13 



Mississippi, than in areas where they are not as famihar, such as 

 Maryland. Although a consensus of opinion exists that financing is 

 difficult, perceptions vary about the importance of this financing 

 difficulty as an impediment to industry expansion. 



Many producers we spoke with rank other issues, such as incon- 

 sistent State regulations regarding product shipments and difficul- 

 ties or potential difficulties associated with complying with emerg- 

 ing environmental requirements as more significant. 



Now, while commercial credit data is not available, we were able, 

 by literally gathering data from all 1,700 FmHA county offices, to 

 quantify the extent of Federal loan-making to aquaculture ventures 

 by USDA's agriculture lender of last resort. 



We found that between October, 1990 and July, 1993, FmHA 

 made or guaranteed nearly 300 aquaculture loans, amounting to al- 

 most $38 million. These 300 or so loans made up less than one-half 

 of one percent of the roughly 87,000 total loans FmHA made during 

 basically the same period of time. 



Almost three-fourths of the loans were made to catfish farmers, 

 primarily in Mississippi and Louisiana. The agency rejected 21 per- 

 cent of aquaculture applications, roughly equivalent to the rejection 

 rate for all agriculture loans. 



Beyond financing, other USDA agencies provide a variety of 

 other services to the industry, amounting to over $24 million in fis- 

 cal year 1993. These services include research by CSRS, totalling 

 about $17 million, research by ARS, totalling another $7 million, 

 educational services by the Extension Service, information services 

 from the Aquaculture Information Center in the National Agri- 

 culture Library and market promotion by FAS, totalling about 

 $210,000. Of course, USDA agriculture-related activities are coordi- 

 nated by the Office of Aquaculture in CSRS. 



Catfish farmers, the largest recipient of USDA-backed loans, are 

 also the prime recipient of USDA's other assistance. For example, 

 the only aquaculture-targeted export promotion program is devoted 

 to catfish. Also, roughly 3 of every 10 research projects are devoted 

 to catfish. 



While USDA offers many services, a number of industry officials 

 we spoke with believe these services are not as helpful as they 

 could be. I understand you will be getting some firsthand views 

 from the producers, so I will not go into great depth on that. But 

 let me just give a few of the highlights of the viewpoints that we 

 picked up along the way. 



With respect to Federal financing assistance, some officials ex- 

 pressed the view that FmHA loan limits are often too low for the 

 loans to be useful. Because initial capitalization costs can often ex- 

 ceed $1 million, the $200,000 limit for direct loans and the 

 $300,000 to $400,000 limit for loan guarantees may be insufficient 

 to meet the industry's needs. 



Concerning research, although certainly acknowledging that all 

 research efforts were welcome, some in the industry also expressed 

 the view that USDA-spon sored research was not always targeted to 

 their most immediate needs. Two specific areas that were men- 

 tioned included the need for more research on animal drugs to com- 

 ply with FDA requirements and the need for practical research on 

 the commercialization of certain particular species. 



74-340 - 94 - 2 



