Texas lawmakers juggle angry voters, data center developers, Trump's AI push and a tech-first governor

65% of Americans don't want a data center built
in their community. (Photo by G. Moffet, Unsplash)

With its sprawling land and business-friendly politics, data center developers decided Texas was an ideal place to build AI infrastructure. They began having their proposals quietly approved, and construction started, with little input from communities near their builds.

Fast forward to today. As data center projects proliferate throughout the state, many Texas communities are pushing back on AI and calling on their political representatives to put up guardrails, reports Liz Carey for The Daily Yonder. But when it comes to putting limits on AI development, Texas lawmakers face competing interests.

"Data center construction is unpopular among locals, and a majority of the facilities are being proposed in red, rural counties," Carey explains. Republican state lawmakers now find themselves "caught between a zealous president, a governor bent on Texas becoming the next global data center hub, and outraged constituents."

According to a Texas Tribune analysis, at least "82 data centers, or nearly 60% of those that are either planned or under construction, are in state House districts that voted for President Donald Trump and elected a Republican state representative in 2024," Carey reports. "A March Quinnipiac poll found that 65% of Americans oppose the building of an AI data center in their community."

Texas House Speaker Dustin Burrows and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who leads the Texas Senate, have made data center development a priority. The Yonder reports, "Both directed their chambers to balance the economic development benefits of the facilities with their potential impact on Texas communities and their water and power infrastructure."

Meanwhile, Texas county officials, who have no power over where AI centers end up, spend their days trying to manage angry, frustrated residents. Republican county executive Matt Sebesta told Carey, "When folks look at me and say, ‘We don’t want this,’ I point them to our state reps and say, ‘Go talk to your state rep. Go talk to your senator,’ because they don’t trust us to make those decisions."

State legislators have even started to divide along rural-urban lines, with "rural lawmakers tending to raise more concerns about data centers while those from urban areas have generally been more supportive — or at least quieter," Carey adds.

In response, AI companies have begun running ad campaigns across the Lone Star State that "tout the benefits of the facilities," Carey explains. "Meanwhile, the tech industry is already lavishing donations across the capitol."

A 10-year solar project in California aims to 'harvest the sun'

The Valley Clean Infrastructure Plan delivers economic value to growers, 
local governments and residents. (Map by Binh Nguyen, Canary Media )

Directors of the largest agricultural water agency in the U.S. are creating a plan to save California farmland from a decades-long water crisis, reports Jeff St. John for Canary Media.

The Valley Clean Infrastructure Plan will transform 136,000 acres of farmland that's no longer irrigable into 21 gigawatts of battery-back solar power, enough to power nine million houses, St. John explains.

The planned build will be the largest project not just in California or the U.S., but in the world, said Jeff Fortune, a third-generation farmer and the board president of the Westlands Water District.

The plans were approved in December, and the project may take 10 years or more, St. John reports. 

"The way we look at it is a new crop," a fifth-generation farmer and another director of the district, Jeremy Hughes, told St. John. "We're harvesting the sun and producing electricity."

In the next 20 years, the state will require four to five times as much new clean energy as the project will provide, according to another director, Ross Franson. 

Rural communities battle over massive solar installations on privately owned farmland

Massive solar installations have some rural communities
in an uproar. (Photo by Andres Siimon, Unsplash)

Some farmers believe leasing crop land for solar panel installations is a way to secure a steady income in a profession marked by unpredictability. But other farmers, landowners and community members see long stretches of solar panels on rich farmland as a wasteful tragedy worth fighting over.

In Richland, Michigan, more than 2,200 acres of farmland were leased to Consumers Energy by Liberty Farms without a word of input from the community, writes Chris Bennett of Farm Journal. But once neighbors were informed, an uproar ensued, and many community members are actively working to prevent the project from moving forward.

Kate Smit's farm sits adjacent to the land Liberty Farms leased to Consumers for its 461,000-solar-panel installation. She told Bennett, "We want to stall the Consumers’ solar project until we can get a bill passed in our state senate, so that townships and counties have to vote if a solar panel company wants in." 

Smit told Farm Journal that she believes that massive solar leases like the one she's fighting in Kalamazoo County are happening all over Michigan and the Midwest.

Bill Peter, who lives two miles from Smit, doesn't consider solar installations to be earth-friendly. He told Bennett, "There’s nothing green about this green energy. I’m not sitting quietly while 450,000 solar panels permanently replace the best farm soil around.”

For many residents in rural communities, resistance to industrial solar installations persists, despite their strong beliefs in private property rights. Ed Yelton, a cattle producer in Dearborn County, Indiana, said solar and AI data center projects belong in a separate category.

Consumers' proposed installation in Richland isn't a done deal yet. Bennett explains, "The Richland Township planning commission has not yet approved Consumer Energy’s application."

USDA can remediate 'forever chemical' pollution on U.S. farmlands, new study shows

The new report found that the USDA can respond to
PFAS contamination on U.S. farmland. (TNL photo)

The Department of Agriculture has the resources to address PFAS contamination on U.S. farmland, a National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine report finds.

The study, which was partially sponsored by the USDA, lists the various tools and remediation planning that can be used to reduce contamination caused by "human-made chemicals that accumulate in the environment and the bodies of humans and animals," which are collectively called "PFAS" or "forever chemicals," reports Shannon Kelleher for The New Lede.

Fertilizer use is one way farmers have unintentionally polluted their soil with forever chemicals. Kelleher explains, "PFAS end up on agricultural lands when farmers apply tainted sewage sludge as a fertilizer, contaminating crops and soil with chemicals linked to certain cancers and other health harms." Forever chemicals can also be added to soil through PFAS-laced pesticides.

The report included a remediation outline and noted that the USDA could leverage its considerable resources to address the farmland PFAS crisis. Researchers suggested the USDA use predictive models, on-site testing and "develop PFAS screening levels for different types of agriculture facilities, soil types and climates," Kelleher reports.

The report also recommends the USDA analyze how forever chemicals interact with different soils and climates to "develop better mechanisms to trap or sequester PFAS, and research ways to minimize the uptake of PFAS in plants and animals," Kelleher writes.

The February Farm Bill draft includes "language that would permit research grants on the agricultural impacts of PFAS in land exposed to firefighting foams, sewage sludge or compost containing the chemicals," Kelleher adds.

A mayor's death in rural Tennessee 'unleashed one of the county’s biggest political conflicts in memory'

Following the unexpected death of their mayor, residents in rural Coffee County, Tennessee, split into factions that began with arguments over real estate development and spiraled into heated debates over what it means to be politically conservative in a deeply red county.

Coffee County, in green, is nested between several
urban centers. (Caliper maps)

 

At 55 years old, Judd Matheny was a pro-growth mayor busy working to develop farm-based Coffee County as a haven for suburbanites fleeing expensive living in Nashville, Chattanooga, and Huntsville, Ala. "Rural Coffee County was poised to become Tennessee’s next boomtown, with subdivisions rapidly replacing farmland," reports Cameron McWhirter of The Wall Street Journal. 

Upon Matheny's death, his plans were diverted by county officials "pushing hard to limit development across the area’s vast farmlands. In March, the county imposed a three-month moratorium on all large subdivision projects in areas zoned for agriculture," McWhirter writes. After the moratorium expired, officials passed a ruling that limited "property owners in agricultural areas to selling land in a minimum of 5-acre-lot increments, effectively halting large subdivisions in those areas." The median lot size in Tennessee is roughly half an acre.

While county officials have sided with multi-generational farmers and residents who want to limit growth to preserve the region's rural identity, the area's strong pro-development faction isn't going quietly. McWhirter explains. "Rival camps have hired lawyers and clash on social media through dueling Facebook pages. . . . Planning commission meetings, typically mundane affairs where leaders wear jeans and work boots, now draw heated crowds and viewers on streaming.

Judd Matheny

The duel extended to what it means to be conservative. "An anti-moratorium sign at a local meeting read: 'Vote like a conservative! Less government. Less rules. Less regulations. Lower taxes," McWhirter reports. "A pro-moratorium group responded in a post that, 'Historically, conservatism has emphasized order, prudence, stewardship. . . .It’s about preserving traditional values and communities — not selling them off for short-term gain."

Even with the current restrictions, Coffee County continues to expand. "Construction crews dig and drill throughout Tullahoma and Manchester, the county seat; real estate for-sale signs line roads," McWhirter writes. 

Meanwhile, both sides seem to agree that if Matheny were still alive, things wouldn't be so contentious. McWhirter adds, "Matheny’s death unleashed one of the county’s biggest political conflicts in memory."

The physical presence of modern technology encroaches over farmland and behind homes

Power lines for Virginia data center may reach across 
Maryland farmland. (Photo by Gary Meulemans, Unsplash)

As the desire for "more" pushes technology to grow and advance, so does the need for electricity to supply its physical growth.

Institutions and businesses used to have their own data centers, but in the past 15 years they began using third parties to house them and warehouses (or computer hotels) followed in quick succession, said Jon Hukill, spokesperson for the Data Center Coalition, according to Stephanie Hanes.

Hanes explored the impact that data centers and their electricity needs are having on communities and farmers in Maryland and Virginia, in an article for The Christian Science Monitor. These data centers are now bumping up to residential areas and the power lines to supply them are proposed to come from New Jersey, through Maryland farms, to the centers in Virginia.

“The industrial scale of data centers makes them largely incompatible with residential uses… And industry trends make future residential impacts more likely,” said Mark Gribbin, chief legislative analyst for Virginia’s Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission. Hanes said Gribbin's research found that a third of data centers were now located near homes.

The concerns of the residents affected vary, but they are worrying. Brent Hunsinger, a local river steward, expressed his fears to Hanes, “With data centers, the effects are more distributed…There’s water; there’s the electricity demand, also the transmission lines.” 

Three ways the new administration could help rural America meet its challenges

Helping younger farmers helps local land stay
locally owned. (Abobe Stock photo)

Seeking a voice and change small-town America needs, many rural voters rallied for President Donald Trump to return to the White House. Now that he's back in the Oval Office, there are three ways his administration could work with Congress to help rural America face its challenges, write Randolph Hubach and Cody Mullen for The Conversation.

Health care is a good place to start.
Rural Americans are more likely to receive Medicaid or Medicare health care coverage and more vulnerable to negative impacts from policy or funding changes. "Funding from those federal programs affects rural hospitals, and rural hospitals are struggling," Hubach and Mullen explain. "Nearly half of rural hospitals operate in the red today, and over 170 rural hospitals have closed since 2010."

They recommend government funding continue for the Low-volume Hospital Adjustment Act and the rural emergency hospital model because both programs address rural health care providers' financial needs. Additional support and expansion of rural telehealth services is also needed.

Help small towns address affordable housing.
Like much of the country, rural communities lack affordable housing. To help small towns create housing solutions, the new administration should support the "bipartisan Neighborhood Homes Investment Act, which calls for creating a new federal tax credit to spur the development and renovation of family housing in distressed urban, suburban and rural neighborhoods," Hubach and Mullen add. "The Section 502 Direct Loan Program through the Department of Agriculture could be expanded with additional funding to enable more people to receive subsidized mortgages."

Keep local lands locally owned.
Rural businesses and landowners tend to care about the communities they call home. Congress could support rural land ownership through the "proposed Farm Transitions Act [that] would establish a commission on farm transitions to study issues that affect locally owned farms and provide recommendations to help transition agricultural operations to the next generation of farmers and ranchers," Hubach and Mullen add.

The Trump administration also could continue assistance for young farmers. "About 30% of farmers have been in business for less than 10 years, and many of them rent the land they farm," they write. "Programs such as USDA’s farm loan programs and the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program help support local land purchases and could be improved to identify and eliminate barriers that communities face."

This small town's residents battled over a giant data center campus. It's a drama happening across rural America.

Giant tech companies often seek out data-center land in
rural towns. The sites feed the AI industry.

When big tech companies look for cheap land and energy to house and feed giant data campuses, they often shop in rural America. In the small town of Peculiar, Missouri, many residents worked to reject a data center proposal by developer Diode Ventures, which represented a secret corporate tech giant.

Their refusal to allow the land planned for the data site to be rezoned pitted residents against each other and their town officials, reports Eli Tan of The New York Times. "Residents described a web of distrust filled with nondisclosure agreements, hurt feelings and a mysterious entity vying to become the town’s new neighbor."

Executives from Diode Ventures plied residents and town officials with promises of an economic "boon," but some folk weren't sure. Becky Wiseman, whose property would border the Peculiar site, and her neighbors "decided to visit data center campuses for Meta and Google in Nebraska and Iowa, which were also 'hyperscale' like the one proposed in Peculiar," Tan writes. "When they arrived, they were terrified at what they saw and heard — the constant hum of generators behind guard towers."

With that, the stage for a David and Goliath battle between concerned residents and Diode supporters was set. "Signs that read 'No Data Centers' sprouted up in yards and windows across town," Tan reports. "So many people started showing up at planning and zoning meetings that Peculiar officials had to move them from City Hall to the Lions Club, a larger venue a mile down the road."

Diode executives were caught off-guard by some of the town's intense resistance. "Behind the scenes, Diode had been working with Peculiar’s mayor, Doug Stark, and city administrator, Mickey Ary," Tan explains. "Over virtual meetings and lunches at City Hall with Stark and Ary, Diode executives laid out a plan to win over Peculiar’s hearts and minds."

Proposal debates and bickering raged on in Peculiar until the aldermen voted this past September. "By unanimous decision, the data center zoning was rejected. It is unclear where Diode will take its project," Tan reports. But Peculiar's conflict isn't unique. The same saga is "playing out in small towns across the country as tech giants look to build hundreds of new data centers — often lured by tax abatements — to house the thousands of computers that would power the booming and energy-intensive artificial intelligence industry."

Quick hits: Calamity-predicting maps; rural areas grow; check out this freezer; are there ghosts in your kitchen?

First Street aims to predict natural calamities.
(First Street aerial photo)

As home insurance rates continue to spike upward, many insurers, home buyers and owners want more accurate, detailed information on how likely a climate catastrophe is in their region. The climate and tech non-profit First Street is "building up-to-date flood maps to estimate what could happen to homes and businesses in an era of rising sea levels and more frequent, stronger storms," reports Leslie Kaufman of Bloomberg News. The company uses advanced climate science and engineering to identify the risk for every property in the country.

As some Americans choose to leave urban hubs, rural America is growing. "In 2020–21 and 2021–22, rural areas experienced an increase in population because more people moved from urban to rural areas than in the opposite direction, a reversal of domestic migration trends from the previous decade," reports the Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service. "Net domestic migration in rural areas jumped from near zero in 2019–20 to more than 0.35 percent in the last two years."

Wilkinson's book celebrates the magical connection
between food and family. (Courtesy photo via UKN)

Family food traditions and recipes are often seen and shared as treasures. Crystal Wilkinson, a Kentucky author and poet, sees her cooking as a path to channeling with her Black Appalachian ancestors, report Lindsey Piercy and Kody Kiser for the University of Kentucky News. "Raised by her grandparents in the hollers of Indian Creek, Kentucky, Wilkinson vividly remembers the dishes that were commonplace in her childhood." Wilkinson calls on cooking memories as a way to reconnect with those she has lost. Her new book is Praisesong for the Kitchen Ghosts.

A farm's value can be based primarily on the land, but what happens to land values when the property is used for solar? In his commentary for Farm Progress, Michael Lauher reviews two land sales for a look at the outcomes. "Professional farm managers have fielded questions about how a solar lease might affect farmland values — or even the option to lease. . . Two sales do not make a trend. But we can make interesting observations from them." Read his thoughts and advice here.

In 2023, Oreo cookie lovers accused its maker of putting less creamy filling in their beloved cookies. The snack maker denied the allegations. Scripps News reports a new cookie conflict: Chips Ahoy! is boldly changing its cookie recipes. Foodmaker Mondelēz International said different chocolate chips will be in the mix along with a higher-concentrate Madagascar vanilla extract. "An official for Chips Ahoy! said developers spent more than 5,000 hours in the kitchen and tested more than 60 recipes before getting the desired result."

A food pantry in rural Nebraska has a new hunger-fighting kitchen appliance -- a freezer that can hold an entire truckload of meat. "Simon House, a Columbus-based thrift store and food pantry, installed a walk-in freezer, with a capacity to store a truckload of frozen meat," reports Tim Trudell of the Columbus Telegram. It's the "first such freezer in rural America . . . . thousands of people can enjoy protein as part of their meals, said Lucy Lutjelusche, Simon House store manager and director."

Farming quick hits: Native Americans are regaining access to land; the best wire cutters; two sisters run this sawmill

Landback.org image

Alongside American colonial expansion during the 1800s came the decimation of many Native Americans' lands and food sources. "Native peoples fought off settler and military encroachment of their hunting, fishing, and gathering territories. Their lifeways — and foodways — were hugely altered and restricted," reports Kate Nelson of Civil Eats. "The Land Back movement is helping communities regain access to both food and land. . . . In Montana, for example, the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes now oversee 18,000 acres where bison roam once again. In Nebraska, the Ponca people have been growing their sacred corn on farmland signed back to them in 2018."

Farmer Mahoney liked the strong
cuts and comfy grips.

Doug Mahoney raises sheep, cows and pigs and spends a lot of time fixing fences. "This can mean days at a time of snip, snip, snip," Mahoney writes. "I tested 13 pairs of wire cutters for Wirecutter. . . . I used them to make hundreds upon hundreds of cuts through wire, hardware cloth, and even nails. At the time, I chose the Channellock E337CB Diagonal Cutting Pliers as the best. . . .Since then, they have become one of the most important tools I own."

Meatpacking industry concentration increased during the 1980s and 1990s as producers shifted to larger plant operations. The industry's consolidation "raised questions about competition, particularly as it related to prices paid for cattle and hogs," writes James M. MacDonald in his essay for Amber Waves. "With fewer firms competing with one another, would packers be able to reduce the prices they paid to farmers and ranchers compared with a world with more (and smaller) competing firms? On the other hand, those fewer firms also had lower processing costs, which they could pass on to beef and pork consumers."

Sisters Mary Haag, left, and Nancy Kieffer took over
the sawmill 28 years ago. (Photo by Jacob Moyer, LF)

Sisters Mary Haag and Nancy Kieffer have been operating Moyer's Sawmill in Bernville, Pennsylvania, for 28 years. "The pair took it over from their father, Ray Moyer, whose father and uncle started the business around 1903," reports Dan Sullivan of Lancaster Farming. "The sisters set about running the place, eventually with help from their spouses, initially doing their own logging and cutting everything from 1-by-4s to large custom pieces — up to 34 feet (though they don't necessarily like to advertise that) — for timber-frame homes, barn restorations and the like." 

Known as twilight farmers, some agricultural operators lack an heir, leaving them wondering who will manage their land, equipment and animals once they're gone. But farmers can work to settle out agreements before they pass, reports Lisa Foust Prater for Successful Farming. Forming a corporation and a select type of trust is one answer, but planning is the biggest key to keeping the farm operating.

UNMC CS-Cash photo via Farm Progress

ATVs, UTVs and even golf carts can be farmland workhorses. But like all farming machinery, driving vehicles on a busy farm requires extra care around buildings, animals and workers. "In 2023, there were 291 ATV and 27 UTV fatalities in the U.S., with many of these related to work in agriculture," Ellen Duysen of Farm Progress reports. "In 2019, ATV incidents resulted in an estimated 95,000 emergency room visits." To reduce the risk of injury, death and possible liability, read her guidelines here.

States look to restrict foreign ownership of agricultural land; many of the concerns involve China and Russia

A farm tractor rolls along outside a Silver City, Mississippi
neighborhood. (Photo by Rogelio V. Solis, AP)

Amid national food security and political concerns, many states are restricting or prohibiting some countries from purchasing farmland. Andy Gipson, Mississippi's commissioner of agriculture and commerce, feels "the growing trend of foreign ownership could threaten what he views as the state's most valuable asset: the land that grows its forests, rice and cotton," reports Kevin Hardy of Stateline. "Gipson has spent recent months studying the growing amount of his state's farmland being bought up by foreign interests."

Gipson hopes Mississippi "will join a growing group of states seeking to ban or further restrict foreign ownership of farmland," Hardy writes. "Lawmakers are targeting nations considered hostile to U.S. interests, such as China and Russia, and looking for new enforcement measures. Many see Arkansas as leading the latter push; officials there invoked a new law in October that bans certain foreign owners and ordered a Chinese seed company to divest its land."

The issue of foreign farmland ownership has been around for centuries, Hardy reports, but it was "reinvigorated after Chinese firms purchased land near military installments in North Dakota and Texas, said Micah Brown, an attorney at the National Agricultural Law Center at the University of Arkansas who tracks the issue. . . . Brown said lawmakers in 36 states proposed some sort of legislation on the issue this year, ranging from caps to bans to targets on certain countries, with measures passing in about a dozen of them. More bills are expected in upcoming sessions."

In opening a U.S. Senate hearing in September, Michigan Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow "acknowledged that the nation's food system is an integral component of national security," Hardy adds. "With more foreign entities buying up land, she said, the issue deserves scrutiny. But she offered a warning: 'We must also be cautious of our history of barring immigrants from owning land in our country and ensure efforts to protect our national and economic security do not encourage discrimination," she said.'"

Overall, foreigners hold a small percentage of U.S. agriculture land, totaling around 40 million acres at the end of 2021, according to the Department of Agriculture. "Canadian investors own the largest share of that acreage, followed by investors from the United Kingdom and Europe. Foreign ownership represents only about 3.1% of all privately held U.S. agricultural land," Hardy notes. "But the number is quickly rising: Foreign ownership has increased more than 50% in the past decade, Brown said. But USDA data shows Chinese ownership is still relatively rare: Chinese interests own less than 1% of the nation's foreign-held agricultural acreage.

"Federal law currently does not regulate foreign ownership land beyond requiring foreign buyers to register with the USDA. But there is bipartisan interest in Congress in tighter restrictions and reporting on foreign ownership."

The land holds more than food; it contains medical breakthroughs and new medicines

"The soil is the great connector of our lives, the source and destination of all." --- Wendell Berry, The Unsettling of America, 1977

The Scoop chart

The land Berry is talking about does more than bind us together, it contains gifts that stretch beyond food. Seventy-five years ago, in Sanborn Field soil plot #23 in Columbia, Missouri, the soil yielded an incredible medical breakthrough, reports Tyne Morgan of The Scoop. Before this discovery, physicians used penicillin alongside other antibiotics with mixed results. In the 1940s, scientists pushed to find more effective and non-toxic microorganisms for people or animals.

Dr. Tim Reinbott, the director of Sanborn Field at the University of Missouri, told Morgan: "Seventy-five years ago, we had known about penicillin and other types of antibiotics, but they were only about 40% effective. . . . [Scientists]were looking for that golden antibiotic, that one that would really be very effective and be taken orally, not by injection. . . . Benjamin Duggar was working for Lederle Laboratories at the time, and he knew the director of Sanborn Field, who was William J. Albrecht, who was the soil microbiologist. Duggar asked him for some soil samples from Sanborn Field so that he could begin to culture for these microorganisms."

Duggar's soil samples "contained a golden mold that suppressed the growth of many microorganisms, including streptococci, a bacteria that causes various types of infections," Morgan writes. "From the sample, researchers eventually created aureomycin, which proved to be an antibiotic effective against 90% of bacteria-caused infections in humans." Bob Kremer, adjunct professor of soil microbiology at the University of Missouri, told Morgan, "One of the interesting facts that is often overlooked is that in any soil, you will find antibiotics, because it's just the nature of how these bacteria survive in nature."

The Food and Drug Administration approved aureomycin for human illness in 1948, and "Reinbott says for the first 30 to 40 years after the discovery of aureomycin, it was the go-to antibiotic for human medicine, but it also grew in popularity within animal medicine," Morgan reports. 

"To celebrate the discovery of aureomycin, a soil sample from Plot 23 was sent to the Smithsonian Institution, where it still resides today," Morgan writes. "The discovery at Sanborn Field wasn't just a breakthrough for human medical science, it was also a breakthrough for livestock. . . . aureomycin is still widely used in cattle today. Such an antibiotic discovery is estimated to cost $1.5 billion in 2023."

Standing at Sanborn Field, Reinbott told Morgan: "We've more aureomycin discoveries out here -- we've just got to look for them. It may or may not be an antibiotic, but it can be something just as groundbreaking, and that's what gets me excited."

Prices for farmland have risen in recent years, but the market is 'cooling down'

Farmland values are expected to plateau.
(Photo by Micheile Henderson, Unsplash)

Farmland prices are predicted to flatten in the future after a period of strong growth. "Headlines boasting record-breaking farmland sales and surging values gave voice to the excitement in the market last year while land prices climbed. As 2023 marches on, the experts say some of that excitement may be waning and to expect strong, but flatter prices going forward," reports Cassidy Walter of Successful Farming. Tim Koch, executive vice president of business development for Farm Credit Services of America told her: "We'll probably see some high reports of really high-quality farms that are well-located…and we might see some lower-quality farms start to back up a little bit in prices as we head toward the end of the year. But as a whole, I would anticipate that we'll see a flattening of prices throughout the remainder of the year."

Data available seems to agree with Koch's outlook. Farmers National Co.’s latest Regional Land Values Report looked at farmland sales data for high-quality farmland across 18 states. "All saw the average sale price per acre increase between June 2021 and June 2022 and from June 2022 to June 2023. However, the rate of growth between 2021 and 2022 was higher for most states than in the past year," Walter explains. Increases varied by state, with Iowa farmland gaining roughly $3,000 per acre during June 2022 to June 2023, as compared to Arkansas, which gleaned only $300 more per acre during the same time period.

Overall, experts predict a competitive, solid market for high-quality land sales. "David Whitaker, president of Realtors Land Institute, says when looking at the numbers from the past several surveys, a good way to describe the most recent one is 'steady.' He also expects steadiness over the next six months," Walters reports. He told Walters: “I think there’s enough money out there that we will hold steady. I think farmland is the asset that everybody wants and wants to keep and is willing to pay for.”

Walters adds, "While there appears to be agreement that the market is staying strong but cooling down, there is a non-negotiable caveat that several variables could send land values in an unexpected direction. . . . Experts say there is a strong connection between commodity prices and farm revenue and farmland values. Higher prices equate to farmers having more cash on hand and more interest in investing in their operations. With lower prices, expect the inverse. . . . Steve Bruere, president of Peoples Co., says rising inflation will drive land values up and it is too soon to tell if this current period of high inflation is truly over."

Senate adds amendment to defense bill to restrict China, Russia, North Korea and Iran from purchasing U.S. land

In another sign of U.S. tensions with competing countries, the U.S. Senate "voted overwhelmingly to prohibit China, Russia, North Korea and Iran from purchasing U.S. agricultural land and agricultural businesses," reports the Food and Environment Reporting Network. "The language was added to a military spending bill that was sure to pass the Senate and then be reconciled with a House version."

The amendment by Sen. Mark Rounds, a South Dakota Republican, "would instruct the powerful Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, an interdepartmental panel led by the Treasury Department, to prohibit such purchases," Ag Insider reports. "The Russian invasion of Ukraine and a heightened Sino-U.S. rivalry have fueled concern about foreign ownership of U.S. assets."

Despite concerns, Chinese and Russian interests do not own much American soil. Ag Insider reports, "Foreign entities own 40.8 million acres of U.S. agricultural land, or 3.1% of the privately owned land in the nation, according to USDA data. Half of the foreign-owned land is forests. Canada accounts for one-third of the foreign-owned land. . . . China owns 347,000 acres at latest count."

As wind and solar projects are proposed in more populated rural areas, they hit more opposition; Kansas is an example

Wind turbines dot the landscape in Waverly, Kansas. (Photo by Dominick Williams, The Wall Street Journal)

Many people like the idea of green energy, but as the federal government's high-dollar push on wind and solar ekes closer to neighborhoods, some residents are saying, "No," or "Not on my land," or even "Over my dead body," reports Jennifer Hiller of The Wall Street Journal. "Plenty of Kansans do want to host projects—wind is already the biggest source of electricity in the state [but] many Kansans are girding for a long fight."

Douglas County (Wikipedia map)

Gerry Coffman lives in Douglas County, a rural community about an hour from Kansas City. She is one resident who said "No." Hiller writes, "She turned down a wind lease last year on a farm that has been in her family since 1866. Someone knocked on her door a few months later, paperwork in hand, and offered $6,000 to hang a wind-power transmission line across her land. If she agreed to store construction equipment, she stood to make an additional $4,000. . . . Coffman doesn't want to see the native forest or prairie disturbed and thinks the industrial nature of towering wind turbines would change the community for the worse if a proposed project were built."

Community debates often turn sour. Hiller reports, "Coffman has attended a series of contentious public meetings over several months as the county considers revising regulations for wind-energy development. . . . County-by-county battles are raging as wind and solar projects balloon in size, edge closer to cities and encounter mounting pushback in communities. . . . Even in states with a long history of building renewables, developers don't know if they can get local permits or how long it might take." Coffman told Hiller, "A year ago we were a nice, quiet neighborhood."

Kansas is among several states where citizens in more populated areas have opted to block or restrict some green-energy builds. Hiller explains, "In Kansas, wind power grew rapidly for two decades . . . ranking it third in the nation. But at least five counties in more-populous eastern Kansas have recently placed moratoriums or bans on new wind or solar projects, joining 18 others that already restricted wind development to preserve the tallgrass prairie ecosystem. . . . In Iowa, a 2022 study of wind ordinances found that 16 of 99 counties had prohibitive rules or a ban against new projects, most of them approved in the previous four years. . . . Developers won't even consider projects on around half to three-quarters of land with good wind resources, according to a study by the nonprofit research firm ClearPath and consulting group LucidCatalyst."

Despite demand, private investment dollars, and the federal government's expected $3 trillion green-energy investment, "U.S. clean power installations dipped 16% last year and 12% over 2020, according to the American Clean Power Association. It was the worst year for land-based wind installations since 2018," Hiller reports. "Economies of scale have pushed solar and wind farm size to hundreds or thousands of acres. . . . . In Michigan, a typical solar project once covered 60 acres but now would take up 1,200, said Sarah Mills, a senior project manager at the University of Michigan's Graham Sustainability Institute. Mills said they may need to get smaller—and more expensive—to be more socially acceptable. Mills told Hiller, "What you're asking our rural community to host is way more than our fair share."

Laurie Shuck, another Douglas County resident, "recently purchased a stack of 'no trespassing' signs to post around her fences to try to keep out representatives offering wind leases," Hiller reports. "One late afternoon as light faded at her farm, the moon rose in the east and a flock of geese honked overhead. She paused to watch. Shuck said she and her brother would lease land for wind projects, 'over our dead bodies. . . . I was here first.'"

Farmers wonder about sequestering carbon. It will take time to measure the soil's capacity, and the results may vary.

Photo via Successful Farming

It's no wonder farmers feel stress. They have to feed the planet, fuel cars, make sure their livestock is healthy, and now they have to decide whether to sequester carbon. "Much fanfare accompanies programs that pay farmers to sequester greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide in their soils. Yet, questions linger as research casts doubt on whether the promise equals reality," reports Laurie Bedord of Successful Farming. Gregg Sanford, senior scientist, Department of Agronomy at the University of Wisconsin, told Bedord, "I worry that we are selling ourselves a pie-in-the-sky dream we might not realize, and that it could come back to bite farmers and ultimately not get us any further down the road toward reducing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere."

Bedord explains, "About two decades ago, Sanford began reading scientific literature that suggested certain farming systems could help combat climate change by sequestering carbon in the soil." Sanford told her, "We love to support farmers and incentivize them to do things that benefit society, but we also put a ridiculous amount of pressure on farmers to save us from every-thing. I don't feel the science is there to say that if you do these practices (e.g., cover crops, no-till, etc.), you will sequester carbon across the board. In some cases, we will, but in many cases, we won't." Bedord adds, "One of the caveats with soil carbon sequestration, Sanford says, is there are places in the United States where certain types of farming management will be able to build soil carbon resources, but results may vary."

"Sanford believes that to make a big impact on soil carbon and use it as a tactic to mitigate climate change, a transformational change must occur in agriculture," Bedord writes. "If the prairies built these soils, should we consider emulating what they can do in our production systems?" Sanford told her, "To get soils in the Midwest back as close as we can to those tallgrass prairies to stabilize or accrue carbon, we need to switch from farming systems dominated by annual crops to systems dominated by or exclusively built around perennials. . . . That is our best hope for building carbon in this region, but it's a big change and a hard pitch to make."

For now, soil, not carbon credits, is farmers' focus. "Initially, Kevin Bahr was among the carbon program skeptics. As he learned more about the Truterra carbon program, Bahr says it seemed like something worth exploring and joined the program in 2021," Bedord reports. "Like most central Kansas farms, Bahr's land is diversified. . . His soils range from good black dirt to sandy loam." Bahr told her, "While we may be talking about carbon, this program is more about soil health, which is a journey that doesn't happen overnight. . . I'm employing certain practices like no-till and cover crops because they are best for my soil; the carbon credit money is like gravy on top of my mashed potatoes. It's a reward for taking care of the land the way I should."

Amid skepticism, Congress considers restricting farmland purchases by China, Russia, Iran and North Korea

Photo via USDA

Congressional support is building to "restrict China and other foreign adversaries from purchasing U.S. farmland, a reflection of a similar push by some states as well as apprehension over Chinese spy balloons, rising land prices and growing international competition," reports Adam Goldstein of the Washington bureau of States Newsroom. A bipartisan group of House members told Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in a Feb. 27 letter, "Foreign ownership of agricultural land threatens small family farms and the overall health of the agricultural supply chain."

Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., has introduced a bill to prohibit North Korea, Iran, China, and Russia from purchasing U.S. farmland and add the Agriculture Department to the Committee on Foreign Investment, "a multi-agency council that reviews financial transactions that affect national security," Goldstein reports. "Renée Johnson, an agricultural policy analyst, noted that these bills have much more to do with military infrastructure and conflict between the U.S. and the governments of China, Iran, Russia, and North Korea."

"Vilsack said in a Thursday Senate hearing that Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea together own under 400,000 acres of agricultural land as of 2021. He added that the nation's largest foreign landholders include Canada, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Vilsack expressed concern over how federal foreign ownership restrictions could be implemented in a way that was fair and legally sound for international investors."

Clay Lowery, former assistant treasury secretary for international affairs, told Goldstein, "I do believe strongly in the ability for countries and entities to invest in the United States because I think that is actually a positive." Jennifer Zwagerman, director of the Drake University Agricultural Law Center in Iowa, told Goldstein, "My bigger fear is that we limit groups or entities or individuals that are really interested in farming or production themselves. And in doing so, we end up with land that is purchased by those less interested in farming and more in development."

Some doubt federal-level restrictions would be effective. "John Schwarz, a row crop farmer and lawyer in Cass County, Indiana, questioned if any national bill would be enforceable due to the sheer scope of farmland in the country," Goldstein writes. "He suggested it may be better left to counties and localities to handle." Schwarz told Goldstein, "If this is going to work, it really has to be on a micro level. I don't think a macro level is going to do it because there's just way too many ways to slip through, getting cute with the ownership and companies."

Growth in cropland value slowed as interest rates increased

Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City map, based on bank surveys

"Farmland values increased sharply in 2022, but growth slowed during recent quarters in some regions alongside higher interest rates," the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City said in a report March 9. "The value of nonirrigated cropland increased by an average of 15% from the previous year across all regions, following growth of more than 20% in early 2022."

The figures are based on surveys by the Federal Reserve banks that cover most of the nation's agricultural production. “Benchmark interest rates surpassed returns to farmland owners in recent months, which could put some downward pressure on growth in farmland values going forward," the report said.

Rural counties have been trying to ban renewable-energy projects, so Illinois and Calif. legislatures banned the bans

Solar panels in Illinois (Photo by Youngrae Kim, The Washington Post)

Rural Illinois has long stretches of flat land, ideal for installing solar and wind projects, but not all rural residents want those projects; some local governments moved to ban them. "Two years ago, Illinois had adopted a landmark clean-energy law that called for building vast amounts of renewable power," reports Dan Gearino and Aydali Campa of Inside Climate News. "At the same time, 15 counties with some of the most land available for wind and solar had passed, or were about to pass, restrictions on new development that made the state’s goals more difficult to reach."

"Something had to give," ICN reports. "That something came last month, when Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed HB 4412 that took away the ability of local governments to limit or ban wind and solar power, a measure that follows similar actions in California and New York. . . . Now, officials from places that had restricted development of renewables projects — like Ford County, located in the rural area between Chicago and Champaign-Urbana — are livid about what they view as a power grab by majority Democrats."

Clean-energy advocates said the law was necessary because rural counties were not relying on fact-based research when vetoing renewable projects, ICN notes. "While there is agreement that rural resistance to wind and solar is an impediment to development," ICN writes. "Experts disagree about whether it’s a good idea to deal with this opposition by yanking power away from local officials." Sarah Mills, a University of Michigan renewable-energy-conflicts writer, told ICN, "This is not the way you build bridges between urban and rural areas. It’s making that chasm even wider.”

Jen Walling is executive director of the Illinois Environmental Council. "She said some county requirements were so restrictive that they were essentially bans on clean energy developments," reports Tim Shelley of WCBU in Peoria, Illinois. Walling told Shelley, "A number of these counties weren't representing their constituents and were taking away individual property rights."

Like Illinois, California has stretches of open land primed for renewables, but counties often said, "No, thank you." California's Gov. Gavin Newsom got his legislature to ban the bans, reports Julie Cart of CalMatters. Alex Jackson, director of California state affairs for American Clean Power, an association of renewable-energy companies, told Cart, "In general we work really well with local government. We have invested a lot in those relationships. We prefer to work with them rather than strong-arm them. Overall we don’t see this as unlocking the path to accelerating clean energy.”

ICN reports, "Kevin Semlow, Illinois Farm Bureau’s director of state legislation, said his larger concern isn’t about the loss of local control; it’s about how the law seems to occupy an uncomfortable middle ground between local and state control, with counties remaining in charge but severely limited in what they can do." Semlow asked ICN, "Since you’re basically having a statewide system, why don’t you have a statewide agency that would be over it, so there’s just more cohesiveness and uniformity?"

Texans block Chinese billionaire's wind farm, citing security; 18 states mulling limits on foreign farmland ownership

Sun Guangxin (Photo by Zhang shi, Imaginechina)

Before curious rural Montanans reported a glowing orb high in the sky and the Chinese spy balloon was shot down, "Texas ranchers were worried about billionaire Sun Guangxin’s close connections with the Chinese state," reports Blake Schmidt of Bloomberg. "The former People’s Liberation Army captain . . . made a fortune by turning failing factories into lux real estate developments. . . . Critics have alleged that state connections are the backbone of Sun’s wealth, estimated at $2.8 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. And that’s precisely why ranchers in southern Texas are worried."

Their worries stem from the sheer size of Sun's landholdings and its location: "They are trying to stop Sun’s foray into the Lone Star State on national-security grounds after his firm amassed 140,000 acres of farmland worth about $100 million along the Mexican border," Schmidt writes. "When he tried to develop part of it as a wind farm, Texas lawmakers sounded alarms because of its proximity to the state’s electric grid and a U.S. Air Force base. ... Spurred by neighboring landowners who oppose the wind farm, state officials passed a law protecting state infrastructure from foreign entities, and are now considering an even more contentious proposal to ban Chinese companies and individuals from owning rural land entirely."

The Texas resistance was local, but it "snowballed into a national movement. The issue of restricting ownership of farmland by entities linked to China and other foreign powers has popped up in at least 18 states, according to the National Agricultural Law Center," Schmidt reports. "It’s another way in which geopolitical tensions are simmering between the world’s two largest economies."

Data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture shows that "foreign entities or individuals control less than 3% of the nation’s farmland, and, within that subset, those with ties to China control less than 1% or about 384,000 acres," Schmidt points out. Despite those details, "In Montana, the suspected spy balloon has breathed new life into a bill to restrict foreign ownership. A city council in North Dakota this month voted down plans for a Chinese company to build a corn mill near an Air Force base. . . . . Virginia’s Democrat-led state Senate approved a ban on land ownership by foreign governments after Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin rejected an effort by Ford Motor Co. to build a plant partnered with a Chinese battery maker."

Texas landowners first opposed the wind farm due to its scenic impact, but over time, they became more focused on national security. “We don’t care if you’re Elon Musk, Tom Hanks or a Chinese oligarch,” Randy Nunns, a board member of the landowner group Devils River Conservancy told Schmidt. “We don’t want the wind farm here.” Schmidt reports, "Nunns said that he didn’t expect his group’s not-in-my-backyard battle to go global, and that while the state’s proposal to ban Chinese ownership is 'too broad,' Sun’s investment activity was particularly concerning."