Local officials pledge to alert Vilsack of CSP case

By SEAN CLOUGHERY
Managing Editor

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — Attention to the recent appeal decision against three Eastern Shore farm operations over ineligible USDA program contracts has taken the national stage.
Maryland agriculture groups and officials have pledged to write letters to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack and Maryland’s congressional delegation outlining the situation and urging relief for the farmers and landowners involved.
On Jan. 14, Karen King a hearing officer for the USDA’s National Appeals Division, ruled that the farmers — the Hutchison Brothers and Mike Elben in Cordova and Sonny Eaton in Queen Anne — and the 12 farmland owners for whom they till the land, will have to repay a total approaching $1 million to the USDA, money they received under five-year-old contracts with the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s now-defunct Conservation Security Program.
The ruling was a shock to virtually all in the farm community who viewed the farmers as having fulfilled the contract requirements by installing several conservation practices on their farms but were led astray by state and county NRCS officials in how the contracts were drawn.
Lee McDaniel, National Association of Conservation Districts executive board member and chairman of the Harford County Soil Conservation District Board, said he — like others concerned about case — were told by NRCS officials that the appeals process would play out and things would take care of themselves.
“Well, the process has been taken pretty far down the line and it hasn’t take care of itself,” McDaniel said.
Last week at the annual meeting of the Maryland Association of Soil Conservation Districts, members voted to draft a letter to Vilsack, Gov. Martin O’Malley and Maryland’s congressional delegation that would outline their concerns on the ruling. At the top of their list, McDaniel said, is that farmers will lose confidence in participating in conservation programs and suffer setbacks to any Chesapeake Bay restoration efforts.
“Farmers aren’t going to sign up for anything if they’re worried about NRCS not keeping its word or changing something after the fact,” McDaniel said.
Leaving last week for the NACD convention in Las Vegas, McDaniel said he would discuss the issue and recent decision with the executive board as well as Dave White, director of NRCS.
In Maryland, NRCS has had a good working partnership with the local soil conservation districts and a ruling like this could “have a major impact on that partnership,” according to Hans Schmidt, a Sudlersville, Md., farmer who is Maryland’s representative to the NACD meeting. “It’s going to make things much more difficult.”
Lynne Hoot, MASCD executive director said the association will also investigate whether it is allowed or appropriate to file a “friend of the court” brief to act as an advisory capacity.
“That’s all tentative,” Hoot said. “But there will be a letter going to Vilsack.”
Vilsack, who keynoted the 41st Delaware Agriculture Industry Dinner in Dover, Del., on Jan. 26 was also briefed in person there on the case.
Maryland Agriculture Secretary Earl “Buddy” Hance said he’s briefed O’Malley on the case, and the governor has offered support for the farmers and Hance said the he’ll likely send a letter of his own through the Maryland Department of Agriculture to the Maryland delegation and Vilsack.
“It’s just an unfortunate situation for these producers who did everything they were asked to do,” Hance said.
Both Hance and McDaniel said even more than the issue of repaying the money to NRCS is restoring the reputation of the farmers, who may be viewed by some outside the farm community as defrauding the government.
“All those things they did, they’re helping to clean up the Chesapeake Bay as we speak,” Hance said. “They didn’t steal anything.”
At the MASCD meeting, Kyle Hutchison, partner in the Hutchison Brothers farm operation, briefed the crowd on the case.
He pointed to the hearing officer King’s determination that they, the farmers, did not meet the burden of “proving that an agency’s adverse decision is erroneous by a preponderance of the evidence.”
“To me, that almost sounds that you’re guilty until you prove yourself innocent,” said Hutchison, who sits on the board of supervisors for the Talbot County Soil Conservation District. “The only way we could be in compliance is if we didn’t sign the contracts in the first place. It’s a Catch-22.”
He said they have 30 days to appeal for “equitable relief” from the ruling. That would mean repayment would not be required.
The appeal would be heard by the National Appeals Division director.
The director, Roger J. Klurfeld, would then have 15 days to issue a decision though Hutchison said he’d been told it’s taking much longer, perhaps two to three months, to process appeals.
Should the appeal fail, the farmers and landowners would then have to decide whether or not to take the matter to federal court.
Hutchison said he hopes the push for national attention will show how serious the issue is for them.
“We need to get to someone who can step up and do what’s right. So far we haven’t found anybody like that,” Hutchison said.