Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Researchers and growers press Congress to sustain and speed Specialty Crop Research funding
Loading...
Summary
Witnesses praised the Specialty Crop Research Initiative (SCRI) and IR‑4 program, urged predictable requests for applications, expanded funding, and faster release of RFPs to enable multidisciplinary, multistate projects addressing pollinators, pests and mechanization.
WASHINGTON — Scientists and growers told the House Agriculture Committee that federal research programs tailored to specialty crops—especially the Specialty Crop Research Initiative (SCRI) and IR‑4—are vital but need improved predictability and more funding.
Ramesh Seguili, professor of horticulture at Oregon State University and SCRI grant recipient, said, "The Specialty Crop Research Initiative is unique among the USDA NIFA competitive programs because of its targeted focus on specialty crops," and described SCRI's value for multidisciplinary, multistate research on pollinators and disease. Seguili urged more timely release of RFAs, longer lead times for submissions, and improved success rates for meritorious proposals.
Why it matters: SCRI funds integrated research and extension projects that industry and university researchers said are essential to address pests, pollinator health, mechanization, and post‑harvest handling that directly affect yields and marketability. Seguili highlighted SCRI’s planned statutory increase from $80,000,000 per year to $175,000,000 starting in 2026 as a major opportunity to expand awards.
Supporting details: Witnesses said IR‑4 functions as a public‑private partnership to secure crop protection tools for minor crops where private incentives are weak. Michael Fraunce called IR‑4 "a fabulous public private partnership" that helps develop pest‑management options otherwise unprofitable for manufacturers. Committee members and witnesses asked USDA to make RFAs more predictable and to consider waiving or clarifying match requirements that can hamper some applicants.
Discussion versus action: Committee members noted HR 1’s increase in mandatory SCRI funding and asked USDA and NIFA to improve RFA timing and reviewer feedback. No formal decision was made at the hearing; researchers requested follow‑up on RFA scheduling, match waivers, and administrative guidance.
Ending: Members and witnesses agreed that predictable, increased research funding and stronger coordination among federal agencies would help specialty crop producers respond to emerging pests, support mechanization, and protect pollinators.
