12
CapitalPress.com
Friday, April 16, 2021
Bill: ‘It’s going to be hard on the middle managers’
Continued from Page 1
may come up during the
2022 session.
Even without it, farm
groups and most Repub-
licans accepted the bill as
the best deal possible for
agricultural employers this
year.
The state Supreme Court
ruled in November that
dairy workers were enti-
tled to overtime. The rul-
ing pointed to further liti-
gation to extend overtime to
all farmworkers, with up to
three years of back pay.
“We averted both of
those potential pitfalls,”
Washington Tree Fruit
Association President Jon
DeVaney said. “Those are
critically important gains
for agricultural employers
who were facing a far worse
situation.”
Yakima Valley tree fruit
grower Jason Matson said
he assumed his family’s
company would have to
pay time-and-a-half after
40 hours this year. The bill
gives the company time to
plan, he said.
Growers will pay over-
time, but they also may cut
hours and acres, and auto-
mate, Matson said. Compa-
nies are working on perfect-
ing robotic apple pickers,
he noted. “Boy, they can’t
get that solved quickly
enough,” he said.
At the 55-hour thresh-
old, an immediate concern
will be 12-hour shifts irri-
gating fields, Matson said.
The work may have to be
spread out among more
workers, leading farmers to
hire more foreign workers
on H-2A visas, he said.
U.S. workers who have
their hours cut may seek
to pick up work at other
farms, he said. “I imagine
there will be a fair amount
of moonlighting.
“It’s going to make some
of those employees upset,”
Matson said. “It’s going to
be hard on the middle man-
agers. They’re going to
have to deal with it.”
Because of the Supreme
Court’s ruling, dairies have
been required to pay time-
and-a-half after 40 hours a
week since November. The
bill won’t change that, but it
nullifies about three dozen
back-pay lawsuits that have
been filed against dairies.
The Washington State
Dairy Federation issued a
statement Monday urging
the Senate to quickly send
the bill to Inslee.
Washington has the high-
est state minimum wage
and is tied with Oregon for
the highest H-2A minimum
wage. Washington and Cal-
ifornia will be the only two
states that will pay all farm-
workers
time-and-a-half
after 40 hours.
The Oregon Legislature
is debating an overtime bill.
Vilsack: What’s happening with the phase 1 deal
Continued from Page 1
system. That may be expensive. It
may require additional equipment
(and) space. Can USDA, through
COVID relief and other resources,
provide assistance with that?
The third piece is a much larg-
er-scale effort, going back to
resources provided in the Amer-
ican Rescue Plan. It’s the ability
to create a fund that would allow
USDA to approach state govern-
ments, officials, private investors
and others, to say, “What if we
could provide you X number of
dollars towards the capital cost of
a new (or retrofitted) processing
facility that would increase your
capacity?”
Part of what we’re doing is in
that space. The other part is regula-
tory. We’re in the process of eval-
uating the state of regulations we
inherited. Once we’ve finished, we
may (strengthen) various aspects
of our enforcement mechanisms.
CP: Can you give me an
example?
Vilsack: Well, in 2016, we had
a series of rules relative to the
poultry industry under the Pack-
ers and Stockyards Act which the
Trump administration basically
froze. Are those still relevant? Do
they need to be modified? Those
kinds of things.
CP: You talked about con-
solidation, how a few giants like
Tyson hold all the sway. But can
you explain how new small-scale
processors will realistically com-
pete? It seems like they serve
different markets. Or are you
planning on scaling up existing
processors?
Vilsack: I think it’s potentially
a combination of both. But I think
you walk before you run.
At the end of the day, the goal is
to create more resiliency.
It’s also about competitive
price. If you have one place to sell
your product, you take the price
you get. If you have two places,
you can at least compare, right?
If you’ve got three or four places,
well then, you’re really in the driv-
er’s seat. Right now, from the pro-
ducer standpoint, the view is: “We
don’t have enough capacity.” I
think producers are looking to
USDA and others to address that.
CP: Sticking with the live-
stock topic, the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service
recently announced it’s pulling
back the radio frequency identi-
fication, or RFID, ear tag man-
date. That may be temporary,
so I’d like to know your lon-
ger-term plan, if you have one.
Vilsack: Well, I want to point
out, I’ve been on the job for about
a month. (He laughed.) You’re ask-
ing a lot of questions the answers
to which will evolve over time.
Let me just say this about the
tag system. Traceability is import-
ant. It’s important in terms of our
ability to contain disease, limit
damage to the market (and) be
able to respond to demands of cus-
tomers overseas. Whatever we do,
we’ve gotta have reliable trace-
ability. All right?
Matthew Doyle
U.S. Rep. Cindy Axne, D-Iowa, left, and Secretary Tom Vilsack, right, handle apples inside a food bank.
Susan Walsh
Vilsack
And I think, frankly, as time
goes on, more consumers are
going to want to know where their
food came from.
Now, what is the right system to
address the concerns of some that
feel the government may have too
much information? I don’t know.
We were trying to strike a balance
with the tag system. We’ll take a
look at it.
CP: Let’s move on to dairy.
The Dairy Margin Coverage
Program is based on the national
price of milk and average cost
of feed, but Western U.S. dairy
farmers often have higher input
and labor costs than farmers in
other regions. Do you have plans
for programs that consider dairy
farmers in the West?
Vilsack: I think one way you
address the needs of Western dairy
farmers is to create new and bet-
ter markets (and) maximize trad-
ing opportunities.
It’s also about innovation, cre-
ating new products in which milk
(and milk ingredients) can be
used.
We just basically changed the
margin protection program to
become the margin coverage pro-
gram, and I think, for the most
part, it’s working pretty well. At
this point, I don’t have any partic-
ular plans to change things. But,
I mean, obviously, if the dairy
industry approaches us and asks
for adjustments, we’ll be open to
that.
CP: OK. Let’s talk trade. On
what specific issues will you be
working with U.S. Trade Rep-
resentative Katherine Tai to
negotiate on trade with China?
What’s happening with the
phase 1 deal, and what’s your
next step?
Vilsack: Well, the next step is
the one I already took, which was
to reach out to the Chinese ag
minister and have a conversation
with him.
I was pleased the conversa-
tion was cordial, that there was
an acknowledgment of the impor-
tance of the phase 1 agreement.
But we still have issues to resolve.
They’re not buying as much
as they promised, but they’ve
increased their purchases signifi-
cantly. What we want to do is
maintain those purchases (and)
continue the relationship.
The relationship with China is
highly complex. In some cases,
we are competitors, in some
cases, cooperators. In some cases,
we are seller and buyer and it’s a
mercantile relationship.
In ag trade, it’s a trade rela-
tionship. But it can be impacted
by national security issues, by
something happening in the South
China Sea, etc. All of that may
play on China’s attitude about
purchasing. And those are things
the Department of Agriculture
doesn’t have control over. What
we attempt to do is make sure
they know we value their market
(and) let them know they can rely
on the stability, safety and supply
from our market.
CP: Changing topics — in the
Western U.S., organic is a grow-
ing sector. What will your agency
do to support organic producers?
Vilsack: Well, first of all, we’ll
have a senior adviser or some high-
level individual who’s charged with
overseeing the organic program.
Secondly, we need to protect
the brand. You don’t get high value
unless people think there’s some-
thing about organic that they like
better than conventional and they’re
willing to pay more for it.
We’ll also, through the regu-
latory process, make sure people
aren’t trying to get product in under
false pretenses. We have friends in
foreign governments (whose) stan-
dards for organic may be differ-
ent than our standards. We need to
make sure their standards are equal
to or better than U.S. standards if
they sell here.
Then we’ll look for ways in
which we can create an easier path-
way to obtaining organic status.
CP: One follow-up: Have you
already appointed someone to
that high-level organic position,
or are you looking?
Vilsack: We’re looking. We’re
in the process of trying to identify
someone.
CP: OK. On a similar note, do
you plan on tapping any West-
ern U.S. ag experts for potential
high-level leadership in USDA?
Vilsack: Our leadership team at
USDA will be diverse in a number
of different definitions of diverse,
including geographic. We’ll be
looking for people who understand
and appreciate specifically West-
ern agriculture.
CP: Moving on — I know
you’ve been following the recent
droughts and fires in the West.
The U.S. Forest Service is under
USDA. What can your agency
do to improve management of
national forests so they aren’t as
susceptible to wildfires?
Vilsack: It’s a function of
resources. We have to do a better
job of managing our forests, and
that means getting resources from
Congress. And in the president’s
budget, as it unfolds, I think peo-
ple will see we’re going to make
a major commitment to increase
resources available for forest
management.
That’s not going to solve the
problem today. It’s going to take
years and years and years. In the
meantime, we’ll use the best sci-
ence available to contain as many
fires as we can.
CP: OK. Assuming for a
moment you get the funding,
what tools will you use in for-
est management? Can you give
me examples, like thinning or
grazing?
Vilsack: It’s a combination of
— I mean — I’m not an expert in
this field. I rely on the Forest Ser-
vice experts to tell me what needs
to be done. But what they tell me
is we need to manage our forests
more aggressively.
It’s a combination of hazard-
ous fuel material removal, pro-
tecting old growth, making sure
the communities around for-
ests are protected, expanding the
number of advocates for our for-
ests. And I think climate (change)
also creates an opportunity for
investment.
CP: One last question. What
major changes, if any, will you
propose surrounding crop
insurance in the next farm bill?
Vilsack: Oh. Well, we don’t yet
have a (Risk Management Agency)
administrator appointed.
Your readers need to know I
recognize and appreciate the role
crop insurance plays in providing
stability and assurance. So, we’re
not going to do anything to the
crop insurance program that would
reduce its effectiveness in provid-
ing that sense of security.
I do also think there is a bar-
gain between farmers and the gov-
ernment when it comes to crop
insurance. We pay — we mean-
ing the government, the people of
the United States — a significant
amount of the crop insurance pre-
mium. In exchange, we only ask
for conservation compliance. I
think we want to keep that bargain.
CP: Great. Thanks for tak-
ing the time to talk with me and
speak to Western U.S. farmers.
Vilsack: You bet. Thank you
very much.
Klamath: Reclamation says it will maintain certain river flows for salmon
Continued from Page 1
through the Klamath Proj-
ect Drought Relief Agency,
which provides funding
for drought relief programs
including groundwater pump-
ing and land idling.
An additional $3 million
will go to the tribes for eco-
system activities aimed at
protecting endangered fish,
as well as monitoring ground-
water levels throughout the
basin.
Under Reclamation’s tem-
porary operations plan for the
Klamath Project in 2021, it
recognizes there is not enough
water available to meet com-
peting demands for farms and
fish.
The plan provides guide-
lines for Reclamation to adap-
tively manage Project opera-
tions this spring to maintain
certain levels of water in
Upper Klamath Lake for Lost
River and shortnose suckers,
as well as preserve options for
flushing flows downstream
for salmon in the lower Klam-
ath River.
Reclamation says it will
maintain certain river flows
for salmon through Septem-
ber 2021.
While the news was widely
expected, it is no less devas-
tating to the basin’s agricul-
tural community. The Klam-
ath Water Users Association
and irrigation districts held an
operations meeting Wednes-
day morning to discuss their
plans going forward with
patrons who
stand to see
their fields
run dry.
In a let-
ter sent April
8 to patrons,
Deb
the KWUA
Haaland
said it is well
aware of the
impact such a low alloca-
tion will have on the business
community.
“We will continue pursu-
ing strategies to correct funda-
mental problems in the basin,
advocate for common sense,
and begin work with respon-
sible parties so that we are not
in this impossible and unnat-
ural situation again in the
future,” the letter reads.
Last week, Interior Secre-
tary Deb Haaland withdrew a
41-page “reassessment” of the
Klamath Project and its water
delivery obligations under the
Endangered Species Act that
likely would have benefited
irrigators in future drought
years.
The analysis, issued by the
outgoing Trump administra-
tion in January, held that the
Bureau of Reclamation has
no legal right to curtail water
contracted for farms to pro-
tect endangered fish, includ-
ing suckers in Upper Klamath
Lake and salmon in the lower
Klamath River.
Irrigators had hailed the
findings as a game-changer,
with the bureau no longer
imposing sever water restric-
tions on the Klamath Project.
But Haaland, who was con-
firmed March 15 as President
Joe Biden’s Interior secre-
tary, announced April 8 she is
rescinding that legal guidance,
along with other Trump-era
memoranda related to Klam-
ath Project operations.
“These documents were
issued
without
govern-
ment-to-government consulta-
tion with affected tribes and do
not reflect the current admin-
istration’s goals for long-term
water recovery and economic
restoration in this region,”
Haaland said. “The documents
also conflict with longstand-
ing departmental positions and
interpretation of governing law
and should not be relied upon
for any purpose.”
Haaland also sent a letter
to the Klamath Water Users
Association outlining her
decision.
“Understandably, this let-
ter may be unwelcome news
given the dire and unprece-
dented drought conditions fac-
ing the Klamath Basin this
year,” she said.
“I want to emphasize that
the Department of the Interior
is firmly committed to work-
ing collaboratively with you,
your constituents, your con-
gressional delegation, and
other interested parties within
the Klamath Basin,” Haaland
added, “not only to minimize
the impacts of upcoming water
allocation decisions, but also
to develop a long-term plan to
facilitate conservation and eco-
nomic growth with the basin.”