Ag Insight

BY JIM ERICKSON

Summer food program shows dramatic increase due to COVID

The Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) provided meals to 4.7 million children each day across more than 37,000 sites in July 2020, the month when the program’s operations typically peak.

Overall, throughout fiscal year (FY) 2020, the SFSP served about 1.3 billion meals and snacks at a cost of $4.1 billion. The number of meals served through SFSP and expenditures on the program were 8.9 and 8.7 times greater than in FY 2019, respectively.

These increases can be attributed to rising food needs during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and USDA’s response to meet those needs, which included waivers expanding the scope and coverage of SFSP.

The program expanded rapidly in the early months of the pandemic, serving about 564.4 million meals from March through May 2020. Comparatively, only 1.2 million meals were served over the same period in 2019.

USDA to launch food labeling review

In the wake of a recent Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) vote to strengthen its enforcement of the “Made in USA” standard, USDA has announced it will complement that effort with an initiative to bolster the labeling of products regulated by its Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS).

USDA announced last year its plans to conduct its own rulemaking to address the concern that the voluntary “Product of USA” label may confuse consumers about the origin of FSIS regulated products.

After considering the many comments received by the FTC and USDA on this issue, USDA is initiating a top-to-bottom review of the “Product of USA” label that will help determine what that label means to consumers, said Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack.

Among other things, comments on meat labeling suggested the current “Product of the USA” stamp may not be as accurate and transparent as both consumers and producers want.

Financial help available for livestock, poultry producers

Livestock and poultry producers who suffered losses during the pandemic due to insufficient access to processing can apply for assistance for those losses and the cost of depopulation and disposal of the animals. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Tom Vilsack announced the Pandemic Livestock Indemnity Program (PLIP) during the recent National Pork Industry Conference in Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin. The program is part of USDA’s Pandemic Assistance for Producers initiative.

The application process at USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) began in July and continues through Sept. 17.

The Consolidated Appropriations Act authorized payments to producers for losses of livestock or poultry depopulated from March 1, 2020, through Dec. 26, 2020, due to insufficient processing access as a result of the pandemic.

PLIP payments will be based on 80% of the fair market value of the livestock and poultry and for the cost of depopulation and disposal of the animal.

Eligible livestock and poultry include swine, chickens and turkeys, but pork producers are expected to be the primary recipients of the assistance. Packers, live poultry dealers and contract growers are not eligible for PLIP.

For more information on how to apply and for a copy of the notice of funding availability, visit farmers. Othergov/plip. Applications can be submitted to the FSA office at any USDA Service Center nationwide by mail, fax, hand delivery or via electronic means. Livestock and poultry producers can also call 877-508-8364 to speak directly with a USDA employee.

Farm program payments reach $14.8B in 2019

More than 30% of about 1.97 million U.S. farms received some government program-related payments in 2019, with an average payment of $24,623 and an overall outlay of $14.8 billion.

The distribution of payments varied by farm type, which USDA’s Economic Research Service defines based on gross cash farm income (GCFI) and operator type.

About 74% of commercial farms received government payments in 2019, with an average payment of $84,775. Commercial farms are defined by ERS as making $350,000 or more in GCFI and include both family and nonfamily farms.

By comparison, about 31% of intermediate farms received government payments, with an average payment of $11,731. An intermediate farm is defined by ERS as making less than $350,000 in GCFI and having a principal operator whose primary occupation is farming.

About 24% of all residence farms received government payments, with an average payment of $8,147. ERS defines a residence farm as making less than $350,000 in GCFI and having a principal operator who is either retired from farming or has a primary occupation other than farming.

Freshwater – its scarcity and importance to nation’s food supply

Although water is one of the Earth’s most abundant resources, only 2.5% percent is freshwater – water that is not seawater or brackish – such as rainfall or lake water. Of this 2.5%, more than two-thirds is not readily available for human use since it may be frozen or underground, or in other forms.

Not only is freshwater a scarce resource, but it also plays a key role in food production. Water is used on-farm for irrigation and later in the supply chain to process food, clean processing plants, generate electricity and operate home kitchens.

Very little is known about these freshwater withdrawals, also called blue water, in the U.S. food system beyond what is used in agriculture, in part because it is mostly self-supplied. Recent research has evaluated the blue water resources used throughout the U.S. food system to meet the domestic demand for foods and beverages over time.

Over the years studied, blue water use in the U.S food system was highest in 2002 at 43 trillion gallons, or 34% of total water withdrawals in the nation that year. In 2012, the most recent year included in the study, the U.S. food system required 34 trillion gallons of water for the production of the nation’s food and beverages purchased (plus home kitchen operations). This would be enough water to cover the State of California to a depth of one foot.

Among key findings from the research were these: One of the primary uses for blue water in the U.S. domestic food system is for agricultural production (crops and livestock), but supply chain stages other than agriculture also use a considerable amount of blue water. In 2012, crop and livestock production used 68% of food-system blue water, while later stages of food production used 32%.

Energy industries such as electric power and numerous petroleum products used substantial amounts of water in the supply chain. Water for energy contributed 13% of food-system water, emphasizing the food-energy-water connection.

Water used by the food system had an inverse relationship with precipitation in the four years studied. As precipitation increased, blue water withdrawals decreased, signaling that these water types are substitutes for each other on-farm.

Among all food-at-home (FAH) purchases in 2012, fresh vegetables accounted for the greatest water use at 5 trillion gallons of blue water, an amount sufficient to cover West Virginia in one foot of water, and the most blue water use by an FAH expenditure category.

Report examines cover crop management

A recent report from USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS) examined cover crop management using data from the Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS), a national survey of farming operations and production practices. This report used field-level data collected for corn (2016), cotton (2015), and soybeans (2018).

For corn fields intended for use as grain or silage in 2016, more than 90 percent of acres with cover crops used a grass or small grain cover crop, such as rye, winter wheat or oats. Rye was more than twice as common as winter wheat as the cover crop used on corn fields.

Rye and winter wheat were also the most common cover crops on soybean fields in 2018. The field-level soybean survey in 2018 added an option for farmers to report the use of a cover crop mix (at least two cover crop species). ERS researchers found that just under a quarter of the cover crops used on soybean acres were a cover crop mix of some kind.

By comparison, winter wheat was the most common cover crop used on cotton fields in 2015. This likely reflects both the role of wheat stubble in protecting cotton seedlings from wind and the potentially negative impact of certain chemicals produced by cereal rye on the growing cotton plant.