How Congress could make a difference and empower Oklahoma farmers for the better
The renewal of the 2023 Farm Bill is a matter of great importance, benefit and perhaps most notably, controversy.
Implemented in 1933, the Farm Bill covers various agricultural-based programs, from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (or SNAP) which provides the poor with financial assistance for groceries, to the federal program under the Crop Insurance Title insuring farmers’ crops destroyed by natural disasters.
While these programs are targeted toward specific people, no one in America will stand unaffected. As a result, there is no shortage of contradicting opinions regarding the allocation of funding.
As Congress attempts to find the line between appropriate funding for programs and limiting its impact on America’s increasing debt, there is one group of citizens whose voice must be heard over the chaos: farmers.
Farmers, the occasionally overlooked 2% of Americans tending to 50% of our land, demand increased funding for the Conservation Title. One of 12 within the bill, this title includes the programs dedicated toward sustainable agricultural practices in the efforts of conserving our natural resources.
This almost unanimous decision from one of America’s largely conservative communities may come as a shock for many. The stereotype that right-leaning citizens turn their back on conservation and ecological health is single-handedly being broken by those in the agriculture industry, where success and ecological health run hand in hand. According to the National Wildlife Foundation, 74% of farmers support voluntary conservation funding in the Farm Bill. This support is coming from America’s original conservationists, whose main goal is simply to see our land cared for.
One of the many programs these farmers are pleased to comply with is the Land Retirement Program, which provides financial compensation for farmers willing to adopt more sustainable land management techniques. Put simply, this program pays farmers for not farming certain plots of land and allowing the land to restore itself. These ecosystem-friendly practices support local biome health such as that of our threatened grasslands and wetlands, and the health of the soil itself.
The environmental benefits from a conservation-based approach to agriculture will in turn assist Congress in another battle: fighting climate change. Restoring the ecological health of America’s natural land, water and soil can single-handedly contribute to 33% of emission reductions needed by 2030. Fighting the effects of climate change is a challenging and expensive effort, and will only be won if we use the earth itself.
Tired of watching climate change and unsustainable practices slowly kill their land, farmers have taken matters into their own hands.
A prime example of this is Russ Jackson from Mountain View who practiced the conventional method of farming for 30 years. It was only until costs rose beyond a manageable amount that Jackson realized he needed to make a change to survive. This change was to begin practicing regenerative agriculture, a method of farming that leaves soil untilled and consistently covered by vegetation, compared to conventional methods that till the soil and leave it bare. This change also includes grazing on the vegetation by farm animals and thus decreasing the number of weeds and pests.
While a lack of information within his community made this change difficult, this different method of farming proved more beneficial than Jackson could have hoped. Regenerative agriculture dramatically aids the work of farmers by reducing soil erosion, increasing soil carbon intake, and decreasing the need for pesticides or fertilizer. Keeping the otherwise bare soil covered and grazed upon also increases resilience against droughts or floods.
Shane O’Daniel, another regenerative agriculture-based farmer in Weatherford, stated that when his land received “3 inches of rain, we wouldn’t be able to drive across a field. When the soil organic matter started building up, that didn’t happen. Now we see 8-12 hours of rain infiltration without runoff.” These positive effects of regenerative agriculture not only benefit farmers, but consequently, every person in America who relies on them for food.
These are only a few examples of sustainable change that programs under the Conservation Title will support. With expanded resources, Jackson's and O’Daniel’s efforts represent only a fraction of the change farmers could make to better their families and the environment.
If we wish to encourage this change and implement the best decision regarding agriculture and the earth, we need to listen to the farmers who have their hands, and their hearts, in it every day.
Megan Mosser is a student in Natural Resources and president of the American Conservation Coalition (ACC) branch at Oklahoma State University.
This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: Congress should empower state farmers to continue being good stewards
