fbpx
Connect with us

Mississippi Today

Farm conservation programs offer solutions to climate threats, but are vastly underfunded

Published

on

When the U.S. Department of Agriculture denied Albert Johnson Sr.'s application for a farm loan in the mid-1980s, he went to a private lender who made him list as collateral all 20 of his cattle and his one bull.

“I stood a chance of losing my livestock,” Johnson wrote in a 1999 affidavit to receive part of a $2.3 federal settlement between Black farmers and the USDA.

Johnson, 81, who lives near Lexington, Mississippi, was among thousands deemed to not qualify for settlement money, his family said.

Against all odds, their family farm has persisted, part of the just 1% of remaining Black-owned farms in the United States. In an age of mechanized and industrialized agriculture, they face many challenges in operating a sustainable cattle farm — and there's federal assistance to help with that.

But last month, Johnson's children learned their application for federal conservation funding  was turned down. They had sought up to $30,000 to dig a well and add cross fencing that would have allowed them to do rotational cattle grazing, which protects the soil from erosion.

Advertisement
Charlene Gatson, seen Nov. 9, 2023, on her family's farm near Lexington, Mississippi, was frustrated when her family's application to the federal Environmental Quality and Incentives Program was denied because the program doesn't have enough money. Credit: Imani Khayyam for the Ag & Water Desk

“It was like ‘here again, another generation',” said Charlene Gatson, 50, Johnson's daughter. ”It was like history repeating itself.”

The Biden administration has called such USDA conservation programs a “linchpin” in the nation's climate strategy, yet they remain vastly underfunded.

Just three out of 10 landowner applications for the two main programs, the Environmental Quality and Incentives Program and the Conservation Stewardship Program, were approved between 2018 and 2022. The majority of landowners are told to try again without advice on how to improve their odds.

“These are farmers and landowners who want to do conservation on their farm. They want to do something we all seem to support — which is conserving natural resources,” said Jonathan Coppess, an associate professor and director of the Gardner Agriculture Policy Program at the University of Illinois.

Farmers want to improve the environment. Hundreds of thousands of them are applying. “And then you don't get funding for no other reason than that funding is not sufficient in the program. The level of frustration and anger is pretty real,” said Coppess.

Advertisement

Although the Reduction Act provided $18 billion more for these in-demand conservation programs, some members of want to claw back that money to pay for the 2023 Farm Bill.

High demand, not enough money

The flagship program of the USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service is the one the Johnsons applied for —the Environmental Quality Incentives Program — which reimburses agricultural and forestry producers 50% to 90% of the cost for fixing specific conservation problems and delivering environmental benefits, such as improving water or quality, enriching soil or protecting against drought.

Between fiscal 2018 and fiscal 2022, the Resource Conservation Service allocated $6.2 billion for the program, but that only covered 31% of the nearly 600,000 applications submitted during that five-year period, according to Investigate Midwest's analysis of application and funding data the USDA provided The Gazette as part of a of Information Act request.

The Conservation Stewardship Program, created in the 2008 Farm Bill, provides annual payments to producers willing to improve conservation over a five-year period. The Resources Conservation Service awarded $2.1 billion from fiscal 2018 through fiscal 2022, which covered just 28% of applications nationwide.

Advertisement

“EQIP and CSP are working lands programs so they are doing conservation on that is continuing to produce crops,” Coppess said.

Programs face criticism, but remain the main federally supported solution

Modern agriculture takes a toll on soil and water. Programs like these are intended to mitigate the damage. A 2020 National Resource Conservation Service report showed the Environmental Quality Incentives Program's conservation from 2014-2018 increased soil and carbon retained in farm fields as well as provided wildlife habitat.

“Practices funded through EQIP to address forest health and watershed protection on non-industrial private forest land also sequester carbon,” the report found.

The most popular requests for the two programs' funds vary by state. In Iowa and Wisconsin, where corn and soybeans grow, cover crops were by far the most-funded environmental incentives program practice from 2017 through 2020, according to an analysis from the Environmental Working Group. But in Mississippi, with a more diverse farming mix including poultry, livestock and cotton, the environmental incentives program's practices that got the most funding were for fencing, grade stabilization structures and irrigation.

Advertisement

Some environmental groups have criticized that program for earmarking 50% of all funding for livestock practices, Coppess said. Although the U.S. has the world's largest fed-cattle industry and livestock make up half or more of some states' ag exports, what if your state isn't big into pork or beef? Does that mean you get less money? There also are fears it will encourage more large-scale animal production, which can produce large amounts of waste that threatens water sources.

The National Resource Conservation Service allocates money to each state for the environmental quality incentive and conservation stewardship programs contracts. States then distribute the cash to counties or manage the funds at the state level.

To decide how to spend the limited pot of money for conservation programming, local Resource Conservation Service officials rank applications on a handful of factors, including how much the practice or activity costs, the magnitude of environmental benefits that could be achieved and how well the practice or activity proposed fits with “national priority resource concerns,” the service reported.

“The ranking was developed to try to be fair to everyone,” said Scott Cagle, assistant state conservationist for partnerships with the Iowa National Resource Conservation Service. But there are winners and losers and some producers drop out if they don't get funded right away, Cagle said.

Advertisement

“We into instances where producers signed up, the process takes too long sometimes and they give up,” he said.

Outreach to Black landowners, others who are underserved

The Johnson family is raising cattle on about 15 of the 200 acres they own near Lexington, Mississippi. During long spells without rain, the grass dries up and the Johnsons have to buy hay. 

Albert Johnson Jr. walks among the cattle on his family farm near Lexington, Mississippi, on Nov. 9, 2023. Credit: Imani Khayyam for the Ag & Water Desk

Then the pond dries up and they have to use a hose from the house to water the cows, Gatson said.

If they got Environmental Quality Incentive Program money, they would install cross fencing that would allow them to move cattle around, so plants can regrow between grazings and better protect the soil from erosion. A new well to provide reliable water would cost as much as $20,000.

“We need funding just for the cows to survive,” Gatson said.

Advertisement

The Mississippi National Resource Conservation Service suggested in a Oct. 6 denial letter that the Johnsons “defer” their program application, which puts it back in the pile for the next funding cycle. But Gatson wants to know why their project didn't rank higher so she can improve the application for next time.

“Could you tell us why some were funded and some were not?” she asked.

National Resource Conservation Service offices across the country have been trying to staff up to provide faster distribution of funds and more help for applicants. A workload analysis for Mississippi's service says they need another 55 to 60 employees to meet the need there.

Mississippi conservation officials have been expanding outreach to small producers, including those who haven't traditionally gotten funding.

Advertisement

“If you look at Mississippi, it has the highest percentage of Black landowners in the nation and that's around 10%,” said James Cummins, executive director of Wildlife Mississippi, a nonprofit that works toward habitat restoration and conservation policy in the state. “We want to see a percentage (of new conservation money) going to help historically-underserved producers to help them maintain their family's land and improve their natural resources.”

Mississippi, a state where agriculture is the No. 1 industry, submitted a whopping 10% of all Environmental Quality Incentive Program and Conservation Stewardship Program applications from fiscal 2018 through fiscal 2022. But despite having the highest number of applications in both programs, only 14% of its stewardship program applications were approved, making it the state with the lowest approval rate relative to its application volume. In the case of environmental quality program, the state had an approval rate of just 21%.

Noemy Serrano is assistant policy director at Michael Fields Agricultural Institute who also works for Wisconsin Women in Conservation, which helps women farmers figure out conservation programs like National Resource Conservation Service. She said recently a farmer who'd received Environmental Quality Incentive Program funding before was confused about whether she could apply again.

“That speaks to the details,” Serrano said. “Even folks that have already applied and been funded through the program sometimes don't fully understand how it works and how to move forward with it.”

Advertisement

According to USDA data, Wisconsin funded 37% of the environmental quality incentives applications and 35% of stewardship program applications received in fiscal year 2022.

In a perfect world, the National Resource Conservation Service would work with each farmer to make their application more likely to be funded, advocates said.

But because the service staff are so busy, “instead of going out and adding different projects to these applications…they're not adding that on, because it means more work,” said Sara George, who grows specialty crops near Pepin, Wisconsin.

Cash infusion in jeopardy

Conservation advocates hope a federal cash infusion will reduce the backlog of unfunded projects.

Advertisement

The Inflation Reduction Act, signed by President Biden in August 2022, provides $8.45 billion more for the environmental quality program and $3.25 billion more for the stewardship program starting this year and building through fiscal 2026. This could potentially fund hundreds of thousands more applications. There's another $300 million to quantify greenhouse gas sequestration.

“We know nationwide that IRA funds will increase” in 2024, said Jamie Alderks, assistant state conservationist for financial assistance programs with the Illinois National Resource Conservation Service. “IRA funds will assist in meeting some of the unmet demand.”

But in the U.S. House want to repurpose that the Inflation Reduction Act conservation money to help pay for the Farm Bill, which expired in October without being renewed. House Agriculture Chairman Glenn Thompson suggested cutting $50 billion, mostly to climate change and public nutrition programs, to pay for other agriculture programs, such as crop insurance, The Hill reported.

In an Oct. 23 letter published by Politico, 24 Democrats on the House Agriculture Committee pushed back against the idea: “Moving the IRA funds from conservation would be denying farmers the support they need and want.”

Advertisement

Brittney J. Miller of the Gazette contributed to this story, which is a product of the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an independent network based at the University of Missouri in partnership with Report for America, with major funding from the Walton Family Foundation.

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Mississippi Today

PSC axes solar programs in light of EPA funds, advocates file lawsuit

Published

on

mississippitoday.org – Alex Rozier – 2024-05-15 12:10:31

Advocates from some of the state's conservation groups — such as Audubon Delta, Mississippi Sierra Club and Steps Coalition — spoke out Wednesday against a recent by the to suspend several solar programs, including “Solar for Schools,” less than two years after the previous commission put them in place.

“This is particularly disappointing because the need for these incentives in the state of Mississippi is significant,” said Jonathan Green, executive director of Steps Coalition. “Energy costs in the South, and in particular the region known as the Black Belt, are higher than those in other parts of the country for a number of reasons. These regions tend to have older energy generation infrastructure, and housing that has not been weatherproofed to modern standards. For many low- to moderate-income residents in the state of Mississippi, energy burden and energy insecurity represent real daily economic challenges.”

The PSC voted 2-1 at its April docket meeting to do away with the programs, reasoning in part that new funds through the Inflation Reduction Act would be available to the state. About 10 days later, the Environmental Protection Agency awarded $62 million to the state, through the Hope Enterprise Corporation, to help low-income afford adding solar power to their homes. The funds are part of the Biden Administration's Solar for All program, one of the several recent federal initiatives aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Advertisement

The PSC decision ended three programs the previous commission put in place to encourage wider adoption of solar power through the two power companies it regulates, Entergy Mississippi and Mississippi Power: “Solar for Schools,” which school districts to essentially build solar panels for free in exchange for tax credits, as well as incentives for low-income customers and battery storage.

Last Friday, the Sierra Club filed lawsuits in chancery courts in Hinds and Harrison counties against the commission, arguing the PSC broke state law by not providing sufficient reasoning or public notice before making the changes. Advocates also argued that new funding going to Hope Enterprise won't go as far without the PSC's low-income incentives.

The programs were part of a 2022 addition to the state's net metering rule, a system that allows homeowners to generate their own solar power and earn credits for excess energy on their electric bills. Mississippi's version is less beneficial to participants than net metering in most states, though, because it doesn't reimburse users at the full retail cost. Mississippi's net metering program itself is still in tact.

Northern District Commissioner Chris Brown said that, while he supported efforts to expand solar power, he didn't think programs that offer incentives from energy companies were fair to other ratepayers.

Advertisement
Solar panels on the roof of the performing arts center at North Forrest High School. Credit: Mike Papas / Forrest County School District

“It's the subsidy that we take issue with,” Brown said at the meeting. “It's not the solar, it's not the helping the schools. We just don't think it's good policy to spread that to the rest of the ratepayers.”

Brown and Southern District Commissioner Carr voted to end the programs, while Central District Commissioner De'Keither Stamps voted against the motion. All three are in their first terms on the PSC. Brown's position is in line with what the power companies as well as Gov. Tate Reeves have argued, which is that programs like net metering forces non-participants to subsidize those who participate.

Robert Wiygul, an attorney for the Mississippi Sierra Club, countered that argument during Wednesday's press conference, saying that net metering actually helps non-participants by adding more power to the grid and reducing the strain on the power companies' other infrastructure. Moreover, he said, the PSC hasn't offered actual numbers showing that non-participants are subsidizing the program.

“Look, if the commission wants to talk about that, we are ready to talk about it,” Wiygul said. “But what we got here is a situation where these two commissioners just decided they were going to do this. We don't even know what that claim is really based on because it hasn't been through the public notice and hasn't been through the public comment .”

While no schools had officially enrolled in “Solar for Schools,” which went into effect in January of last year, Stamps told that there were places in his district getting ready to participate in the very programs the PSC voted to suspend.

Advertisement
Mississippi Public Service Central District Commissioner De'Keither Stamps, discusses current agency operations across the state during an interview at district headquarters, Friday, Feb. 23, 2024, in . Credit: Vickie D. King/Mississippi Today

“My issue was we should have talked to the entities that were going through the process to (understand what they were doing) to participate in the programs before you eliminate the programs,” he said.

Several school districts in the state are already using solar panels thanks to funding from a past settlement with Mississippi Power. Officials there told Mississippi Today that the extra power generated from the panels has freed up spending for other educational needs. During the public comment period for the 2022 net metering update, about a dozen school district superintendents from around the state wrote in to support the initiative. Ninety-five school districts in the state would have been eligible for the program because they power from Entergy Mississippi or Mississippi Power.

Former commissioner Brent Bailey, who lost a close reelection bid in November to Stamps, was an advocate for the schools program that the PSC created while he was there. At the April docket meeting, he pleaded with the new commission to reconsider, arguing that the new federal funding won't have the same impact without those programs.

“My ask is to at least give this program a chance, see where it goes, and hear from stakeholders that have participated,” Bailey said. The solar programs, he added, weren't just about expanding renewable energy, but taking advantage of a growing around solar power as well: “We can just stand by and watch it go by, or we can participate in this and bring economic development to the state.”

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crooked Letter Sports Podcast

Podcast: In or out (of the NCAA Tournament)?

Published

on

College 's regular season is in its last , which means baseball bracketology is a popular activity. needs to finish strong to become a Regional host. Southern Miss probably has already punched its ticket as a 2- or 3-seed. , playing its best baseball presently, needs victories, period. Meanwhile, the State High School softball tournament is this week in Hattiesburg, and the state baseball tournament to Trustmark Park in Pearl next week.

Stream all episodes here.


This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Did you miss our previous article…
https://www.biloxinewsevents.com/?p=358148

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Mississippi Today

Reeves again blocks funds for LeFleur’s Bluff project in Jackson

Published

on

mississippitoday.org – Bobby Harrison – 2024-05-15 10:02:34

For the third consecutive year legislative efforts to direct state money to renovate LeFleur's Bluff in have been stymied, thanks in large part to Gov. Tate Reeves.

Earlier this week, the Republican governor vetoed a portion of a bill that directed $14 million to the office of Secretary of State Michael Watson for work on developing and improving a nature trail connecting parks and museums and making other tourism-related improvements in the LeFleur's Bluff area.

It is not clear whether the could take up the veto during the 2025 , which begins in January, though, that's not likely. The Legislature had the option to return to Jackson Tuesday to take up any veto, but chose not to do so.

Advertisement

Of the , Watson said, “Our office was approached late in the session about helping with a project to revitalize LeFleur's Bluff. As Mississippi's state land commissioner, I was more than happy to help lead this effort not just because it's a natural fit for our office, but also because I believe Mississippi needs a thriving capital to retain our best and brightest. Investing state funds in state property on a project to enhance the quality of life in Jackson makes good sense.

“Unfortunately, some only it when it equates to campaign contributions. Sadly, through the line-item veto of the appropriation, Mississippians will once again wait another year for the to benefit from state investments for the greater public good.”

READ MORE: Gov. Reeves warns Mississippi: Challenge my vetoes, and it could jeopardize hundreds of projects

Various groups, such as representatives of the Mississippi Children's Museum and many other community have been working on the project for years. The area already is the home of the Children's Museum, Museum of Natural History, Mississippi Hall of Fame and Museum and a state park.

Advertisement

The issues with LeFleur's Bluff first arose in 2022 when Reeves vetoed a $14 million appropriation that in part was designed to redesign and create a new golf course in the area. Previously, there had been a nine-hole, state-owned golf course operated by the Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks at LeFleur's Bluff State Park.

In 2022, the LeFleur's Bluff project was one of literally hundreds of projects funded by the Legislature – many of which was tourism projects like LeFleur's Bluff. The governor only vetoed a handful of those projects.

When issuing the LeFleur's  Bluff veto, Reeves said the state should not be involved in funding golf courses.

Then last year $13 million was directed to the Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks to spend on the LeFleur's Bluff project. But legislative leaders said state money would not go toward a golf course.

Advertisement

Lawmakers opted to transfer the project to the Secretary of State's office late in the 2024 session, apparently in part because they felt the Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks had not made enough of an effort to begin the project.

Lynn Posey, executive director of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks, said that before moving forward with the project, “We felt like we needed to do engineering work and see what the situation was. We never got a chance to move forward” because the Legislature redirected the money.

Posey said an engineer's was needed because “it is a unique piece of land.” He said much of the land is prone to flooding.

He said before that work could begin the Legislature switched the authority to the Secretary of State's office. Posey was appointed to his current position by Reeves, whose office had no comment on the veto.

Advertisement

Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann said after the governor's veto, “Projects like the LeFleur's Bluff development are critical to the Capital City, the wider metropolitan area, and our state. Public parks add to the quality of life for our citizens. I am hopeful the individuals involved in this project, including those at the Mississippi Children's Museum, will continue their work to improve this state asset.” 

While the Constitution instructs the governor to provide to the Legislature a reason for any veto, Reeves did not do so this year when vetoing the money going to the Secretary of State's office.

On Monday, the governor also vetoed a portion of another bill dealing with appropriations for specific projects. But in this case, the veto was more of a technicality. The bill was making corrections to language passed in previous sessions. In that language were five projects the governor vetoed in 2022.

The language, as it was written, would not have revived those previously vetoed projects, the governor said. But Reeves said he vetoed the five projects out of caution. He did the same in 2023 when those five projects, which included money appropriated in 2022 for the Russell C. Davis Planetarium in Jackson, were carried forward in a bill also making corrections to previously passed legislation.

Advertisement

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Continue Reading

News from the South

Trending