Ever order a hamburger at a restaurant and wonder where the ingredients came from? Farmers in North Dakota and surrounding states are leaning on a new federal program to help ensure those menu items come from their operations.

This week, partners under the Regional Food Business Center for North Central States gather in Fargo to help small and mid-sized food and farm businesses navigate government resources. The virtual center is one of 12 across the country announced by the USDA over the past year.

Jenny Lester Moffitt, undersecretary for marketing and regulatory programs at the USDA, said some of the early funding went to North Dakota's Square One commercial kitchen, a rental space for culinary startups.

"Someone who's making jams, you can't afford a commercial kitchen just on your own," Moffitt pointed out. "What many folks will do is they'll come together and they'll say, 'We need a space in which to make our product that meets the different food safety requirements; also has the types of equipment that we need.'"

Another example is a family farm in North Dakota, specializing in pasture-raised poultry, receiving funds to expand its wildflower honey operations. The USDA has faced criticism for how it awards funding under separate initiatives, with money flowing to large-scale farms. But Moffitt noted requirements built into this program allow them to focus on under-resourced farmers and businesses.

Moffitt argued it is about more than awarding money and helping these farm and food businesses apply for other grants. She emphasized marketing expertise is another component, so places like restaurants and hospitals have more choices when buying food in bulk.

"It's choice for farmers and producers to be able to have more places that they can sell their product," Moffitt explained. "But also it's about choice for the buyers."

In the end, officials say building a more resilient and diversified food system benefits consumers, who might not feel the squeeze as much during future market disruptions. The north-central food hub covers North and South Dakota, and Minnesota. In its first year, more than $600,000 was awarded to local recipients, with application demand much higher.


get more stories like this via email

In a move to address historical injustices, the Biden administration announced $2 billion dollars in direct payments for Black and minority farmers discriminated against by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. But for many in Florida, this aid comes too little, too late.

According to the USDA, more than 23,000 farmers have been approved for payments ranging from $10,000 to $500,000. An additional 20,000 people who planned to start farms but did not receive USDA loans will get between $3,500 and $6,000, mostly in Mississippi and Alabama.

Courtney Wilson, president of the Florida Black Farmers and Agricultualists Association, said the assistance comes amid ongoing struggles for land and financial support in the Sunshine State.

"It's a move in the right direction," he said, "but it's kind of late because of the ones that was going through the process of getting loans and doing things that way - trying to buy tractors and land, and farm equipment and fertilizer - either sold their land or lost their land."

Loss of land is a significant issue. Wilson said many Black farmers who leased land have been forced out because of new developments, and finding new land to lease is becoming more difficult. He said he plans to visit his local USDA office for more details on how he and his members can tap into needed funds.

According to legal documents, the historical context of this struggle is rooted in systemic discrimination. During President Barack Obama's era, the Pigford Settlement provided $50,000 to Black farmers who were discriminated against. Wilson said that also came too late to make anyone whole.

"If you go back to the Pigford case, you gave those farmers $50,000," he said. "But when they lost 200 acres and lost their tractors and lost equipment, what's $50,000 going to do for the ones that lost their land? All we're doing is playing catch-up."

And yet, Wilson said he appreciates the little help that comes around, and he's hoping to attract more young people to farming so they can breathe new life into the industry.


get more stories like this via email

National Farmers Market Week is coming up next week, and in North Dakota, organizers say they're deeply invested in trying to keep customer interest strong.

In Devils Lake, Maureen Scott oversees Market In The Park, where each weekend through mid-fall, customers can load up on fresh fruits, vegetables and specialty products.

Over the past several years, she said, they've gone from fewer than ten vendors to more than 60. Scott said it takes a lot of phone calls and other marketing in the offseason to maintain that robust group of producers and vendors.

"I think people need to work on it year-round," she said, "because the season is over in October, [and] you need to start planning for next year Oct. 30."

Without that desire, she suggested coordinators risk losing the many age groups who have taken a liking to farmers markets in towns and cities across the country, including young adults. According to the USDA, there are more than 8,000 registered markets. That compares with fewer than 2,000 in 1994, although the growth rate began to slow prior to the pandemic.

Scott remains optimistic that her operation and other farmers markets in North Dakota will continue to thrive. She said a key for her team is to ensure the products sold are grown within a 60-mile radius, and not imported from other parts of the country.

"We don't want to support something from Michigan or Wisconsin," she said. "We want to support the local grower."

Demand for locally grown food by smaller producers comes amid a backlash against corporate consolidation within agriculture, heightening concerns about the environmental and economic impacts industrial farms can have on surrounding communities.


get more stories like this via email

By Grace Hussain for Sentient.
Broadcast version by Nadia Ramlagan for Kentucky News Connection reporting for the Sentient-Public News Service Collaboration

Kentucky is one of the latest states to take aim at undercover investigations of factory farms. Passed after a legislative override of Governor Beshear's veto on April 12, Senate Bill 16 prevents unauthorized filming, pictures or audio recording of food processing plants and meat and dairy operations. The law targets small and large producers - including Tyson Foods, whose lobbyist helped draft the bill. But SB16 is also unique from past ag-gag legislation, as the bill's proponents sought to ban use of drones for investigations.

Historically, ag-gag laws are bills that make it illegal to film inside factory farms and slaughterhouses without the owner's permission. The new Kentucky measure fits that description, but also includes the anti-drone component, and a prohibition on recording any "part, procedure or action" of a factory farm or food processing plant. Critics of the law say its broad language makes it vulnerable to a First Amendment challenge in court, which was the fate for ag gag laws passed in Kansas and Idaho.

Drones Under the Law

Commercial drone pilots are subject to the Federal Aviation Administration's oversight. This includes regulations that set federal no-fly zones, limits on how high they can fly, identification standards and permitting requirements. Earlier this year, the federal agency took steps to beef up drone governance by implementing a rule referred to as Remote ID, which requires that drones be remotely identifiable using long range monitors. There are only a handful of areas in which the ID is not necessary - most run by drone schools.

However, there are rules and then there is reality. "Drone laws are really hard to enforce," Kentucky-based commercial drone pilot Andrew Peckat, tells Sentient. That's especially true in rural areas where many industrial meat and dairy operations are located. "I imagine these facilities are in the middle of nowhere, and there's not going to be any flight restriction zones around them." Peckat sees regulations of drones as largely unenforceable. "I'm not going to have to apply for any permits," Peckat says, adding, "There's probably...going to be no way to figure out" who's taking the drone footage.

Critics Call Out Unintended Consequences

Opponents of the legislation argue that the language of Kentucky's SB16 is overly vague, which suggests that it could end up doing even more to shield the meat and dairy industry from the public eye. "I do think this is just so much broader than a typical Ag Gag bill," says Ashley Wilmes, who leads Kentucky Resources Council, a nonprofit aimed at conserving the state's natural resources.

According to Wilmes, the legislation leaves many unanswered questions, and that lack of clarity could discourage potential whistleblowers from coming forward. Wilmes isn't just concerned about undercover investigations either. If allowed to stand, the law could have implications for some of Kentucky Resources Council's current legal aid clients who want to monitor pollution. "We have clients that care considerably about water quality," she explains, some of whom live next to food processing facilities or factory farms, and have reached out to Wilmes for guidance about what they can and can't do under the new rule. "What if they see something, and they're documenting it from their own property?" she asks. The law is written so broadly, she says, that it's possible to conclude "that's now a crime," Wilmes says.

Tyson Behind the Push for the Legislation

Kentucky's ag gag legislation was sponsored by Senators John Schickel (R), Rick Girdler (R), Brandon Storm (R) and Robin Webb (D). During testimony before the agriculture committee, Senator Schickel revealed the bill was originally drafted by Steve Butts, who appeared to then hold the title of Senior Manager of Security at Tyson. Throughout the bill's progress through the legislature, lobbyist Ronald J. Pryor - who counts Tyson Foods and the Kentucky Poultry Federation among his clients - worked to get the law passed.

In a hearing before the state senate's agriculture committee, Graham Hall, a government affairs manager with Tyson Foods, testified that drones pose a threat to agricultural operations, citing incidents in North Carolina where a drone landed on a truck containing livestock. But there were no such incidents in Kentucky presented as evidence, though the multinational corporation did open a $355 million pork processing facility in the state in January.

Kentucky's Governor Beshear vetoed the measure, writing that "the bill diminishes transparency" in a statement accompanying his decision. With an overwhelming majority in both chambers however, state lawmakers overrode the governor's veto. Now the bill is poised to become law in mid-July of this year - 90 days after the conclusion of the legislative session.

One potential hitch could be a legal challenge however, as Kentucky Resource Council is in talks with other organizations to consider filing a lawsuit to strike down SB-16 for violating the First Amendment.

If successful, the lawsuit would force Kentucky's ag gag law to follow in the footsteps of so many ag gag laws passed before it in other states. One of the most recent decisions, in North Carolina, struck down a similar law, as lawmakers there sought to ban undercover investigations, but ultimately failed.


Grace Hussain wrote this article for Sentient.


get more stories like this via email