[Senate Hearing 117-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


 
   AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND 
          RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022

                              ----------                              

                                       U.S. Senate,
           Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                    Washington, DC.

                       NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES

    [The following testimonies were received by the 
Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug 
Administration, and Related Agencies for inclusion in the 
record. The submitted materials relate to the fiscal year 2022 
budget request for programs within the subcommittee's 
jurisdiction.]
     Prepared Statement of Agricultural Research (SoAR) Foundation
    The Supporters of Agricultural Research (SoAR) Foundation 
appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony to support a 
significant increase in the FY 2022 appropriation for research at the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), including the National Institute 
of Food and Agriculture's (NIFA) Agriculture and Food Research 
Initiative (AFRI). A non-profit organization, SoAR was established in 
2014 to increase the quality and quantity of agricultural research, 
and, in particular, competitive merit-based research programs devoted 
to funding the best science. Recently, SoAR announced that moving 
forward, it will work to expand the overall investment in agricultural 
research around the world, a key solution to the changing climate and 
the growing hunger crisis.
    With climate change already at our front door and the ongoing 
battle against COVID-19, we believe now is the time to significantly 
increase public investments in agricultural research and development 
(R&D) programs at USDA. President Biden agrees and proposed in his 
Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Request an increase of $647 million from the 
fiscal year 2021 enacted level for USDA's research, education, and 
outreach programs. The total request for these programs is $4 billion 
to ``advance innovation and the application of science-based and data 
driven tools to put American technologies into the hands of farmers.'' 
\1\ SoAR strongly supports these proposed increases, including for 
USDA's Agricultural Research Service.
    Food and agriculture have significant direct and indirect economic 
impact. A 2021 study shows that the food and agriculture sectors 
account for roughly one-fifth of the country's economic activity, 
directly supporting nearly 20 million jobs. That is more than 13% of 
U.S. employment. Total jobs indirectly supported by food and 
agriculture reach almost 41 million jobs. The total output of these 
sectors is $7 trillion.\2\
    Through research and innovation providing solutions to short- and 
long-term challenges, our food and agriculture sectors are a driving 
force of the U.S. economy. A recent study found that U.S. public 
agriculture R&D spending from 1910 to 2007 returned, on average, $17 in 
benefits for every $1 invested.\3\ Increased funding of USDA's research 
and development (R&D) programs will invest in our rural communities and 
give our farmers, ranchers, foresters, and producers the tools needed 
to manage current and future challenges, including the climate crisis. 
These critical investments will also provide a significant return by 
improving consumer nutrition, health, and resilience.
    The federal share of overall R&D spending as a percentage of GDP is 
now at its lowest point since the 1950s, and food and agriculture lags 
even further behind most other Federal R&D areas. Agricultural research 
funding at USDA has remained fairly flat over the last 50 years.\4\ In 
contrast, funding for other Federal research agencies has increased 10- 
to 20-fold during the same period. Additionally, Brazil, China, India, 
and other countries are investing heavily in agricultural R&D, while 
the U.S. has fallen behind.\5\
    An analysis by the American Association for the Advancement of 
Science (AAAS) of the impact of the Budget Control Act on R&D funding 
concluded that the ``cumulative ``lost'' federal funding may amount to 
$96 billion for basic and applied research, and $240 billion for total 
R&D. In other words, if R&D agencies had simply grown at their 
historical pace, the (annual) R&D budget would today be about $33 
billion or 20% larger.'' \6\ The overall rate of R&D growth from 1978-
2008 was 5.7%, before the Budget Control Act was signed into law.\7\ 
The Office of Management and Budget's historical data shows that R&D 
programs at USDA only had an overall funding growth rate of 3.5% over 
the same time period.\8\
    With a significant infusion of funding for USDA's Research, 
Education, and Economics agencies, a roadmap exists on how those 
investments can be best utilized. At the request of Members of 
Congress, and with the support of numerous Federal agencies and 
stakeholders, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and 
Medicine (NASEM) conducted a study to determine the greatest 
opportunities in food and agriculture research. Released in July 2018, 
Science Breakthroughs to Advance Food and Agricultural Research by 2030 
(Science Breakthroughs 2030) identifies five priority research areas to 
strengthen U.S. agriculture within the next decade: 1.) Genomics, 2.) 
Microbiomes, 3.) Sensors, 4.) Data and informatics, and 5.) 
Transdisciplinary research.
    In January 2019, research stakeholders expanded upon this report, 
by producing a document identifying for the public and policymakers the 
types of ambitious research goals that can only be achieved through 
implementing the priority areas. By 2030, significant investment in the 
five breakthroughs areas could: 1.) Reduce water use in agriculture by 
20%, 2.) Reduce fertilizer use by 15%, 3.) Significantly reduce the 
need for fungicides and pesticides in plant production, 4.) Radically 
reduce the incidence of infectious disease epidemics for livestock, 5.) 
Reduce the incidence of foodborne illnesses by 50%, and 6.) Increase 
the availability of new plant varieties and animal products with 
enhanced nutrient content.
    SoAR strongly supports the President's FY 2022 Budget Request of 
$700 million for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative at NIFA. 
These investments in USDA's flagship food and agricultural research 
competitive grants program are needed to fund crucial areas aimed at 
addressing our nation's most pressing agriculture and public health 
challenges, including COVID-19, climate change, adaptation, resiliency, 
farmer equity, nutrition, rural prosperity, and food safety. AFRI helps 
our farmers, ranchers, producers, and foresters to mitigate the impacts 
of these agriculture and public health challenges, and gives them an 
opportunity to be part of the solution.
    By Congressional design, this program is flexible, allowing NIFA to 
quickly respond to unforeseen challenges, like COVID-19. For example, 
through AFRI's nimbleness, NIFA was able to award almost $13 million 
across 17 grant projects to support research across all areas of 
agricultural research and education addressing the pandemic. 
Additionally, NIFA invested more than $10.5 million through eight 
regional or national AFRI projects supporting technical schools, 
community and junior colleges, and youth development programs as they 
deploy innovative technologies continuing developing students' STEM 
skills during the COVID-19 pandemic.
    Depending on the fiscal year, as high as approximately 75 percent 
of AFRI proposals that are deemed worthy by expert review panels go 
unfunded (https://nifa.usda.gov/afri-annual-review-archives), because 
not enough funds are available. These are peer reviewed proposals where 
scientists have determined that NIFA should make an investment.
    SoAR's Retaking the Field publications and recently launched 
Podcast series illustrate the many contributions of AFRI and other USDA 
research programs to benefit our producers and consumers, as well as 
strengthen rural communities and the U.S. economy. These efforts 
educate stakeholders about the importance of agricultural research and 
raises the visibility of the value of Federal investment in food and 
agricultural research.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/FY2022-
Discretionary-Request.pdf, Enclosure 2, Page 2.
    \2\ https://feedingtheeconomy.com/
    \3\ Baldos, Uris Lantz, Frederi G. Viens, Thomas W. Hertel, and 
Keith O. Fuglie. R&D Spending, Knowledge Capital, and Agricultural 
Productivity Growth: A Bayesian Approach. American Journal of 
Agricultural Economics. July 2018. 101(1): 291-310; https://doi.org/
10.1093/ajae/aay039.
    \4\ https://www.nsf.gov/statistics
    \5\ Jahn, Molly. New solutions for a changing climate: The policy 
imperative for public investment in agriculture R&D. August 2020. 
https://www.thechicagocouncil.org/sites/default/files/2020-12/
report_new-solutions-for-changing-climate_0.pdf. Pages 1, 13.
    \6\ https://www.aaas.org/news/budget-control-act-may-have-cost-
over-200-billion-federal-rd
    \7\ https://www.aaas.org/news/budget-control-act-may-have-cost-
over-200-billion-federal-rd
    \8\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/historical-tables/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 ______
                                 
   Prepared Statement of American Commodity Distribution Association
    On behalf of the American Commodity Distribution Association 
(ACDA), I respectfully submit this statement regarding the fiscal year 
2021 budget request of the Food and Nutrition Service for inclusion in 
the Subcommittee's official record. ACDA members appreciate the 
Subcommittee's support for these vital programs.
    ACDA appreciates the action the Subcommittee has taken during the 
current fiscal year through both the regular fiscal year 2021 
appropriation and multiple supplemental measures. This year has been a 
challenge for both recipient agencies and food providers, and we 
compliment and thank all of them for the efforts they have made. We 
also offer our thanks to our partners at the Agricultural Marketing 
Service and the Food and Nutrition Service who have responded in ways 
we could not even have imagined. We want to call attention to specific 
concerns we have regarding commodity support for both schools and food 
banks. ACDA believes that there will be great demands for USDA Foods 
during fiscal year 22 with the end of Trade Mitigation and the 
uncertainty of what more will be needed in response to continuing 
challenges resulting from COVID-19. School food programs will face 
challenges as they attempt to return to normal operations. 
Flexibilities will be needed in both programs, and we urge strong 
funding in the fiscal year 22 bill with additional supplementals as may 
be warranted. We continue to ask that you fully fund administrative 
expense funding for TEFAP at $100 million; to provide sufficient 
funding for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP) to maintain 
the current caseload and to allow for requested expansion; and to 
increase funding for the school food equipment grant program.
    ACDA is a non-profit professional trade association, dedicated 
since 1974 to the growth and improvement of USDA's Commodity Food 
Distribution Program. ACDA members include state agencies that 
distribute USDA-purchased commodity foods; agricultural organizations; 
industry; associate members; recipient agencies, such as schools and 
soup kitchens; and allied organizations, such as anti-hunger groups. 
ACDA members distributed nearly 3 billion pounds of domestically 
produced commodities this past year to programs including the National 
School Lunch and Breakfast Programs, the Emergency Food Assistance 
Program, the Summer Food Service Program, the Commodity Supplemental 
Food Program, and the Child and Adult Care Food Program.
   usda foods needed beyond trade mitigation and coronavirus response
    Food banks across the nation do appreciate the additional food 
items provided with Trade Mitigation purchases and those provided as a 
result of supplemental appropriations. The additional resources 
provided by the now discontinued Farmers to Families Food Box program 
were meaningful to many families, and offered additional food items not 
routinely provided in TEFAP. We suggest again that as we go forward, we 
need to consider how we might be able to maintain this volume and 
variety of food assistance. Food banks have committed additional 
resources of their own, getting additional warehouse space and other 
necessary equipment. We urge the Subcommittee to explore other 
authorities that will help maintain this worthwhile flow, and to seek 
guidance from the Department should additional authorities be needed.
    ACDA appreciates the fact that Congress gave the Secretary the 
ability to use FY 19 data in establishing the entitlement calculation 
for FY 20, and extended this authority for FY 21 as well. While we all 
are supportive of schools fully reopening for the next school year, we 
suggest that school meal participation needs to be closely monitored 
and that further flexibilities may well be needed for FY 22. It will 
take time to build back to prior participation levels.
    Flexibilities will also be needed for food vendors whose 
inventories were disrupted by the understandable changes that have been 
made in school meals in order to ensure that children are fed. 
Supplying food items for congregate sites is different than providing 
individual items for meals in the classroom or grab and go. Both food 
vendors and recipient agencies should be engaged to secure their views. 
We have previously highlighted section 4205 of the Agricultural Act of 
2014 which established a multiagency task force to evaluate and monitor 
the commodity programs to ensure that they meet the mission of the 
Department. While the statute requires annual reports to Congress 
regarding the findings and recommendations of the Task Force and the 
policies implemented for the improvement of commodity procurement 
programs, there has not been such a report within the past 2 years. We 
urge the Subcommittee to direct the prompt provision of such a report, 
and to include both food vendors and recipient agencies to secure their 
views.
                   nutrition standards going forward
    School food authorities will face challenges resuming program 
operations, as will suppliers. While all work to provide the highest 
quality foods possible, ACDA agrees that more stringent standards, 
particularly for sodium, need to be reassessed and slated for later 
implementation than SY 22 to give all parties involved time to develop 
and market test revised formulations to ensure that they are 
acceptable.
         fully fund tefap administrative funds at $100 million
    ACDA sincerely appreciates the $79,630,000 provided for TEFAP 
Administrative Funds provided in the final fiscal year 2021 
Consolidated Appropriations Act, and the additional funds provided in 
subsequent supplementals to support commodity distribution expenses. We 
continue to urge the Subcommittee to fully fund TEFAP Administrative 
Funds at $100 million.
    As we have told the Subcommittee in the past, food banks, Community 
Action Agencies, and other TEFAP operators continue to find that they 
have had little choice but to convert food dollars to administrative 
expense funds to maintain their operations. Using food dollars for 
operating expenses is too often necessary and reduces the ability of 
these operators to provide food assistance to more individuals and 
families who continue to face difficult times. We cannot at this time 
predict the food needs we will have in the next fiscal year and must be 
prudent about preserving our food purchasing capability. The current 
situation is even more challenging because of the additional demands 
placed on food banks. We urge the Subcommittee to not force this choice 
between food and expense funds upon operators that are experiencing 
reduced private donations in addition to increased demands.
          funding for the commodity supplemental food program
    ACDA joins the National Commodity Supplemental Food Program 
Association in recommending $375,000,000 for the Commodity Supplemental 
Food Program (CSFP). This is the amount provided when supplemental 
funding is added to the fiscal year 21 regular appropriation. We 
believe this higher amount will continue to be needed to maintain 
current services that have encountered increased food package costs, 
and provide for requested expansion in the program.
                      school food equipment grants
    ACDA supports increasing School Food Equipment Grants to at least 
$35 million, and to increase the number of schools eligible for such 
grants. The resumption of school meals and the desire to provide a 
wider variety of foods is linked to having the appropriate equipment to 
do so. All school food authorities are working diligently to provide 
healthier and desirable meals to millions of students each and every 
day. This grant program has made a positive difference for those 
fortunate enough to receive these grants.
    ACDA continues to support emphasizing the importance of fruits and 
vegetables in all forms--fresh, canned, dried, and frozen--as noted in 
the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. However, we remain 
concerned about mandating not just what children are offered in school 
meals but what they must take, whether they intend to eat it or not. 
Increasing flexibility to program sponsors in planning menus that meet 
high nutrition standards but still are within cost targets is of 
critical importance and will help reduce waste resulting from this 
mandate.
                              buy american
    ACDA appreciates the efforts of America's farmers and ranchers to 
provide wholesome product for various feeding programs, in addition to 
the important role they make in supporting American consumers. 
Producers continue to see product coming into the United States that 
disrupt domestic sales and result in the need for Bonus Buys, in 
addition to the Trade Mitigation Program. ACDA supports strong guidance 
on Buy American requirements and efforts to assist buyers, 
distributors, and school food authorities improve compliance with these 
requirements.
    ACDA thanks the Subcommittee for its support over the years and 
looks forward to continuing to work with you as the fiscal year 2022 
Appropriation moves ahead.

    [This statement was submitted by Sandra Hopple, President, American 
Commodity Distribution Association.]
                                 ______
                                 
           Prepared Statement of American Society of Agronomy
    The American Society of Agronomy (ASA), Crop Science Society of 
America (CSSA), and Soil Science Society of America (SSSA) represent 
more than 8,000 scientists and students, 13,500 Certified Crop Advisers 
(CCA), and more than 700 Certified Professional Soil Scientist (CPSS). 
We are the largest coalition of scientists and professionals dedicated 
to the agronomic, crop, and soil science disciplines in the United 
States. We are supportive of the President's budget request of $4 
billion for Research, Education, and Economics (REE) at the Department 
of Agriculture (USDA) in FY 2022, specifically:
    $1.721 billion in top-line funding for the Agricultural Research 
Service (ARS). ARS is the government's premier agriculture research 
institution. ARS scientists conduct high-priority research at 
facilities across the country, and its world-renowned facilities are 
used to pioneer agricultural advancements. ARS is uniquely suited to 
conduct research that requires long-term investments with high-impact 
payoffs while maintaining the capacity and readiness to respond to 
emerging and pressing challenges.
    This level of funding provides a 5% increase, or $76.35 million, to 
ARS's national programs and flat funding, $102.6 million, for the 
National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF) so that it need not tap 
into funding from ARS's other programs. The remaining $15 million 
represents the amount necessary to meet USDA's serious need for a high-
speed network, high-performance computing, big data storage, and modern 
informatics expertise. Without this additional funding, USDA may choose 
to draw from all other ARS programs with a one percent assessment. This 
one percent cut to all intra- and extramural programs will not be 
necessary if the essential $15 million funding for Big Data is 
appropriated.
    National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA). We strongly 
support NIFA's suite of extramural programs that enable colleges and 
universities to drive innovations, expand outreach, and develop the 
next generation workforce. Within NIFA, our priorities include:
    $600 million for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative 
(AFRI). AFRI is USDA's premier competitive grants program, seeking to 
solve critical challenges in food and agricultural systems. AFRI funded 
research supports cutting-edge advances in emerging areas such as 
genomics, microbiomes, sensors, and informatics to help ensure 
profitable and sustainable farms and a healthy nation. Currently, AFRI 
supports fewer than a third of the projects review panels recommended 
for funding.
    $5 million for Research Equipment Grants. The 2018 Farm Bill 
included a competitive grants program for research equipment at 
colleges and universities. It is authorized at $5 million per year and 
limits individual grants to a maximum of $500,000. This addresses a 
critical need identified by our member scientists. Agricultural 
researchers with innovative and exciting ideas may require large or 
specialized equipment for their research. However, there is no clear 
path to obtain equipment funding through existing programs--forcing 
many scientists to abandon valuable research projects.
    $50 million for the Agriculture Advanced Research and Development 
Authority (AgARDA) Pilot program. The world has witnessed a dramatic 
increase in existential threats to agriculture--disease outbreaks, 
changing climates, and labor challenges to name a few. Current funding 
models at USDA tackle these issues, and many others, by funding low-
risk proposals with small grants. But these grants, by design, are 
capable of only incremental progress. It is now clear that slow, 
incremental gains are not enough--high impact, transformational ideas, 
which are risky in nature, have become necessary. The 2018 Farm Bill 
authorized AgARDA to address challenges that threaten the stability and 
economic viability of agriculture. Modeled after the successful Defense 
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), AgARDA can accelerate 
innovative, high-risk, high-reward research and development in areas 
where industry is unlikely to invest.
    $280 million for Hatch Act formula funding. Hatch funding supports 
agricultural experiment stations at our nation's land-grant colleges 
and universities. This funding addresses high-priority research needs 
to help farmers through droughts and floods, combat pests and 
pathogens, and conserve soil and water.
    $340 million for Smith-Lever 3(b) and (c) funding. Smith-Lever 
funding supports the cooperative extension program, a vital link 
between land-grant university scientists and agricultural producers, 
communities, consumers, families, and others who directly benefit from 
the latest innovations.
    America's incredible agricultural productivity and economic 
prosperity are the result of investments in science and technology. 
Maintaining the pace of scientific discoveries and innovations is 
needed to sustainably meet the growing demand for food, fuel, and fiber 
around the world.

    [This statement was submitted by Karl Anderson, Director of 
Government Relations, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science 
Society of America.]
                                 ______
                                 
     Prepared Statement of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)
    The American Society for Microbiology (ASM) is one of the largest 
life science societies, composed of 30,000 scientists and health 
professionals. Our mission is to promote and advance the microbial 
sciences. ASM respectfully requests that Congress provide $4 billion 
for research, education, and outreach at the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture in Fiscal Year (FY) 2022, and no less than $200 million 
above the FY 2021 budget authority level for the Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA). Specifically, we recommend $600 million for the 
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) and $50 million for the 
Advanced Agriculture Research and Development Authority (AgARDA), an 
increase of at least $85 million for antimicrobial resistance 
priorities at USDA, and an increase of $20 million for the Combating 
Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria program at FDA.
        a strong investment in microbial research pays dividends
    We thank Congress for its bipartisan support of AFRI and for its 
commitment to basic, translational, and clinical microbiology research 
funded by this program and others through the USDA National Institute 
of Food and Agriculture (NIFA). In order to attain the goals of the 
recently released Agriculture Innovation Agenda (AIA) and Climate-Smart 
Agriculture and Forestry Strategy, the USDA must continue to support a 
broad portfolio of fundamental and applied research in the microbial 
sciences, integrated programs, extension, and educational programs that 
include training the next generation of scientists.
    ASM appreciates USDA's commitment to environmentally sound and 
economically viable agricultural practices, and we support the goal of 
increasing U.S. agricultural production by 40 percent while cutting the 
environmental footprint of U.S. agriculture in half by 2050 as 
described in the AIA. In order to support the innovative technologies 
and practices that will help America reach this goal, USDA must 
increase investments in the microbial sciences. As noted in the 
National Academies report Science Breakthroughs to Advance Food and 
Agricultural Research by 2030, further understanding of animal, soil, 
and plant microbiomes will provide opportunities to improve crop 
production, transform feed efficiency, and increase resilience to 
stress and disease.
    Thanks to past investments in microbiology research through AFRI, 
scientists are:

  --Developing a voluntary framework for antimicrobial stewardship in 
        animals. This addresses a critical need, as widespread use of 
        antibiotics in animals and humans has led to increased 
        resistance and could render these medicines ineffective.

  --Learning more about how soil and root microbiome can be altered to 
        improve plant productivity and soil health. This knowledge will 
        help ensure crop viability over the longer term.

    Studying ways that prebiotics and probiotics can improve human gut 
health. An unhealthy balance of gut bacteria can lead to inflammation 
and other intestinal disorders.

  --Learning more about the role that the bovine gut microbiome plays 
        in how cattle process feed. By deepening our understanding of 
        this complex ecosystem, scientists hope that better strategies 
        for sustainable beef production can be developed.
                      meeting the challenges ahead
    The challenges facing our nation's producers and consumers are 
growing. World food demand is expected to double in the next 25 years, 
increasing the stress on the U.S. food and agricultural enterprise. In 
addition, we continue to face the threats of climate change, 
antimicrobial resistance, and the COVID-19 pandemic.
    To combat AMR, COVID, and looming future threats, we recommend an 
increase of at least $20 million for the Combating Antibiotic Resistant 
Bacteria program at FDA. FDA requires support to advance antibiotic 
stewardship in animals and to protect antibiotic effectiveness for 
human and animal populations. With additional resources, FDA can 
accelerate its 2018 five-year antibiotic stewardship action plan, 
including continuing to strengthen the National Antimicrobial 
Resistance Monitoring System (NARMS) and other initiatives by the 
Center for Veterinary Medicine to transition the remaining over-the-
counter antibiotic products to veterinary supervision, promptly update 
product labels to fully reflect judicious use principles, identify new 
ways to encourage the development of antibiotic alternatives, assist 
academic institutions and other partners in the development of 
veterinary educational materials, rapidly develop strategies to collect 
and analyze antibiotic use data on farms and in other agricultural 
settings, and support surveillance capacity-building through FDA's 
Veterinary Laboratory Investigation and Response Network (Vet-LIRN).
    We also recommend an increase of at least $85 million for 
antimicrobial resistance priorities at USDA, including support for the 
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), the National 
Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) and the National Animal Health 
Laboratory Network (NAHLN). Funding allows the agency to continue to 
promote agricultural stewardship, including gathering and evaluating 
valuable information on antibiotic use practices and identifying and 
characterizing injudicious use on farms and other agricultural settings 
through the National Animal Health Monitoring System (NAHMS) and other 
initiatives.
    Expanded funding for agricultural research will enable USDA 
investigators and scientists working at public universities, veterinary 
colleges and other research settings to better understand the factors 
driving the emergence of resistant pathogens. Funding will also help 
producers find new vaccines and antibiotic alternatives and develop 
improved animal management and husbandry practices that can be shared 
directly with farmers and livestock growers through USDA's Cooperative 
Extension Service If we are to seize the current, unparalleled 
scientific opportunities that exist in microbial research, Congress 
must also support the deployment and use of technology and practices to 
enhance microbial research data collection and utilization to make our 
food and agricultural systems more efficient, resilient, and 
sustainable.
    Our nation's ability to meet the 21st century challenges of human 
nutrition and food security, conservation of our nation's resources, 
and antimicrobial resistance will only be possible if Congress 
continues its commitment to robust and sustained funding increases for 
microbial, food, and agricultural research through AFRI, AgARDA, and 
other USDA-funded research, education, and extension programs. ASM 
recognizes the challenges facing our nation and the difficult decisions 
that must be made to ensure our nation's fiscal health, and we believe 
that funding cutting edge agricultural research will help our nation's 
farmers and ranchers succeed in the 21st century. Targeted acceleration 
of innovative research through funding AgARDA, combined with meaningful 
increases for USDA-funded research and FDA budget authority in FY 2022 
are essential for supporting microbial research to benefit animal, 
human, and environmental health.

    [This statement was submitted by Allen Segal, Director of Public 
Policy and Advocacy, American Society for Microbiology.]
                                 ______
                                 
       Prepared Statement of American Society for Nutrition (ASN)
    The American Society for Nutrition (ASN) respectfully requests that 
the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)/National Institute of Food 
and Agriculture/Agriculture and Food Research Initiative receive $600 
million and the USDA/Agricultural Research Service receive $1.72 
billion in fiscal year (FY) 2022. ASN has more than 8,000 members 
working throughout academia, clinical practice, government, and 
industry, who conduct research to advance our knowledge and application 
of nutrition.
                agriculture and food research initiative
    The USDA has been the lead nutrition agency and the most important 
federal agency to influence U.S. policies on dietary intake and food 
patterns for years. Agricultural research is essential to address the 
ever-increasing demand for a healthy, affordable, nutritious and 
sustainable food supply. The Agriculture and Food Research Initiative 
(AFRI) competitive grants program is charged with funding research, 
education, and extension and integrated, competitive grants that 
address key problems of national, regional, and multi-state importance 
in sustaining all components of agriculture. These components include 
human nutrition, farm efficiency and profitability, ranching, renewable 
energy, forestry (both urban and agro forestry), aquaculture, food 
safety, biotechnology, and conventional breeding. AFRI has funded 
cutting-edge, agricultural research on key issues of timely importance 
on a competitive, peer-reviewed basis since its establishment in the 
2008 Farm Bill. Adequate funding for agricultural research is critical 
to provide a safe and nutritious food supply for the world's 
population, to preserve the competitive position of U.S. agriculture in 
the global marketplace, and to provide jobs and revenue crucial to 
support the U.S. economy.
    The USDA/NIFA/Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) funds 
cutting-edge, agricultural research grants on key issues of timely 
importance on a competitive, peer-reviewed basis that address problems 
of national, regional, and multi-state importance in sustaining all 
components of agriculture, including nutrition. Adequate funding for 
AFRI is critical to provide a safe and nutritious food supply for the 
world's population, to preserve the competitive position of U.S. 
agriculture in the global marketplace, and to provide jobs and revenue 
crucial to support the U.S. economy. In order to achieve those 
benefits, AFRI must be able to advance fundamental sciences in support 
of agriculture and coordinate opportunities to build off of these 
discoveries. Therefore, ASN requests that AFRI be funded at $600 
million in FY 2022.
                     agricultural research service
    The Agricultural Research Service (ARS) ensures high-quality, safe 
food and other agricultural products; assesses the nutritional needs of 
Americans; sustains a competitive agricultural economy; enhances the 
natural resource base and the environment; and provides economic 
opportunities for rural citizens, communities, and society as a whole. 
ARS supports intramural and extramural research across four national 
program areas including nutrition, food safety and quality. Therefore, 
ASN requests that ARS receive $1.72 billion in FY 2022. ARS's program 
of human nutrition research includes six Human Nutrition Research 
Centers (HNRCs) across the nation, that link producer and consumer 
interests and form the core for building knowledge about food and 
nutrition. HNRCs conduct unparalleled human nutrition research on the 
role of food and dietary components in human health from conception to 
advanced old age, and they provide authoritative, peer-reviewed, 
science-based evidence that forms the basis of our federal nutrition 
policy and programs. HNRCs play an important role not only in 
generating knowledge, but also in translating it for stakeholders. 
Funding for ARS supports all of the USDA/HNRCs and ensures that these 
research facilities have adequate funding to continue their unique 
mission of improving the health of Americans through cutting-edge food, 
nutrition and agricultural research.
    Nutrition monitoring conducted by the USDA/ARS in partnership with 
the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is a unique and 
critically important surveillance function in which dietary intake, 
nutritional status, and health status are evaluated in a rigorous and 
standardized manner. (ARS is responsible for food and nutrient 
databases and the ``What We Eat in America'' dietary survey, while HHS 
tracks nutritional status and health parameters.) Nutrition monitoring 
findings are essential for multiple government agencies, as well as the 
public and private sector to track what Americans are eating, inform 
nutrition and dietary guidance policy, evaluate the effectiveness and 
efficiency of nutrition assistance programs, and study nutrition-
related disease outcomes. Because of past funding deficiencies, some 
food composition database entries do not reflect the realities of the 
current food supply, which may negatively impact programs and policies 
based on this information. It is imperative that ARS continue to 
receive increased support to update food and nutrient databases and to 
continue critical surveillance of the nation's nutritional status and 
the many benefits it provides.
    Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony regarding FY 2022 
appropriations for the U.S. Department of Agriculture/National 
Institute of Food and Agriculture/AFRI competitive grants program and 
Agricultural Research Service. Please contact John E. Courtney, Ph.D., 
Executive Officer, at [email protected] or 240-428-3643, 9211 
Corporate Boulevard, Suite 300, Rockville, MD 20850 if ASN may provide 
further assistance.

    [This statement was submitted by Lindsay H. Allen, Ph.D., 
President, American Society for Nutrition.]
                                 ______
                                 
   Prepared Statement of American Society of Plant Biologists (ASPB)
    On behalf of the American Society of Plant Biologists (ASPB), we 
submit this statement for the official record in support of funding for 
agricultural research by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 
ASPB supports a funding level of $600 million for the Agriculture and 
Food Research Initiative (AFRI) in fiscal year (FY) 2022, which 
administers competitive funding for innovative research on issues such 
as food security, global health, and renewable energy. ASPB also 
supports a funding level of $1.566 billion for the Agricultural 
Research Service (ARS).
    ASPB, founded in 1924 as the American Society of Plant 
Physiologists, was established to promote the growth and development of 
plant biology, to encourage and publish research in plant biology, and 
to promote the interests and professional advancement of plant 
scientists in general. ASPB members educate, mentor, advise, and 
nurture future generations of plant biologists; they work to increase 
understanding of plant biology, as well as science in general, in K-16 
schools and among the general public; they advocate in support of plant 
biology research; they work to convey the relevance and importance of 
plant biology; and they provide expertise in policy decisions world-
wide. Overall, ASPB members, as representatives of the society, work to 
disseminate information and excitement about plant sciences, especially 
through ASPB's advocacy, outreach activities, conferences, and 
publications.
    ASPB is encouraged by the special attention given to innovative 
soil management, plant biology research, and carbon sequestration 
agricultural techniques that were recently profiled in the 
Administration's American Innovation Effort to Create Jobs and Tackle 
the Climate Crisis. We indeed hope that the Committee will's support 
strategic planning efforts at the Department of Agriculture as 
officials work to advance innovation in agricultural research 
development. However, we are highly cognizant of the fact that in the 
current environment any significant increase in investment in 
innovative research will have to come at the expense of other programs. 
Therefore, as the Department adopts a posture focused on innovation it 
is more important than ever that Congress increase the allocation for 
the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and 
Related Agencies appropriations bill in FY 2022.
    This testimony highlights the critical importance of plant biology 
research and development to addressing vital issues, including 
achieving a sustainable food supply and food security and, by 
extension, global security and peace; fostering energy security; 
reducing reliance on all petrochemical products through the use of 
sustainable renewable biomass approaches; and protecting our 
environment--all in a time of rapid climate change.
    food, fuel, environment, and health: plant biology research and 
             america's competitiveness and self-sufficiency
    We often take plants for granted, but they are vital to our 
national competitiveness, security, and self-sufficiency--indeed to our 
very existence. New plant biology research is now addressing the most 
compelling issues facing our society. We are making groundbreaking 
advances in bioengineering and food security; renewables and energy 
independence; environmental stewardship; and secure development of 
further improved foods, feeds, fibers, and extending to building 
materials.
    Advances in federal priority areas, including artificial 
intelligence, biotechnology and the bioeconomy, are rooted in 
foundational plant biology research, which involves scientists making 
key, necessary discoveries fundamental to translational and applied 
efforts that support the economy. Such foundationally centered 
strategic research is mainly funded by the USDA. As such, limited 
funding commitments to such basic research now threaten our future 
national security and leadership. Stagnant agricultural research 
funding budgets undermine the contributions the agriculture industry 
makes to the American economy: 22.2 million jobs and approximately 5.2 
percent of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-
charting-the-essentials/ag-and-food-sectors-and-the-economy/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       immediate recommendations
    The ASPB membership has extensive expertise and participation in 
the academic, private, and government sectors. Consequently, ASPB is in 
an excellent position to articulate the nation's plant science 
priorities and standards needed as they relate to agriculture. Our 
recommendations are as follows:

  --Since the establishment of the National Institute of Food and 
        Agriculture (NIFA) and AFRI, interest in USDA research has 
        increased dramatically-a trend ASPB hopes to witness continuing 
        in the future. However, an increased, strategic, and focused 
        investment in competitive funding and its oversight is 
        essential if the nation is to continue to make ground-breaking 
        discoveries and accelerate progress toward resolving urgent 
        national priorities and societal needs. ASPB is prepared to be 
        of any assistance and encourages the Committee to fund AFRI at 
        $600 million in FY 2022.

  --ARS provides vital strategic research to serve USDA's mission and 
        objectives, as well as the broader agricultural sector. The 
        need to bolster and enhance ARS efforts to leverage and 
        complement NIFA is great given the challenges in food and 
        energy security. ASPB recommends a congressional appropriation 
        of $1.566 billion to ARS in FY 2022.

  --The Administration has indicated it will prioritize rural 
        development and economic growth, which are driven by the 
        technological advances and innovations supported by USDA's 
        Research, Education, and Economics mission area. Research areas 
        critical to advancing these objectives include water for food 
        production, food safety, resilience, and sustainable energy 
        production. Although ASPB appreciates the value of such 
        strategic focus, we give our most robust support for AFRI's 
        Foundational and Applied Sciences Program. This program 
        provides a basis for outcomes across a wide spectrum, often 
        leading to groundbreaking developments that cannot be 
        anticipated in advance. Indeed, it is these discoveries that 
        are the true engine of success for our agricultural enterprise.

  --There is an increasing need for additional training of scientists 
        in the areas of interdisciplinary energy research and plant 
        breeding. ASPB applauds the ongoing support of the AFRI 
        Education and Workforce program and calls for additional 
        funding for specific programs (i.e., training grants and 
        additional pre and postdoctoral fellowships) to provide this 
        needed workforce over the next 10 years and to adequately 
        prepare these individuals for careers in the agricultural 
        research of the future. Special emphasis should be given to 
        attracting women and individuals from marginalized groups to 
        the agricultural sciences.

  --Considerable research interest is now focused on the use of plant 
        biomass for energy production. However, if we are to use crops 
        and forest resources to their full potential, we must expend 
        extensive effort to improve our understanding of their 
        underlying biology and development, their agronomic 
        performance, and their subsequent processing to meet our goals. 
        Therefore, ASPB calls for additional funding targeted at 
        efforts to increase the utility and agronomic performance of 
        bioenergy crops using the best and most imaginative science and 
        technologies possible.

  --ASPB encourages some flexibility within NIFA's budget to enable the 
        agency to update and improve its data management capabilities.

  --ASPB supports robust funding appropriations for new Farm Bill 
        programs, including the Agricultural Genome to Phenome 
        Initiative and AGARDA, which have the power to transform 
        agricultural research.

    Thank you for your consideration of ASPB's testimony. For more 
information about ASPB, please visit us at www.aspb.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-
charting-the-essentials/ag-and-food-sectors-and-the-economy/

    [This statement was submitted by, Crispin Taylor, PhD, Chief 
Executive Officer, American Society of Plant Biologists.]
                                 ______
                                 
Prepared Statement of American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to 
                            Animals (ASPCA)
    On behalf of The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to 
Animals (ASPCA), the first humane organization in North America, and 
our over 2 million supporters nationwide, thank you for the opportunity 
to submit written testimony to the Subcommittee. We ask that you please 
consider the following provisions that will benefit animal welfare as 
you draft the FY2022 Agriculture Appropriations bill.
        require aphis to properly enforce the animal welfare act
    Over the past several years, enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act 
(AWA) by USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has 
steadily declined across all categories of enforcement actions. In 
2020, APHIS only opened 30 new enforcement cases--a decline of nearly 
90% from 2014, when the agency opened 252 new cases. Lower-level 
actions like formal warnings were also issued sparingly; in 2016, the 
agency issued almost 200 warnings, but in 2020, it issued zero. 
Unfortunately, the decline in enforcement cannot be explained by a lack 
of violations in AWA-regulated facilities; APHIS has failed to bring 
enforcement actions even in instances when inspectors reported multiple 
egregious violations of animal welfare observed during inspection. The 
agency has replaced enforcement with ineffective collaborative policies 
that allow dealers to violate the AWA with impunity. The ASPCA requests 
that the Subcommittee defund the ineffective programs and policies that 
have, for the past four years, allowed the agency to avoid proper 
enforcement of the AWA and allowed animal abusers to continue their 
unlawful activities. The ASPCA requests that the Subcommittee include 
the following bill language: ``Sec. X: None of the funds made available 
by this Act may be used to carry out any activities or incur any 
expense related to:

(a) Any program, policy, or guidance that allows or requires observed 
        violations of, or failure to comply with, the Animal Welfare 
        Act (7 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2131-60) or Regulations (9 C.F.R. 
        Sec. Sec. 3.1-3.7) to not be documented on official inspection 
        reports.

(b) Any program, policy, or guidance that replaces enforcement under 
        the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. Sec. 2149) with collaborative 
        approaches to violations and/or noncompliance.

(c) Any program, policy, or guidance that combines inspections under 
        the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. Sec. 2146) with enforcement 
        under the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. Sec. 2149).

(d) Any program, policy, or guidance that does not require 
        comprehensive photographs and/or video to be taken of the 
        facility and the condition of the animals therein during each 
        pre-license and compliance inspection.

(e) Any program, policy, or guidance that does not require further 
        action on every inspection report that documents observed 
        violations of the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2131-
        60) or Regulations (9 C.F.R. Sec. Sec. 3.1-3.7) to determine if 
        the facility violated the law and/or is continuing to violate 
        the law.
             allocate funding for horse soring enforcement
    APHIS is also charged with protecting horses through its 
enforcement of the Horse Protection Act (HPA). We appreciate that 
Congress provided $2 million in FY2021 for USDA to strengthen 
enforcement of the HPA. The ASPCA requests that the Subcommittee 
continue to exceed the statutory funding cap and fund HPA enforcement 
at $3,000,000, allowing the USDA to better enforce the Horse Protection 
Act.
  provide funding for usda to implement the pet and women safety act 
                             grant program
    We appreciate that Congress provided $2.5 million in FY2021 to 
implement Section 12502 of the 2018 Farm Bill (P.L. 115-334), which 
incorporated the language of the Pet and Women Safety (PAWS) Act to 
authorize a grant program to provide emergency and transitional shelter 
options for domestic violence survivors with companion animals. 
Research shows that abusers often threaten or inflict violence on pets 
to intimidate or exert control over their partners and prevent them 
from leaving. This program will ensure that more domestic violence 
service providers are able to accommodate pets or arrange for pet 
shelter.
    The ASPCA urges the Subcommittee to include $3,000,000 in the 
FY2022 Agriculture Appropriations Bill to continue implementing the 
PAWS grant program as authorized in Section 12502 of P.L. 115-334.
    The ASPCA also requests the Subcommittee to include the following 
Report Language: ``The Committee directs the Secretary of Agriculture 
to continue coordinating with the Departments of Justice, Housing and 
Urban Development, and Health and Human Services to efficiently 
implement the grant program for providing emergency and transitional 
shelter options for domestic violence survivors with companion 
animals.''
 continue the current ban on federal funding for horse slaughterhouse 
                              inspections
    The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 continues the 
longstanding provision barring federal funding for Food Safety and 
Inspection Service (FSIS) inspections at domestic horse 
slaughterhouses. Americans do not consume horse meat, we do not raise 
horses for food, and national polling indicates that 80 percent of 
American voters oppose the slaughter of horses for human consumption. 
Cruelties associated with all stages of horse slaughter are well-
documented. Horses are at risk of suffering for prolonged periods 
during transport to slaughter. Those who survive the journey endure an 
inherently cruel slaughter process. The equipment used to slaughter 
horses is not designed for their physiology. Before this funding 
restriction was in place, horses slaughtered in FSIS regulated plants 
endured repeated blows, sometimes remaining conscious during 
dismemberment. FSIS documented rampant violations and cruelty in 
connection with domestic horse slaughter facilities, including photos 
of protruding broken bones, eyeballs hanging by a thread of skin, and 
open wounds.
    In addition to these intrinsic welfare concerns, consumption of 
meat from American horses is a public safety gamble. Since American 
horses are not raised for food, throughout their lives they are 
routinely given fly and deworming treatments, therapeutic medicines, 
and drugs prohibited by the FDA for use in animals intended for human 
consumption. A 2010 Food and Chemical Toxicology Journal article 
detailed the ubiquitous use of phenylbutazone in race horses 
subsequently sent to auction and then to slaughter only days after 
medication.\1\ Phenylbutazone is one of the most commonly administered 
anti-inflammatory drugs to horses in the United States regardless of 
discipline, and its use is prohibited, at any point, for animals raised 
for human consumption. Taxpayer dollars should not be used to prop up 
an industry that has no regard for animal welfare or human health. 
President Biden's FY22 Budget Proposal includes this longstanding 
provision blocking federal funding for horse slaughterhouse 
inspections. The ASPCA requests that the Subcommittee continue the 
prohibition on federal funding for domestic horse slaughter by 
including the following bill language: ``None of the funds made 
available by this or any other Act may be used to pay the salaries or 
expenses of personnel-- (1) to inspect horses under section 3 of the 
Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 603); (2) to inspect horses 
under section 903 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act 
of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 1901 note; Public Law 104-127); or (3) to implement 
or enforce section 352.19 of title 9, Code of Federal Regulations (or a 
successor regulation).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Dodman, N., Blondeau, N., Marini, A.M., ``Association of 
Phenylbutazone Usage with Horses Bought for Slaughter: A Public Health 
Risk.'' Food and Chemical Toxicology: May 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    require fsis to strengthen enforcement of the humane methods of 
                             slaughter act
    The Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA) is effectively the only 
federal law protecting farm animals from cruelty. It is vitally 
important for animal welfare and food safety that FSIS enforce this law 
and ensure that slaughterhouses follow related humane slaughter and 
handling regulations. We urge the Subcommittee to include the following 
bill language to ensure HMSA enforcement is strengthened: ``No fewer 
than 165 full-time equivalent positions shall be employed during fiscal 
year 2022 for purposes dedicated solely to inspections and enforcement 
related to the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act. The FSIS shall ensure 
that inspectors focus their attention on overseeing compliance with 
humane handling rules for animals as they arrive and are offloaded and 
handled in ante-mortem holding pens, suspect pens, chutes, stunning 
areas, and on the processing line. The FSIS shall also ensure that all 
inspectors receive robust training in humane handling and inspection 
techniques, including for nonambulatory disabled animals, and it shall 
resume preparation and posting of humane handling quarterly enforcement 
reports on its website.''
    We remain deeply concerned about FSIS's efforts to deregulate and 
privatize slaughter across multiple categories of species (chickens and 
turkeys, pigs, and now cows) and the negative impacts of increasing 
slaughter line speeds on animal welfare. When regulatory limits on 
slaughter line speed are raised or removed, it affects every stage of 
slaughter, including ante-mortem handling of animals, as companies rush 
to slaughter and process greater number of animals per hour. 
Privatized, higher-speed slaughter systems endanger animal welfare, 
food safety, worker safety, and the environment. We urge the committee 
to continue to examine this important issue, review the results of the 
pending FSIS report on the impact of line-speed waivers on employees' 
health and safety, and respond accordingly, including by withholding 
funding for FSIS to implement higher-speed and/or privatized slaughter 
systems or grant waivers to establishments seeking to increase 
slaughter line speeds or reduce inspection staffing standards as 
necessary to protect animal welfare, food safety, worker safety, and 
the environment.
      allocate funding for the value-added producer grant program
    The USDA's Value-Added Producer Grant (VAPG) program is meant to 
help farmers participate in value-added farming activities to generate 
new products, create and expand marketing opportunities and increase 
farmer income. Included in the definition of value-added products are 
those produced using more humane farming methods, such as welfare-
certified or pasture-raised products. The VAPG program is one of the 
only federal grant programs available to farmers raising animals 
outside of the conventional confinement model and is a critical 
resource for building a more humane food system. The USDA's recent 
investment of Coronavirus Relief and Response funding into competitive 
farmers market and local food promotion grants is an encouraging 
illustration of the agency's commitment to supporting more resilient 
farming systems and we hope it will encourage further investment in the 
transition to higher welfare farming systems. The VAPG program can 
achieve improved animal welfare throughout our farming system and help 
farmers meet the growing demand for more humanely produced food. The 
enacted Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 included $12 million in 
discretionary funding for this program; the ASPCA requests the 
Subcommittee to meet or exceed this funding level in the FY2022 bill.
 require usda to reinstate the organic livestock and poultry practices 
                               final rule
    Currently, the National Organic Program's (NOP) vague regulations 
allow companies raising animals in crowded, intensive systems harmful 
to public health, animal welfare, and the environment to qualify as 
organic and use the coveted USDA Organic label on their products. In 
2017, USDA finalized the Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices (OLPP) 
rule that would have ensured that animal husbandry practices on farms 
raising animals in the NOP better aligned with consumer expectations. 
This rule was finalized after nearly a decade of USDA engagement with a 
broad array of stakeholders. Unfortunately, in 2018, the Trump 
administration officially withdrew the OLPP rule, leaving millions of 
animals without meaningful protections against industrial conditions 
like crowding, barren environments, lack of meaningful outdoor access, 
and painful mutilations.
    To ensure that the administration takes immediate action to restore 
the requirements of the OLPP rule, the ASPCA requests that the 
Subcommittee include the following bill language: Sec. X. The Secretary 
of Agriculture shall--

(1) within 90 days of enactment of this Act, publish notice of USDA's 
        intent to rescind the final rule withdrawing the Organic 
        Livestock and Poultry Practices final rule (83 FR 10775);

(2) within 90 days of enactment of this Act, publish notice of USDA's 
        intent to reinstate the Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices 
        final rule (82 FR 7042);

(3) take public comments on the notice(s) for not more than 60 days; 
        and

(4) not later than 180 days after the end of the comment period(s), 
        publish in the Federal Register the final rule(s) rescinding 
        the withdrawal of, and reinstating, the Organic Livestock and 
        Poultry Practices final rule.

    [This statement was submitted by, Richard Patch, Vice President, 
Federal Affairs, ASPCA]
                                 ______
                                 
     Prepared Statement of Association for Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    The Association for Clinical Oncology (ASCO), the world's leading 
professional organization representing nearly 45,000 physicians and 
other professionals who treat people with cancer, thanks the 
subcommittee for its long-standing commitment to robust federal funding 
for programs within the FDA, including the Office of Hematology and 
Oncology Products (OHOP), also known as the Office of Oncologic 
Diseases (OOD), and the Oncology Center of Excellence (OCE). ASCO 
applauds your leadership in securing a $42.25 million increase for the 
FDA in fiscal year (FY) 2021 and appreciates the opportunity to weigh 
in on FY2022 appropriations for the FDA. ASCO respectfully requests the 
subcommittee appropriate the following:

  --Food and Drug Administration (FDA): $3.6 billion (not including the 
        $50 million authorized by the 21st Century Cures Act)

  --Oncology Center of Excellence (OCE): $20 million
            harnessing innovation: therapies & therapeutics
    The FDA touches the lives of every American, especially those with 
cancer. As the agency charged with regulation of drugs, vaccines, and 
medical devices, the importance of FDA's ability to carry out its 
mission cannot be overstated. In oncology, the FDA has a significant 
role and impact: in 2020, a total of 40 new indications and 19 new 
molecular entities (NMEs) were approved for oncology use.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ FDA, Oncology Center of Excellence 2020 Annual Report; https://
www.fda.gov/media/145613/download
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Over the last 30 years the cancer death rate has fallen 31%. This 
includes a 2.4% decline from 2017 to 2018--a record for the largest 
one-year drop in the cancer death rate--progress that would not have 
been possible without new, innovative treatments.\2\ The number of new 
approvals in oncology is just one example of the FDA's profound impact 
on Americans and its ability to respond to the scientific progress and 
innovation underway across the country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ American Cancer Society; https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/
cancer-org/research/cancer-facts-and-statistics/annual-cancer-facts-
and-figures/2021/cancer-facts-and-figures-2021.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 2020, the role of immuno-oncology grew, with development and 
approval of 16 new immune checkpoint inhibitors for novel indications 
across several cancer types. These treatments harness the immune system 
to provide new, more efficient treatment paradigms for patients with 
cancer. Additionally, researchers built off of the success of 2019 and 
the discovery of CAR-T therapies to treat cancer. Chimeric antigen 
receptors, or CAR-T, is a targeted treatment based on specific 
characteristics of a tumor, rather than the part of the body where it 
originated. In 2020, the use of CAR-T therapy was expanded by the FDA 
with the approval of the first cell-based gene therapy for the 
treatment of relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma.
    Other groundbreaking discoveries includes the approval of 
combination therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer, which 
offers a chemotherapy-free alternative and first-line treatment for 
patients, by using checkpoint inhibitors to help the immune system 
identify and target cancer cells. Another 2020 approval by the FDA 
provides the first new treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma in more 
than ten years by combining an immunotherapy and a growth factor 
inhibitor that helps limit the blood supply to tumors. Hepatocellular 
carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer worldwide and the 
second leading cause of cancer-related death. Patients with HCC 
commonly present with inoperable disease and face a poor prognosis. 
This newly approved combination therapy provides the opportunity for 
effective treatment.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ ASCO, Clinical Cancer Advances 2021; https://www.asco.org/
research-guidelines/reports-studies/clinical-cancer-advances-2021/
additional-advances
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As scientific insight produces more innovative breakthroughs in 
both diagnostics and treatments, the FDA's role in ensuring safe and 
effective drugs and products is more important than ever. Robust 
funding is critical to sustain important ongoing and innovative work 
throughout the Agency, including the Office of Hematology and Oncology 
Products (OHOP), which recently became the Office of Oncologic Diseases 
(OOD). OHOP, or OOD, oversees the development, approval, and regulation 
of drug and biologic treatments for cancer and hematologic 
malignancies. As the agency responsible for making sure that these 
drugs and biologics are safe and effective, OHOP/OOD plays an 
indispensable role in speeding new and better therapies to patients 
facing cancer and hematologic conditions. We applaud the work of the 
office's highly trained and dedicated employees and the 
Administration's efforts to recruit and retain a competitive workforce. 
This is not an area where Congress can afford to cut corners; American 
lives depend on an efficient review process that facilitates improved 
treatment strategies that are both safe and effective. ASCO looks 
forward to continuing to work with OHOP/OOD on prevention, treatment, 
and diagnosis of the many forms of cancer.
    Despite remarkable progress, even during a global pandemic, cancer 
remains the second most common cause of death in the United States 
(U.S.). In 2021, almost 1.9 million new cancer cases will be diagnosed, 
and more than 600,000 people will die from cancer.\4\ The 21st Century 
Cures Act, which became law in 2016, established an ``FDA Innovation 
Account,'' which authorized additional funding subject to the annual 
appropriations process. In FY2022, the law authorizes $50 million, 
which is critical funding to support the FDA's ability to accelerate 
innovation and increase patient involvement in research.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ American Cancer Society; https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/
cancer-org/research/cancer-facts-and-statistics/annual-cancer-facts-
and-figures/2021/cancer-facts-and-figures-2021.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As part of the Innovation Account, the Oncology Center of 
Excellence (OCE) was created, with a mission to achieve patient-
centered regulatory decision making through innovation and 
collaboration. ASCO fully supports the mission of the OCE and 
appreciates the subcommittee funding the OCE under the FDA's authority, 
allocating $20 million for FY2021. Given the continued, staggering 
burden of cancer and the drastic impact it has on families across the 
country, it is critical that Congress continue to provide the FDA 
resources that sustain the OCE and its ability to speed progress in 
this new era of targeted and combination therapies for patients with 
cancer. It is also vital to provide the OCE with resources it needs to 
implement efficient, cross-disciplinary review processes for oncology 
products. Therefore, ASCO supports the Administration's FY2021 budget 
request of $20 million for the OCE. ASCO looks forward to continuing to 
work with Congress and the FDA on achieving the OCE's mission and 
ensuring the agency's success.
                       addressing drug shortages
    Drug shortages can delay or prevent patients from getting the care 
they need. A variety offactors ranging from environmental disasters to 
issues with manufacturing standards can disrupt the supply of medical 
drugs, threatening patient care. The reality of possible drug shortages 
was highlighted early in the COVID-19 pandemic, as many drug components 
are made exclusively in the Wuhan region of China. While it is crucial 
the U.S. has the tools necessary to address shortages, this is not a 
new challenge.
    After a period of decline, there has been a recent increase in 
reported drug shortages. In 2018 the FDA reported 186 new shortages, up 
27% from 2017.\5\ The FDA is instrumental in helping to mitigate the 
effect of drug shortages. To help prevent and overcome drug shortages, 
the FDA uses tools such as expedited facility inspection, expedited new 
and/or generic drug applications, and the exercise of discretion with 
respect to the temporary importation of products from foreign 
manufacturing sources. The agency may also urge manufacturers to 
increase production in specific situations to meet anticipated 
increases in demand. The FDA has held public meetings and solicited 
stakeholder input in its efforts to identify additional solutions to 
this problem, and its work in this area is critical to daily patient 
care.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ FDA, Drug Shortages: Root Causes and Potential Solutions; 
https://www.fda.gov/media/131130/download
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress increased FDA 
authority to identify, prevent, and mitigate possible drug shortages 
by, among other things, enhancing FDA's visibility into drug supply 
chains. These authorities were included in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, 
and Economic Security Act (CARES Act). ASCO supported these measures, 
but as noted, more permanent authority is necessary to combat future 
shortages and disruptions to our supply chain.
    ASCO supports several recent proposals to address medical and drug 
shortages, including expanding the FDA's authority to require 
manufacturers to label products with the longest possible expiration 
date the FDA agrees is scientifically justified, expanding the 
authority for FDA to require application holders of certain drugs to 
conduct periodic risk assessments to identify the vulnerabilities in 
their manufacturing supply chain and develop plans to mitigate risk, 
and clarifying the FDA's authority to obtain detailed drug listings, 
regardless of whether they were directly or indirectly imported into 
the U.S. ASCO urges the subcommittee to continue to support the FDA's 
role in mitigating drug shortages.
                         combatting tobacco use
    Tobacco use has long been the leading preventable cause of death in 
the U.S. Each year, it kills more than 480,000 Americans and is 
responsible for approximately $170 billion in health care costs. Nearly 
one in three heart disease deaths, one in three cancer deaths, and 
nearly eight in 10 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) deaths 
are caused by tobacco use. The application of the FDA's public health 
mission also continues to evolve as new and different tobacco products 
such as electronic cigarettes and flavored tobacco products come to 
market. FDA regulation of these products is necessary to help stem the 
tide of new cancer cases. The dramatic increase in youth use of e-
cigarettes underscores the need for appropriate oversight by FDA. The 
FDA's 2020 National Youth Tobacco Survey showed that 3.6 million 
children used e-cigarettes in 2020, including nearly 1 in 5 high school 
students. The risks are also becoming clearer. In 2020, 38.9% of all 
high school e-cigarette users used e-cigarettes on 20 or more days a 
month, a sign that youth are addicted or at risk of addiction. Studies 
show that young people who use e-cigarettes are more likely to become 
smokers.\6\ Unfortunately, surveys also show that young adults and 
youth hold many misconceptions about e-cigarettes, with over 20% 
believing e-cigarettes are harmless and not addictive.\7\ ASCO 
continues to support the FDA's role in ensuring flavored tobacco and 
electronic nicotine devices are properly regulated, specifically 
ensuring America's young people do not have access to these products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ FDA, Youth Tobacco Use: Results from the National Youth Tobacco 
Survey; https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/youth-and-tobacco/youth-
tobacco-use-results-national-youth-tobacco-survey
    \7\ ASCO National Survey; https://www.asco.org/about-asco/press-
center/news-releases/national-survey-reveals-one-five-young-adults-
regularly-uses-e
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         the impact of covid-19
    In the oncology world, 2020 started out with promise. By June 2020, 
the FDA was on pace for a record year of oncology and hematology drug 
approvals, with fourteen approved in the year's first six months, 
topping the eleven approvals in all of 2019. The first months of 2020 
saw FDA approval for treatments such as aggressive lung cancer drug 
Tabrecta, PARP Inhibitor Olaparib for advanced prostate cancer, 
daratumumab for newly diagnosed or recurring multiple myeloma, and 
others.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ Survivornet, Record Numbers of Cancer Drugs Approved- But 
Leading Experts Say Vital Clinical Trials Could Drop Off Hugely Due To 
COVID-19; https://www.survivornet.com/articles/boom-in-fda-drug-
approvals-towards-cancer-treatment-in-2020-but-there-may-be-a-
significant-drop-later-this-year-says-leading-expert/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Halfway through 2020, however, cancer clinical trials were shutting 
down as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent shelter in 
place and social distancing guidelines. One study showed that clinical 
trial enrollment in May 2020 was 73% lower than accrual in May 2019. 
Another study found the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a 60% 
decrease in the number of launches of oncology clinical trials of drugs 
and biologic therapies.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ The Journal of the American Medical Association https://
jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2775637
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition to stagnant trials, individuals in the research 
community have faced loss of employment, lab closures, and loss of 
momentum in pre-pandemic research. Younger investigators and support 
staff have been especially vulnerable during the last year. The effects 
of the loss of this research and researchers will likely be felt for 
years to come. To combat the progress lost, ASCO reiterates the request 
of the subcommittee to continue to prioritize funding for the FDA, 
OHOP/OOD and the OCE.
    While we cannot understate the pandemic's disruption of cancer 
clinical trials and drug development, there are lessons learned. Among 
these are streamlined and new flexibilities in the drug approval 
process. Historically, the review and approval process for new cancer 
therapies has been long and arduous. It often takes months before newly 
approved cancer drugs are fully accessible to patients, on average 
taking six months before the drug is readily available to patients, and 
immediate access to a recently approved FDA drug is relatively rare in 
most cases.
    Increased flexibility for clinical trials and expedited review and 
approval processes for drugs and therapeutics experienced as a result 
of pandemic-related policy modifications can continue to benefit cancer 
patients after the conclusion of the public health emergency. I urge 
this subcommittee to work with the FDA and stakeholders to identify 
which regulatory flexibilities should be permanently incorporated into 
agency practice. Specifically, ASCO supports continuing remote and 
virtual approaches to consent and other trial procedures, streamlining 
and standardizing regulatory and training requirement, using central 
Institutional Review Boards and innovative trial designs, and 
increasing flexibility so research will be more resilient in future 
crises.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ ASCO Road to Recovery Report: Learning for the COVID-19 
Experience to Improve Clinical Research and Cancer Care; https://
ascopubs.org/doi/full/10.1200/JCO.20.02953
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We thank the subcommittee for its continued support of patients 
with cancer in the U.S. through consistent and appropriate funding for 
the FDA. We look forward to working with all members of the 
subcommittee on an FY2022 budget to continue to advance cancer research 
and treatment in our country.
    Please contact Kristin Stuart at [email protected] with 
questions.

    [This statement was submitted by Monica Bertagnolli, MD, FASCO, 
Chair of the Board, Association for Clinical Oncology.]
                                 ______
                                 
  Prepared Statement of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
    Thank you for the opportunity to submit recommendations for fiscal 
year 2022 (fiscal year 22) Congressional appropriations. The 
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies' (AFWA) mission, since our 
founding in 1902, is to protect and enable state fish and wildlife 
agencies (states) to exercise their statutory authority to conserve and 
manage the fish and wildlife within their borders. All 50 states, the 
District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are members.
    We express our deep appreciation for the increased fiscal year 21 
funding levels and for additional resources from the American Rescue 
Plan Act. Many of these programs benefit agricultural producers, as 
well as fish, wildlife, their habitats, and the people who enjoy them. 
We look forward to working with you to provide resources for our 
Federal agency partners consistent with fiscal year 21 marks, and in 
some cases higher. Investments in conservation and natural resources 
management programs present some of the highest returns on Federal 
dollars and offer successful solutions for natural resource management 
challenges. States have authority for, and are on the front lines of, 
wildlife health and zoonotic diseases and must be engaged early to 
cooperatively develop a robust health and science-driven surveillance 
framework to successfully combat these challenges. We request Congress 
emphasize the importance of early collaboration with state agencies 
with respect to their authority and expertise in the development of a 
robust, integrated animal health and science framework to combat fish 
wildlife diseases and zoonotic diseases within the OneHealth 
initiative.
             united state department of agriculture (usda)
             natural resources conservation service (nrcs)
    Conservation Operations and Conservation Technical Assistance--The 
AFWA recommends that Congress provide at least $1.2 billion in 
discretionary funding for the Conservation Operations account, 
including $1.1 billion for Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA). 
These funds support NRCS field staff in providing technical assistance 
and planning support for farmers and ranchers across the country and 
are critically needed to realize the full potential of conservation 
programs. Furthermore, leveraging CTA funds through partnership 
opportunities should remain a priority of NRCS to assist with 
delivering technical assistance to farmers, ranchers, and forest 
owners.
    NRCS's on-the-ground capacity remains a limiting factor for 
conservation implementation and program delivery. NRCS staffing levels 
declined by 19 percent between fiscal year 04 to fiscal year 18--a 
trend which continues through fiscal year 21.\1\ \2\ At the end of 
fiscal year 20, NRCS had 2,276 unfilled field positions.\3\ The decline 
in NRCS staffing has occurred while conservation program demand has 
increased, resulting in decreased program delivery capacity. Any effort 
to maintain or expand farmers', ranchers', and forest owners' 
conservation efforts will be predicated on the availability and 
increased capacity of local CTA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Congressional Research Service. (2021, March 11). Staffing 
Trends in the USDA Farm Production and Conservation (FPAC) Mission Area 
(CRS Report IF11452). https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/2020-03-
11_IF11452_bf1eaa6064a214b26bd80b3a56ece56e1a521990.pdf
    \2\ Hearing to Review Implementation of Farm Bill Conservation 
Programs, 116th Congress. (2020) (Testimony of NRCS Chief Matt Lohr). 
https://www.congress.gov/event/116th-congress/house-event/LC65669/
text?s=1&r=1
    \3\ United States Department of Agriculture fiscal year 2021 Budget 
Summary, Explanatory Notes--Natural Resources Conservation Service. 
https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fpac-nrcs-fy2021-
congressional- justifications.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Within these CTA funds, we urge Congress to provide $50 million for 
the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative (GLCI). Grazing planning, 
technical assistance, and peer-to-peer education resources are 
inconsistently available across the country. This technical assistance 
is critical to the proliferation of well-managed and economically 
sustainable grass-based agricultural production that protects water 
quality, improves soil health, provides high quality habitat for 
pollinators and wildlife, and when restoring native grasses can also 
improve carbon sequestration. Counties with dedicated grazing staff 
show marked increases in the use of practices such as rotational and 
prescribed grazing compared to nearby counties with no dedicated staff. 
Fifty million dollars for GLCI would help farmers and ranchers get the 
quality and quantity of grazing technical and educational help they 
need to succeed.
    Mandatory Farm Bill Conservation Programs--As the Subcommittee 
develops fiscal year 22 appropriations bills, we urge you to reject any 
changes in mandatory spending for farm bill conservation programs. 
These programs remain massively oversubscribed, resulting in unmet 
demand for conservation on 13.8 million acres. Funding for conservation 
programs is critical to enable farmers, ranchers, and forest landowners 
across the country to conserve water, maintain soil health, protect 
grasslands and wetlands, create and maintain fish and wildlife habitat, 
and produce abundant and affordable food and fiber. Furthermore, any 
cuts to these programs would result in less funding available for the 
next Farm Bill, reducing available resources for voluntary, incentive-
based conservation well into the future. The funding authorized for 
these programs in the 2018 Farm Bill should be protected as a vital 
investment in our natural resource and agricultural resiliency and 
infrastructure.
    The AFWA urges Congress to include report language directing USDA 
to restore pre-existing Conservation Reserve Program enrollment waivers 
for counties with >25 percent of their farmland enrolled in the 
program. Despite support from local producer and conservation groups, 
landowners in several counties in Texas, Washington, and Idaho with 
critical Lesser Prairie- Chicken, Greater Sage-Grouse, and Columbian 
Sharp-tailed Grouse habitat, respectively, have been unable to enroll 
acres into the program since the provision permitting waivers was 
inadvertently removed in the conforming amendments of the 2018 Farm 
Bill (16 U.S.C. Sec. 3844(f)(1)). This will facilitate much-needed 
voluntarily conservation of these at-risk species.
           animal and plant health inspection service (aphis)
    APHIS Veterinary Services (VS)--Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) 
continues to spread across populations of wild and captive deer species 
(cervids), with the disease now detected in 26 states and the number of 
locations within states growing. This infectious disease is 100 percent 
fatal and threatens rural economies and the sustainability of 
livelihoods. Beyond the devastating effects its unchecked spread will 
have on wildlife populations, the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention has not been able to conclusively determine its zoonotic 
potential, but the threat of its transmission to humans remains.\4\ VS 
must do more to manage the spread of CWD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ Watson, N., Brandel, JP., Green, A. et al. The importance of 
ongoing international surveillance for Creutzfeldt--Jakob disease. Nat 
Rev Neurol (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41582-021-00488-7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The AFWA recommends $30 million in funding for the VS Equine, 
Cervid & Small Ruminant Health Program, of which we support $15 million 
for CWD captive cervid herd surveillance and monitoring and an addition 
$15 million for indemnification of CWD-positive captive cervid herds. 
VS should continue maintaining the Voluntary Herd Certification Program 
and work to increase its effectiveness. Hunters, rural communities, and 
natural resource managers continue to have significant concerns about 
potential deficiencies in the program, particularly since CWD- positive 
captive cervids continue to be found in certified herds and in captive 
cervids that are moved to other captive herds. We request Congress 
direct VS to cooperate fully with the US Geological Survey (USGS), 
jointly commission a National Academies of Sciences (NAS) study on the 
transmission pathways of CWD in cervids, and spend no less than $1 
million from the Equine, Cervid & Small Ruminant Health Program on the 
NAS CWD transmission pathway study as directed by Public Law 116-188. 
The states believe an independent, third party review of the program, 
the best management practices adopted by the AFWA, and other guidance 
to control the spread of CWD is desperately needed to identify 
weaknesses, shortcomings, and risks and to recommend improvements that 
will control the spread of CWD. We request Congress take these actions 
to protect our precious wildlife resources, protect rural economies and 
the sustainable hunting of free-ranging cervids, and to respond to the 
disease as this threat requires.
    APHIS Wildlife Services (WS)--An increase in funding for WS is 
particularly important to address many services and technology 
challenges that were exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The AFWA 
requests at least $112 million for Wildlife Damage Management to 
address increased strains on information technology infrastructure, 
including tele- communications and electronic access to partners' 
tools; to bridge the financial gap experienced by partners who were 
unable to fulfill financial commitments in their cooperative 
agreements; to continue much-needed services; and to address increases 
in administrative and support costs that have caused a reduction in 
program delivery. Further, we recommend eliminating caps on programs, 
such as those on fleets, which hinder staffs' program delivery ability 
and WS's responses to partners' needs. We recommend no less than $35 
million for Methods Development so WS can continue to be a key partner 
in the development of nonlethal techniques and strategies to reduce 
human-wildlife conflicts and respond to the growing needs of partners. 
We recommend providing $25 million for Wildlife Disease Monitoring and 
Surveillance to enable assistance with the surveillance, monitoring, 
and early detection of and the rapid response to fish and wildlife 
diseases, zoonotic diseases, CWD, and emerging pathogens. The AFWA 
recommends Congress provide an additional $15 million to WS for 
surveillance and monitoring of CWD in free-ranging cervids by state 
fish and wildlife agencies. These funds are desperately needed for
    the early detection and rapid response to the disease. States, who 
exercise primary authority over these public trust species, form the 
frontline efforts in combatting these health threats which often occurs 
in partnership with WS.
                u.s. food and drug administration (fda)
    Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM)--The AFWA recommends funding 
CVM at no less than $254.85 million, a $10.5 million increase from 
fiscal year 21 appropriation levels. As the oversight body charged with 
ensuring the health and safety of humans and animals for the approval 
of new animal drugs, CVM is a critical gateway to providing state and 
Federal agencies with essential management tools. Shortfalls in 
capacity, regulatory uncertainty, and inadequate funding mechanisms 
within CVM have all contributed to a lack of new animal drugs, 
particularly for the management of aquatic animal health. While 
resource managers are appreciative of the 2019 label expansions for 
formalin and hydrogen peroxide, and despite robust collaborative 
efforts between CVM, state, and industry partners, no new aquaculture 
drugs have been approved since 2014.
    Within the recommended appropriation, the AFWA requests that 
Congress significantly increase funding for the Office of Minor Use and 
Minor Species Animal Drug Development (OMUMS). As recognized by 
Congress within the Minor Use and Minor Species Animal Health Act of 
2004, low profit margins and small market shares combined with the 
significant capital investment required result in a lack of incentive 
for industry sponsors to develop and obtain approvals for these drugs, 
as it is generally economically infeasible. For this reason, OMUMS 
provides grants to aid and incentivize industry sponsors pursuing these 
approvals. However, minimal appropriations from Congress and funding 
maximums established by the FDA have resulted in this grant program 
being largely unsuccessful, with funds frequently remaining 
undistributed.
    While Congress has typically appropriated approximately $1 million 
annually, this funding level, for which there is no maximum level in 
statute, has proven to be inadequate to fulfill the Congressional 
intent of the program. The FDA imposes a $0.25 million annual maximum 
for each recipient of these grants. Industry reports this amount to be 
an insignificant fraction of the costs of obtaining approval. The 
program is further limited by a 3-year maximum for each grant, far 
below the amount of time required to advance a drug through the 
approval process. We request that, along with the recommended increase 
in appropriations for OMUMS, Congress direct the FDA to adjust 
administration of this program accordingly to address these challenges.
    While vigorous testing and meticulous approval processes are 
necessary for human and animal health and safety, healthy populations 
of aquatic species are compromised by a lack of diversity in FDA 
approved treatment options. For example, even with judicious 
application, states are reporting resistance within fish to 
oxytetracycline hydrochloride and florfenicol, the only approved 
antibiotics for use in aquaculture. Within the $10 million recommended 
increase for CVM, the AFWA strongly recommends that funds be directed 
to increase staff capacity, with particular focus on increased capacity 
for evaluation of human food safety and residue depletion studies. 
These safety assessments present some of the most challenging barriers 
for approval of new animal drugs, and we request Congress to direct the 
allocation of CVM resources accordingly. In order to ensure growth in 
the aquatic drug industry and the health of aquatic populations and 
human safety, the AFWA recommends increased collaboration between the 
FDA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the USGS to identify methods 
to increase efficiencies in the drug approval process and to identify 
and remove superfluous barriers.

    [This statement was submitted by Association of Fish and Wildlife 
Agencies.]
                                 ______
                                 
Prepared Statement of Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities
    As you consider programmatic requests in the Senate Appropriations 
Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug 
Administration, and Related Agencies for fiscal year 2022, we strongly 
urge robust funding for agricultural and food research, education, and 
Cooperative Extension System programs at land-grant universities and 
non-land grant colleges of agriculture.
    Through the fiscal year 2022 appropriations process, the 
subcommittee has an opportunity to enhance the partnership NIFA has 
with the land-grant university (LGU) system: including state colleges 
of agriculture (1862s), historically Black colleges and universities 
(1890 HBCUs), and Tribal Colleges and Universities(1994s), non-land-
grant colleges of agriculture, and Hispanic-serving institutions. In 
doing so, the subcommittee can (insert positive outcomes of ag research 
investments). Over the last three decades, Federal support for 
agricultural research, education, and Extension, which catalyzes state 
and local investment via matching funds, has been flat in real dollar 
terms. In fact, according to purchasing power adjustments National 
Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) appropriated dollars, public 
investment in agricultural research and Extension is below 1990 
levels.\1\ Meanwhile, investments by global competitors are growing at 
a rapid pace.\2\ Agricultural research and Extension programs generate 
significant returns to the economy, averaging $17 for every $1 
invested.\3\ If the U.S. continues stagnant public investment in 
agricultural research, education, and Extension we will lose 
significant economic ground and influence to global competitors while 
failing to capitalize on the enormous potential of these investments to 
(insert positives like improved environment, food security, etc.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The Biomedical Research and Development Price Index (BRDPI) 
indicates how much the NIH budget must change to maintain purchasing 
power. See link: https://officeofbudget.od.nih.gov/gbipriceindexes.html
    \2\ Somers, Joe, Stephen Harris, Gregory Gallant, Steve Wolf, Sana 
Khan, and Diya Pandey, 2021. ``Benefits ofIncreased Public Investment 
in Agricultural Research.'' IHS Markit report commissioned by Farm 
Journal Foundation and American Farm Bureau Federation.
    \3\ Baldos, Uris Lantz, Frederi G. Viens, Thomas W. Hertel, and 
Keith O. Fuglie. R&D Spending, Knowledge Capital, and Agricultural 
Productivity Growth: A Bayesian Approach. American Journal of 
Agricultural Economics. 101(1): 291--310; https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/
aay039.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Specifically, for fiscal year 2022, we ask the Subcommittee to fund 
at least the following amounts for APLU's core priorities at NIFA: $340 
million for Smith Lever, $280 million for the Hatch Act, $79 million 
for Evans-Allen Programs, $67 million for 1890 Extension, $39 million 
for McIntire-Stennis, $10 million for Extension Services at 1994 
Institutions, $6 million for Payments to 1994 Institutions, $6 million 
for Research Grants for 1994 Institutions, and $470 million for the 
Agricultural Food and Research Initiative. Furthermore, we request 
$10.5 million for the multicultural scholars program, graduate 
fellowships, institutional challenge grants, and funding for the 1890s 
institution education grants at $28 million.
    Hatch Act, Evans-Allen Programs, and Research Grants for 1994 
Institutions funding are central to the function of agricultural, food, 
and forest research at our nation's public institutions and in 
critically underserved communities. The list of successful outcomes of 
investment in agricultural research is extensive and includes, disease-
resistant banana clones, soybean cultivars, and post-harvest technology 
to eliminate peanut allergens. Research capacity programs support 
includes field-tested innovations on crop, forest, and animal health 
and disease prevention, as well as technologies, systems and 
interventions that enable access to safe and nutritious foods. These 
investments are instrumental to developing modern, science-based best 
practices about agriculture climate adaptation and mitigation and use/
preservation of natural resources. The Federal-state partnership 
reinforced by these funds bolsters the American agricultural economy 
while keeping our food system safe.
    Smith-Lever, 1890s Extension, and Extension Services at 1994 
Institutions funds support the Cooperative Extension System (CES), a 
unique network of researchers, specialists, agents, and educators who 
deliver vital, practical information to agricultural producers, small 
business owners, communities, youth, and families. Over 32,000 
university- and county-based employees and 2.8 million volunteers 
support this partnership and multiply its impact across nearly all the 
3,143 counties, parishes, and boroughs in the United States. Extension 
programs avert the spread of agricultural pest and diseases, connect 
people with high-quality information during national emergencies, and 
keep American farmers on the farm by providing information about new 
sources of on-farm income.\4\ \5\ As part of CES, the 4-H network 
provides the nation's youth with community mentors and learning 
opportunities related to food, agriculture, environment, and personal 
growth. CES educators and agents have reduced the negative economic 
impact of COVID-19 by connecting farmers with new buyers, elucidating 
the uncertain global agricultural marketplace, assisting local health 
agencies and hospitals, and distributing educational materials to 4-H 
youth and adults.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ https://nifa.usda.gov/announcement/nifa-supports-disaster-
education-through-eden
    \5\ https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1093/aepp/ppw007
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry funding supports university-
based research and education that protects our forests and watersheds, 
preserves environmental resources, and trains the next generation of 
natural resource scientists. Research from McIntire-Stennis enables 
development of new technologies to combat forest fires, approaches to 
carbon sequestration, biobased products and energy sources, and 
mitigation techniques for impacts from invasive species. The increase 
to McIntire-Stennis programs would allow support for more students and 
local and regional solutions for forest management, climate change 
mitigation, and biobased products development.
    Finally, we request robust investment in the Agriculture and Food 
Research Initiative (AFRI), USDA's flagship competitive grants program 
for fundamental and applied research, Extension, and education in 
support of our nation's food and agricultural systems. AFRI was 
established by Congress in the 2008 Farm Bill and re-authorized in the 
2018 Farm Bill with a level of $700 million per year. Competitive 
research is an essential for addressing national priorities. As 
examples, awards from AFRI are going towards rapid detection of cattle 
disease, cutting greenhouse gases from ruminants, and understanding 
heat impacts on bees. We urge the subcommittee fund AFRI of at least 
$470 million in fiscal year 22 to fund a backlog of highly ranked 
applications. An increase in AFRI will allow more meritorious 
applications to receive funding boosting the impact and advancements 
from the program (in 2016, the application success rate was 20 
percent).
    In closing, we urge the Subcommittee to fully fund these important 
agriculture, food and fuel innovation programs at land-grant 
universities and non-land grant colleges of agriculture in the fiscal 
year 2022 Agriculture Appropriations bill. We appreciate your 
consideration of this request and look forward to continuing to work 
with you to support 1862, 1890, and 1994 Land-grant Universities, which 
provide pathways of opportunity for thousands of Americans by 
conducting cutting-edge research that helps keep the United States at 
the forefront of agriculture.

    [This statement was submitted by Caron Gala, Director, Governmental 
Affairs, Agriculture and International Development, Association of 
Public and Land-Grant Universities.]
                                 ______
                                 
             Prepared Statement of Animal Health Institute
    On behalf of the Animal Health Institute, I write today to request 
that you include funding for priorities important to human and animal 
health in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 Agriculture, Rural Development, 
Food and Drug Administrations and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill. 
Funding of these programs protects animal health and human health by 
providing safe and effective products to prevent and treat disease in 
animals.
    AHI is appreciative to Congress for providing $20.570 million for 
the Center for Veterinary Biologics (CVB), an increase of $3 million, 
in last year's spending bill. We request Congress maintain this funding 
level for the Center to continue to review and approve veterinary 
biologics in a timely manner, help compensate for the coming wave of 
retirements by experienced CVB staffers and continue to bring current 
vaccines and new and innovative technologies to market.
    Each year, U.S. animal health companies produce more than 100 
billion doses of animal vaccines. These vaccines are critical to 
protecting the health of America's flocks, herds, and pets from 
domestic and foreign animal diseases. In addition to improving animal 
health, these technologies could lead to similar breakthroughs in 
products for humans. Animal health companies are developing new and 
innovative biologics to greatly reduce the presence of food-borne 
pathogens in production animals, as well as reduce the need for the use 
of antibiotics. These new products represent a step forward in on-farm 
contributions to food safety. Additionally, Congress provided funds in 
the 2018 Farm Bill to fund a vaccine bank, and those dollars will be 
spent more efficiently if the underlying infrastructure to review 
vaccine technologies is fully operational. In order to leverage the 
benefits of these new products and public health assets it is essential 
that CVB is fully funded and staffed.
    We request the user fees established by the Animal Drug User Fee 
Act (ADUFA) of $30.340 million be included in the FY 2022 
appropriations bill. ADUFA provides a system of performance standards 
and user fees to improve the new animal drug review process at the U.S. 
Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Center for Veterinary Medicine 
(CVM). Predictability of the review process has improved as FDA CVM has 
met the agreed-upon performance standards. To maintain this success, we 
request that the fees be integrated into this year's appropriation 
bill. The appropriation is entirely budget neutral as the money will be 
provided by the animal health companies.
    Another area of importance within animal and public health is the 
control of ectoparasites in pets, livestock, and the environment. In 
order to ensure timely approval of new preventative medications for 
controlling fleas, ticks, and other ectoparasites in animals, AHI 
requests the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) pesticide 
registration activities be appropriated $128.3 million for the FY 2022. 
This will help ensure that much needed improvements to the EPA 
registration process are possible and the agency can decrease the time 
currently required for review and approval of new products.
    AHI respectfully request $33 million for the USDA-APHIS Wildlife 
Services National Rabies Management Program (NRMP). The program is 
critical to decreasing the spread of rabies and is protective of human 
and animal health.
    Thank you for your consideration. Please do not hesitate to contact 
me if you have any questions or need additional information.

    [The statement was submitted by Ronald B. Phillips, Vice President, 
Legislative and Public Affairs.]
                                 ______
                                 
             Prepared Statement of Animal Welfare Institute
    The Animal Welfare Institute appreciates the opportunity to submit 
testimony on fiscal year 2022 spending priorities for the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture and is grateful to Congress for the actions 
it has taken over the past several years to address animal welfare 
enforcement problems. While USDA has taken some steps to abide by 
Congress's directives, leadership from the Committee is still needed to 
ensure robust enforcement of Federal laws that protect millions of 
animals as well as the public.
     animal and plant health inspection service/animal welfare act 
                              enforcement
    Requested Bill Language: ``The Secretary shall ensure that each 
violation or failure to comply with the Act identified by a USDA 
inspector under the Animal Welfare Act, 7 U.S.C. Sections 2131-2159, is 
documented on an inspection report. The Secretary shall also ensure 
that `teachable moments' are never used.''
    Requested Report Language: ``The Committee is concerned about 
APHIS's Animal Care program and the steep decline in enforcement 
related to violations of the Animal Welfare Act. The Committee urges 
the agency to reform its current licensing and enforcement scheme. 
While the agency took steps towards this goal last year with its 
licensing and veterinary care rule change, and more recently with the 
withdrawal of the May 2018 Tech Note that allowed facilities to avoid 
citations by self-reporting, we believe more progress can be made. This 
includes, but is not limited to, the following: ensure consistent, 
thorough, unannounced inspections on a regular basis; act swiftly when 
facilities fail to comply with the Act's minimal requirements; ensure 
each failure to allow access for inspection and each violation or 
failure to comply with animal welfare standards is documented on an 
inspection report, and consider assessing penalties in each such case; 
ensure that there is no use of `teachable moments' or any similar 
program that obscures findings during inspections; and, require that 
inspection reports which identify violations or failures of compliance 
be shared with relevant local, state, and Federal agencies. The 
Committee is also concerned about the lack of enforcement of online dog 
dealers, which has allowed many online operations to continue selling 
puppies without the necessary USDA licensing pursuant to Animal Welfare 
Act, 7 U.S.C. Sections 2131-2159. We urge the Secretary of Agriculture 
to prioritize the enforcement of the 2013 rule which requires that 
dealers who are selling animals sight-unseen to consumers must have the 
necessary license to do so. The Committee also urges the Secretary of 
Agriculture to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. 
Attorney General to encourage greater collaboration on Animal Welfare 
Act enforcement and ensure that the Department of Justice has access to 
evidence needed to initiate cases.''
    Background: USDA's Animal Care division is responsible for 
inspecting and enforcing the AWA's minimum standards of care at nearly 
12,000 sites, including puppy mills, laboratories, zoos, circuses, and 
airlines. We are troubled by USDA's oversight of these industries in 
recent years. We recognize that there were fewer in-person inspections 
in 2020 because of the pandemic, but that was neither the start of 
enforcement failures nor will it be the end. From 2016 to 2020, there 
was a 67 percent drop in the number of AWA inspections where citations 
were documented, according to AWI research. New investigations plunged 
by nearly 90 percent during this period.
    In 2013, USDA issued a rule intended to close loopholes that 
allowed dog breeders to sell puppies online without a USDA license, but 
enforcement of online dealers has been lackadaisical. As a result, many 
online operations continue to sell puppies without the necessary USDA 
licensing and oversight.
    The USDA continues to use what it calls ``teachable moments'' as a 
means of avoiding documentation of violations on inspection reports, 
despite Committee report language in fiscal year 2020 directing the 
agency to stop this practice. This emphasis on education over 
enforcement undermines the goal of animal welfare. USDA's own Inspector 
General, in a 2010 audit of the Animal Care program, called attention 
to the problem, stating that ``relying heavily on education for serious 
or repeat violators--without an appropriate level of enforcement--
weakened the agency's ability to protect the animals.'' USDA also needs 
to restore the many enforcement tools that have been dismantled in 
recent years, including the inspection guide and policy manual.
    The requested bill and report language will reiterate Congress' 
justified ongoing concerns and ensure Animal Care, the Office of 
General Counsel, and the Investigative and Enforcement Service conduct 
robust oversight and enforcement of the law as Congress intends.
      aphis/protecting animals with shelter (paws) implementation
    Requested Funding: We request $3 million to continue implementing 
the PAWS grant program (``Emergency and Transitional Pet Shelter and 
Housing Assistance'') as authorized in Section 12502 of Public Law 115-
334.
    Background: We appreciate that Congress provided $2.5 million in 
fiscal year 2021 to continue implementing Section 12502 of the 2018 
Farm Bill (Public Law 115-334), which authorized a new grantprogram to 
provide emergency and transitional shelter options for domestic 
violence survivors with companion animals. Applications for the fiscal 
year 21 round of funding are due in June, and the six recipients of the 
first round of funding in fiscal year 20 are now implementing their 
programs. Those programs represent diversity in geographic areas and 
populations served, and in their solutions to the problem of how best 
to assist domestic violence survivors who have companion animals. The 
common thread through them all is the level of excitement at being able 
to reach this highly underserved population of survivors and to 
increase community awareness about this long-standing oversight, which 
would not have been possible without these grants.
                   aphis/animal care/class b dealers
    Bill language request: None of the funds made available by this Act 
may be used to carry out any activities or incur any expense related to 
the issuance of licenses under section 3 of the Animal Welfare Act (7 
U.S.C. 2133), or the renewal of such licenses, to class B dealers who 
sell dogs and cats for use in research, experiments, teaching, or 
testing.
    Justification: This language, which has been included in the 
Agriculture appropriations bill for several years, prohibits the 
renewal of existing licenses or the issuance of new licenses to Class B 
dealers who sell random source dogs and cats for use in research, 
experimentation, teaching, and testing. Thanks to Congress' efforts, no 
random source B dealers are now operating. Continuing this spending ban 
will ensure that there is no lapse during which these dealers try to 
get back into business or others are tempted to apply for new licenses. 
It would be unfortunate to jeopardize the progress that has been made 
in shutting down this abuse-ridden industry.
            aphis/animal welfare act facility disaster plans
    Requested Bill Language: ``The Secretary of Agriculture shall 
enforce the final rule published on December 31, 2012 (77 Fed. Reg. 
76815) by lifting the stay issued on July 31, 2013 (78 Fed Reg 46255) 
no later than 60 days after enactment of this Act.''
    Background: The USDA proposed a common-sense rule in 2008 requiring 
facilities regulated under the AWA to have contingency plans for safely 
evacuating and caring for their animals in an emergency. In 2012, USDA 
published the final rule; it went into effect on January 30, 2013, 
requiring that plans be in place by July 29, 2013. However, USDA issued 
an indefinite stay of this rule on July 31, 2013, in response to 
concerns about very small businesses being covered. Congress addressed 
these concerns by including a provision in the 2014 Farm Bill directing 
USDA to establish a de minimis exemption in the AWA for licensees with 
only a few non-dangerous animals. Conference managers noted that the de 
minimis exemption would free up agency resources and that they expected 
the agency to lift the stay on the contingency rule ``without delay.'' 
USDA finalized its de minimis rule in June 2018 but has not yet lifted 
the stay.
                   wildlife services/chemical poisons
    Report language request: ``No Federal funds shall be expended or 
committed for the manufacture, import, purchase, sale, distribution, 
preparation, placement, deployment, training in the use of, or 
authorization for use by third parties, of M-44 sodium cyanide ejector 
devices (`M-44s'), including any of the devices' components or parts. 
This prohibition extends to use of Wildlife Services staff time and 
resources in connection with the use of M-44s, including where such 
actions are undertaken in connection with a cooperative agreement, 
except for activities directly related to the removal of M-44s that 
have been placed on Federal, tribal, state, and private land. Nor shall 
Federal funds be expended or committed for the manufacture, import, 
purchase, sale, distribution, preparation, placement, deployment, 
training in the use of, or authorization for use by third parties, of 
sodium fluoroacetate (`Compound 1080'), including for livestock 
protection collars.
    ``The Committee urges Wildlife Services to reallocate resources to 
the provision of technical assistance and education to promote, 
incentivize, implement, and sustain use of nonlethal methods of 
predator control and coexistence, which can be less costly, more 
effective, and less dangerous to non-target species relative to M-44s 
and Compound 1080.
    ``Moreover, no Federal funds may be used to develop, introduce, or 
reintroduce other chemical poisons, including but not limited to 
alternative delivery mechanisms for sodium cyanide, Compound 1080, and 
other pesticides, for purposes of lethal predator control. This 
prohibition extends to the use of Federal funds to initiate or continue 
research, development, testing, registration, manufacture, preparation, 
or investigation of any chemical poisons or pesticides that may be used 
for lethal predator control.''
    Justification: Lethal animal control devices such as M-44s or 
Compound 1080 cause severe pain and suffering and often result in 
painful deaths of wild animals and family pets and are ineffective 
approaches to sustainably reducing and preventing human-wildlife 
conflicts and livestock losses. In 2019, Wildlife Services killed over 
8,000 animals with M-44s alone. Humans have also been injured by 
exposure to these poisons. Wildlife Services should no longer employ M-
44s or Compound 1080 as a means of predator control. Sodium cyanide 
used in M-44s and Compound 1080 (sodium fluoroacetate), which is used 
in livestock collars, are two of the world's deadliest poisons and 
present a significant national security threat. Instead, Wildlife 
Services should ensure the use of more humane non-lethal methods of 
predator control.
            wildlife services/nonlethal methods development
    Report language request: ``The Committee is aware that Wildlife 
Services has, according to the program's informational materials, 
worked with landowners to deploy nonlethal predator management 
strategies such as fladry, electric fencing, and livestock guardian 
dogs. Wildlife Services must implement and prioritize nonlethal 
strategies by: (1) promoting and implementing nonlethal livestock-
predator conflict deterrence and mitigation techniques, including but 
not limited to use of barriers and fencing, fladry and turbo-fladry, 
visual and auditory deterrents, livestock protection animals, 
appropriate husbandry practices, night corralling, shed lambing, 
attractant and carcass removal, livestock herding, and human presence; 
(2) providing training in selection, implementation, monitoring, and 
adaptation of nonlethal techniques for agricultural producers, 
landowners, Federal and state agency personnel, and others; and (3) 
collaborating with the National Wildlife Research Center to advance and 
improve nonlethal predator coexistence methods, research on monitoring 
methods for efficacy of nonlethal control options implemented to reduce 
predation, and establish clear documentation protocols for nonlethal 
approaches implemented in advance of lethal control measures where 
applicable.
    ``The Committee directs Wildlife Services to fund nonlethal 
predator control activities through a percentage of the Service's total 
budget. No less than $2,000,000 of existing funds must be allocated 
towards nonlethal strategies. In fiscal year 21, the Committee 
allocated funding specific to nonlethal measures. Wildlife Services is 
directed to provide a report detailing how these additional funds were 
dispersed--including regional distribution, wild and domestic species 
impacted, number and size of livestock/agricultural operations 
impacted, nonlethal tools and methods implemented and supported, and 
efficacy evaluation methods and outcomes-- within 45 days of the 
enactment of this Act. Wildlife Services is also directed to document 
all work on nonlethal strategies development and submit a report 
demonstrating progress in this area within 180 days of the enactment of 
this Act.''
    Justification: It is estimated that USDA's Wildlife Services has 
killed over 34 million animals over the last decade. In 2019, over 1.2 
million native animals were killed, including wolves, bobcats, bears, 
coyotes, and cougars. These animals were killed using a variety of 
inhumane methods, such as M-44 devices, snares, body-gripping traps, 
leg-hold traps, and firearms. Lethal predator control methods are 
proven to be ineffective, inhumane, pose safety risks humans and pets, 
and are more costly than nonlethal methods. Predator species are a 
critical part of healthy ecosystems. Employing nonlethal predator 
control methods will establish sustainable coexistence and benefit both 
the agricultural community and the environment.
    agricultural research service/welfare for farm animals used in 
                         agricultural research
    Requested Bill Language: ``Hereafter, and notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, ARS facilities as described in the ``Memorandum of 
Understanding Between the U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture Agricultural Research Service (ARS) Concerning Laboratory 
Animal Welfare'' (16--6100--0103--MU Revision 16--1) shall be inspected 
by APHIS for compliance with the Animal Welfare Act and its regulations 
and standards.''
    Requested Report Language: ``The Committee directs ARS to ensure 
that each of its facilities housing animals is adhering to the Animal 
Welfare Act at all times. ARS shall submit quarterly reports that 
include all violations found by APHIS during that quarter as well as 
the specific actions that will be taken to prevent their recurrence. 
The Committee further directs APHIS to conduct inspections of all such 
ARS facilities and to post the resulting inspection reports on line in 
their entirety without redactions except signatures. The Committee 
continues to direct APHIS to transmit to the Committees all inspection 
reports involving ARS facilities, including pre-compliance inspections. 
These facilities involve Federal funds over which this Committee has 
oversight responsibilities. APHIS is directed to include every 
violation its inspectors find and never to interfere with the 
Committee's oversight activities by using so-called `teachable moments' 
or other means of not fully reporting ARS facility violations.''
    Justification: A 2015 investigation by the New York Times reported 
shocking instances of animal mistreatment and neglect associated with 
experiments conducted on farm animals at the U.S. Meat Animal Research 
Center (USMARC), and repeated disregard for objections raised by the 
Center's own veterinary staff. The Committee responded by making 5 
percent of the ARS' fiscal year 16 budget contingent on its updating 
its animal care policies and requiring that all ARS facilities at which 
animal research is conducted have a fully functioning Institutional 
Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC). The Committee has also provided 
increased funding to enable APHIS, under an MOU with ARS, to conduct 
inspections consistent with the AWA at each ARS facility that uses 
animals in research, and directed APHIS to post its inspections reports 
online and provide copies to the Committees. The fiscal year 2021 
omnibus included bill language requiring ARS facilities to be inspected 
by APHIS for compliance with the AWA and its regulations and standards. 
We hope this requirement can be strengthened to ensure that ARS 
facilities will be permanently inspected by APHIS.

    [This statement was submitted by Nancy Blaney, Government Affairs, 
Animal Welfare Institute.]
                                 ______
                                 
             Prepared Statement of Animal Welfare Institute
    Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on fiscal year 
2022 funding priorities for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 
Below are some of the Animal Welfare Institute's top priorities that 
fall under USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), Farm 
Service Agency (FSA), and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 
(APHIS) pertaining to the humane treatment of farm animals and equines.
  food safety and inspection service--humane methods of slaughter act 
                              enforcement
    Effective enforcement of the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA) 
can prevent abuses like those documented in undercover investigations 
and reduce the chance of associated food safety risks and costly 
recalls of meat and egg products. The number of FTEs required under 
annual appropriations for enforcement of the HMSA has remained at 148 
since fiscal year 2012, despite the fact that actual staffing levels 
have consistently been above this number for the past decade. To more 
accurately reflect previous staffing levels that have proven to 
increase the number of humane handling verification procedures 
performed and align with the agency's staffing commitments, 165 FTEs 
should be appropriated. We also request that the agency resume 
publishing the Humane Handling Quarterly Reports--as previously 
directed by the fiscal year 2021 agriculture appropriations report--to 
allow for timely and efficient access to information pertinent to 
monitoring HMSA enforcement. AWI greatly appreciates the Committee's 
attention to this matter and continues to monitor whether USDA has 
gathered and posted the requested information; unfortunately, USDA has 
yet to comply with Congress's clear directive. We trust the Committee 
will again emphasize the need for USDA to resume publishing the Humane 
Handling Quarterly Reports as this critical information promotes 
transparency and public trust in FSIS's oversight of the treatment of 
animals slaughtered at USDA inspected facilities.
    Bill language request: No fewer than 165 full-time equivalent 
positions shall be employed during fiscal year 2022 for purposes 
dedicated solely to inspections and enforcement related to the Humane 
Methods of Slaughter Act. This number is in addition to the Humane 
Handling Enforcement Coordinator and District Veterinary Medical 
Specialist positions.
    Report language request: FSIS shall ensure that all inspection 
personnel conducting humane handling verification procedures receive 
robust initial training and periodic refresher training on the FSIS 
humane handling and slaughter regulations and directives. This includes 
handling of non-ambulatory disabled animals, as well as proper use of 
the Humane Activities Tracking System to ensure humane handling of 
animals as they arrive and are offloaded and handled in ante-mortem 
holding pens, suspect pens, chutes, stunning areas, and on the 
processing line. The Committee directs the agency to resume preparation 
and online publication of the Humane Handling Quarterly Reports, to 
include: (1) the number of humane handling verification procedures 
performed, (2) the number of administrative enforcement actions taken, 
(3) time spent on Humane Handling Activities Tracking System 
activities, and (4) comparisons of these measurements by plant size and 
FSIS district.
 food safety and inspection service--poultry slaughter good commercial 
                               practices
    USDA has documented a variety of serious humane handling problems 
at poultry slaughter plants, including birds drowning in scalding 
tanks, disposal of live birds under piles of dead birds, birds dying 
due to suffocation and/or prolonged exposure to extreme weather, and 
mechanical problems resulting in injury and death. In 2005, USDA issued 
a notice to slaughter establishments that acknowledged the link between 
inhumane treatment of birds and adulterated poultry products, and 
referenced industry ``Good Commercial Practices'' for bird handling. 
Subsequently, USDA inspectors began conducting verification of these 
requirements for live bird handling in every federally inspected plant. 
However, inspector oversight appears to vary widely at poultry 
slaughter establishments. According to USDA enforcement records, 
between 2017 and 2019, more than one-third of federally inspected 
poultry plants were not issued enforcement records documenting GCP 
compliance.
    Report language request: The Committee recognizes that handling of 
birds at slaughter according to Good Commercial Practices reduces the 
occurrence of adulterated poultry products in the marketplace, as well 
as the suffering of birds at slaughter. The committee also is cognizant 
that current oversight of bird handling is inconsistent at USDA-
inspected slaughter plants, with no enforcement records issued by USDA 
inspection personnel documenting compliance with GCP at more than one-
third of inspected plants during the past 3 years. Therefore, the 
Committee directs FSIS to track the number of inspector hours spent on 
GCP verification activities using its existing Humane Activities 
Tracking System or other appropriate method.
            farm service agency--livestock indemnity program
    The Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP) compensates producers for 
farm animal injuries and deaths caused by adverse weather and natural 
disasters. The number of farm animals that die from adverse weather 
events is immense--as is the amount of Federal funds disbursed under 
LIP (between 2008 and 2016, LIP payments totaled $313 million according 
to USDA). However, producers are not required to demonstrate that they 
provide animals with basic protections from extreme weather or that 
they have disaster plans in place before receiving taxpayer dollars 
under LIP. Disaster preparedness plans are widely supported by 
agriculture industry groups and are recommended by both the American 
Veterinary Medical Association and the USDA. To save taxpayer dollars 
and mitigate losses, USDA should require that producers have disaster 
preparedness plans for the issuance of payments under LIP.
    Bill language request: Livestock Indemnity Payments for Adverse 
Weather. For expenses involved in making indemnity payments to eligible 
livestock owners or contract growers, such sums as may be necessary: 
Provided, That the Secretary shall ensure that no funds are used for 
issuing payments under the program, unless the applicant offers 1) a 
disaster preparedness plan that is specific to the species of animal(s) 
and region of the country, and 2) a description of how the plan was 
executed to prevent livestock injuries or deaths.
    Report language request: Disaster Preparedness.--The Committee 
recognizes that millions of farmed animals die each year due to the 
effects of adverse weather, and extreme weather events are occurring at 
increased frequency, putting additional livestock at risk of injury and 
death. The committee also is cognizant that veterinary and agricultural 
trade associations recognize the importance of disaster planning in 
preventing the extent of livestock deaths. Therefore, the Committee 
encourages USDA to require written disaster preparedness plans for the 
issuance of payments under the Livestock Indemnity Program.
     food safety and inspection service--horse slaughter facility 
                              inspections
    Horse slaughter does not occur in the United States due to the 
inclusion of annual appropriations language blocking the use of Federal 
funds to inspect horse slaughter facilities, thereby preventing these 
facilities from legally operating on U.S. soil. Before horse slaughter 
facilities closed in the United States, USDA itself documented horrific 
incidents of cruelty. Horses--which serve as companion, working, and 
performance animals--have a strong fight-or-flight reflex and 
instinctively thrash their long necks when panicked. Rendering horses 
unconscious prior to slaughter can be extremely difficult as stunning 
them often requires repeated blows to the head. In addition to well-
documented animal abuse within the predatory horse slaughter industry, 
the consumption of horse meat presents a significant food safety 
concern. Horses are not raised for human consumption in the United 
States and are regularly administered a wide range of drugs that are 
expressly prohibited by the Food and Drug Administration for use in 
food animals.
    Bill language request: None of the funds made available by this Act 
may be used to pay the salaries or expenses of personnel (1) to inspect 
horses under section 3 of the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C 
603); (2) to inspect horses under section 903 of the Federal 
Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 1901 note; 
Public Law 104-127); or (3) to implement or enforce section 352.19 of 
title 9, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation).
   animal and plant health inspection service--horse protection act 
                              enforcement
    We appreciate Congress providing $2 million in fiscal year 2021 for 
USDA to improve enforcement of the Horse Protection Act (HPA) and 
combat the abusive practices associated with soring. A 2010 Office of 
Inspector report outlined serious conflicts of interest with the 
industry self-monitoring system by Horse Industry Organizations (HIOs) 
on which USDA still relies. Indeed, earlier this year, the National 
Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine issued a report that 
echoed OIG's findings and called for an end to the industry self-
policing system. In January 2017, USDA announced final regulations to 
eliminate industry self-policing and institute other reforms to end 
soring. The HPA rule has received widespread public support, including 
from the veterinary community, and hundreds of lawmakers have also 
written in support of the rule. Unfortunately, these regulations were 
frozen by the prior administration. Again, we appreciate Congress's 
inclusion in fiscal year 2021 of language directing reinstatement of 
this long overdue rule and reminding USDA that it holds primary 
responsibility for enforcing the HPA.
    Bill language request: The Secretary shall reinstate and publish 
the final rule, ``Horse Protection; Licensing of Designated Qualified 
Persons and Other Amendments'' [Docket No. APHIS-2011-0009], as it was 
finalized and displayed in advance public notice in the Federal 
Register on January 19, 2017, with effective dates adjusted to reflect 
the delay in implementation.
    Funding Request: $3 million for Horse Protection Act Enforcement
    Report language request: The Committee provides $3,000,000 for 
enforcement of the Horse Protection Act of 1970, as amended (15 U.S.C. 
1831), and reminds the Secretary that Congress granted the agency 
primary responsibility to enforce this law.

    [This statement was submitted by Dena Jones, Director, Farm Animal 
Program and Joanna Grossman, PhD, Equine Program Manager and Senior 
Advisor.]
                                 ______
                                 
   Prepared Statement of Central Arizona Water Conservation District 
                                (CAWCD)
    On behalf of the Central Arizona Water Conservation District 
(CAWCD), I am writing to ask that you include $12.4 million in the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture's Environmental Quality Incentive Program 
Financial Assistance (EQIP FA) for the Colorado River Basin Salinity 
Control Program in the Fiscal Year 2022 Appropriation bill. The 
salinity control funding under EQIP FA will help protect the water 
quality of the Colorado River that is used by approximately 40 million 
people for municipal and industrial purposes and used to irrigate 
approximately 5.5 million acres in the United States.
    The CAWCD manages the Central Arizona Project (CAP), a multi-
purpose water resource development and management project that delivers 
Colorado River water into central and southern Arizona. The largest 
supplier of renewable water in Arizona, CAP delivers an average of more 
than 1.5 million acre-feet of Arizona's 2.8 million acre-foot Colorado 
River entitlement each year to municipal and industrial users, 
agricultural irrigation districts, and Indian communities.
    Our goal at CAWCD is to provide an affordable, reliable and 
sustainable supply of Colorado River water to a service area that 
includes more than 80 percent of Arizona's population.
    These renewable water supplies are critical to Arizona's economy 
and to the economies of Native American communities throughout the 
state. Nearly 90% of economic activity in the State of Arizona occurs 
within CAP's service area. The canal provides an economic benefit of 
$100 billion annually, accounting for one-third of the entire Arizona 
gross state product. CAP also helps the State of Arizona meet its water 
management and regulatory objectives of reducing groundwater use and 
ensuring availability of groundwater as a supplemental water supply 
during future droughts. Achieving and maintaining these water 
management objectives is critical to the long-term sustainability of a 
state as arid as Arizona.
                 negative impacts of concentrated salts
    Natural and man-induced salt loading to the Colorado River creates 
environmental and economic damages. EPA has identified that more than 
60 percent of the salt load of the Colorado River comes from natural 
sources. With the significant federal ownership in the Basin, most of 
this comes from federally administered lands. Human activity, 
principally irrigation, adds to the salt load of the Colorado River. 
Further, natural and human activities concentrate the dissolved salts 
in the River.
    The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) has estimated 
quantifiable damages at about $354 million per year. Modeling by 
Reclamation indicates that damages will rise to approximately $671 
million per year by 2040 without continuation of the Program. These 
damages include:

  --A reduction in the yield of salt sensitive crops and increased 
        water use to meet the leaching requirements in the agricultural 
        sector;

  --Increased use of imported water and cost of desalination and brine 
        disposal for recycling water in the municipal sector;

  --An increase in the use of water and the cost of water treatment, 
        and an increase in sewer fees in the industrial sector;

  --An increase in the cost of cooling operations and the cost of water 
        softening, and a decrease in equipment service life in the 
        commercial sector;

  --A reduction in the useful life of galvanized water pipe systems, 
        water heaters, faucets, garbage disposals, clothes washers, and 
        dishwashers, and increased use of bottled water and water 
        softeners in the household sector;

  --A decrease in the life of treatment facilities and pipelines in the 
        utility sector, and
  --Difficulty in meeting wastewater discharge requirements to comply 
        with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit 
        terms and conditions, and an increase in desalination and brine 
        disposal costs due to accumulation of salts in groundwater 
        basins.

    The threat of salinity continues to be a concern in both the United 
States and Mexico. In 2012, a five-year agreement, known as Minute 319, 
was signed between the U.S. and Mexico to guide future management of 
the Colorado River. Among the key issues addressed in Minute 319 
included an agreement to maintain salinity standards. The United 
States, Mexico, and key water users, including CAWCD, worked since 2015 
to develop a successor agreement, Minute 323, which was finalized on 
September 27, 2017. Minute 323 continues collaboration and cooperation 
among the United States and Mexico with respect to salinity control in 
the Colorado River system. The CAWCD and other key water providers are 
committed to meeting these goals.
    Funding for salinity control will prevent the water quality of the 
river from further degradation and significant increases in economic 
damages to municipal, industrial and irrigation users.
                               conclusion
    Implementation of salinity control practices through EQIP has 
proven to be a very cost-effective method of controlling the salinity 
in the Colorado River. CAWCD urges the subcommittee to include $12.4 
million from the USDA's Environmental Quality Incentive Program 
Financial Assistance for the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control 
Program in the Fiscal Year 2022 Appropriation bill. Additionally, there 
is needed sufficient Technical Assistance dollars to adequately 
implement the program. The funding level will prevent the further 
degradation of water quality of the Colorado River, and significantly 
increased damages from the higher salt concentrations to municipal, 
industrial and irrigation users.

    [This statement was submitted by Theodore C. Cooke, General 
Manager, Central Arizona Water Conservation District.]
                                 ______
                                 
   Prepared Statement of Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum
    Waters from the Colorado River are used by approximately 40 million 
people for municipal and industrial purposes and used to irrigate 
approximately 5.5 million acres in the United States. Natural and man-
induced salt loading to the Colorado River creates environmental and 
economic damages. In 2020 the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) 
estimated the quantifiable damages to Lower Basin water users due to 
elevated salinity levels at about $354 million per year. Congress 
authorized the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program (Program) 
through the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act (Act)(Public Law 
93-320) in 1974 to offset increased damages caused by continued 
development and use of the waters of the Colorado River. Modeling by 
Reclamation indicates that the quantifiable damages will rise to 
approximately $671 million annually by the year 2040 without 
continuation of the Program. Congress has directed the Secretary of 
Agriculture to participate in the implementation of the Program. The 
USDA portion of the Program, as authorized by Congress and funded and 
administered by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) under 
the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), is an essential 
part of the overall effort. A funding level of $12.4 M in EQIP 
Financial Assistance (FA) in 2022 is in keeping with the Program's Plan 
of Implementation and is required to prevent further degradation of the 
quality of the Colorado River and commensurate increases in downstream 
economic damages to water users.
    In enacting the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act in 1974, 
Congress directed that the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control 
Program should be implemented in a cost-effective way. The Program is 
currently funded under EQIP through NRCS and under Reclamation's 
Basinwide Program. Recognizing that agricultural on-farm improvements 
are some of the most cost-effective strategies, Congress authorized the 
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to establish a 
voluntary, cooperative program with irrigators to improve on-farm water 
management and reduce watershed erosion through amendment of the Act in 
1984 (Public Law 98-569). With the enactment of the Federal Agriculture 
Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (FAIRA) (Public Law 104-127), 
Congress directed that the Program should continue to be implemented as 
part of the then newly created EQIP. Since the enactment of the Farm 
Security and Rural Investment Act (FSRIA) in 2002, and more recent EQIP 
funding levels, there have been, for the first time in a number of 
years, opportunities to adequately fund the Program within EQIP. In 
2008, Congress passed the Food, Conservation and Energy Act (FCEA) 
(Public Law 110-234). The FCEA amended the Act to address the cost 
sharing requirement and established the Basin States Program (BSP). The 
BSP provides the mechanism for expenditure of 30 percent of the total 
amount spent each year by the combined EQIP and BSP effort. With the 
passage of the Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018 (Public Law 115-
334), the authority for USDA to implement salinity control activities 
in the Colorado River Basin was continued.
    The Program, as set forth in the Act, is to benefit Lower Basin 
water users hundreds of miles downstream from the sources of salinity 
in the Upper Basin. The salinity of Colorado River waters increases 
from about 50 mg/L at its headwaters to more than 700 mg/L in the Lower 
Basin. There are very significant economic damages caused downstream by 
high salt levels in the water. EQIP is used to improve upstream 
irrigation efficiencies, which in turn reduce leaching of salts to the 
Colorado River. There are also local benefits in the Upper Colorado 
River Basin from the Program in the form of soil and environmental 
benefits, improved agricultural production, improved water 
efficiencies, lower fertilizer and labor costs, and water distribution 
and infrastructure improvements. Also important is the collaboration 
that EQIP fosters between farmers and ranchers, states, and the federal 
government in complying with EPA mandated water quality standards and 
the attainment of multi-benefit economic and sustainability goals. 
Local producers submit cost-effective applications under EQIP in 
Colorado, Utah and Wyoming and offer to cost share in the acquisition 
of new irrigation equipment. The mix of funding under EQIP, cost share 
from the Basin States and efforts and cost share brought forward by 
local producers has created a most remarkable and successful 
partnership.
    After longstanding urgings from the states and directives from 
Congress, NRCS recognized that this Program is different from small 
watershed enhancement efforts common to EQIP. In the case of the 
Colorado River salinity control effort, the watershed to be considered 
stretches more than 1,400 miles from the Colorado River's headwaters in 
the Rocky Mountains to the Colorado River's terminus in the Gulf of 
California in Mexico. Each year the NRCS State Conservationists for 
Colorado, Utah and Wyoming prepare a three-year funding plan for the 
salinity efforts under EQIP. The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control 
Forum (Forum) supports this funding plan which recognizes the need for 
$12.4 M in EQIP FA allocations in FY 2022. Additionally, there is 
needed sufficient EQIP Technical Assistance (TA) dollars to adequately 
implement the program. State and local cost sharing is triggered by the 
federal appropriation. The Forum appreciates the efforts of NRCS 
leadership and the support of this Subcommittee in implementing the 
Program.
    Concentration of salt in the Colorado River causes approximately 
$354 million annually in quantified damages and significantly more in 
unquantified damages in the United States and results in poor water 
quality for United States users. Damages, by water usage sector, 
include the following:

  --a reduction in the ability to reclaim and reuse water for 
        beneficial uses, including drinking water and irrigation water 
        supplies, due to high salinities in the water delivered to 
        water treatment and reclamation facilities,

  --a reduction in the yield of salt sensitive crops, increased water 
        use to meet leaching requirements and additional actions 
        necessary to comply with the Clean Water Act within the 
        agricultural sector,

  --increased use of imported water and cost of desalination and brine 
        disposal for recycling water in the municipal sector,

  --a reduction in the useful life of galvanized water pipe systems, 
        water heaters, faucets, garbage disposals, clothes washers and 
        dishwashers, and increased use of bottled water and water 
        softeners in the household sector,

  --an increase in the cost of cooling operations and the cost of water 
        softening, and a decrease in equipment service life in the 
        commercial sector,

  --an increase in the use of water and the cost of water treatment, 
        and a corresponding increase in sewer fees in the industrial 
        sector,

  --a decrease in the lifespan of treatment facilities and pipelines in 
        the utility sector, and

  --difficulty in meeting wastewater discharge requirements to comply 
        with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit 
        terms and conditions, and an increase in desalination and brine 
        disposal costs necessary to minimize accumulation of salts in 
        groundwater basins.

    The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum (Forum) is composed 
of gubernatorial appointees from Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, 
New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. The Forum is charged with reviewing the 
Colorado River's water quality standards for salinity every three years 
to facilitate compliance with Section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act 
(Public Law 92-500). In so doing, it adopts a Plan of Implementation 
consistent with these standards. The level of appropriation requested 
in this testimony is in keeping with the adopted Plan of 
Implementation. If adequate funds are not appropriated, significant 
damages from higher salinity concentrations in the water will be more 
widespread in the United States and Mexico.
    Over the years, NRCS personnel have developed a productive working 
relationship with farmers within the Colorado River Basin. Maintaining 
salinity control achieved by implementation of past practices requires 
continuing education and technical assistance from NRCS personnel. 
Additionally, technical assistance is required for planning, design and 
implementation of future projects. Lastly, the continued funding for 
the monitoring and evaluation of existing projects is essential to 
maintaining the salinity reduction already achieved.
    In summary, implementation of salinity control practices through 
EQIP has proven to be a very cost-effective method of controlling the 
salinity of the Colorado River and is an essential component to the 
overall Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program. Continuation of 
EQIP with adequate funding levels dedicated to the Program will prevent 
the water quality of the Colorado River from further degradation and 
significant increases in economic damages to municipal, industrial and 
irrigation users. A modest investment in source control pays huge 
dividends in improved water quality for nearly 40 million Americans.

    [This statement was submitted by Don A. Barnett, Executive 
Director, Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum.]
                                 ______
                                 
  Prepared Statement of Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program
    This Statement is submitted in support of appropriations for the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture's Environmental Quality Incentives 
Program (EQIP) and the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program 
(Program). The Program is funded through EQIP, the U.S. Bureau of 
Reclamation's Basinwide Program, and cost-sharing provided by the Basin 
States. I request that $12.4 million in EQIP funds be designated for 
the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program in FY 2022. I also 
request that adequate funds be appropriated for technical assistance 
and education activities directed to Program participants.
    Congress authorized the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control 
Program in the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act of 1974. 
Congress amended the Act in 1984 to give new responsibilities to the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). While retaining the Department 
of the Interior as the lead coordinator for the Program, the amended 
Act recognized the importance of USDA efforts in meeting the objectives 
of the Program. Many of the most cost-effective salinity control 
projects to date have occurred since implementation of the USDA's 
authorization for the Program.
    With the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 
(FAIRA), Congress directed that the Program be implemented as a 
component of EQIP. However, until 2004, the Program was not funded at 
an adequate level to protect the Basin State-adopted and Environmental 
Protection Agency approved water quality standards for salinity in the 
Colorado River. Appropriations for EQIP prior to 2004 were insufficient 
to adequately control salinity impacts from water delivered to the 
downstream states and Mexico.
    EQIP subsumed the salinity control program without giving adequate 
recognition to the responsibilities of the USDA to implement salinity 
control measures per Section 202 (c) of the Colorado River Basin 
Salinity Control Act. The EQIP evaluation and project ranking criteria 
targeted small watershed improvements and did not recognize that water 
users hundreds of miles downstream are significant beneficiaries of the 
salinity control program. Proposals for EQIP funding were ranked in the 
states of Utah, Wyoming and Colorado under the direction of the 
respective State Conservationists without consideration of those 
downstream, particularly out-of-state, benefits.
    Following recommendations of the Basin States to address the 
funding problem, the USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service 
(NRCS) designated the Colorado River Basin an ``area of special 
interest'' and earmarked funds for the Program. The NRCS concluded that 
the salinity control program is different from the small watershed 
approach of EQIP. The watershed for the Program stretches more than 
1400 miles from the headwaters of the river through the salt-laden 
soils of the entire basin to the river's termination at the Gulf of 
California in Mexico. NRCS is to be commended for its efforts to comply 
with the USDA's responsibilities under the Colorado River Basin 
Salinity Control Act, as amended.
    With the enactment of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act in 
2002, an opportunity to adequately fund the salinity control program 
now exists. The NRCS State Conservationists for Utah, Wyoming, and 
Colorado now prepare a three-year funding plan for the salinity efforts 
under EQIP. I support this plan, including the request for $12.4 
million annually. State and local cost-sharing will be triggered by and 
indexed to the federal appropriation. The Agricultural Act of 2014 
continued the authorities for the USDA's salinity control activities in 
the Colorado River Basin.
    USDA salinity control projects have proven to be a cost-effective 
component of the salinity control program. The Basin states provide 
cost-sharing for the salinity control efforts. The agricultural 
producers in the Upper Basin are willing to cost-share their portion 
and are awaiting funding for their applications to be considered.
    Bureau of Reclamation studies show that quantified damages from 
Colorado River salinity to United States water users are about 
$354,000,000 per year, with these damages rising to $671,000,000 per 
year by 2040 if the Program was discontinued. Continued funding of USDA 
salinity control projects is important to protect the quality of 
Colorado River Basin water delivered to the Lower Basin States and 
Mexico. Also, irrigated agriculture in the Upper Basin realizes local 
benefits of improved irrigation practices.
    I urge the Congress to designate $12.4 million in EQIP funds for 
the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program in FY 2022. Also, I 
fully support testimony by the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control 
Forum's Executive Director, Don Barnett, in request of this 
appropriation.

    [This statement was submitted by Rolf Schmidt-Petersen, Director, 
New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission.]
                                 ______
                                 
  Prepared Statement of Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program
    The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 
(Metropolitan) encourages the Subcommittee's support for fiscal year 
2022 federal funding of $12.4 million in financial assistance from the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Environmental Quality 
Incentives Program (EQIP) for the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control 
Program (Salinity Control Program) to prevent further degradation of 
Colorado River water quality and increased economic damages.
    The salt concentration in the Colorado River causes an estimated 
$354 million in quantifiable damages to water users each year. While 
this figure is significant, had it not been for the efforts of the 
Salinity Control Program, damages would be much higher. Salinity 
Control Program actions have reduced the salinity of Colorado River 
water at key locations over 90 milligrams per liter (mg/L) from what 
they would have been without the actions. Modeling by the U.S. Bureau 
of Reclamation (Reclamation) indicates that quantifiable damages will 
rise to approximately $671 million per year by the year 2040 without 
continuation of the program.
    Metropolitan is the regional water supplier for most of urban 
Southern California, providing supplemental water to retail agencies 
that serve approximately 19 million people. Water imported via the 
Colorado River Aqueduct has the highest level of salinity of all of 
Metropolitan's sources of supply, averaging around 630 mg/L since 1976. 
This salinity level causes economic damages to all sectors. For 
example, high salinity has the following impacts:

  --It reduces the useful life of water heaters, faucets, garbage 
        disposals, clothes washers, and dishwashers, and increases use 
        of water softeners in the household sector;

  --It increases the cost of cooling operations, the need for and cost 
        of water softening, and decreases equipment service life in the 
        commercial sector;

  --It increases water use, the cost of water treatment, and sewer fees 
        in the industrial sector;

  --It decreases the life of treatment facilities and pipelines in the 
        utility sector;

  --It increases the cost of desalination and brine disposal for 
        recycled water in the municipal sector;

  --It reduces the yield of salt sensitive crops and increases water 
        use for leaching in the agricultural sector;

  --It increases desalination and brine disposal costs due to 
        accumulation of salts in groundwater basins, and reduces 
        opportunities for water recycling due to groundwater quality 
        deterioration;

  --It reduces the ability to replenish groundwater in basins with 
        relatively low salinity standards;

  --It reduces the ability to reclaim and reuse water due to high 
        salinities in the water delivered to water treatment and 
        reclamation facilities; and

  --It makes it more difficult to meet wastewater discharge 
        requirements to comply with National Pollutant Discharge 
        Elimination System permit terms and conditions.

    There has been concern over salinity levels in the Colorado River 
for many years. To address the concern, the International Boundary and 
Water Commission signed Minute No. 242, Permanent and Definitive 
Solution to the International Problem of the Salinity of the Colorado 
River in 1973, and the President signed the Colorado River Basin 
Salinity Control Act of 1974 (Act) into law. Title I of the Act deals 
with the U.S. commitment to the quality of waters being delivered to 
Mexico. Title II of the Act deals with improving the quality of the 
water delivered to users in the United States. This testimony deals 
specifically with Title II efforts. To further foster interstate 
cooperation and coordinate the Colorado River Basin states' efforts on 
salinity control, the seven Basin states formed the Colorado River 
Basin Salinity Control Forum.
    The Forum is charged with reviewing the Colorado River's water 
quality standards for salinity every three years. In so doing, it 
adopts a Plan of Implementation consistent with these standards. The 
level of appropriation requested in this testimony is in keeping with 
the adopted Plan of Implementation, which is to be implemented by 
Reclamation, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and the 
U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
    In implementing the Act, Congress recognized that most of the salt 
load in the Colorado River originates from federally owned lands and 
that the majority of land within the Colorado River Basin is federally 
owned and administered. The salts in the Colorado River system 
arenaturally-occurring and pervasive, mostly resulting from saline 
sediments in the Basin that were deposited in prehistoric marine 
environments. They are easily eroded, dissolved, and transported into 
the river system, and enter the River through both natural and 
anthropogenic processes.
    The Salinity Control Program reduces salinity by preventing salts 
from dissolving and mixing with the River's flow. Irrigation 
improvements (sprinklers, gated pipe, lined ditches) and vegetation 
management reduce the amount of salt transported to the Colorado River. 
Point sources such as saline springs are also controlled.
    The Salinity Control Program benefits the Lower Basin water users, 
hundreds of miles downstream from salt sources in the Upper Basin, 
through reduced salinity of Colorado River water. The Salinity Control 
Program, as set forth in the Act, also benefits the Upper Colorado 
River Basin water users through more efficient water management and 
increased crop production, and benefits local economies through 
construction contracts and environmental enhancements.
    In enacting the Act, Congress directed that the Salinity Control 
Program be implemented in the most cost-effective way. The Program is 
currently funded under EQIP through NRCS and under Reclamation's 
Basinwide Program. With the passage of the Agricultural Act of 2014, 
USDA's authority for implementing salinity control activities in the 
Colorado River Basin was continued. Each year the NRCS State 
Conservationists for Colorado, Utah and Wyoming prepare a three-year 
funding plan for the salinity control efforts under EQIP.
    EQIP is used to improve on-farm irrigation efficiencies which in 
turn reduce leaching of salts to the Colorado River. Salinity control 
projects are selected in a competitive process to ensure cost-
effectiveness. Local producers submit applications under EQIP in 
Colorado, Utah and Wyoming and offer to cost share in the acquisition 
of new irrigation equipment. Appropriated federal dollars will be 
augmented by state cost sharing of 30 percent with an additional 25 
percent provided by the agricultural producers with whom the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture contracts for implementation of salinity 
control measures. The mix of funding under EQIP, cost share from the 
Basin States, and efforts and cost share brought forward by local 
producers has created a remarkable and successful partnership.
    Over years, the Salinity Control Program has proven to be a cost-
effective approach to managing salinity in the Colorado River. 
Continued federal funding of this important program is essential. 
Metropolitan urges the Subcommittee to support funding for fiscal year 
2020 of $12.4 million from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's 
Environmental Quality Incentives Program for the Colorado River Basin 
Salinity Control Program. Additionally, there is a need for sufficient 
technical assistance funding to adequately implement the Salinity 
Control Program.

    [This statement was submitted by Jeffrey Kightlinger, General 
Manager, The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.]
                                 ______
                                 
        Prepared Statement of Colorado River Board of California
    This testimony is in support of Fiscal Year 2022 funding for the 
Department of Agriculture (USDA) associated with those activities that 
assist in the implementation of Title II of the Colorado River Basin 
Salinity Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-320), as amended. This 
long-standing and cost-effective salinity control program in the 
Colorado River Basin is being carried out pursuant to the Colorado 
River Basin Salinity Control Act and the Clean Water Act (Public Law 
92-500). Congress authorized the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control 
Program (Program) in 1974 to offset increased damages caused by 
continued development and use of the waters of the Colorado River. The 
USDA portion of the Program, as authorized by Congress and funded and 
administered by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) under 
the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), is an essential 
part of the overall effort. A funding level of at least $12.4 million 
in EQIP Financial Assistance (FA) annually is required to prevent 
further degradation of the quality of the Colorado River and increased 
downstream environmental and economic damages.
    The Colorado River Board of California is the state agency charged 
with protecting California's interests and rights in the water and 
power resources of the Colorado River system. In this capacity, 
California participates along with the other six Colorado River Basin 
states in the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum (Forum), the 
interstate organization responsible for coordinating the Basin States' 
salinity control efforts. In close cooperation with the U. S. 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and pursuant to requirements of 
the Clean Water Act, the Forum is charged with reviewing the Colorado 
River's water quality standards every three years. The Forum adopts a 
Plan of Implementation consistent with these water quality standards. 
The level of appropriation being supported in this testimony is 
consistent with the Forum's 2020 Plan of Implementation. The Forum's 
2020 Plan of Implementation can be found on this website:

    https://coloradoriversalinity.org/docs/2020%20REVIEW%20-
20Final%20w%20
appendices.pdf.

    If adequate funds are not appropriated, significant damages 
associated with increasing salinity concentrations of Colorado River 
water would become more widespread in the United States and Mexico.
    The Program benefits both the Upper Basin water users through more 
efficient water management and Lower Basin water users through reduced 
salinity concentration of Colorado River water. The salinity of 
Colorado River waters increases from about 50 mg/L at its headwaters to 
more than 700 mg/L in the Lower Basin. There are very significant 
economic damages caused downstream by high salt levels in the water. 
There are also local benefits in the Upper Colorado River Basin from 
the Program in the form of soil and environmental benefits, improved 
agricultural production, improved water efficiencies, lower fertilizer 
and labor costs, and water distribution and infrastructure 
improvements. Local producers submit cost-effective applications under 
EQIP in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming and offer to cost-share in the 
acquisition of new irrigation equipment. The mix of funding under EQIP, 
cost-share from the Basin States and efforts and cost-share brought 
forward by local producers has created a most remarkable and successful 
partnership..
    At the urging of the states and directives from Congress, NRCS 
recognized that this Program is different than small watershed 
enhancement efforts common to EQIP. In the case of Colorado River 
salinity control efforts, the watershed to be considered stretches more 
than 1,400 miles from the Colorado River's headwater in the Rocky 
Mountains to the Colorado River's terminus in the Gulf of California in 
Mexico. Each year the NRCS State Conservationists in Colorado, Utah and 
Wyoming prepare a three-year funding plan for the salinity control 
efforts under EQIP. The Colorado River Board of California supports 
this funding plan which recognizes the need for $12.4 million in EQIP 
Financial Assistance (FA) allocations in FY 2022. Additionally, there 
is still a need for sufficient Technical Assistance (TA) dollars to 
adequately implement the Program.
    It has been over forty-five years since the passage of the Colorado 
River Basin Salinity Control Act and much has been learned about the 
impact of salts in the Colorado River system. Currently, the salinity 
concentration of Colorado River water causes about $354 million in 
quantifiable damages in the United States annually. Economic and 
hydrologic modeling by Reclamation indicates that the quantifiable 
damages could rise to nearly $671 million by the year 2040 without the 
continuation of the Program. For example, damages can be incurred 
related to the following activities:

  --A reduction in the ability and increased costs to re-claim and 
        reuse water due to high salinities in the water delivered to 
        water treatment and reclamation facilities;

  --A reduction in the yield of salt sensitive crops and increased 
        water use to meet the leaching requirements in the agricultural 
        sector;

  --Increases in the volumes of imported water required;

  --Increased costs of desalination and brine disposal for recycling 
        water in the municipal and industrial sectors;

  --A reduction in the useful life of galvanized water pipe systems, 
        water heaters, faucets, garbage disposals, clothes washers, and 
        dishwashers, and increased use of bottled water and water 
        softeners in the household sector;

  --An increase in the cost of cooling operations and the cost of water 
        softening, and a decrease in equipment service life in the 
        commercial sectors;

  --An increase in the use of water and the cost of water treatment, 
        and an increase in sewer fees in the industrial sectors;

  --A decrease in the life of treatment facilities and pipelines in the 
        utility sectors;

  --Difficulty in meeting wastewater discharge requirements to comply 
        with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit 
        terms and conditions; and

  --An increase in desalination and brine disposal costs due to 
        accumulation of salts in groundwater basins.

    The Colorado River is, and will continue to be, a major and vital 
water resource to the nearly 20 million residents and 860,000 acres of 
irrigated agriculture within southern California, including municipal, 
industrial, and agricultural water users in Imperial, Los Angeles, 
Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura Counties. The 
protection and improvement of Colorado River water quality through the 
continuation and expansion of an effective salinity control program 
avoids additional economic and environmental damages to Mexico, 
California and the other states that rely on Colorado River water 
resources.
    Thank you for your consideration of this testimony.

    [This statement was submitted by Christopher S. Harris, Executive 
Director, Colorado River Board of California.]
                                 ______
                                 
                 Prepared Statement of Edesia Nutrition
    Edesia appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony to the U.S. 
Senate Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural 
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies. Since 
2010, Edesia has worked in partnership with the U.S. government to 
promote life-saving interventions for beneficiaries and greater global 
stability and national security for Americans by supplying evidence-
based nutritional Ready-to-Use Foods (RUTFs and RUSFs) to vulnerable 
children worldwide. We request that the Subcommittee fund Title II Food 
for Peace Grants (Food for Peace) at a level of $2 billion, and the 
McGovern-Dole Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program (McGovern-
Dole) at a level of $265 million. Food for Peace is administered by the 
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). McGovern-Dole is 
administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Funds for 
these programs support the critical work of the private and non-profit 
sector alike to further America's mission of peace and security aboard. 
As the United States faces unprecedented challenges brought on by the 
Coronavirus pandemic, including food supply chain and market 
disruption, it is imperative that these accounts are fully supported by 
Congress to help the most vulnerable populations in the world. 
According to the most recent Food Security and Nutrition in the World 
Report, an additional 132 million people around the world are estimated 
to have become chronically hungry/food insecure as a result of the 
COVID-19 (a doubling of pre-pandemic figures).
    While there is more than enough food produced in the world to feed 
everyone, there are still about 690 million people who go to bed hungry 
every night. Smallholder farmers, herders, and fishermen produce about 
70 percent of the global food supply, but they are the most vulnerable 
to food insecurity. Of the most in need, there are an estimated 14 
million children under the age of five who suffer from severe acute 
malnutrition, also known as severe wasting. Unfortunately, only 25 
percent of severely malnourished children have access to lifesaving 
treatment (RUTF). Continued financial support of food aid and 
humanitarian assistance leadership from the United States is needed now 
more than ever.
    While serving those in need globally, the current food assistance 
programs simultaneously provide opportunities for Edesia (in Rhode 
Island) as well as our suppliers from other states (including Iowa, 
Wisconsin, New York, Georgia, North Carolina). Edesia is a Rhode 
Island-based non-profit manufacturer of high quality, peanut-based 
ready-to-use therapeutic and supplementary foods (RUTF and RUSF) that 
are used to treat malnutrition in children around the globe. Through 
innovative manufacturing, we have reached over 14 million children in 
55 countries with our products over the last decade. This includes over 
50,000 metric tons of products made from U.S. agricultural goods for 
programs supported by the USAID and the USDA--equivalent to providing 
over 6 million acutely malnourished children with lifesaving 
treatments. We are proud of the part we play in helping to save the 
lives of children around the world--children who would not be reached 
without the generosity of the American people and the hard work of 
USAID, USDA, and the United States' Congress. Saving these lives also 
helps to build safer world--healthy children have the ability to grow 
and reach their full potential.
    As an American manufacturing company, we recognize the important 
part that U.S.-manufactured, in-kind food assistance plays around the 
world. Our partnerships with the U.S. government not only allow us to 
reach children in need, but also allow us to create economic growth at 
home. Since our opening in 2010, we have gone from a company of 20, to 
today having a team of over 100. In 2016, we expanded into a new 83,000 
square foot facility that can produce over 20,000 MT of nutrient-dense 
food aid products per year, made from high-quality, U.S.-sourced 
ingredients (e.g., peanuts, soy, dairy, sugar) that support U.S. 
farmers, U.S. transportation companies and the U.S. economy. Annually, 
we purchase over $30 million of high-quality, U.S. sourced raw 
materials. Our country's lifesaving assistance abroad allows us to 
create opportunities here at home.
    Edesia is an industry leader in innovation and has been a critical 
partner of the U.S. government to ensure that United States remains a 
leader in fighting world hunger. Our work supports the second UN 
Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) of ``Zero Hunger'' with a target of 
ending all forms of malnutrition by 2030. An emphasis on nutrition 
security and aid that is fit-for-purpose, such as specialty nutritional 
products for treating and preventing malnutrition, will be increasingly 
important in order to reach the SDG goals for 2030.
    Thank you for providing Edesia the opportunity to submit testimony. 
As funding for international food aid programs are reviewed by your 
Subcommittee, we hope you will use us as a resource; we are highly 
experienced in the area of specialized food aid, and as a non-profit 
business, we understand the economics while also remaining committed to 
the goals. Please do not hesitate to contact us if the Committee has 
any questions or would like further information.

    [This statement was submitted by Navyn Salem, Founder & CEO, Edesia 
Inc., and Maria Kasparian, Executive Director.]
                                 ______
                                 
         Prepared Statement of Entomological Society of America
    The Entomological Society of America (ESA) respectfully submits 
this statement for the official record in support of funding for 
agricultural research at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). ESA 
joins the research community and requests discretionary appropriations 
of at least $1.345 billion in fiscal year (FY) 2022 for USDA's National 
Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), including at least $600 
million for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI). The 
Society also supports a topline funding level of at least $1.566 
billion for the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) including robust 
funding for the ARS Crop Protection budget as well as funding to 
preserve valuable pest management research and invasive species 
programs in FY 2022. Additionally, ESA supports at least $1.1 billion 
for Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) to carry out 
their mission of safeguarding domestic soil from foreign and invasive 
threats.
    Advances in the agricultural sciences, including the field of 
entomology, help to address some of our most pressing societal needs 
related to food security and safety, as well as environmental and human 
health. Through improved understanding of insect pests and the 
development of biological approaches to pest management, entomology 
plays a critical role in the protection of crops from infestation and 
disease. In addition, entomology contributes to our knowledge of 
pollinator biology and the factors affecting pollinator health and 
populations, helping to ensure safe, reliable crop production that 
meets the needs of a growing world population.
    As NIFA's premier competitive research program, AFRI funds a wide 
range of agricultural research, education, and extension projects at 
universities and research institutions nationwide. To maximize its 
limited resources, AFRI supports projects that address key societal 
challenges and build foundational knowledge in high-priority areas of 
the food and agricultural sciences, such as food safety and food 
security. For example, researchers funded by AFRI are currently 
investigating whether certain viral pathogens are capable of 
manipulating honey bee behavior, which may increase the spread of that 
virus at the expense of honey bee health and mortality. Honey bees 
contribute $16 billion per year to food production in the United States 
alone.\1\ With many species of pollinators in rapid decline, research 
in this area is increasingly critical to maintain our agricultural 
economy.\2\ In addition to directly funding research, AFRI's Education 
and Literacy Initiative annually supports more than 2,000 trainees that 
will become the next generation workforce of agricultural and food 
scientists. ESA appreciates the Subcommittee's efforts to increase the 
AFRI budget since the program's establishment, and ESA requests at 
least $600 million for AFRI in FY 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3358326/
    \2\ AFRI Competitive Grant: ``Inter-strain Variation and Evolution 
of Resistance to Phytochemicals in the Bumblebee Trypanosome Parasite, 
Crithidia bombi.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition to AFRI, other NIFA grants support programs to study 
and implement evidence-based approaches to reduced-risk integrated pest 
management (IPM), which has implications for human health, the 
environment, and the economy. IPM uses science-based, environmentally 
conscious, comprehensive methods to take effective management action 
against pests, often resulting in lower costs and a more judicious use 
of pesticides. NIFA also supports the critical work of our extension 
communities, helping connect farmers, ranchers, homeowners, and others 
with educational resources and information to help everything from 
farms to urban parks flourish. ESA requests at least $1.345 billion in 
fiscal year (FY) 2022 for USDA's National Institute of Food and 
Agriculture (NIFA).
    ESA supports increased funding for research on pollinator 
populations. Insects that play a role in pollination play a vital role 
in our nation's agriculture industry; honey bees alone pollinate more 
than 90 crops in the U.S. and are essential for the production of an 
estimated one-third of all the food we eat or export. To ensure a 
healthy bee population, more research is needed to examine the diverse 
factors that endanger bee health. ESA appreciates the establishment of 
the Honeybee and Pollinator Research Coordinator position in the 2018 
Farm Bill. However, in addition to the funding increases requested 
within AFRI and ARS, ESA supports USDA's coordination of multi-agency 
activities through the Office of the Chief Scientist to further 
investigate pollinator health and develop implementation plans to 
prevent pollinator population decline.
    As USDA's intramural research agency, ARS funds research with a 
direct impact on our nation's agriculture enterprise, including in the 
areas of crop and livestock production and protection, human nutrition, 
food safety, and environmental stewardship. For example, ARS conducts 
research on ways to defend against invasive species, such as by 
conducting research to identify biocontrol agents which can be deployed 
to combat expanding populations of invasive pests like the Emerald Ash 
Borer (EAB), which is one of the most destructive and costliest 
invasive insects to ever spread across the U.S., responsible for an 
estimated cost of $12.7 billion so far in damage. This past year, ARS 
and APHIS jointly found that wasps from eastern Russian parasitize the 
eggs of EAB, thus killing the beetle, and this may lead to a new 
biocontrol to help deal with this terrible pest that is destroying Ash 
trees from the East Coast across the Midwest.\3\ Two other important 
programs in ARS are the Crop Protection and Crop Production programs. 
The ARS Crop Protection research program builds knowledge and develops 
approaches that are made available to crop producers, enabling better 
control of pest and disease outbreaks as they occur. The ARS Crop 
Production research program develops and approves safe and effective 
strategies for reducing crop loss and providing a dependable food 
supply. ESA supports at least $1.566 billion for ARS and maintaining 
strong funding levels for the Crop Protection and Crop Production 
accounts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S1049964418304973
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    USDA also plays a critical role in protecting domestic soils from 
foreign threats in the form of invasive species through APHIS. Invasive 
insect pests are some of the most costly and troublesome challenges 
faced by farmers, homeowners, and others, outcompeting native species, 
spreading disease, and transforming ecosystems. Increasing rates of 
trade, human movement, and climate change all put growing pressure on 
the need for increased inspections and screening. Currently only a tiny 
fraction of cargo coming in through ports and planes are screened. 
While data-driven methods for prioritizing shipment inspections based 
on statistical risk are improving success rates, the international 
capacity and cooperation for pre-border, border, and post-border 
inspection and response must be expanded and improved. Furthermore, 
remote sensing is applied to a range of problems, but it is virtually 
absent in insect pest management. However, it could play a significant 
role in increasing early detection and rapid response (EDRR) to 
invasive pests. APHIS would greatly benefit from a program dedicated to 
EDRR for emerging threats. ESA supports APHIS's mission of safeguarding 
the nation and requests that in addition to supporting APHIS at the 
level of $1.1 billion. This would include an additional $25 million on 
top of the $75 million authorized in the 2018 Farm Bill for a program 
focused on responding to emerging invasive threats via EDRR at a high 
level, rather than a threat-specific line item, giving APHIS the 
flexibility and discretion to respond as new threats emerge.
    ESA, headquartered in Annapolis, Maryland, is the largest 
organization in the world serving the professional and scientific needs 
of entomologists and individuals in related disciplines. Founded in 
1889, ESA is a non-partisan professional organization with nearly 7,000 
members affiliated with educational institutions, health agencies, 
private industry, and government. Members are researchers, teachers, 
extension service personnel, administrators, marketing representatives, 
research technicians, consultants, students, pest management 
professionals, and hobbyists.
    Thank you for the opportunity to offer the Entomological Society of 
America's support for USDA research programs. For more information 
about the Entomological Society of America, please see http://
www.entsoc.org/

    [This statement was submitted by Michelle S. Smith, BCE., 
President, Entomological Society of America.]
                                 ______
                                 
Prepared Statement of Federation of American Societies for Experimental 
                                Biology
    Federal investments in fundamental research have led to remarkable 
progress in the biological and biomedical sciences. Basic research was 
the groundwork for the speed--months instead of years--in the 
development of COVID-19 vaccines, and pre-clinical research, such as 
animal studies, has been essential to every step of achieving medical 
progress.
    Despite Congress' bipartisan support for investing in science, 
Federal funding for research has not kept pace, posing a threat to our 
nation's competitiveness. We face a real threat of losing our edge in 
industries such as biotechnology if we do not prioritize increasing 
investments in science and building a diverse workforce \1\ The U.S. 
spends less on research and development (R&D) than many countries. If 
the U.S. is to be prepared to respond to future threats, our scientific 
leadership must progress. According to Science Is Us, there is the 
added benefit of jobs. STEM supports 69 percent of U.S. gross domestic 
product, touches two out of three workers, and generates $2.3 trillion 
in tax revenue.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ NSF Science Indicators 2018
    \2\ STEM and the American Workforce. You've heard it before: STEM 
jobs--... by Science is US Medium
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Federal government should commit to robust, predictable, and 
sustained funding increases for science agencies.
             usda agriculture and food research initiative
    Our agricultural system faces unprecedented challenges, including 
global food and fuel demand, water availability, and training the 
agricultural workforce. The U.S. Department of Agriculture funds an 
interdisciplinary research portfolio that brings pioneering science to 
address complex problems through the Agriculture and Food Research 
Initiative (AFRI).
    AFRI funds agricultural and food sciences research at colleges, 
universities, and other institutions nationwide. Established by the 
Farm Bill in 2008, AFRI funding has resulted in numerous advancements, 
including new wheat cultivars and novel ways to combat invasive 
species.
    Despite AFRI's progress--and the need for scientifically informed 
solutions--the program is appropriated at about 60 percent of its 
authorization, leaving hundreds of innovative proposals unfunded. AFRI 
should be funded at its full $700 million authorization ($265 million 
above fiscal year 2021), to fulfill its mission as the leading 
competitive grants program for agricultural sciences.
    AFRI should be funded at its full $700 million authorization ($265 
million above fiscal year 2021), to fulfill its mission as the leading 
competitive grants program for agricultural sciences.
    FASEB fiscal year 2022 recommendation: at least $700 million for 
AFRI.

    [This statement was submitted by Ellen Kuo, Associate Director, 
Legislative Affairs, FASEB.]
                                 ______
                                 
              Prepared Statement of Greenwich Biosciences
    On behalf of Greenwich Biosciences, a subsidiary of GW 
Pharmaceuticals (part of Jazz Pharmaceuticals (GW)), we respectfully 
submit this statement regarding the FY 2022 budget request for the Food 
and Drug Administration (FDA) for inclusion in the Committee's official 
record. GW appreciates the Committee's support for FDA's ongoing 
regulatory oversight of cannabis and cannabis-derived substances, 
including encouraging high caliber research, review of product 
applications, and robust inspections and enforcement. We ask for a 
continuation of that support so FDA's work may continue.
      about gw and our cannabis pharmaceutical development program
    Since our founding in 1998, GW has been focused on unlocking the 
potential of cannabinoids as medicines to address serious medical 
conditions with limited treatment options. As a result of GW's long-
term involvement in cannabinoid research, we have a deep understanding 
of the promise that patients and their families see in cannabis-based 
medicines to treat intractable illnesses.
    GW is the first and only company to have brought a cannabis-derived 
pharmaceutical grade therapy through the drug review and approval 
process of the FDA. FDA approved GW's Epidiolex(r) (cannabidiol) oral 
solution in 2018 for the treatment of seizures associated with two rare 
diseases, Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome (LGS) and Dravet Syndrome (Dravet); 
in 2020, FDA also approved Epidiolex for the treatment of seizures 
associated with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC).
    GW's research with cannabis-derived medicines goes far beyond FDA's 
approval of Epidiolex. GW also developed nabiximols (branded name 
Sativex(r) outside the United States), a botanical drug product 
containing a complex mixture of THC- and CBD-rich extracts as well as 
other plant constituents including related cannabinoid and non-
cannabinoid plant components. Nabiximols is licensed and approved for 
marketing in Canada, the United Kingdom, parts of the European Union, 
and more than 25 other countries for the treatment of spasticity due to 
multiple sclerosis. We are currently conducting a drug development 
program with nabiximols in the United States and intend to seek FDA 
approval for the same indication.
    GW supports a comprehensive approach to the regulation of cannabis-
derived products that supports development of new FDA-approved 
medicines from the cannabis plant while, in parallel, protecting 
consumers from unsafe products. To that end, we support an adequately 
funded FDA to accomplish these goals and Congressional oversight of 
these regulatory activities. We appreciate the Committee's support in 
the 2021 appropriations cycle and urge a continuation of those efforts.
                          2021 appropriations
    With the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill,\1\ ``hemp'' (i.e. cannabis 
plants and plant material with no more than 0.3% THC) and hemp 
derivatives are no longer controlled substances. In establishing a 
pathway for the cultivation of hemp, as a significant agricultural 
commodity, Congress also recognized the importance of preserving FDA's 
authority to protect consumers and patients from dangerous products and 
unproven therapies containing cannabis-derived substances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018, H.R. 2; Pub. L. 115-
534.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Last year, the Committee examined the agency's resources to address 
cannabis-derived substances in FDA-regulated products and prepared a 
Joint Explanatory Statement in Division A for the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2021. GW thanks the Committee for the appropriation 
to FDA and this Report Language. Significant work has been done; more, 
however, remains.
           fda's recent work with cannabis-derived substances
    Even with the many demands COVID-19 has placed on the agency, FDA 
has been able to pursue its agenda regarding cannabis and cannabis-
derived substances and implement much of what the Committee directed 
the agency to do. Over the last year, FDA has engaged in significant 
policy development and enforcement,\2\ including:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/what-you-need-
know-and-what-were-working-find-out-about-products-containing-cannabis-
or-cannabis.

  --Reopened a docket indefinitely to receive scientific data and 
        information about products containing cannabis or cannabis-
        derived compounds.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ https://www.regulations.gov/document/FDA-2019-N-1482-4341.

  --Approved Epidiolex (cannabidiol) [CBD] oral solution for the 
        treatment of seizures associated with TSC in patients one year 
        of age and older.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-
approves-new-indication-drug-containing-active-ingredient-derived-
cannabis-treat-seizures-rare.

  --Conducted a workshop on policy options for CBD safety 
        surveillance.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ https://healthpolicy.duke.edu/events/exploring-policy-options-
establishing-cannabidiol-safety-surveillance.

  --Issued numerous warning letters to companies making medical 
        claims.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ https://www.fda.gov/news-events/public-health-focus/warning-
letters-and-test-results-cannabidiol-related-products.

  --Issued draft guidance on the conduct of cannabis-related clinical 
        research.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ https://www.fda.gov/news-events/fda-brief/fda-brief-fda-issues-
draft-guidance-encourage-cannabis-related-clinical-research.

  --Updated the public on concerns about potential harm from CBD 
        products, including potential liver injury, interactions with 
        other drugs and male reproductive toxicity, as well as side 
        effects such as drowsiness.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/what-you-need-
know-and-what-were-working-find-out-about-products-containing-cannabis-
or-cannabis.

  --Conducted a scientific conference regarding sex and gender 
        differences in use and responses to CBD and other 
        cannabinoids.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ https://www.fda.gov/science-research/womens-health-research/
scientific-conference-cbd-and-other-cannabinoids-sex-and-gender-
differences-use-and-responses.

  --Analyzed the purity and content of products in the marketplace and 
        reported those findings to Congress, with more surveying 
        underway.
                    continued support for fda's work
    Amidst the many serious demands upon FDA's resources, the agency 
has still been able to work diligently to further advance science-based 
policies around cannabis-derived substances in regulated products. 
However, much more work remains and we again urge inclusion of language 
regarding cannabis-derived substances in the report accompanying FDA 
appropriations. GW would be happy to work with the Committee and its 
members on specific report language. Among the reasons for continued 
support for FDA's work:

  --Cannabis-Derived Substances Can Pose Significant Health 
        Consequences. Products containing cannabis-derived substances 
        are not approved by FDA and are often promoted to vulnerable 
        populations without a prescription or healthcare professional 
        oversight and with outlandish and unproven therapeutic claims. 
        This poses potential dangers to patient and consumer health 
        because some cannabis derivatives are known to interact with a 
        variety of commonly-used prescription drugs and cause liver 
        complications. The effects of other cannabis compounds on 
        vulnerable populations, including children and pregnant and 
        lactating women, are not fully understood and merit further 
        regulatory consideration. Cannabis-derived products may also 
        contain significant levels of intoxicating compounds such as 
        THC as well as harmful adulterants such as heavy metals, 
        pesticides, and mold.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ See FDA, https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/what-
you-need-know-and-what-were-working-find-out-about-products-containing-
cannabis-or-cannabis (many products did not contain the CBD they 
claimed; FDA is investigating reports of CBD products containing unsafe 
levels of contaminants such as pesticides, heavy metals, and THC); 
Bonn-Miller M.O., et al., Labeling Accuracy of Cannabidiol Extracts 
Sold Online, JAMA. 2017. Vol 318, No. 17 (CBD content of nearly 70 
percent of artisanal products tested was mislabeled).

  --Deceptive Practices Persist. FDA has sent warning letters to over 
        50 marketers of cannabinoid products that were making unproven 
        and false medical claims, including COVID-19 treatment claims. 
        Deceptive marketing of unproven treatments may keep some 
        patients from accessing appropriate, recognized therapies to 
        treat serious or fatal diseases.\11\ Yet, marketing of products 
        bearing false and misleading claims has continued to 
        proliferate. More recently, CBD marketers have been cited for 
        failure to comply with good manufacturing practices and that 
        there are inadequate assurances that the products have the 
        identity, strength, quality, and purity they purport to 
        possess.\12\ Moreover, in the absence of other additional 
        enforcement by FDA, many marketers who have received warning 
        letters continue to market their unlawful cannabis-derived 
        products to vulnerable patients and consumers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ https://www.fda.gov/news-events/public-health-focus/warning-
letters-and-test-results-cannabidiol-related-products.
    \12\ See, e.g., Warning Letter to Honest Globe, Inc., https://
www.fda.gov/inspections-compliance-enforcement-and-criminal-
investigations/warning-letters/honest-globe-inc-597177-03152021.

  --Bringing More Cannabis-Based Therapies Through the FDA Approval 
        Process. Over 4 million Americans are estimated to be using 
        cannabis to treat medical conditions.\13\ Yet, FDA has approved 
        cannabis-derived compounds for only three medical conditions: 
        some rare forms of epilepsy; chemotherapy-induced nausea; and 
        anorexia associated with weight loss in AIDS patients. To 
        address the ongoing widespread and uncontrolled experimentation 
        on Americans, it is in the interest of public health to have 
        more FDA-approved cannabis-derived drugs, supported by high 
        quality clinical research, so that patients seeking cannabis-
        derived medicines do not have to turn to unproven therapies 
        that have bypassed the FDA process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ https://www.mpp.org/issues/medical-marijuana/state-by-state-
medical-marijuana-laws/medical-marijuana-patient-numbers/(as of 
December 2020).

  --Dietary Supplements and Foods Containing Cannabis Derivatives Must 
        Be Differentiated from FDA-Approved Drugs to Preserve Research 
        and Innovation. Unlike foods and dietary supplements, FDA-
        approved drugs are studied for efficacy and safety in intended 
        patient populations and are manufactured to exacting standards. 
        If there is no distinction made between approved drugs and 
        unapproved dietary supplements and foods, there is, similarly, 
        no incentive to undertake costly clinical research to develop 
        robust data on the therapeutic benefits of cannabis. Such 
        differentiation should include limits in finished products on 
        total concentration of cannabinoid content and in recommended 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        daily servings.

  --Addressing Potential Emerging Risks to Public Health. The rise in 
        delta-8-THC use to circumvent controlled substances regulation 
        is another reason for continued support for FDA. While 
        consideration of Drug Enforcement Administration authority over 
        new compounds such as delta-8-THC is ongoing, there is no 
        ambiguity as to FDA's authority. Under the federal Food, Drug 
        and Cosmetic Act, FDA may regulate novel, cannabis-derived 
        substances that may be added to a food or dietary supplement, 
        and has authority over any substance that makes therapeutic 
        claims.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ M. Zhang, High Anxiety Over Federal Weed Loophole, Politico 
(March 27, 2021), https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/27/rise-of-
delta-8-thc-478215.

                                *  *  *
    GW thanks the Committee for its continuing attention to cannabis 
issues and its support for FDA and the agency's ongoing work. While the 
views on cannabis are complex and varied, public health and scientific 
evidence are, and should remain, the cornerstone for patient and 
consumer safety, drug efficacy, and payment.

    [This statement was submitted by Greenwich Biosciences, a 
subsidiary of GW Pharmaceuticals.]
                                 ______
                                 
   Prepared Statement of Humane Society Legislative Fund and Humane 
                      Society of the United States
  office of the secretary/commodity credit corporation/cage-free hen 
                           housing conversion
    We request report language: ``The committee recognizes that the 
cage-free market is rapidly expanding due to demand by consumers and 
food corporations. In addition, a growing number of state laws are 
requiring farmers to convert to cage-free facilities. The committee 
strongly encourages the Secretary to review this information and 
consider helping egg farmers meet these economic opportunities by 
providing financial assistance through the Commodity Credit Corporation 
for the conversion to cage-free housing.'' Due to an increase in 
consumer awareness surrounding animal welfare and food safety concerns 
in our agricultural systems, more than 200 companies are demanding a 
100% cage-free egg supply including McDonald's, Walmart, Kroger, 
Denny's, and IHOP. Eight states have passed laws banning cages for egg 
laying hens (with at least five others considering bills). Six of the 
states with enacted bans require that eggs sold within their state 
borders are cage-free. Producers, however, have been hesitant to make 
the switch to cage-free systems because of the initial costs to convert 
to these systems. While USDA data shows that 29.2% of the U.S. egg 
flock is now cage-free (95.7 million hens), federal support on the 
upfront conversion costs would help other producers to make the shift, 
bolstering animal welfare and helping the egg industry take advantage 
of the expanding cage-free market.
                          fsis/horse slaughter
    We request the same bill language barring USDA from expenditure of 
funds for horse slaughter inspections as was included in the FY21 
omnibus. This provision is vital to prevent renewed horse slaughter 
activity in this country and wasting tax dollars on a practice that 80% 
of the American public opposes as inherently cruel and posing serious 
public health risks.
               aphis/animal welfare act (awa) enforcement
    We request language to address AWA enforcement. Bill language: 
``The Secretary shall ensure that each violation or failure to comply 
with the Act identified by a USDA inspector under the Animal Welfare 
Act, 7 U.S.C. Sections 2131-2159, is documented on an inspection 
report. The Secretary shall also ensure that ``teachable moments'' are 
never used.'' Report: ``The Committee is concerned about APHIS's Animal 
Care program and the steep decline in enforcement related to violations 
of the Animal Welfare Act. The Committee urges the agency to reform its 
current licensing and enforcement scheme. While the agency took steps 
towards this goal last year with its licensing and veterinary care rule 
change, and more recently with the withdrawal of the May 2018 Tech Note 
that allowed facilities to avoid citations by self-reporting, we 
believe more progress can be made. This includes, but is not limited 
to, the following: ensure consistent, thorough, unannounced inspections 
on a regular basis; act swiftly when facilities fail to comply with the 
Act's minimal requirements; ensure each failure to allow access for 
inspection and each violation or failure to comply with animal welfare 
standards is documented on an inspection report, and consider assessing 
penalties in each such case; ensure that there is no use of ``teachable 
moments'' or any similar program that obscures findings during 
inspections; and, require that inspection reports which identify 
violations or failures of compliance be shared with relevant local, 
state, and federal agencies. The Committee is also concerned about the 
lack of enforcement of online dog dealers, which has allowed many 
online operations to continue selling puppies without the necessary 
USDA licensing pursuant to Animal Welfare Act, 7 U.S.C. Sections 2131-
2159. We urge the Secretary of Agriculture to make a priority of the 
enforcement of the 2013 rule which requires that dealers who are 
selling animals sight-unseen to consumers must have the necessary 
license to do so. The Committee also urges the Secretary of Agriculture 
to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. Attorney 
General to encourage greater collaboration on Animal Welfare Act 
enforcement and ensure that the Department of Justice has access to 
evidence needed to initiate cases.''
              aphis/horse protection act (hpa) enforcement
    We request $3,000,000 in the bill and language to strengthen HPA 
enforcement. Bill: ``The Secretary shall reinstate and publish the 
final rule, ``Horse Protection; Licensing of Designated Qualified 
Persons and Other Amendments'' [Docket No. APHIS-2011-0009], as it was 
finalized and displayed in advance public notice in the Federal 
Register on January 19, 2017, with effective dates adjusted to reflect 
the delay in implementation.'' Report: ``The Committee provides 
$3,000,000 for enforcement of the Horse Protection Act of 1970, as 
amended (15 U.S.C. 1831), and reminds the Secretary that Congress 
granted the agency primary responsibility to enforce this law.''
      aphis/protecting animals with shelter (paws) implementation
    We request $3,000,000 in the bill for PAWS grants and report 
language: ``The Committee directs the Secretary of Agriculture to 
continue coordinating with the Departments of Justice, Housing and 
Urban Development, and Health and Human Services to efficiently 
implement the grant program for providing emergency and transitional 
shelter options for domestic violence survivors with companion 
animals.''
                   afri/alternative protein research
    We request report language to support alternative protein research 
that will spur innovation and stimulate economic growth, creating jobs 
including in rural communities, while helping meet growing consumer 
demand and protecting animals and the environment: Alternative Protein 
Research. -The Committee strongly supports the Agriculture and Food 
Research Initiative (AFRI). The Committee encourages USDA to support 
research focused on mimicking the characteristics of animal meat using 
plants, animal cell cultivation, or fermentation (together, 
``alternative proteins'') for competitive awards in the AFRI program. 
The Committee further directs USDA to spend $50 million to support 
alternative protein research (encompassing all stages of the production 
process, including optimizing ingredient processing techniques and 
developing new manufacturing methods) and to encourage applications 
from 1890 Institutions. This research should be done in collaboration 
with other relevant programs, including but not limited to the 
Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and the National Science Foundation 
(NSF).
                    fsis/slaughter plant line speed
    We request bill and report language to address extreme line speeds 
that jeopardize worker safety, animal welfare, and food safety. Bill: 
``None of the funds made available to the Department of Agriculture 
shall be used to develop, propose, finalize, issue, approve, implement, 
maintain, or renew any policy, regulation, directive, constituent 
update, program, waiver, or any other agency action that would allow 
any official establishment, defined in 9 C.F.R. Sec. 301.2 or 9 C.F.R. 
Sec. 381.1, to operate without, or in excess of, the maximum line 
speeds set out at 9 C.F.R. Sec. 381.69(a); 9 C.F.R. Sec. 381.69(b); 9 
C.F.R. Sec. 310.1(b)(2); or 9 C.F.R. Sec. 310.1(b)(3)(ii), Tables 1-4; 
or that would allow any official establishment to reduce or suspend the 
staffing standards set out at 9 C.F.R. Sec. 381.76; 9 C.F.R. 
Sec. 310.1(b)(2); or 9 C.F.R. Sec. 310.1(b)(3)(ii), Tables 1-4; or that 
would otherwise allow any official establishment to increase line 
speeds or reduce inspection staffing standards.'' Report: ``The 
committee is concerned about the harmful impacts of certain USDA-FSIS 
policies that have allowed slaughter and meatpacking establishments, as 
defined in 9 C.F.R. Sec. 301.2 or 9 C.F.R. Sec. 381.1, to operate 
without, or in excess of, the maximum line speed limits at 9 C.F.R. 
Sec. 381.69(a); 9 C.F.R. Sec. 381.69(b); 9 C.F.R. Sec. 310.1(b)(2); or 
9 C.F.R. Sec. 310.1(b)(3)(ii), Tables 1-4; or to reduce the inspection 
staffing standards at 9 C.F.R. Sec. 381.76; 9 C.F.R. Sec. 310.1(b)(2); 
or 9 C.F.R. Sec. 310.1(b)(3)(ii), Tables 1-4. These policies have been 
linked with elevated dangers for slaughterhouse workers, who have been 
disproportionately impacted by the spread of COVID-19 in their 
workplaces, as well as increased risk of contamination of meat with E. 
coli, Salmonella, and other pathogenic bacteria. Also, these policies 
increase the possibility of missed pathology (such as cancer), systemic 
infections (such as pneumonia) or the use of drugs that violate the 
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act or create antimicrobial resistant 
bacteria. The policies also run the risk of exacerbating climate change 
through increased greenhouse gas emissions associated with faster line 
speeds. FSIS is directed to reevaluate and reverse these policies. No 
funds should be used to develop, propose, finalize, issue, implement, 
maintain, or renew any policy, regulation, directive, constituent 
update, program, waiver, or any other agency action that allows any 
official establishment to operate without, or in excess of, maximum 
line speed limits, or to reduce inspection staffing standards.''
        fsis/humane methods of slaughter act (hmsa) enforcement
    We request language to strengthen HMSA enforcement. Bill: ``No 
fewer than 165 full-time equivalent positions shall be employed during 
fiscal year 2022 for purposes dedicated solely to inspections and 
enforcement related to the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act. This number 
is in addition to the Humane Handling Enforcement Coordinator and 
District Veterinary Medical Specialist positions.'' Report: ``FSIS 
shall ensure that all inspection personnel conducting humane handling 
verification procedures receive robust initial training and periodic 
refresher training on the FSIS humane handling and slaughter 
regulations and directives. This includes handling of non-ambulatory 
disabled animals, as well as proper use of the Humane Activities 
Tracking System to ensure humane handling of animals as they arrive and 
are offloaded and handled in ante-mortem holding pens, suspect pens, 
chutes, stunning areas, and on the processing line. The Committee 
directs the agency to continue preparation and online publication of 
the Humane Handling Quarterly Reports, to include: (1) the number of 
humane handling verification procedures performed, (2) the number of 
administrative enforcement actions taken, (3) time spent on Humane 
Handling Activities Tracking System activities, and (4) comparisons of 
these measurements by plant size and FSIS district. The Committee 
recognizes that handling of birds at slaughter according to Good 
Commercial Practices reduces the occurrence of adulterated poultry 
products in the marketplace, as well as the suffering of birds at 
slaughter. The committee also is cognizant that current oversight of 
bird handling is inconsistent at USDA-inspected slaughter plants, with 
no enforcement records issued by USDA inspection personnel documenting 
compliance with GCP at more than one-third of inspected plants during 
the past three years. Therefore, the Committee directs FSIS to track 
the number of inspector hours spent on GCP verification activities 
using its existing Humane Activities Tracking System or other 
appropriate method.''
   ars/animal welfare for farm animals used in agricultural research
    We request language to ensure compliance with the Animal Welfare 
Act for animals used in research at ARS facilities. Bill: ``Hereafter, 
and notwithstanding any other provision of law, ARS facilities as 
described in the ''Memorandum of Understanding Between the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 
(APHIS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research 
Service (ARS) Concerning Laboratory Animal Welfare'' (16-6100-0103-MU 
Revision 16-1) shall be inspected by APHIS for compliance with the 
Animal Welfare Act and its regulations and standards.'' Report: ``The 
Committee directs ARS to ensure that each of its facilities housing 
animals is adhering to the Animal Welfare Act at all times. ARS shall 
submit quarterly reports that include all violations found by APHIS 
during that quarter as well as the specific actions that will be taken 
to prevent their recurrence. The Committee further directs APHIS to 
conduct inspections of all such ARS facilities and to post the 
resulting inspection reports on line in their entirety without 
redactions except signatures. The Committee continues to direct APHIS 
to transmit to the Committees all inspection reports involving ARS 
facilities, including pre-compliance inspections. These facilities 
involve federal funds over which this Committee has oversight 
responsibilities. APHIS is directed to include every violation its 
inspectors find and never to interfere with the Committee's oversight 
activities by using so-called ``teachable moments'' or other means of 
not fully reporting ARS facility violations.''
                    oig/animal fighting enforcement
    We request $1,000,000 in the bill for increased and dedicated 
enforcement of 7 U.S.C. Section 2156, and report language: ``The 
Committee is concerned about illegal animal fighting activity that 
subjects animals to cruel conditions and has the potential to spread 
illnesses such as virulent Newcastle disease and avian flu. The OIG is 
encouraged to increase its enforcement efforts in the states and 
territories and to pursue animal fighting cases even if related 
concerns, such as money laundering and illegal weapons, have not yet 
been determined to be at issue before an investigation is opened. The 
Committee is providing an increase of $1,000,000 for this purpose and 
encourages the OIG to spend at least that much on animal fighting 
enforcement. The Committee also encourages the OIG to audit and 
investigate USDA enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act, the Horse 
Protection Act, and the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act to help improve 
compliance with these important laws, and to prioritize completion of 
the audits on the Horse Protection Act, Animal Care Program Oversight 
of Dog Breeders, and APHIS Controls over Licensing of Animal 
Exhibitors.''
             nifa/national veterinary medical services act
    We request $10,000,000 for the Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment 
Program (P.L. 108-161).
         aphis/emergency preparedness and response/animal care
    We request $1,400,000 for Animal Care to assist in addressing 
animal issues in disasters.
   aphis/animal welfare act enforcement/class b random source dealers
    We request the same bill language as in FY21 barring expenditures 
for licensing Class B dealers who sell ``random source'' dogs and cats 
for use in research, teaching, or testing.

    [This statement was submitted by Mimi Brody, Director of Federal 
Affairs, Humane Society Legislative Fund.]
                                 ______
                                 
       Prepared Statement of Humane Society of the United States
    On behalf of the undersigned horse industry, veterinary, and animal 
welfare organizations, we submit the following testimony seeking 
funding of $3,000,000 and language for the USDA/APHIS Horse Protection 
Program for FY 2022. We appreciate that Congress provided $2,009,000 in 
FY 2021 for USDA to strengthen enforcement of the Horse Protection Act. 
An increase to $3,000,000 is urgently needed as we seek to fulfill the 
intent of the Horse Protection Act--to eliminate the cruel practice of 
soring--by allowing the USDA to further strengthen its enforcement 
capabilities for this law.
    In recent years, it has been reported that USDA officials have 
stated their view that Horse Industry Organizations (HIOs) have primary 
responsibility to enforce the HPA, not the Agency. We request the 
following report language: ``The Committee provides $3,000,000 for 
enforcement of the Horse Protection Act of 1970, as amended (15 U.S.C. 
1831), and reminds the Secretary that Congress granted the agency 
primary responsibility to enforce this law.''
    We also urge you to include the following bill language regarding 
the final rule (announced by USDA in January 2017) that received more 
than 100,000 public comments in support, including letters signed by 
182 Representatives and 42 Senators, to strengthen the HPA regulations 
that have undermined enforcement of this law for decades: ``The 
Secretary shall reinstate and publish the final rule, ``Horse 
Protection; Licensing of Designated Qualified Persons and Other 
Amendments'' [Docket No. APHIS-2011-0009], as it was finalized and 
displayed in advance public notice in the Federal Register on January 
19, 2017, with effective dates adjusted to reflect the delay in 
implementation.''
    In 1970, Congress passed the Horse Protection Act to end soring, 
the intentional infliction of pain on the hooves and legs of a horse to 
produce an exaggerated gait in the ``Big Lick'' segment of the 
Tennessee Walking Horse show industry. Caustic chemicals--such as 
mustard oil, diesel fuel, and kerosene--are painted on the horse's 
lower front legs. Then the legs are wrapped for days in plastic wrap 
and bandages to ``cook'' the chemicals deep into the flesh, making the 
horse's legs extremely painful and sensitive. When ridden, the horse is 
fitted with chains that slide up and down the sore legs, forcing the 
animal to produce an exaggerated, high-stepping gait in the show ring. 
Additional tactics include inserting foreign objects such as hard 
acrylic between a heavy stacked shoe and the horse's hoof; pressure 
shoeing--cutting a horse's hoof down to the sensitive live tissue to 
cause extreme pain every time the horse bears weight on the hoof; and 
applying painful chemicals such as salicylic acid to slough off scarred 
tissue or numbing agents, in an attempt to obscure evidence of soring.
    The Horse Protection Act authorizes the USDA to inspect horses, 
including the three specific breeds known to be involved in soring--
Tennessee Walking Horses, Racking Horses, and Spotted Saddle Horses--in 
transport to and at shows, exhibits, auctions and sales--for signs of 
soring, and to pursue penalties against violators. Unfortunately, since 
its inception, enforcement of the Act has been plagued by underfunding. 
As a result, the USDA has never been able to adequately enforce the 
Act, allowing this extreme and deliberate cruelty to persist on a 
widespread basis.
    To eliminate soring and meet the goals of the Act, USDA officials 
must be present at more shows. However, limited funds allowed USDA 
attendance at only approximately 5% of the 150 HPA events held in FY 
2020. Years ago, the Agency set up the industry-run system of certified 
HIO inspection programs, which are charged with inspecting horses for 
signs of soring at the majority of shows. These groups license 
examiners known as Designated Qualified Persons (DQPs) to conduct 
inspections. To perform this function, some of these organizations hire 
industry insiders who have an obvious stake in preserving the status 
quo. Statistics clearly show that when USDA inspectors are in 
attendance to oversee shows affiliated with these organizations, the 
numbers of noted violations are many times higher than at shows where 
industry inspectors alone are conducting the inspections. By all 
measures, the overall DQP program as a whole has been a failure--the 
only remedy is to abolish the conflicted industry-run inspection 
programs charged with self-regulation and have USDA oversee a 
legitimate inspection program.
    Many horse show industry, veterinary, and animal protection groups 
have called for an end to this flawed system of industry self-policing, 
and USDA's 2017 announced final rule would accomplish this along with 
other needed reforms to end soring. Unfortunately, these regulations 
were withdrawn. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and 
Medicine issued a report in January 2021, following a thorough study on 
methods of detecting soring, which criticized the industry self-
policing system and made recommendations consistent with the 2017 
regulations. The NASEM report called for greater use of technologies 
such as thermography, prohibited substance testing, blood testing, and 
video to assess facial expressions of pain, as well as urging that only 
veterinarians be allowed to inspect the horses, recommendations that 
all depend on adequate agency resources.
    USDA appeared to have attempted to step up its enforcement efforts 
some years ago, and had begun to work with the Department of Justice in 
prosecuting criminal cases as provided for under the Act. In 2011, a 
federal prosecutor sought the first-ever criminal indictments under the 
Act and as a result, a well-known, winning trainer in the Spotted 
Saddle Horse industry served a prison sentence of over one year. A 
former Walking Horse Trainers' Association Trainer of the Year and 
winner of the Tennessee Walking Horse World Grand Championship, Jackie 
McConnell, was indicted in 2012 on 52 counts (18 of them felony) of 
violating the Act and pleaded guilty to felony conspiracy to violate 
the Act. He was sentenced to three years of probation and a $75,000 
fine in federal court. In 2013, another Tennessee trainer, Larry 
Wheelon, and three of his employees were indicted on 19 counts of 
aggravated animal cruelty charges under state law in a case flowing 
from a USDA Office of Inspector General investigation. While Wheelon's 
case was dismissed on a technicality, evidence of soring in his barn 
was plentiful and horrifying.
    These were significant actions that should have had a deterrent 
effect, but there are many other violators who go undetected and many 
cases that go unprosecuted due to a lack of resources USDA needs to 
carry out its responsibilities under this Act as Congress and the 
public expect. In years past, Agency inspections were limited to 
physical observation and palpation by the inspector. Protocols for the 
use of new technologies, such as chemical analysis of prohibited 
foreign substances used by violators on the legs of horses (either to 
sore them, or to mask underlying soring and evade detection by 
inspectors) have been implemented, which can help inspectors identify 
violations more effectively. The results of USDA's testing for 
prohibited foreign substances are staggering: 46 of the 66 random 
samples (70%) taken by the USDA at the industry's pinnacle event--the 
2019 Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration--tested positive for 
illegal foreign substances including soring, masking, and numbing 
agents.
    Effective though this inspection protocol may be, due to budget 
constraints, USDA has been unable to put enough of this testing into 
use in the field, allowing industry players to continually evade 
detection. In 2019, USDA collected and tested only 268 samples at only 
8 of the largest Big Lick shows; in 2018, 260 samples at only 20 shows; 
and in 2017, 316 samples at only 14 shows. With increased funding, the 
USDA could purchase more equipment and dispatch more inspectors to use 
it, greatly increasing the agency's ability to enforce the HPA.
    Currently, when USDA inspectors arrive at shows affiliated with 
some industry organizations, many exhibitors load up and leave to avoid 
being caught with sored horses. While USDA could stop these trailers on 
the way out, Agency officials have stated that inspectors are wary of 
going outside of their designated inspection area, for fear of 
harassment and physical violence from exhibitors. Armed security is 
frequently utilized in the designated area to allow such inspections, 
at additional expense to this program. The fact that exhibitors feel 
they can intimidate government officials without penalty is a testament 
to the inherent shortcomings of the current system.
    Lack of a consistent presence by USDA officials at events featuring 
Tennessee Walking Horses, Racking Horses, and Spotted Saddle Horses has 
fostered a cavalier attitude among industry insiders, who have not 
stopped their abuse, but have only become more clandestine in their 
soring methods. The continued use of soring to gain an advantage in the 
show ring has tainted this segment of the horse industry, and creates 
an unfair advantage for those who are willing to break the law in 
pursuit of victory. Besides the indefensible suffering of the animals 
themselves, the continued acceptance of sored horses in the show ring 
prevents those with sound horses from competing fairly for prizes, 
breeding fees and other financial incentives, while those horse owners 
whose horses are sored may unwittingly suffer property damage and be 
duped into believing that their now abused, damaged horses are 
naturally superior.
    The egregious cruelty of soring is not only a concern for horse 
industry and animal protection organizations, but also for 
veterinarians. In 2008, the American Association of Equine 
Practitioners (AAEP) issued a white paper condemning soring, calling it 
``one of the most significant welfare issues faced by the equine 
industry.'' It called for the abolition of the DQP Program, saying 
``the acknowledged conflicts of interest which involve many of them 
cannot be reasonably resolved, and these individuals should be excluded 
from the regulatory process.'' The AAEP further stated, ``The failure 
of the HPA to eliminate the practice of soring can be traced to the 
woefully inadequate annual budget... allocated to the USDA to enforce 
these rules and regulations.''
    The USDA Office of Inspector General conducted a comprehensive 
audit of the Horse Protection Program, and issued its report in 
September 2010 documenting serious conflicts of interest and other 
significant problems with the industry self-monitoring system of HIOs 
on which the APHIS inspection program still relies. The report 
recommended the abolition of DQP inspections and an increase in funding 
for APHIS enforcement of the Horse Protection Act. The Agency concurred 
with the findings and recommendations in the report, including 
Recommendation 2: ``Seeking the necessary funding from Congress to 
adequately oversee the Horse Protection Program,'' indicating that it 
would develop a budgeting and staffing plan to phase in the resources 
needed to adequately oversee the Horse Protection Program.
    It is unacceptable that more than 50 years after passage of the 
Horse Protection Act, the USDA still lacks the resources needed to end 
this extreme form of abuse. It is time for Congress to give our public 
servants charged with enforcing this Act the support and resources they 
need to fulfill their duty to protect these horses as effectively and 
safely as possible.
    We appreciate the opportunity to share our views about this serious 
problem and thank you for your consideration of our request.

Sincerely,

    Keith Dane, Senior Director, Equine Protection
     Humane Society of the United States

    Scott Hay, DVM, President
    American Association of Equine Practitioners

    Barry Kipperman, DVM, DACVIM, President
    Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association

    Cathy Liss, President
    Animal Welfare Institute

    Sara Amundson, President
    Humane Society Legislative Fund

    Nancy Perry, Senior Vice President, Government Relations
    American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA)

    Teresa Bippen, President
    Friends of Sound Horses, Inc.

    Robin Lohnes, Executive Director
    American Horse Protection Association

    Neda DeMayo, President
    Return to Freedom Wild Horse Conservation

    Donna Benefield, Vice President
    International Walking Horse Association

    Susan Crotty, President
    Plantation Walking Horse Association of California

    Molly Lieberknecht, President
    United Pleasure Walking Horse Association

    Lucy Rangel, President
    Gaitway Walking Horse Association, Inc.

    Bonnie Yeager, President
    International Pleasure Walking Horse Registry

    Penny Austin, President
    One Horse At a Time, Inc. Horse Rescue

    Shayna Shaw, President
    Northern California Walking Horse Association

    Linda Fey, President
    New York State Plantation Walking Horse Club, LLC

    Libby Kurtz
    San Francisco Bay Area Tennessee Walking Horse Club

    Nancy O'Dell Plunkett
    President, Northwest Gaited Horse Association

    [This statement was submitted by Keith Dane, Senior Director, 
Equine Protection, Humane Society of the United States.]
                                 ______
                                 
         Prepared Statement of IR-4 Commodity Liaison Committee
    This request is being submitted behalf of the membership of IR-4 
Commodity Liaison Committee. This group is a coalition of commodity 
associations, grower groups, food processors and individuals who 
represent agriculture that feed Americans healthy fruits, vegetables, 
nuts, herb or enhances our environment with ornamental crops and 
flowers. The membership collectively represents conventional and 
organic specialty crop growers and allied industries with operations in 
every state. Specialty crop agriculture collectively is sector of 
American agriculture; the farm gate value of specialty crops is over 
$65 billion annually.
    We are requesting that US Senate Appropriations Committee--
Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug 
Administration, and Related Agencies restore funding and allocate at 
least $20.0 million for the IR-4 Project. This is justified as follows:
    Farmers of conventionally produced and organic specialty crops must 
protect their high value commodities from economic damage caused by 
insects, plant diseases, weeds and other crop pests. US EPA regulates 
chemical and bio-based pesticides that protect crops. The private 
sector invests significant resources to develop data that meets US EPA 
regulatory standards, which ensure that products are safe for humans 
and the environment. Because of the research costs, the crop protection 
industry concentrates their registration efforts on large acreage 
``major'' crops like corn, soybean, and cotton where potential sales 
support an acceptable return on investment. Small acreage, specialty 
crops are orphan crops. Due to limited potential sales, it is 
economically unfeasible for the crop protection industry to 
commercialize pest control products for specialty crops. Recognizing 
the dilemma, Congress created the IR-4 Project in 1963 to help 
America's specialty crop growers and food processers with the Minor Use 
Problem. The IR-4 Project has facilitated over 20,000 registrations of 
pest management uses on food crops that have benefitted agriculture in 
all states and helped provide quality food for the public.
    The IR-4 Project remains relevant today and in desperate need of 
enhanced funding to sustain services that are critically important to 
specialty crop agriculture. After a decade of a flat funding, the 
impact is significant. Over the past five years, there has been a 20% 
drop in research. However, destructive pests continue to attack and 
damage specialty crops causing reductions in quality and quantity of 
the final product. Newly emerging pest problems, such as Spotted 
Lanternfly, Brown Marmorated Stink Bug, Spotted Wing Drosophila and 
Downy Mildew have disrupted existing integrated pest management 
systems. Additionally, more pests are becoming resistant to existing 
chemical pesticides. IR-4 has been on the front line to facilitate new 
registration/solutions to manage pests and help ensure that domestic 
specialty crop farmers can continue to grow quality and wholesome 
products demanded by food processors and consumers.

    Other factors contribution to the need for enhanced IR-4 Project 
funding include:

  --IR-4 is leading research efforts with the strategic integration of 
        reduced risk pesticides and biopesticides to manage hard to 
        control pests while minimize pest resistance to pesticides and 
        while reducing exposure to pesticides in consumed foods.

  --IR-4 develops data to remove pesticide residues in specialty crops 
        as a barrier to trade allowing domestic producers access to 
        lucrative international specialty crop markets.

  --The cost of IR-4 research continues to escalate from factors such 
        as land rental, supplies, employee salary/health care costs, 
        etc. Furthermore, USDA made an administrative change to the IR-
        4 funding which allowed the land-grant institutions that host 
        IR-4 research to deduct up to 10% of the total direct cost of 
        the grant. This is an effective 12% reduction of funding for 
        research.

  --IR-4 has had to defer replacement of its vital analytical equipment 
        in laboratories due to funding shortfalls.

    The IR-4 Project provides an exceptional return on investment. 
Michigan State University Center for Economic Analysis reported in 
November 2017 that the IR-4 Project's efforts contribute over $9.4 
BILLION to annual US Gross Domestic Product and its efforts support 
over 95,000 JOBS throughout the United States.
    U.S. specialty crop growers and allied industries need IR-4; the 
public needs IR-4. We urge the Subcommittee to bring FY 2022 
Appropriations level to at least $20 million for the Minor Crop Pest 
Management (IR4) line within the USDA-NIFA Research and Education 
Activities area.

    [This statement was submitted by Dr. Michael Bledsoe, Chair, IR-4 
Commodity Liaison Committee.]
                                 ______
                                 
         Prepared Statement of NANA Regional Corporation, Inc.
    Hello, my name is Sonny Adams and I'm the Director of Energy for 
the NANA Regional Corporation, Inc. (NANA), one of 12 land-based 
regional corporations formed under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement 
Act. I write in support of significantly increasing the funding of the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) High Energy Cost Grant (HECG) 
because it is an effective program that is changing lives for the 
better in our region.
    In 2015, NANA received a USDA HECG grant to install energy storage 
batteries in our villages of Deering and Buckland. This project helped 
create the first microgrids for our region, enabling us to achieve 
diesel generator off-operation and capture more solar and wind energy. 
Although we are still collecting performance data and optimizing the 
microgrid, we are currently reducing diesel consumption by 21% per 
year. This project has given our region a road map on how to lower the 
cost of energy, thus allowing us to start replicating the microgrid 
project in the remaining villages. In 2018, NANA worked with the 
Northwest Arctic Borough (NWAB), Alaska Village Electric Cooperative 
(AVEC), and the Native Villages of Kobuk and Shungnak to submit a grant 
application to install a community solar array and energy storage 
batteries in Shungnak. This project will serve both communities via 
intertie and should be operational by the end of June 2021.
    In 2019, NANA once again worked with AVEC, the NWAB, and the Native 
Village of Noatak on submitting a USDA HECG grant application to 
install a community solar array and energy storage batteries in Noatak. 
Noatak met all the criteria for the grant application because they must 
fly in fuel 100% of the time. Because of low river levels, Noatak has 
not been able to barge fuel for decades. Noatak has one of the highest 
costs of energy in Alaska. Noatak residents must make tough choices 
between heating their home, paying their electric bill, or putting food 
on their table. Unfortunately, this project was not funded because of 
lack of USDA funding.
    Increasing funding for high energy cost grants would enable these 
significant projects to be completed. The struggle to find solutions 
for low-cost energy has been ongoing for decades. NANA works with our 
region's 11 federally recognized tribes on the execution of our 
Northwest Arctic Regional Energy Plan. In 2009, NANA held a Regional 
Energy Summit with our villages to discuss the energy crisis and 
potential solutions to lower the cost of energy. NANA helped create the 
Region's Energy Steering Committee and worked with the communities to 
perform an energy options analysis for each village. NANA also 
conducted a regional energy survey to ensure our tribes and elders were 
in support of renewable energy projects. Our regionis in support of 
implementing renewable energy projects if they do not impact 
subsistence or traditional activities.
    NANA continues to work on renewable energy projects for our tribes 
and villages. Our diesel fuel prices can range from $4.89 to $10.04 per 
gallon, depending on where you live within our region. Our region is 
roadless, and diesel fuel is delivered by barge or plane. In past 
years, climate change has had an impact on fuel delivery to some of our 
villages. When snow accumulation is low, it causes river levels to be 
low, which prohibits fuel delivery into three of our villages. Diesel 
fuel is used for both home heating and electricity generation. It is 
64% more expensive to live in our region than it is to live in 
Anchorage, Alaska, the largest city in Alaska.
    NANA feels that the USDA HECG program is underfunded and needs an 
increase to help those communities in need.

    [This statement was submitted by Mr. Sonny Adams, Director of , 
NANA Regional Corporation, Inc.]
                                 ______
                                 
 Prepared Statement of National Association of State Energy Officials 
                                (NASEO)
    Chairman Baldwin and Ranking Member Hoeven, I am David Terry, 
Executive Director of the National Association of State Energy 
Officials (NASEO), and I am testifying in support of FY 22 funding for 
the energy title of the Farm Bill. The mandatory levels of the energy 
title of the Farm Bill should be supported (2018 Farm Bill, P.L. 115-
334). Specifically, we support funding of at least $50 million 
mandatory and $250 million in additional discretionary spending for the 
Rural Energy for America (REAP) program. Fifteen percent of the 
additional discretionary funds should be allocated to underutilized 
renewable energy technologies through a reserve fund. The REAP program 
was created in the 2002 Farm Bill and it has been a huge success. Over 
15,000 energy efficiency and renewable energy projects have been 
implemented in every state since 2003. Since the 2014 Farm Bill, REAP 
has leveraged $4 billion in private investment with $338 million in 
appropriations. We support $15 million in mandatory funding and $30 
million in discretionary funding; a total of $45 million for the Rural 
Energy for America Loans program. Senator Merkley's efforts to support 
``on-bill'' energy efficiency financing programs for rural electric 
cooperatives is an important activity through USDA. Under the Rural 
Energy Savings Program (RESP), $50 million should be provided for 
FY'22. This program is outside of the energy title of the Farm Bill, 
but is very important. The models in South Carolina and Arkansas are 
very exciting. This program should be dramatically expanded. We also 
recommend that electrification initiatives should be funded with both 
the REAP and RESP programs.
    REAP has specifically benefitted farmers, ranchers and rural small 
businesses that are often underserved by other federal energy efforts. 
NASEO's State Energy Office members work directly with eligible 
entities, as well as state agricultural agencies and rural interests to 
promote this successful program. REAP is about facilitating private-
sector led rural economic development.
    NASEO represents the energy offices in the 56 states, territories 
and the District of Columbia. The REAP program, and the other critical 
programs in the energy title of the last multi-year Farm Bill (and 
RESP), helps the private sector create jobs, supports increased 
agricultural productivity and operational efficiency, reduces energy 
costs for farmers, ranchers and rural small businesses, generates home-
grown energy, promotes use of alternative fuels produced by America's 
farmers, and further reduces our dependence on imported petroleum. The 
cost is very low and the payback is very high.
    As noted above, NASEO also supports additional energy title 
programs and RESP. There are several of note that should be supported 
at mandatory funding levels. These include the Biomass Crop Assistance 
Program, Biorefinery Assistance, Renewable Chemical and Biobased 
Product Manufacturing Assistance Program, and the Biobased Markets 
Program (otherwise referred to as ``Biopreferred''), the Biomass 
Research & Development Initiative, the Bioenergy Program for Advanced 
Biofuels, the Biodiesel Fuel Education Program, and the Carbon 
Utilization and Biogas Education Program.
    In FY'22, we urge your support for the REAP program and the Rural 
Energy for America Loans program, and additional energy title programs 
as noted above. We also support expansion and support for ``on-bill'' 
financing programs (RESP) through USDA. For all these programs, we 
recommend streamlining the applications in order to reduce paperwork 
burdens for low-cost grants and loans.

    [This statement was submitted by David Terry, NASEO Executive 
Director and Jeff Genzer, NASEO Counsel.]
                                 ______
                                 
  Prepared Statement of National Association of State Departments of 
                              Agriculture
    The National Association of State Departments of Agriculture 
(NASDA) commends the subcommittee for its work in support of farmers, 
ranchers and their rural communities. NASDA represents the 
Commissioners, Secretaries, and Directors of agriculture in all fifty 
states and four territories. NASDA members are co-regulators with the 
federal government and strong advocates for American agriculture.
    As you begin the fiscal year 2022 appropriations process, NASDA 
asks you to prioritize the following programs that enhance farmers, 
ranchers and their rural communities and ensure a safe, affordable, and 
abundant food supply.

  food safety modernization act (fsma): produce, animal food, produce 
             safety alliance, food safety outreach program

        a. $34 million--Produce Safety Rule Implementation, State 
        Cooperative Agreement Program

        b. $6 million--Animal Food Preventive Controls Rule 
        Implementation, State Cooperative Agreement Program

        c. $10 million--Food Safety Outreach Program

        d. $2 million--Produce Safety Alliance Funding

    NASDA members are at the forefront of implementing FSMA and funding 
these programs will allow NASDA to continue building state regulatory 
programs required by FSMA and educate and train the farm and food 
sectors on compliance. The education, outreach, and training provided 
by state programs, FSOP and PSA are all critical pieces of meeting 
FSMA's mandate and ensuring a safe food supply.
  farm and ranch stress assistance network--$10 million, full funding
    Funding will continue efforts to scale assistance programs and 
create trainings and partnerships to serve rural Americans-60% of whom 
live in areas with mental health professional shortages.
          animal and plant health inspection service programs
a. National Animal Health Laboratory Network--$30 million, full funding

        i. NAHLN funding is critical for large-scale animal-disease 
        outbreak response. NASDA members, who regulate and oversee 
        animal health in the states, are the first line of defense 
        against animal disease outbreaks and rely on NALHN labs for 
        tracking disease progress and performing tests on thousands of 
        diagnostic samples. Federal funding for the NAHLN will expand 
        surveillance and surge capacity to diagnose diseases and ramp 
        up during emergency situations.

b. Swine Health Program--$25.2 million

        i. APHIS' Swine Health program protects the health of the U.S. 
        swine herd through programs such as comprehensive and 
        integrated swine surveillance, emergency preparedness and 
        response planning, disease investigation and control 
        activities, and other activities.

c. National Veterinary Stockpile--Additional $20 million

        i. The National Veterinary Stockpile is a critical component of 
        APHIS emergency response capability. Additional funding towards 
        depopulation equipment is needed to avoid disastrous supply 
        chain disruption in the event of a Foot-and-mouth disease 
        outbreak.

                          agriculture research
a. Agriculture research, educational and extension efforts are vital in 
creating short and long-term advancements in food and agriculture to 
benefit farmers, ranchers, industry and consumers. NASDA supports 
funding USDA's Research, Education and Economics mission areas to 
support short-term and long-term research needs. Specifically, NASDA 
supports funding for:

        i. the Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research, National 
        Institute for Food and Agriculture and USDA-Agricultural 
        Research Service.
        ii. Competitive research grant programs including the 
        Agriculture and Food Research Initiative and other competitive-
        based funding initiatives.
        iii. Maintaining and strengthening program funding through the 
        Hatch, Smith-Lever Act and other formula-based funding 
        authorities.

b. NASDA supports USDA's Agricultural Research Service maintaining a 
focus on agricultural-related legal issues within the National 
Agricultural Library and encourages ARS and the National Agricultural 
Library to engage in multi-year cooperative agreements with the 
Agricultural Law Information Partnership's partner institutions.

c. Animal Disease Research Funding:

        i. Provide $50 million in new funding to support the 
        Agriculture Advanced Research and Development Authority, 
        authorized in Section 7132 of the Agricultural Improvement Act 
        of 2018.
        ii. $11.8 million for the National Antimicrobial Resistance 
        Monitoring System (NARMS). This represents a $500 increase over 
        FY 2019 and maintains FY 2021 funding. NARMS serves as a source 
        of data for the approval of new animal antibiotics and for the 
        post-approval safety monitoring of these compounds.

d. Minor Crop Pest Management Program (IR-4):

        i. NASDA recommends funding this program at the authorized 
        funding level because developing pest control tools has high 
        regulatory costs. This funding ensures safe and effective 
        agrichemicals and biopesticides are available for small, 
        specialty crop markets.
                           bioengineered food
    NASDA supports the inclusion of language that will ensure the FY22 
Agriculture Appropriations bill is aligned with the National 
Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard.
                            wildlife services
    NASDA supports funding to strengthen Wildlife Services' resources 
and to ensure a continued federal partnership in the responsible 
management of our nation's wildlife, including the management of wild 
horse and burro populations.

  --$76 million in no-year funding for FY 2022 to implement the full 
        modernization of the U.S. Geological Survey, National Wildlife 
        Health Center.
                            urban agriculture
    Urban farming has grown more than 30 percent in the U.S. in the 
last 30 years. There is great potential for urban agriculture to help 
address the poverty, unemployment, and food insecurity that often comes 
as a result of urbanization.

  --NASDA supports funding the Office of Urban Agriculture and 
        Innovative Production at the full authorized level of $25 
        million.

  --NASDA recommends an additional $14 million for the urban 
        agriculture data collection initiative.
                               conclusion
    NASDA thanks you for your careful consideration of these requests 
as you work to fund the nation's agricultural policy priorities in 
fiscal year 2022.

    [This statement was submitted by Barbara P. Glenn, Ph.D., Chief 
Executive Officer]
                                 ______
                                 
      Prepared Statement of National Association of Wheat Growers
    The National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) appreciates the 
opportunity to provide testimony about our priorities for the fiscal 
year (FY) 2022 Agriculture Appropriations bill. Before outlining our FY 
2022 requests, we wanted to say ``thank you'' for continuing to fully 
fund our top priority in FY2021-the U.S. Department of Agriculture's 
(USDA) U.S. Wheat and Barley Scab Initiative (USWBSI). The 2018 Farm 
Bill increased authorization for the USWBSI from $9.5 million to $15 
million to enhance food safety and supply by reducing the impact of 
Fusarium Head Blight (Scab) on wheat and barley. The funding secured in 
the enacted FY 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act (H.R. 133) will 
play a vital role in supporting the agricultural economy and public 
food system.
    As our leaders in Congress consider a FY 2022 Agriculture 
Appropriations bill, one of NAWG's main priorities will be to ensure 
that no provisions are included that would cut Farm Bill programs, 
particularly mandatory programs like crop insurance, farm programs, 
conservation programs, or trade promotion programs. Additionally, NAWG 
joins the National Wheat and Barley Improvement Committees in urging 
the Committee to maintain full funding for the UWSBSI. Scab is a plant 
disease attacking all wheat-producing regions of the U.S. that impacts 
not just growers but also millers and bakers because of its impact on 
the quality of wheat. Also, NAWG supports the National Wheat 
Improvement Committee's (NWIC) request to fund a Wheat Resiliency 
Initiative at $5.66 million to address new and emerging challenges to 
wheat production. NAWG urges the Committee to continue providing $1 
million to support research focused on utilizing crop genetics research 
at public-private consortiums. NAWG applauds the funding of the 
National Predictive Modeling Tool Initiative (NPMTI) in FY 2021, and we 
request that the committee fund the NPMTI at $12 million this year. 
Lastly, NAWG urges the Committee to maintain funding of the Agriculture 
Research Service (ARS) Small Grains Genomic Initiative (SGGI) at least 
$3.44 million. NAWG also supports maintaining at least the current 
level of funding for the NIFA Hatch Act, Smith-Lever Formula Grants, 
and the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative.
    Wheat is a vital crop and source of economic activity. In the 
United States, wheat ranks third in planted acreage, production, and 
gross farm receipts, according to the USDA's Economic Research Service 
(ERS). According to the 2020/2021 crop year, total U.S. wheat planted 
acreage was 44.35 million acres in the USDA and produced 1.8 billion 
bushels. Since 2012, working capital for the U.S. farm sector has 
decreased from over $165 billion to around $85 billion in 2020, and, 
according to ERS, working capital is forecasted to fall an additional 
13.6 percent in 2021. In addition to the economic challenges facing 
wheat farmers, growers must deal with a number of disease and pest 
challenges that can only be addressed through public and private 
research efforts. Federal funding for agriculture research has remained 
stagnant, threatening the future viability and competitiveness of U.S. 
food systems by being out invested by competitors such as China.
    Over the past year, the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged 
agriculture in a variety of ways. Economic shutdowns led to high 
volatility in markets and disruptions in the food supply chain that 
negatively impacted farmers. These difficulties came at the same time 
as low commodity prices and numerous weather-related challenges; the 
COVID-19 outbreak only exacerbated the effects on farmers.
    Given the current economic environment that farmers face, it is 
critical that mandatory programs like crop insurance, farm programs, 
conservation programs, and trade promotion programs are not cut or 
harmed. The 2018 Farm Bill passed through Congress with strong 
bipartisan, bicameral support and sent a clear message that these 
critical programs should not be harmed. NAWG also strongly urges 
Congress to provide at least $255 million for the Agricultural Trade 
Promotion and Facilitation Program with at least $200 million for the 
Market Access Program (MAP) and $34.5 million for the Foreign Market 
Development (FMD) program in FY 2022. We are asking that your 
subcommittee use discretionary funds to provide $7 million--less than 3 
percent of the program investment--for USDA administrative and 
operational costs to help reverse the diminished real dollar value of 
MAP and FMD from being funded at the same level for over 15 years. MAP/
FMD funding is critical to help U.S. farmers, ranchers, and food 
exporters keep pace and help us make up for a lost time after two and 
half years of trade conflict and retaliatory tariffs.
    NAWG is extremely appreciative of the historical support for USWBSI 
to address Scab. This disease negatively impacts yields and causes the 
grain to be rejected by elevators and mills due to the mycotoxin 
deoxynivalenol (DON) presence. Each year, particular conditions 
throughout the U.S. result in scab outbreaks, and these epidemics cause 
disruptions in food and feed supply, economic losses to growers, and 
increased costs for end-users. The development of varieties with 
improved scab resistance and better models to predict the need for a 
fungicide application to prevent Scab has led to a reduction in the 
percent of wheat impacted by Fusarium head scab in the United States. A 
2017 economic study by North Dakota State University estimates that 
every dollar invested in the USWBSI provides an economic return of 
approximately 71 dollars.
    The mission of USWBSI is to enhance food safety and supply by 
reducing the impact of Scab on wheat and barley. The USWBSI is an 
organization of grower, research, and miller and baker stakeholders, 
providing annual recommendations to ARS for a mission-directed 
competitive grant program. The USWBSI directs its resources provided by 
Congress to a consortium of land-grant colleges and universities 
through a competitive grant process. The collaborative research efforts 
take place at state universities and ARS facilities in 31 states (AL, 
AR, CA, GA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MD, MI, MN, MO, MT, NC, ND, NE, NJ, 
NY, OH, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, VA, VT, WA, WI). For FY 2022, NAWG is 
recommending that Congress continue to provide fully authorized funding 
for the USWBSI at $15 million.
    In addition to the challenges related to Scab research, NAWG 
supports the NWIC's recommendation of allocating $5.66 million in FY 
2022 for a Wheat Resiliency Initiative. U.S. wheat growers and 
researchers have identified wheat rusts, wheat stem sawfly, hessian 
fly, and bacterial leaf streak as the greatest future threats to wheat 
production. This funding would allow researchers to build capacity to 
address underfunded and emerging challenges to wheat production 
throughout the United States. Specifically, these funds would be used 
to build research capacity at USDA-ARS facilities and work with 
university collaborators to address these threats to wheat production. 
Additionally, we urge Congress to include language to establish a Wheat 
Resiliency Initiative under the ARS to address these challenges related 
to wheat rusts, wheat stem sawfly, hessian fly, and bacterial leaf 
streak.
    Together, these various pests and pathogens affect every growing 
region and market class of wheat grown across the U.S. Wheat is grown, 
milled, and delivered as a dietary staple in every state. If funded, 
through this initiative, the community of U.S. wheat researchers will 
build a new genetic base in all wheat market classes for resiliency to 
these challenges posed by wheat rusts, stem sawfly, hessian fly, and 
bacterial leaf streak. The strength of local agricultural economies of 
every state will be supported through building resiliency in the face 
of these challenges to wheat production.
    Further, NAWG supports the continuation of funding provided by the 
Senate in the FY 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act of $1 million for 
ancient crop genetics research conducted at public-private consortiums 
to enhance yields, fight diseases and pests, and adapt to changing 
climates and reduce global food insecurity. This funding is pivotal for 
research centers where research focused on utilizing ancient crop plant 
ancestors to mobilize genetic diversity, meet consumer demands, and 
protect the global food supply. These public/private partnerships 
create opportunities for researchers across the supply chain to work 
together to provide improved genetics to farmers, millers, bakers, and 
consumers. This funding will expand access to research funding and 
novel germplasm to new regions of the country.
    NAWG continues to support the SGGI under the ARS Salaries, and 
Expenses account. The FY 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act provided 
a $940,00 million increase, raising funding to $3.445 million a year. 
NAWG is supportive of maintaining funding for the SGGI at least at 
$3.44 million in FY 2022. The SGGI provides critical resources to four 
research areas: Next Generation Genotyping, Next Generation Phenomics, 
ARS Uniform Small Grains Nurseries, and Doubled Haploid Research and 
Production.
    NAWG also supports increased funding for the NPMTI at $12 million 
for FY 2022. The NPMTI was funded for the first time as part of the FY 
2020 Consolidated Appropriations Act, and additional resources beyond 
its current appropriations of $5 million are necessary to carry out 
this valuable research to develop a predictive modeling tool for 
diseases and mycotoxins affecting U.S. row crops to better inform 
management decisions. The overall goals of the NPMTI are to ensure crop 
sustainability and crop quality, increase precision, improve soil 
health through soil-borne disease quantification, and improve disease 
management, thereby reducing yield losses. Over time, baseline 
background levels of various pathogens can be established, which will 
help with anomaly detection and serve as an early warning system for 
our nation's food security.
    In addition to USWBSI and SGGI funding, we urge the Committee to 
provide at least level funding for the NIFA Hatch Act and Smith-Lever 
Formula grants. These programs provide the base levels of support for 
our Land Grant institutions and Extension service, which is the conduit 
between university research and its application with the grower. These 
programs enable Land Grants to identify and meet the needs of the 
nation's wheat producers, millers, bakers, and consumers. NAWG also 
supports maintaining the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative 
(AFRI) funding at no less than $400 million. This critical competitive 
grant program provides valuable supplemental support to research in 
agriculture and related sciences to capitalize on recent technological 
advances to respond to agriculture challenges. Investments through this 
program enable significant research to be conducted at Land Grant 
institutions that can have important implications for farmers across 
the country. Additionally, NAWG believes that any increase in funding 
for AFRI should not be at the expense of ARS funding or the Hatch Act 
and Smith-Lever Formula grant.
    Wheat research at the federal level is driven by funding to the ARS 
division of USDA, land grant universities via Hatch Act and Smith-Lever 
Act funds, and Agriculture and Food Research Initiative competitive 
grants. State governments support wheat research through funding of 
public universities and agriculture experiment stations. Wheat growers 
in many states directly support wheat research through check-offs or 
assessments on their crop each year. This collaborative partnership has 
made the United States one of the premier countries for wheat research, 
with all segments sharing in its cost. The investment has resulted in 
wheat varieties with the end-use quality that meets or exceeds the 
demands of our customers, both domestic and international.
    Agribusiness investment in wheat breeding and wheat improvement in 
the United States is minimal compared to other commodities. Private 
investment in wheat research has increased in recent years, but 
increased federal investments must be made to provide solutions for 
problems affecting wheat productivity in the U.S. Wheat growers and the 
wheat industry depend on the USDA-ARS' public research efforts land 
grant universities to provide these solutions.
    The National Association of Wheat Growers works with our 20 wheat 
state associations to benefit all wheat farmers. These requests will 
directly help find new markets to export our wheat, provide critical 
investments in research, and facilitate innovative wheat research to 
improve quality and protect against disease and pest challenges. We 
greatly appreciate your consideration of these requests.

    [This statement was submitted by Dave Milligan, President, National 
Association of Wheat Growers.]
                                 ______
                                 
    Prepared Statement of National Center for Appropriate Technology
Appropriations Bill: Agriculture
Specific Agency: Rural Business--Cooperative Service
Appropriations Account: Rural Cooperative Development Grants
Program: Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas
Amount requested for FY 2022 Appropriations: $3.5 million
Amount requested in the President's FY 2022 Budget: $2.8 million
Amount Provided in FY 2022: $2.8 million
                                summary
    ATTRA (Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas) provides 
practical, cutting edge information to tens of thousands of farmers, 
ranchers, extension agents, conservation professionals and many others. 
ATTRA is a long-standing Farm Bill program with a current authorization 
for appropriations of $5 million annually. ATTRA is a one-stop shop for 
farmers and ranchers, managed by the National Center for Appropriate 
Technology under a Cooperative Agreement with USDA Rural Development's 
Rural Business--Cooperative Service.
    The program offers free technical assistance on sustainable 
agriculture production and farm energy issues via a toll-free hotline 
that is answered in English and Spanish for nine hours per day and 
through our websites www.ncat.attra.org and www.ncat.attra.org/espanol. 
Assistance is also available through email, texting, social media, and 
online chat. NCAT's agricultural specialists include 30+ highly 
qualified experts from diverse agricultural disciplines including 
horticulture, agronomy, animal science, economics, soil science, 
business planning, and marketing. Most staff also have experience in 
farming, ranching, Extension, and education.
    In addition to technical assistance and educational materials, 
ATTRA also helps train military veterans with its Armed to Farm program 
and is accelerating the adoption of regenerative agriculture practices 
through workshops, multi-media materials, conferences and farm visits 
with producers. The Soil for Water Initiative combines peer-to-peer 
learning networks with rangeland monitoring, workshops, and direct 
producer technical support.
    For FY 2022, we request $3.5 million, a $700,000 increase over FY 
21 levels to expand ATTRA services for technical assistance to: improve 
soil health, increase farm resilience and expand market opportunities 
by adapting to and mitigating the effects of climate change support 
marketing of products that are sustainably produced; expand farm energy 
programs including agrisolar; and expand training for beginning, 
socially disadvantaged, limited resource, and veteran farmers.
    NCAT has also signed on in support of other appropriations requests 
when those requests are linked closely to ATTRA's mission and where 
ATTRA can provide resources and expertise to support other programs, 
including support for farm sustainability, climate resilience, soil and 
water conservation and quality, value-added marketing, on-farm 
renewable energy production, and farming opportunities for beginning 
socially disadvantaged, limited resource, and veteran farmers. These 
linkages are highlighted at the end of this testimony.
                    attra highlights and initiatives
    Educational materials: ATTRA offers over 1,000 educational 
resources in print publications, webinars, databases, podcasts, videos, 
blogs, and tutorials directly related to sustainable agriculture, soil 
health, regenerative land management, climate solutions, business 
planning, and marketing.
    Technical Assistance: ATTRA provides one-on-one assistance, small-
group assistance, and peer-to- peer learning networks through 
workshops, conference presentations, farmer listening sessions, farm 
tours, and social media, including six regional Facebook groups.
    Armed to Farm is a sustainable agriculture training program for 
military veterans. More than 500 veterans have been trained in week-
long sessions through farm visits, hands-on activities, and classroom 
sessions on business planning, marketing, recordkeeping, and various 
production topics. To date 82 percent of participants are farming or in 
the process of starting a farm; 94 percent say that the training 
improved their ability to farm; and 34 percent added new enterprises to 
their farm since attending the training. NCAT hosts a listserv and an 
Armed to Farm Facebook page to facilitate peer-to-peer learning.
    The Soil for Water Initiative is accelerating the adoption of 
regenerative agricultural practices that catch and hold more rainwater 
in soils. Peer-to-peer learning networks are combined with rangeland 
monitoring, workshops, and support for producers who are trying new 
ways to improve health of their land and soils. ATTRA resources have 
been leveraged to expand these networks with support from NRCS, SARE, 
and private foundations.
    To learn more about ATTRA's activities, please see our 2019-2020 
Report to RBS as well as the ATTRA website.
                         attra regional offices
    Work carried out under ATTRA is accomplished among all of NCAT's 
regional offices, located in Butte, Montana (headquarters); 
Fayetteville, Arkansas; Davis, California; San Antonio, Texas; Keene, 
New Hampshire; Jackson, Mississippi; and Check, Virginia. Satellite 
offices are in Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Colorado, and Idaho. Each office 
covers a region of the U.S.: Montana covers the northern plains, 
Arkansas covers the southeast, California covers the west, Texas covers 
the southwest, New Hampshire covers the northeast, Mississippi covers 
the Gulf states region, and Virginia covers the mid- Atlantic region.
     attra and ncat contributions to other programs in the annual 
                          appropriations bill
    In addition to running a first-class education, training and 
technical assistance program via a cooperative agreement with USDA with 
funds provided by this Subcommittee, we also have a closely linked 
interest and make contributions to and help promote many other USDA 
programs and thus also have an interest in their annual funding level. 
In that light, earlier this year we joined with many other 
organizations in support of robust appropriations for the following:

  --Research, education, outreach, and technical assistance funding to 
        provide farmers and ranchers the tools they need to adapt to 
        and help mitigate climate change, including support for AFRI, 
        SARE, LTAR, Climate Hubs, ORG, CTA, and ATTRA (March 26, 2021 
        Letter from over 50 national and regional organizations 
        including NCAT)

  --Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA) support at $1.1 billion 
        (April 8, 2021 Letter from 70 national and regional 
        organizations including NCAT)

  --Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative (GLCI) support of $50 million 
        within the NRCS CTA appropriations account (April 15, 2021 
        Letter from over 100 national and regional organizations 
        including NCAT)
  --Farm and Ranch Stress Assistance Network (FRSAN)support of $10 
        million (April 20, 2021 Letter from over 30 national and 
        regional organizations including NCAT)

  --Rural Energy for American Program (REAP) support of $20 million in 
        discretionary funding (April 29, 2021 letter from nearly 50 
        national and regional organizations and businesses including 
        NCAT)

    NCAT is proud to be a long-term partner with USDA in support of 
sustainable agriculture, value-added production and marketing, local 
food systems, and training and technical assistance for beginning, 
socially disadvantaged, limited resource, and veteran farmers. We 
appreciate the Subcommittee's ongoing support for ATTRA as the nation's 
premier source of information on sustainable agriculture and for the 
range of other programs that help farmers thrive by producing healthy, 
fresh food to the American people while conserving natural resources 
and supporting rural communities.

    [This statement was submitted by Steve Thompson, Executive 
Director, National Center for Appropriate Technology.]
                                 ______
                                 
  Prepared Statement of National Coalition for Food and Agricultural 
                            Research (NCFAR)
    The National Coalition for Food and Agricultural Research (NCFAR) 
is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, consensus-based and customer-led coalition 
that brings food, agriculture, nutrition, conservation, and natural 
resource organizations together with the food and agricultural research 
and Cooperative Extension community, serving as a forum and unified 
voice in support of sustaining and increasing federal investment in 
food and agricultural research, extension, and education.
    NCFAR strongly supports increased federal investment in food and 
agricultural research, extension, and education in the U.S. Department 
of Agriculture's (USDA) Research, Education, and Economics (REE) 
mission in fiscal year 2022 (FY22) through intramural and extramural 
programs, as follows:

  --Agricultural Research Service (ARS), at least              $1,720 
        million

  --Economic Research Service (ERS), at least                 $87 
        million

  --National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), at least    $180 
        million

  --National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), at least  $1,721 
        million

  --Agricultural Advanced Research and Development Authority (AGARDA) 
        pilot $2 million

    The requested increase for the NIFA budget should be provided to 
NIFA leadership, with suggested allocations of increases to specific 
programs, including:

  --Hatch Act (Research and Education Programs), at least      $280 
        million

  --Smith-Lever (Extension Activities), at least                $341 
        million

  --Evans-Allen (Research and Education Programs), at least    $79 
        million

  --1890 Extension (Extension Activities), at least              $67 
        million

  --1890 Education Grants, at least                            $28 
        million

  --McIntyre-Stennis (Research and Extension Programs), at least  $39 
        million

  --Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI), at least      $600 
        million

  --Research Grants for 1994 Institutions, at least                $6 
        million

  --Extension Services for 1994 Institutions, at least              $10 
        million

    NCFAR supports at least level funding from FY21 enacted for other 
NIFA programs and encourages proportionate increases where possible.
                       america's competitiveness
    NCFAR submits that our nation is not investing enough in publicly 
funded research to permit the discoveries necessary to regain our place 
as the global leader in agricultural research--supporting our food and 
national security. The unparalleled success story in the nation's food 
and agricultural system is in large part the product of past 
investments in food and agricultural research and extension. Federal 
funding for food and agricultural science has been essentially flat for 
over two decades despite much greater demonstrated needs and 
opportunities. Our nation's health and wellness, along with our 
competitiveness in global markets is at risk, which impacts our 
national security. China surpassed the U.S. in public funding in 2009 
and realized a 2-to-1 advantage in 2013.\1\ In 2015, the U.S. share of 
global investment in public agricultural research and development was 
8.9%; China, India and Brazil together spent some $3.16 for every 
dollar the U.S. invested in public agricultural research and 
development.\2\ U.S. public sector funding in research and development 
is falling in absolute terms and relative to major competitors, 
including Brazil, India, and China.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Abbott, Chuck (March 2017) China Overtakes U.S. as Top 
Government Funder of Ag Research. Successful Farming. https://
www.agriculture.com/news/business/china-overtakes-us-as-top-government-
funder-of-ag-research.
    \2\ https://kansascityfed.org/documents/7107/the-drivers-of-us-
agricultural-productivity-growth.pdf and https://www.cambridge.org/
core/journals/journal-of-economic-history/article/unpacking-the-
agricultural-black-box-the-rise-and-fall-of-american-farm-productivity-
growth/6B12A75BB1FD611628A9FC9C08B90056 and https://www.ers.usda.gov/
amber-waves/2020/july/productivity-is-the-major-driver-of-us-farm-
sector-s-economic-growth/.
    \3\ Clancy, Matthew (2017 September) Public sector spending on 
agricultural research declining in the United States and Western 
Europe, but rising in China, India, and Brazil. USDA ERS. https://
www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/chart-gallery/gallery/chart-detail/
?chartId=85038.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Modern agriculture is a science-based business, supported by the 
important goals of the farm bill research title. Research underpins the 
critical advancements and tools that help those in the food and 
agricultural system do their jobs, on which consumers, rural 
communities, the nation's economy, and global stability rely.
                     taxpayer return on investment
    The returns on investment in agriculture research are significant, 
averaging $17 for every $1 invested.\4\ Public and private investments 
in U.S. agricultural research and practical application of results have 
paid huge dividends to the United States and the world, especially in 
the latter part of the 20th century. These returns include work on food 
quality and quantity; resource conservation; producer profitability; 
food safety and security; and improved human and animal health. 
Societal expectations, climate impacts, and multifaceted food security 
and health challenges placed upon the food and agricultural system are 
ever-changing and growing, requiring in depth responsiveness by the 
research community. The United Nations projects by 2050, a 70 percent 
increase in food production will be necessary. Meeting this increase 
will require much more research developing new technologies.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ Baldos, Uris Lantz, Frederi G. Viens, Thomas W. Hertel, and 
Keith O. Fuglie. R&D Spending, Knowledge Capital, and Agricultural 
Productivity Growth: A Bayesian Approach. American Journal of 
Agricultural Economics. 101(1): 291-310; https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/
aay039.
    \5\ How to Feed the World in 2050. UN Food and Agriculture 
Organization. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/docs/
expert_paper/How_to_Feed_the_World_in_2050.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While Congress has acknowledged this funding need in the America 
Grows Act of 2021, which authorizes a five percent increase for REE 
agencies, more federal funding is needed to ensure the nation's 
competitiveness and continued agricultural innovation.
                   additional background information
    NCFAR supports mandatory programs in the farm bill that provide 
funding for research, encompassing the entire REE mission area. This 
includes extramural programs in NIFA-such as AFRI, and capacity funds 
to support Experiment Stations and Cooperative Extension at the 1862 
and 1890 land-grant universities and 1994 tribal colleges and 
universities-and intramural programs in ARS, ERS, and NASS, as well as 
the U.S. Forest Service research program.
    "Customers'' of the USDA REE enterprise include farmers, ranchers, 
and foresters across the nation; the agricultural input industry; food 
producers and processors; professionals in the fields of nutrition and 
health, natural resources, and environment; rural communities; and 
ultimately all consumers of food and natural fiber around the world. 
Indeed, this Subcommittee and other Members of Congress and policy 
makers at all levels of government are important ``customers'' of 
federally funded research, extension, and education.
                          extramural programs
    NCFAR's strongly held position is that increases to any programs in 
the REE mission area should constitute a net increase in REE funding, 
and not come at the expense of other REE programs, as the various 
programs serve important and complementary roles.
    NCFAR urges the Subcommittee to support AFRI at the authorized 
level of $700 million as soon as practicable. Absent a FY 2022 
President's Budget Request, NCFAR commends USDA for including $600 
million for AFRI in its FY21 budget request, with $100 million targeted 
toward basic and applied research in AI.
    Capacity funding through Smith-Lever 3(b)-(c), the Hatch Act, 
Evans-Allen Programs, and 1890 Extension, Research Grants for 1994 
Institutions, and 1994 institution Extension program have not kept pace 
with inflation due to flat funding for food and agricultural science 
for over 20 years.
    NCFAR supports Hatch Act, Evans-Allen Programs, and Research Grants 
for 1994 Institutions funding which is central to the function of 
agricultural, food, and forest research at our nation's public 
institutions. Research capacity programs in agriculture support high-
priority food, feed, fuel, and fiber research needs including field-
tested innovations on crop, forest, and animal health and disease 
prevention, as well as technologies, systems and interventions that 
enable access to safe and nutritious foods.
    NCFAR encourages the Subcommittee to enhance funding for functions 
that assure the translation of science for practical application 
through Cooperative Extension education. Smith-Lever, 1890s Extension, 
and Extension Services at 1994 Institutions funds support the 
Cooperative Extension System, a unique network of local educators who 
deliver vital, practical information to agricultural producers, small 
business owners, communities, youth, and families. Researchers, agents, 
and educators work together to test new innovations and practices on 
the farm and share science-based best farm and food system information 
with communities. Extension programs avert the spread of agricultural 
pest and diseases, connect people with high-quality information during 
national emergencies \6\, and keep American farmers on the farm by 
providing information about new sources of on-farm income.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ https://nifa.usda.gov/announcement/nifa-supports-disaster-
education-through-eden
    \7\ https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1093/aepp/ppw007
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          intramural programs
    ARS intramural research is uniquely suited to conduct research that 
requires a long-term investment leading to high-impact payoff, while 
maintaining the capacity and readiness to respond to emerging and 
pressing problems. ARS also plays a critical role in partnering with 
the university community and industry to advance science-based 
solutions and address emerging issues.
    The mission of ERS is to inform and enhance public and private 
decision making on economic and policy issues related to agriculture, 
food, the environment, and rural development. ERS manages a 
comprehensive program of economic research and analysis, including 
development of economic and statistical indicators that are coordinated 
with NASS efforts. Connecting with and working closely with researchers 
across the United States, ERS issues cooperative agreements and grant 
awards and works with land-grant partners on many projects.
    NASS is committed to providing timely, accurate, and useful 
statistics to U.S. agriculture. The agency conducts hundreds of surveys 
every year and prepares reports and information to communicate the 
survey results. NASS reports the facts on American agriculture, facts 
needed by people working in, and depending upon, U.S. agriculture.
                  agricultural research infrastructure
    Additionally, we wish to state support for any investments that 
modernize our nation's aging food and agricultural science 
infrastructure. Modern agricultural research and education facilities 
serve as the backbone of our nation's cutting-edge agricultural and 
food research enterprise. The situation is dire, sixty-nine percent of 
the buildings at U.S. colleges and schools of agriculture are at the 
end of their useful life.\8\ Strategic federal investment in 
agricultural research infrastructure would create hundreds of thousands 
of new jobs nationwide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ How to Feed the World in 2050. UN Food and Agriculture 
Organization. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/docs/
expert_paper/How_to_Feed_the_World_in_2050.pdf.

    [This statement was submitted by Laura Wood Peterson, Executive 
Director, National Coalition for Food and Agricultural Research 
(NCFAR).]
                                 ______
                                 
  Prepared Statement of National Commodity Supplemental Food Program 
                              Association
    Madame Chairwoman and Subcommittee members, thank you for this 
opportunity to present information regarding the USDA/FNS Commodity 
Supplemental Food Program (CSFP). The National Commodity Supplemental 
Food Program Association (NCSFPA) requests that the Senate Agriculture 
Appropriations Subcommittee fund CSFP for FY 2022 at $375,000,000 
subject to cost revisions to be submitted by the U. S. Department of 
Agriculture. NCSFPA would also like to thank the Subcommittee for 
providing sufficient funding to support CSFP service in all 50 states, 
and increased caseload as we continue to expand the program to 
statewide levels in all 50 states.
    CSFP is a unique program which brings together federal and state 
agencies, along with public and private entities. In FY 21, CSFP 
provides services through 150 non-profit community and faith-based 
organizations at 1,800 sites located in 50 states, the District of 
Columbia, six Indian Tribal Organizations (Red Lake, Minnesota, Oglala 
Sioux, South Dakota, the Seminole Nation in Oklahoma, the Spirit Lake 
Sioux Tribe in North Dakota, the Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians 
in California, and most recently, Wichita and Affiliated Tribes), and 
Puerto Rico. Each month 760,634 low-income seniors are authorized to 
receive a nutritionally balanced food box. The program has moved to 
serve exclusively elderly participants, as required by the Agricultural 
Act of 2014. Our Association thanks the Subcommittee for funding that 
enables us to continue serving our vulnerable population.
    The CSFP Local Agencies are committed grassroots operators with 
dedicated volunteers fulfilling a mission to provide quality nutrition 
assistance economically, efficiently, and responsibly. In cooperation 
with USDA, NCSFPA seeks to meet the current and emerging needs of CSFP 
participants. NCSFPA wishes to commend the Food Distribution Division 
of the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) of the Department of 
Agriculture for their continued innovations to strengthen the quality 
of the food package and streamline administration. In fact, on February 
1, 2020, USDA implemented a progressive new ``Prescription'' food 
package. This new menu offers an increased quantity and variety of 
food. These changes were informed by the most current information in 
nutrition science, enhancing the health benefits enjoyed by CSFP 
participants. While the pandemic limited the availability of some CSFP 
items during FY 21, distribution waivers and FNS procurement of 
additional items helped maintain distributions across the country. 
Additional CSFP funding is currently helping to replenish national 
inventories and address the increased food costs.
    We are greatly encouraged by the President's efforts to support 
seniors as we move out of the pandemic, as evidenced in the White House 
statements on CSFP released on May 3, 2021:

    ``The Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP) provides 
nutritious, domestically sourced USDA foods to low-income persons 60 
years or older. The American Rescue Plan provided nearly $37 million to 
expand the reach of CSFP by fulfilling all 2021 requests from states to 
serve more seniors and adding the Wichita and Affiliated Tribes to the 
program. This expansion, along with similar actions in other nutrition 
programs including SNAP that serve this population, will help combat 
food insecurity among seniors during the pandemic. In addition, FNS is 
ensuring those who rely on CSFP don't unintentionally lose access to 
their benefits due to the financial relief they receive through the 
American Rescue Plan. FNS is providing guidance to states and Tribal 
nations to exclude stimulus funds and child tax credits provided by the 
American Rescue Plan from income when determining eligibility for 
CSFP.''
    Equally encouraging are the comments from the presidential 
proclamation honoring May 2021 as Older Americans Month:

    ``The proclamation recognizes that older Americans and families 
have faced substantial challenges during the last year, and their 
resilience and strength have made our country stronger,'' the White 
House said. ``Older adults deserve to age with dignity and have 
equitable access to the long-term care system, regardless of race, 
sexual orientation or gender identity, disability, or socioeconomic 
status. The Biden-Harris administration is committed to expanding 
access to health care, nutrition services, caregiving, and 
opportunities to age in place for all older Americans. In the first 100 
days, the Biden-Harris administration has taken significant steps to 
address the health and security of older adults.''
    As a senior-based program, CSFP has a long-standing presence in 
providing healthy food to some of our most vulnerable citizens. The FY 
21 efforts to replenish national inventory and expand caseload sets up 
the opportunity to reach more eligible seniors across the country and 
provide consistent nutrition support in FY 22. Commitment to supporting 
CSFP in FY 22 will build on that foundation at a time when our senior 
population continues to grow, and new distributions remain needed to 
reach unserved populations in states across the US.
    CSFP continues to be a testimony to the power of community 
partnerships with faith-based organizations, farmers, private industry, 
and government agencies. The CSFP offers a unique combination of 
advantages unparalleled by any other food assistance program:

  --The CSFP specifically targets one of our nation's most 
        nutritionally vulnerable populations: low-income seniors.

  --The CSFP provides a monthly selection of food packages tailored to 
        specific nutritional needs.

  --The CSFP involves the entire community. Tens of thousands of 
        volunteers and private companies donate money, equipment, and 
        most importantly time and effort to deliver food to needy and 
        homebound seniors. These volunteers not only bring food but 
        companionship and othe

r assistance to seniors who might have limited support systems.  --The 
        COVID-19 pandemic provided some powerful examples of the 
        protective benefits of CSFP. While stores continued to see 
        limitations for some food items, CSFP participants still had 
        access to nutritious foods, provided through safe and socially 
        distant practices implemented during the pandemic. No-contact 
        distributions, including home deliveries, electronic intake 
        practices, and drive-up food pick-ups streamlined efforts to 
        protect staff, volunteers, and participants.

  --With the aging of the Baby Boomers and the coming ``Silver 
        Tsunami'', CSFP is uniquely positioned to meet the nutritional 
        needs of our nation's growing population of vulnerable seniors. 
        Replenishing national food inventories and increasing caseload 
        are vital as we work to keep up with this growing population.

    NCSFPA senior participants across the country value their CSFP 
benefits for both the balanced meals that CSFP provides each month and 
the interaction between seniors and program staff. CSFP is a program 
that promotes healthy lifestyles and reduces any discomfort associated 
with participation in food support programs. The program allows seniors 
to live more stable, self- sufficient lives, whether homebound, living 
with limited income, or lacking access to other food and support 
options. It allows participant income to be put toward other costs of 
living, such as rent/mortgage, utilities, medical care.
    America is aging and CSFP is an integral part of senior nutrition 
programming that is a cost effective and nutritionally sound way to 
ensure that today's seniors remain productive, healthy, and independent 
to maintain a good quality of life. It is of note that many seniors are 
now continuing to work at least part-time beyond retirement age to 
ensure that they can afford basic necessities. As such, CSFP is an 
important tool for them to remain healthy so that they may continue to 
be an active part of the work force.
    The Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee has consistently 
supported CSFP, acknowledging it as a cost-effective way of providing 
nutritious supplemental foods. We urge the Subcommittee to provide 
$375,000,000 subject to cost revisions submitted by the U. S. 
Department of Agriculture for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program 
in order to allow us to provide needed services to a minimum of 760,634 
vulnerable seniors each month.
    Again, thank you for your continuing support. We look forward to 
working with you on behalf of CSFP participants.

    [This statement was submitted by Danielle Bozarth, President, 
National Commodity Supplemental Food Program Association.]
                                 ______
                                 
      Prepared Statement of National Congress of American Indians
    The National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) is the oldest, 
largest, and most representative national organization serving the 
interests of tribal governments and communities. NCAI appreciates the 
opportunity to provide the following testimony on funding for tribal 
and related programs in the U.S. Department of Agriculture. More 
information on the funding requests that are outlined throughout this 
letter can be found in NCAI's FY 2022 Indian Country Budget Request: 
Restoring Promises.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ National Congress of American Indians (2021). Fiscal Year 2022 
Indian Country Budget Request: Restoring Promises. Washington, DC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Native peoples were farming this land long before the establishment 
of the first American colony. To this day, agriculture remains a major 
economic force in Indian Country, especially as a job creator for rural 
tribal communities. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) 2017 
Census of Agriculture counted at least 79,198 American Indian farm and 
ranch operators utilizing more than 59 million acres of land. These 
farms and ranches sold $3.5 billion of agricultural products, including 
more than $1.4 billion of crops and $2.1 billion of livestock and 
poultry. Additionally, the 2007 Census of Agriculture Fact Sheet notes 
that ``American Indian farm operators are more likely than their 
counterparts nationwide to report farming as their primary 
occupation...to derive a larger portion of their overall income from 
farming...[and] to own all of the land that they operate.'' Tribal 
Nations and individual Native farmers and ranchers rely on active 
partnerships with USDA to sustain and advance common interests across 
the broad array of services that this federal agency provides for 
tribal governments.
    USDA programs span a wide range of areas that impact Indian 
Country, including food safety, housing, business development, 
telecommunications and broadband, water systems, crop insurance, 
nutrition, land conservation, forestry, research, and, of course, the 
programs designed to assist farmers. From 2001 to 2018, USDA Rural 
Development (USDA-RD) invested more than $6.2 billion in Indian 
Country. As such, Tribal Nations look to the myriad services, programs, 
and resources available from USDA to ensure sustained prosperity and 
economic security for American Indians and Alaska Natives--not only 
through its programs to farmers and ranchers, but also through programs 
that serve tribal governments, natural resource managers, Native youth, 
colleges, water infrastructure providers, tribal utilities and housing 
providers, and tribal communities.
    The 2018 Farm Bill contained a historic number of new tribal 
provisions, several of which need increased funding, outreach, and 
technical assistance support to ensure full and proper implementation 
consistent with the intent of Congress. Additionally, the 2018 Farm 
Bill extended tribal self-determination contracting under the Indian 
Self-Determination Education and Assistance Act of 1975 (P.L. 93-638) 
to two USDA programs in food procurement and forestry management. 
Accordingly, NCAI requests the following amounts of programmatic 
support.

             U.S. Department of Agriculture FY 2022 Requests
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Department of Agriculture Programs          NCAI FY 2022 Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1994 Institutions Extension Program (NIFA)  $107,000,000
1994 Institutions Research Program........  $60,500,000
1994 Institutions Educational Equity        $250,000 from non-INAP
 Grants.                                     resources
Native American Endowment Account (Corpus   $434,400,000
 Payment).
TCU Essential Community Facilities Program  $10 million
Office of Tribal Relations................  $1.5 million
Rural Development.........................  $3.4 billion
Rural Utilities Service...................  $980.7 million
Rural Housing and community Facilities      $29 billion
 Programs.
Natural Resources Conservation Service      $1.75 billion
 (NRCS), Environmental Quality Incentives
 Program.
NRCS, Conservation Stewardship Program....  $725 million
Federally Recognized Tribal Extension       $30 million
 Program.
Food Distribution Program on Indian         $200 million
 Reservations (FDPIR).
FDPIR, Traditional Foods Market             $5 million
 Development.
FDPIR, Demonstration Project for Tribal     $5 million
 Organizations.
Industrial Hemp Production, Regulation,     Amounts as necessary to
 and Research.                               implement authorizing
                                             provisions
Rural Development 502 Direct Loan Program   $50 million
 for Tribal Relending Demonstration,
 tribal set-aside.
TCU Broadband/IT Infrastructure Fund        $24 million
 (Rural Utilities Service).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rural Development, Rural Housing and Community Facilities Programs: 
Access to housing, community, and home repair financing provides Native 
individuals, families, and communities with security, credit 
facilities, and repair and weatherization needs. This financing also 
supports community and educational facilities and provides employment 
in construction and related industries that flows from access to 
capital in Indian Country. In FY 2013, the Rural Housing Service (RHS) 
programs provided $177 million in economic support to American Indian 
and Alaska Native enterprises and communities, as well as tribal 
colleges. During this time, USDA-RD provided 56 Single Family Housing 
direct loans (totaling $119 million) and 1,100 Single Family Housing 
loan guarantees (totaling $155 million).
    NCAI requests a minimum of $29 billion in loan authority for the 
Rural Housing and Community Facilities Programs.
    Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations Program (FDPIR): 
FDPIR is currently serving approximately 276 Tribal Nations and is a 
critical food assistance program, particularly in areas that do not 
have easy access to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) 
offices or authorized food stores. Through more than 100 Indian Tribal 
Organizations (ITOs) and three state agencies, FDPIR provides USDA 
foods to low-income households and the elderly living on Indian 
reservations and to AI/AN households residing in eligible areas near 
reservations or in Oklahoma. The ITOs also provide employment to local 
and tribal personnel who administer the program. Average monthly 
participation for FY 2019 was 83,800. Additional funding is needed to 
address the new demands on the programs, rising food costs--especially 
the increasing price of meat-based proteins--and to improve program 
operations at ITO sites, many of which have lacked the administrative 
funds necessary to update critical equipment like refrigerators and 
freezers.
    NCAI requests $200 million for the FDPIR Program. NCAI also 
requests an additional $5 million to develop a traditional foods market 
for FDPIR, and, separately, an additional $5 million for the Tribal 
Self-Governance Demonstration Program.
    Rural Development (RD), Rural Utilities Services (RUS), and Rural 
Housing and Community Facilities Programs: USDA-RD began implementing 
changes in 2012 designed to improve access to RUS funding for 
individuals living in Substantially Underserved Trust Areas (SUTA)--
including tribal lands and lands owned by Alaska Native Regional 
Corporations and Village Corporations--to improve basic services, 
including: water and waste disposal, rural electrification and high-
cost energy, telecommunications and broadband infrastructure, and 
distance learning and telemedicine. The SUTA changes, originally 
authorized by the 2008 Farm Bill, still require additional funding for 
administration as well as for programs and loan authority within RUS. 
It is important that more funding is made available to provide the 
infrastructure development and upgrades necessary in Indian Country.
    NCAI requests $980.624 million to RUS; $1.5 million for the USDA's 
Office of Tribal Relations; and $1.5 million for the USDA Rural 
Development Tribal Technical Assistance Program.
                               conclusion
    Thank you for this opportunity to provide written testimony and for 
your consideration of the FY 2022 budget recommendations of NCAI. We 
look forward to working with this subcommittee on a nonpartisan basis 
to ensure the federal government honors its treaty and trust 
obligations to Tribal Nations through the federal budget process. For 
more information, please contact Policy Analyst Julia Wakeford 
([email protected]).

    [This statement was submitted by Dante Desiderio, Chief Executive 
Officer of the National Congress of American Indians.]
                                 ______
                                 
  Prepared Statement of the National Cooperative Business Association 
                                 CLUSA
    Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony to support your 
work on Fiscal Year 2022 appropriations. The National Cooperative 
Business Association CLUSA International (NCBA CLUSA) represents the 
more than 65,000 cooperative businesses in the United States across all 
sectors of our economy and is an international development organization 
currently working in more than 20 countries.
    The COVID-19 pandemic has ravaged nearly every aspect of life for 
Americans and people across the world. Over the past 15 months, 
cooperative businesses have faced the same challenges as non-
cooperative counterparts but have navigated these challenges in 
fundamentally different ways. Cooperatives are owned and controlled by 
their members, and as such, were able to quickly adapt and make 
decisions in the best interest of all stakeholders-member-owners, 
employees, supply chain partners and the community.
    Cooperatives are more resilient than other business models, 
particularly in times of economic crisis. During the pandemic, many 
cooperative businesses chose to make other adjustments to business 
operations in lieu of laying off employees, including decisions to 
collectively reduce hours or pay. Moreover, many cooperatives have gone 
above and beyond to meet the needs of high-risk community members as 
well as create new partnerships with businesses whose operations were 
impacted by closures. For example, many food co-ops not only expanded 
services to accommodate shopping hours and delivery services for high-
risk people, but also built new and strengthened existing partnerships 
with local farmers that depended on contracts with schools and 
restaurants.
    As our nation transitions toward recovery, more people are turning 
to cooperatives to meet their day-to-day needs and capture economic 
opportunity, it is imperative the Congress allocate funding necessary 
to meet this demand for cooperative business development.
    First, NCBA CLUSA requests funding the Rural Cooperative 
Development Grant program at its authorized level of $40 million, 
including no less than $15 million for technical assistance grants for 
cooperative development organizations. RCDG, administered by the Rural 
Business-Cooperative Service, is awarded on a competitive basis to 
development organizations and institutions of higher education to 
provide technical assistance to support cooperative businesses start-
up, expand and innovate in rural communities.
    Despite growing demand, this grant has been stagnant at $5.8 
million for nearly a decade. While requests for technical assistance 
have steadily increased in the last several years, it has spiked for 
many cooperative development organizations in the last 15 months, with 
some organizations reporting four times the number of requests of 
assistance.
    In addition to requests for assistance in cooperative startups, 
there is also significant drive from retiring business owners seeking 
to sell their business to a cooperative of workers or consumers. Many 
business owners of the Baby Boomer generation, particularly those in 
rural America, are considering selling their businesses in the wake of 
the COVID economic turbulence. In many cases, employees or consumers 
are the most viable buyers, when the alternatives are selling out to a 
bigger firm, or worse, shuttering the business altogether.
    Moreover, the pandemic has created an opportunity to strengthen the 
economies of rural communities. Many families chose to relocate to 
rural communities during the pandemic and are experiencing the quality 
of life and opportunity these communities hold. We must ensure that 
rural communities capture this dynamic and provide a lively the jobs 
and recreational opportunities that contribute to a high quality of 
life. Cooperatives provide community-driven, long-term solution for 
small businesses to thrive for generations to come.
    Second, NCBA CLUSA requests $25 million for the Rural Energy 
Savings Program (RESP) administered by the Rural Utilities Service. 
RESP provides no-interest loans to rural electric cooperatives to 
invest in energy efficiency improvement in rural households. The 
electric co-op or other eligible intermediary works with households to 
facilitate these projects with low or no upfront costs and are paid 
back through monthly on-bill financing.
    Across rural America, rural households face energy burdens 
significantly higher than non-rural homes. RESP not only creates 
greater opportunity for more households to reduce their monthly energy 
bills, but the on-bill financing mechanism ensures that these projects 
can equitably reach low-income households where additional savings can 
have lifechanging impacts.
    Greater resources available for RESP will help scale the impacts of 
energy efficiency improvements across more households and cooperative 
service areas, reducing the overall climate impact. Moreover, RESP 
projects create or support good-paying 21st century energy jobs, with 
many cooperatives choosing to hire new staff to the cooperative or 
contracting with local businesses specializing in these activities, 
further spurring economic activity and growth in rural communities.
    Finally, NCBA CLUSA urges robust funding for the Foreign 
Agriculture Service Food for Peace and McGovern-Dole Food for Education 
programs. NCBA CLUSA is proud to partner with local actors in countries 
across the world using the cooperative approach to promote economic 
growth and build more inclusive, resilient local economies. 
Importantly, NCBA CLUSA projects are built on the seven cooperative 
principles and designed to address larger societal issues that 
communities face by addressing food access, creating equitable 
opportunities for women and young people, and improving health and 
nutrition. These projects are driven by people living in the community, 
with technical assistance from NCBA CLUSA, to build institutions that 
are sustainable long after the project ends. The projects equip people 
with the skills to use the cooperative model to effectively address 
other economic or social challenges that may arise in the future.
    In the United States and globally, the impacts of the pandemic will 
continue to have the harshest impacts on the most vulnerable members of 
communities across the world. Cooperatives have historically been a 
model especially effective for disadvantaged people, not only because 
of lower barriers to entry than other forms of business, but also 
because cooperatives are democratically controlled, so member-owners 
ensure that the business remains responsive to members' most pressing 
needs as conditions change.
    As many communities continue to weather the public health and 
economic impacts of the pandemic, cooperatives are a time-tested 
solution to help more people own and control the businesses they use. 
Both domestically and internationally, the cooperative model can help 
more people to address market failures, gain greater parity with bigger 
competitors, or create market alternatives to existing goods and 
services through local ownership. Robust investments in cooperatives 
will help more people fully recover from the consequences of the 
pandemic, benefit from a rapidly changing economy to reap more of the 
profits they help to create and be more resilient to future economic 
shocks that may come.
    Thank you for your consideration of these requests. NCBA CLUSA 
looks forward to continuing to work with the Subcommittee on 
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and 
Related Agencies on Fiscal Year 2022 appropriations.

    [This statement was submitted by Douglas J. O'Brien, President & 
CEO, McGovern-Dole Food for Education.]
                                 ______
                                 
           Prepared Statement of the National Cotton Council
    This is to transmit the cotton industry's request for FY 2022 
funding for selected programs under the jurisdiction of the 
Subcommittee. The National Cotton Council (NCC) appreciates your 
consideration of our requests.
    The NCC is the central organization of the United States cotton 
industry. Its members include producers, ginners, cottonseed processors 
and merchandizers, merchants, cooperatives, warehousers and textile 
manufacturers. A majority of the industry is concentrated in 17 cotton-
producing states stretching from California to Virginia. U.S. cotton 
producers cultivate between 10 and 14 million acres of cotton with 
production averaging 12 to 20 million 480-lb bales annually. The 
downstream manufacturers of cotton apparel and home furnishings are 
located in virtually every state. Farms and businesses directly 
involved in the production, distribution and processing of cotton 
employ more than 115,000 workers and produce direct business revenue of 
more than $22 billion. Annual cotton production is valued at more than 
$5.5 billion at the farm gate, the point at which the producer markets 
the crop. Accounting for the ripple effect of cotton through the 
broader economy, direct and indirect employment surpasses 265,000 
workers with economic activity of almost $75 billion. In addition to 
the cotton fiber, cottonseed products are used for livestock feed and 
cottonseed oil is used as an ingredient in food products as well as 
being a premium cooking oil.
    The NCC welcomes the opportunity to provide the following 
recommendations and requests for FY 2022 appropriations for programs 
which make important contributions to our industry's ability to compete 
and prosper in a world market.
                           funding priorities
    Animal Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS): The NCC supports 
adequate funding so that APHIS can continue to administer essential 
services.
    Cotton Pests: The NCC requests $15.83 million (a $2.31 million 
increase) for the APHIS Cotton Pests Account. This increase in funding 
will partially offset additional program costs resulting from Hurricane 
Hanna passing through the National Buffer Zone (NBZ), as well as more 
aggressive eradication activities currently underway to accelerate 
completion of eradication.
    The NBZ is the remaining U.S. cotton acreage with residual boll 
weevil populations requiring active eradication operations and is 
located in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas. The NBZ is viewed by 
the cotton industry as an area that protects the national investment in 
this program to date. The U.S. cotton industry recognizes unique 
circumstances of the NBZ bordering active boll weevil populations in 
Tamaulipas, Mexico. The successful completion of boll weevil 
eradication in the U.S. is biologically linked to the success of boll 
weevil eradication in adjacent areas of northern Tamaulipas, Mexico.
    The data for early 2020 reflected the progress of 2019 and advanced 
population reduction significantly until Hurricane Hanna passed through 
the NBZ which caused significant setback and essentially 80% loss of 
cotton crop. High winds destroyed more than 60% of the pheromone 
trapping grid used to monitor weevil movement and areas with growing 
populations, and also dispersed weevils across multiple fields and 
locations that were essentially free of the boll weevil. Flooding and 
continued rain impeded any treatment activities, thus allowing adult 
females to lay numerous eggs protected from program operations for at 
least 30 days as the boll weevil larvae matured inside cotton fruit. 
Record freezing temperatures in the NBZ during the winter of 2021 have 
aided the program by eliminating numerous non-commercial cotton plants 
and likely some overwintering weevils. Scientifically, it would appear 
the 2021 year should provide great advancement of the eradication 
efforts.
    Elimination of Invasice Exotic Cotton Pest Introductions: The NCC 
requests $2 Million in new funds directed to APHIS for the Elimination 
of Invasive Exotic Cotton Pest Introductions. The Cotton Seed Bug (CSB) 
has been identified in residential and urban areas of three counties in 
California. This represents the introduction of a new cotton pest to 
the U.S. The CSB has been reported to cause up to 6.8% reduction in 
yield, 32% reduction in seed weight, 6% reduction in oil content of 
seed, unquantified reduction in germination of seed, unquantified 
reduction in ginning efficiencies, quality reduction due to lint stain, 
reduction in lint quality and reduction in square retention. The 
primary food of adults and nymphs are the seeds of plants in the 
Malvaceae family, which include cotton. Based on literature reporting 
annual damage incurred as a result of CSB, the NCC has conservatively 
estimated $47.8 million dollars lost annually for California, $28.5 
million for Arizona, and $8 million for New Mexico if steps are not 
taken to remedy this threat. APHIS needs funds to improve diagnostic 
capabilities for this virus, survey the fairly isolated area where 
these two finds occurred, sample potential alternate hosts in order to 
determine if alternate host destruction may eliminate this virus from 
the U.S. and prevent further spread to nearby cotton production areas. 
Failure to react now could allow the virus to spread to additional 
areas with greater host availability and more rapid spread across the 
U.S.
    Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS): The industry supports 
sufficient funding to ensure FAS is adequately staffed to carry out 
important market development and trade enhancing functions in 
headquarters and abroad.
    Market Access Program (MAP): The NCC strongly supports the funding 
level of at least $200 million for MAP, as authorized and funded in the 
2018 Farm Bill. Cotton Council International (CCI), the foreign market 
development arm of the NCC, has the critical mission of maintaining and 
expanding exports of US cotton and cotton products in Asia, Europe, 
Africa, and Central and South America. The value of U.S. cotton fiber 
and value-added cotton product exports exceed $10 billion in value. 
Activities carried out using MAP and Foreign Market Development (FMD) 
funds have been documented as contributing to increased export sales of 
cotton fiber and value-added manufactured cotton products. Independent 
studies reveal that for every dollar spent by USDA cooperators, 
including CCI, U.S. exports increase $35, a 35-to-1 return on 
investment. For the cotton industry, this represents over one billion 
dollars in export value or an additional 7,000 jobs to the U.S. 
economy. The cotton industry believes CCI's programs are an effective 
catalyst for private sector investments, with the industry investing 
$2.00 for every dollar of MAP funds received.
    Foreign Market Development (FMD): The FMD program is used to 
encourage and support U.S. commodity groups to undertake long-term 
market development and trade servicing. These funds are used for 
programs with detailed market assessments, strategic program 
development and ongoing evaluations. These funds create unique market 
development and trade servicing value and, like the MAP funds, are 
closely monitored by USDA for compliance with U.S. laws. FMD is 
currently funded at no less than $34.5 million and requires at least a 
dollar-for-dollar industry match. The industry requests that funding 
for FMD be continued at no less than the level authorized in the 2018 
Farm Bill. The cotton industry believes CCI's programs are an effective 
catalyst for private sector investments with industry investments 
totaling $1.75 for every dollar of FMD funds received.
    Farm Service Agency (FSA) and National Resource Conservation 
Service (NRCS): The NCC supports adequate funding for both agencies so 
that FSA and NRCS can continue to deliver essential farm and 
conservation programs and services.
    Joint Pest Eradication: The NCC requests sufficient funding to 
allow FSA to make up to $30 million in loans to eligible producer-
controlled organizations carrying out Boll Weevil Eradication Program. 
This authority has existed since FY2005 and has been critically 
important to the success of the programs. There has not been a 
forfeiture on any loan made by FSA for the purpose of carrying out boll 
weevil eradication efforts.
    Risk Management Agency (RMA): The NCC supports adequate funding so 
that RMA can continue to administer essential insurance products.
    Agricultural Research Service (ARS): The cotton industry continues 
to be concerned with the financial support of this important intramural 
research agency. ARS programs and facilities conduct vital research 
programs in fiber quality, production agronomic systems and textiles 
that ultimately support U.S. cotton production and post-harvest 
processing as well as the U.S. textile industry's efforts to remain 
competitive in global markets.
    Cotton Breeding And Germplasm Program: The NCC specifically 
requests an annual funding increase of $6.8 million to support five 
major cotton breeding and germplasm development program locations in 
Arizona, Mississippi, South Carolina and Texas. There have been 
numerous budget cycles since these programs have seen any significant 
increases. Four of the five major research locations are operating well 
below the current ARS standard of $600,000 per scientist year (SY). A 
portion of this appropriation increase request will be used to provide 
funding to achieve the recommended financial support level per SY. In 
addition, several new positions are needed in multiple locations to 
provide biological, physiological and genetic database support for 
existing cotton breeder projects. In many situations, the lead 
scientists and their support groups are working collaboratively with 
other major row crops such as corn, grain sorghum and peanuts to 
provide sustainable regional cropping systems. Additionally, the Cotton 
Germplasm Collection is in desperate need of additional database 
management support and equipment to adequately catalog existing and new 
accessions (genetically and phenotypically) as well as properly renew 
the collection and then distribute requested germplasm to breeders, 
both public and private, at multiple locations servicing the US 
industry. Other major row crop germplasm collections have access to 
this type of support.
    Cotton Germplasm Collection: The collection is located at the ARS's 
Southern Plains Agricultural Research Center (SPARC), College Station, 
TX and needs significant repairs and renovation to the storage vault 
and related buildings and equipment. Plant breeding experts in cotton, 
that are also familiar with other crops, have identified specific 
renovations that will allow improved storage protection and 
distribution of the collection in addition to providing for increased 
space needs to better complete its mission. We request $2.3 million for 
building renovations for this facility.
    Cotton Ginning Research Units: We request maintaining the level of 
funding for FY 2022 provided in the FY 2018-2021 appropriations for the 
three cotton ginning research units (Southwestern Cotton Ginning 
Research Laboratory, Mesilla Park, NM; Cotton Production and Processing 
Research Unit, Lubbock, TX and the Cotton Ginning Research Unit, 
Stoneville, MS). All three ginning research units need this continued 
level of funding to address scientific personnel needs, conduct 
research, and offset the impact of inflation after years of flat or 
decreasing budgets.
    Cotton Blue Disease: We request an additional $1.5 million to 
Cotton Blue Disease account and urge the language be modified to 
``Exotic Pathogens of Cotton.'' Cotton Leafroll Dwarf Virus is closely 
related to Cotton Blue. The NCC urges the language modification to 
reflect ``Exotic Diseases of Cotton'', thus allowing funding 
prioritization should other exotic diseases threaten the cotton 
industry. In that regard, the additional $ 1.5 M are requested for 
needed proactive activities of the Cotton Leafroll Dwarf Virus.
    Elimination of Invasice Exotic Cotton Pest Introductions: As noted 
in the APHIS section, the Cotton Seed Bug (CSB) has been identified in 
residential and urban areas of three counties in California. The NCC 
requests $2 million in funding to allow ARS to conduct further research 
on the effects of the CSB in conjunction with APHIS.
    Thank you for your consideration of our recommendations and of our 
funding requests for FY 2021. Please contact me with any questions or 
if additional information is needed.

    [This statement was submitted by Reece Langley, VP, National Cotton 
Council.]
                                 ______
                                 
            Prepared Statement of the National Farmers Union
    I write on behalf of National Farmers Union's (NFU) roughly 200,000 
family farmer, rancher, and rural members. This past year, the COVID-19 
pandemic caused severe supply chain disruptions that led to lower 
prices for farmers and difficulty selling crops and livestock. The 
pandemic also resulted in unprecedented levels of stress in rural 
communities and on farms and ranches. The challenges of the past year 
compounded ongoing issues for farmers and rural communities, including 
chronic periods of sustained low crop prices and a changing climate.
    As you draft and advance appropriations legislation, I urge you to 
provide funding for programs that alleviate the challenges facing rural 
and agricultural communities and that improve the resiliency of our 
food system.
                fair, competitive, and resilient markets
    Many sectors in American agriculture are dominated by a small 
handful of multinational corporations. Multiple waves of nearly 
unfettered mergers and acquisitions over several decades has resulted 
in agriculture and food supply chains that are uncompetitive and that 
underpay farmers while overcharging consumers. This extreme 
concentration has also left food and agriculture supply chains less 
resilient and flexible, and thus vulnerable to shocks. During the 
COVID-19 pandemic, this was most evident in the disruption in the 
livestock and poultry industries, where the closures or slowdowns at 
several massive meatpacking plants resulted in lost markets for 
farmers.
    Concentration in the livestock and poultry industries has been on 
the rise for decades. Just four companies controlled approximately 83 
percent of beef slaughter and processing in 2017, and concentration is 
high in pork and poultry as well. Concentrated market structures 
increase opportunities for market manipulation and coordinated 
behavior. Yet, few significant enforcement actions have been taken in 
recent years by USDA under the Packers and Stockyards Act, a law meant 
to assure fair competition, safeguard farmers and ranchers, and protect 
consumers, from unfair, deceptive, and unjustly discriminatory and 
monopolistic practices of the livestock, meat, and poultry industries.
    NFU requests the inclusion of the following report language to 
address these concerns:
    The Packers and Stockyards Act is an important federal statute for 
protecting U.S. livestock and poultry farmers from abusive, 
discriminatory, deceptive, and anti-competitive practices by 
meatpackers, swine contractors and live poultry dealers. Yet the 
statute has been underutilized and underenforced for decades. The 
market disruptions in the meatpacking sector during and prior to the 
COVID-19 pandemic have highlighted the need to scrutinize how the 
practices of the dominant companies in the meat and poultry sectors 
affect farmers and consumers.
    The Committee urges the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) to 
increase enforcement of the Packers and Stockyards Act, including by 
updating existing regulations to expand the tools necessary for the 
agency to fully achieve the farmer protection intent of the Packers and 
Stockyards Act.
    We also request that the Committee provide USDA AMS with robust 
funding for Packers and Stockyards Act enforcement.
            farm and ranch stress assistance network (frsan)
    The purpose of FRSAN is to establish and fund a service provider 
network that connects individuals and their families engaged in 
farming, ranching, and other agriculture-related occupations to stress 
assistance programs. Funding thus far has been used to create four 
regional centers to coordinate efforts to serve the needs of their 
populations. These centers have been developing and implementing 
training and services to address farm stress issues.
    There are many causes of stress among farmers and their families, 
including volatility in the farm economy, the financial risk involved 
in agriculture, weather unpredictability, and a changing climate. Over 
the past year, COVID-19 has taken a significant toll, with a recent 
poll finding that two in three farmers or farmworkers say the pandemic 
has impacted their mental health. Moreover, 60 percent of rural 
residents live in areas with mental health professional shortages.
    We urge you to continue funding FRSAN, administered by the National 
Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), at the authorized level of 
$10 million. This funding is critically important in meeting the needs 
of farmers, ranchers, and their families as they endure and seek to 
manage stress.
                     agricultural mediation program
    It is essential that family farmers and ranchers have access to 
mediation services to resolve disputes affecting their operation. The 
Agricultural Mediation Program, administered by the Farm Service Agency 
(FSA), provides grants to state-designated entities that provide 
mediation services to agricultural producers, lenders, and others to 
resolve a variety of disputes. These services provide a low-cost 
alternative to appeals, litigation, and bankruptcy.
    Mediation programs have seen significant increases in caseload over 
the last several years, and the 2018 Farm Bill further expanded the 
breadth of cases the program covers. In FY21, the program received 
$6.9M through appropriations. To keep pace with growing demand, we urge 
you to increase funding to the fully authorized level of $7.5 million 
in FY22.
           rural cooperative development grant (rcdg) program
    The objective of the RCDG program is to improve the economic 
condition of rural areas by assisting individuals or entities in the 
startup, expansion, or operational improvement of rural cooperatives. 
Over the past decade, RCDG grants have been instrumental in developing 
over 650 businesses and creating more than 10,000 jobs. Yet, the RCDG 
program has received stagnant funding at $5.8 million since FY12. 
Congress should fund this program at its authorized level to sustain 
and accelerate recovery from the pandemic.
    NFU requests full funding for the Rural Cooperative Development 
Grant (RCDG) program, administered by USDA's Rural Business-Cooperative 
Service, at $40 million, including at least $15 million for technical 
assistance development grants.
                conservation programs and climate change
    As Congress and USDA continue to increase their focus on climate 
change, funding must be provided for America's family farmers and 
ranchers to sequester carbon, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and 
adapt working lands. The Environmental Quality Incentives Program 
(EQIP) and the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) are key programs 
in this effort, but demand for participation exceeds available funding 
by at least two to one. We urge you to reject any cuts to mandatory 
spending for farm bill conservation programs.
    On-the-ground capacity at the Natural Resources Conservation 
Service (NRCS) continues to be a limitation for farmers seeking to 
implement conservation practices on their land. While many farmers have 
implemented conservation practices as part of their operation, in some 
cases with the assistance of NRCS, many more stand ready to conserve 
soil, protect waterways, improve air quality, and both adapt to and 
mitigate the effects of a changing climate. However, NRCS often lacks 
the staff needed to help these farmers make such changes. We ask that 
you ensure there are sufficient resources to hire NRCS field staff to 
provide technical assistance to farmers and ranchers by providing at 
least $1.2 billion in funding for Conservation Operations, including 
$1.1 billion for Conservation Technical Assistance.
    Additionally, improved pasture and grazing management has the 
potential to play a substantial role in terrestrial carbon 
sequestration. Thus, we request funding at the authorized level of $60 
million per year for the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative (GLCI). 
The initiative is made up of local, state, and national organizations 
that provide technical assistance to help maintain and improve the 
management, productivity, and health of our nation's privately-owned 
grazing land.
        food safety education, outreach and technical assistance
    As producers struggle to learn the rules and come into compliance 
with the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), it is critical that 
adequate resources are directed to the Food Safety Outreach Program 
(FSOP). FSOP provides targeted outreach, education, and technical 
assistance to small- and mid-sized, beginning, and socially 
disadvantaged farmers and processors to help them comply with complex 
FSMA regulations.
    To help ensure a safe food supply for American families, and to 
help small- and mid-sized, beginning, and socially disadvantaged 
farmers comply with food safety regulations, we urge you to provide $10 
million for FSOP, administered by the National Institute of Food and 
Agriculture (NIFA), in FY22.
    We also request robust funding for Food and Drug Administration 
(FDA) FSMA implementation that will allow FDA to continue their current 
outreach, education, and technical assistance efforts.
                        usda farm loan programs
    It can be difficult, especially in today's farm economy, for some 
farmers to obtain credit from private lenders. Creditors may be 
hesitant to lend to farmers for a variety of reasons and can raise 
their collateral requirements to mitigate risk. When private lending is 
unavailable, farmers turn to Farm Service Agency (FSA) loans and loan 
guarantees.
    The 2018 Farm Bill increased limits for direct and guaranteed loans 
to reflect the current costs of owning and operating a farm. As the 
average size of FSA's loans increases, FSA must have the funding needed 
to maintain the number of loans it provides. Furthermore, many socially 
disadvantaged farmers have been historically underserved by USDA 
programs and lending. With recent legislation and commitments by USDA, 
important steps are underway to right these wrongs. FSA Farm Loan 
programs are well-positioned to help family farmers build a more 
equitable and resilient food system.
    NFU urges the committee to provide robust funding that will ensure 
farmers have access to FSA loans that help keep their farms in 
business.
                               conclusion
    Thank you for your attention to these matters. If you have any 
questions or would like to further discuss NFU's requests, please 
contact Aaron Shier, NFU Senior Government Relations Representative at 
[email protected].

    [This statement was submitted by Rob Larew, President, National 
Farmers Union.]
                                 ______
                                 
          Prepared Statement of the National Organic Coalition
    I am submitting this testimony on behalf of the National Organic 
Coalition (NOC) to detail our fiscal year 2022 funding requests for 
USDA programs of importance to the organic sector.
               usda/ agricultural marketing service (ams)
National Organic Program
Request: $22 million

    Organic agriculture is one of the fastest growing sectors of 
agriculture, fueled by strong consumer demand. The organic sector now 
exceeds $60 billion in annual sales with over 28,000 certified organic 
family farmers and other businesses represented.
    The National Organic Program (NOP) is the agency charged with 
regulating and enforcing the USDA organic label. NOP was funded at $14 
million for FY 2019, $16 million for FY 2020, and $18 million for FY 
2021. The President's FY 2022 budget has not yet been submitted. We are 
requesting $22 million for the NOP for FY 2022, as authorized by 
Section 10104(j) of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, in 
recognition of the need for enhanced oversight, enforcement and 
rulemaking for the rapidly growing sector.
    In addition, we are requesting the following report language to 
encourage NOP to increase enforcement efforts with regard to the soil 
health requirements of existing organic standards:

                USDA organic standards require organic farmers to use 
                farming practices that improve soil health, such as 
                crop rotations, cover cropping, and pasture-based 
                livestock practices. By improving soil health, these 
                farming practices also increase the carbon 
                sequestration potential of the soil, and improve the 
                farm's resilience to extreme weather events and 
                patterns. To maximize the climate benefits of organic 
                agriculture, the Committee urges the National Organic 
                Program to increase enforcement efforts to ensure full 
                compliance with the soil health and pasture 
                requirements of USDA organic standards.

                         usda (ams, nass, ers)
Organic Data Initiative
Request: $1 million for organic data collection and analysis

    Authorized by Section 7407 of the 2002 Farm Bill, the Organic 
Production and Marketing Data Initiative states that the``Secretary 
shall ensure that segregated data on the production and marketing of 
organic agricultural products is included in the ongoing baseline of 
data collection regarding agricultural production and marketing'' In 
addition to mandatory funding, Section 10103 of the 2018 Farm Bill 
authorizes $5 million annually in discretionary funding.
    As the organic industry matures and grows at a rapid rate, the lack 
of data for the production, pricing, and marketing of organic products 
has impeded further development of the industry and limited the 
functioning of USDA organic programs. Organic data collection and 
analysis at USDA has made significant strides in recent years but 
remains in its infancy.
    We request $1 million for FY 2022 for organic data collection at 
AMS, NASS, and ERS.
        usda/ national institute of food and agriculture (nifa)
Organic Transitions Program
Request: $10 million

    The Organic Transitions Program, authorized by Section 406 of the 
Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Reform Act (AREERA) for 
Integrated Research Programs, is a research grant program to help 
farmers address challenges of organic production and marketing. As the 
organic industry grows, the demand for research on organic agriculture 
is experiencing significant growth as well. This research has broad 
applications to all sectors of agriculture, even beyond the organic 
sector.
    Many organic research needs go unmet because of lack of adequate 
funding. As demand for organic products continues to grow at a fast 
rate, domestic production of organic food has not kept pace, requiring 
a greater percentage of organic product to be imported to meet the 
consumer demand. Funding for organic research has not kept pace with 
the growth in the industry either.
    The Organic Transition Program was funded at $6 million for FY 
2020, and $7 million for FY 2021. The Administration's FY 2022 budget 
has not yet been submitted. We are seeking $10 million for FY 2022, 
with report language to specify that the increase in funding should be 
used for fund research regarding climate change and organic 
agriculture.
                     usda/farm service agency (fsa)
National Organic Certification Cost Share Program (NOCCSP)
Request: $12 million in one-time funding

    The Organic Certification Cost Share Program is important for small 
and mid-size farms, underserved farmers, and new organic farmers. 
Unfortunately, USDA's Farm Service Agency (FSA) unilaterally cut 2020 
reimbursements to organic farmers under the Organic Certification Cost 
Share Program, in conflict with the 2018 Farm Bill directive. The 
agency has also explained that they will be cutting reimbursement for 
the next 3 years as well. The problem resulted from accounting errors 
by FSA under the previous Administration. NOC has requested that 
Secretary Vilsack fix the problem internally, but we are also asking 
Congress to work with USDA to fix the problem through the FY 2022 
appropriations process, if necessary. To address this problem, we are 
asking that Congress provide $12 million in extra funding for the 
Organic Certification Cost Share Program in the FY 2022 Agriculture 
Appropriations bill.

Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI)
Request: Report language on public cultivar development

    In recent decades, public resources for the development of improved 
plant varieties and cultivars have dwindled, while resources have 
shifted toward genomics and biotechnology, with a focus on a limited 
set of major crops.
    In Section 7406 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, 
the National Research Initiative was merged with the Initiative for 
Future Agriculture and Food Systems to become the Agriculture and Food 
Research Initiative (AFRI). Congress included language within AFRI to 
make ``conventiona'' plant and animal breeding a priority for AFRI 
grants, consistent with concerns expressed by the Appropriations 
Committee in past appropriations cycles.
    In the last several years, USDA has made regionally adapted 
cultivar development using conventional breeding techniques a higher 
priority within the plant breeding funding area. Recently, in response 
to direction from the Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee 
report language, a ``Conventional Plant Breeding for Cultivar 
Development'' program area was created within the Plant Health and 
Production and Plant Products (PHPPP) priority area with the 
Foundational and Applied Science RFA of AFRI. While this development 
represents progress, there are several areas where further improvement 
is needed: 1) the amount of funding overall remains extremely low 
relative to the need; 2) the AFRI practice of awarding three-to-five-
year grants conflicts with the longer-term breeding cycles typical for 
public cultivar development projects 3) the ``Conventional Plant 
Breeding for Cultivar Developmen'' RFA does not specify that the 
cultivars developed with these grants should remain publicly available 
for farmers and for plant breeders for future breeding efforts; and 4) 
the maximum grant in this new program area priority is $500,000, 
whereas the grant limit within the other PHPPP program area priorities 
range from $650,000 for standard grants up to $800,000 for 
partnerships.

                Therefore, we request the following AFRI report 
                language to address these concerns:

                Section 7406 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act 
                of 2008 specifies priority areas within the Agriculture 
                and Food Research Initiative [AFRI], including an 
                emphasis on conventional (classical) plant and animal 
                breeding. The Committee strongly concurs with the 
                intent of this section and appreciates the agency's 
                progress in creating a distinct Conventional Plant 
                Breeding for Cultivar Development program area priority 
                within the AFRI program for development of locally and 
                regionally adapted cultivars, as the Committee 
                previously directed. While noting this progress, the 
                Committee expects the agency to significantly increase 
                funding for this AFRI priority area, to increase the 
                timeframe for grants made in this area to be more in 
                keeping with classical plant breeding timeframes, to 
                increase grant funding limits to be parallel with the 
                other AFRI Plant Health and Production and Plant Health 
                program areas, and to require that cultivars developed 
                using these grants be publicly available for farmers 
                and for plant breeders for future breeding efforts. In 
                addition, the agency should take steps to improve its 
                tracking of public cultivar development projects within 
                AFRI. The Committee further directs the agency to 
                report its progress in meeting these requirements.

Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE)
Request: $60 million

The SARE program has successfully funded on-farm research on 
environmentally sound and profitable practices and systems, including 
organic production. The reliable information developed and distributed 
through SARE grants is very helpful to organic farmers. SARE was funded 
at $37 million in FY2020, and $40 million in FY2021. The President's 
FY2022 budget has not yet been submitted. We are requesting $60 million 

for SARE for FY 2022.Food Safety Outreach Program
Request: $15 million

    We are requesting $15 million to help small and mid-size farms and 
small processing facilities comply with food safety requirements. This 
training program, authorized in the Food Safety Modernization Act of 
2010 (FSMA), is one of the best and least costly ways to improve food 
safety outcomes without resorting to excessive farm regulation. The 
program received $7 million for FY2018, and $8 million for FY2020, and 
$10 million for FY2021.The President's FY2022 budget has not yet been 
submitted. We are requesting $15 million for FY2022.
          usda/national agricultural statistics service (nass)
Tenure, Ownership, and Transition of Agricultural Land (TOTAL) Survey
Request: $3 million

    Land access is a major challenge facing beginning, socially 
disadvantaged, and young farmers, including organic farmers. Sec. 12607 
of the 2018 Farm Bill tasked the National Agricultural Statistics 
Service with completing an updated TOTAL Survey to provide data on 
farmland ownership, tenure, transition, and entry of beginning and 
socially disadvantaged farmers. NOC requests $3 million for this survey 
for FY 2022.

Organic Research within the Agricultural Research Service (ARS)
Request: $20 million

    Organic farmers across the country lack research on basic agronomic 
challenges. ARS organic funding has declined from over $15 million in 
FY2007 to just $12 million in FY2020. This is less than 1 percent of 
the ARS research budget, versus organic's market share of 6 percent. To 
start addressing this inequity, we are requesting FY2022 statutory 
language to require not less than $20 million for ARS organic research.
    Thank you for your consideration of these requests.

    [This statement was submitted by Steven Etka, Policy Director, 
National Organic Coalition.]
                                 ______
                                 
  Prepared Statement of National Predictive Modeling Tool Initiative 
                                (NPMTI)
    The National Predictive Modeling Tool Initiative (NPMTI) operates 
under the auspices of the USDA-ARS. NPMTI received funding from the 
Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food & 
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies in FY20. It was funded again 
in FY21. NPMTI is requesting a $7-million increase in funding to $12-
million for FY22 so that this successful program can be expanded to 
more geographies and to additional crops.
    NPMTI was designed as a multi-year program to develop research-
based tools to help growers forecast crop diseases and mycotoxins. 
Currently, it brings together applied researchers and pathologists 
(most of whom work in Extension) from 26 states to develop practical 
solutions to diseases that threaten U.S. wheat, corn, and cotton crops. 
This team coordinates and shares research methods and results at 
unprecedented levels. Increased funding will allow expansion of the 
initiative into such crops as peanuts, soybeans, tomatoes, and tuberous 
crops including potatoes, sugar beets and sweet potatoes. Longer term 
expansion into apples, grapes, strawberries and hay, among others is 
anticipated.
    To address the resulting threats of soil erosion, rainfall runoff 
and soil crusting, and improve the resilience of U.S. agriculture, many 
growers across the nation have adopted soil conservation practices 
including reduced tillage and cover crops. These environmentally-sound 
soil conservation practices have precluded the use of two standard 
disease controlling tools: crop residue incorporation (i.e., 
sanitation) and exclusion of alternate hosts.
    Historically, tillage was used to bury crop residues in the soil to 
promote rapid decomposition of stalks, leaves and associated pathogens, 
while non-crop areas were often maintained vegetation free. With soil 
conservation programs, residues now remain on the surface providing 
necessary soil health benefits but also leaving pathogen inoculum for 
future crop infection. Non-crop areas are managed now as grassed 
waterways, filter strips and wildlife habitat that can serve as a 
pathogen bridge from one crop season to the next. Farmers need the 
information that NPMTI researchers are developing to predict when 
pathogens will threaten.
    National Agricultural Genotyping Center (NAGC) is a not-for-profit 
forensic laboratory that develops assays (tests) that can detect and 
quantify pathogens in crop samples. Testing results are sent to Los 
Alamos National Laboratory for inclusion in its suite of modeling 
tools.
    Recent advancements in detecting and modeling the movement of human 
pathogens, such as SARS-CoV-2 can be adapted to plant pathogens with 
appropriate investment. Methods to forecast inoculum exposure would 
allow growers to take timely, better informed management decisions such 
as: delayed planting, resistant varieties, selective fungicides, crop 
growth regulators, irrigation management, and targeted rotations, among 
other agronomic practices.
    There are many advantages and benefits of predictive modeling. 
NPMTI, through these modeling efforts, will improve disease management, 
thereby reducing yield losses, while ensuring crop sustainability and 
quality under changing climate conditions. Over time, baseline 
background levels of various pathogens can be established, which will 
inform anomaly detection and serve as an early warning system for our 
nation's food security.
    On the following pages, three key NPMTI collaborators address the 
agronomic, economic and environmental aspects of arming our nation's 
farmers in advance of disease outbreaks.

    [This statement was submitted by Peter L. Snyder, Chairman, 
National Predictive Modeling Tool Initiative (NPMTI), President, 
National Agricultural Genotyping Center, Inc. (NAGC).]
                     los alamos national laboratory
    Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) has extensive experience in 
the development of epidemiological models, analytics and databases to 
support decision making during infectious disease events in humans. 
Some recent examples include planning vaccine strategies, school re-
openings for the state of New Mexico during the COVID-19 pandemic and 
earlier on, using our analytics to understand effective mitigation 
strategies for the 2014 Ebola outbreak. In the first year of the NPMTI, 
we have leveraged this experience and are adapting some of our tools to 
facilitate preparedness for crop diseases, specifically, corn, cotton 
and wheat.
    A major task for this adaptation was to identify crop disease 
relevant data streams and acquire the data for surveillance of crop 
pathogens and outbreaks. LANL established a working group to include 
representatives from each of the crop specific research area committees 
(RACS--corn, cotton and wheat) and established key collaborations with 
Dr. Erick DeWolfe, Dr. Pierce Paul, Dr. Heather Kelly, and Mr. Dan 
McDonald for data sources. These collaborations will be essential for 
future development and adaptation of LANL tools.
    LANL designed and developed version 1 of the NPMTI database that 
accommodates the surveillance data collected by the three RACs (cotton, 
corn, wheat). Information to be stored includes all data that describes 
the actual setup in a field and all data that are essential to disease 
forecasting tools and models that are used to inform end users such as 
the agricultural community. This database has been designed to be a 
``one stop shop'' for data that can be used by any entity that is 
building crop disease prediction and forecasting models.
    A second LANL tool that is being leveraged for crop disease 
management is Analytics for investigation of disease outbreaks (AIDO). 
This is a visual analytic tool that contains a library of 
representative historical outbreaks of infectious diseases and uses a 
similarity algorithm to compare an unfolding event to the closest match 
in the library and provide control/mitigation actions together with a 
forecast of the trajectory of the unfolding event. LANL developed 
version 1 of AIDO4Crops for Wheat Rust, with planned expansion to other 
Wheat diseases. Following is a simple use case for this version--an 
agricultural extension officer in Kansas visits a farm with extensive 
leaf rust in the North West corner of the state in April. The officer 
is interested in identifying a historical year(s) that has similar rust 
occurrence at this location in April in order to assess possible spread 
of rust for the rest of Kansas. In this scenario, the extension officer 
would input the current situation into the AIDO4Crops user interface 
and evaluate the wheat rust library for Kansas. The closest matching 
rust year would provide the officer with all the details and aid the 
extension officer in making effective recommendations for fungicide 
application in the state.
    Finally, in year 2, in addition to iterative improvement and 
expansion of the NPMTI database and AIDO4Crops, LANL will leverage its 
extensive experience in diagnostic and detection technologies to 
develop a fieldable technique for mycotoxin detection. LANL is thus 
supporting NPMTI through a suite of tools to bolster preparedness for 
the nation's farmers.

    [This statement was submitted by Alina Deshpande, Ph.D., Group 
Leader Biosecurity and Public Health, Bioscience Division.]
                  cotton research area committee (rac)
    Cotton uniquely benefits from the NPMTI because of its role in 
expanding farm resilience to climate change, enhancing farm 
profitability and improving rotational crops such as soybeans, peanuts, 
and tomatoes.
    The NPMTI allows cotton growers to benefit from reduced-tillage and 
no-till instead of sanitation tillage. Historically, tillage or burning 
was necessary to destroy pathogens in crop residue. Tools developed by 
the NPMTI can provide annual pathogen alerts that now give growers the 
confidence to avoid these harsh measures when conditions are 
unfavorable for disease outbreaks and utilize environmentally friendly 
preventative methods when diseases are predicted. The use of surface 
residue, from conservation-till or no till, is expanding across the 
U.S. Innovative growers may adopt these for a single benefit, such as 
soil erosion, and then see multiple benefits from weed suppression, 
wind erosion protection, nutrient availability, rainwater capture, soil 
water storage and root health. These last three are pillars for 
building climate resilience on the farm because the early damage that 
farmers face from climate change is erratic rainfall. As the atmosphere 
and oceans warm storms become more violent and droughts more intense. 
Resilient farming practices better infiltrate heavy rainfall, store 
more moisture during droughts and increase root health for nutrient and 
water uptake.
    The NPMTI enhances farm profitability at a time when profit margins 
are squeezed between variable yields and the ever-rising costs of 
inputs. Even now, when commodity prices are favorable, the input 
suppliers of fertilizer, seed, equipment, and chemicals are increasing 
their prices to capture more of the farm profitability. There is no 
room in farm budgets for disease outbreaks that devastate yields or for 
unbudgeted expensive disease protectants. The NPMTI provides growers 
actionable intelligence to avoid disease outbreaks with cost effective 
tools by planting a more resistant variety or budgeting for disease 
prevention before the outbreak.
    The NPMTI can create farm benefits beyond its current 3 crops, 
because the tools and science learned from cotton, corn or wheat can be 
adapted to a multitude of other crops by both farmers and scientists. 
Examples from cotton are clear. Cotton and peanuts are a preferred 
rotation of growers in Georgia, Virginia, Texas and North Carolina 
because of the disease and nematode suppression each offer to the 
other. Collaboration between these crops through NPMTI will strengthen 
the yield and profitability benefits of this rotation with tools that 
help growers adjust inputs or varieties in one crop to further suppress 
diseases or nematodes in the other. Cotton and soybeans are a preferred 
rotation in the Midsouth. Both crops are impacted by Target Spot and 
both benefit from advanced spore sampling methods to help growers 
anticipate disease outbreaks before damage or costly fungicide 
applications. Processing tomatoes are commonly rotated with cotton for 
weed and disease suppression and salt management. Expanding the NPMTI 
to tomatoes, soybeans and peanuts would extend the knowledge that 
cotton, corn and wheat growers gain from the NPMTI to the diversity of 
crops they grow.
    Collaboration across multiple states and rotational crops 
strengthens the precision of tools that farmers need to maintain 
profitability in times of uncertain weather, diseases, and markets. The 
NPMTI already encompasses 26 states and 3 crops. Geographical and crop 
expansion of this existing collaboration is the logical next step in 
serving U.S. farmers.

    [This statement was submitted by Kater D. Hake, Ph.D., Vice 
President, Agricultural & Environmental Research, Cotton Inc., Co-
Chair, NPMTI Cotton Research Area Committee (RAC).]
                     wheat research area committee
    Wheat is the third-largest commodity crop and largest food crop 
grown in the United States. NPMTI plays a crucial role in developing 
predictive models and tools to help wheat growers evaluate disease 
risk. As growers learn to use these tools, they will maximize the 
efficacy of management decisions, reduce disease-related yield losses, 
and help ensure wheat production remains a viable economic crop in the 
United States.
    Wheat is one of the most versatile plants on Earth. Six classes of 
wheat are produced in 42 states in the United States and nearly every 
region on six continents around the world. Through NPMTI, the wheat 
research area committee (RAC) collects data in six states for two 
disease complexes that result in annual losses of $528 million. The 
pathologists involved in the NPMTI represent a broad cross-section of 
the wheat-producing regions and environmental conditions.
    Wheat in the United States is affected by many types of foliar 
diseases. These foliar diseases limit the productivity and quality of 
the wheat crop in the United States every year. The magnitude of the 
disease-related losses within a state or wheat-producing region varies 
annually and are strongly influenced by environmental conditions 
(weather and cropping system factors such as tillage and crop rotation) 
that favor the survival, reproduction, and movement of pathogens within 
and across fields or regions. Yield losses are further influenced by 
the genetic susceptibility of wheat varieties grown regionally, the 
timing of disease onset relative to crop growth, and whether pesticides 
are applied and applied correctly. Identifying risk factors related to 
the presence and abundance of inoculum, host susceptibility, favorable 
weather conditions, and quantifying their relationship of these factors 
with disease development will help farmers better manage diseases, 
avoid unnecessary pesticide applications and avoid yield losses.
    A focus of NPTMI for wheat is rust research in its three forms: 
stem, stripe, and leaf. Collaborators in the wheat research are 
organizing historical records of disease outbreaks. These data sets are 
already providing valuable insights into weather patterns and source 
regions that favor disease epidemics at a national level. This 
information is already being used to direct disease surveillance and 
provide information about disease risk months before an outbreak 
occurs. Additionally, wheat researchers are working with Los Alamos 
National Laboratory to establish a central data repository. These 
databases provide a foundation for future modeling objectives of NPMTI 
and ensure cohesive communications among researchers within different 
commodity groups. Lastly, wheat researchers involved with NPMTI are 
creating disease and pathogen monitoring networks for multiple diseases 
that cause constant yield losses in the United States. These monitoring 
efforts enhance local extension efforts to communicate in-season 
disease risk to wheat producers in the project's first year.
    Continued and increased support for NPMTI is necessary to carry out 
this valuable research, which will help growers with on-farm management 
decisions. The overall goals of NPMTI are to ensure crop sustainability 
and crop quality, increase precision, improve soil health through soil-
borne disease quantification, and improve disease management, thereby 
reducing yield losses. Over time, baseline background levels of various 
pathogens can be established, which will help with anomaly detection 
and serve as an early warning system for our nation's food security.

    [This statement was submitted by Jacob Westlin, Senior Director, 
National Association of Wheat Growers, Chairman, NPMTI Wheat Research 
Area Committee.]
                                 ______
                                 
    Prepared Statement of National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition
    Thank you for the opportunity to present our FY 2022 funding 
requests and thank you for your work on the Consolidated Appropriations 
Act, 2021, which addressed many of our priorities for FY21. On behalf 
of our member organizations from around the country, we submit the 
following requests for the Department of Agriculture, in the order they 
generally appear in the appropriations bill:
               national institute of food and agriculture
         sustainable agriculture research and education program
    We urge you to provide full funding--$60 million--for the 
Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program (SARE). For over 
30 years, SARE has been at the forefront of research and extension 
activities for farming systems based on profitable and environmentally 
sound practices developed with farmer and business input, including 
research and extension activities that are critically important to 
addressing the climate crisis. It has helped create more innovative 
farm practices that are actually adopted by farmers on the ground than 
any other competitive research program.
    Due to growing demand and limited funding, in recent years USDA can 
only fund roughly ten percent out of all eligible research and 
education pre-proposals submitted to the program each year. In order to 
meet future productivity challenges, farmers need cutting-edge research 
that is easily accessible and relevant to their farming systems. 
Increased funding will allow SARE's farmer driven research to keep pace 
with the growing challenges farmers face in remaining profitable and 
viable in the context of climate change. Finally, the additional 
resources would also help SARE expand its unique graduate student 
research program, which is helping to establish the pipeline of future 
agricultural scientists who will be needed to make the next 
breakthroughs in agriculture. To date, SARE has awarded over 912 
graduate student research grants, which often open the doors for many 
researchers early in their career to larger, more competitive pots of 
research funding--including the Agriculture and Food Research 
Initiative (AFRI).
                     agricultural marketing service
                    local agriculture market program
    The 2018 Farm Bill created the Local Agriculture Market Program 
(LAMP) (7 U.S.C. 1621 et seq), combining two long-standing programs, 
the Farmers Market and Local Food Promotion Program (FMLFPP) and the 
Value-Added Producers Grant Program (VAPG), streamline and better 
coordinate USDA efforts to support the growth and expansion of domestic 
markets for local/regional food and value-added agriculture. 
Administered by the Agricultural Marketing Service, FMLFPP is a 
competitive grants program that supports direct-to-consumer marketing 
strategies, as well as projects to develop and expand local and 
regional markets and associated supply chains. We urge you to provide 
$20 million in additional discretionary funding for LAMP, split 
appropriately between VAPG and FMLFPP. Despite a long track record of 
success and consistent interest in local and regional markets, funding 
for LAMP is typically only a fraction of what is needed to meet the 
demand for support through the program. As the country seeks to recover 
from the global pandemic, it is important that we invest in both 
recovery and building resilience in our food and farm system in 
anticipation of future crisis. LAMP subprograms have been essential to 
past efforts to develop more resilient local and regional food systems 
and should be prioritized and fully utilized for those tasks moving 
forward. Therefore, we request $20 million in discretionary funding 
split appropriately between FMLFPP and VAPG for FY 2022.
                          farm service agency
        direct and guaranteed farm ownership and operating loans
    Direct and Guaranteed Farm Service Agency (FSA) loans provide 
crucial capital for beginning farmers and others not adequately served 
by commercial lenders. There has been greater attention on funding for 
FSA farm loan programs in recent years, due in large part to the 
increased financial pressures placed on farmers as a result of the 
ongoing pandemic.
    With many farmers losing markets and income seemingly overnight, 
they have faced revenue shortfalls and looked to FSA loans to extend 
additional capital necessary to keep their farms operating. Some of 
that capital allowed farmers to quickly pivot their operations to meet 
new market conditions and to meet the additional expenses required to 
work safely during the pandemic (i.e., PPE, cold storage, additional 
packaging, increased transportation and labor costs). Total demand for 
FSA loans in 2020 saw a 30 percent increase compared to the year 
before, and this trend is expected to continue in the year ahead as 
farmers continue to face uncertainty in what the year ahead will hold.
    As Congress looks towards FY 2022, we urge you to work with the 
Administration to ensure they have the funding levels necessary to meet 
anticipated loan demand across their direct and guaranteed portfolios 
given recent increases to loan caps. We believe that Congress must 
respond in a timely manner if it becomes clear loan projections will 
fall short of expected or actual demand in FY 2022, especially given 
the uncertainty this year.
         the national organic certification cost share program
    The National Organic Certification Cost Share Program provides 
organic farmers and handling operations with a reimbursement to cover a 
portion of their annual organic certification fees. In August of 2020, 
USDA slashed funding for this program. This has left organic 
operations, who had been counting on being reimbursed for their 
certification costs at the same level as previous years, burdened with 
an unplanned expense, amid a period of higher costs and disrupted 
markets caused by the pandemic. The cost-share program is particularly 
important to small and mid-sized organic farms, and those who are just 
starting out with organic certification.
    The 2018 Farm Bill provided new mandatory funding for the organic 
certification cost-share program, but at that time the USDA provided 
inaccurate reports of carryover balances to Congress, which has 
resulted in a shortfall for the program for the remainder of the 2018 
Farm Bill. The USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA), which administers this 
program, has communicated to organic stakeholders that $9 million in 
supplemental funding is needed to fill the funding gap for the program, 
at the full authorized reimbursement levels, through the end of the 
2018 Farm Bill cycle (end of fiscal year 2023). However, staff have 
also acknowledged that the $9 million figure does not include any 
growth in the number of certified operations eligible for assistance 
under the program. In order to ensure that there are sufficient 
resources to provide current, and prospective or transitioning, organic 
producers with cost-share assistance at full authorized reimbursement 
rate we request that the National Organic Certification Cost Share 
Program be provided $12 million discretionary funding for FY22.
                 natural resources conservation service
                   conservation technical assistance
    Conservation Technical Assistance is the backbone of USDA's 
conservation programs. Through CTA, NRCS field staff work with farmers 
to develop and implement conservation plans to conserve resources on 
their farms and fulfill conservation compliance requirements. NRCS also 
uses CTA funds to assess conservation practices and systems, and to 
collect, analyze, and disseminate data on the condition of the nation's 
natural resources. This funding is critical in order to help producers 
develop site-specific plans to conserve water, prepare for extreme 
weather, and address natural resource concerns on their land.
    On-the-ground capacity at NRCS continues to be a limiting factor 
for conservation implementation, and an increased investment in CTA 
will give NRCS the ability to truly build local capacity. While 
partially rebounding recently, staffing levels at NRCS declined 19%, or 
over 2,000 employees, from FY 2004 to FY 2018 and with 98% of all NRCS 
staff located outside Washington, D.C. in state, county and technical 
offices, this decrease has taken a toll on customer service and the 
ability to provide technical assistance.\1\ This has all taken place as 
producer demand, as well as consumer expectations, has increased for a 
sustainable and reliant agriculture industry. We must not hamstring our 
investment in conservation and climate efforts by under-funding 
technical assistance and local staffing capacity. In order to ensure 
that CTA has the necessary resources to help producers implement the 
kind of conservation practices that are essential to mitigating climate 
change, CTA should be provided $1.1 billion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/2020-03-
11_IF11452_bf1eaa6064a214b26bd80
b3a56ece56e1a521990.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           office of urban agriculture innovative production
    The 2018 Farm Bill authorized the creation of the Office of Urban 
Agriculture and Innovative Production (the Office), but in doing so 
provided the office with no mandatory funding. The Office of Urban 
Agriculture received $5 million in FY20 and $7 million in FY21 to stand 
up the office and implement its authorities. Funding has supported the 
piloting of eleven urban and suburban Farm Service Agency County 
Committees, the establishment of an advisory committee for the office 
and USDA, a competitive grants program, and a Community Compost and 
Food Waste Reduction cooperative agreement program. In FY20 the Office 
received 578 applications requesting competitive grants or cooperative 
agreement funding. With their limited FY20 discretionary funding, the 
Office was able to fund only four percent of all applications--10 
competitive grant projects and 13 cooperative agreements. Due to the 
overwhelming interest in the program--particularly from farmers of 
color more frequently operating within urban areas--the Office of Urban 
Agriculture should be provided $25 million--full funding--in FY22 so 
that it has sufficient resources to meet the demand of a growing 
farming sector and expand beyond the initial pilot states.
                  rural business--cooperative service
        appropriate technology transfer for rural areas (attra)
    For nearly 30 years, the ATTRA program also known as the National 
Sustainable Agriculture Information Service, has provided practical, 
cutting edge information to farmers, extension agents, and others. In 
2019, ATTRA responded to nearly 48,0000 technical assistance requests 
for resources and materials on sustainable agriculture production and 
farm energy issues, including 2,184 technical responses that required 
substantial research. Resources were accessed by farmers and ranchers 
3,348,790 times via ATTRA's website (www.attra.ncat.org), podcasts and 
social media platforms. Sustainable agriculture workshops and 
presentations by ATTRA staff reached over 52,000 attendees. Clearly, 
the resources that ATTRA provides to the farm community free of charge 
are in high demand and have helped thousands of farmers build more 
profitable and sustainable farming operations over the past three 
decades. We urge Congress to provide at least $3.5 million in FY 2022 
in order to support the continued work and expansion of ATTRA.
                    local agriculture market program
    The 2018 Farm Bill created the Local Agriculture Market Program 
(LAMP) (7 U.S.C. 1621 et seq), which combines the Farmers Market and 
Local Food Promotion Program (FMLFPP) and the Value-Added Producers 
Grant Program (VAPG). Administered by the Rural Business-Cooperative 
Service, VAPG offers competitive grants to farmers and ranchers to fund 
business and marketing plans, feasibility studies, or working capital 
to operate a value-added business. Without future discretionary 
funding, annual VAPG investments will shrink, depriving farmers of 
important tools as they continue to struggle through a prolonged 
downturn in the agriculture economy, compounded by the current 
coronavirus pandemic. We urge you to provide $20 million in additional 
discretionary funding for LAMP, split appropriately between VAPG and 
FMLFPP, to help meet demand. Despite long track records and consistent 
interest in local and regional markets and value-added agriculture, 
funding is only a fraction of what is needed to meet producer demand. 
LAMP has been essential to past efforts to develop more resilient local 
and regional food systems and should be prioritized and fully utilized 
for those tasks moving forward. As the country seeks recover from the 
global pandemic, it is important that we invest in both recovery and 
building resilience in our food and farm system in anticipation of 
future crisis. Therefore, we request $20 million in discretionary 
funding split appropriately between FMLFPP and VAPG for FY 2022.

    [This statement was submitted by Wes King, NSAC, Senior Policy 
Specialist.]
                                 ______
                                 
    Prepared Statement of Non-Land-Grant Agricultural and Renewable 
                     Resources Universities (NARRU)
    The Non-land-grant Agricultural and Renewable Resources 
Universities (NARRU) is requesting that $10 million be appropriated in 
FY22 to the Non-land-grant College of Agriculture Competitive Capacity 
Building Grants program re-authorized in the Agriculture Act of 2018 
(2018 Farm Bill, TITLE VII--RESEARCH, EXTENSION, AND RELATED MATTERS, 
Sec. 7127. Capacity building grants for NLGCA institutions).
    Institutions in Food, Agriculture, and Natural Resources- Non-Land-
Grant Colleges of Agriculture (NLGCAs) have a long and successful 
history of educating and preparing professionals in agriculture, food, 
renewable resources and many related fields. The Non-Land Grant 
Agricultural and Renewable Resources Universities (NARRU) recognize 58 
NLGCA colleges in 20 states that enroll about 25% of the U.S. total, 
and 50% of the food, agriculture, and natural resources graduates in 
those states. These public colleges and universities provide important 
translational research and outreach benefits through graduate education 
(MS and Ph.D. level) as well. NLGCA's are making a significant 
contribution, nationwide, in developing a highly skilled workforce for 
agriculture, food, and renewable resource industries.
    Graduates with Real-World Skills--NLGCA's offer accessible and 
affordable opportunities in agriculture, food, and renewable resource 
education for over 32,000 students annually which is a significant 
complement to the over 110,000 undergraduate students in agriculture 
enrolled at Land-Grant Universities (LGU). Their academic programs and 
graduates are unique because of the incorporation of real world, hands-
on experiences in undergraduate research, independent studies, and 
internships on campus farms and laboratories, directly with producers 
and industry, and in government agencies.
    Graduates that are Workplace Ready--Graduates from NLGCA are 
helping to fulfill a national demand for a highly skilled workforce in 
agriculture and related areas. The Employment Opportunities for College 
Graduates in Food, Agriculture, Renewable Natural Resources and the 
Environment, United States, 2020-2025, produced by Purdue University 
with grant support from USDA National Institute of Food and 
Agriculture, indicates that new U.S. graduates with expertise in food, 
agriculture, renewable natural resources, or the environment are 
expected to fill only 61 percent of the expected 59,400 average annual 
openings. Full report found at: https://www.purdue.edu/usda/
employment/.
    At NLGCAs, theory and practice are balanced through science-based 
curricula that emphasize business principles, critical thinking, 
problem solving, decision-making, creativity, communications, and 
teamwork. NLGCA's graduates have a strong work ethic and are ready to 
enter industry and government careers, or return to production-oriented 
positions on our nation's farms and ranches. Many also pursue graduate 
studies, often at land-grant institutions.
    Double Food Production by 2050--Congress regularly provides many 
authorizations for agriculture- related research, education, and 
extension programming. While these authorizations are generally 
available to NLGCA's, these institutions often lack the capacity to 
compete with land-grant universities and other entities for federal 
funds. The 2008 Farm Bill authorized a program to provide competitive 
grants to NLGCA's to help build such capacity. The program was re-
authorized in the 2014 Farm Bill. In recognition of the need to more 
than double food production on existing land resources to meet the 
global food needs by 2050, increasing the research, educational, and 
outreach capacity of the NLGCA's makes sense. Seven NLGCAs are already 
in the top 100 universities in FY 2014 R&D expenditures for 
agricultural research.
    Since the first awards in FY12, the NLGCA Capacity Building Grants 
have been instrumental in developing academic, research, and outreach 
capabilities at NLGCA institutions. Of particular interest is the 
number of NLGCA awards that have facilitated multi-institutional 
collaboration and regional projects. Progress on enhancing capacity of 
the NLGCA's has been very positive and must be continued to maximize 
NLGCA's ability to compete for Agriculture and Food Research Initiative 
(AFRI) funding that seeks to meet the food, fiber and renewable 
resource needs of a growing world.
    Five million federal dollars were appropriated in FY 2021 for 
competitive capacity building activities on education, research and 
outreach at NLGCA. Although the research mission and activities such as 
Cooperative Extension are not directly comparable, appropriations for 
formula capacity building at Land-Grant Universities provides an 
important perspective on how capacity building funds are used. 
Appropriations in FY 2021 for formula capacity building at Land-Grant 
Universities for six major programs were $1.18 billion. The NLGCA 
Capacity Funds are currently budgeted at 0.4% of these funds, even 
though these universities are preparing 25% of the nation's food, 
agriculture, and natural resources workforce. Further information on 
the need for support of Agricultural Higher Education including NLGCAs 
can be found through the Charles Valentine Riley Memorial Foundation 
at: https://rileymemorial.org/.
    FY22 Request: Provide $10.0 million to the competitive grants 
program to build agriculture, food, and renewable resource related 
education, research, and outreach capacity at the Non-Land-Grant 
Colleges of Agriculture as re-authorized in the Agriculture Improvement 
Act of 2018 (2018 Farm Bill). By making this funding available on a 
competitive basis to qualifying NLGCA's, Congress can be assured the 
funds will be leveraged to the greatest extent possible.

    [This statement was submitted by Dr. Todd A. Winters, Dean, College 
of Agriculture and Applied Sciences, University of Tennessee at Martin, 
and Legislative Affairs Chair, Non-land-grant Agricultural and 
Renewable Resources Universities (NARRU).]
                                 ______
                                 
           Prepared Statement of Organic Farmers Association
    Thank you for the opportunity to provide this testimony on FY 2021 
appropriations to agencies within the U.S. Department of Agriculture. 
The Organic Farmers Association is a nonprofit membership organization 
that represents U.S. certified organic farmers.

National Organic Program
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service
OFA FY 2022 request: $22 million

    The integrity of the organic label is organic farmers' top priority 
and if the National Organic Program (NOP) is not able to enforce the 
organic standards, consumers will lose trust in the integrity of the 
label, putting the economic viability of organic farmers at risk. The 
NOP has oversight of the standards that define the USDA certified 
organic label as well as the accredited certifying agencies that 
inspect organic farms and food companies. The NOP must be able to grow 
to provide proper oversight of certifiers and enforcement in an 
industry that is rapidly expanding to create complex new supply chains 
that present numerous opportunities for fraud. Enforcement priorities 
for OFA include compliance with the Pasture Rule, finishing the Origin 
of Livestock rulemaking, reinstating the Organic Livestock and Poultry 
Practices rule, finishing the Strengthening Organic Enforcement 
rulemaking, clarifying standards and certification interpretation of 
hydroponic and container operations and reducing opportunities for 
fraud in the organic supply chain.
    Despite the explosive growth of the organic industry into a global 
industry and repeated instances of failures of USDA to keep up with 
oversight and enforcement, the NOP was level funded at $9 million from 
fiscal years 2014 to 2017. The NOP was funded at $14 million for fiscal 
year 2019, $16 million in 2020, and $18 million in 2021. To keep up 
with the growth of the industry, funding must be increased. We request 
$22 million for the NOP for FY 2022, as authorized by the 2018 Farm 
Bill.

Organic Certification Cost Share Program
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Services Agency
OFA FY 2022 Request: $12 million

    Report Language Request: OFA requests that funding to restore the 
reimbursement levels for Organic Certification Cost Share Program be 
accompanied by strong report language requiring FSA to reimburse 
eligible organic operations at the full authorized reimbursement rates 
for 2020 and 2021, and to report back to Congress with a plan to ensure 
the accounting problems associated with FSA's administration of the 
program do not occur again.
    The Organic Certification Cost Share Program reimburses a portion 
of organic certification fees paid by organic farms and businesses. 
Annual inspection and certification are a requirement for all organic 
operations, and the inspection and certification process serves as a 
core component in maintaining the integrity of the USDA organic label. 
The federal government has historically reimbursed up to 75% of organic 
certification fees paid by organic farms and businesses, with a maximum 
reimbursement of $750 per certification scope (crops, livestock or 
handling) per operation. In August 2020, the FSA unexpectedly announced 
that reimbursement rates for 2020 certification costs would be cut to 
50% of the certified organic operation's eligible expenses, up to a 
maximum of $500 per scope. The decision by FSA to reduce the 
reimbursement levels came as a surprise to the organic sector. It 
leaves organic operations--who had been planning on being reimbursed 
for their certification costs at the same level as previous years--
burdened with an unplanned expense. The cost share program is 
particularly important to small and mid-sized organic farms, and those 
who are just starting out with organic certification.
    FSA's announcement in August 2020 revealed that the agency has 
struggled to track program spending. This led the agency to provide 
inaccurate reports of the carryover balances to Congress as the funding 
provided in the 2018 Farm Bill was being considered, and has resulted 
in a shortfall for the program for the rest of the years of the Farm 
Bill cycle. FSA has communicated to Congress and organic stakeholders 
that $9 million in supplemental funding is needed to fill the funding 
gap for the program, at the full authorized reimbursement levels, 
through the end of fiscal year 2023. However, FSA staff have also 
acknowledged that the $9 million figure does not include any growth in 
the number of certified operations eligible for assistance under the 
program, which we believe is shortsighted. Therefore, OFA requests $12 
million for the Organic Certification Cost Share Program.

Organic Data Initiative
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Marketing Service, National 
Agricultural Statistics Service, and Economic Research Service
OFA FY 2022 request: $1 million

    As the organic industry has grown, we have struggled to represent 
that growth to policy makers and regulators in part because USDA has 
been slow to develop systems to track the growth of organic. Increasing 
USDA's capacity to conduct the Certified Organic Production Survey and 
other organic data collection will not only help us show the public and 
policy makers that organic is a growth industry for U.S. farmers, 
having accurate data on the amount of organic acreage around the world 
will also help the National Organic Program and organic certifiers to 
better enforce organic standards and identify potential fraud in the 
supply chain.
    The 2002 Farm Bill requires USDA to ``ensure that segregated data 
on the production and marketing of organic agricultural products is 
included in the ongoing baseline of data collection...'' As the organic 
industry grows, the lack of good organic data has been an impediment. 
We request $1 million for the Organic Data Initiative for AMS, NASS, 
and ERS to expand organic data collection and analysis efforts.

Organic Transitions Program
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Food and 
Agriculture
OFA FY 2022 request: $10 million

    Many of the challenges facing the organic sector can be helped with 
increased research. Organic research often addresses practices and 
challenges that are also relevant to farmers who are not certified 
organic or who farm conventionally. An increased focus on soil health, 
alternatives to chemical pest management and cover crops across all 
sectors of agriculture show that this kind of research can serve an 
audience that is wider than certified organic. The Organic Transitions 
Program focuses on these types of topics and addresses the historic 
backlog of research needs in this sector. OFA is requesting $10 million 
for FY 2022, with a focus on using the increase to fund climate change 
research related to organic agriculture.

Farming Opportunities Training and Outreach Program
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Food and 
Agriculture, Office of Partnership and Public Engagement
OFA FY 2022 Request: $5 million

    The 2018 Farm Bill combined the Beginning Farmer and Rancher 
Development Program and the Section 2501 Outreach and Assistance for 
Socially Disadvantaged and Veteran Farmers and Ranchers Program into 
the FOTO program, authorizing annual mandatory funding as well as 
additional discretionary appropriated funding. The Beginning Farmer and 
Rancher Development Program (BFRDP) is administered by NIFA. It is the 
only federal grant program dedicated to training the next generation of 
farmers, including veterans and farmers of color. The Section 2501 
Outreach and Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged and Veteran Farmers 
and Ranchers Program is administered by the Office of Partnership and 
Public Engagement and is dedicated to helping historically underserved 
producers gain access to USDA programs and service. Both parts of the 
combined FOTO program are vitally important to agriculture in general 
and to organic agriculture because the programs help address previous 
inequity in who can access USDA programs and services and helps ensure 
the success of a diverse range of new people entering farming. This 
support is vitally needed to make sure that organic agriculture becomes 
an even more vital and resilient part of the agriculture system. OFA is 
requesting $5 million of appropriated discretionary funding for this 
program, in addition to the mandatory funding authorized by the Farm 
Bill.

Agriculture and Food Research Initiative
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Food and 
Agriculture
Report Language Request: Support Funding for Regionally Adapted, Public 
Cultivar Development Programs.

    Farmers need access to seeds and animal breeds adapted to their 
farming systems, soils and climates. USDA recently responded to the 
request by the Senate Appropriations Committee for a separate AFRI 
funding stream for regionally adapted cultivars, by establishing an 
AFRI ``cultivar development'' program priority area. The FY2022 
appropriations bill should call for increased funding for this AFRI 
priority area.

Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Food and 
Agriculture
OFA FY 2022 Request: $60 million

    The SARE program funds on-farm research into sustainable 
agricultural farming systems, including organic systems. OFA is seeking 
$60 million for SARE in FY2022.

Tenure, Ownership, and Transition of Agricultural Land (TOTAL) Survey
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Survey
OFA FY 2022 Request: $3 million

    Land access is a major challenge facing beginning, socially 
disadvantaged, and young farmers, including organic farmers. Sec. 12607 
of the 2018 Farm Bill tasked the National Agricultural Statistics 
Service with completing an updated TOTAL Survey to provide data on 
farmland ownership, tenure, transition, and entry of beginning and 
socially disadvantaged farmers. OFA requests $3 million for this survey 
for FY22.

Agricultural Research Service
U.S. Department of Agriculture
OFA FY 2022 Request: $20 million for organic research

    Organic farmers across the country lack research on basic 
production challenges. ARS funding for organic research has declined 
from over $15 million in FY07 to just $12 million in FY20. This is less 
than 1 percent of the ARS research budget, versus organic's market 
share of 6 percent. If ARS were to invest 6 percent of its total 
research budget on organic, it would equate to about $80 million. OFA 
requests $20 million for ARS organic research.

    [This statement was submitted by Patty Lovera, Policy Director, 
Organic Farmers Association.]
                                 ______
                                 
     Prepared Statement of the Organic Farming Research Foundation
    Organic farming is a bright spot in the agriculture economy, yet 
organic producers across the country remain challenged by the lack of 
research on basic agronomic challenges. Funding from the USDA 
Agricultural Research Service (ARS) for organic farming research is not 
commensurate with the continued rapid growth of the organic market. In 
fact, according to ARS data, organic funding has declined from over $15 
million in FY 2007 to just $12 million in FY 2020. This represents less 
than one percent of the total ARS research budget, versus organic's 
market share of six percent. If ARS invested the equivalent six 
percent, the total ARS organic research budget would be closer to $80 
million. Clearly a huge gap exists, one that needs to be closed to 
bring about a greater degree of equity, address barriers to wider 
adoption, and advance the substantial contributions of organic 
agriculture to pressing environmental, climate, and human health 
concerns. We believe that appropriators can and should take action, 
over a multiyear period in stair-step fashion, to ensure organic 
agriculture gets its fair share of the ARS research budget. We urge you 
to start with a down payment in the FY 2022 bill at a level of at least 
$20 million for ARS organic farming research, while also directing ARS 
to develop a long-range national strategic plan for organic research.
                         proposed bill language
    We urge you to request the following clause be added to the list of 
statutory clauses that follow the total line item for ARS research that 
says:

    ``$X,XXX,XXX,XXX,..., including not less than $20 million for 
research directly related to organic agriculture and for the agency to 
develop a five-year plan for organic food and agriculture research 
encompassing all relevant crop, animal, nutrition, and natural resource 
national programs; ....''

    The Committee is aware of the important role organic farming can 
play in enhancing farm income, developing new markets, improving soil 
health, mitigating climate change, and protecting water quality. The 
Committee provides an increase for research directly related to organic 
agriculture. The Committee also notes that the percentage of direct 
organic research relative to the total research budget lags far behind 
the share of organic food in the marketplace. Therefore, the Committee 
directs the agency to develop a five-year national strategic plan to 
close the gap. The plan should include all of the relevant national 
programs within the crop, livestock, nutrition, and natural resources 
mission areas, and should include robust stakeholder involvement from 
the organic farming and organic research communities. To improve 
coordination and accountability, the Committee also encourages the 
agency to name one of its existing National Program Leaders in each of 
those four mission areas as the lead for organic research within their 
mission area. In developing the strategic plan, the Committee also 
encourages the agency to coordinate with the National Institute for 
Food and Agriculture on soil health, climate mitigation and resilience, 
crop cultivar development, pest and weed management, grazing systems, 
and other priority topics.
                               background
    The Organic Farming Research Foundation (OFRF) believes the 
Agriculture Research Service (ARS) is ideally positioned to help 
producers sustain production and contribute to climate mitigation 
through better coordination and an expanded research investment in 
organic agriculture. Climate disruption, soil and resource degradation, 
a global pandemic, and inequitable distribution of natural, financial, 
and social resources threaten farmer and rancher livelihoods and food 
security nationwide, especially in communities of color and other 
vulnerable populations. Organic agricultural systems show great 
potential to build agricultural and food system resilience in the face 
of today's multiple crises, and ARS can play a critical role in 
advancing organic agriculture as a climate solution.
    ARS works at the forefront to find solutions to agricultural 
problems. The long-term research carried out at the agency will be 
critical in preparing farmers and ranchers, organic and non-organic, to 
adapt to and mitigate the climate crisis. We believe that by increasing 
funding for organic research, developing an iterative five-year 
strategic plan for organic research, and appointing a National Program 
Leader to coordinate organic research within each of the four mission 
areas at ARS, the agency can address the historical lack of investment 
in organic agriculture research and help organic and non-organic 
producers alike overcome challenges to realize their potential to 
mitigate and adapt to the impacts of the climate crisis.
    The organic method builds and maintains healthy, living soils as 
the foundation for successful production, and largely excludes 
synthetic agrochemicals to protect soil life and other beneficial 
organisms. Research shows that organic practices have great potential 
to sequester carbon (C) in soil and plant biomass, reduce net 
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of agricultural operations, build 
resilience to the impacts of climate disruption and other stresses, and 
enhance long-term sustainability of agriculture and food systems.
    While organic agriculture is a key component to mitigating climate 
change, organic producers face unique challenges. These include 
managing weeds without herbicides while minimizing the soil health 
costs of tillage and cultivation, managing nutrients from organic 
sources for optimal crop yield and soil health, and maintaining 
satisfactory and profitable yields without synthetic pesticides. 
Weather extremes related to climate change further complicate 
production and can compromise soil health itself.
    A coordinated nationwide effort should be directed by dedicated 
National Program Leaders for organic within the crops, livestock, 
natural resources, and nutrition mission areas. Increased investment in 
organic research is urgently needed to help organic producers overcome 
these challenges and help more farms transition to organic to more 
meaningfully contribute to climate mitigation efforts.
    Lack of research investment in organic agriculture is largely 
responsible for the approximately 20% yield gap between organic and 
conventional yields. Most modern crop cultivars and livestock breeds 
have been developed for input-dependent conventional systems and are 
poorly adapted to organic methods that rely on natural biological 
processes for crop nutrition and crop protection.
    Since 2002, extramural funding through the Organic Research and 
Extension Initiative (OREI), Organic Transitions Program (ORG), and 
Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) administered by 
the National Institute for Food and Agriculture (NIFA) has begun to 
address this research gap, yielding valuable practical outcomes for 
organic producers and others wishing to adopt more sustainable farming 
practices.
    Inclusion of organic systems in ARS Long Term Agricultural Research 
(LTAR) at Beltsville, Maryland has made important contributions to 
understanding and optimizing organic crop rotations. In addition, the 
nation's one dedicated ARS organic research facility, based in Salinas, 
California, where long-term research (now in year 17) is making 
significant strides in understanding the effects of cover crops and 
crop rotations on fertility and weed management. This has critical 
implications not just for organic but for the whole agriculture sector, 
as all farmers can utilize and benefit from cover cropping.
    However, ARS organic funding remains at $12 million per year, or 
1.2% of the agency's total budget, which lags far behind the 
exponential growth of the organic industry's market share, now 
approaching 6%. Furthermore, both ARS and NIFA organic funding declined 
significantly between 2010 and 2013, and ARS funding for organic 
research has since remained relatively flat. The 2018 Farm Bill 
increases OREI funding to $50 million by 2023, meaning NIFA's 
contribution is increasing, while ARS investment in organic remains 
disproportionately low.
    ARS National Programs and LTAR sites support long-term basic and 
applied research vital to the understanding of phenomena such as soil 
carbon sequestration, nutrient cycling, plant-soil-microbe 
interactions, and climate resilience in different farming systems. 
NIFA, on the other hand, awards shorter term grants (1--5 years) for 
projects that emphasize practical application and farmer engagement. 
Coordination between ARS and NIFA can leverage their complementary 
roles. For example, ARS-funded plant breeding research conducted in the 
context of organic systems can speed progress toward finished cultivars 
through OREI farmer-participatory breeding networks.
    To better support the organic community, ARS should:

  --Appoint National Program Leaders within each mission area to 
        coordinate organic research efforts at ARS and create a new, 
        coordinated iterative five-year national program plan devoted 
        to organic.

  --Devote at least $80 million per year (6% of the ARS annual budget, 
        equivalent to the organic share of the marketplace) to organic 
        systems by the end of the first 5-year cycle.

  --Strengthen coordination between ARS and NIFA organic research on 
        soil health, climate mitigation and resilience, crop cultivar 
        development, and other priority topics.

  --Include within ARS organic research priorities the following:

    --Optimize organic systems that integrate cover crops, crop 
            rotation, amendments, innovative nutrient management, 
            judicious tillage, and livestock-crop integration on a 
            site-specific basis for soil health climate change 
            resilience, and farm viability. Understand and optimize 
            soil microbiomes and biological processes in organic 
            systems.

    --Understand the role of crop genetics in efficacy of plant-soil-
            microbe relationships for nutrient and moisture uptake, 
            disease resistance, and overall crop resilience and vigor.

    --Advance the cutting edge of organic integrated pest management 
            for crop diseases, pests, and weeds.

    --Develop regionally adapted, climate-resilient, public crop 
            cultivars that perform well in organic systems, partner 
            effectively with beneficial microbes, resist disease, use 
            nutrients and moisture efficiently, outcompete weeds, and 
            meet market needs of organic producers.

    --Advance the science and practice of management-intensive 
            rotational grazing for organic livestock production 
            systems, including regional adaptation of advanced 
            rotational grazing and pasture management methods.

    --Develop soil health, climate mitigation, and organic production 
            methodologies suited to small-scale, diversified, and 
            limited resource production systems.

    OFRF conducts periodic surveys of organic producers across the 
country and summarizes the research priorities identified by producers 
in our National Organic Research Agenda (NORA) publications. The next 
NORA report will be published in 2021, which we will share with the 
Subcommittee and ARS National Program Leaders.
    To learn more about our policy recommendations and research 
priorities to advance organic agriculture as a climate solution, please 
visit our website.

    [This statement was submitted by Organic Farming Research 
Foundation.]
                                 ______
                                 
          Prepared Statement of the Organic Trade Association
    Chairwoman Baldwin, Ranking Member Hoeven, and Members of the 
Subcommittee, I, Laura Batcha, am the Executive Director and CEO of the 
Organic Trade Association (OTA). We respectfully request the following 
funding levels and oversight for programs whose mandate is to support 
the growth of the organic industry: USDA (AMS) National Organic Program 
(NOP)--$22 million*; USDA (NIFA) Organic Transition Research Program--
$10 million; and USDA (AMS) Organic Data Initiative--$1 million. We 
remain concerned by the National Organic Program's lack of commitment 
to updating the organic regulations to ensure consistent standards. 
Therefore, we request that any increase in funding for NOP should be 
strictly limited to standards development. Additionally, we request 
that the committee include bill language requiring NOP to issue an 
Organic Improvement Action Plan to clear the backlog of the more than 
20 National Organic Standards Board Recommendations that have passed 
with wide support, none of which have been implemented by USDA.
    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 farms and businesses across 50 
states. Its members include growers, shippers, processors, certifiers, 
farmers' associations, distributors, importers, exporters, consultants, 
retailers, and others.
    Despite the many challenges facing the food and agriculture sector, 
U.S. organic soared to new highs in 2020, growing by a record 13 
percent to $62 billion in annual sales. As one of the fastest-growing 
food and farming sectors in the U.S. and global marketplace, organic is 
an increasingly essential part of American agriculture. Organic 
provides economic opportunities for farmers, creating jobs and lifting 
rural economies, while also utilizing sustainable farming practices 
that are 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.
                     national organic program (nop)
    A healthy market for organic products requires a clear market 
distinction backed by a trusted, verified and enforced claim. The 
National Organic Program's (NOP) role is to enforce the organic 
regulations and ensure they evolve to keep pace with consumer 
expectations. However, the federal regulatory apparatus, lack of 
inertia and focus at NOP have 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. In fact, the only update to the organic standards that has been 
completed since the program became effective in 2002 is the pasture 
rule, which was finalized in 2010, more than a decade ago.
    For example, clarifying the organic dairy transition standards, 
known as the Origin of Livestock, has gone through a process that has 
taken more than fifteen years and yet a final rule still remains 
elusive despite widespread support and agreement on the standards. 
Congress included bill language in the Fiscal Year 2020 appropriations 
act requiring USDA to issue a final rule on Origin of Livestock by June 
2020. As of now, USDA has reopened the comment period on the proposed 
rule for a third time. Unfortunately, there are numerous examples of 
stalled standards impacting broad segments of the industry. The full 
list can be found here.
    The National Organic Program's resource allocation is currently not 
aligned with its mission to provide clear, consistent organic standards 
as required by the Organic Foods Production Act. In fact, the committee 
with OTA's support has doubled NOP's budget from $9 million to $18 
million in the past five years. NOP has gone from a small staff of 32 
in 2013 to 63 full-time staff today. Of those 63 staff, only three are 
devoted to writing these very standards. Since the foundation of 
organic is strong, consistent standards, we believe it would be 
irresponsible to increase the NOP's budget without strict Congressional 
oversight to ensure the funding is meeting the needs of industry and 
fulfilling NOP's mission.
    OTA requests the following language be included: ``The committee 
requires that the additional National Organic Program funding provided 
be exclusively focused on standards development.'' In the absence of 
the above restrictions placed on additional NOP funding, we would 
request that the budget remain flat at $18 million for FY22.
    Additionally, OTA requests that the committee include provisions 
from the bipartisan Continuous Improvement and Accountability in 
Organic Standards Act (H.R. 2918) introduced by Representatives Peter 
DeFazio, Rodney Davis, Chellie Pingree, Jimmy Panetta, Dan Newhouse and 
Ron Kind. Specifically we request the following bill language: ``Not 
later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register and seek public comment 
on an Organic Improvement Action Plan that identifies and sets forth 
the recommendations approved by the National Organic Standards Board by 
a decisive vote and submitted to the Secretary that have not been 
implemented by a final rule or any other agency action with clear 
timelines for implementation.''
               organic transition research program (org)
    OTA requests that ORG, which supports research, extension, and 
higher education programs for organic producers, be funded at $10 
million. The overall goal of ORG is to improve the competitiveness of 
organic livestock and crop producers, as well as those who are adopting 
organic practices and transitioning to organic certification. Practices 
and systems addressed include those associated with organic crops, 
organic animal production, and organic systems integrating plant and 
animal production. ORG consistently receives more funding requests than 
can be accommodated, as consumer demand for organic products outpaces 
domestic production. Without continued funding of ORG as an organic-
specific research grant program, this gap will only increase.
                     organic data initiative (odi)
    The organic industry has grown at a tremendous rate over the past 
several years, and accurate data for the production, pricing and 
marketing of organic products is essential to maintaining stable 
markets, identifying fraud, creating risk management tools, tracking 
production trends, and increasing exports. ODI collects and 
disseminates data regarding organic agriculture through the 
Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), the National Agricultural 
Statistics Service (NASS) and the Economic Research Service (ERS). This 
program has been successful in providing valuable information to 
Congress, government agencies, and the organic industry at a low cost. 
We ask for a $1 million in discretionary funding for this effort for 
AMS, NASS and ERS to continue collecting organic pricing information 
and surveys, and expand those collections to comparable levels as the 
data collected for conventional agriculture.
    In conclusion, organic food and farming are built on a commitment 
to shape our collective future for the better. The organic industry is 
creating jobs, stimulating our economy and delivering quality products 
in high demand. Consumer expectations drive improvement, and organic 
farms and businesses work hard to have a positive impact on people and 
the planet.
    I thank the Committee and look forward to working with you to 
advance the organic industry.

    [This statement was submitted by Laura Batcha, CEO, Organic Trade 
Association.]
                                 ______
                                 
    Prepared Statement of the Oregon Water Resources Congress (OWRC)
    The Oregon Water Resources Congress (OWRC) strongly supports 
increased funding of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) 
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) programs for FY 2022 
programs. We are supportive of $3 billion split between the Regional 
Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP), Environmental Quality 
Incentives Program (EQIP), and PL-566 programs. Within the PL-566 
programs, a minimum of $800 million is needed to support ongoing 
irrigation modernization efforts under the Watershed Protection and 
Flood Prevention Operations (WFPO) Program and $200 million is needed 
for coordinated federal agency watershed planning and assistance with 
dam rehabilitation under the Small Watershed Rehabilitation Program. 
This funding appropriation is crucial for NRCS to adequately provide 
technical assistance and funding opportunities for farmers and 
agricultural entities across the nation.
    OWRC was established in 1912 as a trade association to support the 
protection and use of water rights and promote the wise stewardship of 
water resources in Oregon. OWRC members are local governmental 
entities, which include irrigation districts, water control districts, 
drainage districts, water improvement districts, and other agricultural 
water suppliers that deliver water to roughly 1/3 of all irrigated land 
in Oregon. These water stewards operate complex water management 
systems, including water supply reservoirs, canals, pipelines, and 
hydropower facilities.
    Our members from across Oregon face challenges related to 
irrigation water supply reliability and aging infrastructure. While 
there are common concerns and interests throughout irrigated 
agriculture, each basin is unique, and necessitates local communities' 
work together to identify their needs and develop solutions to best 
meet them. Funding programs, like the ones housed under the USDA NRCS 
programs, are valuable tools to meet the myriad of infrastructure needs 
throughout all our basins, without placing the entire burden on the 
backs of the agricultural economy that produces food and fiber for our 
nation.
                         rcpp benefits & needs
    OWRC strongly supports robust funding for NRCS programs, 
particularly the RCPP, which is a critical tool for districts and other 
agricultural water suppliers in developing and implementing water and 
energy conservation projects in Oregon. While we understand the need to 
streamline federal agency activities and programs, it is our hope 
essential programs like the RCPP continue to receive the additional 
funding that is still needed to meet program demands. In the past, 
related NRCS programs, such as the Agricultural Water Enhancement 
Program (AWEP) and the Cooperative Conservation Partnership Initiative 
(CCPI), have been highly successful in developing cooperative 
approaches for federal, state, and local interests to address 
Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Clean Water Act (CWA) issues in 
watershed basins and sub basins. Those programs helped catalyze 
conservation efforts that live on in the RCPP today.
    RCPP currently has over 2,000 partners engaged in locally led 
conservation efforts that help implement collaborative basin-level 
solutions and reduce detrimental legal action, resulting in better 
outcomes for all.
    Federal support of water conservation activities funded through 
NRCS programs, including the RCPP, is essential to the conservation of 
our natural resources and critical to protecting our food, energy, and 
water supply. Since 2014, RCPP has invested $1 billion in over 375 
projects across all fifty states and Puerto Rico. That $1 billion has 
leveraged an additional $2 billion from state and local partners for a 
total of $3 billion invested in water conservation projects. Among 
those are Oregon projects that will address water quality and drought 
like those described below. Irrigation districts in Oregon are the 
model of successful RCPP projects that ``innovate, leverage additional 
contributions, offer impactful solutions and engage more 
participants.'' More projects like this could be developed and 
implemented in Oregon and throughout the nation with additional federal 
support through the RCPP.

  --East Fork Irrigation District (EFID) Watershed Restoration--EFID, 
        with a diverse set of partners in the Hood River Watershed in 
        the Columbia River Basin, will focus on a top-priority water 
        conservation and fish habitat project in the Lower East Fork 
        Hood River. EFID and its partners will construct Phase 1 of the 
        Eastside Lateral pipeline project, assist agricultural 
        producers with approximately 400 acres of on-farm water 
        conservation practices and educate producers and farm workers 
        on the latest irrigation water management techniques. The 
        project will also restore one mile of spawning and rearing 
        habitat on the East Fork Hood River for threatened steelhead, 
        spring Chinook, and Coho. The project will increase irrigation 
        water reliability for high value food crops, improve resilience 
        to drought, and restore instream habitat for ESA listed 
        species.

    RCPP Funding: $2,033,000, Project Timeline: 2018-2022

  --The Wallowa Lake Irrigation Modernization Project, Farmers 
        Conservation Alliance (FCA)--This project will address water 
        quantity, water quality, and inadequate habitat resource 
        concerns in the Prairie Creek area of Wallowa County, Oregon. 
        This project proposes to pipe 11.8 miles of private ditches, 
        install water control structures/fish screens on newly piped 
        ditches and install up to ten new sprinkler systems to increase 
        on-farm conveyance and application efficiency. The actions will 
        improve water conveyance and application efficiency, reduce 
        fish entrainment risk decrease return flows into Prairie Creek 
        and the Wallowa River, and decrease sediment, nutrient, and 
        bacteria inputs into Prairie Creek and the Wallowa River. FCA 
        and its partners seek to benefit threatened or endangered 
        populations of spring Chinook salmon, summer steelhead trout 
        and bull trout.

    RCPP Funding: $1,730,000, Project Timeline: 2018-2021

  --Lower Crooked River Strategic Restoration--This is a comprehensive 
        project, led by the Crooked River Watershed Council, intended 
        to address degraded fish and wildlife habitat, water quality, 
        and riparian plant communities over 17 miles of the Crooked 
        River in Central Oregon. Proposed restoration activities 
        include both instream and riparian restoration to improve 
        habitat for fish and wildlife, water quality, and agricultural 
        productivity. In addition, the project will reduce the threat 
        of regulatory enforcement associated with the Federal 
        Endangered Species Act and compliance with non-point source 
        impacts from agriculture under Sections 303 and 319 of the 
        Federal Clean Water Act.

    RCPP Funding: $7,091,000, Project Timeline: 2018-2022

  --Three Sisters Irrigation District (TSID) Innovation--TSID in the 
        Deschutes Basin, Oregon, with government, private industry and 
        nonprofit partners will implement multiple innovative projects 
        to mitigate drought, improve water quality/quantity and improve 
        fish habitat as part of the Whychus Creek Collaborative 
        Conservation Project. The project includes the completion of 
        piping Watson McKenzie Main Canal, resulting in the 
        conservation of 800 acre-feet of annual canal seepage loss. The 
        on-farm component of this project will encompass 61 projects, 
        over 1500 acres, in the Upper District, allowing farmers to 
        pipe private laterals, thereby providing access to pressurized 
        water from the District's pipeline. Pressurized water will 
        eliminate electrical pumps that use over 2.5 million kWh of 
        electricity annually. A feasibility study will be conducted to 
        determine the potential for 60 on-farm hydro net metering 
        projects. This project will allow TSID to mitigate drought by 
        piping the entire District.

    RCPP Funding: $990,604, Project Timeline: 2017-2022

    OWRC also continues to support funding for Environmental Quality 
Incentives Program (EQIP), in accordance with the 2018 Farm Bill. As 
demonstrated by the huge demand for RCPP funding, programs like EQIP 
need to be funded for investment in conservation projects. It is 
essential the EQIP have at least $2 billion in appropriations funding 
if Congress would like to see widespread results. Furthermore, with 
numerous new and potential listings under ESA and increased water 
regulations under the CWA, there is a dire need for additional funding 
to support conservation efforts nationwide.
    RCPP helps fill a funding void for multi-partner conservation 
projects and allows farmers to pool together and leverage the dollars 
invested in the off-farm project with the addition of EQIP on-farm 
projects. The effects of drought combined with ESA and CWA regulation 
has created a daunting set of circumstances for irrigated agriculture 
in the west. RCPP and EQIP have become an essential lifeline for 
farmers to adapt to drought. It is critical to increase funding for new 
eligible RCPP projects that maximize economic investment while 
benefiting the environment and alleviating some of the negative effects 
of drought.
  small watershed rehabilitation program and watershed planning needs
    OWRC also strongly supports the Small Watershed Rehabilitation 
Program. Two of our members, Sutherlin Water Control District (SWCD) 
and Middle Fork Irrigation District (MFID) have dams that were built 
under PL-566. SWCD and MFID have received funds to begin the long and 
expensive process of updating their 50-year-old dams to today's 
standards for safety, however; both districts will need continued 
funding from the Small Watershed Rehabilitation Program to fully update 
their infrastructure.
    SWCD has two dams built under PL-566 and while they were built to 
seismic standards 50 years ago, they do not meet today's standards for 
earthquakes. SWCD's dams serve as multi-purpose storage for the 
community: providing flood control, irrigation water, municipal water, 
and recreation. To date, SWCD has been authorized to receive funding 
for planning, design, and construction of one of their dams and 
planning and design on the other. However, SWCD will still need 
considerable funding dollars to complete construction on the second 
dam.
    MFID is responsible for the management and maintenance of Clear 
Branch Dam, a PL-566 dam within the Hood River watershed, which 
provides a clean, dependable water supply and distribution system for 
the irrigation of pears, apples, cherries, and other high value crops. 
Rehabilitation of the dam is needed to protect the public from 
flooding, for access to a clean and dependable water supply, and to 
maintain agricultural productivity. Rehabilitation of Clear Branch Dam 
will improve fish passage connectivity for ESA threatened Bull Trout 
and improve water temperature for spawning, rearing and migration.
    Once planning and design studies are complete, both MFID and SWCD 
will know what the costs will be to make the necessary improvements to 
their dams, which is currently estimated at over $10 million for both 
SWCD dams and $9.45 million for MFID. Additionally, in 2017, Senator 
Merkley championed increased funding within PL- 566 for Watershed and 
Flood Prevention Operations. The program was funded at $150 million and 
included projects that benefit wildlife and irrigation. These funds are 
available to substantially assist Central Oregon irrigators with water 
conservation projects that benefit spotted frog preservation while 
ensuring farmers and ranchers in the region get the water they need for 
their operations.
    Considering the high costs to fix just three of the PL-566 dams, 
and the immense price tag of modernizing infrastructure to increase 
water conservation, preserve wildlife habitat and increase water 
reliability for farmers and ranchers, a minimum of $1 billion is needed 
to fund this important program. Our member districts, the farms and 
other water users they serve, and the communities in which they are 
located benefit greatly from the NRCS programs described in our 
testimony. NRCS programs are essential to irrigation districts in 
developing and implementing conservation projects that benefit the 
entire watershed and community.
    Furthermore, conservation projects also benefit the economy through 
job creation and ensuring the future viability of American agriculture. 
Oregon's agricultural community is actively committed to water 
conservation programs, but those programs require robust federal 
participation if the agricultural community is to be able to continue 
its efforts to address Oregon's water supply needs through 
conservation. Increasing the budget for NRCS programs is a strategic 
investment that will pay both environmental and economic dividends to 
Oregonians and America as a whole.
    Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony on FY 2022 
Appropriations for the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Natural 
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) programs.

    [This statement was submitted by April Snell, Executive Director, 
Oregon Water Resources Congress.]
                                 ______
                                 
        Prepared Statement of the Personal Care Products Council
    On behalf of the Personal Care Products Council (PCPC), thank you 
Chairwoman Baldwin, Ranking Member Hoeven, and members of the 
Subcommittee for the opportunity to submit testimony on Agriculture, 
Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies 
appropriations for Fiscal Year 2022.
    PCPC is the leading national trade association representing the 
global cosmetic and personal care products industry. Founded in 1894, 
PCPC represents approximately 600 member companies who manufacture, 
distribute, and supply the vast majority of finished personal care 
products marketed in the U.S., ranging from multi-national corporations 
to medium and small enterprises. As the makers of a diverse range of 
products millions of consumers rely on every day, from sunscreens, 
toothpaste and shampoo to moisturizer, lipstick and fragrance, personal 
care products companies are global leaders committed to product safety, 
quality and innovation.
    PCPC and its members very much appreciate the Subcommittee's 
consistent support and once again encourage provision of sufficient 
FY22 funding for the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition 
(CFSAN) and its Office of Cosmetics and Colors. We share your 
commitment to continuing and strengthening FDA's regulatory and 
enforcement capabilities.
    As you know, the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act requires that 
every cosmetic and personal care product and its individual ingredients 
be safe before they are put on the market. Companies that manufacture 
or market cosmetics have a legal responsibility to ensure their 
products are safe and properly labeled, and current federal law 
provides penalties for failure to meet these requirements. Our member 
companies take their responsibility to make safe products very 
seriously. Consumer and product safety are top priorities for our 
industry, with careful and thorough scientific research and development 
serving as the foundation for everything that we do.
    The U.S. cosmetics industry invests nearly $3 billion each year in 
scientific research and development. As a result of this research, 
approximately 2,000 new products are launched annually. The industry 
employs nearly 6,000 scientific and technical professionals dedicated 
to ensuring product and ingredient safety. Companies also work with a 
number of scientific and medical experts--chemists, toxicologists, 
microbiologists, dermatologists, epidemiologists, environmental 
scientists, and other technical experts--to evaluate and ensure the 
safety of their products before they reach the consumer.
    FDA and the personal care products industry continuously strive to 
ensure cosmetics safety, and cosmetics products have an excellent 
safety record. However, because the key statutory provisions 
authorizing FDA regulation of these products have not been updated 
since enactment of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938, 
PCPC supports modernizing cosmetics regulation to ensure that FDA has 
the appropriate authority and resources to oversee cosmetic products 
for decades to come.
    As you consider potential funding for the FDA's Office of Cosmetic 
and Colors, we wanted to share our continuing efforts to work with the 
authorizing committees and key stakeholders on a comprehensive and 
uniform national framework for cosmetics regulation that advances 
safety, innovation, and consumer confidence. Below are the key 
principles guiding our advocacy in support of modernization of cosmetic 
regulation.
    We believe that modernization efforts should be designed to protect 
the public health, while also providing for a framework appropriately 
calibrated to the excellent safety record of cosmetics. The following 
components are key to creating and sustaining a comprehensive, 
effective modernized system for cosmetics regulation:

Cosmetic Safety: The governing statute should require manufacturers to 
substantiate the safety of cosmetic products and ingredients, utilizing 
widely accepted scientific principles and established scientific 
ingredient reviews such as the Cosmetic Ingredient Review. 

        Manufacturers should be able to choose which FDA-accepted data to use.
        FDA Cosmetic Ingredient Review: Congress should authorize FDA 
        to review the safety of individual cosmetic ingredients and 
        nonfunctional constituents found in cosmetics. Review should be 
        discretionary rather than mandatory, which would ensure the 
        Agency can best utilize its public health resources.

        Alternatives to Animal Testing: Congress should prohibit any 
        new testing of cosmetics on animals, exempting over-the-counter 
        drug products from such prohibition (since these products are 
        regulated separately by FDA), allow for limited exemptions for 
        certain ingredients on the basis of safety concerns (as in the 
        EU), ensure national uniformity, and provide greater 
        transparency in use of ``cruelty free'' labeling.

        Mandatory Registration: For all cosmetic products sold in the 
        United States, manufacturers should be required to register 
        their foreign and domestic manufacturing establishments with 
        FDA and report their ingredients to FDA.

        Importation: A federal cosmetics regulation framework should 
        bar importation of cosmetics produced outside the U.S. where 
        the manufacturing facility or ingredient statement has not been 
        registered with FDA.

        Good Manufacturing Practices: FDA should be authorized to issue 
        Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) for cosmetic products. GMP 
        standards created by FDA under this authority should leverage 
        existing national and international standards.
        Adverse Event Reporting: Manufacturers should be required to 
        engage in mandatory reporting to FDA of serious and unexpected 
        adverse health events experienced by a consumer from a cosmetic 
        product marketed and used in the United States.

        Cosmetic Records Inspection: FDA should be authorized to 
        inspect a manufacturer's records if FDA has a reasonable belief 
        that a cosmetic product presents a threat of serious adverse 
        health consequences to humans.

        Mandatory Recall: FDA should be provided authority to order a 
        mandatory recall of a product if a manufacturer refuses to 
        comply with an FDA request for a voluntary recall in which FDA 
        has a reasonable belief that the product is adulterated or 
        otherwise is likely to cause serious adverse health 
        consequences.

        Flexibility for Small Businesses: Any cosmetics regulation 
        framework should allow flexibility for small businesses, as 
        defined by the Small Business Administration, to comply with 
        certain requirements, including additional time to submit 
        ingredient statements to FDA, simplified ingredient statements, 
        additional FDA guidance on safety substantiation, and extended 
        effective date for GMP compliance. Very small cosmetic 
        manufacturers should be exempted from any new requirements.

        Interaction of Cosmetic and Over the Counter Drug Authorities: 
        Congress should clarify that when a product falls under FDA's 
        cosmetic and Over the Counter (OTC) drug authorities, and the 
        requirements conflict, the OTC drug requirements will apply.

        National Program Uniformity: A comprehensive national program 
        is needed to ensure uniform regulation of cosmetics. Consumers 
        benefit from consistently regulated cosmetics across the 
        nation, and cosmetic companies benefit from a uniform 
        regulatory framework. As such, federal legislation modernizing 
        cosmetics regulation should preempt state and local laws that 
        would duplicate new authorities granted to FDA to regulate 
        cosmetics.

    A comprehensive update to federal cosmetics regulation guided by 
these principles will promote development of products that are safe, 
innovative, and meet consumer needs.
    We look forward to working with Congress to develop this regulatory 
framework and serving as a resource to the Subcommittee as it considers 
funding for the FDA's Office of Cosmetics and Colors.
    If you have any questions, feel free to contact at 
[email protected] or 202-431-8686.

    [This statement was submitted by Meredith Simpson with the Personal 
Care Products Council.]
                                 ______
                                 
       Prepared Statement of the Personalized Medicine Coalition
    Chairwoman Baldwin, Ranking Member Hoeven and distinguished members 
of the subcommittee, the Personalized Medicine Coalition (PMC) 
appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony on the U.S. Food and 
Drug Administration (FDA)'s fiscal year (FY) 2022 appropriations. PMC 
is a nonprofit education and advocacy organization comprised of more 
than 220 member institutions across the health care spectrum who are 
working together to advance personalized medicine in ways that benefit 
patients and health systems. The global COVID-19 pandemic did not slow 
the extraordinary pace of scientific innovation in personalized 
medicine. The widely variable effects of COVID-19 have only highlighted 
the need for personalized medicine to move further and faster and for 
Congress to continue its investment in FDA. As the subcommittee begins 
work on the FY 2022 Agriculture, Rural Development, FDA, & Related 
Agencies Appropriations bill, we respectfully ask that you increase the 
FDA's appropriation by no less than $200 million above the FY 2021 
budget authority level so that the agency can continue to carry out its 
public health mission and support the delivery of the targeted health 
care interventions that are the foundation of personalized medicine.
    Personalized medicine, also called precision or individualized 
medicine, is an evolving field in which physicians use diagnostic tests 
to determine which medical treatments will work best for each patient 
or use medical interventions to alter molecular mechanisms that impact 
health. By combining data from diagnostic tests with an individual's 
medical history, circumstances, and values, health care providers can 
develop targeted treatment and prevention plans with their patients. 
Personalized medicine promises to detect the onset of disease, pre-empt 
its progression, and improve the quality, accessibility, and 
affordability of health care.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ http://www.personalizedmedicinecoalition.org/Userfiles/PMC-
Corporate/file/PMC--The--Personalized--Medicine--Report--Opportunity--
Challenges--and--the--Future.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Previous increases in funding have enabled the FDA to advance 
multiple programs facilitating the development of personalized medicine 
products. Additional increases in FY 2022 will allow the FDA to expand 
these initiatives and launch new ones, which all require a highly 
skilled and technical workforce. By increasing federal investment in 
FDA activities fostering the development of innovative medical 
products, clinical trial design, real-world evidence, and digital 
health, Congress can help advance a new era of personalized medicine at 
a pivotal moment, promising a brighter future for health systems and 
patients with unmet medical needs.
              the role of the fda in personalized medicine
    The rapid progress we have seen over the past year, from mRNA 
vaccine development, diagnostic testing, and variant sequencing, to 
beginning to understand how human genomic variation influences 
infectivity, disease severity, vaccine efficacy, and treatment 
response, show that science is leading the health system away from one-
size-fits-all, trial-and-error medicine and toward an era of 
personalized medicine.\2\\,3\ This progress was in part made possible 
by years of diligent funding from Congress to advance the necessary 
regulatory science and infrastructure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.01.015
    \3\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2817-4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Thanks in part to a responsive regulatory agency, personalized 
medicine has seen steady progress in recent years. As of 2020, more 
than 286 personalized treatments are available for patients.\4\ 
Personalized medicines accounted for 39 percent of the new drugs FDA 
approved last year, topping one-third of new drug approvals for the 
third time in the last four years.\5\ This is a sharp increase since a 
decade ago, when personalized medicines accounted for less than 10 
percent of newly approved therapies. These new approvals help transform 
care for molecularly selected subsets of patients with cancer, rare 
diseases, and common/infectious diseases. FDA also approved the first 
blood-based biomarker tests for cancer that will help guide targeted 
treatment strategies for patients who are unable to undergo invasive 
operations to obtain tissue biopsies. The emergence of blood-based 
biomarker testing may also usher in a new era in which cancers are 
detected at earlier stages, when they may be easier and less expensive 
to treat.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ http://www.personalizedmedicinecoalition.org/Userfiles/PMC-
Corporate/file/PMC--The--Personalized--Medicine--Report--Opportunity--
Challenges--and--the--Future.pdf
    \5\ http://www.personalizedmedicinecoalition.org/Userfiles/PMC-
Corporate/file/PM--at--FDA--The--Scope--Significance--of--Progress--
in--2020.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The FDA is the gateway for personalized medicine breakthroughs 
entering the market. FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health 
(CDRH), Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), and Center for 
Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) each have responsibilities for 
evaluating medical products for their safety and efficacy. As 
personalized approaches to treatment and prevention have grown, new 
types of drugs, tools, and technologies using genetic information have 
challenged existing regulatory frameworks and processes.
     facilitating the development of personalized medicine products
    The FDA is taking a number of steps to modernize its regulatory 
processes, such as streamlining its technical and data infrastructure 
to shorten review times, improving clinical trials to address 
disparities and unmet medical needs, integrating RWE into medical 
product reviews, and building partnerships to foster digital health and 
artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. Robust funding from Congress 
will help the FDA build upon this work and bring personalized medicine 
products to patients as efficiently as possible.
                     expediting product development
    The FDA continues to take actions across the agency that enable it 
to make more rapid decisions and improve communications with medical 
product developers. In recent years, the agency has worked toward 
integrating premarket and post-market programs to transition to a total 
product lifecycle approach to device evaluation and monitoring. These 
are positive steps, but the agency's technical infrastructure remains 
fragmented. For example, with over 30 data systems in the Devices 
Program, reviewers need to access up to 10 different systems during the 
review process.\6\ Additional funding would enable the agency to 
continue its Data Modernization Action Plan beginning with near term 
``driver projects'' to promote consistent, repeatable data practices 
across centers that build foundational capabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ https://www.fda.gov/media/135078/download
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The agency must also bolster its workforce to keep pace with the 
growing pipeline of gene therapies, as well as build in workforce 
flexibilities across each of its centers. As of January 2020, FDA had 
over 900 active Investigational New Drug applications for gene 
therapies.\7\ The scientific review of gene therapies requires the 
evaluation of highly complex information and, thus, reviewers with 
highly specific expertise, and by 2025, the agency anticipates it will 
be approving 10 to 20 cell and gene therapy products per year.\8\ 
Additional funding would help FDA grow its workforce to prepare for an 
increasing pre- and post-market cell and gene therapy workload. FDA 
staff have taken extraordinary steps over the past year to respond to 
the coronavirus public health emergency, with CDER staff absorbing the 
workload of around 250 full-time employees and CDRH seeing a 38 percent 
increase in pre-market submissions. This stretched capacity, however, 
is not without consequences. In April 2021, CDRH announced that, due to 
limited resources and delays in review timelines, it will be declining 
in vitro diagnostic pre-submission requests that do not fall into 
certain priority categories.\9\ While Congress has appropriated no-
years monies to the agency to address some of the pandemic's resource 
demands, FDA is only able to hire permanent full-time employees through 
increased budget authority from Congress. Increasing FDA's base funding 
level will allow the agency to begin addressing restraints on workload 
capacity and build in future flexibilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-
continues-strong-support-innovation-development-gene-therapy-products
    \8\ https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-
continues-strong-support-innovation-development-gene-therapy-products
    \9\ https://www.fda.gov/news-events/fda-voices/year-pandemic-how-
fdas-center-devices-and-radiological-health-prioritizing-its-workload-
and-looking
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      modernizing clinical trials
    More rare diseases and cancers are being defined by biological 
markers, creating smaller groups of patients who are more likely to 
respond to targeted treatments and are candidates for participation in 
trials. Trials that rely on identification of patients by biological 
markers, such as enriched trials, trials with master protocols, and in 
silico trials using computer modeling, present opportunities to 
streamline clinical research, especially in cases where a scarcity of 
patients makes a randomized control infeasible and where important 
personalized medicines may be delayed or discarded because FDA cannot 
afford to run trials needed to validate them. In addition, ensuring 
that personalized medicines are impactful to all patients requires the 
inclusive and equitable representation of patients with diverse 
characteristics and health needs in clinical research. In 2020, FDA 
finalized guidance outlining approaches to enhancing the diversity of 
participants in clinical trials, and the COVID-19 pandemic has prompted 
FDA to consider additional opportunities allowing for remote 
participation in research through decentralized trials. FDA is also 
supporting clinical trials networks in rare diseases and working to 
bring clarity to the emerging area of individualized drugs developed 
for a single, ``n-of-one'' patient diagnosed with a very rare genetic 
disease and where traditional clinical trials are not an option. These 
initiatives promise to foster a more agile clinical research enterprise 
for personalized medicine that helps address unmet medical needs and 
disparities in clinical research.
             advancing the use of real-world evidence (rwe)
    Traditional post-market studies require years to design and 
complete and cost millions of dollars. The use of medical data 
collected outside of a clinical trial, or RWE, has played a vital role 
in answering key questions about COVID-19 and related therapeutics, 
diagnostics and vaccines as standards of care evolved rapidly.\10\ 
These experiences over the past year have demonstrated how RWE can be 
used to understand the utility of new treatments and diagnostics, as 
well as improve patient access to personalized medicine. In March 2021, 
CDRH published an analysis of 90 examples of different types of 
regulatory submissions supported by RWE, and later this year CDER plans 
to publish draft guidance on how RWE can contribute to the assessment 
of safety and effectiveness in regulatory submissions. FDA is also 
working to expand its Sentinel System and NEST (National Evaluation 
System for health Technology) programs to monitor the safety and 
effectiveness of approved medical products. Increased budget authority 
for FDA would create a more reliable source of funding for and 
strengthen programs like Sentinel and NEST, which provide national 
resources for filling data gaps in existing surveillance systems, 
improving product review, and improving the quality of RWE available to 
health care providers and patients to make more informed treatment 
decisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ https://www.fda.gov/news-events/fda-voices/fdas-technology-
modernization-action-plan-accelerates-path-enhancing-and-promoting-
people-first
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 fostering digital health technologies and artificial intelligence (ai)
    Data-capturing technological devices, or digital health 
technologies, and AI can play a key role in the collection and analysis 
of RWE. In 2020, CDRH launched the Digital Health Center of Excellence 
to build partnerships advancing the development and FDA review of 
cutting-edge digital health technologies. Over the past year, FDA also 
released an action plan for innovation in medical device software using 
AI and machine learning, held a public meeting to discuss the use of 
real-world data generated from patients through digital health 
technologies, and published learnings from its pilot precertification 
program for medical device software. FDA recently granted Breakthrough 
Designation to an AI platform that would aid clinicians in identifying 
patients at increased risk of developing atrial fibrillation (AFib) or 
atrial flutter. AFib is highly prevalent in the older adult population, 
and AFib-related strokes are disabling and costly. This AI platform 
utilizes ECGs to predict, among people without a previous history of 
AFib, who would develop it within the next 12 months. By informing 
FDA's approach to regulatory oversight of these emerging technologies, 
additional investment in these initiatives may encourage the use of 
personalized medicine by helping match new personalized medicine 
products with the patients who are most likely to benefit or by helping 
to identify potentially serious therapeutic side effects sooner. 
Digital health technologies can also play a key role in enabling remote 
participation in trials. This foundation laid at the FDA for digital 
health and AI will become increasingly important for personalized 
medicine as patients assume a larger role in managing their own health 
care and are more informed by their ability to access their genomic 
data.
          implementing the 21st century cures act (cures act)
    By passing the Cures Act, Congress acknowledged the need for an 
additional focus on and funding for the FDA. These resources have 
facilitated many of the programs mentioned above, but this funding 
alone is insufficient to fully sustain the agency's work in these 
critical areas. The Cures Act authorizes $50 million in FY 2022 for the 
FDA through the Innovation Account, \11\ but as annual allocations 
start to taper off, the science behind product development continues to 
increase in complexity. Increases in the FDA's budget authority 
appropriations are necessary for the agency to continue the important 
programs launched by the Cures Act and build on them in ways that help 
the FDA evaluate novel personalized medicines and technologies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ https://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/
CommitteesMeetingMaterials/ScienceBoardtotheFoodandDrugAdministration/
UCM556618.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               conclusion
    PMC appreciates the opportunity to highlight the FDA's importance 
to the continued success of personalized medicine. A budget authority 
appropriation for the FDA in FY 2022 that is no less than $200 million 
above the FY 2021 base appropriations level will help the agency chart 
an efficient path for advancing innovative medical product development 
and bring us closer to a future in which every patient benefits from a 
personalized approach to health care.

    [This statement was submitted by Cynthia A. Bens, Senior Vice 
President, Public Policy, Personalized Medicine Coalition.]
                                 ______
                                 
  Prepared Statement of the Pet and Women Safety (PAWS) Act Coalition
    The Pet and Women Safety Act (PAWS) Coalition, a group of 
organizations working together in support of domestic violence 
survivors and their pets, strongly supports continued appropriations 
for the Emergency and Transitional Pet Shelter and Housing Assistance 
Grant Program. Together, we call on Congress to fund the program at the 
fully authorized amount of $3,000,000.
    PAWS Act legislation was included in the 2018 Farm Bill (Section 
12502), establishing this important grant program to support domestic 
violence shelters as they help survivors and their families safely seek 
shelter with their pets when leaving an abuser. These grants provide 
emergency and transitional shelter and housing assistance or short-term 
shelter and housing assistance. Grants awarded may also be used for 
programs that provide support services designed to enable someone 
fleeing domestic violence to locate and secure safe housing with their 
pet, safe accommodations for their pet, or related services such as 
transportation and other assistance. The U.S. Department of Justice 
(DOJ) Office of Victims of Crime (OVC) is now in its second year of 
administering this program, and demand for this funding is high.
    The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020 provided $2 million for 
the Emergency Transitional Pet Shelter Housing and Assistance Grant 
Program. In 2020, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of 
Justice Programs (OJP), and Office of Victims of Crime (OVC) awarded 
$2.2 million to six organizations throughout the United States.
    With this funding, these domestic violence shelters are already 
implementing pet- friendly policies such as partnering with local 
veterinary offices to provide care for survivors' pets, and building 
necessary infrastructure such as temporary pet shelters.
    The FY 2020 awards are expanding services and establishing new 
programs that will increase lifesaving resources for families seeking 
safe shelter together with their pets.
    Grant recipients are utilizing funding to:

  --Create a coordinated community response to improve resources 
        available to survivors and their pets

  --Provide temporary shelter for pets, transitional housing and hotel 
        rooms for survivors with pets

  --Establish partnerships with local non-profits and veterinarians to 
        provide preventative, non-emergency, and emergency pet care for 
        survivors' pets

  --Hire new staff and hold additional trainings for staff on the link 
        between domestic violence and animal abuse

  --Target rural communities for capacity-building assistance

  --Establish a survivor emergency relief fund, which will include 
        funding for pet deposits and other support for pet-owning 
        survivors

  --Operate a 10-kennel pet shelter on-site

  --Purchase pet supplies and food

    In late April 2021, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of 
Justice Programs (OJP), and Office of Victims of Crime (OVC) announced 
the availability of $2.5 million in grant funding appropriated by 
Congress in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021. Since this 
announcement, the PAWS Act Coalition has worked to raise awareness 
among the domestic violence shelter community of the availability of 
this important funding.
    PAWS Act Coalition members are also contributing funds and 
volunteer hours to the cause of making more domestic violence shelters 
pet-friendly. For example, Purina and RedRover awarded six additional 
Purple Leash Project grants to domestic violence shelters across the 
country in the winter of 2021. These grants provide funding and 
resources to transform domestic violence emergency shelters into safe 
spaces for survivors and their pets. Shelters can use the grant money 
to complete renovations and upgrades to their survivor services 
offerings that will allow people and pets to escape abuse and heal 
together. The success of this program demonstrates that smaller-size 
grants can still have a big impact. Purple Leash Project grants 
typically range between $20,000 and $50,000 each. Since founding the 
Purple Leash Project, Purina and RedRover have provided 21 grants 
totaling to more than $300,000 in funding to domestic violence shelters 
across the United States. Since 2012, RedRover has awarded 120 Safe 
Housing grants to domestic violence shelters in 41 states to help them 
become pet-friendly, and the majority of these grants are less than 
$20,000.Purina and RedRover are working towards the goal of 25 percent 
of U.S. domestic violence shelters to become pet-friendly by the end of 
2025. While these public-private partnerships are hugely important, 
fully funding the PAWS Act will help to address the widespread need for 
funding to support similar programs across the country.
    Noah's Animal House and Urban Resource Institute (URI), members of 
the PAWS Act Coalition are part of the less than 20% of domestic 
violence shelters across the country that actively offer co-shelter 
services to keep both pets and their owners away from the dangers of 
domestic abuse. Together, these two organizations have saved 
approximately 2,300 pets from abusive conditions, so that domestic 
violence survivors are not forced to choose between staying in an 
abusive relationship and leaving their pet with their abuser.
    Fully funding the Emergency and Transitional Pet Shelter and 
Housing Assistance Grant Program at $3 million is essential to saving 
the lives of people and pets. According to the Centers for Disease 
Control, 4,774,000 women in the United States experience physical 
violence by an intimate partner every year. According to the National 
Coalition Against Domestic Violence, 1 in 4 women and 1 in 4 men have 
experienced physical violence by an intimate partner within their 
lifetime. On a typical day, there are more than 20,000 phone calls 
placed to domestic violence hotlines nationwide.
    Additionally, the majority of domestic violence situations include 
pets in the household and 85% of women residing in domestic violence 
shelters reported a pet was harmed by their abuser\1\. As many as 65% 
of people experiencing domestic violence remain in abusive situations 
out of fear for their pets' safety\2\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Ascione, F.R.,Weber,C V., Thompson,T.M.,Heath,J.,Maruyama, 
M.,Hayashi,K. (2007). Battered Pets and Domestic Violence: Animal Abuse 
Reported by Women Experiencing Intimate Violence and by Nonabused 
Women. Violence Against W omen,13(4),354-373.
    \2\ https://www.drmartybecker.com/healing-power-of-pets/people-
pets-caught-domestic-violence-personal-story/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A growing body of science has demonstrated a link between domestic 
violence and animal cruelty\3\. An outlet of emotional support for 
survivors, the family pet often becomes a target for physical abuse\4\. 
In studies that have explored the role of companion animals in an 
abusive relationship, companion animals are used by abusers to control, 
hurt, and intimidate their partners\5\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Faver, Catherine A., and Elizabeth B. Strand. ``Domestic 
violence and animal cruelty: Untangling the web of abuse.'' Journal of 
Social Work Education 39.2 (2003): 237-253.
    \4\ Matthews, Kevin, and Kelly McConkey. ``Examining the nexus 
between domestic violence and animal abuse in a national sample of 
service providers.'' Violence and victims 27.2 (2012): 280.
    \5\ Flynn, Clifton P. ``Battered women and their animal companions: 
Symbolic interaction between human and nonhuman animals.'' Society & 
Animals 8.2 (2000): 99-127.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Research demonstrates the link between pets and improvements in 
mental health, particularly for those who have experienced trauma. 
Companion animals often serve as a much needed and effective outlet for 
overcoming abuse, and have also been shown to improve mental health 
conditions such as depression, stress and anxiety, all of which can 
manifest from intimate partner violence\6\. The pervasiveness of 
domestic violence during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and the 
incidence of violence towards pets in the United States shows the 
urgency of providing safe shelter for survivors and their pets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ World Health Organization. Global and regional estimates of 
violence against women: prevalence and health effects of intimate 
partner violence and non-partner sexual violence. World Health 
Organization, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The need for additional pet-friendly options for domestic violence 
survivors remains an under-addressed, critical issue facing our 
country. The continuation of the Emergency and Transitional Pet Shelter 
Housing and Assistance Grant Program funding is an important step to 
meet this need. Please increase federal funding in FY 2022 for the PAWS 
Act grant program to the fully authorized amount of $3 million so that 
no survivor of domestic violence will have to choose between their own 
safety or the safety of their pets. The Coalition also encourages the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the DOJ to consider providing 
a greater number of grants at lesser dollar amounts in the future. 
Offering grants in the $20,000--$500,000 range could fill a gap in 
funding resources and help more shelters become pet-friendly, 
especially those that are smaller and more rural.
    The PAWS Act Coalition is counting on your strong support for the 
Emergency and Transitional Pet Shelter Housing and Assistance Grant 
Program. Together, we can protect survivors of domestic violence by 
protecting the animals they rely on for comfort and healing.
    On behalf of the Pet and Women Safety Act Coalition Members:

    Nestle Purina Petcare
    Human Animal Bond Research Institute
     Noah's Animal House

    Pet Partners
    RedRover
    Urban Resource Institute

    [This statement was submitted by Steven Feldman, Human Animal Bond 
Research Institute (HABRI).]
                                 ______
                                 
      Prepared Statement of the Pickle Packers International, Inc.
                                summary
    Sustained and increased funding is desperately needed to maintain 
the research momentum built over recent years and to defray rising 
fixed costs at laboratory facilities. Companies in the pickled 
vegetable industry generously participate in funding and performing 
short-term research, but the expense for long-term research needed to 
insure future global competitiveness is too great for individual 
companies to shoulder on their own.
                 additional budget requests for fy 2022
Funding needs for USDA/ARS laboratories are as follows:

I. Requests for Program Enhancement--Pickled Vegetables

        $500,000     Applied Crop Genomics
        $500,000     Product Quality and New Uses and Food Safety
        $250,000     Precision Agriculture for Specialty Crops
        $500,000     Emerging Diseases of Crops
        $1,750,000   Increase in Operating Funds to Fully Fund Existing
                             Scientists, Support Staff, Graduate 
                        Students, and
                             Post-Doctorates

USDA/ARS Research Provides:

  --Consumers with over 150 safe and healthful vegetable varieties 
        providing vitamins A, C, folate, magnesium, potassium, calcium, 
        and phytonutrients such as antioxidant carotenoids and 
        anthocyanins.

  --Genetic resistance for many major vegetable diseases and pests, 
        assuring sustainable crop production with reduced pesticide 
        residues--valued at nearly $1 billion per year in increased 
        crop production.

  --Classical plant breeding methods combined with bio-technological 
        tools, such as DNA markers, genetic maps, and genome sequencing 
        to expedite traditional breeding and increase efficiency.

  --New vegetable products with economic opportunities amidst 
        increasing foreign competition.

  --Improved varieties suitable for machine harvesting, assuring post 
        harvest quality and marketability.

  --Fermentation and acidification processing techniques to improve the 
        efficiency of energy use, reduce environmental pollution, and 
        reduce clean water intake while continuing to assure safety and 
        quality of our products.

  --Methods for delivering beneficial microorganisms in fermented or 
        acidified vegetables and producing reduced sodium, healthier 
        products.

  --New technology and systems for rapid inspection, sorting and 
        grading of pickling vegetable products in the field and at the 
        processing facility.

Health and Economical Benefits

  --Health agencies continue to encourage increased consumption of 
        fruits and vegetables, useful in preventing heart disease, 
        cancer, stroke, diabetes, and obesity.

  --Vegetable crops, including cucumbers, peppers, carrots, onions, 
        garlic, and cabbage (sauerkraut), are considered ``specialty'' 
        crops and not part of commodity programs supported by taxpayer 
        subsidies.

  --Current farm value for just cucumbers, onions and garlic is 
        estimated at $2.4 billion with a processed value of $5.8 
        billion. These vegetables are grown and/or manufactured in all 
        50 states.

    The pickled vegetable industry strongly supports and encourages 
your committee in its work of maintaining and guiding the Agricultural 
Research Service. To accomplish the goal of improved health and quality 
of life for the American people, the health action agencies of this 
country continue to encourage increased consumption of fruits and 
vegetables in our diets. Accumulating evidence from the epidemiology 
and biochemistry of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and obesity 
supports this policy.
    As an association representing processors that produce over 85 
percent of the tonnage of pickled vegetables in North America, it is 
our goal to produce new products that increase the competitiveness of 
U.S. agriculture as well as meet the demands of an increasingly diverse 
U.S. population that is encouraged to eat more vegetables. The profit 
margins of growers continue to be narrowed by foreign competition. This 
industry can grow by meeting today's lifestyle changes with reasonably 
priced products of good texture and flavor that are high in nutritional 
value, low in negative environmental impacts, and produced with assured 
safety from pathogenic microorganisms and from those who would use food 
as a vehicle for terror. With strong research to back us up, we believe 
our industry can make a greater contribution toward reducing product 
costs and improving human diets and health for all economic strata of 
U.S. society.
    Many small to medium sized growers and processing operations are 
involved in the pickled vegetable industry. We grow and process a group 
of vegetable crops, including cucumbers, peppers, carrots, onions, 
garlic, cauliflower, cabbage (Sauerkraut) and Brussels sprouts, which 
are referred to as 'minor' crops. None of these crops are in any 
``commodity program'' and do not rely on taxpayer subsidies. However, 
current farm value for just cucumbers, onions and garlic is $2.4 
billion with an estimated processed value of $5.8 billion. These crops 
represent important sources of income to farmers and rural America.
                         applied crop genomics
    The USDA/ARS has the only vegetable crops research unit dedicated 
to the genetic improvement of cucumbers, carrots, onions, and garlic. 
ARS scientists account for over half of the total U.S. public breeding 
and genetics research on these crops. Their efforts have yielded 
cultivars and breeding stocks that are widely used by the U.S. 
vegetable industry (i.e., growers, processors, and seed companies). All 
U.S. seed companies rely upon this program for developing new varieties 
and economically important traits (e.g., pest resistances and health-
enhancing characteristics) not available in commercial varieties using 
long-term high-risk research efforts.
    ARS scientists have developed genetic resistance for many major 
vegetable diseases that is estimated at $670 million per year in 
increased crop production, not to mention environmental benefits due to 
reduction in pesticide use. New research has resulted in cucumbers with 
improved disease resistance, pickling quality and suitability for 
machine harvesting. New sources of genetic resistance to viral and 
fungal diseases, tolerance to environmental stresses, and higher yield 
have recently been identified along with molecular tools to expedite 
delivery of elite cucumber lines to U.S. growers.
    There are still serious vegetable production problems which need 
attention. Field loss caused by pathogens and pests remain high, yield 
and nutritional quality needs to be significantly improved, and U.S. 
production value and export markets should be enhanced. Genetic 
improvement of these crop attributes is available through the unique 
USDA lines and populations (i.e., germplasm) and new biotechnological 
methodologies that are being developed. Classical plant breeding 
methods combined with state-of-the art molecular tools such as genetic 
maps, marker-assisted and genomic selection, and genome sequences can 
expedite traditional cucumber, carrot and onion breeding and increase 
efficiency. New high-value vegetable products based upon genetic 
improvements can offer vegetable processors and growers expanded 
economic opportunities for the U.S. and export markets.
              product quality and new uses and food safety
    The USDA-ARS maintains a Food Science and Market Quality & Handling 
Research Unit (FSMQHRU) that our industry looks to for new processing 
technologies and scientific information regarding the quality and 
safety of fermented, acidified, and preserved vegetable products. Major 
accomplishments include: development of pasteurization technology used 
for most acidified pickles and other vegetables in the US market; 
determination of the combined vinegar and sugar concentrations needed 
to preserve shelf stable sweet pickles; purging technology that saves 
the pickled vegetable industry up to 40% in losses due to bloater 
damage; technologies that reduce or eliminate sodium chloride to help 
comply with federal EPA regulations for waste salt disposal; and 
scientific data needed to support required process filings for safe 
production practices of acidified foods under FDA regulations and the 
Food Safety Modernization Act.
    The pickling industry still relies on food processing methods 
developed in the 1940's and 50's. FSMQHRU is working to develop 
continuous flow microwave technology and ``hot-fill-and-hold'' 
pasteurization methods (potentially eliminating the need for a costly 
steam pasteurizers) to save energy costs and reduce water use. The Unit 
is developing a process to eliminate carbon dioxide production in 
cucumber fermentations to significantly reduce the environmental 
footprint of production, eliminating bloater defects and the need for 
air purging conducive to off-flavors and microbial instability. The 
FSMQHRU is also working to develop preservation technologies that will 
enhance health promoting compounds in pickled vegetables with preferred 
textures and flavors. It has been demonstrated that pickles contain 
gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), an amino acid known to reduce anxiety 
and hypertension. Specific fermentation processes can be developed to 
increase GABA in pickle products.
    Additional research funding is urgently needed to: 1) develop low 
salt fermentation methods that significantly reduce environmental 
impact; 2) assure the safety of imported and non-traditional fermented 
and acidified foods through pH modeling to prevent illness and help 
define safe production practices; 3) develop methods for converting 
surplus vegetables into healthful new products. The Economic Research 
Service reported that roughly 1/3 of the food produced in the US is not 
consumed, representing losses of over 1,000 calories per capita per day 
and $100 billion annually; and 4) Develop advanced processing 
technologies that enhance the healthfulness and quality of vegetable 
products to encourage vegetable consumption.
    The FSMQHRU is a unique and valuable resource for the US fermented 
and acidified vegetable industry. It is internationally recognized and 
well-suited to provide the scientific and technological support needed 
to develop new food processing technologies that will enhance industry 
competitiveness and ensure food safety.
               precision agriculture for specialty crops
    Smart or digital technologies have had huge impacts on the 
productivity and sustainability of specialty crop production in the 
U.S. over the past two decades. Recent advances in sensors, robotics 
and automation, machine learning, artificial intelligence, and data 
analytics provide new, exciting opportunities for enhancing specialty 
crops production, food quality and safety, and postharvest food 
handling and distribution. The USDA/ARS engineering research has 
successfully developed and transferred several innovative optical 
technologies for rapid, nondestructive inspection of specialty crops 
for food quality and safety during and after harvest. Its current 
research is focused on the development of new robotic technology, 
coupled with artificial intelligence, for automated harvesting, 
sorting, grading, and tracing of apples and other specialty crops. This 
program is also working on a new generation of intelligent imaging 
technology for evaluation and grading of raw and processed 
horticultural products to ensure food quality and safety and to reduce 
postharvest loss.
    The current resources available are grossly inadequate, threatening 
its leadership position in this scientific field. Increased funding is 
needed to hire a new engineer to address key technical challenges in 
the development of new automation and sensing technology for rapid 
detection of postharvest quality issues and enable fast transfer and 
dissemination of the technologies to the U.S. pickled vegetable 
industry.
                       emerging diseases of crops
    USDA/ARS vegetable research addresses national problems confronting 
the vegetable industry across the U.S. The mission of the program is to 
develop disease and pest resistant vegetables, and new, reliable, 
environmentally-sound disease and pest management practices that do not 
rely on conventional pesticides. Programs currently address 14 crops, 
including those in the cabbage, cucumber, and pepper families--a major 
importance to the pickling industry. USDA/ARS research is recognized 
world-wide, and its accomplishments include over 150 new vegetable 
varieties and many improved management practices.
    Vegetable growers depend heavily on synthetic pesticides to control 
diseases and pests. Without the availability of certain pesticides that 
have been eliminated for use, producers are experiencing significant 
crop losses and even crop failures, and this will continue unless other 
effective, non-pesticide control methods are readily identified. Soil-
borne diseases are especially on the rise due to the elimination of 
methyl bromide, which kept numerous diseases caused by fungi and 
nematodes in check when it was used extensively. In this context, the 
research on improved, more efficient, and environmentally compatible 
vegetable production practices and resistant varieties continues to be 
essential. Increasing funding to hire a new Research Geneticist to 
study and develop host plant resistance will facilitate important 
research in these critical situations.
                      funding needs for the future
    It remains critical that USDA/ARS funding continues the forward 
momentum in pickled vegetable research that the U.S. now enjoys, and to 
increase funding levels to ensure long-term global competitiveness.
    It is important to note that FY 2020 enacted funding for USDA/ARS 
laboratories identified below totaled $17,227,000. However, funding for 
all cucurbits equaled just $5,241,000 with only $3,234,000 directed 
toward cucumber and pickled vegetable research. For FY 2022, PPI is 
requesting an additional $1,750,000 in operating funds to support 
needed research for cucumber and pickled vegetables.

Applied Crop Genomics--Madison, WI

    We request additional funding to replenish recent reductions in 
operating funds and fill the position of a recently retired researcher. 
That hire is not possible until more funds are made available.

                                        FY 2020 Enacted     $357,000
                                        FY 2021 Estimate   $357,000
                                        FY 2022           $357,000 + 
                                        $500,000

Product Quality and New Uses and Food Safety--Raleigh, NC

We request additional funding to offset reductions in operating funds 
and support research initiatives.

                                        FY 2020 Enacted     $595,000
                                        FY 2021 Estimate   $595,000
                                        FY 2022           $595,000 + 
                                        $500,000

Precision Agriculture for Specialty Crops--East Lansing, MI

The current funding is far short of the level needed to conduct needed 
research on pickling cucumbers.

                                        FY 2020 Enacted     $145,000
                                        FY 2021 Estimate   $145,000
                                        FY 2022           $145,000 + 
                                        $250,000

Emerging Diseases of Crops--Charleston, SC

There is a critical need to increase funding to support host plant 
resistance research.

                                        FY 2020 Enacted     $1,797,000
                                        FY 2021 Estimate   $1,797,000
                                        FY 2022           $1,797,000 + 
                                        $500,000

    [This statement was submitted by Brian Bursiek, Executive Vice 
President, Pickle Packers International, Inc.]
                                 ______
                                 
                 Prepared Statement of Research!America
    Research!America appreciates the Subcommittee's stewardship over 
funding for such critical federal agencies as the Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA). The Research!America alliance advocates for 
science, discovery, and innovation to achieve better health for all and 
we hope the comments below prove useful as you allocate funding for 
Fiscal Year 2022 (FY22). We urge you to support a robust increase of no 
less than $200 million above FY21 levels to non-user fee funding to FDA 
in FY22.
    The ever-increasing list of public health responsibilities that FDA 
fulfills directly affects the health and safety of Americans. Overall, 
FDA oversees more than $2.8 trillion in products, which account for 20 
percent of annual spending by U.S. consumers. In 2020, FDA once again 
demonstrated a solid commitment to evaluating the safety and 
effectiveness of new products in as efficient a manner as possible, 
approving 53 novel drugs, 58% of which treat rare or orphan diseases. 
FDA is working collaboratively with patients, academic researchers, and 
industry to responsibly speed the review of medical advances, knowing 
that any unnecessary delay squanders health and time.
    The need for efficient and nimble review of new medical products 
and therapies has been on full display during the ongoing COVID-19 
pandemic. In response to the critical need for therapies for this novel 
disease, the FDA created the Coronavirus Treatment Acceleration Program 
(CTAP), which uses innovative methods to move COVID-19 treatments to 
patients as quickly and as safely as possible. Thanks to this 
innovative program, the FDA has authorized 10 COVID-19 treatments and 3 
vaccines to date. Even while meeting this important need, the FDA has 
not wavered in its commitment to its other health priorities. Of the 53 
drugs approved for a range of medical conditions, 75% were approved in 
the U.S. before any other country. FDA's role is too important, across 
a myriad of American priorities, for inadequate federal support.
    Increased funding for the FDA will allow this agency to continue in 
its many critical functions: developing new strategies for ensuring 
food safety across America, including deploying pioneering artificial 
intelligence programs; assessing the safety of new drugs and medical 
devices coming to market; ensuring that Americans have access to the 
highest quality therapeutics when they need them; and working together 
with other agencies to handle epidemics and pandemics, including the 
ongoing COVID-19 response, as well as potential future threats.
    Additional funding would also allow FDA to do even more to address 
other urgent national health priorities, including using drug 
regulation, enforcement, and education to combat the persistent and 
deadly opioid crisis; approving safe and effective therapies for 
illnesses like Alzheimer's disease, which affected as many as 5.8 
million Americans in 2020; curbing the use of harmful tobacco products; 
and supporting initiatives to eliminate antimicrobial resistance, a 
major public health issue that is reducing the efficacy of antibiotics.
    Americans recognize that our nation cannot afford to retreat in the 
face of these and other health threats. Since 1992, Research!America 
has commissioned national and state-level surveys to gauge public 
sentiment on issues related to research and innovation. According to a 
national survey we commissioned in 2021, more than 75% of Americans say 
that opioid abuse is a problem in their communities. FDA is responsible 
for ensuring prescription drugs are safe for users and has made 
addressing the opioid crisis a key priority. The same 2021 survey found 
that 70% of Americans believe the COVID-19 pandemic has revealed that 
major changes, including more funding, are needed in our public health 
systems. FDA has played a major role in combating the COVID-19 pandemic 
and will continue to be a vital part of preparing for future pandemics 
and other public health threats. We cannot win the battle against the 
opioid crisis or against future pandemics unless FDA has the resources 
necessary to fulfill these crucial responsibilities to protect public 
health.
    Given FDA's growing portfolio of responsibilities that bear on the 
health, safety, and wellbeing of the American people, we believe the 
Subcommittee would be advancing the best interests of our nation by 
supplying FDA with an increase of at least $200 million in budget 
authority.
    I thank you and your respective staff for your hard work, your 
leadership in funding FDA, and for considering Research!America's 
views.
    Contact: Ellie Dehoney, Vice President of Policy and Advocacy, 
Research!America [email protected]

    [This statement was submitted by Mary Woolley, President and CEO, 
Research!America.]
                                 ______
                                 
       Prepared Statement of South Dakota State University (SDSU)
    On behalf of South Dakota State University (SDSU), I respectfully 
submit this statement for inclusion in the Subcommittee's official 
record in support of full funding of $5,000,000 for the New Beginning 
for Tribal Students Program in FY 2022. This is a budget request for 
FY2022 to be included as a part of Title VII, General Provisions.
    The New Beginning Program was authorized by Section 7120 of the 
Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, the most recent farm bill. 
Congress has provided $5,000,000 in each of the last two years as part 
of Title VII, General Provisions. It is an excellent program, and 
funding should be continued at that level for administration by the 
National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
    Congress enacted this program based on the experience we were 
having in South Dakota. The program is intended to promote access to 
higher education and student success for our American Indian students 
through innovative partnerships between tribal communities, K-12 
schools, tribal colleges and universities and Land Grant Universities 
and Colleges. Colleges and universities will receive the funds for, but 
not limited to, support for American Indian students for articulation 
agreements with tribal colleges; dual credit programs; recruiting; 
tuition and related fees; experiential learning; student services, 
including tutoring, counseling, academic advising; and other student 
services that would increase retention and graduation rates. Our work 
in South Dakota began one year ago as an inaugural recipient of a New 
Beginning Program grant. Through a partnership with Sinte Gleska 
University and tribal high schools in Rosebud, Yankton, Crow Creek, and 
Lower Brule Sioux tribal communities, SDSU has embarked on the 
Igluwiyeya (prepare oneself) program. The program invests in college 
access liaisons in three regions to promote college preparation, tribal 
career opportunities, educational options, and financing for college to 
students in the tribal high schools. Pathways to achieving a college 
degree are a focus and work has begun to engage with students in the 
tribal high schools and develop the pathways model that will guide this 
work in a culturally relevant manner.
    SDSU is the largest, most comprehensive university in the state--
serving more than 11,400 undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate 
students. It attracts students, faculty, and staff from around the 
region, nation, and the world. The land-grant heritage commits SDSU to 
serve the entire state of South Dakota, providing academic programming 
in four additional communities outside of Brookings and online.
    South Dakota currently has one of the lowest unemployment rates in 
the nation and, in general, has an extremely healthy economy. However, 
the people living in the nine tribal nations in South Dakota have the 
highest unemployment rate in the nation, reaching more than 80 percent 
in certain areas. Many of those same people are among the poorest in 
the nation. SDSU has a responsibility to provide educational 
opportunities for this underserved population, as it does for all 
people.
    New Beginning is part of a holistic effort transforming the lives 
of many American Indian students throughout the United States, as well 
as in South Dakota. Providing opportunities and access to the benefits 
of higher education will begin a process that allows these young people 
to advance their education and gain new knowledge that will benefit 
their families, communities, and tribes. Sustained opportunities like 
New Beginning will lift individuals to advance their futures.
    South Dakota State University uses these grant funds to help tribal 
students prepare for, and transition to, an institution of higher 
education with the goal of graduating with a college degree. The 
grant's impact is felt by hundreds of young people, providing them 
assistance to address the tough barriers they face when thinking about 
college.
    At SDSU, we created the Wokini Initiative to support our American 
Indian students upon their arrival to campus. Wokini Scholarships in 
the amount of $5,000 per year for up to five years have been very 
impactful. We have gone from awarding 15 Wokini students in 2018 to 25 
Wokini students in 2020. In addition to the $5,000 renewable 
scholarships, we created emergency funding to assist current students 
who are Wokini eligible but matriculated to SDSU before Wokini was 
implemented. SDSU also supports students who paused their degree 
program due to financial hardship by paying past tuition balances which 
allows the student to return to campus. Lastly, we advise and assist 
students to determine a financial plan moving forward.
    SDSU is proud of the results we have seen over the past few years. 
SDSU has over 275 American Indian students, and we continue to promote 
opportunities available to our students to increase recruitment, as 
well as persistence and graduation. The Wokini Initiative provides 
scholarships for tribally enrolled students, collaborative research 
projects with tribal communities, training, and educational workshops 
across campus for all faculty, staff, and administration. Additionally, 
the initiative provided an opportunity to build a stand-alone American 
Indian Student Center (AISC), created an American Indian recruitment 
coordinator position and an American Indian programming coordinator 
position. Through the AISC, we provide tutoring and mentoring services, 
regular cultural programming, a classroom, and study space, art and 
multipurpose room. These are critical to our success in ensuring 
student connectedness to campus which results in increased recruitment 
of American Indian students and better pathways to graduation.
    Nationally, the New Beginning program is having a tremendous 
impact. Last year 20 universities received approved USDA matching 
grants. These Universities included:

    Kansas State University
    Nebraska Indian Community College
    Michigan State University
    University of Nevada, Reno
    North Dakota State University
    University of Arkansas System
    NC State University
    Oglala Lakota College
    Ilisagvik College
    University of Maine System acting through the Univ. of Maine
    Arizona Board of Regents, University of Arizona
    Washington State University
    University of Wyoming
    University of Idaho
    Oregon State University
    Oklahoma State University
    Blackfeet Community College
    University of Wisconsin-Madison
    South Dakota State University
    University of Alaska Fairbanks

    The United States has not yet devised a way to extend the American 
dream to American Indian people, especially on our Native American 
reservations. The reservations in the heartland have the highest 
unemployment rates in the United States. With that unemployment comes a 
long list of social problems.
    The New Beginning program is a critical first step in breaking that 
cycle of poverty. As an educated workforce continues to be established, 
we can attract private sector employers and create an economy on the 
reservations. It is the beginning of an American Indian policy that 
will work for all of America.

    [This statement was submitted by Dr. Barry Dunn, President, South 
Dakota State University (SDSU).]
                                 ______
                                 
             Prepared Statement of the Squaxin Island Tribe
    On behalf of the Tribal Leadership and citizens of the Squaxin 
Island Tribe, I am honored to submit written testimony which identifies 
our annual budget priorities for the FY 2022 appropriations for the 
Rural Development Rural Utilities Program and Rural Housing and 
Community Facilities Program. The Squaxin Island Tribe requests that 
all Tribal program funding throughout the Federal government be exempt 
from future sequestrations, rescissions, and disproportionate cuts.
                                covid-19
    Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic American Indians and Alaska 
Natives have and continue to experience irrevocable impacts in all 
facets of our lives compared to other non-Native communities. We remain 
among the most vulnerable given our remote locations and lack of 
infrastructure to address emerging and critical threats of danger to 
our citizens. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), with its 
unique and essential focus on rural areas across the country continues 
to play a critical role in the response and support of Tribal 
governments to the devastating issues and growing concerns around 
COVID-19. With the important Tribal-specific and overall agriculture 
provisions that were contained in the ``Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and 
Economic Security Act'' (CARES Act) and the ``American Rescue Plan Act 
of 2021'' (ARPA), USDA must continue to work with Tribal leadership on 
expeditiously and wisely allocating relief funds to Tribes. We 
appreciate the additional resources and grateful that Congress listened 
when Tribes vehemently shared reasons why Tribes needed more 
flexibility to use these emergency/relief funds which is assisting the 
Squaxin Island Tribe to better respond to the critical needs of our 
citizens and community more efficiently and effectively.

Tribal Specific Request--Rural Development--Infrastructure
$1.8 million--Water Connection Project

                     national and regional requests
1. $980.62 Million--to Rural Utility Services (RUS)
2. $29 Billion--Loan Authority for the Rural Housing and Community 
        Facilities Program
3. $1.5 Million--Rural Development Technical Assistance Program
4. Support the requests of the National Congress of American Indians 
        (NCAI) and the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians (ATNI)
                    squaxin island tribe background
    We are native people of South Puget Sound and descendants of the 
maritime people who lived and prospered along these shores for untold 
centuries. We are known as the People of the Water because of our 
strong cultural connection to the natural beauty and bounty of Puget 
Sound going back hundreds of years. The Squaxin Island Indian 
Reservation is in southeastern Mason County, Washington and the Tribe 
is a signatory to the 1854 Medicine Creek Treaty. Our treaty- 
designated reservation, Squaxin Island, is approximately 2.2 square 
miles of uninhabited forested land, surrounded by the bays and inlets 
of southern Puget Sound. Because the Island lacks fresh water, the 
Tribe has built its community on roughly 26 acres at Kamilche, 
Washington purchased and placed into trust. The Tribe also owns 6 acres 
across Pickering Passage from Squaxin Island and a plot of 36 acres on 
Harstine Island, across Peale Passage. The total land area including 
off- reservation trust lands is 1,715.46 acres. In addition, the Tribe 
manages roughly 500 acres of Puget Sound tidelands.
    Our Tribal governance combines our sovereign powers as well as U.S. 
Congressional acts related to treaties, statutes, and public law. 
Squaxin Island Tribe, like all Tribal Nations, continue to work through 
the impacts of the pandemic. Prior to COVID-19, the Tribal government 
and our economic enterprises constituted the largest employer in Mason 
County with over 1,250 employees. The Tribe has a current enrollment of 
1,040 and an on-reservation population of 426 living in 141 homes. 
Squaxin has an estimated service area population of 2,747; a growth 
rate of about 10%, and an unemployment rate of about 30% (according to 
the BIA Labor Force Report). We continue to need the assistance of 
Congressional relief funds to mitigate the ongoing challenges to 
recovery. We are grateful for the support we have received so far.
          squaxin island tribe specific request/justification:
$1.8 Million--Water Connection Project--Rural Development

    The Squaxin Island Tribe is seeking funding for our ``Water 
Connection Project'' which is critically essential to provide for the 
safety and health of the Squaxin Island Tribal Community. As the 
largest employer in Mason County, we impact the economy of Grays 
Harbor, Thurston, and Kitsap Counties. Families rely on the jobs 
created by the Tribe. This water source allows for Squaxin to maintain 
and build thriving economies that positively impact the businesses in 
the greater region. When we thrive the State of Washington benefits as 
well. With this water capacity we would be able to create new jobs for 
hundreds of families. Our current water source is at capacity and 
diminishing every year. Along with Taylor Shellfish we have obtained a 
water right that sits on land owned by Taylor. This is approximately 
1.5 miles away and this project would allow for connection to the 
Squaxin Island Tribe water system. A new water connection study has 
been completed with pre-engineering design and costs of the connection. 
We are near shovel ready and could complete the project in FY 2022. 
This new water source will allow the Tribe to build much needed 
housing. We have a large waiting list and overcrowding with 
multigenerational household composition. The pandemic has emphasized 
just how much these households create a high-risk situation. Taylor 
Shellfish fully endorses this project in true collaboration with the 
Squaxin Island Tribe.

National and Regional Requests:

1.   $980.62 Million--Rural Utility Services

        Of special concern is the need to maintain funding for Tribal 
        set-asides for water, wastewater, and solid waste management 
        for Indian Country and Alaska Native villages. USDA's Water and 
        Environmental Program (WEP) provides a combination of loans, 
        grants, and loan guarantees for drinking water, sanitary sewer, 
        solid waste, and storm drainage facilities in Tribal and rural 
        areas and cities and towns of 10,000 or less. WEP also makes 
        grants to non-profit organizations to provide technical 
        assistance and training to assist rural communities with water, 
        wastewater, and solid waste management.

2.   $29 Billion--Loan Authority for the Rural Housing and Community 
        Facilities Program

        As Tribes seek to build sustained prosperity and economic 
        security, it is imperative that Tribal citizens and businesses 
        on Tribal lands have access to environments that are stable, 
        conducive to economic and community development, and support of 
        schools, health facilities, first responders and businesses.

        Access to housing, community, and home repair financing 
        provides Native individuals, families, and communities with 
        security, credit facilities, and repair and weatherization 
        needs. This financing also supports community and educational 
        facilities and provides employment in construction and related 
        industries that flows from access to capital in Indian Country.

3.   Include $1.5 Million for USDA Rural Development Tribal Technical 
        Assistance Program

        The 2018 Farm Bill mandated the establishment of a Tribal 
        Technical Assistance Program within USDA-RD designed to address 
        the unique challenges Indian Country faces when seeking 
        infrastructure, cooperative development, housing, and other 
        development opportunities funded by USDA-RD. Funding for this 
        newly established area is especially critical due to the unique 
        circumstances surrounding lending and infrastructure deployment 
        in Tribal communities, which often leads to either 
        misinformation provided to Tribal nations or misinterpretation 
        of Tribal applications. Appropriating $1.5 million to establish 
        this program will help to eliminate these unnecessary barriers 
        to development in Indian Country.

4.   Support the FY 2022 Budgets Requests of the National Congress of 
        American Indians (NCAI) and the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest 
        Indians (ATNI)
    Thank you for this opportunity to present written testimony and 
considering these requests.

    [This statement was submitted by Kristopher Peters, Chairman, 
Squaxin Island Tribe.]
                                 ______
                                 
    Prepared Statement of Sustainable Urban Forests Coalition (SUFC)
    The undersigned organizations, many of which are members of 
Sustainable Urban Forests Coalition (SUFC), write today to urge 
continued support by the Subcommittee on Agriculture and Rural 
Development for a federal program that is key to protecting America's 
urban and rural forests from pest-caused mortality: the USDA Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). APHIS is responsible for 
preventing introduction and spread of invasive pests. While most port 
inspections are carried out by the Department of Homeland Security 
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, APHIS sets the policy 
guidance. APHIS also inspects imports of living plants.

 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Program                   FY 2020 (millions)  FY 2021 (millions)     FY 2022 ask  (millions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tree & Wood Pest..........................             $60.000             $60.456  $70 million
Specialty Crops...........................            $192.000            $196.553  $200 million
Pest Detection............................             $27.446             $27.733  $30 million
Methods Development.......................             $20.686             $20.844  $25 million
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We ask that you continue your past support for four USDA APHIS 
programs that are essential for protecting the nation's forests from 
invasive pests: Tree and Wood Pests, Specialty Crops, Methods 
Development, and Pest Detection. We thank you for the incremental 
increases in funding for these programs in the past, but a more 
substantial investment is warranted.
    Introduced pests threaten many forest products and services 
benefitting all Americans, including wood products, wildlife habitat, 
carbon sequestration, clean water and air, storm water management, 
lower energy costs, improved health, aesthetic enjoyment, and related 
jobs. These pests also impose significant costs, borne principally by 
municipal governments and homeowners. As more pests have been 
accidentally introduced over time, these costs have risen. Some crops-
including avocadoes, grapes, tree fruits and nuts-are also at risk.
    Tree-killing pests are linked to the international supply chain. 
Many pests-especially the highly damaging wood-borers-arrive in 
inadequately treated crates, pallets, and other forms of packaging made 
of wood. Other pests-especially plant diseases and sap sucking pests-
come on imported plants. Some pests take shelter, or lay their eggs, in 
or on virtually any exposed hard surface, such as steel or decorative 
stone.
    Imports from Asia have a history of transporting highly damaging 
pests, for example, Asian longhorned beetle; emerald ash borer (EAB); 
several ambrosia beetles which vector fungi killing avocado, redbay, 
sycamore, and willow trees in the Southeast and California; and sudden 
oak death disease.
    Import volume from Asia rises every year. Two-thirds of Asian 
imports enter through the two ports of Los Angeles--Long Beach, and New 
York--New Jersey. The rest enter through Savannah, Seattle, Tacoma, 
Oakland, Norfolk, Houston, Charleston, Baltimore, and Mobile.
    An estimated 6,000 of the shipping containers from Asia in 2020 
were infested by tree-killing wood-borers. Rising volumes of imported 
steel, vehicles, and stone, and the containers themselves might carry 
egg masses of gypsy moths and spotted lanternflies.
    Once introduced, the pests that become invasive do not stay in the 
cities where they first arrived. Instead, they proliferate and spread 
through both natural and human-mediated means. Their movement is often 
accidentally facilitated by people moving firewood, plants, and outdoor 
household goods (such as patio furniture). For example, the emerald ash 
borer has spread to 35 states since its likely introduction in the 
early 1990's, and the redbay ambrosia beetle to 11 states since 
detection in 2002.
    In this way, the pests introduced to our cities threaten not just 
the trees in city parks, along our streets, and in people's yards, but 
also the natural forest stands across the country. Scientists estimate 
these pests also threaten an estimated 41% of forest tree biomass 
across the contiguous US and additional trees in Hawai`i.
    Many forest pests are brought here in imported plants for planting 
(such as bulbs, saplings, and bedding plants). Among this group of 
pests are sudden oak death (which attacks more than 100 species of 
trees and shrubs, including oaks and rhododendrons); the rapid ?ohi?a 
death pathogen that threatens Hawai`i's most widespread tree, ?ohi?a 
lehua; and beech leaf disease, a newly discovered threat that is 
killing beech trees in a band stretching from Ohio to Connecticut.
    To respond effectively to these pests and to the others that will 
be introduced in coming years, the key APHIS programs identified above 
must have adequate funds. For this reason, we thank the Congress for 
increasing funding for APHIS' Tree and Wood Pests program to $60.4 
million in FY2021 and ask that you raise that funding level to $70 
million in FY2022. We also thank you for increasing funding for the 
Specialty Crops program to $196,553,000 and ask that you raise that 
level in FY2022 to $200 million.
    The Tree and Wood Pests account supports eradication and control 
efforts targeting principally the Asian longhorned beetle (ALB) and 
gypsy moth. Eradicating the ALB normally receives about two-thirds of 
the funds. The programs in Massachusetts, New York, and Ohio must 
continue until eradication succeeds. The ALB program must expand to 
counter the South Carolina outbreak, where more than 4,000 infested 
trees occupy an area of 58 square miles. Eradicating the South Carolina 
outbreak will be especially difficult because extensive wetlands limit 
access.
    APHIS has terminated its domestic emerald ash borer regulatory 
program, which once cost up to $7 million per year. APHIS has said it 
will now focus on production and release of biocontrol agents as the 
primary management tool, although it has not indicated the funding 
level. It is probable that, in the absence of a federal domestic 
regulation, EAB will now spread more rapidly to the mountain and 
Pacific Coast states, threatening riparian and urban forests and 
potentially California's olive crop. We urge the Committee to monitor 
the effectiveness of this new management focus.
    About $5 million from the Specialty Crops program funds APHIS' 
regulation of nursery operations to prevent spread of the sudden oak 
death pathogen. APHIS must step up its regulatory efforts to prevent a 
repetition of the 2019 incident, in which SOD-infected plants were 
shipped to 18 states, including Alabama, Michigan, Kentucky, and 
Indiana.
    APHIS must also ensure adequate funding for management of the 
spotted lanternfly, which in seven years has spread from Pennsylvania 
to seven additional states, including Maryland, Virginia, West 
Virginia, and Ohio. This pest threatens both native trees and 
agricultural crops- including hops, grapes, apples, and more.
    We support increased funding of the Detection budget line at $30 
million for FY 2022. Early detection of newly introduced pests is 
critical to successful pest eradication or containment, which prevents 
more widespread damage and associated costs and job losses.
    Finally, we seek an increase of $4.2 million in funding for the 
``Methods Development'' program, which allows APHIS to develop 
essential detection and eradication tools.
    Thank you for your attention to these important matters. We look 
forward to working with you.
    Supporting Organizations

    Alliance for Community Trees
    American Forests
    American Society of Consulting Arborists
    Arbor Day Foundation
    Casey Trees
    Center for Invasive Species Prevention
    City Parks Alliance
    Corazon Latino
    Davey Tree Expert Company
    Green Infrastructure Center
    International Society of Arboriculture
    Maryland Forestry Foundation
    Minnesota Shade Tree Advisory Committee
    National Association of Landscape Professionals
    National Association of State Foresters
    NativeScapes
    The Nature Conservancy
    Openlands
    Outdoor Power Equipment Institute
    Sacramento Tree Foundation
    SavATree LLC
    Society of American Foresters
    Society of Municipal Arborists
    Tree Care Industry Association
    Wildlife Habitat Council

    [Submitted by Members of the Sustainable Urban Forests Coalition.]
                                 ______
                                 
           Prepared Statement of USA Dry Pea & Lentil Council
    This request is being submitted on behalf of the USA Dry Pea & 
Lentil Council (USADPLC). The Council is a national coalition 
representing pulse producers, processors, warehouseman, exporters, and 
food manufacturers across the USA. Basically, the USADPLC represents 
the pulse industry from farm to table. As a specialty crop, pulses rely 
on the work of IR-4 to provide crop protection for both conventional 
production and organic production of pulses. One of the biggest 
concerns to pulse crop production is pest management and we estimate 
that IR-4 has enabled or assisted with the registration of over 80% of 
our current crop protection tools. IR-4 provides specialty crop 
producers like pulse crop producers, the tools needed to be successful.
    For this reason, we are requesting that US Senate Appropriations 
Committee--Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and 
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies restore funding and allocate 
at least $20.0 million for the IR-4 Project for FY 2021-22. This is 
justified as follows:

    Pulse crop farmers, like all specialty crop farmers, struggle to 
gain access to crop protection tools. Registrants do not focus their 
efforts to support these smaller acreage crops and the cost of creating 
the data needed to the standards required is an expensive time-
consuming process for the industry to provide. The IR-4 provides the 
expertise and technical information needed to accomplish this goal. The 
need for the IR-4 has continued as the markets demand harmonization of 
standards across countries and IR-4 has begun to provide that help. But 
while the need is increasing, the funding has decreased.
    The IR-4 Project remains relevant today and in desperate need of 
enhanced funding to sustain services that are critically important to 
specialty crop agriculture. After a decade of a flat funding, the 
impact is significant. Over the past five years, there has been a 20% 
drop in research. However, destructive pests continue to attack and 
damage specialty crops causing reductions in quality and quantity of 
the final product. Newly emerging pest problems, such as Spotted 
Lanternfly, Brown Marmorated Stink Bug, Spotted Wing Drosophila and 
Downy Mildew have disrupted existing integrated pest management 
systems. Additionally, more pests are becoming resistant to existing 
chemical pesticides. IR-4 has been on the front line to facilitate new 
registration/solutions to manage pests and help ensure that domestic 
specialty crop farmers can continue to grow quality and wholesome 
products demanded by food processors and consumers.

    Other factors contribution to the need for enhanced IR-4 Project 
funding include:

  --IR-4 is leading research efforts with the strategic integration of 
        reduced risk pesticides and biopesticides to manage hard to 
        control pests while minimize pest resistance to pesticides and 
        while reducing exposure to pesticides in consumed foods.

  --IR-4 develops data to remove pesticide residues in specialty crops 
        as a barrier to trade allowing domestic producers access to 
        lucrative international specialty crop markets. .

  --The cost of IR-4 research continues to escalate from factors such 
        as land rental, supplies, employee salary/health care costs, 
        etc. Furthermore, USDA made an administrative change to the IR-
        4 funding which allowed the land-grant institutions that host 
        IR-4 research to deduct up to 10% of the total direct cost of 
        the grant. This is an effective 12% reduction of funding for 
        research.

  --IR-4 has had to defer replacement of its vital analytical equipment 
        in laboratories due to funding shortfalls.

    The IR-4 Project provides an exceptional return on investment. 
Michigan State University Center for Economic Analysis reported in 
November 2017 that the IR-4 Project's efforts contribute over $9.4 
BILLION to annual US Gross Domestic Product and its efforts support 
over 95,000 JOBS throughout the United States.
    Pulse crops, as a member of the specialty crop community, supports 
increasing the funding of the IR-4 to $20 Million for FY 2021-22. This 
funding is needed to provide the increasing needs of our industry and 
specialty crops across the nation.

    [This statement was submitted by Todd F. Scholz, Vice President for 
Research and Member Services, USA Dry Pea & Lentil Council.]
                                 ______
                                 
          Prepared Statement of Western Governors' Association
    Chair Baldwin, Ranking Member Hoeven, and Members of the 
Subcommittee, the Western Governors' Association (WGA) appreciates the 
opportunity to provide written testimony on the appropriations and 
activities of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). WGA is an 
independent organization representing the Governors of the 22 
westernmost states and territories. The Association is an instrument of 
the Governors for bipartisan policy development, information-sharing 
and collective action on issues of critical importance to the western 
United States.
    USDA programs have a significant effect on the American West and 
the economic viability of its rural communities. Western Governors 
recognize the importance of a close and productive working relationship 
between states and the federal government and understand that more 
effective cooperation depends on federal recognition of states as co-
sovereigns and partners. The promotion of greater partnership between 
states and the federal government is central to the mission of WGA and 
is reflected in the Governors' Policy Resolution 2021-01, Strengthening 
the State-Federal Relationship. WGA also commends your attention to 
other Western Governors' resolutions that articulate policy positions 
relevant to the Subcommittee's work. These include Policy Resolutions 
2020-06, Western Agriculture; 2020-07, Rural Development; 2020-08, 
Broadband Connectivity; 2021-03, National Forest and Rangeland 
Management; and 2019-06, Biosecurity and Invasive Species.
    Agriculture in western states faces a variety of challenges, 
including extreme variations in soil, climate, terrain, commodity types 
and production practices, and water availability. Amid these difficult 
conditions, the western agricultural sector provides a vast array of 
high-demand, high-quality food products for American and foreign 
markets. Western agricultural lands also serve as primary sources of 
crucial ecosystem services, including open space, wildlife habitat, and 
water supplies, and support a diverse suite of rural economic 
opportunities in the recreation, food, fiber, energy and bio-based 
product industries.
    In December 2018, WGA and USDA signed a Memorandum of Understanding 
(MOU) to establish a framework to allow the USFS and WGA to work 
collaboratively to accomplish mutual goals, further common interests, 
and effectively respond to the increasing suite of challenges facing 
western landscapes. Under this agreement, WGA and USDA have pursued 
several collaborative campaigns to improve the management and 
restoration of western forests and rangelands. Western Governors 
consider the WGA-USDA Shared Stewardship MOU an effective framework to 
establish shared state-federal priorities for forest and rangeland 
management, and encourage the development of similar MOUs with other 
Executive Branch agencies for other areas of collaborative endeavor.
    USDA conservation programs promote responsible land management in 
western states and are of crucial importance to the agricultural 
sector, including livestock producers dependent on using federal 
allotments through permits and fees to sustain their operations. 
Western Governors support targeted, voluntary and collaborative 
conservation to address locally identified natural resource issues 
affecting farms, rangelands and forests on private and public lands. 
These issues include soil health, air and water quality, drought and 
wildfire resilience, wildlife habitat conservation and invasive 
species. WGA supports the role of conservation title programs in 
promoting voluntary solutions to the challenges of threatened and 
endangered species, water quality impairments, and groundwater 
recharge. Western Governors encourage the Subcommittee to support 
appropriate funding levels for programs addressing these critical 
concerns.
    The work of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is 
especially important to western states, and WGA encourages you to 
provide adequate funding for the conservation programs administered by 
the agency. NRCS empowers private landowners to work with states and 
the federal government on large-scale management priorities across 
landscapes with different land ownerships. NRCS programs provide 
multiple benefits to western communities:

  --Stimulating economic activity and creating jobs in local 
        communities;

  --Conserving habitat for the greater sage-grouse and lesser prairie 
        chicken, among other species;

  --Mitigating wildland fire potential in western states;

  --Improving water quality;

  --Reducing the threat of invasive species on western lands; and

  --Responding to imminent hazards caused by floods, wildfire, 
        windstorms, and other natural disasters through the Emergency 
        Watershed Protection Program.

    Western Governors also support adequate funding of the NRCS Snow 
Survey and Water Supply Forecasting (SSWSF) program. Sufficient funding 
is required to ensure the long-term viability of the program's 
continued and uninterrupted collection of snowpack and water data, the 
full operation and maintenance of all snow survey sites, the hiring of 
needed program staff, and technological and software upgrades. The 
SSWSF program provides integral information for water supply management 
decisions in agricultural production, hydroelectric power generation, 
reservoir operations, industry, recreation and economic development, 
and international treaties. The program's forecasting and predictive 
capabilities are critically useful throughout the arid West, where 
snowpack accounts for the vast majority of the region's annual water 
supply.
    Western Governors support adequate funding for the Animal and Plant 
Health Inspection Service (APHIS), and the National Institute of Food 
and Agriculture (NIFA). APHIS works in partnership with state 
departments of agriculture to monitor, prevent and control infestations 
of invasive pests and diseases and curtail or minimize wildlife 
conflicts, which can cause widespread environmental and economic 
damage, as well as safety hazards. APHIS is a key agency protecting the 
West from invasive species and was an active participant in the Western 
Governors' Biosecurity and Invasive Species Initiative. APHIS also 
works in cooperation with other federal agencies, states, territories, 
counties and private entities to implement invasives management 
programs. Western Governors recognize the valuable role NIFA plays in 
research on biosecurity and invasive species and support further 
research to understand the potential spread of invasive species and to 
develop geographically appropriate control measures.
    The West's network of land-grant universities and colleges, 
including Cooperative Extension Service programs and Agricultural 
Experiment Stations, provides national leadership in research to 
develop more resilient seeds and crops, manage soil health, advance 
technology deployment in the bio-based economy and conduct on-farm 
research experiments that help farmers and ranchers be more effective 
and efficient. Western Governors support efforts to expand research 
funding to address drought, a changing climate and extreme weather 
risks facing western producers. WGA also encourages the effective use 
of extension and other partnerships to deliver practical tools, 
technologies and information to farmers, ranchers and forest 
landowners.
    Healthy, vibrant and prosperous rural communities are critical to 
western states. Rural communities, however, face a variety of 
challenges with respect to economic development, infrastructure, and 
quality of life. Western Governors support USDA's Rural Development 
programs, which address those challenges and request an increased 
emphasis on rural capacity-building efforts. Building local capacity 
through training, technical assistance and consistent support for 
institutions that serve rural communities is fundamental to economic 
and community development and maximizes the effect of state and federal 
resources. At the same time, rural development programs should be 
designed in a manner that recognizes the limited resources and capacity 
of rural applicants. The COVID-19 pandemic has illustrated the 
challenge of rapidly deploying resources to meet rural needs. WGA 
encourages Congress to examine how emergency funds have been 
distributed to rural communities and ensure that adequate systems are 
in place to meet demand during widespread emergencies.
    Western Governors support rural development programs aimed at 
fostering small businesses, entrepreneurs, and cooperative business 
models. WGA recognizes the need for substantial technical assistance 
and education in developing new cooperative businesses and support 
funding of such efforts. Western Governors remain committed to creating 
new opportunities for rural job seekers and for young people to pursue 
careers in their rural communities. WGA supports solutions that 
leverage public universities, community colleges, and the business 
community to provide the appropriate training and skills for the jobs 
that are available in rural communities.
    Western Governors support funding for the Market Access and Foreign 
Market Development Programs to promote opportunities for western 
producers to increase export revenues and encourage trade agreements 
that maximize benefits for the West's farmers, ranchers and forest 
landowners. WGA also supports adequate funding for the Specialty Crop 
Block Grant Program, which provides critical research, education, and 
promotion tools to fruit and vegetable producers.
    Western agricultural cooperatives perform many important functions 
for their members and rural communities. These include provision of 
seed, feed and fertilizer to growers; product storage, processing and 
transportation; trade and market promotion; and education and technical 
assistance. Western Governors support funding for federal programs that 
provide assistance to agricultural cooperatives across the West. These 
include USDA Rural Cooperative Development Grants and Value-Added 
Producer Grants, and programs administered by USDA's Agricultural 
Marketing Service and National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
    Western Governors support the continued efforts of the Rural 
Utilities Service to provide financial assistance for drinking water 
and wastewater facilities, and broadband connectivity in rural and 
remote areas, particularly in communities that have minimal or no such 
infrastructure. Western Governors support dedicated funding to develop 
innovative solutions for communities and tribes that cannot be served 
by traditional drinking water and wastewater systems. Governors also 
remain concerned by the nationwide shortage of certified water system 
operators, but were encouraged to see an increase in funds for such 
training in last year's House report language (H. Rpt. 116-446). 
Ongoing and coordinated efforts to develop these skilled workers are 
necessary to ensure that existing water access in rural communities can 
be maintained.
    Expanding broadband access to rural America empowers citizens to 
compete in a global market and access electronic information and 
telecommunications technologies to support and promote telehealth and 
distance learning, which have proven to be especially important amidst 
the current public health crisis. Western Governors note the 
significance of programs such as the Distance Learning and Telemedicine 
Program and the ReConnect Program, which support broadband deployment 
to underserved or wholly unserved rural communities. WGA appreciates 
the additional flexibility and funds awarded to such programs under the 
CARES Act (Pub. L. 116-136). However, Western Governors remain 
concerned about ReConnect Program eligibility criteria for communities 
slated to receive satellite service support through the Federal 
Communications Commission's Connect America Fund Phase II program. The 
current eligibility criteria severely limit the ability of many western 
rural communities to develop high-speed, resilient broadband networks 
through the ReConnect Program.
    Western Governors recognize that nutrition assistance programs can 
help meet the needs of children and the most vulnerable, while creating 
economic opportunity across the agriculture supply chain from the store 
where food is purchased all the way back to the farm. Nutrition 
assistance programs should continue to provide flexibility for states 
to respond to unique economic conditions, serve all eligible 
participants without drastically reducing benefits, and pursue 
transparency and accountability in program administration.
    Western states and federal agencies deal with a complex web of 
interrelated agriculture, conservation, and economic development 
priorities. It is an enormous challenge to judiciously balance 
competing needs in this environment, and Western Governors appreciate 
the difficulty of the decisions the Subcommittee must make. The 
foregoing recommendations are offered in a spirit of cooperation and 
respect, and WGA is prepared to assist as you as the Subcommittee 
discharges its critical and challenging responsibilities.

    [This statement was submitted by James D. Ogsbury, Executive 
Director, Western Governors' Association.]

                            [all]