The Power of Shared Narrative: Lessons from the Institute for Agroecology

Have you ever seen a “Map of Joy” before? What would you add to it? Along with several other interactive projects, the Map of Joy in the Food System is one of the tools that the UVM Institute for Agroecology employs to help build collaboration and shared vision of a thriving local food system.

Learning from the UVM Institute for Agroecology

Shane Rogers, UVM, IFA

Earlier this year, OFRF staff met with Shane Rogers, of the University of Vermont’s Institute for Agroecology, to learn more about their work. In mid-2025, Food Solutions New England (FSNE) transitioned much of its programming from their longtime home at the University of New Hampshire to a new institutional partnership with the University of Vermont’s Institute for Agroecology (IFA). As they navigate this transition, IFA is continuing FSNE’s communications and narrative strategy work, as well as regional policy efforts like the New England Integrated Policy Program.

Shane is the Outreach and Narrative Lead for IFA. With a background in journalism, he worked at a number of community newspapers after college, and eventually found himself in Washington D.C.. His love for food eventually combined with a desire to work in advocacy and brought him to rural Vermont, where he became involved with statewide and regional food systems organizations. More recently, he has honed in on a focus on narrative strategy, answering the question of what it means to organize a network of communicators to do this work together.

So, What is Narrative Strategy?

Shane describes narrative as a “shared interpretation of how the world works.” In other words, it’s “the guiding ideas behind the communications or the work that you’re putting out there.” Developing a shared narrative takes time, trust, and relationship building within the group or community. But Shane also points out that many folks working in movement-building spaces probably already have a shared narrative, even if we haven’t taken the time to define it or write it down. It’s the messages that resonate with the people you work with. Developing a narrative framework within a collaborative group can take time. But Shane emphasized that moving slowly with collective energy behind you is stronger in the long run than “going it alone” and then trying to convince everyone else that your way is the right way.

Identifying the messaging that makes sense for your community is key to understanding shared narrative, for instance, the environmental benefits of organic farming practices, or the peace of mind that comes from feeding your family organic food.

Once you’ve identified that narrative, using it strategically is the practice of intentionally shaping public understanding. It’s using those stories to communicate and share values, and build culture. Narrative strategy is the way that movements build the overarching stories that influence what people see as normal, acceptable, or possible. First, you identify the core narrative. Then you frame it intentionally for specific audiences.

Shared Vision, Different Vocabulary

Having a shared narrative doesn’t mean that everyone will talk about it in the same way. Shane explained that when a group or organization creates a shared narrative, it’s often in lofty language, almost nonprofit jargon. But each participating organization or group can take that vision and translate it into the language that works for their community or audience. Narrative is also not limited to the words you use. If you think of it as a way to build and shape culture, you can widen the frame to see that narrative includes the space you meet in, the programming you offer, the ways that you engage, and how you show up. These are all ways that you create a story, shift an understanding of what is normal or acceptable, and begin to create culture that is aligned with the values of your shared narrative.

Shane also reiterated that individuals or even individual organizations aren’t the only carriers of the narrative. It’s essential to look at who else is telling a similar story, and to seek out opportunities to lift those voices up.

Along those lines, Shane also pointed out that, as narratives are created within communities, it is critical to ensure that all voices and perspectives are represented. One way to do this is to invite specific groups to be reviewers. Especially if there are essential perspectives you want to include, but who don’t want to be part of the work of crafting the narrative. This can be a way to offer people or groups a seat at the table, while giving them the opportunity to opt out of all the “legwork” involved in identifying the narrative.

How Does a Map of Joy Fit In?

Map of Joy, from IFA

Shane told us the story of working with a community of practice to identify their shared narrative. As part of the process, they realized that joy was something that was often forgotten in their work in the food system. It just “didn’t fit” into the work most of the time, and they wanted to change that. They decided to celebrate joy, and to allow people to define what joy meant to them individually. The result is the Mapping Joy in the Food System project, which Shane pointed out is brilliant in its simplicity. It utilizes a free ArcGIS mapping tool and collects input through a Google Form, which then populates the map. The process allows individuals to define their own joy, sharing a sentence or a short story, and sometimes a photo of a moment or experience of joy in the food system. The map currently includes things like a story of a farm giving someone who was “down on their luck” a job, and who then ended up staying on for 5 years! Other points on the map include the bite of a fresh berry, all the amazing insects, and sharing carrots with neighbors. The project has seen entries come in from all over the world, and IFA now releases a monthly moment of joy to highlight the experience and multiply that joy through sharing it—an example of narrative strategy in action.

“Because in trying to articulate what, perhaps, joy is, it has occurred to me that among other things—the trees and the mushrooms have shown me this—joy is the mostly invisible, the underground union between us, you and me, which is, among other things, the great fact of our life and the lives of everyone and thing we love going away. If we sink a spoon into that fact, into the duff between us, we will find it teeming. It will look like all the books ever written. It will look like all the nerves in a body. We might call it sorrow, but we might call it a union, one that, once we notice it, once we bring it into the light, might become flower and food. Might be joy.” – Ross Gay, The Book of Delights

To learn more about IFA, their work, and get involved, visit https://www.uvm.edu/instituteforagroecology.

We also strongly recommend joining IFA’s Food System Communicators Community of Practice and reviewing Shane’s guide on helping organizers develop, align, and test shared narratives: Strategic Collective Communications: A Workbook for Building Solidarity and Reshaping Communications.

By admin|2026-03-25T12:34:17-04:00March 25th, 2026|News|

Growing Organic Grains and Pulses in the Northeast: What Does the Research Say?

By Brian Geier, OFRF Communications Manager. This article was originally published in the winter 2026 issue of The Natural Farmer.

Organic grain farmers depend on complex relationships amongst several moving parts of niche organic systems: from our soils, climate, microbes, insects, and diseases to specialty seed sourcing, post-harvest processing, and unique market needs.

In our quest for good info, we might wonder what research has been done on organic grains, and if any results might be helpful. But getting these answers can be overwhelming. Research findings can be difficult to decode, organic solutions might be few or far between, and specificity for our crop or region might be missing.

Through work with the Organic Farming Research Foundation (OFRF), I’ve seen a few programs and resources that I think could help organic grain and pulse growers in the Northeast, and across the country. Here is a roundup:

Introducing the Organic Research Hub

The new Organic Research Hub (“The Hub”) is a curated, searchable collection of science-backed resources for organic production. It can be searched by keyword, topic, region, or production category. For example, here are a couple noteworthy highlights from a search for grain and field crops in the northeast:

The main challenges of grain production in the northeast are outlined in an eOrganic webinar featuring work led by Dr. David Benscher (Cornell University). They are:

finding crop rotations,
sourcing seed,
identifying seeding rates,
weed management,
grain drying,
insect and rodent control during storage, and
qualities for niche markets.

The webinar delves into each challenge and presents unique considerations for crops and regions. Buyers for niche markets prefer different grain qualities. Buyers of grain for bread prefer a higher protein content. Malters are more concerned about germination. Distillers may prefer a lower protein content. Knowing your niche market is key. As the “Ten Keys to successful malting barley production in New York” publication from Cornell states, “Have a marketing plan before you plant.”

There are unique challenges with fertilization of overwintering organic grains. Research by Dr. Ellen Mallory at the University of Maine (UMO), addresses ‘Topdressing Organic Hard Winter Wheat to Enhance Grain Protein.’ Meeting the fertility needs of overwintering grains with pre-planting applications risks winter leaching. Spring applications of manure can be tricky given the 90 days-to-harvest rule for organic. Research shows that later applications of nitrogen lead to higher protein levels in grains. This resource helps growers understand the when, what, and how much to topdress for best results.

Organic grain growers in the northeast are experiencing increases in weed pressure under organic management over time. This sobering reality is addressed in a video on Weed Control in Organic Spring Cereals, also from UMO, which highlights the unique and significant weed management challenges for organic grain producers. Aside from strategies before or during planting like crop rotations or high density plantings to help organic grains out-compete weeds, growers have few options other than mechanical cultivation after the crop germinates. Grain growers can look to tine-weeding to control very young weeds, but one wet spell at the wrong time in spring and growers may miss their window. This resource focuses on in-row weeding setups, one example being the Schmotzer EPP cultivator that is controlled by hydraulic-assisted manual steering. These types of setups can be more effective at disrupting weeds that have passed the early “thread” stage than tine-weeders, and cheaper than high density planting.

Farmer-Led Resources

Organic farmers’ #1 source of information is other farmers (source: National Organic Research Agenda). Farmer-friendly resources from OFRF that grain growers may find useful include a suite of resources and a webinar on crop-livestock integration (CLI), farmer-led trials, and organic researcher spotlights. Here are a few takeaways:

In the CLI webinar, farmer Raymond Hain discusses grazing pigs at the Grain Place Foundation in the last year of pasture in their 9-year crop rotation, before opening up fields for grain and soy. The pigs, moved in 10 acre paddocks, help prepare the ground for planting. And they are left for longer periods in some places to help eradicate bindweed.

In other CLI resources, farmer Mike Bronkema reports that protein content of grains following crop-livestock integration at Shady Side Farm is double that of conventional grains. Reduced need for mechanical cultivation and increased nutrient densities are two of several benefits of CLI that all organic farmers on the CLI project spoke to OFRF about.In farmer-led trials, important work is being done with sourcing seed, variety trials, and evaluating grain qualities for niche markets. With assistance from OFRF, organic farmer Kristin Swoszowski-Tran at Ledoux Grange is testing a new crop (teff) using commercially available seed and seed-bank accessions, while Bob Quinn of the Quinn Institute tests wheat on their farm alongside a baker who evaluates for preferred qualities.

It is also worth mentioning Dr. Dil Thavarajah (Clemson University), an organic researcher who OFRF recently highlighted. While not in the northeast, her work presents advancements in grain and pulse breeding for organic systems. Her work brings seed from all over the world to test on farms in her region. The international aspect is critical for organic systems, she says, because conventional lines of pulse crops in breeding programs in the US are highly inbred and not very diverse. Her project creates breeding pipelines to speed the development of new pulse crops that are:

Suitable for organic crop rotations with existing cash crops,
Have high protein content and quality,
Are resilient to climate extremes in her area.

Organic farmers report decreased needs for mechanical cultivation following crop-livestock integration. Photo: Mike Bronkema.

Moving Forward and Making Connections

This article is far from comprehensive but I hope these resources and The Hub can be useful for growers to find the specific information most useful to you. At The Hub, there is also an Organic Farming Extension Directory to help connect growers and organic experts for future research needs. The Hub and the Directory are living resources open to additions. Feedback or suggestions for additions can be submitted via a form on OFRF’s website or by contacting OFRF staff. If farmers, ranchers, researchers, extension agents, or anyone has suggestions for additions to these resources, OFRF welcomes your input.

By admin|2026-03-19T12:30:06-04:00March 17th, 2026|News|

From Conventional to Certified: Transitioning to Organic in the Northwest

By Clare Boland, Communications and Outreach Fellow

For many farmers, transitioning to certified organic production presents a learning curve. During the three-year transition period, farmers face unique challenges in the field (restoring soil health, managing weeds without herbicides, acquiring new equipment and infrastructure) and off (maintaining financial viability, navigating National Organic Program (NOP) paperwork, and recordkeeping). At a recent Seeds of Success panel, three farmers with roots in conventional agriculture shared their experience of transitioning to organic in the Northwest, demystifying some of the challenges they faced and offering their advice on the process.

Their stories reveal not only the technical challenges of organic production, but also the mindset shifts, economic realities, and long-term resilience that come with farming in an organic system.

About the Farmers

Source: Flansburg Farm

Aaron Flansburg, of Flansburg Farm in Palouse, Washington, is a fifth-generation farmer. After graduating from Washington State University in 2002, he returned to work with his parents on the family farm. Now in his 23rd crop year, Aaron farms roughly 2,000 acres of dryland wheat, barley, peas, lentils, chickpeas, canola, and alfalfa alongside his wife and three children.

Aaron says his family has always been “innovative and progressive in terms of trying to maintain soil, keep it in place, and, in general, doing farming practices the best that we can.” Because of this, transitioning to organic felt like a logical next step.

Aaron began transitioning to organic production in 2020 with 50 acres. Today, 160 acres are certified organic, with additional acreage currently in transition and more planned. Six years into farming without chemical inputs, Aaron’s main focus is self-sufficiency – controlling costs, limiting soil input, and building resilient domestic markets so he can rely less on foreign inputs and global trade.

Source: Yellowstone River Farms

Tracey Dion is a third-generation farmer at Yellowstone River Farms in Terry, Montana. Tracey and her husband transitioned their 500-acre family operation from conventional sugar beet production to a diversified, certified organic cattle and crop farm.

When she first acquired the farm from her parents, she continued to farm conventionally until it “dawned on me that I didn’t have any worms and I was working with land that was devoid of life.” That realization spurred her decision to transition to organic, starting by growing 10 acres of alfalfa on previously unfarmed land. Gradually, they transitioned the entire farm using practices like rotational livestock grazing and cover crops. They now produce alfalfa, specialty crops, certified organic cattle, and, as of 2024, the farm expanded into selling lamb to restaurants.

Tracey believes healthy soil is the foundation of agriculture’s future. She currently serves as chair of the Montana Organic Association and mentors transitioning farmers through the Great Northwest Healthy Soils Program.

Source: Life Springs Farm

Lynn Schaal of Life Springs Farm in Twin Falls, Idaho, was raised in a multi-generational farming and ranching family in eastern Colorado. Growing up on a sugar beet farm, he experienced severe reactions to agricultural chemicals. “I had told myself back then that if I ever had a chance to farm myself, I would never use chemicals.”

Today, Lynn and his wife farm more than 70 acres of certified organic land, producing wheat, barley, dry beans, silage corn, buckwheat, and alfalfa for organic dairy and beef operations, as well as organic lamb and poultry for restaurants.

After purchasing land that had been fallow for over two decades, they transitioned it to organic production and have been farming without chemical inputs for more than 15 years. Life Springs Farm is guided by their belief that soil is a living organism that must be nurtured, not merely a medium to hold plants. Now entering his 16th year at Life Springs Farm, Lynn also mentors other transitioning farmers in the Northwest.

Navigating the First Three Years of Transition

The NOP requires a three-year transition period for land previously farmed with prohibitive inputs, which can cause uncertainty around markets, land management, and financial risk for farmers.

For Lynn, the transition was eased by the fact that part of his land qualified for immediate certification. Located in dairy country, organic barley provided a ready market. During the transition, he farmed organic and conventional barley side by side and was struck by the price difference: “The conventional barley got one-third of what the organic barley got.” While income was limited until the entire farm was certified, the family was fully committed to becoming organic as quickly as possible.

He noted that input costs are drastically different from conventional systems, using strategies like cover cropping rather than using traditional soil inputs. “It seems like a lot of people want to concentrate on yield, you know, how many bushels to the acre are you gonna get? But to that question, I’d say, what are your input costs?” However, the comparison is not always cut-and-dry on the accounting books – while conventional farms spend more money on inputs, organic farming requires more labor and time.

Field of green Scots Bere Barley at Flansburg Farm.

Source: Flansburg Farm

Scots Bere barley growing at Flansburg Farm.

Aaron’s transition began with growing hemp seed in 2020. Because hemp could not be treated with most conventional chemicals, organic production made economic sense. The next year, severe drought further reinforced his decision to move towards organic: conventional wheat with full chemical inputs yielded only modestly better than volunteer wheat grown with no inputs at all. “I thought, huh, I actually really like growing half the crop for twice the price. That led me into thinking that [organic production] would work.”

Tracey’s transition was shaped by the physical layout of her farm, which is parceled out into separate fields. They transitioned these parcels in phases, starting with growing alfalfa to suppress weeds and rebuild nitrogen naturally. Over time, she noticed that weed species common under conventional sugar beet production began to disappear after going organic. While yields initially dropped, soil health eventually rebounded, and long-term resilience improved.

Soil Health in Organic Systems

Moving from conventional to organic, all three farmers emphasized the overall improvement in soil health after transitioning. Rather than depending on purchased soil inputs, they focus on systems that build fertility from within the farm.

Lynn uses a closed-loop approach that integrates livestock, compost, and crop rotation. Cattle play a central role in nutrient cycling, rotating alfalfa and straw help suppress weeds, and compost is applied annually, though dry conditions in the area slow on-farm compost production. He closely monitors soil health; “I go out at night and check my worms. That tells me how healthy my soil is.”

For Aaron, his perspective on tillage has evolved significantly over time. “I thought tillage was a four letter word at one point,” he shared. Now, he sees it as a practical tool, especially on a non-irrigated farm that depends solely on rainfall. Without the ability to manage weeds by controlling water, he has had to adapt, experimenting by incorporating older, mechanical tillage equipment, some of it dating back to the 1980s and 1990s. Crop rotation, planting timing, seeding direction, and cover crops all play a role in suppressing weeds as well. “My whole perspective has shifted,” Aaron shared. “I found that the soil is healing itself on the organic ground in a way I never would’ve expected. Bacteria, fungus, soil micro- and macro- organisms are working to get soil aggregation back without being suppressed by the use of chemical fertilizers, fungicides, and herbicides.”

Tracey emphasized a similar mindset shift: “You’re looking at things completely differently when you are trying to do nothing but create life.” Her farm uses manure, livestock grazing, tillage, and diverse cropping systems to build soil naturally. She views weeds as indicators of soil imbalance and uses them as diagnostic tools rather than enemies to be eradicated.

Cows and calves grazing at Yellowstone Farm.

Source: Yellowstone River Farms

Livestock grazing helps build soil health at Yellowstone River Farms.

Learning from Fellow Farmers

“The organic community is my best resource.”

-Tracey Dion, Yellowstone River Farms

When asked about key resources, all three farmers pointed to people as their most valuable source of knowledge.

Tracey relies heavily on conversations with other farmers, learning through trial and error and shared experience. “The organic community is my best resource,” she said. Lynn echoed this, drawing inspiration from older generations who farmed without chemicals and relied on observation and experimentation. “[Older generations] didn’t have the latest and greatest, they didn’t have chemicals, they didn’t have herbicides and all of that stuff available at their fingertips, yet they produced some great crops.” He continues to try out older equipment and find inspiration in traditional agricultural knowledge.

Aaron was able to find support through mentorship within the Transition to Organic Partnership Program. Farming in an area without many organic growers, seeking out fellow organic farmers through the TOPP program and attending conferences has helped him build community. Aaron also supplements farmer-to-farmer learning with books, shouting out two of his favorites: “When Weeds Talk” by Jay L. McCaman and “Weeds Control Without Poisons” by Charles Walters Jr.

Recordkeeping

For transitioning farmers, the recording-keeping associated with organic certification can seem daunting at first. To counter this, Lynn committed to managing everything digitally from day one. He scanned and digitized all applications, receipts, and documentation, creating an organized, searchable system that made inspections seamless. Using an app called Genius Scan, he converts documents into PDFs and files them instantly, eliminating the need for bulky paper records and reducing the risk of lost paperwork. The process has led to smoother inspections and less stress. He encourages other organic farmers to adopt digital recordkeeping to simplify certification requirements.

Looking Ahead

Despite the challenges presented by the organic transition period, all three farmers agreed that the results were worth it for the overall health of their farms.

“Big picture, your land is more resilient,” Tracey shared. “Yes, there’s market volatility, but you can weather the storms if you have life in your soil.” For Tracey, organic farming has deepened her sense of responsibility to the farm and its future. Her focus now includes long-term viability, succession planning, and creating a farm her children might one day want to inherit.

In the coming years, Aaron plans to transition more acres. To help with the lower yields and weed pressure during the transition period, he plans to develop a consistent crop rotation and incorporate fallow years to rebuild soil fertility. He encourages other farmers not to be discouraged by those early challenges, emphasizing that organic farming is a learning process that requires patience and adaptability. As his operation grows, he has even added labor, reflecting his belief that organic agriculture creates opportunities to bring more people back into rural communities. “I think there’s a lot of positivity for the future of organic,” Aaron said. “And I hope some of you will join the movement and be inspired the way I have been.”

Lynn is looking forward to mentoring more producers through the TOPP program. “T here’s been some great successes. And there’s also been some failures. There’s been some learning curves. But it’s been a wonderful journey.”

All three farmers’ experiences highlight that organic farming is not simply a change in inputs, but a perspective shift. While the transition can be difficult, the result is a more resilient farm, both economically and ecologically.

A dog in a field with mountains in the background.

Source: Yellowstone River Farms

A sheepdog roams the pastures at Yellowstone River Farms.

Explore Resources

By Clare Boland|2026-03-12T16:06:32-04:00March 12th, 2026|Farmer Stories, News|

Katelyn Hemmer, Policy & Programs Intern

By Katelyn Hemmer, OFRF Policy & Programs Intern, Winter 2025-26

Despite messaging around reinvigorated support for small farms, USDA’s policy choices over the last year have revealed a widespread erosion of resources for small farmers. Small farms have been the cornerstone of community for centuries, and it’s no different today. Making up 85% of all farms in the U.S., small family farms keep money in the local economy, conserve land for the next generation, and provide security in the face of global supply chain issues. Although the USDA’s financial assistance programming has by and large been utilized by larger and larger operations, the past year has resulted in a historic level of staffing cuts, leading to fewer resources for small and mid-size farmers and overall a widespread sense of uncertainty.

Key changes to agriculture policy & programs in 2025 affecting farmers in 2026:

The USDA lost almost 1 in 4 NRCS employees in 2025, the vast majority of whom worked in field offices that provide direct technical assistance and grant support to farmers.
The USDA terminated the Local Food for Schools Cooperative Agreement Program, the Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program, and the Regional Food Business Centers program, resulting in the loss of markets and support for small farmers.
Programs that remain in place, such as the Patrick Leahy Farm to School Grant Program, have raised grant floors, making it harder for smaller entities and projects to get funding.
Funding freezes, canceled programs, shutdowns, and market uncertainty have eroded farmers’ trust in the USDA and the federal government.

NRCS Program Cuts & What It Means for Farmers

Over the past year of program cuts and cancellations, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) was hit hard. NRCS provides many types of support to farmers including technical assistance, engineering, and conservation plans. NRCS cost share programs give farmers the opportunity to try more sustainable methods of production without risking their business on the initial infrastructure investment. NRCS programs have been backed up for years. Funding is competitive, with 43-44% of Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) applicants and 53-55% of Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) applicants awarded contracts. Farmers who secure cost share contracts develop a specific design plan based on technicians’ assessment of the land, and they must follow that plan exactly to receive reimbursement. Much of the work at field offices involves site visits to develop these plans, answer farmers’ questions, and confirm site requirements. Even before this year’s cuts, NRCS employees were stretched thin.

The NRCS lost almost one in four of their employees between January and September of 2025. Many offices were reduced to one or two employees or closed altogether. In rural areas, the closure or severe reduction in staff of an NRCS office means that an already lengthy, bureaucratic process has slowed to a snail’s pace. Of the thousands of employees who were fired or took deferred resignation, only 30 were located in D.C.–– the rest were from field offices around the country. This means that the cuts didn’t “optimize the USDA workforce and stop wasteful spending,” they terminated the contracts of people who provided direct support to farmers in the form of site visits, grant support, and system design. Specific agricultural experience takes years to build and is often location-based. For example, a conservation plan for a farm in New Mexico will not work for one in New York due to differences in their agroecological regions. The cuts to NRCS have created difficulty and uncertainty for farmers with current contracts, hindered the ability of offices to begin new projects, placed the responsibilities of entire offices onto one or two employees, and limited the ability of farmers to farm how they choose to. The lost time and experience resulting from these cuts will impact the efficacy of the agency and farmers’ future conservation efforts.

In December, USDA secretary Brooke Rollins announced a $700 million investment in regenerative agriculture, administered through NRCS. Without a new Farm Bill and the creation of new programs, this money is going toward EQIP and CSP contracts, with no money reserved and no plan for restaffing NRCS field offices across the country. With cuts to other funding sources, both programs are still looking at a net decrease in funding according to analysis by MAD Agriculture: EQIP is now funded at a total of $2.655 billion for FY2026, an increase of $605 million over 2018 Farm Bill baselines, but a decrease of $2.845 billion relative to the combined amount previously allocated through IRA and the 2018 Farm Bill. CSP is now funded at a total of $1.3 billion for FY2026, an increase of $300 million over 2018 Farm Bill baselines, but a decrease of $2.2 billion relative to the combined amount previously allocated through IRA and the 2018 Farm Bill.

Reductions in Funding for Agriculture Programs and Grants Hurts Small Farmers

In March, the USDA cut $1 billion in taxpayer dollars that states could use to buy local produce for institutions such as schools, childcare centers, and food banks. The Local Food for Schools Cooperative Agreement Program and the Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program were both terminated, with existing contracts being given only 60 days notice. Other programs also saw cuts–– the Patrick Leahy Farm to School Grant Program was cut by $10 million, more than half its total awarded grants in 2024. Without federal funding, schools and food banks don’t have the extra funds to pay for local, sustainable food, and small farmers can’t afford to give away their food for free.

In July, the USDA dealt another blow to small farmers by eliminating the program that runs the nation’s Regional Food Business Centers. These centers were created with the specific intention of helping small farmers and strengthening the local supply chain in the face of increasing consolidation in the industry. While the centers were only created in 2023, many had already begun funding grants for projects like expanding commercial kitchens and building freezers that allow small farmers to grow their businesses. The Northwest and Rocky Mountain Regional Food Business Center, just one of twelve across the country, reported that their programs helped establish 30 new companies, and increased sales at 50 farms and businesses that worked with the center. Before termination, the program had a budget of $360 million–– a relatively small share of the USDA annual budget, but hugely impactful to the rural communities they served, with 287 businesses across the country reporting increased revenue in just one year of operation. It is difficult to see the termination of these centers as anything more than stated support for the largest players in industrial agriculture.

In September, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins announced an $18 million investment in the Patrick Leahy Farm to School Grant Program, the largest single-year investment in the program. However, besides the upset and uncertainty that the sudden termination of grants earlier in the year caused, the USDA has set a grant floor of $100,000 for individual partnerships. This means that there will be fewer projects and they will be awarded to larger farms. In previous years, small farms and small schools benefited from the program, with grants as small as $23,000 awarded to rural schools to ensure access to healthy food and create agricultural education programs. The agency also eliminated efforts to ensure that the grants were distributed equitably to underserved communities, low-income students, small farms, and rural school districts. With the new restrictions, small farms have lost another market.

How You Can Take Action to Support Small Farmers

Small farmers are struggling to keep their doors open. The number of farms declined 8% between 2017 and 2024 with the vast majority of closed farms having sales under $50,000. With margins so small, the funding freeze in early 2025 and the subsequent termination of many grants and programs dealt a huge blow to small farms. Additionally, the pause in SNAP funding caused by the government shutdown in late 2025 and the new restrictions on the program cut into small farmers’ sales. This is especially impactful in states that have SNAP incentive models that promote healthy eating, like Colorado’s “Double Up Food Bucks” or Georgia’s “Fresh For Less”. The policy changes and political events over the past year have had a measurable effect on farmer profit and future prospects.

Our food system has always been shaped by federal and state policy. There is widespread popular support for policies that would remove artificial dyes or banning harmful pesticides from both major political parties. Officials often propose legislation that would promote agricultural research, limit money going to the biggest players, and other programs or policy changes that would make it easier to live as a small farmer in America. Policy modifications to current government programs, such as Farm to School grants, could make it easier for small farmers to secure contracts. Fully staffed and fully funded NRCS offices would allow more farmers to afford projects that protect their land. Whether you are a farmer, a land owner, or just someone who consumes food, you have a stake in this issue and the ability to get involved. Here are a couple of resources to help you get started:

By admin|2026-02-09T15:51:11-05:00February 9th, 2026|Gordon's Policy Corner, News|

A personal note as I step away from OFRF

By Gordon Merrick, OFRF Policy Program Director

This will be the last edition of Gordon’s Policy Corner that I will write. As I type that I certainly feel a mix of gratitude, pride, and a fair amount of dust in my eye. After nearly four years at the Organic Farming Research Foundation, I’ll soon be stepping away from an organization that has shaped how I think about food, farming, and what it means to do policy work that serves the people who are integral to our food system: farmers, farm workers, researchers, and those that translate the scientific research into practical tools.

When I joined OFRF, I was given an opportunity to rethink how we, a research organization, engage with policy research and advocacy that is rooted in the people we serve. Over the last four years, I’ve had the privilege of helping grow that work in ways that feel tangible and lasting: launching our Communicating with Legislators course which aims to demystify the policy process for researchers and farmers; helping craft and introduce the Organic Science and Research Investment Act in the House and the Senate; working to build stronger connections between researchers, producers, and the policymakers that serve them; developing practical, farmer-facing toolkits on USDA programs through our TOPP-W/SW work; and partnering with NRCS to strengthen research-backed tools and expertise relevant to organic within the agency.

Fellowship of the Rings photo credit: New Line Cinema

But, those are all things you can put in a report or sometimes feel in your hand. What doesn’t show up as easily on paper is the community. I’m especially proud of the role I was able to play in the TOPP network, a constellation of farmers, certifiers, researchers, nonprofits, and agency staff who are doing the unglamorous, essential work of helping organic systems, from the small urban farm to the complex distributors, exist and thrive. Forgive my nerdiness, but that larger network feels like a Tolkien-esque fellowship: a group up against the odds but deeply committed to carrying something important forward, together.

Looking ahead, I am confident that OFRF is set up to keep having an outsized impact on the adoption of organic agriculture systems. That’s because of the people that make up this organization, the relationships those people hold and nurture, and the way this organization operates: constantly grounding priorities and our work in farmer’s lived experiences. OFRF will continue to work to ensure that research is action-oriented, and refuse to accept that organic should be treated as a side quest instead of a core part of U.S. agriculture. The work we’ve built is bigger than any one person, and that is exactly how it should be.

One of the biggest lessons I’m carrying forward with me is both the need, and the effectiveness, of shifting our collective mindset from scarcity to abundance. From either/or to yes/and. From us-versus-them to whole systemic perspectives. Organic agriculture has always pointed in that direction: organic, at its core, is about working alongside natural systems to foster a naturally abundant system that already exists. Soil health doesn’t compete with profitability, farmer wellbeing isn’t matched against stewardship; they reinforce each other.

That being said, it feels important to name the moment we are in. We are living in a time when science is being questioned, expertise is being flattened to opinion, and fear is easier to sell than nuance. I hold real compassion for people who have been misled or who are reacting from a place of uncertainty or loss. At the same time, I believe strongly that compassion cannot mean silence in the face of real harm. We need to consistently provide both: patience to meet people where they are, and firm, principled opposition to actions that undermine farmers, research, and the systems that sustain us all.

I’m deeply grateful for the farmers, researchers, partners, and colleagues who trusted me, argued with me, taught me, and built things alongside me. OFRF will keep doing work that matters. But starting later this month, I’ll be cheering it on loudly from the sidelines.

I’m not disappearing, and I genuinely hope to stay in touch. If you want to keep talking about organic agriculture, the relationship between research and policy, how to build something better than what we’ve inherited, or to share your favorite bread recipe, please reach out. I’d love that.

Eat well and breathe deeply,

Gordon

By admin|2026-02-04T16:40:07-05:00February 4th, 2026|Gordon's Policy Corner, News|

Experimenting with on-farm materials to create organic soil amendments

Written by Mary Hathaway, OFRF’s Research & Education Program Manager, and Kay Bell, FLT Program participant

Mesquite bean pods, collected by Kay Bell, to use as a soil amendment at Passion Garden

Kay Bell has been farming for ten years on her three-acre farm in Waco, TX, called Passion Garden. She grows a variety of fruits, vegetables and herbs that she sells as fresh produce and herbal teas at local farmers markets and health food stores. Her farm is currently in the process of transitioning to certified organic, with a focus on building her own on-farm fertility.

Kay has a big focus on using locally available, on farm inputs to help improve her soil health, and has long considered using the pods of the Mesquite Tree Bean in her fertility plan. As a farmer focused on growing the health of her community, she looked into the nutrient content of Mesquite Bean, and realized that it has a high protein content and is rich in many nutrients. Since the tree is prevalent on her property, and the pods are not too difficult to harvest, she believed it could be a useful amendment in building her soil health.

Using Mesquite Beans as a Soil Amendment for Tomatoes

To test her idea, Kay wanted to build an experiment that would assess the impact of mesquite bean meal as a soil amendment on the yield of ‘Celebrity’ tomatoes, one of her favorite tomato varieties. She hopes that the addition of Mesquite Bean Meal (MBM) will result in a measurable increase in total or marketable tomato yield compared to her normal soil amendments in raised beds. To create the MBM, Kay harvested the pods, and used a simple mill to grind them so that they were in an easy to use powder format.

On-Farm Trial Plan

Plot map from Passion Garden’s FLT Program trial

In the beginning of August 2025, with technical support from OFRF’s Farmer-Led Trials Program staff, Kay prepared eight raised beds, each measuring 4 feet wide by 8 feet long, to provide a uniform growing area for the plants. All of the beds were filled with the same base soil mixture and compost. Kay planted 4 tomato plants in each of the beds in September. At the time of transplanting, the four treatment raised beds received ½ cup of the MBM. During the growing season, all of the beds were treated consistently, with the same irrigation schedule, staking, and pest management.

By mid-October, Kay began tracking the yields, her key metric of the trial. This was recorded as total weight and marketable weight, the weight of tomatoes that meet standards for commercial sale (free from major blemishes, cracks, or rot). Kay also took observations of plant health, pest pressure, and any plant losses that might impact the findings for the trial.

Farmer-Led Trial Results: Tomato Production Increased with On-Farm Amendment

Once all of Kay’s data had been collected, the analysis revealed a significant difference in yield between the control and meal treatments, with the treatment receiving the MBM yielding more per plant and overall than the control treatment.

Anecdotally, Kay observed improved water drainage and thinks that the MBM helped improve the drainage in her clay soils. She also noted increased presence of worms and other soil organisms, and she speculates that the natural sugars in the MBM help attract more soil invertebrates.

Yield results from Passion Garden’s FLT Program trial, showing yield of tomatoes in the control group (blue) vs the group grown using Mesquite Bean Meal (red).

Kay is very motivated by the success of this trial and plans to use MBM as a pre-transplant amendment throughout her farm. She is also excited to spread the word on the many uses of Mesquite Bean – including as a coffee alternative, as a gluten free flour in baking, and a sweet jelly.

Stay tuned for a final report on Kay’s trial coming out later this year.

Prepped beds at Passion Garden during the 2025 FLT.

“I know this trial has made me stronger as a farmer. And I just look forward to experimenting with nature to grow things with resources I have on-farm.”

– Kay Bell, FLT Program Participant

Tomatoes harvest from Passion Garden, during the 2025 trial.

This is part of a series of blogs highlighting farmers who are participating in OFRF’s Farmer-Led Trials program. Farmers receive technical support to address their production challenges through structured on-farm trials. To learn more about OFRF’s Farmer-Led Trials Program, visit our website page at https://ofrf.org/research/farmer-led-research-trials/

To learn more about Kay Bell and Passion Garden, check out this ATTRA article.

Kay is President of the National Women in Agriculture Association Texas Chapter: https://www.nwiaa.org/texas

Learn more about OFRF’s Farmer-Led Trials Program

Meet the rest of the 2025 FLT Program Participants

By admin|2026-02-03T11:11:38-05:00January 27th, 2026|Farmer Stories, News|

Organic Agriculture Research in Action: High Tunnels and Cover Cropping with Moore Family Farms

Written by Rebecca Champagne, PhD, OFRF Conservation Scientist

Meet Moore Family Farms

Robert and Dakota are the father-son team behind Moore Family Farm.

Moore Family Farms is a family-owned and operated farm located in Warsaw, North Carolina. Managed by Robert Moore and his son Dakota, the farm was founded in 1833 based on principles of sustainability. Out of the 260-acre farm, 22 acres are in production—12 conventional and 10 certified organic. On the organic side of the farm, they grow watermelons, collard greens, and cabbage. The non-organic side of the farm produces bell peppers, tomatoes, and cantaloupe.

“Our farm was revived in 2018, focusing on sustainable practices to honor our heritage while also adapting to modern agricultural trends,” Dakota explained.

Their crops are sold mainly wholesale through a regional organic produce distributor called Happy Dirt. They also had a contract with the Second Harvest Food Bank through the Local Food Purchase Assistance program (LFPA), but this contract was unfortunately lost due to federal funding freezes. They are currently exploring additional markets through Feast Down East, a local non-profit organization that connects farmers, restaurants, grocers, and consumers.

Moore Family Farms began the process of transitioning part of their farm to organic production in 2020 and has been certified since late 2023. Dakota mentioned that rising input prices prompted them to seek certification. “Fertilizer prices skyrocketed between 2019 and 2021, and we couldn’t afford to buy them,” he explained. “We did a lot of economic research into organic and decided to jump in.”

He also pointed out that other key reasons for seeking certification included market demand for organic produce and the family’s passion for environmental stewardship.

The volatility of various markets, like fertilizers, can put significant financial strain on farmers. That’s why federal funding for organic agriculture research is so important and helps family farms hedge against production risks.

The Importance of Organic Agriculture Research

During his college days at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical (A&T) State University, Dakota had the opportunity to work on agricultural research in high tunnel systems. He immediately noticed the difference in crops grown in high tunnels during extreme weather. Dakota and his father knew that with a high tunnel, they could get their watermelons planted earlier in the season and have more control of the growing environment. For farmers who rely on wholesale markets, getting their produce out of the field earlier can mean a longer growing season, protection against extreme weather, and ultimately more revenue.

Dakota with watermelon grown on their farm.

“With our high tunnel, we can now harvest watermelons before the Fourth of July,” Dakota said.

Since establishing their high tunnel for organic watermelon production, they’ve seen increased crop protection against extreme heat and cold, which has enhanced the quality of the crop. The high tunnel also extends their growing season, allowing them to plant and harvest crops earlier and later than before.

They’ve also been planting cover crops in their organic and conventional cropland, which have provided weed suppression, reduced soil runoff/erosion, and provided water retention benefits. “We were using plastic mulch for water retention to trap soil moisture, but we didn’t want to be throwing it away every season. We started using cover crops and saw that it helped keep more moisture in the soil,” said Dakota. He also saw the soil health benefits. According to soil test results, one of their fields saw an almost 3% increase in soil organic matter (SOM) over a three-year period, from 1.76% to 4.26% after using cover crops consistently.

View soil test results from Moore Family Farms BEFORE and AFTER utilizing cover crops in their cropping rotations ⬇️

BEFORE Cover Crops

AFTER Cover Crops

Cover crops growing at Moore Family Farm.

The benefits of cover cropping on soil health and soil organic matter show that investments in organic agriculture research can benefit all farms looking to adopt conservation practices, not just organic farms. Moore Family Farms, operating as a split operation with both conventional and certified organic land, can utilize methods that are foundational to organic production across their entire farm. There has been abundant research on cover cropping across the country to provide organic and conventional farmers with the latest practices to help increase soil fertility and organic matter levels without costly synthetic fertilizers.

Without public research funding on these and other agronomic topics, the risk associated with agricultural experimentation would be placed more on farmers themselves, leading to slower development of beneficial innovations and less widespread adoption of practices that can result in greater conservation of natural resources. Investments in organic agriculture research advance environmental stewardship on more than just certified organic land as the findings from this research can give all farm types the knowledge and resources they need to make their operations more resilient. And the benefits of research extend beyond the farm, too. According to an analysis done by the USDA Economic Research Service (ERS), every $1 invested into agricultural research triggers a $20 economic benefit. This provides long-term benefits in addressing agronomic issues, increases farm productivity and profitability, and ultimately benefits the economies and resiliency of communities.

You can support farms like Moore Family and help strengthen the agricultural research all farmers depend on by:

Letting us know about the impact agricultural research has had on your farm (contact communications[at]ofrf.org!).
Enrolling in our free Communicating with Legislators email-based course and sharing your story with elected officials.
Writing a letter to the editor or an opinion piece in your local newspaper, talking about how research projects/programs have benefited your farm.

Dakota Moore in front of a high tunnel on their farm.

By admin|2026-01-15T09:46:04-05:00January 21st, 2026|Farmer Stories, News|

Farmers across the U.S. are eligible for significant technical and financial assistance from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).

Versión en español a continuación.

If you are engaging in environmental stewardship and conservation efforts on your farm, the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) can help support your progress. CSP compensates agricultural producers who agree to increase conservation on their farm by adopting additional conservation activities or improving upon existing practices. With technical assistance from a conservation planner, farmers will work to increase conservation through practices best suited to their operation, like cover cropping, integrated grazing, or building wildlife habitats.

Download CSP Application Summary Flyer

Descargar el folleto

Obtain additional translated materials, or schedule interpretation services for phone calls or in-person visits, at farmers.gov/translations, or request personalized Spanish language support for any USDA resource, at farmers.gov/translations#spanish-request.

Important Points:

CSP provides annual payments for farmers, with the annual minimum being $4,000, for a 5-year contract for installing, maintaining, and improving existing conservation on a farm.
CSP payments are reported to the IRS and should be treated as taxable income.
Unlike the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), there are no minimum acreage requirements, but the program requires whole-farm enrollment. The applicant’s farm must be in existing production; the program generally will not support land being cleared or prepared for future production.
Contacting your local NRCS office is a key step in determining your eligibility and beginning your application process.
Applications are accepted on a rolling basis and will be reviewed on the next ranking date for your state. Begin your application process as soon as possible to ensure completion by the next deadline! Applications are prioritized by local resource concerns and the applicant’s level of need.
- The 2026 batching deadline was January 15, 2026, for all states.
You will need to create a free online account at Farmers.gov and ensure that it is up to date.
If you do not own your land, you will need to submit written permission from the owner with your application.
New this year: the Regenerative Agriculture Initiative may be an opportunity for organic and transitioning-to-organic producers to leverage their operational status for qualifying for contracts.

Step 1. Research Your Options.

CSP offers support for a broad scope of conservation activities and projects to producers, including both financial and technical support. CSP contracts last 5 years, with the option for renewal. Read up on the program to determine your eligibility and brainstorm how you already are, or would like to, increase conservation on your farm. For some possible project inspiration, check out NCRS’s Conservation at Work video series.

Step 2. Connect with USDA.

Create or update your account at Farmers.gov, and contact your local NRCS office to get started. Your conservation specialist will confirm your eligibility and help you determine your farm’s current stewardship thresholds. A stewardship threshold is NRCS’s benchmark for whether a CSP applicant is meeting or exceeding the level of conservation for a specific natural resource concern. To qualify, applicants must meet the threshold for at least two priority resource concerns across all land uses in their operation and commit to meeting or exceeding at least one additional concern by the end of their contract.

Guiding questions for initial contact with NRCS:

“I’m interested in _conservation project(s) of interest_. What do you need from me to get started on my application?”
“What additional funding opportunities are available to my farm?”
“When is the deadline for the next CSP ranking period?”
“I _(own/rent)_ my land. What documents will you need for completion of my CSP application by the deadline?”
“My farm is _certified/transitioning_ to organic. What additional will you need for completion of my conservation plan and application by the deadline?”

Step 3. Gather your application documents.

You’ll need your:

Official tax ID (Social Security Number or Employer Identification Number)
Adjusted gross income certification (Form CCC-941), which requires your Taxpayer ID Number and AGI from the previous 3 tax years.
Deed, or property lease agreement, and written authorization from the landowner to install structural or vegetative practices.
A map showing all land uses and acres in the operation, and a map or other documentation identifying any known ineligible land and associated acreage amounts (NRCS staff will help you obtain this information if you don’t already have it).
Farm tract number (obtained from Farmers.gov or FSA membership).
Documentation of organic certification (if applicable).
Documentation of your land’s irrigation history (if applicable to project).

Step 4. Complete your application & submit!

Your NRCS conservation specialist will complete and submit your application form (CPA 1200) based on your established conservation plan.

Step 5. Implement your plan.

If your application is selected, NRCS will offer a contract outlining the approved conservation activities, payment rates, and other terms. CSP contracts last five years and begin only after both the farmer and NRCS sign the agreement. NRCS provides technical assistance, verifies completion of contract activities, and issues annual payments after October 1 each year.

Apply for CSP now to take conservation efforts on your farm to the next level!

All of this information is summarized in a printable, downloadable PDF below in English and Spanish.

English

Español

Los agricultores de todo Estados Unidos son elegibles para recibir asistencia técnica y financiera del Servicio de Conservación de Recursos Naturales (NRCS).

Si usted participa en esfuerzos de gestión ambiental y conservación en su granja, El Programa de Administración para la Conservación (CSP) puede ayudarle a apoyar su progreso. El CSP compensa a los productores agrícolas que aceptan aumentar la conservación en su granja adoptando actividades adicionales de conservación o mejorando prácticas existentes. Con la asistencia técnica de un planificador de conservación, los agricultores trabajarán para aumentar la conservación mediante prácticas más adecuadas a su explotación, como la construcción de cultivos de cobertura, el pastoreo integrado o la construcción de hábitats para la vida silvestre.

Descargar el folleto

Download CSP Application Summary Flyer

Obtenga materiales traducidos adicionales, programa servicios de interpretación para llamadas telefónicas o visitas presenciales, en farmers.gov/translations, o solicite apoyo personalizado en español para cualquier recurso del USDA, en farmers.gov/translations#spanish-request.

Puntos importantes:

CSP da pagos anuales a los agricultores, con un mínimo anual de 4.000 dólares, por un contrato de 5 años por instalar, mantener y mejorar la conservación existente en la granja.
Los pagos del CSP se reportan al IRS y deben considerarse ingreso sujeto a impuestos.
A diferencia del Programa de Incentivos para la Calidad Ambiental (EQIP), no existen requisitos mínimos de superficie, pero el programa exige la inscripción de toda la granja. La granja del solicitante debe estar en producción existente; El programa generalmente no apoya la limpieza o preparación de terrenos para futuras producciones.
Contactar con la oficina local del NRCS es un paso clave para determinar su elegibilidad y comenzar el proceso de solicitud.
Las solicitudes se aceptan de forma continua y se revisarán en la siguiente fecha de clasificación para su estado. ¡Comience su proceso de solicitud lo antes posible para asegurarse de finalizar antes de la próxima fecha límite! Las solicitudes se priorizan según los recursos locales y el nivel de necesidad del solicitante.
- La fecha límite para 2026 fue el 15 de enero de 2026 para todos los estados.
Tendrá que crear una cuenta online gratuita en Farmers.gov y asegurarse de que está actualizada.
Si no es propietario de su terreno, tendrá que presentar un permiso por escrito del propietario con su solicitud.
Novedad de este año: la Iniciativa de Agricultura Regenerativa podría ser una oportunidad para que los productores orgánicos y en transición a orgánicos aprovechen su estatus operativo para calificar para contratos.

Paso 1. Investigue sus opciones.

El CSP ofrece apoyo para un amplio alcance de actividades y proyectos de conservación a los productores, incluyendo apoyo financiero y técnico. Los contratos CSP duran 5 años, con opción de renovación. Infórmese sobre el programa para determinar su elegibilidad y haga una lluvia de ideas sobre cómo ya está, o le gustaría, aumentar la conservación en su granja. Para alguna posible inspiración en proyectos, revise la serie de videos sobre Conservación en el Trabajo de NCRS.

Paso 2. Contacte con USDA.

Cree o actualice su cuenta en Farmers.gov y contacte con la oficina local del NRCS para empezar. Su especialista en conservación confirmará su elegibilidad y le ayudará a determinar los límites actuales de gestión de su granja. Un umbral de manejo responsable es el referente de la NRCS para determinar si un solicitante de CSP cumple o supera el nivel requerido de conservación para una inquietud específica de recursos naturales. Para calificar, los solicitantes deben cumplir el umbral para al menos dos inquietudes prioritarias de recursos naturales en todos los usos del suelo en su operación y comprometerse a cumplir o superar al menos una inquietud adicional antes de finalizar su contrato.

Preguntas orientadoras para el contacto inicial con el NRCS:

“Me interesa el/los _proyecto(s) de conservación(es) que le interese. ¿Qué necesitan de mí para empezar con mi solicitud?”
“¿Qué oportunidades adicionales de financiación hay disponibles para mi granja?”
“¿Cuándo es la fecha límite para el próximo periodo de clasificación CSP?”
“Yo _(poseo/alquilo)_ mi tierra. ¿Qué documentos necesitarán para completar mi solicitud CSP antes de la fecha límite?”

Paso 3. Reúna sus documentos de solicitud.

Necesitará su:

Identificación fiscal oficial (Número de Seguro Social o de Identificación del Empleador)
Certificación de ingreso bruto ajustado (Formulario CCC-941), que requiere su número de identificación de contribuyente y AGI de los 3 años fiscales anteriores.
Escritura, o contrato de arrendamiento de propiedad, y autorización por escrito del propietario para instalar prácticas estructurales o vegetativas.
Un mapa que muestre todos los usos del suelo y acres en la operación, y un mapa u otra documentación que identifique cualquier terreno no elegible conocido y las extensiones asociadas (el personal de NRCS le ayudará a obtener esta información si aún no la tiene).
Número de parcela de la granja (obtenido de Farmers.gov o de la membresía FSA).
Documentación de certificación orgánica (si procede).
Documentación del historial de riego de su terreno (si es aplicable al proyecto).

Paso 4. ¡Complete su solicitud y envíela!

Su especialista en conservación del NRCS completará y enviará su formulario de solicitud (CPA 1200) en base a su plan de conservación establecido.

Paso 5. Implemente su plan.

Si su solicitud es seleccionada, el NRCS ofrecerá un contrato que detalle las actividades de conservación aprobadas, las tarifas de pago y otros términos. Los contratos CSP duran cinco años y solo comienzan después de que tanto el agricultor como el NRCS firmen el acuerdo. El NRCS proporciona asistencia técnica, verifica la finalización de las actividades contractuales y emite pagos anuales después del 1 de octubre de cada año.

¡Solicite CSP ahora para llevar los esfuerzos de conservación en su granja al siguiente nivel!

Toda esta información se resume en un PDF imprimible y descargable a continuación, disponible en inglés y español.

Español

English

By Clare Boland|2026-01-22T12:38:40-05:00January 15th, 2026|Federal Assistance, News, Spanish Resources, TOPP West|

New Year, Same Farm Bill… Again.

By Gordon Merrick, OFRF Policy Program Director

If it feels like we’ve been talking about the Farm Bill forever, you’re not wrong. As we turn the calendar to a new year, we are still operating under an extended version of the 2018 Farm Bill, once again kicking the can down the road on a comprehensive, bipartisan update to one of the most consequential pieces of legislation for U.S. agriculture.

Here’s a quick reset on where things stand, what key players are signaling, and how OFRF is approaching the year ahead.

A Quick Catch-Up: How We Got Here

Last year was defined less by progress and more by procedural survival. Congress passed multiple short-term extensions to avoid a lapse in Farm Bill authorities, ultimately extending the 2018 Farm Bill into the new year. While this kept critical programs operating, it also delayed meaningful updates to research, conservation, and rural development policy, areas that increasingly need modernization.

At the same time, Farm Bill negotiations were repeatedly sidelined by larger political dynamics: leadership changes, appropriations brinkmanship, reconciliation debates, and an overall lack of floor time. The result was a familiar outcome: temporary certainty paired with long-term stagnation.

For organic farmers and researchers, this has real consequences. Programs authorized by the Farm Bill can’t evolve, funding levels can’t be right-sized, and emerging challenges—climate volatility, supply chain disruptions, market consolidation—remain inadequately addressed.

What Key Players Are Saying About the Farm Bill This Year

As Congress returns, there’s no shortage of rhetoric about getting a Farm Bill “done this year.” Committee leadership in both chambers continues to express support for a bipartisan process, and USDA officials have reiterated the importance of predictability for farmers and rural communities.

That said, the signals are mixed. Some members are focused on a “skinny” Farm Bill approach. Others are openly questioning whether the traditional Farm Bill coalition can hold together. Meanwhile, broader debates over federal spending and agency structure continue to loom over the process.

What’s clear is this: nothing will move on autopilot. A successful Farm Bill this year will require sustained engagement, coalition-building, and pressure from outside Washington to remind lawmakers what’s at stake.

What OFRF Is Doing This Year for Organic Agriculture Policy

OFRF is approaching this Farm Bill cycle with clarity and intention. Our priorities remain consistent: ensuring that organic agriculture is fully recognized as a research-driven, conservation-forward, and economically significant part of U.S. agriculture.

This year, that means:

Advocating for robust investments in organic research, including OREI, ORG/RTOP, and USDA intramural research.
Working to ensure that technical and financial assistance programs actually function for organic and transitioning-to-organic producers, not just on paper.
Elevating the role of organic agriculture as an economic engine, particularly in rural communities.
Supporting bipartisan policy solutions, like the Organic Science and Research Investment (OSRI) Act, that can be integrated into a final Farm Bill.

Just as importantly, we’re continuing to ground-truth these priorities through direct conversations with farmers, researchers, and partners across the country. Policy that isn’t informed by lived experience doesn’t hold up, and we’re committed to making sure that doesn’t happen.

How You Can Get Involved

If there’s one lesson from the last year, it’s that silence doesn’t move policy. Whether this Farm Bill becomes another extension or a meaningful reset depends in part on how clearly lawmakers hear from the communities they serve.

You can:

Talk with your members of Congress about why organic research and conservation matter in your district.
Share your experiences navigating USDA programs: what works, what doesn’t, and what needs to change.
Engage with OFRF’s and our partner’s policy updates, sign-on letters, and action alerts as opportunities arise.
Encourage colleagues, partners, and neighbors to stay engaged, even when the process feels slow or opaque.

A new year doesn’t automatically bring a new Farm Bill. But sustained, informed engagement can.

We’ll keep doing our part to make sure organic agriculture is not an afterthought in this process. We hope you’ll stay in it with us.

Eat well and breathe deeply,

Gordon

By admin|2026-01-08T08:15:23-05:00January 8th, 2026|Gordon's Policy Corner, News|

Organic Agriculture Research in Action: Navigating Urban Farming with Little Lighthouse Farm

Written by Rebecca Champagne, PhD, OFRF Conservation Scientist

Meet Little Lighthouse Farm

Little Lighthouse Farm is a half-acre, certified-organic urban farm founded in 2022. Located in central Phoenix, Arizona, Rachel Opio runs the farm at the house she was born and raised in. She aims to grow everything that’s in season: produce, leafy greens like collards, dandelion greens, and swiss chard, as well as herbs, pasture-raised chickens for egg production, and a beehive for honey. She also cultivates native plants that many people don’t realize they can eat, like purslane.

Rachel sells her produce and other products at the local farmer’s market, at the farm stand right on the farm, and at the food bank. She accepts SNAP, WIC, and the Senior Nutrition Program, and she’s one of only a few places in the area to do so.

“As a black female farmer, I want to ensure my neighbors of all races, backgrounds, and ethnicities have nutrient-rich foods,” Rachel said. “I also offer garden consulting for my neighbors who want to learn how to grow their own edible landscapes.”

Little Lighthouse Farm gained USDA organic certification in February 2025. It is currently the only black-owned, certified organic urban farm in Arizona. Given the history of discrimination in federal lending programs against black farmers by the USDA, it was important to Rachel to seek certification and build trust in what she produces.

Although Little Lighthouse Farm is only half an acre in size, producing crops on even a small scale comes with its challenges. Additionally, there are unique challenges to urban farming. That’s why federal funding for organic agriculture research is so important and helps producers of all sizes.

The Importance of Organic Agriculture Research

Rachel was motivated to implement conservation practices to reduce the risks associated with irrigation costs, one of the biggest concerns on her farm. During the very hot Arizona summers, Rachel can spend up to four hours a day hand-watering her crops. Not only is this time-consuming, but because she operates an urban farm that’s reliant on city water, it can be expensive. She is also passionate about soil health and providing habitat for beneficial insects, like pollinators.

Rachel is already seeing the benefits of implementing conservation practices. She began using cover crops and set up a pollinator garden when she started the farm three years ago. Cover cropping, in particular, has helped alleviate compaction that is typical of the soil in Phoenix.

“If I hadn’t used cover crops, I would have never been able to grow anything in this soil. The first day I put a trowel in the soil after amending it for over a year, the trowel just slid in like a glove. And then I saw the worms. I was crying. Soil life is amazing.”

Investments in organic agriculture research can help farmers of all backgrounds and farms of all sizes. Urban farms face unique challenges of their own but can implement conservation practices just like larger-scale farms, which means they benefit from research findings, too. Organic research projects focused on urban agriculture have published studies that can help with conservation goals such as guides about water management and access and strategies for hydroponic strawberry production.

At Little Lighthouse Farm, soil health was restored because of the years of research on the benefits of cover cropping. Better soil health allows Rachel to grow better crops, which provide nutritious products to community members. Research funding makes this all possible and demonstrates that innovations in organic agriculture research can result in widespread adoption of beneficial practices, helping farms of all sizes and production types meet conservation goals. And the benefits of research extend beyond the farm, too. According to an analysis done by the USDA Economic Research Service (ERS), every $1 invested into agricultural research triggers a $20 economic benefit. This provides long-term benefits in addressing agronomic issues, increases farm productivity and profitability, and ultimately benefits the economies and resiliency of communities.

You can support farmers like Rachel and help strengthen the agricultural research all farmers depend on by:

Letting us know about the impact agricultural research has had on your farm (contact communications[at]ofrf.org!).
Enrolling in our free Communicating with Legislators email-based course and sharing your story with elected officials.
Writing a letter to the editor or an opinion piece in your local newspaper, talking about how research projects/programs have benefited your farm.