There’s never a shortage of agriculture news. Here are a few policy stories you may have missed over the past week.

Farm income report fallout

Following a USDA report projecting the largest farm income decline since 2006, Senate Agriculture Committee Chair Debbie Stabenow issued a statement saying the broader trends in the economy make it clear that the time to pass a farm bill is now. She called for new investments in tools that support farmers as well as new solutions that provide timely assistance to help them meet emerging challenges.

“I have worked with the administration to invest in new trade opportunities, and I have secured a commitment from Senate Democratic leadership to invest billions of dollars in new resources into the farm bill,” she says. “If we act quickly, and begin serious, bipartisan negotiations, we have a real opportunity to invest in the safety net for farmers, families, and rural communities and provide farmers with the tools and choices they need.”

Those sentiments were echoed by Committee Ranking Member John Boozman who issued a statement saying the farm income report underscores the need to make meaningful investments in the farm bill’s safety net programs. He said the bill is Congress’s opportunity to give producers the risk management tools they need to succeed in coming years.

“We are witnessing the most rapid and steepest erosion in the farm economy of all time,” Boozman says. “This dramatic projected decline reflects what I’ve heard around the country from farmers and ranchers and is why I have repeatedly said that risk management tools must be enhanced in the next farm bill. Our current farm safety net is not equipped to handle the challenges our farmers are facing.”

In his own reaction statement, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack noted that the projected income decline follows three consecutive years of record income. According to him, much of that can be attributed to strong harvests and increase commodity stocks as the U.S. economy recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic faster than the global economy. While some production costs have come down, producers are still dealing with higher costs for labor, pesticides and livestock purchases. He touted USDA’s efforts to help small and mid-sized producers, adding that the agency would continue to focus on efforts to keep farming viable and rural communities thriving.

Vilsack calls on governors to improve SNAP performance

In a Feb. 8 letter to state governors, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack called for immediate action to improve Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program effectiveness and efficiency. The letter came after recent data showed a decline in several key benchmarks the government uses to evaluate the program’s effectiveness.

Those benchmarks include the program access index, payment error rates, application processing timeliness, and case and procedural error rate. State and federal officials regularly review households participating in the program as well as those who have been denied benefits or had them terminated.

Vilsack says USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service will continue working with states to improve their SNAP operations.

Trump suggests 60% import tariffs on China

During a recent national television interview, former President Donald Trump said he might slap tariffs as high as 60% on Chinese imports if he regains the oval office. In 2018, Trump imposed a 25% tariff on many Chinese imports, setting of a trade war between the two nations.

Things cooled off somewhat in 2020, though President Biden has kept most of the Trump tariffs in place. According to a USDA report, retaliatory tariffs from China and other trading partners cost American agriculture producers an estimated $13.2 billion across all commodities. Total losses were most felt by Midwestern state producers of soybeans, sorghum and pork.

$306 million more for natural disaster relief

This week USDA will begin issuing $306 million in Emergency Relief Program final payments for commodity and specialty crop producers affected by natural disasters in 2020 in 2021. The funds will go to eligible recipients who received ERP Phase One payments from the Farm Service Agency that were calculated based on crop insurance indemnities.

Those initial payments, which went to producers indemnified through federal crop insurance, were subject to a 75% payment factor. FSA later determined that it had adequate funding to provide an additional 3.5% to those who had crop insurance. The payments are subject to FSA payment limitation provisions.

Additional payments will not be issued to producers of noninsured drops covered by FSA NAP policies because they were originally paid at 100%.

“In the natural disaster recovery process, every little bit of available assistance helps offset the financial toll that these catastrophic events have taken on agricultural producers, their families, and their operations,” FSA Administrator Zach Ducheneaux says. “With remaining funds after initial factoring, USDA was able to put additional money back in the hands of the producers as we strive for the most fair and equitable distribution of available funds to as many producers as possible.”

Farm Bureau presses EPA on dicamba

American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency on Feb. 8 calling for a stock order ensuring dicamba remains available through the growing season. The letter came following a federal court’s order to vacate the registration for three dicamba products. 

Duvall says many farmers have already made planning decisions to use dicamba-tolerant crop systems based on EPA’s prior approval. Without these products, he says farmers face substantial risks to their investments. They also don’t know how they will protect their crops without it.

“Our farmer and rancher members are committed to the safe use of all crop protection tools,” Duvall says. “However, responsible farmers that have invested in – and often taken loans out to purchase – dicamba-resistant products for the current growing season should not bear the financial burden caused by this legal dispute.”

The AFBF is among several ag groups asking the EPA to act in response to the court’s decision.

Ag groups want more time to consider new EPA Clean Water Act regulations

A coalition of various interest groups, including the American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Meat Institute, the U.S. Poultry Egg Council and the National Pork Producers Council, is asking EPA to extend the comment period for a proposed clean water rule. EPA issued a 60-day comment period for its new effluent permitting guidelines for meatpacking facilities in late January. The ag groups say they need at least 90 days to consider the rule. Some have expressed concern that the new guidelines will require many meat and poultry facilities to upgrade facilities and install costly new wastewater treatment technologies.