Protect your teeth and save farmland

Tom Chappell of the environmentally conscious, natural body products company Tom’s of Maine has joined the farmland protection movement in a big way. Chappell recently worked with the Maine Farmland Trust to protect 154 acres of his own farmland from development, and he joined the organization’s campaign to protect 100,000 acres of agricultural land as an honorary chair.

South Carolina farmer shares his love for the land

The South Carolina community and the USDA honored the Williams Muscadine Farm in Nesmith, S.C. during a recent educational USDA Field Day. Farm owner David Williams and his family have transformed the grape vineyard into a destination and place for visitors to learn more about Southern agriculture.

Land transfer program now available nationwide

The Land Contract Guarantee Program, first authorized as a pilot program under the 2002 Farm Bill but expanded and made permanent in the last farm bill, is now available nationwide as of January 3, 2012. The program reduces the financial risk for retiring farmers who sell their farmland to a beginning or socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher, providing “a valuable alternative for intergenerational transfers of farm real estate to help ensure the future viability of family farms.”

Farmer to co-op

A new local foods co-op in Wooster, Ohio, helps to bring products from small local farmers onto its shelves. With area farmers often having difficulty marketing and selling their goods, they are benefiting from selling them to the Local Roots co-op, where they receive 90 percent of the purchase price and local consumers are happy to support them.

Farm incubator programs grow more then experience

Farm workers often hope to eventually own their own land, but even with years of experience, being able to acquire the necessary land isn’t always easy or affordable. Farm incubator programs are increasingly trying to give aspiring farmers the support they need to get off the ground and be viable.

Anaerobic digester aids farmland conservation

A partnership among farmers, an environmental group and an American Indian tribe outside of Seattle, Washington, has resulted in an anaerobic digester that produces electricity and compost while helping dairy farmers deal with waste from their cows in an environmentally sound way.

As Congress works to address the federal deficit, farm support programs are dominating farm bill discussions. Final decisions made will affect farmland values and farm viability, both critical components in efforts to protect farm and ranch land. The farm bill influences not only how farms stay in business and how farmland is protected but also how farmers and ranchers care for the land—the nation’s most critical natural resource.

Farm support programs exist to help farmers manage the unpredictable risks of agriculture. They are included in two of the 15 titles of the farm bill. Title I: Commodities Programs provides income support to growers of select commodities, including wheat, corn and feed grains, cotton, rice, oilseeds, peanuts, sugar and dairy. Title XII: Crop Insurance and Disaster Assistance protects farmers from risks associated with adverse weather, weather-related plant diseases and insect infestations.

Collectively known as the farm safety net, these titles contain programs that support farms from risks they cannot control and that also influence farmers’ economic and environmental behavior. Existing farm safety net programs can be inequitable and inefficient while causing market distortions that have negative impacts on soil and water resources.

In the 2012 Farm Bill, we seek two overarching goals to guide changes to farm safety net programs:

Provide Stronger Risk Management with Minimal Distortions

A farm safety net must enhance the long-term viability and competitiveness of American agriculture while being less costly to taxpayers. It must adjust quickly to changing economic forces rather than be set every five to 10 years. The commodities and crop insurance programs must be complementary, removing overlap and helping to manage broader long-term challenges while protecting farmers against yearly risks. Ultimately, a farm safety net must also be publicly acceptable by requiring that farmers experience real, objective losses before receiving payments.

In addition to being market-orientated and accountable to taxpayers, safety net programs should not determine where and how intensely crops are grown—instead, that should be influenced by environmental conditions, such as weather and soil type. Government-induced distortions have real consequences on land and water resources, sometimes encouraging production in areas that can’t be farmed in an environmentally sustainable manner. As a result, by reducing such distortions, the environmental consequences of farm support payments can be reduced.

Mitigate Unintended Environmental Consequences

Environmentally sensitive land—including highly erodible cropland, wetlands and vulnerable land that has never been farmed—are presently tied to payments through basic requirements known as “conservation compliance.” Although conservation compliance has been credited with tremendous benefits, it may be greatly diminished or lost if certain proposed farm bill changes occur. Instead, in this farm bill, Congress should maintain current conservation compliance provisions in order to ensure that farmers continue to protect sensitive lands, no matter how the farm support system is structured. This would not be a new requirement for farmers and would not necessitate additional funding. Rather, requiring conservation compliance will strengthen a comprehensive safety net by making sure taxpayer funding is serving to protect, not degrade, the nation’s soil and water.

Farm Viability and Environmental Health Through an Improved Safety Net

For more than a decade, many farmers have felt that government’s role in agriculture should be more limited. American Farmland Trust wholeheartedly agrees with this sentiment. The federal government’s current budget problems provide a golden opportunity to make the farm safety net more workable for farmers and acceptable to taxpayers, while contributing to the long-term health of the land resource that makes American agricultural productivity possible.

This is the first in a series of five stories outlining American Farmland Trust’s vision for the 2012 Farm Bill. For more information on our recommendations and positions, please visit www.farmbillfacts.org.

Lately, discussions in the nation’s capital have centered around the looming recommendations from the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, better known as the “Super Committee.” However crucial it may be to reduce the federal budget, the deficit is only one among the many challenges we face when it comes to our farms and food. A growing global population, rising incomes and climate change all intensify existing pressures on our soil and water resources and the viability of our farmers and ranchers.

New Policies for a Better Future

The nation faces many challenges, but agriculture can meet those challenges with the right set of farm policies. The 2012 Farm Bill provides the opportunity to transform farm and food policies so they better promote competition and prosperity for all farm sectors, conserve land and natural resources, and foster a more diverse and healthy food system.

Farmland Loss as a National Security Threat

Programs that protect working lands and safeguard soil, water and air quality will be ever more critical to our national security in the future. The United States has already been losing farmland at an alarming rate: more than an acre a minute for a total of more than 23 million acres over a recent 25-year period. The nation risks losing even more productive land if we fail to support conservation programs that support on-farm needs while ensuring the long-term quality and health of land and water resources.

Making Conservation Programs Smarter

At the same time, conservation programs need to be more strategic, applying support where it will help the most and streamlining existing programs to better engage farmers and ranchers and make conservation practices more accessible and effective.

A Needed Farm Safety Net

Farmers and ranchers need a safety net to help them manage the risks involved in agriculture. However, it must be a program that is responsive to markets, requires accountability and minimizes distortion. Major changes to the farm safety net must also address environmental issues, maintaining incentives to follow conservation compliance rather than eliminating or diminishing this successful program.

Protecting the Working Landscape

Preserving and protecting working lands is inextricably linked with the vitality of that land and the resiliency of the surrounding communities. Farm policy must capitalize on the strengths of the existing farm and food system while recognizing that changes are needed to support economic viability for farms in both the short- and long-term. Farm policy also must embrace the growing consumer connection to healthy and local food and provide a mix of programs that enhance farm profitability in this area. Government investment is also needed to help farmers and ranchers protect their land and pass it on to the next generation, and for programs that help beginning and young farmers enter the business and keep their operations viable.

American Farmland Trust’s Role

For more than 30 years, we have been working to protect America’s farm and ranch land, promote environmentally sound farming practices and ensure an economically sustainable future for farmers and ranchers. The farm bill presents a unique opportunity to bring these cornerstones of our mission to the forefront while influencing agricultural activity in the United States.

Even if the debate over farm and food policy moves forward at a faster pace than normal, we remain vigilant in seeing the process through. Whether the next farm bill is decided in the next few weeks or the next few months, there is still much work to be done in order to effectively transform farm and food policy.

About the Author: Jon Scholl is President of American Farmland Trust. Prior to AFT, he served as Counselor to the Administrator for Agriculture Policy at the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Jon and his family operate a corn and soybean farm in McLean County, Illinois.

A place where veterans and nature connect

A restored ranch in Washington state is providing a retreat for nature-loving veterans with disabilities. Thanks to many grants and funding opportunities, including the Wetlands Reserve Program, the protected land is safeguarding wildlife habitat while also providing a place for veterans to enjoy the outdoors.

Addressing farmland loss in the Pacific Northwest

Washington’s Puget Sound region, like many other parts of the country, continues to face farmland loss due to development pressures. The work of organizations, like PCC Farmland Trust, made possible through farm bill programs, is helping to protect farms and farmland in the region.

Trajectory of farm bill negotiations remains unknown

Federal farm policy helps shape what is grown; where, when and how the land is farmed; and who benefits from this production. The 2012 Farm Bill process is being greatly impacted by the federal budget deficit reduction negotiations, the results of which have yet to be revealed.

Peanuts and pecans go up in price

When you are reaching for pecans or peanut butter to make your favorite holiday dessert, you may notice a sharp increase in price. Peanut growers in Georgia and Texas, and pecan farmers across the Southeast, have experienced a severe drought this past summer. However, Virginia peanut farmers are experiencing a robust harvest this year.

Georgia schools to test farm-to-school program

Three counties in Georgia have enlisted their school systems to serve a minimum of 75 percent Georgia-grown food to their students for a full week. The program will run in the spring and will include guest chef and farmer presentations, while seeking to increase healthy eating habits for elementary school students.

Finding community in a farm and food hub

In Worcester, Pennsylvania, farm and food advocates are working to create a food hub through the Longview Center for Agriculture. The organization’s model—which is finding ways to connect members of the community to the land—offers farmers the opportunity to produce food on small plots of land.

Central New York meetings to address agriculture plans

Farmland protection plans are the topic of discussion at a series of upcoming meetings in central New York. The towns of Nelson, Cazenovia and Lincoln are working together to prepare Agriculture & Farmland Protection Plans, guided by steering committees of local farmers, officials and other landowners.

Study finds water quality in Chesapeake Bay is improving

A new study released from Johns Hopkins University study “efforts to reduce the flow of fertilizers, animal waste and other pollutants” is benefitting the health of the Bay.

Crafting a smarter farm policy

Three agricultural leaders—Jon Scholl, President of American Farmland Trust; Garry Neimeyer, President of the National Corn Growers Association; and Chandler Goule, Vice President of Government Relations for the National Farmers Union—propose that the current crop insurance program and general farm policy initiatives should be revamped “to craft a smarter farm policy for America that will be responsible to taxpayers and effective in helping farms and ranches remain viable and productive.”

Global food sovereignty

National Food Day was celebrated this past Monday, October 24^th for the first time. It brought together people across the nation to recognize healthy, affordable, and sustainable food. Farmers around the world are making efforts to provide for their communities, and this special day marks another way to underscore the importance of farm and ranch land to our food systems.

Vermont seeks aid for storm damage

An estimated more than 20,000 acres were damaged in Vermont due to Tropical Storm Irene. Representative Welch (D-VT) has suggested three different bills to aid in the restoration and repair of the land damaged and money lost by farmers.

New York acquires additional funding for farmland damage

In New York, there has been another successful awarding of federal funds to farms impacted by the intense weather patterns earlier this year. The funding will go toward emergency conservation and watershed programs. In addition, farmers impacted by the floods have found unique ways to raise money for their relief efforts.

Farmland protection in West Virginia

West Virginians interested in preserving agricultural land can now apply for a farmland protection grant. The funding goes toward the purchasing of conservation easements that limit non-agricultural use of the land. The deadline to apply is November 15^th.

Iowa hosts Agriculture for Life conference

Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa, is hosting a day-long conference on November 3^rd called “Agriculture for Life: Cultivating Diversity in Iowa Fields and Food Systems.” A panel of speakers will include a nutrition director, a previous Kraft Food brand manager and various other Iowans.

New geocodes provide easy farmers market access

The USDA just announced its Excel spreadsheet publication of street addresses and geocodes for over 6,200 farmers markets in the United States. Now you can access your favorite markets with the touch of a cell phone key.

Direct subsidies in the farm bill

On Thursday night, the Senate passed an amendment proposed by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) to prohibit subsidy payments to farmers with an average annual income exceeding $1 million. Though only proposed for the short-term, this decision highlights the continued discussion on what form subsidies may take in the next farm bill. To help people understand the different proposals, we recently engaged noted Ohio State University agricultural economist Dr. Carl Zulauf to analyze the features of the leading safety net proposals.

Farmland transformed into thriving natural sanctuary

A Minnesota farm couple converted their old plowed land into a grass-fed cow “oasis” while preserving native trees, shrubs and species. Their revised landscape also helps reduce soil erosion and water pollution, which in turn brings additional species to their property

Inmate-farmer relationships form

The Idaho potato harvest got a little extra help this year from the state’s Department of Correction. Inmates helped farmers out across the country, providing the farmers with greatly needed support and the inmates with a task in hand.

Kentucky increases local food access

In conjunction with the University of Kentucky and the Governors Office of Agriculture, a new online resource was created for Kentuckians to have easier access to locally produced food. The page also includes nutritional, economical and environmental resources.

Vacation on the Farm

Farms opening their doors to overnight guests are a rising trend across the United States right now, and one that has been popular in Europe for decades. They offer a very realistic look at farm life and one that you can often participate in, while also enjoying the countryside.

New England gains protected farmland

Warren, Maine gained two additions to their “Forever Farms” preservation program this past week: Hatchet Cove Farm and Oyster River Farm. Across the state line in Concord, New Hampshire, city council approved an easement for a 72-acre farm that will prevent future subdivisions and development from the property.

Preserve North Carolina Farmland

Want a grant to protect farmland in North Carolina? You are in luck! The N.C. Agriculture Development and Farmland Preservation Trust Fund are currently accepting grant applications up until December 15.

Food Day, October 24

To celebrate Food Day, on Monday, October 24, join NYU for a panel discussion of beginning farmers who live and work in New York state. If you are in the Washington, D.C., area, stop by the National Archives for their Food Day Open House. We will be there along with the USDA and ThinkFood Group.

The deficit reduction roadmap laid out by President Obama this week was a stark reminder of the far-ranging effects of our nation’s debt problems. In addressing the reality of the budget situation, we have long recognized that agriculture must join the ranks and contribute its fair share.

The Obama administration’s five-part plan for agriculture, however, is unreasonable. The proposal outlined a five-part plan with $33 billion in agricultural cuts for the next 10 years, which represents 13 percent of all non-health mandatory cuts identified by the plan. With agricultural programs accounting for only one percent of the federal budget, programs impacting our nation’s farmers and ranchers face disproportionate cuts.

Land and healthy soil are strategic resources critical to our nation’s ability to feed itself and secure a healthy future. Conservation programs for farmers and ranchers are vital to maintaining those resources. The president’s statements about the appropriateness of cutting conservation appear to ignore the realities on the ground. Farmers today face challenges in combating extreme weather events that are likely to become even more acute. Water quality concerns at the local, state and federal levels as well as growing consumer demand must be addressed. And land use pressures will only increase along with the need to feed, clothe and provide fuel for a population projected to reach 10 billion in 2050. In fact, in 2011, 50 percent of farmers applying to the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, 40 percent of farmers applying to the Grassland Reserve Program, and 33 percent of farmers applying to the Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program were turned away due to lack of funding. Current conditions warrant more, not less, emphasis on conservation.

We should note that over the past several years, conservation programs have already contributed more than $2 billion to the nation’s deficit reduction through appropriations cuts. While we acknowledge that everyone may need to sacrifice, the additional $2 billion in cuts proposed by the Obama administration are an unwelcome blow to the nation’s farmers who are already facing a double challenge to meet the needs of a growing population while they face more environmental and resource pressure.

With respect to changes proposed to the safety net, we have concerns about the nature and severity of the cuts being made to the crop insurance sector. Agricultural producers today rely on crop insurance in ways not thought about even a decade ago. Reducing the support given to producers as they buy up larger insurance coverage as proposed by the president is a short-sighted budgeting decision that will ultimately cost taxpayers more when insurance payments are replaced with disaster payments. We oppose that move, but with that said, it is clear that all sectors of the agricultural community may be faced with sacrifice. While we believe the amount and severity of the cuts being asked of crop insurance companies appear to be unwarranted, we concur with the president’s core belief that if cost efficiencies can be identified, then they must be pushed forward.

We have said for some time that taxpayers must receive accountability for the dollars they provide in support. Indeed, in the 2008 Farm Bill we worked with the National Corn Growers Association to create the first Title I program that required a loss before a producer received a check. The president’s move to eliminate direct payments reflects this new fiscal discipline and reality, which many farm organizations have already recognized. As such we are not surprised by this decision.

The president’s plan also calls for the creation of a permanent disaster program. With so few details, we at American Farmland Trust are hesitant to speculate about how that program would really work, but from our perspective a modern safety net program must follow some basic principles:

Responsive to Markets: Programs should reflect the current economic reality that farms face. Programs with arbitrary target prices set by Congress every five to ten years don’t do this and should be changed.

Accountability: Farmers should only receive assistance if there is an unavoidable loss. Trying to justify a program that that doesn’t meet this standard in the face of the fiscal problems our government faces is not a message we can succeed with.

Minimize distortion: Great care should be taken to design a safety net that protects farmers from extreme economic volatility but doesn’t encourage production in areas that can’t be farmed in an environmentally sustainable manner. The public will not stand for programs that don’t consider this concern.

We are struck by, and disappointed in, what was missing from the president’s agricultural plan. The proposal does not talk at all about critical investments needed to create jobs in rural America through the use of critical programs found in the chronically under-funded and fiscally vulnerable rural development portfolio administered by USDA.

Changes are inevitable. As we move forward, we must recognize both the challenges and opportunities of doing more with less. Although some of it may be necessary, we cannot simply look at cutting overlapping programs and downsizing bureaucratic staff. Rather, a look to the future will require answering more fundamental questions about what types of conservation programs best serve the interests of the public, what kind of safety net we think is appropriate for modern agriculture, what kind of rural development strategy is most effective, and how generous all of these programs can be.

About the Author: Jon Scholl is President of American Farmland Trust. Prior to AFT, he served as Counselor to the Administrator for Agriculture Policy at the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Jon and his family operate a corn and soybean farm in McLean County, Illinois.

This post was originally featured on AgriPulse.com as part of an on-going series of opinion pieces.

Since becoming President of the American Farmland Trust, I have been asked many times why an organization that promotes the protection and conservation of farm and ranch land cares about the safety net in the farm bill.

The answer to me is simple:  If you want to protect farmland, keep farmers farming.

Putting aside nutrition spending, the conservation, crop insurance and commodity titles of the farm bill have lots to do with keeping farmers in business. They affect farmland values and farm viability, both of which are critical components in our efforts to protect farm and ranch land. They influence how farms stay in business, how we protect farmland, and, how we care for our greatest natural resource.

Let’s consider commodity programs and crop insurance.  I know from the experience on our farm that the biggest problem we face is extreme volatility often caused by factors we can’t predict or control.  It might be a drought, or a dramatic increase in oil prices, or a political decision by a foreign government.  I believe the American people have it in their interest to help farmers – people who care the most and have in their personal interest to protect the land that sustains them – manage against these kinds of shocks in the market.

While the safety net is necessary, in this time of scarce budget resources we ought to be asking what is the right role for government in risk management, when should they get involved “on the farm”, and what should the principles be by which we help decide our agricultural policies and programs?

We believe that a good safety net is one which meets the needs of modern-day agriculture. I believe the current budget conditions have brought a bit of cohesion among agriculture groups —with a new level of recognition that it’s time to talk about changing programs that were designed for agriculture decades ago—and working toward programs that better serve both farmers and taxpayers.

Some today would eliminate all government support to save only crop insurance. We believe that such an aspiration is misplaced. Crop insurance works well now to provide producers protection during a planting season from a variety of risks. What crop insurance does not do well is deal with multi-year risks, risks that can be caused by things like long-term drought or a multi-year economic downturn. For such multi-year events we need the safety net needs to also include a pure government program.

It’s no secret that American Farmland Trust worked with the National Corn Growers Association in the 2008 Farm Bill to promote the Average Crop Revenue Program (ACRE). Few government programs work perfectly right out of the chute, and ACRE has been no exception.

Some producers have suggested that the current state-level revenue triggers for ACRE are too high. While we have heard these complaints, we also believe that a safety net that takes out too much risk from farming is no safety net at all. Rather, the program becomes a “government hammock.”

Farming is risky, if the government takes too much risk out of the business, producers’ decisions about what to plant become influenced more by government payments, guarantees and programs than they do by market forces, input prices, weather and soil type.

Those government-induced distortions have real consequences on our environment and create oversupply, fueling dramatic fluctuations in farm income. While the appropriate level of risk management can be found, the closer the level of support is to the farm level, and the more generous that level of support is, the greater the distortion.

AFT believes the workable model we should pursue is a partnership between private crop insurance that lets farmers manage farm level risk along with an ACRE-type program that serves to manage risks that broadly affect markets.

There are principles that should set a standard for risk management—and ACRE meets the standard. These principles tend to reduce the market and environmental distortion that our current government support may create.

The principles are:

Responsive to Markets: Programs should reflect the current economic reality that farms face.  Programs with arbitrary target prices set by Congress every five to ten years don’t do this and should be changed.

Accountability: Farmers should only receive assistance if there is an unavoidable loss.  Trying to justify a program that that doesn’t meet this standard in the face of the fiscal problems our government faces is not a message we can succeed with.

Minimize distortion: Great care should be taken to design a safety net that protects farmers from extreme economic volatility but doesn’t encourage production in areas that can’t be farmed in an environmentally sustainable manner.  The public will not stand for programs that don’t consider this concern.

We must find balance in risk management.  It is important that programs provide an adequate means for farmers to manage risk while not making it too safe to grow crops on land that shouldn’t be farmed. ACRE needs improvement, but the concept it promotes provides that balance.

For more than a decade, farmers have felt that government’s role in agriculture should be more limited in scope. I wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment. The federal government’s current budget problems give us a golden opportunity to make the farm safety net workable for farmers, more justifiable to taxpayers, and friendlier to the long term health and well being of the land resource that makes the wonderful productivity of American agriculture possible. That’s an outcome that a leader of an organization that seeks to promote conservation and farmland protection can get very excited about!

About the Author: Jon Scholl is President of American Farmland Trust. Prior to AFT, he served as Counselor to the Administrator for Agriculture Policy at the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Jon and his family operate a corn and soybean farm in McLean County, Illinois.

Note: John Stierna recently received the prestigious Norman A. Berg Conservation Legacy Award, given by the National Capital Chapter of the Soil and Water Conservation Society (SWCS) to individuals who have made outstanding contributions in advocating the conservation of soil, water and related natural resources, and whose service and accomplishments have made widely recognized contributions to the development of leading edge technologies that serve conservation at any geographic area, while working in the Washington, D.C., area.

Minnesota Farmstead 1995

As a boy, I always loved my family’s farm: the outdoors, the fields of hay and oats, the woods, and the gentle stream that flowed across the farm and emptied into Grave Lake in Minnesota’s Itasca County. The farm work, while strenuous, was still fun to a lad in his teens. We were fortunate. We never had the dust storms they had out in the west. Nor did we have very much visible sheet or rill erosion since many fields were planted to alfalfa or clover. Even the oats or wheat helped provide ground cover after sprouting—thus reducing the impact of rain. However, the manure from our dairy cattle clearly provided a risk of runoff that could have adverse effects on the stream and the lake. I started to get the feeling that we could do something more to protect the stream and lake, but I also felt that any effect from our one farm would be minimal since few other working farms were in our immediate area.

John Stierna (left) with Uncle Oilver Juntunen (right) 1995

After college and graduate school, I became engaged in private sector research and then water policy for the National Water Commission – work that me closer to policy aspects of both water quality and water quantity. When I joined the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) I quickly realized that the collective impact of millions of farms on the environment would be substantial over the longer term, yet any adoption of conservation practices would be on a much more localized basis—farm by farm. A real need existed to have tools to influence private landusers to adopt measures that could protect the land and waters on site and those beyond the farm boundaries. The economic evaluations often showed the need for some incentives to offset costs to help producers install suitable conservation systems.

Over the years, I was able to become more and more engaged in policy analysis that has helped bring forward some of the conservation policies and programs to make that happen. From early work on the Resources Conservation Act activity when Norm Berg was Chief of the old SCS, to later work on the Conservation Reserve Program, the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, and the Conservation Security Program and the conservation title of several Farm Bills— these efforts all added to the suite of programs that can assist farmers and ranchers in addressing resource concerns on their farms and better protect the landscape.

Wow. This was a far cry different than the ideas I had as a lad on the farm. But sometimes it takes many years to evolve thought and concerns into workable policies and programs. Persistence over time is something that both Norm Berg and I have shared during our careers. Norm, who played a critical role in the beginning of agricultural conservation in the United States, was a committed conservationist throughout his life. I feel honored to have worked with such a distinguished professional as Norm.

About the Author: Stierna has more than 45 years of experience in natural resources and agriculture as an economist and policy analyst in both the public and private sectors. He has provided significant leadership for economic analysis, policy formation and legislative analysis during his career with USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service in Washington, D.C., and he now serves as a natural resource policy consultant for American Farmland Trust

Implications for Agriculture and the 2012 Farm Bill

Jon Scholl, president of American Farmland Trust, discussed the importance of the 2012 Farm Bill and the changes looming because of debt reduction measures. Scholl pointed out that “our country must now make big decisions about the nature of government and how it will spend our money, and agriculture and food policy will be no exception to that rule.”

Increased Opportunities for Rural Communities

The While House recently announced several initiatives to increase jobs in rural communities. The initiatives touch upon a broad range of issues, including efforts to increase job search accessibility and additional support for small businesses.

Farmers Markets: Farm Fresh Food and Jobs

Farmers markets aren’t just great places to purchase farm-fresh produce, they are also helping our local economies and increasing jobs. A report by the Union of Concerned Scientists argues that “farmers markets and—more significantly—‘the local and regional food systems behind them’ can be a significant source of job growth with minimal investment.”

Support your farmers market by voting in America’s Favorite Farmers Market™ contest.

Nation’s Oldest Family Farm Still for Sale but Still in Use

Last year, the Tuttle family announced that they were putting their 378-year old farm up for sale. The New Hampshire farm was the longest-running family-farm in the nation. While the farm is still on the market, new young farmers are keeping it growing strong through a non-profit for farm business incubation.

North Carolina Continues to Protect Agricultural Land

Union County, North Carolina, is the fastest growing county in the state, so news that close to 1,000 acres of agricultural land are being protected there comes as a relief to the community. The Catawba Lands Conservancy, the group protecting the farmland, hopes to reach its goal of protecting 50,000 acres by 2030.