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 4.5 acre farm surrounded by New Mexico's Sangre de Cristo Mountains is where owner Don Bustos fuses centuries of tradition with modern advances to feed local communities.

The Santa Cruz Farm has been in the hands of Bustos' family for more than 400 years. Working with experts at New Mexico State University, the owner said he gravitated to organic farming long before others adopted such practices.

The 68-year-old Bustos said he hasn't used any major chemicals or pesticides in more than 20 years.

"We do 72 different varieties of produce 12 months a year using nothing but solar energy," said Bustos. "I grow a lot of the traditional corn, the green chili. We still have our same seed, we still have our same corn seeds, the same melons - and then we got a lot into the specialty crops."

Bustos said he believes much of his success is due to taking risks, leaning on scientific advances while also adhering to sacred family traditions and ancestral farming practices.

In addition to solar power, the farm relies on water from a New Mexico acequia - an ancient irrigation ditch - that flows north through the state.

In addition to farming his land, Bustos spent more than a decade working for the American Friends Service Committee - training other New Mexico farmers how to successfully grow organic produce in the middle of winter.

Now, he's well-known for squash, asparagus, leafy greens and other fresh foods.

"We're not trying to save the world," said Bustos. "We're just trying to feed our community. So, we'll let other people worry about growing those big mega-farms and stuff. As long we're healthy, our friends are healthy, and our community's health, we're good with that."

Using research from New Mexico State University's science center, the Triple Crown Blackberry - known for its large size and sweet aromatic flavor - is one of his best-selling and most profitable crops.

Bustos said a business course through the university also helped him better understand the financial side of farm operations.

"I took over the farm in the early '80s, and I just fell in love with it," said Bustos. "I would've had to make a lot of money, but sometimes that's not the goal, that's not the mission. The mission is to have fun doing it."




get more stories like this via email

Massachusetts farmers said they are bracing for revenue losses due to cuts in fresh produce SNAP benefits.

Starting Dec. 1, families who utilize the state's Healthy Incentives Program to buy food directly from farmers will see their benefits cut to just $20 a month, regardless of household size.

Rebecca Miller, policy director for the Massachusetts Food System Collaborative, said many farmers have structured their operations around SNAP customers.

"A lot of them are worried that they might have to do layoffs," Miller pointed out. "Especially for folks that they've hired that are multilingual that serve folks with SNAP benefits."

Miller stressed less money being spent at farmers' markets will have a ripple effect across the state's agricultural industry. Nearly 300 farmers participate in the SNAP program but state officials said the cuts are needed due to budget constraints.

The Healthy Incentives Program provides a dollar-for-dollar reimbursement when SNAP users buy healthy, local food directly from Massachusetts farmers. A state survey found that each dollar spent in the program results in an additional $2 in local economic impact, when farmers spend the money on local goods and services. Miller emphasized she is concerned about families getting through the winter.

"We expect to see increased food insecurity," Miller explained. "Folks needing to visit food pantries more, folks having to take more medicine to address chronic diet-related health needs."

Miller noted a study found each program participant increased their fresh fruit and vegetable intake by one serving per day, which leads to lower public health care costs over time. She added supporters are asking the legislature for an additional $10 million to maintain current funding levels through June. State officials say they are restructuring the program to ensure long-term viability.


get more stories like this via email

Kentucky farmers are using biosolids or "biosludge" from city sewage as cheap fertilizer but the price tag is high in terms of health, from toxic industrial chemicals known as PFAS and heavy metals contaminating produce, groundwater and soil.

Kentucky lawmakers have passed regulations experts said weaken protections for biosludge application on farmland.

Tom FitzGerald, attorney and former director of the Kentucky Resources Council, warned farmers in the Commonwealth trying to save money on fertilizer by using biosludge could end up with a significant headache down the road.

"Unless the cities are properly managing the waste that come into the system, and are sampling and clearing them for release for public use, I would simply tell the farmers not to take these biosludges, because the risks are so high," FitzGerald asserted.

According to open records request data from the Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet, lab samples from around a dozen wastewater treatment plants statewide revealed most contained detectable levels of PFAS.

Adam Nordell said his small family-owned vegetable farm dream in Maine became a nightmare when he discovered sewage sludge applied decades prior had irreparably contaminated his land and groundwater with high levels of PFAS. He stressed he wants to raise awareness among farmers in other states about the risks, and the importance of testing.

"We had been living on contaminated land," Nordell explained. "We've been drinking contaminated water. We've been irrigating our crops and supporting our livestock with contaminated groundwater."

FitzGerald said Kentucky's regulations reduce accountability and do not require cities to test the biosludge before it's applied to farmland.

"The cabinet should have used its authority to broaden out the list of contaminants, to broaden out the sampling and testing requirements and to broaden out the notice requirements to farmers," FitzGerald contended.

According to the Environmental Working Group, at least 5% of all crop fields nationwide could be using biosludge likely contaminated with PFAS. And since 2016, more than 19 billion pounds of biosludge have been applied to farm fields.


get more stories like this via email