Reading Time: 8 minutes

From the docks of the Port of Santos, a 58-terminal complex covering an area the size of 1,500 American football fields, ships loaded with soybeans prepare to set sail for China. 

Less than 45 miles from São Paulo, the port services nearly a quarter of Brazil’s soybean exports. For decades, U.S. agribusiness giants like Archer Daniels Midland, Bunge and Cargill have operated facilities at the port. 

Today, they share space with COFCO International, China’s state-owned food conglomerate, which has invested around $285 million in recent years. The expansion will make it the port’s largest dry bulk terminal.

And Santos isn’t alone. In the west, the Port of Chancay is rising on Peru’s central coast.

COSCO Shipping, a state-owned Chinese company, is investing at least $3.5 billion to construct 15 berths, logistics facilities and a 1.1-mile tunnel, enabling cargo to be channeled directly from the port to nearby highways.

Once fully operational, Chancay will function as a regional redistribution hub for exports from Peru, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador and Colombia: from copper and lithium to soybeans and other agricultural products. Upon completion around 2035, it is expected to become the region’s third-largest port.

These and other recent investments across the region have positioned China to source more agricultural products from Latin America as it pivots away from U.S. farmers in response to President Trump’s higher tariffs. 

China first began that pivot in 2018, when Trump’s first-term tariff hikes ignited a global trade war. But since returning to office, the president has renewed that strategy, and China’s investments signal a generational shift that may not reverse if and when the trade war subsides. 

“What are the signs that China’s here to stay (in Latin America)? Really, the infrastructure,” said Henry Ziemer, an associate fellow with the Americas program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a U.S. nonprofit policy research organization that reports 23 ports across Latin America have some degree of Chinese investment.  

“Ports, railways, roads, bridges, metro lines, energy, power plants are probably the best signs that China has a long-term commitment … These are long-term projects.”

Daniel Munch, an economist with the American Farm Bureau Federation, said that when a country gains control over ports that make trade faster, cheaper and more reliable, such as the Port of Chancay, trade flows tend to “lock in.” Reversing that trend, he warned, would require the United States to narrow its efficiency gap, noting that none of its container ports rank among the world’s top 50.

“It could entrench patterns,” Munch said.

This is bad news for American farmers, particularly soybean growers. 

Soybeans are a cornerstone of American agriculture, particularly in the Midwest. Nationwide, more than 270,000 farms grow the crop, according to the latest Census of Agriculture. In Illinois, nearly half of all farms depend on soybean production, and in Iowa and Minnesota, about four in 10 do.

In 2024, more than 40% of U.S. soybean production was exported, with about half going to China.

But tensions between the United States and China have risen this year – Trump has increased tariffs and recently threatened a 157% tax on all Chinese imports, while China responded by reducing U.S. soybean imports to near zero for six months. 

A trade deal announced in November ends the suspension and includes commitments for China to buy 12 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans in the final two months of 2025 and at least 25 million metric tons annually through 2028, according to Purdue University and farmdoc Daily. 

Brazil has stepped in as China’s biggest supplier of soybeans, which are used to feed livestock to support protein demand. 

China has become one of the two main export markets for at least 10 nations, most of them in South America, according to the International Trade Outlook for Latin America and the Caribbean 2023 report by the U.N. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC).

From 2010 to 2022, the region accounted for nearly one-third of China’s food imports. Brazil alone supplied about 21% of those imports over the same period.

“In recent years, there has been significant growth in telecommunications projects and across all areas of transportation – including airports, ports, roads, railways, and subways – as well as in sanitation and urban mobility. These sectors account for nearly 60% of the total number of projects,” said José Manuel Salazar-Xirinachs, executive secretary of ECLAC, who highlighted the scale of China’s involvement during the 2024 International Seminar on Contemporary China Studies in Costa Rica.

China has viewed Brazil as a strategic partner for several years, primarily because of its soybean supply, and has responded with infrastructure investments, according to Fernando Bastiani, a researcher with ESALQ-LOG, the Group of Research and Extension in Agroindustrial Logistics at the University of São Paulo.

“Today, COFCO has direct access to farmers, purchases soybeans and oversees the entire commercialization chain, including storage and transport to China,” Bastiani said. “In recent years, (COFCO) has also realized it needs to control logistics systems and infrastructure, because that’s a key part.”

In Brazil, Bastiani explained, logistics costs account for 20% to 25% of the final soybean price, mainly due to the long distances between farms and ports and the high cost of trucking. “China understood that by investing in infrastructure, it could help make Brazil more competitive,” he said.

In May, the two countries signed new agreements to deepen their agricultural trade ties, granting Brazil authorization to export meat and ethanol byproducts. 

“Amid the changing and turbulent international landscape, China and Brazil should remain committed to the original aspiration of contributing to human progress and global development,” said Chinese President Xi Jinping.

China’s pullback squeezes US port volumes  

While Latin America has seen growth, many U.S. ports have experienced a significant decline in business.

At the New Orleans District — a dominant grain corridor — soybean exports grew by less than 3% between September 2024 and September 2025, according to the most recent data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics at the U.S. Department of Transportation. Shipments through the Los Angeles District fell almost 15%, while the steepest drop came in the Seattle District, where exports plunged 81%.

Nearly half of all U.S. corn, soybean and wheat exports move through the Mississippi River system, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation’s Market Intel report.

This major inland trade artery connects the Midwest’s farming regions to the Gulf of Mexico, carrying an average of 65 million metric tons annually of bulk agricultural products by barge over the past five years to export terminals near New Orleans, where shipments depart for international markets.

“The facilities that purchase soybeans from farmers extend to our freight railroads, where they don’t have as much volume that they’ve been moving, at least for soybeans,” said Mike Steenhoek, executive director of the Soy Transportation Coalition. 

Steenhoek noted that corn exports have remained strong, which has helped sustain some port activity — but it hasn’t solved the underlying problem: “China imports more U.S. soybeans than all of our other international customers combined,” he said.

At the Port of Los Angeles, the largest container port in the Western Hemisphere, agricultural exports have also weakened as trade with China cools.

“Exports in general have been very soft, and we attributed it to the retaliatory tariffs that have been put in place by China,” said Gene Seroka, executive director of the Port of Los Angeles. “Our single biggest export sector is agriculture … of that, soybeans are the number one export commodity.”

Before the first tariffs were introduced in 2018, China accounted for about 60% of the port’s business. Today, it’s closer to 40% and falling, as trade flows and sourcing shift toward countries such as Vietnam, Indonesia and Thailand. 

“We’ve been very aggressive in finding cargo out of other countries,” Seroka said. “But there is no doubt in my mind that we are concerned every day that these policies could impact the amount of cargo that comes to Los Angeles.”

The decrease in exports is not just a hit to farmers, but also to port workers; each four containers handled at the port generates one job, according to Seroka.

“In Southern California, one in nine people has a job related to this port,” said Seroka, referring to dockworkers, truck drivers, brokers and warehouse employees. “It truly is a conversation of national significance.”

U.S. port traffic isn’t poised for a quick rebound despite a recent trade agreement that ends China’s suspension of U.S. soybean imports. After six months of near-zero shipments due to retaliatory trade measures, Beijing in November agreed to purchase 12 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans in the final two months of 2025 and to commit to annual purchases of at least 25 million tons through 2028.

A recent analysis from Purdue University’s Center for Commercial Agriculture and farmdoc Daily said the announcement offered some relief to U.S. farmers at the tail end of harvest, but overall exports to China this year are still on track to be the weakest since 2018, when trade tensions during the first Trump administration slashed volumes to 8 million tons.

“It is very difficult to take a market (China) of over a billion people and replace that,” said John Bartman, a soybean farmer from Marengo, Illinois.

By October, Brazil had exported a record 79 million metric tons of soybeans to China, nearly 80% of its total soybean shipments during the period, according to a farmdoc Daily analysis of data from Brazil’s Foreign Trade Secretariat. Brazil’s total soybean exports reached about 100 million tons between January and October, already surpassing the country’s full-year total for 2024, which was just under 99 million tons.

“U.S. soybean farmers are standing at a trade and financial precipice,” Caleb Ragland, president of the American Soybean Association, wrote in a statement. 

US trade strategy remains unsettled as China moves ahead

While China builds long-term infrastructure to secure its supply chains, Washington is still struggling to define its trade strategy and to contain the political fallout of renewed tariffs.

In mid-September, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives moved to block Congress from influencing Trump’s tariff policy, even as Senate Democrats prepared to force votes challenging his trade war, The New York Times reported. The maneuver effectively stripped lawmakers of the ability to advance measures to lift tariffs until March 31, 2026, extending a prohibition first imposed in the spring to spare members from taking a politically difficult vote.

“Tariffs not only cause farmers to pay more for their inputs, but they have also seen tariffs reduce markets for U.S. farm products,” said U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, during an October session.

If the November soybean agreement between Trump and the Chinese president holds, Beijing’s purchases would still fall short of recent norms. Even if China buys at least 25 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans annually over the next three years, that volume would remain about 14% below the five-year average shipped to China from 2020 to 2024, according to an analysis from Purdue University’s Center for Commercial Agriculture and farmdoc Daily.

Some purchases have started rolling in. But April Hemmes, an Iowa soybean farmer who has promoted increased trade with China, said the agreement would be difficult to fulfill, noting that delivering 12 million metric tons of soybeans by early next year is “not very realistic.”  

As China establishes new trade routes across Latin America, every new port or shipping lane makes a future recovery for U.S. farmers more challenging.

Despite the tensions, Hemmes still views China as an essential market. 

“I don’t think our relationship with China has been damaged,” the Iowa soybean farmer said. “China is a low-cost buyer and will need soybeans from the U.S. for a long time. But we will never be their number one source.”

For her, the changing politics and policies have made the United States an “unreliable trading partner.”

“The only way that we become their top choice would be if our soybeans were far cheaper than South America’s.”

This story is a product of the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an independent reporting network based at the University of Missouri in partnership with Report for America, with major funding from the Walton Family Foundation.

Wisconsin Watch is a member of the Ag & Water Desk network. Sign up for our newsletters to get our news straight to your inbox.

China is investing billions in Latin America, potentially sidelining US farmers for decades to come is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

This year was an unusual one for most farmers. Across the central U.S., producers faced tight margins, ever-changing global trade conditions and a shake up of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and many of its programs.

The post As 2025 ends, farmers are still reeling from the shake up of markets and federal programs appeared first on WPR.

Reading Time: 8 minutes

Tyler Stafslien is a fourth-generation farmer who’s worked his family’s land in central North Dakota for about 20 years. Roughly half of his 2,500 acres is typically dedicated to soybeans, a major crop in the state and in the Mississippi River Basin. But growing soybeans has become less profitable over the last decade as input costs rose and the Trump administration’s tariff negotiations in 2018 and 2025 destabilized trade and strained farmers’ incomes. 

This year, wary of the precarious export market, Stafslien decreased his soybean acres by half.

“We’ve been experiencing in ag, the last couple of years, a downturn in commodity prices, a lot of that related to just a large supply across the globe of major commodities, but then you add this trade war on top of it, and it’s like the icing on the cake,” Stafslien said.

The administration this month announced a $12 billion fund for one-time payments to row crop farmers to offset a portion of their inflation- and trade-related losses in the 2025 crop year.

Farmers were asking for the federal relief funds and are happy the administration is finally answering, said Stafslien. But he’s still facing uncertainty. The administration has yet to announce how much money per acre eligible growers will be receiving, and the funds will not be distributed until February, further stressing farmers like him with large debt and growing interest.

“Payments announced this week must be followed by additional and expedient efforts to keep farmers on the land and to improve the farm safety net, leaving annual bailouts as cautionary historical context rather than ongoing policy,” David Howard, policy development director of the National Young Farmers Coalition, wrote in a statement earlier in December. 

Farmers and farming associations are looking for longer-term solutions: to diversify trade partners and increase domestic uses for soybeans as export revenues become less certain. Some, like Stafslien, are shifting to other crops, like corn and wheat.

Soybeans are the largest agricultural export in the U.S. The legume covers more than 81 million acres — or 10% — of all U.S. farmland, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported in September, and more than 40% of the nation’s soybeans are exported to other countries. 

U.S. farmers received $24.5 billion from soybean exports in 2024, with Chinese purchases accounting for $12.6 billion – roughly twice the amount purchased by the next five largest export partners combined, according to USDA data.

But this year, China stopped purchasing U.S. soybeans during tariff negotiations with the Trump administration, instead falling back on its relationships with Brazil and other South American countries to meet its soybean needs. For U.S. soybean farmers, this growing season ends with low prices, unsold harvests, big financial losses and uncertainty going into the next season despite a tentative new deal with China. 

“We learned firsthand that being heavily reliant on China for export sales is only good when things are good,” said Andrew Muhammad, University of Tennessee professor of agricultural and resource economics.

How did we get here?

Soybeans brought by traders and missionaries from Asia first took root in North America in small quantities in the 1700s, but the USDA did not begin tracking soybeans as a crop until the early 1920s. 

Around that time, the USDA, land grant university extension agents and farm groups started to promote the soybean to farmers as a soil-fertilizing crop that yielded high-protein meal for animal feed, oil and even meat replacements for human consumption. The Mississippi River Basin’s flat plains and intermittent rain proved to be ideal conditions for the crop. 

Soybeans gained a foothold on U.S. farms in “fits and starts” over several decades, author Matthew Roth writes in his book, “Magic Bean: The Rise of Soy in America,” but really took off  as a cash crop after World War I. Its success was later buoyed by the Agricultural Adjustment Act that allowed soy plantings while restricting other commodities as a way to stabilize crop prices during the Great Depression, policies limiting foreign oils, and the growing need for animal feed and oil during World War II, according to Roth.

The crop helped diversify farming in the South and Midwest. By the 1960s, Roth writes, “the soybean had insinuated itself thoroughly into the American diet,” but indirectly – as feed for the country’s livestock, oils for salads and derivatives in processed foods.

At the same time, soybeans proved to be a desirable product for international trade partners. In 1989, U.S. soybean exports totaled around $4 billion, about a fifth of which went to Japan. The Freedom to Farm Act in 1996 allowed farmers to plant single-crop fields, and with rising export demand from China starting in the early 1990s, many farmers chose to plant soybeans, Roth wrote.

In 2001, China joined the World Trade Organization and gained better access to globalized trade with the organization’s members, including the U.S., according to Muhammad and the Council on Foreign Relations. From there, growth in China’s tourism economy and middle class spurred increased demand for meat protein, Muhammad said, heightening the country’s need for animal feed in the form of U.S. soybeans. 

By 2000, the crop was planted on more than 74 million U.S. acres, according to the National Agricultural Statistics Service.

“Over time, China has grown, and it seems to be the case that our total export sales have grown with our exports to China,” Muhammad explained. “They’ve sort of driven that rise over the last two decades.”

Brazil’s soybean industry has competed with American exports since the 1970s, but since 2017 has consistently exported more than the U.S. 

When Trump first upped tariffs on Chinese goods in 2018, China retaliated, Muhammad said, and began investing more heavily in purchases and transportation infrastructure in Brazil. The turn toward Brazil as a primary provider during trade negotiations in 2025 “represents a return on that investment (for China),” he said.

Farmers in the U.S. are reckoning with the fallout. 

Farming pains and changing plans

Justin Sherlock farms 2,400 acres of corn and soybeans in eastern North Dakota. His dad started farming in the early 2000s and he took over the farm in 2012.

“The last, you know, 13 years that I’ve been going, the last decade, has been pretty tough to really try and get established,” he said. 

For Sherlock, China coming to market very late in the 2025 harvest season was a blow to profits. Nearly one-quarter of the state’s agricultural exports hinge on soybeans, with China serving as the largest market for U.S. grain.

Sherlock was able to sell most of his soybean crop early to North Dakota soybean elevators — facilities that store the beans — which then found domestic processors in Nebraska and Kansas to sell to. But those domestic markets were also absorbing the supply that would typically be exported to China, so prices — around $8.65 per bushel — dropped significantly below Sherlock’s cost of production. He said he will lose “several hundred thousands of dollars” this year, on top of similar losses last year. 

“We just have to find a way to hopefully make it to next year,” he said. “That’s the struggle right now for a lot of producers.” 

Especially for young or beginning producers, said Sherlock, farmers will likely be having “tough financial discussions with their bankers and lenders.” Or, worst case scenario, these losses could mean losing their farms.

“You cannot have a successful agriculture industry in North Dakota without trade,” he said. “It’s so important that we fix these trade relationships and get back to doing business with other countries.” 

Trade uncertainty was keenly felt by soybean farmers in several Mississippi River Basin states, many of which lead the nation in soybean production and exports. 

Illinois accounts for 16% of the country’s total soybean exports, followed by Iowa with 13%, according to the most recent data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Economic Research Service. North Dakota comprises 5% of national exports.

Even in states that aren’t among the country’s top producers, soybeans can make up a significant portion of the state farm economy. Tennessee ranks 16th in the nation for soybean exports, for example, but soybeans were the highest-ranked agricultural commodity produced in the state in 2023, bringing in more than $990 million in cash receipts. In 2025, soybeans covered nearly 1.5 million acres of Tennessee farmland – the most of any crop in the state – according to the University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture.

New crush facilities that separate the beans into oil and meal are under construction in North Dakota, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas and Ohio — states that previously shipped soybeans to other countries to be processed.

The USDA’s Economic Research Service reported in July that more soybeans are being processed domestically. Most of the soybeans that stay in the U.S. are crushed into oil and meal, and a majority of that meal goes toward feeding livestock. The oil is used in biofuels, for industrial uses, and in food. New crush facilities that separate the beans into oil and meal are under construction in North Dakota, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas and Ohio — states that previously shipped soybeans to other countries to be processed. Biofuel has increased domestic demand for soybeans — and crush facilities — since around 2010, providing an alternative for farmers facing lower demand from traditional export partners.

April Hemmes, a fourth-generation farmer in north-central Iowa, said in September that she is fortunate to have nearby options for her beans: There is an ethanol plant and a crush facility that makes soybean meal, biodiesel and food-grade oil, about 10 miles away from her farm. Farmers who don’t have those options will have a harder time adapting to changing export markets, she wrote in an email.

The lack of money in farmers’ pockets is trickling down to other sectors in farming communities, too, said John Bartman, a regenerative farmer working about 850 acres in northern Illinois. He pointed to farm equipment dealers and factories in Illinois and Iowa that are shuttering well-paying jobs because business has been so slow. 

“So it’s more than just farmers who have been affected by this,” Bartman said. 

What comes next? 

In October, China and the U.S. hammered out a trade agreement. China agreed to purchase at least 12 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans by the end of the year, according to the White House, and will purchase at least 25 million metric tons each year through 2028. USDA export sales data from Oct. 2 through Dec. 8 shows China made soybean purchases from the U.S. totaling about 2.8 million metric tons.

For comparison, China purchased an annual average of 29 million metric tons of soybeans from the United States between 2020 and 2024, according to The Center for Strategic and International Studies, an international public policy think tank.

The deal “really isn’t much of a trade deal at all,” Bartman said.

“We’ve just gone through this tariff war, which we’re still going through right now, and what did we get out of it? China agreed to buy less soybeans than what we had last year, and we as farmers have suffered the collateral damage from this,” Bartman said.

With low trade prices and higher input costs, he warned, “we have not improved our economic situation for next year.”

Bartman is among farmers who are promoting investment in domestic uses for soybeans, including biofuels and plastics, though he acknowledges that a market the size of China’s will be “very difficult” to replace.

Muhammad said the turbulence in the soybean exports market shows that disruption of stable trade policy has consequences, which can hurt some sectors more than others.

The U.S. agriculture sector is often a political target in trade disputes, he said, because other countries understand the agricultural community’s significance in U.S. politics.

“It’s not a major export in the context of all exports, but it’s a politically viable community, and it carries a lot of heft in the context of trade agreements and trade policy because of the national security nature of food,” Muhammad said.

Farmers who are eligible for the Trump administration’s $12 billion Farmer Bridge Assistance program should expect the USDA to announce payment rates for crops the week of Dec. 22, according to the department. Payments are limited to up to $155,000 per person or legal entity.

The program appears similar to a $10 billion aid package offered to farmers impacted by trade retaliation in 2018. Those subsidies did not cover all of farmers’ losses. 

For many farmers like Sherlock, these subsidies are a necessity for short-term survival. He said any farming subsidies he receives go straight to paying his bills and paying off loans.

“There will be a lot of producers, especially young, beginning producers, who won’t be able to make it and farm next year if we don’t do something to help them pay their bills from this year,” he said.

Even established producers are worried. Stafslien works land that’s been in his family since 1912, but the tough years are piling up. 

“This is my future. This is my retirement. I don’t have a 401k plan. I have a farm,” said Stafslien, who lives on the farm with his wife, Shannon, and their two kids. “If I have to keep burning through this equity, that’s very, very scary for my future and my family’s future.”

This story is a product of the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an independent reporting network based at the University of Missouri in partnership with Report for America, with major funding from the Walton Family Foundation.

Wisconsin Watch is a member of the Ag & Water Desk network. Sign up for our newsletters to get our news straight to your inbox.

Soybeans have been a top US ag export for decades. What happens when the top buyer stops buying? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The COVID-19 pandemic drove Scott Theis and his teenage son Ayden to take a leap and form the band Power Take Off.

The post How father-son relationship and rural roots shaped this Madison-area rock band appeared first on WPR.

Rob-n-Cin farms has expanded to become a concentrated animal feeding operation. Environmental groups and local residents have filed a petition against the DNR's decision to grant the farm a wastewater discharge permit. (Photo by Darren Hauck/Getty Images)

Two environmental groups filed a petition late last month challenging the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources’ decision to grant a permit allowing a West Bend dairy farm to operate as a concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO). 

The dairy, Rob-n-Cin Farms, has been operating as a CAFO for several years without a permit. Under state law, CAFOs are required to obtain Wisconsin Pollution Discharge Elimination System (WPDES) permits, which regulate the pollution industrial activities such as factory farms are allowed to discharge into local waterways. 

CAFOs are industrial farming facilities with more than 1,000 animal units — one animal unit is equivalent to a 1,000-pound cow. Rob-n-Cin plans to expand its herd from 1,300 cows to 2,000. After expanding, the herd will produce more than 18 million gallons of manure every year which the farm plans to  spread on fields in Ozaukee and Washington counties. 

In 2023, the DNR investigated the farm for operating as an unpermitted CAFO and issued a notice of noncompliance against the farm. 

Since then, Rob-n-Cin has been going through the process to obtain a permit, drawing complaints from local residents and community groups. Those complaints include the farm’s failure to list two satellite locations where it plans to spread manure in its permit application, the lack of sanctions on the farm for operating unpermitted and the effect on local groundwater. 

Residents are worried about the farm’s effects on the Milwaukee River watershed and the Cedarburg Bog, which is protected as a state natural area and national natural landmark. 

On Nov. 26, the environmental-focused law firm Midwest Environmental Advocates filed a petition for a contested case review of the DNR’s permit approval on behalf of Milwaukee Riverkeeper and area residents. The residents include a nearby organic farm and neighbors of Rob-n-Cin. 

The petition alleges that the DNR has not proven the expansion will comply with the state’s groundwater quality standards, particularly the limits for phosphorus and nitrates. The permit includes statements that the farm will follow statewide best practices for manure spreading but the petition argues that’s not enough and the DNR should have done more to prove the groundwater will be protected.

“DNR’s issuance of a permit relying solely on standard practices that are not intended to ensure compliance with groundwater quality standards is unreasonable,” the petition states. “This is particularly true in an area of high susceptibility where many members of the public raised credible concerns of groundwater contamination and examples of excessive nitrate levels. Rob-n-Cin needed to demonstrate, and DNR needed to find, that issuance of a permit would not lead to continued or widespread groundwater contamination in excess of established standards. Simply relying on default nutrient management practices without performing analysis or investigation was unreasonable.” 

The petition also argues the DNR should require monitoring of the local groundwater after the expansion is complete, stating that state regulators can’t know if the farm is violating its standards if it isn’t tracking how the expansion affects the groundwater. 

And the petition states that the DNR did not complete a sufficient environmental review before approving the permit. 

“DNR conducted no substantive evaluation of environmental or socioeconomic impacts of the WPDES permit, including effects on groundwater, Cedar Creek, Mole Creek (a Class II trout stream), the Milwaukee River watershed, which is subject to an EPA-approved [Total Maximum Daily Load] for nutrients and sediment, or the Cedarburg Bog,” the petition states. 

In a news release, MEA attorney Adam Voskuil said the DNR’s authority requires it to prove that the expansion won’t violate state water standards and it has failed to do so. 

“State law is clear that the DNR is required to affirmatively determine — not merely assume — that Rob-n-Cin’s manure-spreading plan will not violate groundwater quality standards. Without off-site groundwater monitoring, there’s simply no way to obtain the data necessary to make that determination,” Voskuil said.

If the petition for a contested case hearing is granted, a hearing on the permit approval will be held by an administrative law judge. That decision would be appealable to the state circuit court system.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Reading Time: 4 minutes

The agricultural industry is feeling the strain from President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown, and Republican lawmakers are certainly hearing about it back home.

What elected officials will do about farmers’ frustrations is much less clear — an indication that relief could be far away.

“Members are beginning to talk about it, but it doesn’t feel as though a particular solution is coming into focus yet, and clearly the White House is going to be the most important player in these conversations,” said Rep. Dusty Johnson, who sits on the House Agriculture Committee.

Ongoing Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids in agricultural centers, from California to Wisconsin to New York, have increased pressure on members of Congress to provide fixes for farmers who say they are facing labor shortages.

In Wisconsin, for example, a 2023 University of Wisconsin study found that 70% of labor on the state’s dairy farms was done by undocumented workers. Many of those farmers have turned to existing temporary visas — like the H-2A visa, a seasonal agricultural visa — to staff their farms. The Trump administration moved to strip back labor protections for farmers hiring workers on the visa earlier this year, in an effort to streamline H-2A visas.

But those visas are inherently limited for year-round work, like at dairy farms.

The program is also associated with high costs and a slow-moving bureaucracy. Democrats and immigrant advocates said the administration’s move put workers at risk of abuse and exploitation. Approximately 17% of agricultural workers have an H-2A visa.

There are currently several proposed reforms floating around the Capitol.

A bipartisan bill introduced in May by Reps. Dan Newhouse and Zoe Lofgren proposes streamlining the H-2A visa process and providing visas for year-round agricultural employers.

Wisconsin Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden has proposed legislation that would allow undocumented farmworkers to gain legal employment status, as long as they haven’t committed a crime. Both immigrants and their employers would be required to acknowledge the worker’s status and pay a fine.

“We got to understand, at this point these people are our neighbors. Our kids go to school together, and they’re part of our communities,” Van Orden said. “I don’t want these people having to hide underneath a trailer when immigration shows up.”

Van Orden’s bill has no co-sponsors.

Lawmakers formed a task force in 2023 to consider possible reforms to the H-2A visa program and improve the industry’s reliable labor shortage.

The Republican-majority House Committee on Agriculture has readied a bill that largely follows task force recommendations — which include proposals to streamline administrative paperwork, expedite application review by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and change the wage system — to overhaul the H-2A program.

Committee chair Rep. Glenn Thompson said the bill is awaiting “technical assistance” from the Department of Labor. That final step had been delayed by shutdown furloughs, he said. The Department of Labor did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“We’re very close to introducing a very strong, I’ll call it a tripartisan bill, because that includes Republicans, Democrats and individuals from the industry,” Thompson said.

The bill draft is expected to be ready for public review by early January.

Rep. Salud Carbajal, a Democrat on the agriculture committee, however, says he hasn’t heard from his Republican colleagues or the White House on the issue.

“There’s been no communication from my colleagues on the other side and from this administration,” he said.

Republicans say the White House is engaged on the issue. Thompson told NOTUS that he’s been in “frequent discussions” with the White House and the Department of Agriculture about immigrant farmworkers.

Rep. Doug LaMalfa, who also sits on the House Agriculture Committee, said the White House is “in the mood here to engage” on farmworker visas.

“A while back, the president acknowledged in a speech that we got to up the game on having more and simpler processes for having farm workers available. I know we feel that in California with our specialty crops,” LaMalfa said.

Trump in June suggested that farms would get a pass in the deportation crackdown — a statement that senior administration officials seemed to disagree with.

Immigration advocates haven’t been happy with the administration’s visa policy changes thus far.

Alexandra Sossa, the chief executive officer with the Farmworker and Landscaper Advocacy Project, said that her organization is “not in favor” of the H-2A visa program, which it associates with “human labor trafficking and labor exploitation.”

And now, with the ongoing immigration raids, she says, farmworkers who are brought to the country under the visa program fear deportation, and those who are considering coming under the program are apprehensive about doing so.

“We are talking about workers who wake up at 4 a.m. in the morning and start working at 5 a.m. and end working around 9 to 10 p.m., Monday to Sunday. So that’s not easy to find, and it’s a difficult job to do. The consequences on the economy are reflected when you go to the grocery store to buy food,” Sossa said.

Democrats, meanwhile, are calling for larger immigration reform to address the dangerous working conditions that the H-2A program has led to, while also giving a bigger pathway to work.

“When people are exploited, we’ve got to crack down on that,” Rep. Jim McGovern, a Democrat on the House Committee on Agriculture, said about the concerns regarding H-2A visas. “But I just think the climate that’s been created by this administration makes it difficult for some Republicans to even want to talk about the issue.”

“I hear from farmers all the time about concerns that their labor force will disappear, or that they can’t count on workers,” McGovern said.

This story was produced and originally published by Wisconsin Watch and NOTUS, a publication from the nonprofit, nonpartisan Allbritton Journalism Institute.

Farmers are feeling the squeeze from Trump’s mass deportations. Congress isn’t close to a fix. is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 7 minutes

When Levi Lyle was just six years old, his father was diagnosed with stage four lung cancer.

With treatment, his father survived his diagnosis. The ordeal changed how he farmed. 

“It created an openness in his approach to farming to start doing things differently,” Lyle said.

His father started no-till farming when the practice was still rare in Iowa. A decade ago, when Lyle, now 47, moved back to the family farm, he and his father jumped into organic farming.

“My experiences seeing my father overcome cancer, along with the Agricultural Health Survey’s Midwest cancer statistics, which point to a rural health crisis, inspire me to farm differently,” he said.

Today, Lyle grows corn and soybeans in Keokuk County, in southeast Iowa. Lyle farms about 250 acres, with 40 acres of that organic-certified. His father farms an additional 250 acres. 

Lyle said introducing cover crops into his practice was a “no-brainer.” 

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, cover crops are usually grasses or legumes that are planted between cash crop seasons to provide soil cover and improve soil health. Cover crops can reduce erosion and compaction, improve soil’s ability to hold water, reduce nutrient runoff, suppress weeds, as well as provide other services.

Despite being an advocate for cover crops, Lyle said the practice does present challenges.

“The initial challenge is that there is more labor involved,” Lyle said. Cover crops “do not pay for themselves in the short run.” 

In the U.S. more than 153,000 farms had land planted in cover crops in 2022.

In Iowa specifically, the use of cover crops has expanded significantly in recent years, growing from 1.3 million acres in 2022 to 3.8 million acres in 2024. 

The conservation practice is promoted by the state through cost share incentives. It’s an effort by the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship to reduce the nutrients that go into local waters, make their way into the Mississippi River and ultimately contribute to the Gulf Dead Zone, an annually reoccurring area of reduced oxygen in the Gulf of Mexico.

According to the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy, an initiative aimed at reducing nitrogen and phosphorus runoff into Iowa’s waterways, to achieve 45% nutrient reduction will require about 14 million additional acres of cover crops to be planted.

But a study published in July 2025 in the Society & Natural Resources Journal found that while the number of acres being planted with cover crops has grown, many farmers abandon the practice after one year.

“This study shows that adoption is not a one-time decision — it’s a dynamic process influenced by a range of factors,” co-author Suraj Upadhaya, assistant professor of sustainable systems at Kentucky State University, said in a news release about the study. 

Why do farmers abandon cover crops? 

Chris Morris, a postdoctoral research associate at Iowa State University, was part of a research team that interviewed more than 3,000 Iowa farmers between 2015 and 2019.

The survey showed that nearly 20% of the farmers who reported planting cover crops on their land the first year had ceased using them the following year.

However, the survey found that most of those farmers (15%) would be open to resuming the practice in the future.

Only about 4% of the farmers who participated in the survey said they have no intention of using cover crops again.

“What we found was a whole lot more shifting back and forth than we anticipated,” J. Arbuckle, professor of rural sociology at ISU, said.

Nationwide, in 2022, nearly 18 million acres, or 4.7% of total U.S. cropland, had cover crops, up 17% from 2017.

Cover crop use is most common in the eastern U.S. In states along the Mississippi River, Iowa had the most acreage with cover crops in 2022, but Wisconsin had the highest percentage of its cropland using cover crops, at nearly 8%. All 10 states saw an increase in cover crop usage from 2012 to 2022, though some states, like Tennessee and Kentucky, saw a drop in cover crop use from 2017 to 2022.

Experts say cover crops present challenges to farmers that can act as barriers to permanent adoption.

Anna Morrow, senior program manager with the Midwest Cover Crops Council, said one hurdle is that cover crop planting overlaps with the busy harvest season.

“Cover crops are a practice where a lot of the labor is right at a peak labor time in our season, right? So obviously (farmers) have to prioritize the cash crop so that they get paid,” Morrow said.

“It’s complicated because a lot of farmers are doing the cover crops in the winter, so between getting the current crop harvested, planting the cover crop, getting that terminated before the next crop, if this cover crop is not going to work in that schedule, it’s going to be abandoned,” Morris said.

Morris said barriers beyond timing abound, too, like the cost of purchasing and planting cover crops, balancing the cover crops with other farm work, and challenges that come with farming on rented land.

“A lot of farmers are in really short-term leases, and a lot of farmers feel like landlords aren’t interested in investing in conservation practices on rented land because they may or may not be farming that land one or two or three years from now,” Arbuckle said.

In Lyle’s case, he owns the 40 acres he uses for organic farming, but he and his father lease the rest of their land. They plant cover crops on both the land they own and rent.

Lyle said for him it’s “economically justifiable” to plant cover crops on his leased land because he expects a “reduction in number of field passes, reduced herbicides and reduced fertilizer use due to the nutrient scavenging capacity of cover crops.”

To address cost barriers and encourage the use of cover crops, various federal and state programs offer cost-share incentives. Lyle said this year he has been awarded cover crop funding for 150 acres, getting paid $10 per acre. On average, it costs producers about $60 per acre to pay for cover crops.

Morris said these programs are helpful, but farmers told him they often don’t pay enough, require complicated, time-sucking paperwork and only last one to three years. 

But cover crops are a long game, Morris said. While use of cover crops can reduce the need for fertilizer, increase soil health and lead to better productivity, he said those benefits can be difficult to measure and can take years to materialize.

“It’s hard for farmers to justify that high economic cost of cover crops in any given year if there’s not going to be an immediate payoff. Most of these farmers are making marginal profits in any given year, if any, and some are at a net loss. So, there’s a huge weight on farmers’ shoulders of trying to keep the farm going, especially if it’s a farm that’s been in their families for generations,” Morris said. “Anything that could potentially put them out of business is going to seem like a threat.” 

Finding new solutions 

Cover crops are generally not harvested; rather, their benefits come from simply being on the land. At the end of their life they’re terminated using herbicides or manual methods, like mowing, and tilled into the soil or left atop it as mulch.

But the Forever Green Initiative, which is housed at the University of Minnesota, works to increase cover crop adoption in Minnesota by developing varieties that can improve soil health and also be harvested for sale. 

“Agricultural science has not focused on this until very recently, so there are very few options for farmers to do that,” said Mitch Hunter, co-director of the Forever Green Initiative. “We’re working on over 15 different species, and they’re all aimed at filling that niche of a harvestable over winter crop that is winter hardy in the Upper Midwest that can fit into existing crop rotations or become part of a more diverse rotation and as a market.” 

He said some commercial and harvestable cover crops have included winter camelina and the perennial grain Kernza, a cousin to annual wheat. He said those crops are “on the cusp of being commercial.” Commercialized cover crops also include alfalfa, winter barley and winter durum.

“The whole point is to fill that gap,” Hunter said.

Pivoting to cover crops that can be harvested and sold is a “natural progression” for many farmers, Morrow said.

“If they start to try cover crops, and they say, ‘Hey, this is working, and I’m seeing benefits.’ And then they’ll say, ‘Well, why can’t I do a winter annual crop and get some cash from this?’” Morrow said. “The Midwest (is) pretty focused on corn and soybeans, but I think there’s some growing interest in winter, annual cash crops.” 

Meanwhile, the overall number of acres invested in cover crop practices has been increasing in recent years, even with some disadoption.  

“This study really reflects that farming is a year-to-year business,” said Sean Stokes, research director at the Rodale Institute Midwest Organic Center in Marion, Iowa. “A farmer might only plant a cover crop, like cereal rye, before soybeans, and then when they go to corn the next year, they might not plant that again. But then when they go back to soybeans, they might use cover crops again.”

“Every farmer and every farm is unique, and they’re all going to have different motivations for what’s driving their cover crop adoption,” he said.

Stokes said these motivations could include concerns over water quality or improving soil health.

“For a lot of farmers, it’s a business decision,” Stokes said. “Are they going to see more money per acre in the following years when using cover crops or are they going to lose money? That’s where there is some risk.”

For Lyle, it’s a risk work taking. 

“Every acre in the Midwest would benefit from being cover cropped,” Lyle said.

This story is a product of the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an independent reporting network based at the University of Missouri in partnership with Report for America, with major funding from the Walton Family Foundation.

Wisconsin Watch is a member of the Ag & Water Desk network. Sign up for our newsletters to get our news straight to your inbox.

As cover crop use grows, many farmers struggle to commit to the practice is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 9 minutes

Click here to read highlights from the story

• The average Wisconsin farmer is nearly 57 years old, and farmers are increasingly finding that their children don’t want to take over their operations. 

• Legislation introduced by Wisconsin lawmakers would create a state-run farmland link program to connect farmers who are interested in selling or renting out their land to beginning farmers. 

• Eight states, including Minnesota and Michigan, have land link programs run in whole or in part by government agencies. 

• While advocates say the need for this type of program is real, some feel the legislation needs to include funding to be successful.

Joy Kirkpatrick spends much of her time thinking about the future of Wisconsin’s farmland. 

As a farm succession outreach specialist for the University of Wisconsin-Madison Division of Extension, she helps farmers figure out what to do with their farms when they’re ready to retire. 

A flood of farmers will soon face that question. The average Wisconsin farmer is nearly 57, and a growing share are 65 or older.  

For generations, the answer was simple: Hand off the land and operations to their kids. But farmers are increasingly finding their grown children have other plans. 

To fund their retirement, today’s farmers will often weigh whether to rent or sell their land to larger agricultural operations, real estate developers, energy companies or even private equity firms. 

Meanwhile, a new generation of aspiring farmers is struggling to get started. Many didn’t grow up on farms and don’t have the land they need. In surveys, beginning farmers nationwide say their biggest challenge is finding affordable farmland. 

Nationally, nearly 70% of all farmland is expected to change hands in the next 20 years, whether through inheritance or sale, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture. What happens to that land will determine whether Wisconsin’s farmers can retire comfortably, and whether small farms have a place in the state’s future. 

“If we want land to be available to new or beginning farmers, figuring out ways that the land can be affordable for them and still provide the income that the owner generation needs is key,” Kirkpatrick said.

Experts say meeting those two goals will require a combination of strategies including tax incentives, conservation easements and loan assistance. But a group of Wisconsin lawmakers is looking to make a dent in the problem with a simple step: a website to connect those with farmland for sale or rent to those looking to start new farms.

A group of Republican lawmakers introduced Assembly Bill 411 and its Senate counterpart, SB 412, this summer. The legislation would direct the state Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to create a “farmland link” program to assist farmers with transferring property. Central to that effort, the bill instructs DATCP to build and maintain a website where farm owners could post land for sale or rent, and beginning farmers could inquire about the opportunities they’re looking for, including the chance to be mentored by an experienced farmer before taking the reins.

The legislation’s lead author, Rep. Clint Moses, R-Menomonie, grew up on a dairy farm and now runs a roughly 50-head beef operation. He’s watched farmland prices rise, much like home prices. 

“It’s much, much more challenging than it was even five to 10 years ago,” Moses said. 

It’s not just a cost problem, Moses said. In the past, farmers looking to pass on their land would talk to their neighbors to see who was interested. Today, those communities are often less connected, so prospective farmers need other ways to find land, Moses said. That’s the purpose of a farmland link website.

“It kind of allows them to not have to go out and sift through all the other real estate listings,” Moses said. 

Eight other states, including neighboring Minnesota and Michigan, have land link programs run in whole or in part by state or local governments. In Wisconsin, where the previous state-run program shut down around a decade ago, only regional nonprofit organizations now offer the service.

While some Wisconsin farm advocates are optimistic the bill could chip away at a tough problem, others say it lacks the funding and specifics to make it work. 

Pair finds farm of their dreams

Les Macare and Els Dobrick of Racing Heart Farm in Colfax found their 36 acres in the Farmland Clearinghouse listings, published by the Minnesota-based nonprofit Land Stewardship Project. 

It was 2016, and the two lived in Minneapolis and rented farmland in Stillwater, where they grew vegetables for Minneapolis farmers markets and a CSA.

But they were getting tired of commuting 40 minutes every morning and evening. 

“We knew either we were going to start looking for land, or not farm,” Macare said.

From the listing, the former sheep and vegetable farm in Dunn County sounded like a dream. The owners, a pair of sisters and their young families, were looking to move somewhere less rural. When Macare and Dobrick visited, the rolling hills and rocky outcroppings reminded Macare of their home state of Connecticut. 

“We got back in the car and we looked at each other like, can we make this happen? Because it was absolutely the perfect thing for our farm business, and for us,” Macare said.

Getting financing took more than nine months, but the sellers waited. That, Macare said, is one benefit of this kind of listing service: The buyers and sellers know the farm business and its particular challenges.

Many landowners who advertise through the Clearinghouse are motivated by more than money, said Karen Stettler, who oversees the listings for the Land Stewardship Project. Many have cultivated their land organically for years and want to see their farms continue the same way.

“People have a lot of connection to land and to what they’re doing on farms and so are very good stewards and caretakers of their land, and they’re wanting to make sure that the next generation also has that same sort of value and vision around stewardship,” Stettler said.

Today, Macare is grateful for the opportunity to raise their vegetables and sheep on their own land. 

“The cost of land has just gotten really astronomical,” Macare said. “I feel so lucky that we bought when we did because I don’t know that 10 years later I would be able to even consider spending what I think the value of this land is now based on seeing prices around us change.”

How would the program work?

If the proposed legislation passes, Wisconsin will offer a similar service to the one Macare used, but the one-page bill offers little detail on how it would work. 

That might be a good thing, said Dan Bauer, program supervisor for the Wisconsin Farm Center at DATCP. His office would oversee the program if the Legislature passes the bill and it’s signed into law. 

The broad nature of the bill could allow his team to create what they think will be most effective, Bauer said. 

He first heard about the bill around the time it was introduced in August, when his department was asked to estimate its cost. They budgeted $66,800 in one-time costs for building the website and $100,300 a year for a full-time staff person to help design and promote it, as well as to provide “shoulder-to-shoulder, on-the-ground, wraparound farmland access services” to site users. They added another $5,000 for initial education, outreach and marketing efforts. 

For the plan to work, Bauer said, staff will need to reach out to farmers who are preparing to transition out of farming and encourage them to advertise their land. Farmers will also need expert help before, during and after any land transfer. 

“A website by itself is not going to deliver the desired outcomes as a stand-alone,” Bauer said. “To really design and launch a program that the state would be happy with, I think it has to be a combination of the website and then also that on-the-ground coaching and advising and mentorship.”

The bill doesn’t include any appropriations, so if it passes, Bauer said the department “would have to explore its options” to cover the $172,100 total. 

While Wisconsin’s two nonprofit-run farmland link programs primarily serve farmers who use organic or “sustainable” practices, the state-run program would serve all kinds of farms and farmers, Moses said. 

Bauer and an agency spokesperson said they knew the Farm Center previously administered a similar program, but they did not know how it worked, when it operated or why it closed. Ryan LeCloux, a Legislative Reference Bureau analyst, said the prior program began in 1993 as part of DATCP’s Farmers Assistance Program and existed until at least 2015, before it was removed from the agency’s website.

In any case, Bauer said, his team would likely create the new program from scratch. “Even if we had really good information on how the last program was operated, I’m not even sure how relevant it would be when you consider just how much technology has advanced in the last 10, 15, 20 years.” 

Need is real, advocates say

Before the bill was introduced, representatives of a handful of organizations that support farmers and aspiring farmers were already discussing such a possibility. A working group convened by the Farmland Access Hub began meeting last year after members identified the idea as a top priority.

“The big elephant in the room is that Wisconsin doesn’t have a (state-run) Farm Link program,” said Mia Ljung, a member of that working group and a community development educator for Outagamie and Winnebago counties through UW-Madison Extension. 

“Not to say that it’s going to be a quick fix, but if you don’t have a Farm Link program in your state, it’s going to be much harder to make those connections between current land holders, land owners and land seekers.”

The group has been studying how such programs work in other states. That research is especially important as legislators consider the bill, Ljung said, calling the proposed budget “very slim.” 

“If the initiative will be supported by enough infrastructure, funding and outreach, I am supportive because there’s a big need,” Ljung said.

The state’s biggest farm lobby has officially backed the bill. Jason Mugnaini, executive director of government relations at the Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation, said supporting Wisconsin’s current and future farmers will take a variety of strategies, from creating conservation easements to helping farm families get health insurance.

Creating a land link program would be a key step, Mugnaini said. “It’s a challenge for those young folks, so finding access to land is one of the easiest ways that they can start farming full time,” Mugnaini said.

Still, the proponents agree it will take much more to get land into the hands of a new generation of small farmers.

“It’s a good tool in the toolbox, but it’s just one part of a very difficult and challenging discussion that has to be had, not only just in Wisconsin, but throughout the United States: Who are the next generation of farmers going to be? Where are they going to find the ability to continue farming, and how are we going to continue to feed the United States of America?” Mugnaini said.

Among the other challenges to address are the reasons farmers may be reluctant to list their land. Many farmers invest nearly everything they have into their farms. This means that some don’t pay enough in Social Security taxes to qualify for payments, or the payments they receive are minimal.

Farmers often need their land to pay their bills after they retire, said Kirkpatrick, the farm succession outreach specialist.

Fearing a hefty capital gains tax bill, many farmers opt not to sell during their lifetimes. But the idea of renting to someone just getting started in a tough business may sound risky, and beginning farmers may not be able to pay as much as bigger players can.

“If the owner generation is dependent on the sale or some sort of income coming from farmland or other assets for their late years, they’re going to be making decisions that they perceive as less risky to them,” Kirkpatrick said, explaining that many will choose to rent to an established farm operation that’s looking to expand. 

Beginning farmers need affordable land, Kirkpatrick said, “and we also need to make sure that that owner generation is able to live and age gracefully.”

A land link program won’t change the economics of the market, but Kirkpatrick thinks such a website, combined with proactive succession planning, could help farmers achieve their own goals for their land.

“I think there are a lot of farm owners that would love to see their farm used in a similar way of, you know, raising a family on it … And to be honest, it would be great for rural communities to still have those farms,” Kirkpatrick said. “If this linking program helps them realize that that’s possible, that’s great.”

“I think that we need to really think about what that generation of owners need and how we can help them plan in a way that feels right for them, and also give opportunities to others,” Kirkpatrick said.

Critics call bill ‘incomplete’

Meanwhile, several other farm lobby groups in the state have taken a neutral stance on the bill. That includes state associations of producers of cattle, corn, pork and vegetables, as well as Wisconsin Farm Credit Services and the Michael Fields Agricultural Institute, a nonprofit that researches and promotes sustainable farming practices. 

“This bill is incomplete as written and requires funding to be successful,” read the Michael Fields Agricultural Institute’s comments on the legislation. “However, we encourage the idea and want to explore this option further.”

Chuck Anderas, the institute’s policy director, said he’s worried that the bill doesn’t include any appropriations. 

“That doesn’t mean that there’s no plans ever to include funding for it, but it needs to be funded enough to be successful,” Anderas said. “Otherwise, it could just be like a website that doesn’t really get used all that much.” 

That could discourage farmers and land seekers who come to the site hoping for help, Anderas said.

“We’d rather see it not happen than happen in a way that sets it up to fail.”

Neither the Senate nor Assembly versions of the bill have any Democratic co-sponsors. Sen. Brad Pfaff, D-Onalaska, serves on the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Revenue, which is currently reviewing the bill. 

Pfaff said creating a farmland link program is “an excellent idea” but the bill is “incomplete.”

“Let’s hope that we can get some more meat on the bones here and be serious about the piece of legislation, and hopefully we can get it passed before the legislative session comes to an end.”

Natalie Yahr reports on pathways to success statewide for Wisconsin Watch, working in partnership with Open Campus. Email her at nyahr@wisconsinwatch.org.

Dream of buying a small farm in Wisconsin? New legislation aims to make the process easier is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 11 minutes

Click here to read highlights from the story

• The number of seasonal workers hired by Wisconsin farmers through the H-2A program has increased six-fold over the past decade.

• Although the surge began before President Donald Trump returned to office, farmers now consider the program even more critical during Trump’s crackdown on immigrants without legal status.

• The Trump administration has introduced adjustments to program rules, including cuts to minimum wages and a pending $250 per-visa fee.

• Mexican nationals made up over 90% of the H-2A workforce last year, but South Africans make up a growing share of workers as well.

• The program does not offer visa holders a pathway to legal permanent residency in the United States.

By the time Monty Lilford received a call from the American consulate in Cape Town in February, he had only days to get from his home in South Africa’s Western Cape to Wisconsin’s Driftless Area. If all went according to plan, the 35-year-old mechanic would spend the next nine months as a do-it-all farmhand, joining the thousands of seasonal agricultural workers seeking better wages in Wisconsin through the H-2A visa program.

Lilford could not afford a last-minute flight halfway across the world. There’s a market for lending to H-2A workers crunched for time, he said — one dominated by “people doing scams to get your banking details.” 

Lilford turned to his father-in-law for help. “I begged him,” he said. “I needed to go.”

The temporary visa program offers Lilford a chance to build a middle-class life back home, albeit one that requires spending much of the year sharing a modest ranch house with seven fellow farmworkers near Fountain City. His visa does not offer him a pathway to legal permanent residency in the United States, and he will be barred from the program if he overstays.

Mike Bushman, Lilford’s employer and the owner of B&B Agri Sales in Buffalo County, considers the program the only legal and reliable source of labor for his farm. While he could hire workers who lack legal status, Bushman is wary of the legal risks. 

“You work your whole life to put something together and then take the risk of losing it all,” he said. 

The H-2A program comes with higher up-front costs, he explained, but he considers it essential  to keep his farm afloat amid a labor shortage.

Bushman is not alone. The number of seasonal workers hired by Wisconsin farmers through the H-2A program has increased six-fold over the past decade, according to 2024 state Department of Workforce Development data. The surge began long before President Donald Trump returned to office in January. Amid the White House’s ongoing immigration crackdown, however, some farmers now consider the program an even more critical alternative to workers without legal status.

The program is far from a flawless solution to the agricultural sector’s labor crisis. 

For farmers, the H-2A application process is often an expensive, slow-moving headache – one they must relive year after year.

Workers, meanwhile, frequently report wage theft and other mistreatment, and the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division routinely uncovers violations of H-2A rules on Wisconsin farms. With inspectors stretched thin, patterns of abuse and fraud can go unpunished for years. Workers who walk away from a dishonest employer or dangerous workplace risk losing their visa.

The Trump administration has introduced a litany of adjustments to the program’s rules in recent months, including cuts to minimum wages and a yet-to-be-implemented $250 fee per visa. With some details still hazy, farmers and workers are awaiting clarity on what lies ahead. 

Application process is ‘constant battle’

Farmers argue the program is rife with inefficiencies. Program staff are often difficult, if not impossible, to reach, the application process relies almost entirely on physical mail, and farmers regularly spend thousands of dollars on attorneys to help navigate the labyrinth of paperwork. Keeping an application moving on schedule is a “constant battle,” Bushman said. 

The application requires approval from multiple federal and state agencies, often resulting in delays during handoffs from one agency to another. Those hurdles and screening interview backlogs at American consulates and embassies can leave workers stuck in their home countries past the planned start of their contract.

“Last year, the workers came almost three days late,” said Adam Lauer, co-owner of a pickling cucumber farm in Waushara County. “At three days late, you’re throwing a lot of pickles away.”

Bushman said such delays were responsible for Lilford’s last-minute rush to secure a plane ticket – a systemic flaw loan sharks exploit by charging desperate workers extortionate interest rates, he added. 

Earlier this month, the Trump administration took steps to address some delays, allowing U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to begin reviewing workers’ applications while the Department of Labor considers applications from employers. That could buy more time for workers to schedule screening interviews at consulates and embassies, said Tom Bortnyk, senior vice president and general counsel for Virginia-based másLabor, which provides H-2A recruitment and application services for farmers nationwide, including in Wisconsin.

Other hurdles are tougher to fix. Federal regulators can be slow to send crucial paperwork, said Ethan Olson, a labor contractor who works with Lauer. That can leave farmers without documentation required – at least in theory – to prove they comply with H-2A rules. “You’re at the government’s mercy,” he said.

The Department of Labor did not respond to a request for comment during an ongoing government shutdown. 

Remaking the workforce

Wisconsin’s H-2A workforce is smaller than those of its neighbors, in part because the seasonal visa program is largely off-limits to the year-round dairy industry, which plays an outsized role in state agriculture. Michigan farmers hired roughly 15,000 H-2A workers in 2024, compared to fewer than 3,000 in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin’s H-2A workers spent the summer picking celery near Janesville, driving farm equipment in Fond du Lac County and tending pheasants outside of Marshfield. Lilford spent an October afternoon bundling equipment in Bushman’s fabrication shop while another farmhand moved feed corn into storage.

In years past, at least some of those jobs went to workers without legal status. “We went down to Florida to recruit,” said Lauer. Between 2021 and 2022 – the most recent years for which Department of Labor survey data are available — roughly 42% of crop workers surveyed lacked work authorization.

Lauer noted practical reasons to switch to an H-2A workforce. “We were so short on people,” he said. “Multiple years, 20 to 30 people short.” By the time his farm needed workers in mid-summer, many undocumented farmworkers had already found jobs elsewhere. 

Hiring undocumented workers also comes with legal risks. If caught, employers face fines of up to $3,000 per worker. Amid a nationwide immigration enforcement crackdown, Lauer said, “I wouldn’t take that chance.”

Elsewhere in Wisconsin, some farmers turned to the program as local alternatives slipped away. 

Before 2019, Dan Hanauer largely hired in and around Shawano for seasonal jobs on his Christmas tree farm. Some local workers were out of high school; others arrived through a county jail employment program.

By law, employers must offer seasonal jobs to “qualified, eligible U.S. workers,” including past employees, before hiring H-2A workers. In the past six months, prosecutors in Mississippi and Washington state have scrutinized employers who allegedly prioritized H-2A workers over U.S. workers.

Hanauer argues he was forced to switch. His local workforce, he said, was dwindling and prone to missing shifts. 

“The job description says you miss three days and you’re gone,” he added. 

On a recent weekday morning, several H-2A workers cut boughs from the bases of fir trees to be sold as Christmas wreaths — a new product for his business made possible by a more reliable team of seasonal workers from Mexico, Hanauer said.

Most of the roughly 20 H-2A workers who spoke to Wisconsin Watch — all employed by either Bushman, Lauer or Hanauer — were from Mexico. 

Upon returning to Mexico, “I take a week off to rest, and then it’s back to work,” said Israel Cruz, a construction worker who spent much of the summer picking cucumbers on Lauer’s farm in Waushara County.

Mexican nationals made up over 90% of the H-2A workforce last year, often traveling by van to and from farms in rural communities like Shawano. This year, a handful of Hanauer’s workers flew to Appleton instead. 

South Africans make up the second-largest nationality in the H-2A workforce, as they have for much of the past two decades. They outnumbered Jamaican workers, the next-largest cohort, more than 3-to-1 last year. 

Lilford, like the other members of Bushman’s crew, is an Afrikaner – a descendant of early Dutch, French and German settlers. Data on the nationalities of visa recipients does not specify ethnicity, but labor contractors who recruit in South Africa say most H-2A workers from the country are white. 

Labor costs and pay cuts

To theoretically avoid undercutting U.S. farmworker wages, the Department of Labor sets a minimum wage for H-2A workers. This year, Wisconsin H-2A employers must pay at least $18.15 an hour, up from $14.40 in 2020. The program also requires employers to pay for housing and transportation and to reimburse travel to and from workers’ home countries, none of which is required when hiring local farmworkers.

The Department of Labor announced cuts to the program’s minimum wage in early October, responding to farmers’ complaints about rising labor costs.

In a preamble to the new rule, the agency argued that the cost of participating in the H-2A program has become “increasingly burdensome” — surpassing the cost of hiring U.S. workers if they were available. The agency also noted that a decline in the number of undocumented agricultural workers will “deprive growers of a relatively cheaper labor supply,” pushing more farmers to the H-2A program.

The new rules reverse a 2023 Biden administration decision requiring farmers to pay H-2A workers based on the specific duties they perform. Some roles, like veterinary medicine and truck driving, required higher wages than standard field work, and farmers were obligated to pay according to the highest-earning role employees performed, even if it was not their primary role.  

That standard prompted legal challenges from H-2A employers, including Bushman, who joined a federal class action lawsuit challenging the rule earlier this year. A federal judge in Louisiana vacated the rule in August after a sugar cane growers’ association brought a separate lawsuit.

Instead, the Department of Labor’s new rule divides H-2A workers into two “skill levels” based on the experience and training required for their job. It does not guarantee that workers who have spent previous seasons in roles deemed “entry-level” will be paid at the higher end of the scale.

The department will also now allow employers to deduct a portion of workers’ hourly wages to reflect housing costs, which the agency argues will even the playing field for domestic farmworkers.

Wisconsin workers classified as less-skilled could receive as little as $12 per hour next year under the new standards — a reduction of 34% from the current H-2A minimum wage.

“In the countries where they’re recruiting, people are desperate enough to take a job for less than the prevailing wage,” said Jose Oliva, campaign director with HEAL Food Alliance, a national group that organizes and advocates for food supply chain workers.

New H-2A minimum wages are higher in every state neighboring Wisconsin. In Michigan and Illinois, H-2A workers will be paid at least the state minimum wages, exceeding the federal program minimum.

Program wages have always varied from state to state, said Bortnyk of másLabor. The latest changes, however, create a “meaningful enough difference” to fuel steeper recruiting competition for Wisconsin farmers. 

For Bushman, that competition is reason enough not to cut wages. The lower minimum “won’t save us anything,” he said, because retaining experienced crew members makes more business sense than training new hires.

Room for abuse

The minimum wage changes follow the Trump administration’s decision in June to suspend enforcement of Biden-era rules intended to crack down on H-2A abuses. 

Among other protections, those rules previously guaranteed that workers could invite guests like legal aid providers and clergy into employer-provided housing. In Wisconsin, H-2A workers retain that right through the state’s migrant labor law.

Wisconsin farmers are well aware of the opportunities for exploitation. 

Lauer recalled discovering that a recruiter in Mexico had charged job seekers hundreds of dollars to apply for openings on his farm — a violation of program rules.

“It all happened in Mexico, so we never saw the money,” he added. Lauer says his business cut ties with the recruiter after consular officials in Mexico alerted him of the recruiter’s practices.

None of the workers who spoke with Wisconsin Watch shared firsthand accounts of violations or mistreatment at their current workplaces. However, the Department of Labor has fined 23 Wisconsin H-2A employers for program violations in the past decade.

Auditors cited one labor contractor, Adams County-based J&P Harvest, for more than 650 violations of H-2A program rules between 2019 and 2023. The department approved J&P Harvest’s most recent application in March of this year. The company, which lists a Florida phone number in its contact information, did not respond to a request for comment.

In some cases, the Department of Labor can temporarily ban, or “debar,” farmers and contractors from participating in the program. J&P Harvest does not appear on the agency’s current list of debarred businesses, but Jan Enterprises, a flower-growing business near Green Bay, is currently banned from participating in the program for allegedly hiring H-2A workers in place of an American applicant. A related greenhouse is also on the department’s debarment list. 

According to a 2015 review by the federal Government Accountability Office and 2023 reporting by Investigate Midwest, loose enforcement of debarments has enabled some businesses to continue hiring through the H-2A program by operating under a new name. 

Federal inspectors do not catch every violation. The Wage and Hour Division employed just over 720 investigators to enforce labor laws nationwide last year, according to the Department of Labor’s fiscal year 2025 budget. The agency audited 659 agricultural workplaces last year — less than half the number of audits conducted a decade ago. 

Inspectors have recorded H-2A violations by more than half of the 42 Wisconsin agricultural employers audited since 2015, not all of which employ H-2A workers.

“There are other places where you’ll work 10 hours and they’ll pay you for nine,” said Salvador Gonzalez Mosqueda, a veteran member of Hanauer’s crew, recalling warnings about dishonest employers from fellow seasonal workers during an earlier stint in Kentucky. 

Some citations were for technical reasons. Lauer Farms, for instance, says it was fined in 2019 for missing date information on pay stubs.

Trump’s law brings new fees 

The Trump administration’s signature “big beautiful” bill-turned law adds another potential hurdle for workers and employers: a new $250 fee for all nonimmigrant visas, including H-2A. 

If federal rulemakers decide workers must pay the fee before entering the country, employers would likely be required to reimburse them. But Oliva warned that enforcement could be weak. “$250 is not chump change” for already vulnerable workers, he added.

It remains unclear whether employers will be eligible for reimbursement from the federal government once their workers return home.

“We’ll just eat another $30,000,” said Lauer, who often hires 120 or more H-2A workers over the course of the year – Wisconsin’s largest crew. While that expense alone won’t bankrupt him, Lauer considers the rising overall costs of participation unsustainable. 

“They’ll eventually push us out of business,” he said.

Workers keep returning  

Most H-2A workers who spoke with Wisconsin Watch worked on the same farms last season. 

Gonzalez, the veteran member of Hanauer’s team, said that he has returned to Shawano for the past six years, turning down offers from other farms. At Lauer Farms, roughly 90% of last year’s crew returned for the most recent harvest season. 

Some workers say they would prefer to settle in the U.S. rather than traveling back and forth from their home countries. 

“Things in Mexico are very hard,” said Jesus Hernandez Robles, another member of Hanauer’s crew. Hanauer says he has researched sponsoring seasonal employees for green cards, but without a full-time job to offer, that option is out of reach.

But Robles considers the H-2A program preferable to entering the country without a visa. 

“You can enter and leave, spend time with your family,” he said. “If you come here illegally, you have to work for a few years to pay off a coyote.” 

South African workers may have a clearer path to legal residency through the Trump administration’s new refugee program for Afrikaners. 

None of the members of Bushman’s crew who spoke to Wisconsin Watch had applied for refugee status as of early October. Anyone who did secure refugee status, Bushman said, “won’t be working in agriculture. There are just better opportunities.”

International workers continue to show interest in H-2A jobs, Bushman added. But when the federal government entered a shutdown earlier this month, the Department of Labor furloughed staff responsible for reviewing H-2A applications. If the shutdown continues into December and January — the busiest season for applications — Wisconsin farmers could be left high and dry next spring.

Farmers turn to flawed visa program in search for legal labor. Now the rules — and costs — are changing. is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 6 minutes

Click here to read highlights from the story

• Juneau County has few grocery stores, and about one in seven county residents, often older and living on fixed incomes, struggles to make ends meet.

• The county partners with local producers to host pop-up distributions of healthy foodstuffs.

• The Local Food Purchase Assistance program allowed the county to host more than 30 pop-ups last year. Cuts by the Trump administration have reduced that to six, with local businesses backfilling funding.

• Donors and volunteers hope to keep the program alive.

On a recent Wednesday about 11 a.m., Dustin Ladd turned the ignition on the county’s Ford pickup. He left the office with a humming, refrigerated trailer in tow and wound along country roads through central Wisconsin, stopping at farms to pack the vehicle with food.

Dustin handled nearly all the retrievals and deliveries last year, too. He isn’t one to say “no.”

“It takes me to all sorts of places — good or bad,” said Dustin, 36, who has worked as Juneau County’s land and water conservation administrator for six years.

The county partnered with more than a dozen local producers to host countywide pop-up distributions of healthy foodstuffs in the Central Sands — one of Wisconsin’s most food-insecure regions.

About one in seven county residents, often older and living on fixed incomes, struggles to make ends meet.

There are few grocery stores. Even so, many folks can’t afford to shop at the county’s only supermarket. A loaf of off-brand bread costs $2.79, a gallon of milk $3.39 and a dozen eggs $3.49.

Residents often turn to local gas stations or dollar stores, without the luxury of variety.

County employees saw a need. And an opportunity.

They obtained a grant in 2024 to run a food distribution initiative — known as the Local Food Purchase Assistance program, or LFPA — and anticipated continuing it this year. 

The federal funding underlying the state program enabled the county to purchase food from more than a dozen area farmers, supporting the economy and residents in need.

But the newly elected Trump administration abruptly canceled the awards in March. Wisconsin would have received $5.5 million.

Additional cuts to the nation’s social safety net coincided with rising inflation that has pinched people’s pocketbooks and stretched food banks.

This year, Juneau County and local businesses backfilled the costs of running a significantly smaller program with just a fraction of the cash: six pop-up distributions. Not the previous 30-plus. Fewer nutritious meals fill stomachs, and the program’s future is unclear. 

Still, a dedicated team of county staff, donors and volunteers is working to ensure residents obtain something.

They find joy in that.

***

Three felines roam the grounds at Orange Cat Community Farm south of the Juneau County border.

The youngsters are the unrelated successors of the farm’s namesake cat, Little Ann. Before she died, the cat kept her human, Laura Mortimore, company as Laura grew three acres of organic vegetables.

Feeding the community through Juneau County’s LFPA program in 2024 felt awesome, said Laura, 43. Nothing went to waste.

“I feel like I made a bunch of new friends,” she said. “I just wanted to keep going.”

Dustin pulled into the farm’s driveway around 1:30 p.m. He and Laura started loading small watermelons and vegetables into the trailer, stacking plastic totes to its ceiling.

The vegetables are growing ravenously this year. Tomatoes are in. Butternut squash and pumpkins on the way.

The two strolled through Laura’s fields.

“I’m scared that I’m gonna have a lot of five-pound sweet potatoes,” she told him, burying her arms into a carpet of vines.

The monster tubers caused the soil to bulge out of the ground.

The farm overproduced in anticipation of a full year of pop-ups. Laura solicited additional customers and is adding extra produce to her subscribers’ food shares. She also threw away seedlings that she grew for the LFPA program.

“But this is really great to keep, you know…” Laura said, pausing. “Moving forward in some way.”

Maybe the local farmers and county staff could have another LFPA committee meeting, she told Dustin. How about applying for some grants?

But as they seek donations, they have to compete with other good causes.

Dustin recently put in an application for $10,000 from the local electric utility. He pondered the unlikely possibility of starting a nonprofit to maximize the Juneau County program’s eligibility.

Will staff be able to run the program next year?

They’re going to keep trying.

***

To Dustin’s knowledge, Juneau County is the only local government in Wisconsin to oversee an LFPA program.

Staff and local producers ironed out the details the first year: crafting business plans, purchasing equipment, charting trucking routes, arranging shifts and building community trust.

Volunteers and employees from the county’s Aging and Disability Resource Center and Land and Water Department passed out food at village halls, parks and fairgrounds.

It’s not easy starting a new service.

“A lot of weeks of late Wednesday nights,” Dustin said.

Deer also preyed upon vegetables growing in farmers’ fields. Wild storms dropped hailstones across rows of sweet corn and apple orchards. One farmer lost about 200 pounds of ground beef when someone left a freezer door ajar.

But the trailer continued to visit all the major communities from May through January.

Sometimes, just 80 families came. Or as many as 200. Everyone left with something. Other than marking their township, age group and household size on a paper slip, no questions asked.

The county ultimately gave away about 4,500 food shares.

The only thing that’s still missing is the promised money to fuel the well-oiled machine.

Amid the polarized politics in Washington, there’s one glimmer of bipartisanship: the Strengthening Local Food Security Act, introduced in July by Sens. Jim Justice, R-West Virginia, and Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island.

The bill would allocate $200 million each year for states to pay farmers and fishers to sell goods to food providers and schools.

Reed called the new proposal a “win-win-win” for local producers, domestic supply chains and hunger relief agencies. He hopes to see the provisions included in the federal farm bill, which sets the nation’s agricultural policies and spending plan.

In Wisconsin, state lawmakers also set aside $10 million in the current two-year state budget for assistance groups to purchase Wisconsin-made foodstuffs.

***

At  3:15 p.m. Dustin rolled into Lyndon Station, a village of 500 residents. He headed to Travis Fitzgerald Memorial Park. Volunteers emptied the trailer and arranged the veggie totes atop impromptu serving tables under a picnic shelter.

Gina Laack, director of the Juneau County Aging and Disability Resource Center, dished out pumpkin bars and brownies as she welcomed arrivals.

The trickle of pedestrians turned into a stream, then a chattering crowd. Volunteers handed out registration forms and carried groceries to people’s cars, which now lined the street. More than 120 arrived that afternoon. 

Some pushed walkers, others leaned on canes. A woman crinkled her face as she limped to the front of the line. Her sciatic nerves were acting up. 

For many, the program expands the foods they can access. Produce straight from the field, better than a food pantry. Each pop-up brings blessings instead of tears.

“You have to remember this is a healthy food distribution,” Gina said, as she carved up the brownie trays.

Dave Dearth, 77, has been coming to nearly every pop-up since LFPA started in Juneau County. He heard about it through the ADRC, which also runs the Men’s Shed social club and dementia classes he attends with his wife, Anna.

“It’s nice to get some fresh vegetables,” he said through tinted eyeglasses. “Just something to look forward to. See people that you know.” 

A retired counselor, Dave moved to the nearby city of Mauston to live close to his son. Dave picks up vegetables at the pop-ups he wouldn’t ordinarily buy. Growing up poor, he said, he learned to like eating everything.

Dave glanced at the bags of apples sitting atop the bar. Those don’t come cheap, he said.

Dave joined the line, and a volunteer handed him a sack loaded with a head of lettuce, a white onion, a red tomato, a green zucchini and a yellow squash. Another passed him a packet of ground beef.

Behind Dave, Anna adjusted her short blond hair and smiled.

By 4:30, the shelter hollowed out, but extra food remained. 

Gina looped through the village — home to Mac’s Stumble Out Pub and the Swagger Inn — peeking into the local bars and grills. She beckoned people to the park.

“I will not have a beer at each of the bars!” she insisted as she left the shelter.

Seven minutes later, Gina returned with a train of locals — one dressed in denim overalls and a conductor’s hat.

He approached the serving line.

“Well, I’m hungry,” he said.

The LFPA crew swung into motion.

Wisconsin county keeps healthy food program alive despite federal cuts is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Soil carbon and carbon farming deal with organic carbon that is present or stored in soil.  It occurs when animals and plants that...

The post Generating Carbon Offsets in Carbon Farming appeared first on Cleantech Group.

Reading Time: 6 minutes

A few years ago, Holly Jones started studying the micro-climate and the topography on her family farm in Crawfordsville, Iowa, about 40 miles south of Iowa City. Jones said learning more about the landscape of her fifth generation flower farm helped her recognize some of the ways weather and climate change could affect her operation.   

“There are some areas of our land that are a little higher than others,” Jones said. “That’s going to impact, for example, when we’re looking out for frost advisories or frost concerns really early in the season or the end.”   

Around this time, the U.S. Department of Agriculture updated its plant hardiness zones map, which divides the United States into 13 zones based on average annual minimum temperatures in a given time period. 

Todd Einhorn, an associate professor in the Department of Horticulture at Michigan State University, said simply put plant hardiness zones help gardeners and farmers determine which plants are most likely to survive winters in a specific location. 

Jones’ farm, called Evergreen Hill, is currently in zone 5b. The USDA found that for her area the temperature had increased by 1 degree Fahrenheit between 2012 and 2023 – a trend experts say will continue in the Upper Midwest.

In response to the changing climate and her deeper understanding of her land, Jones created “crossover plans” for the farm, planting flower varieties with overlapping bloom times. If one species is late to flower or runs its course early, she has other plants that can fill in as the farm’s “focal flower” at any given time. 

Jones works to be transparent with customers about whether they can have certain flowers by a specific date when she takes orders.

She said she and her team have learned that they must be flexible when it comes to farming in a changing climate since she does not have control over growing conditions.  

“We can prepare as much as we want, but there’s so much variability now in growing, especially in the ways that we grow that you just have to be prepared to pivot and adapt,” Jones said.

Jones won’t be the only one adapting. 

Plant hardiness zones are shifting northward nationwide as the country continues to warm, affecting farmers, gardeners and producers across the country. The biggest changes in the coming decades are predicted to be in the Upper Midwest. The Midwest produces 27% of the nation’s agricultural goods.

What are plant hardiness zones?  

The USDA Plant Hardiness Zone map has 13 zones, which serve as guidelines for growers on what kind of plants will grow well in their area. 

“Hardiness zones are meant to at least delineate which species or cultivars of species could be planted based on their survival,” said Einhorn, who specializes in plant hardiness science, particularly with fruit tree species.  

Each zone covers about 10 degrees — for example, Iowa lies primarily in zone 5, which means its coldest temperatures range from -20 degrees to -10 degrees Fahrenheit on average. Each zone is further divided into 5 degree half zones — the northern half of Iowa is in 5a, the southern half in 5b. 

Madelynn Wuestenberg, an agricultural climatology extension specialist with Iowa State University, said that plant hardiness zones are defined by their average coldest temperatures. The averages are calculated over 30 years.   

In 2023, using new averages, the USDA updated the map, moving about half of the country up by half a plant zone, meaning average minimum temperatures rose by zero to 5 degrees in the affected places.

Why are the zones shifting north?  

Climate Central, a nonprofit researching climate change and how it affects people, analyzed 243 locations around the United States and found that about 67% of the locations studied based on National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration data have already shifted to warmer planting zones from the mid-1900s to present.

The researchers found that the Northwest and the Southwest, along with Alaska, have been the most affected to date. 

With unabated climate change about 90% of locations examined will likely shift to warmer planting zones by the middle of this century. The Upper Midwest is predicted to be affected most.  

Wuestenberg said winter temperatures in the Midwest are becoming warmer on average, compared to decades past.  

“What we saw from the 1981 to 2010 climatology versus the 1991 to 2020 climatology is we’re really starting to see warming across the U.S.,” Wuestenberg said. “And this has been observed for a long time, and really it’s a pretty consistent overall warming, but the specific amount of warming varies region to region across the U.S.”   

Of the cities with the highest predicted temperature change between now and mid-century, a majority of the top 25 are in the Mississippi River Basin. 

Madison, Wisconsin, for example, is projected to switch from zone 5b to 6a as the average coldest temperature is expected to increase by 8.4 degrees Fahrenheit.

Jefferson City, Missouri, will likely change from zone 6b to zone 7b as the area’s average cold temperatures are projected to increase by 8.3 degrees Fahrenheit.

In Dubuque, Iowa, the average coldest temperatures are expected to rise by 8.3 degrees Fahrenheit, and producers will go from zone 5a to 6a.

Average cold temperatures in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, are on course to warm by 8.2 degrees Fahrenheit, and the region is expected to jump an entire planting zone to 6a. 

The shift in plant hardiness zones could force some growers across the country to select plants that are adapted to a wider and warmer range of temperatures to survive warmer winters and earlier frosts and thaws.  

In some cases, that could mean new opportunities. 

Dean Colony runs Colony Acres Family Farm in North Liberty, Iowa. On his 200-acre farm, he grows pumpkins, corn, soybeans and zinnias. 

His farm is currently in plant hardiness zone five, but Colony said it could be a matter of time before Iowa is able to produce peaches like Missouri and Kentucky can. 

“How many more years is it going to be? I mean, we could grow peaches in Iowa, but it seems like they grow them way better down there,” Colony said. “So is it a matter of time before that comes here?” 

Wuestenberg said one challenge with the shifting zones is that they are based on climatological averages and do not take atypical and significant frost or freeze events into account, which can be challenging for producers. 

Who will be most affected?  

Wuestenberg said gardeners and fruit tree producers will likely be more concerned about the shifting zones, rather than row crop producers. 

Fruit trees and vines need a certain number of chilling hours, which is the minimum period of cold weather a fruit tree needs to blossom. 

For example, Einhorn said most apple trees require about a thousand chilling hours in the winter to break their dormancy period and bloom in the spring.  

But with winters warming, even by a few degrees, apple trees will want to break dormancy earlier.

“Instead of being at 30 degrees Fahrenheit in the winter, maybe now the days are at 34 (degrees Fahrenheit) and that little bit of warming actually has a humongous effect on a tree,” Einhorn said.  

The apple trees could start flowering in late February or early March.

“Unfortunately, what can happen is overall, winter may have been warmer, but we still might get a March, April frost. And once that happens, those buds, those flowers, are exposed to that cold temperature, and then it kills them,” Wuestenberg said.   

This could lead to reduced fruit yields later in the season.  

But Einhorn said there are ways that producers can work within the unpredictable conditions.  

For example, there are various methods for raising temperatures for trees during a freeze, including using fans to pull warm air out of the atmosphere and running water over plants. There are also research efforts underway breeding new plants that have either delayed blooms or can withstand the new conditions.   

Meanwhile, farmers will continue to adapt. Jones, the flower farmer, has noticed strong winds and storms coming through the eastern Iowa region. She’s planted sunflowers in windier areas of the farm because they can withstand stronger gusts. More delicate flowers go near trees for natural protection. She also uses netting to help stabilize flowers from winds, rains and storms. 

 “At the end of the season, we’re at the mercy of our climate and the weather,” Jones said. “And that can greatly impact what we have in any given season.”  

This story is a product of the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an independent reporting network based at the University of Missouri in partnership with Report for America, with major funding from the Walton Family Foundation.

Wisconsin Watch is a member of the Ag & Water Desk network. Sign up for our newsletters to get our news straight to your inbox.

A warming climate is changing growing conditions, shifting planting zones northward is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

About this video

The Local Food Purchase Assistance program, or LFPA, was a federal program that awarded states two-year grants to help small farmers invest in their local food systems while growing their businesses. 

The Trump administration gutted the program in March, just as farmers started placing seed orders. The timing particularly affected livestock farmers who often need to commit to the size of their herd and harvest over a year in advance. 

Wisconsin Watch staff writer Bennet Goldstein spent weeks talking with producers affected by the loss of LFPA, including Jess D’Souza, a pork farmer in Dane County. During one of several visits to her farm, he and photojournalist Patricio Crooker watched meat processors harvest her pigs to fully appreciate how food travels from farm to plate.

On a separate visit to the farm, Joe Timmerman photographed Jess and her herd of Gloucestershire Old Spots pigs, documenting many beautiful moments on the piece of agricultural land that she purchased nearly a decade ago and eventually named Wonderfarm. 

Collectively, the images tell a story of life, death and resilience on a small farm – but  some viewers may find some of the images in the video uncomfortable or even emotionally upsetting. Our decision to include them was the result of many discussions that touch on long-standing debates in newsrooms about when it is justified to publish or showcase disquieting images related to death, injury or violence. 

Some of the questions raised in these discussions don’t have simple answers. For instance, Bennet wonders whether our desire to outsource meat production to others —  and hide the bloody parts of that business — contributes to the characterization of these photos as being in poor taste or emotionally disturbing.

We welcome your thoughts and feedback on any of the issues and questions raised in this reporting.

As for the LFPA program’s future, Wisconsin producers hope to see funding restored in the yet-to-be-debated federal Farm Bill. 

Video: life, death and resilience at Wonderfarm is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Riley has been rooted in agriculture for generations, embodying the resilience and dedication that define the farming community. Yet, like so many in the industry, they have experienced firsthand the immense pressures that come with farming. In 2024, their beloved Jimmy lost his struggle to maintain mental health, leaving behind a grieving wife and five young children determined to turn their loss into hope for others. In response to their personal loss, Riley has committed to supporting mental health awareness and access to resources for farm families nationwide. 

“Our family understands the struggles that so many in agriculture face, and we want Jimmy’s story to raise awareness and be a beacon of hope, encouraging others to seek help when they need it. Asking for help is a sign of strength, not weakness—it does not define who you are, but rather shows your courage to keep going,” said Riley Boschma. “Through this gift, we hope to ensure that farm families have access to the mental health support they need and to reduce the stigma that prevents many from seeking help.” 

The Farm Family Wellness Alliance, an initiative of Farm Foundation in partnership with most major agricultural organizations in the US, including 4H, American Farmer Bureau Federation, FFA, Farmers Union, and others, provides farm families with free, confidential access to mental health support through an online peer-to-peer community, professional resources, and crisis intervention services. Since its national launch in 2024, the program has expanded to serve farmers and agricultural communities across 47 states, offering a safe space for connection and healing through TogetherAll, an online mental health support community exclusively for American farm family members aged 16 and above. 

“The generosity of Riley Boschma and her children will have a lasting impact on the lives of so many in agriculture,” said Shari Rogge-Fidler, CEO of Farm Foundation. “This gift not only honors Jimmy’s legacy but also strengthens our ability to reach more farm families with critical mental health resources. We are grateful for their commitment to creating meaningful change in the industry.” 

Farmers are the backbone of our nation, yet they often carry an invisible burden. As economic pressures, unpredictable weather, and the weight of legacy continue to challenge those in agriculture, access to mental health support is more vital than ever. Riley’s contribution underscores the urgent need for expanded resources in rural communities and serves as a call to action for others to invest in the well-being of those who feed the nation. Learn more about the Boschma farm at www.boschmafarms.org   

The post The Gift of Hope: Dedication to Mental Health in Rural Communities appeared first on Farm Foundation.

Farm Foundation recently hosted a thought-provoking panel discussion in partnership with the Farm Robotics Challenge, offering college students a unique opportunity to gain insight into real-world agricultural challenges and how technology can play a pivotal role in addressing them. The panel brought together voices from across the agricultural value chain—farmers, innovators, and industry leaders—to discuss the future of robotics in farming and provide direct feedback to the student teams as they embark on their robotics projects. 

If you would like to watch the panel discussion, you can access the full recording here. 

Who Participated? 

The panel featured an incredible lineup of experts and practitioners who shared their perspectives: 

Klaas Martens: Klaas is a third-generation farmer in New York. He operates Martens Farm and Lakeview Organic Grain Mill with his wife Mary Howell Martens and their son Peter. On 1,600 acres, he produces numerous crops, including corn, soybeans, spelt, wheat, einkorn, emmer, triticale, buckwheat, oats, barley, rye, cabbage, dry beans, and hay. He’s been farming since the 1970s and shifted to organic farming in the 90s. Klaas is a Farm Foundation Round Table Fellow.

David Hill: Southern Hill Farms, owned and operated by the Hill family, has deep roots in agriculture. David and Lisa Hill, along with their sons Michael and Kyle and daughter-in-law Brooke, continue a farming legacy that began with Lisa’s grandfather in Virginia and extended to Central Florida in the mid-20th century. Starting with ornamental trees in Clermont, the Hills diversified in 2010 by planting blueberries, eventually welcoming the public in 2014 for u-pick events and community gatherings. Today, Southern Hill Farms is a beloved Central Florida destination, known for its Fall Festival, farm market, and family-friendly experiences. David is also a Farm Foundation Round Table Fellow.  

Kevin Seidel: Kevin Seidl is a group product manager for the John Deere Operations Center (JDOC) at John Deere. He leads a group of product managers responsible for key features within the JDOC, with a specific focus on live remote monitoring and equipment & agronomic analysis capabilities. As a software engineer, Kevin has built some of the foundational features of the JDOC program. Throughout his 15-plus years at John Deere, he has had various product management roles of increasing responsibility, where he has focused on the JDOC’s monitoring and analysis capabilities. Kevin earned a bachelor’s degree in computer science from Bradley University and a master’s in business administration from the University of Iowa. 

Moderator: Tim Brennan, VP of Programs and Strategic Impact at Farm Foundation, who guided the discussion and connected the insights to Farm Foundation’s broader mission. 

Key Themes and Insights 

1. Automation and the Labor Shortage 

Farmers face ongoing labor shortages, making automation and robotics an urgent need rather than a luxury. Panelists emphasized that technology should not replace workers but rather enable farmers to address gaps in their workforce. Solutions like autonomous machinery and follow-me functionality were highlighted as transformative tools that could alleviate these challenges. 

2. Harvesting Challenges and Opportunities 

One of the most pressing issues discussed was the need for robotics to address harvesting challenges, particularly in specialty crops like strawberries. Unlike blueberries, which already have some mechanical solutions, strawberries require precision to pick ripe fruit without damage. Developing robotics capable of 24/7 harvesting could revolutionize the industry. 

3. Smaller, Smarter Machines for Soil Health 

Larger machinery has contributed to significant soil health concerns, including compaction and increased energy use. Panelists discussed the opportunity for robotics to lead the way toward smaller, lighter, and more collaborative machines. These innovations would not only protect soil but also reduce operational energy demands. 

4. Practical, Farmer-Centered Solutions 

A recurring theme throughout the discussion was the importance of creating practical, problem-solving technology. Farmers need innovations that work in diverse conditions, are reliable, and solve specific challenges like soil conditions or adverse weather. 

Farm Foundation’s Mission in Action 

Hosting this panel aligns directly with Farm Foundation’s mission: to build trust and understanding at the intersections of agriculture and society. By partnering with the Farm Robotics Challenge, Farm Foundation supports the next generation of innovators and provides a vital space for collaboration between farmers and technology developers. 

This event highlighted the importance of bringing real-world agricultural perspectives to the forefront, ensuring that technology is grounded in practicality and addresses the evolving needs of those throughout the food and agriculture value chain. 

What’s Next? 

As the student teams dive into their robotics projects, we look forward to seeing how their ideas take shape and how they tackle the challenges outlined during the panel. The Farm Robotics Challenge serves as a testament to the power of collaboration and innovation in shaping the future of agriculture. 

We’re proud to continue fostering connections between agriculture, technology, and society, and we can’t wait to see how these students contribute to a more innovative and sustainable agricultural future. 

The post Bridging Innovation and Agriculture: Insights from the Farm Robotics Challenge Panel  appeared first on Farm Foundation.

Farm Foundation’s Meet Your Farmer podcast featured Steve Kaufman in season 1, episode 3.

Steve is a fifth-generation farmer. He returned to his family’s Idaho farm full time in 2014 when his uncles and father were ready to retire. He and his two brothers farm 14,000 dryland crop acres, growing primarily winter wheat, spring wheat, peas, garbanzo beans, and canola. Prior to that, he worked at Northwest Farm Credit Services while also farming part time. Steve is an alum of Farm Foundation’s Young Farmer Accelerator Program.

In this episode, Steve talks about how gratifying it is to produce enough grain for 30 million loaves of bread on his farm, the hard work of trying to balance life with young kids and farm life, and what the process was like to switch over to no-till.

Listen to the episode.

Music: “Country Roads” by Sergii Pavkin from Pixabay

Reach us at communication@farmfoundation.org.

The post Farm Foundation’s Meet Your Farmer Podcast with Steve Kaufman appeared first on Farm Foundation.