Policy Goal 3:

Promote, Develop and Enforce Fair,
Competitive and Open Markets for Small Farms

Status Code Definitions

1. Integrate fully the economics staff into the investigations of anti-competitive practices; 
   (code 1 - fully implemented);
   
2. Assess staff qualifications and obtain additional staff with economic, statistical, and legal backgrounds to work on investigations of anti-competitive practices:
   (code 1 - fully implemented);
   
3. Use USDA's other economic resources, such as the Economic Research Service, to assist with research activities:
   (code 2- partially implemented);


4. GIPSA should assemble its own staff with legal backgrounds to assist in the development of evidence for investigations:
   (code 1 - fully implemented).

Status: Partially implemented (code 2). GIPSA has hired 32 new economist and legal Specialists. Staffing goals have nearly been met. 

USDA Action. Approval of GIPSA's plan to strengthen its ability to investigate trade and alleged anti-competitive practices demonstrated that USDA will continue its investigative responsibilities. (No legislation to transfer USDA's authority to DOJ has been proposed.) Continue to implement GIPSA's plan. 

Status: Fully implemented (code 1). GIPSA's does not support legislation that transfers its authority to another Federal agency. To investigate possible violations  of the Packages & Stockyards Act, including certain anti-competitive practices to another Federal agency, GIPSA will continue to monitor legislation and discuss concerns with congressional staff.   

USDA should also request additional funds for the following: 

1. $1.6 million and 20 staff years for increased statistical, economic, and legal expertise to pursue investigations of packer competition. 
   
2. $750,000 for investigation and enforcement activities in the poultry sector. 

For FY 2000, GIPSA requested additional funding for competition enforcement and industry structure. The USDA FY 2000 budget submitted to Congress includes $636,000 for competition enforcement and industry structure investigations and $750,000. 

Status: Fully implemented (code 1). Congress appropriated $1.8 million for FY 2000. GIPSA requested and was given additional funding for anticompetitive investigations in livestock and poultry and for rapid response teams for  FY 2001.  

USDA Action. GIPSA established the toll-free number in April 1998. The number is 1-800-998-3447. 

Status: Fully implemented (code 1). Toll-Free Number is active and logs are kept. GIPSA will work to disseminate this information to producers and producer organization. 

USDA Action. Continue to vigorously enforce legislation prohibiting anti-competitive practices, complete GIPSA's restructuring plan, add additional staff with economic, statistical and legal expertise to conduct investigations, complete and release the finding of the ongoing hog, cattle and sheep procurement investigations as soon as possible. 

 Status: Partially implemented (code 2). GIPSA is drafting a proposed rule that would require packers to keep records explaining their reasons for offering different premiums and discounts to different sellers for the same quality of livestock under certain circumstances.

USDA Action. USDA submitted legislation to Congress called "The Agricultural Fair Practices Enforcement Authority Act of 1997". This legislation would provide USDA with administrative enforcement and civil penalty authority. The legislation was not considered by Congress. 

Status: Unable to be implemented (code 3). 
The current Administration has not yet taken a position on legislative changes that would shift such authority from DOJ to USDA.

On January 22, 2001, Senator Tom Dashle introduced a bill, "Securing a Future for Independent Agriculture" Act that would among other actions, amend the AFPA as recommended by the Commission. 

USDA Action. USDA submitted draft legislation to Congress in June 1997 which would allow the Secretary to enforce Section 202 of the Packers and Stockyards Act administratively with regard to live poultry dealers. 

Currently, enforcement of Section 202 is administrative with regard to packers, but referred to the Department of Justice for live poultry dealers. 

Status: Unable to be implemented (code 3). Legislation was not considered by the 106th Congress. USDA will continue to support passage of legislation. 

USDA Action. Established an interagency task force in USDA to evaluate the need for legislation to address contract provisions in contract farming and to recommend appropriate follow-up action. 

Status: Fully implemented (code 1). AMS hosted a seminar on 11/30/99 to develop methods of assistance to producers in contracting. A contracting brochure has been national dissemination to producers AMS' website now includes information for producers on contracting.

USDA also should strengthen the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (PACA) program's ability to act swiftly, leaving no time for cover-up at the merchant level. 

USDA Action. Distributed PACA program literature to Farm Service Agency (FSA) county offices with significant commercial fruit and vegetable production and to 2,100 farmers markets. AMS is continuing to extend its education and outreach efforts to farmers on how to use PACA's many services and entitlements. 

In particular, presentations would seek to ensure that small growers understand that they can request an audit of any PACA-licensed firm if they suspect fraud or other violations. 

Legislation would be required to provide USDA with the authority to perform random audits of commission merchants and handlers; along with an additional budget appropriation to cover the cost. 

Pros: - authority to perform random audits of commission merchants and other handlers would help to ensure compliance with PACA and guard against fraudulent trade practices. 

Cons: - new legislation would take a considerable amount of time and would face political opposition by other affected segments of the fruit and vegetable industry. Increase in PACA audits would require an estimate $600,000 to $800,000 and 10 additional staff members per year. 

Status: Fully implemented (code 1). It was determined that legislation would not be submitted to implement this particular recommendation. Instead, the Marketing & Regulatory Programs' Fruits & Vegetables Division disseminated PACA information via FSA offices, farmers markets, land-grant universities, and articles to major agriculture publications. 

USDA Action. On March 24, 1998, the Secretary announced that GIPSA's technical review of the petition would be released and public dialogue would be solicited before making a final decision on Western Organization of Resources Councils (WORC) petition. 

Continue public dialogue on the issue and continue monitoring, investigating and analyzing the competitive effects of forward contracts, marketing agreements and packer feeding of cattle. Evidence would be needed to support the premise that the conduct being prohibited constitutes a violation of the Packers and Stockyards Act. 

As part of the ongoing dialogue and in keeping with its responsibility to address concerns about concentration in the meat packing industry, including the competitive effects of forward sales of livestock, USDA has conducted professional peer reviews of some of its major investigations. GIPSA's congressionally mandated concentration study of the red meat packing industry & its Texas Fed Cattle Study were subjected to peer review. 

Status: Not implemented (code 4). GIPSA posted  information on peer reviews, the Texas Fed Cattle Study, and backgrounders on the USDA website. Copies are available at: 
http://www.usda.gov/gipsa. 

GIPSA will meet with producers and organizations to discuss findings and options for future actions. MRP hosted a forum to solicit input & discussion on captive supplies in September 2000.

USDA Action. The Department will continue to work with Congress to craft a workable livestock mandatory price reporting pilot program. GIPSA is making plans to implement the one-year pilot study in the FY 1999 Agriculture Appropriations Bill. 

Legislation providing authority for USDA to require mandatory livestock market reporting was sent to Congress on April 7, 1999. The Secretary testified on May 26, 1999, before the Senate Agriculture Committee in support of the legislation. 

USDA has been working closely with the Senate Agricultural committee on mandatory price reporting legislation in a series of meetings held by the committee with industry and state representatives over the last few weeks. 

USDA has also met with House Agricultural  Committee staff on beef industry mandatory price reporting. The meetings with both the House and Senate Agricultural Committee are expected to continue. 

Status. Partially implemented (code 2). Legislation has been passed; supplemental appropriations have been made. AMS is in the process of implementing the program. Mandatory price reporting legislation also included development of a hog contract library which GIPSA will develop & implement.

USDA Action. ERS and OCE will prepare a report that summarizes existing knowledge regarding the relationship between farm and retail prices for dairy products. The report will also review the Cornell University study of retail profitability cited by the Commission, the GAO study of retail milk prices across cities in the United States, and information from AMS regarding operation of dairy departments in retail stores. 

Status: Unable to be implemented (code 3). USDA will encourage, where appropriate, universities to undertake research on competitiveness in the dairy industry and to apply for support under the competitive grants program. Staff will be redirected to complete the report. 

USDA's experience has shown that DOJ requires a very high level of evidence and supporting material before it will undertake any investigation into a violation of antitrust law. 

USDA Action. ERS and OCE will prepare a report that summarizes existing knowledge regarding the relationship between farm and retail prices for dairy products. The report will also review the Cornell University study of retail profitability cited by the Commission, the GAO study of retail milk prices across cities in the United States, and information from AMS regarding operation of dairy departments in retail stores. 

Status: Unable to be implemented (code 3). USDA will encourage, where appropriate, universities to undertake research on competitiveness in the dairy industry and to apply for support under the competitive grants program. Staff will be redirected to complete the report. 

USDA's experience has shown that DOJ requires a very high level of evidence and supporting material before it will undertake any investigation into a violation of antitrust law. 

USDA Action. In lieu of seeking legislative changes such as the Dairy Cow Pay Up Program (proposed by a Commission member), USDA will continue ongoing monitoring of dairy market conditions and direct actions to help dairy farmers through DEIP, school lunch purchases, and the Dairy Options Pilot Program. 

Status: Unable to be implemented (code 3). USDA is considering options within the proposed Federal Milk Marketing Order reform to partially address transition issues. 

USDA Action. The National Economics Council (NEC) organized an interagency initiative to examine concentration and competitive conditions in key segments of the economy. USDA requested participation in the initiative, and was invited to do so. 

Status: Partially implemented (code 2). USDA is participating in the NEC initiative and also participated in an initiative to assess the hog situation during the December 1998-January 1999 period of low prices.

Action Plan. Mission area and Rural Development State Strategic Plans have been amended to explicitly recognize those businesses, including cooperatives or other ventures, that add value to agricultural commodities resulting in economic opportunities to rural residents including small farmers. 

Status: Fully implemented (code 1). RBS issued an unnumbered letter to Rural Development State Directors in September 1998 to implement the Commission's recommendation. 

USDA Action. Rural Development is in the process of re-writing B&I loan guarantee regulation and will incorporate Commission's recommendation. 

Status: Partially implemented (code 2). A review of the B&I Guaranteed Loan Program regulation has bee drafted and is in interagency clearance. Section 4279-113(h) is being eliminated. 

USDA Action. Mission area strategic plan amended to include this as a targeted objective, and State offices to be requested to amend the States' strategic plans accordingly. 

RBS issued an unnumbered letter to Rural Development State Directors in September 1998 to implement the Commission's recommendation. 

Status: Fully implemented (code 1). For FY 1999, $801,941 of the B&I Guarantee Loan program was obligated to farmers for financing start-up capital stock in a new hog processing facility. 

For FY 2000, $170 million of B&I Guarantee Loan program funding has been set aside for cooperative development. Within the priority set aside, projects involving small or limited-resource farmer-owned, value-added cooperatives. 

For FY 2000, an administrative priority goal is to establish one B&I Guarantee Loan per State Office in support of cooperative development. 

USDA Action. RBS has modified instructions for the annual strategic plan development and revision process to specifically require that groups representing small, minority and women farm operators be included among partnership groups in the strategic planning process. 

The Community Priority principal has been amended to include "agriculturally dependent" community as a target. 

Status: Fully implemented (code 1). A revised, draft five-year Rural Development mission area strategic plan includes RBS program funding priorities in support of small, minority, female and disadvantaged farmers, as well as cooperatives and value added programs. 

USDA Action. Program is established, but expansion to serve small resource farmers could occur in FY 2000 and beyond with additional agency funding of $300,000 (annually). 

The additional funds will be used to hire three new staff and accelerate the transfer of technology to provide the ability to effectively deliver the National Agroforestry Center program to small resource farmers. 

Status: Partially implemented (code 2).USDA's request for additional funding for program expansion was submitted in the Fiscal Year 2000 budget. 

USDA Action. Directed Rural Development State Directors to continue to work with State Rural Electric Cooperative Associations, individual electric cooperatives, and other entities, to promote project funding for value-added businesses that process products of small farms. 

RBS issued of an unnumbered letter to Rural Development State Directors in September 1998 to implement the Commission's recommendation. 

Status: Partially implemented (code 2). A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Rural Development and NRCFC on May 4, 1999 formalized a partnership to promote B&I Guarantee Loan Program funding objectives to include value-added businesses which process products of small farmers. 

USDA Action. Modified instructions for the annual strategic plan development to specifically require that groups representing small, minority, and women farm operators be included in the strategic planning process. 

State Directors will use discretionary points to encourage use of the RBS program funds for value-added, cooperative development, and other business activities that support the marketing, supply and service needs of small farmers. 

Status: Partially implemented (code 2). Ninety percent of all RD State Offices have now identified a staff resource to serve as a Cooperative Development Specialist. Providing staff development training to state Cooperative Specialist on an annual basis. 

Nearly doubled the amount of funding available through the Rural Cooperative Development Grant (RCDG) program. 

USDA Action. CSREES has planned to inventory 1862 and 1890 colleges and universities for courses and curricula on (or related to) cooperative marketing. 

Status: Partially implemented (code 2). To be implemented in the spring of 2001. 

USDA Action. The RBS Administrator sent a staff directive to Cooperative Services staff, and RBS program staff, to actively promote the availability of funding that could potentially benefit small farmer cooperatives. 

Status: Fully implemented (code 1). RBS sent an unnumbered letter to all State Directors highlighting the importance of working with small farmers to develop value-added processing cooperatives. Will continue to work to place Cooperative Development Specialists in all Rural Development State offices. 

USDA Action. The Food Science National Program Leader has been asked to prepare a baseline report on 1862 and 1890 colleges and universities with food technology and processing programs. This will be the basis for determining appropriate efforts to help small farm and ranch operators develop value added food products. 

Status: Partially implemented (code 2). Ongoing. The baseline report gathering is on going and will completed in 2001. CSREES has compiled a Directory of Value-Added Enterprises and this can be found on the CSREES small farm website.

USDA Action. Several USDA agencies already have activities aimed at achieving the objectives of individual components of this recommendation. 

The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has undertaken additional outreach, through changes in funding announcements and through informational efforts, to increase the proportion of Federal-State Marketing Improvement Program (FSMIP) projects targeted toward local and regional food systems. 

At the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), officials have been working closely with partners at AMS, State agencies and the National Association of Farmers Market Nutrition Programs to bring new States into the WIC Farmers Market Nutrition Program and to expand existing State programs. 

Although USDA requested $20 million for this program in the President's FY 2000 Budget, Congress only appropriated $15 million. However, within the $15 million appropriated for the FY 2000 WIC/Farmers Market Program, FNS has sufficient funds to expand State participation in the program to most of the 12 non-participating States. 

Currently, 38 States (including 3 Indian Tribal Organizations) participate in the program.

FNS also is working with farmers market organizations and with State agencies to ensure that farmers markets can be properly equipped to handle electronic transactions as food stamps are converted to Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) nationwide. 

FNS, AMS, and other USDA agencies also have continued to pursue marketing opportunities for small farms to directly supply local school lunch programs. 

AMS has undertaken additional outreach measures, through changes in funding announcements and through information efforts, to increase the proportion of FSMIP projects targeted toward local and regional food systems. Additionally, we have continued to support the development of farmers markets on federal property and the promotion of WIC/Farmers Market. 

Status: Partially implemented (code 2). AMS and FNS are working together to implement a Farm-to-School Meal Initiative.  Under this initiative, this interagency team of AMS and FNS staffs have conducted joint work shops and listening forums in several agricultural states to promote School Meals Initiative. Under this initiative, schools are encouraged to purchase fresh fruits and vegetables directly from local farmers. 

Additionally, as proposed the Commission's Recommendation 3.26, the team also is considering all other programs and activities where the Department can foster and promote local and regional food systems. Early results of the these efforts have been published in the USDA's first Progress and Achievements Report published in 1999. 

                and, 

Mission Area: FNCS (Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services 
Agency: FNS (Food & Nutrition   Service) 
Contact: Ron Johnson, FNS 
Tel: 703-305-2654  
Fax: 703-305-2420  
E-Mail: ron.johnson@fns.usda.gov  
Rev. Date: 02/15/01 
Status Code: 2-Partially implemented.

USDA Action. Pilot entrepreneurial ventures now underway in 4 states (FL, Maine, MI, CO), and slated for expansion to other states, including New Mexico, Kentucky, Wisconsin, Texas, Alabama, Florida and Idaho. 

The total estimated cost for the pilots is $300,000 over 4 years. They are being refocused on small and under-served farmers in response to the Commission recommendations. Pilot expansion depends on additional Federal funding from existing funds to leverage private foundation grants. 

Status: Partially implemented (code 2). Planning is underway for professional development workshops in Colorado and Florida to provide USDA field outreach professionals with the understanding and skills needed for producers in launching new ventures and engaging in more direct of farm produce d products and recreational experiences. Internet-based training is projected to go on-line in late 2001. 

A workshop on USDA grants/cost share programs was presented at the North American Farmers Direct Marketing Association Conference in January 2001. USDA resources guide will be released in mid 2001. Maine, Florida, and Michigan are expanding entrepreneurial training for agricultural producers and other rural businesses. 

SARE supported activities in New York State have sponsored leadership training in agri-development. A Memorandum of Understanding is currently being developed to define actions (collectively and individually) for USDA agencies. 

A forestry oriented entrepreneurial training event was hosted in Texas. Wyoming is currently developing a ranch diversification project with the lead of State Rural Development Council and the land-grant University System. Forest Service and CSREES have provided venture funding for new training initiatives.

USDA Action. A concept paper prepared by FSIS was discussed by a Department working group and action team. Further discussions are taking place between Secretary, Deputy Secretary and Under Secretary for Food Safety to address several key policy issues, such as funding needs and impact on foreign trade. 

Status: Not implemented (code 4). Proceeding toward drafting legislation for consideration and funding authorization from Congress.

USDA Action. Historically, NASS has estimated the value of sales as part of its ongoing statistical program. In 1997, the Census of Agriculture was transferred from the Bureau of the Census to NASS which will provide an additional tool to estimate value of sales and accompanying data. 

Data were collected for the 1997 survey and published in February 1999. Information on market value of agricultural products sold was published both at the State and U.S. level. 

Status: Partially implemented (code 2). NASS plans to address issues expressed in the Commission’s recommendation through its ongoing statistical program.