The The New York Times and Washington Post are getting pushback for recent editorials defending large-scale factory farms.

Some environmental groups argued the columns made one critical assumption, that there is no other option.

Peter Lehner, sustainable food and farming program managing attorney for the advocacy group Earthjustice, noted while the Times and Post's editorials claim factory farms are needed to keep up with the demand for meat products, industrial agriculture does not feed the world. Rather, he said, It feeds itself, perpetuating a cycle of overproduction and environmental degradation.

He added U.S. taxpayers foot the bill, sending tens of billions of dollars a year to large corporations.

"There are huge numbers of subsidies to the livestock industry," Lehner pointed out. "The hamburger that you pay (for) is only a fraction of the true cost, as reflected by what taxpayers pay."

It is important in a state like Utah, where people eat the third-highest number of burgers in the country and about eight in 10 farms are family owned. The New York Times editorial said the crop yields of small farms cannot meet the world's daily needs. And the Washington Post editorial urged readers to save the planet by not eating free-range beef. It said moving livestock off pastures and into high-density operations conserves valuable farmland.

Lehner insisted a better way to make more farmland available is to stop growing inefficient crops. For example, it takes 15 pounds of grain to produce one pound of beef. In Utah alone, 27,000 acres were used to harvest grain in 2023.

"We use almost 60 million acres, an area the size of Indiana and Illinois combined, to produce biofuel," Lehner explained. "Where we could produce the same amount of energy with a couple hundred thousand acres of solar panels."

Lehner worries doubling down on industrial agriculture, which mostly produces commodity crops like corn, soy and sugar, for highly processed foods, ignores other meaningful reforms like reducing waste. He pointed out one-third of all food produced in the U.S. ends up in landfills.

"Let's try to not have taxpayer subsidies for inefficient products," Lehner urged. "Ensure that we have a food system that produces nutritious food, not one that gets us sick. And we spend a trillion dollars a year in our health care system because of diet-related disease."


get more stories like this via email

A bill in the Idaho Legislature would lower restrictions for allowing chickens in residential areas.

The impetus for the legislation from Sen. Tammy Nichols, R-Middleton, is in part high prices and the shortage of eggs at the grocery store. Senate Bill 1026 would ensure that homeowners associations could not bar residents from raising up to four chickens per one-fifth of an acre.

"Most people eat more than four chickens a year," said Ariel Agenbroad, who focuses on food systems and small farms at the University of Idaho Extension, "but for egg laying, if a chicken is laying an egg every other day, that can be a significant number of eggs that can be used by that family or that household."

While raising chickens could offset egg costs in the long run, Agenbroad notes there can be substantial upfront costs to the birds. Critics of the bill have said the chickens could potentially disrupt neighbors. Other concerns include noise, odor and the spread of diseases such as salmonella, to name a few. The legislation has passed out of the Senate and moved on to the House.

Agenbroad said people aren't going to get rich raising a small number of chickens in their backyards.

"Policies like this can have a really positive impact on people's ability to be self-sustaining," she said, "but I don't see it having a lot of impact on small business, like entrepreneurship or our farm business development, because the numbers are so small."

Agenbroad said it could pique someone's interest in farming, however. And beyond their value as farm animals, she said as a former chicken owner herself, the entertainment value alone is worth it.


get more stories like this via email

In Pennsylvania, a nonprofit striving to secure the future of small dairy farms is hoping its federal funding won't be frozen much longer.

Agriculture drives the state's $83 billion economy, with more than 50,000 farms. The Dairy Grazing Alliance includes an apprenticeship program to connect mentors and apprentices across 16 states. It supports dairy farmers using managed grazing to restore land, produce quality milk and stay profitable.

Jessica Matthews, apprenticeship manager for the alliance, said Pennsylvania currently has nine apprentices and 12 mentors.

"I read a statistic that we've lost 95% of small dairy farms since the '70s," Matthews noted. "The Dairy Grazing Apprenticeship was originally formed to train the next generation of dairy farmers, because small farm owners were retiring without an identified successor."

Matthews said the program runs on 98% federal grant funding, with some climate-smart funds potentially tied to the Inflation Reduction Act. The money is on hold as they await guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Sustainable Ag Coalition, and producer payments have been paused until further notice.

The Trump administration tariffs on goods from China and Mexico are also expected to have an effect on farming in the state. Matthews pointed out one reason dairy farming is an expensive part of the ag industry in Pennsylvania is farmers are buying their supplies at market cost.

"Everything from Ajax for the milk house to iodine for teat dips, to vaccinations, all of that is bought at market costs at the farm," Matthews stressed. "They're making milk, and the milk is being sold at a wholesale cost per hundredweight."

She underscored it is hard to balance the high expenses with what farmers make from the milk when selling to a co-op. She added most milk stays in the country but higher tariffs on imported production supplies will raise farmers' input costs, even as their output remains the same.


get more stories like this via email

It looks like at least some Indiana farmers will be getting the federal dollars they have been counting on for farm conservation and soil health.

The Inflation Reduction Act included almost $20 million in funding for popular initiatives like the Environmental Quality Incentives Program and the Conservation Stewardship Program. More than 1,100 Indiana farms are part of the programs to help fight climate change.

On Friday, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced it would release funds for farmers who already have contracts.

Russell Taylor, vice president of Live Earth Products, which makes natural soil amendment products, said the funding freeze has forced the U.S. Senate to pivot on some big issues still to be resolved.

"Some of these freezes for funding, those items are really causing things that should have been working or in the works to be halted, such as the Farm Bill," Taylor explained. "Some of these things are just going to be delayed a little bit further out in the year but there still should be optimistic progress for things like getting a Farm Bill passed."

In releasing the funds, Ag Secretary Brooke Rollins blamed the delay on the Biden administration, saying it "rushed out" money which was supposed to be spent over multiple years. She stated her agency is reviewing whether any of the funding so far has gone to programs which, in Rollins' words, "had nothing to do with agriculture."

Taylor cautioned farmers should also ensure they have what they need now to plant their crops should Trump's threats to impose tariffs become reality. And no matter the future of federal farm assistance, he said there are some steps farmers can take to ensure their soil health.

"In those regards to climate change, there are some things that you should be planning as far as the long game, and that is, building your soil organic matter," Taylor emphasized. "That's something that a farmer can address every year after year, and have it be useful for them to reduce their inputs and make a better utilization of those inputs."

He noted soil organic matter is a farmer's reservoir for storing water and nutrients, and it can always be improved regardless of current federal policies. U.S. Department of Agriculture research has found farms can boost their soil health within 10 years by using conservation practices.


get more stories like this via email