DOCSLIB.ORG

2011 Annual Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

2011 Annual Report Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources . Massachusetts is home to more than 515,000 acres of farmland and 7,700 farms, which bring in $490 million annually in revenue and employs thousands of workers. We’re fortunate to have such a vibrant agricultural industry here and this report details our work over this past year on issues ranging from land preservation and food safety to funding of energy effi ciency projects to specialty crop grants, which support our farms and other agricultural businesses. We appreciate the agricultural community and other stakeholders who have devoted time this year to advocate on behalf of the over 60 programs and services we administer in support of sustainable agriculture and animal health in Massachusetts. Despite what was still a challenging economic climate, I am pleased to report some remarkable accomplishments in 2011. We’ve continued our support of popular MDAR signature programs such as the Massachusetts Farm Energy Program and the Agricultural Preservation Restriction (APR) program, which has permanently protected over 800 farms totaling more than 67,000 acres. We disbursed nearly 70 energy and environmental grants to farms and announced specialty crop block grants for 12 agricultural organizations. Under the leadership of Governor Patrick, we established a Public Market Commission focused on the opening of a year-round public market in downtown Boston and a Food Policy Council committed to the advance- ment of a vibrant local food system. We also recommitted to the Dairy Farmer Tax Credit program. By launching our new Commonwealth Quality program in partnership with agriculture, fi sheries, forestry businesses and agricultural industry leaders across the state we’ve advanced our mission to establish safe, sustainable, and environmentally friendly products. One of the projects I’m most proud of is the creation of a Massachusetts gleaning network, which gathers volunteers to harvest unpicked crops at the end of a season to donate to organizations that feed the hungry. It’s a wonderful program that brings fresh, locally grown products to our communities, aids struggling families and individuals and connects volunteers with our agricultural industry. Our outreach eff orts – which stimulate agricultural business development – promote farms, farmers’ markets, farm stands, agri-tourism destinations and more and have tracked positive and measurable results. Page visits to our MassGrown & Fresher website (www.mass.gov/massgrown) grew 175 percent from 2010 to 2011! We’ve also launched other information technology and social media projects including – QR codes, blogs, Flickr, You Tube and Twitter to promote agricultural commodity groups, activities and events. With several severe storms – including Tropical Storm Irene – across the state, last year was challenging for our agricul- tural community. When natural disasters occurred, our staff reacted responded swift ly and were on the ground off er- ing assistance to municipal leaders, businesses and residents related to protection of domestic animals, working with the Patrick-Murray Administration to secure federal disaster relief for crop losses and collaborating with partner organizations to establish a revolving loan fund for aff ected farmers. In 2012, we look forward to continuing our work with our partners to seek out effi ciencies and identify strategies that make us responsive to our growing constituency. Scott J. Soares, Commissioner 2011 ANNUAL REPORT WWW.MASS.GOV/AGR 2011 ANNUAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS OVERVIEW OF THE AGENCY Federal State Market Improvement Program 38 Commissioner’s Biography 1 (FSMIP) Agency Organizational Overview 2 Food Safety Program 39 MDAR’S BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Harvest New England Initiative 40 Agricultural Lands Preservation Committee (ALPC) 6 Massachusetts State Exposition Building, West 40 Springfi eld Board of Food and Agriculture 7 Massachusetts Grown and Fresher Campaign 41 Farm Technology Review Commission (FTRC) 8 Retail Coupon for Fluid Milk Program 41 Massachusetts Dairy Promotion Board (MDPB) 10 Organic Cost Share Certifi cation 43 Massachusetts Food Policy Council (MFPC) 11 Specialty Crop Grant Program 43 Pesticide Board 13 Value-Added Technical Assistance 43 State Reclamation and Mosquito Control Board 14 DIVISION OF ANIMAL HEALTH (SRB) ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION Director’s Biography 45 Public Relations 15 Program Listing 45 Outreach and Events 17 Staff Listing 46 Finacial Report 20 Animal Imports and Livestock Markets 46 Human Resources 22 Animal Shelter/Rescue Program 46 Legal Services 24 Dairy Farmer Tax Credit 46 Public Market Project 26 Dairy Program 47 DIVISION OF AGRICULTURAL MARKETS Equine Program 47 Director’s Biography 27 Municipal Animal Inspector Program 49 Program Listing 27 Pet Shop Program 49 Staff Listing 27 Poultry Program 49 Agricultural Commissions 28 Rabies Program 50 Agricultural Directional Signage 30 Reportable Disease Program 51 Agricultural Fairs Development 30 Swine Program 51 Agricultural Tourism 30 DIVISION OF CROP AND PEST SERVICES Commonwealth Quality 31 Director’s Biography 53 Culinary Tourism 32 Program Listing 53 Export Development 33 Staff Listing 54 PESTICIDE PROGRAM Farm and Market Report 34 Farm to School Project 34 Children and Families Protection Act 54 Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program (FMNP) 35 Ground Water Program 54 Farmers’ Market Program 36 Massachusetts Worker Protection Standard 56 Pesticide Applicators and Licensing Program 56 WWW.MASS.GOV/AGR 2011 ANNUAL REPORT Pesticide Product Registration 58 Agricultural Environmental Enhancement 70 Pesticide Use Reports 59 Program (AEEP) Agricultural Preservation Restriction Program (APR) Rights of Way Management 59 71 FARM PRODUCT AND PLANT INDUSTRIES APR Improvement Program (AIP) 72 Apiary Inspections 61 Aquaculture Program 73 Asian Longhorned Beetle (ALB) 63 Composting Program 74 Branding Law 63 Farm Energy Discount Program 74 Cooperative Agricultural Pest Survey (CAPS) 63 Farm Viability Enhancement Program 74 Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) Inspections 64 Massachusetts Emergency Food Assistance 75 Program (MEFAP) Feed Program 64 Massachusetts Farm Energy Program 76 Fertilizer Program 64 Matching Enterprise Grants for Agriculture (MEGA) 77 Fruit and Vegetable Inspection 64 Milkhouse Waste Pilot Program 78 Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) 65 Mobile Poultry Processing Unit 78 Nursery Inspection 65 State-Owned Farmland and Licensing Program 79 Phytosanitary Inspections 65 APPENDIXES DIVISION OF AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE State Reclamation and Mosquito Control Board 1 Staff Directory Director’s Biography 67 2 Farm To School Listings Program Listing 67 3 Massachusetts Dairy Promotional Board Staff Listing 67 4 Agricultural Business Training Program (ABTP) 68 Agricultural Energy Grant Program 69 Statutory Purpose: This report is intended to not only inform the public generally, but to meet several statutory reporting requirements. The 2011 Annual report of the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources covers the following: • Chapter 310 § 11 of the Acts of 2008, an annual report of the Farm Technology Review Commission (page 8) • M.G.L. Chapter 20 § 25, an annual report of the Agricultural Lands Preservation Committee to the public (page 71) • M.G.L. Chapter 20 § 30, an annual report of the Massachusetts Dairy Promotion Board to the House and Senate Committee on Ways and Means and the Executive Offi ce of Administration and Finance (Appendix 4) • M.G.L. Chapter 94 § 14, an annual report on milk coupon programs to the Joint Committee on the Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture, the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs and the Secretary of Housing and Economic Development (page 41) • M.G.L. Chapter 128 § 5, an annual report of the entire Department (entire report) • M.G.L. Chapter 13B § 5A, a report on IPM efforts to the Clerk of the Senate and the House of Representatives and the Joint Committee on Natural Resources and Agriculture (pages 52-60) • M.G.L. Chapter 252 § 2, a report of the State Reclamation Board (Appendix 1) • Chapter 197 of the Acts of 2010, a report on local procurement by schools. (Appendix 3) Cover Photos: Th anks to the following MDAR staff , from left to right: Highland Cattle at the Van Werhooven Farm in Blandford, submitted by Craig Rickov; Produce at the Cape Ann Farmers’s Market, taken by David Webber; “Inspector Phyllis”, taken by Phyllis Michalewich; and McIntosh Apples bound for Belfast Ireland at J.P. Sullivan in Ayer, taken by Robert Rondeau. WWW.MASS.GOV/AGR 2011 ANNUAL REPORT COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES BIOGRAPHY OF COMMISSIONER SCOTT J. SOARES Scott was soon recognized at the Department as some- one who could eff ectively jump-start new programs and work across many diverse constituencies and agencies. During his time at MDAR, Scott has had an opportunity to serve in a number of capacities; these broad-breadth experiences have in turn given Scott a unique insight into the many programs and services of the Department. Since Governor Deval Patrick appointed Scott Soares Commissioner, Scott has applied his strong work ethic and passion for agriculture towards laying a strong foundation to ensure its vibrant future through MDAR’s programs and services. Important to these eff orts has been the streamlining of internal operations to realize greater effi ciencies, and greater transparency through the initiation of a department wide annual report. Scott has also dedicated himself to the building
Recommended publications
  • An Observation and a Strange but True "Tale": What Might the Historical Trials of Animals Tell Us About the Transforma

    An Observation and a Strange but True "Tale": What Might the Historical Trials of Animals Tell Us About the Transforma

    Hastings Law Journal Volume 52 | Issue 1 Article 3 11-2000 An Observation and a Strange but True "Tale": What Might the Historical Trials of Animals Tell Us about the Transformative Potential of Law in American Culture Paul Schiff Berman Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Paul Schiff Berman, An Observation and a Strange but True "Tale": What Might the Historical Trials of Animals Tell Us about the Transformative Potential of Law in American Culture, 52 Hastings L.J. 123 (2000). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal/vol52/iss1/3 This Essay is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Law Journal by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Essay An Observation and a Strange but True 'Tale": What Might the Historical Trials of Animals Tell Us About the Transformative Potential of Law in American Culture? by PAUL SCHIFF BERMAN* As the title indicates, this Essay is based on an observation and a strange but true tale. The observation, which will probably strike many people as uncontroversial-perhaps even cliched-is that law and legal procedures are at the core of American self-identity and are woven deeply into the fabric of our culture. This is not a new insight. Indeed, de Tocqueville's famous observation that "[s]carcely any political question arises in the United States that is not resolved, * Associate Professor, University of Connecticut School of Law.
  • 27 the Law Is an Ass: Reading E.P. Evans

    27 the Law Is an Ass: Reading E.P. Evans

    27 The Law is an Ass: Reading E.P. Evans' The Medieval Prosecution and Capital Punishment of Animals Piers Beirnes1 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MAINE In this essay I address a little-known chapter in the lengthy history of crimes against (nonhuman) animals. My focus is not crimes committed by humans against animals, as such, but a practical outcome of the seemingly bizarre belief that animals are capable of committing crimes against humans.2 I refer here to the medieval practice whereby animals were prosecuted and punished for their misdeeds, aspects of which readers are likely to have encountered in the work of the historian Robert Darnton (1985). In his book The Great Cat Massacre, Darnton (chapter 2) describes the informal justice meted out to offending neighborhood cats - some of whom were owned and adored by their master's wife - by a group of young male printer's apprentices in Paris during the late 1730s. One night the boys, who felt themselves wronged by the many cats who begged for food from their workshop and who kept them awake at night with their screeching, "gathered round and staged a mock trial, complete with guards, a confessor, and a public executioner. After pronouncing the animals guilty and administering last rites, they strung them up on an improvised gallows" (p. 77). The boys were at once delirious with joy and erupted in gales of laughter - much to the dismay of the owner and his wife, who arrived only after the proceedings had ended. How can we understand this grotesque legalism? Darnton himself is con- cerned less with recounting an episode of human cruelty to animals than he is with confronting the difficult interpretive problem of how a riotous cat massacre seemed to their eighteenth-century participants as an affair of great merriment.
  • FY 2016 Annual Report on Technology Transfer

    FY 2016 Annual Report on Technology Transfer

    United States Department of Agriculture FY 2016 Annual Report on Technology Transfer Non-Discrimination Policy In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institu- tions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sex- ual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program infor- mation (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Com- plaint Form, AD-3027, found online at How to File a Program Discrimination Complaint and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the infor- mation requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S.
  • The Historical and Contemporary Prosecution and Punishment of Animals

    The Historical and Contemporary Prosecution and Punishment of Animals

    ARTICLES THE HISTORICAL AND CONTEMPORARY PROSECUTION AND PUNISHMENT OF ANIMALS By Jen Girgen* This article analyzes the role of the animal "offender," by examining the animal trials and executions of years past. The writer argues that although the formal prosecution of animals as practiced centuries ago may have en- ded (for the most part), we continue to punish animals for their "crimes" against human beings. She suggests that we do this primarily to achieve two ends: the restorationof order and the achievement of revenge, and con- cludes with a call for a renewed emphasis on "due process" for animals threatened with punishment for their offenses. I. INTRODUCTION ......................................... 98 II. HISTORICAL ANIMAL TRIALS AND EXECUTIONS ....... 99 A. The Two Kinds of Animal Trials ....................... 99 1. EcclesiasticalTrials ................................ 100 2. Secular Trials ..................................... 105 B. A Third Kind of Trial?....... 114 C. Rationalizing the Existence, Continuation,and "End"of the Animal Criminal Trials ............................ 115 III. THE PROSECUTION AND PUNISHMENT OF ANIMALS IN MODERN TIMES ..................................... 122 A. Vestiges of the Old Trials: "Death Row" Dogs ("Vicious" Dog Proceedings) ...................................... 123 B. Animal Justice Today: Summary Justice ................ 127 C. Keeping Animals in Their Place:Restoring Order (and Achieving Vengeance) .................................. 129 IV. CONCLUSION ........................................... 131 * © Jen Girgen, 2003. Ms. Girgen received her J.D. from the University of Wyoming College of Law in 1996 and her M.S. in Criminology from Florida State University in 2001, and she is currently pursuing her Ph.D. in Criminology at Florida State Univer- sity. The author is very grateful for the generous suggestions and critical comments she received from Professor Bruce Bullington, Bob Edwards, Rhonda Dobbs, and Roy Carr on an earlier draft of this article.