[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]