Image of wheat field to illustrate report on global wheat production

This week marks the 10-year anniversary of the signing of the U.S.-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement and the Korea-U.S. (KORUS) Free Trade Agreement. These were the last free trade agreements completed by the United States. In the decade since, there has been plenty of negotiating, but nothing to show for it.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is on its way to ratification without the United States. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is indefinitely on ice. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) modernization effort is now likely to slip into 2019. An update to KORUS made only cosmetic changes.

Meanwhile no other country has agreed to sit down at the negotiating table as the United States slaps unilateral tariffs on close allies and strategic competitors alike.

The familiar African proverb says that when elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers. Unfortunately for farmers, that grass is the wheat growing in their fields as the big guys in the United States, China and other countries escalate this trade fight.

In a trade war, agriculture always gets hit first and the effects are likely to force overseas customers who want quality U.S. farm products to compromise or seek alternative supplies and to further erode the incomes of farm families who strongly support addressing the real concerns about trade barriers.

That is why in 2016, U.S. Wheat Associates (USW) and the National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) called for World Trade Organization (WTO) cases intended to push China to meet its WTO commitments on domestic support and tariff rate quota management. We are glad the Trump Administration supports and is pursuing those cases. That is also why USW will continue to press for new trade agreements, including U.S. accession to TPP.

USW and NAWG know that farmers still want our organizations to keep fighting for fair trade opportunities because they know they can compete successfully in the world based on the quality and value of what they produce — given the freedom to do so.

We would prefer, however, to see our government do that first within the processes already in place.

thumbnail

By Jonathan H. Harsch, Agri-Pulse, Excerpted with Permission

(Editor’s note: This is the third in a new series of Agri-Pulse in-depth stories dealing with the challenges and opportunities for U.S. agriculture when it comes to selling more commodities and value-added products to overseas customers. This article was sponsored by funding from the National Association of Wheat Growers, U.S. Wheat Associates, Washington Grain Commission, North Dakota Wheat Commission and Idaho Wheat Commission.)

Prospects for U.S. farm exports can change suddenly and dramatically.

Breaking into foreign markets takes decades of persistent hard work and hefty investments in building infrastructure, relationships and, ultimately, sales.

Augusto Bassanini, chief operating officer for United Grain Corp., knows firsthand the challenges of building all three. This experienced grain exporter tells Agri-Pulse that after taking years to build trust and a reputation for reliability, “any interference with that trust, that reliability, is going to have an immediate impact … So, you spend years building that rapport and everything could change overnight.”

“It takes years, especially in Asia, to build that rapport,” he says, “and you have to build it face-to-face.”

Bassanini says he’s seen major new export markets developed in South America, Asia and elsewhere thanks to vital funding from farmers’ checkoff dollars and USDA’s export promotion programs. But he warns that current concerns over U.S. trade agreements and tariff battles with China “create an environment of uncertainty,” forcing buyers and end-users to scramble to find new sources for the grain, soybeans, or other commodities they need to stay in business.

Vancouver, Wash.-based, United Grain operates grain terminals in Oregon, Montana, and North and South Dakota where, Bassanini says, “small farming communities are dependent upon grain exports for providing crucial revenue to those remote locations.” So, any threat to export growth will have a disproportionate impact on these farming areas. And he says that threat is already here.

“We continue to lose market share in terms of volume to competing major export hubs like South America, Brazil, Argentina, Russia and the Black Sea region,” he says. “If we are going to compete with them on a yield basis, I don’t think we are going to win that fight.”

Still, he says that despite headwinds, “we continue to expand our share in regions like Southeast Asia because competing countries are not able to deliver quality products on a consistent, reliable basis.” Maintaining these gains, he says, depends on the U.S. investing in improving supply chain efficiencies, upgrading the infrastructure needed to deliver product reliably, and avoiding even rumors about trade disruptions.

Disruption Concerns. Since taking office, the Trump administration has made several gains on the export front for agricultural products.

However, the administration has also unnerved trading partners by renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), pulling out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and announcing tariffs on steel, aluminum and a variety of other products – prompting retaliatory threats from the Chinese and other countries.

Several U.S. agricultural groups say that one of the best ways to keep pressure on the Chinese and counter the Asian giant’s influence is for the U.S. to rejoin what used to be called the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

The U.S. Wheat Associates (USW) and the National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) welcomed the possibility of reviving the full 12-nation pact. “If the United States joins TPP, U.S. wheat should be able to compete on a level playing field with Canadian and Australian wheat,” said USW Chairman Michael Miller, a wheat farmer from Ritzville, Wash.

Representing 140,000 American wheat farmers, USW and NAWG wrote USTR’s Lighthizer in March, warning that “Lost market share is incredibly difficult to regain.” They pointed out that under new CPTPP rules, Japan will cut its tariffs on imported Canadian and Australian wheat to $85 per ton but keep the current $150 per ton tariff in place for U.S. wheat. While the change will phase in over nine years, the wheat groups said the “loss in market share and its negative effect on farm-gate prices are likely to come much sooner, as Japanese millers reformulate their product mix to avoid the need to purchase artificially expensive U.S. wheat.”

Hopes were also raised that the farm sector’s major role in the U.S. economy would translate into White House support for increasing rather than flat-lining or reducing funding for the two USDA cost-share programs that, in partnership with farmer-funded checkoff dollars, have played a vital role in expanding U.S. farm sales abroad: the Market Access Program (MAP) and the Foreign Market Development (FMD) Program.

Export promotion legislation. To support these programs, last September Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, introduced S. 1839, the “Cultivating Revitalization by Expanding American Agricultural Trade and Exports Act.” Along with the companion House bill, H.R. 2321, King’s CREAATE bill would steadily raise MAP [and] FMD funding.

The House version of the new farm bill takes a different approach. USDA’s trade programs, including the MAP and FMD, would be combined under a new International Market Development Program … Under current law, only MAP would have funding after this year under the expiring 2014 farm bill. Combining the programs would ensure all the programs have a permanent funding baseline. Boosting both ag exports and export promotion funding has become vital to both the rural and the national economy.

Success in the Philippines. Based in Manila, USW Regional VP for the Philippines and South Korea Joseph Sowers is keenly aware of … aggressive competition. He says it’s an “uphill battle” to convince buyers to opt for premium-priced but better performing U.S. wheat. He also points to significant gains.

In the Philippines, Sowers says, “We have a program here where we invest in increasing consumption of wheat-based foods. And we’ve done it.” He adds that almost all the gains benefit the U.S. with its 97 percent market share, proving that “These kinds of investments are paying off.”

Key to this level of market dominance, Sowers insists, is being on-the-ground for decades with regional offices and regular seminars. He says this presence builds trust with buyers and end-users to the point that “decision makers trust us, they look to us for advice.” He considers [state wheat] checkoff, FMD and MAP funding vital to maintaining USW’s foreign offices and “absolutely essential to everything we do.”

“Our mandate is twofold,” Sowers says. “One is to create the greatest returns to our farmers, to the people who fund us. The other mandate is to make the local industry here the most profitable they can be, to increase their profits so they will buy from us.”

To make it all happen, Sowers hosts seminars year-round, with upcoming ones set for Manila, Bangkok and Jakarta, “talking to buyers about methods that they can use to decrease their purchasing price or to plan their purchases through the year. And then at the same time, have a mill management seminar showing them how to increase their profitability using, of course, U.S. products.”

Along with working to increase exports to developing markets like Sri Lanka and Malaysia, Sowers says Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam offer “the most opportunity for huge increases in sales” and that new trade agreements offer the best way to make U.S. products more competitive.

New Coalitions. USW’s President Vince Peterson and VP of Overseas Operations Mark Fowler [say] with the farm economy struggling in an already down market, the tariff battle with China puts 1.5 million metric tons of U.S. wheat sales at risk just when unsettled NAFTA and TPP issues threaten sales to other major buyers like Mexico and Japan.

Peterson says the trade battles have “forced us to form coalitions” with other U.S. stakeholders and with “customers overseas worried about their supply relationship with us. They don’t like this any more than we do.” He says the new coalitions aim to alert the Trump administration to escalating impacts on U.S. agriculture from recent policy changes.

Peterson and Fowler tell Agri-Pulse that the strategy to success is to sign new trade agreements, complete the NAFTA negotiations without harming ag exports, reconsider joining the TPP, use the WTO dispute settlement process, and double funding for USDA’s MAP and FMD programs as … CREAATE legislation proposes.

Trade Battles Undermine U.S. Reputation as a Reliable Supplier. U.S. Grains Council President and CEO Tom Sleight warns that due to the trade battles launched by the U.S., “our loyal, longtime customers are actively looking at alternative sources of supply … We’re hurting our reputation not only in China, but with other trading partners, with key ones like Japan, Korea, Mexico. Even in places in Southeast Asia that are new and growing markets for the U.S., we’re creating doubt.”

“There are definite consequences if these battles do not get settled expediently and with proper attention to the impact on agriculture,” he says.

National Association of Wheat Growers President Jimmie Musick explains that with his wheat, cattle, alfalfa, cotton and sorghum operation in Sentinel, Okla., “it doesn’t appear like I raise a commodity that China [is] not [targeting] in their tariff trade war.” To help remove this threat, he wants the administration to understand “how important it is that we maintain good trade relationships and how devastating it will be to our farmers when China puts a 25 percent tariff on our commodities.”

Musick’s also at work on getting more support from farm-state members of Congress. He’d like them to persuade the administration to switch from tariffs to negotiations by offering in return to support legislation that’s on Trump’s priority list.

With today’s long list of farm and trade organizations linking arms as never before, Musick and his colleagues are hopeful their concerted pressure on Congress and the White House will pay off in terms of less turbulent waters ahead and continued growth in the U.S. ag export markets that they’ve worked so diligently to build over several decades.

thumbnail

It is a busy week in Washington, D.C., for wheat industry leaders. They have gathered to participate in joint board meetings between U.S. Wheat Associates (USW) and the National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG), and for an educational event on Capitol Hill Feb. 8 (see separate story).

Official USW business was called to order Feb. 7 at the organization’s headquarters office in Arlington, Va., with a budget committee meeting and a comprehensive orientation for new farmer directors. USW and NAWG farmer directors are meeting in joint committee meetings to learn more about plant breeding innovation and international trade policies that affect wheat farmers and their customers. USW’s individual committees are also meeting on long-range planning, sanitary and phytosanitary issues affecting wheat trade, hard white (HW) wheat production and export demand, and topics related to wheat quality.

Of significant interest is the status of three-country negotiations between the United States, Mexico and Canada on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). USW and NAWG strongly support maintaining NAFTA rules that have benefitted U.S. wheat farmers as well as their customers primarily in Mexico, while improving parts of the agreement. Many directors are also learning more on the real concerns about the sustainability of U.S. wheat imports by Japan under the new Trans-Pacific Partnership recently negotiated by 11 of the original member countries without the United States.

Committee meetings continue on Feb. 9, followed by a joint meeting of USW and NAWG governing boards. USW will hold its own board meeting Feb. 10 to review committee actions and recommendations and to hold its annual election of officers for the 2018/19 fiscal year (July to June).

thumbnail

By Gordon Stoner, President of the National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) and a wheat farmer from Outlook, Mont. This op-ed first appeared in “The Hill.”

The United States is known for producing the highest quality wheat in the world, yet when U.S. farmers market their wheat at a Canadian elevator, it is automatically labeled as “foreign wheat” and given the lowest possible grade (a way to measure grain quality). Cross-border wheat faces major hurdles in Canadian marketing channels, primarily due to the country’s grain grading system. Conversely, Canadian wheat has full access to the U.S. bulk grain handling system. U.S. wheat farmers should be treated the same when delivering to Canadian grain elevators as their neighbors to the north are when delivering to U.S. elevators. The modernization of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is a ripe opportunity to level the playing field.

I grow hard amber durum wheat primarily used in pasta production. This high-quality wheat class is valued for its premium protein and gluten strength, within 10 miles of the Canadian border. When prices are higher in Canada, it would not be difficult for me to take advantage of those price premiums and drive across the border to deliver my wheat. But until this grading issue is resolved, that is not an option. My neighbors just on the other side of the border do not have this problem; if prices are higher at a U.S. elevator, they can easily drive south to deliver their wheat. This kind of disparity is frustrating for farmers in Northern Tier states, especially given declining wheat prices and thin profit margins in recent years.

Canada’s grain policies require all wheat not grown domestically to be segregated and classified as “foreign grain” and therefore automatically demoted to “general purpose” or feed wheat. Canada’s grading system even discriminates against wheat grown in the United States that is identical to varieties of wheat approved for planting in Canada (Canada regulates the varieties of wheat plants that can be graded, unlike the United States, where we only grade based on the intrinsic properties of the grain). Such classification results in a substantial price discount regardless of the quality of the wheat, and segregation costs provide little incentive for elevators to handle U.S. wheat of equal or better quality.

An updated NAFTA should remove Canada’s discriminatory grading treatment. All U.S. wheat moving into Canada should be evaluated on quality parameters without regard to country of origin. Canada’s policies are clearly national treatment issues, which Canada has a current obligation to resolve under its World Trade Organization commitments. However, NAFTA can also be the vehicle to fix the grading issue. Canada’s grain policies deprive U.S. wheat farmers near the border of significant marketing opportunities, while millions of bushels of Canadian wheat stream uninterrupted across the border.

Trade agreements have the potential to create a level playing field where individuals, families and companies can make their own decisions about what to buy and sell. The role of trade agreements is to provide that opportunity, and that benefits both U.S. wheat buyers and wheat producers. Industry groups on both side of the border agree that this is an issue that needs to be resolved.

thumbnail

Excerpts reprinted from Agri-Pulse, April 5, 2017

USW shares strong support for more investment in agricultural research with our sister organization, the National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG). NAWG notes that wheat relies on public, private and grower funding for crop innovation. Only 1.6 percent of the $142 billion U.S. federal investment in research is allocated toward agriculture research, according to American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).

NAWG adds that the amount of funding dedicated to wheat research has been dwarfed by the funding dedicated to other major crops. So, growing the investment in wheat research over time is critical to achieving the innovation needed to sustainably support a rapidly growing world population.

Several major policy organizations and influential non-governmental organizations also see global benefits to enhanced agricultural research. For example, the Chicago Council on Global Affairs recently issued a report called “Stability in the 21st Century; Global Food Security for Peace and Prosperity” that calls for increased research investment. The Chicago Council introduced that report, at a Global Food Security Symposium in Washington, DC, covered this week by Agri-Pulse, a news organization reporting on U.S. agricultural policy.

At the symposium, Nick Austin, the director of agricultural development for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, called for the United States and other developed countries need to continue to support agricultural research if farmers are to meet the demand for food from a burgeoning world population.

“We need to feed more with less,” Nick Austin told Agri-Pulse. “I’d like to look at the glass half-full scenario, with ag research leading to improved conditions, especially for small-holder farmers, many of which are women.”

He cited research by the Farm Journal Foundation which found that the high-yielding wheat and rice varieties developed by the Green Revolution during the 1970s led to “substantial growth” in Asian and Latin American agriculture. Those same varieties were used successfully in the United States and added $3.7 billion in value to the U.S. economy by 1996, “an astonishing return to taxpayers on the $134 million investment,” Austin said.

During the Chicago Council symposium, speakers discussed how agriculture must adapt to a number of challenges, including climate change, which is bringing increased temperatures, erratic rainfall, flooding and increased pests and disease. At the same time, Austin said, the world’s farmers need to boost food production by about two-thirds to feed a global population of more than 9 billion by 2050, up from 7.5 billion at present.

“It is a real challenge, but it can be done,” Austin said, citing several hopeful signs, including projects supported by the Gates Foundation.

The fact is, global demand for wheat is on a steadily increasing trend and today’s surplus can quickly become tomorrow’s shortage. U.S. farmers are doing their part to increase average yields through direct support for wheat breeding and research through state wheat commission support and in partnership with land grant universities. With the cost and stakes increasing, Austin stressed that governments need to contribute to the effort, not only to help the poor, but for their own benefit, given the “high rate of return” from investments in ag research.

thumbnail

Wheat farmers came together in the nation’s capital last week to participate in joint meetings between the National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) and U.S. Wheat Associates (USW). These industry leaders discussed many issues facing wheat farmers and many of them visited their members of Congress to share long-term goals for the future of the crop and their farm livelihood.

Official business was called to order Tuesday, Jan. 31, and continued through Thursday, Feb. 2. USW and NAWG directors first met in joint committee meetings to learn more about plant breeding innovation and international trade policies that affect wheat farmers. USW’s individual committees also met, focusing on long-range planning, sanitary and phytosanitary issues affecting wheat trade, reports on hard white (HW) wheat production and export demand, and issues related to wheat quality.

An important topic at these meetings was the long-term status of the public-private partnership between the federal government and farmers supporting export market development activities. USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service administers two programs that fund trade service, technical support and other activities that educate overseas customers about the value of U.S. agricultural products like wheat. The Market Access Program (MAP) and Foreign Market Development (FMD) have specific budgets that have not changed substantially since 2002; however, mandated cuts the past few years and inflation have reduced the effective value of the program budgets. Meanwhile, farmer contributions have increased.

USW, as a member of coalitions that advocate for MAP and FMD, explained to the farmer directors that more program funding is needed to continue serving our long-term customers and to introduce U.S. wheat quality and value to new customers.

“With new technology and farmers becoming more efficient, we are growing more and more wheat, even on less planted area,” said USW Chairman Jason Scott of Easton, MD. “But domestic consumption cannot keep pace with the production so the growing demand for wheat is overseas in the large population centers with rising disposable incomes.”

Scott said wheat growers need to join other farmers, ranchers and small agricultural businesses to voice support for increased MAP and FMD funding in the next Farm Bill to keep competing on an even playing field in the global market.

In other action, the USW board approved the organizations annual budget and elected the new 2017/18 board leadership for the upcoming fiscal year.

thumbnail

By Dalton Henry, USW Vice President of Policy

The two joint farmer committees of USW and the National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) met last week in Fargo, ND, for a policy update and to consider key issues facing the wheat industry. The joint committees were created more than a decade ago to enable and ensure close collaboration between the two organizations on policy priorities in trade and technology.

The Joint Biotechnology Committee, which has broadened its agenda to include a number of technologies, heard updates from private breeding companies on non-GM products they are rolling out to growers. Many of these companies are working to help increase efficiency and drive additional productivity. Two major updates included the continual development of hybrid wheat and products to produce better seeding rate recommendations.

The committee also heard from a researcher from Cibus, a company that has a process for producing gene-edited plants that do not contain any foreign DNA, but can yield substantial improvements for both growers and end-users. Recently they have focused on flax and canola, but according to the speaker, while they do not any active wheat projects, the technology could be readily applied in the wheat industry.

The Joint International Trade Committee considered a range of updates on several priority trade issues for the wheat industry including foreign country domestic support, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and possible future negotiations at the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Staff presented additional detail about the domestic support study that was released earlier this spring. The study focused on wheat support policies in China and their impact on U.S. producers and producers in other exporting countries. In the U.S., the total farm gate losses are now estimated at $653 million, an increase of about $100 million from over a year ago, caused by the continued decline of world wheat prices amid burgeoning Chinese wheat stocks.

NAWG staff discussed TPP and possible windows for Congressional consideration this calendar year. Staff were confident that the U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) office has been working closely and making progress with Congressional leadership to prepare for eventual introduction of the legislative text ratifying TPP, even though the negative rhetoric on trade has increased dramatically from many political candidates during the U.S. election season. TPP would lower tariffs and import restrictions on wheat to the benefit of U.S. wheat farmers and their customers overseas.

Committee members also briefly discussed the current negotiating status at the WTO. Though negotiations on agricultural market access have been largely stalled for some time, progress is being made in other sectors including services and environmental goods. Progress in these other areas may provide a template for future agricultural negotiations. The next WTO ministerial, the most likely target for an attempt at agreement on some portion of unresolved issues, will be in December 2018. The WTO remains a key body for liberalizing trade and ensuring a rules-based trading system exists.

thumbnail

By Josh Tonsager, Legislative Director, National Association of Wheat Growers

Congressional action this year on policy priorities important to wheat farmers has taken some unexpected turns and the outlook for the legislative process is unclear. By now, this should not come as a surprise to anyone who has been following Congress the past several years. What should come as a surprise, though, is just how well critical programs for the wheat industry have fared thus far through the process Congress uses to appropriate federal funds.

Both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees have reported their respective versions of the FY 2017 Agriculture Appropriations bill, which funds the operations of USDA and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG), in conjunction with the National Wheat Improvement Committee, advocated for a funding increase for the U.S. Wheat and Barley Scab Initiative, which helps fund research intended to combat fusarium head blight. While the current Farm Bill authorizes up to $10 million per year for the program, actual funding has only been $6.7 million annually. Our organizations advocated for full funding, and we are pleased that both the House and Senate bills included an increase of $2 million. This is a significant step forward in the fight against a very costly wheat disease. This funding requires full House and Senate membership debate and approval, which could occur in June.

In addition to the Agriculture spending bill, NAWG is actively supporting transportation infrastructure investments through a broad coalition called the Ag Transportation Working Group. NAWG is working collaboratively to ensure continued support for inland waterways infrastructure, including the maintenance of our locks, dams and harbors through the FY 2017 Energy and Water Appropriations bill. The Senate approved its version of the bill on a 90-8 vote on May 12. It included the coalition’s request of the full use of funds through the diesel fuel tax (this has sometimes been limited) for the Inland Waterways Trust Fund as well as $3.17 billion for dredging, repairs, and operations to improve our waterways and help hold down basis cost for buyers and sellers.

The House version of the bill also includes full use of revenues available for the Inland Waterways Trust Fund and about $3.137 billion for dredging, repairs and operations. The status of the House bill, however, is unclear at this time. On May 26, a vote on passage of the bill failed on the House floor, reportedly because that version included a controversial provision that was unrelated to our priorities.

A healthy wheat production system, combined with an efficient waterway, rail and highway systems and continued funding for USDA/Foreign Agricultural Service export market development programs, are critical for the United States to remain the world’s most reliable supplier. NAWG, with input from USW, will stay engaged in the appropriations process in an effort to secure sufficient federal funding for the programs that ultimately benefit U.S. wheat farmers and their downstream customers at home and abroad.

thumbnail

Excerpts from the National Association of Wheat Growers Newsletter.

The United States has a long-history of advancing wheat quality to satisfy the demand of a growing world market for high quality, wholesome grains that become the ingredients of a sophisticated food industry. The National Wheat Improvement Committee (NWIC) — including public wheat breeders, farmers and industry stakeholders — serves a vital role by providing farmers with high quality seed stock so that the United States can produce superior quality wheats demanded by domestic and overseas markets. Unfortunately, wheat research funding relative to the economic viability of U.S. wheat is inadequate

“In many cases, due to the strong dollar, these quality wheats now garner a substantial premium, reflecting their intrinsic end-use functional value,” said USW Vice President and West Coast Office Director Steve Wirsching. “To maintain our competitive advantage in the area of quality, U.S. farmers need new breeding technology that will require continued investment from both public and private sector stakeholders.”

To sustain the research needed to improve U.S. wheat’s position in foreign markets, the NWIC has determined that Congress needs to provide $3.4 million more every year in research funds. As a part of its educational activities, the NWIC brought 21 wheat breeders and stakeholders to Washington, DC, March 15.

Armed with a priority list of critical research appropriation requests, NWIC members made their case with key contacts in USDA and Congress. Their requests included full funding for the U.S. Wheat and Barley Scab Initiative and next-generation genotyping, which will facilitate the application of genomic information and DNA marker technologies for improvement and breeding of wheat, barley and oat varieties.“It is crucial that Congress is aware of the necessity for continued, stable investment in wheat research,” said NWIC Chairman Dr. Paul Murphy, from North Carolina University. “The next decade holds tremendous promise based on emerging technologies that were not possible even five or ten years ago. This is a wonderful time to be a wheat researcher because we are developing technology to improve efficiency, address vulnerabilities such as disease, insect and abiotic stresses, and maintaining the quality of wheat we need to help feed the world.”

The NWIC believes the benefits of increased research investment will cascade from farmers to the world’s millers, bakers, brewers and consumers.

Recently, the USDA has also made a case for agriculture research funding. As reported in Agri-Pulse © on March 16, the leaders of USDA’s research agencies told lawmakers on the House Agriculture Appropriations panel why federal investment in agricultural research is critical to protecting the national food system and supporting American producers. Read the full story from Agri-Pulse here.