foundations, nonprofit
intermediaries, and higher education.
The work supported by these grants began in fiscal year 1991 with
an appropriation of $375,000; fiscal year 1992, $525,000; fiscal year
1993, $692,000; fiscal year 1994, $494,000; fiscal years 1995-2000,
$644,000 each year; fiscal year 2001, $822,000; fiscal year 2002,
$1,040,000; fiscal year 2003, $1,261,745; fiscal year 2004, $1,129,298;
fiscal year 2005, $1,205,280; fiscal year 2006, $1,192,950; fiscal year
2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $888,735; fiscal year 2009, $835,000; and
fiscal year 2010, $889,000. A total of $15,214,008 has been
appropriated.
The Institute's member universities are: the University of
Missouri--Columbia; the University of Nebraska--Lincoln; and Iowa State
University, Ames.
NIFA performed an external review of the Social Science Unit at the
University of Missouri--Columbia in fall 2002, and this included a
review of RUPRI. Since 2005 there has been an ongoing process of
strategic review and priority setting. This has resulted in a set of
programmatic and organizational objectives approved by the RUPRI Board
of Directors in 2008. The National Advisory Board provides analysis of
directions, priorities, and outcomes.
rural renewable energy research and education center, wisconsin
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $500,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
RUSSIAN WHEAT APHID, COLORADO
The objectives of the grant are the: (1) discovery of new crop
genes that provide resistance to the Russian wheat aphid and rapid
incorporation into wheat varieties; (2) identification and
characterization of wheat genes involved in the defensive response to
the Russian wheat aphid; (3) determination of mechanisms of Russian
wheat aphid toxicity; (4) establishment of a program for rapid
assessment of wheat quality characteristics using near-infrared
reflectance spectroscopy; (5) development of methods to identify
valuable wheat quality factors in a rapid manner; (6) location and
characterization of the genetic factors controlling drought tolerance
and end-use quality in two mapping populations; and (7) evaluation of
promising lines of wheat for stress tolerance using field, greenhouse
and growth chamber screening techniques.
Progress is being made using the techniques of molecular genetics
to reach the goal of identifying new genes for resistance to Russian
wheat aphid and incorporating them into commercially acceptable wheat
varieties. Specific accomplishments during the past year included
development of experimental lines that combined resistance to the C-
biotype-two with acceptable agronomic performance, and suitable end-
use. One or more of these lines will be developed for seed increase and
further testing in the 2011 State dryland variety trials. Gene
silencing results from the past year indicate that the tested genes
that were highly expressed in resistant plants are both involved in
host plant response to Russian wheat aphid. Manipulation of the gene
that was highly expressed in susceptible plants may provide a means to
develop broad spectrum resistance to Russian wheat aphid. Results from
the water use efficiency studies suggest that some of the selected
synthetic wheat lines may be a useful source of additional variation
for developing drought resistant wheat cultivars.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1998, and the
appropriation for fiscal years 1998-2000 was $200,000 per year; for
fiscal year 2001, $249,450; for fiscal year 2002, $320,000; for fiscal
year 2003, $317,920; for fiscal year 2004, $284,313; for fiscal year
2005, $289,664; for fiscal year 2006, $302,940; for fiscal year 2007,
$0; for fiscal year 2008, $228,390; for fiscal year 1990, $214,000; and
for fiscal year 2010, $250,000. A total of $3,056,677 has been
appropriated.
Research is conducted on the campus of Colorado State University,
at Colorado State University research stations, and in a collaborator's
laboratory at Kansas State University and on the farms of cooperators
throughout Colorado. Outreach and extension activities are shared with
scientists and wheat growers in Colorado, Nebraska, Wyoming, Kansas,
New Mexico, Texas, and Oklahoma through a Western region Hatch Act
supported multi-State research and extension project.
This project was evaluated during a site visit by senior agency
technical staff in February 1999; the project has been evaluated using
annual progress reports since that time.
SEED TECHNOLOGY, SOUTH DAKOTA
The objective of this grant is to develop and deliver new seed that
will help agricultural producers enhance crop value and farm
profitability.
The seed technology center has been established and is providing
training and developing seed technology and biotechnology methods
needed to support the safe delivery of specific traits to agricultural
producers. Traits currently available in crops include herbicide
tolerance and insect resistance. Progress has been made on assessing
the physiological responses of crops to stress and developing tools
that can be used to assess the impact of stress on current genotypes.
Research in corn has focused on improving our understanding of the
physiological impacts of stress on corn growth and development. In rice
and wheat, research was focused on developing a mechanistic
understanding of seed dormancy. Findings from rice and wheat research
will be used to reduce pre-harvest sprouting and increase seedling
quality. Soybean research was conducted to determine if genes from wild
soybean can be used to improve resistance to biotic and abiotic stress.
A workshop was held to promote dialogue between producers and
scientists concerning the importance of this research. Commodity
representatives including those promoting corn, soybeans, and wheat
were in attendance.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2004, and the
following amounts have been appropriated: in fiscal year 2004,
$313,142; in fiscal year 2005, $354,144; in fiscal year 2006, $356,400;
in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $265,131; in fiscal year
2009, $282,000; and in fiscal year 2010, $350,000. A total of
$1,920,817 has been appropriated.
The research is being conducted at South Dakota State University,
Brookings, South Dakota.
Senior agency technical staff review proposals and accomplishment
reports to ensure technical quality and relevance to needs.
SMALL FRUIT RESEARCH, OREGON, WASHINGTON, AND IDAHO
The objective of this grant is to fund studies that would enhance
the profitability and sustainability of the small fruit industry in the
Pacific northwest through research in genetics, pest management, small
fruit processing, production/physiology, and wine grape production.
This grant supports research using genetic material from national
germplasm collections and the discovery of new isolates, which expand
these genetic holdings. Studies supported by this project use advanced
selections in breeding programs and approaches that utilize genetic
engineering. Another industry wide-goal of this program is to identify
new potentially harmful virus disorders in nursery stock and eliminate
them prior to introduction into small fruit production systems. The
selection and development of new small fruit varieties is essential to
maintaining the competitiveness of the United States in the world
market and in maintaining export advantages required for our
international balance of trade.
The initial support for this grant was an appropriation in fiscal
year 1991 for $125,000. The fiscal appropriation for fiscal years 1992
and 1993 was $187,000 each year; fiscal year 1994, $235,000; fiscal
years 1995-1998, $212,000 each year; fiscal years 1999 and 2000,
$300,000 each year; fiscal year 2001, $324,285; fiscal year 2002,
$392,000; fiscal year 2003, $397,400; fiscal year 2004, $354,894;
fiscal year 2005, $421,600; fiscal year 2006, $438,570; fiscal year
2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $326,697; and fiscal year2 2009 and 2010,
$307,000 per year. A total of $5,451,446 has been appropriated since
the project was initiated in 1991.
The research is conducted at 10 research sites across the Pacific
Northwest, managed by Oregon State University, Washington State
University, and the University of Idaho. Research on projects under
this grant is also conducted at several Agricultural Research Service
laboratories and experiment stations in the Pacific Northwest.
Senior agency technical staff conducted an on-site review in
December 2009. In addition, evaluation of this project is conducted
annually based on the annual progress report and discussions with the
principal investigator.
SOIL-BORNE DISEASE PREVENTION IN IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE, NEW MEXICO
The objective of this grant is to produce safe and nutritious foods
by developing strategies for prevention of soil-borne diseases in
irrigated agriculture. Research includes focusing on genetic
improvement of cultivars of chile pepper, determining the race
structure of the fungal pathogen Phytophthora capsici, and
understanding the molecular basis of resistance and virulence.
To date, the scientists have developed genetically improved
cultivars and produced seeds that they continue to test for disease
resistance. They will continue this cycle of events until the desired
horticultural and agronomic traits needed by industry and consumers are
acceptable. They have also developed a more reliable and rapid
screening method to hasten the selection for disease resistance
breeding stock. The new method allows them to screen numerous races of
foliar blight in a single plant. Further, this method allows them to
distinguish between resistant and susceptible plants in a 3-day period
which is much faster than with the traditional method. They have
distributed recombinant inbred lines of chile pepper to researchers in
several countries including China, Peru, Brazil and India, in addition
to several States in the United States. They continue gain further
insight and knowledge into the host-pathogen interaction and therefore,
are gaining a foothold on reaching their ultimate goal.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $186,684; for fiscal year 2009,
$176,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $187,000. A total of $549,684 has
been appropriated.
The research is being conducted at New Mexico State University
research facilities.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated. A
new proposal, including a progress report, was submitted, reviewed and
approved for fiscal year 2009 funding.
SOUTHERN GREAT PLAINS DAIRY CONSORTIUM, NEW MEXICO
The objective of this grant is to investigate the economic and
environmental impacts of the dairy industry on local economies, air
quality, carbon footprint, and water use in the Southern Great Plains
region.
The formation of multi-disciplinary, university faculty research
teams to address identified issues has been accomplished. Work toward
the determination of the effects of dairies on local economies--air
quality, carbon footprint, and water use--has been implemented by the
multi-disciplinary, university faculty research teams and is currently
underway.
Fiscal year 2009 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $235,000; and in fiscal year 2010,
$350,000. A total of $585,000 has been appropriated.
The work is being carried out at New Mexico State University and on
farms in New Mexico and Texas.
Fiscal year 2009 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant, so NIFA has not yet conducted an evaluation of this
project.
southwest consortium for plant genetics and water resources, new mexico
The objectives of this grant are to understand tolerance to
biological and chemical stresses in plants and the impact of these
stresses on susceptibility of plants to pests and pathogens and on
symbiotic beneficial organisms. An additional objective is to develop
and evaluate genetically transformed plants for better adaptability to
stresses of arid and semi-arid environments and the problems of water
use efficiency and water quality.
Researchers have used chromosome translocation to create bread
wheat lines that can be selected for increased root size and branching.
Many of these selected plants have been shown to exhibit increased
drought tolerance and higher grain yields in the greenhouse, and are
now being moved into field trials. Several families of drought-tolerant
alfalfa have been identified using biomass markers. They have been
successfully field tested and are now being introduced into cultivars
for commercial application. New insight into how plants regulate their
stress genes, including the regulation of saline and heat stress has
been gained in tomato and in the model plant Arabidopsis.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1986 and has
been provided with appropriations of the following amounts: fiscal year
1986, $285,000; fiscal years 1987-1989, $385,000 per year; fiscal year
1990, $380,000; fiscal years 1991-1993, $400,000 per year; fiscal year
1994, $376,000; fiscal years 1995-2000, $338,000 per year; fiscal year
2001, $368,188; fiscal year 2002, $392,000; fiscal year 2003, $389,452;
fiscal year 2004, $350,917; fiscal year 2005, $372,992; fiscal year
2006, $388,080; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $288,963; and
fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $271,000 per year. A total of $8,516,592
has been appropriated since fiscal year 1986.
The research teams are formed from researchers at five
participating southwestern institutions: New Mexico State University,
Texas Tech University, Los Alamos National Laboratory, University of
Arizona, and the University of California in Riverside.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
The submitting institution conducts a peer review of the proposal prior
to submission. Research funding is awarded to researchers at five
participating institutions through a mini-grant program. Projects are
selected for funding based on a competitive external peer review and a
project committee review. A progress report is submitted for review by
each funded mini grant project prior to the award of second year funds.
An annual symposium is held for researchers to present and discuss
results.
SOYBEAN CYST NEMATODE, MISSOURI
The objective of this grant is to develop new management strategies
for managing soybean cyst nematode including research on soybean host
resistance and Soybean cyst nematode variability.
Since 2003, several nematode resistant soybean lines were released,
and many experimental lines with resistance to soybean cyst nematode
and glyphosate herbicide have been evaluated. The pathogen has
continued to become increasingly variable genetically and in virulence,
increasing the need for more locally adapted high-yielding soybean
breeding lines to develop resistant varieties with a broad spectrum of
resistance. Over 500 new resistant soybean lines resulting from this
program were tested in 2008 and many of these were tested again in
2009. Two of the 120 lines screened in 2008 were identified with broad
spectrum resistance to soybean cyst nematode and also have resistance
to other pests of soybean, the reniform nematode, the root knot
nematode and a fungal leaf disease called frogeye leafspot. More lines
with similar pest resistance spectra are continuing in evaluation.
Tolerance to glyphosate herbicide has been incorporated into some of
these new lines which offer great promise for producers. More
fundamental research involves the utilization of new molecular
technologies to identify genes responsible for resistance. Genetic
fingerprinting of soybean lines has identified several multiple genes
for soybean cyst nematode resistance. This team has increased output of
soybean cyst nematode resistant cultivars in recent years through use
of marker assisted selection to screen over 15,000 soybean lines
annually and has developed markers to better identify lines with
resistance to race three of the nematode. As the project has developed,
the objectives have been grouped into two priority research areas,
soybean resistance to SCN and the variability of the pathogen. Under
the resistance priority, the following goals as currently being
pursued, to continue to develop breeding material, to improve the
marker assisted selection used in the breeding programs, to expand the
gene maps for SCN resistance, to identify new sources of SCN
resistance, to better understand the genetics of SCN resistance, and to
educate the public about SCN through the Cooperative Extension Service.
The variability priority area is examining population genetics to
better understand the pathogen and its relationship with the soybean
plant, determine the number of virulence genes in the nematode and
their heritability, to use molecular biology methods to differentiate
SCN variants, and to educate the public about the variability of the
pathogen.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
year 1979, $150,000; fiscal years 1980-1981, $250,000 per year; fiscal
year 1982, $240,000; fiscal years 1983-1985, $300,000 per year; fiscal
years 1986-1989, $285,000 per year; fiscal year 1990, $281,000; fiscal
year 1991, $330,000; fiscal years 1992-1993, $359,000; fiscal year
1994, $337,000; fiscal years 1995-1997, $303,000 per year; fiscal year
1998, $450,000; fiscal years 1999-2000, $475,000 per year; fiscal year
2001, 598,680; fiscal year 2002, $686,000; fiscal year 2003, $688,496;
fiscal year 2004, $616,342; fiscal year 2005, $702,336; fiscal year
2006, $793,980; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $591,828; and
fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $556,000 per year. The total amount
appropriated to date is $12,694,662.
This research is being conducted at the Missouri Agriculture
Experiment Station locations and at the University of Missouri.
The last evaluation of this project was an external review in
September 2008. The review indicated satisfaction with processes
followed in administering the grant and the progress made in addressing
this insidious problem in soybean production fields.
SOYBEAN RESEARCH, ILLINOIS
The objective of this grant is to use biotechnology to identify and
create improved mechanisms of disease tolerance and resistance to
contribute to the reduction of yield losses from plant diseases.
In the past year, significant progress has been achieved including
the completion of a comparative analysis of soybean defense responsive
genes to provide a defense-specific promoter for high-throughput
disease screens; the development of markers for a novel source of
soybean aphid resistance; combining the primary genes conveying
resistance to soybean cyst nematode in one soybean genotype, providing
broad based soybean cyst nematode resistance; developing a new method
for marker discovery that has detected between 3,500 and 15,000
informative markers for in four tested soybean cultivars; discovering a
physiological pathway that can be exploited for engineering soybean
cyst nematode resistance in soybean; developing an improved serological
test to detect soybean rust spores and developed a way to differentiate
living and dead soybean rust spores; identifying as many as 40 new
potential genes for resistance to soybean rust from a wild relative of
soybean, Glycine tomentella and producing hybrids from Glycine
tomentella and soybean that appear to be resistance to soybean rust;
developing a novel software program, Global Food in 3D, to help policy
makers, analysts, and students understand the changing global demand
for protein and showed that markets for soy products from the United
States are dramatically shifting to the fast growing Asia region.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2002, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2002 was $800,000; $844,475 in fiscal
year 2003; $755,516 in fiscal year 2004; $955,296 in fiscal year 2005;
$1,065,240 in fiscal year 2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007; $793,407 in
fiscal year 2008; $745,000 per year in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. The
total amount appropriated is $6,703,934.
The work is conducted by researchers at the Soybean Disease
Biotechnology Center on the campus of the University of Illinois.
Each proposal is peer reviewed by the submitting institution and
senior agency personnel technically review the research proposal and
provide oversight.
SPECIALTY CROPS, ARKANSAS
The objective of this grant is to assist growers, producers, and
processors in the development of profitable production systems to
provide wholesome, safe, and nutritious specialty crops that promote
human health.
Identification of new value-added products and development of
affordable processing techniques that maintain or enhance their sensory
and nutritional characteristics can enhance the viability and
sustainability of the small and medium-sized farms. Addressing food
safety concerns and optimizing the health-promoting aspects of products
are critical. The work with blueberries can serve as a template for use
with other specialty crops. Other research has demonstrated value for
environmentally friendly, sustainable uses of specialty crop waste.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $74,475; and fiscal year 2009,
$164,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $175,000. A total of $413,475 has
been appropriated.
The research will be conducted at the University of Arkansas.
Senior agency technical staff evaluated the research each year, and
satisfactory progress has been made.
SPECIALTY CROPS, INDIANA
The objective of this grant is to conduct research on gummy stem
blight, a fungal disease of melons, and to expand off-season production
of vegetable crops employing high-tunnel growth facilities.
This research will contribute to the establishment of a specialty
crops research, teaching, and extension program at the Southwest
Indiana Purdue Agricultural Center. The initial phase involves
assembling the research facilities needed to pursue the research on
fungal diseases of melons and on off-season production of specialty
crops.
A wide variety of horticultural production techniques will be
evaluated with the goal of increasing productivity and maximizing yield
potential. The geographic and climatic conditions in southwest Indiana
make the area ideal for fruit and vegetable production as well as for
greenhouse production of floricultural and nursery crops. This area
fills a production niche between crops grown in the South and those
from colder climates to the north. A well-educated workforce and
effective strategies to combat diseases of the principal crops are
needed to support and expand an already significant contributor to the
economic activity of southern Indiana; melons alone are a $34 million
crop from the region. Because approximately 40 percent of the Nation's
population lives within a 500-mile radius of Vincennes and Evansville,
Indiana, same-day distribution of fresh produce and floricultural crops
is feasible.
Fiscal year 2009 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant. An amount of $235,000 per year was appropriated for
this grant in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. The total amount appropriated
is $470,000.
The work is being carried out at Purdue University.
The proposal was subjected to peer review by the submitting
institution. Additionally, senior agency technical staff conducted a
critical review of the proposal prior to awarding the grant.
STEEP-WATER QUALITY IN PACIFIC NORTHWEST
The objectives of this grant are to: (1) determine the impact of
farming practices and systems on soil, water, and air quality; (2)
develop new technologies and increase efficiency of inputs which
improve profitability of conservation farming systems; (3) assess the
profitability of conservation systems; and (4) accelerate grower
evaluation and adaptation of profitable conservation farm systems.
Substantial progress has been made toward meeting the objectives.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1991, and the
appropriations for fiscal years 1991-1993 were $980,000 per year; in
fiscal year 1994, $921,000; in fiscal year 1995, $829,000; in fiscal
years 1996-2000, $500,000 per year; in fiscal year 2001, $498,900; in
fiscal year 2002, $588,000; in fiscal year 2003, $665,645; in fiscal
year 2004, $595,466; in fiscal year 2005, $639,840; in fiscal year
2006, $633,600; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $472,668;
and in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $444,000 per year. A total of
$12,172,119 has been appropriated.
This project is hosted by Washington State University. However, the
research activities are conducted on farmlands across Idaho, Oregon,
and Washington with cooperation from researchers and educators at the
University of Idaho, Oregon State University, and Washington State
University.
The Project Director met with the National Program Leader in the
summer of 2009 as part of a regional water quality program review. The
project leadership team meets every year to evaluate the overall
project and contributing projects. Overall, the project is meeting the
goals and remains on schedule as indicated in their plan of work. A
comprehensive review of project accomplishments is being planned for
2010, and an overall evaluation will be conducted in conjunction with
that review.
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE, CALIFORNIA
The objective of the grant is to improve the sustainability of the
food and agriculture system along the Central Coast of California by:
developing economically viable strawberry and vegetable crop management
systems that emphasize crop health, reduce environmental impacts, and
contribute to regional biodiversity conservation; enhancing ecosystem
health in multiple-use watersheds through innovative partnerships;
examining ways to increase participation in the development of
sustainable food systems; and examining social and economic factors
affecting the development of sustainable food systems in communities.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2000, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2000 was $255,000; in fiscal year 2001,
$392,135; in fiscal year 2002, $400,000; in fiscal year 2003, $496,750;
in fiscal year 2004, $444,363; in fiscal year 2005, $514,848; in fiscal
year 2006, $509,850; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008,
$380,319; and in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $357,000 per year. The
total appropriation is $4,107,265.
The work is being carried out in the Monterey Bay area of
California by the Center for Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems
at the University of California at Santa Cruz.
Progress reports are submitted annually and are reviewed by the
NIFA scientific staff. The latest review, in June 2009, found the
procedures reasonable and recommended funding.
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE, MICHIGAN
The objective of the grant is the development of production ecology
information for use in farm management decisionmaking.
Researchers have discovered methods of compost and gypsum
application that improve quality and yield of sweet corn, learned that
there is a high demand for pasture-raised livestock products, and
developed outreach programs for organic growers. They have also tested
such soil-building techniques as cover crops and low-till weed control
and worked with Michigan farmers to develop packaging and labeling for
their products. Results have been summarized in a variety of research
reports as well as a series of practical manuals for field crops, fruit
crops, pest management, and farming systems.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1994 with an
appropriation of $494,000; $445,000 per year in fiscal years 1995
through 2000; $444,021 in fiscal year 2001; $435,000 in fiscal year
2002; $432,173 in fiscal year 2003; $386,705 in fiscal year 2004;
$383,904 in fiscal year 2005; $380,160 in fiscal year 2006; $0 in
fiscal year 2007; $283,005 in fiscal year 2008; and $266,000 per year
in fiscal years 2009 and 2010 bringing total appropriations to
$6,440,968.
This work is being carried out at research stations and other
locations at Michigan State University and on cooperating farms around
the State.
Reports are submitted annually and are reviewed by the NIFA
scientific staff. The most recent review, in June 2009, determined that
the procedures were thoroughly described and scientifically sound.
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES, PENNSYLVANIA
The objective of this grant is to assist farmers in developing
strategies to address issues related to the production, profitability,
and sustainability of organic and conventional production systems.
A study is being conducted to determine if seeding rates can be
reduced without reducing the harvest yield of grain soybeans. Studies
will continue on commercially available products that claim to reduce
loss of surface applied nitrogen. Investigations will continue into
improved cover cropping in the Eastern United States.
Sustainability of various production systems has been improved. On-
farm Soybean network is being developed for use by the farmers.
The work supported under this grant began in fiscal year 1993. The
appropriation for fiscal year 1993 was $100,000; $94,000 per year in
fiscal years 1994 through 1998; $95,000 per year in fiscal years 1999
and 2000; $99,780 in fiscal year 2001; $123,000 in fiscal year 2002;
$149,025 in fiscal year 2003; $133,209 in fiscal year 2004; $190,464 in
fiscal year 2005; $188,100 in fiscal year 2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007;
$141,999 in fiscal year 2008; $133,000 in fiscal year 2009; and
$142,000 in fiscal year 2010. A total of $2,060,577 has been
appropriated.
Research is being conducted by the Pennsylvania State University on
farms throughout the State of Pennsylvania. Additional work is being
undertaken by county-based or statewide specialists in Cooperative
Extension, Rodale Institute, Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable
Agriculture, Pennsylvania Certified Organic, and farmer commodity
groups.
Annual proposals for funding are peer reviewed for relevance and
scientific merit. The NIFA contact is also in regular contact with the
principal researcher at the key institution to discuss progress towards
meeting project objectives. Agency evaluation of this project has not
been conducted.
SUSTAINABLE BEEF SUPPLY, MONTANA
The objectives of this grant are: (1) development and delivery of
educational programs aimed at providing research-based information and
meeting beef quality assurance standards; (2) certification of feeder
calves that have met defined beef quality assurance management
protocols; (3) information feedback from the feedlot and packing plant
to the cow-calf producer showing if the feeder calves met industry
requirements for quality, consistency, and red meat yield; (4) age and
source certification of weaned calves for the export market such as
Japan; (5) development and delivery of educational materials associated
with biosecurity of the ranch to prevent disease; and (6) development
of material for an interactive television program on Global Beef
Production.
Research aimed at measuring phenotypic and genetic effects of
reducing feed intake in beef heifers and cows will be measured.
Reducing feed intake without negatively impacting reproduction, calf
weaning weights, and bull fertility is the main focus with measurements
of greenhouse gas--methane, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide--
production the secondary focus. The hypothesis is that feed intake can
be reduced 15 percent and greenhouse gases can be reduced 17 percent
without affecting productivity. By using county extension agents to
assist with producer training, beef producers are educated on methods
to reduce beef quality defects; age and source verify weaned calves;
and subsequently improve the value of cattle and carcasses. As part of
a regional project, carcass data collected over the past 5 years will
be analyzed to determine if production practices have changed with
regard to carcass quality and yield. The starting point for this
research is accomplished by a series of hands-on courses demonstrating
best management practices. The Montana Stockgrowers Association and
Montana State University will provide beef quality assurance education
throughout the State. Finally, as a component of the educational focus,
a cooperative effort between Montana State University, Montana
Stockgrowers Association, and Montana Grain Growers Association, the
Montana MarketManager Web site will be implemented.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1999. The
appropriation for fiscal year 1999 was $500,000; for fiscal year 2000,
$637,500; for fiscal year 2001, $742,363; for fiscal year 2002,
$1,000,000; for fiscal year 2003, $993,500; for fiscal year 2004,
$889,720; for fiscal year 2005, $937,440; for fiscal year 2006,
$974,160; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $725,883; and
for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $682,000 per year. The total amount
appropriated is $8,764,566.
The work is a joint project that is being carried out at Montana
State University in Bozeman and the Montana Stockgrowers Association in
Helena. In addition, various beef cattle ranches in Montana and
cooperating beef processing facilities are located in more than 10
States throughout the Midwest.
NIFA National Program Leaders evaluated this project in June 2009.
The NIFA review found that progress has been made. The goals and
objectives of the project are relevant to the mission of the USDA and
NIFA.
sustainable engineered materials from renewable resources, virginia
The objectives of the grant are to: (1) develop a methodology and a
database for assessing alternative forest management practices
consistent with future demand for wood products; (2) develop
methodology for designing, evaluating, and deploying new composite
products based on principles of materials science; and (3) assess the
economic viability of developing a new wood-based composite products
and alternative forest management practices.
In 2009, Virginia Tech's Sustainable Engineered Materials Institute
provided a hotbed for material innovation through exploration and
creation of new competitive biobased products and materials that can
enter new markets, create economic recovery, and enhance U.S.
competitiveness. One of its research efforts created a natural fiber
that is substantially less susceptible to destruction from natural
sources such as insects and microorganisms. Current estimates show that
utilizing this process to create a natural durable fiber could result
in saving U.S. homeowners over $1 billion annually in preventative and
remedial treatments currently required to repair damage caused by
insects and decay fungi. Engineered wood and fiber products being
created in this research offers the opportunity for dramatic reduction
in the need for petroleum products, less waste of our Nation's natural
resources, superior product performance, and new economic development
opportunities. By utilizing engineered wood and fiber products rather
than solid wood, we could save approximately 50 percent of the U.S.
wood resources for other uses such as biofuels and bioenergy.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2002 with an
appropriation of $400,000; $596,100 for fiscal year 2003; $532,838 for
fiscal year 2004; $603,136 for fiscal year 2005; $693,000 in fiscal
year 2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007; $516,360 in fiscal year 2008; and
$485,000 per year in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. A total of $4,311,434
has been appropriated.
Research is being conducted at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg,
Virginia.
An evaluation on this project is planned for 2010.
SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AND PROCESSING RESEARCH FOR LOWBUSH SPECIALTY
CROP, MAINE
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $200,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
SWINE AND OTHER ANIMAL WASTE TREATMENT, NORTH CAROLINA
The objective of this grant is to establish a poultry and livestock
air quality research and education initiative that will foster growth
of research programs in agricultural air quality that provide the basis
for effective outreach and educational programs, locally and
nationally.
A porous windbreak wall and a biofilter for the exhaust air from
the swine facility have been constructed. Twelve environmentally
controlled poultry chambers have been used to measure the effect of
various manure management practices, ventilation systems, and animal
diets on the air emissions from the chambers. The vermicomposting pilot
unit at Lake Wheeler Research Farm revealed that this pilot system
works comparatively better for reducing bacteria fecal coliform,
Escherichia coli, and enterococci than two previously studied
conventional lagoon/sprayfield systems.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1997, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 1997 was $215,000; for fiscal year 1998,
$300,000; for fiscal years 1999 and 2000, $500,000 per year; for fiscal
year 2001, $498,900; for fiscal year 2002, $489,000; for fiscal year
2003, $491,783; for fiscal year 2004, $440,386; for fiscal year 2005,
$466,240; for fiscal year 2006, $484,110; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for
fiscal year 2008, $372,375; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$349,000 per year. A total of $5,455,794 has been appropriated.
This work is being conducted at North Carolina State University in
Raleigh and with linkages throughout the country.
The NIFA conducted an evaluation of the progress of this work
during 2009. The project has made progress towards meeting the original
goals.
TECHNOLOGY FOR IRRIGATED VEGETABLE PRODUCTION, NORTH CAROLINA
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $500,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
TEXAS OBESITY RESEARCH PROJECT
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $500,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
TICK BORNE DISEASE PREVENTION, RHODE ISLAND
The objective of this grant is to develop the predictive model
framework and Geographic Information System tools for communicating
changes in risk and a comprehensive community-based public health
action plan for tick-borne disease prevention.
Accomplishments include annual Rhode Island-wide tick surveillance
data collection for development of a risk model for the northeastern
States; continued progress on evaluating environmental parameters
including direct measurement of relative humidity duration for
refinement of a climate-based model for tick and disease risk;
development of tools for the health information delivery and decision
support system; enhancements to the public Internet Tick Encounter
Resource Center; and interactive workshops with citizens of Rhode
Island to provide practical information on reduction of risks to tick-
borne diseases.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2003 with an
appropriation of $99,350; for fiscal year 2004, $88,475; for fiscal
year 2005, $142,848; for fiscal year 2006, $148,500; for fiscal year
2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $297,900; and for fiscal years 2009 and
2010, $280,000 per year. A total of $1,337,073 has been appropriated.
The research is being performed by the University of Rhode Island
at Kingston and at more than 61 field locations throughout the State.
Senior agency technical staff evaluated this project in August
2009. This year's review found the progress on the stated research
objects is on schedule, and the research is answering the overall
objectives of this grant.
TILLAGE, SILVICULTURE, WASTE MANAGEMENT, LOUISIANA
The objective of this grant is improve conservation tillage systems
for Louisiana crops and to address manure issues from dairy and poultry
operations, as well as reduce stream pollution from livestock and
forestry.
Practices to promote greater efficiency of crops within and among
cropping systems and to reduce production costs are being incorporated
to maintain crop productivity with fewer negative effects on the
environment. Continued work on maintaining forest soil fertility and
quality where pine straw is annually removed further supports poultry
litter as superior to inorganic fertilizer. This project is serving as
a foundation for future water quality research in other regions of the
country. Techniques, procedures and expertise learned in the planning
and implementation of this project will be used to guide continuing
research on water quality and waste management in this area. A biomass
gasifier was designed and built at Louisiana State University (LSU). A
non-provisional patent was filed in June 2008. A larger--500 lb/hr--
gasifier unit will be constructed by an investor in early 2010. A novel
technique of producing crude-type oil from wet dairy slurries was also
researched. Tests in 2008 were severely impacted by flooding and winds
of Hurricane Gustav that lowered overall yields by 30 to 50 percent,
and require caution in interpreting recent results.
The work began in fiscal year 1994. The appropriation for fiscal
year 1994 was $235,000; for fiscal years 1995-2000, $212,000 per year;
for fiscal year 2001, $211,534; for fiscal year 2002, $400,000; for
fiscal year 2003, $422,238; for fiscal year 2004, $377,758; for fiscal
year 2005, $424,576; for fiscal year 2006, $495,000; for fiscal year
2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $368,403; for fiscal year 2009,
$188,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $200,000. This sums to $4,594,509.
The work is being conducted on the main campus at Louisiana State
University and at LSU's Experiment Stations at Calhoun, Crowley, Chase,
Winnsboro, St. Joseph, and Washington Parishes.
An on-site review is planned for 2010.
TRI-STATE JOINT PEANUT RESEARCH, ALABAMA
The objective of this grant is to increase peanut yields through
sod-based rotations and conservation tillage cropping systems by
developing and comparing the economic and environmental benefits of
conventional and sod-based farming systems using conservation tillage,
quantifying the positive impact that sod-based rotations have on soil
health, pest reduction and sustainable farm production, and identifying
production practices that result in significant yield increases with
decreased inputs in a sod-based rotation.
Researchers are currently monitoring disease, insect, and nematode
levels in different phases of the sod-based cropping system in Alabama,
Florida and Georgia for peanuts and cotton with Bahia grass. Economic
returns from these systems are being evaluated through the economic
model developed for this system. Soil health factors such as
penetrometer measurements have been taken in the field. Crop growth
parameters and nitrate levels are being monitored in each cropping
system to determine the value of conservation tillage and of perennial
grasses in rotation. Economic models developed thus far through this
research indicate that a 200 acre farm can increase its net profit from
less than $10,000 per year under the present peanut, cotton, cotton
rotation to over $40,000 per year with the bahiagrass rotation. A
reduction in pesticide costs is also projected of over $6,000 on the
farm practicing the rotation. A simple spreadsheet business model is
now available for bahiagrass, cattle, peanuts and cotton rotation.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2002, and the
following amounts have been appropriated: in fiscal year 2002,
$600,000; in fiscal year 2003, $596,100; in fiscal year 2004, $532,838;
in fiscal year 2005, $562,464; in fiscal year 2006, $585,090; in fiscal
year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $439,899; and in fiscal years 2009
and 2010, $413,000 per year. A total of $4,142,691 has been
appropriated since fiscal year 2002.
The research is being conducted at Auburn University, the
University of Florida, and the University of Georgia.
Senior agency technical staff reviewed the accomplishment reports
submitted for each fiscal year since 2004 and have determined that the
investigators are making progress toward the achievement of their
stated objectives for each proposal. A review of recent progress will
be conducted upon the submission of a progress report to be included in
a new proposal solicited for 2010.
TROPICAL AQUACULTURE, FLORIDA
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an appropriation of $300,000. Since this is a new
grant, no information is available regarding the program's research
goals and objectives.
TROPICAL AND SUBTROPICAL RESEARCH/T STAR, FLORIDA, USVI, PUERTO RICO,
AND GUAM
The objectives of the grants are to: (1) provide research that
maintains and enhances production of established tropical and
subtropical agricultural products; (2) develop agricultural practices
in the tropics and subtropics that are environmentally acceptable
through an agro-ecosystems approach; (3) enhance the role of value-
added agriculture in tropical island ecosystems; (4) expand and
diversify presently unexploited food and fiber products which have
potential for commercial production in tropical and subtropical
regions; (5) expand linkages of tropical and subtropical agriculture to
related industries and economic sectors; (6) develop and deliver user-
friendly decision support packages to help client needs; (7) address
invasive species issues affecting agriculture in the Pacific Basin; and
(8) enhance the linkages of agricultural and food production and
consumption by designing foods and intervention strategies that lead to
healthy and productive citizens in the tropical and sub-tropical
regions.
Participants of T STAR program are the University of Florida, the
University of Puerto Rico and the University of the United States
Virgin Islands. These three institutions make up the T STAR Caribbean
basin, while the Pacific basin is comprised of the University of Hawaii
and the University of Guam. The Administrative group of the Caribbean
basin includes State Agricultural Experiment Station staff from
Florida, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. The Administrative group
of T STAR Pacific basin includes State Agricultural Experiment Station
staff from Hawaii and Guam. The Executive Director of the Association
of the Southern Region Agricultural Experiment Station Directors is a
participating non-member of the T STAR Caribbean, while the Executive
Director of the Association of the Western Region Agricultural
Experiment Station Directors is a participating non-member of the T
STAR Pacific basin. The Agricultural Research Service of the United
States Department of Agriculture is also represented in each basin.
Oversight for the T STAR program is provided by two National Program
Leaders in the National Institute of Food and Agriculture. Along with
funding, responsibilities for each basin are divided equally between
the Administrative groups.
T STAR participants also collaborate with food and agricultural
scientists throughout the region including all Ministers of Agriculture
in the Caribbean region, French Overseas Departments, the Dutch
Republic and the State of Florida. These relationships are critical in
the battle against pests and diseases that are either affecting and or
predicted to become problematic in the region
In Guam, funds were used to study the genetic structure of cycads,
which are important ecologically but also as ornamentals. The work is
being coordinated on a global scale with cooperators located from
Thailand to New York State.
T STAR scientists have been successfully meeting these goals over
the life of the program. However, new and emerging issues continue to
present new challenges, many times, on an annual or even monthly basis.
The Administrative group, in consultation with their stakeholders,
identifies the most pressing needs of the food and agricultural sectors
for focusing their research efforts. For example, in the Caribbean
basin, funds are being focused on invasive aquatic and terrestrial
invasive pests and diseases of animals and plants. The goal is to
reduce, eliminate and or prevent the entry of organisms, all while
protecting and conserving the natural resources and ecosystem of the
basin. All the funded projects address important local, regional and
national needs, for example, the effect of climate change on the pests
and diseases, improving meat and fish production efficiency, quality of
foods like coffee, and invasive woody plants and their impact on the
ecosystem.
The operation of the Tropical and Subtropical Research program was
transferred from the Agricultural Research Service to the agency in
fiscal year 1983. Funds were appropriated as follows: fiscal years 1983
and 1984, $2,980,000 per year; fiscal year 1985, $3,250,000; fiscal
years 1986-1988, $3,091,000 per year; fiscal year 1989, $3,341,000;
fiscal year 1990, $3,299,000; fiscal years, 1991-1993, $3,320,000 per
year; fiscal year 1994, $3,121,000; fiscal years 1995-1996, $2,809,000
per year; fiscal years 1997-2000, $2,724,000 per year; fiscal year
2001, $3,853,504; fiscal year 2002, $8,000,000; fiscal year 2003,
$8,941,500; fiscal year 2004, $8,946,900; fiscal year 2005, $9,398,208;
for fiscal year 2006, $9,452,520; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year
2008, $7,110,873; and fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $6,677,000 per year.
A total of $123,775,505 has been appropriated.
Research projects submitted to the T STAR Caribbean program for
funding undergoes a thorough peer-review process, which is then subject
to approval by the Administrative group. The Administrative group is
comprised of administrators from the respective institutions in each
basin, and an Agricultural Research Service and an Executive Regional
Research Administrator from that basin. The projects deemed worthy by
the Administrative group are then submitted to the National Institute
of Agriculture, which conducts its own review to determine whether
these projects will be recommended for funding. Each Administrative
group also meets twice per year to review the program and plan ahead
for future endeavors. In addition, the National Program Leader for T
STAR Caribbean is also the National Institute of Agriculture's liaison
to the University of Florida and through this relationship,
communicates frequently with the Administrator of the T STAR program
regarding all related issues and progress. Success of the program is
also tracked through annual and termination reports that are required
by the agency. The National Program Leader is therefore able to
determine impacts, outcomes and outputs resulting from the conduct of
these projects.
VIRTUAL PLANT DATABASE ENHANCEMENT PROJECT, MISSOURI
The objective of this grant is to develop the complete database for
plants of Central America by capturing half a million new specimen
records, bar coding and geo-referencing the specimens for analysis, and
providing Web access to these data for scientific and agricultural
research.
Since work on this project was initiated in 2004, a user-friendly
data capture program for the project was developed and deployed. Twenty
new data entry people were trained to interpret and enter data from
herbarium specimens. Data from 356,287 specimens at the Missouri
Botanical Garden and 34,367 specimens in Honduras have been added to
TROPICOS. In 2009, the project exceeded its original estimate of geo-
referencing 500,000 specimens by over 200,000. The final total was
718,354 specimens with new coordinates. The information gathered by the
project was made immediately available on the Web to scientists,
researchers, and the informed public.
This project was begun in fiscal year 2004. In fiscal year 2004,
$671,018 was appropriated; in fiscal year 2005, $705,312; in fiscal
year 2006, $697,950; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008,
$625,590; and in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $588,000 per year. A total
of $3,875,870 has been appropriated.
This research is being conducted at the Missouri Botanical Garden.
Senior agency technical staff completed a merit review of this
project in April 2008 and concluded that the objectives of the research
were of value and that the collaborative agreements with various
collection owners and technology are in place. The annual proposals
undergo an internal, institutional review prior to submission to the
agency, where they are again reviewed for merit. Consistent, high-
quality data are being added daily to the database and made available
to researchers world-wide. The Missouri Botanical Garden is making
satisfactory progress.
VIRUS-FREE WINE GRAPE CULTIVARS, WASHINGTON
The objective of this grant is to use virus-free grape clones to
determine the best cultivars to use in the Pacific Northwest.
Funds have been used to establish, expand, and maintain a
foundation block of virus-free commercial grape cultivars from
worldwide sources. These vines have been used to evaluate growth,
yield, cold hardiness, and fruit and wine quality of grape scions and
rootstocks. Data on the interactions of plant diseases with
environmental effects are also being analyzed.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2005 with an
appropriation of $322,400; for fiscal year 2006, $318,700; for fiscal
year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $237,327; for fiscal year 2009,
$223,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $260,000. A total of $1,361,427 has
been appropriated.
Research is being conducted at the Washington State University
Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center.
Each year, the proposal undergoes a peer review at the recipient
institution and a merit review is conducted by senior agency technical
staff.
VITICULTURE CONSORTIUM, NEW YORK, CALIFORNIA, AND PENNSYLVANIA
The objective of this grant is to maintain or enhance the
competitiveness of the United States viticulture and wine industry in
the global market by doing research on: varietal responses of grapes;
modeling of water requirements; management of diseases and insects,
including Phyloxera; and other cultural aspects of grape production.
Each year, researchers meet with stakeholder advisory boards to
determine research priorities, and these priorities are incorporated
into subsequent request for applications. To date, an effective
competitive research program has been established and is addressing
priorities in the eastern and western regions of the country.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
years 1996 and 1997, $500,000 per year; fiscal year 1998, $800,000;
fiscal years 1999 and 2000, $1,000,000 per year; fiscal year 2001,
$1,496,000; fiscal year 2002, $1,600,000; fiscal year 2003, $1,788,300;
fiscal year 2004, $1,599,507; fiscal year 2005, $1,835,200; fiscal year
2006, $2,079,000; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $1,548,087;
and fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $1,454,000 per year. A total of
$18,654,094 has been appropriated.
Research is conducted in as many as 12 different States in any 1
year. Research funds are distributed through the competitive grants
processes administered by Cornell University and the University of
California. Each year a request for applications is distributed to all
States in which there is a viable grape industry.
In addition to scientific peer review of the competitive grant
process and the relevancy review of the regional guidance committees,
the overall process of the Viticulture Consortium underwent review and
recommended changes in 2006. Annually, senior agency technical staff
participates in the review process used to select research projects.
Funded research is addressing the objectives of the grant.
WATER CONSERVATION, KANSAS
The objective of this grant is to determine the feasibility of
subsurface drip irrigation and other alternative irrigation systems in
western Kansas to sustain irrigated corn production to support the beef
feedlot industry.
Primary experimental activities were the continuation of field
studies examining the agronomic relationship of crop yield and water
supply as affected by irrigation technology, tillage and residue
management, nitrogen management and plant density for use in evaluating
limited irrigation strategies.
Differences in soil water evaporation between bare soil and residue
treatments were 0.50 to 0.75 mm/day which for seasonal basis might be
55 to 58 mm. The impact of this change in knowledge is that producers
might be able to obtain much as 2.7 Mg/ha additional corn yield.
Tests indicated that gross irrigation savings of 25 to 100 mm per
year are realistic when weather-based irrigation scheduling is
practiced. In addition to the conserved water resource, energy savings
of $10 to $40/acre are possible. Economic comparison of center pivot
sprinklers and subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) indicated that SDI can
be more profitable than sprinklers with good corn yields and current
crop prices provided the system can last at least 20 years.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1993 with an
appropriation of $94,000; $88,000 in fiscal year 1994; $79,000 per year
in fiscal years 1995-2000; $78,826 in fiscal year 2001; $79,000 in
fiscal year 2002; $78,487 in fiscal year 2003; $70,581 in fiscal year
2004; $74,400 in fiscal year 2005; $73,260 in fiscal year 2006; in
fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $74,475; in fiscal year
2009, $69,000; and in fiscal year 2010, $500,000. The total funds
appropriated are $1,754,029.
The research is being conducted at Kansas State University. The
field portion of the research is being conducted on Research Centers at
Colby and Garden City, Kansas. Additional work is being carried out in
the Departments of Agronomy and Agricultural Economics of Kansas State
University in Manhattan, Kansas.
The agency scientist met with the principal researcher in October
2008 to discuss the project progress and accomplishments. The
researchers continue to make accomplishments in their research and
dissemination of findings.
WATER USE EFFICIENCY AND WATER QUALITY ENHANCEMENTS, GEORGIA
The objective of this grant is to develop and expedite the
implementation of new technologies to improve water use efficiency and
water quality at both a State and watershed scale by determining the
environmental impact of these systems on water quality.
Detailed information on several variable rate irrigation systems
was collected on several Georgia farms, and water quality data on
several sites has been collected with the goal of optimizing yield,
water quality, and field cropping patterns with a minimum of water use.
Research to tie the current and future controller systems to wireless
soil moisture sensors is making good progress, using soil moisture
sensors which transmit data through a mesh network. A second generation
commercial system that makes the nozzle system self-powering and
controlled though a wireless ZigBee link to the controller at the pivot
point is now being evaluated. This second generation system simplifies
installation and maintenance by using water pressure to close the
Bermod valve instead of air. This eliminates the need for air
compressors and air holding tanks on the pivot. Commercial systems,
both first and second generation, have been installed in Georgia,
Alabama, Florida, South Carolina, North Dakota and Alaska with over 50
cooperating growers. These sites show an average water savings of 12 to
16 percent coupled with equal or better production. Additional systems
are now being installed in Nebraska for the 2010 season. Growers in
California and Maryland are likely to order in 2010 or 2011. Work has
also progressed on a solar powered drip irrigation system, particularly
valuable for remote sites. Work continues to simplify the system and to
add additional information including images and temperature and
moisture data and also to add control signals and alerts. Soil moisture
sampling systems, developed by the project team, use a battery powered
watermark sensor connected to a wireless data transmission system and
promises to be significantly cheaper than all systems now commercially
available. Results of a dissertation funded by this project and
increased water quality monitoring have lead to recommendations for
riparian buffers as crucial landscape Best Management Practices for
reducing herbicide runoff from agricultural production on Georgia's
coastal plain. The number of test sites for the variable rate center-
pivot irrigation system was expanded to over 50 last year. The project
is now investigating micro turbines that might be used to power the
system with the goal of coupling the nozzle system and the micro
turbine into a single prototype piece that will be rugged, reliable,
accurate and reasonably priced.
The work supported in this grant began in 2002. The appropriation
for fiscal year 2002 was $480,000; for fiscal year 2003, $536,490; for
fiscal year 2004, $447,345; for fiscal year 2005, $470,208; for fiscal
year 2006, $489,060; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008,
$368,403; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $346,000 per tear. A
total of $3,663,506 has been appropriated.
The development research is carried out in the Tifton laboratory of
the University of Georgia. Testing sites are in several farms in the
area.
The agency conducted a thorough review of the project in fiscal
year 2002. All subsequent proposals related to this project have been
reviewed both internally and by the agency. A second project review was
carried out through a visit to the University of Georgia, reports, and
telephone interviews. A visit from the research team for a review is
tentatively scheduled for 2010. Results from this project have been
reported annually in the USDA Current Research Information System and
in Proceedings of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers.
Results were also presented at a National Science Foundation workshop,
multi-State committee meetings, and a special symposium on Emerging
technologies for real-time integrated management at the American
Society of Agronomy-Crop Science Society of America-Soil Science
Society of America international annual meetings. Results of this
project have also been reviewed through the project Web site, which can
be found at http://www.nespal.org/vri.html. The review found that work
has been in keeping with the project objectives, that progress is on
schedule, and publication of results is appropriate.
WETLAND PLANTS, LOUISIANA
The objective of this grant is to develop an economically feasible
approach to controlling coastal wetlands erosion that would use
vegetation to retain threatened areas and to rebuild lost land. To
accomplish this, a system that incorporates agricultural principles
involved in crop production is required. Specifically, a seed-based
system using appropriate planting material is required, and progress
has been rapid in developing this seed-based system.
In 2008, the Louisiana State University AgCenter's Coastal Plants
Program (CPP), which consists of geneticists, ecologists, and other
scientists, developed improved restoration practices and genetically
enhanced plant varieties of ecologically important native coastal
plants. Cost-efficient seed-based sediment restoration was developed by
the CPP and four smooth cordgrass and five sea oats varieties were
developed that have superior performance in natural environments. These
developments and findings will greatly increase the efficiency and
success of restoration projects by providing improved planting material
and methods that effectively stabilize restored coastal sites and
create natural ecosystems. Louisiana's losses of 20,000 to 30,000 acres
per year with long-term consequences on national security, energy
production, navigation, fisheries, wildlife, and other economic and
environmental resources will benefit from this research.
In 2009, genetically different smooth cordgrass and sea oats
genotypes and clones were developed and tested for performance with
traditional plant breeding methodologies by the Louisiana State
University Agricultural Center's Coastal Plants Program. Four clones of
smooth cordgrass and four clones of sea oats have been identified as
superior clones after multiple years of evaluation in natural marsh or
beach environments. These clones will be released to the public for use
in restoration projects in 2010.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1999, and the
appropriation for fiscal years 1999 and 2000 was $600,000 per year; for
fiscal year 2001, $598,680; for fiscal year 2002, $587,000; for fiscal
year 2003, $596,100; for fiscal year 2004, $532,838; for fiscal year
2005, $562,464; for fiscal year 2006, $557,370; for fiscal year 2007,
$0; for fiscal year 2008, $415,074; for fiscal year 2009, $188,000; and
for fiscal year 2010, $200,000. A total of $5,437,526 has been
appropriated.
Research is being conducted at the Louisiana Agricultural
Experiment Station at Louisiana State University.
This project was reviewed in August 2003. It was found to be
progressing satisfactorily relative to the achievement of its original
goals.
WHEAT GENETIC RESEARCH, KANSAS
The objective of this grant is to enhance the genetic diversity
available to wheat breeders nationally and internationally by
collecting, evaluating, maintaining, and distributing germplasm derived
from wild relatives of wheat.
The Wheat Genetics Resource Center fills requests for seed from the
germplasm collection from wheat breeders in the United States and in
other countries. In 2009, this project identified genetic materials for
screening for resistance to a new and threatening wheat stem rust
referred to as Ug-99. Five new sources of resistance were identified
and are now being used in germplasm enhancement programs.
Work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1989.
Appropriations for this project are as follows: fiscal year 1989,
$100,000; fiscal year 1990, $99,000; fiscal year 1991, $149,000; fiscal
years 1992-1993, $159,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $196,000; fiscal
years 1995-1997, 176,000 per year; fiscal years 1998-2000, $261,000 per
year; fiscal year 2001, $260,426; fiscal year 2002, $255,000; fiscal
year 2003, $263,278; fiscal year 2004, $235,602; fiscal year 2005,
$244,032; fiscal year 2006, $340,560; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year
2008, $256,194; fiscal year 2009, $240,000; and fiscal year 2010,
$1,000,000. A total of $5,268,092 has been appropriated.
This research is being conducted at Kansas State University at the
Wheat Genetics Resource Center. The Center also includes collaborative
projects with other departments at Kansas State University, the
Agricultural Research Service, and with other institutions in the
United States.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
The submitting institution conducts a peer review of the proposal prior
to submission. The project was found to successfully address issues in
the winter wheat industry in Kansas and other States. A senior member
of the agency's technical staff conducted a site visit in March 2008.
wildlife/livestock disease research partnership, wyoming
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $300,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
WOOD UTILIZATION RESEARCH
The objectives of the grant are to: (1) provide science that
addresses the problems associated with harvesting, transporting,
manufacturing, and marketing economical forest products in three
regions, and (2) educate graduate students to be knowledgeable of wood
as a renewable resource.
The program has been expanded to include additional university
research locations--total = 13 universities. These have included new
regions of indigenous forests and specific manufacturing techniques as
well as new research emphases as specified in the Program's 5-Year
Strategic Plan (2006) as follows:
--Domestic and global industrial competitiveness
--Sustainable environmentally acceptable operations and manufacturing
--Efficient use of renewable wood materials for the benefit of
Americans
There are 13 locations. Forest products research centers at
Michigan State University, Mississippi State University, and Oregon
State University were the first centers supported in the program. The
University of Minnesota--Duluth, North Carolina State University, and
the University of Maine were added in fiscal year 1994. In 1999, two
additional units were added: (1) a consortium made up of specific units
at the Universities in Idaho, Montana, and Washington; and (2) the
Forestry Department, University of Tennessee. The University of
Alaska--Sitka was included in the program in fiscal year 2000, and West
Virginia University was added in the program in 2004. Louisiana State
University is the latest addition (2008).
The three original locations have expanded the objectives of their
research as new information became available through ongoing research
and continued responses to the completed studies. The newer programs
have also been continued with new research objectives; some based on
needs from consumers for additional work. The program in Alaska is
working with institutions and organizations in Alaska to define
research priorities. West Virginia University concentrates on the use
of upland hardwoods. All of the programs are working to define
environmentally benign products made of a renewable resource and
procedures that are economically viable.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
year 1985, $3,000,000; fiscal years 1986-1989, $2,852,000 per year;
fiscal year 1990, $2,816,000; fiscal years 1991 and 1992, $2,852,000
per year; fiscal year 1993, $4,153,000; fiscal year 1994, $4,176,000;
fiscal years 1995 and 1996, $3,758,000 per year; fiscal years 1997 and
1998, $3,536,000 per year; fiscal years 1999 and 2000, $5,136,000 per
year; fiscal year 2001, $5,773,271; fiscal year 2002, $5,670,000;
fiscal year 2003, $6,129,895; fiscal year 2004, $6,069,975; fiscal year
2005, $6,234,720; fiscal year 2006, $6,370,650; fiscal year 2007, $0;
fiscal year 2008, $4,840,875; fiscal year 2009, $4,545,000; and fiscal
year 2010, $4,841,000. The total amount appropriated is $106,592,386.
Reviews are conducted when requested by a State institution.
Reviews at Mississippi State University and Oregon State University
were conducted in 2004. Both institutions have successfully achieved
their set objectives. Center directors met in 1996, 1999, 2004, 2005,
2006, 2008 and 2009. Progress reports are reviewed each year. Each
center has its advisory group or research committee to provide
direction and the input of stakeholders into the program.
WOOL RESEARCH, MONTANA, TEXAS, AND WYOMING
The objective of this grant is to improve the efficiency and
profitability of producing and marketing wool, mohair, and cashmere.
Objectives at the three laboratories are continually revised to reflect
the changing research priorities for the wool, mohair, and cashmere
industries and to satisfy consumer demands for products from these
fibers. It is anticipated that 5 years will be required to complete the
current research.
Research conducted at the Texas A&M University station is examining
and contributing to several approaches for making the United States
animal fiber and sheep and goat meat industries more competitive and
more profitable.
The Montana State University station uses the Optical Fiber
Diameter Analyzer OFDA2000 instrument to provide producers an
opportunity to test wool inexpensively and is developing an edge for
marketing their wool clips.
The University of Wyoming effort supports improvement of the United
States sheep industry through identifying and evaluating new
technologies that enhance our abilities to objectively measure the
physical properties of greasy wool and other animal fibers; and through
promoting communication between research organizations, producer
groups, both at the State and national levels, end-user groups, and
regulatory groups.
Grants have been awarded from appropriated funds in the amount of
$150,000 per year for fiscal years 1984-1985; $142,000 per year for
fiscal years 1986-1989; $144,000 for fiscal year 1990; $198,000 for
fiscal year 1991; $250,000 per year for fiscal years 1992-1993;
$235,000 for fiscal year 1994; $212,000 per year for fiscal years 1995-
1997; $300,000 per year for fiscal years 1998-2000; $299,340 for fiscal
year 2001; $294,000 for fiscal year 2002; $292,089 for fiscal year
2003; $268,407 for fiscal year 2004; $297,600 for fiscal year 2005;
$295,020 for fiscal year 2006; $0 for fiscal year 2007; for fiscal year
2008, $219,453; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $206,000 per year.
A total of $5,858,909 has been appropriated.
In 2008, the principal investigators from the three universities
met with the NIFA National Program Leader responsible for the grant
during a multi-State committee meeting where progress and direction of
the grant was discussed. The research encompassed in this grant is a
component of a multi-State research project; therefore, accomplishments
are reported annually to scientific peers and representatives from the
sheep, goat, wool, mohair, and cashmere industries. Each multi-State
research project is periodically peer reviewed to verify
accomplishments and collaborative efforts among the participating
institutions. In addition, research results are presented each year to
the members of the American Sheep Industry Association during its
annual convention.
WORLD FOOD AND HEALTH INITIATIVE, ILLINOIS
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $461,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
RESEARCH FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION GRANTS
AG-BASED INDUSTRIAL LUBRICANTS RESEARCH PROGRAM, IOWA
The Ag-Based Industrial Lubricants program was initiated to develop
new non-food uses for soybean crop oil. Eighteen years of research and
development has led to numerous patents or joint patents on soy-based
lubricants, leading to successful commercialization of many soy-based
grease and lubricant products. In 2007, this program transitioned to a
Center of Excellence and became the National Agriculture-Based
Lubricants Center. The research program continues to investigate
improvements in biolubricants manufacturing efficiency using microwave
energy as a replacement for traditional heating methods which cost more
and cause oxidative break-down in vegetable oils. In addition, the
project has conducted initial diesel engine testing to evaluate
biolubricants in the engine crankcase--a direct result of improved
technologies to control oxidative breakdown of vegetable oils through
continuing research in both chemical and genetic modifications of
vegetable oils to achieve unprecedented stability. Research continues
to investigate nano-metals for control of bacteria which cause
premature lubricant failure in machining equipment.
Federal funding for this project began with a 1998 appropriation of
$200,000. Fiscal years 1999 and 2000 appropriations were $250,000 each
year; for fiscal year 2001, $349,230; for fiscal year 2002, $360,000;
for fiscal year 2003, $447,075; for fiscal year 2004, $402,611; for
fiscal year 2005, $522,784; for fiscal year 2006, $543,510; for fiscal
year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $405,144; for fiscal year 2009,
$380,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $405,000. A total of $4,515,434 has
been appropriated.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE AMERICAN PACIFIC, HAWAII
The Agricultural Development in the American Pacific (ADAP) goals
are to develop human resources and information capacity within the
institutions, to manage more effectively, agricultural programs within
and among the institutions, and to focus available resources on
critical agricultural issues of the Pacific. On-going projects include
animal health surveys, livestock waste management, artificial
insemination demonstration and education, market production information
tracking systems co-developed with ``State'' Departments of
Agriculture, and Web sites that contain relevant research information
supported by ADAP and pacific-based information.
The ADAP Communications, Information and Publications Service
(CIPS) project was created to coordinate and address the information
needs of the ADAP institutions, communities and clientele on a regional
basis. This project helped provide and made accessible appropriate
information and materials that benefit the American Pacific region and
encourage economic and agricultural sustainability. As a result of more
open and immediate access to information, duplication of work in the
region was reduced, leading to more efficient use of fiscal and human
resources. The increased utilization of electronic communication
capabilities greatly reduced travel costs for various meetings,
training, and workshops.
The American Pacific Land-grant institutions and government
agencies want to increase their levels of trained and competent staff
in order to enhance the institution and government services and to
advance local agricultural development or allied fields. One way to
help increase the number of qualified employees is to provide high
school and college students, specifically potential future employees,
and current government or ADAP institution employees, with the
opportunity to compete for educational scholarships. ADAP has developed
programs targeted at different stages of educational development.
The work was funded for 7 years with an annual appropriation of
$650,000 to the former Extension Service. In fiscal year 1994, an
appropriation of $608,000 was made to NIFA to continue the ADAP
program. In fiscal year 1995, the appropriation was $527,000; for
fiscal years 1996 through 2000, $564,000 each year; fiscal year 2001,
$562,759; fiscal year 2002, $552,000; fiscal year 2003, $548,412;
fiscal year 2004, $490,091; fiscal year 2005, $486,080; fiscal year
2006, $481,150; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $372,375;
fiscal year 2009, $349,000; and fiscal year 2010, $400,000. The total
appropriation is $8,196,867.
Work is carried out at American Samoa Community College, College of
Micronesia, College of the Marshall Islands, Palau Community College,
College of Micronesia--Federated State of Micronesia, Northern Marianas
College, University of Guam, and the University of Hawaii at Manoa.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
AGRICULTURE WASTE UTILIZATION, WEST VIRGINIA
The original goal of this project was to determine the
applicability of anaerobic digestion to convert organic waste materials
to energy in the form of biogas, thereby reducing the amount of organic
matter for disposal. The subsequent goal is to manage the remaining
solids from anaerobic digestion in an environmentally sound manner. A
model was developed that predicts the changes of temperature in a pilot
plant anaerobic digester. An experiment has made excellent progress
using a molecular approach to document microbial diversity in an
anaerobic digester. A long-term experiment was begun in 2008 to
investigate the capacity of thermophilic anaerobic digestion to recover
additional energy from a variety of types of waste biomass including
agricultural residues and ethanol manufacturing wastes. Metagenomics is
a new field that has arisen as a result of technological advancements
to understand how a microbial community functions.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1998, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 1998 was $360,000; for fiscal year 1999,
$250,000; for fiscal year 2000, $425,000; for fiscal year 2001,
$494,909; for fiscal year 2002, $600,000; for fiscal year 2003,
$685,515; for fiscal year 2004, $617,336; for fiscal year 2005,
$648,768; for fiscal year 2006, $683,100; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for
fiscal year 2008, $484,584; for fiscal year 2009, $455,000; and for
fiscal year 2010, $500,000. A total of $6,204,212 has been
appropriated.
Research is conducted at West Virginia State College, Institute.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
ANIMAL HEALTH RESEARCH AND DIAGNOSTICS, KENTUCKY
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $300,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT, OKLAHOMA
The goal of this research is to develop best management practices
for the expanded animal industry that will protect ground water
supplies from pollution of nutrients, salts, and pathogens; maintain
air quality; and minimize odors derived from the swine operation to
include: swine buildings, lagoon, land-application, soil-cropping, and/
or rangeland production system, thus maintaining the quality of life in
the rural sector. Long-term application of swine effluent in no-till
cropping systems resulted in increasing levels of carbon sequestration
and nitrogen in the soil profile following 9 years of an irrigated
corn-wheat production. Reductions in protein content in swine feed has
resulted in significant reductions in ammonia emissions from swine
housing. The project has produced several educational videos for use by
swine producers in Oklahoma and in the adjoining States. These videos
describe how producers can reduce the environmental impact of managing
swine manure to protect soil, water, and air. These videos are
accessible by any producer through the Oklahoma State University Web
site.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1998, and the
appropriation for fiscal years 1998-2000 was $250,000 per year; for
fiscal year 2001, $274,395; for fiscal year 2002, $320,000; for fiscal
year 2003, $332,823; for fiscal year 2004, $298,230; for fiscal year
2005, $295,616; for fiscal year 2006, $392,040; for fiscal year 2007,
$0; for fiscal year 2008, $291,942; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$274,000 per year. A total of $3,503,046 has been appropriated for this
project.
Some of the field work has been conducted at The Oklahoma Panhandle
Research and Extension Center located in Goodwell, Oklahoma. Much of
the laboratory analysis work was done at Oklahoma State University. The
diet modification and economic impact studies were conducted at the
swine research facility at Stillwater, Oklahoma.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
APPLIED AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH, CALIFORNIA
California State University scientists are studying the air quality
requirements of particulate matter from agriculture, race horse
muscular injuries threatening the horse racing industry, managing
drought on high value crops like pistachios, development of an avian
flu immunization, and reducing crop processing costs and environmental
impacts.
The project developed an eco-friendly lye peeling system with wide
application in fruit and vegetable processing industries. The system
has potential to significantly reduce fresh water use, wastewater
discharge, and contaminant levels in wastewater. Research demonstrated
that allowing weed growth in winter and vegetation removal in mid-
spring using cultivation, prevented vine yield reductions, reduced
production costs, and avoided pre-emergence herbicide use. Results show
that a series of growth implants increased physiological growth and
carcass attributes in Holstein Steers. Completion of the development of
an Intelligent Mechanical Tomato Transplanter has increased the
knowledge base leading to a new awareness that computer controlled
robotic systems can potentially be used for transplanting tomatoes and
similar crops. Genome mapping in lettuce has led to increased shelf
life and nutrient quality. Wine grape quality and value are improved
through abscisic acid treatments. The use of improved water management
allowed nut orchards to survive through long periods of drought
conditions.
The work for this project began in fiscal year 2006 with an
appropriation of $990,000; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year
2008, $737,799; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $693,000 per year.
A total of $3,113,799 has been appropriated.
The research is being carried out at California State at Fresno;
the California State Polytechnic University at San Luis Obispo;
California State University at Pomona; and California State University
at Chico.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
AQUACULTURE, OHIO
The goal of the project is to establish a program in Ohio to foster
the development of a statewide aquaculture industry. Research funded
under the Aquaculture, Ohio program has led to: new information from
muscle studies that will be useful in identifying gene products unique
to enhanced muscle growth and development and will allow producers to
develop useful breeding strategies for the production of yellow perch;
the establishment of a marker-assisted breeding program in yellow perch
that should improve growth rate by 15 to 20 percent per generation;
unique protein expression patterns that were correlated with specific
traits that can be used to examine muscle in fishes; sensory evaluation
studies comparing wild versus farm-raised yellow perch that found that
farm-raised yellow perch compares favorably to wild-caught perch;
development of new pond fertilization regimes for yellow perch
production that has led to a 30 percent increase of perch juveniles;
establishment of XY female bluegill population that will allow for the
development of a YY-male broodstock population. Progeny from these
broodstock will be entirely male and are expected to grow 30 to 50
percent faster than mixed-gender population; genetic linkage mapping
and identified sex-specific markers that should provide the basis for
detection of important commercial traits; and that market-sized golden
shiners can be raised in one growing season in Ohio's temperate
climate. Recent accomplishments include but are not limited to: 10
improved lines of yellow perch were developed. These fish showed that
the improved lines grew 28 percent to 54 percent faster than unimproved
fish. Approximately 60,000 of these improved yellow perch fry and
fingerlings were distributed to fish farmers in the State. A second
generation of improved fish was created in 2008. Two mapping families
have been developed and induced to produce second generation families
for quantity trait loci mapping. About 15,000 all-male and 5,000 YY
supermale bluegill populations, which would grow 40 to 50 percent
faster than a mixed-gender population, have been generated for
developing all-male broodstock. The Bowling Green Aquaculture Program
established an algal and zooplankton culture lab and produced 50,000
yellow perch juveniles for grow-out trials with a private cooperator.
The aquaponics variety trials in 2008 were successful in producing
tomatoes, peppers, leaf lettuce, cucumbers, eggplant, as well as chives
and basil. The Bowling Green Aquaculture Program organized a Baitfish
Grower's Alliance and provided a Baitfish Culture manual and technical
assistance to the growers. Largemouth bass and yellow perch were
cultured together to market size in 1 year using indoor recirculating
systems, substantially reducing production costs and traditional grow-
out time by nine months. Methods have been developed to identify gene
products associated with muscle growth due to genetic and nutritional
selection and researchers have developed novel proteomic methodology
combining electrophoretic, image, statistical, and primary protein
sequence techniques to identify muscle proteins and enzymes associated
with environmental impacts on muscle growth and meat quality. The
fundamental findings from these studies demonstrate that muscle growth
in meat animals is accomplished through the increase in those enzymes
that are the gate keepers of the glycolytic pathway.
The appropriation for fiscal year 2002 was $400,000; for fiscal
year 2003, $447,075; for fiscal year 2004, $849,955; for fiscal year
2005, $846,176; for fiscal year 2006, $891,000; for fiscal year 2007,
$0; for fiscal year 2008, $663,324; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$623,000 per year. A total of $5,343,530 has been appropriated.
The research is conducted at The Ohio State University in
collaboration with the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development
Center, the South Centers at Piketon, and the Agricultural Technical
Institute.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
AQUACULTURE RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER, PENNSYLVANIA
The goal of this project is to develop a program in aquaculture
production and processing for urban areas. Research conducted by the
program have: found that NuPro, a commercially available feed
ingredient, can be an effective protein supplement for salmonid feeds;
generated new information on the use of commercially available feed
ingredients for salmonids including a study on four organic acids
citric, fumaric, oxalic, and gluconic. In Atlantic salmon feeding
trials, gluconic acid may be the most promising when used as a feed
preservative and may also contribute to enhance growth. Recent studies
have determined: methods for culturing local freshwater mussel species
described and refined, and several native species of fish were tested
as hosts for the parasitic larvae of the mussels. Tilapia can
effectively utilize phytate phosphorus with supplemental phytase being
added to the diet. Research on organic diets for tilapia indicate that
appropriate feeds can be created to support an organic tilapia
aquaculture program once the final regulation from USDA for organic
standards have been finalized.
This project began in fiscal year 2003. The fiscal year 2003
appropriation was $248,375; for fiscal year 2004, $221,684; for fiscal
year 2005, $220,224; for fiscal year 2006, $217,800; for fiscal year
2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $163,845; for fiscal year 2009,
$154,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $300,000. A total of $1,371,928 has
been appropriated.
Cheyney University of Pennsylvania located in Cheyney, Pennsylvania
is conducting the research.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
BEST PRACTICES IN AGRICULTURE WASTE MANAGEMENT, CALIFORNIA
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $300,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
BIOBASED POLYMER INITIATVE, KANSAS
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $750,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
BIOTECHNOLOGY RESEARCH, MISSISSIPPI
A goal of this research is to develop the capacity of Alcorn State
University to conduct research in the area of plant biotechnology,
train students for careers in biotechnology and biomedical sciences,
and to utilize biotechnology techniques to improve the livelihood and
viability of limited resource farmers in Mississippi and the Southeast.
Another goal is to develop new sweet potato cultivars with disease
tolerance, expanded industrial and food uses, and the potential for
greater economic benefits for farmers. Several transgenic sweet potato
lines have been developed with an anti-microbial peptide against
various fungal pathogens.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2000, and the
following amounts have been appropriated: in fiscal year 2000,
$425,000; in fiscal year 2001, $589,700; in fiscal year 2002, $680,000;
in fiscal year 2003, $745,125; in fiscal year 2004, $667,041; in fiscal
year 2005, $661,664; in fiscal year 2006, $680,130; in fiscal year
2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $511,395; and in fiscal years 2009 and
2010, $480,000 per year. The total amount appropriated is $5,920,055.
The research is being conducted at Alcorn State University, in
Lorman, Mississippi, and at field locations in Preston and Mound Bayou,
Mississippi.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
CELLULOSIC BIOMASS, SOUTH CAROLINA
The objective of this project is to determine which plants produce
the highest energy yield per bushel among sugarcane, sugar-beets, and
switchgrass for the production of bio-butanol. Specific objectives
include: (1) establishment of field station; (2) contrasting organic
versus traditional growth methods of feedstocks; and (3) educating the
public through workshops and multimedia presentations in an effort to
produce certified organic crop producers for bio-butanol feedstocks.
Researchers are establishing the testing greenhouse on newly acquired
land. Seeds of switchgrass, sugar beets, and vegetative cuttings of
sugarcane are being planted and germinated. Students and researchers
are collecting pertinent data on feedstock germination, establishment,
and development.
Fiscal year 2009 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant. In fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $469,000 per year was
appropriated. A total of $938,000 has been appropriated.
The work is being carried out by researchers at Claflin University
and on the Agricultural/Biofuel Feed Stock Research Field Station in
Orangeburg County, South Carolina.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
CENTER FOR AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, IOWA
The objectives of this project are to assess and evaluate various
proposals affecting agricultural trade, provide analytical support to
the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, and provide information to
farmers and agribusiness firms on the competitive implications of trade
agreements. Theoretical studies, empirical and descriptive analyses of
policy issues and technical problems pertaining to the Uruguay round of
negotiations were completed and provided to negotiators and the
agribusiness community. Knowledge developed in this phase is now being
used to monitor the effects of the Uruguay Round Agricultural Agreement
(URA).
This grant supports six projects focusing on URA and the World
Trade Organization (WTO) monitoring and implementation problems;
implications of the URA and WTO for Eastern Europe, Baltic, and the
Newly Independent States; development of a model to assess the North
American Free Trade Agreement and its linkages with the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade; trade implications of U.S. food and
development aid in developing countries; integration of China into
world agricultural markets; and special projects as requested for the
U.S. Trade Representative's office. Major emphasis is placed on
developing and improving international livestock and grain sector
models.
This research program was initiated in fiscal year 1989. Grants
have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal year 1989,
$750,000; fiscal years 1990 and 1991, $741,000 per year; fiscal years
1992-1993, $750,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $705,000; fiscal year
1995, $612,000; fiscal year 1996, $655,000; fiscal years 1997-2000,
$355,000 per year; fiscal year 2001, $427,058; fiscal year 2002,
$600,000; fiscal year 2003, $670,613; fiscal year 2004, $600,436;
fiscal year 2005, $595,200; fiscal year 2006, $589,050; fiscal year
2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $438,906; and for fiscal years 2009 and
2010, $412,000 per year. A total of $11,869,263 has been appropriated.
The research program is carried out by the Center for Agriculture
and Rural Development at Iowa State University.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
CENTER FOR FOOD INDUSTRY EXCELLENCE, TEXAS
A goal of this research is to construct a mathematical simulation
model based on real-world data that effectively compared E. coli
O157:H7 and Salmonella movement through the farm-to-fork continuum in
U.S. and Mexican beef processing plants. In addition to the development
of the model, researchers will identify drivers of microbial failures
within this model that could be used to critically evaluate and compare
interventions used in the United States and Mexico to optimize their
ability to reduce the microbial failure rate. This data will be used to
develop training modules for producers involved in the farm-to-fork
continuum in the United States and Mexico. Industry workshops on topics
such as HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points), Listeria
Control, Beef 706 and Beef Baccalaureate have been conducted to reach
several targeted audiences including food processors, the media, and
food retailers.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2003, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2003 was $248,375; $221,684 in fiscal
year 2004; $867,008 in fiscal year 2005; $1,353,330 in fiscal year
2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007; $1,007,895 in fiscal year 2008; and
$946,000 per year in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. The total
appropriation was $5,590,292.
Research is being conducted at the Center for Food Industry
Excellence at Texas Tech University Meat Laboratory in Lubbock, Texas.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
CENTER FOR INNOVATIVE FOOD TECHNOLOGY, OHIO
The goal of the program is to create a program that provided
relevant solutions to technically challenging problems as defined by
the industry. More than 64 industry-driven projects have been completed
to date. The Center has encouraged innovation by leveraging private
sector funding to underwrite projects designed to assess the
feasibility of emerging technologies in specific applications, or
traditional non-food technologies in specific food processing
situations. The accomplishments in this last fiscal year include an
evaluation performed at The Ohio State University on the efficiency of
anti-microbial coatings for processing equipment, a demonstration of
chemical thinning technology to increase the yields of processing
vegetables, the establishment of a program to evaluate the technical
and economic feasibility of electron beam processing of vegetables, the
use of silver zeolite antimicrobial packaging for food products, the
development of gluten-free pasta, wraps, and pizza dough, and the
potential use of an organic substance to inhibit the browning of fresh
cut fruits and vegetables.
The work has been supported since fiscal year 1995. The project
received appropriations of $181,000 per year for fiscal years 1995-
1997; $281,000 for fiscal year 1998; $381,000 per year for fiscal years
1999 and 2000; $759,326 for fiscal year 2001; $765,000 for fiscal year
2002; $760,028 for fiscal year 2003; $1,042,811 for fiscal year 2004;
$1,144,768 for fiscal year 2005; $1,133,550 for fiscal year 2006; $0
for fiscal year 2007; $845,043 in fiscal year 2008; and $793,000 per
year in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. A total of $9,622,526 has been
appropriated.
Research is being conducted in the laboratories of the Ohio State
University and at various participating companies in Ohio, Wisconsin,
Texas, Tennessee, Colorado, Indiana, California, and Michigan.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
CENTER FOR NORTH AMERICAN STUDIES, TEXAS
The goal of this project is to promote strong agricultural ties
among the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The project is also
designed to help ensure the continued competitiveness of U.S.
agriculture. Current progress is addressing the following:
--Evaluate the trade impacts of alternative trade, macroeconomic,
market, and farm policies in each of the three countries.
--Ongoing throughout the existence of the Center for North American
Studies (CNAS).
--Develop cooperative research programs to investigate priority
issues related to growing North American trade in agricultural
and food products.
--Ongoing throughout the existence of CNAS.
--Develop training programs designed to prepare agricultural and
agribusiness firms for international opportunities and
competition.
--Predominately performed during the spring and summer time period,
but also somewhat ongoing throughout the year.
--Maintain and expand institutional linkages with internationally
recognized agricultural programs in Mexico, Canada, and other
countries important to North American agricultural trade.
--Ongoing throughout the existence of CNAS.
Work supported by this grant which began 1994 are as follows:
fiscal year 1994, $94,000; fiscal year 1995, $81,000; fiscal years
1996-2000, $87,000 each year; fiscal year 2001, $86,809; fiscal year
2002, $200,000; fiscal year 2003, $198,700; fiscal year 2004, $894,690;
fiscal year 2005, $992,000; fiscal year 2006, $990,000; fiscal year
2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $737,799; and for fiscal years 2009 and
2010, $693,000 per year. In total, this research has received
$6,095,998 in appropriations.
The work is being carried out at Texas A&M University through the
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, and in other segments of the
Texas A&M University System. In addition to Texas A&M University, other
involved institutions are Texas Tech University, Louisiana State
University Agricultural Center, and New Mexico State University.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
CENTER FOR RENEWABLE TRANSPORTATION FUEL, MICHIGAN
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $500,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
CENTERS FOR DAIRY AND BEEF EXCELLENCE, PENNSYLVANIA
Please note that the Centers for Dairy and Beef Excellence are two
separate organizations that function independently of one another.
The goal for the Center for Dairy Excellence in Pennsylvania is to
continue to revitalize the dairy industry within the State and
positively impact rural communities while strengthening the local
economy with regard to jobs and income. The Center has made significant
progress toward these goals through the development and successful
implementation of the Dairy Profit Team Program. This program has
become a central part of the decision-making process on progressive
dairy farms in Pennsylvania.
The long-term efficiency goals set forth by the Center for Beef
Excellence include increasing feed efficiency statewide by 10 percent,
increasing cow reproduction by five percent, increasing cow efficiency
by five percent and decreasing calf mortality by five percent. The
Center also plans to increase research funding for beef-related
research by 25 percent statewide.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $74,475; for fiscal year 2009,
$319,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $340,000. The total amount
appropriated is $733,475.
The research is conducted at the Center for Dairy Excellence in
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and on dairy farms throughout the State.
The Center for Beef Excellence is located in Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania. A significant proportion of the work is conducted on-farm
throughout the State.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
CLEMSON UNIVERSITY VETERINARY INSTITUTE, SOUTH CAROLINA
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $1,000,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
CLIMATE FORECASTING, FLORIDA
The goal of this research is to improve climate forecasting and
crop models to reduce risk for agricultural producers and the crop
insurance industry. This is being accomplished by designing and
developing a climate forecast information component, a State and
region-wide agricultural outlook component, a commodity-based
component; and produce an Agriculture Climate Information and Decision
Support system. Additional research at the Southeast Climate Consortium
includes the integration of weather generators with climate models; the
assessment of agricultural impact through the analysis of historical
crop yields and simulated yield potentials; understanding forestry risk
and its minimization; water quality assessment and policy analysis; and
the development of crop management optimization toolkits and programs
to explore optimal management options under different El Nino-Southern
Oscillation conditions and optimization criteria.
The project accomplishments to date include: annual regional freeze
forecasts; El Nino-Southern Oscillation phase assessment; historic
weather data by county; weather generator; coupled climate-ocean-land
surface-crop modeling: bimonthly wildfire and forest risk forecasts;
crop simulation model; historic yield data by county; assessments of
yield response to climate; county level climate-crop yield forecasts;
and cattle heat stress forecast.
The program has greatly improved its prototype crop yield risk tool
which helps analyze yield potential based on climate forecast and
planting dates. The Web-based system is a Climate-Related Tool for
Agriculture and Natural Resources Management and referred to as
AgroClimate Tools. The Climate Forecast Tool provides monthly climate
forecasts of average precipitation and minimum and maximum temperatures
at the county level; probabilities for these variables to help the
analysis of risk and observed values for the past 5 years. The crop
yield risk tool helps analyze yield potential based on climate forecast
and planting dates. The results are based on crop model simulations and
are only available for a limited number of counties, depending on the
crop selected. Crops under implementation are: peanuts for selected
counties in Alabama, Georgia, and Florida; potato for Suwannee County,
Florida; and Fresh Tomato for South Florida.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2003 with an
appropriation of $894,150; for fiscal year 2004, $3,131,415; for fiscal
year 2005, $3,601,952; for fiscal year 2006, $3,565,980; for fiscal
year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $2,656,275; and for fiscal years
2009 and 2010, $2,494,000 per year. A total of $18,837,772 has been
appropriated.
Research is conducted at Florida State University, University of
Florida, University of Miami, University of Georgia, Auburn University,
and the University of Alabama--Huntsville.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
COTTON RESEARCH, TEXAS
The goal of this project was to provide comprehensive multi-
disciplinary research to improve cotton production in west Texas and
expand the demand for cotton grown in the area. The research has made
improvements in cotton varieties through traditional genetics and
genetic engineering aimed at improving seedling establishment,
increasing photosynthetic efficiency and cotton yields, and developing
resistance to pest and diseases. As a result of this research, many
production areas have seen an improvement in overall yield and improved
fiber length and strength. Cotton economic and marketing research
projects have provided an analysis of feasibility and market impact of
new production technologies, improvement of pricing and market
reporting, understanding market behavior, and factors related to
international competitiveness.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1998. The
appropriation for fiscal years 1998 and 1999 was $200,000 per year; for
fiscal year 2000, $170,000; for fiscal year 2001, $498,000; for fiscal
year 2002, $880,000; for fiscal year 2003, $1,182,265; for fiscal year
2004, $2,236,725; for fiscal year 2005, $2,480,000; for fiscal year
2006, $2,475,000; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008,
$1,843,008; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $1,730,000 per year. A
total of $15,624,998 has been appropriated.
The work is conducted in or near Lubbock, Texas, on the Texas Tech
University Campus, Fiber and Biopolymer Research Center, Texas ArgiLife
Research and Extension Center, USDA-ARS Cropping Systems Research Lab,
and on area research and demonstration farms.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
COUNCIL FOR AGRICULTURE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, IOWA
The Council for Agriculture Science and Technology (CAST) is a
nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization composed of scientific societies and
many individual, student, company, nonprofit and associate society
members. The goal of CAST is to compile and communicate objective,
science-based information about agriculture.
During the current grant period, CAST published numerous issue
papers, commentaries, and special publications on a wide variety of
timely topics including Poultry and Ruminant Carcass Disposal Options
for Routine and Catastrophic Mortality; Scientific Assessment of the
Welfare of Dry Sows Kept in Individual Accommodations; Animal
Productivity and Genetic Diversity; Considerations in Biodiesel
Production; Food Safety and Fresh Produce; Fate and Transport of
Pathogens in Swine Manure; and Sustainability of U.S. Soybean
Production. These publications were distributed widely to both
scientific and nonscientific audiences.
This project began in fiscal year 2004 with an appropriation of
$134,203; in fiscal year 2005, $148,800; in fiscal year 2006, $147,510;
in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $112,209; in fiscal year
2009, $105,000; and in fiscal year 2010, $110,000. A total of $757,722
has been appropriated.
This work is being carried out at the Council for Agriculture
Science and Technology in Ames, Iowa.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
DATA INFORMATION SYSTEM--REEIS
The objective of the system is to enable users to measure the
impact and effectiveness of research, extension, and education
programs. REEIS is meeting this goal by incrementally incorporating
data from more and more programs and continually expanding the data
available for currently incorporated programs and disseminating
information on current research programs. REEIS now contains over 10
major Data Marts--a subsection of a Data Warehouse--and resources of
information.
In 2008, there was a continuation of enhancing program monitoring
and reporting tools. The Leadership Management Dashboard (LMD) was
developed and released in REEIS as a real time tool integrating
information from multiple databases. The LMD links grant funding
information with program information and provides an integrated view of
how grant funds are allocated and spent by various USDA programs. The
first audience for the LMD was the USDA National Program Leaders. In
2009, additional releases of this enhanced tool were made available to
broader audiences including university partners. Also, data from the
National Information Management and Support System (NIMSS) were
incorporated into the LMD. The REEIS system also incorporated reports
from the new Agricultural Research, Extension and Education Reform Act
(AREERA) system which provides for the direct input by States of Plans
of Work and Annual Reports.
Information from the system is provided for the following topics:
current and historical agricultural research efforts; forestry research
efforts; statistics about students, institutions, faculty, and degrees
related to agriculture; partner institution snapshots; food and
nutrition efforts; 4-H programs; information on families at risk;
impact reports; agricultural snapshots of each State and outlying
areas; agriculture-related patents and citations and state
accomplishments and plans of work;
REEIS began in fiscal year 1997 when Congress appropriated $400,000
for planning and design. The subsequent appropriations by fiscal year
are as follows: 1998--$800,000; 1999--$1,000,000; 2000--$2,000,000;
2001--$2,120,325; 2002--$2,078,000; 2003--$2,750,000; 2004--$2,444,492;
2005--$2,424,448; 2006--$2,561,130; 2007--$0; 2008--$2,703,939; and
2009 and 2010--$2,704,000 per year. The total appropriation for fiscal
years 1997 through 2008 is $26,690,334.
This program is conducted at the NIFA headquarters in Washington,
DC.
DIETARY INTERVENTION, OHIO
The goals of this research are to determine if freeze-dried berries
can exert a preventive effect on the development of colon cancer in
humans, and to identify dietary components mediating CEACAM1 levels for
the prevention of and therapeutics against obesity, diabetes and
secondary complications.
Ohio State University researchers have completed two clinical
trials that provide evidence that freeze-dried black raspberries could
be protective against colon cancer; one trial in patients diagnosed
with colon cancer and the other in patients with familial adenomatous
polyposis. In addition, biomarker studies in normal and polyp tissues
taken from berry treated familial adenomatous polyposis patients showed
that the berries are capable of demethylating tumor suppressor genes in
rectal polyps taken from these patients.
Researchers at the University of Toledo have reported findings that
show a correlation between reduction in hepatic CEACAM1 and obesity
with insulin resistance; high fat diets reduce hepatic CEACAM1 levels
and impact insulin clearance; and high fat diets cause insulin
resistance via a CEACAM1 dependent gene-dose mechanism. Currently,
researchers are investigating the reduction in hepatic CEACAM1 via a
PPARa-depended pathway as an early mechanism of diet-induced insulin
resistance and the premise that additional proteins are involved in the
progression of frank diabetes.
For The Ohio State University the work supported by this grant
began in fiscal year 2003 with an appropriation of $248,375; for fiscal
year 2004, $894,690; for fiscal year 2005, $1,138,816; for fiscal year
2006, $1,237,500; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008,
$922,497; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $866,000 per year. A
total of $6,173,878 has been appropriated.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
ELECTRONIC GRANTS ADMINISTRATION SYSTEM
The goal of the program is to enable the agency to advertise,
accept, process, review and award grants and cooperative agreements
electronically. The initial focus on advertising funding opportunities
with electronic applications has been successful. The goal of receiving
applications electronically has also been successful. In 2009, 99
percent of NIFA proposals were received electronically. Significant
progress is being made on electronic review and evaluation of
proposals, and the final elements of awarding grants electronically
remain.
The work completed in fiscal year 2006 allowed the agency to begin
accepting electronic grant applications. In fiscal year 2007, NIFA
expanded the scope of the project to allow the submission of proposals
in an electronic format for all programs.
In fiscal year 2009, NIFA required electronic submission via
Grants.gov for all program areas eliminating paper-based submissions.
Proposals were submitted through Grants.gov and processed by the Agency
through the eGrants system. Over 5,000 applications were received and
successfully processed through the system during this cycle. The
percentages of problem categories were reduced from previous cycles.
Significant improvements were made in components supporting proposal
review and evaluation as well as other management functions that have
led to significant improvement in overall processing efficiency.
This project began in fiscal year 2003 with an appropriation of
$2,125,960; $1,944,460 in fiscal year 2004; $1,928,448 in fiscal year
2005; $2,030,490 in fiscal year 2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007;
$2,135,943 in fiscal year 2008; and $2,136,000 per year in fiscal years
2009 and 2010. A total of $14,437,301 has been appropriated.
This program is conducted at the NIFA headquarters in Washington,
DC, except the Grants USDA project, which is carried out at a USDA
Rural Development facility in St. Louis, Missouri.
ETHNOBOTANICALS, MARYLAND
Research at the Appalachian Center for Ethnobotanical Studies is
focusing on the multidisciplinary study and conservation of native
plants.
This research will foster economic growth in the region through the
managed development of the area's natural resources and the development
of new local enterprises that explore the use of regional plants for
health-related purposes. It will also help to document and preserve
Appalachian culture as it relates to wild plant harvesting and herbal
medicine through community outreach and education programs.
Black cohosh is one of the most important medicinal plants in the
Appalachian region. The roots and rhizomes are harvested for commercial
medicinal purposes because they contain bioactive secondary metabolites
or natural products.
A number of natural product phytochemicals from black cohosh have
been investigated to elucidate a principal agent and a mechanism of
action. Early work suggested that black cohosh possessed estrogenic
activity, and though a number of unique cinnamic acid esters and
cycloartane-type triterpene glycosides were discovered, no reproducible
evidence has yet to be reported to support that hypothesis. Subsequent
studies demonstrated convincingly that many of the metabolites show
antioxidant activity, bind serotonin and opiate receptors, inhibit
osteoclastogenesis, and inhibit the growth of human breast and prostate
cancer cells. Recent work identified a serotonin derivative from the
plant that binds with high affinity to a cognate receptor, supporting
an emerging model in which small-molecule agonists produced by black
cohosh stimulate the serotonergic system, which is involved in
thermoregulation, and which in turn could alleviate episodes of hot
flashes during menopause.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $372,375; for fiscal year 2009,
$469,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $550,000. The total amount
appropriated is $1,391,375.
The research will be conducted at Frostburg State University, West
Virginia University, and the University of Maryland Biotechnology
Institute.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
FARMLAND PRESERVATION, OHIO
The objectives of the Ohio Center for Farmland Policy Innovation
the Center are to: (1) Become an ``action center'' for farmland policy
in Ohio, creating and delivering new information for communities who do
not currently have the professional capacity to manage and balance
growth and change; (2) Consider and test new policy instruments with
communities seeking to retain farmland in Ohio through a Farmland
Protection Partnership program; and (3) Consider ways to strengthen the
economic viability of Ohio farms as a necessary part of farmland
protection. It achieves its mission by conducting research-based
outreach and extension. Current progress is as follows:
Farmland Protection Partnership Program.--The Center conducts
policy experiments with communities that are leaders in farmland
protection in Ohio.
The main purpose of the policy experiments is to develop and convey
information on likely performance land policy options for Ohio
communities, as well as other techniques that should be available, to
those who can use it.
Farmland Preservation Summit.--The Center co-hosts the annual Ohio
Farmland Preservation Summit. This summit is the one opportunity of the
year for farmland protection interests to gather and learn from each
other and invited speakers. According to the national organization,
American Farmland Trust, the summit is the largest statewide meeting of
farmland preservationists across the country. The most recent Farmland
Preservation Summits was held in November 2009. The next one is planned
for the autumn of 2010. These are excellent opportunities to not only
provide outreach on our partnership projects--number one above--but a
time to bring in outside experts that we can access through the
national network of farmland preservation.
State-level Assistance.--Staff of the Center are often called on to
provide advice and expertise to State level efforts. These efforts have
a direct impact on Ohio communities and their opportunities and options
for farmland preservation. A few of the roles that staff is involved
with include the Food Policy Council, Food Systems Assessment task
force, Ohio Department of Agriculture, Office of Farmland Preservation
advisory board, and Ohio Department of Agriculture Specialty Crop Block
Grant Review Committee.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $112,209; for fiscal year 2009,
$105,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $160,000. A total of $377,000 has
been appropriated.
The research is being conducted at the Ohio State University.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
FLORIDA BIOMASS TO BIOFUELS CONVERSION PROGRAM, FLORIDA
The goal of this project is to optimize the use of waste biomass as
a feedstock for ethanol production. Enzyme cocktails will be made to
utilize a variety of waste biomass including corn stover, rye straw,
wood pulp, switchgrass, sugarcane bagasse, and citrus peel. Three
important enzymes have been expressed in significant quantities.
Because of the enzyme activity observed in plant crude extracts, there
is no need for purification; therefore, further reducing the cost below
current commercial recombinant enzymes. Plant-derived enzyme cocktails
enhanced the hydrolysis of wood and citrus peels, releasing more
fermentable sugars than commercial cocktails.
Fiscal year 2009 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $235,000; and for fiscal year 2010,
$300,000. A total of $535,000 is appropriated.
The work is being carried out at the University of Central Florida.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
GREENHOUSE NURSERIES, OHIO
This goal of this research is to identify and implement strategies
to enhance the economic competitive position of Ohio greenhouse
nurseries, especially those in northwestern Ohio.
Economic impact of the greenhouse industry has been estimated.
Mapping of general industry trends has been completed, and economic
barriers to competitiveness have been identified and strategies have
been developed based upon a cluster-based economic model. This economic
model was implemented in 2005 with the formation of a greenhouse
cluster advisory board with representatives from northwestern Ohio
greenhouse growers, Ohio Floriculture Association, Regional Growth
Partnership, The Ohio State University Extension Office, the
Agricultural Research Service, the University of Toledo, and Bowling
Green State University. This board meets monthly to implement marketing
and branding strategy. The use of controlled release fertilizers is
being researched and implemented to reduce nutrient pollution. During
the last 12 months, the major accomplishment of the grant has been
progress on a sustainable greenhouse cluster in northwest Ohio. A
Maumee Valley Growers cluster developed a positive brand identity. Two
major challenges that have been successfully addressed by Maumee Valley
Growers are the implementation of a coordinated marketing effort
capitalizing on the growers' brand, and the implementation of a group
buying program that will save the northwest Ohio greenhouse industry an
estimated $250,000 in energy, workers compensation, and insurance costs
during the next 12 months. The northwest Ohio natural gas savings
program has been expanded to other parts of the State and southeastern
Michigan and will continue to develop as will a group buying program
for electricity modeled after the highly successful natural gas buying
program. This electricity program will initially focus on 19 northern
Ohio counties. A successful cluster emphasizes collaboration between
the businesses, in this case greenhouses, in a cluster and community
partners. Progress has been made in developing relationships with
community partners since 2005, but efforts to develop long-term,
sustainable, collaborative relationships with community partners will
continue as will the work of nurturing and building on relationships
between participating growers. This cluster strategy has the potential
to be utilized in other areas, strengthening the links between growers
and consumers.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2003, and the
following amounts have been appropriated: in fiscal year 2003,
$149,025; in fiscal year 2004, $712,770; in fiscal year 2005, $726,144;
in fiscal year 2006, $718,740; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year
2008, $535,227; in fiscal year 2009, $502,000; and in fiscal year 2010,
$1,380,000. A total of $4,723,906 has been appropriated.
The research is being conducted at selected sites throughout Ohio
and through subcontracts with the University of Toledo, Bowling Green
State University, and Indiana State University.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
HIGH VALUE HORTICULTURAL CROPS, VIRGINIA
The goal of this grant is to build capacity in the area of
renewable and sustainable resources at the Institute for Advanced
Learning and Research. This effort was conducted in close collaboration
with the Departments of Forestry and Horticulture at Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University. Short-term objectives of
this undertaking were to organize and equip the plant tissue culture/
agricultural biotechnology laboratory and solicit sub-licenses for the
production of polyploid orchids, for the production of landscape
ornamentals and other unique, high value horticultural crops, as well
as initiate research on new ornamental and vegetable cultivars.
In fiscal year 2003, the plant tissue culture/agricultural
biotechnology laboratory was designed and equipped. Fast growing clones
of loblolly pines that are to be used in Institute research were
planted at the Reynolds Homestead. In fiscal year 2004, technicians
were hired and participated in in-depth training at Virginia Tech
University, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and North Carolina
State University. A horticulture graduate student was employed to teach
and document protocols for orchid propagation. Three Danville-based
faculty positions were filled in 2005. These included two molecular
breeding faculty and a Virginia plant introduction program coordinator.
New ornamentals and trees developed through the program will be field
tested in collaboration with the Virginia Nursery and Landscape
Association. The Virginia Tech Department of Horticulture and the
Institute was awarded a grant from the Virginia Tobacco Indemnification
and Community Revitalization Commission to establish test sites for
plant introductions. The Virginia Tech Department of Forestry has hired
a new faculty member with expertise in forest tree genetics and
functional genomics, to collaborate with researchers at the Institute.
Collaborative meetings have been held with several potential partners,
both educational and commercial, including North Carolina State
University, CellFor, and HZPC. A new objective is to development and
breeding of novel biofuel crops. Additionally, high value native
ornamental crops are being propagated to replace commonly sold, but
potentially invasive non-native ornamentals.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2003, and the
following amounts have been appropriated: in fiscal year 2003,
$248,375; in fiscal year 2004, $447,345; in fiscal year 2005, $567,424;
in fiscal year 2006, $717,750; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year
2008, $535,227; and in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $502,000 per year. A
total of $3,520,121 has been appropriated.
This work is being conducted at the Institute for Advanced Learning
and Research, partnering with the Forestry and Horticulture
Departments, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
Blacksburg, Virginia.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR GOOD TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT TO EXPAND MARKETS,
INDIANA
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $750,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
MARICULTURE, NORTH CAROLINA
Projects funded under the fiscal year 2009 Mariculture, North
Carolina grant were designed to develop and transfer to commercial
users, safe and effective methods for marine food fish production.
Current research focuses on three candidate species for aquaculture:
southern flounder, Paralichthys lethostigma; black sea bass,
Centropristis striata; and red porgy, Pagrus pagrus. Specific
objectives include: (1) Compare performance of southern flounder and a
southern flounder female by summer flounder male F1 hybrid; (2)
optimize Artemia enrichment protocols for larval southern flounder and
black sea bass using state-of-the-art products; (3) evaluate
substitution limits of alternative proteins such as underutilized plant
and animal by-products as a fish meal replacement in southern flounder
diets under controlled laboratory conditions by replacing menhaden fish
meal with: (a) poultry by-products and fermented poultry by-products;
and (b) menhaden fish meal with dried distillers grain with solubles;
(4) formulate cost-effective diets using a combination of different
alternative protein sources such as soybean meal, poultry by-product
meal, and meat and bone meal, and determine their effects on growth of
black sea bass; and (5) determine the effects of these feeds on the
biochemical composition of fish flesh.
Research conducted under the Mariculture, North Carolina program
has led to information on the effects of temperature, salinity, and
light intensity on embryos and early larval survival of black sea bass;
fatty acid profile studies in southern flounder provided a better
understanding of the biochemical basis of egg quality and requirements
for natural spawning of southern flounder; culture requirements for
larval rearing and grow-out culture studies have demonstrated that
wild-caught black sea bass can be grown indoors from juvenile to
marketable sizes in low-salinity, brackish water; black sea bass will
undergo sexual maturation under artificial conditions within 1 year of
capture; and using only female black sea bass for cost-effective grow-
out indoors. These advances aid the development of microbound diets for
replacing live feeds and the development of more cost-effective rearing
protocols. Captive, wild-caught, red porgy broodstock produced up to
300,000 eggs per day from January through March, 2005. A total of 1,200
day 35 post-hatch juveniles were produced with 2.4 percent survival.
The University of North Carolina at Wilmington is collaborating with
the city of Jacksonville, North Carolina, to retrofit a defunct waste
water treatment plant to install a state-of-the-art, pilot-scale
recirculating aquaculture system for marine finfish. Southern flounder
and black sea bass will be grown by a commercial practitioner to test
economic viability and to integrate research, education, and technology
transfer for these two species. The results of this project have
advanced knowledge of private practitioners which are currently
undertaking startup commercial companies in North Carolina. The
Sturgeon City project has provided a unique opportunity for a
commercial practitioner to produce marine finfish, specifically the
southern flounder and black sea bass, in a state-of-the-art
recirculating aquaculture system, while receiving training. This is an
example of a public-private partnership for sustainable marine finfish
culture development. The outcomes of the Sturgeon City project in
Jacksonville, North Carolina, will be of significant interest to
prospective commercial aquaculturists, government policy makers, and to
researchers and educators.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1998. The
appropriation for fiscal year 1998 was $150,000; for fiscal years 1999
and 2000, $250,000 per year; for fiscal year 2001, $324,285; for fiscal
year 2002, $360,000; for fiscal year 2003, $357,660; for fiscal year
2004, $320,100; for fiscal year 2005, $317,440; for fiscal year 2006,
$313,830; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $234,348; and
for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $220,000 per year. A total of
$3,317,663 has been appropriated.
The work is being conducted at the Center for Marine Science
Research at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
MEDICINAL AND BIOACTIVE CROPS, TEXAS
The long-term goal of this project is to develop aesculiosides as
novel primary and/or adjuvant therapy for cancers.
To date, over 1,000 species of vascular plants representing 138
families found in Texas have been collected and screened for the
identification of bioactive agents since 1993. Over 600 pure compounds,
including over 100 new compounds, have been isolated from 28 species,
mostly native plants in Texas. Several aesculiosides have shown
promising activity against 60 cell lines from 9 different human cancers
including leukemia, non-small cell lung, colon, central nervous system
(CNS), melanoma, ovarian, renal, prostate, and breast19. Further
investigation indicated that active saponins are highly selective for
tumor cells relative to normal cells.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $267,900; for fiscal year 2009,
$280,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $300,000. A total of $847,900 has
been appropriated.
The research will be conducted at Stephen F. Austin State
University in Nacogdoches, Texas
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
MIDWEST AGRIBUSINESS TRADE AND INFORMATION CENTER, IOWA
The objective of this project is to continue work by the Midwest
Agribusiness Trade Research and Information Center to promote expansion
of foreign trade and investment by small and medium-size midwest
agribusiness firms. Current progress is as follows: Topics for research
to be conducted at Iowa State University include: (1) competitiveness
and marketability of commodity and non-commodity agricultural products;
(2) export opportunities for non-commodity products and methods of
differentiating these products; and (3) emerging issues and trade-
distorting events with significant potential to affect world trade
patterns.
Under subcontract, the Greater Des Moines Partnership will provide
technical assistance and information to agribusinesses, such as
business climate and trade lead information, business contacts of
potential buyers and partners, and other resources that benefit
companies before and during the exporting process. The project
objectives are to: (1) Study the competitiveness and marketability of
commodity and non-commodity agricultural products in international
markets, determine the potential size and value of specific markets,
and evaluate opportunities and constraints faced by U.S. agribusiness
firms conducting business in foreign countries. (2) Evaluate
opportunities for non-commodity products and ways to differentiate
these products, such as process verification, reputation- and location-
based identification, branding, and traceability. (3) Analyze emerging
issues such as trade agreements, trade-distorting events and animal
disease outbreaks and their potential effects on U.S. agricultural
exports and world supply and demand. (4) Disseminate research results
and other relevant information about international business
opportunities to help U.S. agribusiness firms initiate or increase
agricultural exports.
The Greater Des Moines Partnership's objectives and expected
outputs are to: (1) Offer professional consultation to midwest
agribusinesses interested in penetrating international markets through
trainings, one-on-one consultations/assistance, development of
marketing materials and matching up of international delegations with
potential midwest agribusiness partners. (2) Disseminate market
research and information related to agricultural exports. (3) Publish
an online quarterly newsletter to serve the needs of Iowa agribusiness
exporters and create an online database listing Iowa agribusiness
companies wishing to expand their presence in the international
marketplace. (4) Develop expertise in Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ)
provisions for the benefits of midwest exporters. Use two operating
FTZs to serve export-oriented businesses.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $186,684; for fiscal year 2009,
$176,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $187,000. A total of $549,684 has
been appropriated.
The research will be conducted at the Midwest Agribusiness Trade
and Information Center at Iowa State University.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
MISSISSIPPI VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITY
The goal of this project is to expose students, faculty, staff,
community-leaders, and lay citizens to promote a healthier life style
which will reduce obesity rate, encourage young people to stay in
school, and pursue education beyond high school. This is to be
accomplished through curriculum enhancement and faculty research
support.
The accomplishment report indicates that the goals described in the
proposal are being achieved satisfactorily. The goal of the program is
to enhance the various academic programs at Mississippi Valley State
University.
This program was initiated in fiscal year 1987. Grants have been
awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal year 1987, $750,000;
fiscal year 1988 and 1989, $625,000 per year; fiscal year 1990,
$617,000; fiscal year 1991, $642,000; fiscal years 1992 and 1993,
$668,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $593,000; fiscal year 1995,
$544,000; fiscal years 1996-2000, $583,000 per year; fiscal year 2001,
$645,577; fiscal year 2002, $633,000; fiscal year 2003, $1,043,175;
fiscal year 2004, $933,460; fiscal year 2005, $925,536; fiscal year
2006, $1,418,670; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $1,067,475;
and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $1,002,000 per year. A total of
$17,317,893 has been appropriated.
The work is being carried out at Mississippi Valley State-
University campus and off-campus in Leflore County. Other counties in
Mississippi may also be involved.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
MONITORING AGRICULTURAL SEWAGE SLUDGE APPLICATION, OHIO
The University of Toledo, along with Bowling Green State University
and Central State University, will determine the human health and
environmental impacts associated with the application of sewage sludge
on agricultural fields. Researchers will analyze physical, chemical and
biological impacts of sewage sludge application and the impacts of
pharmaceutical and personal care products, pathogens and nutrients on
soil and water. The project will include epidemiological studies,
pathogens, and residual drugs within the sludge.
Researchers have incorporated data into a geographic information
system (GIS) to create layers of parcel data including roads,
waterways, schools, soil data, biosolids permitted fields, and
biosolids application rates for the project. A health survey was
completed in Wood County that examined whether an association existed
between self-reported health effects and distance from fields where
application of Class B biosolids was permitted. Researchers have also
identified approximately 50 compounds in wastewater influent, effluent,
and biosolids that are classified as antibiotics, anti-depressants,
anti-coagulants, and anti-psychotics. New methods of testing for these
contaminants have developed as a result of the conduct of these studies
and have been published in national scientific journals.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2004 with an
appropriation of $1,073,628; for fiscal year 2005, $1,276,704; for
fiscal year 2006, $1,274,130; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year
2008, 893,700; for fiscal year 2009, $839,000; and for fiscal year
2010, $500,000. A total of $5,857,162 has been appropriated.
Research is being conducted at the University of Toledo; Bowling
Green State University; and at field locations in Lucas and Green
counties as appropriate.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
NE CENTER FOR INVASIVE PLANTS, CONNECTICUT, VERMONT, AND MAINE
The goal of this project is to develop a multi-State,
interdisciplinary research program to address the problems caused by
invasive species and to develop methods for sterile, non-invasive
cultivars. There have been a number of achievements including:
The development of methods in the creation of non-invasive euonymus
and Japanese barberry plants as a first step in developing sterile,
non-invasive cultivars in the next 5 years.
Predictive models to predict future spread of invasive plants in
the New England region.
The analysis of economic impacts of invasive plants in New England
as useful information to policy makers, nursery industry and scientific
community.
Development of outreach education activities to make the public
aware of the problems of invasive plants and the importance of adopting
native, non-invasive plants for ornamental purposes.
Sponsoring an international symposium August 10-14, 2009, entitled
``Invasive Plants in the Northeast of Asia and America: Trading
Problems, Trading Solutions,'' that brought together experts of from
the United States, China, Japan, Korea, and eastern Russian for a week
of presentations, field trips, and workshops dealing with the ecology
of invasives, biotechnology and horticultural approaches to control,
and regulatory hurdles and opportunities. Over 80 people attended the
conference, parts of which were broadcast by the Connecticut Public
Broadcasting Network. Agency representatives--USDA and the National
Science Foundation; Chinese Forestry--attended and contributed to
discussions of potential future joint research activities.
There also have been some scientific publications including:
``Detecting the influence of ornamental Berberis thunbergii var.
atropurpurea in invasive populations of Berberis thunbergii--
Berberidaceae--using Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism--AFLP''
published in American J. Botany 95(6):1-7; ``AFLP identification of
Berberis thunbergii cultivars, inter-specific hybrids, and their
parental species'' published in J. Horticultural Science &
Biotechnology 83(1):55-63.
The work under this project began in fiscal year 2006 with an
appropriation of $420,750; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year
2008, $313,788; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $295,000 per year.
A total of $1,324,538 has been appropriated.
Research is being conducted at the University of Connecticut, the
University of Vermont, and the University of Maine.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
NUTRITION RESEARCH, NEW YORK
The goal of this research is to evaluate City Harvest's work in the
Melrose neighborhood-in-the South Bronx in order to increase access to
high quality fresh produce and other nutrient-dense foods; to increase
awareness as to the causes and effects of nutrition-related diseases
while providing the information and tools necessary to enable residents
to improve their dietary health; and to measure the change in dietary
behavior exhibited by clients assessing these services.
City Harvest helps feed 260,000 New Yorkers each week by rescuing
high-quality surplus food and distributing to a network of 600 soup
kitchens, food pantries and other community food programs. This program
provides immediate hunger relief and helps New Yorkers gain access to
affordable, local, nutritious food, with the goal of creating sustained
long-term food security. City Harvest has been developing and testing
measurement tools for the collection of data from users of the Melrose
Mobile Market on fresh produce access. In addition, nutrition education
courses on healthy planning, shopping and cooking for families have
been offered in 6- or 8-week series at strategic locations within the
community.
Fiscal year 2009 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $188,000 under the Special Research
Grants. In fiscal year 2010, this grant was moved to the Research
Federal Administration Grants with an appropriation of $188,000. A
total of $376,000 has been appropriated.
The work is being carried out by City Harvest, New York City and
Cornell University Cooperative Extension, New York City.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
NUTRITION AND DIET RESEARCH, CALIFORNIA
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $925,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
PASTEURIZATION OF SHELL EGGS, MICHIGAN
The goal of this project is the commercialization of this
innovative and patented process that addresses the potential food
safety problem of microbial contamination of eggs and the possible
transfer of pathogenic bacteria to humans. Research on this microwave
and heating process is progressing toward a commercial product. Work is
being conducted in collaboration with government, industry, and
university personnel.
Grants have supported this research grant beginning in fiscal year
2003. The appropriation for fiscal year 2003 was $248,375; for fiscal
year 2004, $1,093,510; for fiscal year 2005, $1,237,024; for fiscal
year 2006, $1,336,500; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008,
$995,979; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $935,000 per year. A
total of $6,781,388 has been appropriated to this time.
The Michigan Research Institute facility is the research site,
which is coordinated with industry or university sub-contractors.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
PM-10 STUDY, WASHINGTON
The PM-10 study object is to address the effects of emissions of
PM-10 and PM-2.5-sized particulates, or dust, from agricultural land on
air quality and development of control strategies to (1) develop a
geographic information system (GIS) database for simulating wind
erosion and transport of fugitive dust; (2) quantify and predict wind
erosion; (3) create a PM emission inventory; (4) develop PM dispersion
models; (5) develop alternate tillage and cropping systems to control
PM emissions; (6) document changes in farming practices that have led
to reduced emissions; (7) identify sustainable farming practices that
control erosion; and (8) help farmers adopt best management practices.
The project has developed an undercutter tillage tool that has
proven effective in reducing erosion. Scientists have reported a 50
percent reduction in dust using the undercutter compared to
conventional tillage. The USDA Wind Erosion Prediction System (WEPS)
has recently been tested and improved for the Columbia Basin in
addition to GIS databases that will drive atmospheric and global
circulation models in the region. On-going work will attempt to couple
WEPS with these advanced circulation models to predict regional wind
erosion events.
The project is in its fifth year of cropping system studies to
evaluate conservation tillage against traditional wheat-fallow systems
for controlling wind erosion. One more cropping season is needed to
evaluate all of their treatments.
The project has documented increases in soil organic carbon from
using no-till versus conventional tillage practices. The chemical
signatures in organic carbon are being utilized to predict sources of
wind-blown sediment. In addition to carbon, the impact of these
practices on soil quality is being documented.
Economic analysis of various farming practices are being performed
to document which practices are the most cost-effective for producers
in controlling erosion. For example, the economic analysis showed that
the undercutter tillage method was profitable, and 50 growers have
adopted the practice through a cost-share program with Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).
The project is transferring direct-seeding technologies to
producers through workshops and on-farm demonstrations.
The work supported by this grant began in March 1994 at the
University of California--Davis and at Washington State University. The
appropriation for fiscal year 1994 was $940,000; for fiscal year 1995,
$815,000; for fiscal years 1996 through 2000, $873,000 per year; for
fiscal year 2001, $435,041; for fiscal year 2002, $426,000; for fiscal
year 2003, $435,153; for fiscal year 2004, $389,687; for fiscal year
2005, $386,880; for fiscal year 2006, $383,130; for fiscal year 2007,
$0; for fiscal year 2008, $284,991; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010,
$268,000 per year. California has not received funding under this grant
since fiscal year 2000 and has had its own funding stream since 2002. A
total of $9,396,882 has been appropriated.
Scientists at Washington State University are leading the efforts,
but additional work is being done at the Agricultural Research
Service's laboratory in Pullman, the University of Idaho, and Oregon
State University through subcontracts.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
POLYMER RESEARCH, KANSAS
The goals of the project are the development of new monomers and
polymers based on vegetable and crop oils and the study of the effects
of structure on the properties of novel polymers. Various processing
methods will be examined. The physical and chemical properties of the
new polymers will be systematically characterized.
Five specific tasks have been completed to date. They include
preparation of pure polyricinoleic acid methyl esters by
transesterification of castor oil and distillation; preparation of
hydroxyl acid methyl ester with secondary hydroxyl groups from oleic
acid by epoxidation and hydrogenation; preparation of polyester diols
of molecular weight 700-4000 transesterification of methylricioleate
and diethylene glycol; preparation of polyurethanes from diols having
soft segment concentration from 40-80 percent; and ozonolysis of
vegetable oils and preparation of methyl esters of hydroxynonanoic
acid. A new class of seven elastomers with well-defined structures and
excellent properties was created suitable for medical and athletic
applications. The new elastomers varied in hardness from soft rubbers
having 70 percent of bio-based content to hard rubber with 50 or 40
percent bio content. The original goal is nearly its completion.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $1,117,125; for fiscal year 2009,
$1,284,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $2,000,000. A total of $4,401,125
has been appropriated.
The research will be conducted at the Pittsburg State University in
Kansas.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
rural agriculture small business development program
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $500,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
RURAL SYSTEMS, MISSISSIPPI
The goal of the National Center for Bio-defense Communications for
Rural America (Center) is to bring to bear Internet-based technologies
for early detection of significant human and animal health events and
to issue authorized, secure, non-public, bio-terror alerts and
notifications to authorized and appropriate policymakers, healthcare,
and first-responder recipients.
The Center is proposing to develop and implement more projects
designed to address several problems that became evident as a result of
Hurricane Katrina. The Center has just completed a major revision of
the State Vet System. This revision has materially enhanced
performance, removed unnecessary steps and key strokes, streamlined the
user interface, and brought several disconnected tasks into the main
body of the application. In partnership with the Mississippi Emergency
Management Agency, the Mississippi State Veterinarian's Office and the
Mississippi Department of Human Services, the Center has developed an
integrated online Mississippi Emergency Evacuation Shelter System. The
Center has begun work on a new goal to design, create, and host a
Mississippi, rural-centric Web portal to personalize, deliver, and
track the review of updated and newly available training materials on
photogrammetric and geospatial analysis.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2003 and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2003 was $347,725; for fiscal year 2004
is $311,153; for fiscal year 2005, $308,512; for fiscal year 2006,
$304,920; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $229,383; and
for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $215,000 per year. A total of
$1,931,693 has been appropriated.
The program is conducted at the Institute of Epidemiology and
Health Services Research at the e-Center of Jackson State University,
and the Jackson Medical Mall, Jackson, Mississippi.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
SHRIMP AQUACULTURE, ARIZONA, HAWAII, LOUISIANA, MASSACHUSETTS,
MISSISSIPPI, SOUTH CAROLINA, AND TEXAS
The goal of this program is to increase domestic production of
marine shrimp through aquaculture. Research funded through past awards
to the program has led to: development of a computerized database for
the shrimp breeding program; providing improved seedstock to industry
that have been developed from the breeding program; improved shrimp
disease diagnostics, prevention, and treatment protocols; advanced
marine shrimp farming technologies, products, and services by providing
high-quality, specific pathogen-free, and genetically improved shrimp
stocks; environmentally and economically viable marine shrimp
production systems that produce a quality product at competitive
prices; improved biosecurity protocols that will provide protection for
cultured and wild shrimp stocks; improving shrimp culture systems that
reduce effluents; identifying and developing diagnostic protocols for
many shrimp diseases that have affected world shrimp production;
developing and using bioeconomic models to guide research and
development efforts for the super-intensive production systems
developed under this program; developing and evaluating disease-
resistant lines of shrimp by selective breeding; elucidating molecular
mechanisms of disease resistance; developing monoclonal antibodies that
have been licensed for rapid field diagnosis of a common bacterial
disease in shrimp; developing new shrimp feeds that have lower
inclusion rates of fish meal and fish oil; establishing a
bioinformatics database with search capabilities to identify genes
associated with traits of economic importance; training students in
shrimp disease diagnostics and prevention; and improving feeds and
feeding strategies using domestically produced grains that reduce our
dependence on marine fish-derived protein and oils.
Recent accomplishments include but are not limited to: production
of approximately 50 shrimp families which are resistant to Taura
Syndrome Virus and exhibit rapid growth and high survival at super-
intensive stocking densities; three new diseases appeared on the list
of Crustacean Diseases in the 2008 Aquatic Code of the Office
International des Epizooties as a direct result of this work. These
were Necrotizing Hepatopancreatitis, Hepatopancreatic Parvovirus
Disease, and Mourilyan Virus Disease. Following review of the global
status of these diseases by the Crustacean ad hoc group at the
University of Arizona, only Necrotizing Hepatopancreatitis was
recommended for full listing by the Office International des
Epizooties. The draft Code chapters on Hepatopancreatic Parvovirus
Disease and Mourilyan Virus Disease were withdrawn in 2008 by the
Crustacean ad hoc group as diseases recommended for listing by the
Office International des Epizooties. The University of Arizona offers
training in shrimp pathology and shrimp disease diagnostic methods to
members of the Consortium, to United States and foreign governments,
and to the domestic and foreign shrimp culture industries. The
University of Arizona's Shrimp Pathology Short Course has been
operational since 1989 as a mostly self-supporting, annually offered
course, and is one of the University of Arizona's functions in the
Consortium.
Grants have been awarded from funds appropriated as follows: fiscal
year 1985, $1,050,000; fiscal year 1986, $1,236,000; fiscal year 1987,
$2,026,000; fiscal year 1988, $2,236,000; fiscal year 1989, $2,736,000;
fiscal year 1990, $3,195,000; fiscal year 1991, $3,365,000; fiscal
years 1992-1993, $3,500,000 per year; fiscal year 1994, $3,290,000;
fiscal year 1995, $2,852,000; fiscal year 1996, $3,054,000; fiscal
years 1997-2000, $3,354,000 per year; fiscal year 2001, $4,167,811;
fiscal year 2002, $4,214,000; fiscal year 2003, $4,186,609; fiscal year
2004, $3,745,769; fiscal year 2005, $3,941,216; fiscal year 2006,
$4,158,000; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008, $3,097,167; and for
fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $2,908,000 per year. A total of $78,782,572
has been appropriated.
The research is conducted through the United States Marine Shrimp
Farming Consortium. Individual projects are administered and conducted
by the University of Southern Mississippi's Gulf Coast Research
Laboratory in Ocean Springs, Mississippi and by the Oceanic Institute
in Hawaii. Other Consortium members conducting the research include:
Tufts University in Massachusetts, the Waddell Mariculture Center in
South Carolina, the Texas A&M Agricultural Experiment Station, the
University of Arizona, and Nicholls State University in Louisiana.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE FRESHWATER CONSERVATION, TEXAS
The goal of this research is to develop a sustainable water use
model for a part of the Rio Grande basin through the identification and
analysis of constraints to the sustainable use of the trans-boundary
Rio Grande water system. With agricultural water use being a major
focus, other relevant project elements include: characterization,
quantification, and modeling of basin surface and groundwater
resources; water supply-demand issues throughout the Rio Grande
drainage basin; human health-related water pollution issues;
agricultural water use practices; identification and characterization
of biological integrity and aquatic habitats as well as wastewater
characterization and treatment options to extend/renew available
supplies. The project seeks to identify the root causes and obstacles
to sustainable use of limited resources and explore the socioeconomic
potential of integrated solutions that are acceptable to stakeholders
throughout the Rio Grande Basin. A focal point of the research is the
identification of organizations and agencies doing water-related
research in the three U.S. States and five Mexican States comprising
the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo drainage basin. The development of a
comprehensive and easily accessible Web-based clearinghouse of
information will enable policy-makers, stakeholders, and the public to
locate critical information throughout the Rio Grande and is intended
to facilitate informed decisionmaking. A Trans-boundary Diagnostic
Analysis Framework (TDA) has been developed specifically for the Rio
Grande drainage basin and is actively used as the outline for
identifying objectives and integrating the results of research
conducted by researchers. The TDA is intended to be a resource in the
subsequent development of a management action plan for Rio Grande Basin
resources.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2004, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2004 was $1,789,380; for fiscal year
2005, $1,805,440; for fiscal year 2006, $1,831,500; for fiscal year
2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $1,527,234; and for fiscal years 2009
and 2010, $1,434,000 per year. A total of $9,821,554 has been
appropriated.
Much of this work is being conducted in the area of the Big Bend
National Park on the Rio Grande River. The institution which provides
leadership of the project is Sul Ross State University in Alpine,
Texas. Subcontracts on the project also exist for Texas State
University at San Marcos.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN--STEVENS POINT INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE
TECHNOLOGIES
The goal of the project is to develop a self-sustaining center that
will provide education, training, and research support for government
and industry in Wisconsin. The Research Division of the institute will
focus on establishing a biofuels research lab to support new
alternative fuel development; a statewide biofuels scientific and
economic conference is under development to provide practical
information to the citizens of Wisconsin; the University of Wisconsin,
Stevens Point Paper Science and Engineering Department is working with
the institute on developing sustainable technologies for the paper
industry; and researchers are collaborating with others in education
and laboratory sciences to develop criteria for sustainability. A draft
curriculum for an alternative energy minor has been developed and will
process through university governance spring semester.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $1,843,008; for fiscal year 2009,
$1,408,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $1,400,000. A total of $4,651,408
has been appropriated.
The research will be conducted at the University of Wisconsin--
Stevens Point.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
VIRAL HEMORRHAGIC SEPTICEMIA, MICHIGAN
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $150,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's research goals and
objectives.
VIRAL HEMORRHAGIC SEPTICEMIA, OHIO
The goal of the project is to investigate the emerging Viral
Hemorrhagic Septicemia disease outbreaks in Lake Erie and in the Great
Lakes region by developing a molecular genetic test to enhance the
rapid and cost-effective detection of the virus and to map the
distribution of VHS in yellow perch, walleye, smallmouth bass, and
other Great Lakes fish populations. Results will be compared to the
cell culture method, and results are currently being used as a
confirmatory test for VHS detection to determine sensitivity,
reliability, and accuracy. A positive outcome from this effort will
result in a less-expensive and more-sensitive VHS test kit to be placed
on the market providing time-efficient testing for aquaculture
facilities and lake managers.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $223,425; for fiscal year 2009,
$209,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $500,000. A total of $932,425 has
been appropriated.
The research is being conducted at the University of Toledo in
Ohio.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
VITIS GENE DISCOVERY, MISSOURI
The original goal of this research was to identify powdery mildew
responsive genes in healthy and infected grapes and to obtain complete
clonal DNA sequences of these genes as expressed in both berries and
leaves.
Molecular genetics will be used to elucidate resistance to powdery
mildew and other fungal diseases in Vitis aestivalis, a grape species
that is native to North America. An efficient gene silencing strategy
will be developed. In addition, research will determine grape
components that are beneficial to human health with the goal of
increasing the content of those components in grapes.
The research began in 2004. The amount appropriated for fiscal year
2004 was $357,876; in fiscal year 2005, $603,136; in fiscal year 2006,
$601,920; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008, $448,836; and
in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $422,000 per year. A total of $2,855,768
has been appropriated to date.
The research is being conducted by the Missouri Agricultural
Experiment Station.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
WATER POLLUTANTS, WEST VIRGINIA
This project goal is aimed at characterizing the potential for
bacterial contamination of water in West Virginia by providing a
comprehensive database of bacteria against which samples can be
compared to determine sources of E. coli contamination in waters. The
database continues to grow as samples are acquired from surrounding
States. Recent work in this project focuses on improving methods for
detecting pathogens and using these detection methods to determine the
potential health hazard posed by bacteria.
The project is being carried out at Marshall University in West
Virginia. Marshall University has one of the Nation's leading forensic
laboratories. As the project has developed, water samples from a
broader geographic region have been included in the analyses. These
additional samples make the analyses more comprehensive in
characterizing bacterial contamination.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2002, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2002 was $206,000; for fiscal year 2003,
$596,100; for fiscal year 2004, $536,814; for fiscal year 2005,
$564,448; for fiscal year 2006, $594,000; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for
fiscal year 2008, $410,109; for fiscal year 2009, $385,000; and for
fiscal year 2010, $500,000. A total of $3,792,471 has been
appropriated.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
EXTENSION FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION GRANTS
AGRICULTURE IN THE CLASSROOM
The project supports State- and regional-level projects that
promote and develop agricultural literacy for the Nation's students and
teachers at the pre-K through secondary levels, by integrating
agriculture into the curriculum currently taught in public and private
schools and to those homeschooled. Funds also support the operating
costs of the national office, including staff salaries and staff travel
for AITC technical assistance workshops, community outreach, and
stakeholder meetings.
AITC encourages pre-K to 12th grade educators to adopt science-
based themes which are an outgrowth of recent scientific advances that
address USDA priorities and advance science-based knowledge in our
Nation's classroom. Such advances prepare students who will be better
able to meet future U.S. manpower needs in science, technology,
engineering and mathematics fields.
On the national level, the AITC program supports a national Web
site, a national resource directory, and an annual national conference.
Each of these entities provides high-quality educational and learning
materials: (1) Teacher resources on the AITC Web site include lesson
plans aligned to State and/or national standards. The Web site also
offers student information that includes virtual field trips, career
options, agriculture and food facts, and State agricultural profiles;
(2) The AITC National Resource Directory is an online database which
lists hundreds of educational materials about agriculture. It was
designed to help educators locate high-quality resources about
agriculture for a pre-Kindergarten through 12th grade youth audience;
(3) The national conference allows teachers from around the world to
come together to learn about agriculture education through teacher
training sessions, workshops, and experiential learning events. It is
also an opportunity to share ideas and learn of others' experiences in
using agriculture as teaching tool.
The total amount appropriated to Agriculture in the Classroom since
its inception in 1981 is $8,081,750. Appropriations are as follows:
fiscal years 2010 and 2009, $553,000 per year; fiscal year 2008,
$553,101; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2006, $856,350; fiscal year
2005, $730,112; fiscal year 2004, $622,307; fiscal year 2003, $700,000;
fiscal year 2002, $600,000; fiscal year 2001, $452,000; fiscal year
2000 through 1997, $208,000 annually; fiscal year 1996, $204,880;
fiscal year 1995, $208,000; fiscal year 1994, $185,000; fiscal year
1993 and 1992, $208,000 annually; fiscal year 1991, $170,000; fiscal
year 1990, $135,000; fiscal year 1989, $87,000; fiscal year 1988 and
1987 $74,000 per year; and fiscal year 1986, $76,000.
AITC is administered through program staff in the Higher Education
Programs unit in NIFA. The USDA's national staff consists of a national
program leader, a program specialist, and a program assistant. Each
State organization operates their programs independently and according
to their individual needs. State AITC programs employs full and/or
part-time staff or relies on volunteers to carry out its mission. The
national program staff works collaboratively with the Consortium of
State Agriculture in the Classroom Programs to maintain an active and
national role in promoting agricultural literacy.
CHILDHOOD FARM SAFETY, IOWA
The objective of the project is to identify the strengths and
weaknesses of delivering farm safety and health messages through the
Farm Safety 4 Just Kids, FS4JK, organization by gathering information,
conducting focus group sessions, and identifying knowledge, attitude,
and behavioral changes among previous participants. Each of the 10
randomly selected FS4JK Chapter focus groups was facilitated by a local
leader to identify their unique strengths, weaknesses, ways to address
each, and strategies to implement change. Five strengths and four
weaknesses were identified from the chapter telephone interviews
completed in the fall of 2008. The strengths included community
support, youth/peer involvement, strong activities, member attributes,
and business partnerships. The four weaknesses included no/few members,
funding, time, and awareness/community support/newness. Additional SWOT
(Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analyses are being
conducted with additional chapters.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2008 with an
appropriation of $74,475; for fiscal year 2009, $69,000; and for fiscal
year 2010, $75,000. A total of $218,475 has been appropriated.
Work is being conducted at the Farm Safety 4 Just Kids in
Urbandale, Iowa.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
CONSERVATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, WISCONSIN
The goal of this project is to coordinate conservation education on
soil and water issues including nutrient management. To date, one
example of success pertains to integrated University research and
extension outreach with Natural Resources Conservation Service
technical assistance mission. This integrated effort has resulted in
cooperative programs that have been used to train and give direct on-
farm consultations and nutrient management assessments to over 2,000
producers who farm a total of 1,358,958 acres in 63 Wisconsin counties.
Ninety-five percent of these producers completed a nutrient management
plan or have one in development. Cost savings in lower fertilizer
inputs have exceeded $1,200 annually per farmer in a representative
sample of those who follow their plans. The Discovery Farms and Pioneer
Farms portions of this program reach over 10,000 additional farmers per
year with on-farm demonstrations, educational publications and local
meetings designed to stimulate their interest in nutrient management
planning and other conservation practices. Finally, local newsletters
are used to inform thousands of farmers and other Wisconsin landowners
annually, of important conservation education and cost share programs.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2000 with an
appropriation of $170,000; for fiscal year 2001, $473,955; for fiscal
year 2002, $490,000; for fiscal year 2003, $496,750; for fiscal year
2004, $447,345; for fiscal year 2005, $463,264; for fiscal year 2006,
$481,140; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008, $372,375; and
for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $376,000 per year. The total amount
appropriated is $4,146,829.
This project is being conducted with individual producers and land
managers throughout Wisconsin, in coordination with USDA Agricultural
Research Stations operated by the University of Wisconsin, Madison. A
number of other States are also adapting portions of the program.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
DAIRY EDUCATION, IOWA
The goals of this program Are: (1) to retain and grow the business
of existing dairy farm families; (2) foster the development of new
family dairy operations; (3) recruit dairy families from other regions
to Northeast Iowa; (4) improve the image of the dairy industry; and (5)
support specialized dairy production and processing.
These goals are being realized by providing educational
opportunities for current and future dairy industry participants. Since
2000, the Northeast Iowa Dairy Foundation has helped contribute to the
success of more than 300 students enrolled in the program's dairy
curriculum. Approximately 95 of those 300 former students now operate,
own, and/or manage successful dairy farms, milking roughly 12,730 cows
and generating $203,680,000 in economic activity each year. These farms
have contributed to a strong rural economy and infrastructure in Iowa.
It is estimated that every 50 dairy cows create one full-time
equivalent farm job, so at least 28 farm jobs have been created by the
cows being milked by alumni of this program. Totaled, at least 61
agricultural jobs are saved annually as a result of this program.
Moreover, for every new job created in agriculture, an additional 1.3
jobs are added to the State's employment base; so in addition to the 61
agricultural jobs, graduates contribute to another 79 off-the-farm
jobs, for a total of 140 jobs created annually.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2001. The
appropriation for fiscal year 2001 was $237,476. In fiscal year 2002,
the appropriation was $232,000; in fiscal year 2003, $233,473; in
fiscal year 2004, $210,749; in fiscal year 2005, $229,152; in fiscal
year 2006, $226,710; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008,
$168,810; in fiscal year 2009, $159,000; and in fiscal year 2010,
$175,000. The total amount appropriated is $1,872,370.
The work in this program takes place at The Dairy Education and
Applied Research Center, located one mile South of Calmar, Iowa,
adjacent to the Northeast Iowa Community College Calmar Campus.
Resources at this Center include a 17,000 square foot education center,
laboratories, and production facilities for 200 dairy cows.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
DIABETES DETECTION AND PREVENTION, WASHINGTON AND PENNSYLVANIA
The goal of the integrated extension and research project, led by
the Joslin Diabetes Center, is to develop and conduct a community-
based, extension diabetes detection and prevention program that would
increase public awareness of diabetes, risk factors for diabetes, and
healthy living behaviors to prevent or delay diabetes and related
complications. In 2009, specific program aims are: continued expansion
of the On the RoadTM sites to increase awareness,
identification and proper management of diabetes; investigate methods
for community screening of diabetes with emphasis on post-screening
follow-up; test and evaluate the community use of On the
RoadTM nutrition and exercise modules; develop and establish
a yearly Diabetes Symposium in Hawaii aimed at providers, community
health workers and patients; update and manage the project database to
improve data collection and analyses and program evaluation; develop
and publish a Medication booklet to accompany On the RoadTM
materials; update and deploy retinal imaging equipment; and establish
project sustainability and outreach to non-partner States and expansion
into new venues.
The goal of the work by Temple University in collaboration with
Pennsylvania State University Cooperative Extension is to promote
behaviors that are associated with decreased risk of obesity, diabetes
and its complication in underserved urban communities. For this work,
Temple University is using Dining with Diabetes, a well-established
program created and used by Extension educators for community-based
diabetes support and education of adults with type 2 diabetes. In
addition, Temple University is conducting formative research among
students, parents and school food service on breakfast participation
among middle school students as relates to incidence and prevalence of
overweight and obesity.
An example of one accomplishment pertains to the Joslin Diabetes
Center lead extension and research activities is the Diabetes Symposium
in Hilo, Hawaii:
Joslin Diabetes Center worked with University of Hawaii partners to
put together the first annual Big Island Diabetes Summit. This 3-day
event took place in Hilo October 17, 2009. Joslin faculty presented
sessions on nutrition and diabetes management to physicians--35,
dietitians and nurse educators--35, and people with diabetes--60 with
over 130 attendees in attendance. The Big Island Diabetes Summit was
developed to provide education, tools and resources to an area
educationally underserved for both providers and patients.
People with diabetes and caregivers were invited to attend the
evening Summit session that included a free A1C and Blood Pressure
screening before the event. Several caregivers not previously diagnosed
were identified with A1C, greater than 6.5 percent, criteria for
referral for full evaluation and possible diagnosis of diabetes. The
session included an interactive education dinner with carbohydrate
counting tips and healthy eating resources.
The event was well received by all groups and will be held again
next year as the 2nd Annual Big Island Diabetes Summit. Local radio
stations expressed interest in the event, as well as other local
businesses. Planning for next year includes attaining more support and
involvement from local businesses and organizations.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1999. The
funds appropriated to date are: 1999: $550,000; 2000: $550,000; 2001:
$923,963; 2002: $906,000; 2003: $917,994; 2004: $1,089,534; 2005:
$1,084,256; 2006: $1,082,070; 2007: $0; 2008: $806,316; 2009:
$1,033,000; 2010: $1,033,000; total appropriated is $9,976,133.
The research aspects of the work to include educational development
for the ``On the Road'' materials and data analysis are being carried
out at the Joslin Diabetes Center in Boston, Massachusetts. ``Dining
with Diabetes'' materials are developed at the West Virginia University
by Extension staff. The Cooperative Extension office of each of the
five Land-Grant Universities--Washington State University, the
University of Hawaii, New Mexico State University, West Virginia
University, Pennsylvania State University--are sites for educational
material development, training of professionals and paraprofessionals,
and data storage. The project makes a deliberate attempt to reach
diverse and underserved audiences outside the mainstream healthcare
system through a variety of methods and at non-traditional sites. For
example, the program is being conducted in a diabetes screening and
health center in a shopping center in Hilo, Hawaii, and in community
facilities in Washington and New Mexico. In New Mexico, the project
attempts to work with the colonistas, located along the border and
among the Nation's poorest; New Mexico has implemented the program with
the Navajo Nation. In addition, Temple University in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, is the site of two program interventions related to
community based approaches to prevent a treat obesity and diabetes.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
E-COMMERCE, MISSISSIPPI
The E-Commerce Extension Demonstration Project helps small
businesses and rural communities use information technology to
strengthen and develop businesses and to create a supportive business
climate in rural communities. Its goal is to grow the rural economy by
developing and delivering timely information, training, and technical
assistance to the hundreds of small businesses and business leaders
that dominate rural America's economic landscape. It builds the
capacity of the land-grant university system to conduct research,
deliver science-based information, train educators, and deliver high
quality e-commerce education. The project is under the leadership of
the Southern Rural Development Center (SRDC) and operates in
partnership with the three other Regional Rural Development Centers and
the Nation's Cooperative Extension Service.
In fiscal year 2009, the project's competitive grants program has
awarded nearly $600,000 to date involving the development of 15
educational resources or curricula. It worked with e-commerce grantees
to develop and release four comprehensive on-line curriculum products
in 2009 for use by Extension educators and customers across the Nation.
They are ``Marketing Food Specialty Products Online,'' ``Beginner's
Guide to e-Commerce,'' ``Web site Basics: A Primer for Hispanic Small
Businesses''--available in English and Spanish, and ``Electronic
Retailing: Selling on the Internet.'' The project's National e-Commerce
Extension Advisory Committee reviewed and recommended funding for the
development of three new curriculum products slated for release in
2010. They are ``Web Presence Strategies for Small Communities and
Local Governments,'' ``Using Social Networking Tools to Enhance Small
Business,'' and Search Engine Optimization (SEO) Strategies.'' The
project updated and maintained the National e-Commerce Extension
Initiative Web site, a state-of-the-art site that offers Extension
educators and consumers high quality broadband and e-commerce
information on a 24/7/365 basis. From January to November of 2009, the
National eCommerce Extension Initiative Web site generated 10,729
individual non-repeat visitors according to the Google analytic reports
we prepared.
The project awarded six competitive State mini-grants to help
facilitate the launching of e-commerce programming that supports ``on
the ground'' piloting of the resources developed by the SRDC. Mini-
grants were awarded to teams of Extension educators in Alabama,
Oklahoma, Michigan, Missouri, South Carolina, and Tennessee. To date,
these grants have resulted in nine workshops in five States and one
national webinar. Three of the six awardees report evaluation efforts
for both short and long term workshop participant impacts.
It developed and released a second round mini-grant Request for
Proposals (RFP) in the fall of 2009 and produced and published six
eNews electronic newsletters, distributed to over 1,000 people
nationwide, offering ready access to research reports, statistical
data, and educational programs as they relate to e-commerce. It also
organized and hosted a series of four webinars that offered Extension
Educators and other participants effective strategies for using the
newly released e-commerce curricula. It researched, completed, and
released a tutorials section of the National e-Commerce Extension
Initiative Web site created to give Web site users information about
Web site design, set-up, and maintenance. Finally, it reviewed and
approved sources for the ``Library of Resource'' section of the
National e-Commerce Extension Initiative Web site. The Library section
is a comprehensive listing of other sources available throughout the
Internet that can enhance one's awareness and knowledge of a host of e-
commerce resources and programs.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2003. The
appropriated amount was $372,563 for fiscal year 2003; $344,018 for
fiscal year 2004; $331,328 for fiscal year 2005; $327,690 for fiscal
year 2006; $0 for fiscal year 2007; $246,264 for fiscal year 2008; and
$231,000 per year in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. A total of $2,083,863
has been appropriated.
The work is being carried out through the leadership of the SRDC
located at Mississippi State University. It draws on SRDC's network of
Extension faculty located in land-grant institutions in Mississippi,
the south, and nationally, and its partner Regional Rural Development
Centers in the northeast, north central, and western regions.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
EFFICIENT IRRIGATION, NEW MEXICO AND TEXAS
The main objective is to efficiently use and/or conserve the
limited available water in the Texas and New Mexico Rio Grande Basin in
order to meet present and future water needs for the region. In doing
so, this project will provide extension education to increase the
efficiency of agriculture and urban landscape irrigation and encourage
the development of efficient water markets in the Rio Grande Basin.
This project will also focus on defining current irrigation district
and system deficiencies and work towards correcting those practices.
Subject areas addressed include irrigation district studies;
irrigation education and training; institutional incentives for
efficient water use; on-farm irrigation system management; urban
landscape and in-home water conservation; environment, ecology, and
water quality protection; saline and waste water management and water
use; basin-wide hydrology studies, salinity modeling, and technology;
and project oversight, communications, biometric support, and
accountability for the multi-components of this multi-State project.
Economics models continue to provide valuable information to
irrigation districts, aiding them with decision-making on costs,
rehabilitation, and other issues. Engineers continue to provide
training and information to irrigation district managers that help
their district delivery systems work more efficiently. The managers
value the information provided by both the economists and engineers and
use it to make management decisions. Other workshops, trainings, short
courses, and field days have been held for homeowners and agricultural
producers. These events demonstrate more efficient and water conserving
technologies, which help the participants realize the importance and
effects of their water use and practices. Many homeowners in particular
have adopted these in-home water conservation strategies, saving not
only gallons of water but money.
The Nutrient Management Education in the Rio Grande Valley Team
helped Valley producers reduce fertilizer use to increase their
profitability and make the Arroyo Colorado Watershed and Rio Grande
Basin healthy again. Results achieved so far through marketing,
educational programs and free soil testing campaigns are remarkable:
Producers adopting these best soil management practices increased by 60
percent; actual fertilizer application was reduced by more than 2.6
million pounds of nitrogen and 3 million pounds of phosphorus; growers
saved $1.6 million or $9.47 to $27.07 an acre; and the watershed's
water quality improved dramatically.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2001, and the
appropriation for fiscal year 2001 was $1,895,820; for fiscal year
2002, $1,960,000; for fiscal year 2003, $2,026,740; for fiscal year
2004, $2,057,787; for fiscal year 2005, $2,161,568; for fiscal year
2006, $2,301,750; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008,
$1,714,911; and for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $1,610,000 per year.
The total amount appropriated is $17,338,576.
Texas A&M University and New Mexico State University jointly
conduct this extension program through coordination provided by Texas
A&M University Extension.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
EXTENSION SPECIALIST, MISSISSIPPI
The goal of this project is to gather and disseminate critical
agricultural weather data for producers and researchers in Mississippi,
surrounding States, and the Nation.
Weather stations were installed to provide data for USDA and
Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station (MAFES)
scientists to predict seasonal variation with wind. Information is
planned to be part of the Delta Agriculture Weather Center Web site.
The information available primarily on the interactive Internet Web
site (www.deltaweather.msstate.edu), has contributed greatly to the
actual and potential annual savings for cotton, soybean, and rice
producers. The Rice DD50 program allows farmers to reduce their risks
and thus avoid possible losses due to untimely application of
protection material for certain insects. Cotton DD60 heat units made
available on a daily basis can allow the Mississippi Delta farmers to
reduce the cost of treatments by over $24 million annually. This
reduction in treatments translates into over 112,000 pounds of active
ingredient of pesticide applications not sprayed in the Mississippi
Delta per year. They also use these data to monitor the cotton boll
formation to help time harvest aid application for economical
defoliation.
The funding for fiscal years 1997 and 1998 was $50,000 each year;
for fiscal years 1999-2000, $100,000 each year; for fiscal year 2001,
$99,780; for fiscal year 2002, $100,000; for fiscal year 2003,
$l49,025; for fiscal year 2004, $133,209; for fiscal year 2005,
$131,936; for fiscal year 2006, $130,680; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for
fiscal year 2008, $98,307; for fiscal year 2009, $92,000; and for
fiscal year 2010, $98,000. A total of $1,332,937 has been appropriated.
The project is conducted by Mississippi State University at the
Delta Research and Extension Center in Stoneville, Mississippi.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
FOOD PRODUCTION EDUCATION, VERMONT
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $120,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's goals and objectives.
HEALTH EDUCATION LEADERSHIP, KENTUCKY
The goal of this program is to develop a partnership among the
University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension Service, the Kentucky
College of Public Health, and the academic health centers at the
University of Kentucky to improve the health status of Kentucky
citizens through (1) utilizing a model for family health with the
framework as the family being the micro unit in a macro system of
public health and healthcare and being the first providers of
healthcare and prevention; (2) creating a partnership of families,
communities, Extension professionals, and university researchers to
design and implement programs at the local level that will change the
health status of Kentuckians; and (3) utilizing a diffusion model to
more rapidly diffuse new research findings and programs throughout the
State and examine the effectiveness of new health behavior
interventions.
The following innovative programs have been developed and
implemented: Get Moving Kentucky, A Matter of Balance, The Literacy,
Eating, and Activity for Pre-School Program, Small Steps to Health and
Wealth and Team-Up Cancer Screening. The Literacy, Eating, and Activity
program added an additional 12 curriculum modules. The Blue to You,
Mental Health for Women curriculum was piloted in 11 western Kentucky
counties and evaluation is underway. Wellness in Kentucky has been
adapted from Wellness in the Rockies and will be implemented statewide
during 2010. The American On the Move program designed for Cooperative
Extension has been integrated into the Get Moving Kentucky program.
This program is being used by Extension educators in several counties
and data collected on participants' progress will be helpful to program
evaluation. Both the Men's health program and the Smoking Cessation
social marketing program and curriculum have been tested and data
collected for program evaluation prior to full-scale implementation in
2011.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2002 with an
appropriation of $800,000. Additional appropriations are $894,150 for
fiscal year 2003; $800,251 for fiscal year 2004; $843,200 for fiscal
year 2005; $834,570 for fiscal year 2006; $0 in fiscal year 2007;
$627,576 in fiscal year 2008; and $590,000 per year in fiscal years
2009 and 2010. A total of $5,979,747 has been appropriated.
The program is being carried out at the University of Kentucky and
in all 120 counties in the State of Kentucky.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
INCOME ENHANCEMENT DEMONSTRATION, OHIO
The goal of this project is to develop new agricultural businesses
and restructure and expand existing businesses in response to domestic
and international challenges. In 2005, the project moved from the Ohio
State University to the Edison Industrial Systems Center and, more
specifically, to a non-profit subsidiary of that company, the
Innovative Food Technology Center. To date, current progress and new
accomplishments include, but are not limited to the following:
--Urban Agriculture/Novel Growing Systems.--During the past year,
existing demonstrations of high tunnel, unheated ``hoop
houses'', and of high-density, vertical hydroponic growing
systems were expanded. The goal of the demonstrations was to
illustrate the economic benefit of each of the technologies. As
a direct result of these demonstrations, one additional hoop
houses, as well as nine additional hydroponic systems, were
purchased by northwest Ohio entities and organizations.
--Green Products.--Since initiating efforts in this area, CIFT has
been in contact via seminars, Web broadcasts, and personal
contact, with more than 200 producers or potential producers of
green products or green versions of existing products. This has
resulted in two new product launches by CIFT constituents.
--Biomass Processing.--At the request of several industry, community,
and governmental groups, CIFT is participating in the Wood
County, Ohio-Agricultural Task Force, a group that is examining
the economics of a community based anaerobic digester. Inspired
by this project, CIFT has also been requested to organize a
similar effort in Defiance County, Ohio.
--Energy Crops.--A current project involving a demonstration and
evaluation of camelina is underway. As the crop is harvested,
oil will be extracted and evaluated in order to determine
whether favorable economics would exist for expanded production
of camelina as an ``extra'' crop in Ohio, increasing per acre
revenue for midwestern growers. CIFT is also actively involved
in promoting the results of research that is undertaking with
the University of Toledo to produce algae as a source of
biofuel feedstock.
--Food Safety Training.--Several years ago, CIFT was selected as the
lead food safety educator for the Good Agricultural Practices
program offered by the Mid-American Agricultural and
Horticultural Services organization. CIFT has continued to
offer this type training to small specialty crop growers,
either as individual consulting, or in educational programming
opportunities.
--Alternate Protein Sources.--During the past year, several
technology development projects were completed by CIFT that
dealt with methods to provide protein to feeding programs for
the poor, for school children, and for elderly. These projects
each considered safe and healthy alternates for these programs.
They each also had significant economic development advantages
inherent in their concepts. During the coming year, CIFT will
attempt to develop evaluation and implementation plans for each
of the results. The projects are, first, a product development
effort to produce high protein canned meat product by combining
mechanically separated poultry and soy protein isolates. The
rationale is that this product will provide economic benefit to
the poultry industry by upgrading a marginally valuable
ingredient, while at the same time increasing the nutritional
value of protein sources distributed through feeding programs.
The second project evaluated the economics of growing various
dry bean cultivars and utilizing them to prepare healthy, high
protein meals for feeding programs. Finally, CIFT is leading
the Lake Erie Underutilized Fish Marketing Project, a
consortium which is evaluating the use of several nutritious
and plentiful fish species from Lake Erie to manufacture
alternative value added, preserved seafood products.
The project began in 1991. Appropriations have been as follows:
$145,000 in fiscal year 1991; $250,000 per year in fiscal years 1992
through 1995; $246,000 per year in fiscal years 1996 through 2000;
$245,459 in fiscal year 2001; $241,000 in fiscal year 2002; $239,434 in
fiscal year 2003; $213,732 in fiscal year 2004; $725,152 in fiscal year
2005; $1,234,530 in fiscal year 2006, $0 in fiscal year 2007; $919,518
in fiscal year 2008; and $864,000 per year in fiscal years 2009 and
2010. Appropriations to date total $7,921,825.
The work is being carried out at the facilities of the Innovative
Food Technology Center, Toledo, Ohio.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE, WISCONSIN
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $400,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's goals and objectives.
INVASIVE PHRAGMITE CONTROL AND OUTREACH, MICHIGAN
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $155,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's goals and objectives.
IOWA VITALITY CENTER
The program was established to develop policy analysis to improve
rural vitality in the State.
The survival of many of Iowa's rural communities is in question,
and communities in the State vary in their capacity to stimulate
development and economic growth. The need for this program is to assist
residents of Iowa's small and medium-sized rural communities as they
work to improve economic and social conditions and achieve sustainable
rural and community vitality. Since 2007 the project has focused on its
Microenterprise Initiative. The local need for microenterprise
assistance, entrepreneurial development projects, and community
philanthropy in creating community vitality is increased because of
weather related disasters and the credit crisis, drop in commodity
prices, and overall economic downturn.
In 2009, the project continued technical assistance and funding
support for Iowa's statewide MicroLoan entity called the Iowa
Foundation for Microenterprise and Community Vitality, a 501(c)(3)
nonprofit foundation organized by the project as a statewide microloan
intermediary that contracts with Cooperative Extension to coordinate
Technical Assistance for Microloan clients. It designed Iowa's
Microloan Web site, and went live in January 2009
(www.iowamicroloan.org). During 2009, 60 applicants who were denied
credit by commercial lenders were assisted by the project in developing
Iowa Microloan applications; 20 microloan clients were approved for a
microloan for which the project developed a technical assistance plan
in collaboration with the entrepreneur; two-thirds of the microloan
clients were startups and one-third were expansions; 2 microloan
clients were minorities; no delinquencies or defaults were experienced
in first year; and 15 Technical Assistance plans were developed and
implemented. It also identified collaborators and negotiated agreements
with eight Iowa regional and statewide microenterprise assistance
networks.
The project provided technical assistance to the Community
Foundation of Greater Des Moines in organizing microenterprise and
philanthropy projects for five rural affiliate county foundations. It
also initiated four nonmetro county philanthropy capacity projects in
collaboration with Iowa Council of Foundation--www.cvcia.org. It
initiated the Ghana Millennium Fund Agricultural Microfinance
Consultancy and consulted on New Market Tax Credits for four rural
projects with three Iowa-based Community Development Entities.
The project completed 15 County Reports for its Rural Migration
Study and conducted 20 local and regional meetings with 365 community
leaders--www.cvcia.org. It also conducted local demonstrations to help
seven community entrepreneurs, and co-sponsored 12 succession planning
workshops. It completed the Youth Marketplace Entrepreneurship Project
in Sac County Middle Schools.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2002.
Appropriated amounts are: fiscal year 2002, $280,000; fiscal year 2003,
$278,180; fiscal year 2004, $250,513; fiscal year 2005, $248,000;
fiscal year 2006, $245,520; fiscal year 2007, $0; fiscal year 2008,
$223,425; fiscal year 2009, $209,000; and fiscal year 2010, $250,000. A
total of $1,984,638 has been appropriated.
The program is being conducted at Iowa State University.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
MAINE CATTLE HEATLH ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $700,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's goals and objectives.
NATIONAL CENTER FOR FARM SAFETY, IOWA
The project supports training at the National Education Center for
Agricultural Safety, or NECAS, to reduce the level of preventable
illnesses, injuries, and fatalities among agricultural populations. The
NECAS provides hand-on training to emergency response personnel and
first responders. NECAS also develops, implement, and evaluate diverse
training methods for at-risk agricultural audiences.
Training topics covered included agricultural rescue and emergency
preparedness, commercial training on hazardous material handling and
pesticides, and youth and elderly farm safety training. The Center also
conducted awareness and informational programs on rural and
agricultural health, certification of safe farms, farm equipment
rescue, and safe tractor operation.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 1998 with an
allocation of $195,000 per year for fiscal years 1998-2000; for fiscal
year 2001, $194,571; for fiscal year 2002, $196,000; for fiscal year
2003, $196,713; for fiscal year 2004, $223,673; for fiscal year 2005,
$241,056; for fiscal year 2006, $238,590; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for
fiscal year 2008, $167,817; for fiscal year 2009, $158,000; and for
fiscal year 2010, $170,000. The total amount appropriated is
$2,371,420.
The National Education Center for Agricultural Safety is located at
the Northeast Iowa Community College in Peosta, Iowa.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
NUTRITION ENHANCEMENT, WISCONSIN
The objectives of this program are to improve food security of
school-age children through school breakfast promotion, enhancement,
and coordination by increasing the number of children and schools
participating in the school breakfast programs; to provide research-
based information, education and outreach associated with school
breakfast promotion and enhancement to support county-based Extension
staff efforts that further the school breakfast program; to provide
research-based information, education and outreach related to school
breakfast programs to schools across the State; and to provide
leadership to statewide efforts to collect and summarize impact
evaluation results related to school breakfast. Other initiatives
include conducting in-depth interviews with key school food service
directors from across the State to obtain detailed information for non-
participation in the breakfast program. In addition, efforts will focus
on working with non-participating schools which qualify as severe, or
schools with high percentages of free and reduced price qualifying
students.
To date a number of activities have been completed or are in
progress. Following a noncompetitive grant application process, mini
grants were awarded in September 2009 for schools to implement new
breakfast programs or to improve an existing program. Forty-two
Wisconsin schools received funding to start up a new breakfast program
and 111 received program improvement grants. The conversion of the
current school breakfast Web site to an updated blog is near
completion. This new blog will incorporate easier navigation features
and integrate new research and updated reports currently not found on
the Web site. Formation of the school breakfast advisory board is in
progress. A face to face meeting of this Board with key leaders in
school breakfast promotion was in January 2010. Work with
organizational partners, such as the Wisconsin Dietetic Association,
the Wisconsin School Nutrition Association, Wisconsin Parent Teacher
Association, and the Wisconsin Milk Marketing Board continues and is
vital to the promotion of school breakfast programs across the State.
Determination of severe need, non-participating schools is a project
that is based on the most current data Wisconsin Department of Public
Instruction collects from schools and this data is scheduled for
release in spring 2010. Due to a demand for more information on school
breakfast, two regional conferences will be offered in 2010. The first
will be in Stevens Point, Wisconsin in February 2010 and the second in
Fond du Lac, Wisconsin in April 2010.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2004 with an
appropriation of $894,690; $965,216 in fiscal year 2005; $1,089,000 in
fiscal year 2006; in fiscal year 2007, $0; in fiscal year 2008,
$744,750; in fiscal year 2009, $751,000; and in fiscal year 2010,
$950,000. A total of $5,394,656 has been appropriated.
The work is being carried out at the University of Wisconsin--
Extension, Madison, in collaboration with the Wisconsin Department of
Public Instruction and in 153 schools.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
OHIO-ISRAEL AGRICULTURE INITIATIVE
The grant is for the Cleveland-based Negev Foundation to promote
the exchange of agricultural technology and resources between Israel
and the State of Ohio. The objective of the Initiative is to foster
greater collaboration between Ohio and Israeli government and research
institutions, farmers and companies; develop joint research and
development and educational activities; identify agribusiness ventures
based on new technologies; introduce potential investors; and expand
commercial ties and market access in both regions. Activities underway
include exports of Ohio-bred beef calves to Israel, agricultural
biosecurity training, soybean purchases and joint processing
facilities, aquaculture cooperation, drip irrigation demonstrations in
Ohio, model greenhouse development, participation in trade shows (trade
shows in Israel promoting Ohio agricultural exports), and joint Ohio-
Israel applied research and scientific exchanges on dairy production,
food safety, integrated pest management, precision and no-till
agriculture, and greenhouse technologies.
This project began in fiscal year 2004. The fiscal year 2004
appropriation was $536,814; for fiscal year 2005, $564,448; for fiscal
year 2006, $587,070; for fiscal year 2007, $0; for fiscal year 2008,
$495,507; for fiscal year 2009, $466,000; and for fiscal year 2010,
$700,000. The total amount appropriated is $3,349,839.
The project is implemented by the Negev Foundation of Cleveland,
Ohio, and project activities are being carried out primarily in Ohio
and Israel. The Ohio State University (OSU) is collaborating with Negev
on several activities, including on-campus seminars, participating in
trade mission teams, exchanging agricultural research findings and
technologies with Israeli scientists, and engaging OSU Cooperative
Extension Service personnel as appropriate.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
PILOT TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER PROJECTS, OKLAHOMA AND MISSISSIPPI
The goal of these projects to contribute to an increase in business
productivity, employment opportunities, and per capita income by
increasing information technology capital, locally and throughout the
States, and applying information from Federal laboratories, Cooperative
Extension, and other university departments and non-campus agencies.
The specific program objectives are to enhance profitability for
existing enterprises; aid in the acquisition, creation, or expansion of
business and industry in the area; establish an effective response
process for technological and industrial-related inquires; devise
effective communication procedures regarding the program for the
relevant audiences; and provide one-on-one and on-site engineering,
technology, and management assistance to small-scale rural
manufacturers. Oklahoma's Manufacturing Extension Partnership--the
Oklahoma Alliance for Manufacturing Excellence has received national
acclaim for its noteworthy and effective partnership with the land-
grant university.
In Oklahoma, for fiscal year 2009, the reported impact of the
Applications Engineering program on client projects totaled over $68
million. This included approximately $31.5 million in sales increase/
retention, $5.8 million in cost savings/avoidance, $15.3 million in new
investment in facilities and equipment, and 209 jobs created or
retained with an economic impact of approximately $15.8 million.
In Mississippi, primary impacts included increased knowledge and
skills regarding software selection and use, hardware selection/
procurement, technological advances, and technology planning/
implementation. Specific impacts included persons obtaining jobs due to
increased skills, companies having better trained and more capable
employees, and individuals being more effective and efficient in their
personal lives.
Funding appropriated to date is as follows: $350,000 per year in
fiscal years 1984 and 1985; $335,000 in fiscal year 1986; $333,000 per
year in fiscal years 1987 through 1990; $331,000 per year in fiscal
years 1991 through 1995; $326,000 per year in fiscal years 1996 through
2000; $325,283, 2001; $319,000, 2002; $335,803, 2003; $300,218, 2004;
$297,600, 2005; $297,000, 2006; $0, 2007; $223,425, 2008; and $209,000
per year, 2009 and 2010. Total appropriations are $8,168,329.
The Oklahoma efforts are being coordinated at Oklahoma State
University and at Rural Enterprises of Oklahoma, Inc. In addition, work
is being done in the offices and shop floors of small, rural
manufacturers across Oklahoma and Mississippi. Coordination of work is
being carried out at Mississippi State University and on the shop
floors of small, rural manufacturers, community colleges, on the
Internet, and in every county in Mississippi.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
PILOT TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, WISCONSIN
The Manufacturing Technology Transfer programs principal objective
in the development of a competitive, secure manufacturing base for
rural communities through the mechanism of industrial extension. The
program principally targets small and medium-size manufacturers in the
economically distressed counties of Northwest Wisconsin.
In 2007, the project managers report that this funding produced the
following impacts for program participants in Northwest Wisconsin:
increased sales, retention of sales, cost savings, targeted technology
investments by clients totaling $90 million; 2,600 jobs were retained
or created; 114 small and medium-sized manufacturers were served with
165 technology transfer projects.
In 2009, project managers continued to pilot test the relevance and
effectiveness of new technology, business strategies, and systems by
monitoring new concepts, systems, and technology with companies in our
region. Project managers attended seminars to develop competencies in
the topics selected. They also will continue to refine their
Cooperative Extension activities by exploring ways to facilitate
entrepreneurship by making referrals to and working closely with
organizations such as the Small Business Development Center, University
of Wisconsin--Extension, Small Business Association, University of
Wisconsin--Stout's Economic Development Administration, and University
of Wisconsin--Stout's Center for Innovation and Development.
This project has been underway since fiscal year 1992 and was
funded for $165,000 per year in fiscal years 1992 through 1995;
$163,000 per year in fiscal years 1996 through 2000; $162,641, 2001;
$160,000, 2002; $161,941, 2003; $214,726, 2004; $231,136, 2005;
$247,500, 2006; $0, 2007; $184,698, 2008; and $174,000 per year, 2009
and 2010. A total of $3,185,642 has been appropriated.
The program has been carried out in northwest Wisconsin at the
University of Wisconsin, Stout campus, and at the facilities of the
following technical colleges in northwest Wisconsin: Chippewa Valley,
North Central, Nicolet, and Wisconsin Indianhead. Work has also been
carried out on-site at small and medium-size manufacturing companies in
northwest Wisconsin.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
POTATO INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT, MAINE
The goal of this extension education project was to improve disease
forecasting and management of potato late blight by providing growers
with educational information to make decisions relating to field
management of the late blight races and other pest problems, potato
disease forecasting, disposal of cull potatoes, insect spread of potato
diseases, insect management, implementation of economic thresholds,
insect identification, disease identification, weed identification, and
increase the knowledge base by increasing research efforts.
The University of Maine Cooperative Extension's Potato Integrated
Pest Management program impacts nearly 60,000 acres of potatoes. The
program employs 26 program aides, maintains nearly 150 specialized
insect traps, coordinates a statewide network of electronic weather
stations, and surveys 125 potato fields on a weekly basis for weeds,
insects, and diseases. The data produced help scientists track
potential pest outbreaks and helps provide growers with current
information on specific and timely treatments in order to minimize the
number of pesticide applications and maximize potato yield. Weather
conditions during the 2008 growing season were extremely conducive for
the development of potato late blight. In the month of June, it rained
23 of 30 days. This was a 40 percent increase in rainfall as compared
to the average. Over 60 percent of the fields surveyed by the
integrated pest management program in 2008 had detectable levels of
potato late blight in them. Grower implementation of the Extension
computerized disease forecasting program coupled with fungicide
selection and applications, field scouting, early detection, and
appropriate management strategies allowed growers to successfully cope
with the serious late blight pressure. Minimal storage losses
attributed to potato late blight were experienced with the 2008 crop.
It was estimated that the total economic impact of the University of
Maine Cooperative Extension Potato Integrated Pest Management program
for the 2008 crop year was $17,216,136.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $297,900; for fiscal year 2009,
$280,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $450,000. A total of $1,027,900 has
been appropriated.
The research is being conducted at the University of Maine and
throughout the State of Maine.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
POTATO PEST MANAGEMENT, WISCONSIN
The of this project is to assist farmers in reducing risks from
pesticides by working with them to implement practicable pest
management options and to explore marketing strategies to allow growers
to capture additional benefits from pesticide reduction. The project's
accomplishments to date include improving the potato industry's
environmental performance by increasing adoption of biointensive
integrated pest management methods through grower education and the
development of grower outreach tools, developing ecosystem function
priorities and implementing total farm ecosystem plans, and the
continued enhancement of a streamlined, real-time certification system
for certified, eco-labeled niche marketed potatoes. Value-added
marketing opportunities for fresh market potatoes have been researched,
and measurement tools for assessing integrated pest management adoption
and pesticide inputs have been coupled with an environmental potato
production standard that requires potato growers to meet pesticide
toxicity reduction and integrated pest management goals. Progress has
been made in reducing the toxicity levels of pesticides used in potato
production, while increasing biointensive integrated pest management
adoption.
In Wisconsin, the foundation for biointensive integrated pest
management education has been developed. Educational efforts are being
proposed to enable growers to integrate biointensive strategies into
existing production systems. The overall momentum of the collaboration
has been extremely strong with many accomplishments such as the
continuation of the marketing effort, enhancements of the collaboration
standards, improvements of resistance management protocols, database
implementation, grant coordination and expansion of the development and
use of educational tools for growers. The project has involved numerous
faculty, industry representatives, potato and other commodity
organizations, and environmental organizations to export this
agricultural model for targeted and industry-wide change. In Wisconsin,
this work is expanding to other vegetable crops, such as carrots,
peppers, beans, and peas and is now also expanding to fruit crops.
Furthermore, the ecological portions of the collaboration have been
enhanced by working with national and local environmental organizations
and expanding research with University of Wisconsin faculty through the
infusion of their expertise, research, and education into the project.
This strength needs to be maintained, while exporting the model of
industry-wide agricultural changes through the use of policy and
communication efforts.
The work supported by this grant began in fiscal year 2001, and the
following amounts have been appropriated: 2001, $189,582; 2002,
$396,000; 2003, $298,050; 2004, $357,876; 2005, $375,968; 2006,
$396,000; 2007, $0; 2008, $294,921; and 2009 and 2010, $277,000 per
year. A total of $2,862,397 has been appropriated.
This work is being conducted with fresh market potato growers in
the following Wisconsin counties: Adams, Columbia, Barron, Green Lake,
Langlade, Marquette, Portage, Sauk, Waupaca, and Waushara; apple
growers in Bayfield, the Chippewa Valley, southeastern counties, and
Dane County; and apple/cherry growers in Door County.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
RANGE IMPROVEMENT, NEW MEXICO
The focus of the project is the public rangeland resource in New
Mexico. The Range Improvement Project: Analyzing the Cumulative Impacts
of Federal Land Policy and Management, formerly called Range Policy
Development, has a long-term goal to bring disparate information
together into a single analysis and develop a comprehensive solution to
issues on Federal land resources and economies. The program developed
local and regional economic models that link management of Federal
rangeland and forestland to the economies of rural communities in New
Mexico. The economic factors of interest included forage loss from
canopy closure in national forests, endangered species act listings/
designations on habitat and industry, recreation, wilderness, rangeland
health and monitoring, private property rights, and cultures of the
region. The modeling activities were intended to inform policy and
decision makers towards understanding the linkages of local and State
economies to the industries that rely on services from New Mexico
public lands.
It is the vision of this project to merge multiple topics and
disciplines to do a complete analysis for specific geographic regions
in New Mexico. This analysis included a historical perspective on land
uses, economic structure, government regulations, customs and cultures,
and private property issues. It also encompassed the current land uses
and management practices, economic structures, government regulations,
customs and cultures, and private property issues. This project created
a baseline for future analysis in socioeconomic, timber, recreation,
and rangeland issues on Federal lands in New Mexico. Education has been
the primary output related to this project. Information is extended to
a variety of audiences including landowners, industry and agency
personnel. These outreach outputs, according to the project leaders,
might lead to improved site selection, disturbance management, and size
of oil and gas well sites on New Mexico rangelands and throughout the
West. These extension efforts provided the data to support the oil and
gas industry on rangelands with minimized impacts on other uses of the
public domain while maintaining the environmental services. Outreach
publications generated by this project coupled with a new rapid
assessment methodology are both used by landowners, county agents,
agency personnel, and researchers throughout New Mexico.
Collection of primary data has occurred on New Mexico ranches, the
Gila and Lincoln national forests, and Bureau of Land Management
allotments adjacent to those forests in New Mexico. Modeling efforts
for this extension project are being carried out at New Mexico State
University. Regional or county economies have been evaluated for
economic dependence on multiple use Federal lands. Area residents,
industry and agency officials were involved in analyzing and checking
socioeconomic data. Field-collected data were used to update the
information available from the Bureau of Commerce, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, and the New Mexico Department of Labor. Broad regional
interest in the project has led to efforts to expand applications to
fit other sites in the southwestern United States.
The amounts appropriated are: 1996-2000, $197,000 per year; 2001,
$196,567; 2002, $240,000; 2003, $243,408; 2004, $217,708; 2005,
$232,128; 2006, $241,560; 2007, $0; 2008, $223,425; 2009, $209,000; and
2010, $223,000. A total of $3,211,796 has been appropriated.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN--EXTENSION NORTHERN AQUACULTURE DEMONSTRATION
FACILITY
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $450,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's goals and objectives.
URBAN HORTICULTURE, WISCONSIN
The goal of this program was to provide the fundamental information
and technology transfer needed by farmers to be successful in the new
enterprises by increasing the capacity of county-based extension
faculty to provide information to the public. County-based faculty are
now working with campus faculty to identify issues where more
information is needed. The project has expanded its focus beyond
providing information primarily to producers by including consumers and
homeowners as well. Overall, over 750 individuals have been empowered
through community, neighborhood and at-risk population programs focused
on fruit and vegetable gardening. The second area of research and
education, impacting over 3,000 horticulturalists in Wisconsin is
sustainable landscape practices, including Web-based pest
identification, appropriate pesticide selection, and preserving water
resources. The project has also involved the creation and dissemination
of new research-based horticultural knowledge through both
traditional--fact sheets, Web sites, etc.--venues as well as new
communication channels--online classes, podcasts, etc. Project funding
from USDA sources has been heavily supplemented through significant
volunteer hours, local funding sources, and individual donations. The
funding has also allowed the project team to leverage significant
community-based relationships in Wisconsin's most urban counties
including Milwaukee, Racine, Kenosha, and Waukesha. Two important
examples include significant educational/facilities formalized
relationships with the Boerner Botanical Gardens in Milwaukee County as
well as funding relationship with the Milwaukee based non-profit
organization ``Growing Power.''
The work supported by this research began in fiscal year 2002. In
fiscal year 2002, $200,000 was appropriated 2003, $536,490; 2004,
$783,351; 2005, $810,464; 2006, $808,830; 2007, $0; 2008, $346,557; and
2009 and 2010, $376,000 per year. The total appropriated to date has
been $4,237,692.
This project is being conducted at the University of Wisconsin at
Madison through the Wisconsin Extension Service.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
URBAN HORTICULTURE AND MARKETING, ILLINOIS
The goals of this project are to provide urban horticulture and
agriculture training for low-income youth and young adults, produce and
market locally grown organic produce at a variety of Chicago-area
markets, and establish a green campus within the community. In 2009,
Windy City Harvest became the first urban agriculture training
certificate program in Illinois to be accredited Illinois Community
College Board. The program attracted and retained a diverse student
body. A Windy City Harvest related production and training garden at
the Cook County Sheriff's Boot Camp is now serving young men in 4-month
incarcerations, and some graduates will participate in the next 9-month
certificate session. Windy City Harvest also collaborated with the
administrators and staff of USDA's Food and Nutrition Services Region 5
Office to create the first Midwest People's Garden on Chicago's west
side.
Fiscal year 2008 was the first year that funds were appropriated
for this grant with an amount of $74,475; for fiscal year 2009,
$104,000; and for fiscal year 2010, $175,000. A total of $353,475 has
been appropriated.
The project will be conducted at the Windy City Harvest in Chicago,
Illinois, in conjunction with the Chicago Botanic Garden and the City
Colleges of Chicago.
Senior agency technical staff conducted a merit review of the
proposal for this research prior to making a funding recommendation.
VETERINARY TECHNOLOGY SATELLITE PROGRAM, KANSAS
Fiscal year 2010 is the first year that funds were appropriated for
this grant with an amount of $1,000,000. Since this is a new grant, no
information is available regarding the program's goals and objectives.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Kohl. Our next hearing will be Tuesday, March 9.
We'll be hearing from Dr. Margaret Hamburg, FDA Commissioner,
on the FDA's budget.
Again, we thank you all for being here.
And we will recess at this time.
[Whereupon, at 11:59 a.m., Tuesday, March 2, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Tuesday,
March 9.]