United applauds USDA reversal on COOL funding

From United Fresh:

At a news conference today, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack informed reporters that he was rescinding a decision by the previous administration that would have moved $3.2 million in Specialty Crop Block Grant money to fund oversight and enforcement responsibilities for mandatory COOL.

Robert Guenther, senior vice president of public policy at United Fresh, released the following statement on this decision:

We are extremely pleased that Secretary Vilsack has made this decision and reversed what would have been bad public policy all the way around. The Specialty Crop Block Grant program is an extremely important tool for producers across the country and was enacted by Congress in the 2008 Farm Bill with mandatory funding. It is incomprehensible that the previous leadership at USDA would place the entire burden of funding COOL enforcement on our sector, when COOL applies to meat and seafood as well. If USDA believes additional funding is required for COOL enforcement, we strongly believe Congress should appropriate funding solely for that purpose.

Vilsack’s policy reversal comes on the heels of former Secretary of Agriculture Ed Schafer informing House and Senate agriculture leaders in December that he was moving forward with this process despite strong objections by United Fresh and others. On January 6, 2009, the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance, of which United Fresh is the secretariat, sent a letter to Secretary Schafer expressing strong opposition to this decision. United Fresh also worked closely with President Obama’s transition team to ensure this issue was address early on in the new Administration.

Raising an objection

I received an email about the USDA's previously announced decision to move funds from the Specialty Crop Block Grant program to enforce country of origin labeling. Here is the text of the letter, with reference to location removed:


Hi - I'm a small scale organic veg transplants grower. What's the most effective way to voice opposition to the transfer of these funds? Do you have an online petition going, or a model letter available? Sec. Schafer will be gone soon, would it be best to write to the co-chairs of Ag committee in the Senate, who are now doing the Vilsack hearings, or what? Your suggestions welcome.


TK: Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance, United, PMA, Western Growers, FFVA. Does anyone have an online petition working on this issue? (I"m looking for responses, by the way). Otherwise, Fresh Talk could start an online petition as well to object to USDA's move.

Managers statement - Specialty crop block grants

Escalating money for specialty crop block grants; From page 242 of the managers statement:

(5) Specialty crop block grants
The House bill amends section 101 of the Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act
by continuing the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program through 2012, and increasing the
mandatory levels of funding to:
$60,000,000 in FY’08
$65,000,000 in FY’09
$70,000,000 in FY’10
$75,000,000 in FY’11
$95,000,000 in FY’12.
The House provision changes the definition of “specialty crop” under the Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act of 2004 to include “horticulture,” and the definition of “State” to include Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the Northern Mariana Islands. (Section 10102) The Senate amendment is the same as the House bill, except funding is discontinued after FY’11. The Senate definitions are the same as in the House bill, but also includes “turfgrass sod” and “herbal crops” in the definition of “specialty crop”. The Senate amendment modifies section 101(e) to require that states, to the maximum extent practicable and appropriate, develop plans that take into consideration the views of beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers who produce specialty crops. It also changes the minimum grant amount from $100,000 to one-half of one percent of the overall funding allocated to the program in a given fiscal year. (Section 1841) The Conference substitute adopts the House provision with amendments to specify that any funds made available for a fiscal year under the program that are not expended by certain date, to be determined by the Secretary, will be reallocated to other States; change the minimum grant amount to $100,000 or one-third of one percent of the overall funding allocated to the program in a given fiscal year (whichever is higher);provide mandatory levels of funding in the amounts of:
$10 million for fiscal year 2008; $49 million for fiscal year 2009; and $55 million for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2012. (Section 10109) The Managers expect that the Secretary will encourage each state making applications for funding under the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program to provide a written plan detailing the affirmative steps it will take to perform outreach to specialty crop producers in the development of the State’s overall grant plan, including outreach to socially disadvantaged and beginning farmers of specialty crops. The Managers also note that herbal crops fall within the statutory definition of eligible specialty crops under the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program, and direct the Agricultural Marketing Service to include a comprehensive list of specific categories of eligible specialty crops in all relevant promotional materials distributed in connection to the program. The Managers expect the Secretary to continue to consider the cultivation of turfgrass sod as horticulture, and therefore included as part of the definition of specialty crop under the Specialty Crop Competitiveness Act of 2004, and as a specialty crop for any other purposes in this or any other Act. The Managers urge the Secretary to encourage state departments of agriculture to develop their grant plans through a competitive process in order to ensure maximum public input and benefit. The Managers expect the Secretary to ensure that States conduct extensive outreach to interested parties through a transparent process of receiving and considering public comment so that grant applications are developed with proven and justified public support, particularly when developing applications for multistate projects. Further, the Managers expect the Secretary to carefully review requests that extend existing projects to ensure that support remains across the broad array of public-private partnerships unique to the structure of the specialty crop industry. The Managers note that since 2006 many states have used specialty crop block grant funding for marketing programs, some of which promote state grown products. The Managers expect the Secretary to carefully monitor the use of funds under grant awards to ensure that funds are promoting specialty crops as defined under the Specialty Crop Competitiveness Act of 2004 and are not being used in generically cross-marketing other commodities which fall under state marketing programs but are outside the scope of the Act’s definition. The Managers recognize the ability of States to submit multi-state projects under current program regulations. The Managers also recognize the growing need for solutions to problems that cross state boundaries and may therefore be addressed more effectively by multi-state projects. These problems include addressing good agricultural practices, research on crop productivity or quality, enhancing access to federal nutrition programs, pest and disease management, or commodity-specific projects addressing common issues in multi-state regions. The Managers therefore request that the Secretary encourage state departments of agriculture to submit grant plans that include multi-state and regional project proposals. The Managers also request that the Secretary give strong consideration to multi-state projects when reallocating unobligated block grant funding.