September 12, 2018 Volume 14, Number 35
CEOs are on the move and salary levels are, too
CEO salaries at major nonprofit trade organizations in the agriculture, food and energy space, for the most part, continue to trend upward.
But experts say a series of retirements and departures by industry veterans may dip pay scales downward, as newer executives step in.
“We’ve been predicting that wave for a while, as a lot have, but now it’s happening, and we’re not sure why,” says Robert Skelton, chief administrative officer with the American Society for Association Executives (ASAE) about the exact reason for the retirements.
For the farm, food and energy organizations that Agri-Pulse has been watching for over three decades, the reasons for a change at the top are perfectly clear for many CEOs. Over the last two years, several long-time “farmhands” like Connie Tipton, Jay Vroom, Alan Tracy, Tom Buis, Ken Auer, John Becherer, and Dwight Armstrong decided to retire after devoting decades of industry leadership.
For others, retirements came as associations themselves were undergoing major structural changes. Pam Bailey, who served as President and CEO of the Grocery Manufacturers Association for almost a Both Chris Novak, who had been CEO of the National decade, stepped down in February of this year, Corn Growers Association, and Julie Anna Potts, noting that: “As GMA’s board continues to executive vice president and treasurer for the American Farm Bureau Federation, secured new CEO positions engage in the reinvention process to build the this year. Novak goes to CropLife and Potts is moving to association of the future to meet the consumer the North American Meat Institute. needs of the future, it is best that they do so in concert with their leader of the future." Bailey was consistently at or near the top compensation levels in the Agri-Pulse CEO compensation survey, and the top female "bread winner," earning about $2.5 million in compensation last year. www.Agri-Pulse.com 1
“What does that have to do to compensation? Well, what you might see is someone leaving after a very long tenure, whose salary has grown significantly over many years. That may give an organization the chance to cut compensation as they bring in a younger person who doesn’t have quite the years in. So, you might see salaries on average decline and it might take time to ramp back up," says Skelton.
However, those job changes could also mean big increases in compensation for those filling the “shoes” of industry veterans. Case in point: Vroom, CEO of CropLife America, is stepping down after almost 30 years – creating a vacancy for one of the most highly sought-after jobs in Washington, D.C. In the non-profit’s tax filing on Form 990, his total compensation package for the year ending 2017 was just over $980,000.
His replacement: Chris Novak, CEO of the National Corn Growers Association, who earned slightly over $490,000 in total compensation that same year at the St. Louis-based commodity organization. But Novak’s new compensation package won’t be known to the public until the organization reports a full year of tax records, as required by federal law.
Our annual “CEO Compensation Report," based on our review of 990 Tax Forms filed on Guidestar.org or provided directly to Agri-Pulse by the non-profit organization or USDA, aims to keep you current on what CEOs who work for national farm, food and energy organizations are earning. Our goal – as we expand the list every year – is to provide substantial comparisons so that boards of directors will be better informed about the marketplace before they hire. And so other potential job candidates can know how much their competitors make.
“I always look at the Agri-Pulse compensation report before I interview for my next job,” noted one executive who asked not to be identified.
Finding and explaining the most recent CEO compensation numbers is not always easy. In many cases, organizations file these reports a year or more later than the actual calendar year in which they are operating. If that’s the case, Agri-Pulse personally contacts the organization to see if they have filed more recent data. In many cases, especially when fiscal and calendar years differ, the 990 forms lag.
In some cases, a CEO is paid with funds from more than one organization. Tom Suber, the CEO of the U.S. Dairy Export Council, was also paid by Dairy Management Inc. as executive vice president until he retired at the end of 2016. His total compensation was slightly over $1.9 million in 2015. He’s been replaced by Tom Vilsack, but the former Agriculture Secretary’s new salary has not yet been made publicly available.
ASAE’s Skelton says that not all CEO packages are headed upward. Another factor that may be putting a brake on compensation, Skelton says, is the tax reform law that took effect in December. One provision in the new law imposes for the first time a 21 percent excise tax, paid by the non-profit, on compensation to top executives in excess of $1 million.
“That’s going to come as a shock to a lot of people,” Skelton says, adding that Congress apparently meant to fix the provision but “never got around to it.”
To see our full list of agricultural organization CEO salaries, see below. You can also click here to see how salaries fared a year earlier.
www.Agri-Pulse.com 2
President/CEO/ Other Retirement/ Tax- Base Compen- Potential Total Year Executive Director or Compen- Deferred Free sation Bonus Compensation Ending Name of Organization VP sation Payment Benefits
American Petroleum Institute Jack N. Gerard* $2,760,703 $1,075,300 $1,662,220 $1,247,821 $27,730 $6,773,774 2016
American Seed Trade Assoc. Andrew LaVigne $685,730 $70,000 $107,000 $33,702 $896,432 2017
Agricultural Retailers Assoc. Daren Coppock $343,909 $21,542 $18,136 $383,587 2017
American Bakers Assoc. Robb Mackie $319,359 $90,000 $21,200 $26,928 $457,487 2016 Frank A. Keating II $1,447,575 $425,000 $1,030,065 $97,150 $17,717 $3,017,479 2016 (retired Dec. 31, 2015)* American Bankers Assoc.^ Rob Nichols (began Jan. $559,634 $75,000 $3,786 $141,450 $7,484 $787,354 2016 4, 2016)
American Beverage Assoc. Susan K. Neely* $1,105,497 $567,000 $686,750 $15,063 $2,374,310 2016
American Coalition for Ethanol Brian Jennings $123,013 $4,057 $127,070 2016
American Cotton Shippers William E. May $226,732 $30,000 $17,978 $14,331 $21,404 $310,445 2016
American Egg Board Anne Alonzo $297,083 $61,500 $673.20 $20,089.13 $1,150 $380,495.74 2017
American Farm Bureau Federation Bob Stallman* $738,277 $3,564 $70,180 $20,195 $832,216 2016 John Piotti (started 7-1- American Farmland Trust $112,861 $112,861 2017 16, reflects 6 mo. salary) American Feed Industry Association Joel Newman $382,541 $56,250 $30,646 $32,415 $501,852 2017
American Frozen Food Institute Alison Bodor $230,946 $33,179 $16,218 $280,343 2016
American Lamb Board Megan Wortman $120,000 $3,000 $123,000 2017
American Soybean Association Steve Censky* $318,036 $12,657 $7,950 $23,078 $361,721 2016
American Sugar Alliance Vickie Myers $180,238 $27,036 $207,274 2017
American Sugarbeet Growers Assoc. Luther Markwart $365,832 $40,500 $38,846 $445,178 2017
American Veterinary Medical Assoc. Ron DeHaven* $488,551 $7,008 $26,500 $1,125 $523,184 2016
American Wind Energy Assn. Thomas C. Kieran $480,416 $103,000 $74,080 $9,250 $666,746 2016 American Society for the Prevention of Matthew Bershadker $436,580 $810 $22,108 $4,153 $463,651 2016 Cruelty to Animals Assoc. of Public and Land-Grant Peter McPherson $511,123 $8,300 $136,500 $17,023 $672,946 2016 Universities
Cattlemen’s Beef Promotion & Research Polly Ruhland* $275,000 $25,000 $30,000 $330,000 2017
Center for Budget and Policy Priorities Robert Greenstein $205,097 $14,755 $21,666 $241,518 2016
Center for Food Safety Andrew Kimbrell $226,467 $16,537 $243,004 2016
Center for Rural Affairs Brian Depew $92,131 $12,451 $104,582 2017
Center for Science in the Public Interest Michael Jacobson* $195,926 $3,278 $3,580 $1,663 $204,447 2017
Consumer Federation of America Stephen Brobeck $132,714 $6,636 $136,077 2017
Consumer Reports Inc Marta Tellado $597,362 $6,887 $44,500 $3,180 $651,929 2017
Corn Refiners Assoc. Inc John Bode $588,806 $1,980 $27,825 $31,350 $649,961 2016
Cotton Board William Gillon $289,819 $33,765 $3,699 $32,880 $3,000 $363,163 2017
Cotton Council International Bruce Atherley $224,794 $4,141 $18,527 $13,028 $260,490 2017 Jay Vroom (retiring end CropLife America $575,897 $366,852 $215,761 $39,153 $981,897 2017 of 2018) Dairy Management Inc. Thomas Gallagher $575,000 $50,000 $334,448 $36,988 $14,943 $1,011,379 2016
Defenders of Wildlife Jamie Rappaport Clark $408,500 $2,412 $28,651 $6,596 $446,159 2017
Ducks Unlimited Inc H. Dale Hall $375,886 $133,940 $12,388 $14,364 $536,578 2017
Environmental Defense Fund Frederic D. Krupp $545,591 $105,000 $39,200 $22,665 $712,456 2017 Environmental Law & Policy Center of Howard A Learner $370,445 $500 $655 $18,000 $28,021 $417,621 2017 Midwest www.Agri-Pulse.com 3
President/CEO/ Other Retirement/ Tax- Base Compen- Potential Total Year Executive Director or Compen- Deferred Free sation Bonus Compensation Ending Name of Organization VP sation Payment Benefits
Environmental Working Group Ken Cook $295,000 $8,500 $9,062 $312,562 2017
Kenneth Auer* $24,359 $349,000 $43,924 $45,931 $2,480 $465,694 2016 Farm Credit Council Todd Van Hoose $458,032 $200,000 $18,900 $2,921 $679,853 2016
Feeding America Diana Aviv* $531,597 $111,184 $11,102 $33,900 $19,797 $707,580 2017
Fertilizer Institute Chris Jahn $552,374 $15,967 $31,747 $600,088 2016 Constance Cullman $128,333 $33,000 $3,183 $164,516 2017 (started May 2016) Farm Foundation Neilson Conklin* $214,118 $31,341 $32,281 $15,874 $293,614 2017
Dwight Armstrong* $185,349 $22,120 $27,608 $41,412 $276,489 2016 FFA Organization Mark Poeschl (started $72,651 $24,181 $96,832 2016 August 2016) Dwight Armstrong* $68,609 $68,609 2016 FFA Foundation Molly Ball $189,725 $240 $18,996 $28,495 $237,456 2016
Florida Sugar Cane League Ryan Weston $487,946 $125,000 $612,946 2016
Food and Water Watch Wenonah Hauter $220,000 $22,000 $8,819 $250,819 2016
Food Marketing Institute Foundation Leslie G. Sarasin $1,292,622 $845,000 $35,912 $21,200 $28,936 $2,223,670 2016 Monica Mills (started July Food Policy Action $160,000 $160,000 2016 2017) Food Research & Action Center James Weill $200,109 $12,006 $19,855 $231,970 2016
Friends of the Earth Erich Pica $173,071 $5,056 $21,502 $199,629 2017
Grocery Manufacturers Assoc. Pamela Bailey* $1,289,452 $634,788 $42,291 $516,976 $34,072 $2,517,579 2017
Tom Buis (left 5/16)* $598,878 $396 $18,000 $733 $618,007 Growth Energy 2016 Emily Skor (started 5/16) $364,058 $20,000 $40 $17,100 $8,558 $409,756
Hass Avocado Board Emiliano Escobedo $288,750 $28,875 $11,000 $328,625 2017
Humane Society of the U.S. Wayne Pacelle $348,444 $38,756 $24,686 $13,696 $425,582 2017 Independent Community Bankers of Camden Fine* $1,800,000 $200,000 $468,670 $108,900 $17,868 $2,595,438 2016 America Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy Juliette Majot $103,309 $4,504 $107,813 2017
International Dairy Foods Assoc. Constance E. Tipton* $777,120 $158,300 $14,581 $950,001 2017
Mushroom Council Bart Minor $246,622 $246,622 2017
National 4-H Council Jennifer Sirangelo $429,792 $53,551 $21,097 $504,440 2017
National Assoc. of Conservation Districts Jeremy Peters $142,336 $7,192 $6,599 $156,127 2016
National Assoc. of Counties Matthew Chase $344,916 $35,200 $7,396 $30,316 $23,839 $441,667 2016 National Assoc. of State Departments of Barbara Glenn $280,000 $11,200 $16,000 $307,200 2017 Agriculture National Assoc. of Wheat Growers and Chandler Goule $16,040 $263,894 2016 NAWG Foundation $247,854 National Audubon Society David Yarnold $491,615 $63,000 $23,544 $21,200 $18,546 $617,905 2017
Donnell Rehagen $228,335 $40,000 $14,444 $20,141 $302,920 2017 National Biodiesel Board Joe Jobe* $476,344 $50,000 $8,250 $13,066 $497,660 2017
Forrest Roberts* $386,523 $304,834 $9,130 $11,712 $712,199 2016 National Cattlemen’s Beef Assoc. Kendal Frazier, CEO $298,478 $29,492 $21,200 $14,186 $363,356 2016
National Chicken Council Michael J. Brown $521,698 $42,540 $564,238 2016
National Confectioners Assoc. John Downs $711,092 $150,000 $15,919 $83,125 $15,273 $975,409 2017
www.Agri-Pulse.com 4
President/CEO/ Other Retirement/ Tax- Base Compen- Potential Total Year Executive Director or Compen- Deferred Free sation Bonus Compensation Ending Name of Organization VP sation Payment Benefits
National Corn Growers Assoc. Christopher Novak* $419,889 $20,000 $26,500 $25,468 $491,857 2017
National Cotton Council Gary Adams $277,826 $8,544 $1,420 $31,838 $23,220 $342,848 2016
National Council of Farmer Cooperatives Charles Conner $506,626 $172,050 $31,800 $2,026 $712,502 2016 National Dairy Promotion and Research Thomas Gallagher (4) $612,500 $50,000 $662,500 2017 Board National Farmers Union Roger Johnson $271,377 $29,550 $16,283 $6,764 $323,974 2016 National Fluid Milk Processor Promotion Julia Kadison $298,480 $44,354 $342,834 2018 Board National Grain and Feed Assoc. Randall Gordon $340,237 $46,535 $24,329 $411,101 2017
National Grange Betsy Huber $55,211 $55,211 2016
National Grocers Assoc. Peter Larkin $539,587 $187,000 $3,089 $70,500 $36,480 $836,656 2016
National Honey Board Margaret Lombard $200,000 $12,000 $212,000 2017
National Mango Board Manuel Michel $115,000 $11,500 $50,000 $176,500 2017
National Milk Producers Federation Jim Mulhern $650,000 $120,000 $57,182 $26,171 $31,432 $884,785 2016
National Oilseed Processors Assoc. Thomas Hammer $292,114 $12,674 $20,505 $325,293 2017
National Peanut Board Robert Parker $243,500 $20,000 $900 $264,400 2017
National Pork Board Bill Even $340,000 $56,000 $406,000 2017
National Pork Producers Council Neil Dierks $278,250 $40,750 $16,694 $14,456 $350,150 2016
National Potato Council John Keeling $280,815 $37,230 $318,045 2017
National Potato Promotion Board Blair Richardson $520,000 $520,000 2017
National Processed Raspberry Council Tom Krugman $120,000 $120,000 2017
Natural Resources Defense Council Rhea Suh $446,142 $55,000 $40,000 $10,157 $551,299 2016
National Renderers Assoc. Nancy Foster $227,656 $11,838 $10,474 $249,968 2016
National Restaurant Assoc. Dawn M. Sweeney $1,683,408 $1,124,605 $44,495 $1,596,621 $24,347 $4,473,476 2016 National Rural Electric Cooperative Jeffrey Connor(1) $379,754 $200 $131,638 $40,349 $36,066 $588,007 2016 Association National Rural Electric Cooperative Jim Matheson (started $478,266 $100,200 $2,281 $2,323 $16,010 $598,980 2016 Association July 19, 2016) National Wildlife Federation Collin O’Mara $311,930 $11,523 $36,378 $17,500 $21,585 $398,916 2017
National Watermelon Board Mark Arney $202,076 $9,000 $6,000 $17,366 $234,442 2017
North American Meat Institute Barry Carpenter $466,271 $140,000 $19,186 $21,200 $8,931 $655,558 2016
North American Millers Assoc. James A. McCarthy $295,608 $8,750 $23,366 $327,724 2017
Organic Consumers Assoc. Ronald Cummins $112,500 $112,500 2016
Organic Trade Assoc. Laura Batcha $278,374 $24,000 $302,374 2016 People for the Ethical Treatment of Ingrid Newkirk $22,688 $3,955 $26,643 2017 Animals Paper/Paper Based Packaging Board Mary Anne Hansen $264,910 $264,910 2017
Pheasants Forever Inc. Howard K. Vincent $299,984 $31,705 $331,689 2017 Ranchers Cattlemen Action Legal Fund; William Bullard Jr. $175,190 $175,190 2016 United Stockgrowers of America Robert Dinneen (plans to Renewable Fuels Assoc. $398,200 $125,000 $53,000 $29,239 $605,439 2016 retire at year-end) Snack Food Assoc. Tom Dempsey* $301,282 $30,000 $18,695 $349,977 2016
Softwood Lumber Board Steve Lovett (2) $280,900 $150,000 $98,315 $529,215 2017
U.S. Beet Sugar Assoc. James Johnson* $378,675 $25,000 $10,600 $414,275 2016
U.S. Dairy Export Council Tom Suber * $365,650 $110,000 $1,215,764 $170,264 $40,402 $1,902,080 2015
www.Agri-Pulse.com 5
President/CEO/ Other Retirement/ Tax- Base Compen- Potential Total Year Executive Director or Compen- Deferred Free sation Bonus Compensation Ending Name of Organization VP sation Payment Benefits
U.S. Farmers and Ranchers Alliance Randy Krotz* $190,115 $8,548 $11,925 $210,558 2016
U.S. Grains Council Tom Sleight $343,289 $15,000 $42,094 $20,808 $421,191 2016
U.S. Highbush Blueberry Council Mark Villata $205,200 $41,922 $247,122 2017
U.S. Meat Export Federation Philip Seng* $455,230 $24,410 $23,625 $503,265 2016 United Sorghum Checkoff and National Tim Lust $220,000 $11,000 $6,940 $237,940 2017 Sorghum Producers (3) U.S. Soybean Export Council James Sutter $418,820 $42,500 $20,322 $17,271 $34,235 $533,148 2016
U.S. Wheat Associates Alan Tracy* $312,600 $31,260 $26,266 $370,126 2017
Union of Concerned Scientists Kenneth Kimmell $282,859 $1,500 $23,261 $26,227 $333,847 2017
United Fresh Produce Assoc. Thomas Stenzel $474,989 $240,421 $104,215 $202,600 $8,003 $1,030,228 2017
United Soybean Board John Becherer* $369,564 $35,880 $1,789 $47,700 $9,293 $464,226 2017
USA Rice Federation Elizabeth C. Ward $344,069 $45,000 $39,750 $19,066 $447,885 2016
Waterkeeper Alliance Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. $200,000 $24,775 $224,775 2017
Waterways Council Michael Toohey $318,511 $48,125 $6,601 $18,048 $33,606 $424,891 2016
*: No longer serves as CEO ^: ABA's 990 covers fiscal year beginning Sept. 1, 2015 (1): Connor served as interim NRECA CEO until Matheson started with the organization in July 2016 (2): Outsourced contractor (3): Lust serves as the CEO of both the checkoff and sorghum producer group (4) Thomas Gallagher is also compensated from Dairy Management Inc.
Broadband money, policy issues in play as fiscal deadline looms
House and Senate negotiators are likely to provide another infusion of cash into rural broadband development, but an effort to repeal the Obama-era “waters of the U.S. rule” doesn’t appear likely to survive the talks on fiscal 2019 spending bills.
The negotiators are rushing to finish work on a series of measures important to agriculture before Oct. 1, the beginning of the new fiscal year. They include a package of bills funding USDA, FDA, EPA, the Interior Department, and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
The negotiators still have a number of differences to work out over spending levels and policy issues, but it's clear that they will reject for the second straight year the spending cuts proposed by the White House, including in research and international food aid.
Environmental riders approved by the House Appropriations Committee, including a repeal of the WOTUS rule, appear likely to be scrapped during the negotiations because of opposition from Democrats. The WOTUS rider was omitted from a final Army Corps of Engineers funding bill that was Don Parrish, American Farm Bureau Federation announced on Monday, but remains alive in the www.Agri-Pulse.com 6
House version of the FY19 funding bill for EPA. Another provision in the House bill would remove gray wolves from protection under the Endangered Species Act.
The Trump administration is in the process of replacing the WOTUS rule, which was issued in 2015. But a federal judge last month ruled that the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers improperly suspended the rule, allowing it to take effect in 26 states where it has not been blocked by court order.
Don Parrish, senior director of regulatory relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation, said the WOTUS repeal provision was unlikely to survive the spending talks. It’s also a long shot to be included in a new farm bill, which is also being negotiated.
Democrats “have dug their heels in, and every inch that we battle in this WOTUS issue is going to be hard fought,” Parrish said.
A new round of funding for grants and loans for rural broadband development is a much better bet. The FY18 omnibus spending bill provided $600 million for the loans and grants as part of a new pilot program.
The House Appropriations Committee added another $550 million for the program in its FY19 Agriculture spending bill. The Senate-passed version of the bill would provide $425 million for FY19. The negotiators will decide on the final level.
It’s not clear how soon the final spending agreements will be reached. House and Senate leaders announced the conference committee members last week for two packages of FY19 bills, one of which includes the Agriculture, Interior-Environment, Transportation-HUD, and Financial Services measures and a second that combines the funding measure for the Defense Department with a second for the Labor Department and the Department of Health and Human Services.
Critics of the Trump administration’s plan to relocate USDA’s Economic Research Service and National Institute for Food and Agriculture have raised the prospect of using the appropriations measures to at least delay the plans. The chairman of the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., told Agri-Pulse that he didn’t expect the plans to be addressed in the negotiations, however. Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Ala.
A letter to Aderholt and other budget negotiators signed by the American Statistical Association and the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, among other groups, says the ERS relocation would “certainly mean a significant loss of experienced staff, which, in turn, will jeopardize the ERS operations for, potentially, years to come.” A separate letter signed by those groups and others said USDA was moving quickly to relocate NIFA.
Here is a look at other issues in play in the spending negotiations:
www.Agri-Pulse.com 7
BIOTECHNOLOGY. The House bill would provide an additional $3 million for FDA to conduct consumer outreach and education on agricultural biotechnology. The program is still under development.
CELL-DERIVED MEAT. The House bill would require USDA to regulate cell-derived meat and poultry products. An attempt by Democrats to strip the provision from the bill in committee was defeated, 21-30.
CFTC. CFTC stands to get an increase in spending as Republicans drop their resistance to additional funding for the agency now that it is under GOP control. The Senate bill would provide $281.5 million to the agency, including a $32.5 million increase the commissioners requested. The House bill would provide a $6 million increase.
CONSERVATION. For once, neither the House nor the Senate appropriators have tried to cut mandatory spending levels for major conservation programs. The Conservation Stewardship Program would be fully funded at 10 million acres under both the House and Senate bills, while the Environmental Quality Incentives Program would receive $1.75 billion for FY19.
FARMWORKERS. The committee report that accompanies the House’s Agriculture spending bill would direct USDA to set up and oversee a cloud-based website through which agricultural employers will complete the H-2A petition and certification process.
FOOD AID. Both chambers rejected White House proposals to gut food aid programs. The Senate bill would maintain funding for the Food for Peace program at the FY18 level of $1.716 billion. The House bill would provide $1.5 billion for Food for Peace. The McGovern-Dole international school-feeding program would get $208 million under the House bill, the same level as FY18. The Senate would increase McGovern-Dole funding by $2 million.
HORSE SLAUGHTER. The Senate bill would continue the existing ban on federal inspection of horse slaughter.
RESEARCH. Again, appropriators rejected Trump’s deep cuts in research programs, but the appropriators will have to find compromises on some individual spending levels.
USDA’s Agricultural Research Service would get $1.3 billion under the Senate bill, $282 million more than President Trump requested. The House bill would provide $1.26 billion, $56 million than the agency received for FY18.
The Agriculture and Food Research Initiative, the leading competitive grants program for agricultural research, would get $415 million under the House bill and $405 million under the Senate version. The program was funded at $400 million for FY18. Trump proposed to cut it to $375 million.
The smaller Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program would be cut to $30 million under the House bill, from $35 million this year, but increased to $37 million under the Senate bill. Trump proposed to cut the program to $19 million.
www.Agri-Pulse.com 8
Will USDA forge ahead with proposed changes to ERS and NIFA?
When Ag Secretary Sonny Perdue proposed moving both the Economic Research Service (ERS) and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) out of the D.C. metro area last month, quite a few folks within the economic and research communities voiced their opposition. But now, USDA's chief economist is offering more insight on the rationale behind the idea - especially for ERS.
Perdue initially said moving the offices would improve staff recruitment and retention, save taxpayer dollars, improve efficiencies and put the organizations closer to the areas they serve. As part of the change, ERS will be aligned with the Office of the Chief Economist under the Office of the Secretary.
Unsurprisingly, many long-time staff members, supporters and stakeholders pushed back hard, and now members of Congress are asking for more information and threatening to withhold appropriations. Most of the critics have raised concerns about potential loss of experienced staff members, loss of influence within USDA and the broader research and congressional communities, and the potential for politicization of ERS.
“Relocating ERS out of the Washington Metro area would be a disaster,” wrote John Lee Jr., who served as ERS Administrator from 1981-1993, in a note to fellow economists. Lee said ERS has long “focused on broad national and international issues of importance to national political and other decision-makers. Many of these are in D.C. and depend on ERS for objective information.” He fears that “if ERS is ‘out of sight and out of mind,’ those linkages could wither.”
It’s not the first time that ERS – originally created in 1922 as the Bureau of Agricultural Economics (BEA) in USDA – has undergone structural changes. But in 1997, ERS leaders asked the Committee on National Statistics of the National Research Council to look at its management and structure. The panel’s 176-page report, “Sowing Seeds of Change: Informing Public Policy in the Economic Research Service of USDA," set the stage for some of the issues that Perdue says he will address – more than 20 years later.
“ERS was the dominant employer of agricultural economists with limited alternative career prospects, today ERS must compete to recruit and retain a much broader array of professionals, most of whom have many attractive alternatives,” the report's authors noted. “All of these factors, combined in a fractious political environment, have led to a widespread perception that the quantity and quality of ERS products are not what they should be, the reduced staff and budget of ERS perhaps notwithstanding."
While the report did not propose relocation, it did advocate for “different methods for procuring the research and information that supports public policy” such as outsourcing to land grant universities and various public-private partnerships.
The report also cited concerns about the lines of authority. Currently, the ERS administrator reports to a political appointee, the Undersecretary for Research, Education, and Economics (REE), along with administrators of three much larger agencies: The Agricultural Research Service, the National Agricultural Statistical Service and the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (now NIFA). www.Agri-Pulse.com 9
“Research and information in support of economic policy within USDA are not well served by these lines of authority,” the report noted. “The administrator of ERS, with responsibility for over 300 professional employees (at the time the report was written), is several steps removed from the policy process to which the work of ERS must be relevant."
USDA Chief Economist Rob Johansson says the realignment currently being proposed would better serve decision-making within the department.
“I came from ERS, I respect ERS researchers and I would like to leverage their expertise and answer a lot of the questions that we’re dealing with at the department,” he told Agri-Pulse. “ERS is going to USDA Chief Economist Rob Johansson continue to function as a statistical agency as they did before.”
Johansson said traditionally, ERS played a key role in the World Agricultural Outlook Board process of estimating supply and demand every month – along with several other agencies. But over time, input from ERS has “sort of been faltering” and “losing a lot of key employees” who haven’t been replaced. “I’d like to turn that around and strengthen again,” he added.
But the task won’t be easy in D.C., because it’s been more difficult to recruit economists who want to work for the federal government within the Beltway. He cited government-wide Office of Personnel Management reports indicating that the need for higher pay, more interesting research opportunities and better work/life balance are the top three reasons that economists leave the federal government.
Johanson said ERS has had attrition higher than other parts of USDA and certainly higher among hires that have less than five years of service. “So, the newer economists that are getting hired are leaving more quickly than other new employees at USDA,” he explains.
He describes criticism about the possibility of making ERS more political as “one of the more curious of arguments.
“Essentially, that says a career ERS administrator who reports to a political undersecretary who reports to the secretary is less political than a career ERS administrator reporting to a career chief economist who reports to the secretary.”
He said OCE is a not a “political office,” noting that OCE oversees offices for pesticide management, risk management, energy policy, environmental markets and climate change.
“Those are all providing information to – not just the secretary – but also helping to coordinate research across the department on those issues and putting them out in a number of unbiased, non-political reports,” he adds. “Just the fact that we’ve maintained a climate change program office throughout the years is certainly one testament” to OCE’s objectivity.
Johansson said that, “whatever the locational selection is, there’s going to be a key component of ERS that remains in D.C. to provide an interface within USDA and with members of www.Agri-Pulse.com 10
Congress." But he declined to say how many of the approximately 300 current staff members would be able to stay. The Federal Register notice calls for a new location to house 260 ERS employees.
Whether USDA will be able to continue with realignment and reallocation of staff remains to be seen. Many have noted that President Trump’s FY19 budget proposed cutting the ERS budget and staff in half and focusing its work on farm production issues. They believe that's really the administration's end game. Congressional critics of the plan have raised the prospect of using the appropriations measures to at least delay the plan.
For former Administrator Lee, he hopes lawmakers and USDA officials look more deeply into the history of the agency before making any decisions. He says the BAE (Bureau of Agricultural Economics) which did the work now done by both ERS and NASS, was a large and respected agency until it was moved directly under the Secretary in either late 1930s or early 1940s.
"That put it too close to political activity and generated unhappiness with powerful members of Congress," Lee recalled. "The BAE was abolished in 1947, and its work scattered among other agencies. That lesson was not forgotten for a long time, but there is little institutional memory among today’s actors."
Alarm sounded in US after African Swine Fever outbreaks in China
The U.S. pork industry is raising concerns about the possibility that African Swine Fever – a deadly animal disease that has never been found in North America – could spread to the U.S., costing hog producers and pork processors billions of dollars in lost export sales.
Right now, most of the world’s attention on ASF is focused on China, the world’s biggest pork producer, which, until August, had never confirmed an outbreak of the highly contagious virus. Since then, there have been at least 14 detections of the disease in six different provinces in eastern China.
Those outbreaks prompted the UN’s Food and Animal Organization to call an emergency meeting last week of specialists from China and nine neighboring countries. As the meeting closed, Juan Lubroth, the FAO’s chief veterinary officer, said it was no longer “if” the disease would spread to other areas bordering China, including the Korean peninsula, but “when,” likely through movements of processed or raw pork.
The National Pork Producers Council also hosted a meeting last week in Washington at which the pork industry outlined the threat posed by ASF and why the threat is becoming more dangerous. In attendance were USDA officials including Dr. Jack Shere, the department’s chief veterinarian, as well as representatives from the American Association of Swine Veterinarians and the Swine Health Information Center.
Dave Pyburn, the National Pork Board’s senior vice president of science and technology, attended the session and said all participants understood the gravity of the threat.
“ASF used to be basically confined to the continent of Africa, and we didn’t do a lot of trade in food products or feed additives with Africa,” Pyburn told Agri-Pulse. “Today, we not only have Russia and Eastern Europe, but now it’s spread to China. This really raises
www.Agri-Pulse.com 11 the risk, based on all the trade we do, especially in feed trade with China,” which ships nearly 2 million tons of ag products, including feed and feed additives, to the U.S. each year.
Pyburn cited research by Scott Dee, with Pipestone Veterinary Services in Minnesota, which shows that the ASF virus can survive a 30-day ocean voyage in feed products and feed ingredients as well as in empty storage containers. And he said if the virus does show up in the U.S., the effects could be enormously harmful, pointing to research by Iowa State University’s Dermot Hayes, who concluded the pork industry could lose as much as $8 billion in the first year after detection. Corn and soybean farmers would also be hurt as herds were culled and feed sales fall.
“Dead pigs don’t eat,” Pyburn said.
ASF is a highly contagious viral disease that can spread very rapidly in pig populations. Hogs can contract the virus in a variety of ways, including transmission by ticks and direct or indirect contact between animals, as well as by contact with Dave Pyburn, National Pork Board contaminated food, animal feed or vehicles. ASF can survive for long periods in uncooked swine products, which can facilitate its introduction into new areas. The virus, which has a mortality rate of near 100 percent, is extremely hardy and can withstand extreme environmental conditions in fresh and frozen meat. In China, more than 40,000 pigs have already been euthanized.
ASF can be transferred by humans, but the virus does not affect people, and is believed to pose no risk to human health. ASF has already been an issue this year in eastern Europe, but August marks the first time the world’s largest pork producing country has reported a case.
While there is no vaccine against ASF, the government and the pork industry are taking steps to protect U.S. herds.
Pyburn said U.S. Customs and Border Protection has increased inspections of cargoes and passengers from countries with a history of ASF infections showing up at any of the 328 ports of entry into the U.S. Rules concerning the collection and destruction of garbage from ships and aircraft arriving in the U.S. are also being strictly enforced.
“Industry-wide, we’re also talking with USDA and FDA to see how we can effectively investigate the feed mills and other facilities in China to make sure they are biosecure and adhere to higher standards,” Pyburn said.
The Swine Health Information Center is also funding research into methods to test bulk feed products for the presence of the ASF pathogen. “We’re also looking into methods we could use to shorten the virus’ lifetime in storage” through temperature or possible chemical treatment, he said.
Industry experts have also compiled a checklist of critical points for pig farmers to bring up with their feed and feed-ingredient suppliers with the objective of starting a dialog about feed www.Agri-Pulse.com 12 ingredient safety. They include discussions about a facility’s programs for pest control, traceability and its training program for feed safety, as well as its biosecurity program. Farmers should also ask whether the feed mill uses ingredients that were manufactured or packaged outside of the United States.
“While this virus poses no threat to human health or any food safety concern, it could have a devastating economic impact if it would be found in the U.S.,” said Iowa Agriculture Secretary Mike Naig, whose state is by far the biggest producer of pigs and pork in the U.S. “Our pork producers do a great job with biosecurity and protecting pig health and the new cases highlight the importance of everyone remaining diligent in their biosecurity efforts.”
The American Farm Bureau Federation, meanwhile, says it is unlikely U.S. pork exports to China will see a significant increase as a result of the outbreak.
“We are in the middle of a trade spat with China, facing steep tariffs on U.S. pork imports into the country,” AFBF says on its website. “Even if a significant disruption were to happen, it would take quite a bit to overcome the 70 percent tariff that U.S. hams and shoulder cuts are facing. Additionally, China is ractopamine-free, and while the U.S. produces some ‘racto-free’ pork, it is not a sizable amount. China would be more likely to turn to another racto-free country such as the European Union or Canada before turning to the U.S. or Brazil.”
US-EU beef trade talks back on track, but other issues remain in limbo
The European Union is now willing to restart negotiations on beef trade with the U.S., but it’s still unclear if the Europeans will be willing to include any other agriculture issues in the ongoing talks aimed at avoiding an all-out trans-Atlantic trade war.
EU Agriculture Commissioner Phil Hogan announced last week that the European Commission has formally requested a mandate from the European Council to renegotiate U.S. access to the Europe’s beef market.
"By requesting this mandate... the Commission is delivering on an engagement taken earlier this year to try to address some concerns raised by the United States on the functioning of the quota in a mutually satisfactory solution that is fully in line with WTO rules,” Hogan said. “By taking this step, we are also contributing to ease tensions across the Atlantic, in line with the agreement reached by (European Commission President Jean-Claude) Juncker in July.” EU Agriculture Commissioner Phil Hogan The announcement was a positive sign for the U.S. beef sector, which has been virtually shut out of the lucrative European market, but it’s also not the first time this year that hopes were high for progress.
Back in January, talks between U.S. and European negotiators were running smoothly when Ag Secretary Sonny Perdue told Agri-Pulse that he expected an imminent breakthrough.
www.Agri-Pulse.com 13
“We're still negotiating with the EU over a hormone-free quota and we think we’ll have some resolution … soon,” Perdue said in an interview at the time.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and his crew were in serious talks with the Europeans then and the prospects looked good to fix a trade deal that long ago turned sour for U.S. producers and exporters.
The World Trade Organization 20 years ago sided with the U.S. and its complaint that the EU ban on U.S. beef produced from cattle treated with growth hormones broke WTO commitments, but that ruling has done very little for the U.S.
The EU vowed to continue its ban no matter what. Instead of hitting Europe with retaliatory tariffs – which was its right – the U.S. agreed to negotiate. U.S. negotiators knew that even if the EU relented on the hormone issue, the Europeans could keep imports out with tariffs.
After years of talks, the U.S. agreed to a European proposal to set up a 45,000-ton quota that would allow the U.S. to export beef to EU countries without the normal steep tariffs.
Through great expense and effort, U.S. ranchers began raising cattle that could be documented to be hormone-free and eventually exported to European buyers. That did not last long, though, because the EU began allowing other countries like Australia, New Zealand, Uruguay and Argentina to ship beef under the tariff rate quota.
Despite Hogan’s announcement last week that the EU is willing to begin negotiations again, he said that does not mean the overall 45,000-ton TRQ will be increased; nor does it mean Europe will agree to import beef from cattle treated with hormones.
“As we send this proposal to the Council, I want to reassure European producers that the already existing beef quota under the Memorandum of Understanding will remain at exactly the same level,” he said. “And I want also to reassure our consumers that the said quota will continue to cover only products complying with Europe's high food safety and health standards, in this case only non-hormone treated beef."
What Europe will likely agree to, according to one source close to the talks, is a dedicated smaller quota for the U.S. within the USTR Robert Lighthizer overall quota of 45,000 tons.
“We’ve been concerned the way the quota operates, we’re not getting our fair share, so we are looking for them to find a way to make sure we get our fair share,” the source said.
But even if that happens, there are still many outstanding European barriers and regulations that continue to frustrate American farmers and ranchers, U.S. trade negotiators and farm state lawmakers say.
It was not long after that July 25 meeting between Trump and Juncker that the U.S. and EU began sparring over whether or not agriculture issues would be included in the trade talks agreed www.Agri-Pulse.com 14 upon by the two presidents. U.S. officials, including Perdue, insisted they should be part of the talks, while EU officials balked at the idea.
Lighthizer returned Monday from talks in Brussels, where a spokesperson said he had “a constructive meeting with (EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia) Malmström to initiate the Executive Working Group to improve trade relations between the United States and the European Union.”
The USTR statement did not address specific topics and the word “agriculture” was not used, but American Farm Bureau Federation Senior Director David Salmonsen tells Agri-Pulse that he expects the USTR to pour the pressure on in the coming weeks.
“The ag issues are the same – all their stuff that keeps out our beef, pork and chicken,” Salmonsen said. The fact that the USTR is now saying it will use its Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) to finalize a deal with Europe, suggests that the U.S. will be pushing Europe to lower its ag trade barriers.
“There are a lot of ag objectives in the TPA,” he said.
One of the most vexing European barriers to U.S. agriculture is the EU’s increasingly complex and lengthy approval process for genetically modified crops.
For any one approval, both the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and a standing committee representing all 28 countries in the EU must give their consent. That process can take up to four years, according to U.S. industry officials.
“It’s an issue that needs to be addressed,” said Matt O’Mara, director of international affairs for the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO). “We’ve called for a streamlined process – one that respects the science.”
But the European process is the opposite of streamlined, requiring separate approvals for all biotech traits and then yet another approval for a stacked trait product even if all of the individual traits have already been approved.
Farmers and ranchers shouldn’t have to wait long to know if the U.S. and EU agree to include a wide variety of agriculture issue in the talks that are expected to continue through the next two months.
“In October, professional staff will hold further discussions on identifying and reducing tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade,” the USTR said this week. “Ministers will then meet in November to finalize outcomes in a number of areas. Specifically, we hope for an early harvest in the area of technical barriers to trade.”
www.Agri-Pulse.com 15
Biochar is back: Old soil input garners new attention
Soil health is hot.
Farmers have always looked for ways to save money on inputs while increasing their crop yields, but research in recent years has increasingly made the case that restoring soil health is a way to do both.
“Practices that improve soil health are taking on elevated importance as a means to protect topsoil, helping farmers manage extreme weather, increase profitability, protect water quality and sequester carbon,” the Soil Health Partnership said in a recent news release. “These practices include reducing tillage, growing cover crops and adopting advanced nutrient management strategies.”
Enter biochar, an ancient product now getting a makeover thanks to new research and technology. The U.S. Biochar Initiative, a nonprofit group that promotes the use of biochar, says the product is a “fine-grained charcoal made by pyrolysis, the process of heating biomass (wood, manure, crop residues, solid waste, etc.) with limited-to-no oxygen in a specially designed furnace capturing all emissions, gases and oils for reuse as energy.”
Research on biochar, which has been used in agriculture for more than 2,000 years, has been extensive, with thousands of papers examining its potential to keep nutrients and water in the soil, increase crop yields and absorb heavy metals. And interest seems to be growing, said U.S. Biochar Initiative Executive Director Tom Miles.
“We’ve had a lot of fits and starts,” Miles says. “It feels like we’re really getting some kind of movement.”
There was a lot of interest about 10 years ago, “when we thought there was going to be a carbon market,” Miles said.
Research has been ongoing, both by government and private industry, though it appears to have slowed at USDA’s Agricultural Research Service, says ARS soil scientist Jeff Novak.
“In my opinion, biochar grants are not as prevalent as they were five years ago,” Novak said. “We’d like to see more (funding),” Miles said, adding, however, that “ARS has been very strongly behind biochar and biochar research.” The Forest Service and EPA also have been looking at biochar, to help reduce woody biomass in forests and to keep heavy metals from migrating into ground and surface waters.
Miles has no figures on the number of acres receiving applications with biochar – he guesses it’s “pretty small” – but estimates that about 135 companies in the U.S. are producing about 45,000 tons of biochar annually. More research and a drop in price will be needed in order for biochar to be used widely in agriculture.
“It’s not well known, and I’ve been working on it for five years,” says David Holden of Holden Research and Consulting in California, who has conducted field trials using biochar. “I haven’t seen it take off anywhere.”
www.Agri-Pulse.com 16
However, Miles said that attendance at a USBI conference last month reflected the change in the biochar market over the last few years.
“What was different about the meeting this year was that this year, two-thirds of the people attending were representing companies in the business or interested in getting into the business, of biochar, whereas in the past, most attendees were in academia,” he said
Given the myriad uses for the product, it’s not surprising that a research paper published last year said it is “known as the new black gold.”
But Novak, who said, “Biochar as a soil amendment is globally recognized,” nonetheless cautioned against labeling it some type of miracle product.
Depending on the feedstock used, “Each biochar has a unique property,” Novak said. The trick is finding the right biochar for the right use, a task USBI will be undertaking as a result of its recent conference, Miles said.
The industry could receive a boost from the farm bill being discussed by a House and Senate conference committee.
The Senate farm bill would authorize a pilot project, to be funded at $15 million annually, that provides financial incentives to producers “to adopt practices designed to improve soil health, including by increasing carbon levels in soil.”
“This program will encourage more farmers to adopt soil health practices, carbon sequestration, and sustainable agriculture, and will help further develop the nascent soil Jim Loar, Cool Planet health industry,” says Jim Loar, president and CEO of Cool Planet, a Colorado-based company that hopes to take advantage of the surge in soil health interest.
The company’s flagship product is Cool Terra, an engineered biocarbon product, similar to biochar, that has been shown to increase water and nutrient efficiency and increase yields – all while boosting the amount of beneficial microbial activity and being “carbon negative.” Cool Terra sequesters carbon by putting biomass back in the soil as fixed carbon.
“At the end of the day, it’s the perfect alignment,” Loar says. “It’s profitability and sustainability in one package.”
Loar is an ag industry veteran of more than 30 years, including 14 years at crop protection company Griffin LLC and 14 years at Wilbur-Ellis, where he was vice president of operations for the $2.1 billion agricultural division. He joined Cool Planet as chief commercial officer in 2015 and became president and CEO two years ago.
“What I believe in is soil health – going back and looking at our soil, thinking how we can make the foundation of ag more productive,” he says.
www.Agri-Pulse.com 17
Cool Terra can be created using a variety of biomass materials as a feedstock, but the company is currently focusing on pine and coconut shells.
Cool Terra is generating a lot of buzz with research studies consistently showing increased yields and improved water and nutrient efficiency in a variety of crops – alfalfa, lettuce, tomatoes, strawberries and potatoes, for example. The company also has had success in the cannabis and turf and landscape industries.
Although Cool Planet won’t release sales figures, Loar says it’s growing steadily, expanding to use on 21 different crops and uses this year, Loar says. In addition, “We expect 2018 to end with seven times more acres treated with Cool Terra than was treated in 2017.”
“What we’re going to do is industrialize a cottage industry,” Loar says.
Dave Cheetham, proprietary products manager at Helena Chemical in Chico, Calif., told Agri- Pulse he was initially a skeptic but has been “pleasantly surprised” by Cool Terra. He said field trials showed an increase in carrot yields from 11 tons/acre to 13.5 tons/acre (a 20 percent jump), and an increase in potatoes from 13.6 ton/acre to 17.8 tons.
In addition, “It’s helping with nutrient exchange and available soil moisture,” Cheetham says. “We’ve done testing within annual and perennial crops and we’ve been able to reduce moisture 10 percent reliably – sometimes by 25 percent.”
“In certain cases, if moisture is not delivered, the biochar doesn’t really get turned on,” Cheetham says. “But it stays there in the soil like a future investment.”
Cool Planet also is working on using Cool Terra in feed for animals to reduce methane generation, and as a delivery mechanism for biological products being developed by other companies, whom Loar says he cannot identify.
Dicamba cutoff date urged to address drift damage issues
Sentiment is growing for the Environmental Protection Agency to establish some type of cutoff for use of dicamba next year, when the agency makes it decision on whether to allow use of the controversial herbicide in 2019.
Both the national group representing pesticide applicators and the Illinois Fertilizer & Chemical Association (IFCA) recently spoke up in favor of limiting application of dicamba products “over the top,” or after soybeans have been planted. This was after Beck’s Hybrids surprised the industry in late July by urging EPA to allow dicamba to be used only in pre-plant applications, citing continued reports of dicamba drift this year, just as there were last year
The American Association of Pest Control Officials (AAPCO) urged the agency in a letter sent late last month to establish “an early season cutoff date” beyond which dicamba could not be used, while still giving the states flexibility to set their own cutoff dates. IFCA, in its own letter, recommended that EPA not allow use beyond the V6 growth stage for soybeans but also establish a firm cutoff date of June 30.
www.Agri-Pulse.com 18
“States may need some flexibility in setting a cutoff date depending on their geography and soybean planting dates, but not going much beyond the summer solstice can be a reasonable guideline,” IFCA President Jean Payne said in her letter to EPA.
Dicamba formulations produced by Bayer (Xtendimax) and BASF (Engenia) are designed for use with genetically engineered RoundupReady 2 Xtend soybeans and Bollgard 3 XtendFlex cotton. While effective in controlling weeds, the products also have been blamed – last year and this year – for damage to non-GMO soybeans and other plants, such as fruit trees and ornamentals.
EPA must decide by Nov. 9, when the two-year registrations for Xtendimax and Engenia expire, whether to cancel them or impose more conditions on their use. Last October, EPA and the registrants agreed on changes to the label that would, the agency and the companies hoped, reduce the number of drift damage complaints this season.
Comprehensive data are not available on the number of complaints filed with state agencies responsible for pesticide enforcement, but it’s safe to say that while some states have seen an improvement, others have not.
For example, in Illinois, complaints have risen from about 350 in 2017 to more than 450 this year, with the vast majority of those related to damage in non-GMO soybeans.
The numbers also have been significant in Indiana. The Office of the Indiana State Chemist (OISC), in a letter to EPA, said that drift complaints in 2017 totalled 287; in 2018, the number as of the end of August was 257. About half of all the complaints have been about dicamba.
"Those 2017 and 2018 figures represent a 300 percent increase in total average annual drift complaints and a 2660 percent increase in average annual dicamba complaints," OISC said, using the previous 10 years' average as a benchmark.
Pointing to the similar numbers of complaints in each of the past two years, OISC said, “Needless to say, the mandatory training was not successful in reducing drift complaints.” Training was required as part of the new label for the products issued last October.
The idea of cutoff dates has “resonated with more people” this year, Jeff Gunsolus, a professor at the University of Minnesota and an extension weed scientist, told Agri-Pulse.
Minnesota adopted a label for dicamba use this season that set a June 20 cutoff date for the state and also prohibited use of dicamba when the temperature exceeds 85 degrees.
The restrictions were “very successful,” Gunsolus said, citing a drop in dicamba-related complaints from 250 in 2017 to 51 so far this year, with the growing season basically over. (He conceded that part of the reason for the lower numbers likely was because of heavy rains in parts of the state, leaving fewer field days to apply dicamba.)
Jeff Gonsolus, University of Minnesota
www.Agri-Pulse.com 19
Gunsolus, like IFCA’s Payne, says dicamba is more effective for early-season weed control and really shouldn’t be used late in the season, both because sensitive crops near those applications could be in their reproductive stages and because weeds can get too tall for herbicides to work on them.
Late in the growing season, dicamba is “not as effective, and you’re picking up more risk from off-target movement,” he said.
IFCA recommended to EPA that it require applicators, before they spray, to obtain from growers a signed document “identifying the trait of any soybean crop planted adjacent to the field (next to, but not necessarily touching) on any side of the field intended for postemergence application.”
“Applicators apply products to soybean, they do not plant soybean; therefore it has been very difficult for applicators to determine the location of sensitive soybeans in the very hectic application season – we need the grower’s assistance in this effort,” Payne said in her letter.
Speaking to Agri-Pulse, Payne said IFCA was trying to come up with a “stewardship approach” that would allow continued use of dicamba while protecting sensitive, or non-GMO, soybeans.
The question of when EPA will have a decision continues to remain unanswered. The agency reiterated Tuesday, in a statement attributed to an EPA spokesperson, that it “will use all available evidence when evaluating registrations for over-the-top use of dicamba. Our goal is to make a decision in time for growers to make informed seed purchase decisions for the next planting season.”
“I really thought they’d have a decision by now,” said Tony Cofer, an Alabama pesticide regulator and president of AAPCO. He said AAPCO has continually reminded EPA of the need for a decision. It also recommended that the products be given one-year conditional registrations, allowing label changes to be made "as additional information becomes available."
And Payne said, “We have to have a decision by the end of September,” noting that just as farmers need time to determine which seeds they plan to buy, pesticide retailers need to know which pesticides to stock.
Bayer, for its part, said it expects EPA to make a “timely, science-based decision” in time for sales and grower purchasing decisions next year. “Farmers are sharing that they need new technologies like Roundup Ready 2 Xtend soybeans, XtendFlex cotton and XtendiMax with VaporGrip Technology to fight weeds on their fields, and this combination of technologies delivers results,” said Ryan Rubischko, the company’s North America dicamba portfolio lead, in a statement.
“Our customers tell us they’re seeing some of the cleanest fields in years and that they’ve had successful on-target applications of XtendiMax over broad acreage,” and “EPA has publicly shared that they are aware of grower need for new low-volatility dicamba technology,” Rubischko said.
www.Agri-Pulse.com 20
News Briefs
Beef exports up amid trade uncertainty. South Korea and Hong Kong are leading the way as growing importers as the U.S. experiences a 14 percent boost in beef exports this year. According to a quarterly report from Rabobank, year-to-date beef exports through June are up 14 percent, with South Korean imports jumping 41 percent and sales to Hong Kong increasing 11 percent. The ongoing trade dispute between the U.S. and China has heavily impacted the pork sector, but the report notes the beef industry has been more insulated from the conflict since the Chinese market was only opened to U.S. beef last year. Export markets will need to remain available in the near future as Rabobank predicts 2019 beef production increasing by 2.5 to 3 percent. Droughts in part of the U.S. are also having mixed results for domestic protein production; Corn yields are expected to experience a slight (1 percent) dip, but pasture conditions are suffering as 15 states have extreme to excessive drought conditions. Half of the U.S. beef cattle herd resides in those states.
Court decision may bring an end to CRISPR patent fight. Patents held by the MIT- Harvard Broad Institute for the use of the gene-editing tool CRISPR-Cas9 have been upheld by a federal appeals court, potentially bringing to an end a battle between the institute and the University of California, Berkeley (UCB). UCB asserted that the Broad Institute’s patents impinged on areas covered by UCB’s patent applications. But the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding that Broad’s patents for the use of CRISPR in eukaryotic cells — found in animals, plants and humans – were sufficiently distinct from UCB’s applications for use of CRISPR in cell-free systems. The Broad Institute hailed the decision, saying, “It is time for all institutions to work together to enable the broadest possible sharing and licensing of foundational CRISPR (Intellectual Property) to accelerate research and improve human health.” Last year, the institute reached an agreement with DuPont Pioneer (now Corteva Agriscience) “to create a joint licensing framework for the use of CRISPR-Cas9 technology in agriculture, Broad said in October 2017. “Specifically, we’ve agreed to jointly provide non-exclusive licenses to intellectual property for use in commercial agricultural research and product development,” the institute said. UCB could appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, but its chances of obtaining review there are slim.
Ag census data coming in February. The first release of 2017 Census of Agriculture results will occur Feb. 21 at the USDA 2019 Outlook Forum, says Hubert Hamer, administrator of the National Agricultural Statistics Service, which conducts the five-year tallies. Hamer delivered a progress update on the census in Hartford, Conn., earlier this week at the annual meeting of the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture, which helps with the census. He said the overall response by farms was an “excellent” rate of nearly 73 percent. Hamer said farmers in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands had yet to be surveyed for the census because of hurricane damage from 2017. That work will begin toward the end of the year. NASS is already working on follow-up surveys dealing with irrigation and aquaculture, and he said other follow-up surveys are in the works.
USDA funds projects fighting opioid addiction. USDA is partnering with rural communities in 22 states to support opportunities for opioid prevention, treatment and recovery. The department says it is investing $10.7 million in 85 projects in 22 states through the Community Facilities program. “With its impact on workforce, quality of life and the economic vitality of rural communities from Maine to California, the opioid epidemic is more than just a matter of public health – it is an issue of rural prosperity,” Anne Hazlett, assistant to
www.Agri-Pulse.com 21 the secretary for Rural Development, said in a release. “Under the leadership of President Trump, USDA is committed to being a strong partner to rural communities in planning and building local responses to this monumental challenge.” The states where investments are being made are: Arkansas, Arizona, California, Iowa, Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Vermont and Wisconsin. Click here to see a list of the projects being financed.
Farm Hands on the Potomac…
Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue named Pam Miller the senior associate administrator for policy at USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service. Perdue noted that Miller has spent 20 years working in the House of Representatives, with service on both the Agriculture and Appropriations committees, focusing on funding for USDA. “I have no doubt Pam will help us continue the work of USDA to do right and feed everyone,” Perdue said.
Syngenta is celebrating the remarkable career of Mary-Dell Chilton, who is retiring from the company at the age of 79. Chilton, who joined Syngenta 35 years ago, is widely recognized as a founder of modern plant biotechnology, after she and her research teams demonstrated that Agrobacterium is an effective vehicle for DNA transfer and produced the first transgenic plant. Chilton’s contributions to agriculture have resulted in numerous accolades, including the World Food Prize in 2013 — recognizing individuals who have “increased the quality, quantity or availability of food in the world.” The retirement ceremony was held at the Syngenta Innovation Center in Research Triangle Park, N.C.
Roy Steiner was named managing director for the Rockefeller Foundation’s Food Initiative, charged with, among other things, carrying forward the Foundation’s “enduring commitment to a sustainable Green Revolution in Africa.” Steiner comes to the Foundation from the Omidyar Network, where he served as director of the Intellectual Capital team. He has also has held leadership positions with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Nearly 27 years ago, as a newly minted graduate student, he joined the Foundation as part of the Warren Weaver Fellows program.
Nick Yaksich, the head of the Association of Equipment Manufacturers Washington D.C. office, says he plans to retire at the end of the year. Yaksich joined AEM in 1998 as vice president of government and industry relations. Prior to that, he worked as a lobbyist for the National Asphalt Pavement Association and the Associated General Contractors of America after leaving Capitol Hill as a congressional aide.
The National Association of State Departments of Agriculture this week is honoring top employees of three member-departments for their service to their states. Recipients of the NASDA Honor Awards are: Lisa Hanson, deputy director of the Oregon Department of Agriculture; Bryan Painter, director of communications and administration for the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, Food, and Forestry; and Larry Maxwell, chief administrative officer and assistant commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Agriculture. The Association also honored the late Gus Schumacher, a former commissioner of food and agriculture in Massachusetts, with its Ambassador’s Circle Award. NASDA calls Schumacher, who went on to become Undersecretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services in the Clinton administration, an industry leader whose personal effort and dedication to NASDA “contributed
www.Agri-Pulse.com 22 to successful policy outcomes and the amplification of NASDA’s mission.” Click here for a fuller description of the awards.
Matt Wohlman, the deputy commission of the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, is joining Land O’Lakes Inc. as senior director of state and industry affairs. Before joining MDA in 2011, the fifth-generation family farmer served in staff roles for U.S. Rep. Tim Walz, D-Minn., and State Sen. Yvonne Prettner Solon. Wohlman starts the new job at Land O’Lakes Sept. 26 and will be working out of the farmer-owned co-op’s headquarters in Arden Hills, Minn.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association hired Mari Stull, a former adviser in the State Department’s International Organization Bureau in the Trump administration, as its director of international regulatory policy. Stull worked for five years at the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture, most recently as coordinator, Caribbean Agribusiness Development, Trinidad and Tobago, West Indies. She also was the founder and executive director of the Caribbean Agribusiness Association: Trinidad and Tobago, and served as acting director of regulatory and procedural development at USDA’s Federal Crop Insurance Corp. from 1992- 1994.
Cris Coffin is returning to American Farmland Trust as a senior policy adviser, expanding AFT’s federal and state policy engagement around farmland protections, farm transfer and succession and land access. Coffin served as New England director for AFT from 2001-2015. Before that, she held several positions in the U.S. Senate, including as professional staff on the Agriculture Committee and as chief of staff to Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis. More recently, Coffin has been policy dirdector for Land For Good, a New England-based organization focused on gaining ground for farmers. She also held positions with Resources for the Future and the Vermont Department of Agriculture.
Professors Keith Slotkin from Ohio State and Iowa State’s Bing Yang were appointed to joint faculty positions at the University of Missouri and the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center. They are the second and third faculty members hired through a collaborative initiative that aims to elevate regional plant science to address global challenges. Blake Meyers was the first faculty member hired as part of a joint initiative with MU, announced in 2014, to attract accomplished scientists focused on cutting-edge plant science and agriculture innovation to both institutions.
FLM Harvest named Chief Operating Officer Laurie Fleck as its new president and CEO. Fleck has held that position on an interim basis for the past eight months. Before joining FLM, Fleck led internal communications for Syngenta Seeds NA and held a variety of senior management roles at major agriculture and food communication and consulting agencies. The Iowa State alum’s experience includes animal health, food production systems, packaged goods and production agriculture… Succeeding Fleck as FLM’s chief operating officer is Steve Zabka, who came to the agency in 2015 as senior vice president for resource planning and project management.
Teresa Romero is the new president of the United Farm Workers, the first woman to hold the post. UFW also says she’s the first immigrant woman to head a national union, having migrated from Mexico in the early 1980s. She succeeds Arturo Rodriguez, who became president when his father-in-law, César Chávez, died unexpectedly in 1993. Dolores Huerta was a cofounder of the organization along with Chávez in the early 1970s, but never held the position of president. Romero managed a construction company and a law firm that helped workers with
www.Agri-Pulse.com 23 immigration and workers compensation claims before joining the farmworker union nine years ago.
Harry Watts, the director of the Kansas Farm Bureau Foundation for Agriculture, is retiring this month after more than 16 years with the organization. Watts started with KFB back in 2002 as managing director for government relations. He says he’s looking forwarded to traveling to places that he’s not yet had a chance to see and to spending quality time with family and friends.
Best Regards,
Sara Wyant
Editor
Copyright Agri-Pulse Communications, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction or distribution in any form is prohibited without consent from Editor Sara Wyant, Agri-Pulse Communications Inc., 110 Waterside Lane, Camdenton, MO. 65020. Phone: (573) 873-0800. Fax: (573) 873-0801. Staff: Managing Editor Daniel Enoch; Deputy Managing Editor Spencer Chase; Senior Editor Philip Brasher; Senior Trade Editor Bill Tomson; Associate Editor Steve Davies; Contributing Editor Jonathan Harsch; Contributing Editor Jim Webster; Contributing Editor Ed Maixner; Editorial Coordinator: Sandra Cowherd; Director of Marketing: Allan R. Johnson; Administrative Assistant: Sandi Schmitt; Marketing Manager: Jason Lutz; Circulation Manager: Paige Dye: Marketing Consultant: Tom Davis. A one-year subscription (48 issues) is $697.00. To subscribe, send an e-mail to: [email protected], or visit: www.Agri-Pulse.com.
www.Agri-Pulse.com 24