\^%i>\\j\ S. H.O. ,04-7,3. PT. 2 Senate Hearings Before the Committee on Appropriations 104-713/^ Y 4.AP 6/2; S.HRO. PT. 2 Agriculture' Rural Developnenti and... Agriculture, Rural Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Fiscal Year 1997 1 Q4'>& congress, second session H.R. 3603 PART 2 (Pages 1-258) Hl\^ j S NONDEPARTMENTALWITNESSES 13SP S. Hrg. 104-713, Pt. 2 AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, AND RE- LATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR FIS- CAL YEAR 1997 HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS SECOlSfD SESSION ON H.R. 3603 AN ACT MAKING APPROPRLATIONS FOR AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVEL- OPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND RELATED AGEN- CIES PROGRAMS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES PART 2 (Pages 1-258) Nondepartmental witnesses Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 23-976cc WASHINGTON : 1997 ForsalebytheU.S.GovernmentPrintingOffice SuperintendentofDocuments,CongressionalSalesOffice,Washington,DC 20402 ISBN 0-16-053983-8 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS MARK O. HATFIELD, Oregon, Chairman TED STEVENS, Alaska ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico J. BENNETT JOHNSTON, Louisiana CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont SLADE GORTON, Washington DALE BUMPERS, Arkansas MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey CONNIE MACK, Florida TOM HARKIN, Iowa CONRAD BURNS, Montana BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama HARRY REID, Nevada JAMES M. JEFFORDS, Vermont J. ROBERT KERREY, Nebraska JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire HERB KOHL, Wisconsin ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah PATTY MURRAY, Washington BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado J. Keith Keiwedy, StaffDirector Mark Van de Water, Deputy StaffDirector James H. English, Minority StaffDirector Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, and Related Agencies THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi, Chairman ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania DALE BUMPERS, Arkansas CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri TOM HARKIN, Iowa SLADE GORTON, Washington J. ROBERT KERREY, Nebraska MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky J. BENNETT JOHNSTON, Louisiana CONRAD BURNS, Montana HERB KOHL, Wisconsin MARK O. HATFIELD, Oregon ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia ex oflicio ex officio Professional Staff Rebecca Davies Hunt Shipman Galen Fountain (Minority) Administrative Support James B. Reynolds (II) CONTENTS Page Agricultural Systems forEnvironmental Quality 1 AmericanAssociation ofNurserymen 4 AmericanAssociation ofRetired Persons 9 American Farm Bureau Federation 12 AmericanFederation ofGovernmentEmployees 16 AmericanForest and PaperAssociation 19 American Honey ProducersAssociation, Inc 23 American Indian HigherEducation Consortium 24 American Sheep IndustryAssociation 29 Association ofResearch Directors, Inc 33 California Farm BureauFederation 35 Cahfomia Industry and GrovemmentCoalition on PM-10 38 Center onHunger, Poverty and Nutrition Policy 41 Centocor, Inc 43 Children's Nutrition Research Center 46 Coalition ofEPSCoR, University ofArkansas 50 Coalition onSmokingOR Health 53 Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum 56 Colorado River Salinity Control Program 57 Colorado State University 58 Consortium for International Earth Science Information Network 60 Council forAgricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching 63 Defenders ofWildlife 66 1890 Land-Grant Colleges and Universities 70 FDACouncU 73 Florida State University 76 Fond du Lac Band ofLake SuperiorChippewa 78 City ofGainesville, FL 80 Georgetown UniversityMedical Center 81 Holden's Foundation Seeds, Inc 82 Human Nutrition Research CenteronAging, Tufts University 85 Humane Societyofthe United States 88 Illinois GroundwaterConsortium 91 University ofIllinois: Statement ofDennis Campion 95 Statement ofPeterJ. Barry 96 Statements ofJamesJ. Stukel 99, 102 Statement ofNaomi B. Lynn 104 International Association ofFish and WildlifeAgencies 109 Livestock MarketingAssociation 114 Lummi Indian Business Council 115 MetropolitanWaterDistrictofSouthern California 116 National Association of Conservation Districts and National Association of State ConservationAgencies 117 NationalAssociation ofState Foresters 120 National Association ofState Universities and Land-Grant Colleges: Statement ofDr. Charles B. Browning 123 Statement ofDr. MiloJ. Shtdt 130 Statement ofDr. Hiram D. Palmertree 132 StatementofDr. Paul D. Hummer 135 StatementofDr. Francille M. Firebaugh 138 StatementofDr. James P. Lassoie 141 NationalAssociation ofWheat Growers 145 National CenterforResource Innovations 150 National Citrus Research Council 153 (III) IV Page National Cooperative BusinessAssociation 155 National Cotton Council ofAmerica 157 National EasterSeal Society 162 National Oat Improvement Committee 166 National Potato Council 167 National Rural HousingCoalition 171 National Rural Telecom Association 175 National Rural WaterAssociation 179 National Telephone CooperativeAssociation 184 National Utilities ContractorsAssociation 187 National Watershed Coalition 190 National Water ResourcesAssociation 194 Northwestern University 195 The Oceanic Institute 198 Organization for the Promotion and Advancement of Small Telecommuni- cations Companies 199 Organization ofProfessional Employees ofthe DepartmentofAigriculture 202 Pharmaceutical Research and Maniifacturers of.^nerica 205 Regional Aquaculture Centers: StatementofDr. Kevan L. Main 207 Statement ofLesterW. Myers 209 Statement ofDr. Richard Spencer 210 StatementofDr. Robert Rheault 212 StatementofDr. Ted R. Batterson 213 StatementofDr. C.G. Shepherd 214 The Rural Coalition/Coalicion Rural 216 Rutgers, the State UniversityofNewJersey: Statement ofFrancis L. Lawrence 222 StatementofTimothy M. Casey 224 StatementofRichard L. Guest 228 San Diego CountyWaterAuthority 232 Soil and WaterConservation Society 233 University ofSouthern Mississippi 237 SouthwestAnimal Health Research Foundation 240 Tarrant County Water Control and ImprovementDistrict 241 Turfgrass Producers International 243 Texas A&M University 244 Texas Tech University 247 U.S. Agricultural Export DevelopmentCouncil 250 United States TelephoneAssociation 253 The Wildlife Society 256 AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997 U.S. Senate, Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, Washington, DC. NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES The following testimonies were received by the Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, and Related Agencies for inclusion in the record. The submitted materials relate to the fiscal year 1997 budget request for programs within the subcommittee's juris- diction, AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY prepared STATEMENT OF NEWELL KITCHEN AND TONY PRATO, UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA Introduction ThistestimonyissubmittedbyNewellKitchen,ProfessorofSoilScienceandTonyPrato, ProfessorofAgriculturalEconomics,oftheUniversityofMissouri-Columbiaonbehalfofthe AgriculturalSystemsforEnvironmentalQuality(ASEQ)program. ASEQisasystems-oriented nationalresearchandeducationprogramdevelopedbyacoalitionofmorethan200university andfederalresearchersandeducatorsfrom 14states. ThegoaloftheASEQprogramisto developprofitableandsociallyacceptableagriculturalsystemsthatreducetheimpactsof agriculturalproductiononourNation'sprecioussoil,waterandairresources. USDAWaterQualityProgram ASEQhasitsrootsinUSDA'sWaterQualityProgramwhichwasestablishedin 1989with strongbipartisansupportfromCongress. ThegoaloftheWaterQualityProgramistoprovide farmersandrancherswiththeknowledge,technicalmeansandfinancialassistancetorespond independentlyandvoluntarilyinaddressingfarm-relatedenvironmentalconcernsandrelated statewaterqualityrequirements. Theobjectiveoftheprogramistodeterminetherelationships betweenagriculturalactivitiesandwaterquality,andadvocateimprovedmanagementsystems. TheWaterQualityProgramconsistsofthreesub-programs:demonstrationsites,hydrologicunit areasandresearch. Theobjectivesofthefirsttwosub-programsareto: a)adviseandassistin theimplementationofknownagrichemicalmanagementandagriculturalproductionsystemsthat enhancewaterquality;b)inducetheadoptionofappropriatewaterqualityenhancementor protectionsystemsatsignificantlevelsinproblemareas. Theobjectiveoftheresearch sub-programisto: a)improveandexpandknowledgeoftechnologiesandagriculturalpractices forprotectingwaterquality;b)integratesuchtechnologiesandpracticesintoproduction managementsystemsthatareeconomicallyandenvironmentallysound. Itisfortheresearch programthatwehaverequestedthisopportunitytotestify. (1) WaterQualitj'ResearchProgram — Theresearchprogramconsistsoftwoparts prioritycomponentresearchandsystemsresearch. Componentresearchexpandsourknowledgeofspecificaspectsoftheinteractionsofagricultural chemicals,soils,waterandthehumandimension: reactions,degradation,persistence,movement andotheraspectsofphysical,biologicalandsocialprocesses. WithintheUSDA-Cooperative StatesResearch,EducationandExtensionService(CSREES),fundingforcomponentresearchis currentlythroughtheNationalResearchInitiative(NRl)program. Incontrast,systemsresearchintegratesthemostpromisingindividualresearchcomponentsinto agriculturalmanagement.systemsforimprovedcropandlivestockproduction. Thisallowsa comprehensiveanalysisofbotheconomicandenvironmentalimpactswithinaregion. Systems researchrequiresmultidisciplinarycooperationandisfocusedondevelopingsolutionsforreal worldproblems. Thescaleofagriculturalsystemsresearchiswholefieldsandwatersheds,not justlaboratoriesandplotsasisnormallyfoundwithcomponentresearch. CSREEShasfunded systemswaterqualityresearchunderacompetitivegrantsprogramcalltheSpecialWaterQuality Grants. Now,universityparticipationinthesesystemsprojectsisinjeopardybecausefunding undertheCSREESSpecialWaterQualityGrantsprogramhasbeencutinhalfeachyearoverthe pasttwofiscalyears. Thepurposeofthistestimonyistorequestrestorationoffundingintothis programinorderthatresearchersatstateuniversitiesandcollegesareabletopartnerwithfederal researchersandprivatecompaniesindevelopingprofitableandenvironmentallysound agriculturalsystems. ManagementSystemsEvaluationArea(MSEA)Program ThesystemsresearcheffortwasinitiatedasapilotprogramintheMidwestthatestablishedfive ManagementSystemsEvaluationArea(MSEA)projectswhichincludedresearchsitesineight states(Iowa,Minnesota,Missouri,Nebraska,NorthDakota.SouthDakota,OhioandWisconsin). TheMidwestregionwasselectedforthepilotprogrambecauseover80percentofthecomand 70percentofthesoybeansproducedintheUnitedStatesaregrownintheMidwest. Production ofthesecropsrequires58percentofthenitrogenfertilizerandover60percentoftheherbicides usedintheUnitedStates. MSEAprojectswereselectedunderapeer-reviewed,competitive grantsprogram. TheMSEAresearchprogramcombinesfieldstudiesoffanningsystemsat manysiteswithlaboratorystudiesdesignedtounderstandthemechanismsofnitrogenand pesticidefateandmovementthroughsoilsandwater. Inthisrespect,theMSEAprogramblends basicandappliedresearch. AuniquefeatureoftheMSEAresearchprogramisthatitutilizesaninterdisciplinary,systems approachtoagro-environmentalproblemsinvolvingthecooperationofmanyfederalandstate agencies. Leadplanning,siteselectionandprogramimplementationfortheprogramwere cooperativelyaccomplishedbythecombinedeffortsoftwoagencies:USDA-Agricultural ResearchServiceandUSDA-CooperativeStatesResearch,EducationandExtensionService (CSREES)workingthroughland-grantcollegesanduniversities. Approximately60-80percent ofthetotal resourcesfortheMSEAprogramhascomethroughthesetwoagencies. Other cooperatingandcontributingagenciesincludeUSGeologicalSurvey,USEnvironmental ProtectionAgency,USDA-NaturalResourcesConservationServiceandvariousstateagencies. Inaddition,privateagriculturalcompanieshavecontributedtimeandequipmenttotheprogram. BenefitsofMSEAProgram CongressistobecommendedforitsvitalroleinappropriatingfundsforcreationoftheMSEA program. Theinvestmentmadeinthisprogramispayingoffbygeneratinglong-termresultsthat willenableUSagriculturetoremainprofitableandcompetitiveonaworldwidebasiswhile reducingadverseenvironmentaleffectsofagriculturalproduction. Someofthebenefitsof MSEAareasfollows: In Iowa,bandingofherbicidesandstripintercroppinghasbeensuccessfulinlowering herbicideconcentrationsinshallowgroundwaterandrunoff. Ridge-till,no-till,split nitrogenfertilizerapplications,applyingnitrogenbasedonresultsofthelatespringsoil nitratetestandnewdevicesforinjectingliquidnitrogenfertilizerhavebeenfoundto reducenitrateleachingtoshallowgroundwater. InMissouri,precisionfarmingmethodshavebeendevelopedwhichhavethepotentialfor reducingnitrogenuseincomby 15to50millionpoundsannually. About50percentof thefarmerssurveyedattheMissouriMSEAwatershedsaidtheynowusegreatercaution inhandlingandapplyingpesticidesasaresultofwhattheyhavelearnedfromtheMSEA program. Improvedtechniquesformanagementofnitrogenandirrigationwaterhavedecreased nitratesingroundwaterinNebraska'sCentralPlatteValleyandhavereducedatrazine concentrationsbelowthemaximumallowablefordrinkingwater. Programsto demonstratemoreefficientirrigationpracticestofarmersinNebraskashowedthat loweringtotalirrigationwaterapplicationsby 10percentreducednitrateleachingto groundwater. TheMinnesota-Dakotas-Wisconsin(NorthernSandPlains)MSEAsiteshaveshownthat, withcarefulmanagement,comandsoybeanscanbegrownonsandysoilswhilekeeping herbicidecontaminationingroundwaterbelowEPAdrinkingwaterstandards. Nitrate levelsingroundwateratallsitesremainedthesameordecreased. Incooperationwith theAnokaSandPlanWaterQualityDemonstrationProject,nitrogenfertilizerusein Minnesota'sAnokaSandPlainwasreducedby 16percent. TheOhioMSEAhasdeterminedthattheburiedvalleyaquiferunderiyingitssitehasnot beencontaminatedbypesticides. Occasionally,nitrate-nitrogenconcentrationsinthis sameaquiferexceedtheEPAdrinkingwaterstandard,butdonotpersist. Inordertoachievecleanwater,abundantfood,andprovideahealthyenvironment,highquality researchresultsfromtheMSEAprogrammustbetransferredandvoluntarilyadopted. MSEA's researchandeducationalprogramsprovideusefulinformationtovariedaudiencesinandoutside theagriculturalcommunity. Sinceinceptionoftheprogramin 1990,combinedeffortshave providedmorethan700educationalprograms,disseminatinginformationtosome50,000users annually. Theseactivitieshaveincreasedawareness,demonstratednewandimproved technologiesandstrategies,andencouragedadoptionofcroppingpracticesthatminimize impairmentoftheMidwest'swaterresources. Further,theprocessofevaluatingtheimpactsof farmingpracticesongroundwaterhasgivenaclearerunderstandingofthemostsignificant waterandsoilqualityproblemsinagriculturalwatersheds. ASEQProgram TheresearchandeducationalinfrastructureestablishedbytheMSEAprogramprovidesawayto accomplishtheprogram'sgoalsonalong-termbasis. Forthisreason,in 1995,adecisionwas madetofocusthisinfrastructureonthemostcriticalwaterqualityproblemsidentifiedduringthe firstfiveyearsoftheprogramandtoaddprotectionofsoilandairresourcesasaresearch objective. Thescopeoftheprogramhasbeenexpandedbyaddressingagro-environmentalissues inadditionalstatesandregionsofthecountry. Specifically,scientistsfromIllinois,Indiana, Mississippi,NorthCarolina,SouthCarolinaandTexasarenowinvolvedinagriculturalsystems research. Toemphasizethesenewprioritiesandpartnerships,theMSEAprogramwasrenamed theAgriculturalSystemsforEnvironmentalOualitv(ASEQ)program. ThegoalsoftheASEQprogramaretoimproveandexpandscientificknowledgeaboutthe relationshipsbetweenagriculturalproductionandthequantity/qualityofnaturalresources,andto developandtransfertofarmersandagribusinessnewagriculturalproductionsystemsand practicesthataresociallyacceptable,economicallyefficientandenvironmentallysound. ObjectivesoftheASEQprogramareto: a)developalternativepracticesandsystemsfor reducingadverseeffectsofagriculturalproductiononsoil,waterandairresources;b)evaluate thesocial,economicandenvironmentalimpactsofthesepracticesandsystemsatthefield,farm andwatershedscales;c)identifymodelsanddecisionaidsformanagingagriculturalandnatural resourcesystemsandprotectingenvironmentalresources;d)assesstheeffectivenessofpublic policiesandprogramsinstimulatingtheadoptionofmoresustainableagriculturalproduction systemsandpractice;e)increasethecapacitytotransferinformationonthesocial,economicand environmentalimplicationsofalternativeproductionsystemstousergroups. Conclusion Weconcludewiththreepointsthatunderscorethepurposeofourtestimony. First.MSEAisasystemsresearchandeducationprogramforreducingtheimpactsof agriculturalproductionongroundwaterresourcesintheMidwest. Theprogramhasasignificant investment,creatinganetworkofpeople,equipment,institutions,andpublic/privateagenciesfor soundassessmentofenvironmentalimpactsofagriculturalproduction. Theresearchand educationinfrastructureestablishedbytheMSEAprogramhasbeenverysuccessfulas evidencedbyitslonglistofscientificandeducationalaccomplishments. KeepingUSagriculture profitableandcompetitiveonaworldwidebasiswhileminimizingadverseimpactsof agriculturalproductionontheenvironmentprovidesastrongjustificationformaintainingthis infrastructure. Second,decliningappropriationsfortheCSREES'specialwaterqualitygrantsprogram,which fundedtheMSEAprogram,areanobstacletoachievingthegoalsoftheASEQprogram. The fundinglevelsforthisgrantsprogramhavedecreasedfrom$9millioninfiscalyear1990to$2.7 millioninfiscalyear1996. Thisamountstoa70percentreductioninfunding. Fundstaken fromthespecialwaterqualitygrantsprogramwerereallocatedtocomponentstudiesofthewater resourcesassessmentandprotectionresearchareaintheNationalResearchInitiative(NRI) competitivegrantsprogram. Whilecomponentresearchisimportant,thisreallocationhas createdanunder-fundedprogramforsystemswaterqualityresearch. Fundingsystemsresearch ofthetypeproposedbytheASEQprogramwouldachieveamorebalsincedandeffective environmentalresearchprogramforagriculture. Third,intheinterestofachievingtheresearchandeducationgoalsenvisionedfortheASEQ program,werequestCongresstoappropriate$5.5millionperyeartothespecialwaterquality grantsprogramintheCSREES. Restoringthebudgetto$5.5millionwouldallowCSREESto fundaninterdisciplinaryagriculturalsystems,competitivegrantsresearchprogramthatwould enableresearchersatstateuniversitiesandcolleges,suchasthoserepresentedbytheASEQ program,tocollaboratewithfederalresearchersandprivatecompaniesindevelopingagricultural systemsthatwillkeepUSagriculturecompetitivewhileprotectingtheenvironment. Weappreciatetheopportunitytotestifybeforethiscommittee. PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN Mr Chairman,theAmericanAssociationofNurserymen(AAN)welcomesthisopportunitytopresentthe nurseryindustry'sviewsregardingtheFiscalYear1997(FY97)BudgetfortheUS Departmentof Agnculturc(USDA). AANisthenationaltradeassociationforthenurseryandlandscapeindustry AANrepresents2,200 productionnurseries,landscapefirms,retailgardencentersandhorticulturaldistributioncenters,andthe 16,000additionalfamilyfarmandsmallbusinessmembersofthestateandregionalnurseryandlandscape associations. ECONONnCSTATUREOFTHENURSERYINDUSTRY AccordingtoUSDA'sEconomicResearchService(ERS),thenurseryandgreenhouseindustryremains thefastestgrowingagnculturalsectorincashreceipts In 1969,anestimated 18,000farms(or 1 percent ofallfarms)wereengagedinproducingatleastsomenurseryandgreenhousecrops. By 1992,an