[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
AN EXAMINATION OF THE STATE OF THE
SPECIALTY CROP INDUSTRY
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SEPTEMBER 16, 2025
__________
Serial No. 119-15
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture
agriculture.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
61-953 PDF WASHINGTON : 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania, Chairman
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota, Ranking
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia, Vice Minority Member
Chairman DAVID SCOTT, Georgia
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas JIM COSTA, California
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts
DOUG LaMALFA, California ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina
DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut
TRENT KELLY, Mississippi SHONTEL M. BROWN, Ohio, Vice
DON BACON, Nebraska Ranking Minority Member
MIKE BOST, Illinois SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas
DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota ANDREA SALINAS, Oregon
JAMES R. BAIRD, Indiana DONALD G. DAVIS, North Carolina
TRACEY MANN, Kansas JILL N. TOKUDA, Hawaii
RANDY FEENSTRA, Iowa NIKKI BUDZINSKI, Illinois
MARY E. MILLER, Illinois ERIC SORENSEN, Illinois
BARRY MOORE, Alabama GABE VASQUEZ, New Mexico
KAT CAMMACK, Florida JONATHAN L. JACKSON, Illinois
BRAD FINSTAD, Minnesota SHRI THANEDAR, Michigan
JOHN W. ROSE, Tennessee ADAM GRAY, California
RONNY JACKSON, Texas KRISTEN McDONALD RIVET, Michigan
MONICA De La CRUZ, Texas SHOMARI FIGURES, Alabama
ZACHARY NUNN, Iowa EUGENE SIMON VINDMAN, Virginia
DERRICK VAN ORDEN, Wisconsin JOSH RILEY, New York
DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington JOHN W. MANNION, New York
TONY WIED, Wisconsin APRIL McCLAIN DELANEY, Maryland
ROBERT P. BRESNAHAN, Jr., CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine
Pennsylvania SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
MARK B. MESSMER, Indiana
MARK HARRIS, North Carolina
DAVID J. TAYLOR, Ohio
______
Parish Braden, Staff Director
Brian Sowyrda, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Craig, Hon. Angie, a Representative in Congress from Minnesota,
opening statement.............................................. 4
Prepared statement........................................... 4
Rouzer, Hon. David, a Representative in Congress from North
Carolina, submitted report..................................... 89
Thompson, Hon. Glenn, a Representative in Congress from
Pennsylvania, opening statement................................ 1
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Witnesses
Frantz, Michael J., President and Co-Owner, Frantz Wholesale
Nursery, LLC, Hickman, CA...................................... 5
Prepared statement........................................... 7
Sagili, Ph.D., Ramesh, Professor, Department of Horticulture,
Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR......................... 17
Prepared statement........................................... 18
Submitted question........................................... 104
Boring, Ph.D., Tim, Director, Michigan Department of Agriculture
and Rural Development, Lansing, MI; on behalf of National
Association of State Departments of Agriculture................ 21
Prepared statement........................................... 23
Brennan, Dana, Vice President, Corporate Affairs, Grimmway Farms,
Bakersfield, CA; on Behalf of International Fresh Produce
Association.................................................... 25
Prepared statement........................................... 27
Supplementary material....................................... 94
AN EXAMINATION OF THE STATE OF THE SPECIALTY CROP INDUSTRY
----------
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2025
House of Representatives,
Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, D.C.
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in Room
1300, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Glenn Thompson
[Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
Members present: Representatives Thompson, Lucas, Austin
Scott of Georgia, Crawford, LaMalfa, Rouzer, Kelly, Bost,
Feenstra, Miller, Moore, Cammack, De La Cruz, Newhouse, Wied,
Bresnahan, Harris, Taylor, Craig, David Scott of Georgia,
Costa, Adams, Hayes, Brown, Salinas, Davis of North Carolina,
Tokuda, Budzinski, Sorensen, Vasquez, Thanedar, Figures,
Mannion, McClain Delaney, Pingree, and Carbajal.
Staff present: Austin DeBerry, Luke Franklin, Sofia Jones,
Josie Montoney, Patricia Straughn, John Konya, Suzie Cavalier,
Emily Pliscott, Emma Simon, Michael Stein, Elaine Zhang, and
Jackson Blodgett.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GLENN THOMPSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM PENNSYLVANIA
The Chairman. The Committee will come to order.
Welcome, and thank you for joining today's hearing,
entitled, An Examination of the State of the Specialty Crop
Industry. After brief opening remarks, Members will receive
testimony from our witnesses today, and then the hearing will
be open to questions.
So, good morning once again, everyone, and welcome to
today's hearing. I want to begin by thanking Ranking Member
Craig for her partnership in hosting this bipartisan hearing. I
also want to thank our colleagues for their participation and
continued commitment to work together on behalf of American
agriculture. Most importantly, I want to extend my sincere
thanks to our witnesses. We know that your time is valuable,
and your decision to be here today to share your perspectives,
your experiences, and concerns is greatly appreciated. As we
examine the current landscape of the specialty crop industry,
your firsthand insights are essential to make sure our work is
informed by those who live and breathe these challenges every
day.
Specialty crop plays a crucial and often under-appreciated
role in the success of U.S. agriculture. Fruits, vegetables,
and tree nuts provide nutritious, high-quality food that
supports the health of our population home and abroad. Beyond
the plate, nursery crops and floriculture industries contribute
to our quality of life, beautifying our communities and
supporting local economies. From the flower beds in our
neighborhoods to produce aisles in our grocery stores,
specialty crops touch our lives in countless ways. However, the
very diversity that defines this industry can also present
unique challenges in policy development. From ensuring adequate
risk management tools to supporting effective research, the
specialty crop industry requires thoughtful solutions to
nuanced challenges. Producers navigate a complex web of pest
and disease threats, rising costs, regulatory constraints, and
global competition, all while trying to meet evolving customer
expectations.
Over the years, this Committee has worked to create those
thoughtful solutions through the creation of specific programs
that support the sector and by working across titles to improve
program delivery for specialty crop producers. We recognize
that the challenges of a citrus producer in California look
different than those of a wheat farmer in Kansas, and we
believe that our agriculture policy should reflect those
differences. As we hear more on what it means to support the
industry in a meaningful and effective way today, it is timely
to highlight the substantial investments made via budget
reconciliation to support our specialty crop producers, and I
wanted to share a few examples.
But I am going to back that up to--really was the
investments that were included were ones that were--I want to--
really wanted to say thank you to all the Members of the
Committee that were here last Congress because that was the
blueprint that we used as we worked on the piece of legislation
that passed out this Committee with some bipartisan votes. That
was the hard work that became the template for what we were
able to move in budget reconciliation as the vehicle to get it
into law, but it was really the bipartisan work of this
Committee in the area of specialty crops, and so some thank
yous.
But some of those accomplishments include an historic
investment of an additional $95 million per year in the
Specialty Crop Research Initiative, a competitive grant program
that provides resources for research and extension projects
that ensures the specialty crop industry is not being
sidelined; an additional $15 million increase for the Specialty
Crop Block Grant program enabling state departments of
agriculture to work with their producers to enhance their
competitiveness; another $15 million in increased funding to
the Plant Pest and Disease Management and Disaster Prevention
Program, which is essential to safeguarding American
agriculture from invasive pests and diseases that can be
particularly devastating to specialty crop producers. And
funding was doubled for market development programs to help
support export growth for agriculture commodities and to,
ultimately, return to an agriculture trade surplus, which we
know is particularly important for the horticulture industry.
These investments represent a substantial step in rising to
the occasion of assisting our specialty crop producers, but
investment alone is not enough. We also need to ensure these
programs are accessible, effective, and responsive to real-
world conditions. Today's hearing is an opportunity to take
stock of where we are, hear directly from stakeholders, and
identify where we can come together to find workable solutions
that support this essential sector. Thank you again to our
witnesses for being here, and thank you to my colleagues for
your attention and engagement. I look forward to a productive
discussion and to work together to ensure a bright future for
America's specialty crop producers.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Thompson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Glenn Thompson, a Representative in Congress
from Pennsylvania
Good morning, and welcome to today's hearing. I want to begin by
thanking Ranking Member Craig for her partnership in hosting this
bipartisan hearing. I also want to thank our colleagues for their
participation and continued commitment to work together on behalf of
American agriculture.
Most importantly, I want to extend my sincere thanks to our
witnesses. We know that your time is valuable, and your decision to be
here today to share your perspectives, experiences, and concerns is
greatly appreciated. As we examine the current landscape of the
specialty crop industry, your firsthand insights are essential to make
sure our work is informed by those who live and breathe these
challenges every day.
Specialty crops play a crucial, and often under-appreciated, role
in the success of U.S. agriculture. Fruits, vegetables, and tree nuts
provide nutritious, high-quality food that supports the health of our
population at home and abroad. Beyond the plate, nursery crops and
floriculture industries contribute to our quality of life, beautifying
our communities and supporting local economies. From the flower beds in
our neighborhoods to the produce aisles in our grocery stores,
specialty crops touch our lives in countless ways.
However, the very diversity that defines this industry can also
present unique challenge in policy development. From ensuring adequate
risk management tools, to supporting effective research, the specialty
crop industry requires thoughtful solutions to nuanced challenges.
Producers navigate a complex web of pest and disease threats, rising
costs, regulatory constraints, and global competition, all while trying
to meet evolving consumer expectations.
Over the years, this Committee has worked to create those
thoughtful solutions through the creation of specific programs that
support the sector, and by working across titles to improve program
delivery for specialty crop producers. We recognize that the challenges
of a citrus producer in California look different than those of a wheat
farmer in Kansas, and we believe that our agricultural policies should
reflect those differences.
As we hear more on what it means to support the industry in a
meaningful and effective way today, it is timely to highlight the
substantial investments made via budget reconciliation to support our
specialty crop producers. A few examples include:
A historic investment of an additional $95 million per year
in the Specialty Crop Research Initiative, a competitive grant
program that provides resources for research and extension
projects that ensure the specialty industry is not being
sidelined.
An additional $15 million increase for the Specialty Crop
Block Grant Program, enabling state departments of agriculture
to work with their producers to enhance their competitiveness.
Another $15 million in increased funding to the Plant Pest
and Disease Management and Disaster Prevention Program, which
is essential is safeguarding American agriculture from invasive
pests and diseases that can be particularly devastating to
specialty crop producers.
And funding was doubled for market development programs to
help support export growth for agricultural commodities and to
ultimately return to an agricultural trade surplus, which we
know is particularly important for the horticulture industry.
These investments represent a substantial step in rising to the
occasion of assisting our specialty crop producers. But investment
alone is not enough. We also need to ensure these programs are
accessible, effective, and responsive to real-world conditions.
Today's hearing is an opportunity to take stock of where we are,
hear directly from stakeholders, and identify where we can come
together to find workable solutions that support this essential sector.
Thank you again to our witnesses for being here, and thank you to
my colleagues for your attention and engagement. I look forward to a
productive discussion and to working together to ensure a bright future
for America's specialty crop producers.
The Chairman. With that, I would now like to welcome the
distinguished Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from Minnesota,
Ms. Craig, for any opening remarks she would like to give.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ANGIE CRAIG, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM MINNESOTA
Ms. Craig. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and a special thank you
and welcome to our witnesses here today. We really appreciate
this bipartisan hearing. I also want to recognize the
Subcommittee Ranking Member, Ms. Salinas, who has been a
stalwart champion for our specialty crop farmers. Oregon, as we
all know, is home to many specialty crops, including
winegrapes, and grass seed. She comes to work every day to
fight on their behalf. Thank you for your leadership, Andrea.
While row crops are critical to our nation's energy and
food security, specialty crops are just as important. Whether
it is fruits, nuts, or vegetables, specialty crops are staples
of the American diet. Like many of our row crop growers,
specialty crop farmers are in a tough spot today. Labor costs
are high. Production costs are being driven up by tariffs or
inputs that simply cannot be sourced within the United States.
The trade wars are causing market turmoil and impacting the
cost of machinery and equipment. All of this makes it harder
for specialty crop farmers to keep farming and harder for the
average American to enjoy reasonably-priced produce. The
Republican's budget bill, which they are now trying to rebrand
because of its unpopularity, was signed into law in July and
made some investments in the farm safety net. However, many of
the requests and needs of the specialty crop industry were left
behind, like improvements to crop insurance.
I visited a berry farm in California earlier this year
where I spoke with farmers about the challenging economic
headwinds they are facing. Specialty crop farmers often produce
delicate crops that require fundamentally different farming
techniques and equipment than the corn and soybean farmers that
call my southwest Minnesota district home. The farmers I spoke
with at the berry farm increasingly see the need for automation
and mechanized labor to perform the specialized work necessary
to tend to and harvest their crops. Their need to innovate new
tools is underscored by this Administration's current assault
on the farm labor community and the chaos it has caused across
farm country. I look forward to hearing from our witnesses
today who are sure to talk more about that. I want to thank you
for being here and for sharing your expertise and experiences
with us.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Craig follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Angie Craig, a Representative in Congress
from Minnesota
I want to thank the Chairman for holding this hearing today.
I also want to recognize the Subcommittee Ranking Member, Ms.
Salinas, who has been a stalwart champion for our specialty crop
farmers. Oregon, as we all know, is home to many specialty crops--
including wine grapes and grass seed. She comes to work every day to
fight on their behalf. Thank you for your leadership.
While row crops are critical to our nation's energy and food
security, specialty crops are just as important. Whether it's fruits,
nuts or vegetables, the specialty crops are staples of the American
diet.
Like many of our row crop growers, specialty crop farmers are in a
tough spot today. Labor costs are high. Production costs are being
driven up by tariffs on inputs that simply cannot be sourced within the
United States. Trump's trade wars are causing market turmoil and
impacting the cost of machinery and equipment. All of this makes it
harder for specialty crop farmers to keep farming and harder for the
average American to enjoy reasonably priced produce.
The Republicans' Big Ugly Bill, which they are now trying to
rebrand due to its unpopularity, was signed into law in July and made
some investments in the farm safety net. However, many of the requests
and needs of the specialty crop industry were left behind, like
improvements to crop insurance.
I visited a berry farm in California earlier this year, where I
spoke with farmers about the challenging economic headwinds they're
facing. Specialty crop farmers often produce delicate crops that
require fundamentally different farming techniques and equipment than
the corn and soybean farmers that call my southwest Minnesota district
home.
The farmers I spoke with at the berry farm increasingly see the
need for automation and mechanized labor to perform the specialized
work necessary to tend to and harvest their crops. Their need to
innovate new tools is underscored by the Administration's current
assault on the farm labor community and the chaos it has caused across
the farm country.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today, who are sure to
talk more about that. I want to thank you for being here and for
sharing your expertise and experience with us.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
The Chairman. The chair would request that other Members
submit their opening statements for the record so the witnesses
may begin your testimony and ensure there is ample time for
questions.
Our first witness today is Mr. Michael Frantz, the
President of Frantz Wholesale Nursery. Our next witness is Dr.
Ramesh Sagili, a Professor of Horticulture at Oregon State
University, and our third witness today is Dr. Tim Boring, the
Director of the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural
Development. Dr. Boring is testifying on behalf of the National
Association of State Departments of Agriculture, and our final
witness is Mrs. Dana Brennan, Vice President for Corporate
Affairs at Grimmway Farms. Thank you all for joining us today,
and we are now going to proceed your testimony. You will each
have 5 minutes. The timer is in front of you and will count
down to zero, at which point your time has expired.
Mr. Frantz, please begin when you are ready.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL J. FRANTZ, PRESIDENT AND CO-OWNER, FRANTZ
WHOLESALE NURSERY, LLC, HICKMAN, CA
Mr. Frantz. Good morning, Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member
Craig, and Members of the Committee. Thank you all for the
opportunity to be here today. My name is Michael Frantz, and I
am the co-owner of Frantz Wholesale Nursery, a family farm
founded by my parents nearly 50 years ago. We grow trees and
shrubs, perennials and grasses, and sell them to landscape
contractors and various retail outlets across the western
United States. I have served for over 15 years as a Director to
the Turlock Irrigation District, a public utility that serves
water and power to my community. I have also served for many
years as the Chair of the Advocacy Committee for AmericanHort,
the premier Federal trade association for the horticultural
industry. I have traveled to Washington many times over the
last 25 years, consistently advocating for bipartisan solutions
that would provide a stable and legal workforce for agriculture
and reasonable water policies for the West. I realize these
topics are outside the jurisdiction of this Committee, but both
remain top priorities for the specialty crop industry and to me
personally. I have submitted a longer, more detailed written
testimony to the Committee. Foundational to my comments today,
the specialty crop industry does not seek commodity price
supports. Consumers value our quality crops and pay a fair
price generally sufficient to pay our bills, but there are key
areas where government support is vital, which I will try to
outline today.
We struggle to find effective insurance to mitigate the
enormous risk we growers take. In our nursery, we grow over 700
varieties of plants and have up to 10,000 individual crops
growing at any given time. Some crops only reside on our farm
for a few weeks, while others will grow as long as 8 years from
sowing the acorn until we ship the half-grown oak tree to our
customer. All our crops are highly perishable and vulnerable to
weather and economic variability. Crop insurance for
catastrophic and nature-related events are in place for Title I
crops, but these programs rarely work well for us because of
our extreme crop diversity. Affordable crop insurance programs
that can provide disaster relief for unique specialty crop
farmers like myself are needed.
While we do our best to prevent the need for quarantine,
much of the quarantine process is out of our hands. We grow
potted citrus trees, a crop highly regulated by USDA to protect
commercial citrus farmers. The nursery industry has invested
millions of dollars in protective structures to ensure the
plants we ship are free of disease, but even small changes in
the regulation of movement of citrus can block multiyear crops'
access to markets, potentially resulting in millions of dollars
of losses essentially overnight. I am happy to see pilot
insurance programs to cover government-imposed quarantine risks
are getting started, but they need refinement to be useful. I
respectfully ask that you continue to fund this vital risk
mitigation tool. We continue to lose crop protection tools each
year, and replacements are slow to fill the void. IR-4 research
dollars were not funded in your last budget bill. They are
critical to advance new pest and disease options for us, and I
respectfully ask that you include IR-4 funding in the next farm
bill.
The recent Marketing Assistance for Specialty Crops--MASC--
funding helped us with our substantial increase in costing. I
understand that some of you on this Committee were essential in
getting the payments out this year. Thank you for your help. As
this ad hoc funding source will hopefully play a vital support
role in future years, I would ask that this Committee consider
providing consistent logic for what and who would qualify for
additional funding when real needs arise. Another challenge we
face is tariffs on essential inputs that largely cannot be
sourced domestically. Many of the crop inputs we depend on,
such as peat moss and coconut core, which are components of our
soil mix, must be sourced internationally. I want to thank the
Chairman and his staff for recognizing this challenge and
elevating the need for tariff exemptions on peat moss. Securing
that exemption has saved our industry millions of dollars and
provided some relief. Still, other non-exempt inputs remain
subject to tariffs, contributing to macro-inflationary pressure
that, in some cases, is pricing our very discretionary products
out of consumers' reach.
Thank you for your time and consideration today. In
closing, I will circle back to my three main issues: the vital
need for a stable and legal workforce, a strong safety net to
protect us when disasters and quarantine strike, increasing
inflationary costs that are pricing our quality American-grown
specialty crops out of consumers' budgets. If any of you find
yourself in California, I would invite you for a tour. We would
love to have you. I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Frantz follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michael J. Frantz, President and Co-Owner, Frantz
Wholesale Nursery, LLC, Hickman, CA
Good morning, Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member Craig, and Members
of the Committee,
Thank you for the opportunity to present to you today. My name is
Michael Frantz, and I am the co-owner of Frantz Wholesale Nursery, a
family farm founded by my parents nearly 50 years ago. The business has
been owned and operated by my brother Keith and me for the last 25
years, fulfilling my parents' dream of founding a farm, and passing it
on to the next generation. We grow trees and shrubs, perennials and
grasses, and almonds. All are grown in containers and sold to landscape
contractors and various retail outlets across the western United
States.
In addition to my primary job at my family's nursery business, I
have served for 15 years as an elected Director to the Turlock
Irrigation District, a publicly owned utility that serves Water and
Power to part of the great San Joaquin Valley in California, where I
live and farm. I served for many years as the chair of the Advocacy
Committee for AmericanHort, the premier trade association for the
Horticultural Industry. I have traveled to Washington many times over
the last 25 years, consistently advocating for bipartisan workforce
solutions that would provide a stable and legal workforce for
agriculture, and reasonable water policies for the West. I realize
these topics are outside the jurisdiction of this Committee, however,
both remain top priorities for the Specialty Crop industry in the great
state of California, and for me personally.
Crop Insurance for Specialty Crops
It is important to note: we do not seek price supports afforded to
commodity crops. Typically, specialty crop growers like me trust the
market. The American consumer desires the quality crops we grow, and we
trust them to pay a price that covers our bills. We do see a few key
areas where government can and should support the industry, and I will
lay those out here today.
We struggle to find effective insurance to mitigate the enormous
risk we take each year. In our nursery, we grow over 700 different
varieties of plants and have up to 10,000 individual crops growing at
any given time. Some may be as small as just a handful of unique plants
for a special market or customer. Some plants are sold within 60 days
of planting, and others can be as long as 8 years from when we sow the
acorn to when we ship the half-grown Oak tree to our customer. All are
highly perishable and vulnerable to weather and economic uncertainty.
Crop Insurance for catastrophic and nature-related events, such as
frost, fire, earthquakes, and hail are in place for Title One crops,
but these programs seldom work for us. Improved crop insurance programs
are needed throughout the specialty crop sector.
Quarantine Insurance
While we do our best work to prevent the need for quarantines, much
of the quarantine process is out of our hands, and we incur a
substantial amount of risk. Pests and diseases can come through the
ports, the transit of goods, and human movement across the United
States. A void that we do not have filled at this time is insurance
coverage to protect us when a government-imposed quarantine prevents
growers from shipping plants or products.
We grow potted citrus trees that are sold via retail outlets and
independent garden centers on the West Coast, and via e-commerce across
most of the lower 48 states. Oranges, grapefruit, mandarins, lemons,
and limes--all are grown in USDA-regulated structures in a highly
controlled environment. But even small changes in the regulations can
block multiyear crops from being sold, resulting in millions of dollars
of losses essentially overnight. Pilot insurance programs to cover this
exact risk are ongoing. I ask that you continue to fund this vital risk
mitigation tool for growers like me.
Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) limits
AGI limits are often an issue for us, especially in sectors of
agriculture where the cost of doing business is capital-intensive.
Greenhouses, irrigation systems, and USDA-compliant growing systems
drive up both investment costs and gross incomes, often pushing
producers above AGI thresholds. For our sector, using the standard that
at least 75% of income must come from agriculture is a far more
accurate measure--particularly in states like California, where high
costs and gross receipts do not reflect true farm profitability.
Protection Tools
Each year, we lose vital crop protection tools, while new
alternatives take far too long to reach the market. The IR-4 Program is
essential to developing safe, effective alternatives for specialty
crops, yet funding was not included in the last budget bill. I ask you
to restore and prioritize IR-4 funding in the farm bill to ensure
growers have the tools they need to protect their crops and remain
competitive.
Miscellaneous Government Programs
We also benefit from a variety of other government programs. The
recent Marketing Assistance for Specialty Crops (MASC) program helped
us with our substantial increases in costs (especially labor) over the
last few years. I understand that some of you on this Committee were
essential in getting the payments out this year--thank you for your
help. Going forward, I respectfully ask this Committee to establish
clear and consistent criteria for determining which needs qualify for
additional funding as they arise.
Inflation
The nursery business is often at the tip of the economic spear as
landscaping and plants for your home or office are almost entirely
discretionary expenses. When there are downturns, we will oftentimes
feel it first, and we are feeling it now due to the looming
inflationary environment. Since prices have spiked during the COVID
pandemic, we have seen our unit counts decline as we have attempted to
pass along the increased costs to our customers.
We now find ourselves in an unsustainable situation where our costs
increase, and our units sold of any given crop decline. Inflation is
pricing our products out of reach of many consumers. This is of great
concern to specialty crop growers such as me. For growers and farmers
across the agricultural sector, the escalating cost of essential
inputs--such as labor, fuel, fertilizer, and equipment--is outpacing
the value of our outputs at an unsustainable rate. This widening gap
places immense pressure on producers, threatening the long-term
viability of agricultural operations and stability. As policymakers,
your understanding and support are critical in shaping strategies and
policies that help safeguard the future of farming and ensure a
resilient, productive agricultural economy[.]
Tariffs
As a nursery grower, I want to emphasize that many of the essential
inputs for our crops, such as peat moss, coconut coir, and burlap, are
sourced internationally, as these materials cannot be produced in the
United States due to climatic and environmental limitations. I would
like to thank the Chairman for recognizing this challenge and elevating
the need for tariff exemptions on critical inputs like peat moss.
Securing an exemption on this input has saved our industry millions of
dollars and provided some relief. However, we continue to experience
margin pressure on other inputs that remain subject to tariffs, further
squeezing profitability in a sector already operating on thin margins.
These ongoing cost burdens jeopardize our ability to remain
competitive.
Thank you for your time and consideration of my comments today. In
closing, I circle back to three main issues: the vital need of a stable
and legal workforce, a strong safety net to protect us when disasters
and quarantines strike and increasing inflationary costs that are
pricing high-quality American grown specialty crops out of the
consumers budgets.
And as I wrap up, I would like to invite any of you to come tour
our nursery in Hickman, California--just outside of Modesto. We would
love to have you. I look forward to your questions.
Attachment 1
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
About Us
AmericanHort unites the horticultural industry and represents
professionals from all facets of the industry.
From growers to retailers, breeders to installers, suppliers to
innovators, students to researchers, and everyone in between, people
and businesses across the horticulture industry call AmericanHort their
inspiration, voice, community, business partner, leader, and advocate.
With farmgate crop value of roughly $17 billion, total industry
economic output of $348 billion, and directly supporting 2.32 million
full- and part-time jobs, the horticulture industry is a key player in
the American economy.
Matt Mika, Vice President, Advocacy & Government Affairs,
Matt [email protected], (202) 222-5719
Rachel Pick, Senior Manager, Advocacy & Government Affairs,
[email protected], (712) 212-2525
Kamron Newberry, Advocacy Project Coordinator,
[email protected], (806) 315-1046
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Scope of the Industry
The business of horticulture is significant and has a big impact.
Our businesses include growers, retailers, breeders, suppliers,
landscape designers, and installers. Most are small and family-owned.
Many are into their third or even fifth generation of family ownership.
They are found in every state. Greenhouse and nursery crops comprise
\1/3\ of the total value of all specialty crops, and 10% of the value
of all crop production in America. More than just a ``pretty face,''
horticulture's products and services add to property values, clean and
filter air and water, make our cities cooler and more livable, and
increase health and well-being.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figures from Executive Summary of Economic Contributions of
the Green Industries in the United States in 2018 by Alan W.
Hodges and Hayk Khachatryan, University of Florida, Charles R.
Hall and Marco A. Palma, Texas A&M University; July 10, 2019.
Green industries in this study are defined as nursery and
floriculture production, lawn and garden equipment
manufacturing, lawn/garden equipment and nursery/florist
wholesalers, retail garden stores, florists, landscape design
and services.
Horticulture Means Jobs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Total Total
State Employment State Employment State Employment
Contributions Contributions Contributions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaba 28,248 Iowa 24,958 Ohio 90,406
ma
Arizo 46,941 Maine 12,743 Oklah 23,946
na oma
Arkan 8,348 Maryl 50,700 Orego 43,078
sas and n
Calif 264,913 Massa 52,913 Penns 90,075
orni chus ylva
a etts nia
Color 48,571 Michi 77,719 Rhode 8,169
ado gan Isla
nd
Conne 31,384 Minne 43,472 South 36,435
ctic sota Caro
ut lina
Flori 203,482 Missi 16,849 Tenne 44,006
da ssip ssee
pi
Georg 66,527 Misso 42,788 Texas 161,151
ia uri
Idaho 15,391 New 64,513 Utah 22,355
Jers
ey
Illin 87,595 North 78,766 Virgi 63,559
ois Caro nia
lina
India 45,701
na
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coast-to-Coast Impact
Regional Employment by Industry Segment
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Attachment 2
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
About Us
AmericanHort unites the horticultural industry and represents
professionals from all facets of the industry.
From growers to retailers, breeders to installers, suppliers to
innovators, students to researchers, and everyone in between, people
and businesses across the horticulture industry call AmericanHort their
inspiration, voice, community, business partner, leader, and advocate.
With farmgate crop value of roughly $17 billion, total industry
economic output of $348 billion, and directly supporting 2.32 million
full- and part-time jobs, the horticulture industry is a key player in
the American economy.
Matt Mika, Vice President, Advocacy & Government Affairs,
Matt [email protected], (202) 222-5719
Rachel Pick, Senior Manager, Advocacy & Government Affairs,
[email protected], (712) 212-2525
Kamron Newberry, Advocacy Project Coordinator,
[email protected], (806) 315-1046
Workforce & Labor
What We Seek
Labor shortages and access to labor continue to pose significant
challenges to the horticulture industry, particularly in plant
production and landscape installation. Horticulture is one of the few
industries that utilize H-2A and H-2B visas.
H-2A
The H-2A visa program is essential but in need of reform to better
meet workforce demands. In the 118th Congress, the House Agriculture
Committee's bipartisan Agricultural Labor Working Group released
targeted policy recommendations to modernize the program, improve
access, and enhance stability. Chairman GT Thompson is working to
translate these recommendations into legislation that would:
Streamline the H-2A application process through a single
electronic portal.
Allow staggered start dates and expedite processing for
returning workers.
Shift recruitment from print to digital and require USDA
consultation on program rules.
Provide greater wage predictability by capping fluctuations
and eliminating mid-contract adjustments.
Offer flexibility in job duties without triggering higher
pay and explore alternative AEWR calculations.
Expand support for safe, affordable farmworker housing and
allow small farm waivers based on financial need.
H-2B
The H-2B visa program is essential for landscape businesses that
face chronic shortages of seasonal labor. It enables companies to scale
during peak seasons, supporting U.S. jobs across the landscape and
horticulture supply chains. The program's outdated annual cap of 66,000
visas--set over 30 years ago--is far below current demand, with roughly
half of all H-2B visas used by the landscape industry, the program's
largest user.
The following fixes would provide relief and assistance to the
landscape and horticulture industry:
Raise the annual visa cap to a minimum of 120,000 visas a
year.
Include ``may to shall'' H-2B discretionary language in the
FY26 DHS appropriations bill.
Create a certified seasonal employer H-2B cap exemption.
We urge Members of Congress to support legislation that strengthens
the H-2A and H-2B visa programs and ensures a stable, legal workforce
for the American horticulture industry.
Further Background
President Trump and his Administration can take immediate steps to
stabilize the agricultural workforce through executive and
administrative actions. These include prioritizing H-2A visa
processing, modernizing wage calculations, expanding eligibility for
non-seasonal roles, and clarifying the definition of agricultural
labor. While these actions are helpful, they are only temporary.
President Trump, his family, and businesses have utilized the H-2A
and H-2B programs--just like many growers across the country. But
agriculture cannot rely on stopgap measures. We urge the Administration
to lead in securing a permanent legislative solution that ensures a
reliable, legal workforce for U.S. horticulture and agriculture.
Attachment 3
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
About Us
AmericanHort unites the horticultural industry and represents
professionals from all facets of the industry.
From growers to retailers, breeders to installers, suppliers to
innovators, students to researchers, and everyone in between, people
and businesses across the horticulture industry call AmericanHort their
inspiration, voice, community, business partner, leader, and advocate.
With farmgate crop value of roughly $17 billion, total industry
economic output of $348 billion, and directly supporting 2.32 million
full- and part-time jobs, the horticulture industry is a key player in
the American economy.
Matt Mika, Vice President, Advocacy & Government Affairs,
Matt [email protected], (202) 222-5719
Rachel Pick, Senior Manager, Advocacy & Government Affairs,
[email protected], (712) 212-2525
Kamron Newberry, Advocacy Project Coordinator,
[email protected], (806) 315-1046
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Farm Bill
The 5 year farm bill is set to expire on October 1, 2025. The
Titles Related to Horticulture, Research, Rural Development, Crop
Insurance, and trade in the farm bill are instrumental in our
industry's success. AmericanHort, along with the Specialty Crop Farm
Bill Alliance (SCFBA), urges Congress to pass a bipartisan 5 year farm
bill to provide much-needed support to our growers, retailers,
suppliers, researchers, partners, and customers.
What We Seek
We urge USDA to adopt the Specialty Crop Competitiveness Act of
2024 definition of specialty crops as the standard across all programs
to ensure clarity and consistency.
Establish a comprehensive safety net for specialty crop growers in
the form of affordable and effective crop insurance:
Congress should work with USDA to expand crop insurance
options for the entire horticulture industry, including
nursery, greenhouse, and landscape operations. Many specialty
crop growers lack access to affordable and effective coverage.
To address this, Congress should create a Specialty Crop
Advisory Committee to guide improvements. Reforms are needed to
include more flexible policy development, improved data
utilization, updates to Whole Farm Revenue Protection, expanded
prevented planting coverage, targeted risk research, and
enhanced outreach to growers.
Tree Assistance Program (TAP) Improvements:
Enhance Flexibility: Extend rehabilitation timelines, allow
replanting of non-viable but living trees, and permit updates
for higher-density plantings to help growers recover and
modernize after disasters.
Consistency and predictability for specialty crop growers receiving
ad hoc economic assistance from USDA:
Congress should establish a permanent program, like the MASC
program, as a mechanism for delivering direct economic
assistance to specialty crop growers.
Agriculture Trade and Food Assistance Program:
U.S. specialty crop growers face higher labor and compliance
costs than many foreign competitors. To stay competitive and
support domestic food production, farm bill programs should
invest in market development, research, and technology. We urge
Congress to fund the Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops
(TASC) program and support efforts to boost specialty crop
export competitiveness.
Invest in research, technology, and innovation:
Support the Specialty Crop Research Initiative (SCRI):
Reinstate the Secretary's ability to waive matching fund
requirements and prioritize research in areas like automation,
pest detection, crop improvement, and post-harvest handling.
Dedicate $40 million annually within SCRI for labor-saving
mechanization and automation, with unused funds returning to
general SCRI use.
Provide stable funding for the IR-4 Program to support
critical crop protection research for specialty crops.
To support the specialty crop sector, Congress should set aside an
increase of at least $5 million per year in the Specialty Crop Block
Grant Program (SCBGP) for multi-state projects with broad industry
benefits.
The 2018 Farm Bill permanently authorized $85 million per
year in mandatory funding for the SCBGP.
Congress should also reaffirm USDA's ability to promote U.S.
specialty crops and direct the agency to use programs like
SCBGP and Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) to
help growers adopt automation and mechanization tools that
lower labor costs but remain expensive and underused.
Attachment 4
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
About Us
AmericanHort unites the horticultural industry and represents
professionals from all facets of the industry.
From growers to retailers, breeders to installers, suppliers to
innovators, students to researchers, and everyone in between, people
and businesses across the horticulture industry call AmericanHort their
inspiration, voice, community, business partner, leader, and advocate.
With farmgate crop value of roughly $17 billion, total industry
economic output of $348 billion, and directly supporting 2.32 million
full- and part-time jobs, the horticulture industry is a key player in
the American economy.
Matt Mika, Vice President, Advocacy & Government Affairs,
Matt [email protected], (202) 222-5719
Rachel Pick, Senior Manager, Advocacy & Government Affairs,
[email protected], (712) 212-2525
Kamron Newberry, Advocacy Project Coordinator,
[email protected], (806) 315-1046
Supply Chain: Tariffs, Trade & Transportation
Tariffs
What We Seek
The horticulture industry relies on a wide range of agricultural
inputs that are not readily produced in the U.S., making access to
imported materials critical for continued growth and competitiveness.
AmericanHort is focused on preserving this access by advocating for
fair and predictable trade policies that minimize cost burdens on
growers and ensure supply chain reliability. Reducing or eliminating
tariffs on essential inputs helps protect businesses, many of them
small and family-owned, from rising production costs and supply
disruptions.
In addition to tariff relief, AmericanHort supports a transparent
and functional exclusion process at the U.S. Trade Representative's
office, particularly when no viable domestic alternatives exist. The
organization also advocates for trade policies that reflect the
structure of the horticulture industry and promote clear communication
between Customs and Border Protection (CBP), USDA APHIS, and importers
to avoid unnecessary delays or penalties at ports of entry to
facilitate safe and efficient plant trade.
Transportation & Supply Chain Policy
What We Seek
Reliable transportation is essential for delivering perishable
horticultural products, inputs, and equipment. The horticultural
industry relies on various modes of transportation, including trucking,
rail, waterways, and ports, to transport goods.
Congress should support a state opt-in pilot program to modernize
Federal Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) limits, allowing 91,000 pounds on
six axles to improve efficiency and reduce congestion. Addressing the
truck driver shortage through better recruitment, retention, and
streamlined licensing is also critical. Additionally, increased
investment in first- and last-mile infrastructure will help growers
access major transport routes and reduce costly delays.
Attachment 5
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
About Us
AmericanHort unites the horticultural industry and represents
professionals from all facets of the industry.
From growers to retailers, breeders to installers, suppliers to
innovators, students to researchers, and everyone in between, people
and businesses across the horticulture industry call AmericanHort their
inspiration, voice, community, business partner, leader, and advocate.
With farmgate crop value of roughly $17 billion, total industry
economic output of $348 billion, and directly supporting 2.32 million
full- and part-time jobs, the horticulture industry is a key player in
the American economy.
Matt Mika, Vice President, Advocacy & Government Affairs,
Matt [email protected], (202) 222-5719
Rachel Pick, Senior Manager, Advocacy & Government Affairs,
[email protected], (712) 212-2525
Kamron Newberry, Advocacy Project Coordinator,
[email protected], (806) 315-1046
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Research & Innovation
Nursery and greenhouse crops account for 15% of the total value of
U.S. crop agriculture, yet our industry receives less than 1% of USDA
research funding. While horticulture does not receive, nor does it
seek, government subsidies, public investment remains essential.
Strategic support for research, plant pest prevention, and mitigation
helps sustain the critical infrastructure our industry relies on to
thrive. We strongly support several USDA programs that serve as pillars
of this infrastructure.
Floriculture and Nursery Research Initiative
The Floriculture and Nursery Research Initiative (FNRI) is a unique
partnership involving USDA's Agricultural Research Service (ARS),
universities, and industry (AmericanHort and SAF). It is often held up
as a model for other industries. FNRI is vital to our industry efforts
to overcome pest and disease challenges, enhance the efficiency of our
production practices, develop and promote sustainable growing
practices, and advance the economic, environmental, and human health
benefits of our industry's products and services. Over the years,
Congress has built the initiative up to over $5.5M annually. We will
seek additional funding of $2M in FY 2026 to keep pace with rising
costs and to tackle additional research.
IR-4 Program
The IR-4 Program was established to facilitate regulatory approval
of sustainable pest management technology for specialty crops,
including environmental horticulture crops, to promote public health
and well-being. Funding for the IR-4 Program remained flat for many
years at $11.9M annually. Coupled with rising research costs and
service fees, the IR-4's impact is diminishing. The number of field
trials decreased 21% in the Environmental Horticulture Program alone
from 2016-2018. We are asking Congress to increase financial support
for the IR-4 Project in FY 2026 from $15M to the Congressionally
authorized $25M.
We Support:
Modernizing agricultural research facilities and increasing
funding for high-priority research focused on the horticulture
industry.
Expanding the Specialty Crop Research Initiative[.]
Increasing funding for the Specialty Crop Block Grant
Program and improving stakeholder consultation processes.
Strengthening U.S. plant health protections by increasing
funding for the Plant Pest and Disease Management and Disaster
Prevention Program under PPA Section 7721.
The Chairman. Mr. Frantz, thank you so much. Dr. Sagili,
please begin when you are ready.
STATEMENT OF RAMESH SAGILI, Ph.D., PROFESSOR,
DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE, OREGON STATE
UNIVERSITY, CORVALLIS, OR
Dr. Sagili. Good morning, Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member
Craig, Representative Salinas, and the Members of the
Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on the role
of the Specialty Crop Research Initiative. My name is Ramesh
Sagili. I am a Professor in the Department of Horticulture at
Oregon State University.
Specialty crops are a critical and an integral part of
United States agriculture. They are produced in all 50 states
on about 15 million acres with a market value of $115 billion.
Oregon ranks among the top states nationally in the production
value of specialty crops, including fruits, tree nuts, berries,
vegetables, and nursery products. Pollinators play an essential
role in the production of many of these specialty crops with
direct impact on both yield and quality. As a university
researcher in apiculture, I have the privilege of working with
beekeepers, farmers, and industry partners in addressing
critical challenges impacting Oregon's and the United States'
specialty crop production. I am a current recipient of an SCRI
grant and was a part of other SCRI-funded projects in the past.
My work focuses on the critical role of pollinators in
specialty crop production and complex threats facing
pollinators.
The Specialty Crop Research Initiative is unique among the
USDA and NIFA competitive programs because of its targeted
focus on specialty crops, its broad scope, integration of
research and extension, and robust funding levels that allow
multidisciplinary and multi-state projects. The program has
five legislatively-mandated focus areas and encourages focus on
emerging priorities, such as threats to specialty crop
pollinators. The SCRI program strongly encourages
transdisciplinary research, which is critical in solving
complex problems as many problems facing agriculture are
multifaceted and need diverse expertise from different
disciplines. SCRI also encourages a systems approach that
emphasizes understanding a problem by focusing on the entire
system rather than looking at individual components. In
addition, the SCRI program closely involves stakeholders in
identifying the needs and in the review of grant proposals.
This unique approach enables SCRI to address the real-world
needs of specialty crop producers by prioritizing practical,
applied research with tangible benefits.
My overall experience with SCRI proposal submission has
been positive, but I believe that there is further scope for
improvement in the process, and I offer three opportunities to
improve and streamline the SCRI grant process. First, the SCRI
program could improve the timely and reliable release of
requests for applications because uncertainty around the
release of RFAs makes planning challenging for the applicants
as they need adequate time for preparing quality proposals.
Second, the SCRI could provide more time between the release of
RFA and submission of the proposals. Finally, a key challenge
with the SCRI program is the limited success rate in securing
grants by the applicants. There are over 300 specialty crops
grown in the United States with a wide range of complex
challenges demanding attention. In recent years, with an
allocation of $80 million per year, the SCRI was able to fund
between 20 to 25 awards per year, but this program receives a
large number of meritorious proposals each year, and the
success rate is only about 15 percent. For my current award, I
had to apply twice before I was successful.
With this said, I applaud the Committee for recognizing the
importance of the SCRI program and the impact of investment in
this program. The Committee's action in H.R. 1, enacted in July
(Pub. L. 119-21), to increase annual investment of mandatory
funds for the SCRI from $18 million per year to $175 million
starting in 2026 creates some meaningful opportunity for USDA
to increase the number of projects awarded each year.
In conclusion, SCRI is an exemplary program that has served
the specialty crop industry needs especially well since its
inception and is the most significant research funding
opportunity for addressing challenges at the intersection of
pollinator health and specialty crop production. Investment in
SCRI not only advances innovation, but also helps secure the
future of American agriculture. Your continued support for the
SCRI is greatly appreciated and essential to ensuring that
program's long-term success and its continued benefits to
specialty crop farmers across the United States. Thank you very
much.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Sagili follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ramesh Sagili, Ph.D., Professor, Department of
Horticulture, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR
Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member Craig, Representative Salinas,
and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify
on the role of the Specialty Crop Research Initiative (SCRI) to help
support a robust and diverse specialty crop industry. My name is Dr.
Ramesh Sagili, and I am a Professor in the Department of Horticulture
at Oregon State University, a land-grant institution deeply committed
to agricultural research, innovation, and outreach.
Oregon is a major producer nationally in specialty crops, many of
which are pollination-dependent crops like blueberries, cherries, or
pears. According to the USDA 2022 Census of Agriculture, Oregon ranks
among the top states nationally in production value for fruit, tree
nuts, berries, vegetables, and nursery. Pollinators play an essential
role in the production of many of these specialty crops with direct
impact on both yield and quality.
As a university researcher in apiculture, I have the privilege of
working closely with beekeepers, farmers and industry partners in
addressing critical challenges impacting Oregon's and the U.S.
specialty crop production. I am a current recipient of an SCRI grant
and have been part of other SCRI funded projects in the past. A focus
of my work is on the role of pollinators and complex threats to
pollinators for specialty crop production. The SCRI is uniquely suited
among Federal agricultural research programs to effectively invest
resources in work that enhances understanding and strategies to address
complex, existing and emerging challenges faced by specialty crop
industries.
In this testimony, I offer the following key points for your
awareness: (1) the important role of pollinators in specialty crop
production; (2) the unique research funding opportunity of the SCRI
program; and (3) opportunities to further improve the implementation of
the SCRI program.
Specialty Crops Overview
Specialty crops are defined in law as ``fruits and vegetables, tree
nuts, dried fruits and horticulture and nursery crops, including
floriculture.'' Specialty crops are produced in all 50 states with a
market value (farm-level) of $115 billion, as most recently assessed in
2022, and were produced on approximately 240,000 farms with a total
acreage of about 15 million acres (USDA Census of Agriculture, 2022)
(Figure 1).
Figure 1. Specialty Crop Growing Farms (by County, 2022)
Share of Farms Primarily Growing Specialty Crops, by County, 2022
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: USDA, Economic Research Service using 2022 Census of
Agriculture data from USDA, National Agricultural Statistics
Service.
Role of Pollinators in Specialty Crops and Importance Or Impacts of
Research To Support Pollinator Health Critical for Specialty
Crop Production
Managed honey bees and other native bees play a critical role in
our food production and food security via pollination of numerous crops
including a large number of specialty crops. Honey bee pollination is
valued at $15 billion in the United States (Calderone, 2012).
Pollination services provided by managed honey bees owned by commercial
beekeepers are vital for the yield and quality of many specialty crops,
affecting their competitiveness. Many high-value specialty crops--such
as almonds, apples, blueberries, cherries, pears and vegetable seed
crops--depend on honey bee pollination to achieve optimal yield, fruit
quality, and consistency.
Further, a vibrant, thriving beekeeping industry is essential in
maintaining healthy colonies for crop pollination and honey production.
Unfortunately, for the past 2 decades the beekeepers in the United
States have reported unsustainably high colony losses due to multitude
of stress factors including parasites, diseases, and poor nutrition.
The colony losses that were reported during 2024-2025 have been
particularly alarming, with reports of about 60% colony losses by
commercial beekeepers across the United States (Project Apis m, 2025).
These significant colony declines are threatening pollination of
specialty crops in all states. Hence, research to address the
challenges facing honey bees is critical for sustainable apiculture and
crop production.
I am a principal investigator on a 4 year, $4.2 million SCRI grant
awarded in 2023 that is addressing an urgent problem threatening honey
bee colonies (European foulbrood disease) that pollinate specialty
crops in several states. The beekeepers that employ their colonies for
pollination of some of the early season specialty crops such as
blueberries are increasingly reluctant to provide pollination services
to these specialty crops due to the fear of exacerbating this disease
when providing pollination services. We have assembled a
transdisciplinary, multi-state research team to comprehensively address
this problem impacting commercial honey bee colonies. The beekeepers
from four different states (California, Mississippi, Oregon and
Washington) are also collaborating on this project. The long-term goal
of this research is to identify causal factors associated with European
foulbrood disease in honey bees and develop strategies to mitigate this
disease. We anticipate that several specialty crops grown in multiple
states that are dependent on honey bees will greatly benefit from
stronger and healthier colonies that beekeepers will be able to manage
following the best management practices formulated from the findings of
this SCRI funded research project. This project sits uniquely at the
intersection of pollinator health and crop production, bridging two
critical areas of agricultural sustainability. This ambitious research
project, aimed at tackling a multifaceted challenge requiring diverse
expertise and substantial funding, would not be possible without the
support of a Federal grant program like the SCRI.
The SCRI Program Provides Unique Funding Opportunities
The SCRI program is unique among the USDA National Institute of
Food and Agriculture competitive grant programs because of its targeted
focus on specialty crops, its broad scope, and robust funding levels
that allows for multi-disciplinary, multi-state projects. The program
requires proposals to address at least one of five required focus
areas, and also encourages focus on emerging priorities, such as
threats to specialty crop pollinators. The SCRI program strongly
encourages transdisciplinary research, which is critical in solving
complex problems, as many problems facing agriculture are multifaceted
and need diverse expertise from different disciplines. Further, SCRI
also encourages a systems approach that emphasizes understanding a
problem by focusing at the entire system rather than looking at
individual components. This program also emphasizes multi-institution
and integrated projects that incorporates research, extension and
education as well as direct engagement with producers. In addition, the
SCRI program closely involves stakeholders in identifying the needs,
and in the initial review of grant proposals. This unique process
allows SCRI to effectively meet the needs of specialty crop farmers by
supporting predominantly applied/practical research that benefits
farmers both in the short term and in the long term.
Opportunities To Support and Improve the SCRI Program
The majority of researchers in the USA spend a large portion of
their time seeking funds for their respective research by submitting
multiple grant proposals each year. This process is quite demanding and
time consuming. My overall experience with submissions of SCRI
proposals has been positive, but I offer three opportunities to improve
and streamline the SCRI grant process.
First, the SCRI program could improve the timely and reliable
release of request for applications (RFA). Uncertainty around when or
if RFAs are released makes planning challenging for applicants as they
need adequate time for preparation of quality proposals. Secondly, the
SCRI could provide more time between the RFA and submission for the
proposals--this would be particularly helpful if the RFA release
schedule remains unreliable. Finally, a key challenge with the SCRI
program is the limited success rate in securing grants by the
applicants. There are over 300 specialty crops grown in the United
States with a wide range of complex challenges demanding attention. In
recent years, funded at $80 million per year, the SCRI program was able
to fund between 20-25 awards per year. The program receives a large
number of meritorious proposals each year and the success rate is
approximately 15 percent of the total applications submitted. For my
current award, I had to apply twice before I was successful.
With this said, I applaud this Committee for recognizing the
importance of the SCRI program and the impact of investment in this
research program. The Committee action in H.R. 1 enacted in July to
increase annual investment of mandatory funds from $80 million per year
to $175 million starting in 2026 creates a meaningful opportunity for
USDA to increase and expand projects awarded each year to address the
most pressing challenges impacting specialty crops. Further, this
increased investment encourages and supports researcher's interest and
effort to pursue these grants to help address the most pressing
industry challenges.
Conclusion
In my opinion, SCRI is an exemplary program that has served the
specialty crop industry needs exceptionally since its inception and is
the most significant research funding opportunity for addressing
challenges at the intersection of pollinator health and specialty crop
production. Investment in SCRI not only advances innovation but also
helps secure the future of American agriculture. Your continued support
of SCRI is much appreciated and helps to ensure the SCRI program will
thrive and benefit the specialty crop farmers in the United States.
References:
https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/charts-of-note/chart-
detail?chartId=
109079
Calderone N.W. (2012) Insect Pollinated Crops, Insect
Pollinators and US Agriculture: Trend Analysis of Aggregate
Data for the Period 1992-2009. PLoS ONE 7(5): e37235. https://
doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037235
https://www.projectapism.org/colony-loss-information
The Chairman. Dr. Sagili, thank you so much for your
testimony. Dr. Boring, please begin when you are ready.
STATEMENT OF TIM BORING, Ph.D., DIRECTOR, MICHIGAN
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL
DEVELOPMENT, LANSING, MI; ON BEHALF OF NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF STATE DEPARTMENTS OF AGRICULTURE
Dr. Boring. Good morning, Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member
Craig, and Members of the Committee. Thank you for the
opportunity to participate today. The perspective I bring to
this hearing is that of the Director of the Michigan Department
of Agriculture and Rural Development. I am also a sixth-
generation family farmer and a proud member of the National
Association of State Departments of Agriculture, or NASDA. Many
of you know my colleagues from around the country who are
currently in Arkansas for NASDA's annual meeting this week. I
appreciate all the work NASDA is doing at a Federal level and
look forward to participating in the rest of the annual meeting
there when I return to Arkansas following this hearing.
My focus this morning will be on Michigan's specialty
crops, their importance, and the challenges and opportunities
that growers and consumers face in this vital industry. Members
of this Committee have the ability to foster the success of
specialty crops today and for years to come. Earlier this year,
I was honored to speak before your colleagues in the Senate,
and I first want to acknowledge the progress that has been made
since I submitted that testimony. I appreciate that the recent
Federal budget did extend portions of the farm bill through
2031, but we know that we are still barreling towards the
September 30 expiration for the remaining provisions not
included in H.R. 1. We know food security is national security,
and the next farm bill will dictate effectively how we are able
to feed ourselves by ourselves in the future.
Agriculture is a nearly $126 billion industry in Michigan,
and I consider our specialty crop farmers the backbone of our
success. I have had the pleasure of visiting many of our
specialty crop growers in their fields and orchards this
season, hearing firsthand the many challenges facing the
industry. These interactions inform our strategy at the state
level as well as how I advocate at a Federal level, when we
have opportunities like this to convey just how vital specialty
crop support programs are for their existence. Unfortunately,
for many specialty crops, times have never been more tenuous.
In Michigan, specialty crops once offered a way for farmers to
diversify, but these days, instead of growing their operations,
many farmers are debating if they can stay in business. Whether
it is due to trade uncertainty, rising input costs, climate
variability, labor constraints, and threats of pest and
disease, many specialty crops in this country are either harder
to grow, more difficult to get to markets, or as challenging as
ever to reach the consumer. In the interest of time this
morning, I want to highlight some key areas that are currently
supported in the farm bill and need continued support, as well
as share what we are doing in Michigan that is seeing success
and deserves more attention at a Federal level.
First, public sector research has been critical for
specialty crops, specifically the Specialty Crop Block Grant
supported through the Specialty Crop Research Initiative. These
investments have been instrumental in keeping farmers one step
ahead of the next disease or pest threat. For instance, in
2024, cherry farmers in our state lost between 30 and 75
percent of the crop, depending on locality and variety, because
of abnormal weather events early in the season that drove
unprecedented insect and disease pressure later. This year,
early spring frost events reduced yields by 30 to 90 percent
across our state, depending on the farm location, and our state
as a whole only harvested 60 percent of a normal cherry crop.
Losses such as these are becoming far more common. Our
researchers in Michigan are utilizing Specialty Crop Block
Grant funding to address new pest pressures and build climate
resiliency in our orchards, but as these recent yield
reductions show, the threats are eminent and significant. I
appreciate H.R. 1 expanding funding for the program by $100
million and believe the next farm bill should affirm that
continued support for continued research investment.
Understanding science is critical for the long-term viability
of specialty crops in Michigan and across the country. At a
time when there are so many unknowns and challenges around our
trade partnerships, fostering stronger domestic markets will be
critical for the success for our growers.
Finally, I want to share two areas we are seeing success in
Michigan: our Regenerative Ag Program and our new Farm to
Family Program. Regenerative agriculture is an active approach
to land management driven by improving soil health. Our Regen
Ag Unit supports Michigan producers by de-risking practice
adoption, strengthening network engagement, and increasing
market opportunities so farmers and landowners can improve
profitability and find new ways to diversify. This also
restores healthy soils and safeguards natural resources for
future generations. The second program I would like to
highlight for its success is our Farm to Family Program, an
effort working to strengthen agrifood systems across our state.
This year, we administered our first research grants to food
hubs and farm stops, creating new opportunities for Michigan
farmers and meeting demands for communities who want healthy,
locally-grown produce on their tables. And just this week, we
finalized plans to launch our new Good Food for Michigan
program. This will be work that is intentionally engaging
different institutions, including community colleges and early
childhood centers, addressing barriers and creating
opportunities for healthy-grown food here in Michigan. It is
another example of how Governor Whitmer is prioritizing
collaboration that translates to improving quality of life for
all Michiganders. I share all this today because the support of
our specialty crop growers directly translates into tools to
keep farmers farming, keep rural communities vibrant, and keeps
fruit and vegetables on the dinner tables across America.
Thank you for this opportunity and look forward to
questions from the Committee.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Boring follows:]
Prepared Statement of Tim Boring, Ph.D., Director, Michigan Department
of Agriculture and Rural Development, Lansing, MI; on Behalf of
National Association of State Departments of Agriculture
Good morning, Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member Craig, and Members
of the Committee. Thank you for opportunity to speak before you for
today's hearing: An Examination of the State of the Specialty Crop
Industry.
The perspective I bring to this hearing is as Director of the
Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD) and
sixth-generation family farmer. I'm proud to lead a state agency of
dedicated public servants who are committed to providing opportunities
for our food and agriculture businesses, lifting up our rural
communities, and preserving Michigan's natural resources.
I'm also a proud member of the National Association of State
Departments of Agriculture (NASDA). Many of you know my colleagues from
around the country who are currently in Arkansas for NASDA's annual
meeting this week. I appreciate all of the work NASDA is doing at the
Federal level and look forward to participating in the rest of the
conference when I return to Arkansas following this hearing.
My focus this morning will be on Michigan's specialty crops--their
importance and the challenges and opportunities that growers and
consumers face in this vital industry. Members of this Committee have
the ability to foster the success of specialty crops today and for
years to come and I'm looking forward to the constructive solutions and
policy decisions that will come out of this hearing.
Earlier this year, I was honored to speak before your colleagues in
the Senate, and I want to first acknowledge the progress that has been
made since I submitted that testimony.
I appreciate that the recent Federal budget did extend portions of
the farm bill through 2031, but we all know we're still barreling
toward a September 30 expiration for remaining provisions that were not
included in H.R. 1. We also know food security is national security,
and the next farm bill will dictate how effectively we will be able to
feed ourselves by ourselves in the future.
Agriculture is a nearly $126 billion industry for Michigan, and I
consider our specialty crop farmers the backbone of our success.
While Michigan is largely considered ``THE'' specialty crop state
with more than 300 crops produced, specialty crops are grown and
consumed in all 50 states. Specialty crop producers feed the country
and much of the world with nutritious fruit, vegetables, legumes, and
more while supplying our homes and businesses with cut flowers and
potted plants. Our holidays include celebrations that see families
partake in food and drink flavored with herbs and spices, snacking on
an array of tree nuts, or maybe putting up Christmas trees in December.
Our yards and gardens are often landscaped with a fir, spruce, or
hemlock. The point is that specialty crops truly are special and are
integrated into what we eat, how we decorate, and when we share moments
with friends and family.
This Committee is well aware of the breadth of crops designated as
``specialty'' and it may be easy to assume these products have always
been here and always will be. But given the tenuous times we're in,
I've remained in close contact with a number of producers to hear just
how vital specialty crop support programs are for their existence.
Unfortunately, for many specialty crops, the future has never been
more fragile. What once provided an avenue for farmers to diversify
their products has forced many to choose whether or not their farm will
welcome the next generation. Whether it's due to trade pressures,
market access challenges, rising input costs, climate variability,
labor constraints, and threats of pests and disease--many specialty
crops in this country are either harder to grow, more difficult to get
to markets, or as challenging as ever to access for the consumer.
This Committee has a history of championing specialty crops in a
purposely intentional way by passing farm bills that have opened market
opportunities through purchasing and food access programs, as well as
by funding programs that foster trade and advance agronomy and plant
pathology.
For example, MDARD--in conjunction with USDA--has awarded nearly
$16 million in Specialty Crop Block Grants since 2019. These
investments supported activities such as new leaf disease and seedling
root rot research in celery; determining action thresholds and
management strategies for root lesion nematodes in carrot production;
methods to combat onion Stemphylium leaf blight; and advancing
etiology, detection, and management of blueberry viruses. All of this
work has been critical to the health of crop yields.
Last year, the block grant funding made it possible for Michigan
specialty crop companies and associations to attend national and
international trade shows including the National Restaurant Association
Show, SIAL Paris, and the Global Produce and Floral Show. These trade
shows resulted in 266 new buyers of specialty crops or specialty crop-
processed products. Companies and specialty crops groups realized $1.4
million in sales immediately from participating in these three trade
shows with an additional $7 million in sales anticipated through the
buyer conversations and negotiations started at these events. The year
before last, Specialty Crop Block Grant dollars funded consumer
preference and market demand studies for blueberries, promoted
specialty crops as healthy food options for school-aged children in
urban communities across west Michigan, furthered sustainable dry bean
production practices to meet evolving market demands, and advanced
social media marketing support to engage target audiences and enhance
competitiveness for Michigan apples.
The block grant program has wide-reaching impacts--from increasing
profits to growing market potential and advancing disease management--
and the funding provides a lifeline to address the needs of Michigan's
specialty crop industry.
In the lead up to the farm bill effort in the previous Congress,
NASDA worked closely with the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance on a
stakeholder proposal to increase funding, as well as to improve
transparency and the priority-setting process concerning how state
departments of agriculture fund awards under this program. This
proposal was shared with Members of this Committee last year and was
ultimately incorporated as section 1002 of H.R. 8467. We are thankful
for the increase in funding for the program, but once again reiterate
our support for improving states' flexibility to work closely with
specialty crop farmers and grower groups in establishing annual
priorities. We support maintaining this language in the next iteration
of the farm bill.
The nation's first land-grant college, Michigan State University,
is driving additional research, much of which is supported by the farm
bill's Specialty Crop Research Initiative. Land-grant universities
across the country are also recipients of this research funding and are
actively engaged on the front lines of keeping farmers one step ahead
of the next pest or disease threat. The increase in Research Initiative
funding to $100 million is a positive signal to our industry, and we
ask that funding continue to be supported by this Committee so progress
is not interrupted.
One program not included in H.R. 1's agriculture funding is the
Marketing Assistance for Specialty Crops program. We appreciate
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announcing another round of
payments through this program back in April, and hope our Federal
partners continue to see the benefit of it by implementing it into the
next farm bill.
MDARD is in constant communication with growers and specialty crop
groups to ensure their state government is listening, engaged, and
responsive. Everywhere I go in Michigan, growers continue to express
concern over increasingly erratic growing conditions. For instance, in
2024, our cherry farmers lost between 30 and 75 percent of their crop,
depending on locality and variety, because of multiple abnormal weather
events that drove unprecedented insect and disease pressure. This year,
early spring frost events reduced yields by 30 to 90 percent across our
state depending on the farm location. Our state has experienced some of
the warmest and wettest spring seasons on record in recent years,
resulting in changes to pest life cycles and early bud breaks. When
followed by events such as late frosts, we see crop disasters our
growers cannot continue to endure. With the future of our specialty
crop industry in such doubt, many farmers don't know how long their
operations can continue. Accordingly, in Michigan, we've taken a
posture of intentional coordination with Federal and local partners to
ensure we're taking action to support farmers when they need it most. A
farm bill that provides growers the support to ensure the continuation
of their family farms in the face of these unprecedented challenges is
critical for the long-term viability of specialty crops in Michigan and
across the country.
At MDARD we're focused on several overarching priorities: Climate
resiliency and regenerative agriculture, diversity in agriculture
production, and economic prosperity across Michigan. Specialty crops
are key to the realization of these priorities not just in Michigan but
in many places across the country. Towards this end, Governor Gretchen
Whitmer has leveraged Federal funding supporting specialty crops,
investing state dollars in two new flagship programs: MDARD's
Regenerative Agriculture Program and the Farm to Family program.
Regenerative agriculture is an active approach to land management
driven by improving soil health. Rather than a rigid set of rules, it
embraces a blend of sustainable farming methods tailored to each
farmer's needs and thus drives profitability and creates opportunities
for farmers to diversify. Core principles include understanding the
context of an individual's farm operation, minimizing soil disturbance,
maximizing biodiversity, keeping soil covered, maintaining living roots
year-round, and integrating livestock.
Our regenerative agriculture unit is the first of its kind to be
embedded in a state department. It allows Michigan producers to receive
support to engage in this approach to production agriculture, which
will only be more important in the years ahead. By adopting
regenerative agriculture practices, farmers and landowners can improve
profitability and find new ways to diversify while restoring healthy
soils and safeguarding natural resources for future generations.
Commodity row crop farmers are on the front lines of integrating many
of these practices, but they are equally important for specialty crop
growers.
The second program I'd like to highlight for its success is Farm to
Family, which is a first-of-its-kind program in state government that's
working to strengthen agrifood systems across two peninsulas. This year
we administered our first grants to food hubs and farm stops, which are
creating new market opportunities for Michigan farmers and meeting
demands from community members who want locally grown, healthy food on
their tables. We're excited about the potential of this program in
strengthening local food systems in a meaningful way.
Both of these state-based programs serve as examples of innovative
ways we can be approaching this work in supporting our specialty crop
growers. Together, Federal and state dollars are critical to the
vibrancy of rural communities, quality of life from the Atlantic to the
Pacific, enhancing America's economic competitive edge, and
establishing and broadening lifelong consumers for U.S. food and
agriculture produce domestically and in markets across the globe.
I share all of this in today's testimony because support for our
specialty cops directly translates to tools to keep farmers farming,
keep rural communities vibrant, and keep fruits and vegetables on
dinner tables across America. Specialty crops are a vital piece in this
puzzle, and I urge the Committee to ensure it doesn't get lost in the
big picture and our continued need for a new farm bill.
The Chairman. Dr. Boring, thank you so much for your
testimony. Mrs. Brennan, please proceed with your 5 minutes
whenever you are ready.
STATEMENT OF DANA BRENNAN, VICE PRESIDENT,
CORPORATE AFFAIRS, GRIMMWAY FARMS, BAKERSFIELD, CA; ON BEHALF
OF INTERNATIONAL FRESH PRODUCE
ASSOCIATION
Mrs. Brennan. Thank you Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member
Craig, and Members of the Committee. My name is Dana Brennan,
and I am here today on behalf of Grimmway Farms, based in
Bakersfield, California, with operations throughout the
country. I am honored to serve as the Chair of the
International Fresh Produce Association's United States Public
Policy Committee, the organization I am proudly representing
today.
Grimmway's story began with a roadside produce stand
started by the Grimm Brothers in the early 1960s. Today,
Grimmway is one of the biggest carrot producers and also one of
the top organic growers in the United States. We grow more than
135 seasonal and year-round products distributed worldwide,
including 65 organic commodities under brands such as Cal-
Organic and Bunny-Luv. Those crops are grown on over 40,000
acres of conventional ground and 55,000 acres of prime,
organically-certified ground throughout California, Arizona,
Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Colorado, Georgia, and Florida.
Fresh produce is a cornerstone of both American agriculture
and public health. Our industry contributes billions annually
to the economy and delivers the healthiest foods available,
foods that are essential to preventing diet-related diseases,
but this vital sector is under real and growing pressure.
Regulatory overreach, labor challenges, and outdated policies
are making it harder to grow, harvest, and deliver fresh food.
Without action, many U.S. producers will not be able to
compete. We appreciated the much-needed funding in the One Big
Beautiful Bill Act, but gaps remain.
Specialty crops make up hundreds of billions of dollars in
value, yet they receive just .5 percent of farm bill funding.
The next law must strive to rebalance this. To secure America's
supply of fresh, affordable produce and in full alignment with
the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance's farm bill priorities,
the updates shared on August 5, we urge Congress to do the
following: one, expand research and development in crop
protection, pest management, innovation, and mechanization;
two, reform and modernize the safety net. Unlike major
commodity crops which benefit from well-established and widely-
utilized insurance programs, many specialty crop growers still
lack access to viable, tailored risk management options.
Congress must prioritize risk management solutions that address
the full spectrum of U.S. agriculture, encompassing both large
and small farms as well as row crops and specialty crops, in a
manner that is both efficient and cost effective.
Three, update and streamline existing specialty crop
programs, including the National Organic Program. Four, promote
produce at home. Domestic produce products are competing with
lower-cost imports and processed alternatives that often serve
as ``like'' substitutes in the eye of the consumer. Questions
have been raised about whether the USDA has the statutory
authority to establish and administer a domestic promotion
program to help address these competitive pressures. Therefore,
Congress should reaffirm that the USDA does indeed have the
statutory authority to conduct domestic promotion activities.
Five, improve nutrition access. Only one in ten Americans
meet the recommended fruit and vegetable intake daily. The
fresh produce industry is ready to help reverse that trend. We
believe Congress should incentivize produce consumption in SNAP
and WIC, expand online SNAP access, make the Fresh Fruit and
Vegetable Program option available to more schools, and ensure
USDA procurement reflects a diverse range of fresh produce.
Last, strengthen trade and market access. Fresh produce is one
of North America's most actively-traded commodities, yet non-
tariff barriers, such as excessive residue limits and packaging
standards, block U.S. exports. This industry, frankly, is
central to America's health, economy, and food security. It
deserves policy support that matches that value.
On behalf of Grimmway and IFPA, I want to thank the
Committee for dedicating so much time today and attention to
specialty crops in America. We look forward to working with you
to build a stronger, more resilient future for U.S. produce and
for the millions of Americans who rely on it every day. Thank
you.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Brennan follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dana Brennan, Vice President, Corporate Affairs,
Grimmway Farms, Bakersfield, CA; on Behalf of International Fresh
Produce Association
Thank you, Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member Craig, and Members of
the Committee. My name is Dana Brennan, and I serve as Vice President
of Corporate Affairs for Grimmway Farms, based in Bakersfield,
California. I have been fortunate enough to work for Grimmway for 7
years and was born and raised in Kern County, which proudly holds the
title of the nation's number one agriculture-producing county.
Additionally, I am honored to serve as the Chair of the International
Fresh Produce Association's United States Public Policy Committee, the
organization I am proudly representing today. IFPA is the largest and
most diverse association serving the entire fresh produce and floral
supply chain worldwide and the only one to integrate advocacy and
industry-facing support seamlessly. IFPA proudly represents member
companies, from modest family businesses to large corporations,
throughout the fresh fruit and vegetable supply chain, including
growers, shippers, fresh-cut processors, wholesalers, distributors,
retailers, food service operators, industry suppliers, and allied
associations.
Headquartered in Kern County, Grimmway Farms traces its roots to a
roadside produce stand started by the Grimm Brothers in the 1960s.
Today, Grimmway is a global produce leader--one of the biggest carrot
producers out there and also one of the top organic growers in the
United States. We take our mission seriously--a commitment to bring
fresh, healthy, and safe produce to communities around the world as we
invest in and care for the earth's natural resources and our family of
employees.
Today, we produce more than 135 seasonal and year-round products,
distributed worldwide--including 65 USDA-certified organic commodities,
under brands such as Cal-Organic and Bunny-Luv. Those crops are grown
on over 40,000 acres of conventional ground and 55,000 acres of prime
organically certified ground throughout California, Arizona, Oregon,
Washington, Idaho, Colorado, Georgia, and Florida.
On average, Grimmway is running upwards of 10 million pounds of
fresh carrots per day through our facilities, 6 days a week, year-
round. Those facilities are in California, the Pacific Northwest, and
the Southeast United States.
That work could not have been done without our incredible family of
employees. More than 6,000 jobs are dependent on our company's success,
including direct labor, contract labor, and H-2A labor.
At Grimmway, we recognize the vital importance of providing
wholesome food. We are proud to play a role in nourishing children in
schools, supporting families at the dinner table, and serving
communities worldwide. Much of our work could not be done without the
support of farm bill programs.
Fresh produce is a cornerstone of both American agriculture and
public health. It is a tremendous economic engine, contributing
billions annually to U.S. agricultural output. Beyond economics, we
provide the healthiest foods available--essential to combating diet-
related diseases and improving public health.
But this vital sector is under siege. Regulatory overreach, labor
shortages, and outdated policies threaten our ability to grow, harvest,
and deliver fresh food. These challenges are not theoretical--they are
very real, and they threaten the viability of many U.S. producers.
The Farm Bill: A Lifeline for Specialty Crops
As a team member of Grimmway Farms and a volunteer leader at the
IFPA, I've seen firsthand how U.S. agricultural policy has evolved and
how it continues to impact different segments of our industry in very
different ways.
When the Great Depression hit, the Federal Government began to
shape farm policy in earnest, stepping in to stabilize supply and
prices for major staple crops of the time, namely corn, wheat, cotton,
and rice. These became the foundation of what are now known as
``program crops'' under the farm bill. Over time, the bill expanded to
include conservation initiatives and crop insurance tools tailored
primarily to these commodities.
With each farm bill reauthorization, adjustments have been made to
further refine pricing and supply mechanisms for program crops.
However, growers of other crops, such as fruits, vegetables, and other
high-value, labor-intensive commodities, were largely left to navigate
the volatility of the marketplace on their own. These crops were
eventually categorized as ``specialty crops,'' now officially defined
to include fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits, horticulture,
and nursery crops (including floriculture).
Despite their critical role in public health and the broader food
supply chain, specialty crops have historically received limited
support through traditional Federal safety nets, particularly in areas
like crop insurance. It's a dynamic that continues to challenge our
sector and one we believe must evolve to reflect the modern realities
of American agriculture.
We want to extend our appreciation to the Chairman and Members of
Congress who helped pass much-needed funding for many farm bill
programs of significance to our industry earlier this year. Although
the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) made significant investments in
programs that support the family farms producing U.S.-grown specialty
crops, the law does not specify the purposes and parameters of those
investments and omits significant policy proposals that specialty crop
growers desperately need to enhance their competitiveness.
As we move into the final stretch of farm bill negotiations for
2025, the specialty crop industry remains focused on ensuring that
Federal farm policy reflects the diversity and complexity of modern
American agriculture.
Farm Bill: Specialty Crop Farm Production Priorities
The fresh sector is an active leader in the Specialty Crop Farm
Bill Alliance (SCFBA). My testimony references many SCFBA farm bill
priorities, and IFPA strongly supports and incorporates, without direct
reference, all SCFBA priorities. Specialty crops represent hundreds of
billions of dollars in farmgate crop value, yet they received just 0.5%
of funding in the 2018 Farm Bill. The next farm bill must invest
robustly and more equitably in specialty crop production to maintain a
reliable, affordable domestic food supply.
We call on Congress to:
1. Expand research and development: In crop protection and pest
management, including support for the IR-4 program, while
investing in applied research on mechanization and
automation for specialty crops to ease the tremendous cost
and liability of labor on the farm--the single largest
concern for fresh produce growers, which often exceeds 50%
of total expenses.
Until laws and regulations around labor, immigration, taxation,
environmental standards, food safety, crop protection, and
trade are more aligned with the day-to-day realities of
family farming, the most reliable path forward for
specialty crop production comes down to one key principle:
innovation.
One of the most impactful innovations needed on today's farms
is increased mechanization. With the labor pool shrinking
at an unsustainable rate, investment in equipment,
robotics, and other advanced tools is essential to help
fill the gap. Without bold, sustained efforts to accelerate
agricultural technology development, we risk losing a
significant portion of our nation's specialty crop
production.
There has never been a greater need for accelerated innovation
leaps in specialty crop production. To get the most bang
for the buck, public-private partnerships in the farm bill
should emphasize addressing mechanization. In California,
the land-grant university system has played a pivotal role
in advancing labor-saving agricultural technologies. UC
Davis' Department of Biological and Agricultural
Engineering has a strong legacy of innovation in specialty
crop mechanization, including the development of the field
harvester that revolutionized processing tomato production.
Closer to home, at Grimmway Farms, we're always exploring new
ways to innovate. Right now, depending on the crop, we're
using automation and precision agriculture in the field--
from planting all the way through to harvest.
2. Reform and Modernize the Safety Net: While specialty crop growers
have demonstrated remarkable resilience in the face of
severe weather, volatile markets, labor shortages, and
mounting regulatory pressures, access to effective risk
management tools continues to lag. Unlike major commodity
crops, which benefit from well-established and widely
utilized insurance programs, many specialty crop growers
still lack access to viable, tailored risk management
options.
Congress must prioritize risk management solutions that address
the full spectrum of U.S. agriculture, encompassing both
large and small farms, as well as row crops and specialty
crops, in the most efficient and cost-effective manner
possible. Most fresh produce growers currently lack access
to affordable and effective crop insurance. The USDA must
be directed and empowered to develop a better system for
specialty crops and implement it quickly. Specialty crop
growers are among the most vulnerable to natural disasters,
and we are just as dramatically impacted by market price
fluctuations as our neighbors in the row sector. We have
also learned that we cannot rely on timely support from
disaster aid when disaster strikes. Congressional gridlock
means relief comes too little and too late. We want better
options for managing production risks and protecting our
businesses.
3. Update and streamline existing specialty crop programs: As
mentioned earlier, organics is a large part of Grimmway's
production and a growing sector in the specialty crop
industry. In 2019, 58 percent of organic sales came from
crops, primarily led by vegetables and fruits (including
berries and tree nuts), representing $9 billion in sales.
With the growing importance of the organic production
sector in specialty crops and increasing participation
throughout the supply chain, the industry continues to
collaborate with other stakeholders on a range of
initiatives aimed at improving the National Organic
Program.
Additionally, Congress should establish a transparent process
by which USDA solicits input directly from stakeholders
every 5 years on what, if any, organic standards need
updating. The agency should then publish a list of
priorities for regulatory action and follow its existing
process and procedures to execute on that plan.
4. Promote Produce at Home: Staying competitive in today's market is
proving to be difficult for farmers. While individual
vegetable growers may succeed in getting their products to
market, driving broader market expansion and increasing
consumer demand remains a significant challenge--largely
due to the fragmented nature of specialty crop production.
Domestic vegetable products are competing with lower-cost
imports and processed alternatives that often serve as
``like'' substitutes in the eyes of consumers. Questions
have been raised about whether USDA has the statutory
authority to establish and administer a domestic promotion
program to help address these competitive pressures. To
that end, Congress should reaffirm that USDA has the
statutory authority to conduct domestic promotion
activities.
Nutrition: The Path to a Healthier America
Only one in ten Americans meets the recommended fruit and vegetable
intake. The fresh produce industry is ready to help reverse this trend.
We call on Congress to:
Incentivize produce consumption in SNAP and WIC
Expand online SNAP access
Make the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP) option
available to more schools
Ensure USDA procurement includes a diverse range of fresh
produce
Trade: Better Access, Fewer Barriers
Fresh produce is one of North America's most actively traded
commodities. Yet, non-tariff barriers, such as excessive residue limits
and packaging standards, block U.S. exports.
We are grateful for the funds recently appropriated and support
future funding designated for specialty crops under the following:
Market Access Program (MAP)
Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC)
Assisting Specialty Crop Exports (ASCE)
These programs help U.S. growers compete globally and ensure
consumers have access to fresh, affordable food.
Conclusion
The fresh produce sector is essential to America's health, economy,
and food security. However, we cannot survive without swift, decisive
Federal action.
We ask this Committee and the Administration to:
Support specialty crops in the farm bill
Invest in innovation
Address labor and regulatory policies
Ensure fair trade and access to more markets
It has been an honor to be here today. The specialty crop industry
is a powerful force in feeding our nation and supporting our economy,
and today's hearing reflects just how important this work is. Together,
we can secure the future of American agriculture and ensure every
American has access to safe, nutritious, and affordable food.
On behalf of Grimmway, I want to thank the Committee for dedicating
so much time and attention to specialty crops in America. We deeply
value your commitment, and we look forward to continuing to work
together to strengthen the industry and ensure that future generations
have access to healthy, affordable fresh produce.
The Chairman. Mrs. Brennan, thank you so much for your
testimony. At this time, Members will be recognized for
questions in order of seniority, alternating between Majority
and Minority Members and in order of arrival for those who
joined us after the hearing convened. You will be recognized
for 5 minutes each in order to allow us to get to as many
questions as possible.
I would like to recognize myself for 5 minutes.
Specialty crops require tailored research, from pest and
disease management, to post-harvest handling and mechanization
technology. To any of our witnesses, how effective have Federal
research programs, like the Specialty Crop Research Initiative
or the IR-4 Project, been in addressing these unique industry
needs, and where do you see opportunities for additional
investment or collaboration?
Dr. Boring. Well, I can share the Michigan perspective,
too, of just how important the Specialty Crop Block Grant
funding has been. Our industry really bands together in the
allocation of this funding. We have a pretty rigorous process
for how applications come in, of how we are advancing any
number of various challenges to the industry, whether it is
emerging pest pressure, the shift of some of the changing
weather patterns we see, the ability to work on market access
in various areas. So, those continued investments, in a
predictable way, in a way that fosters that continued
collaboration for the betterment of our broad industry is going
to continue to be really important for us, of making sure we
are elevating up the stature of all specialty crops as kind of
a rising tide narrative within our state.
The Chairman. Thank you, Dr. Boring. Any other witnesses
care to comment on that question?
Mr. Frantz. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the question.
I can speak to IR-4, which is a fabulous public-private
partnership that really puts a good use of money to help fund
crop protection tools that would otherwise not be put in motion
by commercial producers because there is not enough crop demand
for it. On my farm, we measure the space where we put our crops
in square feet, not in acres, and so there is not much
incentive for the chemical manufacturers to invest in crop
protection tools for crops that have such a small amount of
need. So, we are very grateful for the funding, and we put it
to good use. Thank you.
The Chairman. Very good. Either of the two remaining
witnesses care to comment on that? No? Okay.
Dr. Sagili. Yes. As a researcher, I can talk a little bit
perspective on that. I am glad that I see some language in the
SCRI RFPs recently that they are going to address some labor
issues and promote some of those research programs that might
benefit mechanization so that labor costs can be dealt with.
So, I am glad I see some language in the SCRI now.
The Chairman. Very good. Thank you very much. Well, Mr.
Frantz, as a specialty crop producer in California, you are
operating in a sector that not only drives significant economic
activity, but also faces unique regulatory challenges. Can you
share with us today how Federal policies and regulations impact
your operation and what should we be considering to support the
long-term viability of your operation?
Mr. Frantz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. California is a
wonderful state, but there are a lot of regulatory challenges,
so thank you for asking the question that way. I would give you
a three-part answer. The first is, we urgently need a
bipartisan legal ag labor workforce solution. We need it now,
and we need it for the future. It is a critical component, not
only of agriculture, but of the whole country, so I would ask
this Committee in your other capacities, too, to please focus
on getting that done. The second is price stability. I think we
are going to talk about tariffs quite a bit today. Our business
hasn't been materially affected by tariffs yet, but the
uncertainty around them has already increased our costing,
which has forced us to increase our prices, so we need price
stability. And the third is we need to pass the farm bill. You
have heard already from the four of us the essential provisions
that are in it, and having that foundational backstop is
critically important for us in California. Thank you.
The Chairman. Well, thank you so much, and I yield back the
balance of my time and recognize the gentlelady, Ranking Member
from Minnesota, Ranking Member Craig for 5 minutes.
Ms. Craig. Well, thank you once again to each of our
witnesses who have taken time out of your busy schedules to be
with us here today.
Director Boring, your testimony shows the high level of
success the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural
Development has had in implementing the Specialty Crop Block
Grants in Minnesota. The Minnesota Department of Agriculture
has let me know that while they usually receive USDA's request
for applications for the program in January, this year's RFA
was delayed until, I believe, May. Was this delay experienced
across all departments of agriculture?
Dr. Boring. Well, I can share the--thanks for the question.
I can share the perspective from Michigan that we experienced
similar delays. Normally, we start a lot of the work for
allocation of Specialty Crop Block Grant funding in December,
and this year, we obviously had quite a few delays. I would say
the timeliness and the predictability of these efforts
continues to be really important. We have a pretty rigorous
process for how we are going around and allocating funding. We
have 300 commodities in Michigan. There is a lot of demand for
these products and projects, so those kind of delays and
uncertainty about when and if the funding comes through do have
consequences on our ability to carry out meaningful research
projects.
Ms. Craig. Can you say just a little bit more about how the
timing of those block grant programs should better align with
the growing seasons for specialty crops? How do you think about
that?
Dr. Boring. Well, certainly. I mean, we are obviously
growing crops here that have a predictable growing season, and
so researchers need some time to be planning ahead and
implementing research projects in the field. So, when we have
these delays stretching into May, obviously we are coming into
the growing season for a lot of these crops, and researchers
have set challenges then implementing some of these research
projects in the field and the timelines by which we are
traditionally accustomed to operating.
Ms. Craig. Thank you. I know agriculture research is
absolutely necessary to protect American ag from pests,
diseases, and other threats to crop health and productivity. In
addition to protecting our harvest, ag research has ushered in
new technology and innovations that have helped improve crop
characteristics and even breed industry-changing varieties,
like the Honeycrisp apple that was developed at the University
of Minnesota and that we enjoy so much in my family. I am
pleased to have a researcher here today who is leading a
Specialty Crop Research Initiative project on pollinator health
and crop production. So, Dr. Sagili, can you tell us about your
experience working with a multi-state and multidisciplinary
team on your SCRI project, and how does that collaborative
environment help us better address challenges to specialty crop
production and advance innovation?
Dr. Sagili. Thank you, Congresswoman Craig. So, I have been
fortunate to have an SCRI grant to address some of the
pollinator health issues in intersection with the crop
production or specialty crops as well, so my experience has
been both rewarding and challenging as well. And the way I say
challenging is to deal with multiple institutes to collaborate,
but it has been very rewarding because you can't do--most of
these agricultural problems, especially with specialty crop
production, they are multifaceted. So, you need a--really, a
credible team that is--for example, in our case, I will just
give my example here. So, with--there is a disease that we are
dealing with. It is called European foulbrood disease in
honeybees, and it is impacting not only honeybee colonies, but
because of that decline in colony health, it indirectly impacts
the pollination of specialty crops, like blueberries, almonds,
anything that you can think of. So, what we did is we designed
a--or formulated a very strategic transdisciplinary team.
Because I am a honeybee biologist, I can only do one thing
at a time, but I need a microbiologist on the team and ag
economist to look for cost economics. I need an extension
person to do extension. I need a genomics person to do genomics
work and need a microbiologist as well. So, that is how we
created this interdisciplinary team, and that is why I am
really fortunate that this is really going well, and I am
really glad that we got the SCRI grant to tackle it and not
only--the transdisciplinary team. We are also looking at multi-
state, so this is involving California, Mississippi,
Washington, and Oregon as well because they all grow specialty
crops, and most of them are involving honeybee pollination as
well.
Ms. Craig. Thank you so much.
Dr. Sagili. So, it has been a rewarding experience, yes.
Ms. Craig. Thank you. Last question quickly, Mr. Frantz.
Can you give me any suggestions you have for this Committee on
how crop insurance can be improved for specialty crop products?
Mr. Frantz. Yes. Thank you, Congresswoman, for the
question. I do have a lot of thoughts about ways to improve
crop insurance for specialty crops. There are a few programs
out there, but in my case, because of the extreme diversity of
crops on our farm, none of them work. And so, I would be happy
to give you a much more detail, or I can go now, but,
basically, the catastrophic insurance programs that are out
there require a minimum of 50 percent damage to pay for claims.
In our case, we have so many crops that are immune from that
particular hazard, we never hit the threshold. So, we could
have a crippling frost that, say, would take out \1/3\ of our
nursery, all of our citrus, but it wouldn't affect the frost-
hardy plants, and so I am not eligible to receive payment.
Ms. Craig. Mr. Frantz, thank you for that, and my time is
up and over, so I will yield back and I am sure someone else
will ask you more about that. Thank you.
The Chairman. I thank the gentlelady. I now recognize the
gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Austin Scott, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and
as we are sitting here talking about insurance and other
things, I am reminded of 2008 when the FDA blamed a Salmonella
outbreak on U.S.-grown tomatoes when it ended up being peppers
coming in from Mexico and the bankruptcies that ensued in my
area from a mistake that the FDA made, and then the courts
deemed that FDA had no liability for that mistake, even though
it resulted in not just the loss of millions of dollars, but
the loss of farms that had been in families for generations.
And so, we need to keep that in mind, that FDA not getting
their facts straight before they make a decision like that and
publicize something can lead to widespread disruptions in our
agricultural markets, and I am also reminded of just how vital
the role of our land grant institutions is.
Mrs. Brennan, you have a big operation in south Georgia. I
have been there. It has been a couple of years. It is a great
operation using a lot of new technology with regard to weed
control. Would you mind just giving a brief explanation of what
you are doing for weed control there that is just very
different from what we have seen on other farms where you are
targeting the actual specific individual weed?
Mrs. Brennan. Yes. Thank you for the question, Congressman.
We employ varying technologies across our operation, whether it
is in your district in south Georgia and northern Florida, that
area. We are focused heavily on always looking to the next best
thing. The cost in organics and in any specialty crop industry
is always the highest cost is going to be labor, and so we have
been employing a number of technologies to look at how we can
target weeds when the crop is at its youngest. I think we are
still working through that now. It is a really neat process,
and we would invite you to come down if you haven't already
seen it to take a look, but it is a good example of that,
absolutely.
Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. Sure.
Just for my colleagues, it is actually a piece of machinery
that, through an optical image, as I understand it, determines
where to actually send a laser, which just destroys the weed by
heat, and instead of spraying chemicals on a crop, you are you
are doing that.
Mrs. Brennan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. Where is that machinery
manufactured? Do you know?
Mrs. Brennan. I don't have that off the top of my head, but
I am happy to get you that information later.
Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. Okay.
Well, there is one--look, I am very concerned about the
tariffs on ag machinery that is being brought into the United
States, and that is something that I think we need to revisit.
Machinery that is being brought into the United States that we
use in crop production should not be tariffed. It is putting
Americans to work, it is putting groceries on our table, and I
am very concerned about that.
Today, in Georgia, specialty crop growers in my state are
meeting, actually, in my hometown of Tifton, Georgia. They are
discussing H-2A and the ag labor issues. I want to give each of
you the opportunity over the next 2 minutes to speak to what
you see as keys to successful policy in the ag labor reform
legislation in this Congress and the H-2A program, and again,
Mrs. Brennan, I will start with you. If you could keep it to
about 30 seconds, and then we will just move down the table.
Mrs. Brennan. Yes, absolutely. I mean, we have been on
record as supporting the Farm Workforce Modernization Act of
2023 (H.R. 4319) in the last Congress. We appreciate that
bipartisan work. I think there are a number of things we could
do to reform the program, H-2A specifically, whether it is a
cap on AEWR and a number of other flexibility issues. I would
welcome a further conversation that. I know all of us rely very
heavily on that change.
Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. Okay. Dr. Boring?
Dr. Boring. Well, certainly those ag labor issues are of
top concern in Michigan as well. I would say again that the
collaboration of trying to work on these multi-component issues
is really significant to us in Michigan, recognizing the value
that ag labor continues to provide. I think, certainly, those
multifaceted investments in automation are a piece to this, but
it is going to take some real digging down to get at what some
of these labor issues are in states like Michigan.
Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. All right. Dr. Sagili, the
pollinator expert.
Dr. Sagili. Thank you, Congressman. So, I can just give a
pollinator expert opinion here. So, I work very closely with
our stakeholders, both beekeepers and farmers, and I know labor
is really critical, and many of our beekeepers depend on H-2A
for getting their labor, so I think it is a really important
program. And, just as a researcher, I would emphasize that that
would be definitely helpful for our stakeholders.
Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. Okay. I am down to about 20
seconds. Mr. Frantz, I will get your comments for the record,
but one of the things I am very concerned about is how the wage
rate has been set. Especially, for my state and the State of
Georgia, it has gone up exponentially over the last several
years. I don't know who was filling out the surveys, but I am
yet to find a farmer, and I know a lot of farmers that was
actually asked to fill out a survey on the wage rate, and yet
they continue to go up on the wages somewhere in the range of
20 percent a year, making it very difficult for our family farm
operations. With that, I yield back. Thank you.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize
Mr. David Scott from the State of Georgia.
Mr. David Scott of Georgia. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. In Georgia, my farmers definitely know the importance
of accessing new markets. In my district alone, 95 percent of
our farms are family owned, and nearly half of all producers
are new or beginning farmers, and they understand how critical
finding new buyers can be in order to stay competitive. But I
tell you, this ongoing trade war is directly threatening their
access to new and existing markets, and, Mrs. Brennan, that is
the gist of my concern. And I strongly believe that we here in
Congress must take steps to ensure that our specialty crop
producers remain competitive both domestically and
internationally. And in your testimony, you highlighted how
programs, like Market Access Program, the Marketing Assistance
for Specialty Crops, and Agriculture and Food Research
Initiative, help in producers competing globally.
Please excuse my cold here, but here is the question. How
is the current market volatility compounding existing barriers
to entry that prevent our producers from participating in these
programs?
Mrs. Brennan. Thank you, Congressman. I appreciate the
question. I would add that, in addition to those headwinds, we
already have other headwinds, right? We have pest pressure, we
have weather, we have other volatile activities that affect our
farms, so I would say anything that Congress could do to
stabilize that would be greatly appreciated. Anything that
Congress could do to invest further in specialty crop market
access programs would be greatly welcomed by any number of us
at this table and the growers that we are representing. So, I
appreciate that sentiment, and I would agree with you.
Mr. David Scott of Georgia. Well, we got a number of
Congresspeople here. Let me ask you this question because we
got the answer to this one. Would an increase in funding allow
USDA to help more producers access new markets?
Mrs. Brennan. I feel like that might be a trick question.
[Laughter.]
Mrs. Brennan. Yes, of course, increased funding would be a
huge help. I think ensuring that that goes to specialty crops
would be--something that would be even more of importance in
making sure that specialty crop definition is protected at USDA
so that the programs in need are getting that funding.
Mr. David Scott of Georgia. Well, I agree with you that the
Federal Government can find new ways to partner directly with
specialty group producers to increase that new market
opportunities. For example, in my own district and Gwinnett
County Public Schools, that is located in my district, they
successfully partnered with Georgia blueberry producers to
incorporate more blueberries into their high school and
elementary school menus, simple things like that. So, Mrs.
Brennan, how can domestic promotion drive consumer demand, grow
business for our producers, and are there unique barriers to
domestic markets compared to international markets?
Mrs. Brennan. Well, as you are aware, the cost of doing
business in the U.S., the regulatory barriers, makes the cost
of producing our product more expensive. I think you hit on
something that is really important, which is that domestic
consumption and driving that consumption, which starts at home,
it starts at schools. And so, to the extent that we can invest
in those nutrition programs that start young so those young
people are getting introduced to the commodities that we grow
and are able to have access to that fruit and vegetable, will
inevitably lead to a consumer down the road--who knows what
they are buying--is looking for it at the store, and is
supporting our programs.
Mr. David Scott of Georgia. And let me ask you this. Should
our Agriculture Committee consider incentivizing and expanding
public-private partnerships, like those between specialty crop
producers and school districts, in the next farm bill?
Mrs. Brennan. Yes, absolutely, sir. I would agree with
that.
Mr. David Scott of Georgia. Thank you very much.
Mrs. Brennan. Thank you.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize
the gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Lucas, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Lucas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our
witnesses for testifying today.
Dr. Boring, your testimony touches on this, but why is it
important that states have flexibility in setting their
priorities under the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program?
Dr. Boring. Well, I appreciate that question. I think that
is a really strong point here of the states' abilities to set
those priorities and really knowing that we have challenges
that really cut across numerous commodities in Michigan. Some
of our pest pressures are going to be felt by various orchard
crops or vegetable crops. The ability to respond quickly and to
shift to these emerging issues, whether that is market access
in some ways, but a lot of our emerging pest pressures, we
really count on industry partnership to do that, and that
flexibility moving forward is going to be really critical to
continued success.
Mr. Lucas. Continuing with you, Dr. Boring, before the 2014
Farm Bill, states couldn't collaborate on multi-state projects
under the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program. Why is this
ability to work together, especially on pests and disease
management, so valuable today?
Dr. Boring. Well, really, that leveraging the university
researchers from one institution to the next is really
critical. We share a lot of growing condition challenges across
the Upper Midwest, for instance, right? Many of the issues we
are going to see in specialty crop production in Michigan are
also going to be shared in New York and Minnesota and
Wisconsin. The ability to work on those kinds of issues on a
regional basis really strengthens the capacity for what the
solutions are on the back-end.
Mr. Lucas. Mrs. Brennan, your testimony highlights the need
to help families eat more fruits and vegetables through
programs like SNAP. In Oklahoma, we have a program called
Double Up Oklahoma that matches every SNAP dollar spent on
locally-grown fruits and vegetables. From your perspective, why
is it beneficial to invest in local initiatives like this
alongside broader efforts that expand market access?
Mrs. Brennan. Thank you for the question, Congressman. We
are very supportive of those double up bucks-type programs.
IFPA has been very supportive of that around the U.S. where it
is available. I think local control is always something we
should look at because the success of the program is really,
right, boots-on-the-ground. I think we certainly aren't in the
business of talking or advocating for eligibility, but to the
extent that we can bring fresh fruits and vegetables directly
to those children, it is all about health, and that is a huge
success.
Mr. Lucas. Absolutely. Mr. Chairman, with that, I yield
back the balance of my time.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize
the gentlelady from North Carolina, Ms. Adams, for 5 minutes.
Ms. Adams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our
witnesses for being here today.
Mrs. Brennan, you called on Congress to incentivize produce
consumption in both SNAP and WIC. Given the recent $186 million
cut to SNAP in the Republican's One Big Ugly Bill, what impact
will these cuts have on produce consumption and, consequently,
specialty crop producers, or should we expect Americans to
purchase fewer fresh fruits and vegetables, and how can
Congress attempt to prevent this impending harm to American
producers and consumers?
Mrs. Brennan. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman. I
think we are certainly not going to take position something
that dictates eligibility. However, I would say we are
supportive and have been supportive of anything that increases
consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables, whether it is in
schools or any program under the Federal Government. I am happy
to look at and work with the trade association to get you
numbers as related to your question of what this means on the
ground and circle back with you directly.
Ms. Adams. Thank you. Thank you.
Ms. Adams. A Trump Administration goal is to make America
healthy again, but the Republicans' One Big Ugly Bill
eliminated the SNAP-Ed Program. That is an initiative that
provides a nutrition education and promotes healthy, active
lifestyles to individuals and families eligible for SNAP
benefits. So, what are the potential consequences of
eliminating this program for American families, and how might
it impact specialty crop producers who rely on increased
demands for fruits and vegetables? Yes, ma'am.
Mrs. Brennan. So, I would say long before there was a
movement, the specialty crop producers have been supportive of
health by way of fresh fruits and vegetables. I think we are
going to continue to support things like the Fresh Fruit and
Vegetable Program because that benefits the recipients and the
growers who sell into those programs. So, we will continue to
support those programs as they stand and happy to serve as a
resource for the Committee or the Administration for further
information.
Ms. Adams. Thank you. My last question will be for
everyone, if they can briefly respond. Let me say, first of
all, that specialty crop exports totaled $24.6 billion in
Fiscal Year 2023, providing essential income to U.S. farmers.
The Trump Administration's haphazard imposition of tariffs on
our nation's biggest trade partners have had a detrimental
impact on many industries, including agriculture. And to all of
you, with such a large amount of income tied to the export of
specialty crops, what impact do you foresee that the tariffs
will be having on farm income for specialty crop growers? If
each of you can respond quickly.
Dr. Boring. I can certainly say, from Michigan, we expect
negative ramifications to this in the short-term. We are also
concerned about the long-term stability of markets, right? Our
Michigan specialty crop industry is built on a multifaceted
demand outlet, both domestic and international fresh market
processing. It takes all of those things working in concert
together to have a vibrant industry for our state. The
continued access into international markets is really going to
be critical for our ongoing success.
Ms. Adams. Okay. Thank you, sir. Yes, sir?
Mr. Frantz. Congresswoman, thank you for your question. My
nursery does not ship internationally, but my brother and I do
farm almonds, which is a powerhouse California crop. And in
that market--that crop, it is primarily an export market, and
so in that regard, we support trade agreements that support the
free and fair trade and export of almonds.
Ms. Adams. Okay. Yes, sir.
Dr. Sagili. Congresswoman, I am a researcher, so I
probably--I don't have much opinion on that, but I can convey
my stakeholders' opinion, for sure. So, they are concerned
about some of these issues, but, again, as a researcher, I
don't think I have much information to convey at this point.
Ms. Adams. Okay. Thank you very much. Yes, go ahead.
Mrs. Brennan. I would just add quickly, I think it is the
lack of the unknown, right, which is going to affect the
markets greatly, so I think that is what we are focused on.
Ms. Adams. Okay. Thank you very much. Dr. Boring, North
Carolina and Michigan are not as uncommon as one might imagine.
According to the Census of Agriculture and the Local Food
Marketing Survey, North Carolina and Michigan ranked top ten in
number of operations producing specialty crops and number of
operations. It means then that our states are producing a lot
of nutritious foods that can readily feed our communities, and
North Carolina has done a pretty impressive job implementing
former USDA investments, such as Local Food Purchase Assistance
Programs and the Resilient Food System Infrastructure Grant
programs. So, can you tell me just a little bit about
Michigan's implementation of these programs?
Dr. Boring. We followed, right along with North Carolina,
in implementation of a lot of these. Those kinds of programs
are in demand for the food and the product we grow here in
Michigan. So, continued support of that is really in the long-
term best interest to Michigan and North Carolina.
Ms. Adams. So, I am out of time, and if you could send that
to us in writing, I would appreciate it.
Ms. Adams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
The Chairman. I thank the gentlelady. I now recognize the
gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Rouzer, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Rouzer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to follow
up on what my colleague, Austin Scott, his last couple
questions that he had for the panel.
And first, Mr. Chairman, I want to enter into the record
research conducted by the North Carolina Chamber, North
Carolina Farm Bureau, and other partners regarding the H-2A
program's broken Adverse Effect Wage Rate methodology. The
title of the report is, A Broken Baseline: The Flawed Economics
Behind AEWR Calculations, by Dr. Blake Brown. Dr. Blake Brown,
I know Alma knows him quite well.
The Chairman. Yes. Without objection.
[The report is located on p. 89.]
Mr. Rouzer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Blake Brown was a
longtime ag economist at NC State University, and his research
focused on the current AEWR methodology, which is totally
disconnected from real wage trends or inflation, and how it--
pardon me--has hurt the American farmer and the American
consumer and led to fewer jobs, and I mean all farm jobs. I am
not talking about owned-farm jobs. All farm jobs. When
comparing an alternative model where the AEWR grows in line
with the Employee Cost Index--the ECI--the findings are very
plain. We would have 518 million pounds and 823 million pounds,
respectively, in additional domestic fruit and vegetable
output. We would have an additional $1.73 billion in total
economic impact with 25,744 jobs created over that period of
time, 290 million pounds in reduced fruit imports, and 470
million pounds in fewer vegetable imports.
So, the bottom line of all this is the AEWR is so
artificially high, it has led to increased imports. It has led
to fewer jobs, all farm jobs. It has led to higher prices for
consumers, and smaller farmers, they can't make the numbers
work, so they hang it up. And how many times in this Committee
have I heard so many people talk about the plight of the small
farmer and how we need to protect the small farmer? That
Adverse Effect Wage Rate set so artificially high is running
people out of business. It is affecting the American consumer,
increase in imports, and all the rest of it. So, I encourage
everybody to take a look at this report, which is why I
submitted it for the record. We have to address this so that
American growers can deliver affordable, domestic healthy foods
to the American consumer. That is the bottom line. And so, I
was pleased to see recent action by the Department of Labor to
revise the current methodology following the Federal injunction
in Louisiana, and I encourage Secretary Chavez-DeRemer to
continue engaging with the agriculture industry to get this
right for the future of the entire agriculture economy, and I
know that she will.
Switching gears, Mr. Frantz, your testimony outlines the
struggle your industry has finding effective insurance for the
large variety of plants and different growing cycles you have
in horticulture. In North Carolina, we personally experienced
losses in the mountains at nurseries and Christmas tree farms,
which have not previously carried insurance because, quite
frankly, the region has never experienced such dramatic weather
as with Hurricane Helene. I think the struggles that our
growers experienced, coupled with dramatic losses from natural
disasters we have seen across the country, underscore the need
for some type of standing assistance for growers outside of
crop insurance. Can you speak to how ad hoc assistance supports
horticulture and specialty crop growers who have struggled to
find the right insurance tools?
Mr. Frantz. I can. I can and just--well, thank you for the
question, first of all. I want to acknowledge your comment
about the H-2A increases. I am not an H-2A user, but I sat next
to a gentleman last night at dinner, a large grower from Ohio,
and he shared with me that his adverse wage has changed by 47
percent since 2019, so, Congressman Scott, to your point
earlier. So, it is real, and those wage increases in the
horticultural world where labor is such a significant
component, generally in excess of 30 percent of our direct
inputs, translate into real-world inflation for our products.
To your question, Congressman, I have sort of introduced my
comments as saying that the current status of specialty crop
insurance isn't working. There is a NAP program that is for the
noninsured folks like myself, who maybe went into a situation
like you are discussing where you don't have insurance. The
problem with that program is that the limits are very easily
exceeded. The AGI limits are low, and the maximum payment that
can go out is just a little over $100,000, and so unless you
are a very small farmer, it really doesn't apply. And so, in my
experience, there really isn't yet a program that has the
specificity to be very helpful to us growers. Thank you.
Mr. Rouzer. My time has expired. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank the gentleman. I now recognize the
gentlelady from Ohio, Ms. Brown, for 5 minutes.
Ms. Brown. Thank you, Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member
Craig.
The importance of specialty crops in this country cannot be
understated. These are the foods that families across the
country eat every day: fruits, vegetables, and nuts that fill
the shelves of our grocery stores, stock our farmers' markets,
and end up on lunch trays in school cafeterias and dinner
tables every night. In Ohio, specialty crops are one of the
major backbones of our agriculture sector, ranging from
cucumbers and pumpkins to apples and grapes. These products can
be found in every corner of the state, keeping family farms
running, strengthening local supply chains, and benefiting
rural and urban communities alike. We here on the Agriculture
Committee know just how tough things are in farm country right
now, not only for the commodity crop growers, but also for
specialty crop producers. Rising input costs, new pest and
diseases, extreme weather, and uncertainty around tariff policy
and the farm bill have left our producers in uncharted
territory.
Just last week, I sat down with farmers from Ohio, and one
sixth-generation grower told me something that I haven't heard
since I joined the Agriculture Committee. He said that for the
first time, he wasn't sure if he wanted to pass his farm on to
his children simply because of the uncertainty and economic
burden they would be facing. That kind of uncertainty should
set alarm bells off for all of us because if multigenerational
family farmers are questioning whether there is a future in
farming, then it is time for Congress to take a hard look at
what more we can do to give them stability and a fighting
chance.
So, Dr. Boring, in your testimony, you mentioned that
programs, like the Specialty Crop Block Grant and the Specialty
Crop Research Initiative, have been lifelines for growers,
especially when specialty crop growers have historically not
been able to access traditional farm safety net programs. Dr.
Boring, can you talk about what kinds of new Federal support
programs would most directly help specialty crop farmers, like
those in Michigan, Ohio, and across the country?
Dr. Boring. Well, certainly, and I appreciate the question.
That sentiment around the concern that Ohio growers are having
about the future viability of operations, I can share that that
is being seen in Michigan as well. There has been a lot of work
standing up crop insurance and safety net programs for a lot of
commodity crops. As was previously noted earlier here, that
there are significant challenges around how you do that within
a specialty crop sphere when there is a lot more variability
and there are a lot of complicating factors. Without going into
a lot of detail about specific provisions, I would just say
that the ability to be able to have those kinds of safety net
programs that provide some certainty long-term for these crops,
especially in permanent crops when there has got to be an
additional planning and thought processing around what the
future of these crops look like, that kind of work is going to
be really critical to providing more certainty and keeping more
farmers on farms moving forward.
Ms. Brown. Thank you, and, Dr. Boring, I was really
interested to hear about the work that is coming out of
Michigan's Regenerative Agriculture Program and the way it is
helping farmers improve soil health, profitability, and
resilience. In Ohio, many of our farmers are already using
conservation practices, like cover crops and crop rotation. Can
you share what specific results you have seen from this program
and whether you think it could be scaled up into a model for
Federal policy to support specialty crop producers nationwide?
Dr. Boring. Absolutely. Let me talk about two provisions
and real focus areas for this. First and foremost, our efforts
in regen ag are going to be about building additional
profitability for growers, certainly how you control input cost
to some extent, but even more importantly, about how you might
capture premiums for crops that are grown when we have a
variety of outcomes that are environmentally and economically
advantageous that are aligned with consumer preferences and
desirability. The other aspect I would say is how we build
resiliency into our cropping systems. So, when we talk about
the challenges within crop insurance and mitigating from some
of these weather challenges, we know investments in soil health
build resiliency in soils. It becomes a longer-term approach
then of how we are adding in additional risk mitigation steps
and giving farmers tools to improve resilience in their
operations so that it is not simply a reliance on crop
insurance alone.
Ms. Brown. Thank you so much and just want to say thank you
to all of our witnesses for being here today. Specialty crops
are so important and it is not easy work, so thank you all for
your commitment to feeding this country, and with that, Mr.
Chairman, I yield back
The Chairman. The gentlelady yields back. I now recognize
the gentleman from Mississippi, Mr. Kelly, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Mrs. Brennan, I had
a question for you, but I don't need it answered, but I want to
get it on the record. One of the biggest challenges growers
face is labor with the Department of Labor's Adverse Effect
Wage Rate causing labor costs to skyrocket. This is really
impacting specialty growers in Mississippi, our sweet potato
growers and those folks, and you have already affirmed that,
but this is one of the most significant impacts on our small
farmers is the ability to pay a wage that is unfair right now
because of a rule that doesn't make sense. So, I hope our
Secretary will address that.
To our witnesses, research institutions, like Mississippi
State University, are developing new sweet potato varieties,
including purple varieties popular in Asia. Why is it important
that Congress continues supporting breeding and research
programs that can lead to higher value crops and new consumer
markets?
Dr. Boring. I will touch on a state like Michigan that has
seen a lot of success in these public breeding programs, right?
Whether it is dry beans, it is wheat, it is a lot of our
horticulture crops, the investments in public breeding programs
like that are essential to keep moving this work ahead. It is
true for Michigan growers, but you look at some of our work at
Michigan State University in dry beans, potatoes, those are
efforts that have international focus as well. That investment
of public breeding is absolutely essential to keeping specialty
crops going.
Mr. Kelly. Thank you for your answer on that, and I like--I
am--I am glad that I don't have an accent like you. I have a
good, neutral accent.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Kelly. I want to ask about how will doubling the Market
Access Program and Foreign Market Development signed into law
on July 4 impact specialty crops, for any of you?
Mrs. Brennan. Congressman, I would just say that anything
that adds to our competitiveness both globally and
domestically, we would appreciate.
Mr. Kelly. And then final question, when it comes to
creating new domestic markets, how can nutrition programs--
GusNIP and the Fresh Fruit and Vegetables Program--be used more
effectively to increase sweet potato consumption and other
specialty crop, especially among children?
Dr. Boring. I would say--I am proud to represent a Midwest
accent here, too, by the way. The continued investment in
locally-grown specialty crops into communities is a really big
piece of how we provide more economic opportunities in places
that have been left behind in a lot of ways, increase quality
of life, livability of rural places. And too many places in
Michigan--I am sure it is true in a lot of your districts--
people are moving away from rural areas because they don't see
opportunities, or there isn't high enough quality of life. It
is an area we are really working in Michigan to build
opportunities for farmers to invest, farmers of all kinds,
farmers to diversify, new farmers to get into spaces. It is
having local grocery access. It is about having high-quality
food in schools, hospitals, institutions. That is a real source
of investment and a positive area where we can continue to grow
agriculture and have that work of agriculture seen as more
broadly impacting rural and urban areas alike.
Mr. Kelly. I thank the witnesses, and thank you for being
here today and testifying. It is so important that we continue
to do things that make our farmers stronger, especially our
rural and smaller farmers. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield
back,
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back, I thank him, and
now recognize the gentlelady from Hawaii, Ms. Tokuda, for 5
minutes.
Ms. Tokuda. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Nearly every crop that
we grow in Hawaii is considered a specialty crop, but for us,
these are staple crops, from canoe crops like ulu and kalo or
mai`a--mai`a is banana, ulu is breadfruit, kalo is taro--or to
Asian specialty crops like wong bok, daikon, lychee. These are
the foods that we eat every day. Specialty crop producers are
literally the backbone of our local food system in an island-
state that imports nearly 90 percent of what we eat, and if we
are to meet our goals of trying to decrease our dependency on
imported food, specialty crops are a major part of that answer.
But these crops and growers face challenges, as you can
imagine, magnified by our unique geography. We have some of the
highest shipping costs in the country. We have exposure to
hurricanes, tropical storms, drought, wildfire. We have an
overrun of ungulates, quite frankly, that are literally stuck
on an island to breed and destroy crops, and lands. Volcanic
eruptions and lava and invasive species, like coffee rhinoceros
beetle, coconut coffee bear boar, and the rose-ringed parakeet,
that can literally devastate and take out a crop on acres
overnight.
And so, for us, programs like the Regional Food Business
Centers, that was $400 million, Local Food for Schools Program
and Local Food Purchasing Assistance, which was $1 billion,
they had been vital in strengthening our local food systems
but, as you know, cut and eliminated by the Trump
Administration. These played a key role in connecting
producers, processors, and buyers with regional markets, and,
as you can imagine, providing the much-needed technical support
and infrastructure to be able to support our specialty
producers.
The question I have, Dr. Boring, or for anyone who wants to
answer, is can the--it has been said by USDA that the Specialty
Crop Block Grant can take the place of what the RFBC was to
many different people. I do not believe that it can fill the
gap. Do you think that the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program
can realistically replace the coordination, technical
assistance, and capacity building support loss by the RFBCs,
and is this program designed to support comprehensive regional
food security, or does it have limitations that leave key food
business development needs unmet?
Dr. Boring. I appreciate the question there of the
importance of those programs, and it has really been an area
that we have seen investment on the state level of our Farm to
Family Program, of the genesis of complementary efforts to some
of these federally-funded aspects. We do have quite a bit of
flexibility of how we deploy Specialty Crop Block Grant
funding. The majority of that does go to pest pressures and the
advancement of new technologies. We do a little bit of
marketing access and new market development within that kind of
work, but they tend to be very project focused instead of those
investments in collaboration and building an ecosystem for
success of these kinds of programs. So, those investments into
local foods, the systems by which to facilitate this work
coming together are going to remain very critical. And as we
talk about these shared interests of advancing local foods,
local quality of life, economic opportunities for farms, having
those kinds of systems by which to facilitate market access and
how products move are going to be really important to achieve
those objectives.
Ms. Tokuda. I agree with you that it really seems like that
market access, that technical assistance that farmers,
especially small farmers, micro farmers, I would argue even,
that they rely on, that is going to fall through the cracks
with this. And so, given this is still the universe that we are
dealing with, what thoughts do you have, especially in the area
of research and looking at invasive species and disease, which
is a huge threat and can literally take out a specialty crop
you know, overnight, if you really think about that. What are
any one of your thoughts in terms of how USDA needs to better
coordinate SCBGs, perhaps APHIS funding, maybe even SCRI? They
tend to be siloed, but at this point, we don't have time or
room for error. We literally have funds being taken away when
you think about it for technical application. But what more do
you think we need to do to actually take down the silos and
more, perhaps integrate some of the things APHIS and pest
disease funds are discovering and incorporating that with how
it is executed with specialty crop development grants and other
funds, perhaps?
Dr. Boring. Success and emergency response, whether an
invasive species, whether that is in an animal disease, whether
it is in new and emerging threats, the investments and
coordination are really critical. So, Michigan is the state
that was on the spearhead of HBII a year ago, really
underscored these needs into how we coordinate efforts across
multi-agencies, multi-jurisdictions to have those kinds of
responses. So, invasive species that kind of work to protect
our--these really critical cropping industries, absolutely
essential.
Ms. Tokuda. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will add in
another question later about staffing. I will add that I am
very concerned with the staff reductions we are seeing in all
these levels: NIFA, 18 percent reduction in staff. This is
going to make that coordination more difficult. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. I yield back.
The Chairman. I thank the gentlelady. I now recognize the
gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Bost, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Bost. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you all
for being here today.
The USDA administers specialty crop programs, over \1/4\
million producers, including many in my district. southern
Illinois is one of the most diverse ag districts in the
country, with vineyards, orchards, rice, many other specialty
crops, peaches. I was happy to see the number of previous
provisions included in the Working Families Tax Cut, especially
to promote research and trade for specialty crops and expand
our commercial export markets. Mrs. Brennan, can you speak to
the importance of keeping specialty crops competitive in the
market, and how do you see the specialty crop export market
expanding through the Supplemental Agricultural Trade Promotion
Program?
Mrs. Brennan. I would say that any support we can give a
specialty crop for competitiveness anywhere is going to be much
appreciated by the industry overall. I would be glad to get you
additional information from IFPA to your to office and your
staff on some of the other program questions you had.
Mr. Bost. Thank you.
As a few of you noted in your testimonies, H.R. 1 provided
a significant increase in funding for Specialty Crop Research
Initiative. Dr. Boring, in 2023, the Illinois Agriculture
Research received $3.53 million from the Specialty Crop
Research Initiative to develop the automation of harvesting for
apples and specialty crop producers. As you know, labor costs
are a substantial expense for specialty crops production. Could
you explain how the Specialty Crop Research Initiative help
producers stay ahead of the next disease or pest threat, and
how the increased funding for the initiatives from H.R. 1 will
make an impact on labor cost?
Dr. Boring. Well, absolutely you hit on both the
mechanization piece of why those kinds of technological
investments are really critical, and the continued funding and
certainty of what entomology/pathology investments at research
institutions, like Michigan State, are so critical, even across
these multi-regional efforts here. That kind of certainty of
how we long-term fund research programs is really critical to
having long-term consistency. A lot of these are not overnight
solutions. Certainly, investments in technology take a long
time to come to fruition. A lot of this work around a varietal
development, of how we are deploying IPM practices to respond
to pest/disease issues, those are long-term investments here.
So, the stability, the continued investment to ramp up and have
critical mass of those research programs is really critical to
achieving success.
Mr. Bost. So, for--getting this on the record is vitally
important to me. During our August work period, I went out and
visited with a lot of my specialty crop growers. They grow
apples, they grow peaches, and one thing that was brought up
that I think it is vitally important as we are--we talk trade
and the concern that we have with tariffs and everything like
that, the concern each one of them had was they wanted us to
take notice that with the peaches and with the apples, it isn't
that they are competing against the neighbor, or the person the
county over, or even Georgia with their peaches, but the
foreign markets that come in that produce at such a cheaper
price than they possibly can. Would any of you care to comment
on that, on where we are at, and because I don't think people
understand that.
Dr. Boring. I will bring up two points, really, about our
apple market in Michigan. Our growers depend on Pacific
Northwest exports to be able to have ample domestic consumption
capacity for Michigan and kind of Upper Midwest apples. So,
while Michigan apples specifically are not exported a lot, we
have a vested interest in seeing that kind of exports from
across the country. I will say, too, for crops like asparagus,
cherries, blueberries, imports coming in really do threaten our
industry and really are providing a cap then on what the future
possibilities for the industry might be. Those import pressures
are real and significant for our growers.
Mrs. Brennan. Can I just add quickly? I referenced it in my
testimony, but the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance has some
pretty robust recommendations related to trade enforcement that
I would encourage you and your staff to look to that lines that
out pretty directly.
Mr. Bost. Thank you all. I appreciate that, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize
the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Sorensen for 5 minutes.
Mr. Sorensen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just last week, I
was asked on Ag Radio if I agreed with Senator Chuck Grassley
that we are in a farm crisis. I didn't even have to think about
it. My opinion is based on the fact that I hear directly from
our producers growing the crops that feed and fuel our country,
and the farmers are hurting. Trade relations, they are getting
worse. Farmers are paying the price for tariffs. Our number one
exporter of soybeans didn't drop from number one. China didn't
drop from number one to number two. It went from number one to
off the list. We should be securing and restoring other export
countries because our farmers are the best in the world, but
the cost of fertilizers and pesticides are going up through the
roof now. And people in my district have told me that they are
running out of capital, and now they have to take on high-
interest loans just to survive. And, I am tired of people
saying that we need to do more, but then no one is willing to
come up with any solutions.
So, here we are in the first full Committee hearing back
from August recess--bless you--we are not taking on the
solutions that would provide our specialty growers with the
certainty that you need. We need solutions for research, for
rural broadband, and conservation. Whether you are growing
carrots, almonds, peaches, apples, or corn, we need solutions,
and let's be crystal clear: whether it is specialty crops or
row crops, more farmers are, unfortunately, having to give up.
We shouldn't blame them. Ranking Member Craig as well as the
perseverant Members on this side of the aisle, and I appreciate
those willing to engage on the other side as well, we are
pleading to get the leftovers from the farm bill out in a
bipartisan way. And every day we delay, we increase the risk of
not just a crisis in agriculture, but a failure of American
agriculture.
So, to the panel, this isn't just about policy, because in
March, the Trump Administration canceled more than $1 billion
for programs like the Local Food Purchase Assistance
Cooperative Agreement Program. Basically, it helps farmers
provide fresh produce to local schools and food banks, and last
month, Secretary Rollins announced a similar program, but only
provided a teeny, tiny little fraction of the breadth that we
need. So, to our panel, could you help us understand the impact
that cutting funding has for specialty producers in our local
markets?
Mr. Frantz. Congressman, I will maybe go first. Thank you
for your question. I can just certainly reaffirm the real cost
of uncertainty. You are outlining various aspects that are
current in today's market, and just, without highlighting any
particular import or export issue, I would just say with
certainty that there is so much unknown, that it is very
challenging for those of us who are small family farmers to
commit to making long-term capital expenditures because we
don't know what tomorrow brings. And so, I would tell you that
we can live with almost any outcome, but having to check each
day to find out what the particular rules are for a particular
country incoming or outgoing is very unsettling. And so, we
would like to see certainty around our business environment.
Thank you.
Mr. Sorensen. Anyone else?
Dr. Boring. I will speak a little bit and give a specific
example of some of the--I guess the opportunities of how we
grow demand, right, and some of the ramifications, some of
these cuts, some of the work that we are doing here in
Michigan. It is difficult for institutions, it is difficult for
public entities--hospitals, colleges, schools--to be sourcing
local produce, right, of local products. There is cost to the
aggregation, to the distribution, the transportation, having
critical mass of products, investments into aggregation.
Bringing those things together, increasing market access have
definitive impacts on what demand on local levels looks like.
We import an alarming amount of our fruits and vegetables into
this country. Shifting the focus to value in a more significant
way, domestic production of those, even hyper-local production,
that represents an opportunity of growth for this sector that
all of us represent, that does have meaningful potential.
Mr. Sorensen. Thank you. As of May, around--and I know my
time is brief--the USDA's workforce accepted the Trump
Administration's deferred resignation offer. How has that
impacted our specialty growers?
Mr. Frantz. We interact with USDA a lot, Congressman,
around our citrus program, and I don't know enough about their
budget to be able to tell you if there have been direct
impacts. But, I can tell you that we rely on them doing their
job for us to do ours, and so we need to ensure that the
programs stay funded to the point they can do their jobs.
Mr. Sorensen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for indulging me on
a few extra points. I will stay after class if we can work on
the farm bill. I appreciate your leadership.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. I am up for it. Let's do it. I now recognize
the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Moore, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Moore. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate the
witnesses being here today.
Specialty crops are a cornerstone of American agriculture,
providing both economic strength, essential nutrition for the
American public. And currently, in Alabama, we are ranked top
ten sweet potato producers in all of the states, showing how
important this sector is to our growers. The One Big Beautiful
Bill makes a strong investment in these growers by doubling the
Specialty Crop Research Initiative funding to $175 million
starting annually in Fiscal Year 2026, extending support for
citrus disease research, and increasing resources for plant
pests and disease prevention. These commitments ensure farmers
have some of the tools to stay competitive while protecting the
long-term health of not only Alabama's, but America's specialty
crop growers.
Dr. Boring, your testimony greatly described the importance
of the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program for the State of
Michigan. In your view, how might the increase in funding shape
the future of specialty crop production for our entire nation?
Dr. Boring. I appreciate the question about how we really
broaden the impacts of this. For us in Michigan, that
additional funding means we can be spending time researching
pest pressures, disease threats in a variety of different
crops, right? We have major crops in Michigan, right? Cherries,
asparagus, blueberries. We have a lot of secondary crops,
right? Celery, rutabagas, a variety of smaller crops that don't
always get the attention and the research investments in this
way. Increased funding means we have capacity to be investing
in those really niche crops that still have significant
challenges, that do need research investment at the same time.
Mr. Moore. Dr. Sagili--that is the Alabama way of saying
that; I am not sure if that is right--you described the unique
funding opportunities provided by Specialty Crop Research
Initiative in your testimony. Can you explain the impact those
opportunities will have with ongoing and future research
efforts?
Dr. Sagili. Absolutely. Thank you, Congressman. So, as I
said, SCRI is a very unique program where we can do
transdisciplinary and multi-state institute research programs
where you can get--we can't work in silos, right? As a honeybee
biologist, I can't just focus on one thing, so I need
collaborators on addressing pest and disease problems or other
things in honeybees as well. So, I think this program is really
unique in the sense that it gets all the collaborators together
from multiple states. So, the example I was giving before, I
have colleagues from Mississippi, Washington, California, and
Oregon working on the same project. So, I think there is a lot
of value in SCRI because it is a uniquely qualified to address
some of those big problems that can't be solved by smaller
programs like AFRI or other grants.
Mr. Moore. Dr. Boring, back to you. You also mentioned
growers have expressed their concerns over unpredictable
growing conditions, and we recognize coordination between
local, state, and Federal partners in the ongoing process. Can
you tell us more about those coordination efforts, and are
there specific barriers that hinder the coordination?
Dr. Boring. Absolutely. We really are the front-lines of
dealing with a lot of shifting weather patterns in states like
Michigan. A lot of our specialty crops are located in the west
side of the state that experience those moderating temperatures
from the Great Lakes as weather patterns change, as a variety
of factors continue to evolve. The coordination between those--
the large agencies--National Weather Service, for instance,
NOAA--the ability to predict and then to be responding to some
of these threats in real-time, all the way from Federal
agencies, state-level organizations, like Michigan State
University, down to the local levels, really remain critical to
having these multifaceted responses to these challenging
situations in specialty crops.
Mr. Moore. Thank you. This is kind of for any of the panel
of witnesses. Are there any things we haven't discussed? How
can Congress act to shape the Federal policy for the future of
the industry? In other words, are there any things we are
missing that you guys see that we need to be aware of? And then
whoever. I got about a minute left, so you all get 15 seconds a
piece.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Frantz. I will just take a--one comment, Congressman,
and that is that my industry, when I--and I say ``my.'' I am
talking about the lawn and garden industry across the country.
Those of us who grow flowers and very discretionary items are
very concerned about inflation. We sometimes get accused by our
commodity crop colleagues of having the pleasure and the luxury
of setting our own prices, but the reality is we have been
setting the prices to the point to where our customers can't
afford our products anymore. And so, we are running out of
customers, and in our business, for the last 3 years, our unit
counts have declined each year because our cost to our
customers has increased. It is just that the demand curve is
killing us. And so, I would tell you that when I sit here and
think about what is really keeping me up at night, it is the
concern around pricing discretionary items like flowers that
people don't have to buy out of the consumers' marketplace.
Thank you.
Mr. Moore. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize, folks. I
ran out of time, but I will yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize
the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Figures, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Figures. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the panel,
thank you guys for all being here in this--between Barry and
myself, this is the Alabama hour, I guess, of the Alabama 10
minutes of the hearing, but we both have the privilege of
representing the State of Alabama and specialty crops. They
are, like many of the states you guys represent, very important
to the local economy and to the ag industry, whether we are
talking peaches, sweet potatoes, blueberries, pecans,
strawberries. These are the crops that I grew up seeing along
the state highways as a child. But, unfortunately, we know the
ag industry as a whole, especially our local small farms, are
really feeling the crunch and really feeling the pressure of
today's economy and changes that we have seen over the past
several years and decades, quite honestly, in the industry. And
so, we want to make sure that we are doing everything that we
can on this Committee. And one of the reasons I wanted to be on
this Committee as a freshman Member was to ensure that we are
doing what we can to modernize our outlook and make our
policies more reflective of the current environment that our
farmers are facing.
To that extent, Mrs. Brennan, my first question is to you.
You noted in your testimony that only one in ten Americans
consume the recommended servings of fruits and vegetables.
Well, I am going to one-up you because we have seen studies in
the State of Alabama that say nine in ten Alabamians do not
consume the recommended dietary guidelines for fruits and
vegetable consumption, which, I guess, that will come as no
surprise to anyone that we have one of the lowest life
expectancies in the country. But nevertheless, we want to do
everything that we can to ensure that people have access and
are making good dietary choices, but we also understand the
nexus between those choices and support for our local farmers.
So, what role do cancellations of programs that provide
funding for local food initiatives, and nutrition education,
and garden programs in school and childcare centers play in the
partnership between producers and consumers?
Mrs. Brennan. I mean, anytime we are talking about
affecting consumption or access to consumption, that should be
a concern. I think we should also understand the idea that both
the recipient of those programs and the farmer are benefiting
from those programs. So, that is certainly something that we
will continue to have that conversation and beat that drum as a
specialty crop grower who enjoys providing fresh and healthy
produce to those recipients of the programs.
Mr. Figures. Got it. And along those same lines, I think
what is often lost in the conversations that we have here
around SNAP benefits is that SNAP benefits, to my understanding
and I think to everyone's knowledge, they can only really be
spent in one industry, right, and that is the grocery store.
But in seeing cuts to programs like SNAP, can you talk about
whether or not that undermines efforts to support local
farmers?
Mrs. Brennan. Well, I mean, I think we would like to see
our commodity in the grocery baskets of all Americans,
regardless of whether or not they are on Federal programs. I
see your point, and I would understand and agree that is
concerning.
Mr. Figures. And we all know that USDA is undergoing a
reorganization right now that is going to shift a lot of
priorities in an attempt to streamline programs, but it is
going to change how resources are distributed. What impacts do
you guys, to the extent that you are familiar with what USDA is
considering--I will start with you, Mr. Frantz, so as to not
make this the Mrs. Brennan show. What impact do you see that
having, particularly on rural farmers, whether it is in Alabama
or other states, because we are seeing in Alabama proposals
that will shift some things up to Raleigh, North Carolina, and
some other things to Kansas City, which I am not sure how good
your geography is. Neither one of them are close to Alabama.
Mr. Frantz. Yes. Thank you, Congressman. We do rely on a
healthy USDA, and I would say to you that it isn't--I am
agnostic about where they are located. It is important to me
that the programs that we interact with them are properly
staffed, and that if they do make moves and as they make moves,
that the programs move successfully with them. There is one
exception, and that is that we--they have repositories of trees
and shrubs in the Clean Plant Network that we rely on and those
plants are planted in the ground. And so, it would be important
to me that if moves are made, that the trees that are important
to our national security are moved along with them or
protected, and they are left behind.
Mr. Figures. Got it, and thank you, and I will just end
with a comment. We have heard some commentary about the adverse
effect wages, and one thing I think that we have to keep top of
mind is that the purpose of that is to protect American
workers. Now, I am one that believes those wages certainly have
to be reflective of the realistic conditions and also offset
costs that are being absorbed by the employers, but I think it
is important that we don't forget that that is why that is
there through the same vein as why we want to protect American
farmers in terms of import capacities, in terms of specialty
crops or any other crops that are coming in, and I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize
the gentleman from Washington State, Mr. Newhouse, for 5
minutes.
Mr. Newhouse. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and also
want to thank the Ranking Member Craig for this very important
hearing today, and thank our panelists for being here.
Sometimes specialty crops are referred to as minor crops,
and I want to make sure that people truly understand and not be
confused about their importance. Many times, they are high
cost, labor intensive, high overhead in infrastructure, very
important to our local economies, and I truly do appreciate the
focus that this Committee is taking on this part of the
agricultural industry. As a third-generation hop, grape, and
fruit farmer myself, I think I understand some of the issues
that have been brought up today, and I appreciate the full
Committee's attention on the issues facing not just specialty
crop growers, but agriculture in general throughout the
country. We truly are at a very difficult position, and we are
going to come up with some answers. We have come up with some
answers, and we are looking for help from the outside for some
more input on what more we can do.
I want to start with Mrs. Brennan first, and first of all,
thank you for having a presence in my district. Appreciate very
much your contributions to the economy there. You mentioned in
your testimony the need for enhanced mechanization within the
specialty crop industry. And as many of you have mentioned, the
issue of labor is huge, particularly when it comes to the
operation and harvest of specialty crops. And attention to
detail is particularly important when it comes to things such
as apples, for instance, which Washington raises one or two of.
Nobody in the grocery store is going to buy an apple that is
bruised. They are just not going to do it, so we have to be
very thoughtful about what we do. Could you talk a little bit
more about the need for potential return-on-investment when it
comes to the expansion of mechanization and automation within
the specialty crop industry?
Mrs. Brennan. Absolutely. Thank you, and, Congressman
Newhouse, we appreciate the opportunity to be in your district
as much as you appreciate us. But I would just add that
specialty crops accounts for about \1/3\ of the cash receipts
in U.S. crops but receives only a fraction of dollars related
to research and development. So, I think anything that Congress
can do for strategic investment in that area will really act as
a signal to the tech world. As it stands right now, they are
not going to necessarily invest in something where the market
is so targeted and so small. So, if the Federal Government is
willing to invest in that area, I believe we will see
additional development.
Mr. Newhouse. Thank you. My next question, and I am happy
to open it up to others. You all have provided fantastic input
on this. While we are talking about research, what role does
precision agriculture play in current operations, and how can
Federal research help support and expand those technologies
across the specialty crop sector?
Mrs. Brennan. Congressman, I think you would be hard
pressed to find an operation today that isn't utilizing
precision ag practices every day, day in/day out, but I would
add that I think they are always looking for additional
research opportunities and dollars in those areas. So often we
are faced with headwinds that Mr. Frantz referenced earlier,
and so we are focused there and maybe not able to do the
investment in other areas that maybe we want to at the time
because we are so focused on the headwinds.
Mr. Newhouse. Sure.
Mrs. Brennan. So, that would be--I don't know if Mr. Frantz
has additional nuance to that, but.
Mr. Frantz. Congressman, I will just make a quick comment
to--first of all, to thank you for your stalwart help for years
on the Farm Worker Modernization Act.\1\ You have been a friend
to horticulture, and I appreciate it very much. On the
automation question, we are so desperate for labor at times
that we have thrown ROI to the wind from time to time and
invested in automation just on a hope and a prayer because
things are that tight labor-wise, especially over the last few
years. Thank you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Editor's note: 116th Congress: H.R. 4916, Farm Workforce
Modernization Act of 2019; H.R. 5038, Farm Workforce Modernization Act
of 2019; 117th Congress: H.R. 1537, Farm Workforce Modernization Act of
2021; H.R. 1603, Farm Workforce Modernization Act of 2021; 118th
Congress: H.R. 4319, Farm Workforce Modernization Act of 2023; 119th
Congress, H.R. 3227, Farm Workforce Modernization Act of 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Newhouse. And time goes by so darn fast. I want to
touch on the whole issue of trade, very important for specialty
crops truly, as you mentioned in your testimony as well. I
heard several of you talk about the importance of the Market
Access Program, and other things that we have put in place as
Congress to help specialty crops and agriculture export. We
accomplished something that was--I have been working on for a
long time. We doubled the amount of money invested in market
access as well as the specialty crop efforts to increase
exports. And so, I just want--this legislation was passed on
and signed on July 4, H.R. 1, did some great things for
agriculture. Could you talk about some of the potential that we
could see from increasing our efforts in market development?
Mr. Frantz. Is there time for me to answer your question?
Mr. Newhouse. Yes.
Mr. Frantz. Okay.
Mr. Newhouse. Oh.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Frantz. Mr. Chairman, should I proceed?
Mr. Newhouse. Yes.
Mr. Frantz. Okay. The first one is we are very grateful for
several provisions in that Act. To your question about the
market access, because we were able to attribute those dollars
towards labor--I already mentioned that is our biggest
expense--that funding has helped us keep our costing down this
year when it otherwise would have increased more. So, first of
all, it has been a direct benefit to our customers through
helping to cover our labor cost. The second one I wanted to
comment on is the ability to direct expense our capital
expenditures. I already mentioned that times are uncertain.
Being able to have tax benefits realized immediately has
allowed my brother and I to feel better about making complex
decisions that would otherwise have been held off. Thank you.
Mr. Newhouse. Well, as you noticed--as you noted, too--my
time is running out, but I just want to thank you all for being
here today and being part of this very important discussion.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for going over, but I
yield back.
The Chairman. I thank the gentleman. I am pleased to
recognize the gentleman from New Mexico, Mr. Vasquez, for 5
minutes.
Mr. Vasquez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, thank you, Ranking
Member Craig, and thank you to today's witnesses for being here
today.
Specialty crops are the backbone of agriculture in my
district. If you look at the map that was included in the
documents, there is a little black area there in Dona Ana
County and Otero County and Luna County. That is in southern
New Mexico, and we have world-famous Hatch chili, we have
amazing Barker yellow onions and pistachios, and these crops
don't just sustain our economy. They sustain our way of life.
They are who we are. It is a story of our culture, our people,
our identity, and it is how families gather around the table.
Last week, I convened a meeting with my agriculture advisory
group that includes specialty crop producers from across my
district, and their biggest frustration was that we have gone 2
years without our farm bill. They also talked about rising
input costs, they talked about tariffs, and they talked about
funding freezes. And for them, it wasn't just a policy debate.
It was something that could make or break their family farms.
And so, it is my belief that we can't keep playing politics
with farmland and with specialty crop producers because we lose
more than just profits in my district. We lose generations of
investment. We lose family legacies. We lose productive land.
And so, those conversations I am having with producers
makes it also very hard for the next generation of farmers to
be able to be successful in starting their own business or
taking over the family farm. And as they see that those farms
around them are potentially talking about filing for
bankruptcy, it is very hard to entice new young farmers to take
over the family business. And so, whether it is tariffs,
whether it is losing the workforce, supply chain costs that are
driving up these unsustainable levels, these are just added
costs that are already eating into thin margins that we know
that they have. And so, in my district in particular, it is
harming the pecan and the pistachio growers. They are now
having to look for other markets. They have just lost their
biggest market like a lot of farmers in this country have, and
they are struggling to understand what is happening with this
farm bill.
So, my question first is for Mr. Frantz. Mr. Frantz, do you
think that this Administration's trade posture, and let's call
it a trade war, is raising costs for family farmers and
specialty crop producers?
Mr. Frantz. Thank you, Congressman, for your question. I
would say to you that in my experience in my business, we have
yet to experience costs that have moved our costing, material
changes. What we have is an uncertainty from our customers and
our vendors, and that uncertainty is causing people to trend
prices up potentially prematurely because in our experience,
the tariffs that directly affect us have continued to be
delayed.
Mr. Vasquez. So, Mr. Frantz, would you say certainty then
would be a good thing?
Mr. Frantz. We are looking for certainty, yes, sir.
Mr. Vasquez. Okay. And then in terms of the agricultural
workforce--this question is for you as well, Mr. Frantz--what
are the impacts that you are seeing within your business or
other specialty crop producers in terms of the labor shortage?
Mr. Frantz. Congressman, that is a very good question.
Thanks for asking it. The lack of sufficient labor at times has
prevented us from having the quality products we wish because
we can't get the work done, and it is preventing us from
growing our business and seizing opportunities that are coming
our way. We urgently need a bipartisan legal ag workforce
solution.
Mr. Vasquez. Thank you, Mr. Frantz. I really appreciate
that, and I will commend Chairman Thompson because he convened
a bipartisan group of Members of this Committee to work on
immigration reform as it pertains to the agriculture industry
and what some of our ideas were for programs like H-2A and H-
2B, and we put out a report on that. And so, I would love to
see my colleagues, everyone on this Committee help to push
forward these types of policies that are going to support the
agricultural workforce that, in the end, support family farms,
rural communities, rural businesses. That is something that is
desperately needed in this country, and I think the more that
we hear from folks like you all today about the impact that we
are having, hopefully the more that it hits home with everybody
that serves in this body so that we can actually get something
done.
That is really important. That is something that I
encourage my colleagues to continue those conversations are--
that was a bipartisan working group, and I believe we had some
good results. And so, we have legislation out there, like the
Farm Worker Modernization Act, that is really important. Mr.
Carbajal has introduced it. We have been waiting for some
action on that, so we would love to see that. We would love to
make sure that those pistachio growers, those--that yellow
Barker onion that make--that accounts for over 50 percent of
the nation's onions in September, that we can keep those
workers there, that we can keep those onions from rotting in
the field, and that we can get our specialty crops, like pecans
and pistachios, out to good markets and keep these families in
business. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
The Chairman. Thank the gentlemen yielding back. I now
recognize the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Taylor, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Taylor. Thank you, Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member
Craig, for hosting this hearing today, and thank you to our
witnesses for traveling here to provide your expertise to this
Committee. You guys came a long way, and I appreciate your
sacrifices. At least Dr. Boring got to get out of Michigan for
a little while, which is good.
My district is in southern Ohio, which is by no means the
biggest specialty crop area of the country. There is a
significant presence from several farmers and companies, but
nothing like other areas of the country. Therefore, when
Ohioans go to the grocery store, it is almost always guaranteed
that we are buying 2,000 mile lettuce that could be up to a
week old. This means you are paying for transportation costs
and for storage, and the produce you are buying will go bad
much quicker than lettuce you could buy locally. Obviously,
this is not just the case with lettuce, but with fruits and
vegetables as well.
I visited one business in my area, not in my district,
called 80 Acres, which is an indoor vertical farm in Ohio that
I believe provides a unique model for ensuring everyone in both
rural and urban areas has access to fresh fruits and
vegetables. Mr. Frantz, with that in mind, how do you see
greenhouses or vertical farms transforming rural America, if
you think that is possible?
Mr. Frantz. Thank you, Mr. Congressman. AmericanHort has a
lot of greenhouse customers, greenhouse members, and so, in
general, we are supportive of most anything that supports
greenhouse growth. And as a greenhouse owner myself, I
recognize the potential to have a lot of climate controls and
do things in climates that otherwise wouldn't be possible, but
outside of that, I don't have any particular expertise in
vertical farming.
Mr. Taylor. Okay. In an area like Ohio where it may not be
the best climate for specialty crops, what can we do to promote
more farms like that to provide fresh produce for people?
Anybody have any ideas on promoting anything like--he said it
is not really his area?
Dr. Boring. I would just say the recognition of the value
in these investments, right, the value of greenhouse
production, the value of hoop houses, the value of some of
these season-extending technologies that do pose significant
capital restraints in small farms looking to diversify and
supply local areas with local produce, right? Having these
kinds of dollars spent seen as investments in communities is
really a fundamental pivot to how we view this kind of work.
Mr. Taylor. Thank you. Having a reliable supply of produce
could not only benefit farmers, but it could also greatly help
with the health of our communities across the United States. A
2024 study found that nearly three in four adults in the U.S.
are now considered overweight or obese. Southern Ohio is no
exception. Actually, it is worse than that there as there are
several counties in our district with obesity rates. One is, in
fact, in the top five counties in the country for obesity.
Obviously, it is not just diet that can change these trends,
but having more access to fruits and vegetables would
definitely help. Dr. Boring, could you talk about how
affordable and consistent access to fresh produce could help
combat the obesity epidemic in this country, and specifically,
has it helped address these issues in Michigan where you are
serving now?
Dr. Boring. Absolutely. I think that the statement around
how we modernize our outlook on agriculture is really critical
here, and having agriculture seen as solutions to these bigger
issues that are occurring across the country, right? Livability
in communities, the pursuit of the American Dream for a lot of
rural areas, how agriculture plays into the health of people,
the health of people, communities, that has to be the way in
which we approach this kind of work. And so, investments into
specialty crops being seen as investments into our future as a
country, food security, the health of people, I think that is a
really fundamental position shift here that drives the kind of
investments that get at what you are talking about and why this
work is important for communities.
Mr. Taylor. Thank you. Anybody else have any ideas on that
one? Thank you.
Mrs. Brennan. I would just add that we have--Specialty Crop
Farm Bill Alliance and IFPA have been wildly supportive of
increase with the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program in
elementary schools and the potential expansion. I think we
know, any of us who have children, that the earlier you expose
them to fresh fruits and vegetables, the more likely they are
going to eat those throughout their life, so I would add to
that as well.
Mr. Taylor. Okay. Again, thank you all for being here
today, and, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back now. I now
recognize the gentlelady from Maine, Ms. Pingree, for 5
minutes.
Ms. Pingree. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much
for having this hearing, and thank you so much to all of you
for spending your time with us. I probably could spend my whole
time just kind of ranting about so many of the things that my
colleagues have already discussed, and first and foremost is
just the very idea that we call this specialty crops. I think
that most of you realize you are working in a field about
vital, nutritious items or whether it is a home horticulture,
really critical things to our environment. So, I apologize that
for so long we have called this a specialty item when it really
is essential nutrition in the very fruits and vegetables we
depend on every day, and thank you for working in that
industry.
I am particularly worried about the budget cuts and the
cuts that have already been done, whether it is at the USDA or
some of the other programs that I know in my state, our
specialty crop growers particularly depend on. In these
challenging times, whether it is in relation to the tariffs or
the extreme weather that we have been having in our state--we
had a very wet spring, so our pollinators couldn't do their
jobs in the blueberry fields, and now we haven't had much rain
since July. So, we are in an extreme drought, and we really
need that assistance from the Federal Government, particularly
when it comes to the local offices, the NRCS and other places,
that are understaffed. We have lost most of our engineers. So,
if you are looking for drought planning assistance, how to do
more irrigation, the help just isn't there.
And one of the cuts that has been mentioned before, but I
was really disappointed to see, was that last March, USDA
canceled the billion dollars that went in the Local Food
Purchase Assistance and Local Food for School Programs.
Combined, that was over $2 million to my state. It might not
sound like a lot in a smaller state, but 1.3 million people,
not that many farmers, this was a really good, guaranteed
source of income. And as so many of you have already mentioned,
this is fresh fruits and vegetables that go into food pantries
and to school lunch programs where we really want to make sure
those are accessible and available.
So, do any of you want to comment on the importance of
programs like that or what you are also doing? I know in
Michigan, you have some of your own programs going on, the
GusNIP program, so many of the things that allow people to
access healthy fruits and vegetables and give our farmers that
guaranteed income that helps make them assured that they have
funding on the bottom line. I will just go through whoever
wants to discuss that.
Dr. Boring. I will just briefly reiterate our Farm to
Family Program, of investments in that work being seen as
investments in the future of our state, right? It is economic
opportunities for farms, certainly, but one of the greatest
concerns I hear from farmers time and time again is the health
of their communities and what the economic outlook for rural
areas needs to, and what can it be. We have to be providing
solutions to communities and framing our work as investments
beyond just agriculture and farms, but into communities so we
have an ecosystem of success. That kind of work is really
critical starting at those early, early levels.
Ms. Pingree. Thanks.
Mrs. Brennan. I mean, I think I have said it before and I
will say it again, I think anything that increases consumption
and access in those programs and the recipients, we are
supportive. Of course, we are having open and IFPA is having
open conversations with the Administration and Congress, both
sides of the aisle, of the importance of those programs, and we
will continue to do so.
Ms. Pingree. Thank you, and I do want to say we have a
bipartisan bill going on, largely growing out of this
Committee, and the dissatisfaction with those funds being cut
and looking for ways to make sure that on a bipartisan basis--
this isn't a partisan issue--making sure our farmers in rural
areas have that support.
Let me just jump to crop insurance. You have brought that
up before, but all of you have given really good examples. Same
thing. We are experiencing this extreme weather, and New
England has not been exempt from that. I already mentioned the
rain in the spring, the drought now, and just the challenges
that specialty crop--I just hate saying the word--but that
farmers face. So many successes have grown in our state because
of the interest in purchasing locally, belonging to a CSA,
farmers' markets, all those things, but these are the very
farmers that aren't commodity farmers, and it is almost
impossible to use this system, as many of you have mentioned.
So, before I talk for too long, do you want to just talk about
it a little bit more and why--or any ideas that you have about
how we could fix this finally so it works.
Mr. Frantz. Yes. Thank you, Congresswoman. I understand you
are an organic farmer yourself, so congratulations.
Ms. Pingree. That is true. Spent many years--might even
have a little dirt there right now from the weekend.
Mr. Frantz. We have something in common. Thank you. I just
appreciate you acknowledging that the specialty crop industry
really does need help in the insurance area. Rather than get
too far in the weeds, I would just say that there are pilot
programs running at USDA, and I am grateful for that. But I
hope we can change them around to where they are actually
effective, whether it is this Controlled Environment (CE)
program that I am particularly interested in but isn't helpful,
or the Nursery Value Select, NVS, which is a catastrophic
program that just doesn't ever reach the trigger to be helpful.
So, there are specific issues that need fixing, and I
appreciate your attention to it. Thank you.
Ms. Pingree. I ran out of time, and I will be respectful of
everyone else's time, but I do want to just note that you
mentioned a couple of times your worries about inflation and
the impact that could have on people using ornamentals. And I
know how important the horticulture industry is and just what a
great benefit it was during the pandemic that so many more
people decided to plant that garden and have sort of the
therapeutic and family-based experience of doing that outside,
and I would hate to see that go away. So, thank you all for
your work. Really great to have you here today.
Mr. Frantz. Thank you, Congresswoman. Thank you very much
for your comments.
The Chairman. I thank the gentlelady and now recognize the
gentleman from Iowa, Mr. Feenstra, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Feenstra. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,
Ranking Member, for holding this hearing today, and thank you
to our witnesses. Thank you for coming. I read your
testimonies. Very impressive.
I look at specialty crops, and they are so important to our
agricultural community and feeding the world, in essence, what
you do. And there are so many pieces and parts that go into
specialty crops when you start thinking about it, whether it be
policy, regulatory, environment, transportation, tax
provisions. I want to talk briefly about tax provisions, all
these things sort of go bump in the night that they affect you.
When we start thinking of tax provisions, you think of what
we passed in this--the last bill, the reconciliation bill,
whether it be the death tax so you can move that family farm to
the next generation, 199A, if you are a pass-through, you get a
25 percent qualified business income, whether it be section 179
depreciation, buying a piece of equipment, these are all very
important pieces, and, Mr. Frantz, I would love for you to talk
about what I just said. How is it important to you, and can you
talk about some of these changes that might affect a family
farm?
Mr. Frantz. Yes. Thank you, Congressman. The provisions in
your recently-passed budget bill are extremely helpful, and we
are very grateful for them. So, thank you.
I will speak first to the estate tax. My brother, Keith,
and I were blessed to have parents that transitioned ownership
of our farm 25 years ago, and now, here we are, looking at the
blessing, really, of the opportunity of passing the farm to our
children in the next decade. And were it not for the increase
to $15 million per individual of the lifetime exemption and the
permanency that you have brought to the law, it likely wouldn't
be able to be possible in California where farm real estate is
so expensive, so very grateful for that. I have already touched
on bonus depreciation, in a little way, but R&D tax credits as
well, that is something we take advantage of and we are very
grateful for, so thank you very much.
Mr. Feenstra. Yes. Well, thank you, and I am glad you
addressed that. I mean, again, it is about passing that family
farm to the next generation, and we see that all over the
agricultural landscape, the great concern of how do you--
instead of having corporate farmers buy the land, how do we get
it to the next generation, and the death tax is a big part of
that.
I want to talk a little bit about another issue when it
comes to transportation of goods, and if you start looking
around the world, how do we open new markets, especially for
specialty crops? A lot of specialty crops need refrigeration,
and how do we move into countries like Africa and other warmer
climates when we don't have refrigeration? And I want to talk
to Dr. Boring about this. Can you talk about the importance of
cold chain capacity and the markets, and especially the
specialty crops when it comes to exporting and trying to expand
these horizons?
Dr. Boring. Yes, I appreciate that question. Constraints on
cold storage capacity are something we continually hear in
Michigan as well, those being barriers to growers adding
capacity, adding additional market access, and that even
extends into the infrastructure investments of how we ship that
product, right, as you talk about here. Having those kind of
investments seen as greater good of how we raise the tide in
specialty crops is really critical. I would also hit on two
of--it reinforces the need for a continued investment into
research around how we have alternate storage capacity and
preservation techniques for our crops so that we can take some
of these fresh market products, potentially put them into a
stable format, dried otherwise, so that we can access some of
these markets with acknowledgements of one of some of the
constraints that are going to occur in those specific
geographies.
Mr. Feenstra. Yes. Dr. Boring, I think you are right. I
mean, you think about research that is so critical, and it is
exciting to see what we are going to do in the next farm bill
when it comes to research. It is the key. I mean, if we want to
continue to be exports to the global world, we have to do a lot
more research, and obviously cold chain storage is part of
this, but we have a lot of work to do. So, thank you for your
comments.
We have already talked about specialty crop insurance. I am
not going to get into that. It is so important. I heard some of
your comments. To me, it is invaluable to make sure that we
have some backing when we have catastrophic events, and we have
that periodically. I am from Iowa, second-largest ag district
in the country. When we have derechos or drought or whatever it
might be, we have to have protection. So, with that, I thank
you for your witnesses, and I yield back.
The Chairman. I thank the gentleman, who yields back. I now
recognize the gentlelady from Illinois, Ms. Budzinski, for 5
minutes.
Ms. Budzinski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,
Ranking Member Craig, for calling this hearing today. I want to
say thank you to the witnesses as well for traveling here to be
a part of this. I appreciate it.
My district in Illinois is home to over 1 million acres of
farmland. In fact, farms make up over 70 percent of the total
land in my district. And while my district, like most of
central and southern Illinois, is home to some of the highest-
yielding corn and soybean farms in the country, it is also home
to a huge variety of specialty crop production as well.
Collinsville, Illinois is the horseradish capital of the world,
if you didn't know that. In fact, Collinsville supplies about
\2/3\ of the entire world's horseradish. I have heard from
those farmers, and I am sure many of you have as well, that
specialty crop operations face unique challenges with access to
labor, and of course those needs have only gotten more
complicated in the wake of the Administration's immigration
policies.
Beyond horseradish production, across my district, there
are fruit and vegetable operations that supply our local
communities with a variety of fresh, healthy local food. I have
had the privilege to visit Sola Gratia Farm in Urbana, Illinois
several times now, and I have heard directly from them as well
as the organizations that they supply with their food. One
serious concern they brought to me that I am sure everyone has
heard about is the cancellation of the Local Food Purchase
Assistance Cooperative Agreement and the Local Foods for
Schools programs. Not only has this been a problem for the
farmers and the people they feed, but the University of
Illinois Extension, Illinois Eats Program, in my district
administered these programs across the State of Illinois. I was
proud to join Congressman Bresnahan and a great team of
lawmakers to introduce the Local Farmers Feeding Our
Communities Act (H.R. 4782) earlier this summer to reinvest in
these vital programs that I mentioned. But I think the heart of
this is that farmers need market access for their products,
whether domestically or internationally. I know Congressman
Feenstra just spoke to that. A healthy farm economy relies on
farmers having somewhere to sell.
Director Boring, I am excited to see the success that
Michigan's Farm to Family Program has had in connecting
specialty crop producers to local consumers. Can you elaborate
a little bit on the impact of this program that it has had in
both improving market access for farmers and increasing food
security on a regional scale?
Dr. Boring. Well, certainly, and I appreciate the question
there. I can highlight a few specific examples of work we have
been able to do, knowing this is, really, a new program that we
are looking to stand up here. We have specifically worked on
creating opportunities for local grocery access in different
places. We are replicating success of Farm Stop models that
have been really pioneered in Ann Arbor, Michigan, but the
ability to put into smaller communities consignment-based
grocery access, in essence, brick and mortar farmers' markets
where local farmers are supplying products into those areas,
but they don't have the hassle necessarily of manning a
farmers' market in the evening and weekends. It really provides
an avenue of how communities can have farm produce and food
access in new and different ways and have that viewed as a
community asset to the livability of downtowns and an economic
way for small farms to diversify in different ways. So, the
collaboration with other states, including Illinois, of how we
kind of push those new models, I think is really exciting of
where we might go with that work.
Ms. Budzinski. So, you think that model could be replicated
maybe in other places as well?
Dr. Boring. Yes, certainly.
Ms. Budzinski. And have you thought at all about what in
the farm bill we would need to be prioritizing in order to see
those types of programs be replicated?
Dr. Boring. Absolutely. I think some of the creations of
new and unique pilot programs that recognize some of the work
that is occurring in dynamic ways in states that is utilizing
some creativity, and that is how we come up with a good policy,
right?
Ms. Budzinski. Yes.
Dr. Boring. We take local ideas, we might replicate them
and build them up at the state level, and hopefully some of
those find their way to a Federal level so we can replicate
examples of success.
Ms. Budzinski. Okay. Thank you. I will yield back. Thank
you.
The Chairman. The gentlelady yields back. I now recognize
the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Harris, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Harris. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to all of
you on the panel for your time and perseverance and hanging
throughout this time.
As we have listened today, obviously specialty crops play a
vital role in the American agriculture industry. In fact, in my
home State of North Carolina, farmers produce a wide range of
specialty crops, like sweet potatoes, strawberries, cucumbers,
and peanuts, that feed our communities and provide thousands of
jobs to hardworking North Carolinians. But too often, I hear
from constituents in my district that they consistently have to
deal with excessive government regulations that hinder their
ability to meet demand. Mrs. Brennan, you mentioned similar
concerns in your written testimony, saying the specialty crop
industry is under siege from regulatory overreach and outdated
policies. I want to ask you, if I can, in a few moments this
afternoon, in your view, what specific regulations do you
believe Congress could address to ease the burdens affecting
farmers in the specialty crop industry?
Mrs. Brennan. Thank you for the question, Congressman. I
appreciate it. I think there are any number of issues. The
thing that comes to mind immediately for a number of us who
maybe don't qualify for some of the programs are the AGI limits
and things that are very tangible, boots-on-the-ground issues
that we could address in the long run that could assist us in
qualifying for programs that maybe Mr. Frantz and I wouldn't
necessarily qualify for is the first thing that comes to mind.
Mr. Harris. Gotcha.
Mrs. Brennan. But I am happy to send a long list to you,
sir, after this hearing.
Mr. Harris. Well, and that would be helpful.
Mrs. Brennan. Absolutely.
Mr. Harris. When we are talking about moving forward and we
are talking about legislation, that would be important.
And kind of going off that, Dr. Boring, I will turn to you.
In your role as a state-level agriculture policymaker, how does
your agency balance state regulations while, at the same time,
not overburdening producers with excess regulations that hinder
their operation?
Dr. Boring. Well, I think you hit on a really critical
element, and it is a fundamental piece of our department kind
of ethos, is the fact that we are partners with farms and
agribusinesses across the state, right? Our mission here is to
ensure compliance, provide clear, consistent rules by which
businesses operate, and then help farms and agribusinesses on
how they comply with these sorts of things. So, our preeminent
focus here is making sure that folks clearly understand things
and us working as educational partners and resources of how we
all get to where we need to go together.
Mr. Harris. Gotcha. Well, from your conversations with
other state officials, how can reducing Federal red tape
empower the specialty crop producers to operate more
efficiently and compete more effectively?
Mr. Harris. I think there is a lot of opportunity of just
clarifying different regulatory roles, right? And we hear from
growers a lot of times of how state-based regulation and
requirements are oftentimes not well coordinated with Federal.
Addressing those kinds of issues there, it is the small little
things like that that, ultimately, do add up and make a
difference for growers.
Mr. Harris. Well, thank you for that insight. I believe
that rather than micromanaging farmers, Washington should
instead lower barriers and focus on building an environment
that allows them to grow, innovate, and thrive, because that is
what all of us want for our farmers. Mr. Frantz, in your
testimony, you spoke to how the nursery industry is actually
impacted by the inflationary pressures, many of which were
exasperated by irresponsible government under the previous
Administration. I want to give you a moment, if you can, to
elaborate on how these challenges have actually impacted your
operations.
Mr. Frantz. Yes. Thank you, Congressman. I want to first
just acknowledge your prior comment, and that is that I do
believe that the American farmer and what they have done
productivity-wise is nothing short of awesome, and largely that
has happened when the government has stayed out of the way, so
I completely appreciate your philosophy. As far as the question
to direct impacts of inflation, our product is demonstrably
more expensive today than it was 5 years ago. And as I alluded
to previously, no one really has to buy a flower, and so when
costs go up, and they have broadly gone up as a macro picture,
we have no choice but to pass those costs on the American
consumer, and we want to see prices come down to put our
product back inside the budget of the average shopper at stores
across America. Thank you.
Mr. Harris. Gotcha. Well, thank you, and, Mr. Chairman,
with that, I will yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize
the gentleman from California, Mr. Carbajal, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank
you to all the speakers that are here today.
Mrs. Brennan, as you know, I represent California's Central
Coast where agriculture is the number one industry. Specialty
crops account for a significant portion of agriculture grown in
our state, which is the number one agriculture state in the
nation as well as in my district, including Grimmway Farms in
Cuyama. Growers require an adequate workforce in order to
maintain crop production. Congress can assure our growers have
enough labor by advancing bills like the Farm Workforce
Modernization Act, which I am a cosponsor of. Currently, the
Trump Administration's intensified deportation efforts have
created significant uncertainty within California's
agricultural labor force. Between March and August, the U.S.
agriculture industry has lost an estimated 155,000 workers.
Local stakeholders in my district have voiced their concerns
over the impacts of these actions. Given the uncertainty of
this immigration climate, what impacts have you seen on your
farms, Mrs. Brennan, and what steps do you think Congress
should take to best address and support specialty crop growers
and their workforce?
Mrs. Brennan. Congressman, I appreciate the question, and
we also, as with Congressman Newhouse, appreciate being in your
district as well. I think it goes without saying that that
topic has obviously been top of mind for many of our industry.
We have long advocated for and asked for a reliable legal
workforce and the ability via your efforts with the Farm
Workforce Modernization Act, and have asked Congress to act in
order to step up for our industry. I think I can speak for all
of us to say it is not just our industry being affected by
these issues, and yet we are, of course, at the forefront of
where we feel it first, so I appreciate your leadership in that
area. I would ask that you continue to lead, and as you can
imagine, it is certainly a topic that is top of mind for all of
us.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. Mrs. Brennan, in your testimony,
you mentioned the need for greater Federal investment in
research and development for agriculture technology. Can you
expand on how the Federal Government can support research and
increase innovation within the specialty crop sector, and help
producers like Grimmway Farms?
Mrs. Brennan. Absolutely. I mentioned it earlier, but
specialty crops make up \1/3\ of crop receipts in the U.S., and
yet we see such a small percentage of the R&D dollars. We
believe as a coalition that strategic Federal investment will
lead to additional private-sector investment as well, and we
see that as a net positive for the industry.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. Continuing with you, you noted
that unlike commodity crops, specialty crop growers currently
lack access to affordable and effective crop insurance, yet are
still subject to market price fluctuations and vulnerable to
natural disasters. When considering updates to insurance
policy, what options do you believe are the most needed to
better help manage production risk and protect specialty crop
businesses?
Mrs. Brennan. Congressman, I appreciate that. I would point
to the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance--that is a mouthful--
recommendations that house a long laundry list of things we
would appreciate. Obviously, a lot of our specialty crop
growers are operating without a federally-subsidized safety
net, so anything to add to that program would be incredibly
helpful. So, I will follow up with a that full list as well for
you, if you would like it.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you.
Mr. Frantz, you mentioned that certain exemptions on the
tariffs have saved your industry millions. However, there are
other inputs still subject to tariffs that are currently
impacting your business. Can you share what inputs are still
impacted and how they are affecting your farms, as well as how
those tariffs might be impacting other nurseries like those in
my district?
Mr. Frantz. Yes, Congressman. Thank you for your questions,
and thank you for highlighting the labor issue and for your
leadership in that area. Certainly, your comments highlight the
need for labor reform.
To your question, I will give you an example. A lot of
nurseries across the country dig trees out of the ground, and
they wrap them in burlap to protect the root ball and keep them
secure until they can get planted in the ground. Burlap comes
from India off the jute tree. It is the only place you can buy
burlap, is off the jute tree, which doesn't grow in America.
So, there is an example of an item that must be sourced
internationally that we would like to see exempt from tariffs.
Thank you.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. In closing, let me say, my
colleague, Ms. Pingree, mentioned therapeutic gardens during
this pandemic. I tell you, having worked in the farms and the
fields with my father, I did not do a therapeutic garden.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Carbajal. I have a lot of PTSD from that work, but I
think for those that were able to appreciate and do that, I
think it is a great idea. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mrs. Miller [presiding.] The chair recognizes the gentleman
from Arkansas, Mr. Crawford, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate it. I
know this has already been brought up by several of the Members
already, and I kind of came late to the game, but I appreciate
the topic. I am not going to ask our witnesses to answer, but I
do want to add my voice to the chorus of people raising the
alarm about H-2A.
In the last Congress, and you may have been made aware of
this, but in the last Congress, we actually stood up in--under
GT--Chairman Thompson's direction and under his leadership, we
stood up in Ag Labor Working Group, a bipartisan group, and
spent about a year or so meeting with various stakeholders
across the country representing a diverse mix of crops and
production and all of that. And at the end of that effort, like
I said, about a year-long effort, we came up with 21
recommendations to the committees of jurisdiction, 15 of which
were unanimous in their adoption. All 21 recommendations were
certainly bipartisan, but 15 were unanimous. And so, this was
definitely solid work done by the participants, the panel on
the Ag Labor Working Group under this Committee.
The sad part about this is that the Agriculture Committee,
where the bulk of the subject matter expertise resides, is a
Committee that has no jurisdiction, so we are relying on five
other committees to, essentially, do the work to address the
needs of the H-2A workforce. The bigger problem here, as you
know, the things that we can't control, for example, commodity
markets, we can't necessarily control prices of commodities. We
certainly can't control the weather, but things that we can
control, and that is policy here in Washington and how that is
having a negative impact on the workforce.
And, we can have a conversation about outsourcing our
labor, which we have done and which is a separate conversation
of why we are so heavily reliant on an H-2A workforce. But the
fact remains that we are, and as such, we don't need to further
penalize our farmers when they are already farming below cost
of production as it is. And so, we are adding insult to injury
by making it that much more difficult to manage the workforce
that they rely on to get the job done. So, I know this is
impacting across the spectrum of ag production, whether you are
a specialty crop producer growing berries somewhere, or whether
you are a large-scale row crop producer anywhere in the
country. It could be livestock production, you name it. Across
the spectrum of ag production, this is a problem.
So, we have gotten the support of the Chairman and the
Ranking Member on this issue. It is my hope that we will make
those referrals to the appropriate committees of jurisdiction,
but recognizing, of course, that these recommendations didn't
come in a vacuum. I mean, it was a result of a year-long effort
dealing with producers of virtually every commodity, people who
rely on a migrant workforce to be able to get the job done, to
feed and clothe America. So, I appreciate you being here today,
and I appreciate the Members who spoke earlier raising this
issue, and your answers to those questions will help inform
this Committee on the direction that we ought to go in terms of
making recommendations to the other committees.
And one of the recommendations I would make, in addition to
the 21 that we are making, is maybe the Agriculture Committee
have more jurisdiction in that role because it is a difficult
problem set, and without the appropriate subject matter
expertise, it is that much more difficult to legislate the
appropriate solutions. And with that, Madam Chair, I will yield
back.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you. The chair recognizes the
gentlewoman from Oregon, Ms. Salinas, for 5 minutes.
Ms. Salinas. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I want to thank
Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member Craig for holding this
hearing today. I appreciate that both of you really follow
through on your commitment to ensure this Committee focuses on
the importance of specialty crop industry to our entire
agriculture community, and thank you to our witnesses for
making the time today to be with us.
So, I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I want to give
one final opportunity as we start to close out this hearing on
crop insurance. For Oregon, the nursery greenhouse industry
represents the leading agricultural commodity, and Oregon's
conifers, shade, Christmas, and flowering trees are number one
in U.S. sales. Unfortunately, I have consistently heard from
our nurseries and other multi-crop producers that they simply
can't find crop insurance that works for them, and for any
witnesses who would like to jump in again, just one final time.
And, Mrs. Brennan, Mr. Frantz, thank you for the testimony that
you have already provided; but, why is it that crop insurance
offerings, including Whole-Farm Revenue Protection, fail to
meet the needs of these diversified operations, and are there
any additional suggestions you might make that we can alter to
meet the needs of these producers?
Mr. Frantz. Thank you, Congresswoman. I will take a crack
at it. The first one is to your specific question around the
Whole-Farm Program, it, again, has a 50 percent threshold of
loss, and for us small growers with diversified crops, that is
just an unacceptable standard to be met. It is just we will be
bankrupt before we hit that number. To try address your
specific question, there is a program right now at USDA called
Controlled Environment, which I know is important to you. There
are a lot of greenhouses in Oregon. The Controlled Environment
is a program that addresses quarantine risk when USDA or any
government agency quarantines a crop in a greenhouse or any
controlled environment nursery anywhere in America because of a
quarantine that is outside the control of the grower, no risk
or no fault of the grower, and the crop has to be destroyed,
that grower is compensated for the crop.
Our problem is that USDA doesn't order us to destroy our
citrus. They just take away market access. And so, to give you
a metaphor to--an example would be as--if a potato grower in
Idaho was told you can keep selling your potatoes, but only in
Idaho, and so it is not possible to move all your potatoes out
inside the State of Idaho. And so, that is an example where the
program is well intended, but we have yet to have a situation
where USDA has ever in the country ordered a destruction order
for citrus that have been quarantined inside of a controlled
environment. So, it needs help, and that is just a real
specific example of how the Controlled Environment greenhouse
program could be broadened to where a quarantine would be
viewed more generally. If you lose market access, that is a
triggering event to where the producer could be paid. Thank
you.
Ms. Salinas. Understandable. Thank you. Mrs. Brennan, did
you want to add anything, and thank you for offering your 21
points. I will take a look when you send them over. Would
anybody else like to weigh in?
[No response.]
Ms. Salinas. All right. Thank you. So, this hearing serves
as a reminder of the unique and varied needs of specialty crop
producers. It is why it is so critical that this Committee
continues to increase investment and improve research programs
specific to specialty crops, like the Specialty Crop Research
Initiative. So, Dr. Sagili, thank you so much for being here. I
am honored to have Oregon State represented here again. What
suggestions do you have, given you have so much experience with
this grant process, to improve the SCRI grant, especially as we
increase investment?
Dr. Sagili. Thank you, Congressman Salinas. So, I would
say--I have five things, but I will go with the important ones
here. So, the timely release of request for proposals is really
important because as researchers, we are always busy with
applying for different programs, and if we don't have any
certainty in the RFPs, then probably we are not planning well,
so you may not receive quality proposals, so that is an
important thing. So, I would expect a timely release of
proposals from the SCRI program. The second one is adequate
time between release of proposals and the submission as well
because this year, we have seen with some programs, there is
only a month or maybe 2 months to apply. I am not talking about
SCRI, with other AFRI programs, so that is a limitation for us
as well in applying and providing some good proposals.
And the other one is I would say waive the matching
requirements. There is one catch there for matching funds, and
not all universities and all researchers are able to provide
matching funds. I think we have been graciously waived for the
last 5 years for matching, but I think that language still
exists in the SCRI program. So, I would say if we can look into
that and see that is waived, that would be really beneficial
for researchers that apply for these type of grants. And I
would want to add one more thing into this is also seek
constructive feedback. The program officers or managers,
whatever we call them, they need to seek some good input from
the reviewers as well because sometimes the review process
becomes more cumbersome if the applicant is not able to
understand the process, how it has gone through. So, we need
some more constructive feedback from the reviewers as well.
Ms. Salinas. So, essentially, technical assistance as you
are going through the process itself?
Dr. Sagili. Yes. Yes.
Ms. Salinas. Thank you. My time has expired. I yield back.
The Chairman [presiding.] I thank the gentlelady. I now
recognize the gentlelady from Illinois, Mrs. Miller, for 5
minutes.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our
witnesses for being here today.
Illinois is proud to be a national leader in specialty
crops. We grow more pumpkins than any other state: 11,000 acres
for jack-o-lanterns, 15,000 acres for processing, and another
10,000 acres that grow a variety of a different pumpkin
species. We produce \2/3\ of America's horseradish worth over
$10 million a year, and we rank third in popcorn production.
Altogether, specialty crops in Illinois cover over 83,000 acres
and generate nearly $\1/2\ billion annually for our family
farmers. But these farmers are being squeezed by skyrocketing
input costs, labor shortages, pests and disease, and unfair
foreign competition. Too often, Washington's policies ignore
our specialty crop producers. Our farmers don't want handouts.
They want Washington to get out of the way, they want a fair
shake in the marketplace, and they want the tools to keep
producing the safest, healthiest food in the world right here
at home. As we start having more farm bill discussions, we must
ensure it reflects America First agriculture: supporting our
growers, strengthening our food security, and keeping our
family farms and business for the next generation.
So, my first question is for Dr. Boring. The Specialty Crop
Block Grant Program provides critical research and resources
for farmers. How can we strengthen this program so Illinois
growers have the tools that they need to succeed?
Dr. Boring. Appreciate that question. I would say a big
step has already been taken of increasing the funding capacity
within the program.
Mrs. Miller. Yes.
Dr. Boring. That certainly helps. I think those steps that
have been implemented over time of increasing the program
flexibility of state determining priorities, that regional work
that is often so fundamental for how universities put adequate
resources into a problem, I think those have been reflective
and are positive steps here that the industry has articulated
here. I would say, really, that continued view of the relative
importance of these is the cultural identity of places
increased predictability around what that funding is going to
look like into the future so that researchers, commodity
organizations can build long-term strategic approaches about
how we are developing solutions.
Mrs. Miller. Yes.
Dr. Boring. It is the nimbleness of how we respond to these
ongoing threats, but at the same time, the ability to invest in
a comprehensive strategy on a multiyear basis of how we develop
markets more broadly and address some of these broader concerns
is really critical, and it represents a new area of investment
that the program could pursue.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you. Mrs. Brennan, labor shortages and
rising crop costs are squeezing family farms. What improvements
to crop insurance and support for mechanization would help U.S.
producers compete fairly against cheap foreign labor?
Mrs. Brennan. Yes. I think to your point about
mechanization and automation, I think any additional Federal
strategic investments in those areas will help tremendously for
the family farmer, or for any farmer of specialty crops, so I
would be supportive of that and I can pass along additional
feedback.
Mrs. Miller. Yes.
Mrs. Brennan. But again, the Specialty Crop Farm Bill
Alliance priorities details that pretty specifically, and I
think will act as a resource.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you, and, Mr. Frantz, combining high
input costs and foreign imports, it has been undercutting our
growers. What changes to crop insurance would give American
specialty crop producers a fair shot instead of pricing them
out of the market?
Mr. Frantz. Thank you, Congresswoman, for your question.
First of all, as a person born on Halloween, I thank you for
those pumpkins that your state is growing.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Frantz. To your question about automation, to my
colleague, I would ask that you would work to get tariffs
removed from automation machinery that comes, in the nursery
industry's case, often from Western Europe, nations like
Holland. The Netherlands lead the world in nursery automation,
and it would be extremely helpful to us as growers to have
tariffs removed on specific pieces of machinery that cannot be
sourced domestically. To your question, Congresswoman, on
insurance, as I have stated previously, this specialty crop
industry, especially nurseries where we have so much diversity
on farm crop diversity, it is very challenging for the programs
to be effective. And so, I would ask for an opportunity to
brief you in more detail where we could explain what we think
is a better path forward to make nurseries be more eligible for
specialty crop insurance. Thank you.
Mrs. Miller. Great. And we do want free and fair trade,
which is the purpose of the tariffs, and we do want to be
producing our own equipment here. So, thank you very much, and
I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentlelady yields back. I now recognize
the gentlelady from Maryland, Mrs. McClain Delaney, for 5
minutes.
Mrs. McClain Delaney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank
you all for being here today. I think you are almost at the
tail end, and I appreciate you pushing through.
So, I represent Maryland's 6th District, where specialty
agriculture is both a key driver of our local economy and an
essential part, really, of our farming cultural identity, from
the Ag Reserve to the mountains of western Maryland to our
Chesapeake Bay. And our region has a diverse climate which
supports a wide range of crops, including my visits to Lewis
Orchards, Butler Orchard, and Linganore Winecellars, and this
incredible richness and diversity really informs a lot of my
questions. As we discuss the challenges and opportunities
facing this sector, I look forward to hearing your insights.
And I do have a few questions, but I do have to say I really
appreciated your testimonies related to the need for a stable
legal workforce, really focusing on increasing inflationary
pressures, including tariffs and items that can't be procured
here, like peat moss and burlap, which I didn't know about, and
the dire need for affordable, tailored crop insurance. And, Mr.
Frantz, I am an Idaho potato farmer's daughter, so I liked
those comments.
So, my first about risk mitigation. Mr. Frantz, farming has
always been risky, but with unpredictable weather, rising
costs, and changing markets, it is getting even riskier. And
recent flooding in my district shows how hard natural disasters
can hit farming and rural communities, and I often hear that
the insurance really doesn't properly reflect the actual
losses. For instance, in western Maryland, a late frost can
turn fresh fruit into processing fruit overnight. You grow over
700 plant varieties, and with that kind of diversity, the
reporting requirements on acreage and production and history
could be overwhelming. Could you tell me a little about what
changes would help with reporting requirements and insurance,
which would make it more workable for farmers?
Mr. Frantz. Thank you, Congresswoman, for your question,
and I appreciate your interest in horticulture very much. We do
have a tremendous number of crops, and it is a pretty intense
place to be keeping track of everything. We have full-time
people that all they do is drive the farm and update our
inventory in order to ensure that we are able to meet the
reporting requirements that we have in place to be compliant,
and for our sales team to be able to know what plants look like
at any given time. I also appreciate your comment about the
urgent need for a legal workforce. If I think about what I hope
everyone here remembers when we leave this hearing, it is the
urgency around the need for a labor workforce solution.
Mrs. McClain Delaney. Exactly.
Mr. Frantz. Thank you.
Mrs. McClain Delaney. So, Dr. Sagili, I have really been
impressed by your research on honeybees and nutrition and
pollination, really critical work for agriculture, and many of
our bureaus and research institutes in Maryland have focused on
a lot of that. We are proud to host USDA's Bee Research Lab at
the Beltsville Agricultural Center, BARC, and which really has
been a center of innovation for over a century. USDA's recent
proposed plan of reorganization includes closing BARC, which is
very sad to many of us within Maryland, and while I am deeply
grateful for Secretary Rollins' focus on data and open
communications and collaboration, I am also very concerned
about the long-term effects of USDA's research capacity and the
loss of decades-long institutional expertise due to the
relocations. I would really value your thoughts on why
continued investments in USDA research and institutions like
BARC matters for the field, and if time, if some of the others
could comment as well.
Dr. Sagili. Yes. Thank you, Congresswoman. So, the
Beltsville Bee Lab is really critical. It is a historical lab,
and they have a lot of specimens as well from a long time, and
I think it is a really critical we keep those labs there
because it is strategically located as well. It is not about
whether it will serve in a different location because they are
strategically located to serve the Northeast as well as all the
regions in the country.
Mrs. McClain Delaney. Exactly.
Dr. Sagili. So, we have--I think I have signed a petition
as well for that to request that the Beltsville Lab should stay
there because all researchers across the nation that do
honeybee research, they all appreciate how valuable this
Beltsville Lab is in the D.C. area.
Mrs. McClain Delaney. God bless you.
Dr. Sagili. So, appreciate your input on that as well.
Mrs. McClain Delaney. Does anyone else have any comments on
USDA and research and location?
Mr. Frantz. I will just--thank you for the question. I will
just reiterate there--come in behind and say that the
Beltsville Lab is the location where some of those trees are
located that are very permanently rooted into the ground.
Mrs. McClain Delaney. Yes. Yes. Thank you. I am running out
of time and I yield back, but I will be submitting questions
for the record. Thank you.
The Chairman. I thank the gentlelady. I now recognize the
gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Wied, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Wied. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to all of
you for being here today. As eating healthier becomes an
increasingly popular topic for the American people, I think
this discussion today is especially pertinent. I do believe
that encouraging the American people to eat healthier is
important for a strong nation and, ultimately, for our national
security. It should go without saying, of course, that meeting
the demand to do just that depends on having a specialty crop
industry.
Wisconsin is obviously known for its famous dairy products.
However, the state is also a leader in a multitude of specialty
crops. Door County in my district is globally renowned for its
cherry industry. Additionally, many people do not know that
Wisconsin produces 60 percent of the country's cranberry crop.
Other specialty crops Wisconsin leads in are snap peas,
ginseng, potatoes, carrots, and green peas. Additionally,
Wisconsin ranks third in the country for the number of organic
farms. I look forward to continuing the discussion here on how
we can better support and enhance the specialty crop industry
in the upcoming farm bill and have appreciated what we have
learned thus far.
So, this question can go to any of you. As the national
conversation, which, again, is a very, very good thing that the
American people overwhelmingly are talking about--eating
healthy, and being healthy, and living a healthy lifestyle--can
we expect that specialty crop producers as well as those who
may want to begin to produce specialty crops, are we able to
meet that demand with the current state of specialty crop
programs?
Mr. Frantz. Congressman, I will just make a quick comment
and pass it on to my colleagues, but I just want to say to you,
thank you for your support of the farm bill. And I am the
farmer on the panel, so I don't have a lot of technical
expertise, but I can tell you that AmericanHort, who I
represent today, was supportive of the last version, and we
just want to see something along the lines of what was passed
last time or what was proposed last year moved forward. In
other words, if I can just be so direct, we would be super
happy to pass what is in front of you. Thank you.
Mr. Wied. Dr. Boring?
Dr. Boring. I would certainly say that the nation and the
Upper Midwest, in particular, has the capacity for the
production to be meeting this challenge ahead of us, right, of
how we are feeding ourselves in a more wholesome manner. I
would say the way in which we go about that is very important
as well, and running parallel with the theme that food security
is national security, of certainly putting in place the
structures and the mechanisms and the policies to not only be
eating healthier, but caring and investing in where we grow
those sorts of products.
Mrs. Brennan. If you wouldn't mind, I would add this.
Obviously, we take our job very seriously to bring fresh and
healthy produce to tables across the world, but I would add
that, to the extent that Congress can reaffirm the USDA's
authority to drive domestic consumption and promotion, we would
appreciate greatly, because I think there is certainly no
shortage of a desire to grow more for folks, but that is
certainly a need that I think USDA can fill.
Mr. Wied. Great. Well, Mrs. Brennan, how do you
specifically expect organic production to fit into this
discussion?
Mrs. Brennan. I thought you would never ask. Thank you,
Congressman. I appreciate it. As you may be aware, organic
sales, specifically in crops, led by fruit and vegetables,
accounts for about 58 percent of the organic market. We see
that driving about $9 billion in sales, which is a huge
economic driver. We have seen consumption go up and interest go
up. So, we do see it as something that can drive market
advantages for us as growers, but also for anyone interested in
getting organics as well, so exciting times ahead.
Mr. Wied. Can you elaborate on the growing importance in
organic crops in our make in our agriculture?
Mrs. Brennan. Oh, absolutely.
Yes. I mean, overall, we are looking at that becoming the
economic driver around pricing, availability. I don't know if
you want me to touch on something specifically, but, I mean, I
am happy to chat further outside of this, but something we are
very proud of as a large organic grower.
Mr. Wied. Well, yes, we definitely would be open to that
outside of this. So, how should the upcoming farm bill better
support and address this growing sector, in your opinion?
Mrs. Brennan. Absolutely. I believe we have at least one
recommendation I referenced earlier, which is looking at the
transparency with which NOSB is looking at policies every 5
years. The farm bill can address some of that to bring
stakeholders to the table so that every 5 years we are looking
at the NOSB policies. They are allowing tech and the latest
information to inform what that looks like going forward.
Mr. Wied. Great. Well, thank you for this great discussion
as we all continue to make America healthy again, and it is
very important, so I appreciate it. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. I thank the
gentleman. I now recognize the gentleman from New York, Mr.
Mannion, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Mannion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the
witnesses who are here today.
Today's farm economy is flashing red due to too many
variables that are creating a lack of predictability,
increasing high input costs, volatile trade policy, uncertainty
around immigration and farm labor rules that are shifting week
to week. So, this Administration's approach has created a lot
of whiplash and not enough predictability. Shifting away from
specialty crops--my heart goes out to all of you--but also to
corn and soybean farmers across the country who have seen once-
reliable export and aid markets stall, leaving them with
plentiful harvest but too few customers because of the tariffs.
I appreciate the comments from some of my colleagues today on
both sides of the aisle as we had a discussion about automation
and farm machinery that is not produced domestically. And my
guess would be that there is very little expectation--realistic
expectation that that farm machinery and automation would
quickly be made domestically, and, therefore, our farmers need
help now.
``. . . Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes,
Duties, Imposts and Excises to pay the Debts and provide for
the common Defense and the general Welfare . . .''.\2\ I am a
team player. My team is the House of Representatives. Trade
policy is our job, but just yesterday in the Rules Committee, a
rule was passed to prevent privileged floor motions related to
tariffs from hitting the floor, so we have ceded our power.
Why? Why have we done that? It is an easy thing that we can
fix. All we have to do is our jobs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Editor's note: Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution,
the latest publishing of the pocket edition, S. Doc. 116-3,
Constitution of the United States and the Declaration of Independence,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CDOC-116sdoc3/pdf/CDOC-
116sdoc3.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In central New York, the pain of the multitude of variables
are showing up in our specialty crops. New York is the number
two apple-producing state with roughly 30.5 million bushels
projected this season. Our grapes and wine support thousands of
jobs from the Finger Lakes to the Mohawk Valley, on farms and
in packing houses, tasting rooms, and small businesses
throughout our communities. When trade relationships are fickle
and labor rules change week to week, we are not serving our
farmers well. We need to fix that. We need to fix it together,
and we can fix it because it is our job to fix it.
In the midst of these challenges, it is important to
highlight what is working. Through the Specialty Crop Block
Grant Program and Specialty Crop Research Initiative, New York
universities and growers are leveraging Federal support to
deliver practical solutions, like tackling spotted lantern fly
and fire blight and helping producers access new markets.
Recent increases for these programs were the right call. Now
USDA must keep those funding opportunities predictable and on
time so growers can plan ahead. The bottom line is that New
York farmers need open markets, a committed and legal labor
force, and science-driven resources that keep their farms
resilient, and I am ready to work with all of my colleagues to
deliver solutions to keep our ag economy strong.
As a former biology and chemistry teacher, Dr. Sagili, I am
going to ask you a question in your expert opinion, using the
research that is available. In my conversations with local
farmers, neonicotinoid seed coating is an essential tool that
they need to be able to assure their crop yields. In your
opinion, is there a significant negative impact on the honeybee
population as a result of the use of neonicotinoids?
Dr. Sagili. Yes. Thank you, Congressman. So, there has been
a lot of research in the last 15 years on neonicotinoids, and
what we have seen is it is still mixed results we are seeing or
conclusions. So, there is no conclusive evidence at this point
that just the neonics are causing it, but I think they are
contributing to some degree to the decline in bee populations,
but I don't think they are the primary cause for declines at
this point of time.
Mr. Mannion. Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. I yield back.
[No response.]
Mr. Mannion. I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. I apologize. I was
distracted but for a good reason with the baby. I now recognize
the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Bresnahan, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Bresnahan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to
the Ranking Member for holding this hearing.
As you know well, Mr. Chairman, specialty crops are one of
the cornerstones of Pennsylvania's agriculture economy,
especially in northeastern Pennsylvania, where over \2/3\ of
the crops grown in my district are specialty crops. Because of
their complexities and unique challenges, I know the specialty
crop industry often gets overlooked, even though these are
products that Americans see most when they walk into the
grocery store or a farmers' market. Reminding Americans about
exactly who and where their food comes from has been the
emphasis of my work in this Committee. Just last month, I had
the chance to visit and tour Brace's Orchard right in my
backyard in Dallas, Pennsylvania. This ninth generation orchard
is the staple of the Back Mountain community. The Brace family
grows everything from apples to peaches to fresh flowers, and
shared how they were able to provide 55,000 pounds of fresh
fruit to local food banks for distribution. These types of
stories are exactly why I introduced my bill, the Local Farmers
Feeding Our Communities Act (H.R. 4782), which will help boost
the purchasing of locally-grown food by farmers and growers
like the Braces, and ensure it is distributed to those in need
inside of their communities.
My first question is for Dr. Boring. First off, thank you
to the NASDA for your support on the Local Farmers Feeding Our
Communities Act and excited to work together to get that across
the finish line. But I also wanted to ask you to expand on the
Michigan Farm to Family Program you mentioned in your testimony
and shine some light on any lessons that Congress could take
away from this program.
Dr. Boring. Well, really, I appreciate the question on
that. I would say that the continued investment in these kinds
of areas seen as, just more broadly, advancing the public good
here, the long-term best interest of communities. Creating
meaningful ways for farms to diversify and have additional
profitability is really essential here. It speaks to the
continued investment in areas that we need to be building the
connective tissue around agrifood systems, right, of making
sure that we have capacity from institutions to have staffing
capacity, funding capacity to be valuing local production, but
also making sure that we are making investments in distribution
and transportation aggregation so that we have pathways for
small and diversified farms to be able to access markets for
the betterment of local economies.
Mr. Bresnahan. Well, thank you for that. I also noticed
that most of the specialty crop farms in my district are family
operated, small- or mid-sized, or run by beginning farmers,
and, in many cases, all three. I would welcome any feedback
from the witnesses to answer this, but I am curious about what
unique challenges these types of farmers face and how this
Committee and Congress can best support them and help set them
up for long-term success. I will continue with you, Dr. Boring.
Dr. Boring. Well, I would say the recognition of building
resiliency and diversity into our systems is for our long-term
best interest here, right? Making sure that we have the
capacity there for farms of all kinds to access markets. And
again, it is distribution, it is transportation, it is
aggregation about bringing sufficient quantities of produce
together so that we can access into markets, but the
recognition of the fact that it is going to take farms of all
kinds, sometimes with unique challenges of each individual type
of operation so we have, ultimately, resilient systems here for
the betterment of our ag economy.
Mr. Bresnahan. I appreciate that. Mr. Frantz, how about
you?
Mr. Frantz. My comment is--thank you, Congressman for the
question. I appreciate your passion for this. In specialty
crops, we do highlight our size, and often, we overemphasize
how small we are and how insignificant any one given sector
crop is, but I would highlight that the sum of the parts is we
are pretty mighty. Just the horticulture sector alone, we
contribute $348 billion to the economy across the country, and
that is--that is an outdated survey from Texas A&M. So,
collectively, us specialty crop growers are--have a substantial
contribution to the economy. Thank you.
Mr. Bresnahan. Any other witnesses? No, thanks? Okay.
Doctor?
Dr. Sagili. Yes, I can just say something about it. So, as
I think Dr. Boring mentioned, so there are unique challenges
with--we grow more than 300 different specialty crops here in
the United States, and each one comes with a different--like
for blueberries, for example, like for harvesting, we are
looking for some technology where we can have mechanized
harvesting, and it is not that easy because they are very soft
and you have to be very careful how you harvest. So, coming
back to your question, I think because of this uniqueness,
probably we need more funding to support these kind of
specialty crop industries, not just with SCRI, which I am
representing today, but for other things with crop insurance
and other things that my colleagues have spoken here.
Mr. Bresnahan. I appreciate that. Mr. Chairman, I yield
back.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize
the gentleman from California, Mr. Costa, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Costa. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Members of
the Committee here. I think it is appropriate that we take this
time, and I want to thank the panel, to discuss the challenges
of specialty crops in America. And not only to the witnesses,
but the two that are from California, obviously I have some
familiarity with your efforts, a third-generation farmer myself
and having represented nine out of the ten counties in the
Valley over the years in Sacramento and now in Washington.
We are very proud in California of our specialty crops,
although when I go to the grocery store as a person who likes
to cook and so forth, I never see any signs directing you to
the specialty crop section of the grocery store. Clearly, food
is national security, and the crops that we are talking about
today are essential to a healthy diet and nutrition daily, and
food is a national security issue. We don't treat it that way
often. In California, the farmers, ranchers, dairymen and -
women produce half the nation's fruits, nuts, and vegetables,
20 percent of the dairy production. The list goes on and on.
Last year it was $61 billion at the farmgate. Forty-four
percent of our agriculture is exported, and I want to center a
little bit on research and the issue of tariffs because I think
they are critical.
Right now, this issue of mass deportation, which has
brought fear in the agricultural labor market that I have not
seen in my entire life, 70 percent of our workforce,
unfortunately, is undocumented, and it is a problem. But
tariffs create uncertainty, and they are attacks on not only
American consumers, but also American producers, agricultural
producers, as well as manufacturers. The impact of trade, let's
start there, and I want to find out from Mrs. Brennan and Mr.
Frantz, the uncertainty that has been created over the last 6
to 8 months on these tariff wars, what does that do to your
ability to market as Grimmway Farms does so successfully, Mrs.
Brennan?
Mrs. Brennan. Yes.
Mr. Costa. And I am glad you talked about the organic
production.
Mrs. Brennan. Yes, absolutely. Thank you for your question,
and thank you for your leadership in the Valley. I will just
say, personally, I have appreciated your time in Congress very
much and your representation of our industry. I would say that
we haven't seen a direct--necessarily a direct impact for us.
However, the uncertainty is absolutely something that the
industry and specialty crop industry speaks of quite often. I
think to the extent that Congress can step in to ensure that we
have market access domestically and internationally to compete
globally is incredibly important and will continue to be
important.
Mr. Costa. Because you are price takers and not price
makers.
Mrs. Brennan. Correct.
Mr. Costa. And so, the world markets for all of the
different commodities that you grow, and the same with you, Mr.
Frantz, is depending upon what the world market is. Mr. Frantz,
you want to comment?
Mr. Frantz. Yes, Congressman. Good to see you, a fellow
Central Valley resident. Thank you for your support over the
years for our various issues, especially around the----
Mr. Costa. Mr. Gray wanted to be here. He is under the
weather, but he said to give you his regards.
Mr. Frantz. Thank you. Thank you. I will just highlight
that our industry largely is not much of an exporter, but we
are absolutely very discretionary. People buy our products on
impulse, and if they are feeling uncertain, they are less
inclined to buy discretionary items like flowers.
Mr. Costa. Let me move over to the issue of research and
development because there has been a lot of cuts that took
place with DOGE originally, resulting in over 1,600 employees
being reduced in the USDA alone. I am a big believer in public-
private partnerships, and the University of California ag
research facilities throughout the state, both at the Kearney
Ag Station and the Parlier Station, provides a lot of
innovation in terms of plant development and the plant sciences
issue. Have you found that to be an impact, Mr. Frantz? Are you
concerned about that public-private partnership, the muscle
that has really developed as a result of all that research that
takes place?
Mr. Frantz. Congressman, thank you for the question. I
don't have expertise in that area.
Mr. Costa. Dr. Sagili?
Dr. Sagili. Yes. Congressman, yes, we do have some concerns
because we do, as universities, work with USDA as partners, and
sometimes there have been long-term relationships we have
developed for doing research with USDA partners. And if we lose
workforce at the USDA, probably that is going to impact in a
big way what we have been doing for the last 20, 30 years.
Mr. Costa. And obviously, that research has led to so many
innovations in ag sciences that we appreciate today, and there
is obviously a lot more to be learned and gained with
artificial intelligence and other developments and the whole
issue of agriculture, would you say?
Dr. Sagili. Absolutely. Yes, I agree with that.
Mr. Costa. Mrs. Brennan, your Grimmway Farms is obviously a
leading developer of ag products. Do you have any partnerships
that you would like to talk about?
Mrs. Brennan. I don't today, sir, but I certainly am happy
to talk to you at another time.
Mr. Costa. Okay. My time has expired. I thank the Chairman,
and we will continue this effort and move along. Thank you.
The Chairman. I thank the gentleman, and now I recognize
the--also the gentleman from California, Mr. LaMalfa, for 5
minutes.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for having
this important Committee on our specialty crops. I wanted to
ask Mrs. Brennan there of Grimmway, well, first of all, where
do you get the seeds for those little carrots? I can't find
those.
Voice. They are little seeds.
[Laughter.]
Mrs. Brennan. Very special place.
Mr. LaMalfa. Huh?
Mrs. Brennan. Very special place.
Mr. LaMalfa. Very special place.
Mrs. Brennan. I am sure we can get you some special carrot
seeds.
Mr. LaMalfa. All right. All right, because all I get is
those big old long one, so all right. Thank you. That is not
the real question. So, I wanted to cover with you a little
bit--it is a bit of a--it is a big deal, the H-2A. We have had
a skyrocketing in the number of positions that were requested
and certified in just the last 20 years or so. And this isn't
necessarily in our Committee's jurisdiction, but would you talk
to us a moment about how important it is that we reform H-2A
and get the labor we need here, and just how difficult it is
right now, or how do do you see it? What do you see as the
future of the whole industry if it continues to be this
difficult?
Mrs. Brennan. Yes. I think, sir, we have talked a little
bit earlier on about the need for reform of H-2A. I think we
have all said something akin to that. I think I am happy to
supply with some recommendations from IFPA, who have been very
vocal with the Administration and Congress on the need to
reform that program. I think, at a minimum, Congress,
regardless of which program we are talking about, needs to step
up and step in to look at bipartisan reform because something
has got to give, frankly.
Mr. LaMalfa. Well, we took a couple good swings at it
around here before.
Mrs. Brennan. Yes, you did. We appreciate it very much.
Mr. LaMalfa. I hope we can get that momentum once again.
Mr. Frantz, again, both two fellow farming operations. In
California, I grow a little bit of rice up north of both of
you, and, indeed, California has its challenges. But, Mr.
Frantz, on crop insurance, and something we have fought really
hard to improve and have more strong in the last two farm bills
here especially, as a specialty crop grower, tell me what do
you see as it--for a diversified farm and a specialty crop how
well the insurance policies, the availability, et cetera, is
working for you with, in your line as well as we know there are
a lot of tree nut crops, vineyards, things like that all have
to try and deal with this. Tell me a little bit about how this
works out for you or if they even pencil out.
Mr. Frantz. Yes. Congressman LaMalfa, good to see you. Good
to see another Californian. Thank you for your question, and
thank you for your support for our industry over the years. As
I previously shared in my testimony, the specialty crop growers
like myself, who have a large diversity of crops on farm at any
given time, find that the current insurance programs are just
not workable. The threshold to trigger a payable event are,
essentially, unattainable, and so we would love to work with
you. We have mentioned the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance,
AmericanHort, we have recommendations to bring the table, and
we would hope you would consider moving them forward. Thank
you.
Mr. LaMalfa. Okay. Do you see the work so far in the farm
bill as a step in the direction towards that, or does it still
need improvement?
Mr. Frantz. I believe it still needs improvement, but we
certainly see the farm bill as a step in the right direction,
and we hope it gets passed.
Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, certainly. Okay. And for anybody on the
panel that cares to, I mean, disasters just seem like they are
inevitable in this country, so it is not with--it is not when--
it is going to be when, right, of either on price or,
certainly, on what nature does. So, how much can any individual
farmer endure? Are you going to be even close to being made
whole? I think we know the answer to that. It is just a matter
of can you scrape by, but the feedback I am getting is that
specialty crop folks especially are getting the leftovers. They
are on the bottom of the pot year after year in these issues.
And again, Federal Government can't do everything for
everybody. That is a reality as well, but would you on this
panel give me a perspective of how disaster funding rollouts
have actually worked out in the areas of specialty crops, and
also offer maybe can Congress and the USDA take notes to make
future process of work a little bit better for not just the
Title I's at the top, for specialty crop as well, and I will
give you 30 seconds to do it.
Mrs. Brennan. Yes. I mean, I would just speak directly to
our recommendations, which include the establishment of an
industry-led advisory committee at RMA; additionally, greater
flexibility in the development of the policies around specialty
crops in that area; and then enhance data collection for
specialty crops. But then I would also turn to the real need
for Congress to remove or clarify that all revenue insurance
policies should be agnostic to what causes the loss.
Mr. LaMalfa. Yes.
Mrs. Brennan. Those are some very specific items.
Mr. LaMalfa. Okay. Thank you. Anybody else for a few
seconds?
Mr. Frantz. I was just going to thank you for your
highlighting of change of weather. Certainly, in California, we
see more heat, we see more cold, we see more dry, we see more
rain, and so certainly climate variability is real as it
pertains to crop insurance.
Mr. LaMalfa. Okay. Thank you. That underlines why I need to
have more water storage to catch the water before it runs away
instead of being snow sitting up there on the mountain all
year, so let's build some dams, and I will yield back, Mr.
Chairman. Thank you much.
The Chairman. I thank the gentleman. I will now recognize
the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Davis, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Davis of North Carolina. Thank you so much, Mr.
Chairman and to the Ranking Member, and to our witnesses who
are here today.
North Carolina's 1st District is well known for different
row crops grown in the district. There are many that may not
know, but we tend to rank number one with sweet potato
production, and I am really proud of that. In addition, the
district produces countless berries, vegetables, cultivated
trees. With this increased production level comes the need for
a stable and affordable agricultural workforce. So, I would
like to focus my attention and question briefly on the H-2A
program. For any of the witnesses, what specific challenges,
especially related to cost and harvesting, do specialty crop
producers face compared to those when using the H-2A program?
Mr. Frantz. Congressman, thank you for your question. I
personally am not an H-2A user, but a large number of
nurseries, especially on the East Coast, South and Northeast,
are, and it is an indispensable program for them. Their
consistent voice is, A, the high cost of the program, the
difficulty and the challenging neighborhood environment to
navigate to get employees on your farm. They would ask that
there be a single electronic application process to be able to
streamline getting people onto farm. And the last one is just
the variability of cost, even inside the same contract year.
So, it is very challenging to budget if you end up paying
different wages halfway through your contract than what you
thought you were signing up for. So, again, it is
indispensable. We don't want to see it go away, but it could
absolutely--as you have heard us previously testify, could use
some help. Thank you.
Mr. Davis of North Carolina. Thank you for that. As I said
earlier, sweet potatoes are huge for us in North Carolina.
North Carolina farmers produce over 60 percent of the total
U.S. market. In 2024, these exports totaled over $129 million,
so access to foreign markets is a top priority for NC-1 sweet
potato farmers. Mrs. Brennan, given your role as the Chair of
the International Fresh Produce Association's Public Policy
Committee, can you speak on the challenges that specialty crop
producers and consumers have faced this year with so much trade
uncertainty?
Mrs. Brennan. Thank you, Congressman. I appreciate the
question. I think our members see a lot of benefit in programs
like Market Access and Technical Assistance for Specialty
Crops, TASC. I think they see that as critical in opening new
foreign markets. I think I would also add that there is a real
need, and we have referenced it earlier in the hearing, for
some trade enforcement to protect the growers here and
resources to ensure that they can compete fairly in the global
market.
Mr. Davis of North Carolina. Well, thank you so much for
that as well. The Minor Crop Pests Management Program, or the
IR-4 program, has been essential for specialty crop growers in
their fight against different pests. The program allows the
crop protection industry to provide safe, effective, and
economical crop production products for growers of specialty
crops. For all of the witnesses, anyone who would like to weigh
in here, what specific ways has the IR-4 program benefited the
specialty crop industry?
Mr. Frantz. Congressman, thank you for the question. IR-4
is especially important for the nursery industry because many
of our crops are so small that our pesticide or fungicide
needs--the usage--the quantities usage is so small that private
chemical companies don't wish to invest in pursuing that
particular market. So, we can use the Federal funds to help
leverage research in continuing to develop additional crop
protection tools that are vital for our crops. Thank you.
Mr. Davis of North Carolina. Anyone else?
Mrs. Brennan. I would add just one additional thing. I
think there is a very direct ask from the industry that
Congress would provide no less than $25 million annually to
that program to--and more. We will take more, believe me, to
ensure that we have the crop protection tools necessary.
Mr. Davis of North Carolina. Okay. Well, let me say, Mr.
Chairman, to the Ranking Member, thank you so much for this
panel today, and to all of our witnesses, thank you for being
with us today. I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize
the gentlelady from Texas, Ms. De La Cruz, for 5 minutes.
Ms. De La Cruz. Thank you so much to all of our witnesses
for being here, and thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member,
for holding this very important meeting. My name is
Congresswoman Monica De La Cruz, and I have the honor of
representing deep south Texas, including the McAllen-Edinburg
area, which we are known for our citrus and for our specialty
crops. So, this was very important that not only that I attend,
but that we hear from those specialists in the area and what we
can do better.
In my district, my constituents, my farmers and ranchers
have complained about two things, one being the 1944 water
treaty (Treaty Series 994, Utilization of Waters of the
Colorado and Tijuana Rivers and of the Rio Grande) and how the
Mexican Government has failed to abide by the treaty, thus, not
giving our farmers and ranchers the water that we have
desperately needed. This is not a new problem. It has been a
problem for over 80 years, and, sadly, previous to me becoming
the Congresswoman for south Texas, there was nothing done about
it, and even more sad because of the lack of effort that was
done by the former Congressman in this area, sadly we lost the
only existing sugar mill in Texas. And what a devastation for
our economy, for the loss of jobs, and those farmers and
ranchers who just--those farmers who just worked years doing
something that they loved.
Thankfully, earlier this year, under a Trump presidency, we
were able to do two things. The first is hold the Mexican
Government accountable and force them to give us the water that
they owe us, and the second is to give them the economic relief
so that they could keep their farms and keep farming because we
were very, very close to losing our citrus industry. So, I am
very glad that I was able to work with the Chairman here of the
Agriculture Committee, as well as Secretary Rollins and
Secretary Rubio, and, of course, the White House, having their
support.
But the fight is not over, and, in fact, when I have been
listening here in this hearing, I am hearing things that I have
heard over and over again. Number one, from the H-2A Working
Group that the Chairman put together, and, actually,
Congressman Gabe Vasquez mentioned it, and it was simple
process and simple changes that we could make to the H-2A
program that would make significant difference. That is why I
proudly introduced something called the Bracero Program 2.0 Act
(H.R. 4367) because it has common sense, and I see Michael
writing it down. Thank you. That is the Bracero Program 2.0. A
lot of people know this Bracero Program was in the 1960s. It
was widely successful, and what it did was it helped our
farmers bring over the labor that they needed to help them
farm. This is hard work, and we want to make sure that we have
a process in place to get the labor market that we need, and
what this will do is ultimately drive down prices and also save
farms because, right now, they are having such a hard time
finding labor.
So, what does the Bracero Program do? This legislation will
streamline the application process, which I heard earlier--just
a second ago. Someone was saying we need to streamline the
process so that there are not so many applications to do, but
we have one process. We also expand the H-2A access to
greenhouses and, what we have heard over and over today, make a
fair wage calculation. The current AEWR calculation is complex,
and what we want to do is we want to make it a regional
calculation, which we heard over and over again over these last
several hours, allow for a 12 month contract instead of a 10
month contract, have regional labor permitting, and single
petition for staggering needs, and then, of course, streamline
recruiting. Does that sound like something that would help our
ag community? Is that a yes? Is anybody a no? Go ahead,
Michael.
Mr. Frantz. Congresswoman, thank you for your comments. I
just want to start by saying some of my best friends in life
would--only are citizens and present in my world because of the
Bracero Program, so I am very familiar with it and very
supportive. As far as your bill, I haven't seen it, but I know
the association I am representing today look forward to reading
it and getting involved, so thank you for what you are doing.
Ms. De La Cruz. Well, I will leave you with this. We have
over 20 organizations and associations, everybody from the
Texas Farm Bureau to the Watermelon Association, the Pecan
Association, that is backing this important Act. So, I ask my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to look for this piece of
legislation and get on it so that we can help our farmers and
ranchers today. Thank you. I yield back.
Mrs. Cammack [presiding.] The gentlewoman yields back. The
chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Connecticut, Mrs.
Hayes.
Mrs. Hayes. Thank you, and thank you to our witnesses for
being here today and for your testimony.
Specialty crops account for a large portion of the farm
economy in Connecticut. According to the 2022 Census of
Agriculture, over $362 million of farm sales in Connecticut
came from nursery, greenhouse, floriculture, and sod growers.
You probably guessed I am from Connecticut. I am sorry. I
should have said that. An additional $89 million in sales comes
from farms producing vegetables, fruits, or nuts.
Unfortunately, the number of farms has declined in recent years
with the total farmland area in Connecticut declining by about
2,000 acres between 2022 and 2024. This reflects a nationwide
trend. A combination of high land prices and limited safety net
options makes it extremely difficult for Connecticut farmers to
recover from a poor harvest or an economic downturn. I
reintroduced the Save Our Small Farms Act of 2025 (H.R. 2435),
legislation that would help farmers with limited access to crop
insurance receive more accurate pay-outs from the Noninsured
Disaster Assistance Program, while creating an onramp to a
Whole-Farm Revenue Protection Program, which can better serve
small, diversified operations like the ones I represent in my
home State of Connecticut.
Mr. Frantz, your testimony mentioned the need for crop
insurance reforms, and your materials included a recommendation
that the Whole-Farm Revenue Protection Program be updated. Can
you talk a little bit about why traditional crop insurance
offerings are insufficient for the horticulture industry and
the types of growers that I just described?
Mr. Frantz. Thank you, Congresswoman. I appreciate the
question. The Whole-Farm Program requires, at a minimum, 50
percent loss before a payout can occur. And so, for us nursery
folks across the country who have a broad diversity of crops on
our farm at any given time, it is essentially impossible to
have half of them die because of any one given event. Anything
can happen. For example, where I am from in California, a
freezing kill is our biggest single risk. Well, at any given
time, at least half of the plants we grow are--they don't
freeze. They are for cold markets, and so, even if we had a
killing frost that took out \1/3\ of our citrus production, it
still wouldn't be a payable event. So, that is our concern
around the Whole-Farm Program.
Mrs. Hayes. Thank you. That is a great example because I
know we encourage these small farmers to diversify so that they
are not in these situations, but by doing that, they are
basically pricing themselves out of these programs. The cost of
insurance is only one barrier that producers face when trying
to gain coverage. In parts of the country, like New England,
there are no viable insurance policies for farmers to purchase
in the first place. The agents have no incentive to create new
products. For those who cannot access insurance, USDA offers
limited resources. Producers face delays and burdensome
paperwork for payments that do not cover the value of their
assets, while extreme weather, which threatens their
livelihood, is becoming more frequent. Mr. Brennan, in your
testimony, you said USDA must be empowered to develop a better
safety net for specialty crop growers. Can you tell us what
Congress can do to create practical and competitive insurance
coverings--offerings in places like New England and similar
regions? I am sorry, Mrs.
Mrs. Brennan. That is okay.
[Laughter.]
Mrs. Brennan. You can call me whatever you would like. It
is okay.
Mrs. Hayes. No, no, no.
Mrs. Brennan. Thank you for the question. I appreciate the
sentiment in your comments. I think the Specialty Crop Farm
Bill Alliance has a pretty hefty list of recommendations that
includes a number of items. One thing that comes to mind, and
just to sort of riff off of what Mr. Frantz said, is that there
is a real call to create an advisory committee at RMA that
would inform what that crop insurance could look like from the
perspective of a producer and specialty crop grower. So,
bringing that voice to the table would go a great deal of a way
to where we need to be tomorrow.
Mrs. Hayes. Thank you. On this Committee, I really try to
amplify the voices of small farmers because the only way our ag
ecosystem works is if everybody feels represented and included.
And while much of the work that we do really can be--is to the
benefit of large farmers and people who are single-industry
producers, there are lots of other farmers who, either by
design or default, end up not being able to access these
programs. And we really have an opportunity on this Committee,
based on the testimony of people like you, to really think
about the nuances that our farmers face and our ag producers
face, and make sure that we are doing the most good across the
entire industry. And with that, I yield back.
Mrs. Cammack. The gentlelady yields back. The chair now
recognizes herself for 5 minutes.
I would like to thank our witnesses for appearing before us
today, and as a Floridian and the lone Floridian on this
Committee, I am particularly excited about this topic.
Obviously, home to over 300 specialty crops, Florida is a
leader in this space, and so it is an honor to not only serve
on this Committee, but to be the voice on behalf of the
thousands of producers that call the Sunshine State home. The
latest Census of Agriculture proves the robust nature of
Florida's specialty crop industry. In 2022, the state sold over
$1.4 billion, with a B, dollars of fruits, tree nuts, and
berries, $3.4 billion in nursery greenhouse floriculture and
sod, and over $1.9 billion in vegetables, melons, potatoes, and
sweet potatoes. These specialty crops represent more than half
of the total value in agriculture sold this year.
Now, I know it is not the purview or jurisdiction of this
Committee, but I would be remiss if I did not mention the
importance of labor in today's hearing as we all know that
specialty crops require a tremendous amount of labor. And as I
speak to our producers around the state and, quite frankly,
around the country, we all recognize that there is a dire need
for reliable and affordable labor, but we have a challenge in
this country. I am hopeful that one day we can have a
conversation about the need for reforms, and the specialty crop
research also that is so dire for this industry, I am hopeful
that we can have a different conversation about keeping the
industry resilient and well-funded.
So, I am going to begin with you, Mr. Frantz. You had
mentioned, talking to my colleague from California, that the
farm bill was a step in the right direction. Now, as you know,
Florida's nursery and ornamental industry is one of the largest
in the United States, yet it faces hurricane risk, pest
threats, and supply chain disruptions. Specifically, what
improvements could be made to crop insurance and disaster
relief programs to better serve our nursery and specialty crop
producers? And I know that we know the shortcomings broadly,
but if you could speak to specific fixes that Congress could
undertake, that would be appreciated.
Mr. Frantz. Congresswoman, if you will indulge me, I am
going to answer your question because you said hurricanes,
slightly different. You have a booming citrus industry in
Florida. You are the most important--one of the most important
industries you have in your state. There is a particular
request I have of this Committee----
Mrs. Cammack. I am all ears.
Mr. Frantz.--and that is that there are challenges in the
citrus protocol, the citrus regulations that deal with what to
do with breaches. We grow our citrus inside USDA-certified
houses that exclude pests in order to prevent your citrus
orchards from the continued spread of HLB. When hurricanes come
or even small breaches, but, certainly, hurricanes are a
significant factor in a big one, it is very difficult, if not
impossible, for the nursery growers in your state to get
recertified, and in some cases, the lack of recertification is
more impactful to their business than the hurricane itself. And
so, it would be enormously helpful if we could see some sort of
help getting an update to a decade-old regulation that is still
waiting for improvements from industry to make the breach
protocol be more effective on our nurseries and farms.
Mrs. Cammack. That is very helpful. Thank you.
Mr. Frantz. Thank you.
Mrs. Cammack. Thank you, and I want to echo, I mean, the
citrus industry, as we know, you can't really talk about
Florida without talking about citrus. And I am fearful that
with every grove that goes under and another housing
development replaces it--that just breaks my heart--that could
be the final crop. So, that is something very, very tangible
that I believe we can undertake, and I will follow up with you
to see if we can get that addressed immediately.
Mr. Frantz. Thank you. I appreciate it.
Mrs. Cammack. Thank you. Dr. Boring, based on your
experience, can you share the uncertainty around the farm bill
reauthorization, specifically, how that impacts investment
decisions and planning for the following season?
Dr. Boring. Certainly. I think you really touch on that as
one of the more significant barriers that growers, I know, in
Michigan and across the country continue to experience is the
uncertainty. There are certainly ramifications around trade, of
what that looks like moving forward, but the standing up of
some of these more significant, more comprehensive risk
management strategies. I will additionally highlight some of
the concerns and the pressures of uncertainty on permanent
crops of how growers need to forecast far into the future of
what return-on-investment is going to be. So, oftentimes, when
we are establishing asparagus, apples, cherries, there is a
delayed payoff there before those crops become fruit bearing,
that we can start gathering investments.
Mrs. Cammack. Yes.
Dr. Boring. So, growers in those industries, in particular,
are really plagued by the uncertainty that is currently out
there with some of the uncertainties, certainly, around the
farm bill about how we make long-term bets on the futures of
these industries when there is so much hanging out there that
we are just not sure about it this time.
Mrs. Cammack. No, thank you. I agree wholeheartedly. The
uncertainty is absolutely something that has plagued the
industry, and we need to do a better job here in Congress in
delivering. So, my time has expired. At this time I wish to
recognize the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Thanedar.
Mr. Thanedar. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you,
Ranking Member, for organizing this hearing, and, certainly,
welcome to all of our esteemed panelist here. Particularly, I
want to welcome Dr. Tim Boring, a fellow Michigander. Good to
see you, sir, here. My name is Sri Thanedar. I proudly
represent Michigan's 13th Congressional District, including the
great City of Detroit, and I want to particularly talk about
Detroit, and I understand, Dr. Boring, as you said, Michigan is
a leading specialty crop state with over 300 different crops.
I want to focus a little bit on Detroit, which is a big
part of my district, 35 percent at or below poverty level.
During COVID, our city indiscriminately suffered. Lack of
nutritional products is a huge issue. Now with the SNAP cuts,
that is just going to go into a huge disadvantage, many food
desserts in my district at--in Romulus and parts of Detroit,
and I have first time seen constituents, the only access to
food is gas stations. With lack of public transportation, there
is no other place they could go receive food. We do have a lot
of blight and a lot of empty spaces. I see homes, and then I
see another block empty. What can we do to encourage urban
farming? I know there are some good efforts in Detroit, but not
enough to provide the good nutrition my constituents need and
deserve, and with the lack of SNAP funding, this is going to be
a critical issue. How can the farm bill that is coming up--how
can that make a difference for urban farming? How can we get
good, nutritious food in the hands of people?
Dr. Boring. Well, I will say that Detroit has really been a
pioneer in the urban ag effort across the country, and I will
commend the city for making investments, of standing up an
office of sustainability and funding positions within city
government that recognize the importance of urban agriculture.
Visiting so many of the farms in the Detroit area, it has
really struck me of the power of food as culture, as social
connectedness, of economic opportunities in places that don't
often have enough of those.
So, one of the big emphases in our department of how we
have sought to increase economic opportunity in the livability
of places, certainly I think it is an important pathway in
rural America that has got a number of challenges. But the same
kind of power of those programs to urban areas as well, to
increase livability of places, to increase economic
opportunities, to build social culture, to invest in a
meaningful way into the future of communities, and a lot of
that is food, right? So, it has really struck me as the power
of this kind of work to transcend geographies and particular
demographic areas. The recognition of agriculture as a way that
moves all of us ahead is really critical how we frame this
issue as an approach to the work.
Mr. Thanedar. Thank you. Thank you, and I want to
particularly honor our former U.S. Senator, Debbie Stabenow,
and her great work in the agriculture area. I want to go back
to the climate vulnerabilities, and anyone on the panel, how
can the farm bill help mitigate some of the climate
vulnerabilities for small farmers?
Dr. Boring. I will talk very briefly. The pieces of how we
potentially link conservation programs with risk mitigation and
the recognition of investments in the soil capacity to weather
drought, to weather too much rain, those have demonstrable
benefits of how we build in resiliency. And it becomes hard
sometimes of how we bring together siloed programs in different
areas, but I think there is a lot of power there about how we
more effectively use taxpayer dollars to achieve goals on
multiple different fronts.
Mr. Thanedar. Thank you, Dr. Boring, and my time is up, so
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman [presiding.] I thank the gentleman, and before
we adjourn today, I invite the Ranking Member to share any
closing comments that she might have.
Ms. Craig. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I so appreciate the
opportunity to listen and to learn from our witnesses here
today. It is no surprise that America's specialty crops are
valued at over $115 billion annually, and that our fruits,
vegetables, tree nuts, spices, and decorative plants are
enjoyed worldwide. We have heard from a wide range of
stakeholders that interact with the farm bill's specialty crop
programs and have shed light on these programs' successes and
opportunities for improvement. As we wrap up this examination
of the state of the specialty crop industry, it is clear that
folks across this industry face unique challenges that make it
even more difficult to navigate, farm bill uncertainty, labor
shortages, disaster recovery, and the ever-changing tariffs. I
would like to thank our witnesses again for their time and
expertise here today, and I remain committed to continuing this
conversation and working on tailored and permanent legislative
solutions to make sure that the specialty crop industry is
adequately supported by the Congress. Thank you again, and I
yield back.
The Chairman. I thank the Ranking Member. I also want to
lend my thank you to our witnesses for bringing your expertise
to the table here and helping us shape future policy that we
will see here. Thank you to all the staff that have worked so
hard to make sure that we were prepared for and, quite frankly,
were able to conduct this without a glitch. It was much
appreciated.
While the specific number of specialty crops grown in the
United States is not fixed due to ongoing innovation and
variety, the total number of varieties grown is somewhere well
over 1,000 in our country. H.R. 1 not only recognizes the
importance of specialty crops, but delivered significant
support for specialty crops. Whole-Farm Revenue coverage is
increased to 90 percent to expand access for specialty crops.
The AGI limitation waiver, if a producer's income has 75
percent or more income from the farming or ranching, will allow
them to take advantage of programs like NAP and TAP, which will
create more data for RMA to create more insurance policies for
specialty crops; the doubling of Market Access Program and the
Foreign Market Development Program; $95 million a year increase
to the Specialty Crop Research Initiative; $15 million increase
in Specialty Crop Block Grant Program; $15 million increase in
Plant Pest and Disease Management and Disaster Prevention
Program.
And I will say this was--these were things that are now law
as of July 4, 2025, when we included Farm Bill 1.0 in the H.R.
1, but these are all initiatives that we really developed in a
bipartisan way under the Farm, Food, and National Security Act
of 2024 (H.R. 8467), and we did that working with you all. You
all have been at the table. Whether it has been here in
Washington or, quite frankly, those farm bill listening
sessions in about--I do not know where we are--42 different
states, one territory, you all have been at the table and
helped us to shape those--what we were able to achieve using
the vehicle that was presented to us, which was the Budget
Reconciliation Act, but there is more that remains to be done.
That was very clear from your presentations, your written
testimony, your oral testimony, and the interactions with all
the Members here on the Committee.
We need workforce certainty. Without it, we have food
insecurity, which leads to national insecurity. We need new
trade wins that benefit specialty crops. We need the opening of
the humanitarian aid pipeline that includes specialty crops so
that it is another market for us as we serve people in other
countries that are living in conditions of famine and
starvation. We need fixes to other things that, as we go
forward, we know that we need to do with Farm Bill 2.0, is
fixes to the research programs, carve-outs for mechanization
and automation. We need to improve Specialty Crop Block Grant
to enhance producer collaboration with states, reauthorize the
market access programs for specialty crops with further
improvement to crop insurance. My prediction is until we are
done with adding what we have accomplished with Farm Bill 1.0
with what we know and we need to do in 2.0, and your testimony
has been very instructive of what we need to do, we will have
probably the strongest and the best farm bill for specialty
crops that we have ever seen. And so, thank you for being at
the table to help to shape that.
So, under the Rules of the Committee, the record of today's
hearing will remain open for 10 calendar days to receive
additional material and supplementary written responses from
the witnesses to any question posed by a Member.
This hearing of the Committee on Agriculture is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 1:35 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
Submitted Report by Hon. David Rouzer, a Representative in Congress
from North Carolina
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Prepared by the NC Chamber
A Broken Baseline: The Flawed Economics Behind AEWR Calculations
Blake Brown, Hugh C Kiger Professor Emeritus, NC State University
June 16, 2025
Table of Contents
Introduction
Partners
Executive Summary
The Issue
Impacts on Fruit and Vegetable Consumption, Production and Imports
Economic Impacts
Labor Tensions in Agriculture
Conclusion
References
Introduction
Over the past decade, rising labor costs-driven largely by the
method used to set wage rates in the H-2A visa program--have reshaped
the economics of U.S. fruit and vegetable production. While intended to
protect American jobs, the Adverse Effect Wage Rate (AEWR) has
increased at a pace disconnected from broader economic benchmarks,
unintentionally accelerating offshoring of produce production, raising
food prices, and hurting rural economies.
For business leaders, this means growing instability in domestic
supplychains and increased reliance on imported perishables. For
policymakers, the trend raises critical questions about food security,
public health, and the sustainability of U.S. agricultural labor
programs.
As part of its commitment to strengthening North Carolina's
business climate and rural economies, the NC Chamber commissioned this
research to highlight the economic impact of current AEWR policy on
U.S. fruit and vegetable production, farmers, and rural communities. In
partnership with the NC Chamber, Dr. Blake Brown's research explores an
alternative economic reality if AEWR had been indexed to cost-of-living
adjustments instead of a compounding methodology, and the significant
upside in terms of jobs, production, and economic growth that could
result from reform.
Partners
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Executive Summary
The U.S. fruit and vegetable sector is facing significant
headwinds, largely due to rising labor costs associated with the H-2A
visa program. This white paper explores the economic consequences of
tying H-2A wages to the current Adverse Effect Wage Rate (AEWR)
methodology, which has led to compounding wage increases disconnected
from broader wage trends or inflation.
To assess the potential impact of a more stable wage-setting
mechanism, this paper models an alternative policy scenario in which H-
2A wages grew in line with the Employment Cost Index (ECI)--a standard
measure of U.S. wage growth--rather than the existing AEWR formula. The
report then estimates how this alternative would have influenced
domestic fruit and vegetable production, employment, and import levels
between 2010 and 2023.
Key takeaways for 2022 under an alternative AEWR policy framework
include:
518 million and 823 million pounds in additional domestic
fruit and vegetable output.
$1.073 billion in total economic impact, with 25,744 jobs
created.
290 million pounds in reduced fruit imports and 474 million
pounds in reduced vegetable imports.
These findings suggest that rethinking the AEWR methodology could
strengthen the competitiveness of U.S. agriculture, bolster rural
employment, and reduce reliance on foreign produce--all without
compromising wage standards when indexed responsibly. As policymakers
and industry leaders consider reforms to modernize the H-2A program,
aligning wage growth with widely accepted economic indicators like the
ECI may offer a more sustainable path forward.
The Issue
The minimum wage for the H-2A agricultural visa program, termed the
Adverse Effect Wage Rate (AEWR), increased over 50% from 2012 to 2022,
from a national average of $10.36 to $15.56 per hour.\1\ Social
Security benefits only increased by 29% in the same period.\2\ If the
AEWR had increased by the cost of living over this period, it would
have increased to $12.77 per hour. Rutledge, et al.\5\ provides
statistical evidence that using the current method for setting the AEWR
results in higher domestic wages which in turn cause the next year's
AEWR to rise; a self-perpetuating upward spiral.
Published studies by USDA show that rapidly rising farm labor wage
rates have negatively impacted U.S. fruit and vegetable production,
contributing to increased imports.\3\ This study examines the impact of
the actual increases in farm labor wage rates versus if the AEWR had
been based on the average annual cost-of-living increases.
Percent Increase in AEWR vs. Social Security Benefits 2012 to 2022
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Impacts on Fruit and Vegetable Consumption, Production and Imports
If AEWR increases followed U.S. cost of living increases, then the
AEWR would have been $12.77 per hour in 2022 instead of $15.56; 17.9%
lower than the 2022 rate.
Because labor is such a large share of fruit and vegetable
production expense lower wage rates have a substantial impact on fruit
and vegetable prices. In 2012, fresh fruit grown on U.S. farms
comprised 54% of U.S. fruit consumption. Consumption of U.S. grown
fruit has been declining. The country reached a tipping point in 2017--
the first year that U.S. consumed more imported fruit than U.S. grown.
In 2022, imported fruit made up 53% of U.S. consumption. The data is
not quite as dramatic for fresh vegetables, but in 2022 imported
vegetables made up 37% of U.S. consumption. However, U.S. vegetable
production continues to decline.
Labor Share of Total Cash Expenses by Crop Or Livestock Specialization,
2022
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/charts-of-note/chart-
detail?
chartId=110172]
Note: Labor expenses include the sum of fringe benefits (cash
only), hired labor, and contract labor. A farm's commodity
specialization is determined by the one commodity or related
group if commodities make up at least 50 percent of the farm's
total value of production. The specialty crops category
includes fruits, vegetables, and nursery. General cash grains
include oilseeds, dry beans, and dry peas. Other field crops
include Christmas trees, other crops, and hay. All other
livestock includes sheep, goats, aquaculture, and other
animals.
Source: USDA, Economic Research Service (ERS) using data from
the ERS and USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service 2022
Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS).
An AEWR 17.9% lower in 2022 would have resulted in lower U.S. fruit
and vegetable prices: ^1.07% for fruit and ^1.28% for vegetables. While
these reductions may not sound large, the consequent changes in fresh
fruit and fresh vegetable consumption are significant. U.S. fresh fruit
and vegetable consumption would be 108 million and 251 million pounds
higher, respectively, at the lower labor costs. While fruit and
vegetable prices decline, the lower labor costs would have resulted in
increased U.S. production of 518 million and 823 million pounds for
fruit and vegetables, respectively. Imported fruit and vegetables would
decline by 290 million and 474 million pounds, respectively. Exports of
U.S. grown fruit and vegetables also increase.
U.S. Fresh Fruit Consumption: Imported vs. U.S. Grown 2012 & 2022
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Economic Impacts
The direct impacts of increased fruit and vegetable production are
over 19,000 more farm jobs and increased farm output of $584 million in
U.S. fresh produce production (Table 1). Increased production on U.S.
farms impacts the supply chain for U.S. farming with an indirect output
increase of $734 million.
Table 1. Total Economic Impacts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Employment Output
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct 22,853 $584,256,643
Indirect 4,087 $734,174,972
Induced ^1,195 ($245,861,811)
-----------------------------------------------
Totals................ 25,744 $1,072,569,804
------------------------------------------------------------------------
More employment is created in farming but total employee
compensation on farms is lower with lower wage rates resulting in lower
employee spending (induced impacts). The total annual economic impact
is $1.073 billion with 25,744 jobs created.
Not surprisingly, California is the largest beneficiary of the
lower wage rates with 10,530 jobs created and an increase in farm
output of $281 million. The top ten states in terms of impact on
employment and farm output are given in Table 2.
The top ten industries impacted by the reduction in wage rates are
given in Table 3. The impact on economic output for various sectors is
greatest in Vegetable and melon farming, $310 million, followed by
Fruit farming, $291 million. These are followed by other industries
with support activities for agriculture and forestry having an increase
in output of $119 million. Other agricultural sectors are also among
the top ten impacted, and a number of non-agricultural industries such
as real estate, petroleum refineries and insurance carriers are among
the top ten most impacted.
Table 2. Total Impacts on Employment and Output Top Ten States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
States Employment Output
------------------------------------------------------------------------
California 10,530 $281,327,159
Washington 2,953 $75,151,450
Florida 1,087 $26,456,228
Oregon 622 $15,672,317
Michigan 694 $15,500,725
Arizona 574 $15,373,968
North Carolina 554 $15,334,998
Wisconsin 593 $13,988,534
Georgia 433 $12,070,454
New York 514 $11,758,932
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3. Top Ten Industries Ranked by Impact on Output
Industry Impact on Output
Vegetable and melon farming.......................... $310,341,075
Fruit farming........................................ $291,131,876
Support activities for agriculture and forestry...... $119,478,054
Other real estate.................................... $64,966,701
Pesticide and other agricultural chemical $59,481,557
manufacturing.......................................
Wholesale--Other nondurable goods merchant $48,481,629
wholesalers.........................................
Nitrogenous fertilizer manufacturing................. $19,734,565
Petroleum refineries................................. $16,978,075
Insurance carriers, except direct life............... $14,607,989
Other basic organic chemical manufacturing........... $10,227,947
Labor Tensions in Agriculture
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Social media post from Donald J. Trump referencing the impact
of immigration policy on the agriculture and hospitality
industries.\10\
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
News headline from MSNBC.\11\
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
News headline from The New York Times.\12\
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
News headline from The Washington Post.\13\
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
News headline from USA Today.\14\
Conclusion
A more reasonable way of setting the AEWR (e.g., indexing it to
cost of living increases) will result in more jobs for both domestic
workers and legally vetted farm workers holding government-issued
temporary visas, more economic growth in rural farming communities and
more consumption of fresh produce by U.S. consumers.
References
1. National Council of Agricultural Employers: Data and Statistics.
The AEWR National Average. https://www.ncaeonline.org/resources/data-
and-statistics/ Accessed 1/10/2025.
2. Social Security Administration: Cost-Of-Living-Adjustments.
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/colaseries.html Accessed 1/15/2025.
3. Calvin, Linda, Philip Martin, and Skyler Simnitt July 2022.
Adjusting to Higher Labor Costs in Selected U.S. Fresh Fruit and
Vegetable Industries, EIB-235, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic
Research Service.
4. Subedi, D. and A. Giri. Specialty crop farms have highest labor
cost as portion of total cash expenses. USDA-ERS. Charts of Note. 10/15/
2024. Accessed May 7th, 2025.
5. Avg. Annual Inflation Rate: Bureau of Labor Statistics.
6. Rutledge, Z., M. Castillo, T. Richards, and P. Martin. H-2A
Adverse Effect Wage Rates and U.S. Farm Wages. 2023 Working Paper,
University of CA Davis.
7. IMPLAN model, 2022 Data, using inputs provided by the user and
IMPLAN Group LLC, IMPLAN System (data and software), 16905 Northcross
Dr., Suite 120, Huntersville, NC 28078 www.IMPLAN.com.
8. Ingersoll, D. Revised Armington Elasticies of Substitution for
the USITC Model and the Concordance for Constructing a Consistent Set
for the GTAP Model. U.S. international Trade Commission. January, 2004
9. Espey, M. and D. Thilmany, 2000. Farm Labor Demand: a Meta
Regression Analysis of Wage Elasticities. Journal of Agricultural and
Resource Economics Space 25 (1): 252-266.
10. Trump, Donald J. June 12, 2025. Statement on immigration policy
and labor impacts. Truth Social. https://truthsocial.com/
@realDonaldTrump/posts/114670684664650262.
11. O'Donnell, Lawrence. June 12, 2025. ``Trump `Completely
Surrendered' on This Key Campaign Promise.'' MSNBC. https://
www.msnbc.com/topstories/latest/lawrence-odonnell-trump-surrender-farm-
workers-immigration-rcna212825.
12. Jackie Calmes and Peter Eavis. June 12, 2025. ``Trump Says
Hotels and Farmers Are Hurt by Immigration Crackdown.'' The New York
Times.https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/12/us/politics/trump-farmers-
hotels-immigration.html.
13. Allison, Natalie; LeVine, Marianne; Alfaro, Mariana. June 13,
2025. ``Despite Trump's Claim, No Policy Change Under Way for Migrant
Farmworkers.'' The Washington Post.
14. USA Today. June 12 2025. ``Trump Says Immigration Crackdown Is
Hitting Migrant Farmers, Hotel Workers.'' USA Today. https://
www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/06/12/trump-immigration-
migrant-farmers-hotel-workers-deported/84166061007/
______
Supplementary Material Submitted by Dana Brennan, Vice President,
Corporate Affairs, Grimmway Farms; on Behalf of International Fresh
Produce Association
Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance Farm Bill Policy Recommendations
119th Congress
August 5, 2025
All Programs
A Single Definition of Specialty Crops for USDA Programs
The Specialty Crop Competitiveness Act of 2004 established new
programs at USDA to meet the unique needs of specialty crops in
critical areas such as research, trade, and regional market development
and expansion. Subsequent farm bills have continued to improve and
refine these programs to meet the unique needs of specialty crops.
These initiatives are chronically under-funded and oversubscribed.
Although the OBBBA allocated significant new resources to these
programs, those investments continue to be a small fraction of overall
farm bill spending allocated to specialty crops. It is imperative that
what resources are dedicated to specialty crops not be redirected to
other crops or commodities by expanding or misinterpreting the
definition of specialty crop.
Policy Recommendation--The SCFBA opposes any attempt to
expand or misinterpret the definition of specialty crops beyond
the commonly understood meaning set forth in the 2004 Act.
The Specialty Crop Competitiveness Act of 2004 defines
specialty crop as fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits,
and nursery crops (including floriculture), and Congress should
reaffirm that, whenever practicable, the Secretary should use
this definition of specialty crops for USDA's programs and the
delivery of services to specialty crop growers.
Title I Commodity Programs
Permanent Structure for Delivering Economic Assistance to Specialty
Crop Growers
Although the SCFBA has chosen federally subsidized crop insurance
to become the primary safety net for our growers in the United States
(more details below), and reforming the crop insurance program to work
better for specialty crops is a top priority for the SCFBA, there are
times when USDA or Congress need to deliver economic assistance to
broad categories of agricultural producers quickly. USDA offers a
variety of programs to help farmers, ranchers, communities, and
businesses that have been hard hit by natural disaster events and other
economic challenges. Over time USDA and Congress have adjusted and
refined how this economic aid is delivered to specialty crop growers.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should statutorily establish
a default method for delivering direct economic assistance to
specialty crop growers that includes the following elements:
Payment limitations of not less than $900,000.
Exempt growers from AGI limitation if at least 75
percent of their income
is derived from farming activities (i.e., the OBBBA
version).
Payments calculated based on a grower's individual
aggregate specialty
crop receipts.
Allow growers to select the base year for calculating
their payments from
a predetermined selection of not less than 3 years.
Require minimal paperwork and permit growers to self-
attest under penalty
of perjury (subject to potential future audit).
Tree Assistance Program (TAP)
The Tree Assistance Program (TAP) provides financial assistance to
eligible orchardists and nursery tree growers to replant or
rehabilitate eligible trees, bushes, and vines lost by natural
disasters. TAP is administered by the Farm Service Agency (FSA).
Eligible trees, bushes, and vines are those from which an annual crop
is produced for commercial purposes. Nursery trees include ornamental,
fruit, nut and Christmas trees produced for commercial sale. Trees used
for pulp or timber are not eligible for TAP assistance.
The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 made several changes to TAP,
including removing the per person and legal entity program year payment
limitation ceiling of $125,000. It also increased the acreage cap, and
growers are eligible to be partly reimbursed for losses on up to 1,000
acres per program year, double the previous acreage. The 2018 Farm Bill
increased the reimbursement amount for applicants who meet the
definition of a beginning or veteran farmer or rancher, and the OBBBA
increased coverage levels to 65 percent and adjusted the mortality
threshold.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should provide additional
flexibility for completing TAP-funded rehabilitation by
extending the period of time from the existing 12 months to 24
months or as soon thereafter as is indicated to avoid risk of
reinfection in the case of plant diseases.
Policy Recommendation--Cumulative total quantity of acres
that can receive TAP payments for eligible participants may not
exceed 1,000 acres annually. Congress should provide USDA with
the authority to modify or waive the annual acreage cap under
exigent circumstances, such as a natural disaster.
Policy Recommendation--Reset high-density stand after loss.
TAP only permits producers to reset to their original amount
and not the updated high-density planting that they put in
after the original planting that TAP is based on. Producers
need the ability to update stand to high-density planting after
loss.
Policy Recommendation--The definition of ``eligible
orchardists'' should be amended to state, ``a person who
produces annual or biennial crops from trees for commercial
purposes.''
Policy Recommendation--Rules should be adjusted to account
for perennial crop plants with biennial production cycles, and
reimbursable costs should be broadly defined to account for any
costs incurred in the process of reestablishing,
rehabilitating, and/or nurturing plants suffering from natural
disasters back to a productive condition.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should permit FSA to extend
replanting assistance for eligible trees, bushes, and vines
that although still alive are no longer commercially viable--
e.g., they no longer produce fruit.
Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP)
NAP provides financial assistance to producers of non-insurable
crops when low yields, loss of inventory, or prevented planting occur
due to natural disasters. Since specialty crops continue to have
limited access to risk management tools NAP has been a stopgap for many
in our industry to have some type of coverage when disasters may occur.
Until the full extent of crop insurance reform proposals have been
implemented and specialty crop growers have meaningful access to
affordable and effective crop insurance, NAP will remain an important
tool for those growers and should be enhanced.
Policy Recommendation--Establish additional NAP coverage
options addressing shallower losses, as well as optional units.
Title II Conservation
Working Lands Programs
The specialty crop industry produces hundreds of diverse crops in
all regions of the country, each with their own unique production
methods, structures, and markets. The diversity of specialty crop
production in the United States presents many challenges when
administering new conservation initiatives. However, specialty crop
growers need additional tools to help them adapt and develop greater
resiliency in their operations. Considering the wide diversity of needs
across all specialty crop commodities, the SCFBA has focused on two
resource needs that affect the greatest number of our growers: flood
and drought.
Policy Recommendation--NRCS working lands programs should
include the prevention of flood and drought as a priority,
where appropriate.
NRCS Paperwork Burden
Producers find excessive paperwork a barrier to participation in
NRCS programs. Efforts were made in the last two farm bills to reduce
the paperwork burden on producers. Although these efforts have resulted
in physical paper being reduced, the paperwork has been replaced by
numerous electronic screens.
Policy Recommendation--Allow trade associations representing
producers to undertake the paperwork functions (electronic
screens) for their producers on a watershed or regional project
basis.
Title III Agriculture Trade and Food Assistance Program
Increasing the competitiveness of the U.S. specialty crop industry
is a founding principle of the SCFBA. U.S. specialty crop growers
adhere to strict U.S. regulatory requirements and buyer's standards
designed to protect the environment, provide consumers nutritious and
healthy food, and safeguard workers. Maintaining these high U.S.
standards is extremely costly. In addition, U.S. specialty crop
producers pay some of the highest agricultural labor costs in the
world. However, these investments are undermined globally when our
foreign competitors benefit from lower levels of regulatory compliance
and other associated costs and an overall significantly lower costs of
production. Farm bill programs must recognize this imbalance and
provide non-distorting support in the areas of market development,
research, innovation, and technology. This support should assist
specialty crop producers to maintain competitiveness, offset the cost
of production advantages in other countries, and ensure the continued
existence of domestic food production.
Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC)
The Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC) program funds
projects that address sanitary, phytosanitary, and technical barriers
that prohibit or threaten the export of U.S. specialty crops. Eligible
activities include seminars and workshops, study tours, field surveys,
pest and disease research, and preclearance programs. Eligible crops
include all cultivated plants and their products produced in the United
States except wheat, feed grains, oilseeds, cotton, rice, peanuts,
sugar, and tobacco. Awards are for a maximum of $500,000 per year and
for projects of up to 5 years.
The TASC program is intended to benefit an entire industry or
commodity rather than a specific company or brand. U.S. nonprofit, for-
profit, and government entities are eligible to apply. Proposals may
target individual countries or reasonable regional groupings of
countries.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should provide not less than
$9 million annually to TASC.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should clarify that the TASC
program should align with and use the definition of ``specialty
crops'' from the Specialty Crop Competitiveness Act of 2004,
i.e., fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits, and nursery
crops (including floriculture).
Specialty Crop Competitiveness
Exports play a critical role in maintaining the competitiveness of
those specialty crop sectors that are fortunate to produce more than
can be consumed in the U.S. For those export-dependent commodities, the
USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) and the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS) are critical to advancing the foreign market
competitiveness of U.S. growers, as is the Office of the U.S. Trade
Representative. It is these government agencies and their professional
staff that represent the interests of U.S. growers, open markets and
defend that access internationally. It is critical that USDA and USTR
prioritize the competitiveness of U.S. specialty crop growers and that
Congress utilize its oversight role to reinforce that mandate.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should require USDA and USTR
to issue a report on the export competitiveness of specialty
crops. In this report, special emphasis should be placed on
those barriers to trade that limit the export competitiveness
in specific markets and what steps USDA and USTR will take in
cooperation with specialty crop producers to successfully
remove those barriers to trade, including timelines for action.
A special call for comment, both public and from the
Agricultural Trade Advisory Committee for Trade in Fruits and
Vegetables, should be a condition of the report. (Note: Sens.
Crapo and Wyden introduced a bill on this topic during the
118th Congress.)
Market Access Program (MAP)
Through the Market Access Program (MAP), FAS partners with U.S.
agricultural trade associations, cooperatives, state regional trade
groups and small businesses to share the costs of overseas marketing
and promotional activities that help build commercial export markets
for U.S. agricultural products and commodities.
MAP reaches virtually every corner of the globe, helping build
markets for a wide variety of U.S. farm and food products. FAS provides
cost-share assistance to eligible U.S. organizations for activities
such as consumer advertising, public relations, point-of-sale
demonstrations, participation in trade fairs and exhibits, market
research, and technical assistance. When MAP funds are used for generic
marketing and promotion, participants must contribute a minimum ten
percent match. For the promotion of branded products, a dollar-for-
dollar match is required.
Members of the SCFBA receive approximately 25-30 percent of MAP
funding allocated by the USDA, with the majority 70-75 percent going to
non-specialty crops. Each year, more than 37 specialty crop
organizations from around the country receive more than $50 million of
the $200 million currently from this oversubscribed market development
program. The OBBBA allocated a significant amount of new funding for
USDA to carry out activities to encourage the accessibility,
development, maintenance and expansion of commercial export markets for
U.S. agricultural commodities.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should provide not less than
$400 million annually to MAP.
Title IV Nutrition Programs
Nine in ten Americans do not consume fruits and vegetables in the
amounts recommended by the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans
(DGA). Congress has an opportunity to structure farm bill nutrition
programs to address diet-related disease by increasing consumption of
fruits, vegetables, and tree nuts. Bolstering these programs both
supports the nutritional needs of Americans and improves market
opportunities for growers.
Procurement and Food Box Programs
USDA has a series of direct purchasing programs that aim to support
market prices in and out of emergencies and provide domestically grown
fruits and vegetables to food banks, schools and childcare centers,
Tribal governments, and other feeding sites. These programs include
section 32; the Food Purchase and Distribution Program (FPDP); the USDA
DOD Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program; and USDA Foods, which provides
food to the Emergency Feeding Assistance Program (TEFAP), the Food
Distribution Program for Indian Reservations (FDIPR), the Commodity
Supplemental Food Program, and some schools and childcare centers. USDA
also implemented the Local Food Procurement Agreements, Local Food for
Schools, and the Farmers to Families Program, all of which were popular
programs that were terminated for various reasons.
Policy Recommendation--In general, USDA purchasing programs
should support grower resiliency, ensure recipients have access
to a wide variety of specialty crops consistent with the
Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA), and proactively address
fruit and vegetable consumption shortfalls.
Policy Recommendation--For all of USDA's nutrition
procurement programs, Congress should direct USDA to:
1. Conduct Solicitations using factors other than lowest-cost
bid in solicita-
tions, including best value trade-off and cost-plus.
2. Purchase a greater amount and wider variety of specialty
crops to address
the under-consumption of fruits, vegetables and tree
nuts as recognized
by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and cited in
the DGA.
3. Streamline barriers for vendors including, but not limited
to, inspection
at shipping and accepting food safety certifications
beyond USDA Good
Agricultural Practices (GAP).
4. Extend USDA food distribution programs to reputable
nonprofits beyond
the TEFAP system to ensure that hard-to-reach areas,
including rural
areas, have access to nutritious foods, including
fruits, vegetables, and
tree nuts.
5. USDA has broad authority to make purchases under Section 32,
which
has been underutilized, and USDA should conduct Section
32 purchases
using all three original points of intent, consistent
with current U.S.
international trade policy: (a) encouraging the export
of farm products
through producer payments or other means; (b)
encouraging the domestic
consumption of farm products by diverting surpluses
from normal chan-
nels or increasing their use by low-income groups; and
(c) re-establishing
farmers' purchasing power.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should allow states to
reserve up to 20 percent of their TEFAP allocation for use
within the USDA Department of Defense Fresh (DOD Fresh) Program
to access a wide variety of U.S.-grown fresh produce of their
choosing.
Policy Recommendation--Existing USDA procurement and
distribution programs often inadvertently exclude a wide
variety of U.S. grown fruits and vegetables, given their
perishability and the technical nature of their supply chains.
Any food box program must ensure a standalone option for fresh
produce. (Additional commodities like dairy and meat could also
enjoy a dedicated box which would ensure appropriate
temperature controls and a more seamless experience for
farmers, distributing agencies, and the end-user.)
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
SNAP is the largest Federal Government program to address food
insecurity and presents a significant opportunity to improve dietary
quality for low-income Americans by increasing fruit, vegetable, and
tree nut consumption.
To date, the Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP) is
the only dedicated program to increase the buying power of SNAP
participants for fruits and vegetables. First included in the 2014 Farm
Bill to test whether providing incentives increased fruit and vegetable
purchases and consumption, GusNIP has shown that SNAP incentive
participants eat more fruits and vegetables than not only
nonparticipating SNAP consumers, but all Americans. However, today,
fewer than two percent of SNAP retailers offer SNAP incentives, falling
short of our nation's goals to improve dietary quality.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should continue to invest in
the GusNIP program, which pilots strategies to improve access
to and consumption of fruits and vegetables, including the ten
percent set-side for Produce Prescriptions.
Further innovations are needed to create a dedicated fruit and
vegetable benefit for SNAP participants modeled after the successful
cash value benefit (CVB) in the WIC program. Operating as a fixed
dollar amount set by the National Academy of Sciences, participants can
select the fruit and vegetable of their choice, proving to be a
flexible option across diverse cultures, seasons, and supply chain
disruptions.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should direct USDA to explore
innovative ways to promote consumption of fruits, vegetables,
and tree nuts through online retail, including the integration
with existing programs like GusNIP. With the elimination of
SNAP-Ed, additional innovation will be needed to achieve
consumption goals at the local level.
Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program
The Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP) was originally piloted
in the 2002 Farm Bill and quickly expanded to all states and
territories due to its success and popularity. A USDA evaluation found
that FFVP increases consumption among low-income students, helps reduce
plate waste at school meals, and, most notably, can reduce obesity
rates. The program is oversubscribed, with many more districts (all
low-income) applying each year than funding made available (funded
through a reservation of Section 32). With the additional awareness of
the impact of diet on children through Make America Healthy Again
efforts, the FFVP offers a turn-key and evidence-based solution to
achieve the goal of reducing diet-related disease.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should make FFVP
automatically available to any elementary school that has fifty
percent or more of its students qualifying for free or reduced-
price lunch.
Title VII Research
Advancing research and development activities to overcome existing
and upcoming research challenges in specialty crop agriculture will
require acceleration of novel, early-stage innovative agricultural
research with promising technology applications and products. Below
represents the SCFBA focus for research in the next farm bill.
Specialty Crop Research Initiative (SCRI)
The purpose of the Specialty Crop Research Initiative (SCRI)
program is to address the critical needs of the specialty crop industry
by awarding grants to support research and extension that address key
challenges of national, regional, and multi-state importance in
sustaining all components of food and agriculture, including
conventional and organic food production systems.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should reinstate the
Secretary's authority to waive the matching funds requirement.
SCRI Mechanization and Automation Fund
The availability and rising cost of labor are major limiting
factors for specialty crop producers nationwide. Demographic and
generational shifts have reduced the availability of agricultural
labor, driving a dire need for more mechanization and automation within
specialty crop agriculture. Developing these new forms of technology is
therefore increasingly important with respect to successfully growing,
harvesting, and handling specialty crops.
Policy Recommendation--Of the funds made available to SCRI in
the OBBBA, Congress should allocate $40 million in annual
mandatory spending to the research and development of
mechanized and automated tools and systems for specialty crops,
provided that any unobligated funds set aside for this purpose
return to SCRI for general use at the end of each fiscal year.
The new SCRI fund should include the following funding
priorities:
1. Projects that increase the competitiveness of specialty
crops.
2. Projects that create or improve cost-effective technologies
to reduce a
specialty crop grower's manual labor requirements and
increase the effi-
ciency of crop production, resource management,
harvesting, processing,
post-harvest technologies, and packaging through
mechanization,
automation, and other innovations and technologies.
3. Projects that increase adoption of mechanization and
automation tech-
nologies by:
Emphasizing adoption drivers that could include but
are not limited to
connectivity, autonomy, reliability, durability, in-
field validation, and
cost-effectiveness.
Investing and developing human capital to increase
the specialty crop
sector's capacity to work with new technologies, and
to manage a more
tech-focused farm workforce. (Innovations resulting
from projects will
significantly increase the resilience, economic
sustainability, and im-
pact on state and local economies of a specialty crop
sector or sectors.)
4. Projects that accelerate automation and mechanization through
prototype
development, in-field trial testing, ongoing industry
engagement, and
rapid commercialization.
IR-4 Project
The IR-4 Project serves a critically important role for agriculture
by facilitating the availability of needed pest management solutions
for specialty crops. The private crop protection industry often focuses
its product development efforts and resources on large acreage, major
row crops where potential sales are significant. As a result, specialty
crops can be left with few tools for effectively managing pests and the
tools that are made available to specialty crops can lag as to the
latest advances in crop protection. The IR-4 project aims to combat
these market inefficiencies by advancing crop protection product
registrations for the specialty crop sector.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should provide not less than
$25 million annually in mandatory funding for the IR-4 Project.
Title X Horticulture Organics, AMS, APHIS
Specialty Crop Block Grant Program
The Specialty Crop Block Grant Program (SCBGP) was created to
provide greater Federal assistance to specialty crop producers by
providing grants to state departments of agriculture to enhance the
competitiveness of those crops. SCBGP funds can support a wide array of
projects.
Policy Recommendation--Of the funds provided for the SCBGP in
the OBBBA, not less than $5 million should be reserved for
multi-state projects each year.
Organics
In 2019, 58 percent of organic sales came from crops, led by
vegetables and fruits (including berries and tree nuts) and represents
$9 billion in sales. With the growing importance of the organic
production sector in specialty crops and increasing participation
throughout the supply chain, the SCFBA continues to work with other
stakeholders on a range of initiatives to improve the National Organic
Program.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should establish a
transparent process by which USDA solicits input directly from
stakeholders every 5 years on what, if any, organic standards
need updating. The agency should then publish a list of
priorities for regulatory action and follow its existing
process and procedures to execute on that plan.
Policy Recommendation--Both USDA and the National Organic
Standards Board (NOSB) should consider the best available
information--including scientific, consumer, and market data--
when making organic policy decisions.
Domestic Promotion Activities
While individual producers may be successful at moving their
product into the marketplace, creating the dynamic that expands the
marketplace and encourages consumer commodity consumption is difficult
given the fragmented nature of specialty crop production. Many domestic
specialty crop products increasingly face competition from both less
expensive imports and branded, highly refined manufactured products
that can serve as ``like'' substitutes. Some have questioned whether
USDA has statutory authority to create and operate a domestic promotion
program to address these challenges.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should reaffirm that USDA has
the statutory authority to conduct domestic promotion
activities.
Mechanization and Automation Technology Deployment
Dependence on manual and hand labor in the specialty crop sector
continues to be the predominate method to plant, monitor, harvest, and
even package specialty crops. In fact, of the 20 most widely consumed
fruits and vegetables in the United States, 17 still require hand
harvesting. In almost all cases, hand harvesting results in higher
grower production costs resulting in higher food prices for consumers
compared to other food categories. In addition, domestic labor is
increasingly limited due to an aging work.
When mechanized and automated solutions do arrive in the
marketplace, they are often not adopted quickly as industry best
practices because they are expensive, unproven or under-tested, and
require significant grower investment.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should direct USDA to utilize
existing programs and authorities to assist specialty crop
growers with the purchase of mechanized or automated solutions.
Title XI Crop Insurance
Some specialty crop growers have utilized crop insurance
effectively for many years, and for those growers, the SCFBA focused
its efforts on enhancements that would make existing policies more
effective. Unfortunately, the vast majority of specialty crop growers
in the United States cannot utilize crop insurance in a meaningful way.
As a result, a large cross section of specialty crop growers operates
without any federally supported safety net. Reforming crop insurance to
work more effectively and affordably for all specialty crops has been
the focus of the SCFBA's effort to provide our growers with an
affordable and effective safety net.
Systemic Enhancements
The following three proposed recommendations work together to
establish a more fertile environment for producing crop insurance
policies that are uniquely suited to the needs of specialty crop
growers. (1) The establishment of an industry led advisory committee,
(2) greater flexibility in the development of new policies for
specialty crops, and (3) enhanced data collection regarding specialty
crops.
Policy Recommendation--Establish a Specialty Crop Advisory
Committee for Crop Insurance.
The Specialty Crop Advisory Committee for Crop Insurance
would supple-
ment the expertise at Risk Management Agency (RMA),
including for en-
hancing and improving existing crop insurance policies
available to spe-
cialty crops, conducting outreach to specialty crop
growers and affiliated
groups, and having a formal role in the development of
new crop insurance
policies for specialty crops.
Details of the Specialty Crop Advisory Committee for
Crop Insurance
should include:
Membership should represent a diversity of
specialty crop commodities
and the regions in which they're grown and include
individuals with ex-
pertise in crop insurance for specialty crops.
Membership on the Com-
mittee should include producers with experience with
crop insurance and
crop insurance professionals such as agents and
underwriters familiar
with specialty crop production.
The Committee would have direct influence over the
development of new
insurance policies for specialty crops, amendments to
existing insurance
policies for specialty crops, as well as RMA's outreach
to and engagement
with specialty crop growers.
The chair of Specialty Crop Advisory Committee
would automatically
serve on the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation's Board
of Directors.
USDA's existing Specialty Crops Coordinator would
serve as the RMA
staff liaison to the Advisory Committee.
Policy Recommendation--Require enhanced flexibility in the
application of 508(h) standards required to create new
insurance policies for specialty crops.
The application of statutory requirements related to
data, actuarial sound-
ness, and marketability, among others, can be subjective.
RMA and the
FCIC are accustomed to working with row crops, which have
more uniform
and transparent markets and a longer history of
participation in the Fed-
eral Crop Insurance Program than specialty crops.
Congress should require RMA and FCIC to exercise greater
discretion and
flexibility when evaluating the merits of newly proposed
specialty crop in-
surance policies, guided by the Specialty Crop Advisor
Committee for
Crop Insurance.
Policy Recommendation--Enhance USDA's capacity to collect
data that would be useful to the creation and administration of
crop insurance policies for specialty crops.
In addition to establishing an Advisory Committee and
the enhanced flexi-
bility for specialty crop insurance policy development,
requiring USDA to
acquire more and better data relevant to the creation and
administration
of specialty crop insurance policies should result in
greater availability for
a greater number of individual specialty crop
commodities.
Conduct a pilot program to create a pricing library for
agents and insurance
providers using data from--AMS, NAP, existing insurance
policies approved
by the FCIC Board, land-grant colleges or universities
and other institu-
tions of higher education, grower boards or commissions,
and other relevant
sources.
Establish a presumption that requires USDA RMA to use
available data
whenever possible when considering a new or expanded crop
insurance pol-
icy for specialty crops. (Under current practice, RMA
does not use data from
neighboring counties, NAP, or even other existing
comparable crop insur-
ance policies.) The Specialty Crop Advisory Committee for
Crop Insurance
should have a formal role in evaluating and determining
when and how to
use existing data.
Under current practice, RMA will not use data from
neighboring coun-
ties, NAP, or even other existing crop insurance
policies.
Allow prices and yields used to establish coverage
in other Federal crop
insurance policies or from neighboring counties (when
relevant) to be
used as prices and yields for new or expanded policies.
Establish a process for records and acreage
reports submitted by pro-
ducers for NAP must be accepted as documentation for
the requisite ac-
tual production history for other policies.
Whole Farm Revenue Insurance Program
Although often cited as the default revenue insurance plan for
specialty crops, the existing program has limited utility for many
specialty crop operations. The following enhancements would make the
WFRP more affordable and effective for a wider range of specialty crop
growers.
Policy Recommendation--Utilizing the language from H.R. 8467
(118th), clarify that WFRP is agnostic to what causes a
coverable loss in revenue (other than one directly caused by
the producer).
Policy Recommendation--Require the Secretary to review
annually the merits of the revenue cap in the WFRP with the
goal of its ultimate elimination. (This approach to eliminating
the revenue cap should address concerns regarding the programs
actuarial soundness and avoid CBO scoring a cost.)
Policy Recommendation--Allow WFRP to satisfy the requirement
that a grower have an underlying policy for endorsements for
things like Hurricane Insurance Protection-Wind Index (HIP-WI).
(Current practice requires growers to have additional
Catastrophic or Multi-Peril coverage in addition to WFRP.)
Policy Recommendation--Restrict the ability of Approved
Insurance Providers (AIPs) to alter the revenue guarantee.
Policy Recommendation--Increase the existing 35 percent year-
over-year limit on growth in covered acreage. (Note: this
limits how many acres a grower can insure each year. If WFRP is
expected to be the default safety net for most specialty crop
growers, the growth of its use should not be constrained.)
Policy Recommendation--Clarify diversification requirements
by requiring the RMA and approved insurance providers to treat
different cultivation cycles of a single crop, such as peppers,
as separate crops to recognize the difference in perils at
different periods of the year for purposes of calculating the
diversification premium discount.
Policy Recommendation--Provide additional educational and
training opportunities to approved insurance providers and
insurance agents.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should codify recent
enhancements to WFRP that were made administratively by USDA,
including:
Allowing producers to purchase catastrophic coverage
level policies for indi-
vidual crops with WFRP.
Expanding yield history to a 10 year maximum (from 4
years) for all crops
not covered by another Federal crop insurance policy.
Making the policy more affordable for single commodity
producers.
Allowing producers to customize their coverage by
choosing whether WFRP
will consider other Federal crop insurance policies as
primary insurance
when calculating premium and revenue to count during
claim time.
Other Revenue Insurance Policies
Policy Recommendation--Congress should clarify that all
revenue insurance policies should be agnostic to what causes a
loss in revenue (other than one directly caused by the
producer), Congress should clarify that all revenue insurance
plans are likewise agnostic on the cause of loss.
Prevented Planting
Few specialty crops currently have access to prevented planting
crop insurance coverage, and what prevented planting coverage is
available does not account for the significant capital expenditures
necessary for the production of many specialty crops that's incurred
prior to the crop being planted.
Policy Recommendation--Congress should require RMA to make
``Prevented Planting'' coverage to include more specialty
crops, including the cost of temporary infrastructure installed
in the field prior to a crop being planted (e.g., plastics and
certain types of temporary hoop houses).
Enhancements to Existing Insurance Products
Many specialty crop producers have experience crop insurance
policies with high premium costs with coverage levels and corresponding
pay-outs that are too low. As coverage levels increase so too do
premium rates, at some point producers decide to self-insure. Pricing
accuracy needs to be improved, and varietal development needs to be
accelerated.
Policy Recommendation--Allow for Optional Units to section
out fields and account for different weather events in
different field locations.
Policy Recommendation--Remove harvest costs from the payment,
which should help lower premium costs. (As an example, while
the Strawberry Production and Revenue History program is not
perfect, one useful feature to replicate elsewhere is that
harvest costs are removed.)
Policy Recommendation--Prices should be county-specific for
RMA programs to account for the differences in seasons and
marketing windows.
Policy Recommendation--Higher levels of buy-up coverage for
existing products are needed as well as encouraging RMA to be
quicker to price policies for emerging varieties.
Research and Development Directives
Policy Recommendation--Mandate that USDA RMA initiate
``research and development directives'' for specific
endorsements and index programs, including:
Abnormal amounts of rainfall, extreme heat, wildfire,
hail, drought, hurri-
canes (standalone HIP-WI), and other events, and
An index policy to insure crops during the growing
season against losses
due to frost, freeze, or cold weather events.
RMA Outreach to Specialty Crop Growers
RMA was mandated in the 2018 Farm Bill to engage in greater
outreach to specialty crop growers to develop a greater number of
policies covering specialty crop production. Outreach efforts have been
uneven and insufficient resulting in no meaningful increased
availability of crop insurance policies to specialty crop producers.
RMA relies on crop insurance agents to ``sell'' crop insurance policies
and engage with growers, but this model only works if there are crop
insurance policies to sell.
Policy Recommendation--Require RMA, working with the
Specialty Crop Advisory Committee for Crop Insurance, to
conduct better outreach to specialty crop growers in all
regions of the country, including an equitable outreach program
in all states that engages specialty crop producers, so
producers understand how to currently access and use new and
existing program.
______
Submitted Question
Question Submitted by Hon. Jill N. Tokuda, a Representative in Congress
from Hawaii
Response from Ramesh Sagili, Ph.D., Professor, Department of
Horticulture, Oregon State University
Question. Dr. Sagili, what impact do you expect staffing cuts at
USDA will have on the effectiveness of the Specialty Crop Research
Initiative?
Answer. Thank you for the question. As a university research
scientist and stakeholder to the USDA SCRI and other NIFA research
programs important to pollinator health and specialty crops, program
effectiveness and efficiencies are important for enabling research
activity that can support a resilient and diverse specialty crop
sector. Regarding your question, I currently don't have sufficient
information on USDA staffing plans to comment on possible impacts to
the SCRI program and its functions.
[all]