Congressional Hearings
AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH: PERSPECTIVES ON PAST AND FUTURE SUCCESSES FOR THE 2018 FARM BILL
Congressional Hearings
SuDoc ClassNumber: Y 4.AG 8/3
Congress: Senate
CHRG-115shrg28501
| AUTHORITYID | CHAMBER | TYPE | COMMITTEENAME |
|---|---|---|---|
| ssaf00 | S | S | Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry |
[Senate Hearing 115-172]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 115-172
AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH:
PERSPECTIVES ON PAST
AND FUTURE SUCCESSES
FOR THE 2018 FARM BILL
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE,
NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JUNE 15, 2017
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov/
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
28-501 PDF WASHINGTON : 2019
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).E-
mail,
gpo@custhelp.com.
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY
PAT ROBERTS, Kansas, Chairman
THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan
MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
JONI ERNST, Iowa MICHAEL BENNET, Colorado
CHARLES GRASSLEY, Iowa KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota JOE DONNELLY, Indiana
STEVE DAINES, Montana HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
DAVID PERDUE, Georgia ROBERT P. CASEY, Jr., Pennsylvania
LUTHER STRANGE, Alabama CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
James A. Glueck, Jr., Majority Staff Director
Jessica L. Williams, Chief Clerk
Joseph A. Shultz, Minority Staff Director
Mary Beth Schultz, Minority Chief Counsel
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing(s):
Agricultural Research: Perspectives on Past and Future Successes
for the 2018 Farm Bill......................................... 1
----------
Thursday, June 15, 2017
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY SENATORS
Roberts, Hon. Pat, U.S. Senator from the State of Kansas,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.... 1
Stabenow, Hon. Debbie, U.S. Senator from the State of Michigan... 3
Panel I
Bartuska, Ann, Ph.D., Acting Deputy Under Secretary, Research,
Education & Economics, United States Department of Agriculture,
Washington, DC................................................. 5
Ramaswamy, Sonny, Ph.D., Director, National Institute of Food and
Agriculture, United States Department of Agriculture,
Washington, DC................................................. 7
Jacobs-Young, Chavonda, Ph.D., Administrator, Agricultural
Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture,
Washington, DC................................................. 8
Rockey, Sally, Ph.D., Executive Director, Foundation for Food and
Agriculture Research, Washington, DC........................... 10
Panel II
Floros, John, Ph.D., Dean and Director, College of Agriculture
and K-State Research and Extension, Kansas State University,
Manhattan, KS.................................................. 33
McMurray, Gary, Division Chief, Food Processing Technology
Division, Georgia Tech Research Institute, Atlanta, GA......... 35
Hartman, Kerry, Ph.D., Academic Dean and Sciences Chair,
Environmental Sciences, Nueta Hidatsa Sahnish College, New
Town, ND....................................................... 36
Wellman, Steve, Farmer, Wellman Farms Inc., Syracuse, NE......... 38
----------
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Cochran, Hon. Thad........................................... 48
Bartuska, Ann................................................ 49
Floros, John................................................. 61
Hartman, Kerry............................................... 68
Jacobs-Young, Chavonda....................................... 75
McMurray, Gary............................................... 81
Ramaswamy, Sonny............................................. 84
Rockey, Sally................................................ 94
Wellman, Steve............................................... 105
Document(s) Submitted for the Record:
Stabenow, Hon. Debbie:
Center of Innovative and Sustainable Small Farms, Ranches and
Forest Lands (CISFRL), prepared statement.................. 110
Rockey, Sally:
Addendum to Prepared Statement............................... 118
Question(s) and Answer(s):
Bartuska, Ann:
Written response to questions from Hon. Pat Roberts.......... 120
Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow...... 129
Written response to questions from Hon. Kirsten Gillibrand... 155
Floros, John:
Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow...... 159
Written response to questions from Hon. Kirsten Gillibrand... 162
Hartman, Kerry:
Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow...... 164
Written response to questions from Hon. Amy Klobuchar........ 165
Written response to questions from Hon. Kirsten Gillibrand... 167
Jacobs-Young, Chavonda:
Written response to questions from Hon. Pat Roberts.......... 168
Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow...... 169
Written response to questions from Hon. Sherrod Brown........ 183
Written response to questions from Hon. Amy Klobuchar........ 184
McMurray, Gary:
Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow...... 186
Written response to questions from Hon. Kirsten Gillibrand... 189
Ramaswamy, Sonny:
Written response to questions from Hon. Pat Roberts.......... 192
Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow...... 193
Written response to questions from Hon. Sherrod Brown........ 203
Written response to questions from Hon. Amy Klobuchar........ 206
Written response to questions from Hon. Kirsten Gillibrand... 208
Rockey, Sally:
Written response to questions from Hon. Pat Roberts.......... 211
Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow...... 215
Written response to questions from Hon. Kirsten Gillibrand... 217
Wellman, Steve:
Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow...... 220
Written response to questions from Hon. Sherrod Brown........ 222
AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH:
PERSPECTIVES ON PAST
AND FUTURE SUCCESSES
FOR THE 2018 FARM BILL
Thursday, June 15, 2017
United States Senate,
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry,
Washington, DC
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:33 a.m., in
room 328A, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Pat Roberts,
Chairman of the committee, presiding.
Present or submitting a statement: Senators Roberts,
Boozman, Hoeven, Ernst, Grassley, Thune, Daines, Perdue,
Stabenow, Brown, Klobuchar, Bennet, Gillibrand, Donnelly,
Casey, and Van Hollen.
STATEMENT OF HON. PAT ROBERTS, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF
KANSAS, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND
FORESTRY
Chairman Roberts. Good morning. I call this meeting of the
Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry to
order.
Someone once said, ``Today American agriculture is in the
grip of a technological revolution, as vast and as rapid as any
in history. It is a revolution which has made the American
farmer the most efficient in history. It has made his
productivity the marvel and envy of every nation. Experts from
all over the world come to see our farms, study our techniques,
and learn our methods, and the farm technology we have
developed here in the United States holds out hope to the
world, for the first time, that no man, woman, or child on
Earth needs to go hungry again.''
These words are as accurate today as they were in the past,
when said by then President John F. Kennedy.
My colleagues, and those in the audience, times are pretty
tough right now in farm country, and research is indeed the
backbone that drives agriculture change, efficiencies, and
productivity, and the U.S. must continue leading the charge to
feed a growing population of an estimated 9.7 billion in the
next several decades.
Discretionary spending on the research, education, and
economics mission area at the Department has remained fairly
flat for the past six years, and yet budgets are getting even
tighter here in Washington. However, we must continue to focus
on agriculture research, and in February of this year we kicked
off the farm bill process by holding a field hearing in
Manhattan, Kansas, at Kansas State University, and 600 were in
attendance.
At that hearing, we heard from a variety of agriculture
stakeholders, 21, about what they want to see in the next farm
bill reauthorization, but that day just did not include the
hearing. My day started at the Kansas Wheat Innovation Center,
where I toured the research labs and a greenhouse, and spoke
with some of the center scientists, and observed cutting-edge
research that will help keep our wheat growers as the most
efficient and productive in the world. The Kansas Wheat
Innovation Center is just one example of why the United States
produces the safest, most affordable and abundant food and
fiber supply in the world.
In 2012, we celebrated the 150th anniversary of the United
States Department of Agriculture. That same year, we celebrated
the 150th anniversary of the Morrill Act, which established the
land-grant college system. I might add that Kansas State
University was the first land-grant institution created under
that act. I well know----
[Laughter.]
Chairman Roberts. --the history with regards to Michigan
State, and I will yield.
Senator Stabenow. Official.
Chairman Roberts. --the first official. I think you had a
building and somebody just said that was official, and that we
had the first land grant. Anyway, let us let that go.
Because of the early investment U.S. leaders made in
agriculture research and extension efforts, our producers are
better equipped to manage through drought, disease, floods,
fires, and a great deal more that Mother Nature throws at them.
Today there are additional challenges. Farmers are combating
new pests and diseases and unpredictable weather patterns.
Livestock producers rely on best management practices supported
by accurate data and data to continually improve their
production efficiencies. At the same time, scientists must work
to ensure consumers have accurate science-based information
regarding the nutritional benefits in foods that consumers are
demanding.
My colleagues, we have our work really cut out for us with
this farm bill reauthorization. We need to find ways to do more
with less, to reduce burdens of overregulation, ask tough
questions as we re-examine programs to determine their
effectiveness, and if they are serving their intended purpose.
Strong public-private partnerships have been the cornerstone of
U.S. agriculture research.
Senator Stabenow and I were the original cosponsors of the
bill that became the foundation for food and agriculture
research in the 2000 Farm Bill. The foundation represents an
opportunity to partner with the private sector and generate new
funding streams in the light of budgetary constraints. In order
to carry out bold and innovative agriculture research, this
innovation should build upon and complement existing research
at the Department of Agriculture.
I look forward to hearing more this morning about how the
foundation has used the seed funding Congress provided to
leverage additional resources that produces results. I also
look forward to hearing from leaders at the Department, our
universities, and producers about research priorities for the
next farm bill.
So today's hearing is an opportunity to take stock in where
we have come from and discuss where we are going in agriculture
research. Through the leadership of the Department of
Agriculture and setting priorities, the federal funding at our
universities, and the investment of the public sector, I am
optimistic about our future and overcoming the challenges that
lie ahead.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses and thank them
for coming and participating. I know you all have valuable
time.
With that I am very pleased to recognize Senator Stabenow
for any remarks she might want to make.
STATEMENT OF HON. DEBBIE STABENOW, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE
OF MICHIGAN
Senator Stabenow. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I first want to express what all of us are feeling about the
shooting yesterday and Representative Steve Scalise, the staff,
the Capitol Police, and that we all are saddened and horrified
by what happened.
I particularly want to lift up, though, a young man from
Michigan, Matt Mika, who is very close to our staff. His mom
and dad have flown in from Michigan and are now at the
hospital. He has had one surgery, has to have another, and he
is really in very serious condition, so we lift him up. He
worked for two members of our congressional delegation in the
House and is now with Tyson Foods, but we consider him part of
the extended agriculture family and ask for specific prayers
for Matt as he is going through tough times as well.
I also want to thank our expert witnesses for being here
today to discuss the importance of agricultural research,
education, and extension. I have always said that we do not
have an economy unless somebody makes something and somebody
grows something, and that is exactly what agriculture research
helps us do. Research initiatives included in the 2014 Farm
Bill provide the tools and the science that sustain Michigan
agriculture, and all of agriculture.
I do want to indicate Michigan agriculture is our state's
second-largest industry, supporting one out of four jobs. In
fact every $1 invested in agricultural research creates more
than $20 in return to the U.S. economy, which is a great
investment. Michigan is home to the country's pioneer land-
grant, my alma mater, Michigan State University. We will
probably have to claim joint ownership at some point, depending
on the timing here.
The innovative work happening every day at land-grant
universities, like Michigan State and Kansas State and other
agricultural research institutions protects and improves our
food system. Land-grant universities are unique in that they
implement their research findings in communities through
extension work. When I was getting my graduate degree I
appreciated being a part of extension and seeing it close up.
The Morrill Act of 1862 created the land-grant university
system with the mission to serve rural communities. Since that
time, the United States has led the world in agricultural
research. However, over the last decade we have seen China,
India and Brazil significantly increase their investment in
agricultural research. China now has a 2-to-1 advantage over
the U.S. in critical public investments to address emerging
pests, disease, and extreme weather in the agriculture sector.
If we allow our country to slip behind in agricultural
research, our farmers could lose their global competitiveness.
Now, more than ever, it is critical to invest in public
research and support our world-class agricultural research
institutions that make our farms more productive and
sustainable. From innovative robotic technology to precision
agriculture, our scientists are pushing the bounds of what is
possible to create new opportunities.
In Michigan, we are famous for our wide variety of
specialty crops, from our cherry trees and apple orchards to
our hops yards and wineries, but many of those crops would not
be thriving if it were not for targeted investments like the
farm bill Specialty Crop Research Initiative. For example,
Michigan has been the number one domestic producer of
blueberries over the last 70 years, contributing more than $118
million to Michigan's annual economy.
While it might be easy to find these nutritious berries in
your grocery store--and they are really good--their widespread
popularity is thanks, in part, to agricultural research. Crops
like blueberries have depended on innovative research to meet
the changing needs of consumers and growers alike. Michigan
State has developed some of the most widely planted varieties,
with traits that work best for commercial production.
But it is not just specialty crops that have benefitted. We
are also growing jobs through research that strengthens the
emerging bio-based economy. The 2014 Farm Bill supports the
farms that produce our energy crops and provides innovative
technologies for renewable energy projects across the country.
Research breakthroughs have made it possible for bio-based
products to enter the market, which contributes $393 billion to
the U.S. economy and supports 4.2 million jobs, plus.
There are many other ways, Mr. Chairman, I see that my time
is running out. I am going to place some other comments as to
other examples in the record. But let me just say, every day
our farmers face new and emerging challenges posed by disease
and invasive pests as well. In Michigan, invasive species are
destroying our cherry harvests, and in Florida citrus greening
is devastating orange groves. In Kansas, stripe rust has struck
wheat farmers.
Our agricultural researchers are stepping up to the plate,
over and over again, to address these challenges. That is why,
in the last farm bill, Chairman Roberts and I worked together
to create the Foundation for Food and Agricultural Research. I
am thrilled to see some representatives from the foundation
here today to update us. We owe so many of our accomplishments
in agriculture to the scientists who conduct groundbreaking
research. Every day they pave the way forward for farmers and
food businesses.
So I am very pleased that you are all here today. I also
want to indicate that we are, unfortunately, having national
debates over scientific facts, and I am not afraid to say that
I believe in science. I know that in this Committee, when we
are talking about research, we are talking about science.
Science-based agricultural research is good for our farmers,
good for our consumers, good for our economy, and I look
forward, in the next farm bill, to strengthening our efforts,
working together, based on our past bipartisan victories.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Roberts. I thank the distinguished Ranking Member.
My colleagues, as you all know, we have three votes at 11:00.
We are going to rotate back and forth during those votes to
keep the hearing going. I only mention this to inform our
panelists that we will keep going. If you can keep within the
five-minute allotment that we have given you, despite the fact
that both myself and the Ranking Member went over about 45
seconds, that would be fine.
I would say that, like King Tut, we are pressed for time,
but that is a horrible pun that I will not bring up. Please, no
groaning.
[Laughter.]
Welcome to our first panel of witnesses before the
Committee this morning. Dr. Ann Bartuska serves as the Acting
Deputy Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics
within the Department of Agriculture. Prior to her work at the
Department she served in a variety of roles at the Forest
Service, including the Deputy Chief of Research and Development
from 2004 to 2010. Welcome. I look forward to your testimony.
Dr. Sonny Ramaswamy has served as the Director of the
National Institute of Food and Agriculture since May of 2012.
He has also held a number of leadership positions at
universities across the country, including Kansas State
University, where he was a distinguished professor and head of
the Entomology Department. Welcome, sir, and thank you for
participating.
Dr. Chavonda Jacobs-Young has served as Administrator of
the Agricultural Research Service, the Department of
Agriculture's chief science in-house research agency, since
February of 2014. Previously she worked in a variety of
leadership roles at the Department, at the Agriculture Research
Service, the Office of Chief Scientist, and the National
Institute of Food and Agriculture. Welcome, and thank you for
today's joining--to joining today's panel.
Dr. Sally Rockey serves as the first Executive Director for
the Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research. Prior to this
role, she led the Competitive Grants Program at the Cooperative
State Research Education and Extension Service, what is now
known as NIFA. Dr. Rockey also served as the Deputy Director
for Extramural Research at the National Institutes of Health.
Welcome, Dr. Rockey, and I look forward to your testimony.
We will begin now with Dr. Ann Bartuska. Doctor?
STATEMENT OF ANN BARTUSKA, PH.D., ACTING DEPUTY UNDER
SECRETARY, RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND ECONOMICS, UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, WASHINGTON, DC
Ms. Bartuska. Chairman Roberts, Ranking Member Stabenow,
and distinguished members of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition,
and Forestry Committee, I am very pleased to be able to be here
with you to provide an overview of the activities of the
research branch of USDA, and particularly research education
and economics, my mission area.
But before I begin my statement I would like to offer my
sympathy from the entire USDA family to the victims of
yesterday's shooting and share your thoughts, Senator Stabenow.
I am, as introduced, Dr. Ann Bartuska, Acting Under
Secretary and Acting Chief Scientist of the USDA. I, however,
was serving as Deputy Under Secretary since 2010, and have
really been privileged to be part of the REE mission area. REE
has four agencies: the Agricultural Research Service, the
Economic Research Service, National Agricultural Statistics
Service, and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
Two of the administrators are here today, as have already been
introduced, Dr. Sonny Ramaswamy, the Director of NIFA, and Dr.
Chavonda Jacobs-Young, who is the Administrator of Agricultural
Research Service.
The United States and the world are facing critical
problems and opportunities. Global population is expected to
reach 9.7 billion people by 2050, almost two and a half billion
more people than today. At the same time, we are struggling
with extreme weather events and conditions that really impact
so many agricultural production systems. Investments in
research are a critical factor in meeting these and other
challenges and opportunities, and it is the REE mission area
agencies that support the critical research and analyses that
our country needs to ensure farm profitability and strengthen
our communities, improve nutrition and food safety for lifelong
health, and safeguard sustainable use of natural resources,
including an abundant and safe water supply.
REE's work in food and agricultural sciences is based on
the premise that the Federal Government has a role in advancing
scientific knowledge to promote our nation's social and
economic well-being. REE does this by investing in areas in
which for-profit industry does not invest, such as basic
research. It also collaborates with public sector academic and
the private sector to amplify research outcomes.
We know that the return on investment in agricultural
research is $20 for every dollar spent. An under-investment or
absence of investments in food and agricultural sciences
diminishes the needed foundational knowledge base that fuels
innovation--many of the things that Senator Stabenow mentioned
in terms of precision agriculture and advances in technology
are part of that innovation--and impacts our nation's global
preeminence and economic wellbeing. It is with these goals in
mind that the REE mission area agencies establish their
priorities and conduct their work.
Expected gains in agricultural yield and production are
unlikely to sustainably provide food, fiber, and fuel to meet
the needs of 2050, without additional resources for research.
As it has been pointed out, the U.S. is losing its global
scientific dominance and research leadership to emerging
countries in addressing agricultural productivity and
profitability challenges. China has surpassed the U.S. and it
continues to increase its investment in agricultural research.
Mr. Chairman, despite significant efforts by recent farm
bill and annual spending bills to enhance agricultural science
in the United States, we are at a crossroads. Although REE has
made significant strides in our physical infrastructure, our
human infrastructure, and big science capabilities, we are
falling further and further behind. There is much to be
accomplished. Our storied legacy of discovery, innovation, and
international leadership in agricultural research, education,
and economics is in jeopardy by insufficient investments in
both money and in minds.
This is a challenge that we must all rise to meet and REE
looks forward to rising to that challenge.
Thank you for giving me some time today.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Bartuska can be found on
page 49 in the appendix.]
Chairman Roberts. Thank you so much for your testimony and
for keeping within the time limit.
Next we have Dr. Ramaswamy.
STATEMENT OF SONNY RAMASWAMY, PH.D., DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Ramaswamy. Good morning, Chairman Roberts, and Ranking
Member Stabenow, and Committee members. Thank you so much for
having us here this morning for me to share with you a little
bit of information about the National Institute of Food and
Agriculture, and we have submitted the written testimony that
has got a lot more detail in it as well.
We have, in America, our food systems, collectively,
according to the Economic Research Service, is pretty close to
a trillion-dollar enterprise, and it supports 21 million jobs.
The role of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture is
to provide the research and extension underpinnings, and the
educational underpinnings, of that enterprise itself.
I would like to say that what NIFA supports, across
America, the science that we support is inspired by the end
users, and once the work is done it is translated into
innovations and solutions and delivered to the end users, and
it transforms people's lives.
I want to share with you two examples of that.
The first example is Dr. Barbara Valent from Kansas State
University, last year went to Kentucky, and discovered wheat
blast disease on spring wheat seedlings. This is a particularly
vexing disease that can potentially destroy almost 100 percent
of the wheat, and the work that she did with funding from NIFA
and her colleagues at University of Kentucky and the
Agricultural Research Service has resulted in our ability to
very rapidly determine what species of wheat blast we have, so
that we can deploy the appropriate approaches to deal with it.
A second example, from Michigan, is the work that is done
by our extension colleagues there at Michigan State University,
and just yesterday we heard that the Attorney General of
Michigan has filed charges against people involved in the Flint
water situation--lead in the water situation. Our extension
colleagues at Michigan State University were on the ground as
soon as they discovered lead in the water, and started
deploying information to those folks out there, and providing--
in addition to providing just water, bottled water, they also
provided information on improving the nutrition of the children
so that if you can improve the nutrition of those children they
will not have to suffer the long-term effects of lead itself.
So those are a couple of examples of the transformative
work that NIFA supports. Our mission is to catalyze
transformative research, education, and extension to solve
societal challenges, and at the end of the day, the support
that we provide is really about our producers, our farmers and
livestock producers in America. We want to make sure that they
are able to remain profitable. That, at the end of the day, as
you said, Mr. Chairman, farm incomes are depressed, have been
depressed here in the last few years now, and we have got to do
everything we can to give them a leg up.
So our budget is about $1.5 billion. It is split up into
two big buckets. One supports the experiment stations extension
and education, and the other funding is provided for
competitive grants. These funds, as you noted, and Senator
Stabenow noted, provides tremendous return to our nation, 20-
to-1 return on the investments that we make.
Unfortunately, however, we are falling further and further
behind, as has been noted by you and my colleague here, Dr.
Bartuska, as well. We are falling further and further behind,
so we have got to do everything we can to ensure that this
innovation engine that we have got is going to be supported and
protected.
We undertake stakeholder conversations throughout the year,
and currently we are undertaking conversations about protecting
the biosecurity for our food systems, about nutrition
education, about youth education and 4-H, and about our 1994
tribal-serving institutions as well, and we hope to
aspirationally incorporate those, as we go forward, to work
with you and your colleagues in the farm bill itself, as we go
forward as well.
With that, I want to go ahead and thank you very much for
giving me the opportunity to share some thoughts with you about
the National Institute of Food and Agriculture. Thank you
again.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ramaswamy can be found on
page 84 in the appendix.]
Chairman Roberts. Doctor, thank you very much for your very
fine extemporaneous report, and we appreciate your observing
the time limit.
Dr. Jacobs-Young.
STATEMENT OF CHAVONDA JACOBS-YOUNG, PH.D, ADMINISTRATOR,
AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE, WASHINGTON, DC
Ms. Jacobs-Young. Good morning, Chairman Roberts and
Ranking Member Stabenow and the distinguished members of the
Committee.
My USDA colleagues and I represent the agencies that
exemplify the mandate expressed in President Abraham Lincoln's
1862 executive order establishing the Department of
Agriculture, which the Department was charged with conducting
practical and scientific experiments to improve the quality and
security of agriculture in the United States.
As U.S. Department of Agriculture's chief scientific in-
house research agency, ARS has about 1,900 scientists at 90
laboratories located throughout the United States, that carry
out the mission and constitute an important component of USDA's
science enterprise. We have world-class research laboratories
from Maine to Hawaii, and we maintain research facilities in
France, China, Argentina, and Australia, that serve as bases
for our insect, pest, and biocontrol collection efforts.
ARS has internationally recognized scientists working on
every issue affecting American agriculture today, be it disease
and insect pest, water use, soil erosion, drought, improving
production yields, food safety, or crop and animal management
strategies. Key to our success has been our strong partnerships
and our collaborations. We work closely with our land-grant
university partners, scientists from other federal agencies,
international organizations, and many industry scientists and
producers.
ARS scientists have played an important role in providing
the objective science that action and regulatory agencies
depend on as they set their policies. ARS's institutional
capacity, our wide-ranging expertise, and our geographic reach
allows us to conduct coordinated and integrated research,
targeting national and regional agricultural priorities of
importance to our many stakeholders.
Since its inception, USDA has recognized the importance of
having both intramural and extramural scientific research. The
strength of having an intramural agency provides ARS and the
USDA, and the United States, with unique capabilities, and we
have huge responsibilities. We are responsible for conducting
that research that is inherently governmental--public service,
public good research.
We support the action of regulatory agencies within USDA
and across the Federal Government with sound scientific data.
We maintain essential germplasm collections. In fact, we have
the largest germplasm collection in the world. We conduct long-
term nutritional studies and maintain very, very important
databases. We operate long-term experimental watershed
facilities. We respond to emergencies and national disasters.
We engage in long-term research to meet national goals.
This infrastructure expertise and nationwide network of
partnerships is needed to respond quickly to national
agricultural emergencies, for example, the H1N1 swine flu
virus, the highly pathogenic avian influenza, or soybean rust,
and to prepare for those emerging diseases such as Ug99, stem
rust disease of wheat, or foot-and-mouth disease of cattle that
are not yet here in this country, but we will be prepared.
So how does all of this benefit America? Over the years,
our public investment and the cooperation in agricultural
research among the private sectors, universities, and
government has given Americans the safest, most nutritious, and
most abundant--and might I say most affordable--food supply
anywhere.
So agriculture has formed the foundation of our nation, the
national economy, for the past 200-plus years, and our
agricultural research has been the key to that success. Thank
you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Jacobs-Young can be found on
page 75 in the appendix.]
Chairman Roberts. Yes, ma'am. Thank you for a very strong
statement.
Dr. Rockey.
STATEMENT OF SALLY ROCKEY, PH.D., EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
FOUNDATION FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH, WASHINGTON, DC
Ms. Rockey. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Stabenow, and
members of the Committee, I am Sally Rockey and I am the
Executive Director of the Foundation for Food and Agricultural
Research, known as FFAR. I am honored to have the opportunity
to testify before you as Congress considers its priorities in
the next farm bill.
As you know, FFAR is an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit
organization, established with bipartisan support in the 2014
Farm Bill to serve as a new and unique model in our nation's
mission to be the global leader in food and agricultural
sciences. We fund innovative science that is solving real-world
problems, by filling research gaps and accelerating science
through partnerships. An essential part of this model is our
ability to leverage private sector funds to deliver huge value
for the American taxpayer. The U.S. government's $200 million
investment in FFAR eventually returns more than $400 million in
valuable science.
FFAR unites researchers with funding partners like venture
capitalists, industry, philanthropies, and expands the funding
pool for agricultural science by coalescing groups together
around common priorities. The foundation is also nimble and
efficient, with the ability to award grants very quickly, and
in some cases as little as in one week.
Building a foundation from scratch was really no small
task, but since I came on board in late 2015, FFAR has hired
talented staff and developed reliable systems to protect the
taxpayers' investment. Our esteemed board of directors has
grown, and we have established advisory councils to guide us in
our research.
To date, FFAR has delivered $32.4 million and 22 grants
with more than 41 funding partners. By the end of the year, we
will have obligated about half of our $200 million in public
funding, leveraging, as I said before, another $100 million in
additional funds.
Our first major research project was funded with the Samuel
Roberts Noble Foundation. It was to increase the use of cover
crops and create new cover crop resources, with the goal of
significantly improving soil health, one of the most valuable
resources for our farmers.
We recently awarded our first Rapid Outcomes from
Agricultural Research, or as we call it, ROAR, grant, in
partnership with the Cherry Marketing Institute and Michigan
State University, to combat an invasive pest that will benefit
the fruit industry in eight states. This program demonstrates
our ability to accept applications as critical issues arise,
and to fund them very quickly.
FFAR also is positioned to fund science that adapts to
industry needs. For example--and you may have just read about
the story this morning in The Washington Post--FFAR just
announced a $2 million effort to address the emerging issue in
cage-free egg production, to improve the health and
productivity of cage-free hens.
This week, we awarded a very innovative grant to the
University of Illinois who is bringing together the latest in
plant simulation models to predict how plants respond to their
environment, which can vastly accelerate the pace and the
development of new crops with beneficial traits.
More robust funding and research will allow the United
States to maintain its science prominence, and will give our
producers the opportunity to apply cutting-edge research
results and technologies to their operations. However, as was
already stated, Federal funding for agricultural research has
been relatively stagnant over the last decade. FFAR offers an
opportunity to not only increase the overall funding pool but
increase it for cutting-edge science.
Not only does science drive our economy but it is also
progressing at, really, what is a breath-taking pace. We are
becoming a pivotal player at FFAR in seizing emerging
scientific opportunities in the food and agricultural research
community, and we know our model will serve us well in driving
innovation in the future.
One innovative process that FFAR is exploring now is
photosynthesis. Photosynthesis is what makes a plant a plant,
and it allows it to acquire energy from the sun. By increasing
photosynthetic capacity, we can dramatically increase crop
yields.
We are grateful for the opportunity to continue to work
with Congress to ensure FFAR is reauthorized and fully funded
in the next farm bill, consistent with the bipartisan legacy,
as an institution contributing to the long-term competitiveness
of our nation's food and agriculture sector.
To the members of this Committee who were so instrumental
in establishing FFAR, I thank you on behalf of the entire food
and agriculture community. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Rockey can be found on page
94 in the appendix.]
Chairman Roberts. Thank you, Dr. Rockey.
Dr. Ramaswamy and Dr. Jacobs-Young, we are in the first
week of the wheat harvest in Kansas. Not good news. We have
lost about 40 percent of our crop due to a very late freeze. We
had that 11-county, 850,000-square-mile prairie fire, a freeze
before that. I have no idea what we have done to Mother Nature
but she sure has taken it out on us.
Your testimony references the work of Dr. Valent at K-
State, and what she has been doing in coordination with AFRI
and ARS on wheat blast. You mentioned that in your comments. I
understand that ARS research has been conducted through the
wheat strip initiative, the wheat scab initiative, and the
Insect Biotechnology Products for Pest Control and Emerging
Needs in Agriculture projects. That is a lot of folks.
Can you provide an update on these projects? Are there any
partnership arrangements that are key to this work? How can the
Department work be improved in these areas? Please, first, Dr.
Ramaswamy.
Mr. Ramaswamy. Thank you very much, Chairman Roberts.
Indeed, the National Institute of Food and Agriculture is
investing significant resources in helping develop new
varieties of wheat that can withstand those early freezes, then
the flooding situation, and then you have got the drying up and
the drought situation as well. New varieties of wheat that are
coming along, work being done at Kansas State University, at
the University of Minnesota, at multiple universities across
America, are going to have traits, characteristics in them that
will allow them to withstand not just the biological
constraints, such as wheat blast and other, insect problems as
well. In addition, they will be able to withstand the
environmental conditions, the extreme weather events that you
referenced as well.
We are, hoping that these varieties that are going to come
along here, the investments that we are making now, will result
in offering our producers better ways of dealing with the
challenges that they face.
Chairman Roberts. Dr. Jacobs-Young, any comments?
Ms. Jacobs-Young. Yes. ARS manages the Wheat and Barley
Scab Initiative, which is a coalition of university, federal,
and industry partners. I would just like to say that they have
been working very hard on developing new varieties that
increase resilience and reduce vulnerability, and because of
their efforts, over the past 10 years we have been able to
reduce the amount of mycotoxin in wheat by 32 percent in durum
wheat. We see some real evidence of the work that they have
done in the varieties that have been released.
We have also identified wheat that is resistant to Ug99,
and while we do not have it here in the United States we have
developed varieties that are being planted around the world. So
we will be prepared. We have a diagnostic to determine the
difference between Ug99 rust and other rust pathogens, and our
wheat quality laboratories, which you are very familiar with,
around the country, have been so instrumental to the wheat
industry.
So we are working very hard in releasing varieties that
have increased tolerance or resistance to some of the diseases
that we are being faced with.
Chairman Roberts. Dr. Rockey, as one of the original co-
sponsors of FFAR, and a strong advocate for investment in
agricultural research, we are certainly hoping for the long-
term success of the foundation. I appreciate your efforts to
keep our committee updated as FFAR gets up and running. The
last bill, as you have indicated, provided $200 million in
mandatory funds as a seed investment to establish FFAR.
In a time when there are almost no new programs being
created, what are your plans to generate new funds and
demonstrate project outcomes in order to enable FFAR to be a
sustainable tool to support AG research into the future? I am
especially interested in long-term investments. I know that you
have a good record here in the last few months--well, the last
six months--with short-term projects that are paying off with
private partnerships. What about long-term?
Ms. Rockey. Thank you for that question, Chairman. We have
been working quite a bit on thinking about long-term
sustainability as an organization. If you think about the model
that was defined in the original 2014 Farm Bill, that model
really only works when we have a continued financial investment
from Congress. Really, the Federal funds are what attract our
partners, and we are able to leverage them and bring in
additional funds. So we leverage their funds and they also
leverage the Federal funds, and that allows us to create this
unique partnership and bring additional funds to the table for
agriculture.
But the reauthorization of FFAR as an organization really
allows us to solidify as a viable research entity and a viable
research institution, capable of funding our partners.
We continue, as you noted, to fund projects. Some of our
projects are very short-term. For example, in our rapid
response program, grants are for year-long projects. We are
able to put money on an issue quickly while the USDA then comes
back in with some longer-funded projects. However, we also are
funding some long-term projects. Our grants can range up to
five years, and will continue to, depending on the type of
science that comes across our transect. We will fund either
long or short-term projects, depending on the goals of the
particular project.
However, as an organization, we continue to think about how
to build on these short-term successes and our plans for the
future. We have built a credible organization. We have
established our research priorities. We are securing additional
funds. We have a low operating cost right now, as an
organization. We have launched a giving program. We are looking
at ways to generate IP revenue, and we are seeking major gifts.
So all of this is no small task but we are building on the
success that we have had of late, for our long-term
sustainability. We are really establishing our reputation, and
I think that is a lot of what is going to take us into our
future.
But I want to make something very clear to you, that we
will be a successful organization, and we will fulfill every
intent that you had in authorizing us in the first place. We
have demonstrated now that the model really does work, and it
will, but it will be dependent on our continued support from
Congress.
Chairman Roberts. I thank you. Senator Stabenow.
Senator Stabenow. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank
you to each of you, and Dr. Rockey, I was pleased to hear your
comments, and I appreciate the grant that has been given most
recently, two weeks ago, to tackle some specialty crop issues.
I know there was a slow start, but things are moving now and I
think it is very, very important that we continue to support
this effort as a long-term effort.
I did want to just comment, Dr. Jacobs-Young. You were
talking about the Wheat and Barley Scab Initiative. It takes me
back. I was a new House member in 1997. I authored that
initiative with a then new Republican colleague, Roy Blunt, and
we are now both in the Senate. But when my constituents would
excitedly ask me what was my first bill, and I said ``wheat and
barley scab,'' it was not really exciting, but I am really
pleased to know that it is still going on and is actually
making a difference, so thank you for that.
I wanted to ask Dr. Bartuska about the whole question on
scientific integrity. We are here talking about research, how
important this is. We know, fundamentally, this is so important
for our farmers and food safety and the food economy. But there
is a lot of debate right now, and public scrutiny, about
science, and about facts. Under the last Administration, USDA
developed its first scientific integrity policy, as well as
fostered a culture of scientific integrity.
So I wonder if you could talk a bit about what the USDA has
done to gain the trust of the public and demonstrate it is
conducting unbiased scientific research, and how you are
addressing issues around scientific integrity.
Ms. Bartuska. Thank you very much for that question. We are
very proud of our scientific integrity policy, not only that we
initiated it very early on, among all the science agencies, but
that we have since improved it and we have gone back out to
many of the state of the art scientific integrity policies, in
terms of what kinds of language you should have in a policy.
What does a platinum version of a scientific integrity policy
look like? We have refined it. We had a scientific integrity
officer over the entire department. He, unfortunately, left but
we were recently approved to hire a new one, even in a hiring
freeze and at the time of some resource limitations.
So the commitment USDA is making to a formal scientific
integrity process is very high. It is investing in our own
employees by providing training to all of our scientists. But
we just recently agreed, many of the agencies, to extend that
training to technicians and to those who use science but who
are not scientists themselves.
So again, there is a very strong commitment within USDA. I
have to say, we were very pleased that the Union of Concerned
Scientists, who had initially reviewed our first draft
scientific integrity policy and found it wanting, have since
reviewed all of the policies and have given us a very positive
green light on what we have been able to accomplish.
We believe that we have responded to the community and that
we now have implemented a policy and an implementation that is
demonstrating the highest standards of scientific integrity,
and I think it is through our publications and the peer review
process that the currency of science is reinforced.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much. Dr. Ramaswamy, I
wanted to ask you a little bit about organic research. All
parts of agriculture are obviously incredibly important.
Organic agriculture now counts for over 5 percent of the total
retail food sales, as you know, making it one of the fastest-
growing parts of agriculture, and bringing more people into
focus, in terms of the importance of growing food and the
agriculture economy.
We know that the Organic Research and Extension Initiative
has contributed to that success, and I wonder if you might talk
about how other research programs at USDA help those organic
producers address challenges and meet the increasing demands
for their products.
Mr. Ramaswamy. Thanks very much, Senator Stabenow, for that
question, and, indeed, to your point, organic agriculture is
one of the fastest-growing segments of our agricultural
enterprise in our nation, and it constitutes about $40 billion
of farm value as we are looking at it, and continues to grow as
well.
The Organic Research and Extension Initiative, along with
the Organic Transitions program are two of the programs
specifically geared to provide funding for, research and
extension efforts that support our organic producers. Along
with that, the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative and our
Specialty Crops Research Initiative also encourage applicants
to submit grant proposals in support of organic efforts as
well.
So the sum total of funding that goes to organic type
enterprises, within the competitive grants arena, is in the
neighborhood of around about $40 to $50 million a year. Along
with that, the support that we provide for experiment stations
and extension, adds an additional $30 to $50 million of
investments that the land-grant universities are making.
So those discoveries, that knowledge, is certainly of
significant use, whether it is pest control, pest management,
or dealing with the soil health and other issues as well.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Roberts. Senator Bennet.
Senator Bennet. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for
holding an excellent hearing. This is a great panel, and
timely, I think, because of the budget that has been submitted.
So I really appreciate it.
Dr. Jacobs-Young, for 110 years the Central Great Plains
Research Station in Akron, Colorado, has been working with
local groups like the Colorado Wheat Growers to research crop
varieties that grow best in local conditions. That is a very
big challenge, as in my state. They also focus on new
management techniques to conserve water and soil resources,
helping the environment and improving the bottom line for farm
businesses, generation after generation, for more than a
century.
Despite this, the President's fiscal year '18 budget
proposes closing this station and 16 other similar research
stations across the country. I wonder if you could tell the
panel a little bit about the role these research field stations
play and how they work to provide useful information to local
growers and producers.
Ms. Jacobs-Young. Thank you so much for your question,
Senator.
As Dr. Bartuska shared, and the Chairman as well, we have a
huge goal ahead of us, of feeding 9.7 billion people by 2050,
and ARS is right at the center of helping us achieve that goal.
We were faced with the task of having to find $161 million in
reductions for ARS, and through that process----
Senator Bennet. Who gave you that task?
Ms. Jacobs-Young. It is a part of our President's budget
proposal.
Senator Bennet. Yes.
Ms. Jacobs-Young. --ARS has the reduction of $161 million.
Senator Bennet. Yes.
Ms. Jacobs-Young. As you can imagine, over the past years,
because budgets have not grown tremendously, we have done a big
job of trying to look across our portfolio, using data to
streamline and consolidate.
So we are at the point where every decision we make today
is a tough one. Everything that we give up today, is important,
but we have to make the decision to make these reductions and
we used three criteria for how we are doing this.
The first one, we looked at our employees. ARS is who it is
because of our people. How do we minimize the impact to our ARS
scientific workforce? Therefore, we looked at extramural
funding. The second one is that we looked at those things that
preserve ARS's infrastructure--our germplasm collections, our
LTAR network, our critical databases, et cetera, et cetera. So
we looked at those things and said that we needed to protect
those because they are uniquely what ARS provides to the
scientific community.
The third one was we had to balance the portfolio, and
using data to determine the capacities of all of our research
projects in our locations. So when we took a look across the
portfolio, we looked at those locations and projects that might
be challenged, from a resource perspective human capital,
infrastructure, IT, and dollars.
So we used a data-driven process to look at everything, to
make those decisions. Unfortunately, Akron is on the list for
proposed cuts in FY 18.
Senator Bennet. Well, it is not----
Ms. Jacobs-Young. I assure you it was a data-driven process
and it was not an easy one.
Senator Bennet. Well, it is not. I can tell you that it is
not going to be acceptable to me, and I don't think to the
United States Senate, to cut it, because there is no
replacement for it, and, frankly, I hope I speak for other
members of the Committee when I say that because of the
leadership of the Chairman and the Ranking Member in the last
farm bill, this is the only committee that actually created
deficit reduction. This committee did. The people that we
represent in farm country in the United States stepped up to
the plate, when no other committee in the Congress did that. No
other committee did that. For them to be presented with a 30
percent cut to the Department of Agriculture is an insult. It
is worse than an insult. It is a war on rural America, I think,
and rural Colorado.
There is not a replacement for the Akron Research Station.
There is not anybody else who is going to help our wheat
farmers do what they need to do, or wheat growers do what they
need to do, year after year, because of changes in the climate
and changes in the environment.
So I can appreciate that you made a ``data-driven''
decision and I think it is a terrible decision, for the people
that I represent in my state, and I think, in the context of
this Committee doing its work in a way that, because of your
leadership, Mr. Chairman, and Senator Stabenow from Michigan,
it is entirely unacceptable to me that they are trying--and
they do not even balance the budget. So they have an unbalanced
budget that they are trying to balance on the backs of our
farmers and our ranchers, and it is absolutely unacceptable to
me, because of the work that we have already done. The
sacrifices that have already been made in an environment with
commodity prices where they are, it adds insult to injury and
it is utterly unacceptable.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Roberts. Senator Bennet, thank you very much for
reading the speech that I wrote.
[Laughter.]
Senator Bennet. I hope I put the emphasis in the right
places.
Chairman Roberts. Some of the adjectives were a little out
of line, but I think we can do that.
Senator Bennet. Thank you. I am always happy to repeat your
words.
Chairman Roberts. The President proposes and we dispose. I
do not know of any--this is not an admonition I would like to
expound upon, but the President proposes, we dispose. There has
been a lot of talk about this budget, more especially in my
view on crop insurance, AG research, et cetera, et cetera. That
is not going to happen. It is simply not going to happen. We
are in dire circumstances, and as you have indicated, we have
given and given. We have got crop insurance cuts, $6 billion,
and then seeing what they have done, like Lizzie Borden taking
an ax and cutting another $6 billion. Then there was another
three in the omnibus, which we saved.
We stand ready to do what we have to do and meet our budget
responsibilities, and I thank you for your comments.
We have--Senator Donnelly is gone. It will be Senator
Casey. Thank you.
Senator Casey. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Thank you and the
Ranking Member for having this hearing, and what a great panel,
and I wish we had even more time.
I wanted to start with Dr. Bartuska with regard to the
Chesapeake Bay and nutrient management. I will also, in the
interest of time, to try to get at least to a second major
question for Dr. Ramaswamy on lead in soil.
But let me start with the Chesapeake Bay. In Pennsylvania,
our state is the source of much of both the fresh water for the
Chesapeake Bay and also much of the nitrogen and phosphorus
pollution that enters the Chesapeake Bay, so I am particularly
concerned in nutrient management tools, technologies, and
practices that can help Pennsylvania's farmers meet Chesapeake
Bay restoration goals.
Could you tell us about the work of USDA with regard to
nutrient management, either on the modeling and forecasting
side or the actual on-farm nutrient management?
Ms. Bartuska. I would be happy to. Actually, as a born-and-
raised Philadelphian, I am well aware of the connection between
Pennsylvania and the Bay, and actually worked in that area
about 20-some years ago. I am glad to say we have made
improvements, partly because we have recognized what can be
done on farm to reduce runoff. Bringing those practices into
place through extension has been really important. I have to
commend our University Park ARS lab, partly, for some of the
research, as well as our competitive grants program.
But in particular, connecting our research and science as
information through extension and Natural Resource Conservation
Service, Farm Service Agency, so that they know what those
practices are, to help encourage them to adopt them but also to
give them the tools they need to be able to do that.
When it comes to lower down in the watershed we are
increasingly looking at tools to reduce the impact locally. Can
we do remediation on site? Can we be doing better modeling--I
am sorry--monitoring of those sites, including in water
columns, so you get real-time estimates of what nitro and
phosphorus loading is happening and can take action?
You mentioned modeling. That has been one of the areas
where we, with the university community, have really tried to
better connect a specific practice with what it does, in terms
of the nutrient loading, and then address those loadings.
Then, lastly, I have to acknowledge the Economic Research
Service that has done quite a bit of work on the economics and
the decision-making of farmers--why they choose practices, why
they choose some practices over other practices, and
identifying how can we provide them the tools to make a better
decision.
We really have everything from biogeochemistry and the
chemistry of the site to the water quality, measuring to the
monitoring to the modeling, and then the extension piece.
Senator Casey. How about kind of the appropriations budget
question, which is, do you have the resources to do what you
just talked about? Any--do you have a sense of what your
resources are to carry out that task?
Ms. Bartuska. I think we are still assessing what the
specific implications of the '18 President's budget is and what
projects and what specific activities take place. I do know
that through NIFA's competitive grants--and Dr. Ramaswamy might
talk to this--the water challenge area is continuing to focus
on that.
We will continue to support the highest priority work and
nutrient management is part of the portfolio that we believe is
very important for agricultural producers.
Senator Casey. Well, I hope if you need more resources,
obviously, we hope you tell us over time, when you have a sense
of that.
Thank you very much, Doctor, for that. You were born in
Philadelphia, you said?
Ms. Bartuska. Yes.
Senator Casey. That is great. Well, we always want you to
come back.
Ms. Bartuska. Yes, from East Falls.
Senator Casey. Oh yeah. Thank you so much.
I also wanted to raise a question on lead with Dr.
Ramaswamy. I have heard from constituents across our state,
obviously in the context of what happened in Flint, Michigan,
with regard to water, but in our state, a major challenge is
lead, lead paint in the old homes, and the numbers might be
even higher there. But also, I just got off the phone this
morning with a reporter investigating lead in the soil, and I
know that is not what your testimony was directly about, but
your testimony indicated that NIFA worked with Michigan State
Extension and Edible Flint on a program focused on lead in the
soil if you want to grow--if people want to grow their own
food.
Is there anything you can tell us about that initiative, or
initiatives like it, that would be helpful in the context of
just folks that might have lead in their soil in their back
yard and they may not be growing food. But what would you
recommend and what could you do to help on that?
Mr. Ramaswamy. Yeah. Indeed, I would like to, Senator
Casey, speak to the work that is going on in your state, in
Pennsylvania, and folks at Penn State, as well as the Rodale
Institute, are--they have received funding from NIFA, both
competitive funding as well as what we refer to as capacity
funds for the experiment station and extension.
Very specifically, to address the question that you asked
of Dr. Bartuska as well, in regards to the eutrophication of
the Chesapeake Bay with excess nutrients going through, and
also tied to soil health itself, very recently, Professor
Heather Gall received an Agriculture and Food Research
Initiative funding on that question of developing approaches to
mitigating the movement of these nutrients that are impacting
the Chesapeake Bay. Also, Joseph Keller at Penn State is
looking at improving soil health. By growing certain types of
crops and trees and things like that, that can--there have been
some poplar trees that have been developed, varieties that have
been developed, that can specifically go in and remove lead and
other heavy metals, like arsenic and things like that, as well.
We continue to invest resources in soil. If we do not have
good soil health, as you know, we will not have good crops and
livestock in our agricultural systems. We are going to be hurt.
I want to get back to, specifically, after you asked the
question, do we have enough resources and things like that,
and, the funding rate within the Agriculture and Food Research
Initiative today, we do a three-year rolling average over the
last three years, sits around 13 percent. Over the last three
years, on average, we have received pretty close to 3,000
proposals, of which the grants panels, these peer panels that
we have, have recommended over 1,200 of those to be funded.
Many outstanding, many in high priority. Unfortunately, we have
only funding to support just about 480 of those proposals.
Senator Casey. Out of 1,200.
Mr. Ramaswamy. Yes, sir. So a lot of them----
Senator Casey. Then we have got to go----
Mr. Ramaswamy. --are, left on the floor.
Senator Casey. He is tapping.
Mr. Ramaswamy. Yes, sir.
Senator Casey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Doctor.
Chairman Roberts. Senator Boozman.
Senator Boozman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Ramaswamy, in
your testimony you mentioned how NIFA collaborates with other
government agencies such as DOD, NIH, NSF, VA, and a host of
others. Can you discuss, in more detail, how collaboration
works, and perhaps give us some examples of the work done
through collaboration?
Mr. Ramaswamy. Thanks so much for that question. I was
hoping that one of you was going to ask me that question.
Indeed, the innovations and collaborations with the
National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health,
U.S. Agency for International Development, the Environmental
Protection Agency, the Department of Defense, Veterans
Administration, we have a number of those. I will give you two
examples in the field of, biophysical sciences, and then I will
give you an example in regards to the opioid crisis that we
have got as well.
So we have got, with NSF and NIH, we partner with them in
this area. We refer to it as the Ecology and Evolution of
Infectious Diseases. There are a number of infectious diseases
that impact animals, plants, honeybees, as well as livestock
animals and humans. There is a commonality in some of these
things, and some of them get vectored, carried by insects and
other, species of arthropods and invertebrates. So trying to
understand how these diseases, the epidemiology of the ecology
of it, and things like that, and whether it is foot-and-mouth
disease or colony collapse disorder in honeybees and others, we
have collaboratively provided funding and we have this ongoing
relationship with those agencies now.
For every dollar NIFA invests, it leverages about $5 to $10
from those other agencies. We partner, by the way, with the
British Biotechnology Research and Science Council as well on
those topics.
In regards to our relationships with the Veterans
Administration and the Department of Defense, and Health and
Human Services, we partner with those agencies and the
substance abuse and mental health service agency, SAMHSA, and
deploying funding that they provide to us through interagency
agreements, that goes through extension to address the opioid
crisis, for example, amongst our veterans and active duty
service members' families, children and their families as well.
Then, as you know, we have got this terrible scourge of the
opioid crisis across the United States, and those partnerships
are critically important because the--our extension community
is in every one of our 3,141 counties, boroughs, and parishes.
We have got a footprint throughout the nation. That is being
utilized to deploy information to help those communities.
A good example of that is in Michigan and Ohio and Indiana,
amongst the Amish community. Their children are exhibiting
significant use and abuse of drugs and opioids. Our extension
folks at Purdue University and Michigan State University and
Ohio State University are working together to address the
opioid crisis as well.
So those are a couple of examples.
Senator Boozman. Very good. That is excellent.
Dr. Jacobs-Young, can you describe, in more detail, the
importance of the ARS extramural research projects? How is ARS
able to leverage what you learn with the extramural research
with what you learn at your intramural facilities?
Ms. Jacobs-Young. So one of the beauties of having an
intramural agency is that all of our employees are Federal
employees, outside of just our contractors, our postdocs, and
others, so the expertise we do not have internal to the agency,
we are able to use the extramural funding to partner with
expertise at universities, at corporations. We are able to use
those extramural funds to sort of bridge the gap between the
expertise we have inside ARS. Most of those extramural grants
are with our land-grant partners, and so we leverage those
resources to get the job done.
I think it is also important to note that sometimes those
extramural resources are used as a convening resource, to bring
together groups of people to work on some high-priority topics.
That is how we use the extramural funding inside of the agency.
Senator Boozman. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Roberts. Senator Gillibrand.
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Bartuska,
how will you direct ARS to conduct targeted on-farm data
collection of antibiotic use?
Ms. Bartuska. I am sorry, can you repeat that?
Senator Gillibrand. How will you direct ARS to conduct
targeted on-farm data collection of antibiotic use?
Ms. Bartuska. The antimicrobial resistance work that we
have going on across USDA has become a really high priority,
and working specifically with ARS and NIFA, we have identified,
principally through the partnership with HHS, on a portfolio of
research that needs to be accomplished. The agencies will then
build that into their programs and priority investments as they
shape their fiscal year planning. For ARS, in particular,
something we have worked with them through our priority-setting
process out of the Under Secretary's office. We use the REE
action plan, which was driven by the farm bill, to establish a
set of priorities, and the antimicrobial resistance work is
built into the overall priorities.
Senator Gillibrand. Do you feel you need any additional
authorities to enhance the AMR collection?
Ms. Bartuska. Actually, I would like to defer that to Dr.
Jacobs-Young.
Ms. Jacobs-Young. Thank you. So ARS partners with the Food
and Drug Administration where we are a part of NARMS, the
National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring Program. We are
their technical arm to do a lot of the on-farm data collection
and analysis. We have been partnering with them for a number of
years, and we look forward to continuing that on-farm data
collection, because it helps us be able to trace where the
antimicrobial resistance begins, and learn a little bit more
about management practices.
We have been partnering with the FDA on that and we have a
huge portfolio in antimicrobial resistance inside of ARS,
looking at immune systems between animals, zoonotic diseases,
looking for alternatives to antibiotics, looking at probiotics,
for example, for use in chickens, that is in use right now,
FloraMax, which was developed by ARS. It is currently in use to
minimize the prevalence of enteric diseases in poultry and are
actively advancing vaccine development.
We have been working and we have a lot of great experts
working on AMR, and I think the agriculture community could
benefit from a lot of information for decision-making.
Senator Gillibrand. I agree. I would be grateful if you
would work with my office on further issues on this.
Ms. Jacobs-Young. Would love to do that.
Senator Gillibrand. Mr. Ramaswamy, did you want to add
something.
Mr. Ramaswamy. Yes, if I may, Senator Gillibrand. So NIFA's
portfolio funding in the world of antibiotics and antimicrobial
resistance over the last few years, particularly in relation to
this interagency collaborative effort, we are investing--we
have been investing between $5 and $15 million each year on
looking at it from the farm to the dinner table, rather than
just focusing on any one small part of it, looking across the
food chain, the value chain itself, and the data that are
coming out now in regards to improved animal husbandry and
management, how might that help mitigate the amount of
antibiotics to use, et cetera. These are all, new data that are
really driving the management of our herds in many, many
situations, and poultry flocks as well.
Senator Gillibrand. Well, to the extent you need any
additional resources or authorities, please let us know,
because we would like to provide that with you, because I think
this needs to be a national priority.
On the question of organics, Dr. Bartuska, how do you
intend to increase the resources available to organic farmers
or those that are transitioning, so that we can meet the
domestic demand without having to rely so heavily on imports?
Ms. Bartuska. We have noted, through the Census of
Agriculture, as well as through work done by the Economic
Research Service, there is increasing demand by those who are
going into farming, to want to go into organic farming.
Programs such as the ones at NIFA that Dr. Ramaswamy has
already mentioned have been made available. We are actively
promoting these programs through extension to these new farmers
who want to move into organics.
Part of it is also creating more tools for them, lot of the
organic production is in specialty crops, and so growing the
specialty crop program is another way that we see it as being
very important for them to do.
I might defer to both Dr. Ramaswamy and Jacobs-Young to
talk more about their specific programs, if that would be all
right.
Mr. Ramaswamy. Yeah, so picking up where Dr. Bartuska left,
we have the Organic Research and Extension Initiative and the
Organic Transitions Program funding that is provided, and
collectively they provide in the neighborhood of around $20-
plus million. We also have proposals that are submitted to us
through our other competitive grants as well, so that is one
part of it.
Then the Beginning Farmers and Ranchers Development
Initiative, that brings in literally thousands of new aspirants
wanting to get into the food and agricultural enterprise, there
is a tie-in that is being provided that allows them to develop
the knowledge and skills, the marketplace, the credit, the
capital, et cetera, that is definitely needed in the world of
organic agriculture.
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Roberts. Thank you, Senator. We are awaiting
Senator Daines who would like to ask a question, specifically,
and I will give him about 30 seconds to show up.
[Laughter.]
Senator Gillibrand. I have a question for the record, if I
could ask, Dr. Rockey.
Chairman Roberts. I would be delighted----
Senator Gillibrand. Okay.
Chairman Roberts. --to have you ask a question of Dr.
Rockey.
Senator Gillibrand. It is about the pollinator health fund,
and I know the next panel will talk about pollinators as well,
but to the extent you could tell us about the fund, some of the
partner groups, and what research you expect to see supported
by this initiative, I would be grateful, because, obviously,
for upstate New York, for the Hudson Valley, our pollinators
are essential. We grow a lot of fruits and vegetables. So the
colony collapse disorder has created enormous worry and strain
amongst our--both beekeeper populations but also our farmers.
So to the extent you could just do a briefing for us on the
status, and any authorities, money, research you need added in
the farm bill. Thank you.
Chairman Roberts. Senator Brown.
[Pause.]
Senator Brown. I ask consent for another 60 seconds for
Senator Gillibrand.
Chairman Roberts. You have already used 30 seconds. Let us
go.
[Laughter.]
[Pause.]
Chairman Roberts. It is that second page.
Senator Brown. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize. I
was at two other hearings today and I apologize for not being
right now in the moment.
Dr. Ramaswamy, thank you for--all of you on the panel,
thank you for your work. Thanks for walking the Committee
through the work USDA does on the opioid crisis. In my state,
more people die from opioid overdose than any state in the
country. We are not the highest per capita; we are among them.
But the tragedy particularly hits rural Ohio hard. That is one
of the reasons that so many of us are alarmed at efforts in
this body to take away insurance from people getting opioid
treatment. In my state alone, 200,000 people right now are
getting opioid treatment, many of them in rural Ohio, getting
opioid treatment right now, and who are getting the treatment
because they have insurance through the Affordable Care Act. So
thank you for running through that.
I want to talk for a moment about extension agents and how
extension agents are so many faces in USDA. I think back on
our--I went to the county extension agent in Richland County,
Ohio, when my brothers and I were going to plant apple trees on
our family farm, and I remember that the extension agents said,
``Now when you prune these apple trees, prune them until you
think you have killed them and then prune them a little more.''
We only followed their advice on about half the trees, because
we just could not bring ourselves, as novices, to prune them as
far back as we should, and those ones we pruned as far back as
the AG extension agents told us were the ones that thrived the
most. So thank you for the accumulated wisdom of decades of ag
extension and what you do.
How do we--700 folks at OSU Extension in Ohio, 700 folks,
from helping small dairies to improving water quality to help,
in my case, again, an urban gardener in Cleveland, Ohio, grow
tomatoes. I did not stay on that family farm. Sorry. I want to
ask this. How do we continue to empower these individuals to
continue to address the ever-changing challenges inherent in
agriculture and to interact with the increasing number of
constituents who are interested in how their food is grown,
where it comes from, and, in many cases, even growing it
themselves? How do we sort of empower ag extension, a group of
very committed, very talented men and women?
One more point. John McCracken, in my office, was talking
about the mission statement and sort of the history of ag
extension, and it just is--it is so important, and they love
their jobs so much and what they contribute to our society. Dr.
Ramaswamy?
Mr. Ramaswamy. Senator Brown, thanks so much, and I
appreciate your kind words that you spoke about our extension
community, and you are absolutely right. Without extension--
this is a model that the rest of the world wants to emulate--
our nation--and I truly believe this--would not be globally
pre-eminent. Our ability to translate knowledge and deliver
that knowledge in the form of innovations and solutions, the
hallmark of extension, is truly at the basis of why we have
such, affordable food that is safe and nutritious, that the
rest of the world wants to emulate as well.
We have seen, over the last about 20 years or so, with the
continuing challenges in America with our budgets, at the state
level, at the county level, and at the Federal level, our
extension footprint, across America, on average, in every
state, has been reduced by 30 percent. We have lost a number of
those boots on the ground, even in Ohio. What they have done is
rather than going and having extension agents in every county
they have now had to reduce that and create what we refer to as
districts, so that you have agents servicing multiple counties.
We see this across America, and that is the challenge that we
have got.
All of us need to wake up and really be concerned that this
is going to be, putting us in a significantly challenging
situation if we are not able to make sure that extension agents
are not going to be working together.
So in regards to your question, how do we empower them, we
continue to work with the land-grant universities and,
obviously, funding is one part of it but we also host
stakeholder conversations and make sure that the researchers
and the extension folks are all working together. But the
challenges that are being felt--and, earlier I said that what
NIFA does is inspired by the end users. So the contact with the
end users is critically important for the work that needs to be
done.
Then the work that is undertaken, the research that is
undertaken, that is translated and delivered by our extension
folks, transforms people's lives, and that is sort of an
empowerment that we have had, historically, and we continue to
do so, despite the fact that we are facing these budget
challenges and things like that. It really comes from
partnering with other agencies, partnering with the non-
governmental sector, the Farm Bureau, the various commodity
groups and other, and understanding what it is, and being a
little bit more effective and smart in delivering that
information, and utilizing technology as well, in, really
looking at a multi-faceted approach to staying engaged with the
end users.
Senator Brown. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, could I do--could I
ask Dr. Jacobs-Young a question that she can respond to?
Chairman Roberts. Very quickly.
Senator Brown. Okay. Thank you.
Chairman Roberts. I know we are coming up on vote.
Senator Brown. Central State University in Wilberforce,
Ohio, is the newest 1890 land-grant, even though it has been
around for a while, Dr. Jacobs-Young, as you know. If you would
just, in writing, respond, because of time, and because Senator
Klobuchar just arrived, and Senator Daines has questions. Could
you tell us how ARS works with Central State and other HBCUs to
increase capacity at the university, at best utilize its
existing strengths? CSU has already started a STEM summer
program for middle school students, and if you would give us an
answer to that in writing--I apologize for doing it that way.
Ms. Jacobs-Young. Okay.
Senator Brown. Okay. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Daines. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
Stabenow. Thank you for coming before this committee. I want to
thank Chairman Roberts for joining me in Montana earlier this
month. We had a Montana Ag Summit and it was a home run. I tell
you, the people of Montana were very appreciative of you being
there, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Roberts. My pleasure.
Senator Daines. Thank you for coming. I have got to tell
you, just before we get into the questions here, there is a
picture today, I just got tweeted, that warms my heart. It
shows a picture of the Governor of Nebraska with a few great
big boxes. They are air-freighting U.S. beef into Shanghai
today, and that is really a huge moment. The second-largest
beef import market in the world, China, and it is open now to
U.S. beef, and that is a real milestone here for agriculture.
Chairman Roberts. If the Senator would yield, I would like
to pay credit to him for going to China, because of his
background and prior serving in this body, I want to thank you
for your initiative.
Senator Daines. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, it was a
great team effort and we are glad to see U.S. beef moving into
China now.
One theme that stood out in the summit that the Chairman
was at in Great Falls, Montana--really, it is in the heart of
the Golden Triangle, our wheat country in Montana--was the
importance of ag research in ensuring that producers in Montana
and the U.S. at large continue to be the most productive and
most efficient farmers and ranchers in the world.
Dr. Jacobs-Young, you highlighted, in your testimony, the
importance of ARS labs throughout the United States, and I
could not agree more. Montana farmers and ranchers value the
great work conducted at ARS labs, in Sidney and Miles City,
Dubois, Idaho, that provide research essential to our Montana
grain-growers, ranchers, wool-growers, producers across the
state as well as the nation.
Could you speak about the range and livestock lab,
actually, in Miles City, and the Sheep Experiment Station in
Dubois, Idaho, that we are currently working on?
Ms. Jacobs-Young. So in Dubois, Idaho, one of the things
that we are working on there is sheep production, and one of
the beauties and the unique nature of the Dubois location is
the opportunity to graze at higher elevations, to be able to
study the interface between wildlife and domestic animals.
As you most likely know, for many years we have not been
able to graze in those higher elevations because of legal
challenges to the interface, and the possibility of impact on
grizzly bears and bighorn sheep, and so we have been faced with
those lawsuits since 2007. We have had some difficulty
completing our mission at Dubois, Idaho, in terms of the
grazing patterns we are trying to research.
In Miles City, Montana, we also look at rangeland
management of livestock and beef. We have some very important
work that is being conducted there where the goals of the work
at both of those locations are critically important, and in
some cases we have some challenges being able to conduct that
research.
Senator Daines. Well, thank you, and while all these
stations discussed have been targeted by prior administration,
they provide invaluable research. I have spent time out in
Miles City, spending time with the researchers. It is
invaluable research to our farmers and ranchers across a state
like Montana.
You know, we are from a pretty arid state.
Ms. Jacobs-Young. Right.
Senator Daines. We do not get a lot of rain, and it is so
important to understand the grasses and so forth and these
interfaces you talk about. In fact, the Bighorn Sheep
Foundation is now--their headquarters is in my hometown of
Bozeman----
Ms. Jacobs-Young. Yeah.
Senator Daines. --and we are working constructive with the
wool-growers, our sheep operations, the folks of the Bighorn
Sheep Foundation, to ensure we can have both, and I think we
can. We are going to need this research. So we are going to
continue to work hard to prevent these closures from occurring,
and keep them moving forward.
I want to shift gears and talk about our tribes. Montana is
home to 12 federally recognized Indian tribes, 7 Indian
reservations, and the state recognizes the Little Shell Tribe.
Ag play an essential role in Indian country economies. Montana
also has seven tribal colleges, spread throughout the state, in
fact, the most of any state in the United States. These
colleges play a critical role in disseminating research and
best practices to tribal farms and ranchers.
Dr. Ramaswamy, how is USDA working with tribes and tribal
colleges to ensure that tribal producers have access to the
latest research and are aware of the research-related services
made available by the USDA?
Mr. Ramaswamy. Thank you very much, Senator Daines, and,
indeed, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, broadly writ, works
very closely with our tribal populations and tribal colleges,
and specifically my agency, NIFA, the National Institute of
Food and Agriculture works with the 36 institutions we have
across America and the 7 in your state as well.
There are a number of projects that we support. We offer
funding for research, for education, for extension. There is
also what is referred to as the Federally Recognized Tribal
Extension Program as well, that partners with our 1862
institutions to bring knowledge to our tribal populations.
We provide funding and the good thing is that very recently
several tribal colleges, they partnered together to work on
bison, for example--this is part of their heritage--on
improving the breeds of bison--breeding of bison. That is a
project that we provided funding through our Agriculture and
Food Research Initiative. There is another one that is
developing varieties of relevance to tribal populations that we
have provided funding to as well.
So there are a number of projects that we provide funding,
both through our competitive grants programs as well as through
the regular capacity funds that we provide.
Senator Daines. Dr. Ramaswamy, I am out of time now, but
thank you. You have answered the question well. I am going to
turn it back to the chairman.
Chairman Roberts. Thank you. Senator Klobuchar.
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much. I am back. I had
another hearing and good to see all of you. I know many
questions have been asked but I have not asked them, so here we
go.
The research is very important in my state, and even with
all the advances that you have made, I think you know that it
has been estimated that we will need to produce more than twice
as much food as we do today to feed 9 billion people in the
world. Do you think additional investment will be necessary to
meet future demands in the ag sector when it comes to research?
Anyone can take that.
Ms. Bartuska. Let me go ahead and start and then pass it
over to the administrators. We definitely have produced, from
our research, the ability to grow more food on less land, more
efficiently, and that has continued to be the driver. We see it
as absolutely critical. This figure of 9.7 people in 2050 is
just looming in my brain, and every day I think about what we
have to do to make our investments the most efficient.
Within our resources available, we are going to continue to
focus on that, with laser-like attention, and I think this is
where we need to continue to be innovative.
One of the things that I mentioned earlier, is that we know
that if we make these investments in agricultural research the
benefits are great, and so we need to improve that--continue on
that track.
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you.
Ms. Bartuska. But there is not enough land to grow the
amount of food----
Senator Klobuchar. Right.
Ms. Bartuska. --so we have to be creative, and one of the
areas that is in the area of----
Senator Klobuchar. I want to ask some specific questions
now----
Ms. Bartuska. Okay.
Senator Klobuchar. --but I appreciate that. One of the
specific things that affects my state, recent outbreaks of
avian influenza, the PEDV and other emerging diseases highlight
the significant threats facing animal agriculture and the need
for more research in this area, one of the reasons I am so
concerned about budget cuts proposed by the Administration to
USDA.
Dr. Ramaswamy, can you talk about the importance of the
National Animal Health Lab Network, and are more resources
necessary for that research.
Mr. Ramaswamy. Senator Klobuchar, thank you so much for
that question. Absolutely. We have, across America, several
enterprises that protects the biosecurity for our food
systems--the National Animal Health Laboratory Network, the
National Plant Diagnostic Network, and other efforts of that
sort that protect the biosecurity.
Unfortunately, when we look at cybersecurity--this has been
on the news lately here, with the Chinese and the Russians
hacking us--we are spending about $75 billion to protect our
cybersecurity. To protect the biosecurity of our food systems
we are spending a sum total of about $38 million in America. I
joke, but very seriously, if all of our computers are hacked,
we can go back to using paper and pencil. If our food systems
are hacked, we are in serious trouble.
Senator Klobuchar. Yes.
Mr. Ramaswamy. So the National Health Laboratory Network
and these other networks we have got are critically important
for us to ensure that we are meeting the needs of protecting
the biosecurity, and I agree with you that I dare say we are,
really, really short in the investments that we are making.
These networks that were created post 9/11 are falling apart,
and we have to make sure we protect them.
Senator Klobuchar. Okay. Thank you. Dr. Jacobs-Young,
researchers at the U of M in my state are increasingly working
the area of phenomics, which focuses on measuring the physical
and biochemical traits of organisms as they change in response
to environmental influences. Can you talk about the value of
emerging plant science techniques, like phenomics?
Ms. Jacobs-Young. Absolutely, and back to your original
question, I think this one is very relevant.
You know, agriculture is a very high-tech industry. We do
not just put the seed in the ground and hope something happens.
We have many, many plant breeders, both on the classical--what
we call classical breeding side, as well as our advanced
technology side, and it is important for us to be able to
generate data that enables us to speed up the process.
I would like to just share that, Dr. Edward Buckler from
our Cornell location in ARS, received the first prize for food
and agriculture from the National Academies of Science, and it
is through partnership with the Foundation for Food and
Agriculture Research. He received that prize because his work
in the genetic evaluation of maize has saved lives. It has
helped deal with the vitamin A deficiencies around the world
which result in stunting. But, he is only able to do that
because we have been generating data for years and years and
able to turn that data into solutions. That is why genomics and
phenomics and all the other ``omics'' are extremely important
to us as we try to innovate in agriculture.
Senator Klobuchar. Okay. Very good. I appreciate it. On the
record I will ask a question about research initiatives to
expand the use of ag commodities in non-food markets, so thank
you for your work.
Chairman Roberts. Thank you. Senator Hoeven.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to all of
our witnesses for being here, and I want to express my very
strong support for agricultural research. Growing up in western
North Dakota we grew primarily small grains, and now, thanks to
the incredible ag research and development that has been done
we can grow amazing variety of crops, ranging from corn and
soybeans to all the pulse crops, to oilseed crops, as well as
all of the small grain crops.
Diversity in agriculture has truly been a real benefit,
certainly for farmers, and for our ranchers, but for the
American people, because we can grow so much more food and
provide that variety, and, as I say, about agriculture every
chance I get, our farmers and ranchers provide the highest
quality, lowest cost food supply in the history of the world,
and ag research is a really big part of it. It is a big, big
deal. So we need to support ag research funding in the budget,
and I chair Ag Appropriations so I have every intention--we
have every intention of doing that, and I know our Ag Committee
Chairman and Ranking Member share that sentiment.
I think, as a matter of fact, he even has some pretty good
ag research in Kansas, and I know there is some pretty good ag
research probably in Michigan too.
Chairman Roberts. You do not want to go there, but go
ahead.
[Laughter.]
Senator Hoeven. There is a little rivalry between North
Dakota State and K-State.
My question is, how do we leverage, private and other
public investment with our ag research funds? So what are--
because we want to fund ag research but we want to try to
leverage those funds.
So from each of you, just talk a little bit how we can do
more to leverage private, and other public funding, with the
funds that we provide for ag research.
Ms. Bartuska. How about if I start and we end with Dr.
Rockey, who probably has the home run answer.
Part of it is we really do need to be reaching out to an
emerging group of private partners, those that we have not
necessarily worked with in the past, and to really understand
what their needs are, where they need to be in 5 or 10 years,
and be able to build that knowledge into our programs. So for
me it is expanding those partnerships by reaching out to new
individuals and new organizations.
Senator Hoeven. Are you actively doing that?
Ms. Bartuska. Sorry?
Senator Hoeven. Are you doing that? I mean, how do we do
that----
Ms. Bartuska. Well, part of it----
Senator Hoeven. --in a concerted way.
Ms. Bartuska. I would say one way we are doing that is the
composition of our National Advisory Board, the NAREEE board,
the National Agriculture Research Education Extension Economics
Advisory Board, who advised us.
By choosing qualified members and being able to have a
nomination process to ensure that we have new and diverse
members applying for that board, and then working with them as
they are on the board, and then after they leave.
We are really expanding our connections, so that is one
example that has been a very productive approach to take. The
other is just really reaching out to the business community, to
be able to reach out to those who are in agricultural research,
those who use the National Ag Statistics data, they are ones
who are very interested in how can they continue to grow our
databases to be able to make better assumptions about the crops
and the commodities they are dealing with.
So those are two really big areas that are very ripe for
more partnerships and more outreach.
Mr. Ramaswamy. Senator Hoeven, good to see you again, sir.
Senator Hoeven. Good to see you. Thanks for your good work.
Mr. Ramaswamy. Well, thank you very much. From NIFA's
perspective, we leverage, for every dollar that NIFA invests
there is $1.86 that is returned in leverage, and there are
several tools that you, Congress, has provided us to be able to
do that, this leverage of the public-private leveraging, non-
governmental organizations, and others. For example, in the
last farm bill we have the commodity board provision, which we
match, dollar for dollar, and commodity boards come to us and
they say they want us to invest on particular topics, and so
NIFA co-invests with them. That is one approach that we have
used.
A second approach that we have used, again, thanks to what
Congress did in the previous farm bills, particularly with the
2008 Farm Bill, which created NIFA, we created what we refer to
as coordinated agricultural projects. These are the huge grants
that we have provided. You know, these are like $10, $20, $40
million grants. One of those grants was given to a consortium
of institutions that includes a bunch of private sector folks
as well, led by Washington State University. They had an
airplane fly out of Seattle-Tacoma airport back in November, on
November the 14th, with their congressional delegation that
came to Reagan National, flying on ``woodchips.'' That
project----
Senator Hoeven. Flying on what?
Mr. Ramaswamy. Flying on woodchips. The woodchips were
converted into----
Senator Hoeven. You are making that up. I know you are.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Ramaswamy. Seriously. Get your head wrapped around that
image, right? That particular project, for a $40 million
investment, has leveraged almost $200 million of additional
from the private sector, from the non-governmental sector that
have come in and invested resources as well. That includes some
of our Native American tribal populations in the Northwest as
well.
So those are a couple of examples, and I am going to pass
to Dr. Jacobs-Young.
Ms. Jacobs-Young. So just very quickly, I would like to say
that at ARS, we deliver a lot of products inside of our
laboratories, and then we work with businesses to get them
moved out into commercializations, the Apples in the Happy
Meals at McDonald's, lactose-free milk, instant potatoes, the
potatoes that are used for Pringles. All those things were
developed in ARS, but once we discover it and deliver it, we
work with the private industry to move it out. Sometimes that
includes exclusive license, if that is necessary, but often it
is just in the partnerships, and through other mechanisms.
Ms. Rockey. Senator, as you know, our foundation was
created with that exactly in mind. For every dollar that we
spend we leverage another dollar from the private sector. So it
is really about finding those in the private sector or
commodity groups or other potential partners who share our
goals for the research. We often times use our convening power
to bring those individuals and organizations to the table so we
can decide collectively which areas of research would be the
most important to go through, either first or to place our
funding on.
So it is important for our relationship and for our
foundation to work to bring together those private-public
partnerships.
Senator Hoeven. You are finding that USDA, ARS, NIFA are
all very receptive to that, right----
Ms. Rockey. Oh, absolutely.
Senator Hoeven. --and you are able to work with them and do
creative things----
Ms. Rockey. We work very, very----
Senator Hoeven. --leverage resources.
Ms. Rockey. We work very, very closely with USDA. They are
our closest partners. Not only that we complement their work
but we have, for example, ARS scientists intimately involved in
many of our projects. We work closely with NIFA through the
AFRI program to see where our research programs can come in and
fill gaps or white spaces that the AFRI programs may not be
covering. We have great relationships with the USDA.
Senator Hoeven. Good stuff. Thank you all.
Chairman Roberts. Dr. Ramaswamy, as you know there is a
facility now being under construction at Kansas State called
NBAF. It comes as a result of the danger of agro-terrorism.
Some time back, in a city called Obolensk, which is not too far
from Moscow, that is one of the secret cities during the time
that Russia was much more open than it is today, there were
large amounts of pathogens. I would imagine that it is still
there. I hope it is still there, but under Mr. Putin it is a
whole different matter. The intelligence community would let
you know that it is in the top 10, top 5 things they worry
about, is an attack on our food supply.
I would like to visit with you about that, and also anybody
else that wants to chip in, but we are now in a voting process
on the first of three votes. Senator Stabenow will return and
then we will switch back and forth.
I want to thank all of you for taking time out of your
valuable schedule to come. Usually when we have a hearing like
this, I get to come up, shake your hand, thank you, visit with
you a little bit more, but we have some time constraints. So
thank you so much, and I would like to welcome our second panel
of witnesses to come before the Committee.
Mr. Ramaswamy. Thank you very much, Chairman Roberts.
Ms. Jacobs-Young. Thank you.
Ms. Rockey. Thank you, sir.
[Pause.]
Chairman Roberts. We will proceed with the next panel.
First I would like to introduce Dr. Floros, Dr. John
Floros, of Kansas State University. He has been the Dean of the
College of Agriculture and Director of K-State Research and
Extension since August of 2012, and under his leadership K-
State established the Center on Wheat Genomics and successfully
competed to host four Feed the Future labs on wheat, sorghum,
and millet, and post-harvest loss reduction and sustainable
intensification of agriculture. He was recently recognized by
the Food and Drug Administration for his distinguished service
to the people of the United States, as a member of the Science
Board to the FDA. Welcome. I look forward to your testimony.
Doctor, it is good to see you again.
Mr. Gary McMurray, Senator Perdue is on his way to
introduce you, and so we will wait until the distinguished
Senator arrives.
Then we have Dr. Kerry Hartman. Doctor, I am going to give
this a good go. This is a welcome that Senator Heitkamp wanted
to proceed, and that Senator Stabenow then said she would read,
and now she has given it to me while she is voting. So stay
with me here.
I want to give a warm welcome to Dr. Kerry Hartman,
Academic Dean and Sciences Chair at Nueta Hidatsa Sahnish--and
the parens here on how to really do that is to say Nueta
Hidatsa Sahnish College. I struggled through that. I apologize,
sir.
Dr. Hartman has spent the past 25 years conducting
agriculture research and teaching on the Fort Berthold Indian
Reservation in North Dakota. His research has focused on land,
water, the environment, and native plants and wildlife that are
central to the lives of the Mandan, Arikara, and Hidatsa
people.
I think that I am looking for a second page and obviously
we do not need that with that introduction.
Senator Perdue.
Senator Perdue. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, it is my honor
this morning--good to see you----
Chairman Roberts. Thank you.
Senator Perdue. --it is my honor to introduce Gary McMurray
this morning, a fellow Georgia Tech guy, and I am pleased to
introduce him as a graduate. He received his bachelor's and
master's degree in mechanical engineering from Georgia Tech and
is now a Principal Research Engineer and Division Chief at the
Georgia Tech Research Institute's Food Processing Technology
Division. He has been with the institute for over 25 years. He
is also the Associate Director for Collaborative Robotics at
the Institute of Robotics and Intelligent Machines at Georgia
Tech.
Being from a non-land-grant college, Mr. McMurray's
perspective on ag research is especially important to spur
innovation beyond traditional methods of food production. Mr.
McMurray's research has focused on the development of robotic
technologies and solutions for the manufacturing and
agribusiness communities. His focus on research that brings
experts from non-agricultural fields together with ag
scientists is crucial to defining new technologies that can
benefit farms and ultimately the consumers they feed.
For the previous four years, Mr. McMurray led a strategic
initiative on the future of agricultural sensing that involved
a multidisciplinary team of engineers, computer scientists from
Georgia Tech, and plant pathologists and agricultural engineers
from the University of Georgia.
He is currently leading a National Robotics Initiative
project in conjunction with partners from the University of
Georgia, that is funded by the USDA, to develop an automated
system to identify plants that are potentially suffering from
soil, nutrient, and water deficiency problems.
Thank you, Gary, for being here today. We appreciate and
look forward to your testimony.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Roberts. Thank you, Senator Perdue. It is my
privilege to introduce Mr. Steve Wellman from Syracuse,
Nebraska, where he and his family grow soybeans, corn, winter
wheat, and alfalfa, as well as manage a cow-calf herd on their
fourth-generation family farm. Mr. Wellman has served in a
variety of capacities through his agriculture career, as
President of the American Soybean Association, an inaugural
board member of the Supporters of Agriculture Research, and on
the USDA/USTR Agricultural Technical Advisory Committee for
Grains, Feeds, Oilseeds, and Planting Seeds.
We thank you all for coming.
We will start with Dr. Floros.
STATEMENT OF JOHN FLOROS, PH.D., DEAN AND DIRECTOR, COLLEGE OF
AGRICULTURE AND K-STATE RESEARCH AND EXTENSION, KANSAS STATE
UNIVERSITY, MANHATTAN, KANSAS
Mr. Floros. Senator Roberts, thank you, sir, for inviting
me and good to see you again.
Chairman Roberts. Thank you. EMAW.
Mr. Floros. There you go.
Chairman Roberts. That stands for`` Every Man A Wildcat''.
I want to explain that to the others.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Floros. Sir, I would like to start by apologizing for
my appearance here. It took me more than 20 hours to fly here
from Manhattan, and my bag did not make it, so my apologies for
looking a little----
Chairman Roberts. I think your attire is splendid, sir.
Please proceed.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Floros. What I would like to do today is talk a little
bit about the land-grant system and its importance to our
research, agriculture research, and then very briefly talk a
little bit about agricultural and food research and several
components of its importance, the impact, and the long-lasting
value of such research, so that you and your Committee can
actually continue to support the research and our efforts.
Finally, I want to talk a little bit about infrastructure,
as well as workforce issues, and I am going to start by briefly
saying how important the land-grant system has been, over 150
years now, for this country, and the well-being of the American
citizens, particularly because we have the teaching, research,
and extension components as part of that. I would like to
stress that food security and political security are connected,
and both of those are directly connected to food and
agriculture innovation, and it is driven by agriculture and
food research.
In terms of ag research, what I would like to point out is
that most of the investment that comes through USDA, the land-
grant system, it is actually matched 1-to-1, in some cases 7 or
8-to-1, by other investments, from state governments, local
governments, and other sources as well. So we will appreciate
continuing that investment because not only it is supplemented
by other sources but also because its impact has been long-
lasting.
You heard earlier from USDA that the return is about 20-to-
1, and I am sorry that the Chairman is not here, but that
return in the state of Kansas is actually 33.6-to-1. So the
return of agricultural research is very, very high, and you
will be pressed to find anything higher than that. I also would
like to say that AFRI should be really brought up to its
appropriations of $700 million, because we have a lot of
challenges coming up, as you all know.
One of the points I wanted to stress has to do with food
science and technology-related research. We put some emphasis
on agriculture but we are not putting as much emphasis on food
science and food processing and manufacturing. Food
manufacturing per se, it is almost 15 percent of American
manufacturing, and we are not really emphasizing much of that
in our portfolio of investments. It used to be that half of
every dollar goes to the farmer from the consumer, but today
only probably one out of seven dollars goes to the farmer from
the consumer. The rest, $6, are actually added value, and that
is what we need to capture. We have divested from this area,
and as a result, I think the American manufacturing segment of
food and agriculture has suffered, and innovation is now coming
from elsewhere in the world because of that.
I also would like to say a few words about international
research in food and agriculture. USAID invests a lot of money
in that. We do a lot of work in that. Much of what we do
benefits other countries out there in the world, but most of
the information we generate comes back to the U.S., to help our
own farmers, our own ranchers, our own industry, to improve and
get better.
A couple of things about infrastructure. There was a study
that has been done very recently. Throughout the country, food
and agricultural research infrastructure is suffering from
really negligence in terms of our buildings and their
maintenance. There was a study that shows that about $8.4
billion are needed to just bring the infrastructure to today.
Just at K-State alone, we just did a study and it shows $550
million worth of needs right now to our own infrastructure.
Finally, I want to put a couple of comments about capacity
funding and you all know what that is, and USDA talked a little
bit about that. Just in the last 50 or so years, the
improvement of the U.S. agriculture has been about 2.5 times,
when you look at productivity, compared to where we were 50
years ago. Capacity funding had a lot to do with that.
Everybody talks about the green revolution. We are going to
have to actually have a second green revolution if we are to
meet the needs of a growing world. It is not just the growth in
population. It is also the growth in middle class. It is the
diversity of the population. The food system, the global food
system, needs to respond to all of those, and for that I think
we need to continue to invest in capacity funding as well as
NIFA and AFRI.
The final point I wanted to make is training the next
generation, and it is critical that we find ways to train more
people in agriculture and in food. A USDA study shows that we
only provide maybe a little more than half of the workforce
that we need today, and we will need more tomorrow.
So with that, I have overstated my time. I would like to
assure the Committee that every dollar we invest in food and
agricultural research, it will be worthwhile spent and we will
see very long-term return and huge impact because of that.
Thank you so much for giving me the opportunity.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Floros can be found on page
61 in the appendix.]
Senator Stabenow. [Presiding.] Thank you, Dr. Floros, and
let me just indicate that we are in the midst of three votes
and Chairman Roberts and I are playing tag-team back and forth,
and we apologize that members are being pulled in a number of
directions.
Dr. Floros, I want to just underscore what you said about
food manufacturing, as a state that does a lot of food
manufacturing, how important that is.
Mr. McMurray.
STATEMENT OF GARY MCMURRAY, DIVISION CHIEF, FOOD PROCESSING
TECHNOLOGY DIVISION, GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH INSTITUTE, ATLANTA,
GEORGIA
Mr. McMurray. Thank you very much, Chairman Roberts,
Ranking Committee Member Stabenow, and other Committee members.
It is really an honor to be here today and to represent Georgia
Tech, which is a non-land-grant institution, and the work that
we are doing in agriculture. I, myself, am honored to lead a
team of 28 research faculty members, 14 academic faculty
members, and over 40 students, working in the area of
agribusiness and food manufacturing. So we have over 45 years'
experience working in this through a state-funded program
called the Agricultural Technology Research Program. So we have
a lot of experience in this area, working in sensors, robotics,
and sustainability.
Georgia Tech is one of the leading engineering schools
within the nation. It has outstanding reputation from NSF,
DARPA, DoD, and Department of Energy. One of the things we are
trying to do is leverage that expertise, which is funded from
other government agencies, bring that to the world of
agriculture.
But one of the things which is very critical to us is that
we are very much involved in the multidisciplinary approach.
All of our projects have partners--at University of Georgia,
University of Florida, and other land-grant institutes--because
we really recognize the synergy that comes about when you bring
the engineers together with the scientists. They really come up
with groundbreaking and new ideas, and this is something that
we really want to see continue.
I would like to talk about several projects that we are
focused on. We are mainly focused on yield improvements,
because that is a critical issue to feeding the global
population. We have two projects right now we are focused on:
presymptomatic disease detection and field scouting for abiotic
stress. These issues are very important for a number of
different reasons. Currently we still lose over 12 percent of
our crops to disease and approximately 16 percent of our crops
to pests. So addressing these issues will go a long way to
addressing some of the issues, which are of major concern.
We do this through a couple of different areas. We focus on
novel sensors as well as robotic systems. In the novel sensors,
we have been working on a micro gas chromatograph, which takes
a traditional gas chromatograph, which works in a laboratory
environment, we have reduced it down to something the size of a
9-volt battery size, which can now be field deployed and can
actually, in real time, take air samples and process that.
Why is that important? Because plants emit volatile organic
compounds, and those compounds will give you tremendous insight
into the health of the plant. Not only can we recognize stress
in plants but can actually target and actually identify
specific pathogens and diseases that are attacking the plants.
That is very important.
We are also looking at root sensors to be able to actually
look at the root mass, and this has tremendous value in
agriculture. This, actually, this type of multidisciplinary
work is something that we feel would really be better served
through the creation of something we call ARPA AG. These types
of programs have been very successful in a number of government
agencies, and it is the opportunity to do high-risk, high-
reward, but really bring the scientists and the engineers
together to work on critical issues in agriculture.
So, in conclusion, the land-grant institutes are very
interested in working in agriculture, because it is a major
problem that we face in the world. We think that we can bring
expertise, from NSF, DoD, and other agencies, to bear on this
problem in a very unique way, and this is something that we at
Georgia Tech are very excited about and really look forward to
contributing as the process goes.
So I thank you very much for the opportunity to be here,
and I look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McMurray can be found on
page 81 in the appendix.]
Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much. Dr. Hartman,
welcome.
STATEMENT OF KERRY HARTMAN, PH.D., ACADEMIC DEAN AND SCIENCES
CHAIR, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES, NUETA HIDATSA SAHNISH COLLEGE,
NEW TOWN, NORTH DAKOTA
Mr. Hartman. Thank you very much, Ranking Member Stabenow,
and I wish Chairman Roberts was here. I would like EMAW to him
also. My daughter graduated from our college and is now
attending vet school at Kansas State.
On behalf of the nation's 34 tribal college land-grant
institutions known as the 1994s, thank you very much for this
opportunity to talk about our place-based research. Indian
country includes some of the most isolated and economically
challenged regions in the United States, but our lands are rich
in natural resources and our people are among the most
resilient in the world. Within this context, tribal colleges
are working to strengthen our tribal community economies, to
revitalize our cultures and languages, and to protect, restore,
and sustainably use our lands, waters, and traditional foods.
Since 2001, my undergraduate students and I have been
conducting culturally and economically relevant research under
the USDA/TCU programs. The goal of my current NIFA research
project, conducted with tribal game and fish biologists and
South Dakota State University, Mr. Thune, Senator Thune, is to
figure out how to develop and maintain an environment that will
support the native pollinators of Amelanchier cultivars, or
juneberries, as well as other native fruits. Juneberries are an
ancient plant. There are high levels of protein, calcium,
antioxidants, sustained generations of native people throughout
the northern plains and woodlands, until native pollinators and
juneberry stands fell victim to Western expansion.
Ranking Member Stabenow, a juneberry is very, very, very
similar to a blueberry. If they were sitting here together, you
cannot tell them apart. Down the road I hope to do research on
the genetics. I do not know whether it was convergent evolution
or divergent evolution or just the luck of the draw, but these
two berries are very, very similar.
Back to my written statement now.
If we can restore the juneberry native habit we can
sustainably cultivate crops for local use and small farm
commercial production, helping to grow our reservation's
economy and improve the health standards of our people.
We are also helping to restore the identity and cultural
pride of the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara people. This project
would not happen without USDA support for our specialty crop
research. The need for research into emerging technologies for
small farmers, invasive species management, sustainable growth,
and security, is essential in Indian country, as the juneberry
research attests to.
As you work to reauthorize the farm bill, I have three
quick recommendations. We need to acknowledge the value of
undergraduate place-based research and education. The Farm
Bill's research provisions should specifically acknowledge that
diversity matters. Students and faculty at 1994s and the
minorities and the small institutions can enhance the call to
competency and research capacity of the next generation of
agricultural scientists and practitioners. This is extremely
important in expanding our U.S. workforce as well as the global
economy.
Second would be to resist efforts to consolidate Federal
STEM research programs. We will lose research opportunities
under the President's budget proposal to consolidate Federal
STEM programs. History demonstrates it is small and poor
institutions, like all of the 1994s, cannot compete against
Research I and the large land-grant institutions.
Thirdly, to establish McIntire Stennis eligibility for the
1994s. This is a matter of equity. In 2008, the McIntire
Stennis Act was amended to include tribal lands and a formula
for state forestry programs but tribal land-grant institutions
were excluded. Please amend the McIntire Stennis formula to
include 1994s with the forestry programs.
Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, the modest Federal
investment in the 1994 institutions has already paid great
interest in terms of increased employment, access to higher
education, and research opportunities and economic development.
Continuation and growth in this investment makes sound moral
and fiscal sense.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hartman can be found on page
68 in the appendix.]
Senator Stabenow. Thank you so much for your testimony. Mr.
Wellman, welcome.
STATEMENT OF STEVE WELLMAN, FARMER, WELLMAN FARMS, SYRACUSE,
NEBRASKA
Mr. Wellman. Yeah. Thank you, Ranking Member Stabenow, and
also I appreciate the invitation from Chairman Roberts and you
and the rest of the Committee to appear here today, to really
discuss the science and innovation which is the very essence of
farming. My perspective is, as a third-generation farmer,
farming the same fields that my father and grandfather did,
plus a few more.
We need three things to get American agriculture growing:
sun, rain, and research. There is not much I can do about the
first two, but when it comes to research, I can lend my name,
my time, and my voice, to policymakers, encouraging you to
renew American leadership in agricultural science.
Sufficient Federal investment and wise policies are
essential if the United States is to continue to be a global
leader in agriculture. As SoAR founder, Bill Danforth, has
remarked, ``Food is too important to the human race to be a
research afterthought. It needs to be a high priority for the
nation's entire scientific community,'' and I would add, for
the entire nation.
Traditionally, we have thought of agriculture science in
terms of improving yields, preventing soil erosion, and
adapting crops to a variety of growing conditions. Today,
agriculture stands to realize significant gains through
interdisciplinary research across numerous scientific fields,
including data science, nanotechnology, biotechnology, and
genomics. To capitalize on these relatively modern fields of
science we need to ensure we have a modern Federal research
enterprise, and that is why I am urging you to give the entire
USDA research, education, and economics mission area your full
attention.
Public agriculture research spending peaked in 1994, and
has since declined 20 percent. The 2008 Farm Bill authorized
AFRI at $700 million annually, yet funding has reached only the
halfway point of that level. As a percentage of total Federal
research investment, USDA has fallen to less than 3 percent of
the annual Federal investment. Put another way, research
funding for other Federal agencies is nearly $60 billion.
Research funding at the USDA research mission area tops out at
just over $2 billion, an amount that has remained virtually
unchanged for decades.
On our non-irrigated farm, conservation of natural
resources is a constant focus. Farming practices such as
contour terraces, no till, drought and insect-tolerant seeds
and cover crops are all implemented. Field scripts prescribing
varieties to plant managing nutrients to maximize yield while
controlling inputs, are also used. Thanks to modern science,
these are all effective and productive practices. Will they be
in the future, and will new research demonstrate ways to
improve?
What we do today is based on years of research and
learning. Where will the knowledge to improve U.S. production
practices come from in the future without public research
leading the way?
American agriculture is a marvel of the world but that does
not mean the world is standing by. As you mentioned earlier,
China has increased their investment at a double-digit pace and
are actually outspending the United States on ag R&D at this
point. Funding rates in the European Union has increased and
their grant proposals are nearly a 40 percent success rate. In
the U.S., AFRI grant applications are between 10 and 15
percent, and only around 25 percent of the projects they rate
highly receive support.
For fiscal year 2015, the most recent research AFRI
analysis shows a total of 2,694 competitive grant applications,
requesting just under $1.8 billion. They were received and
reviewed through the competitive peer review process. An
additional 884 proposal were recommended for funding by review
panels and could have been supported provided an additional
$690 million was available for the program. A modernized
system, supported with additional investment, is the plea I
make to you today.
In closing, I leave you with a question. How certain are we
that we can provide food security for 10 billion people by the
middle of the century? The U.S. has been the world leader in
agricultural production and innovation for decades. This is a
role the U.S. needs to retain. I believe it will not happen
without a strong commitment to public research, from Congress
and our Administration.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wellman can be found on page
105 in the appendix.]
Senator Stabenow. Well, thank you very much to each of you,
and I could not agree more, Mr. Wellman, about the importance
of agricultural research and what this means to the future of
the country, and to farmers, and to all of us.
Mr. Hartman--Dr. Hartman, I wanted to ask you first if you
might just expand a bit on the important benefits of
partnerships with the tribal communities and other land-grant
universities and so on. I know we, in Michigan, have some
terrific examples of that with Michigan State University and
our tribal colleges. But these have been very important
partnership and I wondered if you might expand a bit on that.
Mr. Hartman. Thank you for that question very much. They
enable us--partnerships with other land-grant institutions
under the NIFA 1994 program, partnerships are required with
land-grant institutions and state institutions or agricultural
research stations. These partnerships assist us in carrying out
the grant's primary emphasis, which is on training students in
sciences.
Through the collaborations and cooperative projects, I
personally have grown significantly in my education philosophy,
research capabilities, professional contacts, and, most
importantly, in terms of educational research. Scientists,
researchers, professors, career professionals from multiple
institutions are now readily available to me. I have contacts
at NDSU. I graduated. My PhD was from South Dakota State
University. I have done my pollinator research and most of my
cultivator research was with South Dakota State and North
Dakota State.
Our initial--well, I think one of the first NIFA land-grant
collaborative was a huge one, with Iowa State. There was four--
forgive me--I think they are the 1864s, the original land-
grants, the ones that were started under the Morrill Act. There
was four Morrill Act and four tribal colleges--North Dakota,
South Dakota, Nebraska Community College, and Sinte Gleska.
That grant was a huge grant and we still have connections. I
was able to achieve my PhD through a collaboration of that
grant. We did lots of partnerships. We like to say that we help
educate the 1884s also, to extend their understanding of the
tribal communities, and to bring their scientific expertise out
to our communities, and to take some of our students over
there.
As I mentioned, here is--the Chairman is back. As I
mentioned, my daughter graduated from our tribal college and
she is now attending veterinary college at Kansas State
University. EMAW there, sir. We have lots of students that have
transferred to the institutions after these collaborations were
begun.
So I hope I addressed your question. They offer us research
capabilities and scientific--laboratories that we, of course,
are not capable of maintaining, and research expertise, also,
from their professors. We like to say we offer them a very
different ecosystem also. For instance, North Dakota State is
in the Red River Valley, and we are on high, arid, western
North Dakota, so we have very, very different ecosystem climate
characteristics, et cetera.
Chairman Roberts. [Presiding.] I apologize to this panel.
You are caught in those merry-go-round moments that we have on
occasion, where we have had three votes, and the distinguished
Ranking Member was helpful to--she is voting. I just voted. We
have another vote, so time is of the essence, and I apologize
because we have, or I have quite a few questions for you, as
would every member of this Committee.
Dr. Floros, you mentioned that the price and availability
of food directly impacts the political stability of our
country. But we are currently experiencing low commodity
prices. Food insecurity around the world certainly remains of
serious concern, especially South Sudan, Yemen, Somalia,
Northern Nigeria. How can we better leverage USDA domestic and
international research efforts to help support the goal of
producing enough food supply for the incredible 10 billion
people that we may experience in the next several decades?
Mr. Floros. Chairman, thank you. That is a great question.
Not necessarily an easy answer, but definitely we need to
invest more in looking at the system that helps our farmers and
our ranchers plan better, and plan ahead, versus from year to
year.
There is no question that what happens in one part of the
country affects what happens all around the world, but our
system is not quite designed to figure that out ahead of time.
So I think we need to be able to project forward a little
better than we are today.
The other thing that I think we need to work on is
developing a system that is much more robust, in terms of the
varieties that we use, in terms of the genetics we use for
animal production, in terms of how much we lose from the farm
to the table, to reduce food waste. All of that will impact not
only prices but also the availability of food and the final
prices of the food around the world.
Today, in this country, we have the least expensive food
supply in our history, and in the world, for that matter. That
is a result of investing heavily in food and agricultural
research, and I think if we continue to do that, it will help
both our farmers and our ranchers in the long term, as well as
our citizens.
Chairman Roberts. Thank you. Mr. McMurray, as the
representative of the non-land-grant institution on our witness
panel, you bring a unique perspective. Your testimony mentioned
that overhead issues matching requirements from the USDA may
present engineering universities like Georgia Tech from
participating in agriculture research. Do not let Sonny Perdue
know that.
In spite of the tough budgetary environments that many
states are facing, are non-land-grant institutions or other
significant food and agricultural programs still able to find a
way to effectively leverage resources to match Federal grant
dollars and do more with less? If you can, please explain how
the overhead issue is negatively impacting the ability of
Georgia Tech to utilize the USDA grant programs.
Mr. McMurray. Thank you, Chairman, for the question. It is
an excellent question, and I think it is one that is complex in
some sense. We do see engineering as a critical component to
agriculture, and we do want to play a role in this area. But
when it comes to things with cost-matching and overhead rates,
it becomes very difficult for us. My organization, at GTRI, we
do not receive discretionary funding from the state, that we
could use as leverage for cost-sharing or the cost match.
So it becomes a serious impediment for many of the non-
land-grant institutes to participate in programs from USDA. I
think that is unfortunate because I think there is much to be
offered from these institutions. Many of these institutions
have played major roles in some of the innovations in many of
the industries throughout the United States, and they want to
contribute in ag, but so far these issues have limited their
ability to participate.
Chairman Roberts. I appreciate that. Mr. Wellman, you
mentioned research advances including drought-tolerant plant
varieties and plant input management to help you reduce costs
and maximize yields. Research on conservation practices like
contour terraces, no-till farming, cover crops have some
support but they have yet to be broadly adopted.
Beyond seed technology and precise fertilizer application,
what research opportunities in agriculture would most directly
impact our producers on the ground?
Mr. Wellman. Chairman Roberts, I just want to say to you
thank you for the invitation to appear here today. To your
question, agriculture is so diverse across the United States,
and there really is a variety of needs for, depending upon what
area the farmer is and the crops they want to produce, or that
are needed to be produced.
Maybe that is the question, the overarching question. Are
we producing the right products? Are we producing the products
that the world will need in the future, that was mentioned
earlier, looking ahead as to what is needed. How do we
transition? If that is the case, if there are other products
that maybe are more nutritional in a smaller quantity, how do
we transition from where we are now to something like that in
the future?
What we have recognized, up to this point, is from the
technology side of it, with the biotechnology and then also the
equipment that we use today, and the advancements that we have
seen there. It is just amazing the progress that we have made,
and the ability to produce more with less labor, which is
another--I think, a future problem for us, as we move forward,
is where is the labor force going to come from?
The long-term aspect, the long-term view of where research
money needs to be spent to really get a response that is
beneficial to the farmer, the person that is going to use it
and be implementing this research, and then, in turn,
beneficial to the consumer.
Chairman Roberts. Thank you, sir. Senator Hoeven.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to our
witnesses. Dr. Hartman, it is great to have you here,
representing Nueta Hidatsa Sahnish College in New Town, North
Dakota, and the American Indian Higher Education Consortium.
NIFA administers four programs for 1994 institutions, an ag
equity program, a research program. The 1994 institutions often
serve as the primary institutions of scientific inquiry,
knowledge, and learning for tribal communities. The two other
programs that I should mention, the competitive extension
program and also research programs. So four different programs.
In your testimony, you state all of these grant programs
are critically important, to your college and the other 1994
institutions. I guess my question would be, can you tell us a
little bit more about the impacts that these programs and
funding have on students, the colleges, and the communities?
Mr. Hartman. Good to see you, Senator. I do not need this
but I will use it anyway. Thank you for the question, sir.
I will have to qualify my answer just a little bit. I am
primarily involved with the research grants, the Tribal College
Research Grants Programs, and I can talk about them for hours.
I will address the extension. We are the extension agent on the
reservation. So the previous panel was addressing the
importance of extension, and at our land-grant institution, and
many of the tribal colleges, we have an agriculture department,
and our ag department administers the extension and the equity,
and the one other grant, cooperative or collaborative. I do not
remember what the other grant is, sir. My knowledge of them is
somewhat limited.
I know extension, we do a lot of activity with the Boys and
Girls Clubs. We do Young Farmers program. We have--previously
we had emphasis on young farmers, where we introduced everybody
from grades--I think it was 4 through 6, up through 12. They
were eligible for sheep and hogs program that we ran. We have a
gardening program that we run, between those. Of course we do
education. We have our small farmers and ranchers program that
provides workshops and trainings.
We work close--I should not say ``we''--they work closely
with the tribe in administering some of the tribal activities
and assisting with the bison project. Again, the tribal
gardening and reinforcing the gardening, the elders' foods
program. Just to briefly address those that I am least familiar
with.
The Tribal College Research Grants, we have been doing
those since 2002, and we basically have three, I guess, three
chair legs that we like to stress in our research. The first
one, of course, is the educational component of implementing
research in our undergraduate experience. We have a bachelor's
degree in environmental science and our students plan--they
choose, they plan, with my help and from the 1860s also, of
course, we have a design component where we design our research
projects. We conduct our own research. We have done everything
from aquaculture, invasive species. We did a research project
on leafy spurge, when leafy spurge was such a major issue out
in western North Dakota. My juneberry research has been focused
on small fruits and small crops. We have got the best cultivars
we are trying to select out.
But all throughout that we try to implement the concept of
doing quality scientific research to our students, and
validating the results, and repetition trials, et cetera.
We also like to strengthen and reinforce the culture. Of
course, the tribal culture is important, and that is one of the
missions of all tribal colleges is to help perpetuate the
cultures. Juneberries, for instance, they were harvested for
centuries, and we have got elders in telling stories. We talk
about the traditional use of the juneberry. Our nutritional
research was conducted with South Dakota State University. So
our students learned how to do nutritional analysis, in our lab
and in the lab at South Dakota State, and, of course, we stress
that with community members, in collaboration back with our
extension people, of the results. Juneberries are extremely
nutritious in antioxidants.
Right now we--my current research is involving pollinators,
and that would be native pollinators, primarily, and we are
trying to understand the interactions with the environment, of
course, and with the berries, and maximizing the pollinator
habitat, and maximizing the pollinator food plots. That will
hopefully improve not only the juneberry quality and quantity
but also the plums and the chokecherries and the buffaloberries
and the crabapples that are all there.
But throughout all the processes, we like to stress
introducing research to our undergraduates, as well as
reinforcing the culture and the educational opportunities.
Senator Hoeven. Well, again, I want to thank you for your
outstanding work there for many years, in making a real
difference, and then, I had asked the earlier panel, but
anything we can do to help leverage funding from other sources
to join with the NIFA money that you receive, we want to try
and help do that.
Mr. Hartman. Thank you, sir.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you. Thanks for being here today,
too, to all the witnesses.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Roberts. Thank you, Senator. Dr. Floros, you
mentioned that for every $7 spent on food, about $1 goes to the
primary agricultural production, with the remaining $6 spent on
handling, processing, packaging, transportation, and
distribution. Then, in the meantime, it is estimated that we
waste 30 to 40 percent of the food produced in the United
States.
My question is, which research authorities might be most
useful in considering efforts to reduce waste along the entire
food supply chain, and subsequently, help cut costs related to
food production?
Mr. Floros. Senator, thank you for the question. The answer
is not easy and it is not simple. I think there are a lot of
things we need to do. We need to start by some of the comments
that were heard earlier. We need to probably redesign our food
system so that we are actually producing what it is that we
need to produce, rather than producing what we are producing
and push it down the chain.
I think we need to really understand better what are the
needs of the consumer, what are the global needs of the food
system, so that we can come back and really redesign the whole
thing. If we did that, I think prices will be a lot better off
for our farmers and our ranchers.
A quick example about sorghum, which is so important in
Kansas. If we were to figure out ways to create products that
consumers want, that are sorghum-based, I think we will be
doing a big favor to our farmers back home. Similar things we
can do across the board, throughout the food system.
The other part that has to do with waste is how do we
really take the raw material, how we handle the raw material,
how it gets to the consumer, because in this country, most of
that loss happens at the very end of that chain. It happens at
restaurants. It happens at grocery stores. It happens at
consumers' houses. A lot of it has to do with how we label the
food. A lot of it has to do with policies that we have in
place. But it also has to do with the technology and the
science we have behind that very complex system, which we have
not really paid much attention to in recent decades.
So I would say that there are a lot of things that we need
to do to reduce waste in this country, and to really stabilize
the system, make it more robust, so that the producer wins, the
manufacturer wins, the citizen, the consumer wins, as well.
To look at a little broader aspects, however, most of the
loss that happens worldwide, it actually happens between the
farm and the plate, not at the very end, like it happens in
this country and in developed countries. So the developing
world still needs help with really figuring out how to protect
the food supply very early on in that chain.
If we did that, I think we will also gain because of that,
we being the American farmer and the American consumer as well,
because it is a global system.
There are also other things that I believe will contribute
to the complexity of the system, and that has to do with
diseases for plants, diseases for animals, and the safety and
security of our food supply globally, that if we were to really
do a better job of designing the system, we will actually do a
better job of having a safer, more secure food supply overall.
Chairman Roberts. I appreciate that very much. I am
reminded of the--one of the first calls I got from the
Secretary, Secretary Perdue, was to be with him at Leesburg. We
were trying to get at the problem of wasting one-third of the
food that is served in our school lunch program, and the angst
that we have on the regulatory side with school nutritionists.
The decision was made by the Secretary to issue proclamations.
Quite frankly, I did not know that he could do it to that
extent, but I am happy to learn that. I have a whole list of
proclamations that I wish he would issue.
But there were three, and it was to provide one percent
milk to mix with chocolate and/or strawberry so the kids would
actually drink it, or would want to drink it, and then there
was the whole grains issue, and then there was the salt issue.
I just talked to a nutritionist, I think it was yesterday. I
asked her, ``Did this make a difference?'' She said, ``Oh, yes,
especially keeping that salt situation right where it is.''
So there are things that you can try to mandate, from the
United States Government, that simply do not work given the
circumstances, and still have something that is certainly
nutritious.
I have been advised that the third vote just started, and
so, let us see if I can get to the conclusion here.
I am sorry for the disruption we have had, and virtually
every member of this Committee has been running back and forth
between their other committee assignments and voting.
So this will conclude our hearing today. As we heard during
this Committee's recent hearing addressing the state of the
agriculture economy there are macroeconomic forces that have
created these current difficult times for American farmers and
ranchers. Research is an integral tool that can help combat
these larger trends. Research that results in better
efficiencies and productivity becomes a significant risk
management tool against weather, pests, and disease.
Thank you to each of our witnesses on both panels for
taking the time to share your view on agricultural research.
The testimonies provided today are valuable for the Committee
to hear first-hand and also be on the record. For those in the
audience who want to provide additional thoughts on the farm
bill, we have set up an e-mail address on the Senate Ag
Committee's website, to collect your input. Please go to
ag.senate.gov and click on the farm bill Hearing box on the
left-hand side of the screen. That link will be open for five
business days following today's hearing.
To my fellow members, I would ask any additional questions
you may have for the record be submitted to the Committee Clerk
five business days from today, or by 5:00 p.m. next Thursday,
June 22nd.
With that, the Committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:03 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
JUNE 15, 2017
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
JUNE 15, 2017
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
JUNE 15, 2017
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
| MEMBERNAME | BIOGUIDEID | GPOID | CHAMBER | PARTY | ROLE | STATE | CONGRESS | AUTHORITYID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brown, Sherrod | B000944 | 8309 | S | D | COMMMEMBER | OH | 115 | 136 |
| Leahy, Patrick J. | L000174 | 8244 | S | D | COMMMEMBER | VT | 115 | 1383 |
| McConnell, Mitch | M000355 | 8254 | S | R | COMMMEMBER | KY | 115 | 1395 |
| Stabenow, Debbie | S000770 | 8261 | S | D | COMMMEMBER | MI | 115 | 1531 |
| Thune, John | T000250 | 8257 | S | R | COMMMEMBER | SD | 115 | 1534 |
| Boozman, John | B001236 | 8247 | S | R | COMMMEMBER | AR | 115 | 1687 |
| Van Hollen, Chris | V000128 | 7983 | S | D | COMMMEMBER | MD | 115 | 1729 |
| Klobuchar, Amy | K000367 | 8249 | S | D | COMMMEMBER | MN | 115 | 1826 |
| Casey, Robert P., Jr. | C001070 | 8282 | S | D | COMMMEMBER | PA | 115 | 1828 |
| Donnelly, Joe | D000607 | 7941 | S | D | COMMMEMBER | IN | 115 | 1850 |
| Gillibrand, Kirsten E. | G000555 | 8336 | S | D | COMMMEMBER | NY | 115 | 1866 |
| Bennet, Michael F. | B001267 | 8302 | S | D | COMMMEMBER | CO | 115 | 1965 |
| Hoeven, John | H001061 | 8331 | S | R | COMMMEMBER | ND | 115 | 2079 |
| Daines, Steve | D000618 | S | R | COMMMEMBER | MT | 115 | 2138 | |
| Cochran, Thad | C000567 | 8292 | S | R | COMMMEMBER | MS | 115 | 213 |
| Heitkamp, Heidi | H001069 | S | D | COMMMEMBER | ND | 115 | 2174 | |
| Ernst, Joni | E000295 | S | R | COMMMEMBER | IA | 115 | 2283 | |
| Perdue, David | P000612 | S | R | COMMMEMBER | GA | 115 | 2286 | |
| Strange, Luther | S001202 | S | R | COMMMEMBER | AL | 115 | 2357 | |
| Grassley, Chuck | G000386 | 8316 | S | R | COMMMEMBER | IA | 115 | 457 |
| Roberts, Pat | R000307 | 8275 | S | R | COMMMEMBER | KS | 115 | 968 |
Disclaimer:
Please refer to the About page for more information.