The United States Department of Agriculture has made its final ruling in regards to some recommended changes being made to the Federal Milk Marketing Orders, but not all of the changes may help or really change anything for Chautauqua County dairy farmers – depending on who you talk to.

New York ranks among the top five dairy-producing states in the country, and its farmers depend on the FMMO system to establish minimum milk prices and ensure orderly marketing of fluid milk. Prior to the 2018 Farm Bill, Class I milk prices were determined using the higher value between Class III and Class IV milk. However, the 2018 Farm Bill replaced this approach with an averaging formula that added $0.74 to the average of Class III and Class IV prices.

There are four classes of milk overall; Class I, which covers milk used for fluid, or beverage, milk products, Class II refers to milk going into ‘soft’ manufactured products such as sour cream, cottage cheese, ice cream, and yogurt, Class III takes in milk used for making hard cheeses, and Class IV milk is used to make butter and dry products such as non-fat dry milk.

The USDA’s final decision on the Federal Milk Marketing Orders comes following a 49 day national hearing in Indiana from the end of 2023 to January 2024.

The approved amendments in the final decision include; Updating the skim milk composition factors to 3.3 percent true protein, 6.0 percent other solids and 9.3 percent nonfat solids, with a six-month delayed implementation, Removing 500-pound barrel cheddar cheese prices from the Dairy Product Mandatory Reporting Program survey, Updating the Class III and Class IV manufacturing allowances to $0.2519 for cheese, $0.2272 for butter, $0.2393 for nonfat dry milk and $0.2668 for dry whey, all on a per pound basis, and the butterfat recovery factor to 91 percent, Returning the base Class I skim milk price formula to the higher-of the advanced Class III or Class IV skim milk prices for the month along with adoption of a Class I extended shelf life adjustment for all ESL products equal to the average-of mover plus a 24-month rolling average adjuster with a 12-month lag, and Updating the Class I differential values to reflect the increased cost of servicing the Class I market.

On Thursday, the Chautauqua County Farm Bureau praised Congressman Nick Langworthy’s introduction of seven pieces of critical legislation in support of farmers, producers and rural communities in Western New York and the Southern Tier.

“New York, especially Chautauqua County, is home to a rich variety of commodities like dairy, grapes and maple,” Robert Patterson Jr., Chautauqua County Farm Bureau President said. “The acts Congressman Langworthy has introduced will help level the playing field for farms of all sizes. We thank Rep. Langworthy for his continued support of New York’s family farms.”

Langworthy, who served as a member of the House Agriculture Committee during his first term, has made the needs of rural communities one of his top priorities. The bills include: the Fair Milk Pricing for Farmers Act: which would require dairy processors to report their cost and yield information through a mandatory reporting system. This will increase transparency and confidence for farmers that their milk is being priced appropriately. The Dairy Farm Resiliency Act which would update the Dairy Margin Coverage program to better support small and medium-sized dairy farms by ensuring that production levels are updated every five years to reflect current farm sizes. This change would help protect farmers from financial losses due to volatile market conditions by allowing them to insure more of their milk production, addressing gaps in coverage for those who have grown since the program’s inception in 2018.

The Supporting All Producers Act would require the USDA to consult with maple syrup producers on where to focus annual research and education priorities under the Acer Access and Development Program. The ACER program is a competitive grant to promote the domestic maple syrup industry through activities associated with research and education. The Making Agricultural Products Locally Essential Act would add maple syrup to the list of eligible products under the Seniors Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program to provide low-income seniors with coupons that can be exchanged for eligible foods at farmers’ markets, roadside stands and community-supported agriculture programs. This would provide a new market for maple syrup and allow seniors increased access to nutritious, locally sourced maple syrup products.

Grape Research And Protection Expansion Act would create a crop insurance policy to cover losses incurred by table, wine and juice grape growers due to freeze events. Currently, there is no policy that exists to cover losses caused by freezes, which are becoming more common.

Creating Access to Rural Employment and Education for Resilience and Success Act would assist several industry sectors with setting up their workforce pipelines by expanding skills development opportunities in the Rural Innovation Stronger Economy Grant Program for existing workforce challenges in rural America.

And the Rural Telehealth and Education Enhancement Act of 2025 would reauthorize the Distance Learning and Telemedicine Program, which awards grants to support and improve distance learning and telemedicine services in rural areas. The DLT at the Department of Agriculture allocates grants to assist rural communities in acquiring the essential technology and training needed to establish connections between educational and medical experts, students, teachers and patients residing in rural areas.

Chautauqua County Farm Bureau Board Member, Dick Kimball, said that he had “mixed feelings” about the final decision made by the USDA, adding that while some of the amendments may be positive for farmers, not all of them are. Specifically, he noted that while changes made to areas such as the “higher of” pricing formula will help, other areas that were originally recommended during the hearing process were changed right at the end by the USDA, such as making the make allowance higher that what was originally recommended.

Kimball said he was not sure any of these rulings will help farmers in the Chautauqua County area.

“I think in extreme events it can help,” Kimball said. “There are some positive things, such as the ‘higher of’ formula, but I’m not sure it will help at all except for in severe swings like during Covid. From what I’ve seen farmers lost over a billion dollars because of the change that was made during Covid. These decisions now will more maintain the status quo in Chautauqua County than really help anything.”

Kimball noted that some of the changes will help in high Class I milk areas, which Chautauqua County is not. Specifically, things such as returning to the “higher of” formula is expected to help restore stability and fairer pricing, reversing the underperformance of the current “average-of” formula since its inclusion in the 2018 Farm Bill.

Mostly, Kimball said his mixed feelings and biggest disappointments in the ruling come from some of the changes made after the recommendations came from the hearing process. The specific changes made to some of the July recommendations include delaying implementation of composition factors, increasing make allowances and marginal changes to Class I differentials.

Kimball talked specifically about the increase in make allowances, which provide for the costs incurred by processors to convert raw milk into finished products, such as cheese, butter, nonfat dry milk and dry whey and are deducted from the value of raw milk before calculating the prices paid to farmers. According to the American Farm Bureau Federation, the USDA’s final decision introduced additional increases to all four make allowances beyond those in the recommended decision. Higher make allowances generally result in a lower pay price to dairy farmers.

Even with some of the changes that were made, Kimball said he believes some of the ruling will help at times.

“It was a wash, but we did need to go back to the ‘higher of’ pricing formula,” Kimball said. “It will help at times, but not all of the changes were changed to positive things. We were not burnt on it by any means, but the fact that the USDA did not follow all of the recommendations from the hearings is disappointing, especially after going through the long hearing process.”