Southeast Data Users Meeting 

Summary of Questions and Comments 

Atlanta, Georgia 

March 13, 2006 

Note: The following write-up presents a topical summary of issues discussed during the 

forum. Material is presented in essentially chronological order. However, all discussions 

on a topic have been consolidated if a specific topic came up more than once. 

Egg Production Data: A question was asked to Michael Sheats of the Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS) about what percentage of operations are reporting their egg 

production data. The question was asked that since reporting the data is voluntary, what 

is the incentive for them to report and would it be worth it to require mandatory 

reporting? 

Michael Sheats responded that they don’t have problems getting data from the 

respondents as 80-90% of the operations report their egg data. He also mentioned the 

operations don’t have a problem reporting their data and therefore mandatory reporting 

isn’t necessary. Mr. Sheats continued by saying the information is confidential and 

useful to the egg industry. 

Labor Wage Rate Data: A question was asked to Linda Hutton of the National 

Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) about who the users are of labor and wage 

information. 

Linda responded by saying the data are available to the entire industry, but the primary 

user is the Department of Labor (DOL). 

After Linda’s response, the comment was made that the DOL conducts Prevailing Wage 

surveys to collect some of this information and the questioner was concerned about the 

duplication of effort. For this reason, the question was asked if and how users can 

recommend that NASS quit collecting and publishing data because of the negative impact 

on the fruit and vegetable industry. A comment was made that the average wage rates 

from NASS are higher than what is collected from the DOL because NASS collects data 

differently than the DOL and publishes regional estimates whereas the DOL publishes 

estimates regarding geographic location and specific occupations. Lastly, it was 

recommended by the attendee that the DOL take over the publishing of wage rates. 

Linda responded that the data are not being duplicated as both surveys are collecting 

different items. NASS has asked the DOL if NASS should collect and publish more or 

less wage rate data, but they have indicated funding is an issue and that they need 

everything they are currently getting from NASS. 

1
Citrus Data: A question was asked to Linda Hutton of NASS if there were demographic 

statistics for the citrus industry. Also, how does Texas and California get their acreage 

statistics? 

Linda responded by saying the only source of demographic data is the Census of 

Agriculture which was last conducted in 2002, but soon to be done again for 2007. Joe 

Prusacki stated that funding from Florida producers pays for their acreage, yield, and 

production data, but Texas and California are different as the producers don’t fund it. 

Jim Smith continued by saying these two states have data available and he would followup with the questioner to help find the data. 

Cotton Stocks: A comment was made that over the last few years there has been 

substantial revisions to Chinese cotton stocks. A question was then asked to Jerry Bange 

of the World Agricultural Outlook Board (WAOB) about how the ending stocks numbers 

are revised and what process is used to set initial stocks and revised stocks numbers. 

Jerry began by mentioning that China information is very difficult to obtain. He 

mentioned they take the various pieces of usage statistics and back into the numbers. He 

continued by saying the governments in both China and the U.S. are putting in a lot of 

effort to improve the numbers and they are getting better, but it would take a lot of time 

and work to improve them even more. 

Government Contacts: A comment was made that compared to 20-30 years ago, there 

has been a lot of employee turnover in many government agencies. In the past, 

commodity specialists would stay in the same position for a number of years which made 

it easier to work with because you were always dealing with the same person. 

Carol House responded by saying that this is true and the agencies need to keep their 

contact information on the Web up-to-date. 

Tobacco Program: A recommendation was made to Jim Smith of NASS that more 

states be added to the tobacco estimating program, in particular Illinois, Indiana, and 

West Virginia. There is concern that more acreage will be planted to tobacco in these 

states as the tobacco companies write more contracts to producers in these states in the 

future in order to meet demand. 

Jim Smith answered by saying that NASS will evaluate this request. 

Pecan Data: A question was asked to Jim Smith of NASS about who the pecan contacts 

are that worked import and export data. 

Jim gave names and phone numbers of people from both ERS and WAOB. 

Aquaculture: A comment was made about how the various aquaculture industries have 

benefitted from the Aquaculture Census and NASS surveys. Several examples were 

given about how NASS statistics have helped, such as a certain pharmaceutical company 

2
invested the resources to produce a new antibiotic for fish (which was the first new 

animal drug approved in many years), an anti-dumping case was won in favor of the 

industry, the industry successfully fought a pollution issue with the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), and producers are better able to secure bank loans. NASS was 

thanked by the attendee for a job well done. 

Homeland Security: A question was asked about the role NASS will be playing in 

Homeland Security. The question was expanded as to what role NASS would play in 

manufacturing. 

Dan Kerestes of NASS responded by talking about animal ID’s. He mentioned that 

NASS is assisting as much as possible. However, he said NASS is not providing names, 

of course, but helping as much as we can. He continued by saying that certain 

commodities are better than others when it comes to signing up for animal ID’s, but only 

a small portion of American agriculture has signed up. 

Carol House concluded by talking about NASS confidentiality rules and that NASS is 

protected by law not to disclose names of respondents. 

Tobacco Industry: A question was asked to Joe Prusacki of NASS if the tobacco 

industry has been willing to help NASS get good cooperation on price and production 

data for tobacco. 

Joe responded by saying the large tobacco companies have not been very helpful to 

NASS and that it has been difficult to get the information. He finished by saying NASS 

will continue to work with them and hopes cooperation improves in the future. 

Avian Bird Flu: A question was asked to Carol House regarding NASS’s involvement 

in the collection and publishing of data related to the bird flu if and when it arrives in the 

U.S. 

Carol began by saying that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) 

would be taking the lead on this with the help of NASS as well as other government 

agencies. NASS would possibly be involved in providing statistics of the areas where it 

hits and APHIS would possibly be providing information on how to notice symptoms. 

She continued by saying that whatever NASS’s involvement would be, no names of 

individual producers would be revealed. 

Dan Kerestes finished by saying NASS would possibly provide statistics regarding bird 

deaths related to the bird flu. 

Small Flocks: Linda Hutton was asked if any USDA entity knows how many small 

farm-owned flocks there are in the U.S. 

Linda said these numbers can be obtained from the Census of Agriculture. Dan Kerestes 

also mentioned APHIS has already done some of this analysis and has some statistics. 

3
Mike Sheats stated outbreaks in disease mostly occur by live birds from large flocks 

moving from one flock to another. Backyard flocks don’t move around as much resulting 

in fewer disease outbreaks. He finished by saying that AMS already releases weekly 

reports that show how it impacts the marketplace. 

4