admin

About admin

This author has not yet filled in any details.
So far admin has created 129 blog entries.

Why the Trade War Increases the Need for More Organic Farming Research

By Vinnie Trometter, OFRF Policy Fellow

Hi! I’m Vinnie Trometter, the new policy fellow at OFRF. I want to take a moment to introduce myself: Prior to coming to OFRF, I worked in policy fields related to pesticide safeguards, reference prices, and crop insurance. I also have a background in the commodities trade and have worked in international trade organizations around the world. I have also had multiple op-eds about agriculture and the steel industry published in outlets like the Chicago Tribune, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, and the Boston Herald. It seems only fitting then that my first blog post for OFRF be about the elephant in the room, tariffs.

Few sectors of the economy will feel the brunt of the ongoing trade war more than agriculture. Retaliatory tariffs placed on our producers will drive foreign buyers of U.S. agricultural products elsewhere while the tariffs we place on other countries will make import products farmers depend on more expensive. To make matters worse, there is little clarity on how the White House plans to support farmers during this period of uncertainty.

In terms of exemptions, thankfully all food products coming from Mexico and Canada that are United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) compliant have been exempted. Many agricultural inputs, such as fertilizer, potash, and herbicides, have also been exempted. However, these victories do nothing to lessen the blow for farmers who trade with countries other than Canada and Mexico or depend on items that have escaped duties.

Organic farmers, who are less dependent on exports and almost devoid of reliance on foreign agricultural inputs, will still face challenges caused by the trade war. Tariffs could cause inflation and eat away consumer demand for organics that are priced at a premium compared to their conventional alternatives. Things like farm equipment will go up in price since those items, and the parts for those items, are made all over the world.

Ultimately, the total list of foreign items tariffed, exempted, and then the items created in the United States which have been tariffed as retaliation is extensive. All tariff-affected items on a country-by-country basis can be found here

How can Organic Farming Research help Mitigate Costs Associated with the Trade War?

Prior to the trade war, demand for organics was poised to grow significantly. According to the Organic Trade Association (OTA)’s 2024 Organic Survey, sales in organic products were projected to grow by 28% through 2025 compared to 2021 numbers. This trend is consistent with a recent 2025 Economic Research Service (ERS) study showing that the organic market in the United States has grown from $11 billion to almost $64 billion over the last two decades.

However, funding for organic research is less than one percent, or $15 million, of the total Agriculture Research Service (ARS) research budget. Furthermore, less than two percent of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA)’s competitive grants go towards researching organic topics.

Increases in funding for programs that focus on organic production and competition, like the Organic Transitions Program (ORG) and the Organic Research and Extension Initiative (OREI), could be a way to help both conventional and organic producers weather the storm. Since chemical application is restricted for organic farmers, resource optimization and leveraging a farm’s natural environment are critical for success. Organic farming research innovations around production can help conventional operations reduce input costs and improve soil health to maintain or increase yields. In this way, conventional operations can mitigate risk caused by supply chain disruptions.

The Organic Science and Research Investment Act (OSRI)

The most direct path for increasing the funding for OREI and ORG funding is through the passage of the Organic Science and Research Investment Act (OSRI). First introduced by Senator John Fetterman in 2023 in the 118th Congress, and reintroduced April 10th, 2025 by Senators John Fetterman (PA) and Adam Schiff (CA), the OSRI Act would:

  • Provide stair-stepped funding increases for OREI from $60 million to $100 million through the duration of the Farm Bill.
  • Provide Congressional authorization and direction for the Researching the Transition to Organic Program (RTOP), currently known as the Organic Transition Research Program (ORG), with an authorization for appropriations of $10 million a year for the next two years and $20 million the following year.
  • Bolster funding for the Organic Production and Market Data Initiative (ODI). Providing $10 million over the life of the Farm Bill. ODI data is essential for risk management products and targeted market development.
  • Direct ERS to conduct a full, systematic evaluation of the economic impact organic agriculture has on rural and urban communities, taking into account economic, ecological, and social factors.

Organic and conventional producers would greatly benefit from the passage of OSRI because organic research findings are applicable to all agriculture. It would also help producers mitigate supply chain risks by replacing the function of foreign chemical products with natural solutions. Find out if your Senators have signed on to support the OSRI act and reach out to thank them or ask them to do so. Contact gordon@ofrf.org for more info.

Eat well and breathe deep,

Vinnie

By |2025-04-10T17:45:41+00:00April 14th, 2025|Gordon's Policy Corner, News|

OFRF Announces 2025 Farmer-Led Research Trials Cohort

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Nine organic farmers across the country selected to receive technical support for next round of innovative on-farm research trials

SANTA CRUZ, Calif., April 14, 2025 — The Organic Farming Research Foundation (OFRF) is excited to announce the next cohort of organic farmers that will be leading on-farm research trials with OFRF technical assistance in 2025.

Organic farming takes a great deal of dedication, financial investment, and continuous trial and error to adapt to an array of challenges from pests, diseases, soil management, and climate change. In order to address the specific challenges certified organic and transitioning-to-organic growers face, it is essential that farmers help lead efforts to identify problems and trial solutions. In this effort, OFRF provides technical assistance to a small cohort of organic growers each year through our Farmer-Led Trials (FLT) program.

Built in the spirit of curiosity and collaboration, the FLT program provides support to farmers so that they can try new practices, inputs, varieties, or animal breeds that can improve profitability and environmental sustainability.

“Every season, we adjust our growing methods and try out new techniques. But inevitably the season gets busy, we lose track of outcomes and end up with incomplete impressions of what worked or didn’t,” explained Lindsay Klaunig, owner and operator of Trouvaille Farm in Ohio and a participant in OFRF’s 2024 FLT program. “With the FLT program, I had support in designing a solid project, and [assistance] to allow me to allocate time and focus to data collection and analysis.”

The following is the full list of farmers selected for the 2025 FLT cohort:

  • Rollin Baker and Mike Lucas of Farmacea in Munith, Michigan.
  • Kay Bell of Passion Garden in Waco, Texas.
  • Ed and Terri Crowley of Mesta Meadows, LLC in Glenallen, Missouri.
  • Jill Martinez of Garcia Road Farm in El Prado, New Mexico.
  • John O’Meara of O’Meara Family Farm in New Sweden, Maine.
  • Samantha Otto of The Woven Trifecta in Whitehall, Michigan.
  • Markisha Parker of Parker Farm in Warren, Ohio.
  • Anthony Reyes of Oxbow Farm and Conservation Center in Carnation, Washington.
  • Kristin Swoszowski-Tran of Ledoux Grange, LLC in Mora, New Mexico.

To learn more about OFRF’s Farmer-Led Trials program, please visit our program page for updates and to read testimonials from the 2024 cohort. Additionally, we encourage curious farmers to check out OFRF’s free guidebook, Farmers Guide to Conducting On-Farm Research, for guidance on structuring your farm experiments so the results are useful, reliable, and repeatable.

###

About Organic Farming Research Foundation
The Organic Farming Research Foundation (OFRF), headquartered in Santa Cruz, California, with a remote team based across the U.S., works to foster the improvement and widespread adoption of organic farming systems. OFRF cultivates organic research, education, and federal policies that bring more farmers and acreage into organic production. For more information about OFRF, please visit our website: www.ofrf.org.

Media Contact:
Ashley Dulaney, Communications Director, OFRF

ashley@ofrf.org

By |2025-04-15T16:32:45+00:00April 14th, 2025|News|

Real Talk on EQIP: One Organic Farm’s Journey Through Federal Funding

The Story of Three Feathers Farm

(Versión en español a continuación / Spanish version below)

By Jazea Kalea Smith, OFRF Fall 2024 Policy and Communications Intern, and OFRF staff

OFRF is currently working to increase farmer and community awareness of the federal funding opportunities available to organic and transitioning farms. As part of our work with the West/Southwest region of the USDA’s Transition to Organic Partnership Program (TOPP), we’re spotlighting the experience of one farm—Three Feathers Farm in California—that received funding and support through the Natural Resource Conservation Service’s Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)

Their story offers a transparent look at what it’s really like to work with NRCS: the benefits, the obstacles, and the lessons they’ve learned. We hope other farmers can use their experience to navigate the process of applying for and implementing EQIP contracts more easily.

Meet Three Feathers Farm

Organic farmer, Héktor Calderón-Victoria, crouches in field to inspect irrigation and soil at Three Feathers Farm in California.Three Feathers Farm is a small, BIPOC-led organic farm located on four-and-a-half acres in Morgan Hill, California, a mere twenty minutes south of San Jose, on the ancestral lands of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe.

Founded by Héktor Calderón-Victoria and Dilip Sharma in 2022, the farm grows a mix of modern and traditional culturally relevant crops such as corn, pepper, beans, squash, onions, lettuce, radishes, tomatoes, flowers, culinary herbs, basil, and cucumbers. Their mission is to steward the land while providing food that serves and reflects the diverse communities that came before, and the ones that surround them now.

“I think for us, farming is not just a place for growing food, but a place where community comes together,” says Héktor. “It’s where people can bring different mindsets and lifestyles and economic backgrounds. Our mission is that we want to be able to be as diverse as our soil and our crops that we grow.”

In 2023, after a year of preparation—cleaning, designing, sourcing necessary farming equipment, studying the needs of the soil, the climate, pest pressure, and diseases, and prepping the site for practices such as cover cropping and composting—Three Feathers Farm officially began production. They quickly worked to establish relationships with local restaurants, non-profits, food banks, and even their local school district, an uncommon success for a new, small-scale operation.

From the start, they knew they would need funding to implement sustainable practices that aligned with their values. They found EQIP through their local Resource Conservation District office, which helped point them to the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).

Working With NRCS and Putting Conservation Into Practice

So far, Three Feathers Farm has received two NRCS-EQIP contracts. The first, awarded in 2023, was for a hedgerow border along the farm’s property line, which has been completed. The second, approved in 2024, supports the construction and maintenance of two high tunnels.

Getting to those signed contracts, however, took time, persistence, and a steep learning curve. The process began with a farm visit from a local NRCS field agent, followed by the creation of a conservation plan—a prerequisite for applying. Next came a series of forms, eligibility checks, and application submissions, including registering with the Farm Services Agency (FSA) to obtain a farm number, which Héktor, as a new farm owner, hadn’t realized was required.

“That was the biggest obstacle for us was—trying to understand what side of the USDA you go to for certain things, where you submit different paperwork, who to talk to. It felt like the two offices (FSA and NRCS) weren’t in communication with each other,” he explained.

Despite this complication, Three Feathers pushed forward, ultimately securing contracts for two impactful conservation projects:

Hedgerows for Biodiversity

The hedgerow project funded the planting of a variety of native species along a border fence, helping prevent erosion, attract beneficial insects, and buffer wind. It also supported the construction of a barn owl nest box to naturally manage rodent pressure from squirrels and field mice. Maintenance, like regular irrigation and mulching, is required as part of the contract’s ongoing terms.

Prior to the stewardship action taken by Héktor and Dilip, no conservation practices had been applied at the Three Feathers Farm site. “We know this project will improve our water quality, reduce erosion for where the hedgerows will be, and increase biodiversity of the site that we have, by bringing beneficial insects and birds,” Héktor stresses.

High Tunnel Hurdles When Funding Doesn’t Flow Fast

The high tunnel contract, approved in late 2024, was designed to support two season-extending structures, with supplemental guidance on soil management like mulching and cover cropping under the tunnels. The high tunnels would allow the farm to grow sensitive crops through cooler months, protect against late frosts and intense rain events, and increase income stability through longer harvest periods.

But by March 2025, six months after the contract was signed, construction had not begun.

The main reasons: funding logistics and uncertainty. EQIP contracts typically reimburse farmers only after projects are completed and verified by a field agent, often several months or a year after costs have been incurred for project materials or contracted labor. Three Feathers Farm would need to front around $50,000 to complete the high tunnel installation before receiving any reimbursement. This can provide a financial challenge, especially for small farms who may not have access to a bunch of capital to front the cost of a conservation project.

“We’re not just big bags of money,” Héktor laughed. Often the solution for some farmers is to pull out an FSA loan or CDFI loan, but this takes a lot of time and effort and isn’t necessarily feasible for all farmers.

Compounding the issue was the timeline and lack of transparency in the process. Although their contract was approved in September 2024, they were still unclear when reimbursement would be available, which documents were required, and whether any updates had been processed six months later.

“Something that I had a really hard time with is that there is no centralized platform where all of the documents live to show what has been submitted, what contracts do we have, and when these contracts are done,” Héktor said.

They later learned that they could have applied for advance payment as a Historically Underserved operation—a USDA designation that can allow farmers to receive partial funding earlier. This option is still a reimbursement, but farmers are able to submit their receipts immediately after the expense is incurred, rather than having to wait until project completion. Covering expenses for a few weeks instead of several months or a year can make a huge difference in the financial viability of a project for a small farm.

However, Héktor expressed frustration that the option for advance payment was not disclosed to them at the time when they submitted their application. They only learned later that they could have been eligible for the advance payment option. At that point changing the application would have required restarting the whole process, creating a major setback to their project timeline.

“If we had it would have been a very different story,” said Héktor.

In the meantime, the farm is still working to identify financing options or partners to help them move forward with the project.

EQIP Lessons and Hurdles

While Héktor was quick to confirm that “these programs have been incredibly beneficial to our farm” he also pointed out some challenges that they experienced in working with the USDA. These challenges offer valuable lessons for other farmers interested in participating in federal support programs, and also give insight to improvements that NRCS agencies could implement in the processes used and staff training provided.

Navigating FSA and NRCS Requirements

Héktor emphasized that one of the earliest hurdles was not knowing that registering with FSA and obtaining a farm identification number was required before applying for NRCS programs like EQIP. For beginning farmers, this step—and the need to navigate two separate USDA entities—isn’t always intuitive.

The USDA is a large and complex organism with many different agencies working within it. This “doesn’t make it easy for small scale producers to navigate and to understand the complexities of the US government program,” Héktor explained

Language Matters

Despite participating in two different EQIP projects, Héktor pointed out that he and his business partner weren’t clear on exactly which Conservation Practice Standards (CPS) their projects actually supported. CPSs are methods that the NRCS has found to address Resource Concerns.. These technical terms tend to be second nature to NRCS agents, but can leave farmers in the dark.

It would be helpful, Héktor suggested, if NRCS agents were better equipped to speak in terms that are familiar to farmers, helping them understand the connection between their farming practices and the conservation goals of the agency. That way “when we are talking to our elected officials or talking to other organizations we can actually tell them what we’re doing as part of these contracts,” Héktor said.

Communication Gaps and Outdated Systems

Héktor cited communication and use of technology as one of the major challenges that Three Feathers Farm experienced throughout the process of working with a USDA contract.

“The application for both FSA and NRCS felt very archaic,” Héktor said. They were “relying on methods and platforms that weren’t user-friendly or conducive to effectively being able to submit and track documents. It just felt like there’s got to be an easier way.”

This led to a lot of uncertainty about what paperwork needed to be submitted and whether everything required had been properly received by NRCS. It was difficult for Three Feathers Farm to know if they were missing any key documents or steps, Héktor explained, “which added to the stress of the application process, for both me and my business partner.”

“Despite these challenges, we worked diligently to navigate the system by carefully double-checking and following up on each of the steps,” Héktor said, a key tip for other farmers applying for these programs.

Long Delays and Understaffing

“We experienced huge wait times, sometimes 2-4 months, to schedule even just a visit from our field agent,” Héktor explained. “This delay had a significant impact on our ability to move forward with submitting our applications for programs we wanted to apply to–like hedgerows and high tunnels.”

While he stressed that their local field agent was helpful and supportive, it was clear that understaffing limits how quickly farmers can move forward. “They probably have so many farmers they have to respond to that it’s not possible for them to give us the attention that we need,” he added.

For Three Feathers Farm, this made it hard to get a response and meant that they had to constantly be reaching out to their NRCS office to push the project along and make sure things were on track.

Agent Awareness of Practices that Apply to Organic Farms

Héktor expressed a desire for more familiarity on the part of NRCS agents with the programs that could work on an organic farm, pointing out how helpful it would be if they were more able to suggest practices for farmers to consider implementing that are compatible with the organic method.

“We found that agents were not always fully aware of the practices and programs that could apply to our farm,” Héktor mentioned. “I think as a result we sometimes miss out on new or existing programs that could be beneficial to our operation.”

Because of this, Héktor pointed out the importance for farmers to be proactive in asking for support, and doing the work of familiarizing themselves with the programs that are available.

Project Timelines and Reimbursements

Three Feathers Farm was approved for their high tunnel project in September 2024, but by early March 2025, they still hadn’t been able to break ground. Delays—both in scheduling and in understanding the materials sent as part of the contract—have slowed the process. The timeline from application to implementation to reimbursement can be longer and more complex than expected, especially for new applicants who may not anticipate these challenges or factor them into their planning.

While an Advance Payment option exists to help eligible farmers get reimbursed sooner, it wasn’t offered upfront.

Don’t wait until you’re ready to build. Ask detailed questions about timelines and whether you qualify for Advance Payment.

Advice to Others

Despite the challenges, Héktor wants other farmers to know the programs are worth it—if you’re ready to do some extra legwork.

“It taught us that we needed to be really persistent, to pay attention to the details, and to advocate for ourselves,” he said. “Don’t be afraid to ask questions, and don’t assume the agencies will volunteer all the information you need. You have to advocate for it.”

Héktor acknowledges that these programs have eliminated the significant long-term financial burden from incorporating these practices onto Three Feathers Farm, “enabling us to now invest in our sustainable practices without jeopardizing our farm’s [financial] sustainability. The guidance and technical assistance that we’ve received have really streamlined our processes, contributing to our broader goal of environmental stewardship.”

Looking Ahead: Stewardship, Research, and Resilience

Three Feathers Farm became USDA Certified Organic in early 2024, but Héktor and Dilip’s long-term vision goes beyond infrastructure or certification. They see organic farming as part of a broader movement rooted in environmental stewardship, food justice, and cultural resilience.

“We’re in continual kinship with the soil, crops that we grow, and the surrounding nature in our area,” Héktor said.

For Three Feathers Farm, organic isn’t just a label—it’s a responsibility to their community and future generations. That includes advocating for better research, more accessible programs, and a stronger voice for small farms in federal conversations.

Héktor has traveled to Washington, D.C. as an advocate with the National Young Farmers Coalition and continues to speak out about the importance of policy that reflects the lived experiences of diverse farmers. He highlighted the lack of research on culturally relevant crops and the needs for greater recognition of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) in agricultural research.

“A lot of the crops we grow don’t have data behind them for pest and disease management,” he explained. “That forces small farms like ours to do our own research, which takes time we don’t always have.”

Preservation is a common thread in their motivations to go organic, culminating in the greater goal of protecting the land for future generations. Both human and animal communities benefit from land free of chemical pesticides and herbicides, and the choice to receive organic certification is largely about providing accountability. Three Feathers Farm wants its community to know that they “did their due diligence,” and feel that the organic label communicates that.

Although achieving certification was an arduous process, the technical support and monetary backing of a number of organizations and agencies played a large role in enabling the farm to reach this goal. One critical factor that sped up their application timeline was the fact that previous farming operations on that plot had ceased more than twenty years before, meaning that the three-year transition period for land rehabilitation was unnecessary—a requirement Héktor noted can deter some farmers with fewer resources.

OFRF continues to advocate for more research funding that centers BIPOC producers, and to develop resources to help all farmers access the support they need to thrive. As climate change accelerates and challenges deepen, farms like Three Feathers remind us what’s at stake–and what’s possible when farmers have the right tools.

Ready to Apply? Here Are a Few Helpful Resources

If you’re a farmer considering applying for EQIP or other NRCS programs, here are some helpful tools to get started:

Hablemos en serio sobre EQIP: El recorrido de una granja orgánica a través de los fondos federales

La historia de Three Feathers Farm

Por Jazea Kalea Smith, pasante de Políticas y Comunicaciones de OFRF en otoño de 2024, y el personal de OFRF

En OFRF, actualmente estamos trabajando para aumentar el conocimiento entre agricultores y comunidades sobre las oportunidades de financiamiento federal disponibles para granjas orgánicas y en transición. Como parte de nuestro trabajo con la región Oeste/Suroeste del Programa de Asociación para la Transición a la Producción Orgánica (TOPP) del USDA, queremos destacar la experiencia de una granja: Three Feathers Farm, en California, que recibió fondos y apoyo a través del Programa de Incentivos a la Calidad Ambiental (EQIP, por sus siglas en inglés) del Servicio de Conservación de Recursos Naturales (NRCS).

Su historia ofrece una mirada honesta a lo que realmente implica trabajar con el NRCS: los beneficios, obstáculos y lecciones aprendidas. Esperamos que otras granjas puedan usar esta experiencia para navegar el proceso de solicitud e implementación de contratos de EQIP.

Conozca a Three Feathers Farm

Three Feathers Farm es una pequeña granja orgánica dirigida por personas BIPOC, ubicada en cuatro acres y medio en Morgan Hill, California, a solo veinte minutos al sur de San José, en tierras ancestrales de la Tribu Muwekma Ohlone.

Fundada por Héktor Calderón-Victoria y Dilip Sharma en 2022, la granja cultiva una combinación de cultivos modernos y tradicionales con relevancia cultural, como maíz, chile, frijoles, calabazas, cebolla, lechuga, rábanos, jitomates, flores, hierbas culinarias, albahaca y pepinos. Su misión es cuidar la tierra mientras ofrecen alimentos que sirvan y reflejen a las diversas comunidades que los antecedieron y que los rodean actualmente.

“Yo creo que para nosotros, la agricultura no es solo un lugar para cultivar alimentos, sino un espacio donde la comunidad se reúne”, dice Héktor. “Es un sitio donde las personas pueden traer distintas formas de pensar, estilos de vida y trasfondos económicos. Nuestra misión es ser tan diversos como lo son nuestro suelo y los cultivos que cultivamos”. 

En 2023, después de un año de preparación—limpiar el terreno, diseñar, conseguir el equipo agrícola necesario, estudiar las necesidades del suelo, el clima, las plagas y enfermedades, y preparar el sitio para prácticas como cultivos de cobertura y compostaje—Three Feathers Farm comenzó oficialmente su producción. Rápidamente establecieron relaciones con restaurantes locales, organizaciones sin fines de lucro, bancos de alimentos e incluso con su distrito escolar local, lo cual es un logro poco común para una operación nueva de pequeña escala.

Desde el principio, sabían que necesitarían financiamiento para implementar prácticas sostenibles que coincidieran con sus valores. Descubrieron EQIP a través de su oficina local del Distrito de Conservación de Recursos, que los orientó hacia el Servicio de Conservación de Recursos Naturales (NRCS) del USDA.

Trabajar Con el NRCS y Poner la Conservación En Práctica

Hasta ahora, Three Feathers Farm ha recibido dos contratos EQIP del NRCS. El primero, otorgado en 2023, fue para una cerca viva a lo largo del límite de la propiedad, la cual ya ha sido completada. El segundo, aprobado en 2024, apoya la construcción y mantenimiento de dos túneles altos.

Sin embargo, llegar a esos contratos firmados tomó tiempo, persistencia y una proceso de aprendizaje difícil. El proceso comenzó con una visita de campo por parte de un agente local del NRCS, seguida de la creación de un plan de conservación—un requisito previo para la solicitud. Luego vino una serie de formularios, verificación de elegibilidad y presentación de solicitudes, incluyendo el registro en la Agencia de Servicios Agrícolas (FSA) para obtener un número de granja, algo que Héktor, como nuevo propietario de una granja, no sabía que era necesario.

“El mayor obstáculo para nosotros fue tratar de entender a qué parte del USDA acudir para ciertas cosas, dónde entregar distintos formularios, con quién hablar. Sentíamos que las dos oficinas (FSA y NRCS) no se comunicaban entre sí”, explicó.

A pesar de esta complicación, Three Feathers siguió adelante, y finalmente logró asegurar contratos para dos proyectos de conservación con gran impacto:

Cercas vivas para la biodiversidad

El proyecto de cercas vivas financió la siembra de una variedad de especies nativas a lo largo de una cerca perimetral, ayudando a prevenir la erosión, atraer insectos beneficiosos y amortiguar el viento. También incluyó la construcción de una caja nido para lechuzas como forma natural de controlar roedores, como ardillas y ratones de campo. Como parte de los términos del contrato, se requiere mantenimiento continuo, como riego regular y acolchado.

Antes de que Héktor y Dilip implementaran estas prácticas de manejo, no se había aplicado ninguna práctica de conservación en Three Feathers Farm. “Sabemos que este proyecto mejorará la calidad del agua, reducirá la erosión en el área donde estará la cerca viva, y aumentará la biodiversidad del sitio que tenemos, al atraer insectos y aves beneficiosas”, enfatiza Héktor.

Obstáculos en Túneles altos cuando el financiamiento no llega rápido

El contrato para los túneles altos, aprobado a fines de 2024, fue diseñado para apoyar la construcción de dos estructuras que extienden la temporada de cultivo, con orientación complementaria sobre el manejo del suelo, como el acolchado (“mulching”) y el cultivo de cobertura (“cover cropping”) dentro de los túneles. Estos túneles permitirían a la granja cultivar cultivos sensibles durante los meses más fríos, protegerlos de heladas tardías y lluvias intensas, y aumentar la estabilidad de ingresos mediante periodos de cosecha más largos.

Pero en marzo de 2025, seis meses después de firmar el contrato, la construcción aún no había comenzado.

Las principales razones: logística financiera e incertidumbre. Los contratos EQIP normalmente reembolsan a los agricultores solo después de que los proyectos se completan y un agente de campo los verifica, lo que a menudo ocurre varios meses o incluso un año después de que se hayan incurrido los costos de materiales o mano de obra contratada. Three Feathers Farm necesitaba desembolsar alrededor de $50,000 para completar la instalación antes de recibir algún reembolso. Esto puede representar un desafío financiero, especialmente para granjas pequeñas que quizás no cuenten con capital suficiente para cubrir los costos por adelantado.

“No somos sacos grandes de dinero”, se rió Héktor. A menudo, la solución para algunos agricultores es recurrir a un préstamo de FSA o de una Institución Financiera de Desarrollo Comunitario (CDFI, por sus siglas en inglés), pero esto requiere mucho tiempo y esfuerzo, y no siempre es factible para todos.

El problema se agravó con los plazos y la falta de transparencia en el proceso. Aunque su contrato fue aprobado en septiembre de 2024, seis meses después todavía no tenían claro cuándo estaría disponible el reembolso, qué documentos se requerían y si se habían procesado actualizaciones seis meses después.

“Algo que me costó mucho fue que no hay una plataforma centralizada donde estén todos los documentos, que muestre qué se ha enviado, qué contratos tenemos y cuándo están finalizados esos contratos”, dijo Héktor.

Más adelante se enteraron de que podían haber solicitado un pago adelantado por ser una operación designada como “Históricamente Desatendida”—una categoría del USDA que permite a los agricultores recibir una parte de la financiación más pronto. Esta opción sigue siendo un reembolso, pero los agricultores pueden presentar sus recibos inmediatamente después de incurrir en los gastos, en lugar de tener que esperar hasta la finalización del proyecto. Cubrir los gastos por unas semanas en lugar de varios meses o un año puede hacer una gran diferencia para la viabilidad financiera de un proyecto en una granja pequeña.

Sin embargo, Héktor expresó su frustración porque esa opción de pago adelantado no se les presentó cuando enviaron su solicitud. Solo más adelante supieron que podían haber sido elegibles. Para entonces, cambiar la solicitud habría requerido reiniciar todo el proceso, lo que habría representado un gran retraso para su cronograma.

“Si lo hubiéramos hecho, habría sido una historia muy diferente”, dijo Héktor.

Mientras tanto, la granja sigue buscando opciones de financiamiento o socios que los ayuden a avanzar con el proyecto.

Lecciones y obstáculos con EQIP

Aunque Héktor rápidamente confirmó que “estos programas han sido increíblemente beneficiosos para nuestra granja”, también señaló varios desafíos que enfrentaron al trabajar con el USDA. Estas experiencias ofrecen lecciones valiosas para otros agricultores interesados en participar en programas federales de apoyo, y también resaltan áreas en las que NRCS podría mejorar sus procesos y la capacitación de su personal.

Navegando los requisitos de FSA y NRCS

Héktor enfatiza que uno de los primeros obstáculos fue no saber que debían registrarse con FSA y obtener un número de identificación agrícola antes de aplicar a programas NRCS como EQIP. Para agricultores principiantes, este paso—y la necesidad de navegar entre dos agencias diferentes del USDA—no siempre es intuitivo.

“USDA es un organismo grande y complejo con muchas agencias distintas trabajando dentro de él. Esto no facilita que los productores a pequeña escala entiendan y naveguen la complejidad de los programas del gobierno estadounidense”, explicó Héktor.

El lenguaje importa

Aunque participaron en dos proyectos diferentes de EQIP, Héktor señaló que ni él ni su socio comercial tenían claridad sobre cuáles “Estándares de Prácticas de Conservación” (CPS, por sus siglas en inglés) apoyaban realmente sus proyectos. Los CPS son métodos que NRCS ha determinado que abordan problemas de recursos. Estos términos técnicos son naturales para los agentes de NRCS, pero pueden dejar a los agricultores en la oscuridad.

Sería útil, sugirió Héktor, que los agentes de NRCS estén mejor capacitados para comunicarse en términos más comprensibles para los agricultores, ayudándoles a entender la conexión entre sus prácticas agrícolas y los objetivos de conservación de la agencia. Así, “cuando hablemos con funcionarios electos u otras organizaciones, podamos realmente explicar lo que estamos haciendo como parte de estos contratos”, dijo Héktor.

Brechas de comunicación y sistemas obsoletos

Héktor mencionó que uno de los principales desafíos que Three Feathers Farm experimentó fue la comunicación y el uso de tecnología a lo largo del proceso de trabajar con el contrato de  USDA.

“La aplicación para FSA y NRCS nos pareció muy anticuada”, dijo Héktor. “Dependían de métodos y plataformas que no eran fáciles de usar ni ayudaban a enviar y rastrear documentos de forma efectiva. Sentíamos que debía haber una manera más sencilla”.

Esto causó mucha incertidumbre sobre qué documentos debían enviar y si NRCS había recibido todo correctamente. “No sabíamos si faltaban papeles importantes o pasos del proceso”, explicó Héktor, lo que aumentó el estrés tanto para él como para su socio.

“A pesar de estos desafíos, trabajamos con diligencia para navegar el sistema revisando cuidadosamente cada paso y haciendo seguimiento”, dijo Héktor un consejo clave para otros agricultores que estén considerando aplicar a estos programas.

Largos retrasos y falta de personal

“Experimentamos tiempos de espera muy largos, a veces de 2 a 4 meses, solo para agendar una visita de nuestro agente de campo”, explicó Héktor. “Este retraso tuvo un impacto significativo en nuestra capacidad de avanzar con la presentación de solicitudes para programas como las cercas vivas y los túneles altos”.

Si bien destacó que su agente local fue servicial y solidario, quedó claro que la falta de personal limita cuán rápido los agricultores pueden avanzar. “Seguramente tienen muchos agricultores a los que deben responder y no pueden darnos la atención que necesitamos”, añadió.

Para Three Feathers Farm, esto hizo que fuera difícil obtener respuestas y significó que debían estar en constante contacto con su oficina local de NRCS para impulsar el proyecto y asegurarse de que todo siguiera avanzando.

Conocimiento de prácticas aplicables a la agricultura orgánica

Héktor expresó su deseo de que los agentes de NRCS estén más familiarizados con los programas que pueden aplicarse a granjas orgánicas. Señaló lo útil que sería que los agentes pudieran sugerir prácticas compatibles con métodos orgánicos.

“Nos dimos cuenta de que los agentes no siempre estaban completamente informados sobre las prácticas y programas que podrían aplicarse a nuestra granja”, mencionó Héktor. “Creo que a veces eso hace que perdamos oportunidades en programas nuevos o ya existentes que podrían beneficiarnos”.

Por eso, resaltó la importancia de que los agricultores sean proactivos al pedir apoyo y se tomen el tiempo de familiarizarse con los programas disponibles.

Cronogramas de proyectos y reembolsos

Three Feathers Farm recibió la aprobación para su proyecto de túnel alto en septiembre de 2024, pero para principios de marzo de 2025, aún no habían podido comenzar la obra. Los retrasos, tanto en la programación como en la comprensión de los materiales incluidos en el contrato, hicieron más lento el proceso. El tiempo desde la solicitud hasta la implementación y el reembolso puede ser más largo y complejo de lo que se espera, especialmente para quienes participan por primera vez y no anticipan estos desafíos ni los incorporan en su planificación.

Aunque existe una opción de Pago por Adelantado para ayudar a que los agricultores elegibles reciban reembolsos más pronto, no se ofreció desde el inicio.

No espere hasta estar listo para construir. Haga preguntas detalladas sobre los cronogramas y si califica para el Pago por Adelantado.

Consejos para otras personas agricultoras

A pesar de los desafíos, Héktor quiere que otras personas agricultoras sepan que los programas valen la pena, siempre y cuando usted esté dispuesto a hacer un esfuerzo adicional.

“Nos enseñó que necesitábamos ser realmente persistentes, prestar atención a los detalles y abogar por nosotros mismos”, dijo. “No tenga miedo de hacer preguntas y no asuma que las agencias le proporcionarán toda la información que necesita. Usted debe abogar por obtenerla”.

Héktor reconoce que estos programas eliminaron una carga financiera significativa a largo plazo al incorporar estas prácticas en Three Feathers Farm, “lo que ahora nos permite invertir en nuestras prácticas sostenibles sin poner en riesgo la sostenibilidad [financiera] de nuestra granja. La orientación y asistencia técnica que hemos recibido realmente agilizaron nuestros procesos y contribuyeron a nuestro objetivo más amplio de cuidado ambiental”.

Mirando hacia el futuro: cuidado del entorno, investigación y resiliencia

Three Feathers Farm obtuvo la certificación orgánica del USDA a principios de 2024, pero la visión a largo plazo de Héktor y Dilip va más allá de la infraestructura o la certificación. Consideran la agricultura orgánica como parte de un movimiento más amplio, enraizado en el cuidado del medioambiente, la justicia alimentaria y la resiliencia cultural.

“Mantenemos un vínculo constante con el suelo, los cultivos que cultivamos y la naturaleza que nos rodea”, dijo Héktor.

Para Three Feathers Farm, ser orgánico no es solo una etiqueta: es una responsabilidad con su comunidad y con las futuras generaciones. Eso incluye abogar por una mejor investigación, programas más accesibles y una voz más fuerte para las granjas pequeñas en las conversaciones a nivel federal.

Héktor ha viajado a Washington, D.C. como defensor con la National Young Farmers Coalition, y continúa alzando la voz sobre la importancia de que las políticas reflejen las experiencias reales de agricultores diversos. Destacó la falta de investigación sobre cultivos culturalmente relevantes y la necesidad de un mayor reconocimiento del Conocimiento Ecológico Tradicional (TEK, por sus siglas en inglés) en la investigación agrícola.

“Muchos de los cultivos que cultivamos no cuentan con datos disponibles sobre el manejo de plagas y enfermedades”, explicó. “Eso obliga a granjas pequeñas como la nuestra a hacer su propia investigación, lo cual requiere tiempo que no siempre tenemos”.

La preservación es una motivación constante en su decisión de hacer la transición a lo orgánico, con el objetivo final de proteger la tierra para las generaciones futuras. Tanto las comunidades humanas como animales se benefician de un terreno libre de pesticidas y herbicidas químicos, y la decisión de obtener la certificación orgánica tiene mucho que ver con rendir cuentas. Three Feathers Farm quiere que su comunidad sepa que “hicieron las cosas bien” y sienten que la etiqueta orgánica comunica eso.

Aunque lograr la certificación fue un proceso arduo, el apoyo técnico y financiero de varias organizaciones y agencias desempeñó un papel fundamental para que la granja alcanzara esa meta. Un factor crítico que aceleró el cronograma de su solicitud fue el hecho de que las operaciones agrícolas anteriores en ese terreno habían cesado más de veinte años atrás, lo que significó que no fue necesario cumplir con el periodo de transición de tres años para la rehabilitación del suelo—un requisito que, según Héktor, puede desanimar a agricultores con menos recursos.

OFRF continúa abogando por más fondos de investigación que centrados a productores BIPOC, y para desarrollar recursos que ayuden a todas las personas agricultoras a acceder al apoyo que necesitan para prosperar. A medida que el cambio climático se acelera y los desafíos se profundizan, granjas como Three Feathers nos recuerdan lo que está en juego—y lo que es posible cuando las personas agricultoras tienen las herramientas adecuadas.

¿Listo/a para aplicar? Aquí tiene algunos recursos útiles

Si usted es una persona agricultora y está considerando solicitar EQIP u otros programas de NRCS, aquí tiene algunas herramientas útiles para comenzar:

By |2025-04-11T12:14:06+00:00April 10th, 2025|Farmer Stories, News, TOPP West|

Fetterman and Schiff Reintroduce the Organic Science and Research Investment (OSRI) Act

Reintroduced OSRI Act Would Strengthen Organic Agriculture and U.S. Farming Futures

Written by OFRF staff.

We at OFRF are excited that Senators John Fetterman (PA) and Adam Schiff (CA) are leading the reintroduction of the Organic Science and Research Investment (OSRI) Act, joined by Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Tina Smith (D-MN), Peter Welch (D-VT), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Angus King (I-ME)! This legislation comes at a pivotal moment for organic agriculture, and it is backed by strong grassroots support. More than 80 farms, businesses, and organizations from across the United States have signed a new letter organized by OFRF in support of OSRI’s reintroduction.

The OSRI Act is timely and transformative legislation that lays the groundwork for a more resilient, economically vibrant, and science-driven food system. It delivers targeted investments into organic agricultural research, helping address one of the sector’s most pressing challenges: the rise in organic imports. 

The U.S. organic market is expanding rapidly, but the research and data systems supporting it have not kept pace. Without adequate support, U.S. consumers will continue to rely on imported organic products, causing American farmers to miss out. That means we are not only exporting market opportunities, but also the price premiums that should be flowing to U.S. producers and the communities that support them. The OSRI Act is a strategic response that helps reverse this trend and puts those opportunities back in the hands of American farmers.

What’s in the Organic Science and Research Investment Act?

This bill would make strategic investments into USDA-funded and -conducted organic agriculture research, better equipping farmers to meet the growing demand for organic products and keep organic dollars circulating in rural and regional economies.

The OSRI Act does this by strengthening federal commitments to organic agriculture through:

  • Creating the Coordinating and Expanding Organic Research Initiative at the USDA to assess and efficiently expand the agency’s organic research portfolio.
  • Formally authorizing the Organic Transition Research Program to support farmers transitioning to organic practices, and renaming the program to the Researching the Transition to Organic Program (RTOP).
  • Doubling Farm Bill support for the Organic Production and Market Data Initiative to improve market transparency, help inform targeted market development investments, and improve risk management tools.
  • Directing the USDA’s Economic Research Service to evaluate the full economic, ecological, and community impacts of organic agriculture.

At a time when food security and economic resilience are more important than ever, the OSRI Act helps ensure that U.S. producers, not foreign suppliers, are meeting the needs of American consumers.

Investing in Resilience and Rural Opportunity

Every dollar invested in agricultural research returns $20 to the U.S. economy. The USDA’s current investments into organic agricultural research are less than 2% of their total budget, while organic products make up over 6% of all U.S. food sales and over 15% of all U.S. produce sales. The OSRI Act is designed to course-correct this imbalance, ensuring that public investment better reflects the growing role of organic agriculture in our food system and economy.

By supporting organic research, these Senators are investing in resource-efficient, resilient, and economically sustainable farming systems that benefit all producers. Organic practices like cover cropping, crop diversification, and biological pest management reduce input costs, improve soil health, and conserve water, delivering both environmental and financial returns. Many of these practices, first advanced through organic research funded through these programs, are now widely adopted in conventional systems for their proven effectiveness. That means investments in organic science don’t just benefit organic growers; they offer value to the entire agricultural sector by broadening the toolbox for resilient, low-input farming strategies.

Without dedicated public funding, though, organic producers are left without regionally tailored research, technical assistance, or access to evolving best practices. The OSRI Act directs strategic investments into programs that meet organic farmers’ unique needs, while expanding access to tools that benefit all farmers.

This legislation also strengthens the research pipeline by signaling to universities, research institutions, and young scientists that organic agriculture is a national research priority. With clearer funding pathways and institutional support, early-career researchers can pursue long-term, impactful projects in organic systems—building a legacy of innovation that spans generations.

In short, the OSRI Act ensures that our public research infrastructure is inclusive, forward-looking, and working harder for farmers, rural communities, and the broader U.S. economy.

Centering Farmers, Backed by Science

One of the most important aspects of the OSRI Act is its commitment to farmer-led research. The OSRI Act prioritizes agricultural science that begins on the ground in partnership with the people who know farming best: the farmers themselves.

Through OREI and the RTOP programs, the OSRI Act requires researchers to collaborate directly with farmers. This participatory model ensures that real-world challenges shape research questions and that the solutions developed are practical, locally relevant, and readily adoptable on farms of all sizes and types. This participation is not symbolic, either; it is structured, resourced, and compensated. Nearly all of the farmers who have historically participated in OREI projects have been compensated for their participation. The OSRI Act builds on the existing trust between researchers and communities, while also incentivizing future connections. 

In addition to supporting farmer-led work, the OSRI Act embraces knowledge systems that are too often overlooked. Importantly, this bill explicitly broadens research priorities within OREI to include Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK). This is a crucial step toward honoring and integrating indigenous and place-based knowledge systems into USDA’s research portfolio. In practice, this means that farmers and stewards who hold this generational agronomic knowledge are not treated as collaborators, but as co-creators of agricultural science. 

Put simply, the OSRI Act ensures that organic agriculture research isn’t just happening in isolation on research farms but that it’s happening with real farmers, in real conditions, with real impact.

Get Involved

The reintroduction of the OSRI Act is a hopeful and strategic step toward rebalancing our food system. By investing in research that is grounded in science, rooted in farmer experience, and aligned with public demand, this bill helps reclaim the economic, ecological, and innovative potential of organic production here at home. At a time when we urgently need to build resilient farming systems, stronger rural economies, and a more secure domestic food supply, the OSRI Act offers a group of solutions.  

Want to know if your Senator is a co-sponsor or ready to help make the ask for them to join? Reach out to Gordon Merrick, Senior Policy & Programs Manager, at gordon@ofrf.org.

Together, we can ensure that the next Farm Bill invests in the kind of research that grows opportunity for farmers, eaters, and the researchers that empower both.

 


Note: OFRF led support for this legislation when it was first introduced in 2023. You can read more about the bill’s original launch and endorsements here.

By |2025-04-10T16:59:47+00:00April 10th, 2025|News|

OFRF Launches Organic Research Hub to Support Farmers Nationwide

One-of-a-kind platform offers curated, science-based organic farming tools and resources to help farmers find trusted, practical solutions to on-farm challenges.

OFRF Organic Research Hub LogoSANTA CRUZ, Calif., April 7, 2025 — The Organic Farming Research Foundation (OFRF) today announced the launch of the Organic Research Hub, a first-of-its-kind online platform created to serve the needs of organic and transitioning farmers across the United States—offering trusted, science-based tools to solve real on-farm challenges.

Accessible at organicresearchhub.org, the Organic Research Hub brings together an unprecedented collection of curated resources, all searchable by production topic, crop category, region, keyword, and more. The platform includes factsheets, research summaries, webinars, guidebooks, videos, and other technical tools gathered from the country’s top agricultural institutions and organic organizations. It also houses the complete library of nearly 200 final reports from OFRF-funded research projects, making decades of farmer-informed research easily accessible in one place.

“We created the Organic Research Hub to meet farmers where they are,” said Dr. Heather Estrada, OFRF’s research & education senior scientist and architect of the platform. “Producers don’t have time to dig through academic journals or outdated PDFs. They need credible, practical resources they can use in the field—and that’s exactly what this tool provides.”

In addition to advanced filtering and keyword search functions, users can sign up to receive customized notifications when new content is added to their region or area of interest. The Hub also includes a national Organic Extension Directory, helping connect farmers with trusted agricultural professionals and researchers in their communities.

“There’s a lot of noise online. The Hub cuts through that,” said Jordan Settlage, an organic dairy farmer at Settlage & Settlage Farms in St. Mary’s, Ohio. “I was changing our compost management and had some questions. In less than a minute, the Hub helped me find exactly what I needed—from credible sources I trust. That’s a big deal. I can use it to make real decisions for our farm.”

With no comparable tool currently available, the Organic Research Hub addresses a long-standing gap in how organic research is accessed and applied. Although organic now accounts for more than 6% of total U.S. food sales and 15% of all produce sales, research funding for organic agriculture remains disproportionately low—receiving less than 2% of USDA research dollars and less than 1% of the Agricultural Research Service’s budget. OFRF’s own National Organic Research Agenda (NORA) continues to highlight the pressing need for regionally relevant, farmer-informed solutions. The Organic Research Hub is a direct response to that need.

“This is about access,” said Brise Tencer, OFRF’s executive director. “For too long, organic farmers have had to piece together information on their own—often without institutional support or public investment. But what’s exciting is that organic research doesn’t just serve organic farmers—it’s useful to any grower seeking healthy soils, resilient systems, and non-chemical solutions. The Hub reflects our commitment to putting reliable, farmer-focused tools directly into their hands.”

The Hub features content from leading organizations, including the SARE (Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education) program, dozens of land-grant universities, and nonprofit partners such as ATTRA (Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas) and The Organic Center. It will continue to grow as new content is added and more researchers and extension agents contribute their work.

The Organic Research Hub is live now at organicresearchhub.org.

##

About the Organic Farming Research Foundation​

The Organic Farming Research Foundation (OFRF), headquartered in Santa Cruz, California, with a remote team based across the U.S., works to foster the improvement and widespread adoption of organic farming systems. OFRF cultivates organic research, education, and federal policies that bring more farmers and acreage into organic production. For more information about OFRF, please visit our website: www.ofrf.org

Media Contact:
Ashley Dulaney, Communications Director, OFRF
ashley@ofrf.org

 

Hub Visuals:

By |2025-04-07T14:14:46+00:00April 7th, 2025|News, Press Release|

Lessons from OFRF’s Farmer-Researcher Collaboration Panel

Written by Brian Geier

Snacks, refreshments, and a circle of chairs were ready as a group of organic dairy farmers gathered together in southeast Minnesota for a listening session hosted by organic dairy researcher Dr. Brad Heins. Based in the west-central part of the state, Heins wanted to know more about what organic dairy farmers were facing in the southeast. For most of the event, he listened and allowed the producers to speak amongst themselves about the challenges they were facing. Meg Stuedemann of Derrydale Farm recalls Dr. Heins treated it like an informal focus group. “He’d ask a question and sit back and listen to who had been exploring what, who was interested in what, and how many people were dealing with the same issue.” 

Meg recently joined an OFRF panel of farmers and researchers to discuss successful farmer-researcher collaborations for organic agriculture. The panel took place in January of 2025, and is one of OFRF’s Seeds of Success Networking Sessions, a project funded by a cooperative agreement with USDA-NIFA. Other panelists included Dr. Mary Hendrickson, Professor in Rural Sociology at the University of Missouri, Dr. Kerry Clark, Research Professor and Soybean breeder at the University of Missouri and farmer Liz Graznak of Happy Hollow Farm in Jamestown, Missouri. A link to the full recording of the panel is available at the end of this post. 

Meg Stuedemann, Derrydale Farm, Belle Plaine, MN

Dr. Mary Hendrickson, Professor in Rural Sociology, University of Missouri

Liz Graznak, Happy Hollow Farm, Jamestown, Missouri

Dr. Kerry Clark, Research Professor, University of Missouri

Building Trust with Farmers

Spending time with farmers helps build trust reciprocal relationships that are key to successful farmer-researcher collaboration. “We (farmers) are most interested to participate in projects when it is a question that we are interested in,” said Meg, recalling the positive experience she had collaborating with Dr. Heins following the listening session. 

Dr. Mary Hendrickson agreed that being in community with farmers is key to successful research. From her perspective, a lot of the early research work in the 1990’s around grazing dairy and grazing herds in Missouri can be traced back to two researchers who attended “grazing clusters”, monthly peer-to-peer meetups of farmers who met at each other’s farms. Attending the farmers’ conversations allowed the researchers to find researchable questions and resulted in what Dr. Hendrickson called “extremely successful collaborating between grazing, forage researchers (and) beef producers.”

“Every good research idea I’ve ever had has come from being in community and working with farmers…so it [good research] is not my idea really. It really behooves researchers to be out with farmers.” -Dr. Mary Hendrickson

Even if researchers do not have a lot of opportunities to listen directly to farmers, Meg pointed out that they can get a sense of what research farmers are interested in by searching the SARE database, OFRF’s grant database, or state-level programs for on-farm research in their area. “I would be thrilled if someone called me and said, ‘I read about your paper and want to collaborate,’” Meg explained. 

Farmer Involvement in Organic Research

While networking can ensure farmers can help generate ideas for new research, involving farmers in research projects can be a whole other challenge. 

Even after a good research idea has been identified, researchers may have to wait months for funders’ Request for Applications (RFA’s) to be released before they know the specifics for proposals and timelines. These can have very regimented procedures that researchers have to stick to throughout the project period (several years). And it can take months to write a proposal and then several more months before researchers find out if they got the funding. 

To ensure farmer involvement in a given project, knowing several farmers within the industry can help. “Sometimes you end up doing on-farm research with a different farmer than the one that helped generate the idea,” Dr. Clark explained.

For collaboration to work, it is important for researchers to understand that farmers have different priorities. “The farm will always come first,” explained Mary, and Liz agreed. Clear agreements can lead to better outcomes. Meg suggested that more in-person involvement on the farm throughout the project period may help. “Researchers cannot expect farmers to be technicians,” she said. More in-person involvement from the research team, especially at data collection, can help uphold the integrity of the research. 

Even with the best of planning, “Sometimes it just doesn’t work out,” Dr. Clark cautions. She recounted one grazing experiment where the cows kept getting out despite the farmer’s best efforts, and that the research on that farm was ruined for that year. “Don’t feel bad,” Clark advises, “keep trying.”

Compensation for Farmers

While everyone on the panel agreed that farmers’ time is valuable and should be compensated for, amounts are not standardized and can vary greatly from project to project depending on the level of involvement and on what was originally written into a grant. Farmer involvement can even be a requirement in some RFA’s but specifics on those amounts are rarely, if ever, provided. 

Even if a research project is only utilizing land on a working farm, and not requiring a farmer to do any work or data collection, a stipend is expected. But panelists reported offering very different amounts ranging from a few hundred dollars to $2,000. While the researchers on the panel compared the different amounts they’d offered to farmers for their projects, one attendee of the session chimed in the chat to remind everyone that if farmers had been involved at the beginning of those projects, they could have helped set those payment amounts. 

For any use of a farmer’s time, it was recommended that they be treated as professional consultants or specialized contractors, and given a comparable rate.

Farmers Value Long-Term Relationships

One key to the success of farmer-researcher collaboration came up amongst the farmers on the panel, and it echoes what OFRF heard at a panel discussion in early 2024 with Project Directors and collaborating farmers working on USDA-funded organic research projects: long-term relationships build trust. 

That process can start well before a project, with researchers spending time with farmers, or with farmers reaching out to researchers. There are a lot more farmers than there are researchers, so it may be easier for farmers to reach out to researchers than the other way around. “Don’t be afraid to call the University in your state,” said Clark.

The  Follow-Up: An Overlooked Key to Ongoing Success

Once earned, the trust of farmers must be kept. And that, according to farmers on the panel, requires connecting after the conclusion of on-farm research. Farmers report that seeing the end result of research that they contributed to was one of, if not the most important thing to feeling like it was worthwhile. 

“One of the biggest frustrations is not finding out the bigger picture that my farm or my participation has contributed to. I don’t think I’ve ever worked with a researcher who has sent me the final paper or sent me an extension publication or the final paper and said, “This is what you were involved in.” That would mean more to me than the stipend.” -Meg Stuedemann, Derrydale Farm

I agree that acknowledging that farmers are professionals and that compensation is appreciated,” Meg said. “But it’s not why I say yes. It is not a revenue stream for my farm. But knowing what happened would be really wonderful.” According to the farmers on the panel, that could look like simply getting a call or better yet getting sent complementary copies of published papers or extension resources.

Watch the full Seeds of Success networking session:

About the Seeds of Success Series

OFRF has partnered with the Organic Farmers Association (OFA) and National Organic Coalition (NOC) to lead a series of virtual farmer-to-farmer networking sessions. These facilitated events will be engaging opportunities for farmers to share their challenges and successes, and will be accompanied with relevant resources you can use.

To learn more about these and other events from OFRF visit: https://ofrf.org/events/

Funding for this series is provided by a cooperative agreement between OFRF and USDA- NIFA to highlight research investments made through both OREI and ORG grant programs.

Learn more about the Organic Agriculture program at USDA-NIFA at:  https://www.nifa.usda.gov/grants/programs/organic-agriculture-program

By |2025-04-03T10:15:00+00:00March 27th, 2025|News|

What’s Happening with Organic Farming Research in Pennsylvania

Written by Brian Geier, OFRF Communications Manger. This article was originally published in Pennsylvania Certified Organic’s (PCO) Organic Matters publication. See the article in PCO’s Winter/Spring 2025 edition.

Before diving into the importance and impact of organic research in Pennsylvania, let’s start with some national context. Nationwide, certified organic produce now makes up more than 15% of total produce sales in the United States. Organic dairy and eggs now constitute more than 11% of the total market. And overall, organic sales have doubled over the last 10 years and in 2024 made up about 6% of the total US food market. By most measurements, organic food is trending upward. Most notably, the growth of organic sales is consistently outpacing the growth of the overall food market. To say it another way, we might be heading into a future that is more and more organic! 

But will we get there? 

Despite the growth of the organic sector, organic agriculture research funding makes up less than 2% of the total research at the USDA, and less than 1% at the Agricultural Research Service (ARS). Additionally, much of the research focused on conventional agriculture relates to chemical applications or genetic traits—technologies that organic producers do not, and if certified, can not, use. To put it another way, organic research benefits all farmers, including conventional ones, but not the other way around.

In order to sustain the growth in organic acreage, producers, and products, it is crucial that more USDA funding be organic and applicable to all farmers. National policy priorities identified by the Organic Farming Research Foundation (OFRF) include:

  • Increasing USDA’s research funding for organic research through both competitive grant programs at the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) and intramural research at ARS to reflect its market share and growth trajectory.
  • Fully funding the Organic Data Initiative to provide the necessary market analysis of a rapidly sophisticating sector. 
  • Expanding the accessibility and applicability of technical and financial assistance programs for organic farmers. 

To learn more about this policy work that supports organic nationwide and in Pennsylvania, visit OFRF’s advocacy page.

Organic Research in the Keystone State

Pennsylvania is a powerhouse of organic agriculture. It ranked 4th in the nation with over 100,000 certified acres and 1,200+ farms generating $1 billion in sales in 2021, according to the latest organic survey by the National Agricultural Statistics Service.

The USDA’s NIFA has awarded over $28 million in grants to the state’s research institutions for organic research. Penn State University has played a crucial role, investing $12 million. The ARS has historically funded 17 projects in the state researching organic topics, but currently has no active projects. 

Organic farmers in the state and region have identified three key research concerns (according to the 2022 National Organic Research Agenda): 

  • Climate adaptation and resilience. 
  • Pest management.
  • Soil health.

Active Research Projects in Pennsylvania

Recent NIFA investments, through programs like the Organic Research and Extension Initiative (OREI) and the Organic Transitions Program (ORG), have provided nearly $12 million over the past four years to ongoing projects with an organic focus in Pennsylvania. Key projects at Penn State focus on intensifying production and improving resilience of organic grains, developing a nitrogen decision support tool, testing anaerobic soil disinfection (ASD) in fields and in high tunnels, tracking foraging patterns of organic bees, evaluating perennial crop rotations, and developing parasite resistance in dairy cattle. Another project looking at immersive experiential education of urban educators is underway at Drexel University.

Front cover of OFRF's Organic state Factsheet for the state of Pennsylvania

OFRF’s State-By-State leave-behinds provide data on the organic industry and organic research in states, and can be used to help farmers, researchers, and advocates when articulating needs for proposals or advocating for policy.

OREI-funded research on organic grain production (led by Dr. John Wallace) builds on previous research on reduced and no-til strategies, including planting into high-residue cover crops. Credit: Penn State Weed Science.

Besides providing new knowledge to organic growers, each of these research projects have other direct and indirect benefits worth noting. The Economic Research Service estimates that every $1 spent on agricultural research generates an additional $20 in benefits to the economy. In Pennsylvania, that means the $28 million for organic research translates to $560 million in economic activity. This effect can be seen given the growth of the value in Pennsylvania’s organic production between 2019 and 2021. In 2019, Pennsylvania had 1,039 organic farms with over $740 million in farmgate sales. In 2021, those numbers grew to 1,123 organic farms generating over $1 billion. Research provides real economic opportunities to farms looking to maximize both their economic return and their ecological impact.

Additionally, organic research provides professional training opportunities for undergraduates, graduates, and postdoctoral fellows on organic systems, and promotes symbiosis between up-and-coming researchers and the organic community. As Dr. Ajay Nair, newly appointed as the Department of Horticulture Chair at Iowa State University explained in a recent interview with OFRF, OREI “is the foundation for several of the organic projects that happen across the country. It serves as a good platform for us to reach out to organic growers and for organic growers to reach out to us and say, ‘Hey, can we address this particular issue that is coming up?’ These OREI grants,” he explains, are “actually helping to build our network…to help us build teams across the country.” 

How Pennsylvania Research Benefits Growers Across the Eastern US

Just as organic research can be applicable to all farmers, multi-state projects led in Pennsylvania are bringing new findings to organic farmers facing similar challenges across regions. For example, the OREI-funded project assessing ASD in field, led by Dr. Gioia at Penn State, includes similar research plots led by Dr. Xin Zhao at University of Florida. Results from Pennsylvania may provide insights for growers in the Northeast who face challenges managing soil borne diseases, while the plots in Florida reflect conditions faced by organic growers in the Southeast, but results from each region might inform growers who face similar challenges to similar cropping systems. Growers interested in managing soil health with ASD in the Upper Midwest or the Southeast might find the eOrganic webinar from Dr. Zhao valuable. The webinar focuses on selecting the right carbon source for the organic practice of ASD, which includes insights from the trials on Pennsylvania farms. All growers who want to use ASD to support their transition period to organic farming may be interested in the additional grant awarded to Dr. Gioia and his team to assess the economic viability of using ASD during the transition to organic to control pests and weeds. Additionally, any grower using or considering using ASD can share their story and contribute to the project. “The survey,” Dr. Gioia explains “is part of the bottom-up approach our team have been using to improve the ASD application method and make sure that our research is relevant to growers and meets their needs.”

Research at Penn State evaluates the impacts of cover crop residues combined or not with wheat bran and molasses as a carbon source for ASD applications on lettuce. The project supports similar research being conducted at the University of Florida. Credit: Francesco Di Gioia/Penn State.

Completed Projects Provide New Resources for Organic Growers

Aside from the active projects above, several NIFA-funded organic research projects have been completed in Pennsylvania. While they may be concluded, the benefits of these organic projects continue. The results of these studies are not limited to publication in academic scientific journals or relevant only to scientists. Researchers, farmers, and extension specialists often collaborate to share the results of studies in ways that are meaningful and applicable to farmers. 

Take soil microbial management, for example. An OREI-funded study led by Dr. Jason Kaye at Penn State involved adding different sources of microbes (composts, forest soils, and other sources) to soils and measuring microbial populations. The project partnered with Pasa Sustainable Agriculture to collaborate with working farmers to conduct studies on working farms. While measurements of soil microbes may not be enough to provide specific recommendations to growers, the knowledge of how microbe populations change under management conditions and how they interact with plant crops can help farmers make better decisions.

Assuming soil microbes are fascinating to everyone with an interest in organic matters, let’s digress here for a moment. There are a myriad of ways that microbes can help or hinder organic systems: Microbes called biostimulants can release hormones into the soil that can help increase plant growth, while others can degrade the stress chemicals that plants produce during drought, helping plants become more resilient. Some microbes called biofertilizers can unlock nutrients in soils that plants cannot access themselves, helping where there may be excess nutrients, while other biofertilizers exchange nutrients directly with the plants in exchange for carbon. And get this—some perform better than others. That is, some biofertilizers that exchange phosphorus for carbon, called arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF), offer plants more phosphorus in exchange for the same amount of carbon when compared with other AMFs. 

When research-generated insights like these are made available and then accessed, farmers can make better-informed decisions for years to come. All of this fascinating information and more is available to farmers on eOrganic (see Management of Soil Microbes on Organic Farms and Soil Microbes in Organic Cropping Systems 101). Launched in 2009, eOrganic is a national, internet-based, interactive, user-driven, organic agriculture information system for farmers and agricultural professionals.

Want To keep Up With Organic Research in Your State or Nationally?

Aside from using eOrganic, growers and researchers can look forward to a new Organic Content Hub being developed by the OFRF, coming in early 2025. The Content Hub will be searchable by topic, crop, and region, and will provide users with the most current research relevant to organic farming. (Follow OFRF on social media and sign up for our newsletter to get updates on the Content Hub, organic research updates, new organic resources, and more.)

A figure developed by a graduate student (Laura Kaminsky) working on an OREI-funded project during 2019-23 at Penn State, illustrates examples of beneficial microbes. The left diagram shows nitrogen-fixing bacteria, housed either in nodules on legume roots or free-living in the soil. The right diagram illustrates arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) (pink) associated with plant roots. See Soil Microbes in Organic Cropping Systems 101.

Moving Forward With Organic Research 

Organic farming research is generating economic activity in Pennsylvania, providing professional development to researchers and students across the east, forming regional networks between researchers and growers, and producing publications being used by organic growers across the country. One might say that the current state of research in Pennsylvania is healthy and humming! 

Looking to the future, it is critical that federal funding keeps up with the growth of the organic movement nationally and in the state. OFRF and partners work daily to bolster and protect this funding, and we are always looking for farmer and researcher partners in this work. If you are an organic farmer or researcher and are willing to share your story, your experiences can be some of the best fodder for advocating for or directing future organic research in Pennsylvania.

By |2025-04-17T18:50:18+00:00March 20th, 2025|News|

How the Growth of Organic Farming and Indigenous Food Sovereignty Support Each Other

Long before the United States existed, this land has been and continues to be inhabited by hundreds of distinct Indigenous nations. Methods of resource utilization, harvesting, agricultural and management practices differ by region and by culture. However, through the examination of oral traditions and archaeological evidence, we know that a deep emotional and spiritual connection between humans and the land threads together most, and potentially all, of the belief systems of native peoples on this continent. Highly diverse Indigenous spirituality systems and creation stories set the foundation of a dynamic, living universe, upon which all beings are interconnected. Storytelling, a critical facet of Indigenous transmission, has passed down generations of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), providing a framework for responsible, sustainable human interaction and understanding of the natural world.

Strides have been made in the U.S and elsewhere to improve sustainability and reduce the harmful effects of our dominant food production system, partly by incorporating practices that are considered standard within the organic farming methodology, such as cover cropping. However, the prevalence of, and forced dependence upon industrial agriculture continues to undermine Indigenous food sovereignty and utilization of TEK in farming and ranching, as well as disproportionately affect the physical and mental health of Native communities.

“Indigenous food sovereignty” is not a universally defined concept, but generally refers to a community’s ability to control, oversee and cater their food production and distribution to the determined nutritional and cultural needs of the people. Food sovereignty additionally seeks to establish food security, working to eradicate hunger and poverty by emphasizing community engagement, and making healthy, nutritious food widely available. A large component of the food sovereignty movement in the United States centers around the reincorporation of traditional food sources, as well as cultivation and preparation processes. Overall, supporting food sovereignty means supporting decolonization: restoring many Indigenous peoples to their historical role as highly successful custodians and managers of the earth.

At its roots, organic and regenerative agriculture both seek to foster a greater understanding of the needs of the land, fostering a harmonious relationship between the farmer, the farm, and the consumer. The organic system was defined in response to the advent of chemical pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers in the 1930s and 40s, a shunning of attempts to naturally manage agricultural land in ways that would build soil resilience. The holistic philosophy behind organic and regenerative agriculture methods are rooted in TEK, and in the goal of seeking to mend previous anthropogenic damage, a result of colonization, capitalism, and industrialization. Focusing on the rebuilding of soil health, conservation of water, reduction of runoff, and practices such as polyculture (growing multiple, mutually beneficial crops on the same plot) all tie in to create an approach that can work in tandem with the uplifting of native techniques of farming and environmental maintenance.

As we hurtle towards an uncertain future dictated by how we will be able to reverse and/or adapt to the devastating impacts of climate change, we must also grapple with the question of who will be affected most in the coming decades. Advocacy for the increased study and adoption of these alternative systems of farming is a way that OFRF supports the Indigenous food sovereignty movement, in addition to funding research that creates space for crucial dialogue and collaboration with BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) farmers.

Here are a few inspiring and thought-provoking resources we found to continue the conversation:

*Images courtesy of the linked sources.

Globalising Hope: The courageous journey of La Via Campesina

The advocacy and influence of La Via Campesina: an international social justice movement centered around food sovereignty, uplifting rural, small-scale and subsistence farmers, and providing both technical and political agroecology training at over 70 LVC schools globally.

Read more here.

Seeding Food Sovereignty: Black and Indigenous Farming Leaders Share Their Strategies

A panel discussion amongst BIPOC community leaders, activists, and farmers on the future of the food sovereignty movement, and the critical importance of highlighting BIPOC voices in dismantling the destructive system of industrial agriculture.

Read more here.

What is the Land Back Movement? Tribal lands were stolen. What happens when those ancestral territories are returned?

A brief history of the Land Back Movement and federal Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations, and how Indigenous land reclamation is leading to successful restorative climate resilience projects.

Read more here.

Indigenous Food & Agriculture Initiative: Putting Tribal Sovereignty in Food Sovereignty

The Indigenous Food and Agriculture Initiative through the University of Arkansas is focused on supporting tribal nations in reaching food sovereignty goals, largely through policy and legal analysis and the promotion of tribally-backed, sustainable growth and distribution.

Read more here.

Murmurations: Climate Solutions Require Black Ecology 

This article traces the forced disconnection of Black and Indigenous peoples from the land to our present-day responsibility of dismantling the myth of white supremacy. Reversing the environmental destruction created by the industrialization of colonized lands demands the acknowledgement of the relationship between Black liberation and ecology.

Read more here.

Indigenous Food Sovereignty Movements Are Taking Back Ancestral Land

There is a growing momentum behind the Indigenous food sovereignty movement. Over the past few decades, Native American tribes in the U.S. have been fighting for the return of ancestral lands for access to traditional foodways through organizing and advocacy work, coalition building, and legal procedure—and increasingly seeing success.

Read more here.

If you want to keep up to date with our work expanding community research and representation of organic agriculture in policy, please consider joining our mailing list.

By |2025-03-18T18:17:58+00:00March 18th, 2025|News|

Action Alert! Tell Congress: Don’t Fail Our Farmers

Gordon’s Policy Corner, March 2025. By OFRF & NSAC Staff

In much of the country, spring is on its way. For farmers and ranchers, it’s time for planting decisions, for calving and lambing, for lining up their financial capital and markets for a busy season, and more.

But this year, it’s different: across the country, tens of thousands of farmers and farmer-serving organizations have been thrown into limbo by an unprecedented freeze of federal funding and subsequent mass firings of USDA employees. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is currently withholding payments owed under signed, lawful contracts, causing turmoil across the food system. And in a move that will have far-reaching consequences–including disrupting critical research, data collection, and economic analysis that farmers, the businesses they sell to, and policymakers rely on–the administration has dismissed hundreds of thousands of federal employees.

We wrote about The Consequences of Mass Firings Across the USDA in a recent blog, and now we’re taking space in this month’s Policy Corner to share an important action alert from our allies at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC):

Our Farmers and Neighbors Need Your Voice, Now More than Ever 

The disruption of USDA programs is already having serious consequences for farmers, food systems, and our communities:

  • Farmers who’ve already installed new irrigation equipment or planted cover crops with support from USDA are now unable to receive the reimbursements they were promised, jeopardizing their financial stability.
  • Programs that pair local farmers with local food banks are pausing their procurement plans, at the exact time growers most need to know their markets for the season.
  • Organizations who train and support beginning farmers are instead having to lay off staff.
  • Families are anxious about grocery store prices and the availability of food long term.

These immediate impacts could compound and lead to further suffering without swift intervention from Congress.

None of this should be happening: these are signed agreements with the federal government, and USDA must follow through on its commitments before impacts worsen in communities nationwide. Congress has the ability to ensure that USDA restores access to critical programs and funding, and they need to hear directly from folks who are affected – along with all of us who care about our local farmers and ranchers, our fellow neighbors, and the organizations that help us strengthen our communities.

Calling takes only 60 seconds: can you call and email your members of Congress, urging them to protect our farmers and communities from further harm?

Our OFRF Advocacy Page has a new #GetActive Guide to help you prepare to stay active and engaged in policy issues impacting food and farmers at this critical time.

By |2025-03-05T16:03:00+00:00March 6th, 2025|Gordon's Policy Corner, News|

The Consequences of Mass Firings Across the USDA

A Blow to Agricultural Research and Rural Communities

Written by Gordon Merrick and OFRF staff

Editor’s note: Since the publication of this post, the USDA has announced plans to reinstate affected employees. However, the situation remains fluid, and the long-term impacts on agricultural research funding and capacity are still unfolding. OFRF remains committed to advocating for strong, stable investment in organic research to ensure farmers and researchers have the resources they need to innovate and thrive.

In a sweeping, indiscriminate move that has sent shockwaves through the agricultural community, the administration has dismissed thousands of federal employees with the stated goal of reducing government spending and increasing operational efficiency. While the full scope of these staff cuts is still emerging, recent communications requesting employees justify their continued employment have added to the uncertainty. What is already clear, however, is that the USDA has been acutely impacted, particularly within the agencies that form the backbone of our nation’s agricultural research and farmer technical and financial assistance programs.

The Role of USDA Research Agencies and the Impacts of These Firings

The agencies within the Research, Education, and Economics division of the USDA (USDA-REE) are the Agricultural Research Service (ARS), the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), the Economic Research Service (ERS), and the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). These agencies are cornerstones of our agricultural assistance systems, conducting and awarding grants for high-quality research that informs and improves our conservation, risk management, and market development programming in other USDA mission areas.

As these mass firings unfold, it remains difficult to assess the full extent of the cuts, with many agency personnel pages having been taken down. What’s already evident is that these mass firings will have far-reaching consequences—disrupting critical research, data collection, and economic analysis that farmers, the businesses they sell to, and policymakers rely on.

Capitol building, The United States Congress covered with snow in winter time and Capitol hill area covered with snow

The United States Congress covered with snow.

Among the agencies most directly affected by these cuts is ARS, which plays a crucial role in advancing agronomic research. ARS is the sole intramural research agency at the USDA, conducting long-term research that will undoubtedly face disruptions due to these firings. Reports indicate significant staffing reductions at ARS stations, with sources stating that 10-50% of the workforce at different stations has been dismissed, reportedly due to performance-related concerns. While the scope and rationale for these firings remain unclear, they have already disrupted critical research programs across the country.

It is still unclear how NIFA has been affected by these firings. NIFA doesn’t conduct its own research but rather operates competitive grant programs that fund research conducted by farmers themselves (SARE), land-grant institutions, and nonprofits across the country (OREI). As we’ve written about in the past weeks, the RFAs for these grant programs are still under review, and application portals, including for grants that were supposed to be open for applicants, are not currently available, impacting critical funding for universities and other institutions.

Focused more on understanding the past, present, and future status of agricultural markets and related information are the USDA’s NASS and ERS agencies. NASS works to collect and publish raw data about the agricultural system in the United States through their Census of Agriculture and supplemental surveys, like the Organic Survey. ERS provides crucial economic analyses on agriculture, food markets, and the environment. Their research has led to a better understanding of the economic impact of publicly-funded agricultural research: every $1 invested triggers $20 of economic activity, a massive return on investment (ROI). This fact highlights the point that cutting research dollars will negatively impact the agricultural economy.

Immediate Consequences

The abrupt firing of USDA scientists and their lab staff at ARS has thrown vital research projects into chaos. Initiatives aimed at critical topics like improving crop resilience, combating pests and diseases, and improving livestock production systems are now jeopardized, facing setbacks due to reduced research capacity. This is not isolated to any one region or station, derailing research projects that have been able to continue for decades, even through the COVID pandemic, due to the dedication of the civil servants that are now being cast aside.

These firings not only impact the research projects, though; they impact the local and often rural communities that host the research stations and the employees who work there. As mentioned above, the massive ROI of agricultural research will be drastically reduced. In one case, the research station in Salinas, California, has had four researchers and seven lab staff fired, reflecting hundreds of thousands of dollars that will no longer be circulating in that community, meaning that the industries that provide supplies and services to these staff will also be taking a significant hit.

Long-term Consequences

The long-term ramifications of these mass firings are profound. Aside from the economic impacts on the businesses directly involved with the research, this will impact the agricultural industry for decades to come. The United States risks falling even farther behind in meeting the growing demand for organic products as domestic production struggles to keep pace without the support of robust research programming. For example, if NIFA does not award funds through their competitive grant programs, this will lead to significant setbacks at land-grant universities across the nation, simultaneously affecting both the institutions that conduct the research while also hurting the farmers that rely on the research that these programs fund.

Most privately-funded research conducted is focused on generating patentable genetics and compatible products, not the public-welfare-oriented research that NIFA competitive grants fund and ARS conducts. Put simply, cutting federal research funding and personnel undermines the economic engine and weakens the resilience of the agricultural systems against climate change and supply chain disruptions.

Why This Matters

Agricultural research is the backbone of the technical and financial assistance programs operated by the USDA that ensure food security, food safety, environmental sustainability, and economic vitality for the United States. Disruptions in research will lead to higher food prices, reduced innovation in sustainable agriculture systems, and ultimately weakened rural economies. It is imperative to recognize that supporting agricultural research is an investment in the nation’s future success, ensuring that our domestic food supply is stable and resilient, especially in the face of a continually unpredictable international trade environment.

But, it is important to highlight that these firings were not just in USDA-REE’s agencies. The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), the primary conduit for free technical assistance for farmers, had over 1,200 field staff fired; the Farm Service Agency (FSA) has been significantly impacted, in some cases being forced to close entire county offices; and the Risk Management Agency (RMA), which supports farms securing of insurance products and other risk-reduction assistance, have seen significant firings which are just starting to be understood. Ultimately, these firings are impacting these programs’ ability to access high-quality agronomic research and economic information that improves their operation, as well as their specific on-the-ground operation.

OFRF’s Commitment to Farmers

The Organic Farming Research Foundation (OFRF) has a longstanding history of advocating for policies, research, and programs that support organic farmers, both certified and non-certified. Our efforts have directly led to increased USDA funding for organic research, the development of conservation programs tailored to organic producers, and the inclusion of organic priorities in federal farm policies and appropriations allocations. Looking ahead, we have outlined our key policy priorities to strengthen organic research and ensure farmers have the resources they need to succeed.

In this current environment of uncertainty, OFRF is actively working to both understand and address the challenges posed by these mass firings by engaging with policymakers, providing resources to affected communities, and amplifying the voices of farmers and researchers who have been affected.

We have already been working to get in contact with researchers and their support staff who have been unjustly fired during this time. If you have a story or experience you are willing to share, please reach out directly to our Senior Policy & Programs Manager at gordon@ofrf.org or through his Signal account at 207.408.3086.

How To Take Action

Staying informed and taking action right now is crucial to counteract these impacts.

  • Get Educated: We at OFRF have developed a newly updated advocacy page that will help you understand the issues and access resources. We will be continually updating this webpage as new materials and resources are developed.
  • Contact Your Representatives: Share your concerns about the impact of these layoffs on agricultural research, the technical and financial assistance that it impacts, and the rural communities that benefit from these investments. Personal stories about what these mean are oftentimes more important than impersonal data. Find their contact information here.
  • Engage in Community Advocacy: Participate in local meetings that help raise awareness of these impacts, write Letters to the Editor and opinion pieces in your local news outlets, and collaborate with organizations like OFRF to raise awareness.
  • Support Affected Workers: Offer assistance to those who have lost their jobs, whether through networking opportunities or whatever is possible given your current situation.

By taking these steps, you can contribute to a collective effort to uphold the rule of law and the integrity of agricultural research, the technical and financial assistance programs that it bolsters, and the communities that depend on it.

By |2025-03-13T17:51:05+00:00February 26th, 2025|Gordon's Policy Corner, News|
Go to Top