The U.S. Department of Agriculture touts its conservation programs for farmers, but a new study from the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy found last year, three of four applications for the programs were denied.

The Conservation Stewardship Program and the Environmental Quality Incentives Program help farmers handle flooding and drought.

Michael Happ, program associate for climate and rural communities at the institute, said the programs received more than $19 million as part of the Inflation Reduction Act, which his group thinks should be made permanent.

"In a lot of cases, there are farmers who would like to be doing more conservation practices on their farm, would like to grow their food in a more agro-ecological way, but just feel like financially that's not an option," Happ observed. "These programs help open financial options for them."

The report's recommendations include doubling current Farm Bill spending on conservation and improving access to credit and land for farmers of color, as well as for small, medium-sized and beginning farmers.

Doug Doughty, a row crop farmer and cattle rancher from Livingston County, called the agriculture industry "off balance," with farm programs tilted toward large farms and industrial agriculture. He also called talk about eliminating the conservation compliance requirements for crop insurance "alarming," saying it is an important incentive for the crop insurance program.

"In return for these subsidies, here's what we are going to give the general public: cleaner water, less erosion, less erosion of nutrients," Doughty outlined.

Doughty has participated in both the Conservation Stewardship Program and the Environmental Quality Incentives Program. He contended they introduce farmers to new practices and technology, and provide support for healthy practices already in place.

Doughty added one of the Farm Bill's long-standing themes is stabilization. He pointed to the number of rural business, school and hospital closures and ongoing environmental degradation as evidence ag consolidation hasn't helped stabilize rural communities or the environment.

"We're stabilizing income and food, should we not be stabilizing our natural resources and our climate also?" Doughty asked. "Soil loss is still greater than soil production. And obviously, nutrient pollution continues to increase in agriculture."


get more stories like this via email

A new study shows how extreme weather conditions negatively affect production yields on Midwest dairy farms, with a disproportionate impact on smaller farms.

Researchers at the University of Illinois studied milk production records from nine Midwest dairy farmers. Considering both temperature and humidity when measuring extreme heat, they found farms lose about 1% of milk yield annually because of heat stress, while smaller farms lose closer to 2%.

Marin Skidmore, study co-author, said when cows are in extreme heat, it can cause increased restlessness and risk of infection, and decreased appetite, which reduces milk yield and impacts bottom lines.

"To some extent, it's only 1.6%. But if you're really making every dollar from your paycheck count, because you're living in a time with high costs, then 1.6% of your paycheck being gone in a given year is meaningful," she said.

The study predicts extreme heat days to be much more frequent in years to come and milk yield losses to increase about 30% in the next 25 years.

The Midwest tends to have smaller dairy farms compared with other states, with herds ranging from 100 to 200 cows. Researchers say being able to track and compare daily milk yields across a large region with similar climates has never been done before. Skidmore said their findings suggest that larger herds seem to have some level of protection to extreme heat compared with smaller farms, which start to see impacts of heat stress at lower thresholds.

"And this is additionally concerning in the context that we're studying because we've seen a lot of dairy farm exits over the last decade or two, and many of those are small farms," she added.

While researchers say there's no silver bullet for mitigating the effects of heat stress on herds, recommendations include adjusting feeding and calving timing, and using sprinklers and improved ventilation systems.

Skidmore emphasized the need for additional support for small farms since capital costs can be particularly constraining.

"Having the access to enough capital to make these really big investments is difficult, and grants or loans to help small farms adopt some of these management technologies could be one avenue to help small farms cope with heat stress and keep them competitive," she continued.

Skidmore said more research is also needed to explore other options to best manage extreme heat on dairy farms.


get more stories like this via email

President Donald Trump is set to impose sweeping global tariffs this week, a move expected to spark retaliation against a range of American products including food.

Tad DeHaven, policy analyst at the libertarian think tank the Cato Institute, said farmers in Colorado and across the U.S. who endured losses during Trump's first-term tariffs are again facing uncertainty.

"What's frustrating to me is that taxpayers end up footing the bill," DeHaven pointed out. "Last time around, it cost taxpayers $23 billion in farm bailouts, and I think it looks like we're headed down that road again."

Trump said tariffs, which are taxes on imports mostly paid for by U.S. consumers, will compel companies outsourcing labor to places like China to move their operations back to the U.S. Trump has also floated the idea of replacing income taxes with tariffs in what would amount to a national sales tax.

DeHaven believes Trump's tariff strategy will backfire.

"The administration talks about shrinking government and cutting waste," DeHaven observed. "But I'd argue these trade wars create exactly the opposite: more bailouts, more government spending and more taxpayer-funded damage control."

Republicans in Congress have proposed $230 billion in cuts to ag funding, mostly from SNAP, formerly food stamps. But a recent poll found 60% of Trump voters said cutting SNAP is unacceptable. Trump has also canceled $13 million in funding for Colorado food banks and schools to buy food from local producers.

DeHaven added many U.S. farmers still have not recovered from Trump's first-term tariffs.

"You have to feel bad for farmers, they're getting squeezed from both ends," DeHaven emphasized. "Not only are they losing foreign markets but they are also seeing higher costs at home for essentials like equipment and fertilizer, all thanks to tariffs."


get more stories like this via email

Cuts at the U.S. Department of Agriculture have affected farming communities nationwide but a national group said its Black farmers remain unaffected.

The Memphis-based Black Farmers and Agriculturalists Association represents more than 20,000 heirs of Black landowners and ranchers across the country.

Thomas Burrell, president of the association, said because of long-standing discrimination, its members, many of whom are farmers or descendants of farmers, have not been impacted by the USDA freeze.

"What our concern has always been, notwithstanding any administrative efforts or the lack thereof, is the constant, unfortunately, of discrimination that prevents our members from being able to participate," Burrell explained. "Key phrase is 'food production.'"

Burrell noted the association's farmers operate under the USDA and still face challenges from the Pigford v. Glickman settlement. He added Congress has introduced multiple measures this year to compensate Black farmers for past discrimination. Last summer, the Biden administration provided more than $2 billion in direct payments to minority farmers affected by USDA discrimination.

Burrell argued tariffs will have both short- and long-term effects on Tennessee farmers and beyond. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins recently announced the USDA will distribute up to $10 billion to agricultural producers through the Emergency Commodity Assistance Program for 2024 crops, with another $20 billion for disaster-affected farmers.

"Now the administration is going to use this $30 billion to sustain these farmers," Burrell observed. "While that pain is being as a result of the tariffs, and hopefully, in theory, at least once the ship rights itself again, it's full speed ahead, and the economy should benefit in the long term."

Burrell pointed out the Secretary of Agriculture has promised tariffs will not harm them and disaster and commodity payments should help. But Black farmers who are long victims of discrimination still struggle to access the benefits. The core issue remains: Are they receiving equal resources to stay competitive?


get more stories like this via email