[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



 
    SUPPLY CHAIN RECOVERY AND RESILIENCY: SMALL PRODUCERS AND LOCAL
                          AGRICULTURAL MARKETS

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON
               BIOTECHNOLOGY, HORTICULTURE, AND RESEARCH

                                 OF THE

                        COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                             JUNE 30, 2021

                               __________

                           Serial No. 117-11
                           
                           
                           
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]                           
                           
                           


          Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture
                         agriculture.house.gov
                         
                         
                           ______                       


             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 46-505 PDF           WASHINGTON : 2022 
                         
                         


                        COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

                     DAVID SCOTT, Georgia, Chairman

JIM COSTA, California                GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania, 
JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts     Ranking Minority Member
FILEMON VELA, Texas                  AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina, Vice  ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, 
Chair                                Arkansas
ABIGAIL DAVIS SPANBERGER, Virginia   SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut            VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
ANTONIO DELGADO, New York            DOUG LaMALFA, California
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois              RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine               RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia
GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN,      DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina
Northern Mariana Islands             TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire         DON BACON, Nebraska
CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois               DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota
SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York       JAMES R. BAIRD, Indiana
STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands   JIM HAGEDORN, Minnesota
TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona              CHRIS JACOBS, New York
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California        TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
RO KHANNA, California                MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
AL LAWSON, Jr., Florida              TRACEY MANN, Kansas
J. LUIS CORREA, California           RANDY FEENSTRA, Iowa
ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota               MARY E. MILLER, Illinois
JOSH HARDER, California              BARRY MOORE, Alabama
CYNTHIA AXNE, Iowa                   KAT CAMMACK, Florida
KIM SCHRIER, Washington              MICHELLE FISCHBACH, Minnesota
JIMMY PANETTA, California            JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia

                                 ______

                      Anne Simmons, Staff Director

                 Parish Braden, Minority Staff Director

                                 ______

       Subcommittee on Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research

               STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands, Chair

ANTONIO DELGADO, New York            JAMES R. BAIRD, Indiana, Ranking 
KIM SCHRIER, Washington              Minority Member
JIMMY PANETTA, California            AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine               ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, 
SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York       Arkansas
SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California        RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois
AL LAWSON, Jr., Florida              DON BACON, Nebraska
JOSH HARDER, California              JIM HAGEDORN, Minnesota
J. LUIS CORREA, California           CHRIS JACOBS, New York
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona             TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
                                     MICHELLE FISCHBACH, Minnesota
                                     JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana

              Malikha Daniels, Subcommittee Staff Director


                                  (ii)
                                  
                             C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Baird, Hon. James R., a Representative in Congress from Indiana, 
  opening statement..............................................     3
Panetta, Hon. Jimmy, a Representative in Congress from 
  California, submitted comment letter authored by Laura Batcha, 
  Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer, Organic Trade 
  Association....................................................    46
Plaskett, Hon. Stacey E., a Delegate in Congress from Virgin 
  Islands, opening statement.....................................     1
    Prepared statement...........................................     3
    Submitted article............................................    45
Thompson, Hon. Glenn, a Representative in Congress from 
  Pennsylvania, opening statement................................    34

                               Witnesses

Browne, Dale K.K., Owner, Sejah Farm of the Virgin Islands, 
  Kingshill, St. Croix, USVI.....................................     6
    Prepared statement...........................................     7
Cooper, Perri, Director, Georgia Organic Peanut Association; 
  Executive Director, Flint River Soil and Water Conservation 
  District, Americus, GA.........................................     9
    Prepared statement...........................................    10
Kennedy, Tianna, Owner/Operator, Star Route Farm; Founder/
  Operator, The 607 CSA; Board Member, Center for Agricultural 
  Development & Entrepreneurship, Worcester, NY..................    13
    Prepared statement...........................................    15
Shannon, Jonathan, niche market livestock producer, Shannon 
  Family Farms LLC, Crawfordsville, IN; accompanied by Kelly 
  Shannon, Niche Market Livestock Producer, Shannon Family Farms 
  LLC............................................................    20
    Prepared statement...........................................    22


    SUPPLY CHAIN RECOVERY AND RESILIENCY: SMALL PRODUCERS AND LOCAL



                          AGRICULTURAL MARKETS

                              ----------                              


                        WEDNESDAY, JUNE 30, 2021

                  House of Representatives,
 Subcommittee on Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research,
                                  Committee on Agriculture,
                                                   Washington, D.C.
    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m., in 
Room 1300 of the Longworth House Office Building and via Webex, 
Hon. Stacey E. Plaskett [Chair of the Subcommittee] presiding.
    Members present: Representatives Plaskett, Delgado, 
Schrier, Pingree, Maloney, Carbajal, Lawson, Harder, 
Kirkpatrick, Baird, Austin Scott of Georgia, Davis, Bacon, 
Hagedorn, Fischbach, Letlow, and Thompson (ex officio).
    Staff present: Lyron Blum-Evitts, Malikha Daniels, Ross 
Hettervig, Prescott Martin III, Ricki Schroeder, Patricia 
Straughn, Jennifer Tiller, and Dana Sandman.

  OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. STACEY E. PLASKETT, A DELEGATE IN 
                  CONGRESS FROM VIRGIN ISLANDS

    The Chair. This hearing of the Subcommittee on 
Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research entitled, Supply 
Chain Recovery and Resiliency: Small Producers and Local 
Agricultural Markets, will come to order. Welcome, and thank 
you for joining today's hearing. After brief opening remarks, 
Members will receive testimony from our witnesses today, and 
then the hearing will be open to questions. Members will be 
recognized in the order of seniority, alternating between 
Majority and Minority Members, and in order of the arrival for 
those Members who have joined us after the hearing was called 
to order. When you are recognized you will be asked, if you are 
on video, to unmute your microphone, and will have 5 minutes to 
ask your questions or make a statement. If you are not 
speaking, I ask that you remain muted in order to minimize 
background noise. In order to get as many questions as 
possible, the time will stay consistently visible on your 
screen.
    I want to thank my colleagues and our witnesses for joining 
us today as we host this important discussion on the 
consequences of, excuse me, recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic 
on small producers serving local markets. I would also like to 
welcome you all to the first Subcommittee hearing for the 
Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research Subcommittee for the 
117th Congress. I am looking forward to working with all of you 
in finding ways to address our shared priorities, such as 
supporting agricultural research, improving and expanding the 
National Organic Program, and facilitating new developments in 
agricultural technologies. This Subcommittee has jurisdiction 
over a variety of very exciting and important aspects of our 
food and agricultural sector, and it is an honor to serve as 
Chair again.
    The COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly had a lasting impact 
on our agricultural communities around the country, notably 
impacting small farmers and ranchers, including our small 
certified organic producers. During the pandemic producers were 
required to significantly adapt their business practices and 
operations to meet the challenges posed by COVID-19, which 
shifted how these producers were able to participate in 
agricultural markets. The pandemic further caused unprecedented 
interferences within supply chains, and challenges to market 
access, from small producers serving local markets, local 
markets which are becoming increasingly more important as a way 
for producers to add value to their operations. This is true in 
my own district of the U.S. Virgin Islands. Farmers in the 
Territory are mostly small and local producers who are working 
to recover from the supply chain disruptions. Producers from my 
district are certainly seeking all opportunities to strengthen 
their supply chain while serving the local community.
    Each year consumers across the country purchase more and 
more products from local markets. The USDA reported a farm-
level value of direct food sales totaling $11.8 billion in 
2017, including sales from eight percent of U.S. farmers, 
confirming significant growth in these local agricultural 
markets. Farmers across the country are taking advantage of 
this growing demand through a variety of alternative business 
models and production practices, including direct to consumer 
marketing, farmers' markets, community supported agriculture, 
community gardens, and food hubs. However, in order to ensure 
the success of our farmers and producers as demand for local 
markets increase, it is vital to examine the impact of COVID-19 
on our supply chains and facilitate economic recovery.
    Our witnesses today include some of those farmers and 
producers who have seen firsthand the impact of COVID-19 on 
small farmers, farms servicing local communities, and I am 
grateful to hear their experiences, which are crucial to 
advancing our work here today as we look forward to the next 
farm bill. Without objection, I would like to include an op-ed 
that I wrote with the Chicago Council on Global Affairs which 
addresses the need for investment in agricultural research and 
infrastructure, as well as agricultural innovation, to the 
record.* Agricultural research and innovation has a far 
reaching impact and benefits all producers, including our 
small, organic, and local producers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    * The article referred to is located on p. 45.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Plaskett follows:]

 Prepared Statement of Hon. Stacey E. Plaskett, a Delegate in Congress 
                          from Virgin Islands
    Good morning, and thank you to my colleagues and our witnesses for 
joining me today as we host this important discussion on the 
consequences of and recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic on small 
producers serving local markets.
    I would also like to welcome you all to the first Subcommittee 
hearing for the Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research Subcommittee 
for the 117th Congress. I'm looking forward to working with all of you 
and finding ways to address our shared priorities--such as supporting 
agricultural research, improving, and expanding the National Organic 
Program, and facilitating new developments in agricultural 
technologies. This Subcommittee has jurisdiction over a variety of very 
exciting and important aspects of our food and agriculture sectors, and 
it's an honor to serve as Chair again.
    The COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly had a lasting impact on our 
agricultural communities around the country--notably impacting small 
farmers and ranchers, and including our small, certified organic 
producers.
    During the pandemic, producers were required to significantly adapt 
their business practices and operations to meet the challenges posed by 
COVID-19, which shifted how these producers were able to participate in 
agricultural markets.
    The pandemic further caused unprecedented interferences within 
supply-chains and challenges to market access for many small producers 
serving local markets--local markets which are becoming increasingly 
more important as a way for producers to add value to their operations.
    This story is true in my district of the U.S. Virgin Islands. 
Farmers in the Territory are mostly small and local producers who are 
working to recover from the supply chain disruptions. Producers from my 
district are certainly seeking all opportunities to strengthen their 
supply chain while serving the local community.
    Each year, consumers across the country purchase more and more 
products from local markets. The USDA reported a farm-level value of 
direct food sales totaling $11.8 billion in 2017, including sales from 
8% of U.S. farmers, confirming significant growth in these local 
agriculture markets.
    Farmers across the country are taking advantage of this growing 
demand through a variety of alternative business models and production 
practices, including direct-to-consumer marketing, farmers' markets, 
community-supported agriculture (CSA), community gardens, and food 
hubs.
    However, in order to ensure the success of our farmers and 
producers as demand for local markets increase, it is vital to examine 
the impact of COVID-19 on our supply chains and facilitate economic 
recovery.
    Our witnesses today include some of those farmers and producers who 
have seen first-hand the impact of COVID-19 on small farms servicing 
local communities, and I am grateful to hear about their experiences--
which are crucial to advancing our work here today, and as we look 
forward to the next farm bill.

    The Chair. I would now like to welcome the distinguished 
Ranking Member, the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Baird, for any 
opening remarks he would like to give.

 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES R. BAIRD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
                     CONGRESS FROM INDIANA

    Mr. Baird. Well good morning, and thank you, Chair 
Plaskett, for calling this hearing today. I am excited for our 
Subcommittee to come together for the first official hearing of 
this Congress, and, Chair Plaskett, I look forward to 
developing a fruitful relationship with you as we serve on this 
Subcommittee, and the very important role its jurisdiction--
especially in the areas of biotechnology, research, and 
extension--plays in the current landscape of the American farm 
economy, particularly in regard to the sustainability of the 
industry, the profitability of our producers, and the stability 
of our national food supply. And to the Members of this 
Subcommittee, I thank you for committing to serve on this 
panel. I value your leadership and expertise, and look forward 
to serving alongside each of you.
    I find today's topic to be of particular importance. We are 
nearing the end of an indiscriminate pandemic that impacted 
every corner of our lives. The witnesses before us have an 
opportunity and an important story to tell. And like many of 
the hearings held thus far in this Congress, their stories add 
to the narrative that we can do better to prepare for future 
emergencies. I thank our witnesses for their time and 
participation in today's discussion. Of course, I regret that 
we can't gather in person today, but I appreciate the work that 
you have done to put in to preparing your thoughts, and look 
forward to hearing more about your operations and experiences.
    Our nation is home to a varied, yet immensely productive, 
agricultural industry. On one hand, we have a group of 
developed, larger farms that play a most critical role in the 
stability of our food supply chain. Operations leverage the 
efficiencies gained by economies-of-scale to provide our nation 
the cheapest, safest, and most abundant food supply chain the 
world has ever known. They bolster national security and 
stabilize agricultural markets. On the other hand, we have a 
group of smaller producers. Often they are passionately serving 
niche markets, or in the beginning phases of their operations, 
working to build markets and equity. Both of these groups 
represent American farmers. Both represent a crucial component 
of our nation's food supply chain and its security. Both 
experience unique challenges that occasionally rely on policy 
solutions to improve.
    Beginning farmers in the United States face significant 
challenges in entering production. Those without prior 
experience, or land they inherit, or large sums of capital have 
presented with sometimes insurmountable difficulties to begin 
their operation, let alone to be competitive after they are 
established. These obstacles, for some small farmers, 
significantly hinder the ability to bring younger generations 
into agriculture, and to diversify our nation's agricultural 
production. I also think there is ample opportunity for the 
Department to improve outreach and engage for those entering 
into agriculture. Through today's discussion I look forward to 
hearing more about these producers and how they overcame their 
myriad of various challenges, including those set on or 
aggravated by the COVID-19 pandemic. I also hope to hear how 
we, as policymakers, can better serve small or beginning 
farmers, what policies we need to work on, where we can start 
over, and how we ultimately can ensure that agriculture remains 
a highly desired industry.
    As I said, I am excited about our work and the work ahead. 
I sincerely look forward to today's testimony, and thank you 
again, Madam Chair, for calling this hearing. I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you, Ranking Member. The chair would 
request that other Members submit their opening statements for 
the record so witnesses may begin their testimony, and to 
ensure that there is ample time for questioning.
    I am pleased to welcome such a distinguished panel of 
witnesses to our hearing today. Our witnesses bring to the 
hearing a wide range of experience and expertise, and I thank 
you for joining us. Our first witness today is Mr. Dale Browne. 
He and his wife, Yvette Browne, are the owners of Sejah Farm, 
which is located on the Island of St. Croix in the U.S. Virgin 
Islands. He raises goats, sheep, and chickens, and farms a 
variety of organic produce. He is an advocate for locally-
sourced produce and meat, and supports educational programs for 
young farmers, cooking with locally-sourced food, and 
agritourism. He co-founded the Virgin Islands Farmers' 
Cooperative with his wife.
    Our next witness is Ms. Perri Cooper, who is the Executive 
Director of the Georgia Organic Peanut Association. In addition 
to her work there, she is the Director of the Flint River Soil 
and Water Conservation District, and a beginning farmer in 
Sumter County, Georgia. She has a degree in Agriscience and 
Environmental System and a certificate in local food systems.
    To introduce our third witness, I am pleased to yield to 
our colleague on the Subcommittee, and Chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Commodity Exchanges, Energy, and Credit, the 
distinguished gentleman from New York, Mr. Delgado.
    Mr. Delgado. Thank you, Chair Plaskett. It is my privilege 
and honor to introduce our next witness, and my constituent, 
Tianna Kennedy. Tianna Kennedy is the owner of The 607 
Community Supported Agriculture, CSA, and Owner and farmer at 
Star Route Farm, one of nearly 5,000 farms in my district. The 
607 CSA is a multi-farm operation in the Northern Catskills 
region. The CSA supports four vegetable farms, partners with 
more than 35 additional neighboring farms and food businesses 
and serves 800 families in the Catskills and New York City. 
Star Route Farm is a small-scale, diversified vegetable, herb, 
and small grain farm.
    Ms. Kennedy also serves on my bipartisan Locally-Based 
Agriculture Advisory Committee. She has an important 
perspective on the role small scale farmers play in local 
agricultural markets and supply chain resiliency. The COVID-19 
pandemic has made even more clear that we must empower and 
support our local producers to prevent supply chain 
disruptions. I am proud that New York's 19th Congressional 
District is represented here today by Ms. Kennedy. Ms. Kennedy, 
it is good to see you. I look forward to hearing your 
testimony, and learning more about how Congress can best 
support you, and other farmers like you, in the future. I yield 
back.
    The Chair. I thank the gentleman. To introduce our fourth 
witnesses, I am pleased to yield to the Ranking Member of the 
Subcommittee, the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Baird.
    Mr. Baird. Thank you, Madam Chair. It is my distinct 
pleasure to introduce Jonathan and Kelly Shannon to testify 
before us today. Jonathan and Kelly are niche market livestock 
producers and live on a 10 acre farm in rural Montgomery 
County, Indiana, along with their three daughters, where they 
raise cattle, pigs, chickens, and goats. Jonathan and Kelly 
started Shannon Family Farms in 2006, and have continually 
changed their commodities that they raise to meet the needs of 
their consumers. In 2016 they partnered with other farm 
families in the area to form the Four Seasons Local Market, 
located in downtown Crawfordsville. They did this to create 
year-round opportunities to sell local products to their 
community.
    In addition to their work on the farm, and with the local 
market, Jonathan and Kelly both have jobs off the farm, and are 
actively involved in the Montgomery County Farm Bureau and the 
Indiana Farm Bureau. I am honored to have both of you with us 
today, and I look forward to you sharing your story with this 
Committee. And with that, I yield back.
    The Chair. I thank the gentleman for his remarks. We 
welcome all of our witnesses today, and will now proceed to 
hearing your testimony. You will each have 5 minutes, and the 
timer should be visible to you on your screen, and will count 
down to zero, at which point, your time has expired, please, so 
that we can get to the questions for so many of our Members 
which are with us both here in the hearing room and who are 
with us virtually. Mr. Browne, please begin when you are ready. 
Unmute and give your testimony. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Browne. Good morning, and thanks for the invite Madam 
Chair.
    The Chair. Mr. Browne, do you have--are you visible to----
    Mr. Browne. I am visible, but I am doing both screen and 
phone for the audio.
    The Chair. Okay. Excellent. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF DALE K.K. BROWNE, OWNER, SEJAH FARM OF THE VIRGIN 
              ISLANDS, KINGSHILL, ST. CROIX, USVI

    Mr. Browne. Good morning again, and I thank you, Madam 
Chair, for inviting me to this hearing. My testimony is going 
to be brief, but punctual. It is my pleasure to be here to 
testify on the Supply Chain Recovery Resiliency: Small Producer 
and Local Agricultural Markets. My testimony will reflect the 
impact of natural disasters, COVID-19, and programs offered by 
USDA during the pandemic on the island. And to couple with 
that, the local government leadership not being totally 
involved, or not being involved at all, in any of our 
agricultural development. I am an advocate for the resurgence 
of Virgin Islands agriculture. Developing a local food system, 
and ultimately food security, is a challenge. However, it is 
one I am willing to take on, and to make sure we have an 
agriculture resurgence in the Territory. Diversifying our farm 
over the years has helped us to negate the impact of the COVID-
19 pandemic, and this has provided an opportunity for us to 
bring the awareness of local food in the Territory.
    The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted, and has 
taken a role in the operation of the farm, where we had to 
operate in new ways, and it has created an additional burden to 
our overhead costs. There also have been a sudden change in 
sales value, real time decision-making, labor, productivity, 
and the threats of all is more of a risk in all parts of it. 
There was a loss in income to crop and livestock due to COVID-
19. Crops did not get to market as before the pandemic. Our 
farm programs were halted, less patrons and closure of 
restaurants, chefs unable to meet--have scheduled group dining, 
catering, supermarkets not taking large quantity of produce, 
all due to the pandemic. Livestock sales ceased due to the VI 
Department of Agriculture abattoir extended closure due to 
maintenance and the pandemic. In addition, we ceased our 
livestock production, and herd of both sheep and goats were 
separated to avoid any further breeding production.
    The following income generation programs were halted or 
lowered due to the pandemic from 2019 until present. Our 
community supported agriculture, which actually we have about 
20 members partaking in that agriculture program during every 
season. Our Bush Cook/Chef Cook, which is a culinary event. It 
is held on the farm every year. That we could not partake of. 
Our CIGNA Contractual Program, which service over 2,000 
employees between all three islands. We were unable to meet 
that. And our youth summer program, which is Bridging the Gap. 
We were unable to also meet that as well.
    One thing that I have observed is that the USDA programs 
which we do have, which is NRCS-EQIP programs, those programs 
has changed after our drought, and it even continued during the 
pandemic. Where--the changes that was there was that the--you 
received a contract, and you would begin working under contract 
for reimbursement. But, unfortunately, after the drought and 
the hurricane we have an issue where now we are asked--or we 
are told that we have to actually look for our own engineers 
and complete the project at the same time. So reimbursement for 
excess spending was not involved. In addition, the EQIP Program 
is 90 percent reimbursement. The cost of products coming from 
the mainland is higher than--by the time it gets here, so there 
is no mitigation, and we have to actually foot that cost, and 
remain for--the reimbursement that we are allowed by contract. 
To give a simple example, in one of our contracts for a waste 
management facility, $57 was the total amount, and therefore it 
cost us over $400 to complete it. Reimbursement was only $57. 
FSA programs are available for livestock during the drought, 
but here still there are some programs that are not most 
effective for a certain Territory.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Browne follows:]

Prepared Statement of Dale K.K. Browne, Owner, Sejah Farm of the Virgin 
                  Islands, Kingshill, St. Croix, USVI
    It is my pleasure to be here to testify on the ``Supply Chain 
Recovery Resiliency: Small Producers and Local Agricultural Markets''. 
My testimony will reflect the impact of natural disaster, [COVID]-19 
and programs offered by USDA during this pandemic on our island's 
agriculture.
    I am an advocate for the resurgence of Virgin Islands agriculture. 
Developing a local islands food system and ultimately food security is 
a challenge. However, it is one I am willing to take on if ``we are 
going to be part of our islands agriculture resurgence''.
    Diversifying the farm over the year has help us to mitigate the 
impact of [COVID]-19 pandemic and this has provided an opportunity for 
us to bringing the awareness of local food in the Territory.
    COVID-19 pandemic has negatively taken a toll on the farm 
operation, where we had to operate in new ways, and it has also created 
an additional burden to our overhead cost. There has also been a sudden 
change in sale volume, where real-time decision-making, labor, 
productivity, and the threats of all is at more of a risk.
    There was a lost in income to crop and livestock due to COVID-19. 
Crops did not get to market as before the pandemic. On farm programs 
were halted, less patrons and the closure of restaurants, chefs unable 
to have schedule group dining catering and supermarket not taking large 
quantities of produce all due to the pandemic. Livestock sale ceased 
due to the VI Department of Agriculture abattoirs extended closure due 
to maintenance and the pandemic. In addition, we ceased our livestock 
production and the herds of both sheep and goats (ewes and rams) were 
separated to avoid any breeding.
    The following income generating programs were halted or lowered due 
to the pandemic from 2019 until present:
Community Supported Agriculture (CSA)
    CSAs are arrangements based on a contractual agreement between a 
farmer and a consumer. A CSA concept is that the consumer, often 
described as a ``shareholder'' or ``member'', usually purchases up-
front a ``share'' or ``membership'' prior to the growing season. 
Members can rely on fresh, local produce throughout the season. As each 
crop comes in throughout the growing season, members receive their 
share, often once or twice a week. The size of the shares varies in 
quantity and variety. The produce is picked up by members at the farm.
Bush Cook/Chef Cook
    ``Bush Cook/Chef Cook'' is a local food culinary event conducted on 
farm, where 20 or more restaurant, chefs, and cooks participates. The 
scope of the event is based on the creativity of the participating 
cooks and chefs. The participants would choose any unconventional 
method of cooking preferable to their liking (coal pot, three stone, 
hole in the ground or any bush style cooking).
CIGNA Health and Wellness Expo
    CIGNA Health and Wellness Expo. Is a health and wellness 
contractual agreement with the VI Personnel Department to provide bags 
of local food for 2,000 employees with CIGNA Insurance on St. Croix, 
St. Thomas, and St. John.
``Bridging the Gap'' Summer Program
    ``Bridging the Gap'' Summer Program is an agricultural summer camp 
for age 7 to 18, which exposes its participant to the world of an 
island agricultural industry within the Virgin Islands. This includes 
participants from the department of labor summer workforce development.
USDA Programs

  1.  NRCS-EQIP--Environmental Quality Incentive Program is a 
            conservation program which assist farms to develop their 
            farm infrastructure, it is a program for well, fencing, 
            irrigation, and pasture improvement.

       Since the 2017 Hurricanes Maria and Irma to the 
            Territory I have seen 
              changes to how the program are administered. When 
            contract was issued 
              there were no specific or engineering provided. When a 
            practice were com-
              pleted and the request for reimbursement was required it 
            was then told of 
              the new changes or engineering requirement. If these 
            requirements were 
              given before starting, then correction would be accepted 
            rather than having 
              to do over after monies have been spent. Then later were 
            told we will have 
              [to] get your own professional engineer at you expense.

       An EQIP Contract has a 90% reimbursement for practices 
            completed. 
              Therefore, a farmer will have to complete the practice 
            before reimburse-
              ment.

       Contract practice cost are calculated based on cost from 
            the mainland USA. 
              These costs are not relevant to the Territory and when 
            the practice are com-
              pleted the farmer would have spent beyond the cost of the 
            practice and not 
              received any reimbursement for what has been spent.

         Exp. Contract # EQIP 2014 74F352150GH requires the 
            floor construction 
                of a composting facility of 20\2\ to be reimbursed for 
            $57.00 with a roof 
                structure reimbursement of $270.00 thats a total of 
            $327.00. The actual 
                cost of the floor completed was $138.00 and the frame 
            and roof was 
                $400.00 that's a total of $538.00 difference of $186.00 
            not reimbursable.

  2.  FSA

       Reimbursement Transportation Cost Payment Program (RTCP)

       Disaster Assistance for Livestock Forage Losses (drought 
            and hurricanes[)]

Dale K.K. Browne,
Sejah Farm of the Virgin Islands.

    The Chair. Thank you so much, Mr. Browne, during 
questioning I am sure we will be able to understand some 
additional issues with that. Ms. Cooper, please begin when you 
are ready.

         STATEMENT OF PERRI COOPER, DIRECTOR, GEORGIA 
  ORGANIC PEANUT ASSOCIATION; EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, FLINT RIVER 
       SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT, AMERICUS, GA

    Ms. Cooper. Chair Plaskett, Ranking Member Baird, and 
Subcommittee Members, thank you for allowing me to testify 
before you today. My name is Perri Cooper. I am incredibly 
lucky to work with a diverse set of agricultural stakeholders. 
I have the privilege to work as the Executive Director of the 
Flint River Soil and Water Conservation District in southwest 
Georgia, and I am also the Director of the Georgia Organic 
Peanut Association, a farmer-owned agricultural cooperative 
that markets USDA-certified organic peanuts and other 
agricultural products from producers in the Southeast. GOPA has 
continued to grow, both in number and farmers, since 
incorporation, but growth has not been without challenges. 
Without a certified organic supply chain, once peanuts leave 
the farm, they lose their organic associated price premium.
    Certified organic production made up .06 percent of 
Georgia's total peanut production last year, which is nowhere 
near the volume to achieve the added value for the shelling, 
blanching, and roasting facilities to go through the 
certification process. Certified organic production must be 
done at a smaller scale. GOPA works with one certified organic 
shelling facility and one certified organic blanching facility, 
which is limiting and risky. In 2019, when the cooperative 
formally incorporated, the one certified organic peanut sheller 
was still inoperative from Hurricane Michael in October 2018, 
our first experience with issues of a limited supply chain. 
This past year post-harvest processing was so bottlenecked that 
we have only in the past week been able to sell the first part 
of our 2020 crop. That is a long gap for us to pay farmers for 
their crop without the ability to sell it.
    Investment, specifically in rural infrastructure, to 
support local supply chains is critical. For certified organic 
supply chains, this includes support and incentives for 
certification. While GOPA has been able to tap into several 
local markets within Georgia, expanding into small- and mid-
scale markets, both within the Southeast and outside of peanut 
producing regions, has been an obstacle. In fact, last year 
GOPA's Chairman was on a plane to California to attend a 
natural products expo when the event was canceled due to COVID. 
GOPA also has a great demand for, but cannot serve, local 
direct consumer requests. GOPA submitted an unsuccessful 2020 
FMPP proposal to explore a pathway for roasting, packaging, 
marketing to meet these direct consumer demands. While the 
positive feedback was hopeful, reviewers didn't fully 
understand the supply chain and commodity production basics. We 
have seen this pattern repeat for other regional commodity 
markets, such as another rejected LFPP grant in southeast 
Georgia focused on small- to mid-scale blueberry supply chain 
development to serve local markets. Feedback included similar 
misunderstandings of small rural supply chains.
    Projects focused in rural areas, specifically areas of 
persistent poverty, should be a priority funding area for LAMP 
programs, and geographic representation and transparency on 
review panels to ensure there is rural and farmer 
representation is critical. GOPA has also applied for a Value-
Added Producer Grant to expand to unmet markets. The reduced 
cost-share requirement through COVID-19 relief funding made the 
opportunity within reach during a time of production 
bottleneck. In the regular value-added producer process 
recipients have to spend money for a 50 percent reimbursement. 
This can require significant cash flow that can be limiting. I 
urge the Subcommittee to consider permanent reduced cost-share 
requirements for this program for eligible groups, such as 
socially disadvantaged and beginning farmers and small farmer 
cooperatives.
    GOPA also aims to continue to grow the supply to meet this 
demand by providing an entry point into agriculture for new and 
beginning farmers in rural areas. My husband and I wouldn't 
have been able to take the leap into starting our own farm 
business without the mentorship and market support we found 
through the farmer network within GOPA. In 2020 GOPA received a 
Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Planning Grant to 
develop a formal mentorship model, and aims to provide other 
direct support to member farmers.
    Farmers are resilient. In the face of natural disaster, 
extreme weather events, fluctuating markets, and now a global 
pandemic, resilience in the supply chain is critical, and it 
starts at the farm level. Small, big, conventional, organic, 
local, global, this principle holds true across the board, that 
without stewardship of our natural resources and building 
healthy and sustainable farms, local agricultural economies 
suffer, supply chains suffer. Investing in conservation 
research and on-farm conservation programs is a win for all of 
agriculture. Research funding through USDA NIFA, SARE, 
Conservation Innovation Grants through NRCS are all critical 
for the development of proven and farmer-trusted practices and 
technologies that promote conservation and improve farm 
profitability and efficiency.
    Programs that offset costs to adopt these practices, such 
as EQIP, RCPP, and CRP are also critical. My work through the 
Soil and Water Conservation District has allowed me to see 
firsthand the direct on-farm benefit of several of these 
programs. Our supply chain should value the environmental 
benefits of farms that meaningfully implement conservation 
practices, and directly reward farmers for conservation and 
sustainability. If there is one thing I have learned in the 
last 16 months, it is that our supply chains are not virtual. 
We can't farm from home. I am excited to be a part of a 
community in south Georgia that aims to emerge from these 
challenges stronger than before, with clear opportunities for 
improvement, and I appreciate the Subcommittee's interest and 
dedication to enhancing the strength and resiliency of our 
local supply chains. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Cooper follows:]

 Prepared Statement of Perri Cooper, Director, Georgia Organic Peanut 
      Association; Executive Director, Flint River Soil and Water 
                  Conservation District, Americus, GA
    Chair Plaskett, Ranking Member Baird, and Subcommittee Members, 
thank you for allowing me to testify before you today.
    My name is Perri Cooper and I am incredibly lucky to work with a 
diverse set of agricultural stakeholders across south Georgia and to be 
here representing them today.
    I am the Director of the Georgia Organic Peanut Association (GOPA), 
a farmer-owned agricultural cooperative that markets USDA Certified 
Organic peanuts and other agricultural products from producers in the 
Southeast. The cooperative's mission is to bring added value to 
established farming operations, and to create new opportunities for 
small, beginning, and limited-resource producers. GOPA's membership is 
small, but it markets organic commodities from any farmer in the 
region.
    I also have the privilege to work as Executive Director of the 
Flint River Soil and Water Conservation District in southwest Georgia. 
The FRSWCD serves farmers, landowners, partners, and citizens by 
facilitating the transfer of conservation-driven technology and 
widespread implementation across southwest Georgia and beyond, acting 
as a grassroots leader and local voice for stewardship of natural 
resources.
    After years of legwork, meetings, trials, research, and endless 
discussion, GOPA was formally incorporated in the late spring of 2019. 
The grower-owned and operated cooperative consists of a mix of small 
farms including both experienced organic farmers and several beginning 
farmers; some of these members growing organically for the first time. 
These farmers recognized that, without assuming outrageous financial 
risk, no single one of them could produce sufficient volume to supply 
small to mid-scale niche and local markets for Certified Organic 
peanuts. Rather, collective marketing would make it possible to tap 
into these markets. As a result, we've been able to sell Certified 
Organic peanuts to five small craft food manufacturers in Georgia, and 
have continued to grow in terms of the number farmers and Certified 
Organic acres since incorporation.
    Growth has not been without challenges. Many of the experienced 
organic row crop farmers were successfully producing Certified Organic 
peanuts in the late 2000's thanks to innovative research from retired 
[USDA]-ARS weed scientist Dr. W. Carroll Johnson III and breeders and 
pathologists at the University of Georgia. However, once the peanuts 
left the farm they lost Certified Organic status and associated price 
premium because of the lack of supply chain.
    In order to maintain certification integrity, each step of post-
harvest processing and value-add must also be certified. For a crop 
like peanuts, which has a shell and a skin and must be dug out of the 
ground, this post-harvest means buying, cleaning, shelling, blanching, 
roasting, and more. Georgia, the top peanut producing state in the 
country, produced over 3.2 billion pounds of peanuts last year, and the 
processing supply chain is at scale to match this impressive 
production, with innovative technologies and efficiencies. For 
comparison, Certified Organic production made up 0.06% of this total 
last year, which is in nowhere near the volume to demand the time, 
work, or achieve the added value for the shelling, blanching, and 
roasting facilities to go through the certification process. 
Inherently, Certified Organic production must be done at a smaller 
scale. Therefore, options are more limited and identifying similar 
scale supply chain has been critical. GOPA works with one certified 
organic shelling facility, and one certified organic blanching 
facility.
    This presents a risk without the added threat of the COVID-19 
pandemic. Today, I am here sharing challenges specifically faced during 
the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. But, in 2019, when the cooperative 
formally incorporated, the one Certified Organic peanut sheller was 
still decimated and in-operative from Hurricane Michael in October 
2018, our first experience with the issues of a limited supply chain.
    This past year, post-harvest processing was so bottle necked, in 
large part due to impacts from the pandemic and subsequent reduced 
capacity, that we have only in the past week been able to sell the 
first part of our 2020 crop, which was harvested in October and 
November of last year. That is a long gap for a small farmer-owned 
start up to pay farmers for their crop without the ability to sell it. 
But since the beginning, our farmers have believed that Certified 
Organic is promising market and have taken on this risk, waiting on the 
supply chain to catch up.
    Investment specifically in rural infrastructure to support local 
supply chains is critical. For Certified Organic supply chains this 
includes support and incentives for certification.
    This sentiment goes beyond the work of GOPA. Despite the City of 
Albany in southwest Georgia named as the fourth worst hit U.S. city by 
COVID on a per capita basis in April 2020, and the high rates of 
poverty in the largely rural region, relief programs such as the 
Farmers to Families Food Box Program did not tangibly impact the city 
or surrounding area in the same way it did the urban hub of Atlanta. 
This left the nonprofit arm of the FRSWCD to develop our own box 
program with support from local farmers and businesses, even without 
post-harvest and supply chain infrastructure. Would this small-scale 
infrastructure that supports local food systems have allowed food hubs 
that typically serve the more populous urban areas of the state to 
reach a community in need? Or even expand the impact of our own 
grassroots work to address the obvious gap?
    While GOPA has been able to tap into local markets within Georgia, 
peanut production is very region-specific. Craft food manufacturers 
outside of this region that serve their own local communities simply 
can't source local Certified Organic peanuts. And frankly, where the 
southeast lags behind in Certified Organic infrastructure, other 
regions have increased capacity. GOPA has seen interest to meet this 
market need, which would expand GOPA's opportunities and diversify 
markets. However, when marketing efforts in earnest began in 2020, the 
cooperatives first full year of operation, they were soon derailed. In 
fact, GOPA's chairman was on an airplane to California to attend a 
natural products expo when the event was canceled. Even untapped local 
markets here in the Southeast have been inaccessible in this same time. 
These relationships are built organically--no pun intended--through 
industry events, meetings, conferences, and workshops. The groundwork 
for GOPA itself was born from an impromptu lunch meeting at a 
conference for organic farmers. The importance of these person-to-
person interactions can't be overstated.
    GOPA has relied heavily on digital marketing (website and Google 
ads, primarily) since inception. In that time, has been inundated with 
requests from individuals seeking Georgia-grown Certified Organic 
peanut products. Requests in the range of 1 to 10 pound volumes of raw 
and roasted nuts from local individuals looking for peanuts for their 
own personal use has been significant. This is not something we are set 
up to offer--again requiring post-harvest infrastructure and logistics 
that do not exist for a small, Certified Organic local supply chain in 
our area. GOPA has pursued some grant programs to innovate and offset 
some costs associated with supply chain development and exploring new 
markets. This includes a 2020 Farmers['] Market Production Program 
proposal which developed a pathway for roasting, packaging and 
marketing to meet these direct-to-consumer demands.
    Last year, the LFPP/FMPP program under the 2018 Farm Bill Local 
Agriculture Market Program received over 400 applications, highlighting 
the great need for innovative programs that support local food systems. 
Less than \1/4\ were funded, which did not include GOPA's proposal. 
While the positive feedback was hopeful--clear project with 
straightforward objectives and good management plan--the weaknesses 
mentioned included overly ambitious sales goals and a confusion about 
the reference of marketing rotational crops as an objective within this 
particular project. Ultimately, it is difficult for the applicant to 
package these proposals in succinct language.
    I mentioned earlier the relatively small fraction Certified Organic 
production make up in Georgia's vast and diverse agricultural 
landscape. But to GOPA's small farmers, that 0.06% of the state's total 
peanut production is everything. And it's growing. We've seen 
incredible interest in not only Certified Organic peanut production, 
but also in production of rotational crops that GOPA markets through 
the cooperative. This offers not only diversified market opportunities 
for established farmers, but an entry point for small and beginning 
farmers, like myself.
    Marketing can't happen without the production of high quality 
Certified Organic peanuts. This addresses another critical aspect of 
the supply chain issue--the supply. The blend of beginning and 
experienced farmers that make up GOPA's membership is no coincidence. 
At the root of GOPA's formation was a recognition that a specialized 
skill set was critical to successful production of Certified Organic 
crops, peanuts in particular, and it needed to be shared with new and 
beginning farmers. In 2020, GOPA received a Beginning Farmer and 
Rancher Development Planning Grant to develop a formal mentorship 
model, in hopes that it would create an entry point for the many 
beginning farmers that were interested in joining GOPA. GOPA doesn't 
currently produce enough peanuts to supply current and emerging markets 
and creating opportunity for beginning farmers and other small farmers 
seeking to diversify their operations is critical to this success.
    The pandemic impacted this BFRD Planning Grant and the opportunity 
for growth significantly. While GOPA has grown in both acreage and 
farmers each year, 2020 significantly slowed the rate of that progress. 
In short, without in-person meetings, targeted outreach, and 
facilitated opportunities for farmer-to-farmer learning, we haven't 
been as successful in meaningfully engaging new farmers as we hoped, 
despite pivoting to virtual and other limited outreach.
    Each of these grant programs mentioned are key programs that offer 
meaningful opportunities for small-scale local supply chains and should 
be authorized in future farm bill. However, BFRDG and FMPP/LFPP 
specifically can often favor projects focused on mixed specialty crops 
in urban areas, leaving other commodities, rural communities and 
farmers overlooked. Projects focused in rural areas, specifically areas 
of persistent poverty, should be a priority funding area for BFRDG and 
LFPP/FMPP. And geographic representation and transparency on BFRDG and 
FMPP/LFPP review panels by ensuring there are rural and farmer 
representatives is critical.
    This year, GOPA has also applied for Value-Added Producer Grant, 
another key program that allows farmers to generate new agricultural 
products and expand marketing opportunities. The reduced cost-share 
requirement through COVID-19 relief funding made the opportunity within 
reach during a time of production bottle neck; I urge this Subcommittee 
to consider permanent reduced cost-share requirements for this program 
for certain eligible groups, including socially disadvantaged and 
beginning farmers, and small farmer cooperatives.
    Farmers, by nature, are resilient. In the face of natural disaster, 
extreme weather events, fluctuating markets, and, now, a global 
pandemic. Resilience in the supply chain is critical, and it starts at 
the farm level. Small, big, conventional, organic, local, global--this 
principle holds true across the board. That without stewardship of our 
natural resources and building healthy and sustainable farms, local 
agricultural economies and supply chains suffer. Period.
    Since 2004, the FRSWCD has secured over $24 million in targeted 
conservation funding through programs that directly benefit farmers and 
improve economic and environmental sustainability--the foundation of a 
healthy and resilient supply chain. Programs like the USDA Conservation 
Innovation Grant resulted in the development of center pivot irrigation 
technologies in partnership with growers, contractors and research that 
improve irrigation water use efficiency, integrated them into 
commercial operations, and are now adopted globally. The FRSWCD has 
also successfully implemented several other research and RCPP projects, 
providing direct technical assistance and on-farm implementation 
funding towards proven conservation practices. For example, in 
partnership with the USDA National Peanut Research Lab, the District 
worked to develop a smart phone mobile app from the Peanut Lab's 
desktop peanut irrigation scheduling tool, IrrigatorPro. The District 
the worked with local extension to cost-share soil moisture sensor and 
app adoption over 50 peanut fields in the lower Flint River Basin. This 
research is imperative and benefits all farms, including small farms 
that serve local food systems.
    Investing in conservation research and on-farm conservation 
programs is a win for all of agriculture. Research funding through USDA 
NIFA, Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education, and Conservation 
Innovation Grants through NRCS are critical for production of science-
backed and farmer-trusted practices and technologies that promote 
conservation and improve farm profitability and efficiency. Adoption of 
these programs are also key, and NRCS programs that cost-share 
implementation of conservation practices, including EQIP, RCPP, and 
Conservation Reserve programs are a critical component of this.
    Our supply chain should also value the environmental benefits of 
farms that meaningfully implement conservation practices. This includes 
maintaining integrity of the National Organic Program, and ensuring the 
development of any environmental markets has diverse representation and 
input from stakeholders across a diversity of geography, crop, and 
scale.
    If there is one thing I have learned during the past 16 months, it 
that our supply chains aren't virtual, we can't farm from home. I'm 
excited to be a part of a community in south Georgia that aims to 
emerge from these challenges stronger than before, with clear 
opportunities for improvement, and appreciate this Subcommittee's 
interest and dedication to enhancing the strength and resiliency of our 
local supply chains and local farm economies.
    Thank you.

    The Chair. Thank you, Ms. Cooper. Ms. Kennedy, please 
begin.

 STATEMENT OF TIANNA KENNEDY, OWNER/OPERATOR, STAR ROUTE FARM; 
    FOUNDER/OPERATOR, THE 607 CSA; BOARD MEMBER, CENTER FOR 
   AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT & ENTREPRENEURSHIP, WORCESTER, NY

    Ms. Kennedy. Thank you for this opportunity to share 
experience as a young farmer today. I know that you all have 
received a copy of the testimony, so I will just focus on a 
couple of quick things. But before I do that, I also would just 
like to talk about the resiliency, strength, and innovation of 
all of us small-scale producers, such as the other witnesses 
and myself, and in order to encourage you to adapt your 
programs to our needs. My name is Tianna Kennedy. I operate a 
full diet multi-farm CSA that last year served 800 families in 
New York City and in the Catskills, but we also work with 50 
restaurants and grocers and 21 pantries and food justice 
organizations throughout New York. I also grow mixed vegetables 
and small grains on 60 rented acres at Star Route Farm in 
Charlotteville, New York. I have been farming in Delaware and 
Otsego Counties in New York for over a decade.
    My experience farming has been shaped by a lack of access 
to secure farmland to grow my business. I apprenticed first for 
a large vegetable operation for 3 years, but I was burdened by 
student loan debt, and I was making a farmer's wages, so I 
wasn't able to buy a business--my own farm right away. I helped 
a second homeowner start his organic farm on his property, but 
when he pivoted his business model, I lost my job and my home, 
and had to start from scratch again. So finally I found a farm 
partner willing to form an LLC with me, and we rented 60 acres 
and broke ground on our current farm, Star Route Farm, which I 
now run with Walter Riesen and Amanda Wong. But because we only 
had a 10 year lease on that farm, we were unable to put in 
permanent fencing, and build out an adequate wash/pack/cooler 
station, so we lose about 30 percent of our vegetables to deer 
annually and scale our business due to lack of cooler space and 
storage space.
    This past winter we were finally able to purchase our 
neighbor's property with the help of Local Farms Fund 
investors, but the property is an old conventional dairy, and 
has a dilapidated--actually collapsed barn and farmhouse that 
will take years to rebuild and transition to organic 
production. However, despite all these challenges, and despite 
access to land and access to capital until this year, I worked 
collaboratively with other farms throughout my region to 
develop creative solutions to these challenges. To mitigate 
risk and create market advantage to my own farm, I convinced my 
farmers' market buddies to join me in a multi-farm CSA venture 
we call The 607 CSA. It now grows 30 to 50 percent annually. 
The CSA serves as an integral part--proof of concept for an 
organization that can fill in the logistics, gaps, and address 
the needs of regional small agriculture.
    Last year, before our normal season began, we were faced 
with the COVID-19 pandemic. Our whole business had to change in 
an instant. Within 2 weeks we had a fully operational business 
with 45 local farms and food businesses home delivering to 40 
Catskills towns. Though I am proud of the work that we were 
able to do in scaling up to support the community, we had to 
take on all of the risk, and weren't able to meet the actual 
demand at hand because we lacked funding to purchase emergency 
relief food from our farmers, or even to pay our staff 
adequately. Everybody was volunteering time to drive food to 
people's homes.
    For myself, and other farm businesses who share my needs, I 
want to offer these recommendations for the Committee today. 
CSAs are an important piece of the puzzle, especially for young 
and beginning farmers, so it would be great to support them. 
Our member farmers need help with strategic planning and 
identifying new opportunities. Congress could help by funding 
outreach and technical assistance to regional food businesses 
and organizations such as myself to formalize and scale. For 
us, it is time to purchase or lease a refrigerated truck and 
our own pallet jack or two, and there is not a USDA program 
that allows for a lot of this kind of infrastructure 
development beyond FSA microloans, so I would love to see items 
like this included in programs like VAPG, the Local Food 
Promotion Program, and the Regional Food Systems Partnerships.
    We need streamlined access--and accessible--USDA programs. 
The application process is burdensome and extremely academic. 
It is its own culture. The applications are often timed during 
our busiest season, June, and require burdensome funding 
matches, as my colleagues have explained. The match 
requirements can also exclude smaller projects and historically 
underserved communities that do not have access to this sort of 
funding. It would help to have USDA prioritize LAMP grant 
applications that serve targeted communities, like those of 
beginning farmers and BIPOC producers. To get the word out 
about USDA programs, USDA needs dedicated outreach staff, and 
to enter into more cooperative agreements to do outreach.
    Finally, the Farmers to Families Food Box Program in the 
pandemic showed what is possible when the USDA invests in 
connecting farmers with food-insecure communities. We need to 
continue this type of government support. The first round of 
funding was successful to small farmers and small distributors, 
and paid these entities a good price to sell to those in need. 
In the future, more long-term programs like this could be 
created. I suggest that if they are: reserve dedicated funds 
for BIPOC nonprofits and food businesses; consider removing GAP 
requirements so smaller producers can contribute, because, 
remember, a lot of people are using rented land; and publish a 
best practices guide to recruit BIPOC and young farmer 
distributors for participating in the program. I want to note 
that however accessible USDA programs can be, they are harder 
for people that don't have the resources I do. Thank you so 
much for your time.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Kennedy follows:]

Prepared Statement of Tianna Kennedy, Owner/Operator, Star Route Farm; 
 Founder/Operator, The 607 CSA; Board Member, Center for Agricultural 
             Development & Entrepreneurship, Worcester, NY
    Good morning, Committee Chair Delegate Stacey Plaskett and Ranking 
Member Jim Baird, the rest of the Committee and Staff. Thank you for 
this opportunity to share my experiences as a young farmer, operator of 
a multi-farm CSA The 607 CSA, Board member of the Center for 
Agricultural Development & Entrepreneurship (CADE), and member of the 
National Young Farmers Coalition.
    My name is Tianna Kennedy and I operate a full-diet, multi-farm 
community-supported agriculture (CSA) that serves 800 families in New 
York City and the Catskills. I grow mixed vegetables and small grains 
on 60 rented acres at Star Route Farm in Charlotteville, New York. I 
have been farming in Delaware and Otsego Counties of New York for over 
a decade. My experience farming has been shaped by a lack of access for 
secure farmland to grow my business. I apprenticed for 3 years before 
starting my own business, but because I was paid a farmer's wages 
(minimum wage), I was unable to save enough to buy my own farm. I 
helped a second-home owner start an organic farm on his property, but 
he pivoted business models and, in the process, I lost my job and home. 
I then formed an LLC with my current farm partner and broke land on our 
current rented property, but I've been unable to put up permanent 
fencing or build out a viable wash/pack/cooler station since we only 
have a 10 year lease on the farm (where the landlord currently lives). 
We subsequently lose 30-40 percent of vegetables to deer annually and 
are unable to scale our business due to lack of cooler space. This past 
winter, we were finally able to purchase our neighbor's property with 
the help of Local Farm Fund investors, but the property is conventional 
dairy land and comes with a collapsed barn and a run-down old 
farmhouse, and will take years to rebuild and to transition to organic 
production.
    Despite not having secure access to land, or access to capital 
until this year, I have worked collaboratively with farmers throughout 
my region to develop creative solutions to the challenges we face 
growing healthy food for market.
    I was unable to finance our farm startup in a traditional manner 
due to my debt-to-income ratio (student loan debt and farmworker 
wages), so we started a CSA in 2015 to buy seeds and pay for labor in 
the spring before we were able to harvest crops. To mitigate risk and 
create market advantage, I convinced my farmers['] market friends to 
join us in a multi-farm CSA venture we call The 607 CSA. It grows by 
30-50 percent annually. It's become clear that the work of The 607 CSA 
serves as an integral proof of concept for an organization that can 
fill in the logistics gaps and address the needs of regional small 
agriculture. We've discovered that the logistics of moving food from 
field to fork are insurmountable for many small farms to manage on 
their own, and so, multi-farm collaborations for aggregation and 
distribution are not only a creative solution but also a necessary one 
and should be supported through USDA programs.

                          Social Impact Metrics
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       2015     2016     2017     2018     2019    2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Farms Supported        15       16       17       17       25      45
   Families Served       101      167      212      240      453     834
      (CSA Members)
Distribution Sites        14       15       17       19       21      50
              Crew         0        0        0        1        2     10
 Subsidized Shares         0        0        1        5       10    17k
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 27 throughout the year.
 Worth to Social Justice Programs.
* 2020 Survey indicates 3.2 people per share.

    Last year before our normal season began, we were faced with the 
COVID-19 pandemic. Our neighbors were confined to houses and grocery 
store shelves were bare. Through the CSA, we put out the call to our 
local farms to begin a pre-season home-delivery a-la-carte market for 
our frightened house-bound Catskills community. Our whole business had 
to change in an instant. Within 2 weeks we had a fully operational 
business with 45 local farm and food businesses delivering to 40 
Catskills towns. The work was terrifying: at the beginning we came 
close to running out of personal protective equipment (PPE) and each 
delivery felt like a run to Mars. We volunteered time, because we were 
concerned about feeding our rural neighbors and our business model 
could not support the hours of driving that entailed. We were 
overwhelmed by the needs of the community, scared for our own lives, 
and afraid of infecting people when dropping off produce (before we 
learned the virus was airborne and unlikely to be transmitted through 
touch). Though we put out calls for help to local ag nonprofits, we 
received barely any funding to support our work (CADE did find us a 
source of PPE, paid for the software we onboarded for this market, and 
helped pay for one administrative support position for a month).
    We created a program within our CSA for the wealthier members to 
support those in need, which helped, but barely scratched the surface 
of the demand we faced. Though I'm proud of the work we were able to 
do, in trying to scale up to support the community, we had to take on 
all of the risk and weren't able to meet the actual demand at hand 
because we lacked funding to purchase emergency relief food from our 
farmers, or to pay our staff adequately. Farmers who are meeting the 
needs of the public shouldn't have to shoulder all of the burden of 
transitioning to meet the need.

    We feel that The 607 CSA succeeds by:

   Providing a market and trucking logistics for Sustainable 
        Small-Scale Family Farms in a geographically disadvantaged 
        region. Creating a market in an otherwise unprofitable 
        agricultural region helps to ensure the current farmland stays 
        in production while providing incentive for young farmers to 
        set up operations.

   Providing organic, nutrient-dense, full-diet, affordable 
        local food to over 800 Catskills and NYC residents.

   Performing as a regional foodshed model promoting scale 
        through collaboration rather than the proven unsustainable and 
        expensive scaling of individual operations.

   Launching a food sovereignty project in 2020 in 
        collaboration with local nonprofit organizations providing the 
        same organic, nutrient-dense food to pantries, food justice 
        orgs, and emergency food projects like Free Fridges in the 
        Catskills and NYC.

   Working as an agile network, able to mobilize rapidly during 
        emergencies as demonstrated last spring at the onset of the 
        COVID-19 pandemic. The admin team, supported by the CSA's 
        network of farms, launched an entirely new local home-delivery 
        business model within a 2 week span in March 2020. The quick 
        start up included 42 farms and served 40 towns in Delaware, 
        Otsego, and Schoharie Counties.

   Providing flexible employment for local residents. In 2020, 
        the CSA employed 27 people when many had lost other work.

   Growing steadily by word-of-mouth.

   Practicing inclusive decision-making. Decisions are made by 
        consensus between farms and CSA crew members and the admin 
        team's working groups informed by a series of annual surveys 
        and, importantly, ongoing conversations.

   Making way for a Black, Indigenous, and People of Color 
        (BIPOC)-led future. In the interim, we are on a path towards 
        inclusion, listening, learning, engaging, and responding.

    The 607 struggles in the following ways:

   It exists in a false economy in competition with larger, 
        subsidized commodity farms, masking the real value of food. The 
        market will never allow for the margins to provide living wages 
        for employees, payroll taxes, health insurance, vacation, or 
        retirement plans.

   Trucking is very expensive and warehousing is precarious. 
        We've maxed out our local farm storage capacities upstate, have 
        had to hire a third-party trucker from Vermont to take the food 
        from the Catskills to the city, and the future of last-mile 
        delivery is uncertain in the city where warehousing is 
        incredibly expensive, and last-mile logistics are even more so 
        once you get there.

   The business model has evolved organically as locations and 
        members have requested to join. The result is a far-flung 
        network and inefficiency in trucking.

   Unable to meet demand for food-insecure and continually 
        marginalized communities now that the USDA food box program has 
        ended. While before we were filling in the gaps, we are now 
        being asked to provide the bulk of the food. We have the farms, 
        packers, logistics, and transportation, but lack funding to 
        actually support production and distribution.

    In order to become an organization that can scale to meet the needs 
of our communities and to sustain our operations in perpetuity the CSA 
needs the following:

   Strategic planning to identify partners for 2021, develop 
        the food sovereignty projects, and consider the potential of a 
        new 501[(c)(3)] status. Congress could help by funding 
        dedicated Rural Development office staff, non-governmental 
        organizations (NGOs) and extension staff to conduct outreach 
        and provide technical assistance to regional food businesses 
        and organizations like ours to formalize and scale.

   Vertically integrated Infrastructure--It is time to purchase 
        or lease a refrigerated truck and our own pallet jack (or two). 
        There is not a USDA program that allows for a lot of this kind 
        of infrastructure development beyond FSA micro loans, so I 
        would love to see items like these be included in programs like 
        the Value-Added Producer Grants (VAPG), the Local Food 
        Promotion Program (LFPP), and the Regional Food Systems 
        Partnerships (RFSP):

     New e-commerce platforms.

     Personal protective equipment.

     Packaging and labeling materials.

     Signage.

     Food safety practice upgrades.

     Food safety certification.

     COVID-19 testing materials and services.

     Dry or cold storage, as well as other equipment and 
            upgrades.

     Hand washing equipment and materials.

     Cleaning supplies.

     Temperature screening equipment.

     Food delivery costs (fuel and maintenance).

     Expanding or restructuring processing lines.

     Purchasing or leasing temporary space or holding pens.

     Transportation services or equipment.

     Staff time for implementing COVID-19 shifts, 
            protocols, etc.

     Other measures to protect workers, or aid in 
            preventing the spread of, COVID-19, including providing for 
            worker transportation, housing, and childcare.

   Streamlined and accessible USDA programs.

      Federal programs like the VAPG and LFPP support local and 
        regional food projects, but they are not accessible to working 
        farmers. Farmers like us who have innovated creative and 
        practical solutions to feed our local communities do not 
        benefit from the programs designed to help. The application 
        process is burdensome and extremely academic and even with a 
        Master's Degree in writing, I did not succeed in securing an 
        LFPP when I applied in 2020. The match requirements also 
        exclude smaller projects and historically underserved 
        communities who do not have access to additional funding. I 
        urge Congress and the USDA to streamline applications, extend 
        the deadlines particularly during the growing season to winter 
        months, and eliminate the match requirement.
      Farmers do not have dedicated grant-writing staff acculturated to 
        the weighted requirements and other non-explicit intricacies of 
        successful grant writing, nor do they have time to write multi-
        page essays expounding the many virtues of their proposed 
        projects. They are too busy growing food, adding value to that 
        food, and running their businesses. Nevertheless, farmers 
        deserve all the security and support their well-staffed 
        nonprofit colleagues receive from successfully written USDA 
        grants as they are the people shouldering the bulk of the work 
        and assuming the majority of the risk. It is important to 
        mention that a more-streamlined/simplified granting culture 
        might also improve the quality of the projects and services 
        provided. A simplified funding protocol might allow for more 
        flexible deliverables, which is increasingly imperative in our 
        current reality. Federal funding needs to be able to quickly 
        adapt to new issues as they pop up including: social unrest, 
        political strife, weather events and natural disasters 
        (including pandemics) brought about by climate change. COVID-19 
        a great example of one such emergency, a more-flexible funding 
        culture, could have been adapted to address.

      In addition, I urge USDA to commit to prioritizing the ranking of 
        all Local Agriculture Market Program (LAMP) grant applications 
        that are submitted by, or intend to serve, beginning farmers or 
        ranchers, socially disadvantaged farmers or ranchers, operators 
        of small or medium-sized farms or ranches that are structured 
        as family farms, and veteran farmers or ranchers.
      I urge USDA to provide dedicated staff and enter into cooperative 
        agreements to help conduct additional outreach and technical 
        assistance for the VAPG program; train State Rural Development 
        office staff about the program; and support non-governmental 
        organizations (NGOs) and extension staff conducting outreach 
        and assistance for the program. Prioritize providing additional 
        outreach and technical assistance to underserved communities, 
        tribal communities, and for socially disadvantaged farmers and 
        ranchers.

    I am a farmer, and a business owner, but am also involved in the 
regional agricultural conversation: Through my work at CADE, I have 
seen how Federal dollars can have a positive impact on regional food 
systems:
    From what information I have readily available, we have seen a 
total of $1.4M invested by USDA in central NY through CADE since 2015, 
and another $600,000 that has gone directly to farmers (thank you!), 
which would total $2M. Here is a very broad strokes breakdown of the 
$2M:

   Nearly $600,000 in direct grants allocated to central NY 
        farmers for business development and marketing via VAPG or RBDG 
        since 2017, including for value-added dairy.

   More than $1.3M in funding to support aggregation, 
        distribution, and marketing products of central NY farmers via 
        LFPP since 2015--which resulted in an 117% increase in sales 
        for agribusinesses. This includes our most recent LFPP grant 
        for our Emerging Markets Training Program which includes 
        support for Headwaters Food Hub, Common Market, and Upstate 
        Growers and Packers as hubs.

   $100,000 for strengthening the supply chain to expand farm-
        to-school local food purchasing via Food and Nutrition Program 
        since 2018

    In this year alone, CADE received $100k for distance learning that 
enabled us to support COVID rapid response. Our Farm & Food Business 
Incubator which is funded through state and Federal funds, supported in 
1 year 309 farm and food businesses through online workshops and one-
on-one advising and helped 11 new beginning farmers enter local/
regional production--100 percent of whom were socially disadvantaged.
    In 2015, The VAPG helped develop the Lucky Dog Hub, in Hamden, New 
York. With VAPG funds, CADE hired a consultant to help organize the 
HUB, and bought critical infrastructure of a pallet jack and walk-in 
cooler. Though Lucky Dog Farm no longer runs the hub, The 607 CSA has 
taken on the role and we are still using that infrastructure today.
    But while CADE succeeds, the inaccessibility to USDA programs is 
even greater for ``socially disadvantaged farmers''--farmers of color 
who have even less access to the matching requirements, and ability to 
take the time to complete the application. USDA should actively conduct 
outreach to and recruit Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) 
producers and organizations for grant review panels and USDA advisory 
committees and strive to ensure that the final makeup of committees and 
review panels reflects the diversity of the constituencies working in 
agriculture. We ask Congress to allocate more resources to provide 
technical assistance and outreach to BIPOC producers and organizations 
wishing to apply for programs across the food chain like VAPG, LFPP and 
RFSP.
    At CADE, we are not seeing Federal money go toward building or 
securing land access for the next generation of farmers and ranchers, 
most especially to BIPOC beginning farmers who have the least access to 
affordable, secure farmland. We would love to see Federal dollars go 
towards the purchase of public and private land to be made available to 
young farmers and farmers of color. Land prices are skyrocketing in the 
Catskills as wealthy people flee New York City--land was prohibitively 
expensive before COVID but is now much worse.
    Also, CADE is working to create equity in agriculture but keeps 
running up against extreme racism in communities that scare off BIPOC 
beginning farmers. We need resources for culture change and public 
dialogue to create safe communities for multiculturalism to exist here. 
It's hard when our country's divisions and deep seeded racism is 
playing out so much in rural spaces. But this kind of work is not 
considered part of agriculture. USDA needs to think more holistically 
to support diverse new entrants to agriculture.
    The Farmers to Families Food Box Program in the pandemic showed 
what is possible if USDA invests in connecting farmers with food-
insecure communities. We need to continue this type of government 
support. The first round, before subsequent changes, was accessible to 
small farmers and small distributors, and paid these entities a good 
price to sell to those in need.
    If a future, more long-term program was to be created like Farmers 
to Families Food Box Program, I suggest that it:

   Require that at least 20 percent of dedicated funds be 
        reserved for BIPOC nonprofits and food businesses, especially 
        those with proven experience working with BIPOC producers and 
        communities.

   Remove the Good Agriculture Practices certificate 
        requirement to be a producer participating in the program, so 
        that smaller producers growing good, clean, nutrient-dense 
        food, but without resources to modernize production facilities, 
        might also contribute to the program.

   Publish regional lists of small- and mid-sized, and 
        minority- and women-owned farms qualified to be subcontractors 
        in the program or enact a matching program across contractors 
        and producers.

   Evaluate bid prices based on historic and reasonable costs 
        for a particular farm, producer, or distribution operation in 
        order to ensure that small and specialty farms are adequately 
        compensated.

   Set a goal of subcontracting with small- and mid-sized, and 
        minority- and women-owned farms with distributing to minority-
        led nonprofits as primary goals of the program, aligning all 
        procurement processes and messaging accordingly, and tracking 
        progress toward these goals.

   Publish a best practices guide to recruit BIPOC and young 
        farmers for distributors participating in the program.

    A list of The 607 CSA/Star Route Farm Food Justice Partners who are 
asking The 607 CSA to take up the slack of the USDA FOOD BOX Program 
(21k already donated by CSA members in 2021, but we're running out of 
funds).
NYC
    St. John's Bread and Life: Every day, Bread & Life serves thousands 
of meals to hungry New Yorkers.
    Bushwick Ayuda Mutua: A grassroots network of volunteers providing 
groceries and household staples to residents in Bushwick, Brooklyn with 
an emphasis on serving undocumented people, low-income families with 
children and those sick or positive to COVID-19, serving 200 families a 
week.
    Guanabana Collective: Guanabana serves as a collective dedicated to 
centering the voices of Black folks with Antillean roots including the 
Greater and Lesser Antilles.
    Heart of Dinner: A nonprofit organization that fundraises to 
provide cooked-meals and groceries to 1,000 elderly-community of 
Chinatown, Manhattan.
    Woodbine: Woodbine is an experimental hub in Ridgewood, Queens for 
developing the practices, skills, and tools needed to build autonomy. 
Woodbine serves around a thousand people each week.
    Wat Buddha Thai Thavorn Vanaram: Wat Buddha Thai Thavorn Vanaram is 
a Buddhist temple in Elmhurst, Queens. We work with them to do 
occasional distribution for 100 residents.
Catskills
    Delaware Opportunities: A nonprofit serving Delaware County, New 
York residents with emergency food and economic relief, school 
supplies, and home deliveries. The CSA works with Delaware Opportunity 
to provide 77 food boxes a month composed of organic: veggies, milk, 
ground beef, eggs, and bread. Together we distribute to families in 
Delaware County. We are actively fundraising to increase the number 
served.
    Pantries Organized with a generous grant from CADE Farms:

 
 
 
Burlington Flats Food Pantry         Richfield Springs Food Pantry
Community Cupboard                   Unadilla Community Food Pantry
Cooperstown Food Pantry              Worcester Food Pantry
Delaware Opportunity                 Helping Hands Food Pantry
Greater Franklin Food Pantry         FDT Maryland
Loaves & Fishes Food Pantry          Milford Food Pantry
 

    Thank you for your time and your support! It's a pleasure to share 
our work feeding our neighbors with you. I look forward to 
participating in future USDA programs!

    Tianna Kennedy.

    The Chair. Thank you very much for that. And Mr. Shannon, 
please begin when you are ready.

          STATEMENT OF JONATHAN SHANNON, NICHE MARKET 
 LIVESTOCK PRODUCER, SHANNON FAMILY FARMS LLC, CRAWFORDSVILLE, 
   IN; ACCOMPANIED BY KELLY SHANNON, NICHE MARKET LIVESTOCK 
               PRODUCER, SHANNON FAMILY FARMS LLC

    Mr. Shannon. Chair Plaskett and Ranking Member Baird, thank 
you for allowing us to join this discussion today. Kelly and I 
are both fully involved in our day-to-day operations of our 
small niche livestock market in town, where those products end 
up in the end-consumer's hand throughout our community and 
beyond. We have submitted some written testimony. I would like 
to just cover some of the highlights from there, and tell a 
little bit of our story.
    Kelly returned to rural Montgomery County in 2003 after 
graduating college, and a year later I joined her by purchasing 
our 10 acre farm, less than 1 mile from where she grew up. As 
most farm families, land and profits were too tight to add more 
family members to the operation, so we both took off-farm jobs. 
As time passed, we were forced to find what our niche was to 
make our farm profitable. At the young age of 26 we began 
Shannon Family Farms, with little knowledge of our local 
markets or opportunities available through the USDA. The goal 
was to produce proteins for local consumers and provide buying 
options for the community.
    A few years later, 70 adjoining acres became available to 
us. As beginning teachers on beginning teacher salaries, many 
lending institutions would not even entertain a conversation 
about purchasing those 70 acres, so we were not able to obtain 
that land, and had to regroup and decide how will we be most 
profitable on 10 acres? We had no knowledge of beginning 
farmers or ranchers loans through the USDA at that time, but 
would self-fund our 10 acres and become profitable. We would 
become a beef, pork, poultry, and egg producer, and deal with 
the end-consumer.
    From 2006 to 2016 we formed our own agricultural market 
through our on-farm sales, through attending farmers' markets 
in surrounding areas, and working with Indiana Grown through 
the Indiana State Department of Agriculture. Finally, in 2016, 
we hit a roadblock with market opportunities. Based on this 
dilemma, we could continue being a small producer, or expanding 
into a year-round retail business model. Thankfully, there were 
other like-minded producers in the community that faced some of 
the same barriers, and we made an effort to find a solution to 
those reduced market opportunities. Ranking Member Baird 
mentioned that we started Four Seasons Local Market. That is a 
cooperative of a few small producers for a year-round retail 
storefront that sits on Main Street in historic downtown 
Crawfordsville. We offer locally produced products from the 
community and across the state. This market is vibrant, and a 
weekly meeting place of local food consumers who purchase 
products from local farm families.
    Our official interactions with the USDA began in July 2020, 
almost 14 years after we had begun our small operation. The 
reason for the encounter was for the Coronavirus Food 
Assistance Program during COVID-19. Why had it taken us 14 
years to discover some of the economic opportunities available 
to the USDA? We believe that services were mostly offered and 
benefitted large row crop or large livestock operations, but 
did not help small producers. Our experience both through CFAP 
phases at the local FSA office were easy and beneficial. 
Earlier, I mentioned partnerships with Indiana Grown. That 
included the Indiana Grown for Schools network, which is a 
statewide initiative to get products of local producers into 
the schools. That grant was through the Indiana State 
Department of Health, Indiana State Department of Agriculture, 
and Purdue Extension. It funded the creation of a website and 
buyer's guide so that people would have opportunity to 
purchase. We have not been able to take advantage of this 
opportunity, and it is our belief that the USDA could be of 
assistance by incentivizing schools to use more individual 
ingredients, and less prepared and pre-packaged foods.
    As other livestock producers experienced during COVID, we 
had a bottleneck in our processing. There are grants that have 
recently been made available, including the Meat and Poultry 
Inspection Readiness Grant to hopefully prevent future 
bottlenecks. We have been able to give up a few of our staple 
proteins, grass-fed beef and pasteurized poultry, and have had 
to move and change with consumer demand. At this time, 
increased e-commerce opportunities are there, but as many 
others have found, we have not benefitted from high-speed 
internet in our rural area. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Shannon follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Jonathan Shannon, Niche Market Livestock 
         Producer, Shannon Family Farms LLC, Crawfordsville, IN
    Chair Plaskett, Ranking Member Baird, and Members of the 
Subcommittee, thank you for inviting us to join the discussion today. 
We are both involved in the day-to-day operations of our small, niche 
market livestock farm where we directly market our products to the 
local, end consumers of our community and beyond. Through our testimony 
we will share the successes and struggles those small producers, like 
ourselves, face in a new era of local food production.
Background
    Small, local producers that grow and raise food, fuel, and fiber 
for local communities are a vital part of what makes rural America 
vibrant. Local, family-owned farms are an economic driver for many 
communities throughout the United States because of the financial 
reinvestment into other businesses in the region. What makes local 
producers successful and able to grow is the access to plentiful 
agricultural markets. Continued and increased economic opportunities 
need to be readily available to small farms.
Growth of Our Farm
    Kelly returned to rural Montgomery County, Indiana in 2003 after 
graduating college. One year later, I joined her, and we purchased a 10 
acre farm less than 1 mile from where she grew up. As most farm 
families across the country, land and profits were too tight to add 
more family members to the operation, so both of us took off-farm jobs, 
as teachers, with the hope of finding our niche in agriculture as time 
passed. At the young age of 26, we began Shannon Family Farms in 2006 
with little knowledge of our local markets or opportunities through the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The goal was to produce proteins 
(beef, pork, chicken, and eggs) for local consumers and provide buying 
options to the community.
    A few years later, 70 acres of adjoining land became available for 
purchase, but with two beginning teacher salaries, local lending 
institutions would not even entertain a conversation about the purchase 
of those acres. With no knowledge of Beginning Farmers and Ranchers 
Loans through the USDA at that time, the land was never acquired. 
Consequently, we made the conscious decision to most effectively use 
our 10 acres to grow our operation. This would lead to becoming a beef, 
pork, poultry, and egg producer that dealt directly with the end 
consumer.
    From 2006 to 2016, we formed our own agricultural market through 
on-farm sales, attending farmer's markets in surrounding areas, and 
working with Indiana Grown through the Indiana State Department of 
Agriculture. Finally, in 2016, we hit a roadblock with market 
opportunities. Based on this dilemma, we were faced with continuing as 
a small, seasonal operation or expanding into a year-round retail 
business model. Thankfully, there were other like-minded small 
producers in the community that faced the same barriers and made the 
conscious effort to find a solution to reduced market opportunities.
    Four Seasons Local Market was founded in October of 2016 through a 
partnership of a few small producers in an effort to expand their 
economic opportunities. A year round, retail storefront sits on Main 
Street in historic downtown Crawfordsville, IN to offer locally 
produced products from the community and across the state. This local 
market is a vibrant, weekly meeting place of local food consumers who 
purchase products from local family farms. The market has been blessed 
with continuous growth each year. This endeavor was supported by 
individual investments from each farm family.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Interactions and Support
    Shannon Family Farms began their official interactions with the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture and their local Farm Service Agency 
(FSA) office in July 2020, almost 14 years after we began our small 
operation. The reason for the encounter was to participate in the 
Coronavirus Food Assistance Program (CFAP) during COVID-19 at the 
recommendation of fellow local producers. Why had it taken us 14 years 
to discover some of the economic opportunities available through the 
USDA? We believed services were mostly offered and benefited large row 
crop or large livestock operations and did not help small producers. 
Our experience through both CFAP phases at the local FSA office was 
easy and beneficial.
    Earlier, I mentioned a partnership with Indiana Grown. The 
partnership included the Indiana Grown for Schools Network which is a 
statewide initiative that was the product of a 2018-2020 USDA Farm to 
School Grant, received by the Indiana State Department of Health. In 
partnership with the Indiana State Department of Agriculture and Purdue 
Extension. This grant funded the creation of a website and the Indiana 
Grown for Schools Buyer's Guide. This is a local agricultural market 
our farm has not been able to take advantage of through meat sales. It 
is our belief that the USDA could be of assistance in accessing this 
market by incentivizing schools to use more individual ingredients, and 
less prepared and prepackaged foods.
The Future of Local, Niche Market Livestock Production
    The farm's economic opportunities and agricultural markets have 
become throttled as the country emerges from COVID-19 and its effects 
on supply chains. A major contributing factor to this decreased revenue 
is access to reasonably priced, USDA inspected, processing facilities 
for small producers that are available regionally. Knowing that only 9 
days ago the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced $55.2 million in 
competitive grant funding available through the new Meat and Poultry 
Inspection Readiness Grant (MPIRG) program,\1\ that does not fix that 
damage that has been done prior to now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2021/06/21/usda-
invests-552-million-grants-increase-capacity-and-expand-access.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Poultry was a staple protein offered to customers of Shannon Family 
Farms but has become a casualty in our product offerings due to the 
local, small, USDA processor not offering poultry processing in 2021. 
With the increased demand for pork and beef processing, poultry 
processing was put off to the side by the processor for this year and 
maybe the future. Small, local, reliable, and affordable processing 
will continue to be a struggle for local producers like Shannon Family 
Farms. During the COVID-19 pandemic, supply chains were strained and 
prices of processing inputs, such as PPE, sanitation products, and 
packaging increased. Those costs were not absorbed by the inspected 
processing facilities and were passed directly on to the small producer 
as evidence by our raising processing costs. It is our sincere hope 
that as supply chains return to normal that those price increases can 
be rolled back. Through the years, we have benefited from using a USDA 
inspected processing facility as our sole processor.
    With increased e-commerce opportunities quickly gaining popularity 
among local food consumers and the benefit of opening other agriculture 
markets through online sales, the farm yearns for reliable, rural 
broadband. The USDA ReConnect Program, introduced in 2018, and multiple 
additional appropriations for FY 2019, 2020, and 2021 \2\ is a step in 
the right direction, COVID-19 has magnified the need for that rural 
telecommunications infrastructure to reach many more local producers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://www.usda.gov/broadband.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resiliency and Change
    Shannon Family Farms has prided themselves with adapting to 
customer demand and maximizing return on investment from agricultural 
products produced with our small amount of acreage. Local demand has 
increased for cut flowers in recent years. The 2021 growing season has 
seen pasture acreage at the farm converted to cut flowers rows. With 
that being said, we will be exploring opportunities through the USDA to 
secure and expand the future of this agricultural commodity in our 
local market through grants, operating loans, microloans, and youth 
loans. This is being done to replace some of the protein sources no 
longer being raised because of meat processing bottlenecks.
    Having new knowledge of economic opportunities for local 
agricultural markets through the USDA, Shannon Family Farms continues 
to look toward the future and focus on growth through various 
agricultural commodities. We cannot tell you what commodity we will be 
raising in 10 years, but it will mirror the demands of our consumers 
and customers. It is with eternal optimism that issues facing small 
producers, like ourselves, can be resolved and new, expanded 
agricultural markets are opened.
Conclusion
    Small, local producers are the backbone of rural communities and 
must work side-by-side with larger producers to provide food, fuel, and 
fiber to all consumers. Small farms that work directly with the end-
consumer can share the success and struggles directly with them. We 
have cherished that relationship with our customers since 2006 but are 
always looking for economic opportunities to expand local agricultural 
markets especially in the post COVID-19 pandemic era. If anything was 
demonstrated during the past year, it was the necessity of having local 
food options available as larger store shelves were minimally stocked 
or empty. Local producers are able to shorten the supply chain 
tremendously when the correct tools and supports are in place. Shannon 
Family Farms looks forward to future opportunities to expand our 
current market options and grow with different commodity options for 
consumers.
    Kelly and I would like to thank you for the opportunity to 
participate in this discussion on a topic that is vital to our 
operation and the future generations being raised on our farm.

    The Chair. Thank you very much to all of our witnesses for 
those statements. At this time Members will be recognized for 
questions in order of seniority, alternating between Majority 
and Minority Members. You will be recognized for 5 minutes each 
in order to allow us to get to as many questions as possible. I 
recognize myself for 5 minutes at this time.
    I wanted to ask, Ms. Kennedy, would you speak to the role 
that consumers play in local agricultural markets, and how did 
the change in consumer demand impact farmers' business 
decisions and drive innovation in local markets during the 
COVID pandemic?
    Ms. Kennedy. Yes, I would love to. I think that, as Ranking 
Member Baird mentioned, us small farmers usually have to find 
niche markets, and so usually we are just trying to fill in the 
gaps of the big guys. But during the COVID pandemic, when the 
larger supply chains were threatened, and the grocery stores 
were closed, we became the market. Most of my producers did not 
have--I mean, the restaurants closed, and so we lost one 
market, but everybody else that I knew was scaling up, and 
struggling to meet demand. And so I feel like we all had to 
pivot in a moment's notice to try to meet those demands to try 
to feed our members, our neighbors, and people that we had 
never worked with before.
    Yes, during emergency moments the small-scale producers 
sort of take the burden of the whole food system, but lack the 
support to pivot and to make those changes, and just take all 
the risk. And then this year, once the pandemic had started 
easing off, everybody goes back to business as normal, and 
forgets that last year they were depending on us for their 
lives, so that is also a challenge, because then everybody had 
scaled up, and now we have to find other avenues for the food.
    The Chair. Thank you. Thank you for that.
    Ms. Kennedy. Does that answer your question?
    The Chair. Yes. Mr. Shannon, would you agree with what Ms. 
Kennedy has just outlined?
    Mr. Shannon. Madam Chair, I was sitting here shaking my 
head on every point Mrs. Kennedy made, that we had record sales 
through the months of March 2020 and also April 2020. Store 
shelves were empty, we ramped up. Dealing with livestock, it is 
a little lengthier process to ramp up. But as things came back 
to normal, sales, and those consumers, had started to disappear 
out of local food, but yes, we did take the brunt, and were 
able to support our local community, and make sure they had 
proteins in their freezers and refrigerators throughout the 
pandemic.
    The Chair. Thank you. Mr. Browne, thank you for joining us. 
And can you speak towards the unique market access challenges 
that come with farming on an island off of the mainland?
    Mr. Browne. Thank you. Yes. We are in one of the most 
unfortunate circumstances, and that is because our import is 
almost 98 or 99 percent. So, in a time of supply, where food 
was being halted during the pandemic, we saw some changes, but 
we had to make changes as well, and put the protocol in place 
in order to mitigate what was happening. Most of our wholesale 
production was lost, and those channels that we used, such as a 
supermarket, and other restaurants, were actually not taking 
anything at that time.
    Now, we had to actually adapt, in a way, where we had to 
serve a certain amount of customers at a time, and even 
though--like the other person before said, we had increased 
sales, but then, as we go along, we find that it tapers off, so 
we are looking over the last 6 months where it has tapered off, 
where the--everything seems to be getting back to normal, and 
we are now back at the same place, for instance, our local 
Department of Agriculture, which actually processed meat, has 
been closed for the last 6 weeks. And during the pandemic it 
had been closed for almost a whole year. So we had a situation 
where we had to stop our meat CSA and only deal with the 
produce CSA, so customers were asking for protein, but, 
unfortunately, we could not provide it because we are doing 
commercial sale of protein, and not to go against the law 
itself to have protein processed through some other method.
    The Chair. Thank you. I have run out of time, but I want to 
thank you, Mr. Browne, also for your promotion of local farming 
and educating young farmers. I would love to see your written 
testimony about that as well. At this time, Ranking Member 
Baird?
    Mr. Baird. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Shannon, in your 
testimony you mentioned difficulties you faced in obtaining 
capital to pursue your business plan. I have seen through my 
years, time and again, the near impossibility for a beginning 
farmer to begin and run an operation that was large enough to 
support his family. So my question to you is: how do you 
suggest and recommend young people go about this process, and 
what steps should they take to prepare to try to start their 
operation? Mr. Shannon?
    Mr. Shannon. Thank you, sir. I was encouraged the other 
day, looking through some of the USDA programs, that there are 
youth loans available, and what popped into my head were my two 
daughters that have an interest in agriculture, and finding out 
ways of how they could add to the farm that is unique to them. 
What we were really missing, starting out back in 2006, was 
some succession planning, or a mentor, some guidance for young, 
beginning farmers on what has worked, what has not worked. So 
teaming up with that mentor that may be a seasoned farmer 
looking to retire eventually, to pass that along, to give 
advice and get you going on the straight and narrow to be 
profitable. So I believe finding that mentor, whether that is 
in your local community, anywhere across the country, having 
that network of folks to give guidance.
    Something else that we ran into was business essentials. 
Grant writing, legalities with business entities, health 
departments, accounting, Federal tax registration. All of that 
could be part of the USDA stepping up and providing those 
resources and guidance, whether that is through classes, 
outreach, but having that so that you are prepared early on in 
your career as a beginning farmer to gain that capital and make 
those best choices.
    Mr. Baird. If I may continue on that conversation just a 
little bit with you, you mentioned the resources of the USDA, 
but you also mentioned that you worked with the Indiana 
Department of Agriculture, and all states have departments of 
agriculture. Can you share with this Committee how you got 
involved with the Indiana Grown, and how it helped you enter 
into even more markets?
    Mr. Shannon. Yes. We were attending a conference at one 
point early on, and Indiana Grown was just in its infancy, I 
believe around 2015 Indiana Grown began, and they came to 
present, and the goal was to have a network of Indiana farmers, 
Indiana-produced products, and share those successes and open 
markets. We are in a frozen processed meat business. Indiana 
Grown worked tirelessly for other producers to get them on the 
shelves, but, again, frozen meat in a grocery store is 
difficult. There has been much success with other local 
producers getting on grocery store shelves. Indiana Grown has 
put on events that we were able to attend and get our face, our 
name, our store in front of consumers. So we have benefitted 
from their statewide network, mentoring with other folks later 
in our career, and being able to, like I said, have that story, 
have our product, in front of a larger audience, and it is all 
concentrated at the State House, and has a good look, a good 
message, that goes out to the community and the state.
    Mr. Baird. Thank you. I only have about a minute left, but 
many states have programs like Indiana Grown to support state 
products, so have any of the other witnesses been able to work 
with their state departments of agriculture to help enter the 
local markets, and if so, please feel free to comment. We have 
about 40 seconds.
    Mr. Browne. It is Dale Browne, if I may comment? That is 
one of our biggest challenges here in the Territory, because 
the Virgin Islands Department of Agriculture has become so very 
dysfunctional. It is hard for us to actually use that time or 
have that engagement where the Department is reaching other 
markets. So we are, like, in a catch-22 position that we have 
to do it ourselves totally.
    Mr. Baird. Thank you, and I thank our witnesses again for 
being here, and appreciate all of their efforts. And I yield 
back.
    The Chair. Thank you very much. Our next Member is Mr. 
Delgado. Mr. Delgado? Mr. Delgado? If not, we will move to Ms. 
Schrier of Washington State.
    Ms. Schrier. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to our 
witnesses. I want to focus on how the Federal Government can 
better support small- and medium-sized family farms. Right now 
we subsidize farm production in a manner that really benefits 
most of the largest corporate farms in the country, and I have 
heard from small- and medium-sized producers in my district in 
Washington State that significant barriers exist for them to 
participate in USDA purchasing programs and local markets, and 
these need to be addressed. Better supporting market access for 
family farms will help farmers themselves, it will shrink the 
carbon footprint of agricultural production, reduce 
transportation needs, and lead to healthier diets locally, in 
particular in our schools.
    And I know that the pandemic dramatically disrupted life 
throughout the country, leaving millions struggling to feed 
themselves and their families, and yet early Federal aid was 
heavily weighted toward larger farms and corporations because 
their scale allowed for efficient distribution in a national 
program. Many specialty crop producers and smaller, family-run 
operations suffered tremendously, and at a time when more 
people than ever were facing hunger, small and medium farms had 
nowhere to send their food.
    And at a time when our food supply chains were collapsing, 
local family farms were in many ways left out. That is why I 
introduced several bills, including the Farmers Feeding 
Families Coronavirus Response Act (H.R. 6725), the Food and 
Farm Emergency Assistance Act (H.R. 7656), and the Farming 
Support to States Act (H.R. 6956), to assist local growers and 
producers. These bills aimed to move the management of the food 
supply chains to the states, since state departments of 
agriculture have existing relationships with local small and 
medium farmers, provide emergency grants to assist growers and 
producers in covering significant costs incurred as a result of 
the pandemic. And one of the bills would have provided grants 
to cover PPE and supplies to convert operations, like 
refrigeration or packaging goods for individual consumers, as 
opposed to restaurants.
    And I am really glad to hear that my colleague, Mr. Baird, 
brought up this very issue of how state departments of 
agriculture can help our smaller producers. I was excited to 
see the recent announcement from the USDA that it will invest 
$1 billion to purchase nutritious food for state food bank 
networks from local and regional producers. This announcement 
mirrors many of the proposals in the bills I just mentioned, 
and it is vital for those who are administering Federal 
programs to have relationships with local small producers and 
food banks in order to better support the local economies and 
target distribution.
    Now, several of you mentioned that the Farmers to Families 
Food Box Program did not adequately benefit small producers, 
and, Ms. Cooper, I have a question for you. Can you tell me 
about your experience with the Food Box Program, and share any 
insights into how the USDA can ensure small farms are able to 
participate in this latest round of USDA funding, as well as 
future programs, and are there some barriers at USDA that we 
here should be looking to fix?
    Ms. Cooper. Thanks so much. And in my written testimony, I 
mentioned a little bit about the Food Box Program, and our 
experience with it, and couldn't fit it into 5 minutes, but we 
actually--in southwest Georgia, when you think of small food 
infrastructure, there are some more urban areas in the northern 
part of our state that were really well suited for this. This 
wasn't true for my area, despite Albany, which is in southwest 
Georgia, being a nationally recognized top three hot spot 
during the pandemic on a per capita basis. Through my work with 
the Soil and Water Conservation District, we actually launched 
our own Food Box Program to supplement Federal and state 
efforts.
    So through the nonprofit arm we worked with local farmers, 
and also with our network of nonprofit community garden spaces 
to source local produce, and then partnered with local 
restaurant businesses that had been hit by the pandemic, and, 
through funds raised here locally, purchased hot meals from 
those locally owned restaurants. So we had both produce boxes 
and hot meals, and delivered them to folks in need, working, 
again, with local businesses in our local community to 
identify----
    Ms. Schrier. Thank you.
    That is incredibly resourceful. I appreciate that. I just 
want to mention two other things. One is the heat wave hitting 
the Northwest that has really worried our farmers about crop 
losses, particularly the tree fruit industry and specialty 
crops; and second that labor continues to be a huge challenge 
for farmers in the Pacific Northwest, and we desperately need 
reform, and I would encourage the Senate to pass our Farm 
Workforce Modernization Act (H.R. 1603), which I wholeheartedly 
supported. Thank you, and I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you so much for that. As we can see 
throughout our country, hearing from Mr. Browne, you 
discussing, Ms. Schrier, that farmers are on the front line of 
so much of the climate issues that we have in our country, and 
we have to support them to be able to overcome those and 
continue producing. They are so vitally important to us. I 
noted our Ranking Member, Mr. Thompson, was with us earlier, 
but right now I would like to call on Mr. Scott for his 
testimony. Mr. Scott of Georgia, but I always say the younger 
Scott. Right?
    Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. Fair enough.
    The Chair. Scott the younger.
    Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. Fair enough. And, thank you. 
And I want to talk briefly about the supply chain, just a 
little bit, and I can't talk about this without reminding the 
American public that is watching, the American farmer gets a 
little less than 10 of every dollar that you are spending at 
the grocery store, probably even less than that right now.
    The increased cost of transportation, and what is happening 
with inflation at the grocery store, the American farmer is not 
seeing that revenue. I went to the local grocery store this 
past weekend, intending to buy steak. I passed over the steak 
because it simply cost way too much. I looked at the pork, and 
the pork was unbelievably high, and I ended up with $5 worth of 
chicken that I paid $7 or $8 for. When we talk about supply 
chain, it is not limited to the farmer. The American consumer 
is feeling the brunt of this when they walk into the grocery 
store, and I want you to know as the consumer that the American 
farmer is not benefitting from the price increases that you are 
seeing. So one of the issues, as we talk about supply chain, 
that I never thought of is the issue of boxes. I think about 
seed, I think about chemicals, I think about transportation, 
but I got a call the other day from a farmer saying, ``Guess 
what, we have a crop that is growing, and we can't get the 
boxes to harvest it and put it in to transport it.'' And so I 
thought I might share with you this aspect of what happens in 
the supply chain.
    ``Do you have 11 by 12s?'' That is the size of the boxes, a 
text message from a producer to a box supplier. ``I will have 
some in a few days, we are out of boxes and can't get labor. I 
am supposed to have some coming in from Honduras at the end of 
the week.'' Having to source boxes from Honduras. ``Well, do 
you have 11 by 11s?'' ``No. I am out of everything right now. I 
don't know what to tell you. We are having major supply chain 
and labor problems,'' and he names another company that I will 
skip. ``All the crate manufacturers are out of crates, and RPC 
and anchor boxes are non-existent.'' This is something that the 
American farmer is just starting to feel. There were enough to 
cover the producers in Florida for their fruit and vegetables, 
but now, as the harvest is coming into Georgia and the other 
states, we may very well see a shortage of fruit and vegetables 
on the shelves because of supply chain issues with boxes. But 
the American consumers' buying habits have changed.
    And I want to go to Ms. Cooper from Georgia. I spent a lot 
of time at the Cordele Farmers' Market when I was a much 
younger man, as did most members of my family. It used to be 
that you would go to the farmers' market, you would buy your 
fruit and your vegetables, I should say, not your fruit. You 
would shuck the corn, and cut it off the cob, put it in the 
freezer and everything else, and the American consumer has 
changed, but you mentioned programs, not only Beginning Young 
Farmers in Georgia. We have Georgia Grown, we have Farmers' 
Market Promotion Program. What can we do to influence the 
consumer buying habits to encourage them to go to the farmers' 
markets, and other ways that they can buy directly from the 
farmer so that the farmer can get more than 10 out of the 
dollar that the American consumer is spending? And I know 
farmers from your area that actually carry their product all 
the way to the Atlanta Farmers' Market because they don't feel 
like they have the volume of customers at the local farmers' 
markets there. So just looking for your input there. I know you 
do a lot with organics, but obviously that is a specialty 
market, and you have to have the volume of customers as well, 
so any input there would be appreciated.
    Ms. Cooper. Yes, sir, thank you, Congressman Scott. Yes, I 
farm in Sumter County, which is a really large green bean 
producing county in our state, and one thing that we observed 
this past year is that these large green bean packing houses 
that, like, you said, are typically sending things up to 
Atlanta to serve larger urban markets, they started opening 
their doors for local residents to come in and pick up a couple 
pounds of green beans from the farmer down the road that had 
been sending everything up to a larger urban market. And this 
is true for your question, but also for peanuts, and some of 
the commodity supply chains that are on a small scale in a 
niche market. There just needs to be a scale-appropriate 
infrastructure so that farmers don't feel that pressure to go 
to these larger markets.
    For peanuts we handle 2,000 pound totes, which is the 
industry standard, but we get calls and e-mails all the time of 
people asking, how can I get 5 pounds of raw peanuts from you, 
which we can't do because we just don't have the proper 
infrastructure.
    Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. My time has expired, but this 
is important to me, and supply chain issues are something that 
we witnessed the fragility of this past year. And, Madam Chair, 
while we did some things to help, I think it is very much still 
there. I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Mr. Scott. At this time we 
call on Congresswoman Pingree of Maine for her 5 minutes. Thank 
you.
    Ms. Pingree. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you to 
you and the Ranking Member both for your opening remarks, and 
for having this hearing today. As I think everyone before me 
has said, this is a really timely hearing. Unfortunately, the 
pandemic provided so many challenges, but it really showed us 
the difficulties with the supply chain, but also some 
opportunities for the very farmers we have with us today, and 
the small- to medium-sized farmers they represent.
    It is certainly been an issue that I have focused a lot of 
my work in agriculture around, and I am really pleased that we 
have this chance to talk about how we support more programs at 
the USDA, and think about tailoring programs to the small- to 
medium-sized farmer, to developing more infrastructure to 
support the very concerns people are talking about today, 
technical assistance, loan availability, more value-added 
products, getting more from the market, as Mr. Scott said, 
making sure everybody makes more than 10 on the dollar, which 
is possible when you can direct retail. So there are just so 
many things you all have discussed, thank you to all of the 
people who are testifying for us today, because your personal 
stories really bring it home to all the Members of the 
Committee.
    So let me just see if I can fit in a few questions here and 
stop talking. To Ms. Kennedy and Ms. Cooper, you both mentioned 
in your testimony that you applied for USDA Local Food 
Promotion Grants but had not been successful, we all work on 
supporting these programs, and then we are very discouraged 
when there is either not enough money, or the programs that we 
think should be serving the very needs that you have mentioned 
aren't available. So could you talk a little bit about that?
    And actually, before I mention that, I want to say that I 
personally have been operating a small farm that has many of 
the same challenges that you all do, but in particular, Ms. 
Kennedy, if I could get rid of all the deer that interfere with 
my ability to harvest the crop, that would be my number one pet 
peeve, and you just can't buy enough fencing sometime to keep 
them all out, but could you two talk a little bit about the 
application process, and the challenges that you have faced, so 
we can make sure we are really thinking about how the money 
from those programs get to the very needs you are talking 
about?
    Ms. Kennedy. Sure. I would love to start, if I may. I am 
also on the board of a number of nonprofit organizations that 
do regional ag support here, and those organizations are 
supported by USDA grants. So the grants are serving our 
communities, they are just not making it all the way to the 
farmers.
    Ms. Pingree. Yes.
    Ms. Kennedy. So the difference between the board that I am 
on and my own farm is that the board has dedicated grant 
writers, and a staff that is accustomed to the process, and 
knows about weighted, all of the intricacies of these grants 
that is a culture unto themselves, whereas the farmers that--as 
you can see, we are all competent, educated people, so it is 
not that it is too complicated, it is just that we are very, 
very busy. We are doing ten jobs as it is, and then just 
fitting in that, like, 2 days of grant writing, it just doesn't 
happen a lot of the time. So part of it is just lack of time 
dedicated to the kind of bureaucratic process, and part of it 
is also just that the reimbursement part is a little bit--it--
the access to--it is a barrier to access. A lot of farms just 
don't have the cash flow to make those matches or those 
reimbursements, and so it is just not worth applying.
    Yes, the nonprofit has been funded this year by $1 million, 
and my farm last year, I got $5,000 for CFAP, or something like 
that, so there is a huge discrepancy between what actually 
makes it to the farms and what supports our nonprofit 
colleagues. I think that----
    Ms. Pingree. Great. Thank you, that is really helpful. Ms. 
Cooper?
    Ms. Cooper. Thank you so much for that question. As you 
mentioned, we have applied for some programs. Specifically with 
LAMP programming, just one thing that I have observed 
anecdotally is that some of the more rural supply chain-focused 
projects, there is just not an understanding on the review side 
of what those rural economies and supply chains look like. And 
even though 30 pages sounds like a lot, it is really hard to 
succinctly describe what is going on in 30 pages to someone who 
might not be familiar with your rural community, or what that 
supply chain looks like. So, having a representative review 
panel is important, and also reviewers that can critically look 
at the impact directly to farmers in a meaningful way from 
these programs, just to echo what my fellow witness shared.
    Ms. Pingree. Great. Thank you so much. I am unfortunately 
going to run out of time, but I just wanted to thank Jonathan 
and Kelly Shannon. I really appreciate your testimony, and so 
many of the things that you mentioned about having more locally 
grown foods in our school lunch program, the real challenge 
people have with lack of slaughterhouses and meat processing 
capacity, loan access, and I just wish you all the success. I 
won't be here for a second question round, but really, I 
appreciate it. You laid out a lot of the really important 
things, and good luck with your flower operation. I know there 
are opportunities there as well. So thank you for being with 
us, all of you, today, and thank you to our friend from the 
Virgin Islands. I really appreciate it. I yield back, Madam 
Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Ms. Pingree. I note that 
specifically Mr. Shannon, as well as Mr. Browne, talked about 
the issues with loans, rather Mr. Dale Browne talked about 
reimbursement, and I think that is something we really need to 
work on to provide access to these farmers for the financing 
that they need to be able to be successful, and support our 
food supply in this country so that we can once again become 
the number one producers of our own food. At this time I call 
on Congressman Davis of Illinois. Five minutes to you. No smart 
remarks.
    Mr. Davis. Well, thank you, Madam Chair, and Ranking Member 
Baird. I do have to express my displeasure, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Yes.
    Mr. Davis. I thought this was going to be a field hearing 
in your district, but instead we are stuck here in the----
    The Chair. Why don't we do that in February? That is the 
appropriate time for the Committee on Agriculture to come to 
the Virgin Islands.
    Mr. Davis. I like that, and let us plan that. But, thank 
you for having this very important hearing today. And, 
actually, I am honored to follow my friend, and co-Chair of the 
House Organic Caucus, Ms. Pingree on this panel. I appreciate 
the perspective that organic farmers bring to this 
conversation. And as we look to move past the pandemic, and 
overcome obstacles that have challenged and threatened our 
supply chains, including weather and cyber security, among 
others, we must identify solutions within existing programs 
that strengthen our supply chains, and prioritize food security 
as really a matter of national security.
    I have been a major advocate of organic farmers not only 
because of the consumer choice aspect, but to ensure a level 
playing field for organic farmers, and also maintain consumer 
confidence in the integrity of the organic label. My question 
is actually for Ms. Cooper. As an organic farmer, what are some 
of the biggest challenges you face, particularly as it relates 
to the need for strong organic standards in the marketplace, to 
live up to that commitment of possessing the USDA Organic seal?
    Ms. Cooper. That is a really wonderful question, and 
something that we have been really dealing with here locally. 
The Peanut Cooperative is the only group of certified organic 
peanut and other commodity producers in our region. 
Historically organic peanuts are not produced in the Southeast 
or in Georgia, and for us it has been new for the farmers, as 
well as for the certifiers, and there has been a learning curve 
there. I think that having certifying bodies that can work with 
growers, as well as with our respected land-grant institutions 
that provide recommendations for production, both in 
conventional and in organic production, to understand the 
system, at times there are arbitrary aspects that may work in 
other regions or with other crops that specifically don't work 
in the Southeast, or in peanut productions in particular.
    Also, it has been very hard for us to incentivize folks to 
get certified when we can't certify the supply chain. There is 
just not a scale-appropriate supply chain, and folks that are 
scale-appropriate, there is no incentive or support for them to 
go through the certification process. That has been a huge 
barrier. You cannot grow organic acreage without growing the 
organic processing, the organic supply chain that follows, or 
else you just lose that premium, and then there is no 
incentive. And then, last, one of the things that the 
cooperative aims to do through our mentorship and beginning 
farmer program is to just offer the technical assistance to 
growers that are going through this for the first time. We have 
had both beginning farmers and experienced conventional farmers 
that are interested in diversifying their market come to us 
with all sorts of questions, and having targeted opportunities 
for cooperative agreements, or technical assistance dollars for 
folks on the ground familiar with these systems, familiar with 
the process, to offer that support is really, really critical. 
And we have some of that here, but certainly not enough to meet 
the demand.
    Mr. Davis. Well, I appreciate your comments, and you 
actually answered my next question about how strong organic 
standards translate into better resiliency. But we all know the 
demand for organic products is going to increase in areas 
mostly where they don't grow organic products or non-organic 
products. And, due to this increased demand, I know that many 
that are in your position are worried about foreign products 
that may come into our country that do not even come close to 
meeting the organic label standards that are put in place. Can 
you offer just your thoughts on some of those concerns, if you 
have them?
    Ms. Cooper. Sure. We face that, certainly, because there is 
not a lot of organic production here. There is just a limited 
supply, and the difference in that supply is coming from 
international markets that typically can offer things at a 
cheaper price, and so then those efforts here locally, it can 
be hard to compete with that. Of course, not even specific to 
Georgia or the Southeast, but just in general the national 
production volume is not meeting the national demand, and to 
really uplift and promote the consumption and purchase of those 
domestically produced products, both conventional and organic, 
we have high standards of sustainability across the board, and 
I am really valuing those domestically produced products--it is 
very important for the industry as a whole, certainly for 
organics specifically.
    Mr. Davis. Well, thank you. I yield back, Madam Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you very much. At this time we call on 
Salud Carbajal of California for his 5 minutes.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to all 
the witnesses that took time to join us today. Local and 
regional food systems are critical for both rural economies and 
addressing food insecurity in the United States, which 
skyrocketed during the COVID-19 pandemic. In my district, these 
markets give area residents access to fresh and nutritious 
foods, while supporting the local economy. Public investments 
in local food systems have proven broadly successful, and need 
further upscaling and technical support in order to reach more 
people. Ms. Kennedy, what sort of additional investments, in 
terms of funding, technical assistance, and outreach can we 
include or look into to assist and expand local and regional 
markets, and what lessons can we take from the success and 
flexibility of smaller operations to apply to the larger food 
supply chain in the United States?
    Ms. Kennedy. Thank you. Thank you, Congressman. I would 
like to echo my fellow witnesses, the Shannons, talking about 
lack of adequate processing for slaughter and packaging of 
protein. In our rural neighborhoods, there are very few 
processing centers, and it becomes a bottleneck quickly, so if 
we want to scale up at all in anything, whether it is dairy, or 
meat, or veggies, pre-packaged for schools or institutional 
work, we need those sort of mid-sized post-harvest processing 
facilities. We also need support in the supply chain in terms 
of trucking, and one of the other Congressmen mentioned that 
trucking and boxes are very expensive. In my CSA we spend about 
50 percent of our gross on trucking, and so that doesn't leave 
a lot for the farmers.
    Yes, if the larger ag competitors are getting subsidies in 
trucking, they are getting subsidies, and they are, they have 
contracts with schools to provide local school systems with 
beef, none of us small farms have those. We also don't have 
crop insurance. So if--we are an organic, diversified, small 
crop farm, we don't get reimbursed if there is a weather event 
and we lose our crops. So if all of these sorts of support that 
our larger brethren are receiving, it would be really wonderful 
if that were directed to the small, more resilient, more 
flexible farms, such as ourselves, that can pivot on a dime, 
change our models, work with whatever the situation is at hand, 
and that is increasingly important in our time of uncertainty, 
and in our current climate. But I think that those are some 
ideas that----
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Ms. Kennedy. And certainly, as we 
look to start working on the farm bill next year, we certainly 
need to take into consideration your input, because we should 
do more to extend those benefits to smaller companies, such as 
the ones that you are referencing, and the need to ensure that 
you are getting your share and support as well.
    The organic industry has proven to be an economic driver in 
my Central Coast district, and in the United States, however I 
am aware that farmers face steep challenges and barriers when 
seeking to transition to organic production and maintain 
certification. Organic farming communities, and the resulting 
co-benefits, depend on farmers having access to handling, 
processing, and distribution infrastructure and market 
opportunities. I am thankful to see that the USDA has recently 
announced additional grant funding for the Value-Added Producer 
Grant Program. Ms. Cooper, as a producer of value-added 
products, have you been able to take advantage of that program, 
and has it worked for you?
    Ms. Cooper. The Value-Added Producer Grant Program in 
particular, we have a pending application for that, so fingers 
crossed my answer will be yes in a couple months. But, 
originally it was not something that we were looking at just 
because of the 50 percent reimbursement. We faced a huge 
bottleneck this past year. We couldn't make sales because our 
processing wasn't up to have our product ready to get it to 
market, so we just didn't have the cash flow to spend $10 to 
get $5 back. It just didn't work for us. So when that COVID 
relief came out, and there was the ten percent cost-share 
requirement, that is really what attracted us to go for it, and 
hopefully it is something that will really allow us to tap into 
some of our currently untapped markets.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you very much. Madam Chair, I yield 
back.
    The Chair. Thank you very much. And I would like to thank 
and acknowledge the presence of the Ranking Member of the full 
Committee, Mr. Thompson, and yield to him at this time for his 
5 minutes. Thank you, sir.

 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GLENN THOMPSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
                   CONGRESS FROM PENNSYLVANIA

    Mr. Thompson. Well, good morning, and thank you, Chair 
Plaskett and Ranking Member Baird, for holding today's hearing, 
it is incredibly important. I would also like to thank our 
witnesses for taking time to be here today, and their 
willingness to share their stories and experiences with us. I 
think everyone can agree that this past year and a half has 
been unprecedented, and our small local producers have been on 
the front lines working to make sure that consumers and 
families maintain abundant access to safe and affordable food. 
Hearing their stories is important. While not the purpose of 
the hearing, I do like to think that we have an opportunity for 
some oversight.
    The farm bill includes several programs designed to help 
beginning and small producers and develop local agricultural 
markets, including the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development 
Program, and the Local Agricultural Market Program. The 
interactions between our witnesses, consumers, communities, and 
the Department will inform where we need to go from here, and I 
am most excited about that. So thanks again to Chair Plaskett 
and Ranking Member Baird for calling this hearing, and to our 
witnesses for being here. And my question is directed to Ms. 
Kennedy.
    Thank you for what you do. You talked a bit about the 
Farmers to Families Food Box Program. I had a chance to, 
obviously, see a lot of that in distribution, talking with 
producers that were providing the foods to include in that, 
whether it was dairy or meat, fruits, vegetables, and USDA was 
able to deliver over 173 million food boxes to families in need 
before it was abruptly ended by the Biden Administration, while 
other pandemic-related assistance programs remain in place. 
Now, in your testimony you mentioned the need to continue this 
type of support and provided a few recommendations. So, for my 
own edification, I want to check with you. Do you agree with 
that decision by USDA, specifically, I guess, by Secretary 
Vilsack, to terminate this program?
    Ms. Kennedy. I feel like, in my experience, I wasn't really 
able to access the Food Box Program, so it didn't affect my 
business. I am at a scale that is a little bit smaller, so I 
wasn't really considered as a producer. So, like Ms. Cooper, I 
created my own food box program with my local constituency, and 
we supplied our local pantries and our local food relief 
organizations. I think that food relief is still needed. I 
think that a program like the food box program should still 
exist. I think, if I would create this new program, I would 
make sure that small-scale producers could participate, and 
that it is--because right now, because the Food Box Program has 
ended, it is us small-scale producers that are taking up the 
slack, but we don't have the funding to support our efforts.
    Mr. Thompson. Yes, the Farmers to Families Food Box seemed 
like it was a real win-win, right? First of all, with the 
disruption of the food supply chain, because well over 60 
percent of meals were eaten in restaurants prior to this 
pandemic, and all of a sudden there was a processing and 
packaging issue. And so this allowed, first of all, our 
families who were most in need economically, especially those 
who overnight were told by their governors you are not allowed 
to go to work, you have to stay in your house, you can't work 
your job. And for the farmers too, to be able to have a market. 
Really seemed like just an effective tool. And you put on top 
of that the emphasis was on fresh foods. All nutrition is 
welcome, but certainly when you look at fruits and vegetables, 
and dairy and meat, it was just the best of all worlds. I don't 
know if any of the other witnesses have any experience, any 
thoughts, on the Farmers to Families Food Boxes? Certainly, 
with what time I have left, would love to hear from you as 
well.
    Mr. Browne. David Browne from St. Croix. Rep. Thompson, 
most of these programs were not available to the Virgin 
Islands, so that even made it harder for us to participate. So 
these are actually missed opportunities to farms here in the 
Territory. And there was nothing coming from USDA, whether 
through rural development efforts or FSA, NRCS, because that is 
all the programs that we have here. As in reference to the 
producer grant, that is time consuming for any producer to 
provide, and there is not a collective on island that can 
actually help to mitigate that problem. So, therefore, we are 
totally on the other side of the train as small producers.
    So our local Department of Agriculture is practically 
absent, and during the pandemic it was even more so. So that in 
itself has put us at a disadvantage here in the Territory. And 
definitely, if USDA had some of these programs to contribute to 
the development of food boxes during a time of crisis, that 
would be adequate. However, we are still facing both cultural 
and customarily traditional foods that we try to produce 
locally. And for those programs, what they were asking for, and 
what was not maintained was a program to actually meet this 
need. Thank you.
    Mr. Thompson. Very good. Mr. Browne, Ms. Kennedy, thank you 
so much for your insight. Madam Chair, my time has long 
expired.
    The Chair. That is all right. For the Ranking Member of the 
Committee, you get leniency in more ways than one. Thank you 
for being here with us. The next Member is Congresswoman 
Kirkpatrick.
    Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Thank you, Madam Chair. I really thank 
you for having this hearing. I come from a multi-generational 
family of ranchers in northern Arizona. We had an enormous 
ranch, and ran a lot of cattle, and I just assumed as a kid it 
would always be there, so it is interesting to me that times 
have changed. So, anyway, my question is for Mr. Shannon. 
Livestock producers who are serving multiple markets often have 
a difficult time getting a market ready product produced, 
requiring meat slaughtering and processing, as well as 
aggregation of local meat products for sale at the wholesale 
market. So can you describe some of the challenges facing local 
meat producers, and how that impacts business decisions?
    Mr. Shannon. Yes. Thank you for that question. One of the 
biggest things that we face at this time--we have been using a 
USDA inspected processor for many years, and had a great 
working relationship. So, through the pandemic, slaughtering 
spots were not an issue for us since we had that longstanding 
relationship. Where it comes into is adequate storage after 
that processing, because, of course, we cannot move all that 
product within a week or so, so that storage capacity needs to 
be there. And looking through COVID-19, nobody in the county or 
surrounding area had that capacity to store what was being 
processed to keep up with demand. So that is one of the issues 
we face.
    Another one, I mentioned this in my written testimony, 
costs have risen because of the supply chain issues, and, of 
course, those costs do not get absorbed by the processors. That 
was passed right on to the local farmers and producers. We 
experienced a large increase because sanitation products, PPE, 
was not available, and that price was up. Those have been 
passed on to us, and we are still waiting for that to be 
returned or rewind to pre-COVID prices. So those are some of 
adequate, reliable, and economical processing and storage are 
some of our biggest issues that we face.
    Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Thank you for your answer. Ranching is 
hard enough as it is, in the best of circumstances, so thank 
you for staying with it, and for what you do. We need you to be 
in the business, and you have my full support in any way I can 
help. I get it, like I said, from the bottom of my heart, and 
it is not easy. As we saw with COVID-19, the supply chain 
breakdown occurred through multiple sectors. As this Committee 
works to strengthen the local food supply chain and prepare for 
future disruptions, what farm bill programs do you think would 
help you and the farmer members build resilience, and what 
additional support could help you all strengthen the market 
access? That is for Ms. Cooper. Ms. Cooper?
    Ms. Cooper. Okay.
    Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Sorry, do you want me to repeat that?
    Ms. Cooper. I think I have it. Our biggest thing right now 
is just the lack of rural infrastructure that is scale-
appropriate. We are in the breadbasket of our state, the heart 
of agricultural production. There are amazing efficiencies and 
technologies, and they are all just at a scale that is a little 
bit bigger than where small farmers are, where certified 
organic production is. So scale-appropriate, certainly. And 
then the other biggest challenge for us is, of course, the 
biggest piece of a supply chain is the supply. And while we 
have so many farmers that are interested in working with us, 
and we really see this as an opportunity for beginning farmers, 
it is a leap.
    As a beginning farmer myself, I have really been lucky to 
have the mentorship and the marketing opportunity, but I lease 
land, and it is a year-to-year lease, and so it is hard to make 
the specialized equipment investments, and so we are also 
looking at opportunities like shared equipment, and other 
benefits of cooperative farming that will help bring those 
farmers along, and actually build a supply as well. And that 
is--Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program is really 
critical for that.
    Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Yes. Thank you so much. I mean, for my 
generation, it was hard work. We didn't want to do it, so we 
all went to college and became professionals. But my children 
want to go back into ranching, so we will see how that all 
shakes out. But, I thank you. My time is up, and I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you very much. Our next Member is Mrs. 
Fischbach. Mrs. Fischbach, your time.
    Mrs. Fischbach. Thank you very much. I appreciate it, and I 
appreciate being able to participate in the hearing today, it 
has been very informative. But I had read in some of the 
written testimony about the application process for the USDA 
being rather burdensome, and very heavy on paperwork, things 
like that. I was wondering if maybe each of the producers could 
talk a little bit about--each of the witnesses could talk a 
little bit about how we might improve that process for them, 
and do more outreach. I believe the Shannons talked about the 
outreach, but if there was something that we could do to 
improve that process? So I don't know who we want to start 
with, if maybe the Shannons would like to start?
    Mr. Shannon. Sure. Thank you for that question. Again, our 
relationship only started last year with our local USDA office. 
That process was easy. But in the past week or 2, looking 
through some of the grants and programs, it comes down to a 
time issue, and that has been mentioned before. Simplicity of 
forms, simplicity of getting paperwork back and forth 
electronically this day and age is essential. We are busy 
raising livestock, kids, running businesses. There is not time 
to sit up for multiple hours looking through paperwork, 
gathering everything. So whether that outreach is having 
someone come out, visit the farm, fill out that paperwork 
alongside you while you are working and producing, but yes, 
some simplification through technology, and having that 
paperwork back and forth, would be beneficial.
    Mrs. Fischbach. Thank you. And, Ms. Kennedy?
    Ms. Kennedy. I agree with the streamlined application. 
Also, the timing of the application, as I mentioned before, to 
maybe winter months, when we are a little bit less busy, or at 
least the vegetable producers. Also, again, just incentive. If 
we have the reimbursement and matching needs, then people just 
don't bother applying. So if you were to eliminate or decrease 
those, then more people would apply. And I think also just 
making sure there is support for people that don't have--that 
can't go find these online. Rural broadband issues have also 
been mentioned, so more outreach, more technical assistance on 
applications, especially for BIPOC and underserved communities.
    Mrs. Fischbach. And if any of the other witnesses--I don't 
have everybody on my screen, so if any of the other witnesses 
have something they would like to bring up?
    Ms. Cooper. I would love to also echo the cost-share, 
especially for smaller farmers, and in small farm businesses. 
That cash flow and those cost-share requirements can be quite 
burdensome. One thing that I would also just like to mention 
very briefly, in Georgia there has been some effort in 
different parts of our state, and with the support of our 
Department of Agriculture, to create hubs for small farm 
businesses to seek some professional services. I think it is 
really innovative, and something that could really benefit 
small farms and small farm businesses is kind of these 
incubator hubs that offer some of these services, which would 
be led at a local level, but could definitely benefit from 
Federal support, certainly.
    Mrs. Fischbach. Thank you very much. Mr. Browne, did you 
have anything to add?
    Mr. Browne. Dale Browne from the Virgin Islands. Most of 
these programs that are spoken of by the other witnesses aren't 
available to the Virgin Islands, because we only have Rural 
Development, and that requires affordable housing, and the 
Small Minority Producer Grant. You have FSA, that is basically 
the loans, and programs that require disaster, and NRCS, which 
is a [inaudible] program. So these other programs are not 
available. We are basically 2 to 3 miles away from the office 
itself, and that is an easy trip, however, most of these other 
programs are not available in the Territory.
    Mrs. Fischbach. Well, I thank everyone for their input, and 
with my last 30 seconds I am just going to say that I think one 
of the big things that we hear, and I hear of the regulation, 
but that broadband issue, we hear about that in every single 
Agriculture Committee hearing that we have because it is so 
vital, and we absolutely need to make sure that we are working 
on that. But I appreciate all the input from the witnesses, and 
thank you all for being here today, and I yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Ms. Fischbach. Now time for 
Mr. Lawson of Florida.
    Mr. Lawson. Thank you, Madam Chair, to you and the Ranking 
Member. It is a real privilege to welcome everyone to this 
Committee today. Before I ask my question, and my first 
question will go to Mr. Shannon, do you all still use the 
Almanac in determining climate and everything? I grew up in the 
country, and when we were farming, that is one of the things 
that we used was the Almanac. But I am going to ask you a 
question, and someone--and everybody else could--can respond to 
that, because I think the Almanac is still good today.
    The question is directed to the Shannons, but anyone may 
answer this, if we have the time. As you know, Congress and the 
USDA support a number of programs that provide direct support 
to local agricultural markets and producers. However, some 
farmers have little to no knowledge of these opportunities 
available there. What are some ways that Congress and USDA can 
better support the outreach to these farmers? Just listening to 
you all the--this morning, I thought it was incredible, the 
adjustment that you had to make during the pandemic.
    Mr. Shannon. Yes. To your first question, we no longer use 
the Farmers' Almanac. It is just more word of mouth from more 
shall we say seasoned farmers in the area that have been 
around, and seen things. So, no, we don't even have a current 
paper copy sitting anywhere at home anymore, and you are 
exactly correct.
    Mr. Lawson. Okay.
    Mr. Shannon. Other witnesses here today are talking about 
programs that I have never heard of in my life before, and we 
have been at this 15 years, so getting that word out that these 
programs are available, these opportunities are available, is 
the struggle. I don't know if that is starting with the youth 
loans, reaching out to high school ag classes to show them 
where that is, see the opportunities there, reaching out to 
kids in FFA, that those programs are available as beginning and 
young farmers.
    Again, someone in the county, in the local office, going 
out and stopping at farms that they know are producing produce, 
livestock, whatever it may be in our region, and saying, hey, 
are you aware? Here is a handout, a page of what is available 
to your local area. But no, there was no knowledge, and, again, 
a lot of these things that are being spoken of I am going to 
have to go home and look up and see if those are beneficial to 
us. But that outreach is super important in a face-to-face 
environment.
    Mr. Lawson. That is amazing. Anyone else care to comment? 
Because we say we have a lot of programs, and so it will be 
interesting to see--but anyone else on the panel would like to 
comment?
    Mr. Browne. Well--Dale Browne, Virgin Islands. The Farmers' 
Almanac, we can actually produce all year round, so it is not 
really used by most farmers. For those older farmers, yes, they 
will use it because there are above-ground days and below-
ground days, and if we wait on above-ground days to plant 
above-ground, we won't plant anything. If we have to wait on 
the below-ground days, to plant below-ground, we won't plant 
anything below ground. So we can plant in any conditions once 
we have adequate water supplies, and knowing the crops, and 
what the crop dates to actually come to fruition.
    Mr. Lawson. Ms. Cooper?
    Ms. Cooper. Representative Lawson, I would like to address 
your second question. We here in Georgia have an outreach arm 
called Team Agriculture Georgia that specifically aims to 
provide outreach to beginning and underserved producers in the 
state, and convenes various arms of USDA, from NRCS, to Rural 
Development, to FSA, to engage all of them collectively and 
provide direct outreach. I think some of the challenges with 
that are certainly funding, so that it is not just adding 
additional work to folks here on the ground that are already 
working really hard, and really dedicating funding to ensure 
that outreach is effective. And, of course, this past year has 
been really difficult for the in-person engagement, but in-
person opportunities are really invaluable.
    Mr. Lawson. Okay. Thank you. Madam Chair, before I yield 
back, I am going to share the Almanac with you, because it 
might be before your time.
    The Chair. I am not even going to respond to you. Thank you 
so much, Mr. Lawson. Ms. Cooper, may I ask, the program that 
you talked about in Georgia that assists underserved areas, is 
that an organization that was created by the state, or by 
farmers themselves, and how is that staffed and funded?
    Ms. Cooper. The one I just mentioned?
    The Chair. Yes. Yes, ma'am.
    Ms. Cooper. It is an USDA outreach arm. I am trying to 
think of the technical term for it, but a local RC&D is 
actually the funding body, so they have been seeking small 
grants, cooperative agreements with NRCS, other opportunities 
for that. It began just kind of as a coalition of the different 
agencies talking to each other to identify opportunities, but 
it is really that extra funding to have someone to run outreach 
programs, to ramp up our website, to provide a newsletter with 
upcoming grant opportunities, and that sort of thing.
    Those extra resources that go into those locally led 
projects to make them have some teeth and stand alone, and not 
just become extra work for agencies that are already stretched 
so thin I think has really made the difference. If you would 
like to look it up, it is Team Agriculture Georgia, and it kind 
of spells out the structure, and how it operates.
    The Chair. Thank you.
    Ms. Cooper. It has been really beneficial for GOPA to look 
toward that as a resource.
    The Chair. Thank you very much for that information. All 
right. Our next Member to question is Ms. Letlow.
    Ms. Letlow. Chair Plaskett, Ranking Member Baird, Members 
of the Subcommittee, and witnesses, thank you for taking the 
time to discuss supply chain resiliency, especially focused on 
our small-scale farms. Our farmers and ranchers are the 
cornerstone of food production in America. Many of our rural 
communities are fueled by the perseverance of our local 
agriculture producers, large and small. However, over the last 
year we have all seen and experienced the impacts that the 
COVID-19 pandemic had on our essential food supply chains. As 
discussed here today, the farm to market sector faced many 
challenges presented by the pandemic. Small produce and 
crawfish farmers in Louisiana lost access to traditional direct 
market opportunities, which ultimately led them to explore new 
avenues for distribution and profitability.
    Mr. Shannon, your testimony is one that I have often heard 
across my district, a young, beginning small farmer seeking 
opportunities to grow and expand into new markets. Can you 
further share with the Subcommittee how Shannon Family Farms is 
adapting to customer demand, and any plans to maximize on 
newfound opportunities for local agriculture markets through 
USDA?
    Mr. Shannon. I sure can. I am going to let Kelly talk on 
this one a little bit here. Again, husband and wife team, we 
each have our own kind of--what we are responsible for in the 
farm, so I will let her go on this one.
    Ms. Letlow. Sure.
    Mrs. Shannon. All right. Basically, we have continued to 
explore new markets through starting with the farmers' markets, 
and then just some direct to consumer with people that we knew. 
Then we got together with some other farmers and developed Four 
Seasons Local Market, which is where we came together with 
those other farmers from our community, and decided that we 
were going to put together a retail space that would be 
available to our customers year-round.
    Basically, in Indiana, our farmers' markets run from 
basically May until October, and then close, and the question 
was where do our people go after that October timeframe until 
we are available the next May? And we found our customers 
basically just disappeared, so I assume that they go back to 
using just our basic grocery stores. By establishing Four 
Seasons Local Market, we were able to draw those customers in 
year-round, and create that space so that they could get local 
foods provided to them without as many restraints as there are, 
like, visiting the farm, or having to drive multiple places to 
get things.
    Ms. Letlow. Awesome. Thank you so much for sharing that. I 
have a follow-up question. This past year many small businesses 
were for forced to close, some temporarily and some 
permanently. Mr. Shannon, you said that the Four Seasons Local 
Market has had continuous growth each year. How did the 
pandemic impact your operations at Four Seasons Local Market, 
and what are the plans for growing the market as we near the 
end of the pandemic?
    Mr. Shannon. Sure, I can speak on that a little bit. 
Mentioned before, record sales through March and April, and in 
May, things started to come back to normal. We did benefit by a 
lot of those customers sticking around, but a majority returned 
to their normal buying habits as supplies increased at the 
store. So our focus is how can we work together, large and 
small, to give folks options in every community? And that is 
what we are struggling with. We are kind of serving as an 
incubator. We stepped out on a ledge, took the risk to put the 
capital in to have a store. So other local producers, very 
small, in our area are being able to take advantage of putting 
their product into the store at a very reasonable price to get 
their name out there, and try to grow that next generation of 
local food producer.
    So in the question of USDA, that was all self-funded, but 
having those opportunities to capital-heavy investments, 
starting that, and giving other people options like that, would 
be very helpful.
    Ms. Letlow. Wonderful. Thank you so much, Mr. Shannon and 
Kelly, for sharing with me today. I yield back the remainder of 
my time.
    The Chair. Thank you very much, Ms. Letlow, and thank you 
for getting Mrs. Shannon to give us some information as well. 
Mr. Bacon, you now have 5 minutes.
    Mr. Bacon. Thank you, and I am going to start off by 
sharing Rodney Davis's sentiments about the Virgin Islands, it 
may be the prettiest place in the world. To the panelists, 
thank you all for being here. I just want to start off just by 
saying America is the strongest nation in the world, and we 
have lots of reasons for it. Part of it is our energy 
independence, which we have to protect, but here we have just 
got to restate the fact that we are so blessed to also have 
agriculture independence. We can feed our entire country, and 
we can feed much of the world, and our agriculture is a 
national treasure that we have to protect.
    So my first question is to all the panelists, or those who 
want to participate. A few of you mentioned in your testimony 
that you are either utilizing or looking at establishing e-
commerce as a tool to boost your sales. Of course, e-commerce 
requires strong rural broadband, and many of our rural areas 
lack this connection. Can any of you speak to how critical 
rural broadband is, not only for e-commerce, but for the rest 
of your operations as well? Thank you.
    Ms. Kennedy. I would love to speak to this. I live in 
Charlotteville, New York, which is in the middle of nowhere, 
and we don't have broadband internet. We also don't have cell 
phone service, so I am speaking to you over satellite right 
now, and I run two businesses, my farm, and this CSA, which is 
an e-commerce platform, via satellite. Anytime it rains, it 
goes down. It is Tuesday, and the Moon is a certain color, the 
satellite goes down. So it is really a huge challenge to run 
both of those businesses on satellite internet, and I cannot 
stress enough how important broadband is for our rural area.
    Mr. Bacon. You make a great point. Thank you. I appreciate 
it. Anybody else?
    Mr. Shannon. Jonathan Shannon here. As more programs--
anything from our accounting to our inventory, everything is 
cloud-based these days, and the struggle is finding that 
reliable broadband to run those businesses. We were blessed, 
through the COVID-19 pandemic, that we had an e-commerce site 
set up to reach those customers that were not getting out, and 
that we could make those deliveries to the doorstep. Again, all 
broadband heavy requirement that is not available. We are 
blessed today that we came up to town, per se, and there in the 
city-owned co-working studio in the Chamber of Commerce has 
allowed us to have reliable internet today to speak to you, 
because that was not available at home.
    Mr. Bacon. Thank you very much. Anyone else?
    Ms. Cooper. I will echo the Shannons. I also had to come 
into town to our little, I mentioned a small business 
incubator. This is the only place I can get reliable internet. 
In addition to some of the e-commerce, something that we also 
face here in my work with the Soil and Water Conservation 
District is implementing a lot of on-farm technologies that 
really improve efficiencies. A lot of those are becoming cloud-
based, app-based, requiring broadband. So, in addition to just 
basic communication, serving customers, there is also a missed 
opportunity with farm efficiencies, and being able to implement 
new technologies actually on the farm as well.
    Mr. Bacon. Thank you so much. I have a follow-up question 
for Mr. Dale Browne.
    Mr. Browne, in your testimony you mentioned your work with 
the Bridging the Gap Summer Program that aims to educate kids 
between the ages of 7 and 18 about agriculture in the Virgin 
Islands. I am a firm believer in giving our students firsthand 
experiences on the farm, help them understand where their food 
comes from. Can you talk a little more about your work in this 
program? Thank you.
    Mr. Browne. Yes, I can. Bridging the Gap has been one of 
our main focus because there aren't any agricultural programs. 
It is only up to recently our land-grant institutions trying to 
reinstitute agriculture back into its academic format. Now, 
since 1984, there has been no agricultural science part of our 
land-grant institution. So we have taken it on ourselves to 
actually begin, through summer programs, and through the 
workforce development from our local Department of Labor, to 
have students be brought in and be shown different areas, and 
all aspects of island agriculture, and how we can function as 
an economic development tool, and career building just as well.
    Presently we have ten students to work in the office on the 
farm, and eight out in the field. One of the things that we do 
with these students is actually take them through different 
career levels at the University of the Virgin Islands, and also 
teach them the practical and the science of growing food on the 
farm. Now, that is one aspect. The other aspect has been 
students between 7 and 18 which engage in our summer program, 
and that includes culinary, working side by side with the older 
students, and also providing lunches for them that comes 
directly from the farm. So they are able to actually see the 
different aspects of agriculture growing, and that not all of 
their food actually comes from out of the supermarket, from 
abroad, and giving them that self-value that they can look at, 
and choosing a career from that.
    Mr. Bacon. Thank you so much for your insight. That is 
outstanding. And, Madam Chair, I will yield back.
    The Chair. Thank you so much. Before we adjourn today, I 
invite the Ranking Member to share any closing remarks he may 
have at this time.
    Mr. Baird. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. I think we both 
appreciate all of our witnesses here today, as well as our 
Member participation. And consumers are becoming increasingly 
interested in where their food comes from, and so, with the 
discussions that we have had here, we may be shedding some 
light on an opportunity for young farmers to get involved, and 
bring them into the agricultural industry. So with that, Madam 
Chair, I look forward to the opportunity to work with you in 
the future.
    The Chair. Thank you so much, Ranking Member Baird. As we 
wrap up this first hearing of the Subcommittee on 
Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research, I would first like 
to thank all of our witnesses for their testimony and their 
comments and answers. The expertise and knowledge shared today 
is invaluable as we work to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic 
and build back better. Today we heard about the importance of 
local agricultural markets, the role of urban agriculture, 
special steps that can be taken to improve the resiliency of 
our local, national, and global food supplies.
    I think that this Subcommittee hearing has shown a 
tremendous level of bipartisanship, and I am really grateful to 
the Ranking Member for facilitating that. All of our witnesses 
showed the--even the range of issues--the range of locations 
that they are all share so many similar issues in farming, and 
overcoming the COVID pandemic, and I want to thank them all for 
that as well. I am excited to continue to work with our panel 
of witnesses, and the Members of this Committee, to make sure 
that our small producers and local agricultural markets have 
the tools that they need to best serve their communities.
    Under the Rules of the Committee, the record of today's 
hearing will remain open for 10 calendar days to receive 
additional material, supplemental written responses from the 
witnesses, to any of the questions posed by the Members. This 
hearing of the Subcommittee on Biotechnology, Horticulture, and 
Research is adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:56 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
    [Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
 Submitted Article by Hon. Stacey E. Plaskett, a Delegate in Congress 
                          from Virgin Islands
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

[https://www.agri-pulse.com/articles/16100-opinion-reestablishing-us-
leadership-in-agricultural-rd]
Opinion: Reestablishing US leadership in agricultural R&D
06/28/21 12:01 p.m. By Rep. Stacey Plaskett \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.agri-pulse.com/authors/379-rep-stacey-plaskett.

          Editor's Note: Agri-Pulse and The Chicago Council on Global 
        Affairs are teaming up to host a monthly column to explore how 
        the U.S. agriculture and food sector can maintain its 
        competitive edge and advance food security in an increasingly 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        integrated and dynamic world.

    Over the last year, America's food and agricultural sectors have 
faced robust challenges. The coronavirus pandemic has highlighted the 
need for a more resilient food system, which is why I'm calling for an 
investment of at least $40 billion for agricultural research and 
infrastructure, as well as agricultural innovation.
    The U.S. is a world leader in agricultural production, but we need 
to continue to invest in research and infrastructure to both remain 
competitive with our friends and neighbors around the world, and to 
meet challenges to global food security. Last month, top economists 
reported at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City's \2\ annual 
Agricultural Symposium that while the United States' share of global 
agricultural R&D investment was 20% in 1960, it declined to 8.9% in 
2015. This issue was only exacerbated by the global pandemic, which 
challenged our agricultural supply chains and magnified the need to 
expand our agricultural research. We are currently falling behind our 
peers, but with smart investments we can regain our footing as the 
leader in global agriculture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://kansascityfed.org/documents/7107/the-drivers-of-us-
agricultural-productivity-growth.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The U.S. cannot reestablish our agricultural research prominence, 
however, when our research facilities are aging and in dire need of 
revitalization. Unlike our global partners and competitors, much of the 
agriculture research in the U.S. is being done in facilities that were 
built in the 1950s or 1960s. According to a recent report, 69% of the 
buildings at U.S. colleges and schools of agriculture \3\ are at the 
end of their useful life. We are asking an era of students to lead 
cutting edge research that will feed generations well into the future 
in facilities that were built for their grandparents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ https://www.aplu.org/library/a-national-study-of-capital-
infrastructure-at-colleges-and-schools-of-agriculture-an-update/file.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Our land-grant university system fosters excellence in research 
innovation while providing training opportunities for the global 
leaders of the future. We know from research by leading economists that 
U.S. public food and agriculture R&D \4\ spending from 1910 to 2007 
returned, on average, $17 in benefits for every $1 invested. Our 
nation's Cooperative Extension System\5\ keeps farmers in business and 
transfers important agricultural and food information to people, 
farmers, businesses and communities. Land-grant universities aren't 
just pillars of their communities--they're pillars of our entire 
country's agricultural and research systems. As the new infrastructure 
proposal is developed, we need to keep Federal agricultural research 
infrastructure, research, and extension delivery of agricultural 
innovation as part of the package. Now is the time to invest in these 
land-grant universities--our incubators for talent, outreach, and 
agricultural innovation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1093/ajae/aay039.
    \5\ https://pennstate.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/state-
level-cooperative-extension-spending-and-farmer-exits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Key investments in these agricultural institutions will support 
American jobs, develop climate-smart practices for farmers and ranchers 
across the country and world, increase global food security, and help 
ensure that the agricultural sciences pipeline looks like all of 
America, not just one region or group.
    Right now, we are presented with an opportunity to think critically 
about what tools we want our agricultural researchers and students to 
have going into the next decades, and I believe that with this bold 
research investment, we can make strides to reposition the U.S. as the 
world agricultural leader well into this century.

          Congresswoman Stacey Plaskett represents the at large 
        district of the U.S. Virgin Islands in the United States House 
        of Representatives. She is an African-Caribbean attorney who 
        has practiced law in New York, Washington D.C. and the U.S. 
        Virgin Islands. Plaskett is best known for her understanding of 
        economic development and public-private partnerships for 
        growing the economy of developing areas. She is an active 
        community advocate in the Virgin Islands.
                                 ______
                                 
  Submitted Comment Letter by Hon. Jimmy Panetta, a Representative in 
Congress from California; Authored By Laura Batcha, Executive Director 
         and Chief Executive Officer, Organic Trade Association
June 21, 2021

  Dr. Melissa R. Bailey,
  Agricultural Marketing Service,
  U.S. Department of Agriculture,

  Docket: AMS-TM-21-0034
  Federal Register Number 2021-08152
  Re: Supply Chains for the Production of Agricultural Commodities and 
            Food Products

    Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on USDA's programs 
and spending related to increasing durability and reliance within the 
U.S. food supply chain. The Organic Trade Association (OTA) is the 
membership-based business association for organic agriculture and 
products in North America. OTA is the leading voice for the organic 
trade in the United States, representing over 9,500 organic businesses 
across 50 states. Our members include growers, shippers, processors, 
certifiers, farmers' associations, distributors, importers, exporters, 
consultants, retailers and others. OTA's mission is to promote and 
protect organic with a unifying voice that serves and engages its 
diverse members from farm to marketplace.
    OTA appreciates USDA's commitment to elevating the significance and 
importance of organic, and welcomes the recent USDA announcement \1\ of 
an additional $20 million for organic cost-share assistance. This is an 
important step to bridge the gap in previous short-falls for organic 
producer assistance, but we caution against limiting organic programs 
to micro funding or not prioritizing the organic opportunity within the 
larger funding buckets. Proportionally, the organic sector has 
historically been under-funded based on size and growth of market. USDA 
has a critical opportunity at this moment to correct the course, and 
meet the organic opportunity with big and bold investments in organic 
programming and resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2021/06/15/usda-
announces-additional-aid-ag-producers-and-businesses-pandemic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We call on USDA to make big and bold investments in organic. The 
organic industry soared to a new high of nearly $62 billion in 2020, 
jumping by a record 12.4 percent (more than twice the 2019 growth rate 
of organic).\2\ In 2020, almost six percent of the food sold in the 
U.S. was certified organic. As a bright spot in U.S. agriculture, the 
organic sector should command resources and support that are 
proportionate to the growth and size of the sector, and reflect the 
economic, environmental and health benefits provided to organic 
farmers, businesses, and consumers. Substantial investments are needed 
at orders of magnitude higher than any previous Administration has ever 
offered. Increasing funding levels and removing caps on organic-
specific programs are key to supporting the organic sector's full 
potential to grow and thrive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://ota.com/news/press-releases/21755.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Every dollar invested in organic agriculture drives co-benefits for 
rural economic development and beyond. U.S. farms and business of all 
sizes across all 50 states are choosing to participate in voluntary 
market-based, federally backed, independently certified organic value 
chains, representing hundreds of specialty crops and grains, livestock, 
poultry, dairy, fiber, packaged goods and other value-added products. 
Organic hotspots--counties with high levels of organic agricultural 
activity whose neighboring counties also have a high level of organic 
activity--boost median household incomes by an average of $2,000, and 
reduce poverty levels by an average of 1.3 percentage points.\3\ 
Thriving organic farming communities and the resulting co-benefits 
depend on farmers having access to handling, processing, and 
distribution infrastructure and market opportunities. Organic 
investments also drive climate benefits,\4\ and other economic, 
environmental and health benefits for all those involved in our food 
system--from the grower and the processor, to the distributor and the 
consumer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ https://ota.com/sites/default/files/indexed_files/OTA-
HotSpotsWhitePaper-OnlineVer
sion.pdf.
    \4\ https://ota.com/sites/default/files/indexed_files/
OTA%20Climate-Smart%20Ag%20com
ments_FINAL.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We offer the following specific recommendations of areas to support 
supply chain resiliency of the organic sector. Our recommended funding 
levels totaling $300 million represent 6% of the $5 billion in funds 
announced through USDA's Build Back Better Initiative, which is 
commensurate with organic's market share of the U.S. food industry.
Establish a National Organic Transition Program at USDA
    Organic farming presents a promising economic opportunity for U.S. 
farmers, yet less than one percent of domestic farmland is certified 
organic today. Many farmers face steep challenges and barriers when 
seeking to transition to organic production. The arduous 3 year 
transition process is an important prerequisite to becoming eligible 
for organic certification, but there is little Federal support to help 
farmers through this transition. Lack of agronomic and technical 
assistance, access to credit and loans, and adequate tools for managing 
on-farm risk are all significant barriers farmers face during the 
transition process. Given the long-term economic and environmental 
benefits organic agriculture provides, USDA should wisely invest in 
programs that support farmers in successfully transitioning to, and 
staying in, organic production. We recommend that USDA establish a 
national program to support farmers transitioning to organic that 
includes the following elements.

   Invest in improvements to technical assistance, risk 
        management, access to land, credit and capital, processing and 
        distribution infrastructure and market development--Financial, 
        policy, and programmatic improvements are needed to make 
        certified organic production accessible to all farmers who 
        chose to participate in the thriving organic market. Specific 
        focus on reducing financial risks, improving market and 
        infrastructure development, increasing access to land and 
        credit, providing technical assistance, and removing 
        disincentives to transition. Examples of these improvements are 
        described throughout this document.

   Provide grant funding for projects that address barriers to 
        transition--Many organizations are actively pursuing 
        initiatives that can help address some of the barriers to 
        transitioning to and staying in organic production. USDA should 
        support these efforts by developing a competitive grant program 
        for organizations that provide programs and services that 
        support farmers who are transiting to organic. A portion of the 
        funds should be designated for programs that support socially 
        disadvantaged farmers with limited resources and/or are 
        geographically isolated. Additional details on grant programs 
        for technical assistance projects are described below.

   Evaluate and address the various barriers associated with 
        transitioning to organic--USDA should conduct a needs 
        assessment of transitioning farmers in the U.S. across 
        production systems, scales, geographic regions, product types, 
        and demographic background of farmers. The results of the 
        analysis should be used to develop, publish, and implement a 
        plan for overcoming the key barriers.

   Identify staff responsible for assisting farmers who are 
        transitioning to organic. Farmers need access to a designated 
        point-person at USDA who is able to answer technical, 
        programmatic, and regulatory questions about organic under all 
        USDA agencies, including FSA, RMA, and AMS.

   Establish a USDA certified transitional program. 
        Certification of farms in transition can be a key aspect of 
        encouraging increased domestic organic production by providing 
        technical support and supply-chain recognition. While various 
        certifiers have transitional certification programs, these are 
        not harmonized and lack consistent oversight. Transitional 
        certification can prevent ``surprises'' for operations going 
        through the certification process, because the operation has 
        been inspected and audited during each year of its transition. 
        Furthermore, operations enrolling in a transitional 
        certification program will support supply chain management as 
        transparency in future growth of organic acreage can facilitate 
        appropriate business planning and contract development for 
        buyers and producers. The program would also help develop 
        transitional markets, enabling a supply-chain premium for 
        transitional crops that can incentivize producers to move 
        towards organic and can reduce the financial burden that a 3 
        year transition period poses. OTA submitted an application to 
        USDA Agricultural Marketing Service's Quality Systems 
        Assessment Program to establish a USDA Certified Transitional 
        Program. USDA made a formal announcement approving the program 
        in early 2017 but months later withdrew the program with no 
        explanation. USDA should reestablish this program, and begin 
        accepting applications from qualified certifiers immediately.

   Allocate $50 million to support transition to organic. In 
        addition to providing certification cost-share assistance to 
        transitioning farmers, USDA should invest a minimum of $50 
        million across department programs to expand domestic organic 
        production by supporting both producers and processors. 
        Technical assistance, increased conservation funding for 
        programs such as the EQIP Organic Initiative, and direct 
        financial assistance should be provided to producers 
        transitioning to organic. For example, conventional farmers 
        transitioning to organic production--an entirely distinct 
        farming system that requires investments and learning new 
        techniques--should be able to qualify under the definition of 
        beginning farmers for USDA programs that provide grants and 
        assistance to that population. Additionally, support for 
        producers should be coupled with tax credits, low interest 
        loans and grants for companies to invest, retool and build 
        organic processing and infrastructure capacity. By supporting 
        transition to organic, USDA will be incentivizing farmers to 
        adopt climate-friendly agricultural practices, creating 
        opportunities for small- and medium-sized farms to thrive, and 
        supporting rural economic development.

   Facilitate market connections between farmers and buyers. 
        One of the primary barriers that prevents farmers from going 
        through the 3 year transition process is uncertainty around 
        whether or not they will have a long-term contract for their 
        premium organic crops. USDA should facilitate links between 
        transitioning growers and buyers, and provide incentives for 
        buyers that offer long-term contracts to transitioning and 
        organic producers.
Market Development & Processing/Distribution Infrastructure
    A significant limit to the continued growth and sustainability of 
the U.S. organic industry is a gap in domestic supply of organic 
ingredients and raw products. The growth of organic acreage in the U.S. 
has never kept pace with demand for organic products, and increasing 
amounts of imports continue to fill the gap. Overcoming barriers to the 
growth in domestic organic acreage will require a multi-faceted and 
regionally-oriented approach.
Organic Processing and Distribution Capacity
   Invest $100 million in organic processing and 
        infrastructure. Investment in organic processing and 
        distribution infrastructure is critical to support domestic 
        supply chains. All processing facilities that handle organic 
        product are required to maintain an organic certification and 
        systems plan to ensure compliance with the organic regulations 
        and prevent commingling and contamination of organic and non-
        organic product. To transition more acreage to organic and 
        support farmers transitioning, USDA must put an equal emphasis 
        on increasing processing capacity and supporting market 
        development opportunities to ensure a healthy organic 
        marketplace. USDA should establish a competitive grant program 
        for market and infrastructure development to expand organic 
        processing capacity. The program will assist companies in 
        retooling, refurbishing and rebuilding processing facilities to 
        meet organic market demand across all regions, commodities and 
        scales.
Organic Certification Continuity
    The pandemic created supply chain disruptions such as capacity 
constraints, increased demand, supply shortages, and facility closures. 
Certified organic farmers and handlers need to quickly adjust to bring 
on new land, processing lines and/or facilities, and storage units. 
This creates a unique challenge for organic businesses because an on-
site inspection must be conducted for a person or operation seeking new 
organic certification. For organic operations requesting an addition or 
update to its existing certification, the new land or facility must 
quickly move through the certification process, which typically 
includes an on-site inspection. Certified organic products must also 
meet very specific packaging and labeling requirements. Overall, this 
leads to reduced flexibility and unique supply chain challenges for 
organic businesses and farms when on-site inspections are not possible. 
The continuity of organic inspection operations is critical to the 
compliance of the organic supply chain, and the health and safety of 
organic farmers, processors and inspectors must remain at the center of 
all decision-making. Fortunately, there are many inspection tools and 
technologies that can be used to verify organic compliance while travel 
restrictions and advisories associated with the novel coronavirus are 
in place.

   During this unprecedented time, it is critical that USDA 
        support the organic marketplace by allowing accredited 
        certifiers to utilize emergency remote inspections when on-site 
        inspections are not possible.

    If a farmer or business fails to pay their organic certification 
fee on time, they are at risk of being issued a noncompliance by their 
certifier, and having their organic certification suspended. 
Certification cost-share was reduced and delayed so many operations 
experiencing financial strain from the pandemic weren't able to rely on 
full and timely certification cost-share assistance.

   USDA should provide flexibility to operations unable to pay 
        their certification fees by delaying suspension of 
        certification if the only non-compliance is related to late 
        payments of certification fees.
Market Development
   Purchase $100 million in organic food for nutrition 
        programs. Many U.S. commodities rely on USDA's purchasing power 
        and nutrition procurement programs for supply chain management. 
        However, organic food has largely been shut out of Federal 
        feeding programs such as the school lunch program, the Women, 
        Infant, and Children (WIC) program, and emergency food 
        assistance programs despite the fact that over 80% of U.S. 
        households purchase some organic products on a regulator basis. 
        USDA should establish a pilot program, and work with states to 
        increase purchases of organic food and reduce barriers to 
        purchasing organic food within feeding programs. USDA nutrition 
        programs must be modernized to meet consumer needs and demand 
        while also supporting climate-friendly agriculture and 
        reflecting the diversity of U.S. agriculture. Cost should not 
        be a barrier. For example, USDA should purchase both certified 
        organic and certified transitional to support farmers through 
        the transition process with a stepped-up premium. At the very 
        least, USDA should purchase organic food for feeding programs 
        in line with organic's current overall market share to ensure 
        equitable access. Over 15% of fruits and vegetables sold in the 
        U.S. are certified organic and over 8% of dairy and eggs sold 
        are organic. Therefore, at a minimum, Federal nutrition 
        purchasing should reflect the current market share for organic 
        products.

   Increase international market development funding to $5 
        million annually. Organic is persistently under-funded in the 
        USDA market access program, receiving less than a million 
        dollars annually to promote organic export development despite 
        the fact that U.S. organic represents $62 billion in annual 
        sales. As a comparison, the U.S. Almond Board receives nearly 
        $5 million in USDA market access program funding even though 
        the total global almond market is worth only $11 billion.
Risk Management Tools & Access to Land, Credit and Capital
Crop Insurance Policy Improvements
    Crop insurance is an important financial safety net for farms. Yet 
organic and transitioning farmers face challenges in finding 
appropriate crop insurance tools for their operations. Some of the 
challenges and barriers include: limited availability of policies for 
the crops and locations where they are growing, difficulty insuring the 
full value of organic crops; inappropriate restrictions and penalties 
for using legitimate organic farming practices; contradictions between 
requirements for crop insurance and other USDA programs; and lack of 
access to insurance agents who understand organic farming and 
certification.
    These challenges have systemically put organic farmers at a 
disadvantage for decades. The absence of these safety nets put organic 
farms at an even greater disadvantage during the pandemic, and they 
experienced supply chain disruptions, revenues losses, and price 
reductions on top of extreme weather-related yield reductions. 
Improvements are needed to help organic and transitioning farmers 
overcome barriers to fully benefit from crop insurance as a risk 
management tool and farm safety net. USDA should expand or adapt policy 
options that better accommodate organic crops and production systems, 
and eliminate policies that penalize farms when transitioning to 
organic production.
    Several specific examples of policy improvements are listed below:
    When farms successfully transition from conventional to organic, 
they can anticipate significant increases in revenue. However, current 
RMA policies on Whole Farm Revenue Protection (WFRP) coverage limit 
expansion of revenue coverage to 30%. RMA should ensure that all 
producers, including rapidly expanding operations and operations that 
have recently obtained access to premium markets like organic, are able 
to obtain coverage under this policy.

   Under the Whole-Farm Revenue Protection Program, recognize 
        the change in farm revenue after a farm has transitioned to 
        organic. Eliminate the 30% cap on increased production value 
        under the expansion provision.

    Organic farmers can obtain contract prices that far exceed two-
times the conventional price for a specific commodity. However, current 
RMA policies cap the amount a producer can insure against at two-times 
the conventional price election regardless of the price indicated on 
the contract.

   RMA should evaluate whether current caps on the Contract 
        Price Addendum (CPA) improperly limits the ability of an 
        organic producer to obtain crop insurance, and determine 
        whether to eliminate or raise the caps if they do limit the 
        organic producers' ability to obtain crop insurance with the 
        CPA option.

    When farmers successfully transition from conventional to organic, 
they currently cannot utilize their previous conventional or 
transitional production histories when calculating actual production 
history for their crop insurance coverage.

   RMA should allow producers to utilize previous yield 
        history, whether conventional or transitional, with appropriate 
        discounts for known reductions in yields that may occur when 
        employing organic production practices, when calculating Actual 
        Production History for their organic crop insurance coverage.
Loan Program Improvements
    Many USDA risk management programs administered across various 
mission areas such as the Farm Service Agency, Risk Management Agency, 
Natural Resources Conservation Service, etc. place unnecessary and 
arbitrary caps on organic producers which minimizes their 
effectiveness.

   USDA should remove all caps on loans and programs for 
        organic producers if similar caps are not in place for 
        conventional producers.

    Organic producers may obtain Marketing Assistance Loans for their 
crops in storage, but the loan rates are not adjusted for the premium 
prices that organic commodities receive in the market.

   FSA should make adjusted Marketing Assistance Loans 
        available to organic producers with crops in storage, and 
        provide organic loan rates for certified organic commodities 
        under existing adjustment authority.

   Organic farmers' crops command premiums at market, and FSA 
        should incorporate organic price premiums when determining loan 
        rates for their Farm Storage Facility Loan Program.
Organic Certification Cost-Share Improvements
    The organic certification cost-share program is one of the only 
avenues of Federal financial support for organic farmers, and it is 
especially important for small- and medium-sized farms and for 
attracting new, young farmers to organic. Last fall, USDA delayed the 
release of funds and unexpectedly announced that the reimbursement rate 
would be reduced to a maximum of 50% of certification costs, cutting 
funding for organic farmers when they needed it most. We are pleased by 
USDA's recent announcement to include $20 million in additional funding 
for this program, and expanding the program to include farmers who are 
transitioning to organic production. Making improvements to the 
certification cost-share program is one of the most efficient and 
effective ways to get money into the pockets of organic farmers. Annual 
certification costs continue to rise, and failure to pay can lead to 
non-compliance and potential revocation and loss of certification 
status. Funding this program is essential to keeping farmers enrolled 
and benefiting from organic certification.

   FSA should increase the maximum reimbursement rate from $750 
        per certification scope to $1,500 per certification scope, and 
        cover 100% of the costs of certification for qualified small- 
        and mid-sized producers and socially disadvantaged farmers.

   FSA should streamline and improve program efficiency by 
        setting up agreements with USDA accredited certifiers to 
        disburse cost-share assistance. Eligible producers could be 
        reimbursed directly by certifiers rather than having to apply 
        and submit paperwork annually through FSA.
Provide Tax Credits to Landowners Offering Long-Term Leases
    Organic agriculture production relies on long-term soil-building 
practices that help to manage fertility and control weeds and disease 
pressures. Farmers who operate on leased land need security and 
assurance that they can farm on the land long enough to reap the 
economic and environmental benefits of their agricultural management 
investments. Landowners should be incentivized to offer long-term 
leases to organic and transitioning farmers. This policy can 
particularly support socially disadvantaged farmers who may be more 
likely to lease than own land.

   Provide tax credits to landowners offering long-term leases.
Technical Assistance
    Invest $50 million in organic technical assistance. Successful 
organic and transitioning farmers need to rely on agronomists and 
extension agents who are trained in organic production methods. 
However, there is a large gap in technical assistance investment to 
meet the needs of organic and transitioning farmers across production 
systems, scales, and geographic regions. There is a lack of crop 
advisors, extension agents, and other agricultural service providers 
with organic management literacy to support farmers. A substantial 
investment across various programs and services is critical to 
expanding access for organic and transitioning farmers to organic 
technical assistance. Improved technical assistance gets more organic 
acres under organic management, develops more domestically-grown 
organic products, and improves the environmental impact of supply 
chains.

   Develop a competitive grant program for organizations 
        providing technical assistance to transitioning farmers. Many 
        organizations are actively pursuing initiatives that can help 
        address the shortage of organic-focused technical assistance 
        for transitioning farmers in the U.S. USDA should support these 
        efforts by developing a competitive grant program for 
        organizations that provide regionally adapted programs and 
        services that support farmers transitioning to organic. A 
        portion of the funds should be designated for programs that 
        support socially disadvantaged farmers, farmers with limited 
        resources, and/or are geographically isolated.

      Topics for funded projects should include:

     Basics of organic production: weed control, nutrient 
            management, crop rotation, pest management

     Systems thinking & long-term strategies for success in 
            organic production

     Managing risk during transition

     Organic certification process & record keeping

     National Organic Program regulations

     Organic marketing and profitability

     On-farm & hands-on experiential learning on organic 
            operations

     Mentoring

     Farmer-to-Fa[r]mer peer learning networks

      USDA's investments can help support public-private partnerships 
        that expand the availability of technical assistance. 
        Partnerships across organizations, sectors, and supply chain 
        participants create public goods while allowing private 
        businesses to strengthen their own supply chains. For example, 
        the Organic Agronomy Training Service (OATS), sponsored by the 
        Organic Trade Association, seeks to expand the network of 
        agronomists and technical service providers for organic and 
        transitioning farmers. A ``train-the-trainer'' model, OATS 
        provides science-based trainings for agriculture professionals 
        to gain competency in organic systems to better serve their 
        farmer clients. Over the four training events held in 2019-
        2020, OATS trained 140 agricultural professionals who have 
        directly impacted management decisions on almost \1/2\ million 
        acres of organic and transitional farmland.

   Expand USDA National Organic Program's Organic Integrity 
        Database to facilitate producer-to-producer information 
        exchange on organic practices and resources at a regional 
        level. Producer-to-producer information sharing is a highly 
        effective method of practice implementation. USDA's Organic 
        Integrity Database is a tremendous resource for organic 
        operation information, and could be expanded to facilitate 
        information exchange on organic production practices and 
        resources at a regional level. Extension agencies and NRCS 
        support show the effectiveness of such a model, and this should 
        be expanded to organic specific resources.

   Reduce or waive industry contributions under USDA-NRCS 
        cooperative agreements from 50:50 to 25:75 for organic 
        technical assistance providers. NRCS cooperative agreements are 
        one way that USDA can support organic expertise within NRCS. 
        However, it has been difficult for stakeholders to resource the 
        matching funds needed to establish these positions.
Workforce Safety, Availability & Training
    The pandemic caused major disruptions in the agriculture workforce 
and further exposed systemic vulnerabilities. From farm to shelf, at 
the forefront of our membership's mind is concern about maintaining the 
safety of their workforce. In general, organic farming is more labor-
intensive. Like other food and agriculture businesses, organic farms 
are challenged to protect essential workers while also facing 
astronomical operational costs. We echo the concerns that have already 
been raised by a majority of agriculture stakeholders for the need to 
maintain a stable supply of labor. Investments in workforce training 
and human capacity building are also critical.

   USDA should continue to work with other Federal agencies 
        such as FEMA to ensure that an adequate supply of personal 
        protective equipment, sanitation supplies, and vaccines are 
        available to the food and agriculture sectors. Small businesses 
        are especially at a disadvantage for acquiring these resources, 
        so we ask that you provide them enhanced support.

   Tax relief should be provided to businesses that have had to 
        make massive investments to their operations to protect their 
        workforce. In addition to purchasing supplies, business have 
        had to change operational dynamics to accommodate social 
        distancing, as well as cover costs of replacing employees who 
        are sick or quarantining.

   The pandemic has also further exposed the vulnerability of 
        an agricultural workforce that is in short supply, does not 
        have legal status and lacks basic protections. Agricultural 
        workforce policies must support the health, safety and legal 
        standing of agricultural farmworkers, including assistance to 
        protect workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

   The organic industry is currently experiencing a decline in 
        well-trained and well-qualified inspectors and certification 
        reviewers. USDA should continue and expand efforts to develop 
        human capital within the organic inspector and certification 
        community.

   USDA should explore options for improving the accessibility 
        and affordability of healthcare for farmers, especially 
        socially disadvantages farmers and new or beginning farmers and 
        ranchers.
Organic Standards Development
    Strong standards provide the foundation for the USDA organic 
program. For the organic premium to be recognized in the marketplace, 
there has to be a clear distinction backed by consistent, enforceable 
standards. Organic is a voluntary regulatory program for farmers and 
businesses who choose to meet strict standards and market their 
products under the USDA Organic seal. However, the Federal regulatory 
apparatus at USDA has stifled innovation and continuous improvement 
within the industry. In the past 10 years, industry has advanced 20 
consensus recommendations for improvements to the organic standards, 
yet USDA has not completed rulemaking on a single one of them. USDA 
should work with industry to repair the public-private partnership and 
advance organic standards. This is the number one challenge facing the 
organic sector and without addressing it, all other assistance and 
investments USDA makes in organic will be meaningless.

   USDA should realign staffing and resources at the National 
        Organic Program to include an increased focus on organic 
        standards development. Currently, NOP has 63 full-time staff 
        yet only two are dedicated to organic standards development.

   USDA should publish in the Federal Register and take public 
        comment on an Organic Improvement Action Plan comprised of the 
        backlog of NOSB recommendations that have not been implemented. 
        The plan must include detailed timelines, prioritization, and 
        implementation plans for dealing with each recommendation.

   Establish a new framework for advancing Federal organic 
        standards to keep up with the marketplace and ensure the 
        credibility of the USDA Organic seal.

   Improve oversight and ensure consistent enforcement of USDA 
        accredited third-party certification agents by including the 
        specific evaluation of how certifiers are interpreting and 
        implementing new regulations and updates to the standards.

    Organic is an increasingly important part of American agriculture, 
and represents one of the fastest-growing food and farming sectors in 
the U.S. and the global marketplace, achieving $62 billion in annual 
sales in 2020. Organic provides economic opportunities for farmers, 
creating jobs and lifting rural economies, while also utilizing 
sustainable farming practices proven to help mitigate the threat of 
climate change. Organic also provides a safe, healthy choice to 
consumers, who are increasingly seeking out the trusted USDA Organic 
seal on the food and products they purchase for their families. Thank 
you for providing this opportunity to comment on building a more 
resilient, equitable and climate-friendly food system.
            Sincerely,
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
            
Laura Batcha,
Executive Director/CEO,
Organic Trade Association.