Congress is looking to roll back state animal welfare laws as it wrangles over reauthorization of the federal farm bill.

The farm bill, which Congress generally reworks every five years, includes money and federal rules for food assistance programs, farm subsidies, and other ag-related programs.

A pending version of the legislation includes the Save Our Bacon Act, which would block states from regulating the raising of livestock. The measure takes direct aim at California’s Proposition 12, which requires farms to meet specific standards providing animals freedom of movement, cage-free confinement and minimum floor space.

A key component of California’s law effectively bans hog sow farms from using gestation crates — pens so small that mother pigs can’t even turn around. Currently, at least 15 states ban battery cages for egg-laying hens, gestation crates for sows or veal crates for calves.

California’s law includes protections for egg-laying hens, but the current farm bill proposal that Congress is considering specifically excludes them.

The California law also bars retailers from selling meats raised in other states that don’t meet the state’s standards. Opponents say that provision places a heavy burden on producers across the country who must meet different standards for different markets.

“This legislation will stop out-of-touch activists — who don’t know the first thing about farming — from dictating how Iowa farmers do their job,” U.S. Rep. Ashley Hinson, an Iowa Republican, said when introducing the Save Our Bacon Act last year.

But supporters of the California law say consumers increasingly demand higher animal welfare standards. They note that farmers outside of California are free to ignore the law — if they choose not to sell into the nation’s most populous state.

A spokesperson for the California Department of Food and Agriculture, which enforces Proposition 12 regulations, said the agency could not comment on pending legislation.

California Assemblywoman Esmeralda Soria, the Democratic chair of the agriculture committee, said voters “spoke clearly” when more than 62% approved the 2018 ballot measure.

“Taking Prop 12 away now, would create long term uncertainty and disruption to California meat and egg production,” Soria said in a statement. “We can do better for California agriculture, and for the millions of people who rely on stable and affordable food systems.”

Following an unsuccessful legal challenge to Proposition 12 by pork producers, lawmakers and ag interests have been pushing for years for federal action to block similar laws. While a similar anti-Proposition 12 measure was introduced in 2023 farm bill negotiations, the effort has gained some momentum after receiving bipartisan support in the U.S. House of Representatives, which approved the farm bill legislation by a 224-200 vote in late April. It’s now the subject of Senate negotiations.

The yearslong debate over agricultural regulations has inflamed tensions between states and the feds over who should regulate various sectors of the economy, mirroring ongoing debates about artificial intelligence and online prediction markets.

An issue of state autonomy

Most of the focus has centered on California, which has the world’s fourth largest economy. But opponents say the congressional proposal could upend hundreds of state laws and regulations.

An analysis by Harvard Law School’s Animal Law and Policy Clinic concluded that the Save Our Bacon Act could affect more than 600 state agricultural regulations, including seafood labeling requirements, food safety regulations and state restrictions aimed at preventing the spread of pests and diseases, such as the New World screwworm.

“Congress would be overturning the results of democratic elections and devaluing animal welfare investments made by livestock producers across the country,” researchers wrote, noting it would take years for regulators and courts to sort out implementation of the legal change, creating years of uncertainty for regulators, consumers and producers.

Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller said he doesn’t agree with California’s mandates but said he would “defend to my dying day California’s right to self-determination.”

In an interview, Miller said Proposition 12 has driven up the price of eggs and pork. But he said the Constitution’s 10th Amendment clearly endows states with such power by reserving for the states those powers not delegated to the federal government.

“It is what it is,” he said. “I’m ready to move on and accept Prop 12.”

Miller, who recently lost the Republican primary for reelection, said producers who have poured millions into revamping their operations to ensure more space for animals would be “up a creek without a paddle” if the law is blocked by Congress.

“They spent all that money for nothing if that happens,” he said.

Proponents say consumers are already demanding higher standards.

“No one is mandated to sell in California, and I think that’s a really important piece of this. This is all market driven, and so there are other options,” said Alicia Prygoski, strategic legislative affairs manager for the Animal Legal Defense Fund, a nonprofit advocating for animal protections.

Prygoski characterized Proposition 12 as a “common sense, reasonable measure” that allows animals the freedom to move and exhibit natural behaviors. She rejected arguments that such animal welfare laws create a burdensome patchwork of regulations for farmers, noting that states already have a variety of ag rules regarding animal imports, noxious weed transportation and zoonotic diseases.

‘We care a lot about our animals’

Trish Cook, who raises about 40,000 pigs per year on her family’s Iowa farm, said large-scale swine operations like hers rely on scientific guidance from groups such as the American Veterinary Medical Association and American Association of Swine Veterinarians.

Cook is a board member of the Iowa Pork Producers and the National Pork Producers Council, the latter of which unsuccessfully sued to block California’s Proposition 12. In 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision upheld California’s rules.

In April, the organization and the American Farm Bureau Federation wrote to congressional leaders arguing that Proposition 12 has created uncertainty across rural America, especially on small and medium-size farms that can’t afford to retrofit barns. The letter was signed by nearly 400 agricultural groups.

The issue is particularly relevant in Iowa, by far the nation’s largest pork producer with nearly one-third of American hogs raised there.

Cook said most pig farmers she knows are not producing Proposition 12-compliant pork because California’s demand is being met. But, she said, Congress must protect farmers before more states pass different rules and regulations.

“I do still feel like it’s really important that we get a fix for things like Prop 12, because this is just the beginning,” she said.

Cook said consumers across the country should have access to her pork products without following “arbitrary” rules created by state ballot measures. As an example, she cited the California requirement that each sow have access to 24 square feet of usable floor space. That footage allows the sow to turn around completely within its pen.

“If you didn’t enjoy raising pigs, you wouldn’t be in the business,” she said. “So we care a lot about our animals, we care about taking care of them, having them in the best facilities, and being comfortable with the climate that we provide them.”

Some producers, though, say they are troubled by the confinement systems commonly used in industrial agriculture.

“Keeping a 500-pound gestating sow in a metal crate where she can’t ever turn around for the vast majority of her adult life is simply not good animal husbandry,” said Alicia LaPorte, senior director of communications and impact at Niman Ranch, a national network of hundreds of farms producing what they call humanely raised meat.

Although Niman’s 500 hog farms have always been crate free, LaPorte said they have spent time and money ensuring compliance with California’s Proposition 12. She said the proposed legislation in Congress would pull the rug out from under family farmers who played by the rules and made huge investments to comply.

“They are actively devaluing these investments, disrupting stable markets and putting forward-thinking family farms at financial risk,” she said.

By moving away from confinement to more humane practices like group housing, LaPorte said producers can see increased profitability through improved sow health, lower stress and higher conception rates. And growing demand for such products pushed laws like Proposition 12 in the first place.

“The consumer drove the change,” she said, “and policy secured the marketplace.”

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org. 

The signs and rope can be seen just to the left of the park trail that leads to the beach. One sign reads "private property, no trespassing, violators will be prosecuted."

The post Private property signs go up along shoreline past popular nature preserve in Ozaukee County appeared first on WPR.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

New federal dollars could extend the life of one of Wisconsin’s remaining coal power plants.

The Trump administration plans to spend $425 million to support operations at 13 coal plants in 10 states, arguing the move will help meet rising electricity demand and preserve thousands of jobs tied to the ailing coal industry. The White House will do so by invoking the Defense Production Act, a Cold War-era law that gives the president broad authority to accelerate American industrial output at times of crisis.

Some of that funding could go to Madison-based utility Alliant Energy, which told Wisconsin Watch that it applied for a $19 million grant to extend the life of coal-powered units it owns at the Columbia Energy Center near Portage in central Wisconsin. The utility previously planned to retire the plant’s coal units before the end of the decade. 

President Donald Trump announced the action from the Oval Office Thursday, highlighting  that the coal plants set to benefit are all in states he won during the 2024 election.

 “Wisconsin put you over the edge,” U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden, R-Wis., interjected, standing among the gaggle of Republican lawmakers and Cabinet officials behind the president. 

“Our action will allow these facilities to invest in upgrades that will extend their operational lives for decades into the future, reinforce the reliability of our electrical grid … and keep electricity prices low for the American people,” Trump said, adding that the move may also bolster the nation’s artificial intelligence boom.  

The administration will also distribute $200 million in Department of Energy grants to reopen a coal plant in Maryland and build the first new coal plants in the U.S. in over a decade: one in Alaska and another in West Virginia.

The Trump administration has already intervened to block the retirement of coal plants in Michigan, Indiana and elsewhere. But the White House did not pair those earlier orders with funding to support ongoing operations, so ratepayers across most of the Midwest — including in Wisconsin — will pick up the bill for those extensions.

Wisconsin’s Citizens Utility Board (CUB) and other Midwestern ratepayer advocacy groups have since filed an amicus brief in support of a lawsuit challenging federal orders blocking the closure of the Michigan and Indiana plants. The costs of extending aging coal plants’ operations “are adding to an affordability challenge customers are already experiencing in Wisconsin and nearby states,” said CUB Wisconsin Executive Director Tom Content.

Alliant has already pushed back the retirement dates for its coal-powered generators at the Columbia Energy Center and Edgewater Energy Center in Sheboygan. The company initially pledged to shut down the last coal generator at the Columbia plant by 2024; Alliant did not clarify the new expected life span of the plant. 

The Edgewater plant is slated to transition to natural gas generation by 2029.

Coal generation accounts for a declining share of Wisconsin’s and the Midwest’s overall energy mix. Natural gas surpassed coal as the state’s primary fuel for generating electricity in 2022.

Wisconsin ratepayers owe at least $1 billion to pay off debts tied to retired coal plants, including We Energies’ now-shuttered Pleasant Prairie Power Plant in Kenosha County.

Extending operations at Alliant’s remaining coal plants could reduce the amount ratepayers will still owe when those facilities eventually close. 

Wisconsin clean energy advocates reacted with alarm to the White House’s doubling down on coal generation. 

“Burning coal in Wisconsin releases a long list of toxic chemicals and heavy metals, both into the air and water,” said Clean Wisconsin spokesperson Amy Barrilleaux. “No one in Wisconsin is asking for more mercury, arsenic, lead or soot. But we will be getting all of it, especially as the Trump administration dismantles pollution safeguards at coal plants, insisting more power is needed for the ‘AI data center revolution.’”

“It’s also important to note that burning coal is one of the most expensive ways to produce energy in Wisconsin — far more expensive than wind and solar farms, which are the cheapest,” she added. “So Wisconsinites will have higher energy costs and will be paying for the health costs, the longer we burn coal in this state.”

Alliant has scaled up investments in renewable energy generation in recent years, buoyed in part by clean energy tax credits extended by the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022. The U.S. Department of Energy also agreed to back $3 billion in loans supporting Alliant’s wind generation and battery storage buildouts in the final days of the Biden administration.

The Trump administration has since largely reversed Biden-era tax incentives for renewable energy development. In its 2025 annual report to the Securities and Exchange Commission, Alliant noted that the termination of clean energy tax credits could “adversely impact” the company’s finances. 

The company did not immediately respond to an inquiry about the status of Department of Energy financing for its wind and battery storage projects.

U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum argued Thursday that clean energy tax incentives created a false impression of the viability of renewable energy sources. Wind energy developers, he said, “weren’t trying to generate electricity. They’re just trying to generate tax credits.”

“Energy shouldn’t need subsidy,” Trump responded.

Editor’s note: This story was updated on June 5, 2026 to include information from Citizens Utility Board of Wisconsin

Wisconsin power plant could benefit from Trump’s $425 million coal push 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: 3 minutes

The manufacturer of a firefighting foam that contaminated the water supply in northeastern Wisconsin with PFAS chemicals for decades agreed to a $10 million settlement with the state, the governor and attorney general announced on Thursday.

The settlement comes as residents, communities, regulators and environmental activists across the country are struggling with how to address contamination from PFAS, also known as “forever chemicals.”

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers hailed the settlement with Tyco Fire Products as a “historic and important milestone” in the fight for clean water. The lawsuit filed in 2022 alleged that Tyco, a subsidiary of Johnson Controls, had contaminated the area around a firefighting training center since the 1960s and did not do enough to address it.

“Today’s a key step toward making sure polluters are held accountable, take responsibility for their actions, and ensure Wisconsinites don’t have to foot the bill for cleaning up the messes that others made,” Evers said in a statement announcing the deal.

But residents of the affected city of Marinette were hoping for more.

“The word of the day is underwhelming from our perspective,” said Doug Oitzinger, a former mayor of Marinette and current president of the advocacy group Save Our Water. “The dollar amount disappointed us. Ten million is kind of a drop in the bucket.”

Tyco ended outdoor training sessions with the foam containing PFAS chemicals in 2017. Also that year, the company first started providing bottled water and water purification systems to affected residents. The company says it has spent more than $100 million addressing the contamination.

Tyco said in a statement Thursday that it was pleased to have reached the deal, saying it “reflects the extensive work Tyco has undertaken” to address PFAS pollution.

“We’ve been part of the Marinette community for over 100 years and the spirit of doing what is best for our neighbors and the environment will continue to be our priority,” the company said.

PFAS are often referred to as forever chemicals because they resist breaking down, whether in well water or the environment. In the human body, they accumulate in the liver, kidneys and blood. Research has linked them to an increased risk of certain cancers and developmental delays in children.

The chemicals were developed as coatings to protect consumer goods from stains, water and corrosion. Nonstick cookware, carpets, outdoor gear and food packaging are among items that contain the chemicals. They also are an ingredient in firefighting foams.

Government estimates suggest that up to half of all U.S. households have some level of PFAS in their water — whether it comes from a private well or a tap. It is a widespread problem in Wisconsin and spawned numerous lawsuits.

Under the terms of the settlement announced Thursday, Wisconsin will put the $10 million from Tyco into a trust fund earmarked for PFAS cleanup. Tyco also agreed to continue to provide for replacement wells to provide clean drinking water to affected residents, conduct required monitoring and reporting, and implement further measures for the long-term remediation of the area.

The lawsuit, filed by Democratic Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, alleged that the company violated state law when it failed to notify regulators about a PFAS discharge and did not investigate or remediate the contamination around the Fire Technology Center in Marinette, a city of about 11,000 people that borders Michigan’s Upper Peninsula.

Tyco officials said at the time the lawsuit was filed that the company has invested “considerable resources” on investigating and remediating PFAS pollution from the Marinette firefighting training facility, including offering bottled water and in-home filtration systems to affected residents as well as building a groundwater pollution extraction system.

A second lawsuit filed by the state against Tyco and more than a dozen other companies over PFAS contamination in Wisconsin remains active.

The settlement announced Thursday will take effect if it’s approved by the judge overseeing the case.

Oitzinger, the former Marinette mayor, said Tyco was getting off too easy.

“Legally you may have gotten off of some hooks, but morally you’re not there,” he said. “You’re not there by a long shot.”

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Tyco agrees to $10 million settlement with Wisconsin over PFAS water contamination 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.

Gov. Tony Evers announced the state’s first settlement with a Marinette manufacturer of firefighting foam over alleged violations of the state’s spills law for failing to report PFAS contamination.

The post Wisconsin reaches $10M settlement with Tyco, Johnson Controls over PFAS contamination appeared first on WPR.

The state of Wisconsin and Tyco Fire Products have reached a settlement agreement to help clean up the environment and provide clean drinking water in Marinette, where the company’s actions have caused PFAS contamination in the city water supply. 

Under the settlement, Tyco agreed to pay $10 million into the state’s PFAS remediation trust fund, provide clean drinking water to residents in the affected area and work with the Department of Natural Resources to clean up the contamination. The agreement concludes a lawsuit filed by the state Department of Justice against Tyco in 2022 in which the state accused Tyco of failing to notify the state of the PFAS discharge and then failing to properly remediate the pollution. 

A separate legal action in which the state sued the manufacturers of products containing PFAS, including Tyco, is still pending. 

Officials on Thursday celebrated the settlement as a historic first for the state in its efforts to hold polluters accountable for the PFAS pollution that has affected communities across Wisconsin. 

“Today is a historic and important milestone in our fight to make sure every Wisconsinite has access to clean and safe drinking water, whether they live in Marinette or Stella or on French Island or anywhere in between,” Gov. Tony Evers said in a statement. “While today is an important victory, we know our work cannot stop. For the folks in Marinette, this day has been a long time coming, but we know that for so many families and communities across our state, dealing with PFAS pollution is still a daily reality. Here in Wisconsin, we must keep working to tackle PFAS head-on, and that includes continuing to hold PFAS polluters accountable for the damage they’ve caused and are causing across our state.”

PFAS are a group of manmade chemical compounds commonly called “forever chemicals” because they don’t break down in the body or environment. They’ve been used in household goods such as non-stick pans and fast food wrappers, as well as certain kinds of firefighting foam. PFAS have been connected to health problems, including birth defects and certain types of cancer. 

The settlement marks another action by the state this year to address the state’s PFAS problems. In April, Evers signed into law a bill that will release $125 million to help communities test for and clean up PFAS contamination in the local water. 

The enactment of that law ended a multi-year legislative saga to reach bipartisan agreement on how to best structure the clean up programs and who should be held responsible for the pollution. 

“Municipalities like Marinette and Peshtigo have waited far too long for this day to come. Now, the work begins to turn this settlement into relief for pollution victims,” Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Gillett), the PFAS law’s main author, said in a statement. “Now, every single dollar from the Tyco settlement will go into the PFAS Trust Fund and be used to support affected victims and communities.”

But clean water advocates in the area said in a Thursday evening press release they’re disappointed in the settlement — mostly due to the state’s agreement to reduce the area for which Tyco is being held responsible. SOH20, a Marinette-based group that has pushed for better protections of PFAS-affected communities across the state, said that the boundaries the state agreed to means that 80 households with contaminated private wells won’t get the support they need.

“Safe drinking water should never become a competition between contaminated communities,” said SOH2O. “By placing these funds into a statewide PFAS trust fund, impacted residents across Wisconsin are now forced to compete against one another for limited resources, despite all communities being equally deserving of clean, safe drinking water.”

This report has been updated with a statement from SOH20 in Marinette.

The Cenovus oil refinery in Superior has shut down a unit that treats and removes hydrogen sulfide gas due to a small leak, according to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.

The post Superior refinery shuts down unit that removes harmful emissions appeared first on WPR.

The lab tests products for how well they break down and how beneficial the material is for plants.

The post Building up, breaking down: UW-Stevens Point expanding its compostability lab appeared first on WPR.

The Apostle Islands National Lakeshore will bid farewell this summer to a historic light tower that’s been compromised by storm damage and shoreline erosion on Lake Superior.

The post Once a beacon of light, historic tower in Apostle Islands will be dismantled appeared first on WPR.

The world’s largest meat and dairy companies, many of which operate in Wisconsin, have made hundreds of claims that their practices are sustainable and promises of future climate protection initiatives. But a report released last month in the journal PLOS Climate found that hardly any of those claims are legitimate. 

The report, authored by researchers at the University of Miami, assessed publicly made environmental claims and promises of the 33 largest meat and dairy companies in the world. The corporations assessed in the report includes companies with Wisconsin operations such as Saputo Cheese, Tyson Foods, JBS, Hormel Foods, Dairy Farmers of America and Nestle. 

Since 2021, the corporations made 1,233 environmental claims but, according to the report, 98% of those claims can be called “greenwashing” because they were made without supporting evidence. Only three of the claims were backed with actual peer reviewed studies. 

“This study is consistent with what we have experienced: big claims, big promises, but little in the way of quantifiable improvement in environmental quality,” said George Kraft, the former Director of the Center for Watershed Science and Education at UW-Extension and UW-Stevens Point who now sits on the science council of Wisconsin’s Greenfire. 

The report’s authors argue that it’s important to assess the claims of these companies because corporate meat and dairy operations cause a huge proportion of global greenhouse gas emissions. 

“Meat and dairy companies, which produce disproportionate amounts of pollution relative to other kinds of foods, have prioritized climate change in their sustainability initiatives,” the report states. “They make many promises and provide very little supporting evidence. Like the fossil fuel industry, which has used greenwashing over the last several decades to delay meaningful climate action, the meat and dairy industry may be misleading consumers and investors regarding whether and to what extent they are addressing environmental impacts, including climate change, with even less time to spare.” 

In Wisconsin, economic forces have for decades pushed the state’s dairy industry to get bigger. Hundreds of factory dairy farms are now permitted to operate in the state, putting more cows on more concentrated plots of land while the state’s corporate dairy interests fight at the local and state level to prevent government regulation. 

Tara Greiman, the Wisconsin Farmers Union’s director of conservation and stewardship, told the Wisconsin Examiner that corporate agriculture has been the dominant force in the industry for the last 50 years and the effect of that control on the environment is clear. 

“They can say as much as they want, ‘look at all of our promises, look at what good stewards we are,’ but the fact of the matter is that our groundwater quality is depleting in the sectors that they control, our ecological habitat diversity depleting, we are losing farmers at the same time,” she said. “There’s other economic factors, but speaking in terms of just the climate measurements, they’re not doing a good job.” 

Earlier this month, the environmental organization Clean Wisconsin released a report outlining the steps Wisconsin’s agricultural industry will need to take to help the state achieve its climate emissions goals. The research found that reducing nitrogen fertilizer use, reducing the amount of acreage used for corn-based ethanol production, practices such as no-till and cover crops, better livestock management and the planting of perennials instead of commodity crops would help put Wisconsin on the right track. 

Chelsea Chandler, Clean Wisconsin’s climate, energy and air program director, told the Examiner the fact that corporate agribusiness feels the need to make sustainability claims is a first step. She said that sometimes companies are intentionally “overstating the benefits” of a practice, lack enough data or are extrapolating too much across different parts of the world. Still, the discussion can lead to helpful action and the adoption of scientifically backed solutions. 

Clean Wisconsin’s climate solutions roadmap can help, Chandler said,  “because it’s based on the latest science, it’s tailored specifically to Wisconsin, and it’s checking some of those claims that are overstated when it comes to the climate impacts.” 

Chandler hopes that providing good information will affect investment and support, “whether that’s coming from private companies who are trying to improve their sustainability in their operations, or if that’s coming from governments through different kinds of incentive mechanisms and channeling those into the things that are really having an impact” 

Both Chandler and Greiman said that deliberate choices built the food system we have today and it will take deliberate choices to build something more sustainable. 

“We need a new food system. Growing corn, even if you’re doing no-till, even if you’re cover-cropping after it, if you’re only growing corn and soybeans, it’s not a regenerative system. Full stop,” Greiman said. “We have to have new markets, otherwise we’re just rearranging deck chairs, and the research is saying this.” 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Wisconsin youth are appealing a recent decision to dismiss their legal challenge seeking to strike down state laws that they say worsen the climate crisis and violate their constitutional rights.

The post Wisconsin youth appeal ruling to dismiss climate lawsuit appeared first on WPR.

Wisconsin wildlife regulators and an advisory committee are advising against a hunt for sharp-tailed grouse this fall due to a decline in the bird’s population.

The post Declining population likely means no hunt for sharp-tailed grouse in Wisconsin this year appeared first on WPR.

Hearing backlash from residents, cities and counties across the country in recent weeks have blocked planned data centers amid concerns over rising electricity prices and environmental harms.

The local actions come as state lawmakers also are looking to limit or repeal the incentives for the centers, which are sprawling campuses of computer servers that store and transmit the data behind apps and websites.

Supporters of the pauses say cities need rules before projects arrive, especially to answer residential concerns about electricity use, energy costs and nuisance issues. Industry supporters argue data centers bring jobs and tax revenue and are an essential part of the nation’s digital infrastructure. They warn that communities that block data centers are sacrificing those benefits.

The Denver City Council this month unanimously approved a one-year moratorium on data centers, halting new zoning permits and site development plans while the city drafts rules for future projects. In April, Oklahoma City approved a similar moratorium that will be in effect until the end of this year, or until the city updates its zoning code. Tulsa, Oklahoma, also approved a temporary stop on new data center construction, though major projects already in the pipeline will be allowed to proceed.

Smaller communities are taking similar steps.

In Illinois, both Bloomington and Normal earlier this month approved six-month moratoriums, and Morgan County took the same action in April. In Michigan, Huron County this week approved a three-year moratorium, joining roughly 20 other Michigan communities that have paused data center construction.

In Georgia, Camden County enacted a six-month moratorium earlier this month, becoming the first community on the state’s coast to do so. And a cluster of counties in North Carolina have hit pause, including Chatham County in February and Orange County (which includes Chapel Hill) in April.

But not all cities are souring on data centers: Cheyenne, Wyoming, this week opted not to proceed with a one-year moratorium after a lengthy public hearing.

A study released at the end of 2024 by researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory estimated U.S. data centers used about 4.4% of U.S. electricity in 2023, with projected use rising to between 6.7% and 12% by 2028.

A March Gallup poll found that seven in 10 Americans would oppose the nearby construction of data centers for artificial intelligence (AI), higher than the 53% of respondents who said they would oppose living near a nuclear power plant.

Stateline reporter Robbie Sequeira can be reached at rsequeira@stateline.org

Southern states are bracing for a potential invasion of the New World screwworm that could disrupt livestock markets and raise already high meat prices.

So far, the parasite has yet to land in the United States, but it has been spreading across Mexico and Central America. Previously eradicated from the United States in the 1960s, the fly can infest livestock, pets, wildlife and in rare cases, humans. The parasites are named for their larvae, which burrow into living flesh like a screw, causing severe tissue damage and sometimes death.

With multiple cases reported within 100 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border, the federal government has already banned the import of live cattle from Mexico, compounding the shortage of domestic beef. State and federal officials also have created new monitoring, testing and quarantine protocols even as the feds put in place measures to sterilize millions of flies — including a $750 million new facility that will produce sterile flies.

“It’s going to be very challenging, I think, at this point to keep it out of the United States,” said Dr. Samantha Holeck, state veterinarian with the New Mexico Livestock Board, which regulates the livestock industry.

Beef prices are already at record highs, with federal data showing the average price of ground beef at $6.90 per pound this month. That’s a 77% increase since January 2020, when ground beef stood at $3.89 per pound, Yahoo Finance reported.

Years of drought, increased operating costs and other supply disruptions have pushed ranchers to liquidate their herds to the smallest level in 75 years, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation. Despite the drop in supply, demand remains strong, which has pushed many ranchers to feed cattle to record-high weights.

Beef prices are unlikely to fall, because it takes time to grow herds and increase production, said David Anderson, professor and extension specialist in livestock and food product marketing at Texas A&M University. He said beef producers appear well prepared to fight a domestic screwworm invasion, which many view as an inevitability.

“I think we will re-eradicate it. I think it just depends on how much time it takes us to do that,” he said.

But the market has already been disrupted by the ban on live Mexican cattle imports, which traditionally occupy American pastures and feedlots before going to slaughter.

“We certainly are feeling the consequences of our policy response to fears of screwworms,” he said.

‘A long-term response’

Last week, the New Mexico Department of Agriculture launched a new website in collaboration with several agencies to provide a single source of information about the New World screwworm, including how to identify infestations, protect people and animals, and report suspected cases.

As screwworm approaches New Mexico, agencies focus on outreach with few details on broader response

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has approved emergency use of several medications for prevention and treatment of the parasite. Those include ivermectin, the drug that many people hoarded for off-label use during the coronavirus pandemic, even though the U.S. Food and Drug Administration did not approve its use for the virus. But Holeck said ranchers must be careful about starting preventive medications too early and overusing them.

“While it’s important that we have these medications, we need to be very judicious about how we use them, because we don’t want to create resistance to these medications and then have them become ineffective,” Holeck said.

The fly larvae (maggots) can burrow into the flesh of living animals through wounds as small as a tick bite or in body openings such as the eyes or nose. About the size of a common housefly, the adult screwworm fly has orange eyes, a metallic blue or green body, and three dark stripes along the back.

Holeck said ranchers will need to keep close watch over newborn calves with exposed umbilical cords. They may also have to rethink branding and tagging operations in the case of an infestation, because those wounds can provide an entry for the pests.

New Mexico has distributed test kits to every county extension office for producers and the general public who suspect cases. Holeck said the state has already performed about 30 tests — all were negative.

She noted that the last infestation took more than a decade for American and Mexican officials to eradicate.

“It’s not going to be a quick fix,” she said. “It’s going to be a long-term response, and it’s going to require everybody to work together to help get control of it.”

‘We’re going to get infested’

To combat the screwworm, the federal government plans to breed sterile male flies and then release them into areas with established populations. The sterilized males will mate with females, which will then lay unfertilized eggs. With females mating only once in their lifespan, officials say this method progressively reduces and eliminates the fly population.

USDA just broke ground on a $750 million sterile fly facility in Edinburg, Texas, that aims to produce up to 300 million sterile flies per week when it opens next year. The agency has also invested in sterile fly facilities in Mexico and Panama.

But Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller said those plants won’t produce enough sterile flies to eradicate the parasites.

“We’re going to get infested,” he said. “There’s no doubt about it. And USDA knows that. They’ve already distributed test kits to ranchers and farmers and veterinarians and wildlife personnel up and down the Rio Grande.”

“It wouldn’t surprise me if we had a case today,” he said earlier this month.

Miller said ranchers should have no trouble accessing effective drugs like ivermectin, which he said he still personally takes each week.

He expects the screwworm to cause temporary fluctuations in livestock markets as ranchers treat and quarantine affected herds. Texas is by far the nation’s leading beef producer, with more than 12.5 million cattle. For now, he expects an outbreak to affect animals in a few counties along the Southern border.

“Now, if the whole state of Texas gets infected, that’s a lot,” he said.

In the case of an outbreak, USDA has created monitoring, reporting and quarantine protocols for animals. But because the disease does not create food safety concerns, the agency will not stop any movement of animal products, including meat.

But the infestation could ripple to other animal products, livestock and even pets, officials warn. 

While ranchers can hold back cattle during an outbreak, dairies may face immediate losses during infections, according to the University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources. 

“Dairy cows produce milk every day that must be processed immediately — if a farm is quarantined or a plant shuts down, milk spoils quickly and has to be dumped,” said Daniela Bruno, a dairy adviser with University of California Cooperative Extension.

She said producers should review their insurance coverage and bolster biosecurity against threats such as screwworm and avian flu, which has reemerged in California dairies.

The federal government and states have been preparing for months.

On a February trip to the Rio Grande Valley with Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott, USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins said, “We are as prepared as we could possibly be.” In March, the secretary told Oklahoma Farm Report that the agency had predicted an invasion into Texas as early as last summer, but she acknowledged the ongoing risk.

“There’s no question, when you look at the heat maps, that it is in large proportion moving up,” she said of the screwworm.

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org. 

Anyone hunting for a Wisconsin elk license is quickly running out of time — and with only 16 tags — applications need to be turned in before May 31.

The post Only Wisconsin residents can hunt elk, but the clock’s ticking for applications appeared first on WPR.

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources can now begin crafting regulations for special bag and size limits for walleye as populations are declining on some lakes.

The post Wisconsin seeks to quickly set special bag limits for walleye on lakes seeing declines appeared first on WPR.

Vermont became the first state to ban the use of the highly toxic herbicide paraquat after Republican Gov. Phil Scott signed Democratic-sponsored legislation this week. 

Vermont’s new law bans the sale or use of paraquat without explicit approval from the secretary of agriculture. Widely used to control weeds in major crops across the country, that chemical is linked to Parkinson’s disease.

More than a dozen states have recently introduced legislation to ban or limit the use of paraquat, according to The Council of State Governments. 

“With Vermont leading the way, states across the country now have a clear path to end the use of one of the most toxic herbicides still on the market,” Geoff Horsfield, legislative director for the Environmental Working Group, said in a news release. “This is a turning point in the effort to protect public health from a chemical that has been tied to devastating neurological harm.”

The nonprofit research and advocacy organization has been pushing for an end of paraquat use, which is banned in more than 70 countries.

Lawmakers in nearby New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania are also considering paraquat bans. And bills to ban or limit its use have been proposed in Hawaii, Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, Utah, Virginia, Washington and West Virginia. 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says paraquat is one of the nation’s most widely used herbicides. But because of its inherent risks, only certified individuals may apply the herbicide and the agency warns against using it near home gardens, schools, parks, golf courses or playgrounds.

“Paraquat is highly toxic,” EPA’s website says. “One small sip can be fatal and there is no antidote.” 

Contact to the skin, swallowing or breathing the herbicide can cause lung damage, heart failure, kidney failure and has been linked to certain cancers. 

Agricultural giant Syngenta has faced thousands of lawsuits from people claiming the company did not warn consumers of the dangers of its weedkiller Gramoxone, whose key ingredient is paraquat. 

In March, Syngenta announced it would end global production of paraquat by the end of June. 

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org.

A Microsoft official said Tuesday the company doesn’t expect its data centers in the Great Lakes region will reach a threshold that would trigger greater review under the Great Lakes Compact.

The post Microsoft doesn’t expect its data centers will trigger review under Great Lakes Compact appeared first on WPR.

The National Park Service recently purchased more than 200 acres for the country’s longest national scenic trail along the south shore of Lake Superior in northern Wisconsin.

The post Around 200 acres protected along Lake Superior for longest national scenic trail appeared first on WPR.

Proponents of ethanol, including lawmakers from corn-growing states, say year-round sales of a gasoline blend containing 15% of the biofuel would give consumers a less expensive alternative to fill their gas tanks, boost energy supplies and benefit agricultural interests.

So why hasn’t Congress allowed it?

There’s credible skepticism about those claims — and opposition from the strange bedfellows of environmental advocates and lawmakers from states where oil production and refining are major industries. As a result, expanding the availability of E15, as the blend is called, has become a congressional brawl with no predictable result.

The outcome of this debate, which will continue in June when Congress returns from its Memorial Day recess, largely depends on whether the push for year-round E15 use can get 60 U.S. Senate votes after the U.S. House this month passed legislation allowing it and the White House has signaled its support.

“I don’t know if it can get 60, to be honest with you,” Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chair Shelley Moore Capito, a Republican from West Virginia, said in an interview.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune offered some hope. 

“We’re looking at ways to move it,” he told reporters. “We have people here who represent states that also have refineries, and that’s a factor in this conversation.”

Iran war boosts support

Federal regulations have restricted E15 from being sold from June 1 to Sept. 15 because of its effects on air quality.

But the turmoil triggered by the war in Iran has been an important boost to Congress’ efforts to pass year-round E15 legislation. 

AAA reported that the national average for a gallon of regular gasoline cost $4.55 a gallon Friday, up from $3.20 a year earlier.

The Environmental Protection Agency issued waivers this year to allow extended sales of the blend. E15, often sold at gas stations as Unleaded 88, will be widely available this summer as “the result of ongoing issues in the Middle East, among other events,” EPA said in a statement. 

‘Unique agreement’

One’s view of the issue “depends on which study you look at,” Senate Agriculture Chairman John Boozman, an Arkansas Republican, said in an interview.

On one side is a historically influential coalition of agricultural, retail and petroleum interests.

“This legislation reflects a unique area of agreement across the fuel and agriculture supply chain,” organizations representing those industries said in a May 11 letter.

“While our industries do not always see eye to eye, we are united in the belief that these policy reforms provide needed certainty, preserve consumer choice, and support agriculture and energy economies alike,” they said.

The Renewable Fuels Association says E15 has been “fully approved for use in cars, pickups, vans and other light-duty vehicles” made after 2000.

Consumers can save 10 to 30 cents a gallon compared to 87-octane regular gasoline, industry members say. In Pennsylvania last weekend, Unleaded 88 was in some cases selling for 50 cents a gallon less.

The E15 critics

Many environmental groups maintain production of ethanol costs more than regular gasoline, and those costs are passed on to consumers not only at the pump, but in various agricultural products.

“Expanding ethanol sales is a shortsighted approach that ignores the environmental costs of industrial agriculture,” said Patrick Drupp, Sierra Club’s director of climate policy.

He said much of the corn used to produce E15 is grown in Midwestern states “already facing severe aquifer depletion and water shortages, and expanding ethanol production would only intensify the strain on their water supplies, farmland, and ecosystems.”

Eight environmental groups wrote an open letter May 8, concerned that “We should not commit additional land, resources, or taxpayer dollars to policies that undermine our climate goals, strain our natural systems, and increase costs for American families.”

The groups, which include the World Resources Institute and the Sierra Club, countered the notion that consumers would benefit.

“Production expenses for corn ethanol typically exceed those of gasoline, except during periods of unusually high oil prices—and even then, ethanol prices tend to rise in tandem with global energy markets,” they said.

That would mean even higher prices not only for fuel but for food, the organizations wrote.

One analysis that takes neither side is the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which said in a May 12 analysis that because E15 needs separate or specialized tanks and pumps, “retailers wanting to sell E15 would confront the additional expense of installing new equipment.”

And, it said, “some refiners will incur additional costs as they adjust their refinery processes to produce the appropriate gasoline to be blended into E15.” 

What will Congress do?

The congressional coalitions for and against year-round E15 are as unusual as the outside groups supporting and opposing it.

The House’s  218-203 vote on May 13 saw 122 Republicans, 95 Democrats and one independent voting yes, while 113 Republicans and 90 Democrats voted no.

The yes coalition largely united rural lawmakers with more urban members who see the change as helping consumers.

“This debate is about much more than fuel,” Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, an Iowa Republican, said. “Agriculture is hurting right now,” 

Joining her was New Jersey’s Rep. Frank Pallone, the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

The bill “lowers prices for American drivers, supports farmers, and fosters investment in cleaner transportation fuel,” he said.

On the other side was Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas. 

“If we need to do something to support farmers, let’s have a direct conversation about it. Expanding E15 is just the wrong direction to go,” he said.

The same sort of party split looms in the Senate.

After the House vote, Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb., who’s fought for the change for years, hailed the approval as “a major step toward securing stability and certainty for American producers and consumers – without any government mandates.” 

Thune, of South Dakota, has been sympathetic to year-round E15. 

At a news conference this week he called E15 “a way of creating additional demand for agricultural commodities in this country and creating additional supply when it comes to fuels.

“And when that happens, at least in my part of the country, that means that when you buy ethanol at the pump, it’s significantly lower in price,” he said.

He faces a powerful skeptic in the Senate: Majority Whip John Barrasso of Wyoming, the Senate’s second-ranking Republican..

“Congress is currently discussing new mandates – mandates that would force more and more ethanol into our fuels,” he said in a Senate floor speech the day after the House vote.

“I oppose the year-round E15 mandate,” he said. “I oppose it because it hurts small oil refineries and all of the people who work at them.”

Small refineries

There are about 30 small refineries across the country, usually in inland areas, and about half could face problems under the House bill.

Small refineries are those that produce less than 75,000 barrels of oil per day, compared to 300,000 barrels or more at larger facilities. 

The small refineries can petition for an EPA exemption from the annual renewable fuel obligations based on “disproportionate economic hardship.”

For 2025, there were 33 exemption petitions filed.  Approximately 17 of those facilities would be ineligible under the proposed legislation because they are owned by companies with more than one refinery. Instead of focusing on the single facility, the bill requires aggregation of all facilities together.

The House bill would allow a 75% exemption instead of the current full exemption. It could also reduce the number of small refineries currently eligible for an exemption by half. 

Most small refineries would find themselves operationally constrained without the ability to receive exemptions, as they would have to use much of their cash flow to comply with the annual mandates, said Peter Whitfield, partner at Sidley Austin, a law firm that represents the Small Refineries of America, in an interview

Many senators want assurances small refineries won’t be hurt. 

“I’m interested in the small refinery piece,” Capito said.

That concern is yet another reason, at the moment, Capito said she is doubtful the House bill could get the 60 votes needed in the Senate.