Morning Ag Clips

Home Âť You searched for land values Âť Page 2

USDA to provide $6 billion to producers impacted by 2020, 2021 disasters

by

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has announced that commodity and specialty crop producers impacted by natural disaster events in 2020 and 2021 will soon begin receiving emergency relief payments totaling approximately $6 billion through the Farm Service Agency’s (FSA) new Emergency Relief Program (ERP) to offset crop yield and value losses.

“For over two years, farmers and ranchers across the country have been hard hit by an ongoing pandemic coupled with more frequent and catastrophic natural disasters,” said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. “As the agriculture industry deals with new challenges and stressors, we at USDA look for opportunities to inject financial support back into the rural economy through direct payments to producers who bear the brunt of circumstances beyond their control. These emergency relief payments will help offset the significant crop losses due to major weather events in 2020 and 2021 and help ensure farming operations are viable this crop year, into the next growing season and beyond.”

Background

On September 30, 2021, President Biden signed into law the Extending Government Funding and Delivering Emergency Assistance Act (P.L. 117-43), which includes $10 billion in assistance to agricultural producers impacted by wildfires, droughts, hurricanes, winter storms, and other eligible disasters experienced during calendar years 2020 and 2021. FSA recently made payments to ranchers impacted by drought and wildfire through the first phase of the Emergency Livestock Relief Program (ELRP). ERP is another relief component of the Act.

For impacted producers, existing Federal Crop Insurance or Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) data is the basis for calculating initial payments. USDA estimates that phase one ERP benefits will reach more than 220,000 producers who received indemnities for losses covered by federal crop insurance and more than 4,000 producers who obtained NAP coverage for 2020 and 2021 crop losses.

ERP Eligibility – Phase One

ERP covers losses to crops, trees, bushes, and vines due to a qualifying natural disaster event in calendar years 2020 and 2021. Eligible crops include all crops for which crop insurance or NAP coverage was available, except for crops intended for grazing. Qualifying natural disaster events include wildfires, hurricanes, floods, derechos, excessive heat, winter storms, freeze (including a polar vortex), smoke exposure, excessive moisture, qualifying drought, and related conditions.

For drought, ERP assistance is available if any area within the county in which the loss occurred was rated by the U.S. Drought Monitor as having a:

  • D2 (severe drought) for eight consecutive weeks; or
  • D3 (extreme drought) or higher level of drought intensity.

Lists of 2020 (PDF, 1.8 MB) and 2021 (PDF, 431 KB) drought counties eligible for ERP is available on the emergency relief website.

To streamline and simplify the delivery of ERP phase one benefits, FSA will send pre-filled application forms to producers where crop insurance and NAP data are already on file. This form includes eligibility requirements, outlines the application process and provides ERP payment calculations. Producers will receive a separate application form for each program year in which an eligible loss occurred. Receipt of a pre-filled application is not confirmation that a producer is eligible to receive an ERP phase one payment.

Additionally, producers must have the following forms on file with FSA within 60 days of the ERP phase one deadline, which will later be announced by FSA’s Deputy Administrator for Farm Programs:

  • Form AD-2047, Customer Data Worksheet.
  • Form CCC-902, Farm Operating Plan for an individual or legal entity.
  • Form CCC-901, Member Information for Legal Entities (if applicable).
  • Form FSA-510, Request for an Exception to the $125,000 Payment Limitation for Certain Programs (if applicable).
  • Form CCC-860, Socially Disadvantaged, Limited Resource, Beginning and Veteran Farmer or Rancher Certification, if applicable, for the 2021 program year.
  • A highly erodible land conservation (sometimes referred to as HELC) and wetland conservation certification (Form AD-1026 Highly Erodible Land Conservation (HELC) and Wetland Conservation (WC) Certification) for the ERP producer and applicable affiliates.

Most producers, especially those who have previously participated in FSA programs, will likely have these required forms on file. However, those who are uncertain or want to confirm the status of their forms can contact their local FSA county office.

ERP Payment Calculations – Phase One

For crops covered by crop insurance, the ERP phase one payment calculation for a crop and unit will depend on the type and level of coverage obtained by the producer. Each calculation will use an ERP factor based on the producer’s level of crop insurance or NAP coverage.

  • Crop Insurance – the ERP factor is 75% to 95% depending on the level of coverage ranging from catastrophic to at least 80% coverage.
  • NAP – the ERP factor is 75% to 95% depending on the level of coverage ranging from catastrophic to 65% coverage.

Full ERP payment calculation factor tables are available on the emergency relief website and in the program fact sheet (PDF, 813 KB).

Applying ERP factors ensures that payments to producers do not exceed available funding and that cumulative payments do not exceed 90% of losses for all producers as required by the Act.

Also, there will be certain payment calculation considerations for area plans under crop insurance policies.

The ERP payment percentage for historically underserved producers, including beginning, limited resource, socially disadvantaged, and veteran farmers and ranchers will be increased by 15% of the calculated payment for crops having insurance coverage or NAP.

To qualify for the higher payment percentage, eligible producers must have a CCC-860, Socially Disadvantaged, Limited Resource, Beginning and Veteran Farmer or Rancher Certification, form on file with FSA for the 2021 program year.

Because the amount of loss due to a qualifying disaster event in calendar years 202 and 2021 cannot be separated from the amount of loss caused by other eligible causes of loss as defined by the applicable crop insurance or NAP policy, the ERP phase one payment will be calculated based on the producer’s loss due to all eligible causes of loss.

Future Insurance Coverage Requirements

All producers who receive ERP phase one payments, including those receiving a payment based on crop, tree, bush, or vine insurance policies, are statutorily required to purchase crop insurance, or NAP coverage where crop insurance is not available, for the next two available crop years, as determined by the Secretary. Participants must obtain crop insurance or NAP, as may be applicable:

  • At a coverage level equal to or greater than 60% for insurable crops; or
  • At the catastrophic level or higher for NAP crops.

Coverage requirements will be determined from the date a producer receives an ERP payment and may vary depending on the timing and availability of crop insurance or NAP for a producer’s particular crops. The final crop year to purchase crop insurance or NAP coverage to meet the second year of coverage for this requirement is the 2026 crop year.

Emergency Relief – Phase Two (Crop and Livestock Producers)

Today’s announcement is only phase one of relief for commodity and specialty crop producers. Making the initial payments using existing safety net and risk management data will both speed implementation and further encourage participation in these permanent programs, such as Federal crop insurance, as Congress intended.

The second phase of both ERP and ELRP programs will fill gaps and cover producers who did not participate in or receive payments through the existing programs that are being leveraged for phase one implementation. When phase one payment processing is complete, the remaining funds will be used to cover gaps identified under phase two.

Through proactive communication and outreach, USDA will keep producers and stakeholders informed as program details are made available. More information on ERP can be found in the Notice of Funding Availability (PDF, 290 KB).

Additional Commodity Loss Assistance

The Milk Loss Program and On-Farm Stored Commodity Loss Program are also funded through the Extending Government Funding and Delivering Emergency Assistance Act and will be announced in a future rule in the Federal Register.

More Information

Additional USDA disaster assistance information can be found on farmers.gov, including the Disaster Assistance Discovery Tool, Disaster-at-a-Glance fact sheet (PDF, 1.5 MB), and Farm Loan Discovery Tool. For FSA and Natural Resources Conservation Service programs, producers should contact their local USDA Service Center. For assistance with a crop insurance claim, producers and landowners should contact their crop insurance agent.

USDA touches the lives of all Americans each day in so many positive ways. Under the Biden-Harris Administration, USDA is transforming America’s food system with a greater focus on more resilient local and regional food production, fairer markets for all producers, ensuring access to safe, healthy and nutritious food in all communities, building new markets and streams of income for farmers and producers using climate smart food and forestry practices, making historic investments in infrastructure and clean energy capabilities in rural America, and committing to equity across the Department by removing systemic barriers and building a workforce more representative of America. To learn more, visit usda.gov.

–USDA

USDA seeks feedback from producers about 2022 crops, stocks, inventories, and values

by

OLYMPIA, Wash. — During the next several weeks, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) will conduct two major mid-year surveys, the June Agricultural Survey and the June Area Survey. The agency will contact more than 4000 producers across the Northwest Region to determine crop acreage and stock levels as of June 1, 2022.

“The June Agricultural Survey and the June Area Survey are two of the most important and well- known surveys NASS conducts,” explained Christopher Mertz, director of the NASS Northwest Region Office. “When producers respond to these surveys, they provide essential information that helps determine the expected acreage and supply of major commodities in the United States for the 2022 crop year. The results are used by farmers and ranchers, USDA, businesses, exporters, researchers, economists, policymakers, and others to inform a wide range of decisions.”

NASS gathers the data for the June Agricultural Survey online at agcounts.usda.gov, by mail, phone and in-person interview. They will be asked to provide information on planted and harvested acreage, including acreage for biotech crops and grain stocks. For the June Area Survey, agency representatives will interview farm and ranch operators in randomly selected segments. Producers will be asked to provide information on crop acreage, grain stocks, livestock inventory, land values, and value of sales.

“NASS safeguards the privacy of all respondents, by keeping all individual information confidential and publishing the data in aggregate form only to ensure that no operation or producer can be identified,” said Mertz “We recognize that this is a hectic time for farmers, but the information they provide helps U.S. agriculture remain viable and capable. I urge them to respond to these surveys and thank them for their cooperation.”
NASS will analyze the survey information and publish the results in a series of USDA reports, including the annual Acreage and quarterly Grain Stocks reports June 30, 2022. Survey data also contribute to NASS’s monthly and annual Crop Production reports, the annual Small Grains Summary, annual Farms and Land in Farms and Land Values reports, various livestock reports, including Cattle, Sheep and Goats, and Hogs and Pigs, and USDA’s monthly World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates.

These and all NASS reports are available at nass.usda.gov/Publications/. For more information, call the NASS Northwest Regional Field Office at (800) 435-5883.

— USDA NASS

Forest Legacy Program opportunity for landowners to conserve forested lands

by

FORT COLLINS, Colo. – Colorado landowners who want to protect environmentally valuable private forest areas that could someday be threatened by development or conversion to other non-forest uses – and who desire to receive monetary compensation in the process – now have the opportunity to submit proposals to protect their forestlands.

The Colorado State Forest Service (CSFS) is accepting Forest Legacy Program proposals from Colorado landowners. The program authorizes the CSFS or U.S. Forest Service to purchase permanent conservation easements or contribute to fee acquisitions on private forestlands to prevent those lands from being converted to non-forest uses.

The purpose of the Colorado Forest Legacy Program is to protect environmentally important private forest areas that are threatened by conversion to non-forest uses. The program provides an opportunity for private landowners to retain ownership and management of their land, while receiving compensation for unrealized development rights.

To be eligible for the program, the proposed property must be located within a Forest Legacy Area, as identified in the Assessment of Need for the Colorado Forest Legacy Program, must be privately owned and must consist of at least 75 percent of lands that are classified as forests. At least 25 percent of the project costs must be planned to be secured from non-federal cash or in-kind sources.

The application deadline is June 15, 2022, for federal fiscal year 2024 funding, and proposals must be submitted by standard mail.

Forestlands that contain important scenic, cultural, recreation and water resources, including fish and  wildlife habitat and other ecological values, and that support traditional forest uses, will receive priority. Landowners who elect to participate in the program are required to follow a land management plan approved by the CSFS. Activities consistent with the management plan are permitted, including timber harvesting, grazing and recreation activities.

The Colorado State Forest Stewardship Coordinating Committee will evaluate proposals and recommend to the state forester those proposals that have sufficient merit to forward to the U.S. Forest Service. Forwarded proposals will then compete at a regional and national level for funding.

For additional information or to obtain an application packet, contact Erik Castello at 970-491-3850 or Erik.Castello@colostate.edu. Applications available at the Forest Legacy Program.

–Colorado State Forest Service

Big picture: during Va. Agriculture Week, June 12-18

by

RICHMOND, Va. — Virginia Agriculture Week is approaching, and the state’s farms are ready to be the stars of the show.

Held this year June 12-18, Virginia Agriculture Week celebrates agriculture’s $70 billion annual economic impact and the 334,000 jobs it generates. Commodities and products grown and produced in Virginia are sourced from a broad range of agricultural zones, from mountainous altitudes to the sprawling Piedmont, and below sea level.

To help paint a picture of the state’s largest private industry, photographers are invited to submit their best farm photos to the Virginia Agriculture Week Photo Contest, organized by the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.

Photographers may share photos in several categories—agricultural landscapes, livestock, produce and crops, local food and aquaculture. Winners will receive a Virginia’s Finest gift basket valued up to $200, and their photos will be featured in Virginia Agriculture magazine.

There is plenty to photograph. Virginia is home to 43,225 farms on 7.8 million acres of land, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s 2017 Census of Agriculture. The average farm size is 181 acres. The typical Virginia farmer is 58.5 years old, and about 36% of primary farm operators are female. Broiler chickens top the state’s commodities list with annual cash receipts at $625 million, followed by cattle, miscellaneous crops, turkeys, dairy and milk, and soybeans.

The state’s farmers are represented by Virginia Farm Bureau Federation, the commonwealth’s largest agricultural advocacy group. With more than 132,000 members in 88 county Farm Bureaus, the organization provides a unified voice to advocate for local, state and national policies using a grassroots process.

“While we celebrate the efforts of our farmers every day, Virginia Agriculture Week is an opportunity to include the public in that recognition, sharing gratitude for the state’s agricultural community,” said Wayne F. Pryor, VFBF president and a Goochland County grain and hay producer. “The high-quality food, fiber and other products grown by Virginia farmers are valued at all levels—from neighborhood farm stands to international exports.”

The VDACS photo contest’s entry deadline is May 31. Visit bit.ly/3Mb0SgY for complete contest rules.

–Virginia Farm Bureau

Foreign investment in US cropland nearly triples in past decade, USDA data shows

by

WASHINGTON — Foreign investment in U.S. cropland has nearly tripled in the past decade, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data.

The total cropland controlled by foreign interests in 2020 was 10.9 million acres, up from 4.1 million acres in 2010.

This increase has been largely driven by foreign-owned wind companies signing long-term leases on a large number of acres, according to the USDA. However, “the acres actually utilized by said companies are very few due to the small footprint of the wind towers erected on the land,” a USDA report said.

Foreign investors own more than just cropland. Overall, they own or lease nearly 37.6 million acres of agricultural land, including forests and pastures. That is an area slightly larger than the state of Illinois and makes up 2.9% of all privately held agricultural land in the U.S.

This is up from a total of 24.2 million acres in 2010, according to the USDA.

Under the Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act, all foreign holders of agricultural land — whether that is owners or long-term renters — must report those holdings to USDA.

This USDA graphic shows the concentration of foreign holdings of agricultural land in each state. Graphic is on page 10 of the PDF of the USDA’s 2020 AFIDA report.

Those reports are filed via a FSA-153 report. Each year, the USDA releases that information in an annual report, which shows where that investment is growing.

Investigate Midwest obtained a database containing all of the information behind the USDA’s report. Although the USDA has released a 2020 report, the latest data available is through 2019.

The database has significant gaps. There are more than 3.1 million acres without an owner listed. Spot checks show that many parcels listed are no longer controlled by the owner in the database. It is unclear if land is removed from the database after it is sold or a lease is terminated.

While the database has significant errors and often has incomplete information, it still is a strong indicator of the quantity of land being sold or leased to foreign interests.

This growing level of investment has sparked legislative action. Currently, three bills before Congress would require additional review of foreign investment. Also, 14 states restrict or prohibit foreign ownership of farmland, though none outright forbid it, according to a November memo by the Congressional Research Service.

U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, has been one of the leading voices concerned about foreign ownership of agricultural land. As a representative, Grassley helped write AFIDA, which became law in 1978, and has introduced the bipartisan Food Security is National Security Act during multiple sessions of Congress.

Grassley said that America’s young farmers will struggle to replace an aging farming population if farmland continues to become an investment.

“If deep-pocketed investors come in, foreign or not, it drives up prices and makes it harder for new and beginning farmers to get started,” Grassley said in a Q-and-A posted on his website.

For years, Joe Maxwell has lobbied for more states to enact laws to monitor foreign investment in farmland. The president and cofounder of Farm Action, an advocacy group trying to counteract what it sees as an agricultural system that prioritizes corporations, he said AFIDA disclosures are unreliable.

“We have no confidence at the federal level that the law is working,” said Maxwell, a Democrat who formerly served as Lieutenant Governor of Missouri.

This USDA graphic shows the proportion of foreign-held agriculture land to all privately held agriculture land. Graphic is on page 10 of the PDF of USDA’s 2020 AFIDA report.

Maxwell said foreign investment, corporate investment and investment by billionaires concerns him the most. He contends these entities aren’t looking at the production value of farmland. They view it as an investment, he said, which in turn drives up prices for farmers.

“We want everyone to think about, ‘Who do you want to be your farmer?'” Maxwell said. “If you’re happy with Bayer/Monsanto — a German corporation — being your farmer. Or Saudi Arabia. Or China. Then OK. But if you’re not OK with that, then you ought to care about this issue. We ought to make sure the next generation of farmers are individuals who will care for the land for future generations and care about producing safe and healthy food for their neighbors.”

Institutional investors, such as TIAA-CREF, have been increasingly investing in U.S. agricultural land.

Many of the largest agricultural companies in the U.S. are foreign-owned.

JBS, a Brazilian company, and Smithfield, owned by Chinese company WH Group, are two of the largest meat companies in the U.S. Bayer and BASF, two German companies, and Syngenta, owned by the state-owned Chinese chemical company, are also leading producers of seeds and agrochemicals.

According to the USDA’s database, Bayer, which bought Monsanto in 2018, owns at least 17,315 acres across 22 states and Puerto Rico. Syngenta owns at least 3,558 acres across 14 states.

But the true figures may be higher. It can be difficult to track the exact number of acres owned by a corporation because of the number of holding companies with different names that many corporations have.

The largest holders of U.S. agriculture land are based in Canada (12.3 million acres), the Netherlands (4.9 million acres) and Italy (2.7 million acres). The single largest corporations that control U.S. agricultural land are generally institutional investors of timberland. Foreign renewable energy companies are also increasing their level of investment.

Foreign investment in agricultural land is split into five categories: forest, pasture, cropland, other ag and non-ag. The largest category for foreign ownership is forest land.

That is particularly true in the state of Maine, where 19.5% of agricultural land is controlled by foreign investors. This is largely due to foreign institutional investment in companies that own timberland.

In Hawaii, 9.2% of agricultural land (totalling 171,108 acres) is controlled by foreign investors. Of that, 42.6% is controlled by Japanese companies, while 27.3% is controlled by New Zealand investors, as of 2019.

The figures for Midwestern states are considerably smaller. For instance, foreign investors control 2.6% of agricultural land in Illinois and 1.6% in Iowa.

In recent years, there has been a trend of foreign-owned energy companies leasing large swaths of land, fueled by federal tax credits.

Generally, when a wind turbine is on U.S. cropland, most of the acreage remains in production, surrounding a small area offset for the turbine structure and maintenance of the turbine.

Investigate Midwest is an independent, nonprofit newsroom. Our mission is to serve the public interest by exposing dangerous and costly practices of influential agricultural corporations and institutions through in-depth and data-driven investigative journalism.

Scott Chadde contributed data analysis.

—Johnathan Hettinger, Investigate Midwest

Texas wildfire preliminary agriculture losses total $23.1 million

by

COLLEGE STATION, Texas — Texas wildfires that ravaged the Eastland Complex, parts of the Panhandle and Coryell County regions encompassing 433,000 acres have resulted in $23.1 million in preliminary agricultural loss estimates, according to Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service economists.

The losses include more than 400 livestock deaths, lost grazing values and fence repair costs. Dry, windy conditions throughout the winter season and into early spring heightened the fire danger threat.

“AgriLife Extension continues its commitment to providing the resources needed for landowners and livestock producers to help recover from this tragic event,” said Rick Avery, Ph.D., director of AgriLife Extension, Bryan-College Station. “We appreciate the ongoing efforts of our dedicated agent network and industry partners. Texas agriculture producers are resilient, although the damages to thousands of acres of grazing land, livestock and infrastructure will be long lasting.”

“The Texas Division of Emergency Management will continue to support local officials’ response and recovery efforts from the devastating wildfires that have impacted the state this year,” said Texas Division of Emergency Management Chief Nim Kidd. “I thank the hundreds of local and state first responders who worked around the clock to protect life and property from these wildfires. TDEM field staff will continue supporting local partners in affected areas as those communities recover.”

The preliminary estimates were calculated beginning with the early March fires and running through the end of April. AgriLife Extension economists say the preliminary loss estimates could climb higher due to ongoing fire threats.

“Drought conditions are only intensifying the potential for further economic losses moving forward considering the prospects of hay availability and associated feed costs,” said David Anderson, Ph.D., AgriLife Extension livestock economist, Bryan-College Station.

AgriLife Extension deployed its Disaster Assessment Recovery agents along with its county agents to implement animal supply points in the Eastland Complex at Rising Star, Cross Plains and Gorman. Agents assisted with collecting donations and distributing hay, feed and other resources. They also provided field and damage assessment support.

“Our Disaster Assessment Recovery agents worked tirelessly to establish and operate animal supply points at key areas,” said Monty Dozier, Ph.D., AgriLife Extension Disaster Assessment Recovery program coordinator, Bryan-College Station. “Agents were working around the clock coordinating the distribution of hundreds of round bales of hay, livestock and pet food, assisting with field assessments and identification of cattle during this catastrophic event. Again, we thank those throughout Texas and our friends out of state who donated during this critical time of need.”

AgriLife Extension, Texas A&M Forest Service and Texas Division of Emergency Management, all part of The Texas A&M University System, have provided numerous support and response efforts throughout the wildfire event that began in March.

During a seven-day span in late March, state, federal and local fire resources responded to 192 wildfires that burned 173,559 acres. More than 300 Texas A&M Forest Service firefighters and more than 200 Texas Intrastate Fire Mutual Aid System firefighters, along with firefighting personnel from 28 states, were positioned across the state to respond.

Disaster assistance

The U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency has approved low-interest physical loss loans to help producers repair or replace damaged or destroyed qualifying physical property. To confirm eligibility and access application information, contact your local USDA Service Center.

The U.S. Small Business Administration approved Gov. Greg Abbott’s request for a disaster declaration in communities affected by the Eastland Complex Fire, unlocking access to multiple loan programs. Applicants may apply for loans, receive additional disaster assistance information, and download applications online.  Applicants may also call SBA’s Customer Service Center at 800-659-2955 or email disastercustomerservice@sba.gov for more information on SBA disaster assistance.

Texans affected by wildfires are encouraged to submit property damage at damage.tdem.texas.gov to help officials identify resource needs and determine the state’s eligibility for additional disaster assistance.

–Blair Fannin
Texas A&M AgriLife Today

Student works to revolutionize seaweed industry

by

ATHENS, Ga. — When you hear the word agriculture, seaweed might not be the first thing that comes to mind.

But Allison Fortner, a University of Georgia doctoral student pursuing a degree in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communication, is doing her part to help raise the profile of this important marine species.

Fortner recently completed an eight-week international internship both in Paris and on France’s Brittany Coast, where she worked as a science communicator with the Safe Seaweed Coalition, a global partnership established in 2021 to support a safe and sustainable seaweed industry. The internship fulfilled the requirements of Fortner’s International Agriculture Certificate in the College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences.

A kelp worker in Plougeurneau-France. (Submitted photo)

Fortner, who earned her bachelor’s degree in agricultural communication in 2016, followed by a master’s degree in agricultural and environmental education in 2021, put the communication skills she gained at CAES to the test, building out effective strategic communications for the coalition.

A seaweed ambassador

As the seaweed industry continues to expand worldwide, the coalition works to ensure safety for workers, consumers and the environment. One way they do that is by awarding targeted small grants twice a year to accelerate safety in the seaweed sector. Fortner helped facilitate communication with and about the grant recipients through press releases and social media posts.

Fields of kelp in Plougeurneau-France. (Submitted photo)

Another goal of the coalition is to improve awareness of the applications and environmental significance of seaweed among global audiences. Fortner coordinated the group’s Seaweed Ambassadors, seaweed enthusiasts who want to be involved in the coalition’s advocacy efforts.

“I had the privilege of establishing the Seaweed Ambassadors Program, a group of people seeking to share evidence-based information about seaweed while using accessible language within their existing networks. I built a framework for and coordinated the activities of the first and second cohort of Seaweed Ambassadors,” Fortner said. “I used the skills learned in my communication, leadership and education classes to tailor messages to the ambassadors, create orientation materials and activities for them, and evaluate the success and engagement of our meetings.”

At the conclusion of her internship, Fortner continued working with the organization as a Seaweed Ambassador herself, joining 21 other ambassadors around the world, sharing information about the full potential of seaweed.

Drying kelp. (Submitted photo)

The many uses of seaweed

But what is the full potential of seaweed?

Seaweed, also referred to as macroalgae, is an incredible marine organism. Alongside microscopic algae, it is responsible for around half of the photosynthesis on our planet — which means it provides about half of the oxygen that we breathe, no matter where we live on Earth.

Fortunately, some species of seaweed grow incredibly fast — giant kelp for example can grow up to 24 inches per day in ideal conditions.

“Just like crops on land, seaweed has seasons. There are times of year when people who harvest wild seaweed are allowed to access the wild seaweed populations and collect them, while they have to leave them to optimize growth during other parts of the year,” said Fortner.

While it may not be typically associated with agriculture, seaweed has made important contributions to the agricultural field for hundreds of years. Long ago, farmers took seaweed that washed up on the beaches and put it onto their fields as a form of fertilizer. Fast forward a few decades, and this idea has transformed into applying seaweed extracts in the form of biostimulants on a variety of crops to enhance the plants’ nutrient uptake and drought tolerance.

Seaweed has myriad human uses as well. Seaweed as a food product is one of the fastest growing sectors, currently valued at $9 billion annually. Of course, if you’ve ever had sushi, you are well acquainted with seaweed.

And seaweed-based snacks are becoming more mainstream on grocery store shelves. There’s even a species of seaweed known as “sea truffle” because its flavor resembles that of truffles found on land. Seaweed has also long been used as a thickening agent in foods and is featured prominently in cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and vitamin supplements.

The plant’s potential is still untapped

There are big plans for the future of seaweed as researchers continue to unlock its full potential.

“We are still very much in the ‘hunter-gatherer’ stage of seaweed outside of Asia. While a select few species of algae have been domesticated and cultivated for commercial use, there is more work to be done to determine the best species that will serve specific needs and how best to grow those species,” said Fortner. “Understanding how to do this while not disturbing ocean ecosystems, using too much energy or introducing invasive species and disease may be a challenge.”

Despite the challenges, researchers and industries are working to tap into the full promise of seaweed. Seaweed is already being used by startup companies as a replacement for plastic packaging, and innovations in bioprocessing are being developed to extract high-value compounds from seaweed.

It’s also being used as fibers in clothing and as a method of removing carbon from the atmosphere. And there’s a flurry of research being done with seaweed in animal agriculture — adding seaweed to livestock diets has been found to reduce the need for antibiotics and it may also reduce greenhouse gas emissions from some animals, including cows.

Seaweed has the potential to significantly contribute to at least nine of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. Increasing the growth and use of seaweed would provide employment for millions of people on every continent and serve as an important source of nutrition for the world’s growing population. As our climate warms, seaweed’s ability to absorb carbon can help fight the climate crisis, positioning it to become one solution to many of the problems our planet is facing.

And the Safe Seaweed Coalition and its ambassadors will be there along the way, ensuring that the industry will continue to be safe for consumers, workers and the environment as it scales up.

–Emily Davenport, University of Georgia

From pests to protein: Edible insects as a sustainable food source

by

BLACKSBURG, Va. — Some bite. Some sting. Some stink. But what if they could be considered beyond their pesky traits? What if certain insects could actually benefit the health of humans, of animals, of the entire planet? Edible insects

Virginia Tech scientists think so, and they have the research to prove it.

Faculty at the Virginia Seafood Agricultural Research and Extension Center are testing – and eating – certain insects to develop alternative and sustainable food sources to support a world population forecasted to reach 10 billion by 2050.

Some of the insects, seven, in their lab so far, are edible on their own. Others are being converted to proteins that are rich in nutrients and antioxidants and incorporated into bars and cookies. And the bugs aren’t just for human consumption. Some of the edible insects are being used in animal feed, as well.

Beyond its nutritional value, the consumption of bugs is also a boost for the economy and Mother Nature, explained Reza Ovissipour, an assistant professor in the Virginia Tech Department of Food Science and Technology and Virginia Cooperative Extension specialist.

“Blending our current agricultural practices with insect-based protein will increase the food supply to meet demand while reducing pressure on natural resources,” he said. “Eating bugs is good for the Earth. It is good for the environment, and it is good for your health.”

Photo via shankar s., Flickr/Creative Commons.

BARBECUE-FLAVORED BUGS?

Ovissipour began the insect protein project in 2018, inspired by a problem that had been bugging him for some time.

“Many agricultural byproducts have high value, and they are being thrown away. Not only are they not being used, but they are also being added to the environment and causing environmental issues,” he eplained.

In Ovissipour’s lab, these valuable by-products aren’t treated as waste, but rather, as insect feed.

“We are using different types of agricultural waste materials, which are really rich in proteins, fibers, and carbohydrates, to feed our insects,” he said.

Loud and annoying with their buzzes and clicks, two of the most common edible insects used are black soldier flies and crickets.

Using fermentation and different bioprocessing methods, the insects are eventually converted to protein with high nutritional and medicinal value. Research suggests this source of protein may mitigate several health problems, including hypertension, Ovissipour said.

Once the protein is created, it is extracted and mixed with different ingredients to produce certain food items, such as cookies and protein bars with endless flavor possibilities. Some are savory. Some sweet. Popular among Ovissipour’s team: barbecue.

Ovissipour compared the process to that of brewing beer: yeast converts glucose to create a value-added beverage.

Also in his lab are bugs such as cicadas, silkworms and scorpions that are edible on their own. Their taste isn’t preferred by everyone, but neither is the taste of seafood, beef, or poultry, Ovissipour pointed out.

The research team has been working with large companies and insect producers across the United States to put the products on the market.

Some, such as crickets, silkworms, scorpions, meal worms, sago worm, and Junebug, are already on store shelves, Ovissipour said, so bee on the lookout.

BRINGING EDIBLE INSECTS FROM THE LAB TO THE TABLE

Beyond insect harvesting, Ovissipour’s team is also using similar research methods to create cultivated meat: animal cells grown in vitro to form anything from chicken tenders to salmon fillets.

This effort is an additional attempt to keep pace with the growing demand for food and meat, he said.

“Compounded with diminishing land and water resources and an accelerating climate crisis, new technologies that maximize resource efficiency and minimize waste are needed to feed an increasingly hungry world,” Ovissipour said.

Whether a fish fillet, a beef patty, or a chicken nugget, everything begins with cells — the basic building blocks of organisms.

“In our lab, we’re focused on stem cells from aquatic species to create seafood products,” explained Lexi Duscher, a postdoctoral researcher at the Virginia Seafood AREC who is working in Ovissipour’s lab.

Using fish stem cells, which can be ethically collected from live animals, Duscher will differentiate cells to selectively grow muscle and fat cells — the same cells and tissues that make up the fish fillets you can buy at the store. The cells, grown in specialized media in the lab, will then be assembled into a fish fillet.

Using animal stem cells and plant-based media, lab technicians can differentiate cells and grow muscle and fat cell types that can then be assembled into a final meat product. Mimicking a fish fillet using cell culture then requires structural engineering at the microscopic level.

“There are different ways to form the final meat product, but our lab will be focused on 3D bioprinting as well as scaffolding with plant-based and sustainable materials to achieve that delicious, flavorful meat texture,” Duscher said.

A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT

As new technologies continue to emerge for producing alternative food sources, such as smart agriculture and airborne agriculture, it is important to remind producers and consumers that these methods are not competing with traditional agricultural processes.

“We are just trying to introduce another option and we are trying to help farmers and growers be more sustainable and profitable,” Ovissipour said.

“For example, insect farming is going to help farmers and agricultural communities because they can use insects to convert their byproduct to value-added products – products they can add to the soil as a fertilizer to enhance soil quality. They can also be fed to their chickens, their cattle, their swine, and their seafood.”

Ovissipour is excited to see insects share the shelves with some other protein-packed favorites, like a juicy fillet of beef or chicken breast.

“When I go to the grocery store, I have these options, and they are all good sources of protein. They are good for your health, and they are tasty,” Ovissipour said. “My hope is that edible insects and insect protein products will soon become an option, too.”

—Virginia Tech

NYS Dairy Ambassador helps students connect with farmers

by

SYRACUSE, N.Y. — American Dairy Association North East and New York State Dairy Ambassador Gabby Taylor are working to help students connect with dairy farmers through the New York Thursdays school nutrition program.

Foods grown and raised in New York are featured in public schools every Thursday to help students learn about local food, as part of the New York Department of Agriculture and Market’s farm-to-school program. Dairy is no exception.

“I was excited to lend my voice to the dairy videos being prepared by ADA North East to help students understand how the local milk and dairy foods served in their school meals is produced,” said Taylor. Classrooms across New York State will be invited to view the videos that will also feature Gen Z farmers, including dairy science students from Cornell University, and one of ADA North East’s National Football League (NFL) partners and dairy advocates.

“Thanks to our dairy checkoff-funded school nutrition programs and our partnership with the NFL, we have direct line into schools to showcase New York dairy farms and dairy farmers,” said ADA North East CEO Rick Naczi. “These opportunities help build trust in dairy and secure dairy’s place on school menus and therefore increase dairy sales.”

Naczi added that ADA North East’s strategic school nutrition marketing strategies are viewed as a valued resource for school nutrition directors throughout the region. “Our staff provides trainings for serving milk and dairy, menu ideas packed with dairy that fit strict nutrition requirements and budgets, and nutrition education opportunities,” he said.

Schools with the most New York Thursdays dairy video views will be entered to win prizes from ADA North East, including a virtual farm tour. Last year, more than 2,300 students earned the chance to watch the tours that were hosted by Kelly Reynolds of Reyncrest Farm, Corfu, N.Y., and Nate Chittenden of Dutch Hollow Farm, Schodack Landing, N.Y.

To watch one of last year’s New York Thursdays videos that earned students the virtual farm tours, click here. To learn more about ADA North East’s other school nutrition programs, visit AmericanDairy.com, and click on “In Schools.”

–American Dairy Association North East

Reduce muddy conditions for livestock health

by

FARGO, N.D. — With mud impacting many farms and ranches, North Dakota State University Extension specialists offer tips for protecting livestock health and managing muddy conditions.

“When cattle get wet, their hair lies down and loses insulation value,” says Zac Carlson, NDSU Extension beef cattle specialist. “Mud will further reduce the insulation value of hair coats. Cattle become chilled quicker from wet and muddy conditions; this stress can inhibit the immune system, making animals more susceptible to disease.”

“Mud and manure carry bacteria and other pathogens that can affect cattle health,” says Dr. Gerald Stokka, Extension veterinarian and livestock stewardship specialist. “Calves are particularly susceptible by direct contact or mud on dirty udders. Calves consuming mud or drinking from mud puddles are at risk for digestive tract infections, such as scours.

“Calves born in wet, muddy conditions are also more susceptible to naval/joint infections,” Stokka continues. “Dip the naval after birth with a sanitizing liquid. A classic product is 7% tincture of iodine. A tincture contains alcohol. The alcohol provides drying action, while the iodine has disinfectant properties. Just be sure the solution is fresh and the container is free from contamination.”

In muddy conditions, ranchers should regularly move bunks and bale ring feeders to dry ground, recommends Miranda Meehan, Extension livestock environmental stewardship specialist.

“If footing around feeders becomes deep with mud, cows have a better chance of getting dirty udders,” says Meehan. “If moving feeders is not possible, use bedding materials around feeders to keep footing as dry and clean as possible.”

“Feed conversion and growth rate are severely impacted in feedlot cattle as mud conditions increase in severity,” says Karl Hoppe, Extension livestock systems specialist. “Research has shown that mud up to 8 inches deep will decrease feed intakes by 5% to 15%. Severe conditions with mud deeper that 10 inches will decrease feed intake 15% to 30%.”

“Foot rot can also be an issue with muddy conditions,” adds Carlson. “The bacteria responsible for foot rot persist in wet areas. The skin between the toes becomes tender in wet conditions, leading to an increased risk of an opened wound and infection.”

“It is often difficult to do anything about mud when there are limited areas of dry ground,” says Mary Keena, Extension livestock environmental management specialist. “Anything that can be done to minimize mud can help decrease the incidence of health issues. During calving, move cows yet to calve periodically to the driest ground possible or add bedding for those cows.”

There are few options once muddy conditions are in place, so preventive practices are key. NDSU Extension specialists recommend these tips to help reduce muddy conditions:

  • Scrape lots to maintain a 3% to 5% slope away from the feed bunk.
  • Reshape mounds to ensure quick drainage.
  • Move livestock to temporary feeding areas such as stockpiled pastures with adequate drainage or fields containing crop residue such as corn stalks.
  • If stockpiled pastures are not available, consider moving livestock to pastures with tame grasses, such as brome, crested wheatgrass, or old Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) land that is better able to withstand the impact of early grazing.
  • If tame pasture is not an option, consider native pastures with Kentucky bluegrass as a dominant species to reduce potential negative impacts on the growth of native grass species.

Be aware of the potential for soil compaction when placing livestock in saturated crop fields in the spring and the potential for challenging planting conditions, adds Meehan.

— NDSU Extension