![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.5in" height="1.4534722222222223in"}

Release No. 0318.05 Contact: USDA Press Office (202) 720-4623

**TRANSCRIPT OF CALIFORNIA FARM BILL FORUM\
WITH AGRICULTURE SECRETARY MIKE JOHANNS\
AND MODERATOR ROY ISOM OF KMJ RADIO,\
FRESNO COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS \-- FRESNO, CALIFORNIA\
ON AUGUST 12, 2005**

(in progress)

CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE A.G. KAWAMURA: I think I\'d
want to emphasize California\'s part in the nation\'s total food supply.
He is here to learn all about California, and I share with you, then,
our enthusiasm in welcoming Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns.

\[Applause.\]

USDA SECRETARY MIKE JOHANNS: Thank you. Well, thank you very much. It is
great to be in California. I appreciate this opportunity immensely. I
get to start out here and offer a few words.

But I will tell you after I speak to you for a few minutes you\'re not
going to hear much from me after that. This is your time. This is your
opportunity to go to the microphone, and quite honestly my role here is
going to be to listen, take some notes. I\'ll offer a few comments maybe
here and there, but not very much. And then about three hours from now
I\'ll wrap up, and we\'ll have another Farm Bill listening session under
our belt.

Now the Secretary mentioned that I did grow up on a dairy farm in North
Central Iowa. That was near a community called Osage, Iowa. Now you\'re
all looking puzzled\-- like where is Osage, Iowa? Right? So I better
clear that up. I don\'t want you thinking about that during this forum.
Osage is straight south of Stacyville and St. Ansgar, and it's straight
east of Manly. So now you know where Osage is at.

\[Laughter.\]

My father had three sons, and his idea of building character for these
sons was, he would hand us the scoop shovel or a pitchfork and send us
out to the barn or the hog house and you know we\'d stand knee-deep in
you-know-what and we\'d pitch away. And that was his idea of building
character in his sons. Little did John know that what he was really
truly doing was preparing me for my life in politics, right?

\[Laughter.\]

Well, before I get in any more trouble I should move on here. Secretary
Kawamura, thank you so very much for your hospitality. I want to also
extend my appreciation to the Governor for extending the invitation for
me to be out here.

Secretary Chrisman, I appreciate spending the day with you also. We had
a great morning together, and then as we came over here we flew over
some of the water projects in the state\-- which to me was immensely,
immensely informational, fascinating information. So I really appreciate
being put on the list.

And your two congressmen\-- Congressman Nunes and Radanovich. How do you
like that? So it is great to have them here.

We\'ve done a number of these, and I always consider it to be so
impressive when you have state officials here, you have people from
Congress who really are interested and so they show up. So we thank you.

Roy, thank you.

MODERATOR ROY ISOM: Thank you, sir.

SEC. JOHANNS: The broadcasters across the nation were in Washington some
months ago, and we were just starting to think about this idea, and the
president was encouraging me. He said, 'Mike, I want you to really get
out across the country and talk to farmers and ranchers.' So we were
kind of thinking about this idea of Farm Bill Forums, so I thought, what
better way of testing that idea than to visit with the nation\'s farm
broadcasters? And so we said, what do you think? And they said, well we
think that would be a great idea. And I said, Great, then we enlist you;
we want you to be moderators and help us promote what we\'re doing.

And ladies and gentlemen, thank you so much for being here. What a great
crowd. Really, really appreciate that.

We had a children\'s choir, the Central California Children\'s Choir. I
thought they were great. Our \-- yeah, you bet.

\[Applause.\]

Our National Air Station in Lemoore in Kings County was the color guard.
We appreciate that.

\[Applause.\]

And then Jordan and Natalie helped us with the Pledge of Allegiance, and
I thought that was great\-- 4-H and FFA, thank you very much\-- Jordan
and Natalie.

\[Applause.\]

When I was growing up, I\'ll share with you that I was both in 4-H and
FFA, and it\'s great to see you all here\-- the green for 4-H and the
blue jackets for FFA. I\'m really proud of you. Believe in agriculture.
You have a future here. We\'d love to see you, and that\'s part of what
we\'re going to talk about today\-- how do we build a Farm Bill that
recognizes the need to have good farm policy so young people can get
excited about being involved in agriculture?

I was doing some of my homework before I came out to California, and I
have to tell you that when it comes to agriculture the statistics here
are incredibly impressive. You have the largest and most diverse
agriculture in the nation. Now if there\'s another state out there that
challenges me on that, we\'ll probably have a debate. But it\'s
unbelievable what you see here. The facts are almost breathless. More
than 80,000 farms and ranches, nearly a \$28 billion industry that
generates \$100 billion in related economic activity.

So it is really incredible. Now there\'s another thing I want to
mention. I succeeded a very special person as Secretary of Agriculture,
Secretary Ann Veneman. And as you know, Ann was from California, the
family has a long history here. I want to report to you, she\'s doing
great at UNICEF. She\'s very admired and respected. And I took over a
department that she had managed very well.

I too came from a state that was rich in ag heritage, the state of Iowa
where I grew up, the state of Nebraska where I lived during really all
of my adult life. I loved growing up on a farm. This whole idea of the
Farm Bill Forums is to try to make sure we\'re doing the right thing
with ag policy so that these young people have the same opportunities
that previous generations have had. So we\'re doing this nationwide
listening tour, and the tour has been fantastic.

A little earlier this week on Tuesday I was at a ranch in Crawford,
Texas, with the President of the United States. He is so engaged and
interested in what we\'re doing. Every time I see him he wants to know,
'Where've you been, what are people talking about, what are the issues
you\'re hearing about?' Well, I told him I was going to be in Iowa this
week and in California, and he said, Great, send my warm regards to the
people of Iowa where I was at yesterday and to the people of California
where I\'m of course at today.

And if this is working right, I think I even brought a message from the
President of the United States. Did we do that? If we\'re ready for
that, let\'s roll it.

\[Showing of videotape\]

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Thanks for letting me speak to you at this
Farm Bill Forum. America\'s farm and ranch families provide a safe and
abundant food supply for our people and for much of the world. You
represent the best values of America\-- stewardship of the land, hard
work and independence, faith, service, and community.

Mike Johanns understands the importance of America\'s farmers to our
country \-- which is why I chose him to lead our Department of
Agriculture. I\'m proud of his work, and he will lead our efforts on the
next Farm Bill. Secretary Johanns and I believe the first step in this
process is to ask each of you how today\'s Farm Bill is working and how
it can be better.

And as we look to improve America\'s farm policy, we will continue to
focus on the following goals:

See, America has about 5 percent of the world\'s population, which means
95 percent of your potential customers are overseas. So one of our goals
must be to ensure that America\'s farmers and ranchers have access to
open, global markets.

A second goal is that we want future generations to have plenty of
opportunities to go into agriculture.

Thirdly, we need cooperative conservation that encourages good
stewardship of our land and natural habitats. We also need to act wisely
in delivering health to our nation\'s producers, and we must promote
cutting-edge agricultural products and research.

And finally, we must ensure a good quality of life in rural America. The
Farm Bill is important legislation that meets real needs. The next Farm
Bill should further strengthen the farm economy and preserve this way of
life for farmers and ranchers of the future.

Hearing your advice is an important step toward meeting these goals. I
thank you for all you do for our country, and thank you for listening.

SEC. JOHANNS: Great. That\'s your President. You bet!

\[Applause.\]

Well, ladies and gentlemen, the President and I have a vision for rural
America and it\'s a vision of a vibrant rural economy. Forward-looking
policies are a part of that vision, and that\'s exactly what this Forum
is about. You\'ve heard the six questions that we\'re going to ask you
to talk about today. We don\'t strictly enforce that necessarily, but I
would ask just one thing from you. If you have a specific issue, maybe
you\'ve got a loan application pending that\'s taking too much time or
whatever, we want to help you with that. And so we have USDA people all
over the place to try to help you with those specific issues. But what
we would like to hear from you today about is the Farm Bill, farm
policy, and what\'s working and what you think we might do better.

So it\'s your time. It\'s your opportunity to grab that microphone.
We\'re going to spend some time together this afternoon, and I\'m going
to sit back now. I\'m going to listen and I\'m going to take some notes.

Thank you for being here. God bless each of you.

\[Applause.\]

MODERATOR: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Before we go over the parameters
once again on how this will work this afternoon, I want to call up a
couple other speakers\-- the California Future Farmers of America
Treasurer, Daniel Bays, for some remarks.

MR. DANIEL BAYS: I want to thank you, Mr. Secretary, for allowing me to
speak today on behalf of the California Association of Future Farmers of
America, young agriculturalists throughout this state. My name is Daniel
Bays, and I will be addressing question number one.

The increasingly high investment costs and relatively low return rates
associated with production agriculture are some of the most prominent
unintended consequences that discourage future generations from entering
production agriculture. Federal programs need to be established that
help to support and encourage future generations to return back to the
family farms.

Resources should be allotted for agriculture education programs \-- such
as the 4-H, FFA, Grange, and Farm Bureau \-- that help to educate future
generations on the importance of production agriculture and of the
importance of agriculture to the United States of America\'s economy.

Funding is also needed to help encourage future generations to return
back to the family farm.

A program that would base the amount of financial assistance upon
initial start-up costs and land value relative to the applicant\'s
respective region would make the most sense so that young
agriculturalists returning or entering into production agriculture for
the first time would have an equal opportunity, no matter which state or
region they come from.

Mr. Secretary, each of the proposals that I have mentioned are two of
many that you will hear. I stand ready and able along with the other
63,711 Future Farmer members of the California Association of Future
Farmers of America to assist you in finding solutions to the problems.

Thank you. Are there any questions?

MODERATOR: Thank you, Daniel. You wouldn\'t know I get paid for reading
for a living, but actually Daniel Bays from Patterson, California.

Next speaker \-- I hope I get this one right \-- is from the 4-H,
Fairmont 4-H. Fairmont is, I believe there\'s a Fairmont here, but this
could be outside the area \-- Catherine Rubio?

MS. CATHERINE KUBER (sp): Kuber.

MODERATOR: See? Thank you. Catherine?

MS. CATHERINE KUBER (sp): Thank you. Thank you for inviting me to speak
to representing the 4-H program. My views on the Farm Bill and its
unintended consequences I\'ll be addressing question one, will be
focused on the communication aspect of the bill itself.

Instead of focusing on the details of the Farm Bill I\'d like to talk
about the Farm Bill as a whole and its unintended consequences towards
the agriculture industry and young people starting in agriculture.

The general public perception of the Farm Bill can be extremely
negative. The general public views the Farm Bill as welfare for farmers.
They view subsidies as a way for farmers to become rich while the rest
of the country suffers. On the contrary, subsidies are in place to help
maintain a stable economy, allowing the food that we eat to continue to
be reasonably priced. The public does not realize that the agriculture
industry is working to maintain a safe, affordable food supply for the
United States \-- because we don\'t do enough to advertise that fact.

I just returned home from Washington, DC where I spent three weeks at
the Junior Statesman of America Summer School learning about politics,
government, and U.S. foreign policy. My fellow students were shocked to
learn that I raise dairy cattle and were convinced that farmers were the
Old McDonald variety and, worse, that they are paid by the government
surplus of (unclear).

I did my best to explain, with my limited knowledge of the Farm Bill,
that the Farm Bill is intended to maintain a healthy farm economy,
stabilizing prices for consumers and farmers alike. I made little
headway but learned that the more I communicated with them about what
the Farm Bill is, the more they had a better understanding of its
relevance and importance.

I also spent a week at the University of Delaware for the Gillette
Company Economics For Leaders Conference where one of my professors
lectured about subsidies and actually stated that dairy producers are
welfare recipients, and posed the question why should we subsidize
farmers?

The young people that I met are four to five generations removed from
agrarian culture. Unfortunately for every young person wanting to enter
into production agriculture there are perhaps two to three others who
will be future environmentalists, regulators, or legislators who do not
understand agriculture and its importance. Hence, I would say that the
greatest unintended consequence, looking at the Farm Bill as a whole,
would be the lack of communication by the government as well as producer
groups. We must educate consumers of the Farm Bill\'s role and
importance. If we don\'t, it will be even harder for young farmers to
get their start in agriculture.

Again, thank you for allowing me to express my opinions today.

\[Applause.\]

MODERATOR: Thank you, Catherine. Quickly, remember to comment to the six
questions as stated, as I\'ve stated already. And this first session
will go until about 10 minutes to 2:00. So you can pick up on mike one
or two, and here we go.

MR. KIM PENNINGTON: Good afternoon. Kim Pennington, battalion chief,
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, representing
Fresno County Fire Protection District. This is a little different, but
we are here to address number five. We welcome you, sir, distinguished
guests, and, from Secretary Chrisman, you are in the safest place in
California with us.

The Fresno County Fire Protection District is the emergency provider
throughout many of the rural communities in Fresno County. Our funding
is very limited due to the agriculture land base value and the transient
workforce which is employed to harvest the vast crops.

Maintaining the public and firefighter safety and the protection of
properties is our number one priority. This requires the deployment of
suppression, rescue and emergency medical services, HAZMAT, the law
enforcement resources, every minute, every hour, every day in Fresno
County, the state of California, and we\'ve been deployed throughout the
nation, sir.

Providing emergency services will be challenging without the USDA\'s
assistance. Fresno County Fire Protection District is funded by property
taxes. Current budgets do not fully meet the need of providing emergency
services to our stakeholders of Fresno County. They occupy a limit of
real property values within the rural communities and cities (unclear)
our budget.

Our district utilizes the USDA grants in maintaining an acceptable level
of service. The USDA provides and improves equipment for emergency
services. Our district has been fortunate recipients of the Economic
Impact Initiative Community Grant facilities, i.e., for first
responders, for a total of about \$62,600 over the last three fiscal
years. This has provided the ability to maintain and enhance our
services to the rural communities of Del Rey, the cities of Mendota and
Parlier \-- using this equipment related to the fire service, EMS and
law enforcement.

In closing, Fresno County Fire Protection District thanks you, sir, the
Secretary of Agriculture, our state director Paul Venosdel, and the
staff of the Fresno office for your continued assistance and support to
maintain emergency services saving lives and properties and the
environment. To the all the citizens and stakeholders we proudly serve
within the heartland of the nation\'s agriculture center, Fresno County,
San Joaquin Valley, state of California.

We need to continue to support the much needed and deserved emergency
services that we provide daily to the cities and communities throughout
Fresno County. Any questions?

MODERATOR: Thank you very much, Chief Pennington.

MR. PENNINGTON: Thank you, sir. I have my division chief Doug Hicks and
I have my daughter who is currently a combat veteran from Iraq, Kaci
Pennington.

\[Applause.\]

MODERATOR: Over here on this side. We\'ll take this side this time,
okay? Two minutes. Remember that.

MS. EDIE JESSUP (sp): Okay. Thank you. Good afternoon, Secretary. My
name\'s Edie Jessup, and I\'m privileged to work for Fresno Metro
Ministry, a faith-based organization on a hunger and nutrition food
security project that is focused on access to healthy, affordable
culturally appropriate food for all Fresnoans and all of our country.

I speak for the hard work of some 80 organizations, interfaith
communities, and small farmers who are linked with like collaboratives
throughout California.

I come from a blatantly social justice perspective, and I really feel
that healthy food that is accessible by all is homeland security. I hope
that you will understand that food is important to the fabric of all of
people in our country, not just the agricultural industry.

The 2007 Farm Bill does not just affect agriculture. Farm policy on your
watch will affect all of the American people and the people of the
world. It will be a legacy of health, good employment for growing
families and community and responsible for modeling sustainability and
access to food on this planet.

Government does indeed have a place to play in assuring the health of
our economic and health of our world. I want to speak to two issues \--
the rural economic development and expanded markets. I have two
recommendations.

One, please do not retreat from funding federal nutrition programs until
we can assure healthy food access to all of our population. People are
customers of farmers. Government has a role. Charity cannot provide
that. Until such time people have jobs that put food on the table, the
Farm Bill can assist in seeing that they are healthy, ready to learn and
ready to work.

And also, Food Stamps bring in money to our county and the estimates
from our Board of Supervisors are that \$89 million more in food to buy
food by Food Stamps \-- if we had full enrollment in the Food Stamp
program. It\'s necessary. Our children, 85 percent of the kids in Fresno
schools are eligible for free and reduced price meals. Please do not cut
those programs. They are our future.

The second \--

MODERATOR: Ms. Jessup, not to cut you short, time is up. Don\'t want to
go long. Want to give everybody an opportunity. Thank you very much for
your comments. And we\'ll go to this side over here now, to the left.

MR. TOM NASSIF: Mr. Secretary, Representatives Radanovich and the new
Secretaries Kawamura and Chrisman, I\'m Tom Nassif from Western Growers,
representing approximately 3,000 growers, packers, and shippers of fresh
produce in Arizona and California.

As you know, Mr. Secretary, a secure domestic food supply is a national
security imperative, and a competitive specialty crop industry is
necessary for the production of an abundant, affordable supply of highly
nutritious fruits, vegetables, and nuts and other specialty crops.
Specialty crops are vital to the health and well-being of all Americans,
and increased consumption of specialty crops will provide tremendous
health and economic benefits to both consumers and growers. It has
become increasingly difficult for specialty crop growers to compete
against heavily subsidized and minimally regulated foreign producers in
today\'s global markets. The next Farm Bill must address specialty crop
issues much more effectively than in the past Farm Bills.

Specialty crop growers produce approximately 50 percent of the farm gate
value of total plant and agricultural production in the United States
but receive a very small percentage of federal resources aimed at
promoting and sustaining efficient agricultural production. Federal
resources aimed at addressing issues of concern to specialty crop
producers must reflect the value of their production to the U.S. economy
as well as the dietary needs of all Americans. Despite a decade of free
trade agreements, U.S. specialty crop growers continue to face tariff
and non-tariff trade barriers from many international markets, thus
impeding the growth of our exports.

Congressional enactment of the Specialty Crop Competitiveness Act of
2004 was a small first step toward addressing the many challenges that
now confront specialty crop growers. We urge USDA to move forward as
expeditiously with the implementation of this landmark law. The Farm
Bill must build upon the Specialty Crop Act and provide growers with the
tools needed to remain competitive in global and domestic markets.

Policy areas that the next Farm Bill must address, with respect to the
unique needs of specialty crop growers, include the following: specialty
crop block grants, international trade, nutrition, marketing, invasive
pest and disease issues, research, competitive grants, and conservation
programs. The specialty crop industry looks forward to working with the
Bush administration and Congress to craft a Farm Bill which truly
addresses the needs of specialty crop growers and allocates resources
sufficient to achieve the specialty crop policy goals. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir.

\[Applause.\]

MODERATOR: Let\'s go to the north side now.

MR. JOSE RAMIREZ: Yes. Honorable Secretary Johanns and Congressmen Nunes
and Radanovich, thank you for being here. My name is Jose Ramirez, city
manager for the city of Firebaugh. It\'s a rural community on the north
side of Fresno County. I\'m here to let you know the specific programs
like Rural Business Enterprise Grant, the Community Facilities Grant,
and Economic Impact Grants do work. And they work because you have a
wonderful set of staff all the way to the top. Mr. Paul Venosdel, of
course\-- they\'re the ones who really look at the proposals and work
with us professionally. And we want you to keep funding those because
they certainly do help communities like ours that are in need of new
fire trucks, police cars, and other projects that really are important
for small communities such as ours.

So I certainly want to thank Sally Tripp, Jose Guardado, Pete Yribarren,
and all the other folks from USDA. So continue to fund again those
specific programs. Thank you for being here.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Now back to the south side.

MR. JOE PARIS (sp): My name is Joe Paris. I\'m here today on behalf of
Joseph Gallo Farms in Atwater, California. We want to thank the
Secretary for the opportunity to express our thoughts as we approach the
2007 Farm Bill. And I\'ll be addressing question number four.

Joseph Gallo Farms was established in 1946. It's a study in total
integration, balancing thousands of business and environmental elements
to maintain cost-effective farming operations and a highly productive
cheese processing facility while protecting the environment. It is both
a state-of-the-art dairy and crop farm.

At Gallo Farms we continuously monitor our operating plan to ensure a
high level of compatibility with our surrounding environment while
meeting our business profit of objectives. Nutrients from farm waste are
returned to our land with a sophisticated waste control program and
irrigation that ensures no groundwater seepage and zero reliance on
naturally occurring evaporation.

Joseph Gallo Farms began operating a methane digester system in 2004
that generates power for the operations of our own dairy waste. With the
addition of another power generator we\'ll soon be providing over 80
percent of our (unclear) plants' power needs as well as saving thousands
of gallons of propane annually.

As farmers face increased air, water, and other environmental
regulations requiring the best available control technology, the demand
for financial investments can be daunting. Gallo\'s digester project
costs in excess of \$2 million and would have been difficult to finance
without the help of the California State Grants for Alternative Energy
Programs administered by Western United Resource Development and Pacific
Gas and Electric Company.

USDA as well as other federal agencies must provide necessary resources
to farmers to make these demanding investments that are clearly in the
public interest. Farm support programs must be continued in order to
ensure an adequate level of income to all food producers. Regulations
must be based on sound science and economic principles.

However, under the increasing environmental regulations we are entering
a new era in food production. The 2000 Farm Bill should provide adequate
programs to enable farmers to meet these challenges and continue to
provide consumers with the safest, highest quality food available.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Okay, remember to keep it within two minutes
so we can all give everybody an opportunity here. All right. We\'ll go
to the north side this time.

MR. RICHARD MOLINAR: Mr. Secretary, my name is Richard Molinar. I\'m
with the University of California Cooperative Extension Service. You are
also in one of the most ethnically diverse states in the nation, so in
Spanish, Hmong, and Lao, I will say hola, nyob zoo, sawbyedee.

I have two points to make. USDA state funds for outreach \-- these are
to provide for linkages and partnerships to assist the farmers.
Specifically the small farm center at Davis is operating primarily on
state funds; federal funds are limited. And so we ask that you look at
3B and 4B formula funds which have not been changed in the last 10
years. This impacts negatively our state-wide small farms program.

Point number two is related to assistance to small family farmers and
minorities. This is being done on a shoestring. There is inadequate and
unacceptable dollar support from USDA. I think I can speak for the
10,000 Hispanic farmers, 336 African American farmers in California, and
1,200 Hmong farmers in Fresno County when I say that Washington is only
providing minimal support to California small family farms. This
includes risk management, food safety, alternative marketing, value
added foods and agri-tourism.

FSA, RMA, NRCS have been doing a wonderful job here in Fresno with what
they have to work with, but we need Washington to pay more attention to
California and to make these kinds of programs and others more
accessible and more user-friendly especially to the minorities.

Specifically, now, with relationship to the specialty crops grant, the
problem is that the specialty crops include just about everything in
California. The grants are very competitive and hard to get. Ethnic
crops are left out of the picture. Two examples are lemon grass and
sinqua. Few if any registered pesticides are available for these, and so
for the 2,000 to 3,000 Hmong and Lao growing these crops in California,
we ask for equal opportunities and access to their assistance.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Mr. Molinar. I think you\'re all getting the hit.
You want to raise the mike up here and raise the papers, it\'s time to
cut it short there. Okay. Now we\'ll go to the south side.

MR. JOEL NELSON: Thank you. Mr. Secretary, Joel Nelson, president of
California Citrus Mutual, Congressman Radanovich, Congressman Nunes,
thank you for being here.

We\'re a billion-plus industry, sir, employing over 14,000 people in the
San Joaquin Valley, and when we catch a cold like in 1990, 1998, the
whole Valley freezes. As a result of that, we are well aware of how
important the Farm Bill is, and we remain to play this year. I\'ve also
been asked to captain the task force by the specialty crop industry on
APHIS-related issues and invasive species. The balance of my comments
will focus on that.

It\'s unprecedented that under this administration, triggered by
comments made in the previous administration, we now have a deficit
balance of payments as it relates to trade whereas it relates to fresh
fruits and vegetables. That has to be corrected, sir, and I believe more
resources to APHIS, to help us overcome artificial barriers placed in
front of us after trade agreements are reached, can be helpful. You\'ll
see that being articulated by the specialty crop industry.

We also believe the invasive species problem in the United States is
second to none as to what it\'s been in the past. Our borders have
become a sieve. We don\'t believe the transition to the Department of
Homeland Security has worked as smoothly as we would have liked to have
seen. Therefore we will be asking for more interface with your people at
APHIS so that their expertise can be made more valuable to pest-invasive
activities.

We\'ll also be asking for the Department to prioritize where offshore
threats will be coming from as it relates to future trade agreements and
pressures from competing countries so that they can access our market.
Pest-infested areas, products come in from so-called pest-free areas\--
that\'s creating additional pressures throughout the United States. We
believe the Department can prioritize that and help us develop
mitigation steps along those lines.

Lastly, we believe your Foreign Agricultural Service is an excellent
agency but woefully understaffed and underfunded. As a result of that,
we believe there too is areas for improvement as it relates to the
specialty crop industry.

Finally, sir, as it relates to question three, I believe the Department
has already answered how Farm Bill dollars should be allocated. That\'s
your Food Pyramid, sir. You\'ve got a significant amount of activity
focused on the Food Pyramid. The dollars should be allocated as to the
plates that you\'ve designed there. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Mr. Nelson. You\'re doing a great job here, folks,
keeping it moving along. I would say at this point though, we\'re going
to take a break for about five minutes, then come back and we\'ll do it
again. But keep in mind the two minutes. You see when I raise the mike
up here and the papers go flying around, that\'s your signal you've got
to wrap it up so we can give everybody an opportunity to have their say
about what should go into this 2007 Farm Bill Forum. I\'ll redo those
questions once we come back from our little break. Take a little break
right now and we\'ll be right back.

(The Farm Forum was in recess.)

(Off and on the record)

(in progress)

MALE VOICE: \-- payment limitations. That affects one out of every two,
and that\'s the highest of any state. Changes in eligibility rules
forces changes in rental contracts with the possible consequences of
forcing landlords to cash rents rather than share rent land. This change
will adversely affect beginning farmers and small operators who are
normally unable to obtain production financing on a cash-rent basis.

MODERATOR: Sir, that\'s your time. Thank you very much. Let\'s go to the
south side now.

MR. VERNON HIGHLEY: All right. Mr. Secretary and our capable members of
Congress, Secretary Kawamura, and also Phil Larsen who\'s one of our
capable supervisors\-- I\'m Vernon Highley, the public affairs director
of the National Watermelon Association. I reside here in Fresno. Our
national office is in Plant City, Florida.

We were established in 1914, which makes us about the second or third
oldest farm service organization in America behind the Farm Bureau and
the Grange. We have about 3,100 watermelon producers in the United
States that grow about 4 billion pounds of seeded and seedless
watermelon for a farm-gate value of about \$300 or \$400 million.

Our association, along with dozens of other commodity groups in the
United States, believes that specialty crops deserve to have a major
title in the 2007 Farm Bill. The produce industry continues to have
decreased availability of crop production tools that can be used to
provide the abundant and safe food supply the consumer demands. So the
impact of increased fruit and vegetable consumption in preventing
chronic diseases, including reduced obesity and diabetes and
diverticulosis, cataracts, cancer, heart disease, stroke,
hypertension\-- the overall benefits of whole-food consumption,
including the documentation of phytonutrients like lycopene found in
fresh fruit produce, may help prevent those chronic diseases.

We\'re working closely with United Fresh Fruit and Vegetable in
Washington, DC on a major specialty crops plank for the Farm Bill.
United will be our spokesman even though we as several hundred other
produce organizations across the country will have a slate of our own.

I\'m glad to say that Robert Guenther who is the senior member of the
United staff is here and will be testifying shortly \-- came here today
from Washington, DC to be with you, Mr. Secretary.

I\'d like to associate Tom Nassif\'s remarks on the Specialty Crops
Competitiveness Act with mine and that of the National Watermelon
Association. Though final funding was far reduced when that bill passed
in the 108th Congress, we did get a goodly amount, and that will be used
to help us compete globally. None of this money will be used as a
subsidy to specialty crop agriculture, and funds will strengthen the
industry through research, enhancements of food inspection, improved
training, and other tools to improve the competitiveness of each
state\'s agriculture. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Now we\'ll go to the north side.

MR. CHUKOU THAO: Mr. Secretary, thank you. It\'s good to see you again.
My name is Chukou Thao. I work with the National Hmong American Farmers
and I represent the Hmong farmers here and also across the nation.

As you know, after 30 years here in the United States many of our
farmers are still spinning their wheels. They face the same challenges
that they faced 30 years ago when they came here in the Central Valley
just to farm. We need small minority farm programs that will help the
family farm. There\'s a lack of land and a lack of land ownership in our
community. Less than 5 percent of our people own land, so that as
development happens they\'re being pushed out.

Our farmers want to farm and market (unclear) to develop markets to sell
Asian specialty crops. That\'s what they know and that\'s what they grow
and that\'s what they use in the homes.

Recently we\'ve had an issue with Workers Comp. We work with the Nisei
Farmers League on this. We lost 25 percent of our farmers and many of
them are still farming in fear. They don\'t understand the regulations.
We need to have training on those regulations, both at state and federal
level. Because the last thing we need is for our people to go back and
work where they took 30 years to come off of it.

The ag census \-- I don\'t think it\'s representative enough of all the
farmers out there. Again, many of our small farmers aren\'t counted.
Please work with CBOs like (unclear) and others to get in touch with
those farmers.

We need new markets again. For example working with NRCS the EQIP
program to develop matching grants that can help develop new
technologies for our farms \-- maybe develop refrigerated trucks or
develop sorting tables for our cherry tomatoes.

As you know, it\'s 100 degrees here in Fresno during the peak farming
season, and that raises a challenge for many of our farmers. Loan
program. Many of our farmers don\'t qualify for loans. We know there\'s
loan programs throughout through FSA, but the paperwork is so thick and
it\'s not user-friendly that our farmers, limited English-speaking
farmers, aren\'t able to apply. We need to simplify those loan
application for smaller loans.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Thank you very much. We\'ll now go to the
south side.

MR. RICHARD MOSS: My name is Richard Moss. Welcome to Fresno, Mr.
Secretary, and I thank you for coming. I want to thank the congressman,
both Congressman Nunes and Radanovich, for helping to bring the
Secretary here.

I\'m primarily a civil engineer, and working in water resources. But
I\'m here today as a citrus grower, a small citrus grower farming near
Ivanhoe, and it\'s like your small town in Iowa. To help you find
Ivanhoe it\'s south of Civil and west of Tuleyville (sp).

Specifically today I want to talk about air quality issues. We have a
tremendous air quality problem here in the San Joaquin Valley. Part of
it is because of our geography. We have a bowl, if you will, trapped
between three sets of mountains, with an inversion layer lid that
oftentimes traps pollution within this bowl.

It\'s also part of our\-- because of the intensity of agriculture here
which you\'ve seen and the predominance of it in the area, if you will,
combined with the fact that our demographics are changing that we are in
fact the fastest-growing region in the West where we have lots of new
people, if you will, coming to the Valley. We need help in meeting the
new air quality mandates. We need research to help us understand the
true impacts of farming here in the Valley\-- both good and bad. We need
better science to know where we can focus our limited resources to guard
the most bang for our buck, if you will, in terms of helping to fix
these problems. We need to develop practical, implementable,
best-management practices and best-control technologies.

We need expansion of such programs such as EQIP to provide\-- both
technically and financially assist our growers. We want to thank the
USDA for what they\'ve done to date, but we really need you to step it
up and would suggest that a new air quality division within NRCS be
created.

I feel compelled to mention one other issue close to my heart, and that
is water. And we are facing a reduction in our water supplies as a
result of environmental issues associated with the restoration of a
fishery on the San Joaquin River. And this has potential adverse impacts
especially for the citrus industry along the east side of the San
Joaquin Valley as we don\'t have alternative sources of supply. We need
the USDA to engage in this issue\-- not to help us pick up the pieces
but before the hammer falls. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Okay. We\'ll go to the north side.

MR. JERRY PRIETO: Mr. Secretary, Congressmen Nunes and Radanovich, and
Secretary Kawamura\-- I\'m Jerry Prieto, Jr., Fresno County Agriculture
Commissioner and president of the California Agriculture Commissioners
Association.

I will address the question of: How should farm policy best achieve
conservation and environmental goals? The need to protect our food
supply is greater than ever. With increasing movement of people in
commerce, our environment and food supply are at a serious risk from
accidental or intentional introduction of exotic and invasive species.
Invasive species are considered the second greatest threat to biological
diversity, after habitat loss, and range from plants and animals to
insect pests and various diseases. California is particularly vulnerable
because of the diversity of its ag production and the trade of
agricultural products with states and foreign countries.

Further, California has the single largest land international border at
San Ysidro, the sixth busiest port in the world in Los Angeles. We\'re
home to over 10 percent of the nation\'s population. We produce \$30
billion annually in agriculture production and 15 percent of the
nation\'s agriculture production value. We supply over 40 percent of the
nation\'s fruits, nuts, and vegetables.

Consequently, the risk to California is in reality a risk to the entire
nation\'s food supply. California is a potential gateway to the entire
nation for biological pollution. The California county agriculture
commissioners and the California Department of Food and Agriculture
manage programs for excluding, detecting, eradicating, controlling
harmful animal diseases, insects, weeds, plant diseases and rodents,
interception of quarantined pests and diseases at points of entry to
California as our primary defense against introduction and spread of
these pests and diseases in the state.

Allowing these pests to become established threatens our environment and
conservation efforts.

Last March Agriculture Commissioners traveled to DC to meet with our
congressional representatives. Two of them are up there now. And we\'re
working with them to develop a federal funding proposal in the Farm Bill
to provide \$30 million to California for the Agriculture commissioners
and the State Department of Agriculture to help prevent these pests from
being introduced. We need the help of the federal government. The
problem has outpaced what California can handle on its own. Thank you
very much.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Ag Commissioner. Okay, we\'ll go to the south
side.

MR. BEN HIGGINS: Good afternoon, gentlemen. It\'s good to see all of you
again. My name is Ben Higgins. I\'m the executive vice president of the
California Cattlemen\'s Association. I appreciate the opportunity to
speak to you today.

As you know, California beef cattle producers have a long tradition of
producing safe and healthy food, contributing significantly to
California\'s agricultural economy and maintaining millions of acres of
open space and wildlife habitat. We feel very strongly, however, that if
these ranches are to survive and succeed in the 21st Century we\'re
going to need policies which among other things reward these beef cattle
producers for their stewardship efforts and doing so without
compromising the viability of the operation.

As such we strongly believe the next Farm Bill should enhance and fully
fund programs like the Grasslands Reserve Program, the Farm and
Ranchland Protection Program, and the Conservation Security Program.

This isn\'t just a request, though, for more dollars. We need USDA to
work more closely with the agricultural community to make these programs
more user friendly. Too often we have good programs that are undermined
by policies which preclude participation by interested producers. We
could also \-- you won\'t hear this one probably again \-- we could use
programs specifically tailored to help agricultural producers recover
from catastrophic disasters like wildfires or floods. We found that in
trying to assist our members after past disasters we\'ve been trying to
stuff a conservation program peg into a disaster assistance hole, and it
hasn\'t worked.

We could very much use programs specifically tailored for helping
agricultural producers rebuild their livelihoods after disasters.

Lastly and very briefly, our producers need resolution on the ongoing
debates over country of origin labeling and the proposed ban on packer
ownership. We hope USDA will recognize that there\'s a tremendous desire
out there for producers to differentiate their products in the
marketplace and work to correct some of the fundamental flaws of the
country of origin labeling provisions in the Farm Bill. We\'d also hope
that you work to continue to defeat a proposed ban on packer ownership.

Thank you very much. Appreciate the opportunity.

MODERATOR: Thank you very, very much. Doing very well, keeping it right
on the two-minute limit here. So let\'s go down to the north side.

MR. KEN MICHAEL: Congressmen and Secretary Kawamura, Secretary Johanns,
thank you very much for allowing us to be here and, and we appreciate
the chance to address you. My name\'s Ken Michael. I\'m the sixth
generation of a California farming family, been here since the 1850s,
and I hope with officials like yourselves that we\'re able to continue
in the future with responsible farm policy.

I wanted to just briefly touch on the current Farm Bill. In 2002 the
United States enacted the farm law that has been criticized since its
inception, yet the current program provides an important safety net for
production agriculture and it does so in a fiscally responsible manner.
Spending under the current farm law is much less than was originally
projected. Countercyclical payments, along with direct payments and the
marketing loan program, protect farmers from fickle weather and
commodity markets while allowing us to respond to market signals and to
not distort overproduction prices.

Today farmers face greater risks than the vast majority of businessmen.
Many of these factors are beyond our control, a variable dollar,
unanticipated oversupply in high production years depress prices and
destructive natural events that can wipe out an entire crop. An
effective farm program is essential for providing stability in
production, financing, and marketing.

Looking forward to the next Farm Bill, it is vital that the U.S.
maintain a stable, predictable, and equitable farm policy. Such policy
supports rural America and permits U.S. consumers continued access to
the safest, most affordable, and secure supply of food and fiber in the
world. I ask you to continue your support of this legislation in its
current form.

And I thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Okay, we\'ll move now to the south side.

MR. BARRY BEDWELL: Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Secretary. My name\'s
Barry Bedwell. I\'m president of the California Grape & Tree Fruit
League. Specifically, I\'d like to address the issue that was mentioned
in the President\'s discussion, that 95 percent of the world\'s
population lives outside the United States and the need to export our
product.

Unfortunately, our ability to increase those exports is hindered by the
reality of non-tariff trade barriers evidenced by quarantine pest lists
and unreasonably high oversight levels on the part of those countries we
are exporting to. On the other hand, our efforts have been assisted by
the existence of task funds, technical assistance for specialty crops,
and this is an area that should definitely be expanded.

If we are going to realize our true potential in the world market, the
Farm Bill must meet these challenges to fund these very vital programs.

I would also like to emphasize the growing recognition of the importance
of fruits and vegetables and their role in providing nutrition and
fighting obesity. The economic impact of specialty crops cannot be
ignored as well. This sector comprises a majority of the total values of
crops grown in the United States as well as employing almost
three-quarters of the nation\'s agricultural workforce.

In California alone the importance of specialty crops is well-documented
in that they represent an estimated 92 percent of the state\'s
agricultural crop production and a like number of the agricultural
workforce.

In the final analysis, we are going to require a Farm Bill that will
help our competitiveness, strengthen our research efforts, enhance our
conservation goals, and encourage investment and efficiency in all
sectors of agricultural production.

Again, Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here in California today.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Let\'s go to the north microphone now.

MR. DAVE ZOLDOSKE: Good afternoon. And welcome, Secretary and
Congressmen. Appreciate you putting together this listening session.

I\'m Dave Zoldoske, and I\'m with Fresno State University. But today
I\'m here representing the Irrigation Association, of which I\'m serving
as president of the industry. We represent about 90 percent of all the
irrigation equipment manufacturers in the country, and we\'d like to
express our concerns or our issues related to number four\-- 'How can
farm policy best achieve conservation and environmental goals?'

Irrigation equipment and irrigation is responsible for about 100 percent
of the agriculture in California and much of the production in the West.
It impacts air quality, water quality, water quantity and energy use.
And we believe it\'s a major factor in the security of this country to
have good policies and practices that will enable us to continue our
successes.

Along those lines we\'d like to encourage the Secretary to meet with
other department heads and secretaries of the Department of Energy,
Bureau of Reclamation, EPA and bring together like programs. We\'ve
recognized that the different agencies and departments are all
interested in water, all attack it from different areas\-- water
quality, energy use, quantity of water. And we think it\'s important
that there\'s a unified policy at the United States government that we
can look to rather than bits and pieces across the whole funding
spectrum.

Along that line, with the EQIP program, while we believe it\'s a good
start to have funds available for irrigation equipment and such, the
regulations vary by county. Perhaps there\'s too much flexibility and a
lack of focus. And we\'d really like to encourage not just the adoption
of pressurized irrigation systems, because in and of that there may not
be any water savings or energy savings. But we need to be sure the best
products are used and the best systems are designed and utilized.

The Irrigation Association will be submitting their comments in a
separate letter to the Secretary, and we hope you\'ll take time to read
them. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Okay, moving now to the south side.

MR. BOB FEENSTRA: Mr. Secretary, members of Congress, Bob Feenstra from
Milk Producers Council. Thank you for coming to the number one dairy
state in America.

First of all, Milk Producers Council strongly supports the continuance
of three historical pillars of national dairy policy. The
Capper-Volstead Act, the Dairy Support Price Program, and the Federal
Milk Marketing Order Program\-- those are three major pillars that we
hope would continue in the national dairy policy of a Farm Bill.

We strongly oppose the forward contracting exemption, Mr. Secretary, to
the Federal Order Program because it will undermine the basic principles
of equal raw product cost to all processors. We oppose, however, the
Milk Income Loss Program because it distorts the ability of the market
to communicate supply and demand signals to our industry. So we\'re
opposed to that.

We support improving the efficiency of our hearing process in the
Federal Milk Marketing Orders. And we want that so that we could \-- it
would be a major improvement to mandate timelines for those hearings to
be ruled on. Bottom line, Milk Producers Council supports no major
changes that are needed to the fundamental outline of our Farm Bill.

Again, thank you for coming to California.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Okay, moving now the north side. Pat?

MR. PAT RICCHIUTI: Thank you, Secretary Johanns, Congressman Nunes and
Radanovich, Secretaries Kawamura, Chrisman\-- thank you very much for
the opportunity to be here to speak before you today. My name is Pat
Ricchiuti. I\'m president of the Fresno County Farm Bureau, and I\'m
representing our Diversified Family Farming Corporation.

One thing I find we\'re dealing with is that agriculture is caught
between government and common sense these days, and we\'re really truly
handicapped by some of the policies and procedures that are in place.
One particular procedure that addressed policy of EQIP and some of the
payments made in the cost sharing program are: we have a problem with
the application process going through to the approval process. If any
individual farmer wants to apply, they need to apply prior to their
starting the program or their project. We find that\'s a great
disincentive to a grower who has to start his farming operation and has
a plan he wants to implement.

I\'ll give you an example. If I\'m planting deciduous tree fruit in
January and I\'m applying for an irrigation project to be cost shared,
it won\'t be approved until July \-- I\'m frustrated in the fact that I
can\'t be approved, disqualified because I have to have an irrigation
system in place with those trees planted in January. I think it\'s a
great disincentive.

And I\'ve gotten support from your wonderful people at FSA and NRCS.
They are really truly great to work with in both Fresno and Madera
Counties and also strapped with having to deal with this particular
procedure and process. So if we could implement that, take a lot of the
red tape out of it, streamline it so a grower can apply and have the
initiative to apply, have incentive to apply and go forward it, he\'ll
take on the process of the cost and go on from there.

I have a booklet here I\'d like to present to you from Fresno State
University from Issues and Outlook of 2005 of Agriculture in the Valley
in California.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Pat. Let\'s go to the south side now.

MANUEL: Yes, Mr. Secretary. Welcome to the San Joaquin Valley. I\'ve had
a touch of the flu and you\'re very fortunate for that. First time I\'ve
ever been cut off, but Roy is really going to do it to me today. Again,
the issue I\'d like to talk revolves around the entire Farm Bill and
it\'s called agricultural labor across this country.

Our seasonal workforce in this nation harbors between 1.6 million and
1.9 million seasonal workers. The San Joaquin Valley, of that number is
236,000. California is 560,000 of the 1.6 or the 1.9. That is a big
issue for us in agriculture\-- the Ag Jobs Bill that we\'ve worked on
for seven years.

When the Nisei Farmers League and the United Farm Workers can shake
hands and come to an agreement on such an immigration bill, that means
something is in the right direction. And when you have that type of
unions in agriculture that tells us we in this industry and the
workforce know what type of bill will be the best for us. And I would
hope that we can make this item part of it because if you don\'t have
labor there is no Farm Bill because you can\'t pick the products, you
can\'t harvest the products, you can\'t do nothing without labor.

And this week alone I\'ve already\-- we\'re starting to face a crisis in
this valley with labor shortages. On Tuesday we have a meeting with the
state Unemployment and Welfare people to figure out the strategies. I
have an article here I\'m going to give to you. It relates about the
labor shortages that\'s occurring and that more 70 percent of our labor
force in this country in agriculture is undocumented. With documents
that need whatever. But we have strings and regulations that make
farmers\-- they can\'t do nothing to check on those things. And until we
have, and we must have, a legal, qualified workforce \-- then we need
that. I thank you very much.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Manuel. Let\'s go to the north side now.

MR. DON CAMERON: My name is Don Cameron, and a tough act to follow
behind Manuel there.

I\'m a Fresno County producer. We grow not only cotton but 15 other
crops here in the San Joaquin Valley. Mr. Secretary, I appreciate your
time and willingness to hold these listening sessions about our farm
programs.

Before looking ahead to the next Farm Bill I\'d like to make a couple
comments about the challenges to our current program. We\'re just now at
the midpoint of the life of the Farm Bill, and my hope is that this
program will be allowed to remain unchanged through its completion with
the 2007 crop.

A stable and consistent farm program provides an essential foundation
upon which we make long-term investments that are necessary in today\'s
agriculture. With that in mind, I understand that the current budget
pressures may require reduced spending in order to contribute to the
deficit reduction. Any required cuts should be done in a manner that is
equitable across all parts of the Farm Bill and across all commodities.

In addition, the structure of the Farm Bill should be maintained. This
would include the current eligibility rules and the payment limit
provisions. The budget process should not be used as a vehicle for
rewriting the farm policy.

As a final point, I would hope that we see a continuation of the Step
Two Program for as long as possible. I understand that the recent WTO
ruling found fault with the program. However, the Step Two Program is an
integral part of cotton\'s marketing loan and the negative impacts of
any possible changes should be carefully considered.

Looking ahead to the next Farm Bill, I believe that the continuation of
the current program would serve agriculture well. There are several key
advantages worth noting. The current program provides planting
flexibility to growers, an effective safety net in times of low prices,
and minimal impacts on overall plantings and prices.

Mr. Secretary, thank you very much for the opportunity to express my
views. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Now let\'s go to the south side.

MR. ROBERT GUENTHER: Good afternoon, Mr. Secretary, Congressman
Radanovich and Congressman Nunes. My name is Robert Guenther. I\'m vice
president of public policy for the United Fresh Fruit and Vegetable
Association. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to testify this
afternoon on behalf of our members in the U.S. fruit and vegetable
industry in regard to the future direction of farm policy.

As the national trade organization representing the produce industry,
our members include growers, shippers, marketers in almost every state
in the nation as well as a broad cross-section of state, regional
commodity groups representing produce growers across the country, many
of which you\'ve heard from today.

As the administration and Congress begins to consider the farm policy
for the 2007 Farm Bill, we respectfully ask that one important thing
does change. Today the fruit and vegetable industry represents almost
one-quarter of the nation\'s total crop value and is a strong
contributor to our export opportunities. We believe our sector of
agriculture must receive significantly greater attention in the future
farm policy and that the next Farm Bill address the numerous issues that
we face.

In May the produce industry leaders met in Washington to discuss
developing policy positions for the 2007 Farm Bill debate. As a result,
the Farm Bill Working Group was created, with 17 produce organizations
and every fruit and vegetable produce region in the United States
participating in this effort.

Currently the Farm Bill Working Group is meeting to develop
comprehensive recommendations for the next Farm Bill. In addition, we
look to build upon the past successful efforts that were achieved
through the 2002 Farm Bill, the Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act, and
the passage of the Specialty Crop Competitiveness Act.

Overall, United\'s members strongly support the development of farm
policies that will sustain the financial stability and viability of our
nation\'s agriculture industry while maintaining appropriate flexibility
for our producers.

Out of that have merged several issues including maintaining the current
planting flexibility law, securing permanent funding for state block
grants, and expanding the USDA fruit and vegetable snack program to all
50 states.

Fruit and vegetable growers produce crops that are vital to the health
of American agriculture. They represent a significant amount to
contribute to that economic area. We urge you to take these issues and
many other challenges facing the fruit and vegetable industry fully into
consideration as you move forward in your Farm Bill listening sessions
and as you consider the 2007 Farm Bill. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Now moving over to the north side?

MR. JIMMY PIERCE: Good afternoon, Mr. Secretary. My name is Jimmy
Pierce, and I\'m representing the 63,711 members of the California
Association of Future Farmers of America. And today I\'m commenting on
Farm Bill Question Number Five.

For many years our association has been working hard in developing a
plan to build a home for our association. After raising \$1.5 million
and receiving a \$2.2 million loan from the Communities Program, our
dream is becoming a reality as the first phase of the project is
beginning in a matter of days.

The loan provided by the USDA has given our past, present, and future
agriculture education students a place to showcase our history and a
home to provide integral learning opportunities for all our students. We
are proud and we look forward to the finishing of the building which,
like I said before, will be a showcase for California Future Farmers of
America as well as the California agriculture industry \-- which will
attract thousands of FFA members as well as agriculture supporters to
rural (unclear) California every single year.

Our association along with our FFA Foundation is proud of our
partnership with the USDA. Although small in dollar amount, the Rural
Development Communities Program is vital for the survival of small
communities in answering the delivery of agricultural (unclear).

On behalf of the 34 members here today and the members all across the
state of California, we thank you. And we stand in support of the Rural
Communities Development Program, and we ask if there are any questions
we\'re available to answer them. Thank you, Secretary.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Now moving to the south side once again?

MALE: Secretary Johanns and distinguished guests, we thank you for this
opportunity that\'s been presented to us today. One of the issues I\'d
like to address is the continuation of the (unclear) crop insurance that
is in the Farm Bill. This is a vital tool for all farmers, especially
those with specialty crops. The problem that we see in that is, as was
mentioned earlier, not all crops are covered under this program. And we
would like to see a large expansion of that program for our farmers and
our ranchers.

One of the reasons we feel this is of vital importance is, I\'m a lender
and as a lender when I look at young, beginning, small and minority
farmers that come in to my association to ask for a loan, I look at one
of the management tools they use. This is a good way of mitigating
potential losses. Right now, though, one of the problems we\'re facing,
we\'ve just brought in international flights into Fresno. That hasn\'t
been put into place yet, but one of the items that\'s not covered in
crop insurance is the fact of a quarantine. So if we have an invasion of
foreign pests into our area, this area is then quarantined from
exporting any fruits. That would be completely devastating to the entire
economy of this area, and I\'m not talking just Fresno. I\'m talking the
entire San Joaquin Valley.

So that\'s why we think this is a vital tool that must continue to be
funded and supported by the federal government and that we believe the
expansion of it is necessary. And we need to get it on the fast track.

The citrus industry has done marvelous things in getting different
programs added on to it. But it\'s taken years for them to get that way.
So therefore we\'d request any type of proposals done by industry that
would be put forth in order to speed it along in order to cover that
portion of the program.

My time is up. Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. We\'ll move to the north side.

MR. RON HARBEN: Good afternoon, Secretaries Johanns and Kawamura. My
name is Ron Harben, and I represent the California Association of
Resource Conservation Districts. Our comments relate mainly to the
conservation and research titles of the Farm Bill. CARCD firmly believes
and supports the concept of using voluntary approaches to conservation
and agriculture. We believe that if landowners and land-users are
provided information and technical and financial assistance they will
make the best decisions, both economically and socially, for the future.

A significant problem at the rural/urban interface is the loss of prime
farmland. We encourage you to fully fund the Farmland Protection Program
and other such programs that conserve prime farmlands in the U.S.

Farm policy should be constructed so as not to put U.S. agriculture at a
competitive disadvantage in world markets. Commodity payments lost due
to international trade agreements should be countered with incentive
payments to farmers through conservation programs. The current
Conservation Security Program needs to be fully funded so that producers
are compensated for the conservation and environmental benefits they
provide.

We need to fully fund the present conservation programs of:
Environmental Quality Incentives Program, Wetland Reserve Program, and
Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program, and others in which farmers can
obtain cost share assistance for the installation of new conservation
practices.

The technical assistance to administer these conservation programs
should also be fully funded so that producers don\'t have to wait months
and months before they know whether they have been awarded a contract
and then more months to receive their payments. Effective assistance in
rural areas is also about staffing those agencies. Now if a landowner is
not participating in a cost share program, the USDA agencies have little
staff-time to help them because most of them are spending time on
cost-share programs. I\'ve speaking mainly of NRCS.

More NRCS technical staff is needed in the field to help landowners with
solving natural resource problems that do not involve cost-share
programs. Small and limited resource farmers have great difficulty in
participating in most conservation cost-share programs. Even though the
collective impact on the environment may be significant, due to their
small size and limited resources they are not able to take advantage of
these programs. Because the issues with small and limited resource
farmers are not usually addressed in nationwide conservation programs,
there is a need for USDA agencies at the state level to have the
authority to develop and administer programs that fit the needs of their
local small and limited resource farmers.

As the population grows, ag has to adhere to more and more environmental
regulations. What was common in agriculture 50 years ago cannot be
continued now. Ag knows this and is more than willing to do its part to
maintain and improve the nation\'s water, air, and other natural
resources.

MODERATOR: Sir, time. Sir, thank you very much. Before we go to our next
speaker over here, our Secretary might have some comments?

SEC. JOHANNS: One quick comment. When we have to cut you off, I feel
badly about that but I do want to remind you that we do have a great
website. We would love to receive your comments also on that website
USDA.COM. And so if you\'ve been cut off, or you\'re shy about going to
the microphone, use that website.

I just noticed that Congressman Costa has joined us, and Congressman, we
would sure love to have you come up on the stage and join us up here.
How about a round of applause for the Congressman?

\[Applause.\]

MODERATOR: I mentioned earlier he was going to be a little bit late.
He\'s ahead of time, matter of fact. He was going to be here about 3:00.
Not bad, Congressman. Not bad. That\'s great. I\'m sure your trip was
okay. You\'re still resting up? Good. Good.

All right. Do you have any comments you\'d like to make real quick?

REP. JIM COSTA: Thank you very much, Roy. I, too, as everyone I\'m sure
told you today, Mr. Secretary, welcome you to the breadbasket of not
only California but we believe the entire nation. And I\'m sure that
literally and figuratively you\'ve had a warm San Joaquin Valley
welcome. The fact of the matter is, we think California\'s agriculture
is really at the cutting edge in the entire nation for many reasons.
This Valley that you are in today provides over 300 various types of
crops that are grown here. We lead the nation in half their fruits and
vegetables production, number one in dairy, number one in grapes and
wine production, nut production \-- the list goes on and on and on. And
I\'m sure the witnesses here have told you that.

I simply want to make two points on behalf of all those that are
testifying here. First of all, the delegation you see here with my
colleagues Devin and George and Dennis Cardoza and the other two
members, Congressman Thomas and (unclear), reflect a bipartisan effort
that on the overwhelming majority of these agricultural and water
issues, I might add, we work together. We work together because we share
the same passion and support for the people of this valley.

I, like my colleagues here, represent a third-generation farm family.
I\'m farming almonds today, or almonds as we say, and the fact is, we
believe we come together with solutions that work best when we do it in
a bipartisan fashion.

The other point I wanted to make, that, as we contemplate the 2007 Farm
Bill, that we do it in conjunction with the current issues going on with
the World Trade Organization and the new Doha Rounds because the fact
is, we know we are in a global market. California truly is at the
cutting edge with our 300 commodities as we try to every day, every day
compete in this global market. And therefore we think the issues that
are so critical as we look at the World Trade Organization and bilateral
and multilateral agreements are so essential as we look on how we can
have a level playing field.

I know you\'ve been an advocate, been trying to, as all of us, lift the
ban on U.S. beef to Japan. We\'ve got problems in China. We\'ve had
countries that have taken us on with regards to our farm programs that
we thought were in conformance with the WTO. We want you to know that we
think, as we look at the 2007 Farm Bill, that we ought to look at the
long-term ramifications of the various commodity programs and how they
intersect with our trading partners around the world.

Most importantly, not just assess the winners in agriculture, but the
losers over the next 10, 15 years. We know there will inevitably be
regional parochialism as we look at this new Act, this Farm Bill, but
we\'ve got to get beyond that and look at the long-term impacts to
maintain a viable U.S. agriculture economy that competes on world
markets. And we think California is the place to start for all the
reasons that I mentioned because we are, in fact, at the cutting edge.

We look forward to working with you. And we appreciate very much the
fact that you would take this afternoon here, as you\'re listening
around the country, to ensure that American agriculture maintains its
competitive edge in the 21st Century. Thank you very much.

\[Applause.\]

MODERATOR: Thank you very much, Congressman. Okay, now we\'ll move along
and go back over to the south side. You, sir.

MR. DENNIS KELLER: Welcome to California, Mr. Secretary. You sit there
with my support group, so you\'re in good company. My name is Dennis
Keller. I\'m the son of a Nevada rancher and married to a California
farmer\'s daughter. And my wife says I practice engineering to raise
figs and livestock.

So I\'m not here today on my behalf. I\'m here today on behalf of
somebody else. As you flew around earlier with Secretary Chrisman,
sprinkled amongst the latest work of the browns and the greens and the
threads of water were a number of unincorporated communities.

And in those unincorporated communities are the principle labor force
that makes agricultural work in this area. Within those communities are
the mark of USDA, the sticks and bricks that your item number five has
provided through the Rural Development Program. And not just so much in
the sticks and bricks as much as in the community pride and in the
public health nexus that the federal investment brought to those
communities.

I bring to you today two messages from those communities. One is a word
of thanks\-- thanks for support of the federal government. You are
really the last bastion of funding that\'s available to those
communities for rural infrastructure. And they very much appreciate it.
It brings about a sense within their being that nobody else can
approach.

Number two, they are very cognizant of what you face in terms of budget
development, and they\'d ask you to face these increasing times of
budget times to keep in mind the Rural Development Program does bring to
them. Their median income in the high 20s and the low \$30,000 per year.
Right now the majority of those district people pay on order of \$70 per
month for water and sewer services. That\'s only as a result of what RD
does. So on behalf of those people, thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Okay. Turning to the north side now.

MR. MARK MCCAIN: Good afternoon, gentlemen. My name is Mark McCain.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for coming to Fresno. We appreciate your
attendance.

My comments today are to address question number two. You have heard a
lot of the problems with the EQIP program, but however I will tell you
the EQIP funds have helped farmers take modern technologies and apply
them to production agriculture. We use EQIP funds to address local needs
across all commodities. EQIP funds are very important to California
agriculture as they help us to address resource management that us
farmers are in charge of.

It is my belief that implementing these modern technologies will go a
long way to helping agriculture stay competitive in a global
marketplace. Thank you for your presence.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Let\'s go down to the south side now.

MS. BRISE TENCER: Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Brise Tencer.
And I\'m here from the Organic Farming Research Foundation. We are a
small, nonprofit national charitable organization dedicated to the
expansion and improvement of organic farming practices.

As you probably are already aware, organic agriculture has seen some of
the fastest growth within the agriculture economy, almost 20 percent
growth per year for over a decade now. U.S. retail food sales are
approximately 2 percent organic, and I just heard yesterday that 5
percent of U.S. fruit and vegetable sales are organic.

So it\'s growing really dramatically, and the last Farm Bill, the 2002
Farm Bill, made some improvements within the Department of Agriculture
as how to better serve that community. But despite those gains organics
still receives a disproportionately small share of USDA resources.

Organic farming and ranching provide multiple benefits that contribute
to all USDA strategic goals for agriculture. That includes a safe and
secure food system, environmental protection, increased trade
opportunities, improved human health and nutrition, and prosperous rural
communities. The USDA programs supporting organic agriculture should
likewise be present in all agencies and mission areas.

Our core focus, therefore, is to promote existing or potential USDA
programs that improve and expand successful organic production by
diversified producers of all scales. In the 2007 Food and Farm Bill our
primary interest is to see strengthened public investment in organic
research extension, education, and economics. These programs should
receive a share of USDA resources that reflects the growth and
opportunities of the organic sectors.

Programs and policies in other areas including natural resources, risk
management, etcetera, should be established that provide strategic
support for the balanced growth of organic production. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Okay. We\'ll go to the north side now.

MR. WALT TREVETHAN: Mr. Secretary, Congressmen, thank you very much for
being here today and letting us respond to your questions. My name is
Walt Trevethan. I\'m a family farmer from Pleasant Grove, which is a
small community just north of Sacramento where my wife and I grow rice.

From our perspective, it\'s essential to continue a federal farm policy
that protects producers against low market prices and maintains an
abundant, affordable, and stable food supply.

I\'d like to respond to two questions. Number one, the unintended
consequences. As you know, rice farms require significant (audio break)
\--

(tape flip)

MIKE BENNETT, CHAIRMAN OF THE CALIFORNIA RANGELAND TRUST: (in progress)
\-- to the quality of life of California\'s residents. The 21 million
acres of rangeland in California offers safe and well-managed habitat
for wildlife including countless endangered species and plants. It also
helps in maintaining large blocks of land and well-managed, low-impact
grazing which protects our watersheds and helps guarantee a clean water
supply.

Rangeland Trust has encouraged and assisted many ranchers involved in
your programs in the previous Farm Bills. However, as important as
rangeland is to habitat, watersheds, and fruit production, it doesn\'t
get sufficient money for conservation programs compared to other
programs.

Accordingly, we would like to encourage you to continue support for the
existing conservation programs, but also ask that you dedicate a greater
portion of Farm Bill funds to stewardship support and permanent
conservation and engage the Rangeland Trust and other members of the
agricultural community to assist in developing policies that will make
these programs more user-friendly, particularly with respect to use by
nonprofit agricultural conservation organizations \-- because those
organizations have the trust of ranching and farming communities, large
segments of which are often wary of doing business with government
agencies. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Okay. We\'re coming up on a break as they say
in radio, pretty close to that. We\'re not in radio so we don\'t have to
worry and we can keep going. Let\'s talk to the Secretary. Do you think
you want to take some more?

SEC. JOHANNS: Let\'s take one more and then let\'s take maybe a
five-minute break and we\'ll come back and hopefully get everybody in
that wants to say something.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. There you are. Okay, sir. Your
turn.

MR. FRANK REHERMANN: Thank you, Mr. Secretary and members of Congress.
My name is Frank Rehermann. By the way, Mr. Secretary, I spell that with
two Ns just like you do. I\'m a rice-grower. I live in Live Oak,
California. I\'m a family farmer, and I\'ve produced rice there for over
30 years.

In addition, I serve as chair of the California Rice Commission. In the
main, we view that U.S. farm policy must continue to be market-oriented
and provide a reliable planning tool for producers. With respect to
question two, increasingly we see farm policy and trade policy tied
together which makes it more important for USDA and the USTR to ensure
that trade agreements are fair, transparent, and enforceable. Farm
programs written in the future must be linked with meaningful and
significant market access in other countries so that U.S. producers have
an opportunity to compete fairly.

Unfortunately, as you know, many markets that were opened during the
Uruguay Round of WTO still limit genuine access to consumers. Markets
opened to California rice for over a decade still face a variety of
non-tariff trade barriers that severely restrict imports of rice. These
are issues we face every day in our efforts to export some 40 percent of
our crop.

At the same time, rice imported into the United States faces virtually
no barriers to trade. In conclusion to that topic, let me emphasize that
any Farm Bill must recognize that trade is not fair across the world.
Other countries significantly support their agricultural sectors
directly or through non-tariff trade barriers that take years to
overcome. Therefore, we strongly support a new, comprehensive WTO
agreement.

Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Okay. Five-minute break. Just five minutes
and we\'ll be right back with the Forum.

(tape 3, in progress)

MODERATOR: Come on up here to the front if you want to. Please come up
and be seated. We\'ll get things rolling again, keep on our time
limitations. I want to compliment you on doing that, folks. I had the
feeling when we first started I might have to come out and take the mike
away from you. They have to do that to me, you know, every once in
awhile because I don\'t know when to stop talking, but then I get paid
to talk, so hey. But anyway, make yourself free to come up here to the
front. Again, we\'re not in church so you can come up and sit in the
front \-- or not in school. You know the persons in school who sat in
front got the A's? Anyway, get ready to start.

By the way, it\'s difficult to hear in back when someone\'s up here
trying to talk. Hold it down a bit if you would, please. With that
we\'re going into the final session and still have the two-minute time
limits on this. So where did we stop? On the north side? We did. We\'re
going to start on the south side. You\'re on, sir.

MR. DAN DOOLEY: Mr. Secretary, Congressmen, my name\'s Dan Dooley. I\'m
a water lawyer in the area and a member of a fifth-generation family
farming operation. I\'m here today as the chairman of the University of
California\'s President\'s Commission on Agriculture and Natural
Resources. And I\'d also note by way of background that I served as a
member and vice chair of the USDA Advisory Board on Agriculture
Research, Economics, and something and something for the first six years
of its existence, and have been very closely associated with the
University\'s research programs.

And that\'s what I\'m here to talk about a little bit today. I think
it\'s important in the Farm Bill discussion to keep tuned to the
importance of the USDA role in developing new science and technologies
to support the competitive advantages of our industry and the
stakeholders you serve. I think historically this relationship between
the USDA and its Land Grant University partners and cooperative
extension has served the agricultural enterprise quite well, and we
should be very proud of that.

However, it\'s easy to rest on our laurels and past successes, and I am
concerned that the historic role of the partnership with the Land Grant
Universities and ARS at USDA has not kept pace with either the demand
for new science and technology that exists within the industry or with
the increase in funding growth and development in other science agencies
in the federal government such as NIH, NSF, and the Department of
Energy, to name a couple.

As a result of this concern in the 2002 Farm Bill there was created a
task force appointed by the Secretary and which was chaired by Dr.
Danforth to take a look at the way USDA is organized with respect to
science and technology.

And as you may be aware, that task force recommended the establishment
of a national institute for food and agriculture to become a
science-based organization that could be the recipient of funding for
new organizations. I would encourage you to consider that in the
development of your programs for the 2002 Farm Bill.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Okay. We\'ll move across to the north side
now. You, sir.

MR. GABE GONZALEZ: Mr. Secretary, my name\'s Gabe Gonzalez. I\'m the
city manager for the city of Mendota, a rural community about 35 miles
west of Fresno.

I\'m here to address question number five. I think the new bill should
have, and continue, funding for rural programs. Small communities such
as Mendota, Firebaugh are significantly impacted because that\'s where
the farmworker resides in. As the farm operations expand, so do our
cities grow. As a result, oftentimes we don\'t have the financial
resources to mitigate that impact on our city infrastructure.

In 2002 with the assistance of USDA financial assistance we were able to
construct a new water treatment plant. It\'s been a great project for us
that we\'ve been able to provide quality water for our residents. So
again I think the new bill, to the extent possible, should have some
additional funds but most definitely continue funding because with
limited resources us small cities in the rural areas have a hard time
being able to provide that quality of life for its residents. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Okay, moving over to the south side now.

MR. TIM JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Secretary, and members of Congress, for
the opportunity to address you today. I\'m Tim Johnson, president of the
California Rice Commission. We represent the entirety of the California
rice industry including all 2,500 producers and over 40 marketing
organizations.

Our industry produces rice on over 500,000 acres. It provides thousands
of high-paying jobs and produces one of the foods that is the basis of
the Food Pyramid. Today I\'d like to spend my time addressing the
question of how we achieve conservation environmental goals through the
Farm Bill.

California rice fields are literally known throughout the world for
their significant contribution to many environmental goals of this
state. Approximately 235 species of wildlife are known to use our
fields. At the same time, we have reduced our open field burning by 75
percent, we have also reduced the pesticide loading in drainage water by
over 95 percent.

In addition, all of California rice fields are designated as part of the
shorebird habitat of international significance within the western
hemisphere shorebird reserve network. California rice fields are also
proven to be high quality wintering habitat for millions of ducks,
geese, shorebirds, and other waterbirds that migrate along the Pacific
flyway.

Our industry\'s valuable winter flooded habitat contributes to that
flyway to the tune of 175,000 acres of wetland equivalent land. We asked
some wetland biologists to go through and calculate what that would
cost. They came back with a number of \$600 million to create that much
habitat that our industry provides. In addition it would cost \$17- to
\$20 million a year to maintain that habitat. This significant benefit
comes at no cost to the public because of the valuable rice industry in
California.

The Farm Bill is a critical element in maintaining the valuable rice
lands. Given the significant contributions of our working lands to
conservation goals, we strongly recommend that full consideration be
given to the commodity title to the Farm Bill that provides those
benefits and also conservation funding be directly related to working
lands. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Okay. Let\'s go to the north side now.

MR. TZAXA CHERTA LEE: Good afternoon, Mr. Secretary Johanns. Thank you
very much for giving me the opportunity to express my concern. My name
is Tzaxa Cherta Lee, owner of Cherta Farms here in Fresno. I\'m also the
chair of Southeast Asian Farmers for Clean Air in Fresno County. My farm
has been growing specialty crops for many years since 1984, and we grow
bok choy, gailon, sinqua, moqua, and bitter melon. So the small unit
thing that you can find in oriental stores.

There are many of us that have been small farmers for many years, and I
have witnessed so many small farmers such as us going up and down and
disappear, and this trend continue to happen these days, and I believe
it\'s going to continue into the future. If these trends are going to
continue I believe the small farmers in specialty crops such as in this
area will completely disappear in not many years in the future.

What we have seen here is that we have been working very hard\-- we
strive mostly by ourself, and we did not really get assistance from the
government even we are aware that there are resources, but they are far
out of our reach from us. We are too small to qualify for too few
categories, and we are not even exist, I believe, in USDA agenda for
assistance.

Like myself I have apply for grants but I am not qualify for categories,
and I apply for loan and what happened was the procedure is that one
person, one has to find the land and then apply for the loan. What I
found out that it was ridiculous. I found the land that they give me a
limit of time, and when I apply for the loan they said it\'s going to
take about three\-- to a year to get approved. And that\'s tremendous of
time and I don\'t think it works with this situation here.

The other thing is that we need assistance, money, and we need programs
such as pilot so that we can get fund to start our own land. As you can
see that many of us stop farming because we lack land, we are bound from
land to land, piece to piece in a couple years.

MODERATOR: All right, sir. Thank you very much. Move to the south side
now.

MS. BONNIE FERNANDEZ: My name is Bonnie Fernandez, and if you can\'t
hear me please let me know. I am representing today the California Wheat
Commission and the California Association of Wheat Growers. I\'ll
address, quickly, questions number three and six.

In regards to fair assistance and distribution of product, we are often
appreciative of the programs that wheat growers have in the United
States. Unfortunately California wheat growers do not always readily get
to participate in those programs because of our differences in marketing
and agronomic practices here.

What we would like to see in the future is that perhaps there is either
more staff or perhaps more empowerment at our state level to help
address and correct these things so we can quickly get them implemented
for the benefit of our growers.

In regards to the second number, six, our biggest concern in regards to
product development, market development, and research is that we do not
isolate these three items as being independent of each other. They\'re
extremely important, they each have an important link in the chain of
California agriculture. I would like to give a very quick example of
what we mean by that.

Right now there is a hard white wheat incentive program in the United
States. This has been an exceptional program for the U.S. wheat growers
as well as California. We have benefited greatly. In fact we\'re going
to ask for three more years of that program. But after we have developed
hard white wheat, our product, we now have to get out and promote it
through our foreign market development efforts. So therefore we have the
product, and then the foreign market development.

Unfortunately right now we have over 150 races of striped rust in the
United States. It won\'t matter what we develop if we have a disease
that will come and remove these varieties. We understand there is a
striped rust initiative to help us with that right now. But
independently each of these areas are very important, but they\'re more
important when we look at them as a group.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Bonnie. Okay, up to the north side now.

MR. RICK PITTMAN: Thank you. Mr. Secretary, my name is Rick Pittman with
Pittman Farms. We\'re poultry producers here in the Fresno County. We
were the benefit of your Rural Development program about two years ago
through a loan guarantee. We are very grateful for that. Without that on
a new venture raising poultry is one thing, but we got into processing
two years ago with a new venture. Banks will not finance you on new
ventures. With a loan guarantee, all the banks wanted us. So it was a
very grateful opportunity.

It also has a benefit to the area which is creating more jobs. We urge
you at this time to increase your funds for this program, especially for
Fresno. We\'ve got projects, but we\'re running out of funds too
quickly.

The one thing we noticed when we received these funds when we developed,
retrofitted the plant, we had 10 people helping us at that time to
retrofit the plant and get it changed over to processing chickens,
turkeys, and ducks. I had mentioned to those 10 employees\-- I said,
please tell your friends the first July we\'re going to start operating,
and I need maybe 50 or so people to help run this plant. I didn\'t put
an ad in the paper for jobs, didn\'t put a sign on the door, didn\'t put
a sign up the street. I told them that in the middle of May and by the
first of July I had 1,500 people ask me for a job. We need more jobs,
sir. We need your help. We need more funds, and that\'s why I wanted to
say this at this time. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Okay. Now the south side?

MR. RICH MATTEIS: Mr. Secretary and gentlemen, I\'m Rich Matteis, today
representing the Pacific Egg and Poultry Association. Our concerns
relate to avian health, and I\'d like to start by thanking the agency
for the remarkable effort in eradicating exotic Newcastle disease from
this state. To be able to do that in 10 months was just an enormous
feat, and we appreciate the help from the agency in doing that.

To that end we support continuation of the specialty crop block grants.
We used some of those funds here in that state to enhance biosecurity.
It was at the same as that eradication effort. Those funds were put to
very effective use in GPS mapping, which is consistent with the
livestock ID program, developing education materials, doing outreach,
and developing operational protocols.

As such again we support continuation of those specialty crop block
grants. Again, eggs are a specialty crop \-- less than \$300 million in
revenues here per year.

Secondly, we support continuation of the avian health program and ask
that it be considered as part of, or in the context of, the Farm Bill.
And somebody mentioned earlier invasive species in the plant arena.
Diseases are the invasive species that impact animal agriculture. An
ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. We spent \$170 million
eradicating exotic Newcastle. If we spent the funds in a preventative
way we\'ll be money ahead in the long run. Thank you for your time.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Okay, now let\'s go over to the north side.

MR. KEVIN O'CONNOR: Hello, Mr. Secretary. My name is Kevin O\'Connor. I
represent the southern region FFA. I am addressing an issue that ties
closely to issue number one, and that is: ag awareness in urban
communities, because with the negative perception of productive
agriculture, many youths may be deterred from entering our field.

I am from Riverside, and I am continuously finding that not only my
peers but local business leaders and politicians do not have the
understanding of what agriculture\'s objective is. Unfortunately urban
areas have the least understanding of agriculture but have the greatest
influence, as this is where most of the nation\'s voters are.

We have the opportunity to inform the public but need the resources to
create agriculture awareness advertisements in the urban communities and
the media. We are blessed to have people so dedicated to our industry,
but we need the support from the United States Department of Agriculture
and this Farm Bill to have the success.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Now to the south side?

MR. TOM BERRYHILL: Yes, hi. My name is Tom Berryhill. Mr. Secretary,
thanks to you and your team for coming here today. I want to give a
special thanks also to Congressman Radanovich for letting me know this
was happening today. I am running for an assembly seat up in the Modesto
area. I\'m a fourth-generation wine/grape grower. My father was Claire
Berryhill, secretary of agriculture in the mid \'80s. And I plan on
continuing that fight.

But as my staff gave me these questions I immediately looked through
them and said, 'You know I\'m not a Ph.D. in any of these things.' but
as I wanted to make a comment, I looked through them. And the one thing
that did catch my eye was the second question about the competitiveness
of this industry internationally especially. And I am concerned about
the sustainability of agriculture for these kids 10 and 20 years down
the line with the global economy the way it is. All agriculture has such
a hard time maintaining a profitability, and it\'s very important, as we
move down the line, to keep a fair and even playing field.

I guess my one comment to you, Mr. Secretary, would be: as this Farm
Bill comes up, keep in mind the massive diversity that we have here in
California agriculture. Sometimes we kind of think that we get left out
with all the big grain commodities and what-not in the Midwest. But try
to keep us in mind. We\'re all here today to try to keep this a
profitable industry in the next 10 years. And thank you for coming
today.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Okay, north side?

MR. GEORGE FLAGLER: Yes. My name is George Flagler. I\'m just a dumb
farmer from Parlier. And we\'re having a hell of a time making a living.
We farm about, oh, 500 acres of peaches, plums, and nectarines and
raisins. And through the weather aspect that we had at the beginning of
this year, a lot of our crops were very minimal in production. But
that\'s not your problem; that\'s our problem. But what our problem is,
is we can\'t compete overseas. We go to sell raisins, and the guy \--
and I can get \$.95 and the guy comes back, Korea comes back and says,
'I can buy these raisins cheaper someplace else.' I says, 'Are you
addressing the health issues?' I says, 'Go and address those health
issues and then come back and tell me if my price is too high.' He then
comes back and says, 'I want a lower quality raisin.' It\'s impossible.

Our overseas situation is becoming very, very miserable. Our situation,
\$6.75 an hour we pay our workers can\'t make a living and we can\'t
afford to pay them any more. And because our neighbors are all going
broke. Fortunately I\'m in a unique situation, but one of the things
that really bothered me, and has been driving at my heart for a long
time, is the generation preceding my generation had to make raisins
during the Second World War \-- no ifs, ands, and buts. You made raisins
or you went to jail. And it was a commodity then. And now we\'re a
specialty crop and they could care less about us whether we make money
or we can sustain ourselves. And I just can\'t understand that magnitude
of a shift.

And excuse me for not thanking Cal and Jim and Devin and George and the
Secretary and introducing myself. I got the subject too fast. But
anyway, it\'s very painful. Thank you, Secretary, and maybe you can help
us.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much, George. Okay. Let\'s go to the south
side.

MR. LARRY SERPA: Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for visiting our valley today
and thank you, Congressman, for hosting this event. My name is Larry
Serpa, director of Member Relations in Land O' Lakes here. Land O Lakes
appreciates the opportunity to testify today. We represent about 280
members in California and about over 4,000 dairy producers nationwide.
We have members located all over California with a majority here in the
Central Valley.

I know you are keenly aware of the importance of agriculture in the
Central Valley of California and its impact on our culture and economy.
I know that you understand the dairy industry is the largest ag sector
generating more than 120,000 jobs statewide through our dairy farms,
dairy products, processing facilities, and tens of thousands more in the
retailing and service industries.

You are keenly aware of the rapid urbanization going on in the Valley
and the impact that this has on agriculture and our environment.
Increased air pollution and impacts on our water resources has led as,
it should, to increased concern by our environmental regulatory services
agencies.

Regulatory impacts are getting tougher on all businesses including ag,
and many of us are feeling the impact. In some cases the impact is so
severe we are concerned about the ag sector\'s ability to continue to
grow, develop, and prosper in California.

We in the dairy industry recognize the need for all of us to work
together to protect our air and water resources. We firmly believe
California\'s Central Valley will be better off in the long run, both
environmentally and economically, with a healthy, strong, and prosperous
ag industry. Indeed, agriculture represents a unique way to secure our
ability to feed, clothe, and employ our people in harmony with the
environment we all share.

Perhaps this is the opportunity for the environment\-- far greater in
other industries.

MODERATOR: Okay, Larry. Thank you very much. Appreciate that.

Let\'s go to the north side now?

MR. MIKE SILVA: Secretary Johanns, thank you for the opportunity to
express our views. Congressman Costa, Congressmen Nunes, Radanovich,
thank you. And Secretary Kawamura and Chrisman, thank you for the effort
to put together this Forum. Good afternoon. My name is Mike Silva, and I
own and operate a farm in the South Valley. I also serve as vice
president of the California Farmers Union which represents farmers,
ranchers, and dairymen throughout the state.

We appreciate the opportunity to speak today about the future of federal
farm policy. In order to maximize U.S. competitiveness and enable
today\'s farm and dairy producers to compete in the global marketplace,
we believe it is vital that the next Farm Bill truly invests in U.S.
agriculture. Today we are forced to compete against imports that do not
meet our labor, health, safety, environmental, and other standards.

Our foreign competitors, particularly the European Union, spend
significant resources each year to ensure the future of their
agriculture producers. We should do the same here in the United States.
Our federal policy should have an effective safety net for all producers
when prices drop, including specialty crop producers.

We believe the next Farm Bill should address the growing consolidation
that continues to occur in the agriculture sector. In order to level the
playing field for farmers and ranchers it is vital that lawmakers take
immediate steps to foster greater competition in agriculture markets.
Until there is true competition in the marketplace, farmers and ranchers
simply will not receive a fair price.

Lawmakers should immediately implement mandatory 'country of origin
labeling' for meat and produce as called for in the 2002 Farm Bill. An
overwhelming majority of farmers and consumers support COOL and its
implementation is now long overdue. We support full funding of the
Conservation Security Program and the extension of the Conservation
Reserve Program and the Environmental Quality Incentive Program, EQIP.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Let\'s go to the south side now.

MR. MIKE DAYTON: Thank you, Mr. Secretary, members of Congress, Mr.
Radanovich, Mr. Nunes, Mr. Costa. I appreciate you being here today. My
name is Mike Dayton. I\'m the deputy director of the Governor\'s Office
of Homeland Security. I\'ll make this pretty simple.

Our job is to protect and secure the food supply, and we do this in
close partnership with the Secretary of Agriculture in California. I\'m
pleased to report that we\'ve got a great relationship.

We\'ve made great strides since 9/11, but there\'s still a lot that
remains to be done. And how the Department can really help us is to
dedicate resources directly to agriculture and ag producers.

There\'s a number of initiatives that the Department could pursue, but
I\'m just here to underscore the importance of securing our food supply
so that we can achieve all of our trade objectives and to ensure that
our communities are safe. So I look forward to working with the members
of Congress and the Department on some of those ideas. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. To the north side now?

MR. JOE AUGUSTO: Good afternoon. My name is Joe Augusto, and I own and
operate a dairy farm in Merced, California. I also serve as the vice
president of California Dairy Campaign. We represent more than 350
dairies throughout the state. We appreciate this opportunity to speak to
you today on future federal dairy policy.

We believe fundamental reforms in federal dairy policy are necessary to
foster a strong dairy industry in the future. In order to maximize U.S.
competitiveness and enable dairy producers to compete in the global
marketplace, we believe it is vital that effective tariffs are put in
place for dairy imports.

For years we have urged members of Congress to pass the Milk Import
Tariff Equity Act to apply effective tariffs to milk protein
concentrates, casein, and caseinates that now enter the country
virtually tariff-free. Until these loopholes will close, U.S. producers
will continue to be at a significant disadvantage in the marketplace.

Dairy producers from around the country have participated in
cooperatives, working together (unclear) so that producers can manage
their inventories. We consider this program to be a success. However,
the fact is that these imports continue to flood our marketplaces,
costing U.S. producers considerable market share. Compared to 2004, from
January to May of this year our imports have increased by about 18
percent.

We support the continuance of the Milk Income Loss Compensation Program
and support increasing the eligibility cap. The MILC Program has
provided a vital safety net to dairy producers throughout the country
when prices drop. We oppose any legislation once again that establishes
a federal forward contracting program. Forward contracting simply shifts
more risk to producers and leads to greater consolidation in the dairy
sector by decreasing competition.

We further oppose legislation that would subsidize the production of MPC
in the U.S. The establishment of an MPC subsidization program would lead
to significantly lower (unclear) prices. We support the current federal
milk marketing order system.

We believe that conservation and environmental programs can be improved
by directing more resources to the environmental quality assurance
initiative program, EQIP. Under this program producers gain access to
valuable cost sharing dollars to improve the environment. EQIP is
continually oversubscribed and in the next Farm Bill it is important for
lawmakers to make it a higher priority.

MODERATOR: Yes, sir. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, we go to the
south side now.

MR. STEVE NASH: Good afternoon, gentlemen. My name is Steve Nash, and
I\'m a dairyman from nearby Selma. We have 1,100 Holstein and Jerseys
and a 620-acre farming operation. The current Farm Bill has been
successful in many different areas including the environment. However,
more needs to be done. The EQIP program has been used extensively
throughout this area. I personally had a good experience with the
program to oil roads for dust control over a five-year contract. I am
required to use road oil for three of the five years and receive a 50
percent cost share on the cost of oil. It greatly assisted my farm in
dust reduction and spider mite population on my corn crops. The cost
share limit of 75 percent for certain conservation practices was
overstated.

At project sign-ups I was told the project would have a greater chance
of approval if I took a lower percentage of the cost share and my
project cost was significantly below the \$450,000 limit. Based on this
I feel the cost-share percentages and total limits should reflect the
actual intended numbers USDA is willing to accept instead of these
inflated numbers. It will allow me to plan projects that have a stronger
chance of approval.

Currently the dairy industry has a great deal of need for engineering
expertise in both water and air. Every county has a different staff
expertise, and some of the producers are left out without any dairy
engineering assistance. I feel a multi-county engineering team would
greatly benefit producers in coping with ever-increasing environmental
rules and save staff dollars at the same time.

Templates could be made for all dairies and then slightly modified for
each facility\'s management style and design type.

Rural crime is on the increase in this area. Meth labs, graffiti, theft
of farm equipment, vehicles, diesel, and livestock are growing with
increased urbanization. Ag crime prevention needs to be addressed in
this Farm Bill. In 1980 Fresno County had a population of 514,000.
Projections are for 2.5 million over the coming years.

Research and the dairy industry have a long history of innovative
discoveries. Today, however, our industry is under attack from
environmental and animal rights advocates. Our industry needs some
leadership from the USDA and CDFA concerning research priorities and
funding. Here in the San Joaquin Valley air quality is an emotional
issue for urban and rural citizens. Studies by the University of
California have shown 25 to 30 percent losses in many crops grown in the
Central Valley due to air pollution. University air research on
California dairies has shown that 3.6 counts to per count annual of VOCs
are emitted. However, the San Joaquin air district staff has insisted on
a much higher number, one that will make dairies the number one polluter
in the region.

Dairymen are shocked by the lack of fairness and attention this has
brought to our industry.

MODERATOR: Steve, thank you very much. Appreciate that. Time\'s up. At
this point it\'s kind of an open line \-- at least that\'s a radio open
line \-- open mikes for any comments or questions you might have. The
two-minute limit\'s still in effect, but if you have a comment or
question you might have now\'s the time to do it. Let\'s go back to the
north side here.

MR. FRED OLMSTEAD: Secretary Johanns, distinguished congressmen, my name
is Fred Olmstead, and I represent the Carberry family who had been
farming out on the west side since the early 1940s. I would like to
share three areas of concern with you.

One area of concern is community that the farmers support through crops
that we've produced, tires we buy, the oil we buy, and all the money
that we spend and it turns around in the community. Our money turns
around seven times in that community, and I think without the Farm Bill
those communities will all suffer as the farmers have to cut back trying
to make ends meet.

My second area of concern is money for new equipment. While there are
monies from NRCS to assist in purchasing equipment, it is limited to
helping farmers who will go together and then hire a farmer with new
equipment and new type of equipment to be able to harvest their crops.
I\'m developing new harvesting equipment for almonds which will reduce
the dust, and we\'ve been unable to get direct support in helping
develop that product. It\'s a product that not only will help us but
will help the industry, and I think it\'s a special concern here in the
Valley.

My other concern is: we need new money for dams. Water is a big issue
here in the Valley. We\'re short of it. It\'s no secret. And anything
that can be done to help us replenish that water supply through the
building of new dams or whatever is critical to the Valley.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Now let\'s go back to the south side.

MS. CLAUDIA REID: Good afternoon, Secretary Johanns and distinguished
guests. It\'s my extreme honor and pleasure to be in this room along
with you and especially with the farmers and the future farmers that
have come here today to greet you. My name is Claudia Reid. I\'m the
policy director for the California Coalition for Food and Farming. We
are a nonprofit, made up of about 54 organizations and about 110
members, individual members. We range from environmental activists and
food security activists all the way through to farmers. We include
academic membership representation and other organizations that work on
sustainable agriculture and food systems. That is a food system that
honors economic viability, environmentally sound farming practices, and
social justice.

We will be submitting full comments to your website, and we appreciate
that opportunity. Our policy work primarily focuses on the several areas
that have been mentioned here today \-- specialty crops, the Nutrition
Program including Farmers Market Nutrition Programs, and the Senior
Market Nutrition Program. We\'re extremely interested in additional
research funds into the SARE program, the organic programs you heard
from, OFRF, and the IPM program. We have a strong focus on value-added
producer grants. We are working quite closely on the EQIP program and
the CSP program. We really appreciate this opportunity, and we welcome
your questions. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Okay. To the north side?

MR. GARY SOYERS (sp): Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here. My name
is Gary Soyers, and at the risk of eliciting the wrong response I\'ll
disclose that I\'m a lawyer. I work with a lot of the farmers in this
room on farm program matters, and I\'d like to talk very briefly about
customer service by the Farm Service Agency.

This area is blessed, as is the state, with a fine staff at the county
level and at the state level. Unfortunately that fine staff is somewhat
hamstrung in dealing with farm program eligibility because the rules
that have been adopted for eligibility have, frankly, lost touch with
the way in which the farmers and lenders that loan to farmers operate.

If the farm program rules of eligibility do not recognize the modern
realities of ag lending and ag operations, it\'s a significant
impediment not only to existing farmers from participation in the
program but also to new farmers who want to come into the program. So I
would really encourage, as you look at the new Farm Bill, to look at how
the farm program requirements can be structured so that they recognize
modern realties and don\'t penalize farmers for acting like farmers and
don\'t penalize ag lenders for acting like ag lenders.

The second point I wanted to make is a more general one, which is that
the farm program requirements have become so arcane and complex that
it\'s virtually impossible for many operators to understand them and to
comply. And if I could leave you with just one point, it would be that
it is unfortunate at best that people like the folks in this audience
have to hire people like me to interface with people like you. I think
it would be far better if the folks in this audience could deal directly
with the fine staff that you have here at the counties and the states in
order to take advantage of the programs that you offer.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Okay, one more? One more on the south
side.

MR. RAY SOUZA (sp): Good evening. Thank you Secretary Johanns,
Congressman Radanovich, Congressman Nunes and Congressman Costa. Thank
you for this opportunity to express some of our thoughts regarding the
upcoming Farm Bill.

My name is Ray Souza. I\'m a dairy farmer in Turlock, California. This
year marks the 75th year that my family has been producing milk in this
valley without exception every day, 365 days. But today I\'m
representing the Western States Dairy Producers Trade Association, which
is a coalition of trade associations representing the western states. I
want to talk to you about a few things. One of the things we\'d like to
talk about is to request that you look into giving us the ability to
maximize the use of the DEIP program. The money has been appropriated by
Congress but oftentimes goes un-issued to the CCC. There\'s been
contracts that unfortunately we haven\'t been able to meet because of
the lack of responsiveness at USDA, and you would believe that there are
critical times when this program could be better used as it was intended
by Congress.

We also encourage support of the program in its current form. The
program stabilizes prices without encouraging additional production.
Stability is paramount if we hope to attract younger farmers to the
industry. The support program is far less expensive than the official
score. One of the unique things about the support program is it\'s
scored one way but the federal government, CCC, takes control of the
product. That product is resold, and that money is returned back to the
general fund without getting credit back to the farmers. It gives people
the opinion that the program is much more expensive than it really is.

We would like to have you work with industry to streamline the federal
milk marketing order program. While we believe that the system has value
and we encourage participation, we feel it needs to be more responsive
so it can better meet the rapidly changing markets. It should not take
six to eight years to get a result back from a hearing. Oftentimes we
have a hearing\-- right now that we\'re still waiting for the response
for eight years.

We would like to maintain full funding of the EQIP program,
public/private programs, partnerships are essential to the long-term
viability of the dairy farmer under an ever-increasing regulatory
climate.

Finally, we\'d like to ask you to continue to work with federal and
state agencies to seek out the best and most reliable scientific data so
that regulation can truly serve the public good without unreasonably
overburdening our industry. Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. We\'re running down to our final moments
here. We\'ll be able to take one over here and one over here. So we\'ll
go this way and this way. We can do both, Mr. Secretary?

MR. JOE ZANGER: I\'ll be very short. I\'m Joe Zanger from San Benito
County which is about two hours northwest of here. We\'re tree and
fruit, nut, and vegetable growers. We do some retail. As you heard here
this afternoon, all the various parts of the Farm Bill are very
important to different individual groups. There\'s something in it for
everyone, and they\'re here expressing that.

We know for the rice industry, without those payments for the most part
they\'re out of business, and that\'s somewhat true for cotton. So the
commodity section of the Farm Bill is important to California growers.

But as you said, Representative Costa, and what the President said in
his first point, the real long-term fix is opening up international
trade. We need to be able to move our product to the rest of the market
because we produce too much. The reason we produce too much is because
we\'ve had to, to stay in business. You have to get your units up, your
efficiencies up, and it\'s Catch-22. We\'re over-supplied, prices are
down. We need to get trade going.

The Doha is coming fast. We\'re in Hong Kong in December, and that\'s
ahead of the Farm Bill. So really the discussion is now with the USTR,
in concert with the Farm Bill conversations, to get things lined up now
because we need to make commitments here this last quarter of the year
to get the Doha done to get tariffs down and to get EU subsidies down so
that we can export our product and stay in business. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much, Joe. Okay. We\'re going to go to the
south side.

MALE VOICE: Thank you. Congressmen, thank you always for your support.
Secretary Johanns, my family raised cattle in the sandhills of Nebraska.
Nice to see you out here in California, and welcome.

Just a couple of items. The Environmental Quality Incentives Program \--
by the way I represent 1,100 of the state\'s dairy producers in West
United Dairymen, the state\'s 1,900 dairy families, and the
Environmental Quality Incentives Program is extremely important program
to California\'s dairy producers as we face an onslaught of regulation
from the Air District, Regional Water Quality Control Boards, and
continuation of the Environmental Quality Incentives Program is
extremely important to the viability of agriculture within California,
the Central Valley in particular.

I\'d also like to mention that if USDA\--ARS could see fit to perhaps
look into some technologies that might help us address some of these
issues that we\'re facing on the environmental front, would be very
helpful.

And then finally I\'d like to echo the comments of Mr. Sousa from
Turlock indicating that the federal order system truly has to be
reformed. California has a system under Secretary Kawamura where we can
get a decision in our state milk marketing order out of the Secretary\'s
Office in 79 days. As Mr. Sousa indicated, the federal system often
takes six to eight to nine years to get a decision. In a global
marketplace that negatively impacts America\'s competitiveness, and we
do have to be competitive.

Once again, welcome to California. Nice to see you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Okay. Good. Next here on the south side?

MS. KATHRYN PHILLIPS: Thank you. Thank you for holding this listening
session and allowing all of us to have a chance. My name is Kathryn
Phillips. I\'m with Environmental Defense. We\'re a 450,000-member
organization nationwide. We have about 60,000 members and activists in
California.

I work specifically on air quality issues. I want to talk about a couple
of things today. One is: innovation. It\'s been mentioned earlier that
California grows about 350 different crops. In 1939 we were growing
about 180 different crops. In less than 100 years we\'ve just about
doubled the number of crops, different types of crops, we grow in this
state.

I think that speaks to the incredible innovation that California farmers
bring to their trade, the incredible amount of creativity and their
willingness to take a risk.

I\'d like to talk a little bit about some of the environmental
challenges. We have about 221 federally listed endangered species in
this state. There are some of us who would argue that what you\'re
seeing around those federally listed species isn\'t really as many as
probably are endangered in this state. But let\'s stick with the 221.
Many of those rely on private lands for survival. Much of that private
land is farmland. We\'re anxious to see that farmers have the
opportunity to protect those portions of their farmland that provide the
riparian habitat, that provide the corridors for those species to get
from one place to another to allow them to survive.

We have some of the dirtiest air in the country. In fact the San Joaquin
Valley ranks among the top three for dirty air in the country. We\'re in
extreme non-attainment for ozone. The only other region with that
characteristic is the \-- (audio break)

\-- states like Iowa. Iowa is number one. Iowa has 13 endangered
species. We have 221. There seems to be a disconnect there. We\'re not
suggesting that Iowa not get money, not get good conservation money, but
we suggest we need more conservation money in the whole pot. And more of
it needs to come to California. And we need programs that will address
some of California\'s specific problems, especially its air quality
problems, especially its water quality problems, and help the farmers
who have proven they\'ve been innovative to continue to be innovative
and use those programs to help solve our environmental problems
hand-in-hand.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Thank you very much. We\'ve had a lot of
interesting input here, and you\'ve been a great listener, Mr.
Secretary. Any more do you want to listen to or is it \--

SEC. JOHANNS: I think we wore everybody out. I don\'t see anyone else
standing at the microphone. Let me if I might just take a minute or two
to wrap up.

I think your secretaries, your congressmen, deserve a round of applause.
I think, I\'ve had congressmen in my other listening sessions, I\'ve had
senators, and if memory serves me correctly I think this is the first
group that stayed to the bitter end. They deserve a round of applause.

\[Applause.\]

I think it speaks volumes of their commitment to you. It\'s always easy
to come in and offer a few thoughts and then meander down the road. So I
appreciate it, and Secretaries thank you very much.

We have had a great day in California, and this forum just adds to that.
As I was thinking about California agriculture and I was thinking about
this Forum I must admit I wondered a little bit about what would this
Forum be like? You certainly have rice and cotton industries, but it\'s
not like the state has a huge amount of program crops, if you know what
I\'m talking about. You have a lot of specialty crops. And you have a
lot of crops that quite honestly are not subsidized at all by the Farm
Bill.

When we talk about the Farm Bill we oftentimes think about the
subsidies, but the reality is about 75 percent of American agriculture
is not subsidized under the Farm Bill. There\'s research dollars and
some of those things, but the vast majority of agriculture in the United
States is actually not subsidized.

So I wondered what I would hear as I came here. Well, what I heard is
probably the greatest diversity, in terms of people offering thoughts
about the Farm Bill, that I\'ve heard yet. And I guess thinking about
it, that would be what you would expect, because you have such
tremendous diversity in agriculture here. You have everything from
livestock to fruits to vegetables and kind of everything in between.

The second thing I would say is that people were enormously prepared.
Did you all get together and decide who would say what in this Forum,
because it really was well-presented and you owe yourselves a pat on the
back for that. This was really one of the best-prepared Farm Bill Forums
that we\'ve had to date.

Now what I wanted to spend a minute talking about was process. We\'ve
had a lot of input on various things, but process is important here, and
so I wanted to kind of maybe telegraph for you what I see out there in
terms of process. And I\'m sure your congressional representatives, your
Senate representatives will keep you up to date. But I was asked: isn\'t
this quite early for a 2007 Farm Bill to be out across the country doing
these listening sessions? Really it is not if you think about the timing
here.

To do a nationwide effort it\'s a big country out there, even with the
help of under secretaries and my deputy. We will be working on these
Forums through the end of the year, probably a little bit into the first
part of next year. It will take us a certain amount of time to organize
the information from the Forums, talk to Congress, get their ideas,
those kinds of things. So by the time you really get to it, a proposal
probably won\'t come until sometime into 2006.

We haven\'t even decided what that timeline would be. Quite honestly
we\'re going to get some more Forums under our belt before we decide
whether there will be an administrative proposal, although it\'s very
fair to say after this much work we\'re going to do everything we can to
work with the House, to work with the Senate, and really do everything
we can to drive our ideas as to what the next Farm Bill would look like.
That may even be a specific legislative proposal.

Well, by the time that rolls out you\'re well into 2006. You\'ve got an
election cycle next year, so a lot of time gets occupied with that, so
quite honestly if we can get that out there what you\'re probably
looking at is action on a 2007 Farm Bill in the first part of 2007. And
we almost need to get it done then to send a signal to agriculture as to
what that Farm Bill will be and what it will look like so producers and
bankers and whoever can make decisions about what they\'re doing.

So again it appears to me that our timeline is actually very aggressive,
and we need to stick with our timeline in order to get this Farm Bill
done early in 2007 so people know what it will look like.

There was some comment about, well don\'t pass the Farm Bill while
we\'ve got some of this left. I don\'t see that happening, quite
honestly, just simply because again if you look at that timeline I think
it\'s optimistic to think we\'ll get this one done by early 2007 which
we need to do. But it just appears to me that we\'ll see the end of this
Farm Bill. I would be very, very surprised if anything would happen
quicker than that. It just doesn\'t appear likely.

The industry isn\'t calling for it, and the House isn\'t calling for it,
and the Senate isn\'t calling for it, and we\'re not calling for it. So
it appears to me that what we will be doing is putting in place a Farm
Bill that will start as it was originally intended when this Farm Bill
runs out with the crops for 2007.

So that\'s kind of my ideas on the process.

Final request, if I could. As this continues to go on, the national
debate on farm programs is going to increase. You\'re seeing editorials
already, you\'re seeing articles. I was in Iowa yesterday. The Des
Moines Register did a very extensive analysis of farm programs and their
impact on agriculture and on the next generation of farmers. I can
almost guarantee you that you\'re probably going to get to a point where
you want to offer something new. That\'s why we\'ve got the website. We
want you to stay in touch with us on the website. It\'s an excellent
website. We will be very transparent in what we\'re doing. But we want
to hear from you. Write us a letter, get on the website, do whatever you
can to make sure that the information you provided today continues to be
current.

If you have a new idea, a new thought, we want to hear about that.

So Congressmen, thank you. This was great. I appreciate it. Secretaries,
it\'s great to have you as my traveling companions today and to all of
our friends in California thank you so very much. God bless you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for
your input, your participation, and your cooperation. It was a
tremendous experience for me to be here to take part in this. And have a
good evening.

\#