Farmers in Richland County can get paid to plant cover crops — here's how
The Richland Soil and Water Conservation District is accepting applications for the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District Cover Crop Cost Share program. Enrollment is open until June 20, according to an announcement.
The program aims to encourage farmers and landowners to plant cover crops to reduce soil erosion and enhance soil health. In 2024, the program helped establish cover crops on 380 acres of farmland in Richland County.
Producers accepted into the program will receive $12 per acre for cover crops planted. A cap of 175 acres applies for landowners enrolling in multiple counties. Enrollment is open for those landowners and farmers within the assessment zone. However, cover crops planted in the watersheds of Charles Mill or Pleasant Hill Lakes qualify for funding without an acreage cap.
Participants must note that they cannot enroll in this program if they already receive funding for the same cover crop through other programs like the Environmental Quality Incentives Program or the Conservation Stewardship Program. Additionally, applicants must adhere to the seeding dates and rates set by the United States Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service.
To apply or for more information, interested parties can contact Technician Matt Wallace at 419.747.8687 or via email at Wallace.Matt@RichlandSWCD.Net.
This story was created by Jane Imbody, jimbody@gannett.com, with the assistance of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Journalists were involved in every step of the information gathering, review, editing and publishing process. Learn more at cm.usatoday.com/ethical-conduct or share your thoughts at http://bit.ly/3RapUkA with our News Automation and AI team.
This article originally appeared on Mansfield News Journal: Richland County farmers: Want $12 an acre to plant cover crops?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
CHARLEBOIS: Where's the beef? Priced out of the Canadian grill
With summer weather finally settling in, Canadians are returning to a familiar ritual — firing up the barbecue. But as they approach the meat counter in search of steaks and burgers, many are encountering a far less familiar reality: Shockingly high prices. This year, the meat aisle has become a case study in supply-side economics and market dysfunction. Since January, according to Statistics Canada, beef prices have surged at an alarming pace. Striploin is up 34.2%, top sirloin 33.7%, and rib cuts nearly 12%. Pork rib cuts and chicken breasts have each risen 5.9%, and even meatless burger patties are 6.8% more expensive. While all proteins in the so-called 'meat trifecta' have climbed, beef leads the charge — by a wide margin. Behind these increases lies a sobering trend. Canada's beef cow inventory has dropped to just 3.38 million head — the lowest since 1989. That's a 1.2% decrease from last year, signalling more than just cyclical decline. Many cattle producers are exiting the industry while prices are favourable, opting to reinvest in less volatile sectors or shift entirely to crop production. In short, the Canadian beef industry is retreating and becoming increasingly risk-averse. South of the border, the U.S. is seeing a similar trend — but far less severe. According to the United States Department of Agriculture, the American beef cow herd declined just 0.5% to 27.9 million head. And that gap shows up in retail prices. Over the past year, U.S. boneless sirloin steak rose just 5.7%, compared to a staggering 22% in Canada. Ground beef increased 10.8% in the U.S., but by 23% here at home. Beef inflation is simply hitting Canadians harder. KINSELLA: Complaint filed after Ontario farm accused of refusing to hire Israeli LILLEY: Draft trade deal with U.S. hammered out amid 'intensive discussions' GOLDSTEIN: Tax Freedom Day is June 8, when Canadians finally start working for themselves Other than a shrinking herd, there are several other contributing factors: Canada's expansive geography, higher transportation costs, a limited number of federally licensed beef processors, carbon pricing, and higher labour costs all compound the problem. Regulations and logistical inefficiencies are more burdensome in Canada, driving up prices for retailers — and ultimately consumers. But there's another possibility we can't afford to ignore: Potential collusion within the industry. In the United States, the federal government has shown little tolerance for anti-competitive behaviour in the meat sector. Under President Joe Biden, the White House launched a 2022 investigation into price fixing among major meat packers — JBS, Tyson Foods, Cargill, and National Beef. That investigation has since resulted in several high-profile settlements, including a US$83.5-million payout by JBS in February. The Canadian Competition Bureau, by contrast, has remained largely silent on similar concerns. Perhaps it's time for that to change. The consequences are already visible. According to industry researcher IBISWorld, Canadian per capita beef consumption fell by 7.1% in 2023 and another 2.1% in 2024. This is no longer just a matter of shifting dietary preferences — it's a structural shift in consumer behaviour. Beef is increasingly seen as a luxury item, with ground beef becoming the primary choice for budget-conscious households still committed to red meat. That's unfortunate. Beef remains one of the most natural, authentic and sustainable sources of protein available to Canadians. Canadian ranchers and processors have made significant strides in improving environmental stewardship and animal welfare, often without fanfare. As a whole, beef delivers exceptional nutritional value, supports rural economies, and offers a level of traceability and food safety few protein alternatives can match. For many Canadian families, a summer steak on the grill is starting to feel more like a splurge than a staple. Consumers will continue to enjoy beef — but with moderation, and on occasions that justify the cost. Barbecue season hasn't disappeared. But for many, it's starting to look a little different: More sausages, more chicken, and less striploin. A shame, really — for a product that offers so much more than just taste.
Yahoo
30-05-2025
- Yahoo
Texas moves close to ban on some land sales to foreigners
With just three days left before the deadline, the House has approved the negotiated version of a bill that bans people tied to the governments of China, North Korea, Russia and Iran from purchasing land in the state. The bill awaits Senate approval before going to the governor. Senate Bill 17 has moved forward in Texas despite a federal court ruling that a similar law in Florida was likely beyond the state's authority. It's the second attempt by Sen. Lois Kolkhorst, who said in 2023 that the right time to address concerns over foreign entities owning Texas land is before it becomes widespread — something she sees as a way to bolster national security. The latest data available shows that investors from the four countries own a small portion of farmland in Texas and nationally. Chinese investors own about 383,000 total acres of U.S. farmland — about 600 square miles — which is less than 1% of total, foreign-held acreage, according to the United States Department of Agriculture's 2021 land report. On Thursday, the House approved a conference report on the measure after both chambers passed versions of the bill. Last session, although the Senate passed a similar measure, the House failed to take it up. In mid-May, Kolkhorst initiated a process to reconcile differences between the chambers over who should be banned. The select group of lawmakers known as a conference committee worked in private on the conference version that is now up for a vote in the Senate. The conference report preserves the last-minute amendments from the bill passed by the House: giving the governor the authority to add more countries to the list, restricting leaseholders from renting for up to 100 years to just one year, and including language that barred people who were part of a ruling political party from buying land. The conference committee version requires that the person have permission to live in the U.S. legally, but also that the property would serve as a primary residence. Under that version, those in the United States on work or student visas are also barred from buying a controlling interest in land as a business investment. 'The metric by which we decide who can and cannot be buying land here is to help the asylum seeker, but not to allow someone that just happens to be here on a tourist visa or a student visa to buy multiple properties, investment properties and everything else,' Kolkhorst said on the Senate floor in May. Asian Texans for Justice, an advocacy group that opposes the effort, said they see the bill as racist and discriminatory. The group has said the bill revives 'a shameful chapter in American history — when Asian immigrants were banned from owning land.' Lily Trieu, executive director of the group, said that by passing the bill, lawmakers were setting up Texans to have their taxpayer dollars spent on inevitable lawsuits. 'The Florida bill is caught up in the courts. So why would you model a bill after one that's being challenged legally?' she said in an interview. 'Why wouldn't you file a bill that you know is legally sound and constitutional? The conference committee version also lays out specific procedures for the attorney general to investigate, and the process by which land could be reclaimed if someone were found to have violated the law. Texas and Florida are not alone in their attempts to pass such legislation: between January 2023 and July 2024, at least 22 other states initiated similar bills, according to the federal Congressional Research Service. Florida's law, which also includes Cuba, Syria, and Venezuela, was struck down by a U.S. District Court in 2023, but the law remains in effect while the state is appealing it. In a 2023 letter to the court, the U.S. Department of Justice said the law violates the federal Fair Housing Act and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution: 'These unlawful provisions will cause serious harm to people simply because of their national origin, contravene federal civil rights laws, undermine constitutional rights, and will not advance the State's purported goal of increasing public safety,' the Department of Justice wrote. The Texas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union raised similar concerns. "Discriminating against residents based on their national origin is not only barred by the Constitution's requirements for due process and equal protection, but it also tramples on the United States' prerogatives on foreign relations," said David Donatti, senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Texas. Sarah Cruz, a policy and advocacy strategist with the ACLU, said the policy could also lead to racial profiling. 'How is it going to look in practice?,' she said. 'If an individual who just simply looks like they may be from one of those designated countries, does that open them to … some additional scrutiny? The bill is a priority of Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, and has received the encouragement of Gov. Greg Abbott. First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Yahoo
Exclusive: Biden's race-based loan program hurt white farmers, whistleblower says
(NewsNation) — While President Donald Trump has spoken out against most of the Biden administration's policies, he's been particularly enraged by what he sees as Biden's endorsement of diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in all aspects of government. However, Trump didn't even know the Biden administration had managed to implement DEI policies involving American farmers. It has remained a secret until now. NewsNation exclusively spoke with a whistleblower from the United States Department of Agriculture about loan forgiveness policies under the Biden administration. The whistleblower discussed the passage of the American Rescue Act and how Section 1005 of that act provided loan relief specifically for socially disadvantaged farmers. Analyst: iPhone exports from China to US drop 75% The section provided race-based loan forgiveness, granted only to those who qualified as socially disadvantaged farmers or ranchers. Buried in the American Plan Rescue Act passed by a Democratic majority in Congress, the United States secretary of agriculture shall 'provide payment in an amount up to 120 percent of the outstanding indebtedness of each socially disadvantaged farmer.' The 'socially disadvantaged farmer' was defined by the act as American Indian, Alaskan Native, Asian, Black, African American, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, Hispanic or Latino in order to qualify for their loan to be paid off, plus 20% to cover taxes. When word got out that the American Rescue Plan Act was paying off the loans of only a specific class of minority farmers, white farmers from all over the country sued in federal court, alleging that the American Rescue Plan Act was race-based and violated the equal protection clause under the Constitution. James Dunlap owns a small family farm in Baker City, Oregon. He works two other jobs to keep his farm afloat, but he did not qualify for loan forgiveness because he's white. James Dunlap told NewsNation that he found out about the new loan forgiveness policy from a friend. Trump admin orders halt to student visa interviews 'As far as I understand, not at all. It wasn't about hardship. It wasn't about financial situations. It was about that box you checked under ethnicity line under your application,' he said. If a borrower checked the 'non-white' box, they received loan forgiveness. It didn't matter if they actually needed assistance in making their loan payments. Dunlap, along with other white farmers, successfully sued the Biden administration in federal court with the assistance of their attorney, Glenn Roper, from the Pacific Legal Foundation. The federal court judge found the loan forgiveness program for socially disadvantaged farmers was 'an actual constitutional harm that cannot be undone.' He added that the fact James and other white farmers 'will suffer the harm of being excluded from eligibility for that debt relief program solely on the basis of race … is irreparable.' But despite the federal judge's ruling, the Biden administration wasn't ready to give up on providing loan forgiveness for socially disadvantaged farmers. Trump plans to pardon Todd and Julie Chrisley They pushed for passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, which provided $3.1 billion for distressed direct and guaranteed loan borrowers (all farmers) who were over 60 days delinquent on qualified loans as of September 30, 2022. It was intended to provide financial assistance to all distressed borrowers as of January 2023, but as NewsNation discovered, not all farmers were actually informed about the provision. NewsNation obtained a copy of an email that was sent out on January 10, 2023, 'to share information about new payments and/or loan modifications that may assist you.' But the USDA whistleblower told NewsNation that not everyone received this letter. It was only sent out to minority farmers — those who qualified as socially disadvantaged farmers or ranchers under the definition set forth in the American Rescue Plan Act, which was subsequently deemed unconstitutional and repealed by Congress. The letter was addressed to borrowers and clearly stated the reason for their notification: 'You are receiving this letter because you were previously informed of your potential eligibility as a Farm Loan Programs borrower for a payment under Section 1005 of the American Rescue Plan Act.' Tommy Tuberville running for governor of Alabama The letter went on to inform these socially disadvantaged farmers that, although the American Rescue Plan Act no longer grants the USDA statutory authority to fund payments to them, a new payment and loan modification program is available under the IRA. The whistleblower told NewsNation none of the white farmers he works with received this email. He also noted that USDA workers were even instructed to tell that specific group of socially disadvantaged farmers to stop paying their loans because they would be forgiven. 'It's not right,' the whistleblower told NewsNation. 'It was discriminatory. Unethical. And the people who pushed it are still in charge of the agency … (those) at the national office. Trump hasn't gotten rid of them.' The USDA spokesperson provided NewsNation with the following statement: 'Over the last four years, the Biden administration left USDA in complete disarray and dysfunction and that's why farmers were being left behind. The entire farm economy has been hurt by Biden's inaction. It is absurd that while the Biden Administration was driving up inflation, American taxpayers were forced to fund billions in woke DEI initiatives. No one should be shocked that Biden weaponized bipartisan farm programs to discriminate and provide taxpayer dollars to one group based on race and not on merit. On day one, Secretary Rollins issued a memorandum to rescind all DEI programs. Instead, USDA is reprioritizing unity, equality, meritocracy, and color-blind policies. Secretary Rollins directed USDA to review Inflation Reduction Act funding to ensure that it honors the sacred obligation to American taxpayers—and to ensure that programs are focused on supporting farmers and ranchers, not DEI programs or far-left climate programs. As part of returning the department to normal business operations, Secretary Rollins has ended the four-year-long COVID-19 pause on debt collections. This includes terminating the 'Distressed Borrowers' program and servicing those loans. Unlike the Biden Administration, under Trump, USDA does not discriminate and single out individual farmers based on race, sex, or political orientation. Secretary Rollins is working to reorient the department to be more effective at serving the American people and put farmers first. Fortunately, President Trump is taking strong action to support farmers by quickly rolling out programs like the Emergency Commodity Assistance Program that provides $10 Billion in direct assistance to producers. All farmers are encouraged to apply.' USDA spokesperson Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
