Almost 8,000 holders of H2-A visas worked on Kentucky farms in fiscal 2023, including harvesting burley tobacco. (Getty Images)

Seven Kentucky farmers last week sued the U.S. Department of Labor to block new federal protections for foreign farmworkers who enter the country on H2-A temporary visas.

On Monday Kentucky Attorney General Russell Coleman joined them, saying the new rule would clear the way for farmworkers in Kentucky to unionize.

Also moving to intervene to block the new rule are Republican attorneys general in Alabama, Ohio and West Virginia, according to a release from Coleman’s office.

A federal judge in Georgia earlier this year blocked the Biden administration from enforcing the rule in 17 other states.

Announced in April, the rule expands protections to seasonal workers, including against employer retaliation, unsafe working conditions and illegal recruitment practices. It requires that vans used to transport workers have seat belts.

Coleman, a Republican, said the new regulation “would force Kentucky farmers to allow temporary foreign-migrant workers to form a union and engage in collective bargaining. It would add excessive new bureaucratic burdens to Kentucky agricultural employers, who are already struggling to make ends meet.”

The Labor Department issued H2-A visas to 378,000 temporary workers, most from Mexico, in fiscal year 2023, according to Rural Migration News. Almost 8,000 of the temporary workers were employed in Kentucky.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court of Kentucky’s Eastern District, also include organizations that help growers navigate the H2-A process, including the Lexington-based Agriculture Workforce Management Association, which says it is “owned and managed by agricultural employers.”

They argue that without authorization from Congress, the Labor Department lacks the authority to confer “certain new ‘rights’ on foreign agricultural workers who are employed temporarily in the United States on H-2A visas, as well as on American agricultural workers deemed to be engaged in ‘corresponding employment’ with the H-2A workers.”?

Federal law requires the Labor Department to determine U.S. workers won’t lose work or wages to foreign workers admitted under the temporary visas.

Unveiling the rule in a California vineyard, U.S. Labor Secretary Julie Su said it “is meant to give H2-A workers more ability to advocate for themselves, to speak up when they experience labor law abuses.”?

Coleman said the rule “will force new burdens on our growers, making it harder to get their products to market and raising costs on families at the grocery store.”

The attorney who filed the suit, Joe Bilby, is a former general counsel in the Kentucky Department of Agriculture.

A fire in April 2023 at Natural Bridge State Park closed trails. (Photo by Middlefork Fire/Rescue, Facebook)

State environmental officials have declared a drought across all counties in Kentucky as the state has seen significantly less rainfall than usual in recent weeks.?

The Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet, coordinating with a drought monitoring team representing various agencies, declared Monday a Level 1 drought impacting vegetation health and soil moisture with the biggest impacts in Central and Western Kentucky. More than two dozen counties in the state have burn bans in place according to state officials.?

A cabinet release Monday states the drought in some areas has increased agricultural water needs and increased wildfire risk. A Level 1 drought can be declared if certain conditions — such as low rainfall, streamflows in waterways and drier soil —? are met. Three levels of drought can be declared by state officials. The U.S. Drought Monitor, a group of governmental weather experts tracking drought, has much of Kentucky in either moderate or severe drought conditions.?

Matthew Dixon, a senior meteorologist with the University of Kentucky Agricultural Weather Center, in a statement said the state has had over 1.5 inches of rain less than what’s normal over the past 30 days.?

“Despite severe dryness that began in mid-June, most rivers are flowing at the lower end of a normal range for this time of year. In some rivers and their tributaries, however, moderate hydrologic drought is developing, including the lower Green, lower Kentucky and Licking River basins,” Dixon said. “Most drinking water supplies across Kentucky have held up well, however in areas with moderate to severe drought, there is an increasing likelihood of water shortages developing in rivers and small water supply lakes.”

Jerry Brotzge, the state climatologist and director of the Kentucky Mesonet and Kentucky Climate Center, in a statement said drought conditions are likely to continue into the near future. Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet Secretary Rebecca Goodman is encouraging Kentuckians to conserve water through small practices at home.

District Judge Kevin Mullins was pronounced dead at the courthouse in Whitesburg. (Kentucky Court of Justice photo)

A sheriff in Eastern Kentucky has been charged with murder after allegedly shooting a district court judge Thursday at the Letcher County Courthouse in Whitesburg.?

Kentucky State Police said District Judge Kevin Mullins, 54, was pronounced dead at the scene with multiple gunshot wounds.

Letcher County Sheriff Shawn M. “Mickey” Stines, 43, was charged with one count of murder in the first degree, according to a news release by state police Thursday night.

Stines ??fatally shot Mullins following an argument inside the courthouse, state police said, and Stines was taken into custody at the scene without incident.?

The Mountain Eagle reported Thursday reported that Stines had “allegedly walked into the judge’s outer office, told court employees and others gathered there that he needed to speak with Mullins alone. The two then went into the inner office, closed the door and those outside heard shots. Stines walked out with his hands up and surrendered to police.” The newspaper reported that Stines had been seen handcuffed in the courthouse foyer.

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear in a social media post? wrote that he’d been informed a Letcher County district judge had been shot and killed in his chambers. “There is far too much violence in this world, and I pray there is a path to a better tomorrow,” Beshear wrote on social media.

On Friday morning, Beshear, answering questions during a news briefing, said it would be inappropriate for him to comment on the investigation and appeared to allude to rumors circulating about motive. “I know there’s a whole lot that’s out there on the internet and elsewhere. This is an active, ongoing investigation,” Beshear said. As a former prosecutor and the former AG, I’m not going to comment on any pieces of it to make sure that the state police can continue that investigation. They will follow the evidence. When they have it, they will comment on motive, and then it will be prosecuted by the Commonwealth attorney, Jackie Steele.”

Letcher County Schools posted on social media that Kentucky State Police had advised them to go into lockdown Thursday because of the shooting.?

Kentucky Attorney General Russell Coleman in a social media post wrote he and 27th Judicial Circuit Commonwealth’s Attorney Jackie Steele, who serves Knox and Laurel counties, would collaborate as special prosecutors in the case involving the “deadly shooting” and that the two would “fully investigate and pursue justice.”

Kentucky Chief Justice Laurance VanMeter in a statement Thursday night expressed shock “at this act of violence” and said the court system is shaken by the news. He said his prayers are with Mullins’ “family and the Letcher County community as they try to process and mourn this tragic loss. I ask for respect and privacy on their behalf.

“We will continue to monitor this situation. Out of respect for the ongoing investigation, we are unable to share further details. We are committed to supporting law enforcement in their efforts and will avoid any actions that could impede their important work. Our priority at this time is the well-being and safety of the Kentucky Court of Justice family.”

Mullins, of Jackhorn, was an assistant commonwealth’s attorney before being appointed district judge in 2009. He won election to the office in 2010. He is a graduate of the University of Kentucky and University of Louisville law school.

Stines, of McRoberts, was elected sheriff in 2018 and reelected in 2022. The Mountain Eagle reported in 2019 that Stines worked briefly as a Neon police officer and for the Letcher County sheriff and then worked for six years as a court bailiff in Letcher County until becoming sheriff.

Joe and Kelly Craft admire their $10.5 million country ham held by Miss Kentucky Chapel Tinius. (Kentucky Lantern photo by McKenna Horsley)

LOUISVILLE —?Two Republican megadonors once again were the highest bidders at Kentucky Farm Bureau’s Country Ham Breakfast charity auction.?

Kelly Craft, a former United Nations ambassador and 2023 Republican gubernatorial candidate, and her husband, coal executive Joe Craft, bid a record $10.5 million Thursday morning for the country ham that was crowned champion of the 2024 Kentucky State Fair.

?The money will support charities, which Kelly Craft said included the Boys and Girls Club and building new homes in Eastern Kentucky following devastating floods.?

The Crafts have repeatedly made the highest bid at the breakfast in recent years. Last year, the couple joined Central Bank in bidding though they were not present. Craft had placed third in the GOP primary months before, behind winner and former Attorney General Daniel Cameron and former Agriculture Commissioner Ryan Quarles — both of whom were also present Thursday.?

“I’m not going to mix politics with charity,” Craft told reporters when asked about her future political ambitions. “This is a really important day, and I think this is all about the Kentucky Farm Bureau and all about the people that work so hard in our state to make today happen.”?

With former Republican President Donald Trump’s campaign underway this year, the Crafts hosted a Lexington fundraiser for him in May. Before that, the Crafts donated to some of Trump’s primary rivals. Trump appointed Kelly Craft as UN ambassador in 2019 but endorsed Cameron in the Republican primary for governor.?

The KFB Country Ham Breakfast annually brings together politicos with agriculture leaders and high-profile Kentuckians during the Kentucky State Fair in Louisville. However, this year’s crowd heard from only a couple politicians as no candidates are campaigning for statewide offices this year.?

Republican elected officials in the crowd included Attorney General Russell Coleman, Secretary of State Michael Adams, Auditor Allison Ball and Treasurer Mark Metcalf, as well as dozens of members of the General Assembly. Most Democrats, including Gov. Andy Beshear, had a scheduling conflict this year —?the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. Thursday was the last day of the DNC.?

Kentucky’s highest ranking Republican, U.S. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, addressed the breakfast and said it was his 30th time attending the event. He addressed the crowd on issues of foreign policy and agriculture, particularly the farm bill that has been hung up in Congress. The legislation covers agriculture support and nutrition programs.?

McConnell said that if his party were in the majority, “we’d be doing the farm bill.” He added that the situation shows a core difference between elected Republicans and Democrats, and that the latter has a more urban focus.

“Frankly, there are not many Democratic elected officials left in small town and rural America,” McConnell said. “And how that impacts an issue like this — they’re just not particularly interested.”?

Flyers promoting an upcoming McConnell biography, “The Price of Power,” were also on chairs for the breakfast’s attendees before the event began.?

Republican Agriculture Commissioner Jonathan Shell also took a moment to highlight farm issues in Kentucky in his remarks.

“I’ll tell you that when our rural areas of this state prosper, so does the overall economy in the state of Kentucky,” he said. “We in Kentucky have a $8.1 billion impact for our farms and families and businesses that are the backbone of this commonwealth, and we owe them a debt of gratitude.”?

Broadbent B&B, of Kuttawa in Lyon County, produced the Crafts’ 18.2-pound ham. Kelly Craft said the family typically has Critchfield Meats in Lexington cook and slice the ham so it can be served for Christmas dinner.

A bipartisan bill that has been pre-filed ahead of the legislative session would allow certain Kentucky school districts to get more financial support from the Kentucky Department of Agriculture when funding is available. (Getty Images)

Kentucky lawmakers from both parties are hoping to lessen childhood hunger while also supporting farmers with new legislation set to be introduced in next year’s legislative session.?

The pre-filed legislation from Sen. Cassie Chambers Armstrong, D-Louisville, and Reps. Chad Aull, D-Lexington, and Scott McPherson, R-Scottsville, would establish the “Kentucky Proud School Match Program.”?

In a statement Friday, Aull said the program would “make farm-to-table more of a reality in our school lunchrooms and have the state becoming a bigger financial partner.”?

The new program would allow Kentucky school districts that participate in the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP)? — a federal program reimbursing districts for the costs of providing free school breakfast and lunch in low-income areas — to get more financial support from the Kentucky Department of Agriculture when funding is available. About 90% of all public school districts and private schools in Kentucky participate in CEP, according to state data.

For school districts to get that additional support they would have to create a plan to reduce food waste and buy “Kentucky-grown agricultural products” that could prioritize “Kentucky Proud” branded products.?

“We know this program benefits both our children and our ag economy. Increasing the state’s investment will return even greater results, particularly with rising costs due to inflation and federal pandemic relief funds coming to an end,” McPherson said in a statement.?

A previous study partly supported by the food bank network Feeding Kentucky found Kentucky school districts generally lagged behind on incorporating local farm products into school meals. According to a press release on the pre-filed bill, Kentucky was one of the first 10 states to participate in CEP when it was established in 2010. More than 500,000 Kentucky students currently take advantage of it.?

“Since most schools are already using CEP, we believe the state needs to be a better financial partner in this effort,” Armstrong said in a statement. “For many children, a school cafeteria is the only place they regularly get nutritious meals, and studies are clear that students who are not hungry are more likely to do well academically.”

The U.S. Department of Agriculture will pay a total of about $2 billion to farmers across the U.S. who were victims of discrimination. (Stock photo by Preston Keres/USDA/FPAC)

Tens of thousands of farmers or would-be farmers who say they suffered discrimination when they applied for assistance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture will get one-time payments that total about $2 billion from the federal government.

“While this financial assistance is not compensation for anyone’s losses or pain endured, it is an acknowledgement,” U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said Wednesday in a call with reporters.

The payments are the result of a program — the Discrimination Financial Assistance Program — created by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 that was meant to aid farmers, ranchers and forest landowners. President Joe Biden said it was the result of his promise “to address this inequity when I became president.”

The USDA received more than 58,000 applications from people who claimed discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, age, marital status, disability and retaliation for “civil rights activity.”

Vilsack could not immediately say what type of discrimination was most often indicated by the applicants, but the bulk of the payments went to farmers in southern states with higher percentages of Black residents.

Payments were awarded to people in every state and three of its territories, but residents of Alabama and Mississippi alone received almost half of the money.

In Kentucky, 75 recipients will share in $4.4 million.

More than 43,000 people will be paid, Vilsack said. The payments range from $3,500 to $500,000, depending on the circumstances and effects of the discrimination.

The department could not immediately supply a summary of those claims, but Vilsack said the discrimination resulted in loan denials, loan delays, higher interest rates and an overall lack of assistance.

“We’ve made significant strides in breaking down barriers to access, and my hope is that people will begin to think differently about USDA, so that we can better serve all who want to participate in agriculture in the future,” Vilsack said.

Specifically, Vilsack said the department’s Farm Service Agency, which administers farm loans, now has a more diverse leadership and loan assessment processes that rely less on human discretion.

This story republished from the Iowa Capital Dispatch, a sister publication to the Kentucky Lantern and part of the nonprofit States Newsroom network.

A new paper from researchers whose abortion-pill studies were retracted touts C-sections and induced labor as alternatives for pregnant patients in medical emergencies as a federal appellate court revisits a pivotal case in Idaho. (Getty Images)

The day the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, the medical board that certifies OB-GYNs in America released a statement calling legal pregnancy termination and knowledge of abortion procedures “essential to reproductive health care.”

But a small number of influential anti-abortion doctors have spent the last two years trying to change the reproductive health care standards in state and federal health policy, in a way that is potentially dangerous, doctors representing major medical institutions say.

The question of when abortion is essential health care that states can’t ban is central to several ongoing lawsuits, including Moyle v. United States, a case about whether emergency rooms receiving federal funding have to treat pregnant patients with stabilizing care if it might result in the end of the pregnancy. The U.S. Supreme Court recently kicked the case back to the appellate court, a move that newly allows doctors in Idaho to perform emergency abortions. But the issues remain unresolved, with doctors in Idaho (as in other states) still seeking clarity about whether what they’ve long considered necessary care is legal.

Now as the case returns to the U.S. 9th Circuit of Appeals, researchers behind retracted studies claiming abortion drugs are dangerous are out with new policy recommendations that say when pregnancy termination is necessary, doctors should opt for procedures considered by the wider reproductive health community to carry bigger health risks, such as cesarean sections, rather than less invasive abortion procedures.

“[M]any physicians argue that it is almost never necessary to end the life of a child directly and intentionally by an abortion procedure,” public health researcher James Studnicki and OB-GYN Dr. Ingrid Skop, of the Charlotte Lozier Institute, wrote in a paper published this summer in Medical Research Archives, a journal of the European Society of Medicine. “[W]hen a pregnancy endangering the life of the mother requires termination, a direct ‘dismemberment’ dilation and evacuation (D&E) abortion may be unnecessary, as delivery can usually be performed with a standard obstetric intervention such as labor induction or cesarean section (if indicated).”

Experts told States Newsroom that Charlotte Lozier’s claims contradict national standards of care. And they come at a time when states with strict abortion bans like Texas and Louisiana are seeing a rise in surgical incisions like C-sections and hysterotomies to end pregnancies, even though they carry higher risk, delay future pregnancies, and can affect fertility.

“The end goal of doing a medical intervention to end a pregnancy and save a patient’s life is the same as when we do an abortion. They are just calling for more complicated, sometimes invasive procedures to get to that same end goal,” said Atlanta-based OB-GYN and complex family planning specialist Dr. Nisha Verma. “I think this is really dangerous — it creates confusion. It prevents the public from understanding that abortion is a necessary life-saving procedure.”

The Charlotte Lozier Institute has for more than a decade worked to build the anti-abortion movement’s credibility, by providing research and data to defend anti-abortion laws in the legislature and in the courts. Their claims frequently contradict major American medical institutions on abortion science and safety, and their research methods have faced academic scrutiny — while continuing to wield influence.

Between 2019 and 2022, Studnicki and Skop co-authored three papers in the journal “Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology,” two of which were used by anti-abortion plaintiffs and judges to argue for the restriction of abortion pills in a lawsuit against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which the Supreme Court rejected this term for lack of standing. But earlier this year, Sage Journals retracted these studies following a reader-prompted investigation, in part for methodological flaws and data misrepresentation. The Charlotte Lozier researchers have insisted the retractions were meritless and politically motivated.

Skop, an OB-GYN from San Antonio, Texas, and Charlotte Lozier’s director of medical affairs, now has even more influence, after her controversial appointment to Texas’s maternal mortality review committee. Skop has made unfounded claims, including that abortion bans will improve maternal mortality rates and that rape or incest victims as young as 9 can “safely give birth to a baby.” But experts say minors are at increased risk for serious complications like preeclampsia and likelier to give birth to low-birth-weight babies.

Last year the San Antonio-based OB-GYN served as a state expert witness when Kate Cox from Dallas asked a Texas judge to grant her an abortion for a nonviable pregnancy. Skop’s sworn affidavit alleged Cox was not at risk of death or “substantial impairment of a major bodily function,” though Cox’s doctor recommended an abortion to preserve her health and future fertility. Denied the abortion in her home state, Cox aborted in New Mexico, and is newly pregnant again.

As a fellow for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which has more than 60,000 members, Verma said she has regularly testified before Congress alongside OB-GYNs with minority-held positions on reproductive health policy like Skop and Dr. Christina Francis, the CEO of the anti-abortion American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which comparatively has approximately 7,500 members.

“It can be really deceptive and confusing for the public who just hear different things coming from two OB-GYNs,” Verma said.

Studnicki and Skop argue that abortion is “not evidence-based” because many people do not seek abortions for physical health reasons, and because much of the existing abortion-safety and efficacy data does not involve randomized controls, i.e., comparing groups of people receiving abortion procedures with those delivering unwanted or nonviable pregnancies to term.

“Based upon the research standard of the Cochrane guidelines, our study shows the science required to consider abortion ‘evidence-based’, alone or in comparison to other interventions, does not exist,” said Studnicki in an written statement, referring to guidelines for systematic reviews, named after British medical researcher Archie Cochrane. “All of us who want the best for women should desire better quality data, including comparison of abortion to other pregnancy outcomes like childbirth, so we can best address the needs of women in heartbreaking circumstances.”

They do not mention the longitudinal Turnaway Study, produced at the University of California San Francisco, which found short- and long-term improved health and socioeconomic outcomes for women who received versus were denied wanted abortions. (Editor’s note: Reporter Sofia Resnick contributed proofreading and editing to UCSF professor Diana Greene Foster’s 2020 book about the study she led.) Anti-abortion activists have criticized that study, including in a published critique that was retracted following concerns about its peer review.

Studnicki and Skop did not agree to an interview but provided a fact sheet for their claims, which notes that OB-GYNs should adhere to guidelines set by ACOG when it comes to life-threatening situations, but also asserts that existing abortion bans do not preclude necessary care.

Claim: “Almost all induced abortions demonstrate no therapeutic intent or medical necessity.”

That abortion is not legitimate health care is a similar argument that a coalition of anti-abortion doctor groups including AAPLOG (of which Skop is a member) made in the abortion-pill case. It’s an argument Charlotte Lozier advanced in an amicus brief submitted to the Supreme Court in Moyle v. United States.

And it’s an argument featured in Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for a potential future GOP presidency, which says that the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act? should not be interpreted to cover abortions. Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump has attempted to distance himself from Project 2025’s proposed federal abortion restrictions, though they were authored by officials from his previous administration.

But decades of research have established the high safety record and medical benefits of termination.

“Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) clearly shows that pregnancy is a condition that can kill you,” said Dr. Sarah Horvath, an OB-GYN and complex family planning subspecialist and researcher at Penn State University’s Hershey Medical Center, in an email. “As a mother, I can tell you that the benefits of a wanted child often, but not always, outweigh the risks of pregnancy complications and death.”

According to the CDC, the U.S. has the highest maternal mortality rate in the developed world at 22.3 deaths per 100,000 live births as of 2022, with rates for Black women more than double, at 49.5 deaths per 100,000 live births. Research in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology shows that by contrast the risks from an induced abortion are smaller than the continuing a pregnancy: In the first trimester (more than 90% of all abortions), the rate of maternal death is less than 1 per 100,000, and for abortions at 18 weeks gestation or higher, the risk of death is 6.7 per 100,000.

In the two years since the Dobbs decision overturned federal abortion protections, OB-GYNs in states with near or total abortion bans have reported denying critical care because of these new laws. Many have become politically active, trying to impress upon lawmakers and the public that pregnancy is highly variable and vague exceptions to prevent death are impossible to interpret medically, especially as complications are not always immediately deadly but could become so if not treated promptly.

Claim: When the ‘separation of a mother and her baby’ is necessary, C-sections and inductions should be prioritized over induced abortion to allow parents to ‘express appropriate grief.’?

Referring to a medically indicated abortion as the “separation of a mother and her baby,” which is not a medical term, Studnicki and Skop pose labor induction or cesarean section as the ethical choice.

“Beyond 22 weeks’ gestation, the baby will often survive separation from the mother if given active medical intervention, and even if too young or sick to survive, the family can show the child love and express appropriate grief with the assistance of supportive palliative care,” Studnicki and Skop write. “No study has compared the well-being of a woman and family who end their child’s life in these tragic circumstances to those who continue to allow their child to live until a natural death.”

Verma said depending on the situation and especially before 20 weeks, induction or a C-section could introduce unnecessary risks and delays of care. And the patient would have to wait longer to try to get pregnant again.

“I have a hard time even understanding this claim that a C-section is equally invasive and morbid to abortion procedure,” Verma said. “That’s a major abdominal surgery. We are making a large incision in the abdomen, making incisions in the tissue below the skin, pulling apart the muscles, going into the abdominal cavity, the peritoneal cavity, cutting open the uterus and removing a pregnancy. … If the patient wants to get pregnant again, after a D&E procedure, they can start trying a month later, whereas after a C-section, you have to wait months to be able to safely start trying again without as much risk of your uterus rupturing in the next pregnancy.”

Verma said that sometimes C-sections do make sense in these cases, and that many of her patients do opt for labor and delivery to hold their dead or dying child, but she doesn’t believe these options should be forced on patients.

Claim: Rape and incest victims — who are often adolescents and children – don’t need abortions.

“The emotionally provocative scenario of a young adolescent girl seeking to abort a pregnancy conceived in rape or incest is repeated in the media at a rate which is grotesquely disproportionate to the rarity of its occurrence,” Studnicki and Skop write. “The question of importance is whether an abortion in this circumstance improves the mental or physical health status of the victimized girl. Understandably, there have been no clinical trials addressing this question, so even an abortion in this tragic circumstance cannot be characterized as an evidence-based medical intervention.”

But there is evidence that children and teens face greater physical health risks from pregnancy and childbirth than adults. And Verma noted that the incidence of young children getting pregnant, often by rape or incest, is small but real.

“I have treated young kids in, like the 10-, 11-year-old range,” Verma said. “It’s not something that’s happening every day, but there are many reasons why people need abortions, and that is something that we see and it is terrible.”

Lauren Ralph, an epidemiologist and associate professor at UCSF who specializes in the impact of abortion policies on young people, told States Newsroom that initial research out of Texas is showing fewer young people able to access abortions. According to a national 2021-2022 patient survey, about 10% of abortion seekers were 19 and younger, and about 2% were 17 and younger. Ralph noted that many rape and incest cases among young people are likely underreported.

“The rarity of it, I don’t think diminishes its importance in conversations around the reasons why people seek abortion, for young people in particular, who are victims of sexual assault,” Ralph said. “We know that they’ve had their autonomy violated once, and then if you deny them access to a wanted abortion and force them to continue a pregnancy and give birth, that violates their autonomy yet again.”

Kentucky State University. (Kentucky Lantern photo by McKenna Horsley)

FRANKFORT —?Kentucky State University has been awarded a $7 million grant from the National Science Foundation for an agricultural research incubator that has partners across the state.

With the dollars, KSU plans to establish a statewide research network that focuses on agriculture, climate change and access to fresh food called Driving AgTech Research and Education in Kentucky (DARE-KY). Other partners on the project include the University of Pikeville, Bluegrass Community and Technology College, Kentucky Science and Technology Corporation and FoodChain Inc.

The project will focus on soilless food systems for more sustainable agriculture. The systems will be hydroponic and use fish waste as fertilizer to grow produce.?

KSU President Koffi Akakpo said the grant was a historic announcement for the university.?

“This project emphasizes impact — the impact on the commonwealth by Kentucky State University and partners, the impact on the economy, on education and on the future,” Akakpo said. “I could not be more proud.”

Representatives from the offices of U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell and U.S. Rep. James Comer attended a ceremony on campus Thursday afternoon. Frankfort and Franklin County officials, Education and Labor Cabinet personnel and state lawmakers were also present.?

The Kentucky General Assembly set aside $60 million for KSU to use for campus maintenance and repairs in legislation earlier this year, along with $5 million for the design of a health science education building. Two years ago, legislators passed a law to give KSU $23 million to offset budget shortfalls and required the Council on Postsecondary Education to oversee a management improvement plan.?

While the university has faced numerous controversies in recent years, such as an accreditation warning and misused funds under a previous administration, current officials told lawmakers earlier this month KSU has completed 53 of its 130 improvement plan objectives.?

CPE President Aaron Thompson said Thursday that the NSF grant is “the kind of grant that gives you the base to build on other possibilities and outcomes.” He said such achievement signaled more good things to come.?

“We will get the enrollment. We will have the student success,” Thompson said during the ceremony.” We will have the innovative programming and we will have many more of these.”

Valves on a Kentucky River hydroelectric plant await the installation of turbines. (Photo courtesy of Jonathan Moore)

Jonathan Moore sees potential for reliable, durable electric power in Kentucky’s hundreds of miles of waterways, more navigable water than many states can boast.

The Kentucky River is a prime example, says Moore, a partner in the company Appalachian Hydro Associates. Taking advantage of a system of locks and dams dating back to the 19th century, his company has partnered with Berea College in recent years to build two hydroelectric plants at locks?on the Kentucky River. One plant has been online since 2021, and Moore said the second plant should be fully constructed by the end of the year.?

These hydro plants produce only a small amount of electricity, a few megawatts at most, while other renewable energy sources such as utility-scale solar can generate hundreds of megawatts of power. But Moore said the small number “belies the fact that it’s going to generate that power all the time for 100 years or more — basically forever.”?

“Appalachia in general has a good deal of potential,” Moore said. “It’s low-hanging fruit in the renewable energy spectrum for power that can be produced when the wind doesn’t blow in, the sun doesn’t shine.”?

Federal funding, announced Wednesday, will help construct a third hydroelectric plant along the river, another partnership with Berea College.

U.S. Department of Agriculture officials announced more than $375 million in partially forgivable loans and grants across the country through two U.S. Department of Agriculture programs — the funding made possible through the Inflation Reduction Act — to help fund numerous energy projects, including installing rooftop solar panels on farms and heat pumps at small businesses.?

In Kentucky, the USDA is providing about $16.6 million in partially forgivable loans for the latest hydropower plant. Moore said the federal support will help build the plant much more quickly. Power from the third plant, like the others, will be sold at a discount to the utility East Kentucky Power Cooperative to generate revenue for Berea College. Moore said a total of six plants are planned along the river, which he believes can add up to a significant amount of electricity.?

“I’m glad that water’s going to turn a turbine and get some people power,” he said.?

Another grant provided through the USDA is helping a Hancock County farmer try out solar power on his farm for the first time. Justin Obenchain, 37, grows about 20 acres of sweet corn and uses energy-intensive freezers year-round to keep the corn fresh for sale to local schools and elsewhere.?

He learned about the grant program through a local agriculture extension agent and saw solar as a way to curb some of the cost of powering the freezers.

“I thought it would be something that would fit us pretty well,” Obenchain said. “An open mind to what’s coming is going to be very beneficial in the long run.”?

He received a $40,000 grant through the USDA’s Rural Energy for America Program, or REAP, which covered about half the cost of the rooftop solar installations now located on his farm. He expects the about 90 solar panels to be turned on sometime in July, he said, potentially an opportunity to show his neighbors how solar power works for him.?

“??I think everything deserves a look. And some farms it may fit, some it may not,” Obenchain said. “But I think for ours, it’ll be a good fit.”

Republican U.S. Sen. John Boozman of Arkansas on Tuesday, June 11, 2024, met with reporters to discuss the GOP farm bill. (Photo by John Sykes/Arkansas Advocate)

WASHINGTON — Republicans on the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry on Tuesday released their framework for a new five-year farm bill that will set the policy and funding levels for key food, agriculture and conservation programs.

The top Republican on the committee, Arkansas Sen. John Boozman, laid out?GOP priorities?with reporters during a Tuesday morning briefing prior to publication of the framework.

Those priorities include an increase in reference prices for all covered commodities; increased spending for conservation programs by pulling funds from climate legislation passed in 2022;?“cost-neutral” updates?to the formula that calculates benefits for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP; increased crop insurance levels; and reporting requirements for foreign purchase and ownership of farmland.

“Hopefully, we can take all of these together and build on that so we can actually get a farm bill passed,” Boozman said.

The GOP measure also doubles funding for land grant universities for research on topics such as fertilizer application, pesticides and labor, Boozman said.

Boozman said the investment in research will help with “getting agriculture into this century.”

Boozman said the framework will also boost crop insurance by increasing support for the?Supplemental Coverage Option?to 80% and the coverage level to 90% for more than 55 specialty and row crops.

He added that the Senate’s framework is similar to the one House Republicans put forth.

“Following on the House Committee on Agriculture’s bipartisan passage of (a) farmer-focused farm bill, we are putting forth a framework that exhibits a shared common ground with our Democrat counterparts on several key priorities and offers a path forward in the places where we differ,” Boozman said.

House action

The House Committee on Agriculture?passed its version of the farm bill out of committee in late May,?and while four Democrats joined Republicans in approving the bill, nearly two dozen Democrats were against it.

The House version of the farm bill is expected to cost $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years, but there is currently no cost estimate for the Senate GOP version. There is also no bill text for the Senate version.

The current farm bill expires on Sept. 30, and if Congress doesn’t pass a new one, an extension would be needed of policies enacted under the 2018 farm bill.

Boozman said he hopes Congress doesn’t have to pass an extension, but if so, he expects to get the farm bill done during the lame-duck session after the November elections.

Like the House GOP version, the Senate legislation would divert funds from climate-related legislation passed in 2022 for conservation projects that would remove some climate-smart guardrails, which has drawn objections from Democrats.

Boozman said taking off the guardrails would “make it more useful.”

Nutrition programs

The Senate Republican farm bill framework would not make any changes to benefits and eligibility for SNAP, but it curtails an update tool used by the Thrifty Food Plan.

“The Republican framework restores Congress’ constitutional spending authority by returning to a cost-neutral and transparent process for future five-year reevaluations of the (Thrifty Food Plan) based on the most up-to-date consumption data and dietary guidance, all while ensuring an annual inflationary adjustment,” according to the framework.

In 2018, the farm bill allowed the U.S. Department of Agriculture to reevaluate the Thrifty Food plan and?in 2021 the agency updated?it to reflect the cost of living, which led to a 21% increase in SNAP benefits. About 12.8% of U.S. households were food-insecure in 2022,?according to USDA.?More than 41 million people?use SNAP benefits.

The Senate’s version reverts to a “cost-neutral” model, Boozman said, which is similar to the House Republican version. Democrats have already opposed those changes.

The Democratic chair of the Senate committee, Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, released a?section-by-section version?of the Democrats’ farm bill in early May. That version would boost eligibility for SNAP benefits, but there is no legislative text for that bill either.

Foreign ownership of farmland

Limiting foreign ownership of U.S. farmland has?garnered bipartisan support in Congress, as states have passed their own laws on the issue.

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has said the biggest foreign land ownership comes from Canada, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, but there is concern in Congress about ownership by Russia, China, Iran and North Korea — which own less than 400,000 acres of land.

Lawmakers are pushing for federal reporting requirements in the Senate GOP farm bill under Title XII, the miscellaneous section.

“This modernization will help ensure compliance with reporting requirements and provides a clearer picture of the scope and scale of the issues foreign ownership of U.S. farmland poses to our country,” according to the framework.

Cattle crowd inside a feedlot operated by JBS Five Rivers Colorado Beef on August 22, 2012 in Wiley, Colorado. (Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)

This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, independent news organization that covers climate, energy and the environment. It is republished with permission. Sign up for their newsletter here.?

About five miles south of Broken Bow, in the heart of central Nebraska, thousands of cattle stand in feedlots at Adams Land & Cattle Co., a supplier of beef to the meat giant Tyson Foods.

From the air, the feedlots look dusty brown and packed with cows — not a vision of happy animals grazing on open pastureland, enriching the soil with carbon. But when the animals are slaughtered, processed and sent onward to consumers, labels on the final product can claim that they were raised in a “climate friendly” way.??

In late 2022, Tyson — one of the country’s “big four” meat packers — applied to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), seeking a “climate friendly” label for its Brazen Beef brand. The production of Brazen Beef, the label claims, achieves a “10 percent greenhouse gas reduction.” Soon after, the USDA approved the label.

Happy cows, good food, more profits for farmers

Immediately, environmental groups questioned the claim and petitioned the agency to stop using it, citing livestock’s significant greenhouse gas emissions and the growing pile of research that documents them. These groups and journalism outlets, including Inside Climate News, have asked the agency for the data it used to support its rubber-stamping of Tyson’s label but have essentially gotten nowhere.

“There are lots of misleading claims on food, but it’s hard to imagine a claim that’s more misleading than ‘climate friendly’ beef,” said Scott Faber, a senior vice president at the Environmental Working Group (EWG). “It’s like putting a cancer-free label on a cigarette. There’s no worse food choice for the climate than beef.”

The USDA has since confirmed it is currently considering and has approved similar labels for more livestock companies, but would not say which ones.

Last week, the EWG, a longtime watchdog of the USDA, published a new analysis, outlining its efforts over the last year to push the agency for more transparency, including asking it to provide the specific rationale for allowing Brazen Beef to carry the “climate friendly” label. Last year, the group filed a Freedom of Information Act request, seeking the data that Tyson supplied to the agency in support of its application, but received only a heavily redacted response. EWG also petitioned the agency to not allow climate friendly or low carbon claims on beef.

The Biden administration’s signature climate legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act, appropriated nearly $20 billion for agricultural practices deemed to have benefits for the climate. Another $3.1 billion is available through a Biden-era program called the Partnership for Climate-Smart Commodities.?

To earn the “climate friendly” label, Tyson requires ranchers to meet the criteria of its internal “Climate-Smart Beef” program, but EWG notes that the company fails to provide information about the practices that farmers are required to adopt or about which farmers participate in the program. The only farm it has publicly identified is the Adams company in Nebraska.

A USDA spokesperson told Inside Climate News it can only rely on a third-party verification company to substantiate a label claim and could not provide the data Tyson submitted for its review.??

“Because Congress did not provide USDA with on-farm oversight authority that would enable it to verify these types of labeling claims, companies must use third-party certifying organizations to substantiate these claims,” the spokesperson wrote in an email, directing Inside Climate News to the third-party verifier or Tyson for more information.?

The third-party verification company, Where Food Comes From, did not respond to emailed questions from Inside Climate News, and Tyson did not respond to emails seeking comment.

The USDA said it is reviewing EWG’s petitions and announced in June 2023 that it’s working on strengthening the “substantiation of animal-raising claims, which includes the type of claim affixed to the Brazen Beef product.”

The agency said other livestock companies were seeking similar labels and that the agency has approved them, but would not identify those companies, saying Inside Climate News would have to seek the information through a Freedom of Information Act request.

“They’re being incredibly obstinate about sharing anything right now,” said Matthew Hayek, a researcher with New York University who studies the environmental and climate impacts of the food system. “Speaking as a scientist, it’s not transparent and it’s a scandal in its own right that the government can’t provide this information.”

This lack of transparency from the agency worries environmental and legal advocacy groups, especially now that billions of dollars in taxpayer funds are available for agricultural practices deemed to have benefits for the climate. The Biden administration’s signature climate legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act, appropriated nearly $20 billion for these practices; another $3.1 billion is available through a Biden-era program called the Partnership for Climate-Smart Commodities.

“This is an important test case for USDA,” Faber said. “If they can’t say no to a clearly misleading climate claim like ‘climate friendly’ beef, why should they be trusted to say no to other misleading climate claims? There’s a lot of money at stake.”

Tyson is the primary recipient of about $60 million in funding from the Climate-Smart Commodities program that will help the company “expand climate-smart markets and increase carbon sequestration and reduce emissions in the production of beef and row crops for livestock feed,” according to the USDA.??

Other recipients of that grant include McDonald’s, the biggest buyer of beef in the United States, and Where Food Comes From.

The funds for the Climate-Smart Commodities program come from the agency’s Commodity Credit Corporation and are not subject to congressional approval or oversight.?

Last year, the Center for Biological Diversity submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the USDA, asking for details about funding to support “low carbon” beef. The agency’s response was heavily redacted and the Center is now appealing.

“The industry continues to make big claims about sequestering carbon, with no science or scale to back it up, and uses very fuzzy accounting for their methane emissions, even though cattle are the main agricultural source of domestic methane emissions,” explained Jennifer Molidor, a senior campaigner for the group, in an email to Inside Climate News. “Brazen Beef has used a third party auditor, but it’s not clear what baseline and metrics they are using either.”

“If the USDA wants climate-smart agriculture, propping up the beef industry isn’t the smartest way to go about it,” Molidor added.

On its website, Tyson claims to reach its 10 percent greenhouse gas reduction through improved grazing methods and practices that reduce emissions from growing feed. But it does not publish the data and it says farmers can “customize their practices depending on their unique geographic location and circumstances.”

The company also says it worked with two environmental advocacy groups, the Environmental Defense Fund and The Nature Conservancy, to develop its carbon accounting methodology.?

Katie Anderson, a senior director with the Environmental Defense Fund, said the organization’s role in Tyson’s Climate Smart Beef program was limited to sharing its method for measuring nitrogen, the major component of fertilizer used to grow livestock feed. When nitrogen-based fertilizer is applied to farm fields, much of it is lost to the air as nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas 300 times more powerful than carbon dioxide.

The organization’s method calculates nitrous oxide emissions across watersheds or “entire sourcing regions,” making it less cumbersome for individual farms to calculate.

“The models make it easier and more accurate for food and agriculture companies to report progress toward the nitrogen-related parts of their climate and water quality goals for their direct operations and supply chains,” Anderson said.???

Tyson did not pay the group for its contribution.

The Nature Conservancy, which has received funding from Tyson for some of its conservation projects in the company’s home state of Arkansas, was paid to share some of its expertise on sustainable agriculture and translating data from farmers.

“We only shared knowledge and advice, which Tyson took into consideration when working on the model,” said Nancy Labbe, the co-director of TNC’s Regenerative Grazing Lands program, who noted that the data on Tyson’s accounting methodology would have to come from the company itself.?

Both the Environmental Defense Fund and The Nature Conservancy have received funding from the USDA via the Climate-Smart Commodities program.

Silvia Secchi, a natural resource economist at the University of Iowa and outspoken critic of U.S. agricultural policy, said the environmental groups, universities and corporations taking money from the USDA for climate-focused efforts should all be subject to the same rules.

“USDA should have a transparent methodology that’s applicable to everyone—the outsourcing, the monitoring, the verification—for all these groups that have incentives to make things look better than they are,” Secchi said. “There’s no transparency. How are they actually going to verify that farmers are reducing nitrogen? Are they getting GPS coordinates for tractors every day of the year? I think it’s complete bulls- – – t. They’re only looking at select indicators, not the whole system.”

Already, the agency has expanded its definition of “climate smart” to practices critics say are not climate smart and may actually lead to more greenhouse gas emissions.

Though it has long worked to downplay its climate impact, the livestock industry has become increasingly sensitive to growing consumer awareness of livestock’s huge carbon footprint. It has spent millions lobbying against climate action and courting academic specialists to minimize the greenhouse gas emissions of livestock.?

“There’s no transparency. How are they actually going to verify that farmers are reducing nitrogen?”

Last month the American Farm Bureau Federation, the country’s most powerful farm lobbying group, which had long denied the science behind human-caused climate change, celebrated a drop in agricultural greenhouse gas emissions reported by the Environmental Protection Agency.

“America’s farmers and ranchers are leading the way in greenhouse gas emission reduction through voluntary conservation efforts and market-based incentives,” the Farm Bureau said, noting that agricultural emissions fell by 2 percent from 2021 to 2022, “ the largest decrease of any economic sector.”

But Ben Lilliston, the director of rural strategies and climate change for the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, noted that the drop was not the result of voluntary farm practices. High fertilizer prices, in part caused by the war in Ukraine, resulted in less fertilizer use as farmers switched to planting soybeans rather than corn, which is especially nitrogen intensive. Less corn and less fertilizer led to lower nitrous oxide emissions. Over roughly the same period, a multi-year drought killed thousands of cattle, resulting in lower methane emissions from cattle. (Cattle are the biggest source of agricultural methane, largely from their belches and from the way their manure is stored.)

“Those are the two drivers that reduced emissions,” Lilliston said. “It wasn’t anything the industry did or anything farmers did.”

“When we do reduce the number of cattle, we reduce emissions, and when we do plant other crops besides corn — crops that aren’t as fertilizer intensive — emissions go down,” Lilliston added. “This is the pathway to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.”

The downplaying of livestock’s carbon impact isn’t just the work of the American farm and livestock lobbies. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations last year came under fire as reporters revealed that researchers had been pressured to downplay livestock’s climate impact in a landmark report.?

Last month, Hayek, of NYU, accused the FAO of misusing his data in a subsequent report that he and others say downplayed the importance of reducing beef and dairy consumption to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which research has demonstrated is critical, especially in developing countries.?

The food system, from farm to consumer, accounts for about one-third of all human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, with livestock production accounting for about two-thirds of that. It is now widely understood that emissions from the food system alone will push temperatures past the 1.5 degree Celsius target set in the Paris Agreement. Assuming the world continues to eat meat and dairy the way it does now, most of the warming projected to come from the food system will come from livestock, recent research has found.

Industry efforts to pursue “low carbon” and “climate friendly” labeling are another step toward minimizing its climate and broader environmental impacts — and they further mislead consumers, critics say. “It implies there’s a beef choice that’s good for the climate,” Faber said.

The debate over low carbon beef claims could, in theory, end up facing legal challenges.

In February, the New York Attorney General’s office sued the world’s largest beef company, Brazil-based JBS, for misleading consumers by promising to achieve “net zero” emissions by 2040, even though the company clearly has a growth strategy that relies on ramping up beef production.?

“It would be difficult to achieve if not impossible,” said Peter Lehner, an attorney for Earthjustice whose work focuses on agriculture. “The measures JBS are taking are not enough and that would overlap with Tyson.”

“You can’t claim to be climate friendly or net zero because beef production ineluctably uses an enormous amount of land and emits an enormous amount of methane and nitrous oxide,” he added. “You can reduce that, but you’re still not close to a climate friendly food.”

A national advocacy group says a bill approved by the Kentucky legislature will criminalize investigations of industrial agriculture abuses. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

An animal protection advocacy group released footage from a “hidden-camera investigation” Monday of what it says is cruel treatment of chickens being transported from poultry operations in Kentucky — an investigation the group says would be criminalized under a bill recently approved by the Kentucky legislature.

Mercy For Animals, a California-based nonprofit which describes its mission as to “end industrial animal agriculture by constructing a just and sustainable food system,” in its published video showed workers throwing chickens into cages for transport. Some chickens are kicked and thrown around as workers navigate the enclosure, and at least one chicken is stepped on as a worker tries to catch it. The video narrator says six-week-old birds living in “overcrowded barns” are “kicked, thrown and stuffed into cramped transport cages.”

A separate video the group shared with the Lantern details documentation, including screenshots of GPS locations the group’s investigator visited and video of the investigator allegedly talking with other workers. They appear to show the poultry houses, which the group describes as contract farms, are in Western Kentucky and provide chickens to Pilgrim’s Pride, one of the country’s largest poultry producers with a meatpacking plant in Graves County.

The group is releasing the footage as part of its opposition to Senate Bill 16, sponsored by Sen. John Schickel, R-Union, which would criminalize using drones or recording equipment at commercial food processing and manufacturing plants and concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) without the permission of the operation’s owner or manager.?

The legislation, which is now at the desk of Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear for his consideration, would also criminalize the distribution of such footage at food processing plants or CAFOs. The bill would make exceptions for utility workers and state and federal law enforcement and regulators.

Alex Cerussi, a senior state policy manager for the group, in a statement said “whistleblowing is an important safeguard against unsanitary practices” in the absence of robust government oversight of “factory farms.”?

“Kentucky’s Senate Bill 16 is dangerous legislation blatantly designed to keep the public in the dark about cruelty and hazards in industrial animal agriculture,” Cerussi said. “This bill isn’t about protecting small Kentucky family farms; it’s about shielding massive corporations from accountability for the harms they cause to animals, workers, and consumers. The public deserves to know what happens in factory farms and food-processing facilities.”

The Lantern tried to contact JBS, the international meatpacking company that owns Pilgrim’s Pride, through its online media inquiries form to ask about the footage and whether workers are paid by the number of chickens caught, as Mercy For Animals alleges. The company has not responded. Messages sent to Jamie Guffey, the executive director of the industry group Kentucky Poultry Federation, asking about the standard protocol for handling chickens in poultry houses, were not immediately returned.?

Critics of the legislation have characterized SB 16 as the latest in a long line of so-called “ag-gag” bills enacted around the country to block whistleblowers from investigating the practices and conduct of industrial agriculture. A lobbyist with the Humane Society of the United States has also questioned whether SB 16 is constitutional on First Amendment grounds, and the environmental legal advocacy group Kentucky Resources Council has expressed concerns about the bill’s unintended legal consequences.

A federal appeals court struck down a similar law enacted in 2015 in North Carolina, a decision the U.S. Supreme Court last year let stand.

Legislative debate

Proponents of the legislation, including a lobbyist for Tyson Foods and the industry group Kentucky Poultry Federation, have argued SB 16 is needed to prevent harassment and endangerment of employees and livestock at these facilities. Schickel, the bill’s sponsor, had previously told the Lantern that “agriculture by its nature can be distasteful to some” and that “these businesses have to protect their operations and their customers.”

SB 16 passed on largely party line votes through the GOP-dominated legislature during this legislative session. An email sent to a spokesperson for Beshear asking whether the governor planned to sign, veto or let SB 16 become law without his signature was not immediately returned.?

Democrats in the Kentucky House of Representatives unsuccessfully last week tried to add additions to the bill through floor amendments, one of which would have clarified employees of these facilities would be protected from “retaliation or discrimination” for making public “any wrongdoing or documentation of noncompliance of any federal, state, or local law or regulation.”

Rep. Al Gentry, D-Louisville, said he had heard Tyson Foods’ lobbyist say it wasn’t the intent of SB 16 to interfere with whistleblower protections for employees, but he hoped his floor amendment would make that clear.?

“If we vote no on this amendment, to me I think it shows there is a lack of concern for this potential situation that could exist and for employees that find themselves in a difficult predicament,” Gentry said.

Rep. Richard Heath, R-Mayfield, whose district includes the Pilgrim’s Pride meatpacking plant in Graves County, said he’d talked with the lobbyist for Tyson Foods along with the sponsor of SB 16 who considered the floor amendment “unfriendly.”?

Gentry’s floor amendment was voted down 27-49.?

Heath on the House floor said the bill protected “food processors” including Pilgrim’s Pride in his district, along with protecting “the farmers who raise livestock and poultry” from an “unauthorized intrusion.”?

“This is a private property protection bill for the folks who produce and process the food of our state and who employ thousands,” Heath said.?

A national advocacy group says a bill approved by the Kentucky legislature will criminalize investigations of industrial agriculture abuses. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

After rejecting protections for whistleblowers and accidental violations, the House on Tuesday approved Senate Bill 16 restricting drone photography of food production plants and animal feeding operations.

Democratic Rep. Al Gentry of Louisville offered an amendment protecting whistleblowers who film violations of safety or health laws.?

Overbroad bill risks turning food plant workers, government inspectors, neighbors into criminals

Rep. Chad Aull, D-Lexington, offered an amendment to clarify that unintentionally leaving on a phone camera or recorder would not constitute a violation.

Both amendments were defeated on party line votes after Rep. Richard Heath, R-Mayfield, told his colleagues that the bill’s sponsor and the lobbyist for Tyson Foods considered both proposals unfriendly amendments. Sen. John Schickel, R- Union, is the bill’s sponsor.

The House voted 72-25 in favor of the measure sought by the poultry industry.

Opponents have warned that imprecise language in what they call an “ag-gag” bill could be used to punish citizens and even government inspectors trying to document hazardous conditions, including pollution and food safety violations.?

The bill will now go to Gov. Andy Beshear.

Gov. Andy Beshear speaks to reporters in Louisville before addressing a luncheon hosted by Greater Louisville, Inc. (Kentucky Lantern photo by McKenna Horsley)

LOUISVILLE — Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear on Monday called a Republican-backed bill that would move the state’s wildlife management agency from his administration to the agriculture department an unconstitutional “power grab.”?

Beshear also called out Senate Republicans for refusing to confirm his appointees to the Fish and Wildlife Commission.?

“It’s time for them to stop protecting leadership of what I think is the most corrupt part of state government,” the governor told reporters before speaking at a luncheon in Louisville.

Beshear said he chooses his appointees for Fish and Wildlife commissioners from a pool of five candidates nominated by sportspeople who vote at nine district meetings.

Kentucky hunters, anglers decry proposal to put Fish and Wildlife under agriculture department

The Senate “has refused to confirm them over and over,” Beshear said.

The nine-member commission has three vacancies.

Controversy surrounded the appointment of Rich Storm as commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDRFW). Then-Attorney General Daniel Cameron issued an opinion in 2021 saying the commission had violated the open meetings law when hiring Storm. A group of sportspeople sued Fish and Wildlife for access to texts and emails related to Storm’s contract renewal. The case is awaiting a state Supreme Court ruling.

In a narrow Friday vote, the Senate passed Senate Bill 3, which would move the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources from the tourism cabinet, which is part of Beshear’s administration, to the Kentucky Department of Agriculture, which is overseen by elected Republican Agriculture Commissioner Jonathan Shell.??

The Kentucky Horse Racing Commission would be moved from the Public Protection Cabinet to the agriculture department, under a floor amendment added to the bill by Senate Republican Floor Leader Damon Thayer, of Georgetown.

The bill is awaiting House action.

Speaking with reporters on Monday ahead of a Capitol Connection luncheon hosted by Greater Louisville, Inc., Beshear chalked up the move to partisan politics. He pointed to a recent Court of Appeals decision that found a law giving the majority of the Kentucky State Fair Board appointments to the agriculture commissioner instead of the governor was unconstitutional. The bill is part of a legislative trend to limit gubernatorial authority.?

“I mean, knock it off, all right? People don’t want this constant back and forth. I’m trying to serve all the people of Kentucky,” Beshear said. “This is simply because I’m a Democrat and they’re Republicans, and that’s not how we should govern.”?

In his remarks to the crowd, which included local business leaders, the governor renewed his call for more public education funding, universal pre-kindergarten and economic development.

He also voiced support for diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, which are under fire from the Republican-controlled legislature.?

“It’s got to stop,” Beshear said. “It’s tearing our country apart, the type of anger and hate politics we see out there. The need to create a boogeyman every session which is normally a three-letter acronym they try to turn into a four-letter word.”

What is Beshear reviewing??

Last week, the House and Senate moved several GOP priority bills, including an omnibus crime bill that won approval in the House and Senate, House Bill 5. Beshear told reporters while he hasn’t reviewed the latest version of the bill, he is supportive of parts of the legislation, such as a carjacking statute, but is concerned about other provisions, such as how creating the crime of illegal street camping could affect people who are homeless.?

“I’m going to look very carefully over it when we get it,” Beshear said. “At the end of the day, we want to make sure that our communities are truly safer based on any legislation we pass.”

Beshear also raised concerns about an increase in corrections costs if HB 5 becomes law.? According to an analysis by progressive think tank the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, the legislation would cost more than $1 billion over the next decade because of an increase in incarceration expenses.?

“If they’re going to ask the executive branch to house more inmates, they’re going to need to provide the funding to do it,” the governor said.?

As Beshear spoke in Louisville, members of Senate and House leadership met in a conference committee at the Capitol to reconcile differences between their proposed budgets. The governor said he was more supportive of the Senate’s version, as it restores “necessary dollars to Medicaid and a number of other programs.” Some of the things he had proposed in his budget, like dollars to renovate career and technical education facilities in high schools, were included in the Senate budget.?

Beshear did however lament what he sees as inadequate funding for public education needs the the House and Senate budgets.?

“We cannot have a state budget unless it includes raises for our public school educators and at least strongly considers universal pre-K,” he said.?

Ensuring universal pre-K is essential to addressing the need for child care, the governor said. Beshear has proposed spending $141 million over the next two years to stabilize the child care industry in his budget. He also asked the state to spend $172 million to begin funding universal preschool for Kentucky four-year-olds, though child care advocates worried his plan could cannibalize the child care industry since most providers don’t start making money on students until they reach three and four years old.?

The Senate did not propose enough to stabilize the industry this year as COVID-era federal dollars dry up, child care advocates have said.

Meanwhile, Republican Sen. Danny Carroll, of Benton, proposed $300 million on child care, including a $66 million annual investment into the Child Care Assistance Program, which helps families pay for expensive child care tuition.

The General Assembly has eight days left in its current 60-day session. The House and Senate will reconvene Thursday, but committees will meet at the Capitol before then. Lawmakers will recess for the 10-day veto period starting next Friday, March 29.?

The two-term governor’s vetoes have been futile because the Republican supermajority in the General Assembly can easily override them. For the most part, they do highlight differences in policy priorities between Democrats and Republicans. So far, Beshear has issued one veto against a bill that preempts local bans on housing discrimination based on the renter’s source of income. The General Assembly already overrode it.?

Constitutional amendment

One piece of legislation that Beshear will not be able to veto or sign is a bill that puts a constitutional amendment on the ballot to allow the General Assembly the ability to give public dollars to nonpublic schools. The House and Senate approved the amendment last week, paving the way for a November election. Constitutional amendments are decided by Kentucky voters and not sent to the governor.?

Beshear said he is “fully and entirely” opposed to the constitutional amendment. He said the General Assembly has been underfunding public schools for decades.?

“Basically they starve our public schools and the resources they need, and then argue our public schools aren’t succeeding,” Beshear said. “Well, if you want to fix public schools, provide them the money that will help with that fix.”?

Kentucky Senate Majority Floor Leader Damon Thayer (LRC Public Information)

FRANKFORT — The GOP-dominated Senate narrowly advanced a controversial change for Kentucky’s wildlife management agency Friday while also voting to administratively attach the racing commission to the state agriculture department as well.?

Sportsmen’s and wildlife conservation groups have strongly opposed the proposal, and lawmakers echoed their concerns during Friday’s debate.?

Senate Bill 3, primarily sponsored by Sen. Jason Howell, R-Murray, was approved 20-16, with nine Republicans joining the minority of Democrats in opposition. The bill is now under the Kentucky House of Representatives’ consideration.

SB 3 would move the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) from the tourism cabinet, a part of Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear’s administration, and attach it to the Kentucky Department of Agriculture overseen by Republican Agriculture Commissioner Jonathan Shell, a former House leader elected to the statewide position last November.?

The bill would also end Beshear’s power to appoint members to the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission, the governing board for the KDFWR, and give the power to Shell.?

In addition, Senate Majority Floor Leader Damon Thayer, R-Georgetown, successfully sponsored a floor amendment that would also move the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission from the Public Protection Cabinet and attach it to the Kentucky Department of Agriculture. Thayer’s amendment also adds a requirement for Senate confirmation of gubernatorial appointments to the commission that regulates racing in Kentucky.

On the Senate floor, Howell, chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, reiterated his reasoning for the bill, acknowledging opposition from hunters and anglers that agriculture interests are antithetical to wildlife management’s mission and interests. Sportsmen testified in committee that Kentucky Farm Bureau, a powerful lobbying presence in the state, advocates for reducing wildlife as a policy.

“While there is some grounds for natural friction between the two, I see a natural alignment coming between the two agencies,” Howell said. “Shell has been out in front pushing rural economic development as part of his platform.”?

Howell again referenced past conflicts between the KDFWR and Beshear’s administration as a driving reason to remove KDFWR from the state executive branch.

“Stability is our main goal,” Howell said, mentioning that lawmakers were tired of the “trauma” with past governors “attacking Fish and Wildlife operational independence.”?

Sen. Robin Webb, D-Grayson, a long-time advocate for the KDFWR who strongly opposes the bill, withdrew her floor amendments, saying offering them would most likely be an “exercise in futility.” She said she hopes the amendments would give the House of Representatives ideas for improving the bill.

One of her floor amendments would have struck the language of SB 3 and instead created a working group on how the KDFWR could “maintain autonomy” in its operations “while retaining the oversight and accountability required of a public agency charged with the expenditure of public funds.”?

Webb lambasted the bill while waving an orange National Assembly of Sportsmen’s Caucuses hat, arguing agriculture interests don’t always follow the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, a standard-bearing system of policies and laws designed to safeguard wildlife through “sound science and active management.”?

“We talk about making money? That is a secondary benefit of management. Fish and Wildlife is not about making money or economic development. It’s about preservation and opportunity for cultural heritage,” Webb said.?

Webb also said no other state wildlife management agency is coupled to their state agriculture agency, something that would make Kentucky a “laughing stock” if implemented.?

John Culclasure, a director with the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, told the Lantern he wasn’t aware of any state agriculture agency attached to a state wildlife management agency, nor was he aware of any state that allows a state agriculture official to have power over the entire membership of a wildlife management agency board.?

Other Republicans who voted for the bill didn’t see a problem with coupling the two agencies. Sen. Shelley Funke Frommeyer, R-Alexandria, said? her family has land used for both farming and hunting creating “a great marriage” between the two land uses.?

Sen. Adrienne Southworth, R-Lawrenceburg, in voting against the bill pushed back on the idea that the executive branch was solely causing issues with the KDFWR, mentioning that her constituents have asked her in recent years to support the Senate confirmation of appointments to the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission, the governing board for the KDFWR.?

The nine-member commission represents hunters and anglers across Kentucky, and sportspeople nominate commissioners through a direct vote at a scheduled meeting. A list of the top five vote-getters from that meeting are then sent to the governor, who can then appoint a member to the commission or reject the list, restarting the nomination process. But any appointments made by the governor must be confirmed by the Kentucky Senate.?

In committee testimony against SB 3, Edwin Nighbert, the president of the League of Kentucky Sportsmen, said sportsmen had nominated “very good people” for the commission, only for the Senate confirmation process to be “weaponized” against sportsmen.?

According to a Lantern analysis of appointments made to the commission over the course of Beshear’s tenure, the Senate has failed to confirm a majority of his appointments. One of Beshear’s past commission appointments was voted down on the Senate floor.?

Southworth said that during her earlier work in the state executive branch she worked to solve “disconnected issues” between agencies. She said in this case, the “disconnect” with the Fish and Wildlife Commission was being created by the Senate itself.?

“My recollection is constituents asking me the last multiple years to please support this or that confirmation, and it’s this body — and I’d like to lay it right on our feet — this body is the one that’s created the disconnect,” Southworth said.

One of the floor amendments that Webb withdrew would have required the governor to pick a new appointment for a Fish and Wildlife Commission seat if the Senate didn’t act to confirm the appointment by Feb. 15 during a legislative session.?

Five appointments by Beshear are still awaiting confirmation by the Senate this session; three of his nominees would fill current vacancies on the Fish and Wildlife Commission.?

When SB 3 passed the Senate Agriculture Committee earlier this week, Howell had said the KDFWR Commissioner Rich Storm — who runs the daily operations of the department and is hired by the Fish and Wildlife Commission — had supported the bill.?

In a Lantern interview at the state Capitol complex on Thursday, Storm told the Lantern the department didn’t have a position on the bill but believed the KDFWR could still operate independently while attached to the Department of Agriculture. Storm said the KDFWR had been attached to a number of agencies over the course of its history.

“As long as we have that independency, if it’s the General Assembly’s desire we’ll comply with whatever that may be,” Storm said.?

Under SB 3, the KDFWR would be attached to the Department of Agriculture only for “limited functions and purposes expressly requested” by KDFWR to be performed by the Department of Agriculture.?

Storm, who also serves as a director for the Nicholas County Farm Bureau, said there have always “been people with ag interest” serving on the Fish and Wildlife Commission.

“We’ve had the requirement that they have the fishing and hunting license experience,” Storm said, referencing state requirements to serve on the commission. “I think that’s a protective mechanism.”

In an interview with the Lantern, Nighbert, the president of the League of Kentucky Sportsmen, agreed that past members of the Fish and Wildlife Commission have had interests in farming.

But the concern among sportsmen, he said, is that an agriculture commissioner could choose nominees more heavily invested in agriculture, thereby conflicting with the interests and mission of wildlife conservation and management.?

“That’s the fear of giving all these appointments to the ag commissioner is that they will put full agricultural guys on there,” Nighbert said.

Edwin Nighbert (Kentucky Lantern photo by Liam Niemeyer)

FRANKFORT —Wildlife conservation and sportsmen groups on Tuesday voiced strong opposition to a bill that would put wildlife management under the purview of the Kentucky Department of Agriculture and its Republican commissioner.?

Senate Bill 3, sponsored by Sen. Jason Howell, R-Murray, would move the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) from the tourism cabinet, overseen by Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear, and attach it to the agriculture department overseen by Republican Agriculture Commissioner Jonathan Shell, a former House leader who was elected to the statewide post last November.?

The bill also would transfer authority for appointing Fish and Wildlife Commission members from the governor to the agriculture commissioner.

Howell told the Senate Agriculture Committee, which he chairs, that the bill is needed because of years-long conflicts between Beshear’s administration and the KDFWR. He said Beshear had tried to sweep funding from KDFWR — which is primarily funded through revenue generated by fishing and hunting license fees and doesn’t receive General Fund monies? — in 2020, something a Beshear spokesperson had denied at the time.?

The committee passed the bill on a near party line vote with one Republican joining Democrats in opposition.?

“There’s been a problem back and forth with Fish and Wildlife and various governors for a long time,” Howell said. “There’s going to be inherent conflicts with any governor that we have for things that they want to do, or not do, and what Fish and Wildlife’s true mission is.”

Howell said he saw a lot of “synergies” from coupling wildlife management with agriculture, focusing on rural economic development. He said he had spoken to Shell and KDFWR Commissioner Rich Storm, who oversees the daily operations of the department, and that both were in favor of the bill.?

But a number of Kentucky organizations representing hunters, fishers and wildlife conservationists thought much differently. Several representatives of those groups were present in the committee room wearing orange hunter vests.

Larry Richards, the legislative affairs committee chairman for the Kentuckiana Chapter of Safari Club International, said the “political outcome” of this bill would be the “immediate overhaul of this commission favoring agriculture interests.”?

“The department of ag is diametrically anathema to the Fish and Wildlife department, to the biologists and the staff that work at that department, so much so as to be antithetical to the proven, science-based methodologies that have been used by the department for years,” Richards said. “This mix is oil and water, folks.”?

Richards pointed out that the Kentucky Farm Bureau, a powerful lobbying presence in the state, continues to advocate for reduced wildlife populations to lessen impacts on crops and livestock.?

Richards also criticized Howell over what he described as lack of transparency surrounding SB 3, saying sportsmen’s groups were not contacted at all before the bill was filed. He noted that SB 3 was filed on the very last day for filing bills in the Kentucky Senate — leaving? stakeholders less time to respond than if the bill had been filed earlier in the session which began in January.?

No representatives from the Kentucky Department of Agriculture or the KDFWR spoke at the committee meeting. A call to a Kentucky Department of Agriculture spokesperson was not returned.?

Lisa Jackson, a KDFWR spokesperson, in a statement said Storm wanted a change in SB 3 to maintain “the agency’s operational independence.”

“Commissioner Storm appreciates any opportunities to engage in conversations with bill sponsors and works to maintain positive relationships with all members of the Legislative and Executive branches,” Jackson said in her statement.?

KDFWR is administratively attached to the state executive branch through the Kentucky Tourism, Arts and Heritage Cabinet. But the department does manage much of its duties independently, including issuing and enforcing a number of hunting and fishing regulations; managing wildlife through maintaining a mussel nursery and controlling a number of wildlife management areas; and maintaining a mussel nursery; and overseeing hunting seasons for deer, elk, turkey, bears and other wildlife.?

SB 3 would also strip the power of the governor to appoint commissioners to the nine-member Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission, a volunteer board of hunters and anglers who oversee the department and tens of millions of dollars of revenue received from the sale of hunting and fishing licenses.?

“This is going to set our agency back 40 years, at a minimum, and we’re going to be the laughingstock of the nation. It means a lot to me, this agency does, and it’s bigger than any commissioner, it’s bigger than any political party.” – Sen. Robin Webb, D-Grayson

The commission is made up of representatives of nine districts representing hunters and anglers around the state, and these sportspeople nominate a commissioner through a vote at a meeting in their district. A list of the top five vote-getters from that meeting are then sent to the governor, who can then appoint a member to the commission or reject the list, restarting the nomination process. Any appointments made by the governor must be confirmed by the Kentucky Senate.

SB 3 would instead give Republican Agriculture Commissioner Shell the power to choose from the nomination lists, including nominating candidates for five Fish and Wildlife Commission appointments made by Beshear that are currently awaiting Kentucky Senate confirmation. Three of those pending appointments are to fill current vacancies on the Fish and Wildlife Commission.?

Edwin Nighbert, the president of the League of Kentucky Sportsmen representing thousands of hunters across the state, said the voices of sportsmen in the Fish and Wildlife Commission appointment and confirmation process had been “slowly eroded.”?

“We have sent up names to the governor. The governor sends the Senate five nominees,” Nighbert said, referring to the five Fish and Wildlife Commission appointments made by the governor awaiting Senate confirmation this legislative session. “We expect those nominees to be confirmed as long as they are vetted, and the governor has vetted them.”?

“You’re interrupting the process in my opinion right now, and quite frankly, have been. We have sent up very, very good people in the past for that commission, and the Senate has weaponized their confirmation process against the sportsmen,” Nighbert said.?

The Kentucky Senate, which the GOP took control of in 2000, has had the power to confirm the governor’s appointments to the commission since the legislature passed a 2010 law, which also implemented term limits for members of the Fish and Wildlife Commission.?

The majority of Beshear’s appointments to the commission haven’t been confirmed, according to an analysis of past appointments and confirmations by the Lantern. One of the appointments was voted down on the Senate floor.?

Senate Majority Floor Leader Damon Thayer, R-Georgetown, responded to the criticism from sportsmen by saying the Kentucky Senate was not a “rubber stamp” for the governor’s nominees to the commission.?

“We have the right to not confirm or to confirm. We have not confirmed in the past, and trust me when I tell you that possibility is out there again this session,” Thayer said. “Please, don’t ever come up here and just say that we should confirm all five appointees.”

Thayer said the five appointees this session awaiting confirmation would be vetted by the Senate staff before a decision is made on whether to confirm them.?

Sen. Jared Carpenter, R-Berea, also took issue with sportsmens’ assertions that agriculture interests can’t coincide with wildlife management interests.?

“I don’t think that there’s any way that you can say that farmers are wanting to decimate a population of wildlife,” Carpenter said. “You shake your head all you want, but I just don’t feel like that’s the truth.”?

James Hatchett, a spokesperson for Gov. Andy Beshear, in a statement said the Senate was “thwarting the legal process and disrespecting the sportsmen and women” and their elections by not confirming the appointments sent by the governor.?

“These actions have resulted in nearly all the major organizations representing sportsmen and women opposing the current bill and opposing the current leadership of Fish and Wildlife,” Hatchett said.?

Hatchett didn’t address Howell’s reference to a past budget sweep, saying the governor “has no interest in and would not move any fish and wildlife funds.”

Before the bill passed out of committee, Sen. Robin Webb, D-Grayson, gave emotional testimony against the bill, referencing her father’s long-time role serving on the Fish and Wildlife Commission.?

“I’ve lost sleep over this,” Webb said, saying she was moved “to tears because of the priority of the bill number.”

Webb said the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, a system of policies and laws designed to safeguard wildlife through “sound science and active management,” embraces priorities that are distinctly different from those of agricultural interests. She said she was involved in an effort to kill a similar bill in the past.?

“This is going to set our agency back 40 years, at a minimum, and we’re going to be the laughingstock of the nation,” Webb said. “It means a lot to me, this agency does, and it’s bigger than any commissioner, it’s bigger than any political party.”

Webb said she would try to be the “voice of those species” that the state manages for the benefit of wildlife, hunters and anglers.?

Would ratepayers get handed the bill for expanding electricity generation and transmission to accommodate energy-hungry data centers? (Getty Images)

Republicans in the GOP-dominated Kentucky Senate advanced a bill Tuesday largely on a party line vote to create new hurdles before utilities can retire fossil fuel-fired power plants in the state, touting the legislation as a way to keep the state’s electricity supply reliable and available.?

Senate Bill 349, backed by Senate President Robert Stivers, R-Manchester, and primarily sponsored by Sen. Robby Mills, R-Henderson, would create a new review commission that utilities would have to provide notice to before filing requests to the state’s utility regulator to retire a fossil fuel-fired power plant.?

“Senate Bill 349 simply requires due diligence and a thorough review to ensure existing capacity is not retired too quickly and that any new or replacement generation is ready to meet Kentucky’s energy needs,” Mills said on the Senate floor.?

Investor-owned utilities, such as Duke Energy and Louisville Gas and Electric and Kentucky Utilities (LG&E and KU) and environmental groups have previously decried the bill as creating unnecessary bureaucracy to impede retirement requests and keep aging, uneconomical coal-fired power plants on the grid. Ratepayers, critics warn, could be burdened with the costs of unnecessarily extending the life of coal-fired power plants. Critics have also honed in on what they see is the problematic makeup of the commission, which would include industry representatives from a number of energy sources but favor the? fossil fuels —? coal and natural gas.?

Lane Boldman, the executive director of the environmental advocacy group Kentucky Conservation Committee, said she doesn’t understand the need to create an “additional layer” of regulation when the Public Service Commission could have its resources boosted to handle broader responsibilities.?

“It just doesn’t make sense to hang on to infrastructure that’s even near its lifecycle,” Boldman said. “I know there were comments made that these plants aren’t done yet, but they’re clearly past their prime.”

SB 349 passed the Kentucky Senate on a party line vote of 28-9, with a handful of Republicans from Northern Kentucky and the Louisville area joining nearly all Democrats in voting against the bill. The bill heads to the House for its consideration.?

This proposed 18-member commission, dubbed the Energy Planning and Inventory Commission (EPIC) under SB 349, would be charged with creating a report for each retirement request analyzing the impacts of and alternatives to the request, including how it would impact electricity supply and whether the retirement would create a “loss of revenue” for local and state government.?

Utilities wouldn’t be allowed to file retirement requests with the Kentucky Public Service Commission (PSC), the state utility regulator that approves or denies such requests, without having the EPIC report on file.?

Mills said he made changes to SB 349, added through a floor amendment, after listening to feedback from utilities. The amendment would shorten the timeframe in which EPIC could operate ahead of a retirement request made to the PSC. Utilities would have to give notice to EPIC of a retirement request 180 days before filing a request to the PSC, instead of 365 days in the original bill.?

Senate Democrats who criticized the bill echoed the concerns of utilities and environmental groups.

Sen. Karen Berg, D-Louisville said the proposed commission would limit the state’s future energy choices. “My constituents want clean energy, clean air and clean water,” Berg said. “If we don’t begin to deliver that to our children, then we’re gonna leave them in a world that is not safe to live in.”?

Sen. David Yates, D-Louisville, said the Senate should be “open and honest” that the added bureaucracy of the commission would contribute to future rate increases for Kentuckians.?

Senate President Robert Stivers, R-Manchester, a co-sponsor of the bill, reiterated his support by saying there needed to be an “honest conversation” about the upcoming “reliability crisis” the state faces.?

“We do not need to remove any generation. In fact, we need to increase generation,” Stivers said, referencing the amount of power supply created in Kentucky.?

LG&E and KU President John Crockett, who was among utility representatives who testified against SB 349, has previously rebuffed assertions from Stivers that the state is facing an energy reliability crisis.?

SB 349 does have the backing of the coal interests. Dependable Power First Kentucky is a lobbying group affiliated with America’s Power, a national organization advocating “on behalf of the U.S. coal fleet and its supply chain.”?

In a statement last week when SB 349 passed out of a Senate committee, Dependable Power Kentucky commended the bill sponsors for “taking much needed steps to help ensure a reliable supply of electricity for the citizens of Kentucky.”

The sludges remaining from municipal waste treatment contain nutrients for crops and pastures. They may also contain heavy metals and chemical contaminants that are taken up into the food chain and may harm the safety of crops and the health of livestock like these beef cattle grazing in Jessamine County. (Photo by Robert Pokorny)

On March 11, the Administrative Regulations Review Subcommittee will consider a set of revisions to Energy and Environment Cabinet regulations that weaken protections for farmers, farmland and the public from the application of contaminated sludges from municipal wastewater treatment plants.

Called “biosolids,” the sludges remaining from city treatment of residential, commercial and industrial wastes contain nutrients of value to crops and for growing livestock forage. They may also contain heavy metals and chemical contaminants with no value to agriculture, including contaminants that are taken up into the food chain and may harm the health of livestock, the safety of crops and the health of the consuming public.

Kentucky farmers, already in difficult economic circumstances in a “cheap food” economy that undervalues their essential work and the importance of their crop and livestock production, often use these sludges as fertilizers as a cost-cutting measure in lieu of commercial fertilizers.

And they rely on the cabinet to require permits and set standards and enforce testing requirements on these city treatment plant sludges to assure that if the sludge is sold or given to farmers for use as fertilizers it will not damage the productivity of their farmlands, contaminate their crops, or harm their livestock and ability to sell those products.

The land application of sewage sludges from cities has been subject to regulation by the cabinet for many years. Those cities have also been subject to federal regulations known as the 503 Regulations, adopted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1992.???

Complaints from a few cities of alleged delays in getting approvals for land applying their sewage sludges led to the enactment of Senate Bill 213 by the General Assembly in 2023.? SB 213 required the cabinet to revise its regulations to adopt standards “in conformance” with federal regulations that require routine monitoring for only nine pollutants.?

According to EPA’s own Inspector General in a 2018 report, EPA has failed to study the risks of and to set standards and require monitoring for 352 other pollutants detected in sludges by EPA, including 61 designated as acutely hazardous, hazardous or priority pollutants in other programs. The report concluded that EPA’s controls over the land application of sewage sludge (biosolids) may not fully protect human health and the environment.?

The cabinet’s proposed administrative regulations go much further than necessary to address SB 213 and significantly weaken accountability for applying this category of special wastes to Kentucky land. The cabinet’s regulations, if finalized without significant improvement, will result in:

• Less accountability for cities with respect to their wastewater treatment plant sludges that are land applied;
• Greater risk of contamination of farmland and potentially of crops and livestock;
• Creation of a new generation of state superfund sites where future remedial costs could be imposed on farmers and cities for cleanup of any lands where contaminated sludges were applied.

The cabinet knows that so-called “forever chemicals,” PFAs and PFOAs, are likely to be present in the sewage treatment plant sludges of cities whose municipal wastewater treatment plants (MWWTPs) accept industrial and commercial wastewaters in addition to residential and institutional wastewaters.

The key flaw among many is that there is no requirement for city testing of the sludges prior to land application for all known contaminants and no obligation to inform farmers if these sludges contain pollutants that may harm their health or land and soil productivity.

The cabinet knows that the EPA is moving forward to establish standards to limit public exposure to these forever chemicals due to known and suspected adverse health outcomes.

Yet despite this knowledge, the cabinet is moving forward with regulation changes that fail to require cities to test the sludges thoroughly and to inform farmers of the contents and that also fail to limit the land application of contaminated sludges. These regulations invite repetition of catastrophic situations such as have occurred in other states from such land applications, and which caused Maine to ban such actions.

The key flaw among many in the proposed regulations is that there is no requirement for city testing of the sludges prior to land application for all known contaminants of concern, including emerging contaminants such as PFAs and PFOAs, and no obligation to inform farmers if these sludges contain, in addition to nutrients, pollutants that may harm their health or land and soil productivity, and at what levels they are present.? The only thing that the city must tell the farmer is that the “biosolids may contain constituents from an industrial pretreatment program.” What pollutants are present and how much, are not required to be tested for or shared even if known.

And when that contamination of farmland occurs, it will be only by happenstance that it? is discovered, and there will be no obligation under these proposed regulations, to remedy the contamination.?The burden of the contamination of land and groundwater resources will fall on the farmer, and not the cities whose systems generated the sludges.

The cabinet admits that it is aware of instances in other states where long-term application of biosolids containing emerging contaminants has been “determined to be impactful to public health and the future viability of the land on which it was applied.” Yet knowing this, it proposes to allow that practice here until and unless federal rules are developed that limit such practices.

The?interests of the farming community in assuring that the sludges that they get from the cities are not contaminated with PFAs and other chemicals that have no agricultural use or value — but have a real and proven potential for contamination of land, crops, and livestock — is being sacrificed to accommodate the short-term interests of cities in cheaper disposal of their wastewater treatment sludges.?

The long-term interests of the cities and of the commonwealth — in the protection of farmers and farmland, public health, and avoidance of future cleanup liability — are served by shelving the proposed regulations and proposing a more responsible and vigorous set of requirements for testing and informed consent.

The short-term interests of the cities in finding a way to inexpensively dispose of their municipal wastewater treatment sludges appears in the proposed regulations to have trumped the protection of public health, the environment, agricultural land and those who receive and apply the wastes.??

If the cities cannot control or address the contamination through pretreatment or other means to assure that the sludges they sell or give to farmers are?in fact?only “nutrient-rich,” “organic,” and will “improve” or “maintain” productivity of the soils — rather than contaminate and render them unusable — then the cities should utilize other more responsible and accountable approaches to special waste management.

Sen. Steve West, R-Paris, is the latest to withdraw support for an airport expansion at Bluegrass Station. (LRC Public Information)

FRANKFORT — Key supporters of a proposed airport expansion at Bluegrass Station, a state-owned industrial park at Avon in Fayette County, have changed their tunes after strong local pushback.

Sen. Steve West, who represents Bourbon County, on Tuesday became the latest to abandon his earlier support for including the project in the next state budget. Gov. Andy Beshear withdrew his support last week.??

West, a Republican, blamed the Democratic governor for failing to take the lead on selling the project. West faulted the administration for not providing opportunities for public participation or information on how the proposed funding would have been spent.?

The GOP-dominated Kentucky House of Representatives earlier this month passed a state budget that included hundreds of millions of dollars to build a general aviation airport, which would create a 7,800-foot runway extending into Bourbon County. The state budget proposed by Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear also supported the airport but to a lesser degree, allocating $55 million for land acquisition.?

Yet in the past week, Beshear, West and the director of the Bluegrass Station have all retracted their support in the face of opposition from Bourbon County landowners who feared the project would take prime farmland through eminent domain and destroy family farms.?

Beshear in a Feb. 22 statement on social media said he “never supported” moving forward with the airport expansion if it didn’t have local support, saying the Kentucky Department of Military Affairs had proposed the project.?

“Several elected officials who have supported the project both publicly and privately now claim they oppose it, and landowners are appropriately asserting their disagreement,” Beshear said in his statement. “It should not move forward, and I will not support its inclusion in any final budget this year, or in the coming years.”?

In a letter posted on the airport project’s website the following day, Bluegrass Station director Steve Collins said the project was “closed” and apologized to elected officials and community members who had “endured unmentionable attacks” that should have been directed at him “as the driving agent for feasibility information.”?

State budget support for airport at Bluegrass Station reignites local opposition

Collins, who had supported the project, told the Lantern that public outreach and engagement would have made sure people were heard during the land acquisition process once state funding was allocated. Collins described eminent domain as favoring the “needs of the many versus the wants of a few.”?

A 2022 feasibility report commissioned by the legislature signaled eminent domain could be used for the project and also said its economic development impact could be significant: 3,000 to 6,000 new permanent jobs, $12 million to $20 million in annual tax revenues and more than $1.2 billion in private investment.?

Earlier this month, West, who lives in Bourbon County, told the Lantern he supported the project, calling it an economic development “game changer.” He said then that using eminent domain was “always messy” but that he hoped state-led developers would be “generous” with owners selling their property for the airport.?

But on Tuesday, West announced in a statement he was now against funding for the airport, saying that the “lack of communication and local involvement” regarding eminent domain and land impacts was “simply unacceptable.”?

West in an interview said he and Rep. Matthew Koch, R-Paris, who also represents Bourbon County, received “zero information” from the Beshear administration, other than a video conference call with Collins, about how the project funding would be allocated and how eminent domain would be used.?

“I expected some kind of scheduled public meeting, some type of written proposal or plan regarding eminent domain, a public private partnership, what that would look like,” West said. “I can’t sell this to my constituents. I have zero information.”?

West said Beshear had “bailed” on the project and that he found it troubling the governor was blaming the Department of Military Affairs for proposing the airport plan. When asked about the House GOP budget’s support for the airport — much higher than in the governor’s budget — he characterized it as a “placeholder” out of “deference” to the governor’s budget request.?

Crystal Staley, a spokesperson for Beshear, in a statement said the governor “has been crystal clear” that the project “would never move forward without community buy-in and support.”?

“He said this in every meeting and conversation with lawmakers, local officials and the Department of Military Affairs,” Staley said.?

She also listed three times the Department of Military Affairs notified the Legislative Research Commission, the nonpartisan research branch of the legislature, or lawmakers about the budget request for the airport project. That included when the department mentioned funding for the project among other budget requests presented before a legislative planning board last summer.?

Ike VanMeter, a Bourbon County landowner and cattle farmer who owns about 1,500 acres near the Bluegrass Station, credited organizing and activism against the airport project for changing the minds of elected officials. That activism included holding a town hall meeting about the project. Bourbon County Fiscal Court passed a resolution opposing the airport expansion.

VanMeter said he believes that activism isn’t about “calling somebody out necessarily” but making sure “we have been heard.”?

“I don’t know if we’ll ever know whose idea, or who was the majority of the drive behind this project,” VanMeter said. “Our concern as citizens for Bourbon County is stopping the project.”?

VanMeter said the goal for concerned residents moving forward is to make sure funding for the airport project is missing from any state budget that passes the legislature.?

A national advocacy group says a bill approved by the Kentucky legislature will criminalize investigations of industrial agriculture abuses. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

FRANKFORT — A bill backed by Kentucky’s poultry industry and approved by the Senate Thursday would subject drone operators to new restrictions that opponents warn could help hide health and safety hazards in food production.

Critics worry that Senate Bill 16, sponsored by Sen. John Schickel, a Republican from Northern Kentucky, could criminalize more activities than lawmakers realize and that it’s part of a long line of so-called “ag-gag” laws enacted across the country to block whistleblowers and watchdogs from investigating the conduct and practices of industrial agriculture.?

Schickel on the Senate floor said Kentucky’s poultry industry has large “chicken houses” and processing facilities around the state, and the industry had asked for help dealing with drones flying over and “basically harassing” their facilities.?

Graham Hall, a government affairs manager with Tyson Foods, testified in favor of the bill when it passed the Senate Agriculture Committee earlier this week. Hall said drones could “hinder” their business and endanger employees and livestock, saying a drone landed on a “live haul” truck in Wilkesboro, North Carolina. The North Carolina town in 2020 temporarily prohibited drones from flying over a local Tyson facility that had a COVID-19 outbreak after some TV stations flew drones over the facility for news coverage.?

SB 16, which passed the Senate along a largely party line vote, would add concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and commercial food manufacturing or processing facilities, such as meatpacking plants, to a list of “key infrastructure,” such as energy or military research installations. Flying drones over these sites is classified as misdemeanor trespassing under state law.?

The bill restricts more than drones. It also would impose restrictions on any photography or filming of CAFOs and food-processing sites.

CAFOs are meat, dairy, and egg operations where hundreds or thousands of animals are raised together in a confined facility; Kentucky had 150 of them as of 2022. Such facilities have been the target of animal rights groups investigating instances of animal cruelty and health violations.?

The bill would criminalize flying drones above or on such facilities. It prohibits recording and distributing photos or video of CAFOs or food manufacturing or processing facilities, even when photographed or filmed from the ground.?

Sen. Jason Howell, R-Murray, said facilities “come under fire a lot from well-meaning activists that interrupt operations” and that the bill was “narrowly tailored” to protect the facilities.?

But critics of the bill, including some Democrats who voted against the legislation, believe it could have far-reaching and ?unintended consequences.?

The environmental legal group Kentucky Resources Council, which has strongly opposed the legislation, cites multiple examples of how the law could be misused or misinterpreted: Employees or inspectors taking photos or videos of workplace violations could run afoul of the restrictions. So could a neighbor taking video from their own property, or someone simply taking photos at zoos, horse tracks or pumpkin patches, which could constitute an “animal feeding operation, ” the council has warned.?

“This bill may prevent the documenting and chill the reporting of dangerous conditions at commercial food manufacturing and packaging facilities that threaten worker or public safety,” an email from the legal group stated. “Workers or visitors to these facilities would be criminally liable for recording or reporting proof of an illegally and potentially dangerous source of food, defective equipment, or a spill or release of a hazardous materials, or transmitting documents to a government agency.”

Todd Blevins, the Kentucky state director of the Humane Society of the United States, echoed those concerns and also questioned whether the bill would be constitutional on First Amendment grounds. Other state laws restricting video and photo recording around agricultural facilities have been litigated, with some laws being struck down in court.?

“It just doesn’t seem like smart policy to pass something that’s been found unconstitutional more often than not,” Blevins said.?

In an interview after SB 16 cleared the Senate, Schickel said he thinks some of Kentucky Resource Council’s concerns are “farfetched” but that any potential unintended consequences created by the bill would be fixed.?

“Agriculture by its nature can be distasteful to some,” Schickel said. “I think these groups have harassed these businesses, and these businesses have to protect their operations and their customers.”

“Tyson does a great job and these other corporations are providing that service,” he said. “Kentucky benefits from it.”

Warren Beeler (Western Kentucky University)

Kentucky Agriculture Commissioner-elect Jonathan Shell has named Warren Beeler, a veteran of the Kentucky Department of Agriculture and a former University of Kentucky Extension specialist, as his deputy commissioner.

Beeler, who served as Republican Shell’s campaign chairman, held positions in the state agriculture department for 17 years. Republican Gov. Matt Bevin in 2016 appointed him director of the Governor’s Office of Agricultural Policy, overseeing tobacco settlement dollars designated for restructuring Kentucky farming as tobacco income declined.

Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear in 2020 replaced Beeler as the office’s head with former Democratic lawmaker Dorsey Ridley. The next year the Republican-controlled legislature moved oversight ?of the tobacco settlement funds from the governor’s office to the Department of Agriculture.

The settlement with cigarette manufacturers has brought more than $2 billion to Kentucky in yearly installments since 1999; half of the settlement money goes to the Agricultural Development Fund which provides grants and loans for diversification and infrastructure. The funding decisions are made by two boards who, after the legislature’s 2021 changes, are ?appointed by the commissioner of agriculture.

Shell, a former lawmaker from Garrard County, received 59 percent of the votes for agriculture commissioner in November, defeating Democrat Sierra Enlow.

In a release, Shell said: “Warren Beeler, or Mr. Agriculture as most of us call him, is one of Kentucky’s greatest agriculture champions, and I am honored he has agreed to join my team. I’m confident that in this new role all of Kentucky will continue to benefit from his knowledge and tireless work on behalf of Kentucky agriculture.”

Beeler, an expert in livestock genetics, ?has raised Kentucky grand champion hogs and lambs on his farm in Caneyville in Grayson County.

Shell also announced that he has hired several senior team members, including:

• Jay Hall, executive director of marketing;
• Dana Feldman, executive director of the Office of Consumer and Environmental Protection;
• Lee McIntosh, executive director of the Office of Administrative Services.

Shell will be sworn in during a ceremony in Garrard County Jan. 1.

Kentucky's veterinary shortage will likely be a topic during the upcoming General Assembly. (Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)

Kentucky’s Veterinary Shortage Working Group met Tuesday to finalize a report 18 months in the making.?

The report includes ways Kentucky can bring more veterinarians, especially those who practice on large animals, into the profession and give them further support to practice in Kentucky.

The group, which is under the Kentucky Department of Agriculture, has met a few times to discuss solutions to the shortage of veterinarians who work on large animals. Outgoing Commissioner of Agriculture Ryan Quarles named members of the group in February.

At that time, about 5% of veterinarians nationally practiced on large animals. In Kentucky, 3% of vets have dedicated large animal practices.?

Kentucky isn’t alone in looking to tackle its veterinary shortage. In West Virginia, state and higher education officials are planning to launch a four-year veterinary technology program as a response to its shortage. Earlier this year, the U.S. Senate established its first Senate Veterinary Medicine Caucus.?

“Other states’ departments of ag are looking to see what we do,” Quarles said during Tuesday’s meeting and added that the topic was discussed in a recent multi-state meeting.?

Kentucky’s veterinary shortage will likely be a topic discussed during the upcoming legislative session starting in January. In October, the General Assembly’s Interim Joint Committee on Agriculture discussed the shortage.

The 25-page report includes several goals and actions to encourage more students to go into veterinary medicine and recruit students to practice in Kentucky. Subcommittees of the working group researched areas in depth for the final report and presented recommendations Tuesday.?

Some key objectives are:?

• Begin the veterinary recruitment pipeline sooner while growing Kentucky agricultural community programs to educate primary and secondary school students about veterinary medicine and agriculture.
• Encourage Kentucky’s agricultural leadership and organizations to assist in the development and funding opportunities for students to work in rural areas while attending veterinary school.?
• Have state and organization agricultural leadership establish a team approach to develop, support and retain ongoing relationships with veterinary schools.
• Create financial literacy training and mental health support programs to reduce barriers for students and aid in wellness.

Also during the meeting, ??Quarles told the group his office is working to transition with incoming Commissioner Jonathan Shell. Quarles, who has served two terms in Frankfort, will become the president of the Kentucky Community and Technical College System after he leaves his office.?

Quarles said he will also plan to be in Frankfort frequently and told working group members to let him “know how I can be engaged in the conversation.”?

In the the late 19th century almost half the population lived on farms, like this one in Jessamine County, and needed a strong defender against the economic monopolies that bought and shipped their products. Now fewer than 2% of Americans live on farms but all Kentucky voters have a say in electing the “voice” of agriculture. (Kentucky Lantern photo by Jamie Lucke)

Any “red meat” in campaigns for commissioner of agriculture has usually pertained to Kentucky’s large beef herd — until now.

Republican Jonathan Shell, a former state House floor leader, is dishing out political red meat in his quest for the office, vowing to fight “woke liberals,” serve as “guardian” to the “unborn” and “save” Kentucky from President Joe Biden.

And, for the first time ever, Planned Parenthood has endorsed a candidate — Democrat Sierra Enlow —? in the race to head Kentucky’s Department of Agriculture.

The race’s partisan tone strikes some as unfortunate, if not surprising given the current high degree of political polarization.

“Agriculture has always attempted to stay above the fray of politics and partisanship,” said Jeffery Hall, who has helped shape farm policy for more than 30 years, including as the state executive director for the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency in Kentucky under President George W. Bush. Hall now serves as one of three board members overseeing the U.S. Farm Credit Administration.

“The primary focus of the agriculture commissioner should be agriculture,” said Hall. “It seems like more of the partisan, political issues are taking away from the real issues in agriculture, and that’s a shame.”

Scott Smith, retired dean of agriculture at the University of Kentucky, agrees. “In recent history, the race for agriculture commissioner has been more about who can be the best voice for all farmers and for ag advancement in Kentucky, less so about partisan politics.

“We should all be concerned if selection of a commissioner is to be decided primarily by their positions on divisive Republican vs. Democrat national issues, which are beyond the work of the Department of Agriculture in Kentucky,” said Smith.

The job?

The Department of Agriculture has 237 employees, a budget of? $87 million and an array of duties, some not directly related to farming, such as regulating gasoline pumps and amusement rides and licensing pesticide operators.?

The winner of the race will earn $148,109 annually and succeed Ryan Quarles, who has served the maximum two terms and finished second in the Republican primary for governor. Quarles will become president of the Kentucky Community and Technical College System in January.

Quarles’ predecessor was Republican U.S. Rep. James Comer, who also fell short of winning the GOP nomination for governor but went on to win a seat in Congress in 2016. Comer now holds a high-profile position as chairman of the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, which is conducting an investigation aimed at impeaching Biden.

The post has also served as a springboard to federal prison for two commissioners convicted of corruption, Democrat Ward “Butch” Burnette and Republican Richie Farmer.

The office itself is a vestige of the late 19th century when almost half the population lived on farms and needed a strong defender against the economic monopolies that bought and shipped their products. In 1891, the new state Constitution created the office of commissioner of agriculture, labor and statistics.

Now fewer than 2% of Americans live on farms but all Kentucky voters have a say in electing the “voice” of agriculture.

The candidates

The two candidates in the Nov. 7 election describe themselves as “fifth generation farmers” and were born within days of each other almost 36 years ago.

Enlow grew up in Larue County, working from an early age in tobacco with her family. She has a master’s degree in agricultural economics from the University of Kentucky and says she knew early on that she wanted to be ag commissioner.?

She has worked in economic development in government as well as the nonprofit and private sectors. She helped start a Kentucky chapter of the New Leaders Council which trains and promotes young progressive leaders. She has worked in Kentucky Democratic political campaigns. She’s now a self-employed consultant who helps companies with site selection and negotiations for tax incentives and advises local governments.

Shell and his father run cow-calf and greenhouse operations in Garrard County. Shell says in recent years pumpkins have become his favorite crop to grow. He earned a bachelor of science in agriculture from Eastern Kentucky University.?

Shell has refused invitations for joint appearances with Enlow, including on KET’s “Kentucky Tonight,” but both candidates participated in a Kentucky Farm Bureau “Meet the Candidate” forum on Oct. 10.

During the forum, Shell promised to be “a fighter” and touted the political friendships he has made since becoming the youngest ever House member at 24. Shell in 2012 won the seat vacated by Republican Lonnie Napier who retired after 27 years.

Shell quickly stood out as a rising star. Frustrated by the then-minority Republicans’ inability to push through conservative priorities such as right to work and anti-abortion laws, Shell recruited House candidates and headed the House GOP’s campaign committee. He was rewarded for the 70,000 miles he put on his vehicle when Republicans in 2016 took the House for the first time in 100 years, electing Shell their floor leader.?

“And we changed this state forever,” he told the Farm Bureau forum. “All the successes that we’re seeing now economically” resulted, he said, from actions by the legislature’s Republican supermajority.?

In a surprise upset, Shell was unseated in 2018 when he narrowly lost a Republican primary to R. Travis Brenda, a ?schoolteacher from Rockcastle County.

In 2020, Shell served as chairman of Sen. Mitch McConnell’s reelection campaign.?

Farm Bureau forum

When asked by Farm Bureau members how he would advocate for ag department funding and other priorities, Shell touted his friendships with lawmakers. “I can tell you that they’re going to take my phone calls. They’re going to take my meetings, and we’re going to have a great working relationship. I talked to the leaders of the House and the Senate almost on a daily basis, still today. Most of those members are friends of mine.”?

Enlow told the Farm Bureau forum that agriculture needs bipartisan support especially when the executive branch is under a Democratic governor to “build cross agency collaboration.”??

She said one of her top priorities would be increasing pay for ag department staff. “We’re in a space right now where we’re asking people to work for under $30,000 a year and to work for what is equivalently not a livable wage. … It’s not giving us a competitive advantage of attracting talent to the Department of Agriculture,” she said, nor will it help the department replace a coming “wave” of retirees.?

A concern on the minds of the Farm Bureau questioners was how to protect both private property rights and prime farmland, especially as industrial-scale solar energy developers are looking for sites in rural Kentucky.

Enlow recommended “good community conversations” years in advance of industry locating in an area, zoning that protects farmland and steering solar developments away from prime farmland onto more marginal land.

Shell said he wants to remove the pressure to sell or lease land by making farming more profitable. “Private property rights is one of the most American things that we have,” said Shell. “I mean, it’s one of the things that separates us from the rest of the world is that we are actually able to own things in America. And I think that it’s one of the inherent things that we need to make sure that we’re protecting on a daily basis.”?

Not surprisingly, the challenge of increasing farm profits by adding value to agricultural products was on the minds of Farm Bureau members.

Enlow said the “space from the farm gate into the corporate supply chain” is where her experience negotiating with corporate executives would serve farmers. She pointed to hemp as an example of public officials promoting a crop to farmers without having processors or retailers in place, and as a result farmers lost investments in hemp production.?

She also said she would work to bring employers to rural Kentucky to provide off-farm wages that help support family farms.

Shell said Kentucky’s cattle industry needs “a large-scale processor” and more regionalization of processors and that the Agricultural Development Fund should be modernized to work toward “getting cattle under roof” to be finished. He also advocated increasing grain storage facilities for row crops.

“We need to get closer from the farm gate to the food plate with our consumers.” He cautioned against “economic development for economic development’s sake,” saying new factories are making it harder for existing businesses to find workers. “Every business in America that I’ve talked to and in Kentucky says that they could nearly double their output if they could just get the employees to be able to show up to work, be clean on a drug test; most of them have stopped drug testing. And that’s the world that we’re living in today.”

Tobacco settlement dollars

The agriculture commissioner became more important to the future of Kentucky farming in 2021 when the Republican-controlled legislature moved oversight of tobacco master settlement dollars designated for agriculture from the governor’s office to the Department of Agriculture.?

The settlement with cigarette manufacturers has brought more than $2 billion to Kentucky in yearly installments since 1999; half of the settlement money goes to the Agricultural Development Fund which provides grants and loans for diversification and infrastructure.?

The funding decisions are made by two boards who are now appointed by the commissioner of agriculture.?

Asked what changes they envision for the fund, Shell said it’s time to develop another 20-year plan to “see in what direction that we may want to take Kentucky agriculture into the future.”?

Enlow said “investing in new technologies to help our farmers meet the next generation of agriculture” should be a priority, including “contained and controlled” environments for agriculture.?

She also said she wants to “help support diversity in agriculture in different ways”?by increasing transparency and helping new and young farmers understand the fund’s processes for gaining access to capital.

Money and media

Shell’s campaign has outraised Enlow’s. He reported raising and spending $500,000 in the Republican primary against state Rep. Richard Heath, chairman of the Kentucky House Agriculture Committee. For the general election, Shell reports receipts of $284,864.

Enlow raised $33,567 for the primary and $172,852 ?for the general election. In addition, Enlow reports in-kind contributions, most from the Kentucky Democratic Party, of $227,867. She points out that she has received financial support from many more individuals, making smaller donations, than Shell.

Shell’s campaign recently announced a “robust statewide media buy” including two television ads.?

Enlow said she’s relying on digital platforms to get out her message because the “saturation” will be higher, especially as the governor’s race takes up so much TV time.

Shell did not agree to an interview with the Lantern.

Enlow told the Lantern that despite her opponent’s fundraising advantage, her campaign is competitive and that Shell’s nationalizing the race could backfire.? “The commissioner’s job is not to fight Biden. It’s to make sure the office fights for Kentuckians.”?

She also said “Kentucky is not necessarily as divided as people think it is.”

Tamarra Wieder, Kentucky state director for the Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates, told the Lantern that the organization decided to endorse in the agriculture commissioner’s race for the first time because of concerns about access to health care in rural Kentucky, especially reproductive care and birth control. Seventy-three of the state’s 120 counties have no OB-GYN, she said. Planned Parenthood has challenged Kentucky’s near-total ban on abortion in court.

Shell is endorsed by anti-abortion groups Kentucky Right to Life and Northern Kentucky Right to Life.?

Enlow said she shares Planned Parenthood’s concern about limited access to medical care in rural Kentucky and appreciates its efforts to fill gaps. “When I accepted the endorsement I knew how committed they are to health care in Kentucky and serving populations that are typically underserved.”

Mike Scully harvests soybeans at Scully Family Farms in Spencer, Indiana, on Sept. 29, 2022. (USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service photo by Brandon O’Connor)

Kevin Kirby operates a tractor to begin the sweet potato harvest process by plowing them up from the field on Kirby Farms in Mechanicsville, Virginia, on Sep. 20, 2013. Kirby is a fourth-generation farmer. A U.S. Senate hearing on Sept. 27, 2023 examined foreign ownership of U.S. farmland. (USDA photo by Lance Cheung.)

Martin Richards will step down as executive director of the Community Farm Alliance at the end of the year. (Photo submitted)

Martin Richards, executive director of Kentucky’s Community Farm Alliance since 2010, will step down at the end of the year, according to a release from the Berea-based organization, which has launched a search for his successor.

Kentucky farmers founded CFA in 1985 to support small family farms during an American farm crisis that resulted in record foreclosures.

Richards has been a CFA member since 1995, served as its board president in 1998, and during the 2000 General Assembly lobbied for House Bill 611, the historic law that created the Agricultural Development Fund and has pumped hundreds of millions of dollars from the tobacco master settlement into Kentucky agriculture.?

Under Richards’ leadership CFA has attracted more than $12 million in federal, state and and private philanthropic funding to support its mission, according to the release. The organization has launched or collaborated on direct farm marketing initiatives, efforts to leverage local food for better health and access to nutrition and to build local economies, and programs for beginning farmers and those in disadvantaged communities, including Farmers Market Support Program, Kentucky Double Dollars, Fresh RX for Moms, The Patchwork Initiative ?and CFA’s Farm to Table Program.

Pieces of Good Meat's cultivated chicken are shown at the Eat Just office in Alameda, Calif., Wednesday, June 14, 2023. The Agriculture Department issued final approvals Wednesday, June 21 to California firms Upside Foods and Good Meat to sell the products, known as “lab grown” or “cultivated” meat. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)

Select U.S. restaurants have begun serving laboratory-grown chicken, spurring long wait times for reservations by diners curious to taste it.

In June, the U.S. Department of Agriculture gave final approval for a few California-based companies to begin selling lab-produced chicken across the country.

While it may be years before lab-grown meat is available at grocery stores, a handful of states are tightening rules on labeling the new food, which is produced by growing cells acquired from living animals into muscle tissue.

Consumers interested in sustainable foods that avoid the slaughter of animals are driving the growing industry. But, pushed by the cattle and poultry industries, more states are defining what can be sold to consumers as “meat” and are requiring prominent labels on products cultured in labs.

Under a USDA agreement, UPSIDE Foods and GOOD Meat, as well as the latter’s manufacturing partner JOINN Biologics, will sell their products with the label “cell-cultivated chicken,” while the department develops further labeling rules.

But some states are imposing their own additional requirements.

Texas passed the most recent bill, signed into law by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott in May. Starting Sept. 1, cultivated products in Texas must include the term “cell-cultured,” “lab-grown” or similar wording on packaging near the name of the product, in type at least the same size as the text around it.

The Texas Farm Bureau, an advocacy group of farmers and ranchers, had listed the bill as one of its legislative priorities this year.

In 2018, Missouri became the first state to pass legislation requiring different labeling for traditional meat versus products not derived from livestock or poultry.

Such products marketed in Missouri as meat without the words “plant-based,” “veggie,” “lab-grown,” “lab-created” or a similar phrase before or after the product’s name may be referred to a county prosecutor and the attorney general for potential violations, according to a memorandum from the state. The products also must state that they are “made from plants,” “grown in a lab” or a comparable disclosure.

Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wyomingenacted similar legislation the following year.

In 2020, Oklahoma enacted a law giving state officials the authority to enforce meat labeling practices.

This year, Iowa considered a bill to prohibit lab-grown proteins in public schools, but it didn’t pass. A Michigan labeling measure remains in committee.

Kentucky’s 2019 law deems a food misbranded if it is labeled as meat but contains cultured animal tissue.

The cattle industry in Kentucky is extremely important to the economy, said state Rep. Michael Meredith, a Republican from Oakland, who sponsored the measure. People are interested in knowing about the origin and makeup of their food now more than ever before, he said, and legislators wanted to ensure labels are clear.

“I think the public is very skeptical of the product,” Meredith said. “I have talked with people — and I come from a fairly rural area — and folks are just appalled, and it’s not even funny.”

He added, “I think it’s going be really, really hard to push something like this in rural America as a market.”

But the cell-cultured meat industry has made significant strides in recent years. As of 2022, the global number of cultivated meat companies rose to 156, with headquarters in 26 countries, according to the Good Food Institute’s State of the Industry?report. The nonprofit, which advocates in favor of protein alternatives and prefers the term “cultivated” meat, found that all-time investments in the industry had reached $2.8 billion globally last year.

The institute argues that U.S. state legislatures are taking steps to undermine the market through “label censorship,” which it calls unconstitutional and unnecessary.

“It’s always been our position that state label censorship through legislative efforts were kind of a ‘solution in search of a problem,’” said Laura Braden, associate director of regulatory affairs and an attorney at the Good Food Institute. “Consumer choice rather than label censorship should determine winners and losers in the marketplace.”

Still, legislators in states such as Wyoming, where the law requires labels on lab-grown meat to include “containing cell cultured product” or similar wording, say they want labels clearly understood by the public.

“It never hurts to have our Department of Agriculture, doing this work alongside the USDA,” Wyoming Republican state Sen. Brian Boner said. “We’re just going to have a more robust system where folks will know exactly what they’re purchasing when it comes to meat products.”

But such measures have met resistance.

The Missouri law prompted a lawsuit arguing the state made “a brazen attempt to stifle the growing grocery category of plant-based meats,” according to a statement from the ACLU of Missouri, which is part of the lawsuit. Including the Animal Legal Defense Fund, the Good Food Institute and Tofurky, a plant-based protein company, a coalition of organizations challenged the law for violating the First Amendment.

“I don’t think this was about consumer confusion,” said Amanda Howell, a managing attorney at Animal Legal Defense Fund. “I don’t think this is about ensuring clear and non-misleading labels. I think this was about taking First Amendment rights away from companies and making them call themselves things that you know would be unintelligible to consumers. And if a consumer can’t tell what a product is, they’re not going to buy it.”

Howell said states are acting now because they sense the growing market possibilities.

“These are very animal agriculture-heavy states, their GDP relies on those animal producers, and they feel beholden to their constituents to pass these laws designed to attack plant and cell-cultured meats.”

Mike Badger, executive director of the American Pastured Poultry Producers Association, said poultry producers have long been expecting the approval of cell-cultivated chicken.

The association represents independent farms that market directly to consumers, unlike poultry giants like Tyson Foods, which has been investing in lab-grown meat companies for a few years. While the traditional poultry farm community isn’t overly concerned about the possibility of competition, Badger said, there are still ethical concerns for consumers choosing cell-cultivated chicken.

“I think the really big question here is this: What’s driving the demand to create this new lab-grown protein?” Badger asked. “Is it only the fact that people think it’s more ethical than having a living chicken that dies for your table? And if that’s the case, how are the ethics of all the other stuff coming into it?”

Backers of cultivated meat argue it is better for the environment. Traditional meat is one of the top contributors to the average U.S. household’s carbon footprint, according to the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In 2019, a sizable portion of the Earth’s greenhouse gas emissions came from the global agriculture industry.

A 2021 article by university researchers in India published in the Journal of Animal Science and Technology suggests lab-grown meat could fulfill the increasing demand for meat using fewer natural resources.

But Badger cited an April preprint by researchers at the University of California, Davis that found lab-grown meat’s environmental impact could be higher than retail beef based on current production methods.

“It’s very early in the whole process,” Badger said, “and there’s a lot of questions to be sorted out.”

This article is republished from Stateline, part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: [email protected]. Follow Stateline on Facebook and Twitter.

At Kentucky Farm Bureau’s 59th annual Country Ham Breakfast, the Grand Champion Ham raised $10 million for Kentucky charities. In the front row, from left, are Kelly Craft’s brother, Marc Guilfoil; Gerry Roll of the Foundation for Appalachian Kentucky; Kristen Branscum on behalf of Kelly and Joe Craft; Miss Kentucky Mallory Hudson; Luther Deaton, chairman/president and CEO of Central Bank & Trust Co.; Leslie Catron with Central Bank; Greg Shewmaker. In the back row, from left, are John Sparrow of KFB; auctioneer Seth Hembree; President of Kentucky Farm Bureau Federation Mark Haney; Eddie Melton with KFB; Grand Champion Country Ham producers Beth Drennan and Ronnie Drennan; state Agriculture Commissioner Ryan Quarles; Emma Arvin; Drew Graham with KFB; Sharon Furches with KFB; David Beck with Kentucky Venues; Nathaniel Keith with Kentucky Poultry Federation on Aug, 24, 2023 in Louisville. (Provided by Kentucky Farm Bureau)

LOUISVILLE — Per Kentucky State Fair tradition, the Kentucky Farm Bureau Country Ham Breakfast brought political rivals under one roof as an 18-pound prize-winning country ham was auctioned off for a charitable donation.?

Coal executive Joe Craft and his wife, former United Nations Ambassador Kelly Craft, joined Central Bank in making a record $10 million bid on the Grand Champion Country Ham. The funds will support various needs across Kentucky, including building 57 new homes in Knott County for families affected by 2022 floods.?

Kelly Craft said in a press release she and her husband were “extremely excited” to be part of the bidders on the prize winning ham. Last year, the Crafts and the bank made a winning $5 million bid on a ham.?

“Giving back to those in need is the Kentucky way, and as lifelong Kentuckians we will always do everything we can to improve lives across Kentucky,” she said.?

The breakfast takes place on the grounds of the Kentucky State Fair. Kelly Craft finished third in the Republican gubernatorial primary earlier this year.?

Incumbent Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear spoke of unity, as he often does on the campaign trail. He renewed his emphasis on economic and infrastructure developments throughout his first term, such as plans to build the Brent Spence Bridge in Northern Kentucky without tolls and new businesses opening in the state.?

“Our administration continues to be focused not on moving this state to the right or the left but moving it forward for all of our families,” the governor said.?

At a table a few feet from the stage, Attorney General Daniel Cameron, the Republican candidate for governor, listened but did not address the crowd. Afterwards when talking to reporters, Cameron criticized Beshear for his policies on crime, education and workforce development. He also noted that Beshear did not attend Kentucky Farm Bureau’s Measure-the-Candidate forum for gubernatorial candidates last month. Cameron did speak at that event.?

“It’s oftentimes he comes to these events to lecture Kentuckians,” Cameron said. “When he had an opportunity to talk about his views and espouse those in front of the Kentucky Farm Bureau at the forum, he didn’t do that.”?

“It’s oftentimes he comes to these events to lecture Kentuckians,” Cameron said. “When he had an opportunity to talk about his views and espouse those in front of the Kentucky Farm Bureau at the forum, he didn’t do that.”?

Both of Kentucky’s United States senators, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Sen. Rand Paul, addressed the crowd of more than 1,600 attendees.

McConnell, whose health has been the subject of speculation since he froze during a news conference in late July, has made a series of Kentucky appearances during the current congressional recess. He blamed federal spending to boost the economy during the coronavirus pandemic for inflation the country is now experiencing. He also briefly discussed the debate around the farm bill, which will reauthorize the nation’s agriculture and nutrition programs.?

“You have to make compromises you didn’t want to make in order to protect agriculture because much of what the farm bill has to be is because the Democrats are really not interested in rural America anymore, or various food programs,” McConnell said before adding that he believed the bill will come together before the Sept. 30 deadline, which is when the 2018 version of the bill is set to expire.?

Paul, who also spoke at the Jefferson County Republican Party’s Lincoln Day Dinner the night before, also touched on agriculture. He brought up former President Donald Trump without using his name but instead referring to him as a “guy who talked about making America great again.”?

“In order to make America great again, you got to know what made America great,” Paul said. “How did we become this farming success? We became this farming success over a 250-year history with faith and family and freedom.”?

A nod to his audience’s location, Paul opened with a quip that he dreamt that instead of Kentucky farmers being in charge of the breakfast, it had been left to the government and the Jefferson County Public Schools’ bus administrator. The school district has made headlines after new bus routes have caused hours-long delays in getting students home from school and also forced a delay in reopening schools after the chaotic first day.?

Agriculture Commissioner Ryan Quarles also noted the bus debacle in his remarks. He said Kentucky State Fair organizers quickly decided to offer a discounted entry rate to JCPS families and students, making this year’s fair “the largest classroom” in the state. Quarles added that the fair should consider doing it again in the future.?

“My public service towards the commonwealth is just getting started,” he said. Quarles was a Republican primary candidate who came in second to Cameron and is serving his second term as commissioner.?

Another speaker at the breakfast, Louisville Mayor Craig Greenberg thanked lawmakers on both sides of the aisle for working with the city on various policies and added that he hoped that continues in the future.?

“When I ran for office last year, my promise to the voters was to move our city in a new direction,” the mayor said. “And part of that direction is one where we embrace our connections to our neighbors all across the state of Kentucky to reset Louisville’s relationship with Frankfort and the rest of Kentucky.”

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is funding projects to create new markets and revenue streams for “climate-smart” practices in farming, including beef production. In this photo, cattle graze in a field outside of North English, Iowa, on Sept. 13, 2017. (USDA photo by Preston Keres)

A garden toolkit and mindfulness programs were created in response to a UK Extension survey in 2018. (USDA photo/Preston Keres)

The?University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension Service is surveying Kentuckians to get ideas for new programs, according to a UK news release.

“In addition to this survey, county extension agents will actively seek feedback through informal listening sessions, fostering close relationships with local communities,” said Laura Stephenson, UK associate vice president for land-grant engagement and associate dean and extension director for the ?Martin-Gatton College of Agriculture, Food and Environment.

Programming areas in Cooperative Extension include agriculture and natural resources, family and consumer sciences and 4-H youth development. In addition, horticulture and fine arts programming are also offered in some counties.

A similar survey in 2018 received 38,000 responses and led to the creation of a number of programs, says the release, including 4-H mindfulness and a garden toolkit.

To participate in the 10-minute community needs assessment survey, visit?https://go.uky.edu/serveKY.

Republican Attorney General Daniel Cameron speaks at the Kentucky Farm Bureau Measure-the-Candidate forum. (Screenshot from KFB feed)

Values was the word of the day as Republican Attorney General Daniel Cameron addressed a crowd of Kentucky Farm Bureau board members and employees in its Measure-the-Candidate forum.?

He pitched himself as a politician who embodies rural ideas and criticized the absence of his opponent in the gubernatorial race, incumbent Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear.?

“Of course, he will show up at the Ham Breakfast here in a few weeks, and he’ll lecture you on your values and tell you what his values are and try to bully you into thinking that your position in values should be different,” said Cameron, referring to an upcoming annual Kentucky State Fair event. “But I hope that you recognize that is not the way in which I operate, and I stand firmly with your values. I respect your values.”?

Beshear’s campaign did not specify why the governor didn’t attend.

Ahead of the forum, Cameron began his criticism of Beshear in a Tuesday statement, saying not going shows he “has turned his back on Kentucky’s farm families” and adding that it shouldn’t be surprising because “he’s been silent in the face of Joe Biden’s assault on them for years,” referring to inflation and regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency.?

Cameron has joined other attorneys general in pushing back against new EPA regulations, including leading a coalition of Republican state attorneys general to oppose policy that would cut vehicle tailpipe emissions.?

In response to Cameron’s criticism, Beshear campaign spokesman Alex Floyd said that Beshear “is proud of his record delivering record-setting economic growth for our rural communities and standing up to support Kentucky farmers, especially in the aftermath of devastating natural disasters,” a nod to recent flooding in Eastern Kentucky and tornadoes in Western Kentucky, both areas with rural communities.?

The Kentucky Farm Bureau, an insurance company that represents 462,000 Kentucky families and businesses, has regularly held its Measure-the-Candidate forum to have politicians discuss agriculture and farm issues. In 2019, during his first gubernatorial campaign, Beshear participated opposite former Republican Gov. Matt Bevin.?

On Wednesday, attendees asked Cameron about taxes on agriculture products and how he envisioned state agricultural dollars being used. In response, Cameron said he would work with the legislature on those policy decisions. Throughout his talk, he reiterated many of the same policy points that he’s laid out on the campaign trail, including support of work requirements for able-bodied individuals that receive Medicaid and eliminating the state income tax.?

During the Republican primary election, Cameron attended several debates and forums held with other candidates, but not all. Most notably, Kentucky Sports Radio host Matt Jones said the attorney general initially accepted but later backed out of the KSR debate.?

After a campaign stop in Shelbyville earlier this month, Beshear told reporters that he’s “certainly willing to participate in debates,” but had not received invitations yet.?

“But listen, a debate is when you have to talk about what you’re for, not who you’re against,” Beshear added.?

Both Beshear and Cameron, as well as their respective running mates, Lt. Gov. Jacqueline Coleman and state Sen. Robby Mills, have agreed to appear at the Fancy Farm Picnic next week in Fancy Farm, a community in Graves County. The annual West Kentucky political spectacle is known for fiery candidate speeches and country fair flair as locals make heaps of barbecue all day long.Recently released polls on Kentucky’s governor race shows Cameron trailing Beshear by between 4 to 10 percentage points.

A garden toolkit and mindfulness programs were created in response to a UK Extension survey in 2018. (USDA photo/Preston Keres)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Agriculture Monday announced $33 million in funding to 19 Historically Black Colleges and Universities designated as land-grant institutions to support research and education projects.

The funding through USDA’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture will support 82 projects in sustainable farming practices such as reducing use of plastics, enhancing nutritional value in vegetables and addressing shortages in sunflower seed oil.

“The work these universities will take on as a result of this funding have ripple effects far beyond the walls of their laboratories and classrooms,” Agriculture Deputy Secretary Xochitl Torres Small said in a statement.

Torres Small said the investments will help “deliver real-life, applicable solutions to make our food system stronger, while at the same time inspiring a next generation of students and scientists who will help us meet tomorrow’s agricultural challenges.”

1890 Land-Grant Institutions are a byproduct of a Civil War-era law that gave land to dozens of universities, including the HBCUs, but the land had been forcibly taken from Indigenous tribes. In total, nearly 11 million acres were taken from more than 250 tribes, according to a project published in High Country News.

“USDA looks forward to the impact these visionary projects will have in improving the supply of affordable, safe, nutritious and accessible food and agricultural products, while fostering economic development and rural prosperity in America,” NIFA Director Manjit K. Misra said in a statement.

Many of the projects are geared toward sustainable practices in farming. U.S. agriculture contributes to about 11.2% of greenhouse gas emissions, and the Biden administration has focused on “climate smart” farming practices.

One project at North Carolina A&T State University was awarded about $250,000 to conduct farm trials of biodegradable mulches, which would be an alternative to plastic mulch.

Another land-grant university in Wilberforce, Ohio, the Central State University, was awarded about $500,000 to explore the use of a perennial flower — meaning it comes back year after year — as a way to improve honey production in order to enhance sustainability practices in agriculture.

And in Nashville, a project at Tennessee State University was awarded $100,000 to evaluate climate resiliency in legume species, which are crops such as snow peas, chickpeas and lentils, that are crucial to fixing nitrogen into the soil to improve soil health.

A full list of projects can be found here, and the 19 land-grant universities sharing in the $33 million include:

Alabama A&M University

Alcorn State University

Central State University

Delaware State University

Florida A&M University

Fort Valley State University

Kentucky State University

Langston University

Lincoln University of Missouri

North Carolina A&T State University

Prairie View A&M University

South Carolina State University

Southern University and A&M College

Tennessee State University

Tuskegee University

University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff

University of Maryland Eastern Shore

Virginia State University

West Virginia State University

Rows of plants are shown inside AppHarvest's Berea Farm facility. The company has filed for bankruptcy. (AppHarvest photo)

Kentucky-based agricultural technology company AppHarvest filed for bankruptcy amid doubts about the business’ future.??

The company, which has built some of the world’s largest indoor farms, announced plans Monday morning for “a financial and operational transition” that includes filing for bankruptcy. Recent media reports have highlighted turmoil associated with the company, such as a lease termination and facility foreclosures.?

An attorney for AppHarvest filed documents late Sunday night in the Southern District of Texas U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The case is assigned to Judge David R. Jones.?

A company press release said AppHarvest’s course correction plan revolves around the bankruptcy filing. Additionally, the company has a commitment from creditor Equilibrium for $30 million of debtor-in-possession financing to support its operations in Morehead, Richmond and Somerset. The financing is subject to the court’s approval.?

Earlier in July, the Lexington Herald-Leader reported that the property owner of AppHarvest’s Berea facility wanted to terminate the company’s lease. As part of its plan, AppHarvest wants to transfer its Berea operations to distribution partner Mastronardi Produce or an affiliate at the cost of $3.75 million, along with additional support. This, too, is subject to court approval.?

AppHarvest’s stock price was $0.33 at the close of business Friday, before news of the bankruptcy made headlines. Mid-morning Monday, the stock price dipped to $0.11.

Tony Martin, CEO of AppHarvest, said in a statement that the company’s board and executives “evaluated several strategic alternatives to maximize value for all stakeholders” before the bankruptcy filing.?

“The Chapter 11 filing provides protection while we work to transition operation of our strategic plan, Project New Leaf, which has shown strong progress toward operational efficiencies resulting in higher sales, cost savings and product quality,” he continued.?

Almost two weeks ago, the company announced AppHarvest founder Jonathan Webb would step down as CEO and board chairman to become chief strategy officer. Martin was named CEO effective immediately and Kevin Willis stepped in as board chairman. Webb remains on the board.?

Meanwhile, company documents show continued concern with AppHarvest’s future success. In December and May quarterly reports, management wrote “there is substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue.”?

Media reports have shown other issues with the company. The Herald-Leader reported the company’s Richmond facility was at-risk of foreclosure. Last week, WDRB reported AppHarvest’s board approved nearly $2.5 million in immediate cash payments to its top four executives and hiking board members cash fees substantially, which will be paid in advance.?

AppHarvest in 2020 opened huge greenhouses to grow tomatoes and other vegetables indoors. Across its Kentucky facilities, it has 165 acres in its farm network.?

Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear, who is seeking a second term in office, recently told reporters that while “it’s unfortunate” AppHarvest has struggled in the commonwealth, agriculture technology will remain part of Kentucky’s future economy.?

Sarah Jones poses with a flock of her sheep at Red Hill Farms which straddles the Tennessee state line in Allen County, Kentucky, on June 2, 2023. (Kentucky Lantern photo by Austin Anthony)

This story discusses suicide and mental health among farmers. If you or someone you know is contemplating suicide, please call or text the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 988. You can also text “KY” to 741741.?

A thousand hungry mouths must be fed before farmer Sarah Jones can eat.?

Seven days a week — sometimes during 100-hour work weeks — Jones and her family tend their land and animals in southcentral Kentucky and northern Tennessee.?

They put the earth, their animals and hired hands before themselves. Finding time for self care when your job is a 24/7 lifestyle is nearly impossible.?

That’s why experts say farmers face unique mental health challenges that a coalition called Raising Hope, out of the Kentucky Department of Agriculture, is aiming to address. Staff know of at least four people who are alive today because of the coalition’s efforts. It was established in 2021.?

Stressors stretch beyond the hours of labor the Jones family puts into Red Hill Farms, though finding laborers “willing to smell like a pig” and put in long hours has become more challenging with time.?

The availability and affordability of land, too, is a challenge for farmers looking to start or expand. They’re often up against developers. Weather is unpredictable. Everything – from labor to feed – costs more now.?

And, Jones said, it’s concerning when members of the public don’t understand what farmers do.?

“That’s changed dramatically as more and more people are more and more generations removed from agriculture and the farming lifestyle,” she said. Many “really don’t understand where their food comes from.”?

Elizabeth Gordon, who does marketing work with Raising Hope, said the coalition’s mission is twofold. It seeks to decrease mental health stigma and suicide rates among farmers, which may be worse than numbers show thanks to underreporting in rural areas. But it also exists to educate non-farmers about the farming lifestyle.?

“It’s hard to appreciate when you don’t understand,” said Gordon.?

In addition to destigmatizing mental health, she said, Raising Hope staff also try to destigmatize the farmers themselves.?

“They don’t stand in a field with pitchforks,” she said. “They’re … very technologically advanced.”?

The need: more access to mental health resources, less stigma ?

In 2020, someone in America died by suicide every 11 minutes, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found. Rates were worse in rural areas, yet rural folks tend not to get mental health help as frequently as those in urban areas, according to the National Library of Medicine.?

The University of Kentucky said in 2022 that at least 109 farmers in Kentucky died by suicide between 2004 and 2017. Farmers 64 and older were at higher risk. From 2012 to 2015, male farmers were twice as likely to take their lives.?

Yet farms make up a massive chunk of the commonwealth’s land, according to Kentucky AgriTech.?

In 2022, there were more than 73,000 farm operations in the state, according to the State Agriculture Review. Chickens, calves and cows were the biggest livestock productions reported in that data. Kentucky produces the most beef of any state east of the Mississippi River, making it a massive contributor to the food supply.?

The lifestyle comes with a measure of independence, experts said, that can make reaching out difficult.?

Cheryl Witt, a researcher and sixth generation farmer from central Kentucky, said stigma and cultural differences sometimes keep farmers from getting help.?

“In the general population, there’s high rates of stigma seeking help for mental health,” said Witt, whose doctoral dissertation was on depression rates among female farmers in Kentucky and Tennessee.?

“But when you deal with a farming population, particularly men, you have that masculine, highly independent, self-reliant, male attitude or cultural beliefs … you just don’t do that. That’s just not something you do,” she added. “You can handle it, or you’re going to handle it yourself.”?

And often, they must handle it alone because the public doesn’t understand what they face – and not all health care providers are culturally competent enough to understand their unique challenges.?

Jeanne Ward, whose passion for mental health advocacy grew during her Ph.D research into rural health disparities, said it’s crucial that health care providers understand those specific stressors in order to best treat the whole farmer.?

“When you go to the fair, you see the shiniest stuff,” the registered nurse explained. “You see the beautiful animals and that happy version of farmers that we’re used to.”?

But behind the scenes, in the day-to-day, she said, “farmers are really faced with a lot of uncertainty that makes the occupation more challenging.”?

They are, Ward said, disproportionately affected by suicide as a result.?

Raising Hope – one coin and conversation at a time?

Raising Hope got its start in 2021 and is a holistic, multi-faceted approach to improving Kentucky farmers’ wellbeing.?

Coalition members go to farming events around the state and do physical health screenings. They also educate non-farmers about farming.?

The physical screenings are important because poor physical health can contribute to poor mental health – and many in rural communities live far from primary care. Driving to a doctor may take too long, causing a to-do list to grow even longer. Telehealth helps, but isn’t always possible or applicable.?

Staff also distribute mental health challenge coins and have passed out more than 1,300 since Raising Hope launched.?

The coins are small, physical tokens meant to remind farmers that they and their work are appreciated. They also encourage them to reach out for help when they need it.?

Jones keeps her challenge coin in her wallet. It is, she said, “a continuous reminder that … I’m not alone. That there is somebody that understands and … has an appreciation … to what I might be experiencing.”?

Beyond individual help, the coins can help build connectedness among farmers, which Ward said is a “protective factor against suicide.”?

“Self compassion is really important too. We want people to understand that we’re all imperfect, and everybody has mental health challenges,” she said. “We want to normalize it and get people talking about it versus facing these problems alone, which often doesn’t have a very good ending.”?

On top of the coins, the coalition puts out ads about mental health and sets up booths at farming events. The digital side of the coalition is huge, Ward said.?

“With the stigma of suicide and mental health issues, not everybody wants to come up to us at a booth at an event,” she explained. “So that’s why these digital campaigns are so powerful, because we are actually able to confidentially serve farmers and the farm communities.”?

Future goal: Form a nonprofit??

Witt, the researcher, said primary coping mechanisms for farmers that she’s found include faith, prayer and social interaction with likeminded people.?

Staff will also distribute small bluetooth speakers for farmers whose trucks or tractors don’t have radios, Gordon said.?

A good podcast or music can “free their mind a little bit so they don’t just worry all the time,” she said.?

Other interventions include teaching nursing students how to interact with and treat farmers in a culturally competent way, as well as providing farmers the option when calling 988 to identify as a farmer and get specialized help.?

These interventions take money, which is why Raising Hope staff want to move toward forming a nonprofit. Doing so would allow ?it to accept donations.?

A health care workforce that understands farming is important, though. Without it, Jones said, stigma worsens.?

“We make up such a small percentage of the population. There are very, very few people that can even fathom the stress and the workload that I have,” she said.?

Talking about it is nothing to be ashamed of, she said.?

“Farmer mental health is an issue and it’s not something to keep a secret. It’s okay to share,” she said. “It’s normal for farmers to feel stress…it’s normal for farmers to feel defeated. And so if you’re having those thoughts, there are other people that have had those thoughts too.”?

Just “take care of those thoughts,” she said. And: Have a conversation with someone about how you’re feeling. You’re not alone.?

The photo captions have been updated to clarify the location of Red Hill Farms.

Customers shop for fresh fruits and vegetables at Campbell’s Market, April 24, 2023, in McArthur, Ohio. (Ohio Capital Journal photo by Graham Stokes)

“Efficiency” is a frequent justification for allowing corporations to consolidate vast swathes of the marketplace. But when it comes to food, huge grocery chains and ubiquitous dollar stores are limiting some rural and urban communities’ access to healthy food at the same time they bankrupt the farmers who produce it, members of a virtual panel said late last month.

Walmart, Amazon, and Kroger already control a huge amount of the nation’s grocery business. And if Cincinnati-based Kroger completes its acquisition of Albertson’s, the consolidation will be greater still.

“We’ve seen extreme concentration in the grocery sector,” Stacy Mitchell of the Institute for Self Reliance said. The institute advocates for local power in the face of increasing corporate dominance. “Just five giant retail chains now capture about half of all grocery sales and one company, Walmart, captures one out of every four dollars that Americans spend on groceries.”

The institute hosted the panel, in which Alvaro Bedoya, the newest member of the Federal Trade Commission participated. In an interview with the Capital Journal last year, Bedoya said that when Congress passed antitrust laws in the first half of the 20th century, the record shows that its main concern was fairness — particularly for rural communities — and not efficiency as some later claimed in successfully arguing to weaken enforcement of those laws.

To see for himself the effect of consolidation in the food sector, Bedoya in December traveled to Pine Ridge, South Dakota, to meet with a fourth-generation grocer. Bedoya expected the meeting to be in a drab office, but he was mistaken.

“We spent maybe two hours meeting with the incoming Oglala Lakota Tribal Council in the dairy aisle,” he said. “What they talked about was a crisis. Members of their community could not afford healthy groceries. They talked about 13-year-olds showing up at the emergency room with ulcers because at the end of the month all they could afford was the kind of stuff you find at a convenience store. They talked about how 50% of residents over 40 suffered from diabetes. This is the part of the country that has the lowest life expectancy in the Western Hemisphere outside of Haiti.”

Most Pine Ridge residents don’t have cars, making the hour-long drive to the nearest big-chain grocery impossible. Meanwhile, the local independent store can’t offer the same prices because it doesn’t have access to the same deals as the big chains do, Bedoya said.

“What the folks in that grocery aisle said is, ‘We love this store. We love shopping here, but we can’t afford it,” he said.

That lack of access also harms people in Ohio, said another participant, the Rev. Donald Perryman of the Center of Hope Community Baptist Church in Toledo. It leads to what he called “false narratives” about members of struggling communities — that if they only ate better, they’d be in better health.

“To me, that did violence to a certain group of people,” he said. “It does nothing to address the source of their ill health.”

As grocery stores consolidated, they departed disadvantaged Toledo neighborhoods and dollar stores moved in, Perryman said. Harm followed.

“The Toledo Police Department provided crime statistics that indicated that dollar stores elevated crime in the neighborhoods we were serving,” he said, adding that the stores are understaffed and don’t have much in the way of healthy food.

Even so, the two big dollar store chains are able to leverage suppliers into providing special packaging at special prices, Mitchell said.

Michael Gay, owner and manager of Food Fresh in Claxton, Ga., said that’s in addition to being unable to get the same prices for non-perishable foods that the big-box chains get.

“Where we get hammered is in the middle of the store,” he said.

Gay said he buys produce and other perishables from small farmers, while Angela Huffman of Farm Action said that the big chains often do what they can to cut out small farmers.

“When grocery stores consolidate, everybody along the supply chain down to the farmer is really feeling the sting of that,” said Huffman, who is herself a Northwest Ohio farmer. “When dollar stores come in and displace independent grocers, farmers lose a local purchaser. They usually don’t buy produce and when they do, it isn’t from a local farmer.”

Huffman added that the big grocery chains are also wreaking havoc with family farms.

“When Albertsons acquired Safeway in 2015, Albertsons only kept contracts with its largest produce suppliers and it dropped contracts with most of the small Safeway suppliers,” she said. “In the case of Walmart, they didn’t want to go to a supplier for their dairy products at all. They wanted to control their dairy supply. So they dropped their dairy supplier, which was Dean Foods, and caused Dean Foods to have to cancel more than 100 contracts with dairy farmers across eight states. Within two years, Dean Foods was bankrupt.”

While jurist Robert Bork might have argued that easing antitrust regulation promotes efficiency, when it comes to food, there’s evidence to the contrary. A 2012 working paper by the FTC’s Bureau of Economics examined what happened to food prices after retailers merged. It found “that mergers in highly concentrated markets are most frequently associated with price increases, while mergers in less concentrated markets are most often associated with price decreases.”

In other words, it’s all good until too few players control too much of the marketplace.

Bedoya said there are provisions in existing antitrust law to keep some of that from happening. He explained that in the 1970s and 80s, some parts of the law were largely forgotten.

For example, under the 1936 Robinson-Patman Antidiscrimination Act, a food producer can’t simply package things differently and charge different prices for it — particularly if the effect is to drive smaller competitors from the field.

But another, largely forgotten part of the law also prohibits big chains from forcing big, special discounts or fees for itself. The provision arose from then-mega chain A&P forcing suppliers to pay kickbacks in the form of brokerage fees, the FTC commissioner said.

That part of the law was “a mainstay of FTC enforcement, but now it’s largely been forgotten,” Bedoya said. “I’m not in Congress. I can’t choose what the law is, it’s my job just to enforce it. But for me, I’m more focused on reviving all aspects of the law and not just focusing on the ones that have gotten the most attention.”

Bill Gatton

LEXINGTON — The University of Kentucky on Thursday announced a $100 million gift, the largest in UK’s history, to the College of Agriculture, Food and Environment.

The gift is from the Bill Gatton Foundation, endowed by the late Carol Martin “Bill” Gatton, a businessman, investor and UK alum who gave generously to his alma mater. Gatton died in April 2022.?

To honor Gatton’s parents, Edith Martin and Harry W. Gatton Sr., the college will be renamed as the Martin-Gatton College of Agriculture, Food and Environment.

A UK news release says Gatton’s gift to CAFE is the “latest in a series of generous donations that have transformed the university, including record-breaking gifts to the Gatton College of Business and Economics, the university’s Gatton Student Center and scholarships for students with unmet financial need through the UK LEADS initiative.”

Gatton’s impact on the University of Kentucky exceeds $180 million; he is the university’s single largest donor, says the UK release.

Nancy Cox, UK vice president for land-grant engagement and dean of UK CAFE, said the gift “will allow us to both accelerate our land-grant mission and create new programs to serve our citizens.”

Cox said the college will form a task force of faculty and staff to consider how the gift will be used to support the Gatton Foundation’s vision for scholarships, academic programming, infrastructure and research.

Considered by UK to be the largest ever to any college of agriculture, the donation will be “transformational,” said UK President Eli Capilouto.

“Like Mr. Gatton did, we dream of a Kentucky tomorrow that is healthier, wealthier and wiser than it is today. This gift reflects his profound belief in this institution to be a partner for progress in our capacity and commitment to advance Kentucky,” Capilouto said.

Gatton grew up on a farm in Muhlenberg County and during his freshman year at UK? served as the state president of the Kentucky Future Farmers of America. He graduated from the College of Commerce in 1954 and earned a master’s degree from the University of Pennsylvania. He owned car dealerships and was involved in real estate projects in multiple states.?

Bill Gatton Foundation Trustee Danny Dunn said the gift is the foundation’s first major donation since Gatton’s death. “This gift symbolizes the foundation’s commitment to honoring Mr. Gatton’s passion for Kentucky and his desire to support its agricultural community as an essential way to advance this state.”

Kentucky was a top producer of hemp before World War II. (Photo by Christopher Furlong/Getty Images)

FRANKFORT — After a court decision last year legalized an intoxicating compound derived from hemp, a bill to regulate Delta-8 THC sped through the House of Representatives on Thursday.?

Delta-8 THC can get a user “high” similar to the Delta-9 THC compound found in marijuana. Some hemp farmers have been trying to find a market for extra CBD-rich hemp by synthetically converting it into Delta-8 THC, and it’s seen growing popularity across the state being sold in edibles and vapes.?

The Kentucky Hemp Association sued the state in 2021 after a series of police raids of Delta-8 THC products, arguing Delta-8 THC was made legal under a past federal farm bill. A Boone County Circuit Court judge sided with the association last year, and the president of the association says it’s now advocating for “common sense rules” on the sale and production of the compound.?

“We have sort of a ‘wild west’ situation. It’s a gray area. Delta-8 is being sold around the state, and it’s being sold in gas stations, health food stores,” Katie Moyer, president of the Kentucky Hemp Association, said. “But it’s coming from ‘who knows where.’ We’re not surely getting it from Kentucky producers who are growing it here, who we can go visit their store, their facility.”?

House Bill 544, sponsored by Rep. Rebecca Raymer, R-Morgantown, was as of Wednesday a bill making technical language changes related to the Cabinet for Health and Family Services. Such bills making only minor language changes are often known as “shell” bills, a procedural maneuver that allows a lawmaker to substitute the language of a bill and move forward with said legislation past the filing deadline for bills.?

The new bill language —? which the Kentucky Hemp Association supports — directs the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to immediately begin the process of regulating Delta-8 THC and “other hemp-derived substances.”

Among the regulations the legislation directs the cabinet to develop: prohibiting anyone younger than 21 from buying or possessing Delta-8 THC products, ensuring Delta-8 THC is produced in Kentucky and is? properly tested, and requiring a standard of labeling for the products.?

Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear issued an executive order in November 2022 directing the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to begin regulating Delta-8 THC following the Boone County court ruling.?

The House passed the bill, 97-0, Thursday afternoon.?

Speaker Pro Tem David Meade, R-Stanford, a co-sponsor of the bill, said that since Beshear issued that executive order “there has been nothing done” in regards to regulating the intoxicating compound.?

“I’ve had numerous folks in our school systems and my local sheriff asking for us to do something about this issue,” Meade said. “What’s sad is that we have to do this in order to tell the governor to do the right thing and go ahead and push the regs forward.”

A spokesperson for the Cabinet for Health and Family Services did not immediately respond to a request for comment.?

The Kentucky Hemp Association had opposed a bill last year that would have banned Delta-8 THC products, which ultimately died in the House.?

U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack addresses the annual Agricultural Outlook Forum, the largest annual meeting of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. (USDA photo by Tom Witham)

U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack on Monday announced new steps the Department of Agriculture is taking to recenter U.S. agriculture and benefit small and midsized operations, including a proposed new “Product of USA” labeling rule and an $89 million expansion of the USDA intermediary lending program.

At the National Farmers Union conference in San Francisco, Vilsack also discussed creating a new “seed liaison” in the department to increase fairness in the commodity biotech industry, and proposed changes to the Packers and Stockyards Act. The Packers and Stockyards Act governs competition in the livestock and poultry industries, and is supposed to prevent unfair market manipulation or consolidation.

The secretary said these developments mark progress in the Biden administration’s approach to transform the existing food system and increase resilience and profitability.

“I want this audience — and every audience I’ve been speaking to —? to understand that it’s not just this ‘organic over here, and local original food over here, and processing over here,’” Vilsack said.

“It’s part of a concerted effort to create another model. One that doesn’t necessarily require us to not produce — we want to produce what the world needs us to produce. But one that creates more revenue opportunities within that same small and midsize farming operation.”

The National Farmers Union is a nonprofit organization with the mission to “protect and enhance the quality of life of American family farmers and ranchers and their communities,” according to its website.?

Negative farm income

Vilsack, a former governor of Iowa, broke out a whiteboard and marker to illustrate the challenges American farmers are facing with land consolidation and declining returns. He said that despite record farm income in 2022, 50% of farms nationwide brought in negative farm income.

The secretary added that while 10% of farms made a net profit, nearly 40% of these profitable farms were owned by investment banks and large landholders who bring in more than $1 million per year in revenue.

Vilsack attributed this imbalance to the “get big or get out” structure of production-based agriculture, which took hold in the 1970s. He noted that his Trump administration predecessor, former Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue, was honest about this reality. Yet Vilsack said the approach is one he refuses to accept.

“That does raise the question of what do we do,” Vilsack said. “This is the game, but it’s based on production. I think we’ve got to develop a new game. A game where farmers can not only raise crops and sell them, and raise livestock and sell them, and get government payments, but they can get other ways to make money from the same landmass.”

Loan program?

To punctuate his vision, Vilsack announced new investments in diversifying local and regional meat processors, including $89 million in guaranteed loans through the USDA’s intermediary lending program.

The loan program will provide credit to independently owned-and-operated meat processing facilities to expand or purchase equipment. The investment comes in addition to the more than $100 million being invested in grants this year to expand processing supply chain capacity.

“These are resources that didn’t exist before, that creates competition to create better value,” Vilsack said.

Vilsack also mentioned a USDA rule proposed Monday that would alter the criteria for a product to use a “Product of USA” label. The secretary noted that while producers voluntarily put this label on packages for marketing purposes, prior criteria only required that labeled food products be processed in the United States. As such, the primary agricultural product could be grown, slaughtered, or raised outside the country.

Vilsack said that the new rule would require goods that use a “Product of USA” label to have their whole production cycle based in the United States.

Vilsack also said that the USDA was releasing a “seed report” on Monday, which details agency plans to provide oversight on intellectual property within the plant science sector. He said that the report outlines plans to create a “seed liaison” through the Agricultural Marketing Service, which will address concerns over intellectual property claims in the commodity seed market.

Vilsack said that this individual’s responsibility would be to gather input from farmers and breeders on the fairness of a given patent claim during the process of approval.

“They will now have a place and person to go to, to share information and to make sure that information is supplied in the complex formal process of a patent,” Vilsack said. “This now gives these folks an opportunity to have input.”

Vilsack added that the USDA will also partner with the U.S. Patent and Trade Office on a task force designed to limit unnecessary trait-stacking in genetically modified seeds, and encourage seed market competition.

Packers and Stockyards Act

Vilsack also addressed the USDA’s proposed changes to the Packers and Stockyards Act and efforts to bring increased fairness to the meat industry

The secretary noted that the department expects to push through four new rules related to the act over the next two years, which would drive market competition and open space for small and mid-sized producers to prosper.

The first rule Vilsack discussed would require increased financial disclosures for large-scale processors and integrators in the poultry supply chain. The secretary noted this first rule is in the comment analysis period, and will likely be approved in 2023.

The other rule Vilsack expects the agency to issue this year would prohibit large-scale operations from retaliating against independent producers if these large commercial farms are reported to a regulatory agency. He said that this rule is currently in the comment gathering stage, and will likely become law in 2023.

The third Packers and Stockyards rule would alter the structure of the tournament system, in which poultry breeders are forced to compete over processor markets. Vilsack said he expected the process of approving this rule to “bleed over into 2024.”

“That rule is in the process of being worked on as a kind of a new concept,” the secretary said. “When we first started this, we weren’t actually thinking about it. But by virtue of the comments that we got, we thought we needed to do that.”

Vilsack also touched on a fourth rule which is in the process of being written. The rule will address the scope of harms required to bring an unfair competition or injury claim under the Packers and Stockyards Act.

“It is the most complicated rule,” Vilsack said. “That rule is obviously going to attract a lot of attention.”

Vilsack said the goal would be to have all four rules in place by 2024.

The closure of four weekly newspapers last year left Northern Kentucky without a paper of record for legal notices. An online outlet could step into that role under a proposal awaiting a House vote. In 1947, Dick Pearce sold newspapers on the corner of Douglas and Broadway in Wichita, Kansas. (Fox Photos/Getty Images)

FRANKFORT — Without a daily or weekly printed newspaper of record in Northern Kentucky, local leaders are seeking a way to get public notices out to readers digitally.?

The House Local Government Committee on March 3 gave its favor to House Bill 534, which would create qualifications for a digital news publication to be considered a paper of record. If passed, it paves the way for an online news outlet with a print publication to publish public notices daily on its website.?

State law requires local governments and? agencies to advertise notices of public meetings, calls for proposals on upcoming projects and other government business in a local newspaper. These “legal ads” are a source of revenue for the publications. The bill would create criteria for counties with more than 80,000 residents to have notices published online if a digital publication meets the law’s requirements.

Lacy Starling, the president of for-profit online news outlet LINK nky, said the bill would allow the outlet to publish public notices on its website, as it also maintains a weekly print publication, the LINK Reader, both of which focus on reporting in Northern Kentucky.?

Gannett closed weekly newspapers last year in Boone, Campbell and Kenton counties.?Starling said that left the area with no paper of record.?

In meetings with local government officials as well as some non-governmental organizations that must post public notices, Starling said it became clear that waiting for LINK’s weekly print edition imposed an inconvenient delay on some. She said it was important to preserve a way for print publications to still publish legal notices while creating guidelines for online outlets.?

“For us, it was really important from the press’ perspective. We want to maintain transparency.”

The bill would allow local governments to publish a legal advertisement with an online publication if the notice can be viewed in full on the website.?

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Stephanie Dietz, R-Edgewood, said the bill stems from the lack of a paper of record within Northern Kentucky for some time. She believes it will pass the House.?

“I think it’s an important first step and it means a lot to northern Kentucky,” Dietz said.??

When presenting the bill, the representative was joined by Starling, Boone County Judge-Executive Gary Moore and Northern Kentucky Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Brent Cooper.?

David Thompson, the executive director of the Kentucky Press Association, said most of the KPA board is supportive of the committee substitute version of the bill. With the population limit, the bill will likely only affect Northern Kentucky counties, but 10 counties in the state have more than 80,000 residents.?

KPA has opposed allowing government agencies to satisfy legal requirements by posting public notices online via their own sites or third-party websites since 2005 “because they pretty much control what is published, where it’s published and how it is published,” Thompson said.?

“We have argued all along there’s got to be an independent third party associated with this. And newspapers, for more than a hundred years, have been that independent third party.”

Provisions in the bill could make it easier for online publications to begin, Starling said. Starting a new print publication can be costly. Dietz too said the bill opens the way for future online publications.?

“I think that in communities where their print publication has disappeared, this provides an opportunity for the community to have a paper of record,” Starling said.

Thompson said that the committee substitute version of the bill could support the start of new print publications in some counties.?

The bill has been given two readings on the House floor and could get a vote Tuesday.?

The bill’s proposed qualifications for a digital newspaper to be considered a paper of record include:?

• An “active news gathering office in the publication area.”
• Actively publishing for at least a year and be updated at least weekly.
• On its landing page, have visible links or headings to direct users to public notices.
• Can be easily found through internet search engines or other search means.
• Primarily reports on matters of importance to the public with regular reporting on local and community issues.
• Is connected to another entity that distributes newspapers or is capable of circulating printed newspapers in its region.

Correction: This story was updated on Tuesday to correct that LINK nky is a for-profit company and not a nonprofit organization.?

Kentucky's small farm wineries would be allowed to self-distribute 12,000 gallons annually under a bill that awaits only a House vote. (Photo by Marie LaFauci/Getty Images)

FRANKFORT — After the Kentucky Senate last week approved allowing Kentucky small farm wineries to self-distribute their products, a House of Representatives committee followed suit Wednesday.?

The bill underwent some changes since it was filed after the wineries and the Wine and Spirits Wholesalers of Kentucky reached a compromise on the amount of wine the farms could sell.?

The biggest change was made by a floor amendment from the sponsor, Sen. Mike Wilson, R-Bowling Green, which lowered the amount of wine that licensed small farm wineries would be allowed to self-distribute annually from 30,000 gallons to 12,000 gallons. The wholesalers objected to the larger amount during the Senate committee meeting?and?some senators also expressed concerns over the figure.

On Wednesday, the House Licensing, Occupations, & Administrative Regulations unanimously forwarded Senate Bill 28 to the House for further review.

Brian Young, treasurer of the wineries association, said while the groups started out on different sides of the equation, negotiations are at a good point.?

“It is a game changer for Kentucky and Kentucky farms and Kentucky small farm wineries without a doubt. It changes the landscape,” Young said.?

He added that he knew of some small farm wineries that Kentucky has lost because they did not have the opportunity to get their products on shelves.?

In a tweet following the vote in the Senate last week, Charles George, executive director of the wholesalers group, said: “Working with KY small farm wineries, we agreed on a compromise to allow self-distribution of limited quantities while largely retaining our safe, reliable three-tier system. We will continue to work with our producer and retailer tiers to promote sound alcohol policy. #Cheers”

The Senate vote was 32-1. Wilson,?the Senate majority whip, said he wanted to file the legislation after learning about small farm wineries during an event in his district and that he was concerned “they did not have any distribution.”?

On Wednesday, Wilson said the bill is “a great economic incentive and tool” to grow the commonwealth. Small farm wineries are small businesses, he emphasized.?

“We had to give them the opportunity to thrive as a small business,” Wilson told the Kentucky Lantern.?

According to the Department of Agriculture’s website, Kentucky has more than 60 small farm wineries. The Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control’s online database says more than 90 small farm wineries licenses have been issued.

U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack addresses the annual Agricultural Outlook Forum, the largest annual meeting of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. (USDA photo by Tom Witham)

Kentucky's small farm wineries would be allowed to self-distribute 12,000 gallons annually under a bill that awaits only a House vote. (Photo by Marie LaFauci/Getty Images)

FRANKFORT — Kentucky’s small farm wineries are asking lawmakers to let them sell up to 30,000 gallons of wine annually to licensed retailers, but the Wine and Spirits Wholesalers of Kentucky says that’s too much.

Charles George, executive director of the wholesalers group, told a legislative committee that the wholesalers would support direct sales to retailers by small farm wineries of 7,000 gallons a year.?

“That’s more than double or even triple what most wineries in Kentucky are producing,” George told the Senate Licensing & Occupations Committee Tuesday.

The committee moved Senate Bill 28, which would set the limit at 30,000 gallons a year. Several senators voting “yes” expressed reservations about allowing small farms to sell that much wine but said they wanted to get the bill to the Senate floor.

Two representatives of the Kentucky Wineries Association made the case for what the group’s vice president Derrick Huff called “frustrated small farm wineries across our state.”

Huff told lawmakers that wholesalers do not move products from small farm wineries because it is not profitable for them and that Kentucky wine “has been cast aside and ignored by distributors” for decades.

“Imagine how much more revenue we could generate if we had a larger presence in the retail market,” Huff said. “We could grow it here, produce it here and sell it to all who come to enjoy beverages within our commonwealth.”?

Huff’s Traveler’s Cellar Winery, based in Rockfield in Warren County, has been in business three years. While the amount of product varies among small farm wineries, Huff said his typically produces 15,000 bottles. One gallon of wine is about five bottles.

Kentucky law defines small farm wineries as those producing 250 gallons to 500,000 gallons of wine in a calendar year. The 30,000 gallon figure represents 6% of what small farm wineries are allowed to produce.

The wineries would like to build large enough portfolios to attract distributors and not be their own distributor, Huff told the committee.?

Sen. Mike Wilson, R-Bowling Green, said he decided to sponsor the bill after meeting Huff and learning about small farm wineries during an event at one in his district. Wilson, the Senate majority whip, said he “found out that they did not have any distribution, and so that was very concerning to me.”

Both the winery owners and the wholesalers were scolded by Senate Majority Leader Damon Thayer who said he was weary of resolving disputes like this.?

“You know when you come before this committee and spend an hour of our lives that we’re never going to get back, you guys come up, you attack the distributors. You come up, you got to play defense, kind of attack the wineries. I’m tired of it.”?

According to the Department of Agriculture’s website, Kentucky has more than 60 small farm wineries. Small farm wineries’ licenses can be found in the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control’s online database. Of the 92 licenses issued, four had out-of-state premise addresses listed.

Planting corn near Dwight, Ill. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Members of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee quibbled Thursday over spending on crop insurance and ad-hoc disaster relief, previewing potential fights in the 2023 farm bill.

Legislators of both parties emphasized their support at a Thursday hearing for better funding programs that protect underserved producers, and accounting for future natural disasters in crop insurance negotiations.

“Farming remains one of the riskiest businesses, and farmers still need these tools,” said Democratic Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow, chairwoman of the committee. “We need to work together to create a farm safety net that is responsive to the needs of all of our farmers.”

But Republican members of the committee raised concerns about the amount of recent spending on emergency aid. The committee’s ranking member, John Boozman of Arkansas, said authorized farm bill programs formed a better safety net than ad-hoc aid.

“We owe it to all Americans to ensure the bottom does not fall out of agriculture,” Boozman said. “We cannot only focus on certain programs and not others when all farm bill programs are necessary to achieve economic sustainability for our farmers, ranchers and rural communities.”

The federal farm “safety net” is a collection of policies that provide billions of dollars worth of annual risk protection and income support to American farmers. The programs protect producers from the financial impacts of poor growing seasons, low market prices and disaster relief.

From 2018 through 2021, average annual expenditures included $8.9 billion for the federal crop insurance program, $660 million for the standing disaster assistance programs, and $5.7 billion for the commodity support programs.

If continued into the next farm bill, the Congressional Research Service estimates combined spending on the federal crop insurance, agricultural commodity support and agricultural disaster programs would be $13.4 billion annually over the next 9 years.

The USDA also administered more than $65 billion in ad-hoc farm aid from 2019 through 2023, to help farmers navigate trade wars, natural disasters, and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Assessing the net’s impacts

USDA Under Secretary for Farm Production and Conservation Robert Bonnie, Farm Service Agency Administrator Zach Ducheneaux, and Risk Management Agency Administrator Marcia Bunger briefed the panel on the current state of farm aid programs.

Bonnie said the FSA has processed over 350,000 applications totaling over $8 billion in payments to livestock and crop producers to help offset losses from 2020 and 2021.

He added that the omnibus spending bill passed last year will allow for close to $10 billion annually of USDA ad-hoc relief in 2023, similar to recent years.

Bonnie said that crop insurance still remains a “vital tool” for producers, and the department has made efforts to expand crop insurance options in a greater range of options.

Bunger spoke to the necessity of expanding high-quality crop insurance policies to specialty and organic crop producers, along with smaller operations.

“My husband and I have been farming together for the last 40 years, and in the last 27 years, crop insurance has been a cornerstone of our operation,” Bunger said. “It’s a passion of mine that all of these growers, whether they are beginning farmers, whether they are veterans, that they have the same kind of policy my husband and I have used.”

Increasing equity, access to protection

Stabenow asked Bunger about how the Risk Management Agency plans to bolster options for specialty crop producers.

Bunger responded that the agency has been hosting stakeholder meetings across the country, and has worked to ease the application process and lower requirements for insurance plans for small-scale farms.

Democratic Sen. Tina Smith of Minnesota asked how the farm bill could improve access to credit and insurance programs for farmers of color.

Ducheneaux replied that a culture shift must take place within the agency, adjusting tests of credit, using Inflation Adjustment Act resources to make loan modifications and lowering barriers like excessive paperwork.

“We should look to be the lender of first opportunity, as opposed to the lender of last resort,” Ducheneaux said.

Sen. Ben Ray Lujan, a Democrat from New Mexico, expressed concern over a lack of eligibility for some drought-stressed New Mexico farmers to receive prevented plant payments due to the Trump administration’s “one-in-four” rule. This rule states that agricultural land must be planted, insured, and harvested in one of the past four years to receive prevented plant compensation.

“We have come to hear from groups stakeholders that we maybe didn’t have all of the conversations that we needed to have,” Bunger replied. “One in four is very regionalized in a lot of cases. And so for this coming year, we’ve made an exception for several Western states to step outside of that one-in-four.”

Bunger noted New Mexico will be receiving one of these waivers.

Planning for disaster in the farm bill

A number of senators spoke to the imbalance of farmer aid resources between the farm bill and ad-hoc programs, voicing concerns over inequity and wasteful spending. Ad-hoc farm payments to farmers have dwarfed crop insurance payments, $70 billion to $3 billion, over the last 6 years.

“The reality suggests the existing safety nets need to be enhanced, and that we must find a better way to more quickly deliver relief to producers,” Boozman said.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, an Iowa Republican, noted that the crop insurance title of the farm bill is one of the most heavily funded. He asked if there is any way to better set up crop insurance to mitigate the need for ad-hoc funding.

Bonnie noted that reducing paperwork is key to ensuring that existing disaster programs in the farm bill get rolled out quickly, along with expanding access to crop insurance and the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program.

Still, Bonnie noted that while the USDA structures their ad-hoc programs to recruit enrollees into the crop insurance and disaster assistance programs, there is growing interest in the ad-hoc programs among producers.

“I think our job on the implementation side is to get those out as efficiently and quickly as we can to help our producers,” Bonnie said. “We’re open to discussion.”

Addressing foreign ownership

Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa asked, in light of the recent Chinese suspected spy balloon incident, if Congress can use the farm bill to modernize the Agriculture Foreign Investment Disclosure Act.

Bonnie said that monitoring and disclosing of foreign agriculture investments to the USDA is a “paper-based process,” and the department lacks enforcement tools to enforce oversight of that paperwork.

Republican Sen. Mike Braun of Indiana asked if the USDA would commit to blocking purchases of land from countries like China, Iran, North Korea and Russia.

Bonnie said that he would not commit to blocking purchases, but offered technical assistance on drafting the legislation.

Kentucky Commissioner of Agriculture Ryan Quarles has named a working group of agriculture industry stakeholders to search for “solutions to the state’s large animal vet shortage,” the Agriculture Department said Friday.?

A shortage of large animal veterinarians across the country has created “a negative impact as farmers search to find the veterinary care they need for their animals,” a department press release said. About 5% of veterinarians in the U.S. practice on large animals. The rest are part of companion animal practices, research, or regulations. In Kentucky, about 3% of veterinarians have dedicated large animal practices.?

“This shortage of large animal veterinarians in Kentucky and throughout the nation has already started impacting the farmer and could impact our food source in the future,” Quarles said. “This creates a significant concern for farmers being able to access adequate animal care to keep their herds and flocks healthy. The working group brings together the brightest agriculture minds to find solutions to the issues at hand and improve the services farmers need.”

The group’s first meeting will be later this month. Throughout 2023, it will meet to define solutions and develop action plans and benchmarks. The department held two discussion meetings with industry stakeholders about reasons for the shortage and possible solutions, which is where the idea for the working group came from.?

Last year, some reasons for the shortage identified were “large animal veterinarians often make less on average than those in other areas,” graduating veterinary student’s average debt is “more than $200,000,” and burnout from working long hours with strenuous workloads and unpredictable schedules. Also, almost 40% of Kentucky’s large animal veterinarians “are within 10 years of retirement.”?

Solutions discussed last year included changing loan programs, finding state and federal government opportunities to assist with student debt and beginning practices; creating incentive programs to recruit graduating veterinary students into large animal practices in rural or underserved areas; develop education programs through organizations like? 4-H, FFA, and career tracks in schools to introduce youth to career opportunities as veterinarians early on; and reviewing admittance criteria for veterinarian schools.?

The working group members are:?

Glen Sellers, Auburn University

• Dr. Debbie Reed, Breathitt Veterinary Center and Murray State University
• Dr. Gordon Jones, Kentucky Agriculture Development Board
• Dustin Blosser, Kentucky Alternative Livestock Association
• Dr. Andy Roberts, Kentucky Association of Equine Practitioners
• Dr. Tim Gardner, Kentucky Board of Veterinary Examiners
• Dave Maples, Kentucky Cattlemen Association
• Dr. Charles Townsend, Kentucky Dairy Development Council
• Sharon Furches, Kentucky Farm Bureau
• Erin Klarer, Kentucky Higher Education Assistance Authority
• Sarah E. Coleman, Kentucky Horse Council
• Caleb Ragland, Kentucky Livestock Coalition and Kentucky Soybean Association
• Dennis Liptrap, Kentucky Pork Producers
• Aaron Miller, Kentucky Poultry Federation
• Dr. Beth Johnson, Kentucky Sheep & Goat Development Office
• Dr. Jon Laster, Kentucky Veterinary Medical Association
• Randall Evans DVM, Lincoln Memorial University
• Mark Reding, State Board of Agriculture
• Dr. James “Jamie” Matthew, UK College of Agriculture and UK Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory
• Dr. Andrea Sexten, Eastern Kentucky University

In December, NPR reported farmers across the U.S. have faced a shortage of rural veterinarians for decades, but the problem was at an all-time high. The U.S. Department of Agriculture said 500 counties in 46 states had critical shortages in 2022.

Planting corn near Dwight, Ill. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The top 10% of recipients of federal farm payments raked in more than 79% of total subsidies over the last 25 years — producing billions of dollars for a relatively small group of U.S. producers, according to a new analysis of federal data from an environmental group.

In total, the federal government paid more than $478 billion from 2015 to 2021 in farm support for crop insurance, disasters, conservation payments and subsidies for certain crops like corn and soybeans, according to the analysis of federal data the Environmental Working Group released Wednesday.

The U.S. Agriculture Department programs support hundreds of thousands of producers across the country. But a select group of super collectors is bringing in an outsized portion of farm subsidies.

The top 1% collected 27% of total subsidies between 1995 and 2021, according to the report.

Some of the farm payments are more opaque. The government does not release information on all of the individuals who receive support for crop insurance. And the Trump administration changed how it reported some farm subsidies, so it lists them by banks instead of individuals, making it harder to see who received some of the payments from 2019 to 2021.

More than half of farm subsidies over the last 25 years were commodity payments to crops like corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton and rice, according to the EWG database.

“Based on what we do know, we can still see the most successful farm businesses are still collecting the lion’s share of subsidies … while the vast majority of farmers are getting little or nothing,” said Scott Faber, vice president of government affairs at the Environmental Working Group, an independent nonprofit that conducts extensive research.

The biggest of those were corn subsidies.

Federal spending on crop insurance has grown in recent farm bills, and crop insurance payments now make up a quarter of all subsidy payments.

In Iowa, the family farm that is managed by the son of Republican U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, a farm policy leader, received more than $1.4 million from 1995 to 2021, the report shows. The payments included disaster, corn, soybean and oat commodity subsidies.

The payments are listed for Robin Grassley, the family farm manager. Chuck Grassley and Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa both sit on the Senate Agriculture Committee.

Pat Grassley, a state representative in Iowa and the senator’s grandson, collected $55,500 in federal payments since 2005. Most of those were relatively small commodity payments from $700 to $2,000 a year — with the exception of 2020, when he received $20,000.

The database compiles data collected from federal reporting and Freedom of Information Act requests.

Harvesting federal support

The distribution of farm subsidies does not necessarily follow the amount of agricultural production in a state.

For instance, California is the most agriculture-producing state, according to the USDA, but is 11th on the list for subsidy payments.

North Carolina is in the top 10 for agriculture production but ranks 20th for farm subsidy receipts. Instead, more money goes to Texas, Iowa and Illinois, where large farms grow subsidized commodity crops, like corn and soybeans.

The top 15 states with the most total farm subsidies distributed from 1995 to 2021, ranked by payments, were:

1. Texas ($44.5 billion)
2. Iowa ($39. 6 billion)
3. Illinois ($32.7 billion)
4. Minnesota ($28.1 billion)
5. Kansas ($27.7 billion)
6. Nebraska ($27 billion)
7. North Dakota ($26.6 billion)
8. South Dakota ($21 billion)
9. Missouri ($17.4 billion)
10. Indiana ($16.5 billion)
11. California ($16.3 billion)
12. Arkansas ($15.9 billion)
13. Ohio ($12.8 billion)
14. Wisconsin ($11.7 billion)
15. Oklahoma ($11.5 billion).

Pennsylvania, a major agricultural state, is 29th on the list with $3.4 billion from 1995-2021. The biggest subsidy programs in the state are for dairy farmers.

But 80% of Pennsylvania’s producers do not receive federal farm subsidies, according to the report.

Producers in House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn Thompson’s congressional district in Pennsylvania received nearly $35 million in commodity payment support from 1995 to 2021, according to the database. The largest of those went to Long Acres Potato Farms in Tionesta, which collected more than $1.5 million over that time period.

Farm bill debate launches

The report comes as Congress kicks off its rewrite of the sweeping federal farm bill, which will set both policy and funding levels for farm, food and conservation programs for the next five years. The Senate Agriculture Committee held its first farm bill hearing of the year Wednesday. The current farm bill expires at the end of September.

Originally a product of the New Deal, the first farm bill in 1933 focused on commodity price support to provide relief for farmers and ensure a steady domestic food supply for Americans during the Great Depression.

Since then, lawmakers have passed 18 farm bills and greatly expanded the reach of the legislation.

For example, Congress added a conservation section to the farm bill in 1985 with payments for farmers who conserve soil, idle land for wildlife habitat or employ certain conservation practices.

But the biggest spending in recent farm bills is not on farms at all but in the nutrition title, which includes the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, formerly known as food stamps.

The politically fraught process of authoring a new farm bill faces extra challenges this year from a divided Congress, a looming debate over the federal debt ceiling and the potential for extended amendments in the House.

The leaders of the House and Senate Agriculture committees, Thompson and Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, have each said they will aim to finish a new farm bill on time but acknowledged it will be a challenge this year.

“We know because of the timeline and all of the complexity of everything going on and the challenges in the House that it may take a little bit longer, but we’re committed to getting it done,” Stabenow said in a January interview on the web broadcast Agri-Pulse newsmakers.

Crop subsidies could face attacks

Crop subsidies come under fire in every farm bill debate — both from environmental groups that would like to see the money invested elsewhere and budget hawks who want to trim federal spending.

The Republican Study Committee, whose members make up 80% of all Republican members of Congress, proposed drastic cuts for the farm bill and limits on some farm subsidies in the draft budget it released last summer as a “Blueprint to Save America.”

But Agriculture Committee leaders have not indicated they intend to undertake any massive overhaul in this farm bill.

Thompson has said he does not want to dismantle farm supports, which he and other farm state lawmakers see as a safety net critical for producers and rural communities.

Democrats on his committee have not shown enthusiasm for an overhaul of farm subsidies, either.

In a recent list of farm bill priorities, Georgia Rep. David Scott, the top Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee, did not include changes for farm subsidies other than extending programs for livestock producers and? small farmers.

Georgia Republican Rep. Austin Scott, who will chair the subcommittee that oversees farm commodities, said at a farm bill listening session last month that he wants to look at the reference prices that trigger payments for row crops but has not expressed interest in a massive subsidy overhaul.

In an ongoing effort to diversify the country’s meat processing and create new markets for smaller livestock producers, the federal government is distributing about $3.9 million of grant money and guaranteeing loans that total $5.7 million for more than two dozen projects in 15 states, including Kentucky.

Danville farmer Dennis Spencer Guinn was awarded a $161,914 Value-Added Producer Grant to expand his family’s beef operation by processing, packaging, and marketing custom retail beef cuts. The project will serve Boyle, Fayette, Jessamine and Woodford counties and result in the creation of one job, according to a release from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Guinn and his wife Carly Guinn founded, own and operate Circle G Farms in Danville, where they raise beef, pork, heirloom corn, garden produce and other grains and hay, according to Circle G’s website.

“It’s getting harder and harder to make a living as a farmer, but investments like this can help bring in additional revenue,” said USDA Rural Development Kentucky State Director Tom Carew. “This is just the latest way we’re trying to reduce bottlenecks and increase opportunities for producers.”

The grants are aimed at strengthening the nation’s meat supply chain and promoting competition. Carew said that under the Biden administration, Rural Development “will continue to help build a resilient food supply chain in rural Kentucky.”

The Biden administration has dedicated billions of dollars to agricultural and food-supply initiatives to make them more climate-friendly and resilient against calamitous market disruptions, such as pandemics.

U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told reporters last week, “We are just in the beginning processes of this. It takes a while, obviously, for the grant application process to go through, but we’re excited about this. We think they’re going to begin to see some results.”

Jared Strong, a reporter for the Iowa Capital Dispatch, contributed to this report.

Tyson chicken barns, like these in West Tennessee, house more than 624,000 chickens each and produce massive quantities of waste. (Photo: John Partipilo)

This article was first published by the Tennessee Lookout.

Brenda Scott’s father came to west Tennessee as a sharecropper. By 1971 — as a result of hard work and government loans — he had 129 acres of his own, some of which his descendants occupy today.

His adult children and grandchildren belong to an enclave of Black farming families that have lived in Henderson County’s Cedar Grove community for generations. Some continue to raise hogs, cattle and crops. Others, like Scott, left for college and jobs, only to return to raise their kids.

Scott, along with many Cedar Grove families, has now become part of a novel legal challenge to a federal government farm loan program they say has allowed industrial poultry operations to proliferate at a cost to the long established community.

Chicken farms have rapidly expanded across rural west Tennessee in recent years in order to supply product to Tyson Foods, the world’s largest poultry producer. The Fortune 500 company’s footprint has been rapidly expanding in the state.

Last year, Tyson opened a $425 million meat processing plant in nearby Humboldt, Tenn., its third large-scale Tennessee plant. The operation was made possible, in part, by $20 million in taxpayer incentives from the administration of Gov. Bill Lee.

Tyson relies on contract growers located within about a 60 mile radius of their slaughtering plants. The contractors raise chicks supplied by Tyson in massive barns built according to Tyson specifications and bring them to Tyson’s Humboldt plant for slaughter in order to get paid.

Scott, who is 56, said her community shares the same concerns as family farmers in adjoining counties who in recent years have tried — and failed — to get local or state governments to more closely regulate industrial chicken farming operations.

The operations produce vast quantities of chicken manure that she fears will pollute the well water her family relies on for drinking, the streams and creeks they fish for catfish and the quality of life that beckoned her back home to raise her two sons.

“I really want to stress the fact that this was a predominantly Black community growing up; it’s legacy land we want our kids to grow up on and enjoy the freedoms and experiences we had growing up,” she said. “There’s nothing like country living.”

“My fear now is that there’s no regulations for these chicken operators. What’s going to happen to my grandchildren drinking our well water? What about the air quality? I have asthma. So do members of my family. And nobody is telling us anything.”

A new lawsuit brought by the Southern Environmental Law Center, representing Scott and neighbors who banded together to form “Concerned Citizens of West Tennessee,” is now challenging the federal government’s role in providing tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer-backed loans to Tyson contract growers.

The litigation claims the United States Department of Agriculture, through the Farm Service Agency, is illegally subsidizing industrial chicken operations through a federal lending program intended to provide “family farms” with startup and operational capital.

“The FSA loan guarantees are illegal corporate welfare that contravene federal lending rules,” the lawsuit said.

“The federal loan guarantees are illegal because the lending program is reserved for helping ‘family farms.’ Because Tyson controls virtually all aspects of the industrial chicken growing operations, those facilities are not ‘family farms’ under applicable lending rules.”

The lawsuit also accuses the Farm Service Agency of failing to follow its own rules in conducting thorough environmental impact studies of farm operations seeking the loans — or in keeping local communities informed.

Instead, the federal agency only conducts perfunctory environmental reviews, before issuing “rubber stamped approval,” according to the suit.

The lawsuit names a pair of affiliated operations across the street from one another in the Cedar Grove community that are owned by two limited liability companies — Trang Nguyen, LLC and Nguyen LLC. Each LLC is owned by one individual.

Each operation has 8 chicken barns, massive single-story structures the length of a football field that hold 624,000 Tyson chickens at any given time.

The barns, along with an open-air chicken waste dumping area, lie adjacent to a subdivision of more than a dozen homes and are located within 3 miles of the Cedar Grove community’s four Black churches, Scott said. On the far side of the barns, a Mennonite farming community has lived for decades.

Scott is a longtime member of Bible Hill Baptist Church. Her husband pastors two of the other churches: Mount Pleasant Methodist and Seats Chapel Holiness Church.

“We see them every Sunday,” Scott said. “I can see them on my way to church.”

The USDA did not respond to a request for comment, and contact information for Trang Nguyen LLC and Nguyen LLC’s could not be immediately found.

Poultry farmers that contract with Tyson buy land and build barns in communities surrounding the company’s processing plants to serve as sole company suppliers.? Many of the farmers have little or no prior farming background. A growing number of Vietnamese-American families have moved to Tennessee from elsewhere in the nation to start their own Tyson-contracted chicken-growing operations.

In 2017 — the same year Tyson announced its plans to open its Humboldt facility — Tennessee lawmakers rolled back a requirement for poultry growers to obtain water quality permits from the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation.

According to the lawsuit, Trang Nguyen, LLC bought 152 acres in Henderson County and Nguyen, LLC bought 128 acres; then the two farmers collectively secured federal loan guarantees of approximately $3.5 million to purchase, construct and operate the facilities.

The federal loan assistance can take the form of direct loans of up to $600,000 from the Farm Service Agency or up to $2,037,000 through a commercial lender with FSA loan guarantees. The loans are confined to farmers and their family members

The rules guide agency officials to define a “family farm” as one that is “recognized in the community as a farm,” and that has “day-to-day management operational decisions should be made by members of the family farm”

Tyson financed a large portion of the cost of the building the Nguyens’ facilities, contributing more than $960,000 in construction funding, the lawsuit said.

“The Nguyen’s will not be poultry ‘farmers,’” the lawsuit alleged. “They will be poultry caretakers who own neither chicken nor feed. They will be much like indentured servants, strapped with tremendous debt and laboring within an industrial meat complex in which they are required to follow Tyson’s rules, lest they suffer extreme financial consequences.”

The lawsuit notes that other government loan programs have determined that poultry contractors do not qualify for loans because of their integration into corporate operations.

Tyson “exercise(s) such comprehensive control over poultry growers that those growers do not qualify for small business loans,” the lawsuit said, noting that the Small Business Association refuses to consider the poultry growers as “small businesses” for the purpose of loans because of their control by corporate poultry corporations.

The federal loans and loan guarantees must also include an environmental assessment of the planned farm operations to “determine whether a proposed action would significantly affect the environment.” and to “involve the public in the environmental review process as early as possible.”

The federal challenge follows years of failed efforts by family farmers in other rural west Tennessee communities to challenge poultry growing operations. Those efforts have largely been stymied by state deregulation.

In 2017 — the same year Tyson announced its plans to open its Humboldt facility — Tennessee lawmakers rolled back a requirement for poultry growers to obtain water quality permits from the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation.

In 2021, Tennessee legislature removed the power of local health boards to regulate industrial animal operations on health grounds, a preemptive move that came as the boards of health in Henderson County and adjacent Madison County weighed whether to regulate Tyson contract growers on health grounds.

And, noted George Nolan, an attorney with the environmental law firm, residents have little recourse to take legal action against the massive chicken operations because Tennessee is a Right to Farm state, a reference to a 1982 law enacted to protect farmers from nuisance lawsuits by city or suburban dwellers who moved to rural communities, then protested about the noise, odor and pesticides from farms next door.

“It’s a very problematic situation,” he said. “Our legislature has passed laws that make it impossible for neighbors suffering or losing their home values to go to court. The courthouse doors to these individuals are closed.”

James Lavel, a retired Navy commander in Henderson County, who has advocated for greater poultry operation regulation, said last week he has been frustrated by local and state elected leaders actions, and inactions, in the movement of large scale animal operations to the area, where the dangers of air and water pollution, and the overwhelming smell generated by chicken feces, have disrupted quality of life.

“I’ve gotten a hodgepodge of excuses from them,” Lavel said. “And then the FSA comes in here and uses our taxpayer money for this. If you just keep putting the people at risk you’re trying to feed, what’s the point? We need regulations. They exist to protect the people.”

Scott said the willingness of the federal government to provide Tyson contractors with federally subsidized loans and loan guarantees carry a particular sting for her, a second generation African-American farmer.

In 2018, Scott applied for the same loan program to grow watermelons on the tract she inherited from her dad, who passed away in 2003.

She was denied, she said, because she lacked “managerial experience.

Joseph Monroe, holding his son Angus, raises grass-fed calves in Henry County and markets them through Our Home Place Meat. Photo courtesy of The Berry Center

NEW CASTLE?— For more than a century Henry County relied on tobacco to keep its farmers and its economy going.

For most of the second half of the 20th century a federal program?stabilized the price of tobacco, guaranteeing those farmers a steady, predictable income. That all changed in the new century after Congress ended tobacco price supports.

Just as all that change was underway, Mary Berry, the daughter of Henry County’s?renowned author, activist, farmer and environmentalist Wendell Berry, founded The?Berry Center to carry on his vision of “prosperous well-tended farms serving and supporting healthy local communities.”

Thinking about how to help farmers prosper, they began with the mantra, “start with what?you have.” With tobacco gone, what Henry County had was cattle and pasture.

No state east of the Mississippi River produces more cattle than Kentucky.

So the Berry Center began to think about ways small farmers could make more, and more?predictable, money from their cattle operations and landed on the idea of producing veal.

The economics made sense. Typically, weaned calves would be sent off in a tractor-trailer to a feedlot in the Midwest, fattened up and then sold into the industrial meat?complex. Cutting out all the middlemen and harvesting them at weaning for a premium?product could mean more money going directly to the farmer.

And that’s how Our Home Place Meat came to be in 2017. A pilot program created and?supported by the nonprofit Berry Center, Our Home Place took on the challenge of?persuading farmers to raise the veal, guaranteeing them a price for it, and finding markets?for it.

It was a tall order.

The program began with the principle of guaranteeing a price that took into account farmers’ expenses and added a reasonable profit. “With the market you are gambling,” explained Beth Douglas, who directs the program. “At the beginning of the year we tell the farmers how many cattle we will purchase and at what price. That allows the farmers to plan for the year.”

Plus, the farmers don’t have to invest in different equipment or new barns, they just have?to keep raising cattle and, instead of sending them off to feed lots, “we take it to?Trackside Butcher Shoppe,” in Campbellsburg (also in Henry County), Douglas said. “So?it’s literally not changing anything for the farmer. It’s taking them where they are.”

At the same time, Our Home Place began developing partnerships for marketing the?product.

Overcoming veal’s bad rep

Veal had fallen out of the favor in the United States because of inhumane methods —?confining calves in small pens to prevent muscle development, feeding them only milk or?milk solids — used to produce a very white, tender meat.

But in Europe veal is different, a?rosy-colored meat from calves raised outside, nursing and eating grass. This was the type?of veal they wanted to raise in Henry County.

Perry helped with the re-education process by preparing a multi-course meal at The Berry?Center in 2017 using Rose Veal, inviting chefs to taste the product. He cooked sliders,?ribeyes, strips and filets, even veal blanc which he described as “the national French?hangover food” to demonstrate the flavor and versatility of Rose Veal.

But even if chefs wanted it they had to be able to get it. That’s where What Chefs Want!?(formerly Creation Gardens), a Louisville-based wholesaler came into the venture.

John Thomas, a vice-president there, said it is a partnership, not a typical?customer-vendor relationship. His team works with the farmers, Douglas and the people?at Trackside Butcher Shoppe, discussing pricing, production and quality.

“Everybody’s really on the same page and pulling in the same direction,” Thomas said.

That gives What Chefs Want! what it needs to promote Rose Veal to restaurateurs who want to source more of their food locally and support family farmers.

“There’s plenty of beef out there to buy, we didn’t need another beef supplier. We needed a relationship that has a purpose.”

And, he adds, “we’re very, very happy with the product.”

At Red Hog Artisan Meat in Louisville most of the meat comes from whole animals that?are processed in-house by a team of five butchers. But Aaron Sortman, the executive?butcher there, jumped at the chance to get involved when he learned what the Berry?Center was doing “to help out these smaller farms.” He’d always admired Wendell?Berry’s work (“I think he’s the coolest”) and is constantly on the lookout for “local farms?that ethically raise their animals.”

Although Red Hog butchers most of its own meat, they need to fill in the gaps for many?popular items like tenderloins, New York strip steaks and ribeyes, and Our Home Place?has “become our main supplemental supplier.” Sortman buys both Rose Veal and?Berry Beef, meat from older cattle that are finished on grain but on the farm in pastures?not in feedlots.

‘Better product from a taste standpoint’

As with Thomas at What Chefs Want!, Sortman said there’s a personal relationship that?he’d never get with a commodity producer. He met several of the farmers at a dinner?sponsored by Our Home Place and has sent some of his butchers to workshops to learn?more about the product.

As far as he’s concerned, it’s a safer product (less chance of bacterial contamination from?large farms and factory feedlots) and “an alternative to the supermarket food chain.”

Plus, Sortman said, “it’s a better product from a taste standpoint.”

Most new ventures fail because they must make money from day one, explained Douglas,?but the Berry Center’s support has “given us time to build the program and figure out?what works and what doesn’t work.”

Last year the program handled about 100 head and returned $245,000 to the Henry?County economy through direct payments to farmers and to Trackside for processing the?meat. This year Douglas figures that the combination of Rose Veal and Berry Beef will reach about 270 head.

Those aren’t big figures in the sea of the Kentucky agriculture economy but they make a?difference to local farmers, said John Logan Brent, the retiring Henry County judge?executive, a member of The Berry Center board and a farmer who sells to the program —?about 20 head of veal and 10 of beef this year. He figures the contract with Our Home?Place typically adds from $200 to $300 a head to the commodity price. For small?operations that extra income is “something they can count on, (it) certainly makes a?difference at the end of the year.”

Brent sees a future when this pilot program can grow up and become a full-fledged?agricultural cooperative that can pay its own administrative costs but believes it will?have to achieve a scale of about 1,000 head processed annually to get there.

Our Home Place targets young farmers, Brent said, many of whom “desperately want to?be involved in agriculture,” whether they are trying to make a family farm work or are new?to the business. An added benefit of this program is that it gives them a product they can?be proud of. “Who thanks you for your animals at a sale barn?”

Dalla Emerson, food-service director for the Bowling Green Independent Schools, is congratulated by, from right, Wilondja Akili and Quinn Otto after General Mills honored her school-nutrition work by putting her photo on a Wheaties box. The students serve on the Child Nutrition Food Committee at McNeill Elementary. (Photo by Leslie McCoy)

The food-service director at Bowling Green Independent Schools will often get texts from a farmer in a neighboring county asking her if she wants the latest produce, like a fresh batch of purple cauliflower.?

“We’re not ever going to say no. We can always add something fresh,” said Dalla Emerson. “We try to bake them in the oven, salt them a little bit.”?

That cauliflower is just the tip of the iceberg with Kentucky produce in her schools: A salad bar offers local cucumbers, tomatoes and lettuce. During the pandemic, her school district handed out 1,200 pounds of blueberries from a Warren County orchard, and bags of local vegetables were also given to families.?

“Farm to School” programs across the country generally work to bring locally-grown food into schools. Emerson said her program is a dedicated effort to make sure students have these local options, a part of their education to show children and teenagers the possibilities with what they eat.?

“We’re expected to produce citizens that are vested in our community, and it starts with us,” she said. “It starts with educating them in the schools, not just about math and science and history, but also nutrition.”

Emerson has used up to about 20% of her school district’s food budget each year to buy locally, but that makes her an exception in Kentucky, according to a recent study by Kentucky agriculture and nutrition advocates.

Only about 5% of food purchased by Kentucky schools was sourced from local farms in 2019, the latest year with federal data available, according to a study published in October by the Kentucky Food Action Network — a coalition made up of the food bank network Feeding Kentucky, the poverty law research center Kentucky Equal Justice Center and other groups.

More farm to school food served in nearby states

Kentucky schools also lagged behind in incorporating local food compared to schools in nearby states such as Ohio, Indiana, and Tennessee, the study found.?

Food and nutrition advocates see these shortfalls as an opportunity to expand on not only providing students with nutritious meals but also to boost the incomes of smaller-scale Kentucky farms. Kate McDonald, who runs the No Kid Hungry campaign for Feeding Kentucky, points to the fact many school children receive multiple meals each day during the school year.

“Farm to School is making sure that kids have access to local foods. It just makes sense. It’s a win-win for Kentucky kids and Kentucky farms,” McDonald said.?

McDonald helped launch the Kentucky Grown Vegetable Incentive Program in 2018 to help support more local fruit and vegetable purchases to include in summer meal programs for children. But the research study McDonald contributed also lists several challenges in trying to adopt Farm to School more widely.?

For one, according to the latest federal agriculture data from 2017, there aren’t enough Kentucky farms that sell to institutions and retail markets such as school districts to supply produce for every school in the state; many more farms sell directly to consumers at farmers markets, for example. It also takes time to build purchasing relationships between farmers and districts, and food service directors in schools want to make sure they have a dependable supply of food.

“It’s just hard for schools to balance wanting to work with local farmers and having a dependable reliable quantity when they need it,” said Tyler Offerman, a food justice fellow with the Kentucky Equal Justice Center.

Offerman said the paperwork and bureaucracy involved with procuring local food is also a burden, with some school districts not wanting to deal with the extra effort.?

Paperwork, bureaucracy, burnout

Leah Feagin, President of the Kentucky School Nutrition Association and food-service director for Mayfield Independent Schools, said these local food service directors often wear multiple hats — such as also directing transportation for the district — and in small school districts, may be the only district employee ordering the food.?

“The director job is a full-time job,” Feagin said. “They’re burnt out. And then how do you say to that director, ‘I know you still don’t have everything you need to get done today and you’ve already put in your nine hours, but what about trying to find some farm to school options?’”

In Bowling Green Independent Schools, Emerson was able to convince the school board to hire a menu coordinator to help with managing the food orders. But the costs of buying local food can also be prohibitive; Emerson has had to fill out paperwork for grants to help support some of her purchases.?

Nutrition advocates behind the Farm to School study point to an incentive program implemented in Alabama that provides school districts extra funding to buy local food, or more collaboration in Ohio between university-run agriculture extension offices and school districts to incorporate local foods. In Kentucky, a farm to school online portal run by the University of Kentucky aims to help connect school districts with farmers interested in providing local meat or produce.?

Tina Garland, the Farm to School coordinator for the Kentucky Department of Agriculture, said she understands there’s a lot of room for improvement with Farm to School programs. But she believes the growing engagement she’s seen in schools with local food, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic when food supply chains were roiled, is something that can be built upon.?

“I see more and more people making that connection of the importance of, you know, connecting with a farmer, and knowing where your food comes from,” Garland said.