You are viewing the Center for Rural Affairs newsletter archive for 2002-2006.
Visit the current newsletter and recent archive pages.
Visit the Center for Rural Affairs Home Page.

Are You a Farmer Who Wants to Retire?

But maybe you are not so sure that you want to get out of farming just yet. If so, then Land Link may be your solution. Land Link is a program offered by the Center for Rural Affairs in which we connect beginning farmers to retiring farmers.

In the match, the farm may be a lease to own or may be kept in the family, but either way the farm stays alive. Over the transition period, anywhere from 3 to 7 years, the beginning farmer is worked into the current operation to ensure the success of not only the retiring farmer and his enterprise but also the beginning farmer.

If you are a farmer thinking about retiring who would like to help a new generation of farmers get their start in farming, then contact Amanda Tuttle at the Center, 402.687.2100, ext 1007 or amandat@cfra.org

Conservation Security Program Watersheds
The second round of CSP sign-ups includes more watersheds, but USDA’s premise on rolling out the conservation program’s implementation is still fundamentally flawed

The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) announced new watersheds for the 2005 Conservation Security Program (CSP) sign-up. There are 202 eligible watersheds, placing one or more eligible watersheds in each state. To view the map of the selected watersheds electronically, use the following link: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/csp/2005_CSP_WS/index.html

NRCS continues to argue for the watershed approach, citing the payment cap for CSP. Yet despite varying funding levels for the program, Congress has never changed the implementation plan. Congress, and CSP’s many supporters, expects the program to be rolled out nationwide, with top-notch conservation as the requirement to fulfill, not the luck of the draw in your location.

NRCS puts a positive spin on the watershed approach by saying that it allows farmers and ranchers time to plan and get ready for the program. They (farmers and ranchers) can start by accessing other farm bill programs, such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) to help them meet certain CSP requirements.

Wouldn’t it serve conservation better if the program was available nationwide so that all farmers and ranchers could learn how the program works and follow the examples being set by the best stewards? To implement a program on narrow geographic boundaries does more to instill doubt in farmers and ranchers than to help them envision future participation.

The farmers and ranchers who need one or two practices put in place to qualify for CSP may find it hard to get funds through EQIP to help them meet that goal. EQIP applications generally exceed funding by double the funds available. And with more EQIP funding being steered towards large-scale Animal Feeding Operations (AFO), the chances of the “almost-CSP level” farmer or rancher getting needed EQIP funds is slim.

NRCS could do something to make the step-up option through EQIP viable by adding points to any EQIP application that would be at the CSP level when complete. By doing that, NRCS would prove they are serious about achieving high-quality conservation across our agricultural land.

Contact: Traci Bruckner, tracib@cfra.org for more information. And remember our Conservation Hotline, which is here to help farmers and ranchers with questions or problems they may have in signing up for CSP. The number is 402.687.2100.

Kellogg Entrepreneurship Development Systems

To commemorate its 75th Anniversary, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation is leading a new project to encourage entrepreneurship across rural regions of the country. The Kellogg Foundation contracted with CFED, a nonprofit based in Washington DC, to assist in identifying statewide and regional collaboratives that show potential for creating rural Entrepreneurship Development Systems.

The request for proposals (RFP) for the project resulted in over 180 collaborative proposals from 46 states. The Center for Rural Affairs is part of a Nebraska collaborative which will advance to the semi-final round. For a listing of the semi-finalists and more on the Kellogg project, go to http://www.cfed.org

Can We Save Rural America?
We know the challenges facing small communities; do we also know the strengths?

Over the past several months we have looked at what makes rural America special and what communities are doing to preserve their way of life. The question that really needs to be asked now is, “Can rural America be saved?”

Small communities and rural areas are presented with numerous hardships. Access to schools, businesses, health care, and jobs is a barrier rather than the accepted norm. Out-migration of people from rural areas plagues smaller rural communities. Grocery stores, hospitals, schools, and churches are closing due to the lack of numbers.

The average commute to a job has steadily increased over the past 10 years while opportunities have decreased. All of these continue to paint a picture of doom and gloom. Why should we have an optimistic view of our rural future?

The answers lie in the people. As long as vision and creativity exist within our rural citizens, there is hope and that is what springs eternal. The key to making it work in rural areas is to accentuate the positive and adapt to the environment.

Our expectations must change to meet our needs. We can no longer afford to live the way our rural parents and grandparents did. A movement is being created by both urban and rural people who look at the opportunities rural areas are giving back.

Instead of lamenting the fate of rural America, these people have come to understand that urban areas face their own set of problems. Many people are unwilling to accept those any more. There is a longing to return to the simplicity of the rural way of life.

What is a rural way of life? It doesn’t need to have one definition, as each person who comes to live in a rural area has already created that definition. In the next few months, this column will examine why people are looking to settle in rural areas and highlight how they are making it work.

Contact: Michael L. Holton, michaellh@cfra.org for more information on community revitalization.

Madden Sustainable Agriculture Awards

USDA’s Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program holds a bi-annual award contest for farmers and ranchers who raise food or fiber in ways that are profitable, good for families and communities, and beneficial to the environment. The 2004 Patrick Madden Award for Sustainable Agriculture honors three such exemplary producers.

Jean-Paul Courtens, Peter Kenagy and Ron Macher are the winners of SARE’s 2004 Patrick Madden Award contest. New York grower Courtens runs one of the largest community-supported ag farms in the country. Diversified vegetable and livestock producer Macher earns profits with his value-added meat, feed, and open-pollinated corn. Oregon vegetable farmer Kenagy practices extensive stewardship to safeguard his land and the Willamette River.

SARE Director Jill Auburn presented the awards, which included a $1,000 cash prize and an expenses-paid trip to SARE’s biannual sustainable agriculture conference in Vermont. The award-winners and their farming operations, as well as farmers and ranchers who merited honorable mention in the contest, are described in greater detail in an online booklet http://www.sare.org/publications/madden/madden_booklet_2004.pdf 

These folks raise vegetables, fruit, flowers and livestock; they sell through cooperatives, CSAs, and farmers markets; they supply food banks, train youth, and use renewable energy. Center Advisory Board member Todd Stewart of Meadow Grove Neb. is among those profiled.

SARE’s first director, Patrick Madden was a pioneer in the movement toward a strong, independent agriculture for small and medium-sized growers. Wyatt Fraas, Center staff member, helped to review the award applications.

Corporate Farming Notes
Lawsuit seeks to reform USDA and Smithfield settles antitrust suit over its acquisition of IBP stock

>> John Munsell, owner of Montana Quality Foods meatpacking plant located in Miles City, Mont. filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture to ensure USDA implements thorough inspection of beef coming from large-scale packing houses for the detection of E. coli. The Government Accountability Project assisted with the suit.

Munsell notified USDA that he had been shipped beef from ConAgra that was contaminated with E. coli. USDA followed up with retaliation against Munsell himself, forcing him to perform numerous rewrites of his Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point Plan and cover the cost of additional testing while at the same time not allowing him to grind his own beef for four months. It was later discovered that ConAgra was shipping beef contaminated with E. coli, leading to one of the largest recalls in history.

This lawsuit could serve as a catalyst to ensure USDA changes the way they do business. The ultimate goal of the lawsuit is to rid the USDA system of “agency capture” – whereby USDA has become beholden to large corporate agricultural interest at the expense of small and mid-scale operations – and their retaliatory policies such as the one used in this whistleblower case.

>> A civil lawsuit filed against Smithfield in March of 2003 for violating antitrust laws was settled by the company last month for $2 million. The U.S. Department of Justice, in the original filing, was seeking a civil penalty of $5.478 million under the Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) Act.

HSR calls for companies planning to acquire stock that meets certain limits to submit notice of such and abide by a mandatory waiting period before performing the transaction. Smithfield failed to comply with this pre-merger notification requirement before acquiring the stock of their competitor, IBP.

The HSR Act allows federal antitrust enforcement agencies to investigate proposed transactions to determine whether or not the transactions would be a violation of antitrust laws. If a transaction is found to be a violation, it can be blocked before the waiting period expires.

Contact: Traci Bruckner, tracib@cfra.org for more information.

Small Farms Cooperative’s 2004 Value-Added Producer Grant
The cooperative will bring pork, bison, lamb, poultry, and goat products to the natural meat market

The 2002 Farm Bill authorized the U.S. Department of Agriculture to award up to $240,000,000 over the next six years (up to $40,000,000 per year) to producers or producer groups that engage in value-added agricultural operations. The Value-Added Producer Grant (VAPG) program authorizes two general types of grants:

PLANNING: awarded to proposals requesting funds for organizational activities – feasibility studies, business plans, marketing plans, legal expenses, and other expenses associated with beginning a VAPG business.

WORKING CAPITAL: to be eligible for a working capital grant, a feasibility study and a business plan MUST be completed prior to requesting funds. Working Capital funds cannot be used for “brick and mortar,” or for most equipment.

The maximum dollar amount for one of these VAPG awards is $500,000. A dollar-for-dollar match is required. Match funds can either be in cash or in-kind – the more cash, the better. None of the match can come from other federal dollars.

In October 2004, Small Farms Cooperative was awarded a second working capital grant of $250,000. The 2004 award will concentrate on developing products and markets for pork, bison, lamb, poultry, and goat. An earlier 2002 award saw members of this marketing cooperative focusing on beef – developing a Non-Hormone Treated Cattle (NHTC) program that allowed the group to supply meat to the European Union (EU).

Additionally, the cooperative entered the natural meat market in the USA. They have developed a line of consumer-friendly, pre-cooked, ready-to-eat natural beef entrées available in selected Midwestern cities – including Wohlner’s Market in Omaha.

The brand name under which Small Farms Cooperative will be sold is Heartland Harvest. The beef entrées available to consumers include pot roast au jus, meatloaf with red sauce, beef tips in gravy, and BBQ brisket.

In 2002, funds were used for staff, marketing expenses, operational expenses, inventory, and other key elements in moving meat to consumers in the EU and the USA. The 2004 award will follow the same basic plan, but the focus will be on pork, bison, lamb, poultry, and goat products, which will follow the beef line already appearing in stores.

Contact: Mike Heavrin, mikeh@cfra.org . Mike is available to assist groups with VAPG proposals.

Fresh Promises for America’s Rural Places
Presenting strategies and practices that are helping to revitalize rural communities

The Wallace Foundation was created in 1988 in response to the rural economic crisis of the mid 80’s. Their mission is to help Southwest Iowa growers increase profit margins – add value to – their livestock, poultry, and cropland investments.

The Value-Added Innovation Center was created specifically to assist growers in developing value-added business opportunities throughout the Wallace Foundation’s 19 county area in Southwest Iowa. The business concept must involve an expectation of adding economic value to Iowa-grown livestock or crops.

The business may be at any stage of the development cycle. Progression through the cycle – from business concept to business plan through creation of a legal entity, business start-up, incubation, and graduation – is expected of all Innovation Center clients.

If assistance begins at the business concept stage, business plan completion is expected within six months. The timing of subsequent stages is negotiable, depending on individual circumstances. Graduation is expected.

Applicants accepted into the Innovation Center program are offered rent-free office space for one year (occupancy and rental status are reviewed every six months thereafter). In addition to an office space, Innovation Center clients have access to the Learning Center’s conference room, classrooms, lunchroom, reception area, and other common facilities. Each Innovation Center cubicle contains a desk, two chairs, and a telephone. File cabinets, computers, typewriters, etc. may be added by individual occupants as needed.

The Innovation Center is located at the Wallace Foundation Learning and Outreach Center at the Armstrong Research Farm near Lewis, Iowa. The Innovation Center operates under a steering committee. Seven members are farmer representatives as well as representatives of other agriculture and county organizations, the Precision Beef Alliance, the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation, and the Iowa Area Development Group; the other two members are ISU Extension leaders.

For more information or application materials, call 712.769.2650, or email kbooth@iastate.edu Visit the Wallace Foundation on the internet, www.wallacefdn.org 

Contact: Kim Preston, kimp@cfra.org for more information or to submit ideas for this column.

New Faces at Center

The Communications and Development Program is up to full strength again as of November. Stephenie Eastman is the new Communications Associate, and her assignment is to transmit the Center’s message to the world. Steph brings a wealth of media and marketing experience to the Center, as well as four years of experience in non-profit management and fundraising.

A graduate of Morningside College, Steph currently lives in Salix, Iowa, and is also a rural small business entrepreneur. “I’m very excited about the opportunity to work with the Center,” says Steph, who has already begun work with the policy team. Welcome aboard, Stephenie! You can contact her at stepheniee@cfra.org  or 402.687. 2100, ext 1010.

There’s also been another new face at the Center – or perhaps you can think of him as a new voice. During the past few months Kevin Hayes has helped us by providing a few hours a week in special communications tasks.

His work calling numerous media outlets and gathering contact information has expanded our reach and made it much easier to get the word out about the many programs and events that the Center offers. Many thanks, Kevin!

Over 100 Years of Sustainability: A Closer Look at Century Farms
A research team finds that stewardship and sustainability are key management strategies for these farms

The threatened demise of the family farm has been the subject of passionate public and academic debate. A team of four researchers at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln have adopted a different perspective.

Doctors Eric Arnould, Linda Price, John Allen, and Peter Bleed are studying how some Nebraska family farms have survived for over 100 years. Through a grant funded by USDA, the team representing marketing, agribusiness, agricultural economics, and archaeology is conducting in-depth interviews with families living and working on these century farms.

Dr. Arnould says sustainability and stewardship are key pieces of century farmers’ management strategies. “The farmers have a strong sense of caring for the land for future generations. The investment of labor, time, and resourcefulness, the experience of working on the land, and the passage of generations seems to translate into a desire to hold onto the land for future generations whenever possible.” Even those who don’t actively farm often intend to hold on to and pass forward their land.

Century farmers are rarely conspicuous consumers of new farm equipment. It was not uncommon to find farmers adapting available farm equipment rather than buying new machinery. Several farmers interviewed showed machinery they had built or equipment they had manufactured.

Many farm families are also creative when it comes to finding market niches. Dr. Price comments, “Century farmers we interviewed were very innovative and conservative at the same time. They evaluated new opportunities quickly and were many times the first in the community to try something new. On the other hand, they were cautious in not overextending themselves financially.” Farming operations were often diversified, and farmers looked to innovative ways to market their products.

The family, farm, and community are linked together in a web of support mechanisms that is part of the fabric of the community. Century farm families are active and often innovators and leaders in their communities. They share a strong sense of responsibility and a tradition of participation in community institutions such as school, church, and local government boards. Century farm families draw on local educational and financial services as well as expertise distributed through their communities to help them develop their farm-based enterprises.

USDA will fund the research for another year. The UNL research team plans to expand the number of farm families interviewed and to look into risk management and community-farm relationships.

Contact: Dr. Eric Arnould, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 402.472.5758, or by email, earnould2@unl.edu

Essay: Meaningful Debate over Rural Issues Should Emerge
The moral dimensions of rural economic and social issues are topics ripe for exploration with rural voters

The media has been awash with talk of the decisive roles of rural voters and moral issues in the recent election.

Perhaps that creates an opportunity in the next election to create a meaningful debate over the issues confronting rural people and communities, including their moral dimensions. Economic and social issues are moral issues. Virtually all the major religious dominations recognize that.

As wrote the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, justice demands that people be assured of a minimum level of participation as the way to carry forward creative activity in society. Particular attention must be paid to the needs of the poor, because without that attention, the human community cannot become whole and the common good is not pursued.

Most Americans also recognize the moral side of economic issues. A post-election poll found that about one-third of Americans say the nation’s most urgent moral issues are greed and materialism. Another third cite poverty and economic injustice.

The elevation of morality in politics – if it is genuine – opens the door to address these critical issues. Economic inequality has reached its greatest level in American history. Rural people and working people are seeing their livelihoods fall. They are being denied genuine opportunity, their communities are at risk, and they are losing control of their future. These are moral issues.

But they were not seriously addressed in this campaign. If the elevation of morality in politics is genuine, they will be addressed in the next campaign.

Likewise, the pivotal role of rural voters may create the political capital to demand meaningful action to address rural issues. To date, neither party has delivered on steps that promise a better future to rural people and communities.

Individual policymakers have taken piecemeal steps to help. But neither party has used its control of the White House or Congress in recent decades to change the fundamental policy choices that left unchanged ensure decline – but that can be reversed to create genuine opportunity and a better rural future.

At the federal level, the Republicans strengthened their control of the While House and both houses of Congress, based in no small part on the support of rural voters. The party owes its rural supporters meaningful action.

The Democrats, on the other hand, must present a clear and effective agenda and demonstrate commitment to advancing it. Democrats have lamented the tendency of rural voters to base their votes on social issues. But if Democrats want rural people to vote on economic issues, they need to give them a reason to vote on economic issues.

For our part – as rural citizens – we need to hold both sides accountable.

Agree or disagree? Send your opinions, questions, or comments to Chuck Hassebrook, chuckh@cfra.org 

Editor: Marie Powell