Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill Issues

Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill Issues

Renée Johnson

Specialist in Agricultural Policy

January 13, 2009

Congressional Research Service

7-5700

www.crs.gov

RL33520

CRS Report for Congress

Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill Issues

Summary

Congress has completed action on omnibus legislation to replace expiring law governing the

programs and policies of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The new Food,

Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-246, H.R. 6124) contains provisions on

marketing, crop insurance and disaster assistance, protection against pests and diseases, export

promotion, research, and domestic food assistance, all of which are important to the

competitiveness of the specialty crop sector of U.S. agriculture. The sector includes fruit,

vegetable, tree nut, and nursery crop producers, processors, manufacturers, wholesalers,

importers, and exporters.

Although specialty crops are not eligible for direct support under USDA’s farm commodity price

and income support programs, the policies that Congress sets for the those programs affect them.

Chief among these policies is one that largely restricts commodity program participants from

planting fruits and vegetables on program base acres. Specialty crop interests long have

maintained that the provision is essential to protect the sector from the economic damage that

could occur if additional acres of vegetables (in particular) suddenly came into production. The

Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 extends the planting restriction through FY2012, but

authorizes a pilot program in seven midwestern states to allow planting of fruits and vegetables—

exclusively for processing—on base acres.

P.L. 110-246 also includes, for the first time in the history of the farm bill, a separate title

covering horticultural (specialty) and organic crops (Title X). The title provides substantial

mandatory funding over the life of the farm bill and beyond for several major new and continuing

programs. The key provisions include (1) reauthorization of the program making block grants to

states for research, marketing, and promotion projects benefitting specialty crops, providing $466

million over 10 years in mandatory funds; (2) reauthorization of the program of cost-share

assistance to producers for organic certification, with a one-time transfer of $22 million in

mandatory funds; (3) expansion of the current Farmers’ Market Promotion Program to increase

direct farmer-to-consumer marketing opportunities, providing $33 million in mandatory funds;

(4) establishment of a federal/state pest and disease detection and control program with $377

million in mandatory funds over 10 years; and (5) creation of a network of nurseries to grow pestand disease-free plant stocks for horticultural crops, with $20 million in mandatory funds. The

title also contains a section authorizing $10 million annually in appropriations for research on

colony collapse disorder in honeybees.

The nutrition title of P.L. 110-246 contains provisions intended to increase the availability of

fresh fruits and vegetables in the school lunch and other domestic nutrition assistance programs.

For greater detail on these provisions, see CRS Report RL33829, Domestic Food Assistance: The

Farm Bill and Other Legislation in the 110th Congress, coordinated by Joe Richardson.

This report will not be updated.

Congressional Research Service

Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill Issues

Contents

Introduction ................................................................................................................................1

Sector Snapshot ....................................................................................................................1

Selected Issues and Their Status in the Enacted 2008 Farm Bill ...................................................4

Planting Flexibility................................................................................................................4

In the Enacted Bill ..........................................................................................................4

Government Purchases for Nutrition Programs ......................................................................5

In the Enacted Bill ..........................................................................................................5

Market Expansion Through Promotion Programs ..................................................................5

In the Enacted Bill ..........................................................................................................5

Disease and Pest Protection...................................................................................................6

In the Enacted Bill ..........................................................................................................6

Research ...............................................................................................................................7

In the Enacted Bill ..........................................................................................................7

Organic Agriculture...............................................................................................................7

In the Enacted Bill ..........................................................................................................7

Additional Provisions............................................................................................................8

Figures

Figure 1. Value of Vegetables, Melons, Potatoes, and Sweet Potatoes as Percent of Total

Market Value of Agricultural Products Sold: 2002 ....................................................................2

Figure 2. Value of Fruits, Tree Nuts, and Berries as Percent of Total Market Value of

Agricultural Products Sold: 2002..............................................................................................3

Figure 3. Value of Nursery, Greenhouse, Floriculture, and Sod as Percent of Total Market

Value of Agricultural Products Sold: 2002 ................................................................................3

Appendixes

Appendix. Major Provisions of the Enacted 2008 Farm Bill (P.L. 110-246) Compared

with Previous Law and House- and Senate-Passed Bills (H.R. 2419) ........................................9

Contacts

Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 16

Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................... 16

Congressional Research Service

Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill Issues

Introduction

Specialty crops (fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, and nursery crops) are not eligible for direct support

under USDA’s farm commodity price and income support programs. Nonetheless, the policies

that Congress sets for those programs significantly affect the specialty crop sector’s economic

well-being. Federal policies on trade, conservation, credit, marketing programs, domestic food

assistance, and research also all affect the specialty crop sector.1

Congress sets the policies in these areas, for the most part, in an omnibus, multi-year authorizing

law commonly called the “farm bill.” In May 2008, Congress passed a new farm bill to replace

the previous one, the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-171), which

expired in 2007 (Congress extended it until the new bill could be enacted).

Some stakeholders and policymakers called for specialty crop issues to occupy a larger role in

farm bill policy discussions than in the past. They noted that the traditional farm commodity

support programs are under pressure from constraints on the federal budget, as well as from

developments in existing trade obligations and from negotiations on further trade agreements. 2

Policies covering U.S. agriculture more comprehensively could provide a way to address those

pressures while increasing U.S. competitiveness, they argued.

Several major legislative proposals focusing on policies and programs of importance to the

specialty crop sector were introduced in the 110th Congress in preparation for the 2007 farm bill

debate. These bills included H.R. 1600 (Cardoza), the EAT Healthy America Act; H.R. 1551

(Kind)/S. 919 (Menendez), the Healthy Farms, Foods, and Fuels Act; and S. 1160 (Stabenow), the

Specialty Crops Competition Act, among others. The Administration also proposed several policy

reforms affecting specialty crops as part of the comprehensive 2007 farm bill proposal that it

released in February 2007. A number of stakeholder groups also issued position statements

concerning the specialty crops issues they wanted to see addressed in the new farm bill.

Sector Snapshot

Sales of fruits, vegetables, and tree nuts account for nearly one-third of U.S. crop cash receipts

and one-fifth of U.S. agricultural exports, according to USDA’s Economic Research Service

(ERS). When floriculture, greenhouse, and nursery crops are included, specialty crops account for

approximately 50% of all U.S. cash receipts of farm crops.3

Despite their relatively large share of crop receipts, specialty crops occupy only about 3% of U.S.

harvested cropland. Although certain states and regions are predominant, nearly every state has

some commercial specialty crop production within its borders. Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 3

illustrate the distribution, nationwide, of areas producing fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, and nursery

1

For background information on all federal programs affecting specialty crops, see CRS Report RL32746, Fruits,

Vegetables, and Other Specialty Crops: A Primer on Government Programs, by Jean M. Rawson.

2

For information on the relationship between international trade negotiations and U.S. farm policy, see CRS Report

RS21905, Agriculture in the WTO Doha Round: The Framework Agreement and Next Steps, by Charles E. Hanrahan.

3

Fruit and Vegetable Backgrounder (USDA, Economic Research Service, April 2006) is the source for all the

statistical information in this section. It is available online at http://www.ers.usda.gov/.

Congressional Research Service

1

Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill Issues

crops, shown as percentages of the total market value of agricultural products sold (including

livestock).4

About three-fourths of growers are considered specialized, which means that they receive at least

half of their gross value of production from the sale of fruits, vegetables, tree nuts or horticultural

crops. According to ERS survey data, specialized farms account for 95% of the total value of U.S.

specialty crop production, although more than half of them have annual sales of less than

$250,000 and identify off-farm income as their primary means of support. Specialized farms may

produce one or two other commodities in addition to their specialty crop, according to ERS, and

about 15% of them also participate in the major commodity support programs.

The remaining 5% of the value of U.S. specialty crop production comes from non-specialized

fruit and vegetable farms, which may produce as many as four other commodities (often

including livestock) besides their specialty crop. Nearly half of these farms grow one or more of

the major commodity crops and participate in the price and income support programs, according

to ERS.

Vegetables, dry beans, and potatoes—for processing—are grown primarily on large-acreage, nonspecialized commercial farms. California is the overwhelming leader in production, but certain

states in the Northeast, Central and Upper Midwest, and Pacific Northwest also are major

producers.

Figure 1.Value of Vegetables, Melons, Potatoes, and Sweet Potatoes

as Percent of Total Market Value of Agricultural Products Sold: 2002

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service (02-M021)

4

The maps show the value of specialty crops as a percent of total market value of all agricultural products sold,

including livestock. Data from ERS’s Fruit and Vegetable Backgounder, cited above in this section, compare specialty

crop values to other crop values.

Congressional Research Service

2

Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill Issues

Figure 2.Value of Fruits,Tree Nuts, and Berries as Percent of

Total Market Value of Agricultural Products Sold: 2002

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service (02-M022)

Figure 3.Value of Nursery, Greenhouse, Floriculture, and Sod

as Percent of Total Market Value of Agricultural Products Sold: 2002

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service (02-M023)

Congressional Research Service

3

Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill Issues

Selected Issues and Their Status in the Enacted 2008

Farm Bill5

The Appendix compares the horticulture and organic production policies set in the 2002 farm bill

(P.L. 107-171) with the provisions in the House- and Senate-passed farm bill (H.R. 2419) and the

enacted Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-246).

Planting Flexibility6

A persistent issue for the specialty crop industry is the status of continuation of a policy set in

previous farm bills that restricts the ability of participants in the farm income and commodity

price support programs to plant fruits and vegetables on acres on which they receive benefits

(base acres). Congress first inserted this provision in the 1996 farm act (P.L. 104-127), after it had

adopted a proposal to allow producers of program crops to respond to market signals and grow

different crops on base acreage. The restriction was extended through 2007 by the 2002 farm bill.

Specialty crop producers, in general, have maintained since 1996 that allowing program crop

producers to switch even small numbers of acres to fruits or vegetables would negatively affect

markets, and thus growers’ annual income. In 2005, a World Trade Organization (WTO)

challenge to U.S. farm commodity programs raised questions concerning the use of the planting

flexibility restriction under existing trade commitments.7 Discussion on whether to extend the

restriction in the next farm bill thus has an important trade policy aspect as well as domestic

market aspect.

A number of reports have been issued since late 2006 that examine the possible effects on

domestic fruit and vegetable producers of eliminating the planting restriction. These analyses

suggest that the adverse effects of removing the restriction likely would be small relative to the

overall industry, although there could be larger impacts on individual producers, commodities,

and regions.

In the Enacted Bill

The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-246) maintains the 2002 farm bill

provision restricting the planting of fruits and vegetables on base acres. However, the act

authorizes a pilot project in seven midwestern states that will allow fruits and vegetables—

exclusively for processing—to be planted on 75,000 base acres. USDA is required to evaluate and

report to Congress on the impact the pilot project is having on the price and supply of both fresh

and processed fruits and vegetables.

5

For a comparison of the provisions in P.L. 110-246 with the provisions in the House and Senate bills, and with

previous law, see CRS Report RL34696, The 2008 Farm Bill: Major Provisions and Legislative Action, by Renée

Johnson et al.

6

For detailed analysis of this issue, see CRS Report RL34019, Eliminating the Planting Restrictions on Fruits and

Vegetables in the Farm Commodity Programs, by Renée Johnson and Jim Monke.

7

For more detailed information and analysis of this issue, see CRS Report RS22187, Brazil’s WTO Case Against the

U.S. Cotton Program: A Brief Overview, by Randy Schnepf and CRS Report RL33697, Potential Challenges to U.S.

Farm Subsidies in the WTO, by Randy Schnepf.

Congressional Research Service

4

Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill Issues

Government Purchases for Nutrition Programs

USDA directly purchases and then donates a variety of non-price supported commodities,

including fruit, vegetable, and tree nut products, for consumption through domestic nutrition and

food assistance programs. These purchases and donations help groups of nutritionally vulnerable

recipients (such as low-income school children, participants at family child care homes, and

others) to eat a healthy diet and avoid hunger, while also helping to balance supply and demand

for various commodities.

In the Enacted Bill

Section 10603 requires USDA to purchase additional fruits, vegetables, and nuts for nutrition

assistance programs, above the traditional purchases of $200 million per year. USDA must

purchase an additional $190 million in FY2008; $193 million in FY2009; $199 million in

FY2010; $203 million in FY2011; and $206 million in FY2012 and thereafter. Section 10101

requires the Secretary to arrange for an independent evaluation of USDA’s purchasing process in

order to ensure that the funds are principally devoted to procuring fresh fruits and vegetables.

The enacted bill also creates a new program to provide fresh fruits and vegetables to elementary

schools, replacing a program that began as a pilot project in a limited number of states. The new

program will operate in all states, in those elementary schools that the state designates. The act

provides mandatory funding of $40 million in October 2008; $65 million in July 2009; $101

million in July 2010; and $150 million in July 2011. Funding in future years will be indexed for

inflation. Half of the annual funding will be divided equally among the states, and the remaining

half will be allocated under a formula based on population.

Market Expansion Through Promotion Programs

A key provision of the Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-465), which was

the first law that Congress passed on specialty crop policies specifically, was the authorization,

through FY2009, of a program of block grants to states to support projects in research, marketing,

education, pest and disease management, production, and food safety. In most states, the state

department of agriculture administers this program. The act authorized $44.5 million in annual

appropriations for the program; Congress appropriated $7 million in each of FY2006-FY2008.

Expansion of this program and an effort to provide mandatory funding for it was a major focus in

the farm bill debate. Specialty crop interests have consistently urged Congress to provide

mandatory funds for the block grant program, arguing that the government should increase its

investment in the sector in light of its value to U.S. agriculture as a whole. However, producer

groups and lawmakers from states where commodity crops predominate were not in favor of

redirecting money to support other programs if it meant reducing the current level of support for

the commodity programs.

In the Enacted Bill

Title X of P.L. 110-246 extends the program of block grants to states and provides mandatory

funding for the program totaling $224 million over the five-year farm bill period. Congress did

not redirect commodity program funds to support the block grant program. The House bill would

Congressional Research Service

5

Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill Issues

have provided $365 million in mandatory funding; the Senate bill would have provided $270

million from FY2008 through FY2011.

The rural development title of P.L. 110-246 reauthorizes and provides $15 million in mandatory

funding for the Value-Added Producer Grants program that was created by the Agricultural Risk

Protection Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-224). The program makes planning grants and provides working

capital for marketing value-added agricultural products. The new act stipulates that 10% of the

funding be set aside for beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, and that

another 10% be reserved to help small and medium-sized farm operations make marketing

alliances with other segments of the supply chain. Organic producers also are eligible to receive

these grants.

The trade title of the conference agreement provides $37 million in mandatory funding over a

five-year period for Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC), a program that helps

exporters of U.S. specialty crops overcome other countries’ non-tariff trade barriers, particularly

those associated with plant pest and disease concerns.

The trade title also maintains mandatory funding for the Market Access Program (MAP) at $200

million annually, and specifies that organically produced commodities are eligible for marketing

assistance. MAP is a cost-share program between USDA and commodity organizations or

agribusinesses to promote U.S. agricultural products overseas.

Disease and Pest Protection

Stakeholders traditionally have expressed the concern that efforts to identify and mitigate the

effects of existing pest and disease threats and to prevent the importation of new ones need to be

strengthened. H.R. 1600 (the EAT Healthy America Act, introduced in early 2007) included

provisions to establish a new program of cooperative agreements with states to conduct early pest

detection activities, and to return the import and entry agricultural inspection functions to USDA

from the Department of Homeland Security, where they were transferred in 2003. The latter

provision was dropped in both the House and Senate bills, but other significant pest and disease

provisions were retained in the conference agreement.

In the Enacted Bill

Title X of P.L. 110-246 establishes a cooperative federal-state program for early pest detection

and surveillance and for threat identification and mitigation. The act provides mandatory funding

of $12 million for FY2009, $45 million in FY2010, and $50 million annually in FY2011 and

FY2012. Bill language prohibits USDA from considering the availability of non-federal funds in

the states’ applications for federal funds.

Title X contains additional provisions relating to pest and disease control. Section 10202 provides

$5 million annually in mandatory funds over four years to establish a National Clean Plant

Network to grow pest- and disease-free planting stock for the specialty crop industry. Section

10203 amends the Plant Protection Act (PPA; 7 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), the act authorizing USDA’s

Animal and Plant Health Service’s activities on the plant health, to increase the penalties for

violating the PPA, expand the violations for which penalties are assessed, and clarify subpoena

authorities under the PPA.

Congressional Research Service

6

Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill Issues

Research

In hearings before the farm bill debate, specialty crops producers and trade associations argued

strongly in favor of increasing federal expenditures for specialty crop research. They maintained

that research provides critical support for the industry, without risking challenges under

international trade rules. The EAT Healthy America Act (H.R. 1600) and the Administration’s

farm bill proposal called for using mandatory funds to substantially increase agricultural research

on the production and economics of specialty crops.

In the Enacted Bill

The research title of P.L. 110-246 (Title VII) provides $230 million in mandatory funds for a

specialty crop research initiative over the five-year farm bill period and also authorizes annual

appropriations of $100 million. This amount is greater than that provided in the House and Senate

bills ($215 million and $80 million, respectively.) Five subject areas for research—crop

improvement, identification of pest and disease threats, production efficiency, improved

technologies, and prevention and detection of food safety hazards—are identified to each receive

at least 10% of the grant funds. Recipients must commit to providing a 100% match, either in

funds or in-kind support.

Organic Agriculture

The National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program, which was established by the 2002 farm

bill, authorized a one-time, mandatory transfer of $5 million from the Commodity Credit

Corporation (CCC) with which USDA helped to defray the costs of producers and handlers

seeking organic certification. There was a $500 maximum on the amount a producer could

receive, and the federal share could not account for more than 75% of a producer’s total costs.

The transfer occurred in FY2002 and remained available until fully expended, which was in fall

2006. Certain of the farm bill proposals that were introduced or released early in 2007 called for a

substantial expansion of this program. Some early farm bill proposals also contained a provision

to make technical assistance available to farmers wanting to convert their operations from

conventional to organic practices, and to reimburse transition costs up to $10,000 per farm or

handling operation.

In the Enacted Bill

Section 10301 extends the certification cost-share program, provides a one-time transfer of $22

million in mandatory funds to be available until expended, and raises the maximum amount that a

producer or handler can receive to $750. Conferees deleted the requirement that the federal share

of a producer or handler’s certification not exceed 75%. The enacted bill also provides $5 million

in mandatory funding to improve USDA’s collection of segregated data and survey information

about the price, production, and marketing of major organically produced commodities. The bill

contains a detailed list of required data sets, studies, and market surveys, and authorizes an

additional $25 million in appropriations over the five-year farm bill period to maintain support for

these activities.

The enacted bill adds language to the conservation title (Title II) to establish that producers are

eligible for technical assistance under the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) for

Congressional Research Service

7

Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill Issues

converting their farm to organic production. Efforts to authorize a $50 million program in the

farm bill specifically for this purpose were not successful. The bill increases mandatory funding

for all activities under EQIP by $3.4 billion.

The 1990 farm bill established an organic agriculture research and extension initiative supported

by $3 million annually in mandatory funding. The enacted bill provides $78 million in mandatory

funds over the FY2009-FY2012 period for this initiative, and also authorizes annual

appropriations of $25 million.

Additional Provisions

The enacted bill contains a number of provisions addressing other issues of importance to the

horticulture and organic agriculture communities. Among these are provisions to:

•

increase the amount that orchardists and nursery tree growers can receive in

payments for weather-related losses under the Tree Assistance Program from

$75,000 to $100,000;

•

authorize increasing appropriations for USDA’s National Organic Program

Office, starting at $5 million in FY2008 and rising to $11 million in FY2012, for

the purpose of improving program efficiency and regulatory oversight activities;

•

expand the Farmers’ Market Promotion Program with $33 million in mandatory

funds over the five-year term of the farm bill;

•

establish a Healthy Food Enterprise Development Center with $5 million in

mandatory funds to make competitive grants to entities that will increase lowincome families’ access to healthy affordable foods;

•

authorize $1 million in annual appropriations for a program to educate consumers

and handlers of fresh produce on science-based sanitary handling methods;

•

authorize $9 million in annual appropriations to support market news and price

information on specialty crops; and

•

authorize $10 million in annual appropriations for grants to conduct research on

honeybee colony collapse disorder.

Congressional Research Service

8

Appendix. Major Provisions of the Enacted 2008 Farm Bill (P.L. 110-246)

Compared with Previous Law and House- and Senate-Passed Bills (H.R. 2419)

Prior Law/Policy

House-Passed Bill

(H.R. 2419)

Senate-Passed Substitute

Amendment (H.R. 2419)

Enacted 2008 Farm Bill

(P.L. 110-246)

“Farm Security and Rural Investment

Act of 2002” [7 U.S.C. 7901 note]

“Farm, Nutrition, and Bioenergy Act of

2007” [Sec. 1]

“Food and Energy Security Act of 2007”

[Sec. 1]

“Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of

2008” [P.L. 110-246]

Title X: Horticulture and Organic Production

Marketing and Trade Promotion, Consumer Access

No comparable provision.

No comparable provision.

Sets definitions to apply throughout one of

the bill’s subtitles the terms “specialty

crop,” “state,” and “state department of

agriculture.” [Sec. 1801]

Adopts Senate provision with an amendment

to remove the definition of the term “State.”

[Sec. 10001]

No comparable provision.

Requires an independent evaluation of

the commodity purchasing processes

and the importance of increasing

purchases of specialty crops. [Sec.

10104]

No comparable provision.

Adopts House provision with changes to

require the Secretary to arrange an

independent evaluation of the purchasing

processes used by USDA to implement the

requirement that funds available under

Section 32 be principally devoted to

perishable agricultural commodities. [Sec.

10101]

The Specialty Crops Competitiveness

Act of 2004 [P.L. 108-465, 7 U.S.C.

1621 note] established a program of

block grants to states to support

projects in marketing, research, pest

management, and food safety, among

other purposes. Authorizes $44.5

million annually through FY2009.

Reauthorizes the block grant program

through FY2012 and provides

mandatory funding starting at $60

million in FY2008, rising to $95 million

in FY2012. Increases the number of U.S.

insular areas eligible to receive grants.

[Sec. 10102]

Contains an identical provision, except

that funding ends after FY2011. Specifies

that turfgrass sod and herbal crops also

are specialty crops. [Sec. 1841]

Adopts House provision with changes to

specify that any funds made available for a

fiscal year under the program that are not

expended by certain date, to be determined

by USDA, will be reallocated to other States;

change the minimum grant amount to

$100,000 or one-third of 1% of the overall

funding allocated to the program in a given

fiscal year (whichever is higher). Provides

mandatory funding: $10 million (FY2008);

$49 million (FY2009); and $55 million

annually (FY2010-2012). [Sec. 10109]

The Farmer-to-Consumer Direct

Marketing Act established a Farmers’

Market Promotion Program to

promote farmers’ markets, authorizing

Expands types of activities eligible for

funding. Renames program the Farmer

Marketing Assistance Program. Provides

annual mandatory funds of $5 million

Reauthorizes the Farmers’ Market

Promotion Program and provides

mandatory funds of $5 million annually in

FY2008-FY2011, and $10 million in

Adopts Senate provision with an amendment

to specify that 10% of the funds available to

carry out the program be used to implement

electronic benefit transfer systems at

CRS-9

Prior Law/Policy

House-Passed Bill

(H.R. 2419)

Senate-Passed Substitute

Amendment (H.R. 2419)

Enacted 2008 Farm Bill

(P.L. 110-246)

annual appropriations for grants to

local governments and nonprofit

organizations. [7 U.S.C. 3005]

(FY2008-FY2010) and $10 million

(FY2011-FY2012). [Sec. 10404]

FY2012. [Sec. 1812]

farmers’ markets; and to specify mandatory

funding: $3 million (FY2008); $5 million

annually (FY2009-FY2010); $10 million

annually (FY2011-FY2012). [Sec. 10106]

No comparable provision.

Authorizes grants to a variety of public

and private entities to improve

transporting specialty crops to markets.

Similar to the House bill, but with minor

technical differences. [Sec. 1842]

Adopts House provision with changes to

allow national/state/regional organizations of

producers, shippers or carriers to be eligible

for grants. [Sec. 10403]

No comparable provision.

No comparable provision.

Requires the Government Accountability

Office (GAO) to investigate the impact on

specialty crops of lowering foreign trade

barriers and to prepare a strategy for

addressing the issue. [Sec. 1831]

Deletes Senate provision.

No comparable provision.

No comparable provision.

Encourages USDA and the U.S. Trade

Representative to increase attention to

sanitary and phytosanitary trade issues,

and to develop a strategic risk

management framework. [Sec. 1833]

Deletes Senate provision.

No comparable provision.

Establishes a grant program entitled the

Healthy Food Urban Enterprise

Program to support feasibility studies

on improving the access of underserved

communities to affordable, locally

produced, nutritious food. Authorizes

annual appropriations for this purpose.

[Sec. 10405]

Authorizes a grant program to establish a

Healthy Food Enterprise Development

Center, providing information and

technical assistance to entities to make

affordable, locally produced, nutritious

food available in underserved

communities. Provides $1 million in

mandatory funds (FY2009); $2 million

annually (FY2010-12). [Sec. 1843]

Adopts Senate provision with changes to

place language for the Healthy Urban Food

Enterprise Development Center within the

Community Food Projects statute. Clarifies

that subgrants may be used to establish and

facilitate enterprises that process, distribute,

aggregate, store, and market healthy

affordable foods. Limits allocations for

administrative expenses. Provides $1 million

in funding annually (FY2009-2011) and

authorizes $2 million (FY2012). [Sec. 4402]

Provides a one-time transfer (FY2008)

of $22 million in mandatory funds to

continue the cost-share program, caps

the federal share of certification cost at

no more that 75%, and raises the

maximum amount a producer can

receive from $500 to $750. [Sec.

Similar to the House bill, and requires an

annual report to the House and Senate

Agriculture Committees on cost-share

expenditures in each state. [Sec. 1823]

Adopts Senate provision but deletes the cap

on the federal cost share. [Sec. 10301]

Organic Agriculture Production

The 2002 farm bill established a costshare program to help producers and

handlers of organic products obtain

certification under the National

Organic Program (NOP), and provided

a one-time transfer of $5 million in

mandatory crop insurance funds. [7

CRS-10

House-Passed Bill

(H.R. 2419)

Senate-Passed Substitute

Amendment (H.R. 2419)

Enacted 2008 Farm Bill

(P.L. 110-246)

U.S.C. 1524]

10301]

The 2002 farm bill required USDA to

keep segregated data on organic

production and marketing. [7 U.S.C.

5925c]

Provides $3 million in mandatory CCC

funds to support data collection and

analysis on organic production,

marketing, pricing, and crop loss risk.

[Sec. 10302]

Similar to the House bill and provides a

one-time transfer of $5 million for

segregated data collection and analysis.

[Sec. 1821]

Adopts Senate provision with changes to

clarify USDA’s data collection, analysis, and

survey development requirements, and to

specify the contents of USDA’s report to the

House/Senate Agriculture Committees.

Provides $5 million in mandatory funding,

with an additional authorization of

appropriations of $25 million (FY2008-2012),

further specifying that $3.5 million in funding

be allocated to AMS to collect and distribute

comprehensive reporting of prices relating

to organically produced agricultural

products. [Sec. 10302]

No comparable provision.

Authorizes $50 million subject to

appropriations over the life of the farm

bill to provide technical assistance and

cost-sharing grants to producers

seeking to convert from conventional

to organic production. [Sec. 10303]

Provides for technical assistance and costsharing under the Environmental Quality

Incentives Program (EQIP) to producers

seeking to convert to organic production.

[Sec. 2361] Authorizes grants for this

purpose under the Beginning Farmer and

Rancher Development Program. [Sec.

7309]

Deletes House provision, but includes

language addressing the goal of providing

technical assistance to farmers transitioning

to organic farming under the EQIP program

[Sec. 2501] of the conservation title.

Assessments are exempted under

marketing orders for conventionallygrown fruits and vegetables, for

producers whose operations are 100%

organic. [7 U.S.C. 7401]

No comparable provision.

Allows producers who have part of their

farm certified organic under the NOP to

receive the exemption. [Sec. 1822]

Deletes Senate provision.

The Organic Foods Production Act of

1990 authorizes appropriations of such

sums as necessary for the National

Organic Program. [7 U.S.C. 6522]

No comparable provision.

Specifies increased authorized annual

funding levels for the NOP, starting at $5

million in FY2008 and rising to $11 million

in FY2012. [Sec. 1824]

Adopts Senate provision with changes to

provide such additional sums as are

necessary. [Sec. 10303]

No comparable provision.

Provides grants using Section 32 funds

(7 U.S.C. 612c) to help urban gardening

and greenhouse projects to purchase

and operate organic fruit and vegetable

gardens and greenhouses. [Sec. 10103A]

No comparable provision.

Deletes House provision.

Prior Law/Policy

CRS-11

House-Passed Bill

(H.R. 2419)

Senate-Passed Substitute

Amendment (H.R. 2419)

Enacted 2008 Farm Bill

(P.L. 110-246)

No comparable provision.

Establishes a cooperative program with

state agriculture departments to

conduct early pest detection and

surveillance activities and create action

plans, among other things. Provides

mandatory funds starting at $10 million

(FY2008), rising to $70 million

(FY2012).

[Sec. 10201]

Similar to the House bill, with technical

differences. Provides mandatory funds

starting at $10 million (FY2008), rising to

$64 million (FY2012). [Sec. 12101(f)]

Adopts Senate provision with changes to

describe the application process; prohibit

USDA from considering nonfederal funds;

direct USDA to consider risk factors when

considering an application; and express

disapproval of a cost-sharing rule for animal

and health emergency programs. Specifies

mandatory funds: $12 million (FY2009); $45

million (FY2010); $50 million (FY2011); and

$50 million (FY2012). [Sec. 10201]

No comparable provision.

Authorizes the appropriation of $15

million for the construction of a sterile

fruit fly rearing facility in Waimanalo,

Hawaii, and the appropriation of $1

million annually thereafter. [Sec. 10202]

No comparable provision.

Deletes House provision.

No comparable provision.

Authorizes the appropriation of

necessary funds through FY2012, in

addition to $20 million annually in

mandatory funds, to create a National

Clean Plant Network where the

specialty crop industry can obtain pestand disease-free planting stock. [Sec.

10404]

Similar to the House bill, with technical

differences. [Sec. 1851]

Adopts Senate provision with an amendment

to add NLGCA institutions to the list of

entities that USDA shall consult with to

carry out the program. Specifies mandatory

funding: $5 million annually (FY2009-2012).

[Sec. 10202]

The Plant Protection Act (PPA) [7

U.S.C. 7701 et seq.] authorizes USDA’s

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service (APHIS) to cooperate with

states, localities and others to prevent

the spread of and eradicate invasive

pests and diseases.

No comparable provision.

Modifies penalties in the PPA as follows:

$500,000 for each violation adjudicated in

a single proceeding; $1,000,000 for each

violation adjudicated in a single proceeding

involving a genetically modified organism.

Requires an action, suit or proceeding

regarding a violation of the PPA to be

considered no later than 5 years after the

date the violation is initially discovered by

USDA. [Sec. 11017]

Adopts Senate provision with changes to

strike the change to the statute of

limitations, to expand the penalties to cover

any willful violation of the PPA, and to clarify

subpoena authorities of USDA under the

PPA. Modifies the ability of the executive

branch to delay the provision of

compensation for economic losses. [Sec.

10203]. Identical amendments were made to

the Animal Health Protection Act in the

livestock title. [Sec. 11012]

The PPA [7 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.]

authorizes USDA’s activities under the

No comparable provision.

Requires USDA, no later than 18 months

after enactment, to take action on each

Adopts Senate provision, with modification.

[Sec. 10204]

Prior Law/Policy

Pest and Disease Control

CRS-12

House-Passed Bill

(H.R. 2419)

Prior Law/Policy

Federal Coordinated Framework for

the Regulation of Biotechnology.

APHIS regulated the importation,

interstate movement, and field testing

of genetically engineered organisms

that may pose a plant risk.

Senate-Passed Substitute

Amendment (H.R. 2419)

Enacted 2008 Farm Bill

(P.L. 110-246)

issue identified in the document “Lessons

Learned and Revisions under Consideration for APHIS’ Biotechnology Framework,” dated October 4, 2007; and as

USDA considers appropriate, to

promulgate regulations to improve the

management and oversight of articles

regulated under the PPA, among other

specified action items. [Sec. 11077]

Food Safety Provisions

The Agricultural Adjustment Act

governs the terms and conditions of

marketing orders applicable to

specified commodities. [7 U.S.C.

608c(6)]

Authorizes the implementation of

quality-related food safety programs

under marketing orders for specialty

crops. [Sec. 10106]

No comparable provision.

Deletes House provision.

No comparable provision.

Authorizes appropriation of necessary

sums to implement a program to

educate fresh produce industry

personnel and consumers about ways

to reduce pathogens in fresh produce.

[Sec. 10110]

Similar to the House bill, and authorizes

$1 million in annual appropriations for that

purpose. [Sec. 1813]

Adopts Senate provision, authorizing

appropriations of $1 million annually

(FY2008-2012) to remain available until

expended. [Sec. 10105]

Makes nursery tree growers eligible for

disaster assistance under the program,

increases the limitation on annual

assistance from $75,000 to $150,000,

and continues appropriations authority.

[Sec. 10101]

Makes nursery tree growers eligible for

disaster assistance, increases the limit on

annual assistance to $100,000, adds

reimbursement for orchard management

to repair losses, and provides necessary

mandatory funding over the life of the

farm bill. [Sec. 1210(e)]

Adopts Senate provision with changes to

modify the reimbursement cost of replanting

trees lost from a natural disaster; amend the

Federal Crop Insurance Act with a provision

identical to that in the Trade Act of 1974;

and to make other technical changes. The

Manager’s report clarifies the insurance

requirement for eligibility applies only to

insurance on crops and not underlying

vines/trees. [Secs. 12033 and 15101]

Authorizes $9 million annually in funds to

support market news and price

information on specialty crops. [Sec. 1811]

Adopts Senate provision with changes to

authorize appropriations $9 million annually

(FY2008-2012) to remain available until

expended, in addition to available annual

Disaster Assistance

The 2002 farm bill established the Tree

Assistance Program to compensate

commercial orchardists for losses due

to natural disasters and authorized

annual appropriations for the program.

[7 U.S.C. 8201]

Specialty Crop Sector Data Collection

No comparable provision.

CRS-13

Authorizes necessary funds through

FY2012 to support the collection and

dissemination of market news for

House-Passed Bill

(H.R. 2419)

Prior Law/Policy

Senate-Passed Substitute

Amendment (H.R. 2419)

specialty crops. [Sec. 10402]

The 1997 Census of Agriculture Act

(P.L. 105-113) authorizes a Census of

Agriculture to be taken every 5 years.

[7 U.S.C. 2204g(a)]

Amends the 1997 law to include a

census of specialty crops as part of the

Census of Agriculture. [Sec. 10107]

Enacted 2008 Farm Bill

(P.L. 110-246)

appropriations for market news services.

[Sec. 10107]

Allows USDA to include a census of

specialty crops in the Census or to

conduct a separate census of specialty

crops not later than the end of FY2008

and every 5 years thereafter. [Sec. 1814]

Adopts House provision. [Sec. 10103]

Other Commodity-Specific Provisions

No comparable provision.

Requires USDA to submit a report on

the investigation of honey bee colony

collapse disorder and strategies to

combat the problem. [Sec. 10001]

No comparable provision.

Deletes House provision.

The Honey Research, Promotion, and

Consumer Information Act (P.L. 98590), as amended, provides for

coordinated research, promotion, and

consumer information to expand their

markets for honey.

[7 U.S.C. 4601 note]

No comparable provision.

Amends the Honey Research, Promotion,

and Consumer Information Act with

provisions regarding the Honey Board and

referenda on the honey research and

promotion order.

[Sec. 1854]

Adopts Senate provision with changes to

discontinue the current Honey Board after

USDA conducts a referendum for honey

producers or honey packers, importers and

handlers. Requires USDA to act as a

fiduciary in conducting the referenda. [Sec.

10401]

No comparable provision.

No comparable provision.

Amends 7 U.S.C. 1622(h) to require the

USDA grading or inspection mark be

located close to the country of origin label

on packaged honey. [Sec. 1855]

Adopts Senate provision with changes to

specify that violations of the labeling

requirements of this section, with respect to

honey, may be deemed by USDA as

sufficient cause for debarment from the

benefits of the Agricultural Marketing Act of

1946. [Sec 10402]

The Agricultural Adjustment Act

requires that imported commodities

that are under marketing orders in the

U.S. meet the order’s standards. [7

U.S.C. 608e-1(a)]

Adds clementines to the list of

commodities to which this requirement

applies. [Sec. 10105]

Similar to the House bill. [Sec. 3207]

Adopts the House and Senate provision.

[Sec. 10102]

The Agricultural Marketing Act of

1946 governs research and marketing

programs for agricultural products. [7

U.S.C. 1641]

Adds a section to the 1946 act to

regulate the minimum maturity of all

Hass avocados sold in the United

States. [Sec. 10108]

Authorizes USDA to initiate the process

of establishing a marketing order

regulating the grades and standards of

Hass avocados, if a U.S. organization

submits such a proposal. [Sec. 1856]

Adopts Senate provision. [Sec. 10108]

CRS-14

Prior Law/Policy

House-Passed Bill

(H.R. 2419)

Senate-Passed Substitute

Amendment (H.R. 2419)

Enacted 2008 Farm Bill

(P.L. 110-246)

A 1990 law contains the terms and

conditions of the mushroom marketing

order. [7 U.S.C. 6104]

Makes changes to the geographic

composition of the Mushroom Board,

and other provisions.

[Sec. 10109]

Similar to the House bill, with technical

differences. [Sec. 1853]

Adopts House provision with changes to

clarify that the mushroom council may

develop and propose to USDA programs for

good agricultural and good handling practices

and related activities for mushrooms. [Sec.

10104]

No comparable provision.

No comparable provision.

Establishes a program to compensate

asparagus growers for losses in 2004-2007

due to imports. Provides $15 million in

mandatory funds for this purpose. [Sec.

1852]

Adopts Senate provision. [Sec. 10404]

The 2002 farm bill did not include a

separate title for horticultural products

or organic production.

Creates new farm bill title, Horticulture

and Organic Agriculture (Title X).

No new title; includes most horticulture

and organic agriculture provisions as part

of the Commodity Title I.

Creates new farm bill title, Horticulture and

Organic Agriculture (Title X).

CRS-15

Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill Issues

Author Contact Information

Renée Johnson

Specialist in Agricultural Policy

rjohnson@crs.loc.gov, 7-9588

Acknowledgments

This report is an updated and revised version of a report originally written by former CRS specialist Jean

M. Rawson.

Congressional Research Service

16