Sales of locally produced foods comprise a small but growing part of U.S. agricultural sales. USDA estimates that farm-level value of local food sales totaled about $4.8 billion in 2008, or about 1.6% of the U.S. market for agricultural products. An estimated total of 107,000 farms are engaged in local food systems, or about 5% of all U.S. farms. There is no established definition of what constitutes a "local food." Local and regional food systems generally refer to agricultural production and marketing that occurs within a certain geographic proximity (between farmer and consumer) or that involves certain social or supply chain characteristics in producing food (such as small family farms, urban gardens, or farms using sustainable agriculture practices). Some perceive locally sourced foods as fresher and higher in quality compared to some other readily available foods, and also believe that purchasing local foods helps support local farm economies and/or farmers that use certain production practices that are perceived to be more environmentally sustainable. A wide range of farm businesses may be considered to be engaged in local foods. These include direct-to-consumer marketing, farmers' markets, farm-to-school programs, community-supported agriculture, community gardens, school gardens, food hubs and market aggregators, and kitchen incubators and mobile slaughter units. Other types of operations include on-farm sales/stores, internet marketing, food cooperatives and buying clubs, pick-your-own or "U-Pick" operations, roadside farm stands, urban farms (and rooftop farms and gardens), community kitchens, small scale food processing and decentralized root cellars, and some agritourism or other types of on farm recreational activities. The 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-246, Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008) contained a few program provisions that directly support local and regional food systems. However, many existing federal programs benefiting U.S. agricultural producers may also provide support and assistance for local food systems. These include farm support and grant programs administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and may be grouped into several broad program categories: marketing and promotion; business assistance; rural and community development; nutrition and education; agricultural research and cooperative extension; and farmland conservation. Examples include USDA's farmers' market programs, rural cooperative grants, and selected child nutrition programs, among myriad other grant and loan programs, as well as USDA's research and cooperative extension service. Farm bill proposals debated in the 112th Congress would have expanded several of these programs. The 113th Congress will likely consider reauthorization of the 2008 farm bill and may reconsider proposals debated in the 112th Congress to address expiring farm bill provisions, including provisions that either directly or indirectly support local food systems. Although the 2008 farm bill contained few specific programs that directly support local and regional food systems, many community and farm advocacy groups have been arguing that such food systems should play a larger policy role within the next farm bill, and that laws should be modified to reflect broader, more equitable policies across a range of production systems, including local food systems. The 112th Congress introduced legislation, including several comprehensive marker bills, which would have expanded the benefits for local and regional food systems. These issues may continue to be of interest in the 113th Congress.

In the United States, the agriculture and forestry sectors account for less than 10% of current estimated total U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions annually. Combined, these sectors are estimated to emit nearly 600 million metric tons CO2 equivalent (MMT CO2-Eq.) each year, most of which is emitted from the agriculture sector.

Fast horses and fast cars are hardly proper interests for a high society turn of the century girl - but then neither is the fledgling motion picture industry. The films may be silent, but actress, Coriander McDurvish, on the contrary, is not Even her domineering mother can't crush her spirit so why would a cad like Ben Sinclair think he has what it takes to tame her? An undeniably charming attorney at law, Ben is attracted to Cori in every way. His intense attraction to her and his curiosity about her lifestyle leads him onto the set of her motion picture, The Adventures of Suzie Sunshine, where he is pulled into the madcap world of film-making. Before he knows what's happening he finds himself playing the role of the villain opposite Cori. Cori is irritated by the fact that Ben is well received by the eclectic and quirky cast and crew. He was supposed to fall flat on his smug face He's also having too much fun for her liking, especially because it seems to be at her expense. Nevertheless, Ben has his mind set to win Cori - but is he up to the task? Coriander, one of the few actresses to do all of her own stunts is as fit as a fiddle - but is she ready for love? Or will Ben have to throw her over his shoulder?

Bees, both commercially managed honey bees and wild bees, play an important role in global food production. In the United States, the value of honey bees only as commercial pollinators in U.S. food production is estimated at about $15 billion to $20 billion annually. The estimated value of other types of insect pollinators, including wild bees, to U.S. food production is not available. Given their importance to food production, many have expressed concern about whether a "pollinator crisis" has been occurring in recent decades. In the United States, commercial migratory beekeepers along the East Coast of the United States began reporting sharp declines in 2006 in their honey bee colonies. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) reports that overwinter colony losses from 2006 to 2011 averaged more than 32% annually. This issue remained legislatively active in the 110th Congress and resulted in increased funding for pollinator research, among other types of farm program support, as part of the 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-246). Congressional interest in the health of honey bees and other pollinators has continued in the 112th Congress (e.g., H.R. 2381, H.R. 6083, and S. 3240) and may extend into the 113th Congress. This report: Describes changes in managed and wild bee populations, given readily available data and information. It focuses on managed and wild bees only, and excludes other types of pollinators, including other insects, birds, and bats. Data on managed honey bees are limited, and do not provide a comprehensive view of changes in bee populations. Data for wild bee populations are even more limited; Provides a listing of the range of possible factors thought to be negatively affecting managed and wild bee populations. In addition to pesticides, other identified factors include bee pests and diseases, diet and nutrition, genetics, habitat loss and other environmental stressors, and beekeeping management issues, as well as the possibility that bees are being negatively affected by cumulative, multiple exposures and/or the interactive effects of each of these factors; Briefly summarizes readily available scientific research and analysis regarding the potential role of pesticides among the factors affecting the health and wellbeing of bees, as well as the statutory authority and related regulatory activities of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) related to pesticide use. A 2007 report by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, Status of Pollinators in North America, provides a more detailed scientific context for this report and may be consulted for more in depth understanding about bee health. That study concluded that many factors contribute to pollinator declines in North America, and CRS accedes to that conclusion. Accordingly, the focus of this report on bee exposure to pesticides is not intended to imply that pesticides are any more important in influencing the health and wellness of bees than any of the other identified factors influencing bee health. Pesticides are only one of the many influences on bee health. Because neonicotinoid pesticides have been the focus of concerns in Europe and in the United States, this report briefly describes recent scientific research related to possible effects of exposure to these pesticides on bees. The report concludes with a summary of recent regulatory activity regarding neonicotinoids at EPA, the federal agency charged with assessing risks and regulating U.S. sale and use of pesticides.