House Farm Bill Aims to Establish Permanent Disaster Framework for Specialty Crops

Key Takeaways

The House’s farm bill proposes standardizing specialty crop disaster aid based on producers’ prior-year sales.
Payment caps will be set at $155,000 for non-full-time farmers and a minimum of $900,000 for full-time producers.
This sales-based model aims to provide consistency and predictability in aid distribution after past inconsistencies.

Standardizing Specialty Crop Disaster Aid

The House has introduced a provision in its farm bill aimed at standardizing disaster aid for specialty crops. This initiative directs the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to calculate future ad hoc disaster aid payments based on producers’ sales from the previous year. The Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance supports this move, seeking to establish consistent guidelines for aid distribution.

Under this provision, producers who do not earn at least 75% of their average income from farming will face a payment cap of $155,000. For full-time producers, the cap cannot fall below $900,000 per crop year, with the secretary of agriculture holding discretion over additional caps.

Rebeckah Adcock, vice president of U.S. government relations for the International Fresh Produce Association, highlighted the ongoing disruptions in the specialty crop sector over the past 15 years, emphasizing the need for a more predictable assistance structure in contrast to the sporadic support received earlier. Historically, USDA programs have better served row crop and livestock producers, making the assistance for specialty crops a newer challenge for both agency officials and farmers.

Adcock noted that previous attempts to implement assistance measures were met with mixed responses. For instance, while many producers criticized the crop-specific approach in the first round of the Coronavirus Food Assistance Program (CFAP-1), they found the sales-based model of the second round (CFAP-2) more favorable. The first round relied heavily on national crop price data, which limited participation from specialty crop producers and failed to address their unique market challenges.

Dennis Nuxoll, vice president of federal affairs at Western Growers, pointed out that the crop-by-crop method used in CFAP-1 complicated the process for specialty crop producers, who might cultivate several crops on the same land. The reporting requirements frustrated those who typically engage little with the Farm Service Agency (FSA).

Nuxoll also discussed the challenges of calculating national crop prices for specialty items, revealing the inadequacies in USDA data. For example, crops like bok choy lack transparent pricing due to their absence from public trading markets.

Kam Quarles, CEO of the National Potato Council, echoed these concerns regarding inadequate data collection by the USDA. He mentioned that many potato producers faced severe restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic when much of their market disappeared almost overnight, leading to significant losses.

Responding to these criticisms, the USDA altered its approach in CFAP-2, allowing for payments based on the previous year’s sales value for specialty crops lacking comprehensive price and acreage data. This strategy was also applied to the new Marketing Assistance for Specialty Crops (MASC) program, introduced in 2024, which allocated $2 billion to address rising marketing and labor costs based on total sales.

Quarles advocated for the adoption of standardized payment models in future aid programs to avoid reverting to less effective methods like CFAP-1. He emphasized the importance of learning from past experiences and maintaining a consistent, effective model for disaster aid distribution.

The content above is a summary. For more details, see the source article.