U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

20–574 PDF 2016

BIG DATA AND AGRICULTURE: INNOVATION 

IN THE AIR

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

GENERAL FARM COMMODITIES 

AND RISK MANAGEMENT

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

JUNE 23, 2016

Serial No. 114–54

(

Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture 

agriculture.house.gov 

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE 

K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas, Chairman 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas, 

Vice Chairman 

BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

MIKE ROGERS, Alabama 

GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania 

BOB GIBBS, Ohio 

AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia 

ERIC A. ‘‘RICK’’ CRAWFORD, Arkansas 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

CHRISTOPHER P. GIBSON, New York 

VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri 

DAN BENISHEK, Michigan 

JEFF DENHAM, California 

DOUG LAMALFA, California 

RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana 

RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia 

MIKE BOST, Illinois 

DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina 

RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana 

JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan 

DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington 

TRENT KELLY, Mississippi 

COLLIN C. PETERSON, Minnesota, Ranking 

Minority Member 

DAVID SCOTT, Georgia 

JIM COSTA, California 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

MARCIA L. FUDGE, Ohio 

JAMES P. MCGOVERN, Massachusetts 

SUZAN K. DELBENE, Washington 

FILEMON VELA, Texas 

MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, New Mexico 

ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire 

RICHARD M. NOLAN, Minnesota 

CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois 

SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York 

ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona 

PETE AGUILAR, California 

STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands 

ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina 

GWEN GRAHAM, Florida 

BRAD ASHFORD, Nebraska 

SCOTT C. GRAVES, Staff Director 

ROBERT L. LAREW, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON GENERAL FARM COMMODITIES AND RISK MANAGEMENT

ERIC A. ‘‘RICK’’ CRAWFORD, Arkansas, Chairman 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

MIKE ROGERS, Alabama 

BOB GIBBS, Ohio 

AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia 

JEFF DENHAM, California 

DOUG LAMALFA, California 

JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana 

RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia 

MIKE BOST, Illinois 

RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota, Ranking 

Minority Member 

CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois 

GWEN GRAHAM, Florida 

BRAD ASHFORD, Nebraska 

DAVID SCOTT, Georgia 

JIM COSTA, California 

SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York 

ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona 

(II) 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Crawford, Hon. Eric A. ‘‘Rick’’, a Representative in Congress from Arkansas, 

prepared statement .............................................................................................. 2

Submitted statement on behalf of Andrew D. Moore, Executive Director, 

National Agricultural Aviation Association ................................................ 49

Graham, Hon. Gwen, a Representative in Congress from Florida, opening 

statement .............................................................................................................. 3

Lucas, Hon. Frank D., a Representative in Congress from Oklahoma, opening 

statement .............................................................................................................. 1

WITNESSES

Faleide, Rodney ‘‘Lanny’’, Founder and President, Satshot Inc., Fargo, ND ...... 4

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 5

Crago, Tim, Vice President, North West Geomatics Ltd., Calgary, AB, CAN; 

on behalf of Craig Molander, Senior Vice President, Business Development, 

Surdex Corporation, Chesterfield, MO ............................................................... 13

Prepared statement of Craig Molander .......................................................... 15

Blair, Robert, Vice President, Agriculture Division, Measure, the Drone as 

a Service® Company; Owner/Manager/Operator, Blair Farms, Kendrick, ID 25

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 27

SUBMITTED MATERIAL

Dombrowski, Ph.D., Christopher C., Chief Technology Officer, TerrAvion, Inc., 

San Leandro, CA, submitted statement ............................................................. 51

(1)

BIG DATA AND AGRICULTURE: INNOVATION 

IN THE AIR 

THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 2016

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON GENERAL FARM COMMODITIES AND RISK

MANAGEMENT, COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, Washington, D.C. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m., in Room 

1300 of the Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Frank D. Lucas 

presiding. 

Members present: Representatives Lucas, Neugebauer, Rogers, 

Gibbs, Austin Scott of Georgia, LaMalfa, Allen, Bost, Abraham, 

Bustos, and Graham. 

Staff present: Bart Fischer, Callie McAdams, Haley Graves, Matt 

Schertz, Skylar Sowder, Stephanie Addison, John Konya, Anne 

Simmons, Liz Friedlander, Mike Stranz, Nicole Scott, and Carly 

Reedholm. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK D. LUCAS, A 

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM OKLAHOMA 

Mr. LUCAS. Thank you all for being here this morning for this 

hearing exploring big data and agriculture: innovation in the air. 

This is our second hearing in a series to educate Members about 

different facets of the new frontier in agriculture. 

Production agriculture from 100 years ago is markedly different 

than it is today. While our farmers still produce many of the same 

crops, a plow once pulled by mules is now pulled by a tractor with 

a satellite guiding it through the field. When formerly the only option a farmer had to control weeds was tilling the field with major 

losses to water and wind erosion, pinpoint chemical and fertilizer 

application now enable the use of no-till farming technologies. 

While these are just two simple examples, an important piece underpinning much of the innovation in agriculture, and specifically 

in precision agriculture, is the development of imaging and mapping technology. As we all know, maps of farmland and cropland 

are not new, but the means of capturing and utilizing the imagery 

is constantly changing. 

We will have an opportunity to hear about three technologies 

used to capture images: manned airplanes, satellites, and Unmanned Aerial Systems or drones. Each of these technologies serve 

a specific purpose for providing information based on imagery for 

farmers and improving their stewardship of natural resources and 

the sustainability of their farming operations. 

2

While we are only scratching the surface on the innovation that 

satellites and Unmanned Aerial Systems will bring to agriculture, 

manned airplanes also continue to play a vital role. Aerial imagery 

from manned airplanes is the foundation of the administration of 

Farm Service Agency programs, such as ARC and PLC, and we will 

hear more today about how FSA’s National Agricultural Imagery 

Program, NAIP, is useful to farmers and to a broad spectrum of 

other users, which in the past has included companies such as 

Google. 

This hearing is timely since the FAA finalized the Small Unmanned Aircraft Rule, known as Part 107, which governs commercial use of drones, just this week. Commercial drone use will now 

be possible without the need to acquire a special exemption, which 

under the old regulations could take up to 6 months to be approved. We will be engaging with industry to gather their views on 

the impacts of this new rule on the use of drones in agriculture. 

And before I turn to my colleague, I would like to note that the 

hearing on the Committee of Agriculture, Big Data and Agriculture: Innovation in the Air, has come to order, and before I recognize my ranking colleague in my role as a substitute, she too is 

ably manning this position, I think it would be worth noting that 

our good friend and the Ranking Member of this Subcommittee, 

Mr. Walz, is not at the hearing this morning. As many of you 

know, his brother, Craig, was killed in a tragic accident this past 

weekend, and Craig’s son, Jacob, was seriously injured. It is an incredibly difficult time for the Walz family, and of course, I and you 

together will keep them in our thoughts and prayers over the coming days and weeks ahead. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Crawford follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. ERIC A. ‘‘RICK’’ CRAWFORD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM ARKANSAS

Thank you all for being here for this hearing exploring big data and agriculture: 

innovation in the air. This is our second hearing in a series to educate Members 

about the different facets of this new frontier in agriculture. 

Production agriculture from 100 years ago is markedly different than it is today. 

While our farmers are still producing many of the same crops, a plow once pulled 

by a team of mules is now pulled by a tractor that satellites guide through the field. 

When formerly the only option a farmer had to control weeds was tilling the field 

with major losses to water and wind erosion, pinpoint chemical and fertilizer application now enables the use of no-till farming techniques. 

While these are just two simple examples, an important piece underpinning much 

of the innovation in agriculture, and specifically in precision agriculture, is the development of imaging and mapping technology. As we all know, maps of farmland 

and crops are not new, but the means of capturing and utilizing this imagery is constantly changing. 

We will have an opportunity to hear about three technologies used to capture images—manned airplanes, satellites, and Unmanned Aerial Systems or drones. Each 

of these technologies can serve a specific purpose for providing information based 

on imagery for farmers and improving their stewardship of natural resources and 

the sustainability of their farming operations. 

While we are only scratching the surface on the innovation that satellites and Unmanned Aerial Systems will bring to agriculture, manned airplanes also continue 

to play a vital role. Aerial imagery from manned airplanes is the foundation of the 

administration of Farm Service Agency programs, such as ARC and PLC. We will 

hear more today about how FSA’s National Agricultural Imagery Program, or NAIP, 

is useful to farmers and to a broad spectrum of other users, which in the past have 

included companies such as Google. 

3

This hearing is also timely since the FAA finalized the Small Unmanned Aircraft 

Rule, known as Part 107, which governs commercial use of drones, just this week. 

Commercial drone use will now be possible without the need to acquire a special 

exemption, which under the old regulations could take up to 6 months to be approved. We will be engaging with industry to gather their views on the impacts of 

this new rule on the use of drones in agriculture. 

Before I conclude and before we carry on with today’s hearing, I want to briefly 

change the subject. You can all see that the Ranking Member and my good friend 

Mr. Walz is not at the hearing this morning. As some of you may know, his brother 

Craig was killed in a tragic accident this past weekend and Craig’s son Jacob was 

seriously injured. This is an incredibly difficult time for the Walz family, and I’d 

ask that you keep them all in your thoughts and prayers over the days and weeks 

ahead. 

Ms. Graham has graciously agreed to fill in for him today, and I now recognize 

her for her opening statement.

Mr. LUCAS. Ms. Graham has graciously agreed to fill in for him 

today, and at this point I would like to recognize her for any opening statement that she would have. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GWEN GRAHAM, A 

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM FLORIDA 

Ms. GRAHAM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I echo your 

thoughts regarding Mr. Walz, and I ask that we all continue to 

keep him and his family in our prayers. 

It has been a tough time to be a farmer in America today. The 

farm economy is struggling, and farmers are being forced to do 

more with less. As Members of this Subcommittee, our role is to 

protect our existing agriculture infrastructure, while exploring new 

ways to make it work more effectively and efficiently. 

Aerial imaging is at the forefront of innovation in agriculture. 

This technology has already proven to be an important tool for agriculture agencies, and it has great potential to make farming operations more streamlined and efficient. I look forward to hearing 

today how we can safely harness this technology to benefit individual farmers and farm programs like crop insurance and others. 

Thank you very much for being here today. You all represent the 

different sectors of the aerial data collection industry, and your testimony will shed light on applications for this technology in the 

realm of agriculture. I look forward to hearing from each of you, 

and Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. LUCAS. I thank the Ranking Member for her insightful opening statement. The chair would request that other Members submit 

their opening statement for the record so that the witnesses may 

begin their testimony, and to ensure that there is ample time for 

questions. 

I would like to welcome to the table our witnesses. Mr. Lanny 

Faleide, President of Satshot, Incorporated, Fargo, North Dakota. 

Mr. Craig Molander, Senior Vice President, Business Development, 

Surdex Corporation, Chesterville, Missouri, was unable to be with 

us today due to flight complications, and every Member of this 

Committee understands the joys of flights in this day and time. In 

his place, we have Mr. Tim Crago, Vice President of North West 

Geomatics Limited, Calgary, Alberta, will be giving his testimony, 

and also, Mr. Robert Blair, Farmer/Vice President, Measure Drones 

as a Service, Kendrick, Idaho. 

And with that, Mr. Faleide, you may begin whenever you are 

ready, sir. 

4

STATEMENT OF RODNEY ‘‘LANNY’’ FALEIDE, FOUNDER AND 

PRESIDENT, SATSHOT INC., FARGO, ND 

Mr. FALEIDE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for inviting me to your hearing here today, and the Members of the Committee as well. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss a little bit 

about our experience and how imaging technologies and big data 

comes together. I have my written testimony, as has been submitted, and I will provide an overview of that. There are many details in there that I won’t go into. 

Let me give you a little history of why I am in this business and 

how it all happened. I farmed for about 18+ years with my father 

in central North Dakota, starting around 1978. I received my pilot’s 

license before that, and I was actually taking pictures of my fields 

with new infrared photography back in about 1977. I thought it 

was pretty cool looking at the fields, and I remember one time or 

many times, actually, my father would say to me, ‘‘Gee, Lanny, the 

fields don’t look very good. Your new ideas are maybe not proper 

ones.’’ And of course, I would say, ‘‘Dad, why are you looking at the 

fields at noon? Why don’t you look at them at 8:00 a.m. in the 

morning when you are up and I might still be in bed, or at night 

at 8:00 p.m. when the sunlight reflects off the leaves and shines 

the quality of the crop?’’ Well, that was always a discussion point 

that we had. 

But I learned from my father’s history and how he grew up in 

an open cab tractor how the soils worked, how the fields looked, 

how the vegetation changed. I saw the variability in the fields back 

then as a young farmer. I went through the 1980s. As many of you 

know, that farm situation was very difficult. Actually, I looked into 

some satellite stuff in 1987 when some of the first private satellites 

went up, European satellites and government satellites in the 

United States. But in 1992, we decided to go back to school and 

change our careers, because farming was very difficult. That lasted 

for about a year, and I started a company, and so we went and say 

well, I like to do imaging technologies with satellites. That turned 

into a discussion with American Crystal Sugar Beets, a company 

up in Fargo Morehead, and a colleague of mine now that works for 

me was part of that. I said let’s go look at all the sugarbeet fields. 

Let’s see if we can monitor nitrogen off of these sugarbeet leaves 

and come up with a more environmental, economically sound practice to develop variable rate solutions to manage nitrogen. Because 

they were paying on high quality sugar content. So back 20+ years 

ago, we were already looking at that. 

In 1996, we did the first actionable—that is the word, actionable 

variable rate application of nitrogen with a satellite image: 1996. 

That is 20 years ago. The technology was put into a tractor with 

an ag leader monitor, GPS, variable rating with a Raven Industries 

nitrogen controller, a company out of Sioux Falls, South Dakota. 

The technology that we are talking about, bringing imaging in to 

help precision agriculture, which started at about the same time officially was available then. We have been doing this for 20 years. 

The difficulties to get that technology out into a form that allows 

the farmers to understand it and to see it easily with one, two, 

three button approach, it has been a struggle. We were using mobile devices in the early 2000s, around the 2000 timeframe, but it 

5

wasn’t on the phone. Because of the iPhone, android phone, mobile 

devices, the ability to stream that into the farmers’ hands, right 

into the tractors, is now completely available today. 

The question is, is how do we get that technology to scale up? 

All the interpretation of imagery, whether it is from a satellite, an 

airplane—and we did aerial imaging in 1998 as well—and drones 

now, or UAVs, let’s bring the proper terminology to that, is now 

using technologies that have been developed by the scientific community and from NASA and others, and now we are just embracing 

that. Now with the mobile technologies going and bringing that 

into the hands of everybody just in the last 4 or 5 years has become 

commonplace, and with the stringing of fiberoptics across many 

parts of the rural areas, which I am very happy in North Dakota, 

where I am from, we are maybe about 80, 90 percent fiberopticbased. And that actually helped our company partner with a new 

Silicon Valley company to put two $1 million satellite receiving stations in the middle of North Dakota on my prairie farmland. 

What I am trying to get at is the technology is moving fast. Education really needs to be done more, but the economics of the current farm situation is now starting to open up eyes to a number 

of farmers and ag companies, and that scaling up of availability of 

data to help control costs is becoming a very, very possible situation. 

This morning I just had a brand new customer clamoring for imagery from us, and I said, ‘‘Look, we just got an image 2 days ago 

that covered all of Iowa. Here you go. Let’s do variable rate nitrogen.’’ 

So in closing, I will be open to any questions here, more details, 

but the big data situation is taking care of a lot of things. Our big 

data today is tomorrow’s small data. The industries are adapting 

to that, but there is a great future in precision agriculture and how 

imaging is going to be used to help farmers to economically farm 

in the future. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Faleide follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RODNEY ‘‘LANNY’’ FALEIDE, FOUNDER AND PRESIDENT, 

SATSHOT INC., FARGO, ND 

Hon. ERIC A. ‘‘RICK’’ CRAWFORD, 

Chairman,

Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities and Risk Management, 

House Committee on Agriculture, 

Washington, D.C.

Subject: Big Data in Agriculture—Innovations in the Air

I am the founder and President of Satshot. I have been deeply engaged in developing remote sensing technologies for agriculture since the early 1990’s. My accomplishments include creating the first variable rate applications map back in 1996, 

based on imagery and assisting in the development of agronomic remote sensing 

methods. My current responsibilities at Satshot include driving strategic vision, 

overseeing operations, and marketing the Company’s products to high-value strategic accounts. 

Satshot began analyzing satellite imagery for agriculture in 1994. In 1998, the 

Company released their first web-based GIS mapping software, becoming the first 

commercial user of MapServer, a NASA funded open-source software that serves as 

a geographic data rendering engine. In 2003, Satshot migrated its mapping database to open cloud based technology, allowing more user customization and seamless 

integration with more data sources. 

6

Satshot is focused on producing and marketing satellite data products for sale to 

agribusiness, such as production cooperatives, ag suppliers, crop consultants and 

also crop Insurance companies as well as to individual producers. Satshot is currently marketing the Satshot system across 400 million acres across North America 

and expanding around the world in countries like Brazil, Argentina, Russia, 

Ukraine and Australia. 

Our Satshot system is also being integrated into Precision Ag systems softwares 

to access satellite imagery directly through their processes. Our history, current 

business and leading capabilities position us for exponential growth in Agriculture 

Sales & Marketing, Precision Agriculture, Ag Intelligence, Crop Identification, Crop 

Acreage Estimation, Yield Evaluation and Environmental Monitoring. 

Satshot is one of precision agriculture’s longest operating and most interconnected 

data providers, uniquely offering advanced analytics through automated processing 

and distribution of imagery. Satshot’s cutting edge push notification system enables 

global delivery of updated field-specific imagery the moment it becomes available. 

Satshot is sensor agnostic and has the ability to bundle the entire imagery distribution chain, delivering from all sources. Image sensors have the same specifications 

and conform to NASA standards, thus the supply of imagery data sold by Satshot 

is based on the same structures of multi-spectral bands. As a result, Satshot’s core 

code can enter any imagery server, including drones, and distinctively pull out imagery field by field. 

The remote sensing imagery for agriculture has its official beginning back in the 

early 1970s when the first satellite Landsat was launched for largely to monitor agriculture. Since then technology has rapidly increased with resolution coverage and 

technical enhancements. The concept of using imagery to define field crop conditions 

is nothing new. Even in the previous decade, near infrared photography was used 

to define vegetation bias with photographic film, For example, all SSURGO soils 

maps created were based off of high resolution grayscale images taken in the 1950s, 

1960s and 1970s 

I got my start taking aerial NIR images of my fields in 1977 of my farm in central 

North Dakota. The advancements in technology has now allowed me to look at any 

field anywhere on the earth right from my desk or through a mobile devices in the 

tractor and use that image to define crop production patterns while adjusting them 

on the fly to manage crop inputs more efficiently for more profit gain. You can also 

look at crop damage to assess crop insurance loss across a field and define more 

accurately production and quality of the growing crop. 

These real-time observations and advancements are the core future of how agriculture will be managed to gain the best profitability to manage our food production 

system for our food security needs. 

There are many way to provide image crop production data to the user. My company Satshot, specializes in satellites because of their ability to cover large area of 

the [E]arth. We also use aerial and UAV imagery if desired by the customer. There 

are many consideration of logistics to get the proper data to the farmer cost effectively and timely. Each of these platforms whether Satellite, Aerial and UAV have 

their advantages and disadvantages. 

Satellite imagery has a relative advantage over other types of other agronomic 

data layers given its comprehensive geographical coverage, lack of privacy issues, 

and rapidly increasing analytical capabilities. The scalability of satellite imaging 

also makes it the most cost effective form of coverage. Ongoing development in the 

private commercial satellite industry provides detailed spatial and spectral resolution imagery that allows for increasingly accurate in-season yield variability measurements, soil and water content monitoring, and harvest yield estimates. I believe 

that at this time that accessing any field on the earth anytime is an extremely valuable tool, that is why we focus on the satellite source as first option. 

Satellite Imagery Market 

New satellite launches will make consistent weekly access to in-season imagery 

possible, providing growers real-time crop conditions. Scheduled satellite launches 

will provide daily curated imagery for future growing seasons. Advancements in on 

board remote sensing analytic capabilities from satellites coupled with increasing 

adoption rates for precision ag services in general are projected to drive considerable 

demand for imagery based crop health analytical products. 

Recent estimates show the size of the precision agriculture market in the U.S. is 

between $1.5 and $2.0 billion. It is estimated over the next 5 years to grow at greater than 13% per annum to reach $3.0 to $3.5 billion. Outside the U.S., including 

developing countries where the need to improve productivity is even greater, the 

growth rate is expected to be over 25% per year. Satellite imagery offers the compelVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:26 Jul 25, 2016 Jkt 041481 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\114-54\20574.TXT BRIAN
7

ling benefit of being the fastest growing area of the precision agriculture market, 

while also having the highest ceiling. 

The recent CropLife/Purdue Precision Agriculture Survey project that this year 

that over 46% of the growers are using satellite imagery, up from 33.3% in 2013. 

Next generation imaging promises further intensification of demand with improved 

remote sensing technology and increasing downstream market potential. 

Satellite Imagery Data Agriculture Uses 

Satellite imagery has important applications to other aspects of farm management 

which also include: year-to-year comparisons on a micro-area or macro basis; early 

detection of crop stress (weeds, disease); accurate mapping of damage (hail, floods, 

etc.) for insurance purposes; yield estimation of crop and acreage and others. 

Satellite Imagery allows Agribusiness the visibility to precisely target their products and solutions to the right prospect at the right time and with the right offer. 

In addition to serving the Agribusiness sector, we provide solutions for the growers. 

Imagery analysis involves quantitative evaluation of satellite images for crop health 

vegetative growth patterns across fields. 

Satellites can deliver broadscale field resolution imagery, information and analysis to the farmer/grower to use in their precision farming systems. Crops and vegetation appear differently in each spectral band, and these differences can vary due 

to plant vigor, soil type, available moisture, and a host of other factors. 

Results of this analysis are used to supply information for precision farming operations, in assisting crop production decisions, and in making yield and quality estimates on a detailed level. Growers can draw in their field and analyze each field 

by acres, and build maps to scout or variable rate their field. Maps can be exported 

directly to variable rate controllers into their tractors or application equipment. 

GIS mapped farm boundaries associated with landowner contact information and 

related vendors for substantially all farmland in the United States can also drive 

field-level distribution. Back-end tracking of notification interest and imagery distribution allows the user to build multi-layer relationship trees that identify valuable interactions within the big geospatial data systems hierarchy user ecosystem. 

As a companies user base grows, these relationship networks become increasingly 

valuable. 

Imagery analytical tools allow the grower to analyze a farm field for vegetation 

variability, which relates to different productivity of soils within the field. Tying this 

information with agronomic knowledge and farming techniques, one can efficiently 

apply chemicals and fertilizers where needed for improved productive capabilities. 

Vegetation field variability is determined by analyzing near Infrared wavelengths 

obtained from the satellite sensors. 

By providing soil type, precipitation and the history on farm field production down 

to 5 meter2 resolutions or better, the grower can efficiently maximize farm production by applying the right quantity and type of seed variety, the optimal amount 

of water and fertilizer, etc. To the dealer it provides the farm field level intelligence 

to recommend the optimal seed variety to the farmers or appropriate type and quantity of fertilizer. 

Satellite Imagery can be available within as early as 24–48 hrs. from the time 

the satellite takes an image. Once available, web-based GIS systems allow the user 

to quickly submit field information over a website, which can be turned into management information for ag companies. In return farmer/growers can have access to 

incentives for crop information submitted. 

Although many precision ag platforms still use the free low resolution imagery 

from Landsat, it has significant limitations in deciphering the sub-field variance 

necessary to make accurate agronomic decisions. Detailed image accuracy allows for 

more precise field management. Different satellites provide comprehensive offerings 

of high quality imagery data sources with resolutions ranging from 30 meters to 25 

centimeters: 

Insight into crop variability using various graphical indicators, known as vegetation indices are created by the coordination of various satellite sensor readings for 

electromagnetic reflectance. During the photosynthetic process, the chlorophyll in 

plants captures electromagnetic energy, but does so at varying levels for waves of 

different lengths. Vegetation indices use the variation in specific wavelength channel reflections to analyze chlorophyll content and extrapolate a field’s vegetation biomass. 

These analytics are accomplished by sensor reflectance readings for near-infrared, 

red-edge, red, green, and blue electromagnetic waves. Healthy leaves with high chlorophyll levels reflect wavelengths that distinctively fall in the near-infrared band, 

whereas distressed leaves absorb waves. High near-infrared reflectance corresponds 

with crop health. Similarly, chlorophyll strongly absorbs red wavelengths and reVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:26 Jul 25, 2016 Jkt 041481 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\114-54\20574.TXT BRIAN
8

flects green. As such, low red reflectance and high green reflectance are both indicators of healthy pants. The different vegetation indices utilize different wavelength 

channel reflectance to provide a variety of field information 

Imagery is increasingly viable for determining real-time intra-field yield variability, an essential component to precision ag practices. Near-infrared wavelengths 

show the most detailed field variability analysis of a field. 

Precision Agriculture Growth 

Powerful technological trends are developing within precision agriculture. These 

trends include increasing hardware and software adoption, cloud connectivity, and 

growing data standards for platform integrations. Rapid growth in the agricultural 

data science market is fostering companies to move quickly to penetrate the market. 

Many companies are developing large user geospatial bases by empowering local 

agronomists and dealers to make informed, graphical decisions for their clients. 

Rapid growth in the agricultural data science market is fostering unprecedented 

levels of growth opportunities to penetrate the market. Precision Ag Data companies 

are building large client user bases over years by empowering local agronomists and 

dealers to make informed, graphical decisions for their clients. 

Field Management focused on fulfilling orders for curated imagery in real-time 

and providing clear analytics that intentionally do not provide direct recommendations, will serve as highly effective tools for informing or validating agronomic decisions. Enhanced remote sensed imagery from different multi-spectral channels with 

multi-temporal capabilities during the growing season are coveted to quantify, 

project and manage vegetation changes of crops throughout the year. 

The driving force behind the growth of precision farming is that patterns of productivity are highly variable within a given farm field, and that farm management 

provided to this micro-level of variation can significantly reduce costs, while also increasing yield. However, this does require some investment in new equipment. In 

addition to variable rate applicators (fertilizer, chemicals, seed, and Water) and infield navigation equipment (i.e., GPS), a digital data map is provided from a georeferenced vegetation biomass Image dataset that tells the computer-controlled applicator how much to apply based on vegetation productivity. The data in this digital map can also be based on a number of sources, such as soil tests and historical 

yield (from harvester monitors). Patterns detected from satellite imagery can significantly enhance, and in some cases supplant, these other sources of information. 

New Satellite Technology shift 

Next generation satellites improve the frequency of in-season shots, allowing realtime monitoring of crop conditions. Leading partners developing high frequency satellite imaging will soon 1–3 years operate powerful micro satellites capable of shooting more reliable, inexpensive imagery on a weekly and eventually daily basis. The 

increasing availability of imagery allows the ag industry to fully leverage its notification capabilities by providing actionable crop condition updates. 

Tremendous disruption is underway for the satellite imaging industry, and the 

most notable breakthrough is the ambition of several well-funded entities to supply 

global satellite coverage with high-resolution daily imaging through small low-cost 

satellites that form constellations of ‘‘birds’’ of Microsats or CubeSats. The CubeSat 

low-orbit standard format is revolutionizing how satellites are used by providing 

much of the performance of a conventional satellite for a fraction of the cost by 

using many off-the-shelf micro technologies. 

The low cost of these micro satellites enable increased launches and therefore 

high frequency data. This creates a radical new data set, which makes clear a need 

for advanced processing and distribution technologies. The paradigm shift in the 

satellite imaging industry is that a current lack of image availability will quickly 

swing towards overcapacity over the next 10 years. 

The first private companies to build CubeSats already have a significant amount 

of traction and are entering their latter financing rounds with strong proof of concept. Critical design is complete and the focus has shifted to large-scale manufacturing and deployment. Many companies are planning to launch extensive constellations, several of which will cost in excess of $1 billion. 

At the same time, traditional satellite cost is also declining and many planned 

launches for relatively smaller and infinitely more powerful structures exist as well. 

Upcoming generations of satellites will also use new technologies like short-wave infrared, which is capable of seeing through smoke, clouds, fog and other particulates. 

The most recent or identified upcoming Satellite launches (traditional and CubeSat) 

will provide consistent global coverage and a nice scale to meet agricultural needs. 

Satellite imagery has a relative advantage over other imaging aerial platforms 

given its comprehensive geographical coverage, lack of permission issues, cost effecVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:26 Jul 25, 2016 Jkt 041481 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\114-54\20574.TXT BRIAN
9

tiveness, and rapidly increasing analytical capabilities. A single satellite image can 

cover millions of acres, enabling cost effective coverage. 

New satellite launches will make consistent weekly access to in-season imagery 

possible, providing growers real-time crop conditions. Scheduled satellite launches, 

will provide daily curated imagery for users. Advancements in remote sensing analytic capabilities from satellites coupled with increasing adoption rates for Precision 

Ag services in general, are projected to drive considerable demand for the industry. 

This increased availability of imagery will allow farmers to fully leverage image notification capabilities by using actionable crop condition updates. 

Most satellite imagery is used as a crop health vegetation analyses overlaid on 

a precisely bound, recent satellite image of a grower’s field. These images and analyses provide valuable insight for pre- and in-season crop conditions. Field image 

analysis employs a variety of data correction techniques on orthorectified satellite 

imagery and then applies a set of index algorithms which interpret channel wavelength data. 

Precision Ag software systems display this data as an image, enabling growers to 

easily view several measures of crop variability such as biomass diversity. Primary 

crop health indices include NIR, NIR Red Edge, NDVIR, NDVIG, and NDVI Red 

Edge. These graphical indicators enable users to easily build variable rate application maps or identify precise in-field zones to scout. Currently, Satellite processed 

spatial resolution of 5 meters provides the ideal mix of analytic capabilities, image 

cost, and geographical coverage. 

Many precision agriculture platforms employing imagery rely on low resolution 

imagery for cost savings, delivery now of 5⁄10 meter resolution imagery provide a 

drastic improvement over the industry standard Landsat images, which are often 

only available 2–4 times per season. While irregularities can begin to be seen with 

30 meter imagery, the reduced resolution also makes these images a less effective 

tool for precision applications. Distinct advantages of a high resolution quality data 

layer is essential for the level of accuracy for performing agronomic cross-analysis 

activities including definition and adjustment of management zones for variable rate 

applications. 

For super high resolution imagery from 1 MM to 6′′ resolution, The market for 

unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) commonly known as drones will be available upon 

approval by the FAA, which infant drone technologies seek to fill the white space 

left by satellites. UAV’s have a place along the modern agriculture imaging chain, 

and the marketplace will eventually grow once standardized, processing and delivery drone imagery will be little different than that of aerial imaging or satellites. 

Despite its limitations regarding logistical processing and scalability, the commercial unmanned aircraft systems market is projected to experience growth as a result 

of the integration of UAVs into the National Airspace System. UAV data will be 

more available following clarity on legal permission issues, standardization of imagery, and decreased bandwidth utilization. 

UAV’s do present problems associated with managing the data load because of the 

massive amount of pixel data, and the stumbling logistical points of platform execution. UAV’s do not currently provide scale and coverage, and are akin to fine dining 

for imaging. Big geospatial data systems are being developed to capitalize on this 

opportunity by easily incorporating UAV data into its existing data storage and analytical framework, This will require bigger servers and more bandwidth, but future 

core architectures will handle any data load to scale across the agriculture sector. 

A strong platform for imaging will ultimately fuse the use of UAV, satellite and 

aerial imaging, and capture the benefits of each source. With scalable infrastructure, these big geospatial data systems will have the ability to expand data curation, 

analysis, and delivery capabilities to include diverse geospatial data in raster and 

vector formats, from micro-weather sources, and soil sensors, among others. 

Satellites, Airplanes and UAV’s will solve the problem of imagery access in the 

near term, and successful systems will deliver these images in a useful format to 

the common grower. However, capabilities in a decision support system within the 

cab will make the biggest impact in terms of decision-making on the farm. Distribution of real-time data streams, coupled with unbiased education regarding how to 

leverage this information is really the Holy Grail of platform execution. Simplifying 

the massive data to meet the daily needs of the common grower through decision 

support modules will change the farming paradigm! 

Big Data—Cloud Structure—Todays Big Data Is Tomorrows Small Data! 

Cloud systems are becoming logical steps towards building a larger platforms for 

data storage, analysis, and mosaic processing, enabling distribution and management of mass amounts of satellite, aerial, and UAV data. 

10

Service providers, resellers and operators concur that the Internet is a key enabler in disseminating (EO) Earth observation data and services. Web-based platforms are becoming common for storing and distributing data sets and products, and 

will continue to provide innovative delivery platforms from which users can obtain 

data and services. 

A pillar of wide-ranging user ecosystems that include leading agronomic data providers, growers, cooperatives, crop consultants, crop insurance companies, dealers, 

crop input retailers, equipment manufacturers, and independent dashboards will become more available. Internet platforms and distribution is expected to be the important tool for attracting enterprise and private users in the effort to bring EO 

data to the masses. 

With these systems, Big data is now transforming modern agricultural practices 

by ingesting real-time field information into geospatial mapping systems. These systems along with big data allow farmers to get more out of their arable land in order 

to meet rising commercial agriculture production needs. There are few big data platforms which have proven to be scalable globally, particularly in areas of the world 

where there is limited access to historical yield, weather, water, topography and soil 

data to develop decision algorithms and support optimization of various agronomic 

models. 

In more advanced agricultural markets like the United States, data platforms 

struggle with logistical issues like quality of data acquisition and privacy. For reasons like these, the market is becoming increasingly reliant on satellite imagery 

technologies to collect real-time field crop data to inform GIS models for pixel-level 

applications. 

A focus on data cloud imagery infrastructure enables image providers to develop 

a range of applications that previously required complicated contracts with data providers or the maintenance of a separate geospatial database. Robust open platform 

user ecosystems continue to grow through an increasingly diverse group of agribusiness related entities, as third party developer momentum proliferates. 

Cloud infrastructures for back-end distribution for digital imagery curation and 

distribution capabilities are needed to highly scale to the ag sector. Once an image 

is delivered, users can measure, or project growth characteristics such as early season crop vigor, biomass, or yield variations through agronomic modeling. These models may determine economic return variability, define effective management zones, 

or inform timing of planting, treating, and harvesting the crop. 

Through the culmination of years of software development, leveraging cloud-driven distribution capabilities in a manner that provides more timely and frequent 

field management insights, companies like us are providing synergistic benefits and 

allow users to also leverage the clouds data infrastructure for easy storage, management, and sharing of their agronomic data. Cloud data systems must permit users 

to import other geospatial data layers such as UAV imagery, aerial imagery, and 

soil sensor data. For imagery, analysis tools must be broadly applied. 

Cloud Data delivery and notification infrastructures are also extending into third 

party software through API’s (Application Programming Interface). Core API structures must be enterprise ready and provide retrieval and batch processing of multiple value-added images from a single imagery hub. Also platform partners must 

be able to redistribute image products to a growing number of connected applications and users. 

Push to Grower Technology 

Data notification platforms are massively becoming deployable through relatively 

frictionless distribution. To accelerate scale, companies can intentionally omit direct 

recommendations, in favor of offering the most impactful set of applications and 

data for the use of their grower/advisor clients as support for individual judgments. 

The ability to link geospatial data and imagery with precision to areas within the 

individual farm field gives a distinct grower touch and results in the ability to deliver unique and highly relevant data. Data image hubs can effectively reach the 

edges of a mass user base at a fraction of the overall cost. 

Distributing predominantly high-resolution imagery, directly to the cab will help 

ease the case for precision management and machine empowerment through automation. Solutions must be scalable for rapid integrations into large agribusinesses. 

Enterprises must be able to quickly set up and link users to fields through extensively attributed databases and allow tools for the creation of a hierarchy of users, 

which enables clients to track interactions for active field management and big data 

analytics which will offer unique opportunities to immediately acquire a scalable, robust, and vertically focused imaging platform for agriculture. 

Platforms that are successful will tactically and strategically use cloud core code 

to enable a broad range of solutions for tracking user activity for social or ecosystem 

11

benefits while leveraging the cloud notification systems backbone to generate realtime, relevant dialogue with the grower. This allows scalable big data analysis 

through a network of APIs and advanced database-level algorithms, which users can 

access a system that is limitless in data-depiction and manipulation. 

Mobile Apps 

Mobile Image analytics software apps are now mostly cloud-driven, and used for 

in-field decision support solutions. These mobile applications offer analytical tools 

specifically focused on in-field analysis which enable users to define management 

zones for variable rate applications as well as track in-field crop condition events. 

Scouting tools within the app also provide tracking capabilities for users to record 

all the harvesting, soil-testing, and scouting events that take place throughout the 

season. Events are linked directly to field boundaries, allowing the information to 

be included in any related analysis. Additionally, ‘‘Photos’’ tabs give users the ability 

to shoot in-field images of problem areas from their mobile devices. These photos 

are precisely geo-tagged with the geographic coordinates of where they were taken. 

These mobile apps not only provide satellite and aerial imagery based analytics, 

but also seamlessly incorporates UAV imagery into the apps platform. When users 

conduct in-field biomass analyses based on satellite imagery, they are directed to 

specific zones of concern within the field. This streamlined process allows for targeted high resolution UAV imagery to detail leaf-level crop conditions. This synergistic use of satellites and UAV’s provides the optimal mix of data storage and detail 

for large scale management. Mobile in the field platforms show the consultant to 

the variations in the field. The consultant has the option to take a picture of the 

affected area and beam that right to the management team back at the office for 

immediate management techniques. 

Next-Generation Notification Capability: Automatic notification of field observations is fundamental to next generation customer acquisition and user interaction. 

Using multiple imaging sources to increase frequency and quality, normalizing all 

images, and introduce change detection algorithms in the near term and will be 

scalable globally, likely driving adoption of the notification center and the platform 

in general. 

Crop Insurance Claim & Compliance Analysis 

Satellite imagery has also been used extensively for 10 years or more for Crop 

Insurance and field loss claims. 

The USDA/RMA and the crop insurance industry uses satellite imagery to evaluate crop damage and assess a more accurate loss analysis of the crop loss event. 

Imagery is taken from satellite archives before the damage event and another image 

is tasked of the area after the event. An analysis of vegetation conditions are provided by acreage and percentage of vegetative change to the adjustor in the field, 

resulting in a more accurate loss determination. Imagery is also used in fraud 

claims to evaluate losses from previous year to determine accuracy of the adjustment. 

For crop loss determination, users can track crop loss claims and reports while 

at the same time analyzing vegetation loss through satellite imagery analysis. Features include claim tracking, map creation of field location, with GPS coordinates 

plus acreage of analysis using a satellite image taken 10 days of the loss. Map report generation of the vegetation zone characteristics by acre and percentage. Loss 

maps are printed and emailed to the loss adjuster in the field. 

Imagery is also used for creation of Crop Insurance map booklets tied to historical 

insurance yield information. For crop loss determination, imagery is used to evaluate crop damage and assess a more accurate loss analysis of the crop loss event. 

AG Intelligence 

Agricultural uses of satellite imagery to date, have historically focused on broad 

macro-based evaluations, such as regional, national, and international estimates of 

acreage and yield. However, agribusiness’s demand for satellite data is shifting to 

a more micro-based (local area, individual farm, and in-field) focus. The primary 

driver in this shift is the increasing adoption of precision farming techniques for increased crop input and yield maximization efficiency. 

Individual field vegetation analysis of satellite data provides users access to enhanced tools to process and analyze satellite imagery of comparable fields or groups 

of fields. Imagery analysis involves quantitative evaluation of satellite images for 

patterns and trends. Crops and vegetation, can be compared by farm to farm or 

county by county by a host of agronomic vegetative factors. 

Software platforms will continue to be developed further to provide more advanced crop monitoring tools automatically for the Agribusiness community and provide detailed reports of crop acreage conditions. This allows grain buyers/traders to 

12

quantitatively assess the impact of drought conditions. Similarly, users can use tools 

and datasets to evaluate crop growing conditions. 

The need for future food security for evaluating crop levels will allow stability of 

the food supply for Worlds needs. In the past few years, volatility in crop prices has 

been caused by a lack of real-time information on crop conditions and their levels 

of productivity. For example, in the 2010 season the agriculture grain trading industry was affected by the inadequate crop information sources of the Russian wheat 

crop, resulting in a 50% increase of prices within weeks. 

Also these past years, inaccurate USDA crops report have resulted in an increase 

in crop prices that has affected the stability of commodity stocks , like corn and soybeans. The ability to track crop information down to the field level and its infield 

variability tied to grower operator information will result in new tools to allow the 

food security situation to be addressed. 

The ability to have real-time information of crops is invaluable for the proper pricing of commodities. Satellite imagery provides real-time crop information across the 

country and the world throughout. 

Crop Identification, Crop Acreage Estimation and Yield Evaluation 

Many new satellites have just been available in the past years. These new satellites have changed the logistics in accessing real-time growing information like 

never seen before. New satellites system can access ten times more information realtime than current and previous satellites. World coverage of satellite images and 

data linked with field boundary data allows multiple satellite sources in varying resolution and footprints to remotely:

• Identify crops, current vegetation and crop density.

• Evaluate and track crop growth trends against other regions, other years.

• Assist crop insurers to estimate risk based on vegetation patterns and confirm 

loss claims.

• Assist Farm lenders to evaluate current and potential crop income.

• Provide grain buyers visibility to available grain production acres.

• Early detection of crop stress (weeds, disease).

• Accurate mapping of damage (hail, floods, etc.) for insurance purposes.

• Estimated current vegetation using biomass information which has been calibrated with verifiable crop data.

• Precipitation and weather data.

• Previous crop rotation (i.e., is their current vegetative state the product of a 

good crop year or crop rotation).

• 3D topographic elevation of each farm field.

• Biomass Index that allows to estimate current level of vegetation in regular 

(e.g., every 3–4 days) intervals.

• Weather reports tied to Grower degree days and crop stages relating to Vegetation Image maps.

Other developments in the market include environmental monitoring, for carbon 

management and food security. Technologies allow regulators or the market to accurately define the level of total biomass carbon sequestration on agricultural land 

and its acreage. Identifying and monitoring actual carbon sources and carbon sinks 

within a given region or farm, with comparisons of net carbon dioxide emission 

sources amongst individual crop fields, can improve annual reporting of carbon sequestration levels per agricultural grower. 

Hyperspectral Imaging 

Applied research for high spectral resolution imagery in agriculture is increasing 

due to availability of new image sensors. This technology is expected to gain high 

levels of adoption in the future once new spectral libraries are created, improving 

efficiency and market awareness of detailed crop conditions. 

The benefits of hyperspectral imagery lie in its ability to attribute a complete 

wavelength spectrum to each individual pixel. This creates hundreds more spectral 

bands than multi-spectral imagery, enabling precise measurements that support a 

variety of agronomic activities. This includes added accuracy for yield predictions, 

vegetative stress detection, seed stock differentiation, and crop tillage methodology 

assessments. Advancements in hyper spectral remote sensing and applied research 

will provide users added precision for better yield projections, vegetative stress detection, and crop quality differentiation. 

13

Future Agricultural Imaging Trends 

Curated imagery provides a powerful data layer along with robust suites of analytical tools to support long-term agronomic decision making processes. High volume 

satellite image distribution platforms have ben available for agriculture for a number of years, and as the commercial space industry releases next generation satellites capable of more frequent in-season monitoring, scalable, high utility components for agronomic platforms must be available for the agricultural information 

market 

Big data will be an ever increasing concern because of the massive amounts of 

information we gather for defining our fields needs for more efficient production. 

The tech industry has the infrastructure to handle this growth. The main issues are 

data privacy and security concerns which need to be addressed, and the proper rules 

applied for secure access to agricultural data. These issues can be resolved by looking at other industries data policies, and to allow open data standards to continue 

to develop. Transparency of data will be key to the growth of the agriculture information industry to allow new technology to proliferate and create a robust food industry for our future growth as a society. 

Sincerely,

RODNEY ‘‘LANNY’’ FALEIDE, 

President, 

Satshot Inc.

Mr. LUCAS. Thank you, Mr. Faleide. 

Mr. Crago, you are recognized for 5 minutes. Pushing that button 

is always important, yes. 

STATEMENT OF TIM CRAGO, VICE PRESIDENT, NORTH WEST 

GEOMATICS LTD., CALGARY, AB, CAN; ON BEHALF OF CRAIG 

MOLANDER, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, BUSINESS

DEVELOPMENT, SURDEX CORPORATION, CHESTERFIELD, 

MO 

Mr. CRAGO. It is only one button. You think I could figure that 

out. 

Mr. Chairman and other Members of the Subcommittee, thank 

you very much for the opportunity. I appreciate it very much. What 

I would like to provide is a bit of a discussion on the innovation 

in the air, and specifically as it relates to the NAIP Program, which 

is the National Agricultural Imagery Program. This is a longstanding aerial imagery program that was initiated and is currently maintained by the Aerial Photography Field Office out of 

FSA in Salt Lake City. The program has been running since 2002, 

and from its beginning and what it is today is a program that collects high resolution aerial imagery of the entire lower 48 states, 

currently, on a 2 year refresh cycle. There are three prime contractors that are awarded 5 year contracts with annual task orders 

issued, and these companies work in collaboration with the APFO 

in Salt Lake City and with each other in ensuring that the entire 

lower 48 states are covered on a 2 year cycle. 

The program is interesting in the way that it came about, and 

as it has evolved over the years. What I would like to do is find 

my presentation and put some examples of the imagery up for you 

to view. There we go. Thank you. 

So this program is undertaken with aircraft, and as it has 

evolved over the years, it has taken advantage of technological advances in the sensor technology. What you see on the screen here 

are two images taken last year in Wyoming, one standard color 

RGB, the one on the right is color infrared. These two renditions 

are part of the visible spectrum that are acquired simultaneously 

14

by a single sensor. Another example of it from Craighead County 

in Arkansas, again taken in 2015. 

This evolution of the technology that has occurred has really 

been a result of driving from the USDA from FSA, and manufacturers of these sensors in trying to accommodate the requirements 

of the USDA and undertaking its role in providing this type of data 

to the USDA and to the farmers themselves. 

Here is another example of the ability to take this imagery and 

provide a 3D version of it, simply from a single flight. 

One of the innovations that has occurred, and you can appreciate 

that this data is acquired, the value of the data is getting the data 

into the hands of those folks within FSA that have requirements 

with respect to management of various programs, including RMA 

programs and other programs within the USDA. 

The urgency of getting this data and the currency of this data 

is of utmost importance. One of the innovations that has been driven by FSA has been the requirement now to provide this data within 5 days of a flight, so you can appreciate that at the beginning 

of the program, delivery times were something in the order of 

months, and today we are delivering the imagery to Salt Lake City 

within 5 days of acquisition. It is made available through a web 

service, and it is available to all participants within the FSA and 

their requirements for compliance and monitoring. 

To give you an idea of what we are talking about here, to cover 1⁄2 of the lower 48 in a single acquisition season—and remember, 

an acquisition season is during peak crop growing times—the three 

contractors that undertake this work have, at any one time, up to 

25 aircraft with sensors in the aircraft. Some of the parameters for 

the acquisition are 35,000′ altitude, speeds of up to 200 knots. 

In summary, what I want to communicate to you is some of the 

improvements that have occurred and the importance of this program in the sense that the original program was partial state coverage. This is now full state coverage. It is 1⁄2 of the 48 states. Resolution has gone from a 2 meter acquisition now to some states 

being done at a 1⁄2 meter resolution. Originally the program was all 

film. It is now all digital. It is all multiband. Accuracy is an extremely important part of this when you consider the comparison 

and use of CLUs and other land units in relationship to the imagery. Delivery, as I said, has gone from several months down to 

5 days. And finally, what we have is a program now that is being 

undertaken for approximately 1⁄2 of the cost that it was being undertaken with as recently as 5 years ago. 

This funding issue is probably one of the most significant ones 

in the sense that the program is not authorized specifically for the 

NAIP program, and you can see in this chart the fluctuations in 

the funding. The desire of the USDA and FSA and the APFO in 

Salt Lake City is complete 48 state coverage within 1 year. That 

would require an authorization of approximately $30 million per 

year. The last couple of years, we have been able to secure funding 

for about 1⁄2, and this is a consideration we would like to put to 

the Subcommittee is consideration of an authorization for full 48 

state acquisition annually at an annual cost of $30 million per 

year. 

15

And with that, I will thank you for your time, and I would welcome any questions later. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Molander follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CRAIG MOLANDER, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, BUSINESS

DEVELOPMENT, SURDEX CORPORATION, CHESTERFIELD, MO 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for the opportunity to testify at this morning’s hearing on ‘‘Big Data 

and Agriculture: Innovation in the Air.’’ I am Craig Molander, Senior Vice President 

of Surdex Corporation, one of the three prime contractors working with the USDA’s 

Farm Service Agency (FSA) to implement the National Agricultural Imagery Program or NAIP. With me is Tim Crago, Vice President of North West Geomatics Ltd., 

representing another of the three NAIP contractors. Surdex and North West have 

each been involved with NAIP for 15 years. 

Agriculture, because of its tie to the land, has been a leader in mapping since the 

1930s when USDA first began collecting aerial photography of farmland on a small 

scale basis, then consolidated its efforts with the Aerial Photography Field Office 

in Salt Lake City (APFO) in 1977. NAIP was initiated in 2002 to coordinate the collection of imagery in support of the administration of FSA farm programs. Today, 

NAIP imagery covers the entire lower 48 states and has achieved a 2 year refresh 

cycle. It is safe to say that this is the largest continuous imagery mapping program 

in U.S. history. 

So useful has NAIP imagery become that a 2014 National Earth Portfolio Assessment by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy ranked NAIP as 

the fifth most important of 149 existing [E]arth observation systems in terms of assisting Federal agencies and providing societal benefits. Much of the imagery in consumer products, from automobile GPS systems to web services companies, that consumers assume originate with satellites, actually come from NAIP and other aerial 

sources. 

Imagery from satellites and drones also play vital roles, and we appreciate that 

this hearing has been structured to explore the importance of each of these technologies in a complementary fashion. NAIP, however, has demonstrated that aerial 

imagery acquisition is uniquely capable of providing widespread coverage that meets 

the demanding seasonal windows aligned with peak crop growing seasons and 

weather and cloud constraints. 

Within USDA, NAIP imagery is a key geospatial data layer for FSA, the Risk 

Management Agency (RMA), the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), 

the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), which use it for a variety of farmer services and program compliance 

functions. But NAIP imagery is used far beyond USDA itself. It is made available 

both government-wide and to the public for digital download, purchase at nominal 

cost—literally the cost of a thumb drive—or web imagery services hosted by the 

APFO. Within the Federal Government, other users include the Department of [the] 

Interior and its U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

Homeland Security, the Census Bureau, and the National Geospatial-Intelligence 

Agency. State and local governments use NAIP imagery to support functions from 

law enforcement to fire and emergency services to crisis management to transportation to urban planning to natural resources management and monitoring. In the 

private sector, NAIP imagery has become an essential tool for companies involved 

in mining and energy, urban planning, engineering, and environmental analysis. Attachment A shows the range of entities using NAIP imagery from the USDA NRCS 

portal. 

Finally, individual farmers and their supporting services use NAIP for a host of 

farm management functions. They are a foundation for FSA’s Common Land Units, 

crucial to acreage reporting for crop insurance and farm programs, and are integrated into precision farming, agronomic analysis, and irrigation systems. Attachment B is a list of typical NAIP farmer uses. In order to assure consistency and 

avoid duplication, the NAIP program, and particularly its technical specifications, 

are coordinated though the government-wide Federal Geographic Data Committee 

created in 1990 by OMB Circular A–16 and co-chaired by the Secretary of [the] Interior and the Deputy Director of OMB, as well as its National Digital Orthoimagery 

Program (NDOP) subcommittee. 

The collection and processing of NAIP imagery each year is a substantial undertaking that has required continual investment by contractors in equipment, software, and process refinement. Imagery is acquired under ‘‘leaf-on’’ conditions during 

16

the growing season in order to reflect crop status. This is in marked contrast to 

nearly all other Federal, state, and local government ‘‘leaf-off’’ projects at higher resolution for traditional mapping. The aircraft used in NAIP, approximately twentyfive of them in 2015, represent an investment of $2.5 to $3.5 million each. These 

aircraft operate at up to 35,000′ using multi-spectral sensors yielding color and 

color-infrared imagery. Standard NAIP products include Compressed County Mosaics (CCMs) and Digital Orthophoto Quarter-Quadrangle (DOQQ) imagery. In recent 

years, the contractors have implemented Early Access Web Services (EAWS) to provide initial imagery within 5 days of acquisition, allowing USDA and its Federal 

partners to begin analysis earlier and meet demanding reporting timelines. 

NAIP imagery fits seamlessly into modern Geospatial Information Systems as a 

‘‘base layer’’ that is combined with other layers such as farm program data, information on structures and underground pipelines, political boundaries, financial and 

[C]ensus information, land agronomics, elevation data, soil qualities, addresses, so 

on. Often, these systems also incorporate imagery from drones and satellites to address special needs, creating powerful systems for business, government, and 

science. 

Over the years, we have witnessed numerous improvements in NAIP:

• Cost: The program cost has fallen sharply from an estimated $55 million per 

year to cover the entire lower forty-eight states a few years ago to now just 

below $30 million, a result both of improved technology and excellent program 

management by FSA’s APFO. APFO has reduced the program to three prime 

contractors (down from as many as ten early in the program) to streamline 

management and coordination.

• Quality: NAIP imagery is now entirely captured with digital sensors rather 

than film cameras, and has improved in clarity to as fine as 1⁄2 meter resolution, 

thus meeting established map accuracy standards at the highest level. The 

multi-spectral data can be exploited using automated classification for investigation of plant health, spread of infestations such as bark beetles and the like. 

The success of the program has resulted in its standards and guidelines being 

adopted by many other Federal, state, and local projects.

• Speed and currency: Initial imagery is now available within 5 days of acquisition and final products within 30 days. With resolution of the funding issue discussed below, it is possible to provide coverage of the entire lower 48 states on 

an annual basis, which would provide substantial benefits to program users. 

User surveys conducted by the USDA and organizations such as the National 

States Geographic Information Council (NSGIC) highlight the need for annual 

coverage. Surveys by the USDA have shown a consistently very high level of 

satisfaction among NAIP users.

The result of these improvements has been an extremely high return on taxpayer 

dollars, a high value for funding partners, and more widespread use both by publicand private-sectors. 

The single greatest concern regarding NAIP is its funding structure that has resulted in instability. Since NAIP originally was created as an internal oversight/

service initiative within the FSA, it has been funded primarily out of FSA’s own 

‘‘salaries and expenses’’ appropriation—despite the program’s wide use both by government and the public—and without a separate statutory authorization from Congress. FSA’s support for NAIP has been strong and unwavering, a principal reason 

that NAIP has survived several years of budget constraints. FSA annually provides 

about 2⁄3 of the annual cost of NAIP, with its partners, notably USGS, NRCS, and 

USFS, funding the remaining portion along with occasional investments by state 

partners. As mentioned earlier, public users of NAIP and noncontributing government agencies obtain imagery essentially for free. 

This situation has placed FSA in a difficult position with regard to NAIP, and the 

result has been unpredictable program funding. (Attachment C contains a chart 

showing the annual NAIP funding from 2003 through 2016.) In years when FSA 

faces severe internal funding needs—be it staff training, implementation of farm 

bills or other major legislation, computer upgrades or maintaining field offices—

these create direct competition for funding NAIP. In some years, FSA has been 

forced to turn to the Commodity Credit Corporation to fill the gap. In other years, 

contracts were finalized too late for much of the growing season. 

For this reason, we have long advocated that Congress adopt a statutory line-item 

authorization and appropriations for NAIP as a basis for long-term funding stability. We hope you will consider this idea in upcoming legislation. 

From our collective experience in contracting with Federal, state, and local government, we at Surdex and North West Geomatics have found NAIP an exemplary 

17

illustration of a true government-private partnership that has improved products 

and services and exploited technology to lower costs, resulting in expanded coverage. 

Our annual contractor meetings with APFO at the end of each year to review lessons learned and explore improvements features open discussions benefitting both 

sides and, most importantly, improve the quality, accuracy, and timeliness of our 

imagery for the end-users. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to appear at today’s hearing. We would be 

glad to answer any questions you might have. 

ATTACHMENT A 

Data Distribution by the USDA

Downloads of CCMs from the USDA 

Geospatial Gateway 

Downloads by Usage 

Note: APFO CSS more than offset 

the drop-off in 2012–2013. 

>30% are from some level of government. 

Graphics courtesy of Farm Service Agency. 

ATTACHMENT B 

How Farmers Benefit from NAIP Imagery 

Managing their Farms:

• Keep current, effective farm records.

• Oversee operations and plan new projects.

• Find best locations for grain bin and other farm structure locations for loans.

• Identify urban encroachment, sites for new buildings, gas and oil well development.

• Review topography changes around waterways after flooding or other extreme 

weather.

• Identify and plan irrigation changes.

• Assist with crop reporting.

• Support program appeals.

• See surrounding lands and fields for comparison and planning.

Receiving benefits from USDA agencies:

• Respond to inquiries on USDA programs.

• Self-check for program compliance.

• Verify crop history and planting patterns.

• Apply for and receiving disaster response/assessments.

• Manage food plots on CRP fields and CRP-managed haying and grazing acreage.

• Assess, monitor, and address crop and animal disease outbreaks with APHIS.

• Assist U.S. Forest Service in managing forest lands.

• Work with NRCS on resource assessments & inventory management.


11454001.eps
18

• Benefit from NASS, ERS, and University statistics and ag. Research in USDA 

program; management and development.

Receiving services from private vendors:

• Agricultural industry:

» Precision farming systems.

» Agronomic services.

» Private insurance offerings.

» Irrigation consultants and monitors.

• Tool for obtaining carbon offsets where available.

• Basis for Google Earth, Microsoft Maps, and OPS navigation systems used by 

farmers.

• Forestry management companies:

» Inventory and financial planning.

» Fire tracking and mitigation.

» Riparian analysis.

» Fire inventory. 

ATTACHMENT C 

Funding Challenge 

CCC Funding Replaced FSA S&E Funding for 2011–2014


11454002.eps
19

POWERPOINT PRESENTATION


11454003.eps 11454004.eps
20


11454005.eps 11454006.eps
21


11454007.eps 11454008.eps
22


11454009.eps 11454010.eps
23


11454011.eps 11454012.eps
24


11454013.eps 11454014.eps
25

Mr. LUCAS. Thank you, Mr. Crago. 

Mr. Blair, whenever you are ready, you may proceed. 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT BLAIR, VICE PRESIDENT,

AGRICULTURE DIVISION, MEASURE, THE DRONE AS A

SERVICE® COMPANY; OWNER/MANAGER/OPERATOR, BLAIR 

FARMS, KENDRICK, ID 

Mr. BLAIR. Okay, thank you. 

Good morning and thank you, acting Chairman Lucas, acting 

Ranking Member Graham, and Members of the House Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities and Risk Management. 

I am honored to be here today and I appreciate this opportunity to 

discuss the benefits of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, UAVs for short, 

in agriculture and some of their challenges. My name is Robert 

Blair, a fourth generation north Idaho farmer raising wheat, barley, peas, lentils, and garbanzo beans on the rolling hills of the 

Palouse. I am also the VP of Agriculture for Measure, the leading 

Drone as a Service® Company. We put pilots and systems in place 

for agriculture and other industries to collect data and return it to 

the customer in a timely manner. 

Agriculture has a tremendous challenge and responsibility of producing enough food to feed nine billion people by the year 2050, 

and doing so sustainably. Global agriculture is under increased 

pressure from different sectors to reduce water use, reduce erosion, 

and reduce inputs, while increasing crop quantity and quality. The 

agriculture industry cannot do this alone, but utilizing precision 

agriculture technologies, especially UAVs, those working and managing the land can be successful in this mountainous challenge. 


11454015.eps
26

For five generations, my family has incorporated new farming 

technologies and practices to raise better crops with less labor and 

inputs. Our farm was started in 1903, and my family has gone 

from using horses to continually updating tractors through the 

years, tractors that have computers and technology, allowing for 

placement of inputs exactly where they are needed from information collected from a UAV. 

Many things affect crop production, especially weather and management. The slide you are looking at is from a 2015 study conducted by Measure and multiple sponsors, many in agriculture. 

The study shows crop yield gap reduction potential is reduced approximately 20 percent. This study also shows that UAVs can positively affect the management gap by 25 percent. Based upon my 

own experiences, UAVs can also reduce the impacts caused by 

weather. 

Any aerial data needs to fit into a cab to be useful, otherwise it 

is just a picture. Today’s agriculture machinery has the capability 

to apply multiple products, either full boom, in sections, or by individual nozzles. Data collected from UAV can be used by the farmer 

to do crop application in all three instances. 

With the announcement of Part 107 on Tuesday by the Federal 

Aviation Administration, there is a certainty that UAV operations 

are here to stay in the United States, and agriculture can benefit. 

However, there is still work that needs to be done. Agriculture cannot wait for a slow application process to fly in restricted areas 

that results in losing a generations’ worth of information. Capturing photos and videos from a UAV is not enough. Agriculture 

needs friendlier regulations in place that allow for UAV application 

of products. Furthermore, Congress and USDA need to start working today to incorporate UAVs into the next farm bill, while the 

FAA should strongly consider giving agriculture a seat at the UAV 

rulemaking table. 

I started my precision ag journey in 2003 doing simple mapping 

with a PDA and a magnetic receiver. Holding everything at the 

same time was difficult, as you can see here, trying to pull out the 

stylus. Well, following the footsteps of what farmers have done for 

centuries, I created the solution to the problem by riveting a piece 

of metal on the brim of my hat to hold the receiver. This same hat 

represents an opportunity today to start shaping a new solution for 

the Risk Management Agency and crop insurance industry by utilizing UAVs to assist and adjust for claims. Currently when a hailstorm damages my crops, I would go out in the field with the adjuster. After walking into the crop where I am guessing damage occurred, the adjuster or I would throw the hat and do the official 

inspection. UAVs can collect high resolution images ahead of bootson-the-ground inspections so farmers and adjusters can go to those 

exact areas that are damaged. No more hat throwing. 

We are in the information age where timing of data is becoming 

more critical every day. The precision agriculture industry is already trying to put a fire hose worth of data through a straw, and 

with the announcement of Part 107, the amount of data collected 

will only put more strain on an inadequate Internet infrastructure 

in rural America, and will only compromise the ability of American 

farmers to compete in a global economy. 

27

With today’s low commodity prices and tighter margins, UAVs 

and companies like Measure can help reduce costs, increase productivity, and turn precision agriculture into surgical agriculture. 

I am very optimistic about the future of agriculture and UAVs, because in America, the sky truly is the limit and UAVs can help 

keep farmers where they belong, on the farm. 

Acting Chairman Lucas, acting Ranking Member Graham, and 

Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to 

testify before you this morning. I look forward to answering your 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Blair follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBERT BLAIR, VICE PRESIDENT, AGRICULTURE DIVISION, 

MEASURE, THE DRONE AS A SERVICE® COMPANY; OWNER/MANAGER/OPERATOR, 

BLAIR FARMS, KENDRICK, ID 

Good morning and thank you Chairman Crawford, Ranking Member Walz, and 

Members of the House Committee on Agriculture. I am honored to be here today 

and appreciate this opportunity to discuss the benefits of drones in agriculture and 

some of the challenges that impact its adoption and implementation. 

My name is Robert Blair and I am a fourth generation north Idaho farmer raising 

wheat, barley, peas, lentils, and garbanzo beans on the rolling hills and canyon tops 

of the Palouse growing region. I am also the VP of Agriculture for Measure, the 

leading Drone as a Service® Company that offers a drone flying service to agriculture and other industries. We put pilots and systems in place to collect data, do 

analytics, and return the data to the customer in a timely manner. 

It is vital to the national security of the United States of America and to the rural 

communities throughout that agriculture remains strong and viable. Rural communities greatly depend upon the economic success of agriculture but it goes farther 

than that. All of America, along with those in many other countries, depends upon 

U.S. agriculture success as well. I truly believe that agriculture technology, especially the use of UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles), sUAS (small Unmanned Aircraft Systems), or drones, as many people call them, will pave the way from precision agriculture to surgical agriculture. 

Agriculture has a tremendous challenge and responsibility of producing enough 

food to feed nine billion people by the year 2050 and doing so sustainably. Agriculture domestically and internationally is under increased pressure from many different sectors to reduce water use, reduce erosion, reduce pesticide use, and reduce 

nutrient applications while increasing crop quantity and quality. The agriculture industry cannot do this alone, but by utilizing precision agriculture technologies, especially UAVs, those working and managing the land can be successful in the mountainous challenge. 

Agriculture Technology Background 

The agriculture industry has always been on the leading edge of incorporating 

technology. From the beginning of time humans evolved from poking their finger in 

the ground to using a stick to plant seeds. The Industrial Revolution saw inventions 

like John Deere’s plow, McCormick’s reaper, and Eli Whitney’s cotton gin help to 

increase productivity, increase quality, and to replace rural labor that was migrating to cities. 

My Great, Great, Great Uncle started the farm in 1903, the same year Henry 

Ford started his company that gave us assembly lines, the same year the Wright 

Brothers had the first successful manned powered flight, and the same year of the 

first successful west to east radio signal transmission. These innovations are the 

corner stones for today’s agriculture equipment and precision technologies. 

I started my precision agriculture journey in 2003 by using a simple PDA (Personal Data Assistant) to do simple mapping. Holding the device, the stylus, and the 

GPS receiver brought about a challenge of needing a third hand which led me to 

creating my own innovation by riveting metal on the brim of my hat to affix the 

magnetic GPS receiver to so I could run the stylus and hold the device. 

From that point on, I didn’t look back. I incorporated a yield monitor, which led 

to saving 20–25% of nitrogen costs; autoboom, which has saved me between 10–15% 

on seed, fertilizer, and pesticides; and autosteering, which has reduced my overlap 

between 3–5%. 

28

It was a very exciting time in 2004 learning about these technologies, incorporating them on my existing equipment, and trying to figure out how they could 

best serve me and my quest to be a better manager and steward of the land. It 

wasn’t until I flew in a manned plane that summer that I realized aerial imagery 

was the missing piece to the precision agriculture puzzle. 

Agriculture UAV Timeline 

Being able to see crops growing from the air in 2004 provided a perspective I 

never had before. I could see areas in my crops that were doing very well and others 

that were falling down. When scouting a field, problem areas are hard to identify 

until I am in the middle of the worst part. Being able to see my fields from the 

air was an ‘‘ah ha’’ moment for me. 

At the time I did not realize that the person I was working with was introducing 

me to remote sensing. He was using a modified camera with a filter to try to capture images to produce a Normalized Differential Vegetative Index (NDVI), a form 

of vegetation health analysis. 

However, the crop ‘‘production line’’ does not shut off or get put on hold while aerial data is being captured and processed; the crops keep growing. I had to wait at 

least 3 weeks for the plane to come to my farm and then another 3 weeks to get 

the information that I was paying $6 an acre for. Too much time had passed to 

where I could take action to address issues. The information needed to be timely. 

We have come a long way since I saw an ad for a UAV in 2006 but the need for 

timely information has not changed. 

In the early days of experimenting with my UAV I discovered many shortcomings 

with the technology. Existing agriculture software was inadequate at utilizing UAV 

data, photo stitching software was practically non-existent, and analytical processing software was almost not even thought of. I was at the cusp of what this new 

technology could achieve. 

In 2008, I filed the first petition for exemption to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for commercial UAV use in agriculture, along with providing the 

FAA documentation on guidelines of how they should be used; many of my points 

are very similar to the current exemption rules. I also petitioned to try and obtain 

a seat at the FAA rulemaking table for agriculture. To this date agriculture still 

does not have a seat at the table. 

Around the same time in 2008, many people outside of agriculture saw the possibilities of what this technology could do and companies sprang up overnight building less expensive UAVs and better software; technology that farmers could afford. 

I no longer needed to worry about building my own UAV, modifying cameras, cobbling software together or trying to understand hard to use autopilots and flight 

software. It all comes down to being able to put UAV collected data into the cab 

of a tractor, applicator, or mobile device. 

On June 18, 2014, the FAA defined what constituted as commercial versus hobby 

UAV operations. Since that time, I have not piloted a UAV over my own property; 

instead, I have complied with the rules and had certified pilots operating under FAA 

Section 333 exemptions to gather data over my farm. An example of the distinction 

made between commercial and hobby use is that while I can fly a UAV over my 

property and take all of the pictures and video I want, the moment I use that information to make management decisions, I am a commercial UAV operator. 

Over the years I have been asked many times ‘‘Who will be flying UAVs, the 

farmer or a service provider?’’ With my experience in this industry, I see a future 

of service providers flying for agriculture. Farmers, ranchers, crop advisors, and 

agronomists have enough on their plate let alone becoming an aviation expert, remote sensing expert, software expert, and/or geographic information systems (GIS) 

expert. Instead, UAV service providers like Measure can collect the data to make 

the jobs of those with boots on the ground easier. A crop advisor friend stated, ‘‘I 

am currently managing 20,000 acres and with your service I could double the acres 

along with having better information for the farmer.’’

Part 107 was announced on Tuesday, June 21, 2016. There are a couple of provisions beneficial for agriculture such as obtaining a remote pilot certificate instead 

of needing a full pilot’s license and not being required to have a visual observer. 

Both of these provisions will save costs making it less expensive to conduct business. 

However, I believe UAV service providers like Measure will still be needed due 

to the time required for flying, processing imagery, and trying to make the imagery 

into actionable information. Operating safely is a priority of Measure and we will 

use highly trained and certified pilots to carry out flights. 

While Part 107 is a major milestone for the UAV industry there is still work that 

needs to be done. Beyond line of sight (BLOS) operation will be needed to cover the 

29

millions of agriculture acres in the United States in a timely manner. Rules to fly 

at night with thermal cameras can collect data with higher accuracy due to the cooler evening temperatures. Also, further clarification is needed to conduct aerial application of pesticides with UAVs. 

UAV Benefits and Opportunities 

Before I had even heard of a UAV I saw tremendous potential for aerial imagery 

that could help my farm and the agriculture industry. I asked myself questions such 

as: ‘‘Can I apply nitrogen as needed and where it’s needed during the growing season with certainty,’’ ‘‘Can I identify weed infestations and treat twenty percent of 

the field instead of 100 percent,’’ or ‘‘Where should I go to do a visual observation, 

take a soil sample, take a tissue sample, or do a combination of the three?’’

I have been fortunate to speak domestically and internationally on the benefits 

of precision agriculture, remote sensing, and UAVs and listen to people’s questions 

on how could this technology be used on their farming operation. I have also benefited from doing two different agriculture fellowships that allowed me to interact 

with thought leaders and technology adopters at all levels in South America and 

Europe. These experiences have provided me with a better understanding of what 

UAVs can do for agriculture. 

Last year Measure did a high-level, two-part study on agriculture UAVs with 

many different industry partners as co-sponsors. The highlight for me was the part 

of agriculture crops that are lost to weather and management. Roughly twenty percent of a crop is lost and the report indicated that UAVs can help gain back 1⁄4 of 

what is lost due to management. I believe there can be even larger gains because 

better management and direct application can lead to gains against weather. 

My experiences helped me gain a unique understanding of how UAVs can help 

agriculture today and in the future. Below I will list and briefly describe where 

UAVs can be of service to agriculture.

• General Scouting—UAVs can assist farmers and agronomists/crop advisors with 

their scouting by covering the acres in advance of needing to put boots-on-theground. Currently those in agriculture go into a field to find a problem. UAVs 

can scout ahead of time, locating specific areas that would need further inspection. Another scouting benefit of UAVs is the amount of area it can cover. A 

UAV can cover 100 percent of a field, while the example included in the testimony only covered around five percent.

• Nutrient Management—Fertilizer is a major expense for most crops. UAVs can 

be used to identify and monitor production zones created for variable rate application of nitrogen. This type of application not only reduces costs for the farmer 

but also helps reduce impact on the environment by applying what is needed 

where it is needed.

• Irrigation Management—In irrigated crops water management is critical. UAVs 

can help identify zones to apply water at varying rates and identify irrigation 

equipment issues such as a plugged nozzle, a worn out nozzle, etc.

• Weed Identification—UAVs can obtain high enough resolution imagery that can 

show weeds between the rows before a crop canopies. The ability to use this 

data so a farmer can determine the threshold level on treating an area versus

not applying can save thousands of dollars at the farm level.

• Insect & Disease Detection—While this is very similar to weed detection, it is 

more difficult to achieve in most cases. The creation of new sensors and a better 

understanding of where these pests show up on the spectrum chart are things 

the agriculture and UAV industry need to strive for.

• UAV Aerial Application—Japan has been doing aerial application of pesticides 

for almost thirty years. In the United States we are just getting started. These 

UAVs can be used to do spot applications in fields for small pest areas along 

with operating safely in difficult terrain such as pasture hillsides and grazing 

land. It could also operate safely over fields that are located within urban areas.

• Crop Insurance—Crop insurance is the cornerstone of risk management for 

farmers. UAVs could provide high resolution images to identify the area of a 

field that has been damaged by weather to assist the crop adjuster. Currently, 

the area designated for damage counts is identified with the toss of the farmer’s 

or crop adjuster’s hat. Where the hat lands is where crop inspection begins. 

Using UAVs to determine the severity of weather damage would be an improvement upon this process.

• Crop Stand & Germination—UAV imagery can be used to detect how well a 

crop has been established and/or if there are germination issues so the farmer 

can determine if he/she should reseed. In the case of sugarcane, understanding 

30

* Editor’s note: Ratooning (from Spanish reton ̃ o, ‘‘sprout’’) is a method of harvesting a crop 

which leaves the roots and the lower parts of the plant uncut to give the ratoon or the stubble 

crop. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-492099/ratooning. Britannica Online 

Encyclopedia. Retrieved 2009–01–19.

what percentage of the sugarcane crop is viable at ratoon * 2 or ratoon 3 is important so the farmer can determine if he can leave the existing crop in another 

year or if it should be worked up and planted to something else. 

• Cattle—A thermal imaging camera could be used in a feedlot situation to detect 

sick animals along with detecting a cow in heat that is ready for artificial insemination. Furthermore, we can use thermal data to locate cattle on the range.

These are just a few innovative ways that UAVs can be used today. Just imagine 

what they could do tomorrow on farms and ranches to help American agriculturists 

compete on a global scale and ensure that food is continually on the dinner table. 

We need to look at ways this technology can also be used by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to keep up with the rapidly evolving and tech savvy 

agriculture industry. I believe there are many uses that each department could take 

advantage of including:

• Risk Management Agency—Crop insurance claims, reporting and validation.

• Farm Service Agency—Crop reporting accuracy, especially with spring crops.

• Animal, Plant, & Health Inspection Service (APHIS)—I have had discussions 

with Under Secretary Osama El-Lissy about using UAVs to inspect cargo ships 

and containers to identify insect larvae and nests. Also, how UAVs can be used 

in the battle to eradicate the boll weevil by identifying host plants in noncropped areas and then do an herbicide application by UAV instead of by foot.

• Natural Resource Conservation Service—Not only could UAVs be a program enhancement for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) or the 

Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), it could help to better assess residue 

in fields instead of using a 100′ string line with markers on it.

While I could go on listing more departments and uses, I believe this paints a 

great picture of why UAVs need to be a more integral part of the next farm bill 

discussion. Everyone from Congress to the farmer and agriculture organizations to 

UAV companies need to start talking now on how this technology should be used 

and incorporated at all levels. This is a tremendous opportunity for all segments of 

agriculture. 

Challenges 

The future of UAVs in agriculture is here. As we watch the creation of a brandnew technology and industry unfold before our eyes, questions emerge: who should 

be working on this new technology, how should it look, what time frame is acceptable, and how can UAVs be used safely? None of these are easy questions to answer, 

and in order to promote this technology for adoption, the following challenges must 

be addressed:

• Aging Agriculture—While I initially look at this as a benefit for using UAVs, 

it is also a major hurdle. The average age of a farmer and for the most part, 

those in supporting businesses, is between 57–59 years old. They are getting 

close to retiring and in most cases do not want to learn something new. My 

question to Congress, USDA, and the agriculture community is: ‘‘What can we 

do to incentivize the agriculture industry to adopt the use of this technology?’’ 

One thought is to provide a premium reduction on crop insurance for implementation of the technology that is reducing risk from weather.

• Local Expertise—In most instances there is not enough expertise to show farmers and ranchers the benefits of UAVs and how to use the data. Agriculture has 

relied upon universities and their Extension to be experts, but due to cuts in 

agriculture funding, that expertise has fallen behind. We need to act now to attract young people into agriculture and technology could be very attractive to 

a new generation of agriculturists.

• UAV Regulations—The FAA has the important responsibility and challenge to 

keep the sky safe while trying to incorporate UAVs into the most congested airspace in the world; no small task. I would like to pose some examples for the 

FAA to consider when it comes to how American farmers could benefit from 

using UAVs for agriculture:

» Aerial Application—Japan has been using a helicopter UAV to apply pesticides for almost thirty years and that program is overseen by their Ministry 

31

of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries. In the United States, UAVs are being 

flown under exemptions instead of permanent rules for pictures and video—

not for pesticide application. I am hopeful that this week’s announcement by 

the FAA accelerates this application.

» Competing Countries—I spent 6 weeks on an Eisenhower Agriculture Fellowship studying precision agriculture, remote sensing, and UAVs in Argentina, 

Uruguay, and Brazil; countries that are direct competitors to U.S. farmers 

and commodities. Not only did I see the first UAV for agriculture fly in Uruguay at a field day in Rosario, but they streamed the video from the UAV 

to a large screen on a truck. I have never seen that level of technology used 

in a U.S. field day.

» Timeliness for Agriculture—For 2 years I have been trying to fly over the test 

plots of one of the largest wheat breeding companies in the world with no success. The process to obtain permission to fly within restricted airspace in 

Walla Walla, Washington and other restricted airspace locations where agriculture is located could be better. The trials at Walla Walla were for drought 

tolerant varieties and the last time a drought was as severe as last year in 

the Pacific Northwest was in 1977. The lack of a timely process led to agriculture losing a generation’s worth of data.

• Big Data—Ownership and integrity of the data Measure uses its UAVs to collect are very important and we work hard to make that a priority. However, 

with more technology evolution and use looming in the future, all segments in 

the agriculture chain need to make data security a priority.

• Rural Connectivity Infrastructure—Agriculture and natural resources are the 

major economic sectors that keep rural communities going. Many of America’s 

farms and ranches are international companies that do business on the world 

market. At this early stage in agriculture UAVs, we are trying to put a firehose 

worth of data through a straw with Internet connection speeds on my farm at 

5–8 Mbs down and less than 1 Mbs upload. America can and should do better.

• Agriculture Representation—Agriculture needs a seat at the FAA table to make 

sure rules that are proposed will work for our industry. The USDA motto of 

‘‘Agriculture is the foundation of manufacture and commerce’’ is as true today 

as it was when it was first uttered, especially in ensuring the economic success 

of rural America.

• Safety—This is a critical challenge for not only agriculture UAVs but the entire 

UAV industry. Measure’s mantra is ‘‘Safe, Legal, and Insured’’ and we try to 

live that and lead by example. Often, outsourcing to service providers whose responsibility is to fly within the current scope of unmanned regulations is the 

safest way to obtain aerial data. It is my hope that Measure and the agriculture 

UAV industry can help lead the way on this important issue.

• Investment—We are living in a time when the United States is putting less 

money into agriculture research when competing countries are increasing 

theirs. This trend needs to change for our national and global security. We are 

watching the birth of the UAV industry in agriculture; we must nurture it so 

it can mature successfully and become a benefit to American society.

Even though there are many more challenges that could be listed and that the 

growing UAV industry will be encountering, I am very optimistic that with good 

communication, increased understanding, and everyone working toward the same 

objective of safely incorporating UAVs into the National Airspace System (NAS) and 

the agriculture industry we truly will be successful. 

Closing 

Agriculture has evolved from poking fingers into the ground to using those fingers 

to select a specific spot on a screen to be captured by a UAV. Agriculturists have 

been doing remote sensing in shades of green since the beginning of time and now 

we need to help this new crop of agriculturists to see things in colors of not just 

green, but in red, yellow, blue and all shades in between. 

The journey that UAVs have taken me on has brought me closer to my roots by 

looking at the technology used on my farm over five generations while at the same 

time making me ask more questions about the future. What will UAVs be doing besides pictures, videos, and aerial application in 5 years? 

Again, agriculture cannot do all the lifting alone; we will need to work with industries, organizations, companies, and agencies we haven’t had to work with before. 

However, agriculture does need a seat at the regulatory table for everyone involved 

to be successful. 

32

I am hopeful that my testimony has planted one of many seeds on the road to 

the next farm bill. Congress and USDA will need to work with traditional agriculture organizations while expanding to those in the UAV industry to start laying 

the foundation of how this technology can be used and promoted. 

However, without better connectivity and a stronger Internet infrastructure, rural 

America and all Americans will not benefit. Those utilizing precision agriculture 

and UAV data today are struggling greatly to deliver, in relative terms, this small 

amount of data today. America will need to invest into rural connectivity the same 

way America invested in a successful electrical infrastructure starting at the beginning of last century. 

We are in the information age where timing of data is becoming more critical 

every day. We have larger tractors, combines, and implements that are equipped 

with the technology that can utilize the data collected from a UAV. I have been implementing these technologies on my farm for over a decade and I am very optimistic about the future of agriculture, because in America the sky truly is the limit. 

With today’s low commodity prices and tighter margins, UAVs can help reduce costs 

while keeping farmers where they belong . . . on the farm. 

Chairman Crawford, Ranking Member Walz, and Members of the Subcommittee, 

thank you for the opportunity to testify before you this morning. I look forward to 

answering your questions. 

[ATTACHMENT]

Since the farm was started in 1903, five generations have been involved with major technology innovations in agriculture moving 

from horses to tractors to autosteering to unmanned air vehicles 

(UAV). This new generation of farmers and ranchers have grown up 

with computers and precision agriculture and we need to ensure 

today that there is a strong infrastructure in place for these leaders 

of tomorrow.


11454016.eps
33

In 2006 I became the first farmer in the United States to own and 

use a UAV. My two sons, Dillon and Logan have learned what this 

technology can do and how it can be used for over a decade to take 

pictures. They will need additional rules in place for uses such as 

aerial application by UAVs.

Scouting is traditionally done by sitting on a four-wheeler and 

driving through a field to find problems. This is inefficient, time 

consuming, and does not see all of the acres. Above, the green line 

is twenty feet wide and follows the tracks of the four-wheeler. The 

twenty feet represents being able to see into the canopy 10′ on each 

side of center which is less than five percent of the field.


11454017.eps 11454018.eps
34

Incorporating a UAV to detect problem areas, farmers can place 

markers on the field like the ones in green to scout to, instead of 

hoping to see problems just driving or walking through a field. We 

can also create management zones and adjust inputs based upon 

productivity potential. 

Estimated Yield Increases 

• Closing the yield gaps

» Estimated yield gaps range from 15% to 30%.

» Approximately 50% of gap is due to weather.

➢ Remainder due to sub-optimal management and information.

• Based on research and interviews, drones are estimated to reduce management 

yield gap by 25%.

In a 2015 study conducted by Informa for Measure and sponsoring agriculture partners it highlighted that UAVs could recover 

25% of the yield lost by improper management. I believe that utilizing UAVs during the growing season reductions in yield lost by 

weather can also be gained by increasing test weights, reducing 

shrunken and broken kernels, and increasing overall quality.


11454019.eps 11454020.eps
35

Images captured by UAVs have greater resolution that can show 

more issues to address in a crop. Solutions for treatment can be incorporated into the cab of a tractor or applicator for precise placement reducing costs and impacts on the environment.

Mr. LUCAS. Thank you, Mr. Blair. 

The chair would like to remind Members that they will be recognized for questioning in order of seniority for those who were here 

at the start of the hearing, and after that, Members will be recognized in order of arrival. I appreciate Members’ understanding, and 

with that, I recognize myself for 5 minutes. 

Gentlemen, the Committee just concluded a six-part hearing series focusing on the farm economy and the downturn of the last 

couple of years. Things in farm country, we would all agree, are 

starkly different than they were just a couple years ago when the 

2014 Farm Bill was signed into law. In fact, percentage-wise statistically, the 3 year drop in net farm income that we have encountered is, in some ways reminiscent of the Great Depression and 

some commodity years, perhaps even worse. 

That said, though, given the downturn in the farm economy, how 

has that affected the utilization and the adoption of imagery in production agriculture? Basically what I am asking is when we had 

the higher prices, to what extent were farmers willing to adopt the 

new technology, and now with the significant drop, how has that 

affected their willingness to step up and use the services that have 

been developed and are being developed? 

And with that, in no particular order, I will start with Mr. Blair, 

and if you would care to offer a response, and then your colleagues, 

if they would like to comment. 

Mr. BLAIR. Okay, thank you, Chairman Lucas. For me as a farmer, we have seen going from a $6 week down 

to $5 week. Talking with clients around the company or potential 

clients, it is hard to sell. They are not adopting it, and then if we 

look at the lending institutions and the bottleneck created there, 

they don’t understand the technology and the benefits they provide 

as well, creating further hurdles in adopting this technology. 

We need to work harder in getting the word out as to what this 

technology can do, from universities, from land-grant system extenVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:26 Jul 25, 2016 Jkt 041481 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 P:\DOCS\114-54\20574.TXT BRIAN

11454021.eps
36

sion, private-sector, and USDA system. Here is the return on investment: Last year, I raised 105 bushel wheat on dry land in a 

drought year. Because I varied the rate of nitrogen, I was able to 

not only have very good yields, I had less impact from that drought 

by better quality, less shrunken and broken kernels, and less dockage. Furthermore, on my soft white wheat, because I had low protein, I gained an additional $10 an acre because I had that low protein from a premium. The technology can pay. We have not done 

as good of a job as we can showing what that return on investment 

is at the ground level. 

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Crago or Mr. Faleide. 

Mr. FALEIDE. I can comment on that on adoption. It is interesting over the years that it has been a difficult sell. I think whenever there are hard times, people look at different ways of being 

more efficient. 

In the mid-1990s when we were working with the sugarbeet industry, we saw a definite increase of usage by the company to push 

it to the farms because they needed to grow more sugar pounds per 

acre, and there was an advantage to monitor and manage the fields 

with nitrogen to create more economic profit. Then times started 

getting better in the farm industry in the late 1990s economically, 

especially in the 2000s, and recently very well. We actually saw 

more of a drop off or a complacency of using technology or data to 

drive the machines. Now most farmers were getting the equipment 

in their new tractors, and it has become OEM required because you 

can’t sell your tractor again if you don’t have the proper equipment. 

So that was a lot of the argument I was getting. 

Now actually, we thought in the last year or so that we were 

going to see a drop off in interest because of the economic problems. We are seeing the opposite, partly because our company is 

ready to deliver. We can deliver any image to any field that the 

satellite rolls over at a moment’s notice. We have the distribution 

system in place. We have the big data infrastructure behind us, 

and we are getting data. Now we still need more images. We need 

more images from satellites. We wanted more imagery from aerial 

and to incorporate the UAV data as well, which we are doing. But 

we are finding actually that we are seeing an uptick of interest because we have an actionable solution that can provide it like that, 

and that is part of the whole problem of bringing data and imagery 

to the agriculture sector. We do not have enough infrastructure of 

satellites on my end. We are working with many satellite companies to get more satellites up, and that is going to happen over the 

course of the next 1 to 2 to 3 years. But, right now, we are actually 

seeing an uptick on information. 

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Crago, any thoughts? 

Mr. CRAGO. Well, I am not a farmer, but I have worked with the 

USDA for close to 20 years now, and what I have seen is the desire 

and requirement of the APFO in Salt Lake City is really being a 

base for providing fundamental information and data to the farmer, 

and providing it in a manner that is fairly open to them. 

From my perspective, one of the areas that really requires some 

work is in the implementation of tools and customized tools, specifically as it relates to precision agriculture and other uses farmers 

make of that in being able to use the data. And so, in my perspecVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:26 Jul 25, 2016 Jkt 041481 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 P:\DOCS\114-54\20574.TXT BRIAN
37

tive in my work, we really are trying or attempting to provide a 

base data layer set that augments what these other two gentlemen 

have been talking about in terms of being able to interpret that 

data in manners that fit a particular farmer’s issue, and there are 

a number of them. I appreciate that. 

Mr. LUCAS. Thank you, Mr. Crago. 

My time has expired. The chair now recognizes the ranking 

gentlelady for 5 minutes. 

Ms. GRAHAM. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. They left, 

but there was a group of Future Farmers of America in the back. 

I wanted to recognize them, because my question sort of segues 

from that. 

Mr. LUCAS. I thought they were a bright looking bunch. 

Ms. GRAHAM. We have bright ones in Florida as well, so it is consistent. 

One of my early meetings with FFA I was sitting there, and they 

were providing a presentation on UAVs, and I was just amazed at 

all that they were able to do with this technology, and recognize 

that the world that young farmers are growing up in. We really 

want to encourage young farmers to get into farming and have it 

as their life work, is changing so rapidly. 

So you all are experts in this area of UAVs and the new technologies in aerial imaging. I am wondering, what do you see? What 

do you think 10 years from now those new FFA groups will be involved in that we don’t even, we may not be aware of it on the horizon, but certainly would be interested in what you all see as the 

next technology breakthrough and advancement in farming? 

Mr. FALEIDE. Just my viewpoints that, my youngest boy is now 

in college and my two older boys are mid-30s. But I told them a 

few years ago, I said it is up to you guys to figure out how to take 

our technology to the next generation, and they are doing that. 

They have worked for me and actually, my youngest is interning 

with me. It is interesting how the younger generation is so interested in the social media instant information, and everybody 

catches themselves: what is the answer for that? I will Google it, 

right? So that generation is now wanting the data immediately. 

Our generation tended to say we could take a while to get that answer. There is no time now to wait. And so the expectation of the 

younger generation is going to require more infrastructure to instantly provide that data to that young person. 

We are working with companies to create persistence imagery, 

24/7 imagery over your field in certain locations of the country or 

the world. That generation wants it now, and that is going to be 

the main thing is the phone, the mobile device is a part of their 

social being. That is what the answer is going to be in my belief, 

that they are going to demand data, and the infrastructure has to 

be in place. The fiber has to be in place in the rural areas, or they 

will not agree with that policy if it is not done. 

Ms. GRAHAM. Thank you. Does anyone else have any ideas? Mr. 

Blair? 

Mr. BLAIR. Yes, thank you. Thank you, acting Ranking Member 

Graham. I, too, wore the blue jacket and it is exciting to see these 

young kids growing up in this time. I grew up on an open deck 

38

tractor pulling clutch and pressing brake on a Caterpillar, not fun. 

Those were the good old days. 

Today, what we are seeing is an exponential increase of how 

technology is evolving. I fought doing e-mails. I liked letters and 

phone, face-to-face conversation. Now give me an e-mail. I fought 

it, too. Back in the mid-1990s, one of the crop protection providers 

sent out freebies. It was a Velcro box. Open it up, here is our product, and you open the pages, and here is this robot hovering over 

the ground sucking up the weeds. Another one they sent out 

showed a robot on tracks picking it up and eating them. We are 

heading in that direction. Today, we are taking pictures and videos. 

Tomorrow, are we going to be putting lasers on UAVs to spot treat 

for disease like fire blight in apples, maybe, or the orange industry? 

We have done flights down there for lettuce, string beans, and 

sugarcane, and we believe that technologies like thermal imaging 

will get better and that we can look at transpiration from those 

crops to detect earlier these disease issues that affect their quality. 

So we will be evolving quickly with new sensors and new platforms. 

Ms. GRAHAM. Thank you. My time has expired. It would be great 

if we could develop a laser to take out fire ants. That would be 

great. 

Anyway, I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all very much. 

Mr. LUCAS. As Mr. Blair knows, you have not lived until you 

have been on that tractor with the heat coming off the engine and 

the exhaust in your face. The good old days. 

The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Rogers, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Blair, Auburn University is in my district. It is a research 

university. Engineers and scientists there have been studying how 

the data collected by Unmanned Aerial Systems carrying different 

types of sensors can be used to improve how we manage agriculture and forestry. One of the current limitations in deploying 

UAS over larger agricultural fields or forests is a rule that our aircraft must be in view of the pilot during operation. Now the forestry industry is significant in Alabama. When flying UAS over forests, maintaining this line of sight between the pilot and the aircraft is particularly difficult. What kind of development work is 

being done in your industry to alleviate the concerns of the FAA 

and ultimately allow the UAS to fly safely beyond the line of sight? 

Mr. BLAIR. Thank you, Mr. Rogers, for that question. Line of 

sight and flying beyond line of sight is very important, not only for 

agriculture, but for the natural resource industry as well, and forestry. Idaho, about 80 percent or around 70 percent are public 

lands and mountains. We need that beyond line of sight. 

What is being done, the FAA has a pathfinder program, and I 

know there are companies working on this beyond line of sight 

issue. Right now, the technology can allow and is good enough to 

allow for UAVs to already fly safely beyond line of sight. It comes 

down to regulations and being able to isolate or locate areas where 

we could fly line of sight in commercial research purposes that can 

benefit both agriculture and the forestry industries. 

Mr. ROGERS. Okay, thanks. 

39

Mr. Crago, given the increasing discussions about Americans’ privacy concerns, how can we be sure that these systems will maintain American privacy and that the data collected won’t be shared 

with outside groups? 

Mr. CRAGO. Thanks for the question. Privacy is a big issue, and 

I know that it has raised its head in a number of instances. 

In the case of the aerial imagery that is being taken for the 

NAIP Program, there is a longstanding rule and protection of the 

information within FSA to the extent that I am not aware of any 

privacy issues that have ever arisen out of aerial imagery taken for 

the NAIP Program at 30,000′ or at 20,000′. This imagery is highly 

technical in nature, and the distribution of private information as 

I know the contractual requirements put on us is extremely wellprotected within FSA. I am not aware of any issues of that nature. 

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. LUCAS. The gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes 

the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Austin Scott. 

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and 

Mr. Blair, we have heard a lot about a number of different technologies, but they all provide imagery. 

How does a farmer know which type of imagery is right for his 

or her operation, and what factors should a farmer consider when 

deciding on which imagery or how imagery might fit into their 

farm? 

Mr. BLAIR. Thank you, Mr. Scott, for that question. 

The type and size of imagery is dependent upon the management 

style of the farmer and what their goals are. It is my job to help 

them figure out what their goals and what their objectives could 

be. Are you looking for disease or insects on leaves? We need higher resolution. If you are looking at nutrient management, less resolution images can work fine. But it comes down to our equipment, 

how can that react, and right now, all three technologies, satellite, 

manned aircraft, and UAVs are collecting good data. We need to 

get the word out there on how to utilize it better and for that return on investment. 

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. It seems to me that one of the key 

factors of the UAV is that the individual farmer has the control 

over the time at which the imagery is taken, and that that would 

be one of the key differences where they don’t have the control with 

the other technologies. I may be wrong about that, but——

Mr. BLAIR. Yes, Mr. Scott. It is timelier information. We can fly 

under the clouds where a lot of times satellite can’t get through. 

We can put different sensors on there, like thermal imaging, and 

collect higher value data in a lot of instances, and get that higher 

resolution image of about 2 centimeters. The timing right now, we 

can cover a lot of territory and ground. We just need that beyond 

line of sight would be very, very helpful to incorporate this technology. 

While Part 107 has been useful and is giving us in the industry 

some permanency with UAVs, there is still work to be done and 

line of sight is one of those. 

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Crago, why does the NAIP 

Program use manned aircraft when we have satellites that can provide similar imagery, and can you provide us specific examples 

40

where the manned aircraft would be able to provide, would be a 

better source for the imagery than the satellites? 

Mr. CRAGO. Well, if you understand the requirements under the 

NAIP Program, the NAIP Program is designed for agriculture crop 

management. So what that means is that the imagery needs to be 

taken when the crops are at their peak. So if you take the State 

of Texas, for example. The State of Texas is divided into four acquisition seasons that are defined by the APFO, and the window to 

acquire those seasons ranges from anywhere from 2 weeks to 3 

weeks. So what is required is an extreme amount of capacity to be 

able to acquire that imagery in an extremely short period of time. 

The comparison between satellite acquisition, which is completely 

dependent upon the orbit of the satellite and the timing of it, 

wouldn’t facilitate, or generally wouldn’t facilitate, the ability to acquire that imagery within that particular growing season. And so 

in the case of the NAIP Program, you can see as many as six or 

seven aircraft being mobilized to a particular area for a 2 day wet 

weather window in the ability to acquire all of south Texas. 

And so notwithstanding that, satellite plays a very valuable role 

in being able to acquire imagery, but in terms of being able to address the seasonality of the USDA’s requirements, the only current 

way of achieving that is fairly massive manned aircraft sensors 

that can address that. 

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Thank you. I am down to 30 seconds, but Mr. Faleide, you have been in this business a long time, 

and one of the issues that we wrestle with today with data is who 

owns the data? And I would be interested in your opinion on who 

you think should own the data, and whether or not there is a difference between satellite imagery and UAV imagery, and who 

should own the data? 

Mr. FALEIDE. Well, thank you. Let me start with those different 

platforms. These UAV aerial and satellite are just platforms for a 

camera. Each one has different abilities occurring at different resolutions. Like Mr. Crago said, there are airplanes that come in and 

specifically target at high resolution. Satellites will come in more 

commonplace and see general areas. Now the satellite infrastructure is improving rapidly, but you have to put satellites in the category right now is the best I can get on a satellite right now is 31 

centimeters. It is going to move to 25 centimeters, up to 30 meter 

resolution, depending on what you want. Airplanes fit in the category of about 6′′ resolution to approximately 1 to 2 meter resolution, depending on how you scale your lenses. UAVs will be in the 

1 millimeter range to about 6′′ level. So each one has its own category, so it depends on what you want to do. The more infrastructure of satellites that come in, you are going to see more infrastructure. 

Now as for privacy, the common rule of thumb is if I can’t identify your face and know who you are, if you are just an object that 

is there, I have not gone past the privacy issue and the idea of who 

owns the data, we have taken the opinion that whoever pays for 

that data owns that, as long as I don’t enter into your privacy situation. But once I can identify you, then I am going into a different 

realm and that can be problematic. 

41

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. My time has expired. Gentlemen, 

thank you for being here. 

Mr. LUCAS. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

The chair now recognizes the Vice Chairman of the full Committee from Texas, Mr. Neugebauer, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This device I have 

in my hand here would be a flashlight if it wasn’t for the applications that are attached to it, and so one of the things I was wondering is Mr. Lucas and I sit on the Financial Services Committee, 

and we have seen a lot of interesting technology take place in that 

sector, and what was done is that there have been a lot of applications developed for financial products. But we have a bigger sector 

of potential users. 

I guess one of the questions I would have this morning is as the 

technology with UAV or satellite resolution, all that, as that is getting better, are they keeping up with the technology, and I will let 

whoever wants to jump on that first. Yes, sir? 

Mr. FALEIDE. Yes, I believe it is. At the beginning, based on the 

lower resolution imagery that we could pull in from satellite, we 

could look at a pattern within a field about every, let’s say, 100′, and bring that down to a level to control a 30′, 50′ applicator. 

Okay? And now with the higher resolutions, the industry is looking 

at while there is more data here, we are now able to boom control 

where we can split a boom, a 130′ sprayer from the green machine 

would maybe have about nine to eleven sections. I can change 

those sections. Other companies are also bringing in nozzle control 

where the planters are going down to individual row units to variable rate that, or sections that requires higher resolution. So the 

more infrastructure that the OEMs and the machinery companies 

can start splitting these equipment into different rates, it requires 

higher and higher resolution imagery. 

So I believe the industry is adapting well. It is maybe not as fast 

as I want it, but it is adapting. Yes. 

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Crago? 

Mr. CRAGO. What we see is really two movements in it, and the 

first one is the standard type app that you would download onto 

your phone and operate on your phone. And to some extent, there 

are some, at least, visualization capabilities coming in that area. 

But equally important or possibly more important is cloud type 

where the iPhone or your smartphone is used to access some activity in the cloud, and that activity may be some form of remote 

sensing interpretation. So it could be different bands or spectrums 

of the imagery that is acquired, or things like change detection 

where it is comparing one vintage of imagery to another. There 

clearly is movement down, literally on the app on the unit, but 

maybe more importantly in the cloud where the handheld unit is 

used to access that through the cloud. It is moving, yes. 

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Yes. Mr. Blair? 

Mr. BLAIR. Thank you for the question. 

Applications are keeping up with the technology. Japan has been 

using a helicopter to spray for almost 30 years. We are just being 

able to do that here in the United States. The regulations aren’t 

keeping up. That is what is not keeping up with the technology. 

Government programs are not keeping up with the technology eiVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:26 Jul 25, 2016 Jkt 041481 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 P:\DOCS\114-54\20574.TXT BRIAN
42

ther. We have a great opportunity, especially with UAVs, not only 

to do spot spraying applications after doing a flight and gathering 

that information. We have an opportunity to do crop adjusting, 

being able to gather that high resolution imagery to not only pinpoint the areas that have been damaged, but to hopefully assess 

where that damage is and how severe that it is. 

So is our data engineered for Measure? In a 10 minute period 

when we were on the phone talking, he created a functionality in 

our software deliverable of just being able to put points on a map 

as I am viewing that I can go out and scout. It is moving fast. 

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Yes, I know several of my colleagues have 

brought up the line of sight thing, but I think that is a very important part of it. Particularly when you take in my district, for example, we have farmers that are farming 5,000, 10,000 acres, and for 

example, a UAV to be effective on that, rather than following the 

UAV around in your pickup, being able to program that UAV to go 

do a particular mission and come back and, I guess, download that 

information. The same way with the ranching, in my district we 

have ranches that are 20,000–30,000 acres, and so if you are going 

to have the digital cowboy that is going to ride the fence, you are 

going to have to be able to program that. 

So what are some of the things that might be inhibiting the use 

of that technology, and what would be the message to this Committee? 

Mr. BLAIR. Well, one of the things is the regulations. We need 

to have beyond line of sight for natural resource use. Agriculture 

is not populated. You are not flying over a lot of people. We can 

fly safely and have flown safely. I have been UAV since 2006, and 

have not had an incident with any aircraft. It comes down to communication, and that is very easy. I am going to be talking to the 

crop duster who is going to be flying that low. 

The other one is we do need our agencies to be proactive as well 

in promoting this technology. How are we going to be using it? 

Thermal imaging to identify cattle, for identifying cattle rustlers in 

snow storms. I have had phone calls on a lot of these over the 

years. We haven’t scratched the surface because we haven’t had the 

regulatory certainty, and beyond line of sight is one of the most 

crucial rules that needs to be gone after for agriculture. 

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. LUCAS. The gentleman’s time has expired. I would note to 

my colleagues that in the line, we have Mr. Gibbs, then Mr. 

LaMalfa, then Mr. Allen. With that, I turn to the gentleman from 

Ohio for 5 minutes, Mr. Gibbs. 

Mr. GIBBS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks for this hearing. It is a very interesting topic, as we know technology happens 

fast and regulation of public policy lags. You have said that. 

One thing, I am also serving on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and talking about drones and stuff, and it 

seems to me it is a no-brainer. Out in the rural area, far away from 

airports, the line of sight shouldn’t even be an issue, especially if 

they are talking 400′. What is the maximum altitude you really 

need for a drone to work well to do what we are talking about 

here? 

43

Mr. BLAIR. Well right now, 400′, that is really good. To cover 

acres we could fly higher, but it comes down to what resolution do 

you need? If we start flying the UAV higher, is that the most efficient way or do we go to satellite or manned aircraft as the most 

efficient? 

Mr. GIBBS. I guess that may be my next question. The three components, your satellite, aerial, and drone, and I would think the 

drone, as a farmer, if I need real time data today, if I think I have 

a problem out in my bean crop or whatever, the drone would make 

a lot of sense, probably. I know the aerial is a wider spot. I guess 

that is the question I have. My understanding, the technology is 

adapting where we can go out and using these three technologies 

and determine insect infestation, disease, that is correct, right? I 

don’t think anybody has said anything about yield. Can we determine possible yields through this technology? 

Mr. BLAIR. Yes, we are able to predict yield with some certainty. 

There are a lot of things that can affect it. I don’t talk about yield 

because that brings in a whole——

Mr. GIBBS. Yes, I know. I am going there next. I am going there 

next, but it has helped me improve my yields because I have had 

better information. 

Mr. BLAIR. Yes. 

Mr. GIBBS. Have I been able to predict, no. That is why I use a 

yield monitor to give me that actual value. 

Mr. BLAIR. Well, I guess that——

Mr. GIBBS. I am going to the 50,000′ question, the macro question. Is the technology moving towards where through the aerial or 

whatever where an entity could come and fly over a wide area of 

Iowa or whatever and kind of get a good handle in August, September, what that corn crop is going to be? Because USDA has crop 

production reports and we see what the markets use them and that 

speculation. So is the technology moving that way? Will that be actually feasibly possible? 

Mr. BLAIR. Yes, and with the different technologies out there, if 

you incorporate images and we create this database over time to 

understand what we are seeing in those images at the different 

resolutions, along with using weather data, there is a lot of very 

good electronic weather data out there as well, and when you incorporate those two together, we should be able to do some very, very 

good predictive predictions on yields for agriculture, for NASS reporting, on down the line. 

Mr. GIBBS. So that is really going to be a big public policy question, because that does give an entity the possibility to get realtime data ahead of anybody else, and it could affect the markets. 

It is just an interesting policy question that I don’t think anybody 

has really discussed yet. 

Obviously, the technology is coming, since I started farming in 

the mid-1970s, the changes are just immense, and it is just incredible. It is like the technology builds on itself. Mr. Chairman, the 

way this technology goes, it is hard for the public policy to stay 

with it, but in this aspect, there are a lot of aspects that we have 

to adopt this technology or we will fall back globally, because I am 

sure that is another aspect of it. Where do you see it happening 

44

in like Brazil with their bean crop? What do you see happening 

with our competitors? 

Mr. BLAIR. Well, I have been fortunate to travel and visit a lot 

of these countries and talk with farmers and researchers. They are 

outpacing us on adoption of the technology because they have had 

to. Their economies and some of those factors that are forcing them 

to look at their margins, technology is allowing them to stay profitable. 

We have had it good as farmers in the United States and haven’t 

really had to look at this until now when the commodity prices are 

dropping. 

Mr. GIBBS. Yes. 

Mr. BLAIR. Now we are turning to this technology, what can it 

do? It becomes more attractive, but those challenges are there. We 

need to push this forward to be more competitive with our competing countries. 

Mr. GIBBS. Thank you. Thanks for being here. Thank you, and 

I yield back. 

Mr. NEUGEBAUER [presiding.] I thank the gentleman. Now the 

gentleman from California, Mr. LaMalfa, is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. LAMALFA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Blair, I appreciate you and the whole panel being here today. 

My question is pointed at you here first. 

I enjoyed some time on a D8 slide bar track layer during my 

formative years, cutting teeth on tractors as well, and the first pass 

over the fields is a nice one there. There is not much dust to deal 

with, but that second or third one, that is the tougher deal. So I 

relate to that totally. 

Let me touch on: I missed part of the testimony getting here, but 

the FAA with their rules released, what do you see are the latitude 

that you have, or is there more latitude needed with the FAA rules 

that are in place? We have FFA in here now. FAA rules that are 

in place, and do you see the latitude in order to do the work that 

needs to be done using the UAV technology? 

Mr. BLAIR. Thank you for that question. I mess up FAA, FFA a 

lot over the years. That is a tongue twister, so I am right there 

with you. 

Part 107 is a great start. It allows us to be more flexible. We no 

longer have to try for exemptions to operate commercially, but 

there are still areas that can be improved. One of them is being 

able to fly in restricted air space. Agriculture land doesn’t know 

boundaries in the air. It goes right into restricted air space. In the 

last 2 years, we have been trying to fly for one of the larger wheat 

growing companies in the world to no avail. We have lost a generation’s worth of data because of we could not fly inside there. 

What do I mean by that? Last year, we had the worst drought 

since 1977, a generation ago, and we couldn’t collect that data on 

drought tolerant varieties. So those processes need to be more responsive for agriculture to——

Mr. LAMALFA. Is the FAA rule the one that precludes the restricted air space, or is this more you are talking military bases 

that already have this in place? 

45

Mr. BLAIR. No, this is for restricted air space. You still have to 

file to fly inside these restricted areas, that 5 mile——

Mr. LAMALFA. Is it because of the FAA rule or because of military rule? 

Mr. BLAIR. FAA rule. 

Mr. LAMALFA. Okay, thank you. 

Mr. BLAIR. And some of the other things beyond line of sight is 

another issue that we need to address, and also make it easier for 

UAV operators to do aerial application. 

Right now, what the exemptions have done is try to shoehorn 

UAVs into existing regulations instead of creating their own, and 

Part 107 has not addressed Part 137, which is aerial application. 

Mr. LAMALFA. Okay. I wanted to touch on, you might call it privacy or a lot of things. When you use your own UAV on your own 

stuff or you have a contractor doing it for you at your request, do 

you see the FAA rule allowing for some type of prosecution or restriction of people basically poaching, like you might have an extremist group that wants to come look at your junk pile or see 

what you are doing with your water, or how you are managing your 

chemical containers? Flying over your place, screwing around, looking at that stuff. Do you see enough teeth in that to be able to keep 

people from snooping around your property? 

Mr. BLAIR. Well, right now I can drive down a road, take my 

iPhone out, and take a picture. There is nothing to stop me from 

doing that. I can be in a manned aircraft, hot air balloon, ultralight 

and take the same pictures and it is not an issue. But because of 

the negative connotation of the word drone, now all of a sudden 

using that iPhone has become an issue. But to address the example, there is a concern, especially in the agriculture industry of certain groups and sectors using this information maliciously. How do 

we stop that? The laws and regulations should not be around the 

UAV, but it is the use of the information. 

Mr. LAMALFA. Okay. Just for my own info, what is the lowest 

elevation someone can fly over your place in this scenario? 

Mr. BLAIR. With a UAV, you mean? 

Mr. LAMALFA. Yes. 

Mr. BLAIR. I do not believe they can, well, we cannot fly over 

someone’s property without their permission, and will not, and I 

am not certain of that low altitude. 

Mr. LAMALFA. Is a frontier justice allowed if you find somebody 

flying over your place? 

Mr. BLAIR. In the words of one of my elected officials long ago, 

‘‘Shoot, shovel, and shut up’’ so I am sure that will happen. 

You are going to see those instances. People are going to do some 

crazy things out there. In my state, people have shot at manned 

helicopters. 

Mr. LAMALFA. Okay. I will yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I thank the gentleman, and now the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Allen, is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. ALLEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for joining 

us today. I am going to kind of present this to all three of you and 

get your comments on it. 

46

Of course, I grew up on a farm and it was a little different back 

then, but I did have an experience in my district to plow a couple 

of rows or plant a couple of rows of peanuts, and we cranked up 

the computer and we planted 14′′ over from the year before, basically, and I didn’t know exactly why we did that, and I also did not 

touch the steering wheel during this process. And I tell you what 

it made me think about is from a business experience now we use 

technology in the construction industry to accomplish a lot of the 

same things we are doing in agriculture as far as equipment and 

how to use that equipment efficiently. I will tell you one of the 

most difficult decisions that we had every year in the construction 

business was: how much do we invest in this? Because it always 

seemed like I said we are not going to spend any more on this, and 

then the next year, okay, we got to buy this. We have to have this. 

And then, of course, trying to justify the investment, and then 

what is that going to yield? What is that going to do to my bottom 

line, and what is that going to do to my longevity as far as this 

business is concerned? 

The third thing is the fact that this Subcommittee and this Committee is here to promote not only what you are doing, but agriculture, and what is it that we can do, and maybe you can think 

about this and file something like a report on just what we can do 

in the next, well, maybe this Congress to help you accomplish some 

of these goals that you have, and as I like to term it, get the Federal Government out of your way. 

So we will start right here. 

Mr. FALEIDE. Very good comment, sir. The industry has focused 

on hardware, like you were mentioning when is that device going 

to be antiquated? And that is a tangible object, and it is very easy 

to put value to that. What has been very difficult to put value to 

is the data itself. We are now seeing, and a good friend of mine 

who worked with us and started some of this, Gary Wagner out of 

Crookston, Minnesota, one of the pioneers of precision ag. In his 

presentations years ago, he said this data is so important, it is 

going to put value to my land. Some day this data is going to and 

with the land sale, because that history of that data, that device 

that captured it is long gone, no value. So now the intangible data 

now becomes tangible. And so it is very important that we start 

looking at information as the value point, not the device, not 

whether it came from what color a machine or anything. 

What your latter part of your question about what can we do as 

a government, the key is to make sure that the regulations allow 

that flow of data to not be restricted and to make sure that the infrastructure is in place that the data can flow, just like I said before about the fiber optic infrastructure. We have to have those 

kind of infrastructures to make data flow very easily and also very 

economically. So that if the government can help in that process, 

I think that is a good move for the future. 

Mr. ALLEN. Okay, very good. 

Mr. CRAGO. Yes, I agree completely. I think that the value of the 

data is not being fully recognized yet, and in my particular world 

with respect to the NAIP Program, the ability of everyone, farmers, 

government regulators, to have access to this open data is of paramount importance, and equally important is the maintenance of 

47

the legacy data and bringing it forward with current data. The 

value of being able to analyze the past with the present and predicting into the future in a lot of the things that my colleagues here 

have said is key, and having that data open and having it widely 

available is essential to this, to the process. Yes. 

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Blair, you have 1 second. Sorry. 

Mr. BLAIR. Thank you. Real quick, risk management is the key. 

Using the technology to do crop insurance, we need to work on 

that, both for adjusting and on the severity of the claim and the 

area of the claim. 

Mr. ALLEN. Also lenders, right? I mean, as far as you know, you 

have crop investment and you have the lender, and then you have 

the crop insurance. But this information would be invaluable to 

lenders to be able to justify loaning the money, wouldn’t it? 

Mr. BLAIR. Yes, it helps, how I view this, if we incorporate the 

technology, the grower is doing a better job at averting risk. The 

grower should actually get a premium reduction because he is making those weather and management decisions right there. If I am 

utilizing this technology on my farm, why do I have to pay the 

same premium as my neighbor, and I have less risk in the insurance industry? 

Beyond line of sight and then Internet infrastructure as well. 

Mr. ALLEN. Okay. 

Mr. BLAIR. Thank you. 

Mr. ALLEN. I yield back. 

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I thank the gentleman. 

This has been a very informative hearing, and a very important 

hearing, because one of the things that we know is there are a lot 

of challenges for agriculture today. Farmers are competing in a 

global marketplace that is maybe not always on a level playing 

field, dealing with weather and other factors. Obviously, we want 

to make sure that our producers have all the tools that they need 

to be as competitive as they can, and more importantly, to be economically viable. With the prices we are seeing right now, yield becomes a very important part of having a successful farming operation. 

I thank our witnesses today. One of the things that I always 

want to encourage our witnesses is that you come up here and give 

us almost an hour and a half of your time, and I know the preparation that you put in requires additional time. We appreciate that. 

I would hope that this is an ongoing dialogue, because we want to 

make sure that we are facilitating this technology and this tool and 

making it as an effective tool as we can for our producers. 

Before I adjourn the Committee, I would yield to the acting 

Ranking Member for any comments. 

Ms. GRAHAM. I just want to echo what you just said, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. 

I have such a respect for folks who are willing to come up here 

and help us understand these issues in a greater way, and I know 

it takes a lot of time and so just thank you very much. It was very 

interesting, and we learned a lot, and we will take this information 

and you will help us do our jobs better, so it is very much appreciated. 

48

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Under the rules of the Committee, the record 

of today’s hearing will remain open for 10 calendar days to receive 

additional material and supplemental written responses from the 

witnesses to any questions posed by a Member. This hearing of the 

Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities and Risk Management is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:15 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:] 

49

SUBMITTED STATEMENT BY HON. ERIC A. ‘‘RICK’’ CRAWFORD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM ARKANSAS; ON BEHALF OF ANDREW D. MOORE, EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR, NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL AVIATION ASSOCIATION

June 30, 2016

Hon. ERIC A. ‘‘RICK’’ CRAWFORD,

Chairman,

Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities and Risk Management, 

House Committee on Agriculture, 

Washington, D.C. 

Introduction 

[The] National Agricultural Aviation Association appreciates this opportunity to 

submit comments to the record on the recent hearing held June 23, 2016 by the 

House of Representatives’ Committee on Agriculture, Subcommittee on General 

Farm Commodities and risk Management titled ‘‘Big Data and Agriculture: Innovation in the Air.’’

Since 2005 the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has been working to develop a regulatory framework to integrate unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) into 

the National Airspace System (NAS). In 2012 those efforts were doubled following 

the passage of the Federal Aviation Modernization and Reform Act (P.L. 112–95), 

which has culminated in the now-finalized small UAS rule, the first step in the ‘‘integration’’ phase, as outlined by the FAA’s UAS roadmap. Throughout this process 

the National Agricultural Aviation Association (NAAA) has been engaged in informing the FAA of our safety concerns with UAS and potential uses of UAS in the agricultural aviation industry. 

NAAA works to support the agricultural aviation industry which is made up of 

small businesses and pilots that use aircraft to aid farmers in producing a safe, affordable and abundant supply of food, fiber and biofuel, in addition to protecting forestry and controlling health-threatening pests. In NAAA’s communications with 

FAA’s UAS Integration Office, NAAA has stressed that above all else UAS, particularly small UAS (sUAS), need to be identifiable, visible and safely operated to agricultural aviators (ag aviators) given agricultural aviation is one of the sectors of 

general aviation whose missions are performed as low as 10′ above ground level and 

usually not above 500′ when ferrying to a field to treat a crop or forest. 

NAAA urges the Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities and Risk Management to consider the great risk that accompanies UAS integration into the NAS 

should the FAA not increase safety precautions for UAS, and to support the safety 

provisions outlined below. 

Importance of Aerial Application Industry 

NAAA consists of over 1,900 members, and represents the interests of small business owners and pilots licensed as commercial applicators that use aircraft to enhance the production of food, fiber, and biofuel; protect forestry; protect waterways, 

pastureland, and ranchland from invasive species; and control health-threatening 

pests, including mosquitos that spread West Nile virus and Zika virus. Almost 20 

percent of crop protection product applications to commercial farmland are made 

aerially. As a result, NAAA estimates that 71 million acres of cropland are treated 

via aerial application in the U.S. each year. This does not include pastureland, 

rangeland, forestry-land and other areas also treated via aerial application. Aerial 

applications are often the only, or most economical method for timely pesticide application. Additionally, aerial application is conducive to higher crop yields, as it is 

non-disruptive to the crop and causes no soil compaction, thus improving soil health 

and crop yields. This results in more food and fiber being produced using less land, 

allowing the land to be repurposed for other uses, including habitat preservation for 

endangered and/or threatened plant, animal, and aquatic species beneficial to the 

environment, and for preserving vegetative ecosystems important to the sequestration of carbon and water purifying wetlands. 

Because of the importance of the aerial application industry, it is vital a safe, lowlevel airspace exists to ensure these pilots can continue to do their jobs safely. Ensuring safe low-level airspace includes minimizing obstructions which are difficult 

to be seen and identified by the pilots. In addition to aerial application operations, 

aircraft users of low-level airspace include: Emergency Medical Services (EMS), air 

tanker firefighting aircraft and their lead aircraft; power line and pipeline patrol 

aircraft; power line maintenance helicopters; fish and wildlife service aircraft; animal control aircraft (USDA–APHIS–ADC); military helicopter and fixed-wing operations; seismic operations (usually helicopters); livestock roundup (ranching or aniVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:26 Jul 25, 2016 Jkt 041481 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6621 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\114-54\20574.TXT BRIAN
50

1 ‘‘Fowl Play: Aviation Bird Strikes Could be a Harbinger of Things to Come Once UAVs Are 

Approved for Agriculture,’’ Agricultural Aviation. May–June [2014]. Pages 12–15. (see Appendix). Editor’s note: the article referred to has been retained in Committee file. It can also be 

found at: http://www.agaviationmagazine.org/agriculturalaviation/20140506?pg=14#pg14.

mal relocation); aircraft GIS mapping of cropland for noxious weed populations and 

the like; and others. 

Safety Recommendations 

NAAA understands that UAS will be used for crop sensing as another tool to 

make precision applications and scout for livestock, among other uses, joining satellite and manned aircraft that also perform these services. 

A January NAAA survey found that about three percent of NAAA members have 

begun to use UAS at their operations, and nearly 15 percent are looking into using 

UAS. Moreover, the world’s largest agricultural aircraft manufacturer and NAAA 

member—Air Tractor—has purchased a UAS company and will be looking into their 

use to aide aerial applicators to perform crop-sensing and aerial imaging services. 

But NAAA believes it’s vitally important to both the manned and unmanned aviation industries to integrate UAS safely into the NAS to prevent tragic loss of life 

and prevent backlash against UAS from the public. 

Birds provide an apt example of what could happen if a drone hits a manned aircraft. According to a joint report by the FAA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA–APHIS), between 

1990 and 2012 over 131,000 wildlife strikes occurred with civil aircraft, 97 percent 

of which were the result of collisions with birds, with 25 resulting in fatalities. 

It doesn’t take a very large bird to do significant damage to an airplane. As the 

photo here indicates, a turkey vulture, which has an average weight range of between 1.8 to 5.1 pounds can break through an ag aircraft windshield. Even smaller 

birds such as a mallard duck have broken through ag aircraft windshield and that 

species of waterfowl only weighs 1.6–3.5 pounds.1 NAAA especially fears what will 

happen if a sUAS weighing as much as 55 pounds traveling at 100 mph—both allowed under FAA’s finalized UAS operations rule, Part 107—will do to an agricultural aircraft when much smaller birds are known to do significant damage. Birds 

consist of hollow bones, feathers, sinew and muscle, whereas UAS are made of more 

solid materials, particularly the batteries. 

Above: Luckily, operator Steve Fletcher only sustained minor injuries 

when a turkey vulture blew out the cockpit window of his Air Tractor 802 

while he was flying.

NAAA is concerned that the widespread use of UAS as projected in agricultural 

areas without devices that allow ag aviators to track and see these aircraft will result in incidents similar to bird strikes, which can ultimately prove fatal. Not only 

could this result in harm and death for agricultural pilots and chemical spills resultVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:26 Jul 25, 2016 Jkt 041481 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 6621 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\114-54\20574.TXT BRIAN

11454022.eps
51

ing in environmental endangerment, but it could also result in a black eye for the 

promising UAS industry. 

The agricultural aviation industry places a great amount of importance on the 

ability to see and avoid obstructions and other aircraft in the airspace in which they 

operate. While this principal is the backbone of safety for our industry and all air 

traffic operating under visual flight rules (VFR), it can only be utilized effectively 

when all aircraft do their part in sensing and avoiding other aircraft and, hence, 

avoiding collisions. 

The necessary technology to allow UAS to ‘‘sense and avoid’’ other aircraft has yet 

to be proven commercially viable. NAAA believes until this technology is developed, 

UAS operators in agricultural areas should be required to be equipped with strobe 

lights on the UAS itself, and, to assist with identification of UAS operating areas, 

on the UAS operator’s ground vehicle. Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast 

(ADS–B) Out technology is a key component of the FAA’s Next Generation Air 

Transport System (NextGen) that allows the identification of aircraft based on 

transponder and GPS signals, and allows nearby aircraft with the proper reading 

equipment to identify their exact location. Proven, ADS–B-like systems designed for 

UAS are currently on the market and should also be a requirement for UAS in agricultural areas, allowing low-level manned aircraft to identify them. These units 

weigh as little as 300 grams and cost as little as $1,200. An ag aviator equipped 

with ADS–B In technology in his cockpit would be informed of a UAS in his vicinity, 

then he would know to look for an aircraft, such as a UAS, that should also be 

equipped with a strobe, outside of the cockpit. This would then enable him the necessary information to then sense and avoid the object. 

NAAA also believes the FAA should require that UAS in agricultural areas be 

painted in colors which make them readily distinguishable from the background. 

This, coupled with an ADS–B-like system and visible lighting, will greatly improve 

our pilots’ ability to protect themselves from potentially deadly UAVs. 

NAAA was pleased to see Part 107 will continue to require UAS to give way to 

manned aircraft, and believe this practice should continue to ensure human safety. 

NAAA is concerned, however, that FAA has set a low-bar for entry for UAS operators by not requiring that they demonstrate the ability to safely operate a UAS, or 

that they be certified pilots well versed in the safe function of our national air space. 

Moreover, NAAA believes that UAS should be certified to be safely manufactured 

and maintained like agricultural aircraft and other manned aircraft must be. 

Conclusion 

NAAA’s goal is to ensure a continued safe operating environment for aerial applicators and UAS users throughout the UAS integration process. Given that crop 

sensing and aerial photography are among the top growth areas for UAS, we believe 

it is vital that the future fleet of unmanned aircraft are marked and piloted by responsible, knowledgeable professionals. 

NAAA urges the Subcommittee to support future UAS safety efforts to prevent 

future accidents that would setback the UAS industry for years to come. 

Thank you, and please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. 

Sincerely,

ANDREW D. MOORE. 

Executive Director. 

SUBMITTED STATEMENT BY CHRISTOPHER C. DOMBROWSKI, PH.D., CHIEF

TECHNOLOGY OFFICER, TERRAVION, INC., SAN LEANDRO, CA 

Innovation in Aerial Imagery and How It Can Be Useful to Farmers 

TerrAvion helps farms take a high tech approach to improving yield and revenue, 

with the first cloud-based, next day aerial imaging and data analytics service for 

agriculture. From small family farms, to the largest agribusinesses, TerrAvion provides producers with images and data that accurately detail the conditions of every 

acre, allowing farmers to identify problems before they can impact yield. As we 

move into the future, with our ever growing population, we will have to rely on precision agriculture, and just plain farm smarter. 

Our company began with our founder and CEO Robert Morris, who served in U.S. 

Army as the Tactical Unmanned Aerial (TUAV) Platoon Leader in Afghanistan. The 

platoon was the first of its kind in Afghanistan, and helped uncover critical intelligence that altered the course of a number of strategically important operations. 


11454023.eps
52

When he returned to civilian life, in 2012, a farmer friend said to him, ‘‘You ran 

a drone platoon in the army. I need to see all of my crops every week. Can I use 

drones for that?’’ The friend was not able to survey the entirety of his fields in the 

time he had. It was the same problem that the army had solved with drones and 

stealth aircraft. 

Robert explored the market and quickly ascertained that, as useful as drones can 

be, they would not provide a scalable, and affordable, service to the people that 

needed it most, the farmers. The other option of plane-based imagery was available, 

but they charged $6–$15 per acre, per pass (fly by), and the imagery was not sent 

for weeks! Not only was the cost prohibitive, the delay in receiving the imagery 

caused the data captured to be too out of date for anything but a few, limited uses. 

Due to his time in the military, Robert know that it was possible to deliver imagery much more quickly. Our imagery is available next day, and we are working 

on cutting that time down. He ultimately decided to partner with an expert in computer imagery and equipped light aircraft with the hardware necessary to collect 

large amounts of data and deliver it to TerrAvion’s servers in real time, where it 

could be packaged and sent to individual clients. For far less than the cost both in 

time, and capital of procuring a drone, or drone service, a producer can subscribe 

to TerrAvion’s cloud-based service and not have to worry about the extra management. Electric drone collection uses 20 times more labor per acre than TerrAvion. 

This model simply doesn’t work for growers who are trying to control costs or for 

a populous expected to reach nearly 10(9) billion people by 2050. Last year 

TerrAvion collected more acres per week than all electric drones combined did in 

a year. With TerrAvion, the farmer can focus on their farm. 

TerrAvion’s core focus is to provide growers with high quality aerial imagery that 

is current and actionable. For most of our customers this means imagery delivered 

once per week within 24 hours of capture. By cutting down the time it takes between gathering the data, and putting it in the farmer’s hands, we allow them to 

act on the imagery in a meaningful way. With our subscription based plan, we can 

take more images and avoid weather and time constraints that affect other services, 

namely drones and satellites. The high frequency of flights gives the grower the 

ability to rapidly detect issues and target problem areas in the fields, as well as 

monitor the efficacy of different fertilizers, pesticides, seeds, etc. While about 90% 

of our customers sign up for annual subscriptions we are also provide single and 

multishot services for a variety of needs and purposes. As we continue to grow we 

will apply our services to the crop insurance adjustment sector. In the past, we have 

provided our customers with timely imagery of their crops after disasters such as 

wildfires or flooding. This information allowed them to document damages and calculate the acreage affected, a useful tool for farmers and insurance companies alike. 

Our current offerings can be summed up by the following list:

• Visible imagery:

» Provides overview of entire operation in one image.

» Directly comparable to what would be seen on the ground.

» Directed scouting, where to focus manpower, where you don’t need to check.

• IR:

» Color Infrared, a traditional imaging technique allows for rapid detection and 

assessment of vegetation.

» NDVI (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index) allows for the assessment of 

plant health and vitality.

• Thermal:

» Water management, leaks and plant growth associated with leaks have a 

strong signature in the Thermal Band.

» Stressed plants can be distinguished from non-stressed plants easily in the 

Thermal Band.

• Analytics:

» Through image processing useful information can be extracted into tabular 

form. Vegetation mean, planted acreage, quality variation, et cetera.

» This tabular data can easily be compared, field to field, region to region, or 

track a crop through time.

• Big Data:

» Our data can be combined with other GIS ready data such as weather, soil 

chemistry, irrigation data, treatment regimens, et cetera.

53

» Analysis and planning can be done combining all available data.

These offerings lead me to point another advantage of the precision agriculture 

movement, and of TerrAvion in particular. We manage all of the technological burden. We collect and process the data and make it deliverable through a standard 

web browser or mobile application. All we require from a customer is the location 

and geometry of the area they need flown and when. Our API is fully supported 

and has already been integrated with several of the largest agricultural retailers in 

the U.S., allowing our customers to quickly, and easily, access their imagery in existing management systems. 

TerrAvion provides full documentation and training programs, free of charge, to 

teach growers who are not used to using aerial imagery so that they may manage 

their crops more efficiently. This support provides a tremendous value to the grower 

and reduces a primary barrier to entry into the usage of aerial photography. While 

we provide some analytics, and that amount is growing, TerrAvion knows that technology is not going to replace farmers, or their personal knowledge. We seek to provide them the support they need to move forward in a rapidly changing world. In 

our minds, we work for the growers. 

Because of all of the reasons listed above, growers can farm smarter. Aerial imagery allows for farmers to target problems areas, drastically reducing labor costs 

as well as other inputs. The extra time provides farmers the ability to improve the 

entirety of their field, increasing yield, while decreasing their investments. With our 

service a grower can view the entirety of their crops in one place and have confidence that the choices they are making are accomplishing results. 

As recently as 5 years ago, what we do would not have been possible at a large 

scale. The speed of image processing and cloud computing has made this service accessible to every grower. Sensors are constantly evolving, giving farmers more and 

more insight into the plants they see every day. With our plane-based systems we 

have the ability to add more sensors to our collection at a minuscule increase in 

cost. And now, we can do this at a resolution that is competitive, or better than 

drones and satellites at lower cost that is better or competitive.

What makes TerrAvion different/unique among aerial imagery options? 

Among other mapping and technology options?

• High revisit and up to date images.

• Rapid delivery of imagery. We strive for 24 hour turnaround from capture to 

delivery to the customer.

• Subscription-based service. Cost is for a season of up to date images, not per 

pass. 90% of our customers use annual subscription, about 10% do single or up 

to three passes.

• Cost and scalability are unbeatable.

• Easy integration with other management systems.

• Our company is built on serving the needs of farmers/the market and not on 

technology/silicon valley hype, that being said we are always innovating.

• We have the ability to survey large areas for insurance adjusting after natural 

disasters

What new, innovative practices is TerrAvion employing?

• Distributed collection brings collection costs down.

• Cloud-based storage, processing, and delivery reduces infrastructure overhead 

bringing costs down.

• Distributed labor force allows for 24 hour coverage and overnight delivery.

• Image processing and analytics as a service.

How is this different from something farmers could get 5 years ago? 10 

years ago? 20 years ago?

• Speed of collection and rate of delivery.

• Cloud computing has allowed for the processing and delivery of data on a scale 

what would have been cost prohibitive even 5 years ago.

• Sensor size has dramatically increased while costs have decreased in the past 

20 years.

• Competitive or better resolutions than satellite and drones.

What challenges for farmers can be mitigated by using TerrAvion?

• Directed scouting, documentation, and overall labor reduction.

54

• Crop management: problem detection (pest, disease, water, etc.), yield prediction, side by side trial comparisons, informed decision making.

• Big data analytics.

Æ