We did it! On May 12, 2021 Governor Scott signed H.218 into law. The new law, Act 22, expands raw milk sales for tier two producers to other farms’ farmstands and CSAs in Vermont, and will go into effect on July 1st, 2021.

Congratulations, Everyone! Passing this bill was an uphill battle every single step of the way. Farmers leaders have laid the groundwork on this effort for the past twelve years, and it is thanks to this history, the diligent testimony of producers, and outpouring of support from consumers that got us here. Although this bill only directly effects tier two producers, we do believe that our work this legislative session has successfully elevated the importance of raw milk producers as an integral part of the agricultural landscape and Vermont's dairy community. We will continue work on this issue to support producers of all scales through grassroots organizing and potential future legislative initiatives as directed by farmer leaders.

We'd like to extend a special thank you to Rep. Heather Surprenant, lead sponsor and overall champion on this bill, for her tireless work on this issue, as well as Senator Pollina, who was instrumental in ushering this bill through the Senate.

Please consider thanking Rep Surprenant, Senator Pollina, and other members of the House and Senate Ag Cmtes for their work on this bill.

All House Ag Cmte Members:

Chairwoman Carolyn Partridge
Rep. Graham
Rep. O’Brien
Rep. Bock 
Rep Norris
Rep Strong
Rep Pearl
Rep Surprenant

All Senate Ag Cmte Members:

Sen. Starr, Chair
Sen. Pearson
Sen. Collamore 
Sen. Parent
Sen. Pollina 

What’s in Act 22, the new RAW MILK LAW:

• Tier two raw milk producers would be able to sell raw milk at other farm’s farmstands and CSAs within the state of Vermont (the 30 mile limit was removed)

• The requirement to verbally inform each customer of the need to refrigerate milk is removed

• The CSA or Farmstand selling the milk will maintain the required transaction records and customer contact records required by existing law. Farmstand and CSA owners will transfer this information to the raw milk producer within one week.

• Milk must remain below 40 degree Fahrenheit at all times

• The milk producer must notify VAAFM of any CSA or farmstand locations their milk is being sold. These locations will be subject to inspection by VAAFM.

• The farmstand or CSA where milk is sold must display the 8.5x11 warning sign: “Unpasteurized (Raw) Milk. Keep Refrigerated. Consuming raw unpasteurized milk may cause illness, particularly in children, seniors, persons with weakened immune systems, and pregnant women.”

• All labeling and other requirements of the law remain the same

• The cmte added language to the statute to clarify the existing requirement that rabies vaccines, tuberculosis, and brucellosis tests must be conducted by a licensed veterinarian

• These changes go into effect July 1, 2021

Thank you so much. This is your victory and you all inspire us everyday. Stay tuned for what's next!

From VAAFM:

The USDA is now accepting applications for three different grants that support the development, coordination and expansion of direct producer-to-consumer marketing, local and regional food markets and enterprises and value-added agricultural products. Over $93.5 million dollars is available in total.

Special consideration will be given to projects that assist underserved local and regional agricultural businesses, producer networks and associations, and local and tribal government in responding to COVID-19 disruptions and impacts.

$38.5 million is available through the Farmers Market Promotion Program, which supports direct-to-consumer markets like farmers markets and CSAs. The deadline to apply is June 21st.

$38.5 million is available through the Local Food Promotion Program to support indirect-to-consumer markets like food hubs and value-added product incubators. The deadline to apply is June 21st.

$15.3 million is available through the Regional Food System Partnership Program to fund public-private partnerships that build and strengthen viability and resilience of local or regional food economies. The deadline to apply is July 6th.

Rural VT began the session advocating in collaboration with NOFA VT, and many grazing farmers, to amend the existing “adequate shelter” requirements for livestock such that they would be refined from requiring livestock have access to shade and shelter at all times to requiring them have this access under particular conditions.  After much debate but no action in the House, Senate Agriculture did not decide to implement our proposed language - but they did agree that it was unclear in the existing law whether or not those using accepted animal husbandry practices were subject to the law.  They included language to this affect in a related bill - H.421.  This ensures that grazers will not be subject to violations of animal welfare if their animals do not have access to shade and shelter at all times; though it does not implement any of our suggestions for conditions under which this determination could be made. 

H.421 has now passed the Senate with the amendment and we expect it to pass in the House and he signed into law.

The Senate amended H.420, the miscellaneous ag bill, that now doubles the allowances for on-farm slaughter of livestock (in 6 V.S.A. § 3311a): from 5 to 10 cattle, 15 to 30 pigs, 40 to 80 sheep and goats or a total combined live weight of 12,000 pounds. We expect a vote of the House about concurrence any day now. The bill also repeals the “sunset” of the law and thereby secures this important practice of food sovereignty in perpetuity. 

In addition, the bill directs the legislative council to draft legislation by 2022 that will clearly allow for CSAs with animal shares in consultation with the Agency for Agriculture, Food, and Markets (AAFM) "and other interested parties." Rural Vermont is in dispute with AAFM about the interpretation of the current law, especially about the question of whether the current law does or does not allow for CSAs for animal shares when the members become owners of the animal or herd. 

In consultation with legislative council Michael O'Grady, the committee learned last Friday (watch recording here) that their approach to clarify in statute the legality of animal shares for on-farm slaughter - including the shared ownership of a herd and the delivery of meat products - would conflict with the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Services interpretation of the legal barriers of the federal personal use exemption in 9 CFR § 303.1 (a) (1) that states that the federal requirements for meat inspection do not apply to  (*Content warning: sexist language*): “The slaughtering by any individual of livestock of his own raising and the preparation by him and transportation in commerce of the carcasses, parts thereof, meat and meat food products of such livestock exclusively for use by him and members of his household and his nonpaying guests and employees;” Legislative Counsel, Michael O’Grady, referenced FSIS interpretation as effectively requiring any and all owner(s) of the livestock to participate in some ways in the slaughter of the livestock. This interpretation, which FSIS only offered a few days ago, would render the personal use exemption completely impractical. 

The discourse around CSAs with animal shares has revealed that AAFM is in a pickle with navigating taking agency for the on-farm slaughter community while also satisfying FSIS guidelines. In the Senate Committee on Agriculture they raised concern that FSIS's narrow interpretation of the law would impair Vermont's "equal to" status (that equated state inspected meat with USDA inspection) as well as the interstate shipment agreement with the USDA (that allows for out of state sales of state inspected meat), shall the committee proceed with their allowance of animal shares within the on-farm slaughter practice.

Rural Vermont argued in testimony last week (watch recording here) that Vermont’s current state law could be interpreted as already allowing for CSA’s with animal shares since it does allow for multiple owners and also does not prohibit a farmer's delivery of meat products as derived from custom butcher shops. 
In 2019, Rural Vermont successfully advocated for the “multiple owner” amendment - that now allows a farmer to sell a live animal to an individual or individuals to slaughter for their personal use on the farm the animal was raised. The USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) confirmed back then that this amendment would be permissible under the federal personal use exemption in 9 CFR § 303.1 (a) (1).

Considering the multiple owner rule and the ability to utilize custom butchery, Rural Vermont believes that current law does not create barriers for realizing CSA models with animal shares. CSAs can facilitate what on-farm slaughter requires: a contract pre-slaughter that turns “customers” into “owners” of the animal(s) and thus responsible for the slaughter of their livestock for their own “personal use.” Legally, we argue that the law doesn’t prohibit CSAs so that farmers and their customers/members/stakeholders may design their contracts within the limitations of federal and state law as part of their “freedom of contract” - a doctrine derived from the fourteenth amendment (read more here). That would include that a farmer is allowed to sell a herd of livestock to multiple owners and include also that these owners are free to hire the farmer to maintain care of the livestock and to organize for the hiring of an itinerant slaughterer to perform the act of slaughtering as well as to utilize the services of a custom butcher shop on behalf of the owners. Farmers are also allowed to maintain (co-)ownership of any of the animals and to slaughter the animals they will consume themselves. 

Rural Vermont will engage in finding a legislative solution for the CSA with animal shares for the 2022 legislative session as directed in H. 420. We celebrate the increase in allowances for on-farm slaughter and the sunset repeal that will secure this important decentralized direct-to-owner pathway to local meat consumption. 

For more information please contact caroline@ruralvermont.org

S.102 passed today with a Senate vote in concurrence to the House amendments. While the latest version of the bill is not online yet, consider this side-by-side that highlights the latest House amendments in comparison to the bill as passed by the Senate. The bill means a milestone for soil health in Vermont - allowing farmers to produce the valuable compost they need to enhance soils and support their crops. S.102 is creating a pathway for the priority use of food residuals for the “agricultural use, including the consumption by animals” as laid out in the Universal Recycling Law . 

At the core, S.102 amends the definition of farming in Act 250 and the RAP's to allow for the importation of 2,000 cubic yards per year or less of food residuals or food  processing residuals onto a farm for the production of compost, provided that:

(i) the compost is principally used on the farm where it is produced; or

(ii) the compost is produced on a small farm that raises or manages poultry.

AAFM is charged to initiate rulemaking on or before January 1, 2022. In the interim, practitioners are held to comply with Sections 6–1101 through 6–1111 of the Agency of Natural Resources’ Vermont Solid Waste Management Rules. AAFM has the authority to regulate soil amendments, plant amendments and plant biostimulants aside from fertilizers that are already under their purview. This will allow farmers to Close-The-Nutrient-Loop by creating valuable composts for soil enhancement while also providing AAFM with the oversight to keep plastics out of Vermont soils - ensuring that their rules are “equal to or better” than the current ANR rules with respect to protecting public health and the environment.

To avoid future conflicts with neighbors around projected nuisance complaints, S. 102 prohibits a farm from initiating the production of compost from food residuals or food processing residuals on or after July 1, 2021 within a downtown, village center, new town center, neighborhood development area, or growth center, unless the municipality has expressly allowed composting in the designated area under the municipal zoning or subdivision bylaws or in an  approved municipal plan.

The Poultry Farmers for Compost Foraging and I are excited to celebrate this success with you in spirit today! These pioneering farmers have been operating under a variance from ANR to obtain solid waste permits for years to persistently advocate for their innovative agricultural practice of “compost foraging”  - where poultry is allowed access to forage on the compost piles of food residuals. 

Senate Ag voted unanimously in favor of the amendment to H.420, the miscellaneous ag bill, that will double the allowances for on-farm slaughter (in 6 V.S.A. § 3311a): from 5 to 10 cattle, 15 to 30 pigs, 40 to 80 sheep and goats or a total combined live weight of 12,000 pounds. The committee also charged the legislative council to draft legislation that would effectively allow for CSA's with animal shares in consultation with the agency "and other interested parties." In consultation with legislative council Michael O'Grady, the committee learned last Friday (watch recording here) that their approach to clarify in statute the legality of animal shares for on-farm slaughter - including the shared ownership of a herd and the delivery of meat products - would conflict with the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Services interpretation of the legal barriers of the federal personal use exemption in 9 CFR § 303.1 (a) (1) (*Content warning: sexist language*). The agency of agriculture, food, and markets raised concern that FSIS's narrow interpretation of the law would impair Vermont's precious "equal to" status for state inspected meat as well as the interstate shipment agreement with the USDA (that allows for out of state sales of state inspected meat), shall the committee proceed with their allowance of animal shares within the on-farm slaughter practice.

While Rural Vermont will engage in finding a legislative solution for the CSA with animal shares for the 2022 legislative session - we will celebrate with H.420 the increase in allowances for on-farm slaughter and the sunset repeal that will secure this important decentralized direct-to-consumer pathway to local meat consumption.

For more information please contact caroline@ruralvermont.org

USDA has reopened sign-up for CFAP 2 for at least 60 days beginning on April 5, 2021.

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack announced an expansion of the Coronavirus Food Assistance Program (CFAP) on March 24, 2021. CFAP updates include reopening of Coronavirus Food Assistance Program 2 (CFAP 2), additional payments for eligible cattle and row crop producers, and the processing of payments for certain applications filed as part of CFAP Additional Assistance.

Any individual or legal entity who shares in the risk of producing a commodity may apply for CFAP 2. Under CFAP Additional Assistance, certain contract growers are now also eligible for the program. Producers must be in the business of farming at the time of submitting their application to be eligible.  Producers can apply for assistance for only commercially produced commodities. A full list of eligible commodities can be found here.

To complete the application for CFAP 2, producers will need to reference their sales, inventory, revenue, and other records. However, since CFAP 2 is a self-certification program, most documentation will not need to be submitted with the application. Learn more here.

New farms that began farming at the end of calendar year 2019 or later are eligible for CFAP 2 benefits. They are instructed to reach out to their local USDA office for assistance filling out their applications. 

No deadline has been set for applications thus far. 

Also, check out: NRCS Agricultural Management Assistance (AMA) 

The Agricultural Management Assistance (AMA) helps agricultural producers manage financial risk through diversification, marketing or natural resource conservation practices. AMA provides financial assistance up to 75 percent of the cost of installing conservation practices.  Producers may construct or improve water management structures or irrigation structures; plant trees for windbreaks or to improve water quality; and mitigate risk through production diversification or resource conservation practices, including soil erosion control, integrated pest management, or transition to organic farming.

AMA offers an additional higher cost-share for historically underserved producers.

Eligible producers must be engaged in livestock or agricultural production, have an interest in the farming operation associated with the land being offered for AMA enrollment, have control of the land for the term of the proposed contract, be in compliance with the provisions for protecting the interests of tenants and sharecroppers, including the provisions for sharing AMA payments on a fair and equitable basis, and be within appropriate payment limitation requirements. Learn more about AMA here.

H.218, the new raw milk bill, passed out of the Senate Ag Cmte 4/14 with a vote of 4-1-0! Senator Brian Collamore remarked that he had been staunchly against the bill until he heard farmer testimony and was contacted by dozens and dozens of constituents and farmers on this issue. Today, he was the one who made a motion to pass the bill. Senator Parent was the sole vote against the bill. The committee made one minor amendment that expands the definition of CSA to make it more broad for diversified operations. We will share the exact bill language when it is available. Senator Pollina presented the bill on the Senate Floor for second reading on 4/20, where it passed in a landslide with only two votes against the bill (Senator Parent and Senator Brock).

The bill easily passes third reading and final vote on 4/21. The bill now goes to the Governor to be signed into law, allowed to become law, or vetoed. We do not expect the Governor to veto this bill, and believe we have the necessary 2/3 majority in both the House and Senate to overturn a veto if he did. If the Governor allows this bill to become law, it will go effect on 7/1/21.  

Contact Governor Scott and ask him to sign H.218 into law!

Thank you to the many, many farmers, eaters, and activists that helped us get this far. This is your victory!

What’s in the bill:

• Tier two raw milk producers would be able to sell raw milk at other farm’s farmstands and CSAs within the state of Vermont (the 30 mile limit was removed)

• The requirement to verbally inform each customer of the need to refrigerate milk is removed

• The CSA or Farmstand selling the milk will maintain the required transaction records and customer contact records required by existing law. Farmstand and CSA owners will transfer this information to the raw milk producer within one week. 

• Milk must remain below 40 degree Fahrenheit at all times 

• The milk producer must notify VAAFM of any CSA or farmstand locations their milk is being sold. These locations will be subject to inspection by VAAFM. 

• The farm producing the milk and the farm selling the milk must have a conversation and mutual understanding about shared liability of this product

• The farmstand or CSA where milk is sold must display the 8.5x11 warning sign: “Unpasteurized (Raw) Milk. Keep Refrigerated. Consuming raw unpasteurized milk may cause illness, particularly in children, seniors, persons with weakened immune systems, and pregnant women.”

• All labeling and other requirements of the law remain the same

• The cmte added language requested by VAAFM to clarify the existing requirement that rabies vaccines, tuberculosis, and brucellosis tests must be conducted by a licensed veterinarian

• If successful, these changes would go into effect July 1, 2021

Questions? Contact mollie@ruralvermont.org

“Crossover” describes the deadlines by which policy bills and those with money involved have to pass one chamber in order to make it through the process in the same year. Here’s our summary about where Rural Vermont’s policy priorities stand in the process. We also included an overview of all testimonials and committee discussions as they are available on YouTube.
Good news: H.218 on increasing market access of raw milk, and S. 102 on regulating on-farm composting of food residuals as farming, made crossover! 

Raw Milk - H. 218 An act relating to the sale of unpasteurized raw milk

Status: passed the House
Current draft: as passed by the House
Process ups: With your help, we defeated a detrimental amendment that would have nullified any gains offered by this bill. Thank you! The amendment was soundly defeated and the bill passed by the House on a resounding voice vote. 
Process downs: The bill is now in the Senate Ag Cmte, where it again faces stiff opposition from the Department of Health, Veterinary Medical Association, and others. Do you live in Chittenden, Essex, Franklin, Orleans, Rutland, or Washington counties? We need you to contact your Senator on this issue! All the details here. 
For more information on H.218, please contact mollie@ruralvermont.org 
Testimonials on H.218 in the House Committee on Agriculture and Forestry

• Feb 17 - https://youtu.be/2196K3nFxqQ?t=3782 

  •  Rep. Heather Surprenant, Sponsor

• Feb 23 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DToDHlJ35g 

  • Kylie Cook, Owner, Sunday Bell Farm; E.B. Flory, Dairy Section Chief, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets; Kent Henderson, Northwest Veterinary Associates, Vermont Veterinary Medical Association; Natalie Kwit, State Public Health Veterinarian, Department of Health; Rich Larson, Owner, Larson Farm and Creamery; Kelley McGill, Law Clerk, Office of Legislative Counsel; Michael O'Grady, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel; Mollie Wills, Rural Vermont; Elisabeth Wirsing, Senior Environmental Health Program Manager, Department of Health

• March 9 - https://youtu.be/kBrUu0r5TIU?t=4276

  • Becky Allen, Food Animal Veterinarian, Addison County; Mollie Wills, Rural Vermont

• March 10 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEE0rabBfks 

  • Roy Folsom, Elite Certified Farm Agent, Nationwide Agribusiness; Mollie Wills, Rural Vermont

• March 11 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5qTs9rwglM

  • Committee discussion

• March 12

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8PjU_Mje90
    James Donegan, Owner, Trillium Hill Farm; Rich Larson, Owner, Larson Farm and Creamery; Suzanne Long, Owner, Luna Bleu Farm; Mollie Wills, Rural Vermont

  • https://youtu.be/v6hALlR2xhI?t=1272
    Becky Allen, Addison County; E.B. Flory, Dairy Section Chief, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets; Rich Larson, Owner, Larson Farm and Creamery; Suzanne Long, Owner, Luna Bleu Farm; Mollie Wills, Rural Vermont

• March 18 -  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxVjfhkqI7s

  • Rep. John L. Bartholomew, former member, House Agriculture and Forestry Committee; E.B. Flory, Dairy Section Chief, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets; Kristin Haas, State Vet, Director, Food Safety, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets; Michael O'Grady, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel; Rep. Carl Rosenquist, House Committee On Human Services; Mollie Wills, Rural Vermont

• March 19 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6U8IlseBt8s 

  • Consideration of amendment - Rep. John L. Bartholomew, former member, House Agriculture and Forestry Committee; Steven Collier, General Counsel, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets; Michael O'Grady, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel; Rep. Carl Rosenquist, Amendment Sponsor, House Committee On Human Services; Mollie Wills, Rural Vermont

Compost - S.102 An act relating to the regulation of agricultural inputs for farming

Status: passed the Senate with amendment, referred to House Ag
Current draft: as passed by the Senate
Process ups:

• In its third year in the State House our “chicken bill” finally moves with the support of the Agency of Agriculture, Food, and Markets as well as the Agency of Natural Resources. 

• After discussion, the Senate Committee on Natural Resources refrained from putting a sunset into their amendment of the bill

• Our champions from the Senate Ag Committee secured that municipalities will be able to expressly allow composting within the designated prohibited areas.

Process downs: 

• The Senate Natural Resources and Energy committee amended the bill to prohibit the development of compost operations within a downtown, village center, new town center, neighborhood development area, or growth area - areas that make up 0.014% of Vermonts land mass altogether. 

• Being in touch with legislators over complicated discourses virtually or in a quick exchange can be challenging and the Rural Vermont community is missing the opportunity to check-in at the State House cafeteria. 

For more information on S.102, please contact caroline@ruralvermont.org 
Testimonials on S. 102: Senate Committee on Agriculture (SAG), Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Energy (SNR), Senate Finance

• SAG Jan 13 - https://youtu.be/9iWAPRNGN80?t=203

  • Kelley McGill, Law Clerk, Office of Legislative Counsel

• SAG Jan 15 - https://youtu.be/rMmLqrxDiFg?t=6136

  • Cary Giguere, Policy Director, Public Health and Agricultural Resource Management, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets

• SAG Jan 21 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61_YV3v9qz0

  • Kurt Ericksen, Vermont Compost Company; Cary Giguere, Policy Director, Public Health and Agricultural Resource Management, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets; Caroline Gordon, Legislative Director, Rural Vermont; Karl Hammer, Owner, Vermont Compost Co.; Cathy Jamieson, Program Manager, WMPD Solid Waste Program, Department of Environmental Conservation; Maddie Kempner, Policy Director, NOFA VT; Peter Walke, Commissioner, Department of Environmental Conservation

• SAG Feb 10 - https://youtu.be/WJ0-lZ_6FdI?t=3563

  • Cary Giguere, Policy Director, Public Health and Agricultural Resource Management, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets; Eamon Twohig, Program Manager, ResidualS MANAGEMENT & Emerging Contaminants Program, Department of Environmental Conservation

• SAG Feb 16 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhnqR-8bpks

  • Caroline Gordon, Legislative Director, Rural Vermont; Cathy Jamieson, Program Manager, WMPD Solid Waste Program, Department of Environmental Conservation

• SAG Feb 19 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnwWejETp60

  • Cary Giguere, Policy Director, Public Health and Agricultural Resource Management, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets; Caroline Gordon, Legislative Director, Rural Vermont; Cathy Jamieson, Program Manager, WMPD Solid Waste Program, Department of Environmental Conservation; Kelley McGill, Law Clerk, Office of Legislative Counsel; Michael O'Grady, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel

• SAG Feb 23 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uVzpv2OhAQ

  • Cary Giguere, Policy Director, Public Health and Agricultural Resource Management, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets; Caroline Gordon, Legislative Director, Rural Vermont; Cathy Jamieson, Program Manager, WMPD Solid Waste Program, Department of Environmental Conservation; Kelley McGill, Law Clerk, Office of Legislative Counsel; Michael O'Grady, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel

• SNR March 9 Bill Intro - https://youtu.be/joYmLQohrmQ?t=4980 

  • Michael O'Grady, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel; Sen. Christopher A. Pearson, Sponsor; Sen. Anthony Pollina, Sponsor

• SNR March 10 - https://youtu.be/l3IsqOwGzgg?t=65 

  • Cathy Jamieson, Program Manager, WMPD Solid Waste Program, Department of Environmental Conservation; Steven La Rosa, Team Leader, Weston and Sampson

• SNR March 12 - https://youtu.be/YrYtsnHunJ8

  • Committee Discussion: Cary Giguere, Policy Director, Public Health and Agricultural Resource Management, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets; Peter Walke, Commissioner, Department of Environmental Conservation

  • Continued Committee Discussion

    • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jDGMezOx0k 

• SNR March 16 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiKWAMCopqk&t=5s 

  • Amendments to S. 102 on locations suitable for composting

  • Discussion and Possible Vote: Chris Cochran, Director of Community Planning & Revitalization, Department of Housing and Community Development; Cary Giguere, Policy Director, Public Health and Agricultural Resource Management, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets; Caroline Gordon, Legislative Director, Rural Vermont; Michael O'Grady, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel

• Senate Finance March 17 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2IR_3gbC8g 

  • Review Finance-related Sections of the Bill: Michael O'Grady, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel

• SNR March 18 - https://youtu.be/DivVdxTJ_eg?t=3746 

  • Michael O'Grady, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel

• SAG March 19 - consideration of Amendment by Senate Natural Resources and Energy

  • Michael O'Grady, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel

    • https://youtu.be/EV5UhQ9XjCU?t=1620

• SNR March 23 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2N4O78X9hoQ 

  • Revised Amendments to S. 102: Michael O'Grady, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel

• SNR March 24 - https://youtu.be/xwtkJs4HrWQ?t=1640 

  • S.102 Amendment; Michael O'Grady, Deputy Chief Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel

Adequate Shelter - proposed amendments to Act 116 (2020)

Status:  Not included in the Miscellaneous Ag Bill or other Legislation / Awaiting interpretation from Legislative Council
Process ups:  

• We’ve had the support and voices of a number of farmers and grazing experts throughout this process providing testimony in Committee on multiple occasions.  

• Our testimony before the Livestock Care and Standards Advisory Council shifted votes on the Council such that it provided a split decision on whether to support our proposed amendments or not (as opposed to opposing our proposal).  

• We have the support of a number of organizations including NOFA VT, Vermont Grass Farmers Association, and the Champlain Valley Farmers Coalition.

Process downs:  

• Because this policy was amended last year after multiple years of work on it, there is reluctance to change the language at this point.  

• This process has also made clear that there is an immense amount of education which needs to be done with respect to Adaptive Multi-Paddock Grazing (AMP Grazing) among policymakers, non-grazing farmers, and the general public - as well as greater education with respect to what qualifies as animal welfare and / or abuse among particular types of animals under particular management.  

• Lastly, there has been, and remains, significant confusion with respect to whether the existing language of Act 116 is applicable to people raising livestock at all given language in other parts of Title 13 which may or may not provide an “exemption” for accepted livestock management.  We have had multiple interpretations offered by different stakeholders in Committee as well as Legislative Council - and are currently awaiting a more definitive response from Legislative Council to determine how we will proceed with our advocacy.   

For more information on Act 116, please contact graham@ruralvermont.org 
Testimonials on Act 116 in the House Committee on Agriculture and Forestry

• Feb 17 - https://youtu.be/ewY-9suSWBE?t=1870 

  • Jill Remick, Director of Property Valuation and Review, Department of Taxes

• Feb 24 - https://youtu.be/z2tPMiMC6bU?t=2640

  • Rep. John L. Bartholomew, former member, House Agriculture and Forestry Committee; Maddie Kempner, Policy Director, NOFA VT; Graham Unangst-Rufehacht, Policy Director, Rural Vermont

• Feb 25 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omT6n3ZFzlg 

  • Report from the Livestock Care Standards Advisory Council: Ruth Blauwiekel, UVM Veterinarian, Vermont Veterinary Medical Association; Brynn Hare, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel; Kent Henderson, Northwest Veterinary Associates, Vermont Veterinary Medical Association

• March 10 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRMwGZN5SbM 

  • Brandon Bless, Bread and Butter Farm; Jessica Danyow, Chair, Animal Cruelty Investigation Advisory Board; Bruce Hennesey, Maple Wind Farm; Maddie Kempner, Policy Director, NOFA VT; Barry Londeree, Former Vermont State Director, Humane Society of the United States; Mary McFaun, Animal Cruelty Investigation Advisory Board; Justin Poulin, Poulin And Daughters Farm, Randolph; Graham Unangst-Rufehacht, Policy Director, Rural Vermont

• March 11 -https://youtu.be/LdS8Bf-TCMg?t=1768 

  • Brynn Hare, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel

Cannabis - S.25 & H.414 related to cannabis as agriculture and social equity programs

Status:  S.25 passed the Senate, H.414 remains in the House
Current drafts: S. 25 as passed by the Senate, H. 414 as introduced
Process ups:

• Our coalition was able to work with the Chairs of, and secure time to testify in, the Senate Judiciary, and Senate Government Ops Committees - exploring how we can use S.25 as a vehicle for inclusion of our proposals.

• We succeeded in having these Chairs and other members of their Committees acknowledge that our agricultural equity and access concerns are most appropriately addressed by the Agricultural Committees.  These Chairs and Senators helped us gain a very brief opportunity to provide testimony in the Senate Agriculture Committee.

• 3 farmers provided strong testimony in Rural VT and NOFA VT’s Small Farm Advocacy Day in support of our proposed amendments.

Process downs:

• Our coalition’s agricultural and economic equity and access proposals were separated from our racial equity proposals in the drafting process with Legislative Council, resulting in our advocacy being split between one effort (H.414) focused on racial equity, and another effort (without drafted language) focused on introducing all of our proposals (racial equity, agricultural equity, economic equity) to S.25.  

• H.414 has not proceeded beyond an initial reading.

• Extremely few of our proposals have gained traction in Committee, largely due to time based concerns, suggestions that our efforts would be more appropriately directed to the rulemaking process before a 3 member unelected Board (the Cannabis Control Board), and political concerns expressed about how the House of Representatives will receive the bill.  The response from the Senate Agriculture Committee was particularly disappointing, revealing the lack of fluency with Act 164 across the legislature, and the lack of understanding of (and willingness to understand) the issue from the perspective of cultivation and small business.  It is unfortunate that a Committee (in this case the Senate Ag Committee) would determine not to act on proposals which its members acknowledge have "merit", and which will help to achieve equity and access for the communities which a Committee is specifically tasked with serving and representing, for primarily and explicitly political reasons.  

For more information on S.25 & H.414, please contact graham@ruralvermont.org
Testimonials on S.25 & H.414: Senate Judiciary

• Feb 16 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3Oxho9J_vA

  • Walk-through: Michele Childs, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel

  • Ram amendment: Sen. Kesha Ram, Sponsor

• Feb 25

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXl4RUNV74A
    Mark Hughes, Executive Director, Vermont Racial Justice Alliance; Geoffrey Pizzutillo, Executive Director and CoFounder, Vermont Growers Association;Graham Unangst-Rufehacht, Policy Director, Rural Vermont

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GL2uD0rJfGc
    Belan Atensaye, Public Policy and Research Analyst, City of Burlington's Racial Equity,Inclusion & Belonging Office; Skyler Nash , Public Policy and Research Analyst, City of Burlington's Racial Equity,Inclusion & Belonging Office; David Scherr, Assistant Attorney General, Vermont Attorney General's Office

• March 9

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNVqDiElh84
    Amendments: Michele Childs, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel: Mark Hughes, Executive Director, Vermont Racial Justice Alliance; Geoffrey Pizzutillo, Executive Director and CoFounder, Vermont Growers Association; Virginia Renfrew, Lobbyist, Marijuana Dispensaries; Graham Unangst-Rufehacht, Policy Director, Rural Vermont

• March 9

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6CtSPfshRI

  • Amendments:  Mark Hughes, Executive Director, Vermont Racial Justice Alliance; Michele Childs, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfEVOLaaPqo

  • Amendments: Michele Childs, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel: Mark Hughes, Executive Director, Vermont Racial Justice Alliance; Joshua Decatur, Trace VT; Geoffrey Pizzutillo, Executive Director and CoFounder, Vermont Growers; Graham Unangst-Rufehacht, Policy Director, Rural Vermont

• March 10 

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHjscbjyWoI&t=2764s

  • Amendments: Michele Childs, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel: Geoffrey Pizzutillo, Executive Director and CoFounder, Vermont Growers Association; Virginia Renfrew, Lobbyist, Marijuana Dispensaries; Maddie Kempner, Policy Director, NOFA VT; Graham Unangst-Rufehacht, Policy Director, Rural Vermont

• March 11- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvjeO_qBODw 

  • Committee Discussion: Michele Childs, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel

• March 11

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adPR4j-ohvU&t=4339s

  • Amendments: Michele Childs, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel: Geoffrey Pizzutillo, Executive Director and CoFounder, Vermont Growers Association; Virginia Renfrew, Lobbyist, Marijuana Dispensaries; Maddie Kempner, Policy Director, NOFA VT; Graham Unangst-Rufehacht, Policy Director, Rural Vermont

• March 12 

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Erb2lVq7b3o&t=3815s

  • Committee Discussion:  Michele Childs, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel

• March 17 

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctAg_SL8gUc

  • Joint Committee Hearing at Small Farm Action Day

On Farm Slaughter/ Meat Processing - H. 315 & H. 420

Status: H. 315 - House concurred with Senate proposal of amendment with proposal of amendment; H.420 - passed the House. 
Current drafts: H. 315 House proposal of amendment to Senate proposal of amendment, H. 420 as passed by the House
Process ups: 

• H. 315 - The Senate reserved 500K of the 3M going to Working Lands for slaughter and processing capacity grants and the House concurred.  

• H. 420 - AAFM acknowledged the continued importance of on-farm slaughter and proposed the removal of the sunset of the law in the 2021 miscellaneous ag bill

Process downs: Without data that proves that on-farm slaughter is used at capacity by practitioners in registration and report numbers, legislators are hesitant to make improvements to the law. 
For more information on on-farm slaughter, please contact caroline@ruralvermont.org
Testimonials (excerpt):

• Feb 09 - House Agriculture and Forestry 02-09-2021-01 - YouTube

  • Kristin Haas, State Vet, Director, Food Safety, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets

Payment For Ecosystem Services - H. 420 & H.315

Status: H. 420 - Passed the House, referred to Senate Ag.; H. 315 - House concurred with Senate proposal of amendment with proposal of amendment
Current drafts: H. 315 House proposal of amendment to Senate proposal of amendment, H. 420 as passed by the House
Process ups: 

• Senator Bobby Starr championed for PES & Soil Health research funding and managed to add 250K to H. 315 as requested in the PES & Soil Health working groups report. House concurred in their proposal of amendment.

• Section 6 of H. 420 extends the PES & Soil Health Working Groups timeline into February 1, 2023 and gives the group until January 15 of 2023 to submit their report. 

Process downs: Why didn’t the administration request any funding for Payment for Ecosystem Services and Soil Health?
For more information on PES & Soil Health, please contact caroline@ruralvermont.org
Testimonials (excerpt): 

• SAG, Feb 10 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ0-lZ_6FdI 

  • Ryan Patch, Deputy Director, Water Quality Division, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets

• Senate Appropriations, March 11 - Senate Appropriations 3-11-21 - YouTube

  • Senator Bobby Starr championing for PES & Soil Health funds 

  It’s hard to believe that the legislative session has already surpassed what, in normal years at least, could be considered the halfway point.  At this time, bills must pass out of their chamber of origin in time for crossover (March 12 was the deadline for most bills but those requiring an appropriation or financing have until March 19) in order to remain on the table for this year’s session.  

           Rural Vermont’s policy team has been busy these first few months of the session, advocating and organizing around our core issues.  Some of the bills we have been closely tracking include: H. 218, a bill that would expand raw milk community sales;  H. 420, a miscellaneous ag bill that includes a clause to repeal the sunset of on-farm slaughter; S. 102, the food residuals on farms bill, and; S.25, the miscellaneous cannabis regulation bill.   You can read more about these bills and other legislative updates here. 

           While RV’s policy team has been concentrating on key strategic priorities, there are several other bills in the food and agriculture arena that have been gaining traction.  Many of these bills have benefitted from the advocacy of our friends at Action Circles and their clients.  This spring, our Operations Director, Emma Paradis, is a Legislative Intern with Action Circles and has been helping to monitor these other bills of note.  Here are a few highlights:

•  H. 315, An Act Related to COVID-19 Relief - This bill, which is being used as a vehicle to expedite funding for purposes related to COVID relief or that would benefit from receiving money sooner than later, passed out of the House February 26th. The bill passed by the House included $3M in one-time funding for Working Lands Program and $1.367M for the the Vermont Food Bank’s Farmers to Families Food Box Program so that it could continue through February.  Other appropriations included support for housing, businesses, and new Americans, refugees and immigrants, grants to Reach Up participants, and money for school indoor air quality.  The bill passed out of the Senate Appropriations Committee on Tuesday, where several changes were made, including $10M in grants for businesses who have not yet received federal COVID assistance.  The committee’s version of the bill allocates $500K of the $3M appropriated to Working Lands to address the slaughterhouse bottleneck issue through grants for slaughter, meat processing and training proposals. They are also including funding to get a new payment for ecosystem services program up and running.  While the House bill only included CRF (covid relief funds) and general funds, the Senate Appropriations Committee is planning to use ESSER (Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief) funds as well that are now available to fund initiatives such as summer meals, after school programs and other educational programs.  The bill also includes a provision to utilize American Rescue Plan dollars where permitted once they are made available.  

•  S. 100, “Farm Fresh School Meals for All” bill - This bill would require all schools to provide breakfast and lunch to all students free of charge, implement a grant program to incentivise schools to purchase local food, and fully fund the Farm to School and Early Childhood Grant Program. The is sponsored by the Senate Agriculture Committee and is currently in Senate Appropriations.  If passed, in addition to supporting food security and addressing the stigma attached to the free lunch program, this bill would also benefit Vermont farmers by growing the institutional market. Action Circles has been a lead advocate for this bill as it impacts two of their clients directly and you can read a VTDigger article about the bill here.

• H. 434, an act related to establishing the Agricultural Innovation Board - This bill would replace the Pesticide Advisory Council with the Agricultural Innovation Board, tasked making recommendations to the Legislature and Governor about the prioritizing and coordinating implementation of recommendations from groups such as the Soil Health and PES working group and the Vermont Climate Council.  They would also make recommendations about reducing the use of pesticides and synthetic fertilizers.  The bill was voted out of House Appropriations on Tuesday and is sponsored by the House Ag Committee. 

• H. 89, an act relating to limiting liability for agritourism -  This bill that has passed out of the House and is currently in Senate Judiciary Committee would limit the liability of providers of agritourism if a participant is injured from risks inherent to the activity.  

• H. 171, an act relating to the governance and financing of Vermont’s child care system - This bill focuses on making much needed investments in Vermont’s childcare system.  In the long term, this bill sets the goal that no family participating in the Child Care Financial Assistance Program (CCFAP) shall pay more than 10% of their income towards childcare by 2023, and by 2026, no family shall spend more than 10% of their income on childcare.  It includes a $5.529M appropriation for FY22 to achieve this, with a note of intent to meet or exceed this additional amount each year until these goals are met.  In the short term, this bill expands the lower eligibility limit for CCFAP with no co-pays from families at 100% FPL to 150% FPL, and expands subsidies to those making up to 350% FPL.  There are additional provisions that invest in childcare providers and the Bright Futures Information System (BFIS), create an advisory committee to advise on the BFIS project (including seats for parents and other relevant stakeholders), and require reports on the cost and financing of expanding childcare assistance. The bill passed out of House Human Services on March 9 and is currently in Appropriations. While childcare has been voiced as a priority this session, it is unclear whether this bill will make it out of the House in time for crossover.

Just before the crossover deadline, the House Cmte on Agriculture unanimously voted H.218, the bill that would expand raw milk sales to farmstands and CSAs in Vermont for tier two producers, out of committee. On 3/17/21, the bill passed second reading on the House Floor. On 3/18/21, an ill-informed and detrimental amendment was proposed by Reps Rosenquist and Honga, but thankfully was defeated 81-15 on the House Floor. The bill was passed out of the House on third and final reading on 3/19/21. The bill now goes to the Senate Ag Cmte. The current version of the bill is available here.

YOU did this! Not all members of the Cmte were inclined to work on this bill before hundreds of farmers and customers contacted them about its importance and signed onto letters of support. A detrimental amendment was proposed and you again raised your voices on behalf on the raw milk community and squashed a proposal that would have been directly harmful, not to mention impossible, for producers. THANK YOU.

Thank you for the leadership and wisdom of the raw milk farmers and CSA and farmstand owners that took time away from the farm to provide compelling testimony on this issue, and thank you to all of the farmer leaders who guide this work everyday.

Rep. Heather Surprenant has been an amazing advocate for this bill. Please consider thanking her for her leadership, as well as the other members of the House Ag Cmte, who voted unanimously against the amendment on the House Floor. We thank all of the committee members for their work on this bill. 

What’s in the bill:

• Tier two raw milk producers would be able to sell raw milk at other farm’s farmstands and CSAs within the state of Vermont (the 30 mile limit was removed)

• The requirement to verbally inform each customer of the need to refrigerate milk is removed

• The CSA or Farmstand selling the milk will maintain the required transaction records and customer contact records required by existing law. Farmstand and CSA owners will transfer this information to the raw milk producer within one week. 

• Milk must remain below 40 degree Fahrenheit at all times 

• The milk producer must notify VAAFM of any CSA or farmstand locations their milk is being sold. These locations will be subject to inspection by VAAFM. 

• The farm producing the milk and the farm selling the milk must have a conversation and mutual understanding about shared liability of this product

• The farmstand or CSA where milk is sold must display the 8.5x11 warning sign: “Unpasteurized (Raw) Milk. Keep Refrigerated. Consuming raw unpasteurized milk may cause illness, particularly in children, seniors, persons with weakened immune systems, and pregnant women.”

• All labeling and other requirements of the law remain the same

• The cmte added language to the statute to clarify the existing requirement that rabies vaccines, tuberculosis, and brucellosis tests must be conducted by a licensed veterinarian

• If successful, these changes would go into effect July 1, 2021

Questions? Contact mollie@ruralvermont.or

We continue to work with a group of farmers and grazing experts to advocate on this issue, and to understand how animal welfare complaints are responded to in VT.  We have brought in more farmers to testify in Committee, have attended and provided public comment at the Livestock Care and Standards Advisory Council, and have met with the State Veterinarian - Kristin Haas.  There is resistance to the language we have offered, but there is an interest in making sure the concerns we have brought to the table are addressed.  We are currently seeking clarity on interpretation of legal language to understand how to appropriately move forward.

As a reminder, NOFA VT and Rural VT are working with farmers, grazing professionals, and others to offer amendments to, and testimony on, Act 116 – Adequate Shelter for Livestock.  This law requires livestock to have access to shelter or shade at all times, and last year the exemption for “any accepted housing or grazing practices for any livestock industry” was removed, and the definition for adequate shelter was refined.  Our organizations and a number of farmers and grazing professionals who testified to the House Agriculture Committee on multiple occasions now feel strongly that:

1. Access to shelter and shade at all times for all livestock is not necessarily an indicator of animal welfare or abuse. 

2. Current language in Act 116 disproportionately impacts the grazing community (in particular farmers practicing Adaptive Multi-Paddock Grazing - AMP Grazing) and farms which happen to be more in the public eye. 

3. Current language in Act 116 conflicts with Current Use laws when it comes to integrating agricultural land in Current Use with forestry land in Current Use in order to provide access to shade for livestock. 

4. It is important to have language in the law that accurately reflects conditions of animal abuse and mistreatment, and which accounts for progressive livestock and land management methods.  It is critical to have people who are professionally trained in diversified livestock management, and in assessing livestock condition and welfare, responding to reports of abuse and neglect in order to make an accurate and informed assessment of the situation.  In lieu of this, the Agency of Agriculture is required by law to be consulted prior to any enforcement action, to "provide guidance to the law enforcement community", and "the Agency's Animal Health Section personnel are available to assist humane and law enforcement agents for purposes of determining if a situation represents an acceptable husbandry practice (VAAFM website, https://agriculture.vermont.gov/animal-health/animal-welfare)."

We are offering these proposed amendments which are based on the National Organic Program Standards (NOPs).  This language changes the requirement for shade / shelter to be based on “inclement weather” which may threaten animal welfare (extremes of heat, cold, etc.) – as opposed to the current language requiring access to shade / shelter at all times regardless of environmental conditions.

As the implementation of Act 164, Vermont’s Taxation and Regulation of Cannabis Law, continues to be approximately 2 months behind schedule - Rural Vermont and our coalition have been quite active in the legislature over these past two weeks prior to cross-over providing testimony in support of our proposed amendments to Act 164. 

Members of our coalition from the Vermont Growers’ Association, the Vermont Racial Justice Alliance, NOFA VT, and Trace VT were present and presenting in the Sen. Judiciary, Sen. Government Operations, and Sen. Agriculture Committees.  We have been working with Senators Sears and White (Chairs of the Senate Judiciary and Senate Government Operations Committees respectively) to consider our agricultural proposals to S.25, an Act Relating to Miscellaneous Cannabis Regulatory Procedures.  Our coalition partner the VT Racial Justice Alliance has a bill in the House, H.414 - An Act Relating to Cannabis Social Equity Programs (which comprehensively includes the coalition’s racial equity proposals) - and has also been working to bring language from that bill into S.25.  Our original intention was to have all of our proposals in one bill - however, we have been unable to achieve that to this point, and continue to work towards this outcome.

It has been a primary goal of our coalition to be given time in an agricultural committee, and we were briefly given that opportunity last week in Senate Agriculture - thanks to the support of the Senate Judiciary and Senate Government Operations Committees which felt that our proposals were in the domain of the Agricultural Committee.  However, after providing testimony which multiple committee members supported based upon its “merit” - we left with the messages that it was too late in the process, and too politically unfeasible to include any of our suggestions.  They also felt that some of our goals could be addressed through the CCB rulemaking process - which we expressed concerns about. 

We are disappointed by the inaction of the Senate Agriculture Committee, and the very limited time which has been devoted to agricultural understanding, equity, and access in shaping this law. By the end of the week, we will know if our advocacy has affected any substantive change in S.25 which will be carried through to the House after Cross-Over. We understand that given this law is in its infancy, it will continue to be actively reformed legislatively and through rulemaking for years to come.  We will continue to work legislatively - and in the eventual rulemaking process - to address racial equity, economic equity, and agricultural access in VT’s cannabis regulations. 

What can you do?

-        Voice your support for cannabis being regulated as an agricultural product and the amendments to S.25 and Act 164 being proposed by the coalition of Rural Vermont, The Vermont Racial Justice Alliance, NOFA VT, the Vermont Growers Association, and Trace VT by contacting your representative and members of the House and Senate Agriculture and House Ways and Means Committees. 

-        Consider providing public comment in the Rulemaking Process which will be undertaken by the Cannabis Control Board (potentially this late Summer or Fall)

-        Continue to monitor this issue and be in touch about your ideas and concerns!

Rural Vermont joined 22 organizations requesting a formal Legislative Review of the Organics Management Hierarchy and the Source Separation provision of the URL, and the Agency’s current implementation of these sections. Read the letter here. Interested in this issue? Contact caroline[@]ruralvermont.org

NFFC summary of Legislative happenings in D.C.

• There has been a flurry of activity in Congress over the past week to advance another COVID-19 relief bill, through budget reconciliation, as the economy continues to face stiff headwinds. Top line funding allocations for the food and agriculture sector include:

  • $3.6 billion for general food supply chain management, such as purchasing and distributing commodities (including produce, meat, dairy, and seafood)

  • An extension of a 15 percent boost in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits through the end of September.

  • $1 billion in funding for institutions that provide technical assistance to farmers of color.       

  • $100 million to help small-scale meat processors cover the cost of overtime inspection.

Of particular note, the package includes the Emergency Relief for Farmers of Color Act, introduced by Senators Warnock, Booker, Luján and Chairwoman Stabenow, which offers FSA debt relief to farmers of color who have historically faced discrimination in USDA’s loan programs. We at NFFC support Emergency Relief for Farmers of Color Act and continue to push Congress to extend this much needed debt relief assistance to all small-scale producers with FSA debt through the Relief for America’s Small Farmers Act in the next round of COVID 19 relief legislation.

• On February 8th Senators Booker, Warren, Gillibrand, Smith, Warnock, and Leahy reintroduced the Justice for Black Farmers Act for the current Congressional session. NFFC continues to support this landmark bill, which includes provisions that our members and staff advocated last year, including land access mechanisms for Black farmers, protections for heirs property owners, a mandate to USDA to study and publicly disclose corporate land investment trends, and reforms to the livestock sector to support farmers rights and market competition.

• On Thursday 4th, Sen. Klobuchar, with Senators Blumenthal, Booker, Markey, and Schatz introduced the Competition and Antitrust Law Enforcement Reform Act. While not specific to agriculture and the food system, the bill has been widely heralded as strengthening anti-trust law to support competitive markets.

NOFA VT and Rural VT are working with farmers, grazing professionals, and others to offer amendments to, and testimony on, Act 116 – Adequate Shelter for Livestock.  This bill was amended last year to require livestock to have access to shelter or shade at all times, and removed the exemption for “any accepted housing or grazing practices for any livestock industry” (leaving the exemption for dairy in place).  Our organizations and a number of farmers and grazing professionals who testified to the House Agriculture committee on February 2nd, and who have been corresponding about this law, feel strongly that:

1. Access to shelter and shade at all times for all livestock is not necessarily an indicator of animal welfare or abuse.  

2. Current language in Act 116 disproportionately impacts the grazing community (in particular farmers practicing Adaptive Multi-Paddock Grazing - AMP Grazing) and farms which happen to be more in the public eye.  

3. Current language in Act 116 conflicts with Current Use laws when it comes to integrating agricultural land in Current Use with forestry land in Current Use in order to provide access to shade for livestock.  

4. It is important to have language in the law that accurately reflects conditions of animal abuse and mistreatment, and which accounts for progressive livestock and land management methods.  It is critical to have people who are professionally trained in diversified livestock management, and in assessing livestock condition and welfare, responding to reports of abuse and neglect in order to make an accurate and informed assessment of the situation.  In lieu of this, the Agency of Agriculture is required by law to be consulted prior to any enforcement action, to "provide guidance to the law enforcement community", and "the Agency's Animal Health Section personnel are available to assist humane and law enforcement agents for purposes of determining if a situation represents an acceptable husbandry practice (VAAFM website, https://agriculture.vermont.gov/animal-health/animal-welfare)."

We are offering these proposed amendments which are based on the National Organic Program Standards (NOPs).  This language essentially changes the requirement for shade / shelter to be based on “inclement weather” which may threaten animal welfare (extremes of heat, cold, etc.) – as opposed to the current language requiring access to shade / shelter at all times regardless of environmental conditions.

If you are a livestock farmer and would like to provide feedback on the current law and /or our suggested amendment, please be in touch with Graham (graham@ruralvermont.org).

We continue to work with our coalition to introduce amendments addressing racial equity, criminal justice reform, economic equity, and agricultural access into Act 164.  As we do so, we are also mindful of the requirement for municipalities to “opt-in” to allowing cannabis retail establishments in their boundaries via town meeting or another warned meeting.  As we see towns move forward with resolutions, our coalition partner VT Growers’ Association has made this helpful “opt-in guide” to help folks understand that process more.

In Rural Vermont’s introductory presentations to both the House and Senate Ag Committees this January, we reminded committee members that they never took testimony on this legislation despite this being a fundamentally agricultural issue - providing no appropriate place or opportunity for farmers or cultivators (and their advocates) to testify.  We requested that they take testimony from the agricultural community on this issue.  We also brought up that despite cannabis meeting all definitions of an “agricultural product” under the RAPs, despite it being principally produced on the farm, and despite the fact that hemp and crops for alcohol, biofuels, and more are not only considered agricultural - but some of them have their own Briefs in the VT Agriculture Strategic Plan (recently released) - cannabis in VT law is not considered an agricultural crop or product.  We also brought up some of the consequences of this for farmers – in particular those whose land is in current use, or in agricultural easements who will not be allowed to grow cannabis on that land (other than an extremely marginal allowance for some land in current use).  

We remain saddened and frustrated with the lack of willingness of representatives across the legislature to even allow time for our community to speak for, and represent, itself on this issue from an agricultural access and economic equity perspective.  We are hopeful that legislation advanced by our coalition partner the VT Racial Justice Alliance and Justice For All will gain more traction among representatives in relationship to our racial equity concerns and suggestions.

It appears as though the process to name a Cannabis Control Board, and all that follows (rulemaking, Advisory Board naming / seating, etc.) is behind by approximately 6 weeks.

If you own a piece of equipment, you should be able to fix it. This seems like a fairly obvious and uncontroversial idea, right? And yet, more and more, farmers are unable to make basic repairs to  farm equipment they own because manufacturers refuse to provide the parts, tools, and documentation necessary to do so. Fair repair is a major issue in the agricultural community—farmers struggle to repair newer tractors with modern electronic equipment and are forced to rely on dealerships to make these costly (and often time-consuming) repairs.

That’s why Rural Vermont, VPIRG and others are proud to be part of the Right-to-Repair movement and in support of bill H.58 that would require agricultural equipment manufacturers to provide, on fair and reasonable terms, the documentation, parts, and tools necessary to repair their equipment. This would give farmers more repair options--by either allowing them to fix certain issues themselves or make use of local independent repair providers.

2021 promises to be a big year for the Right-to-Repair movement. There is currently fair repair legislation pending in 14 states. We have a chance to make some real progress in Vermont, if we can enact this legislation. But we also know the large equipment manufacturers are going to fight this tooth-and-nail. 

Lawmakers need to hear from farmers directly on this issue. Stories directly from Vermont farmers will help push back on the large manufacturers’ scare tactics and misinformation. If you’re a farmer or know somebody that has dealt with issues around the repair of agricultural equipment, please share your story with us and contact caroline@ruralvermont.org.

So if you’ve got an experience you’re willing to share, please let us know!

The  “miscellaneous” agricultural bill traditionally facilitates a series of technical corrections that the Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets brings to the lawmakers’ attention in each session (here is the misc ag bill draft). 

We celebrate that in 2021, Section 1 proposes to repeal the on-farm slaughter sunset. This “sunset” means that without a legislative act, the on-farm slaughter law would automatically cease to exist in July 2023 - right after this legislative biennium. Shall the proposed legislation to repeal the sunset pass into law, the on-farm slaughter law will continue to exist indefinitely. This will allow Rural Vermont to organize for the new policy priorities related to improving the on-farm slaughter law as indicated by the ongoing survey (click here and take the survey). Contact caroline@ruralvermont.org if you want to stay up to date on the developments of the on-farm slaughter campaign. 

Among other smaller changes, of further importance is the proposed expansion of the PES and Soil Health working group into 2023; as well as the continuation of the states hemp pilot program throughout the year. The pilot program was previously set to expire in 2020, but states are federally now allowed to operate a pilot program in 2021. The PES and Soil Health working group was created through Act 83 (2019): “to recommend financial incentives designed to encourage farmers in Vermont to implement agricultural practices that exceed the requirements of 6 V.S.A. chapter 215 and that improve soil health, enhance crop resilience, increase carbon storage and stormwater storage capacity, and reduce agricultural runoff to waters.” The group was renamed and reauthorized last year with Act 129 (2020) and AAFM aims to reconvene the working group early in March. 

Secretary Tebbetts advocates to designate a significant percentage of the 3.6M proposed by the Governor to be spent on the Working Lands Enterprise Board on meat processing. The funds would still be subject to the competitive application process but the agency is expecting many applications to be targeting the meat processing bottleneck. Read more here:

State money could help farmers by increasing meat-processing capacity - VTDigger

Rural Vermont appreciates VAAFM prioritizing the devastating meat processing bottleneck and supporting emerging initiatives. Tebbetts mentioned in testimony the development of slaughterhouses in Windham, Alburgh, Westford, and Putney; as well as a poultry processing facility in Charlotte and new custom processors coming up in Enosburg and Royalton.

The House Appropriations Committee Chair, Rep. Mary Hooper, said in response “I am just concerned that we not crowd out some of the traditional smaller scale possibilities that are really transformational for those producers who are trying to step up. I don’t want to lose sight of them as we focus on this particular need.”

Good news for on-farm slaughter: VAAFM proposes to repeal the July 2023 sunset of the on-farm slaughter law - in recognition of the continued importance of on-farm slaughter for livestock producers! Section 1 of the 2021 "miscellaneous ag bill," the housekeeping bill of the agency of ag, is devoted to securing the institution of on-farm slaughter. The repeal would allow the on-farm slaughter law to exist long-term. 

Take Rural Vermont's on-farm slaughter survey to help set policy priorities for improving the on-farm slaughter law: On Farm Slaughter & Butchery (google.com