Proposed Cut of USDA-ARS Funding for Alaska

I wanted to give everyone an update as to what the situation is regarding probable loss of funding for USDA-ARS (Agricultural Research Services) in Alaska.  I spoke at length to an ARS-funded researcher the other day about what the repercussions of this would mean to agriculture in our state.  With today’s decision to put off passing a federal budget for 3 more weeks, we have the opportunity to mount a strong response to these proposed budget cuts.

As background, ARS is the research arm of the USDA and funding is allocated to research “stations” under one of several defined research focuses.  As the government in DC attempts to balance the national budget, among the many programs they are threatening to cut are 10 ARS “stations” throughout the nation, including the one in Alaska.  Unfortunately for AK, we have only one station in state, and perhaps more unfortunately, it is funded specifically to research IPM (Integrated Pest Management) and not some of the other focuses that might be more applicable to this state, such as Climate Change or Food Security.  As most of us already know, Alaska faces relatively little pest or even weed pressure when compared to most states in the Lower 48, and IPM research in Alaska probably doesn’t look too critical from an office in DC.  Unfortunately for Alaska, though, ARS funding is integrated into many other programs and provides funding for much of the agricultural research in the state, whether related to IPM or not.

At this point, then, it looks likely that if these budget cuts go through, all ARS funding will be terminated as of 9/30/11.  ARS directly pays for 24 jobs and funds several grad students throughout the state, and most of the fully funded ARS researchers will leave the state and their research will be dropped.  Looking back at the history of ARS in Alaska, funding was cut for Ag research in 1993 under similar circumstances, but a congressional earmark re-funded it and has supported it until this year.   Even if ARS gets re-funded through some congressional earmark in the future, all the work currently in progress would be lost or need to be started again with new funds, new equipment, and new researchers.

Among the projects funded by ARS that will end if this cut goes through:

• ·         Fish waste utilization research in Kodiak (including work on fish-based fertilizers and many more innovative and entrepreneurial projects)
• ·         Composting research (including  research on cold-soil nitrogen utilization)
• ·         Rhubarb research to support the growing rhubarb industry
• ·         Peony research to support the growing peony industry
• ·         Research supporting small fruit and berry production
• ·         Potato research including marketing of seed potatoes to China
• ·         Community Ag outreach in villages (ARS actually provides funding for community gardens, seed potatoes for school gardens, helps run Ag Fairs and provides teachers and mentors throughout the state)

Besides directly funding specific research and support as listed above, ARS also provides support that is less obvious but will have significant impacts on the agricultural sector of this state.  For example, while ARS does not directly provide funding for local Ag conferences, they provide funding to pay for speakers to attend, as well as having a wealth of researchers and academics to call upon as speakers.  Without ARS funding, popular conferences like SARE will have that much harder a time sourcing or paying for speakers and keeping costs down.  Likewise, while ARS researchers don’t actually work for UAF/SNARS, they collaborate on many projects and offer expertise in some key areas such as insect and weed management in which UAF does not actually have full-time faculty.  ARS is also integral to the functioning of the Palmer Research Farm.  Again, while ARS cannot directly pay for UAF faculty doing research there, they have provided funding for much of the equipment, the greenhouses, and even the upkeep on them.  The timing of this de-funding is particularly bad in light of the fact that SNARS is facing massive budget cuts of its own and relies quite heavily on federal funds to help run its own research and programs.  Loss of USDA-ARS funding will be a double-hit on all Ag research in this state even at the University level.

The timing of these budget cuts is likewise unfortunate in light of the recent new focus on local agriculture and food security both in-state and nationally.  At a time when local food is becoming a topic of conversation in homes beyond those of farmers and University researchers, we are about to lose critical funding that helps support and sustain our industry, as well as some of the agricultural education that could help train new generations of community and home gardeners, farmers and Ag researchers. 

So what can we do?  We know that budget cuts are inevitable, what compelling argument do we have in favor of protecting our funding? 

• ·         For one thing, while closing an ASR station in California will no doubt impact locally relevant research and cause some researchers to lose their jobs, there are other nearby stations that CES agents, Universities, or farmers can turn to with questions.  In effect, due to both its isolation and unique growing conditions, Alaska truly stands alone and we cannot simply look to our neighboring state (or another ARS station in another part of our state) for expert advice or relevant research.  If we lose our ARS funding, we lose access to relevant and locally specific Ag research and trained professionals with knowledge of Alaskan growing conditions.  In this we are truly unique and, I would argue, we should be treated as a unique situation. 
• ·         As stated above, Alaska is also unique in its dire need for enhanced food security and local food production.  In an extreme situation, Alaska would be unable to feed itself or to easily ship food from other states – again, we are isolated and agriculture-poor, and in desperate need of growing and solidifying our agricultural industry.  This is a terrible time to lose this funding, when both the general public and even our local politicians are beginning to appreciate the importance of supporting our industry and answering some of our food security needs.
• ·         Perhaps one of the questions to ask our congressional representatives is whether we can get ARS funds re-allocated to Alaska under a more logical, appropriate program, such as Climate Change, or, even more critically, Food Security.  Surely there are few states in the nation as much in need of federal research dollars for either of those two focuses than Alaska.  If indeed it is too late to save ARS funding tagged for IPM research in this state, what process would Alaska have to go through to qualify for ARS funding for Food Security?  And if we need to face budget cuts, is there any way to maintain some level of funding so that current projects aren’t just discontinued across the board?

Please take a few minutes to write or call your representatives and make the argument for protecting this funding or, in the worst case scenario, finding money to re-allocate to agricultural research.   Our state’s ability to feed itself might be on the line.  Also, please consider writing an editorial to your local paper in order to get this information out to as many people as possible.

For more info from a recent SNARS Science and News article, please follow this link: http://snras.blogspot.com/2011/03/snras-agriculture-partner-faces-closure.html

Congressional contact information:
http://www.alaska.gov/CongressDelegation.html