Latest news with #NaturalResourcesDefenseCouncil
The Guardian
23-05-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Trump vowed to help US farmers. These four say his policies are ‘wreaking havoc'
Donald Trump may have won the votes of the US's most farming-dependent counties by an average of 78% in the 2024 election. But the moves made by his administration in the past few months – imposing steep tariffs, immigration policies that target the migrant labor farmers rely on, and canceling a wide range of USDA programs – have left many farmers reeling. 'The policies of the Trump administration are wreaking havoc on family farmers. It's been terrible,' said John Bartman, a row crop farmer in Illinois. Bartman is owed thousands of dollars for sustainable practices he implemented on his row crop operation as part of the USDA's Climate-Smart program. And he's not the only one. Other farmers across the country are reporting that the Trump administration's policies have destroyed their markets by ending programs that help farmers sell their produce to local schools and food banks; implementing draconian immigration policies that destabilize the farm labor pool; and generally creating volatility that makes it hard for farmers to plan ahead. One group of farmers, the Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York, joined organizations like Earthjustice and the Natural Resources Defense Council in suing the USDA for removing department webpages focused on climate change, arguing that the move was unlawful and undermines farmers' ability to adapt and respond to climate threats. (On 13 May, the coalition declared a kind of victory when the government committed to restore the purged content; the government is set to provide more information about the restoration process on 11 June.) Some farmers, such as Bartman, loudly oppose Trump. 'I've met some Democrats who'll say: 'You farmers deserve this. You voted for him.' Well, I didn't vote for the guy. The programs that have been impacted the most are targeted towards farmers that care about the environment.' Others, such as those living near North Carolina farmer Patrick Brown, are experiencing 'buyer's remorse', said Brown, 'but they don't want to say it because they voted for the current administration'. No matter who they voted for, farmers across the country are living in the new reality created by the Trump administration's agricultural policies. The Guardian spoke to four farmers about what it's like trying to grow crops, feed people, and keep their operations afloat in 2025. John Bartman, Bartman FarmMarengo, Illinois I am a vegetable and grain farmer; we're mostly a row crop operation. My family has been farming in Illinois since 1846; we have the oldest continuous running vegetable stand in McHenry county. I farm 900 acres. I try to use the least amount of fertilizer and herbicides that I can. Three main policies have been impacting us. Number one is the cancellation of USAID. That's about a billion dollars worth of grain that the United States purchases from farmers like me, and they give it to third world nations who are hungry. To kill that program is a disaster. It's morally bankrupt, and it hurts farmers' bottom line. Another thing that's very pressing is the payment freezes to farmers from the USDA. I was involved in the Climate-Smart practices. We were paid to implement stewardship practices that the USDA has been preaching since the Dust Bowl. The added benefit is these practices combat climate change. That's what the current administration doesn't want anything to do with. I'm supposed to be paid close to $100 an acre. Then the current administration came in and put a freeze on everything. $100 an acre may not sound like much, but there are some years where we're happy if we make $20 an acre off of things. I have an operating loan that I haven't been able to pay off because I was counting on this money. I have rent that's due. I have seed costs. I have chemical costs. I try to explain to people, if I were a repair person, and I went to my local grade school and fixed their furnace, and in the meantime, a new school board was elected, I still deserve to be paid. I've signed a contract with the USDA. The full faith and credit of the United States is at risk, because if Uncle Sam will renege on a farmer, they'll renege on anybody. The third one is the tariff situation. China is and has been our number one export for soybeans; 100% of the soybeans that I grow are exported. During Trump's first administration, half of all the soybeans that China purchased were from the United States. By the end of his first administration, it was down to a quarter. Now Brazil has taken over our role as the number one importer of soybeans into China. From an environmental standpoint, that means more deforestation in the Amazon. Mexico purchases 40% of all the corn in the United States. And he wants to have a trade war with Mexico? Mexico can just as easily buy their grain from Argentina and Brazil. The USDA has also canceled a lot of contracts for food pantries and school districts to purchase from local farmers, and that's absolutely devastating. I was just in Springfield, Illinois, testifying and hearing testimony from other farmers. Many of them are first-generation farmers, and that program gave them an outlet for their produce. It's so sad listening to them saying, 'I finally had my dream of owning my own farm and making a living at it. Now I don't know what I'm going to do, because my market has dried up.' Shah Kazemi, Monterey MushroomsSanta Cruz county, California People don't recognize that we either have to import our labor, or import our food. We operate five farms right now: in California, Tennessee, Texas and Mexico. We have close to 2,000 employees. Our business has been totally dependent on migrant workers, just like all other ag businesses in this country. Without them, there is no food on anybody's table. In 1983 we acquired a farm in Loudon, Tennessee. At the time we didn't have one migrant worker in that plant. By the early 1990s we had about 20% migrant workers, and by the early 2000s we had 85%, because nobody wants to do that kind of work any more in this country. When you're bent over picking strawberries, cucumber, lettuce, zucchini, whatever the crop is – try to do that for eight hours. See how your back feels, how the rest of your body feels. Farming is hard, physical work. These are skilled workers, harvesting at a certain rate to stay productive; you have to know your trade. A skilled mushroom picker can pick about 75 to 80 pounds an hour, and some of them exceed 100 pounds an hour. A new picker comes in, their productivity is in the 20s, and it will take six to eight months to get them up to 50. So if you had to replace a guy that's picking 80 pounds an hour with people who are picking in the 20s, you need three or four of them. We have a lot of respect and admiration for these people. They're really underappreciated. I have a friend who is in the farming business. About a month ago, there was an Ice [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] raid in the area. The following day, most of his employees didn't show up. Even the people who have been here for a long time, they're listening to the news and hearing that people with green cards are being deported. The fear factor has been heightened significantly. That's what has happened with the new administration coming in. If we don't have enough workers, we cannot harvest our crops. And if you don't harvest, then it's all wasted. The uncertainty and erratic decision making creates volatility in the marketplace. And now we're concerned about where we're going to get future workers. What's going to happen a year from now, as some of these people get deported, or they feel so fearful they go back to their home country? Who's going to replace them? We need to have a program that lets people come in who can do the work, and then at the end of whatever the term is, they can go back home. They have a guest worker program in Canada that works significantly better than what we have here. Nobody pays any attention to the farmers, and we are the people who put food on the table every day. And the migrant workers, those are the hands that pick the crops that you eat. Josh Sneddon, Fox at the ForkMonee, Illinois I got into farming because I love to cook. When I was in New Jersey and I was getting my food from local farmers, ranchers and fishermen, the quality of the food was so much better that my spice cabinet became essentially salt and pepper, because the food was good enough [on its own]. I took my entrepreneurial spirit and applied it to my interest in building a local food system driven by higher-quality foods, greater accessibility, and a climate smart focus on our food system. Fox at the Fork is a 10-acre regenerative farm – we grow fruit and nut trees like pecans, persimmons and currants, while also stewarding approximately one acre of land intensively in annual vegetables. It's my fifth year in business. In prior farm bills and administrations, the USDA supported individuals like me who are considered 'beginning farmers'. That's one of their historically underserved categories. The USDA [formerly] created and reinforced programs that supported individuals who hadn't had the same opportunities – Bipoc, LGBTQ+, beginning, veteran farmers – to have an equitable shot at growing and establishing small-scale food businesses in their communities. Being considered a beginning farmer was part of the criteria that has helped me secure NRCS [Natural Resources Conservation Service] grants, one of them being a Conservation Stewardship Program contract. That's a five-year contract that recognizes all of the conservation practices we implemented. For us, that's about [protecting] native prairie; cover cropping; building bird boxes to bring back native kestrels and owls. Almost all federal grants require that some of the money spent is yours and is not reimbursed. So farmers have a stake in the game; it's not just the government giving out corn and soy subsidies. The other program that really helped our farm last year [that has been canceled under the current administration] is the LFPA, the Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program. It was getting up to $25m [in Illinois] that had been obligated to the state for food distribution organizations like food banks, who provide food to the community and pay a fair market value to us farmers. I also have a Reap contract – the Rural Energy for America Program – which is another program that faced direct cuts. At the end of last year, I spent approximately $79,000 to install solar, having already received approval and signed paperwork. That grant is a 25% reimbursement through the USDA reap, which is for me, $19,784. I'm still waiting for that. Not receiving that $19,784 has slowed what investments I'm going to make for the year. It's hard to predict the long-term impacts, but the short-term impact is more anxiety, fewer investments on the farm, and likely greater effort trying to get my food placed in the community at a fair market price. Patrick Brown, Brown Family FarmsWarren county, North Carolina I'm a fourth-generation row crop farmer. My home farm is about 165 acres. I also grow industrial hemp fiber and produce – watermelons, leafy greens, tomatoes, sweet corn. We're an impoverished community, and we don't have access to a lot of food, so I try to get healthy options to children especially. We were participants for the past two years in a USDA project – which has just gotten terminated – providing fresh food to local schools. We also created a non-profit to help create a path for young kids that want to become farmers. And I also am a director of a non-profit called Nature for Justice, and we were awarded a USDA Climate-Smart contract to help farmers with conservation practices. All my projects that were funded by the federal government have been terminated during the current administration. It's caused us to pivot. We're so used to not having anything – as a minority farmer, that's the way things have always been. But when you sign a government contract, you feel some sense of, 'this can't be taken away.' I was doing two projects: one for cover crops and nutrient management, and the other one to plant trees to help with erosion and chemical drift, and to create habitat for wildlife. We did all this work and invested all this money, all for them to say, as of 29 January, the project is no longer in place. We were expecting to get over $65,000 this year from work we did in 2024. They claim that I will eventually get the money, but who knows how long that will be held up? Plus, the announcements made during this administration through the secretary of agriculture are not getting down to the rural community offices that represent small farmers. It's almost as if things are announced on social media, and then the offices hear about it. And our local NRCS offices and our Farm Service Agency offices are more understaffed than they've been in 20 years. The technical assistance is non-existent. The main thing we need right now is for our local legislators to speak up for us. A lot of them are being quiet. But we need to advocate against the wrongdoing that is being done to farmers.
Globe and Mail
22-05-2025
- Business
- Globe and Mail
Tax bill passed by House Republicans would gut Biden-era clean energy tax credits
WASHINGTON (AP) — The multitrillion-dollar tax breaks package passed by House Republicans early Thursday would gut clean energy tax credits that Democrats approved three years ago while supporting increased mining, drilling and other traditional energy production. A marathon session that began Wednesday resulted in 1,100-plus page legislation that curbs billions of dollars in spending across food assistance, student loans, Medicaid and action to address climate change. The bill, which now heads to the Senate, repeals or phases out more quickly clean energy tax credits passed in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act during former President Joe Biden's term. Biden's climate law has been considered monumental for the clean energy transition, but the House bill effectively renders moot much of the law's incentives for renewable energy such as wind and solar power. Clean energy advocates said the bill walks back the largest government investment in clean energy in history. 'In a bid to cut taxes for billionaires and provide a grab bag of goodies to Big Oil, the majority in the House took a sledgehammer to clean energy tax credits and to the protection of our public lands," said Christy Goldfuss, executive director of the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'These credits are delivering billions of dollars in new investments in homegrown American energy -- creating jobs, lowering energy costs and addressing the climate crisis that is fueling floods, fires and heat waves,'' Goldfuss said. President Donald Trump celebrated the bill's passage, calling it 'arguably the most significant piece of Legislation that will ever be signed in the History of our Country.' Trump appealed to the Senate to pass the measure as soon as possible and send it to his desk. The Senate hopes to wrap up its version by the Fourth of July holiday. At least four Republican senators, led by Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, have urged continuation of energy tax credits, including support for traditional and renewable energy sources. Republican-led states and Congressional districts have benefited from billions of dollars in clean energy manufacturing investments spurred by the Biden-era subsidies. Full-scale repeal of current credits "could lead to significant disruptions for the American people and weaken our position as a global energy leader,'' the senators said in a letter to Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota. "A wholesale repeal, or the termination of certain individual credits, would create uncertainty, jeopardizing capital allocation, long-term project planning and job creation in the energy sector and across our broader economy,' the senators wrote in the April 9 letter. The letter was also signed by GOP Sens. John Curtis of Utah, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Jerry Moran of Kansas. In a win for House moderates and some Western lawmakers, the House bill strips language that would have allowed the sale of hundreds of thousands acres of public lands in Utah and Nevada. Opponents argued the sales would have opened the door for more oil and gas drilling. What was gutted in the bill The House bill takes an axe to tax credits for rooftop solar installments and eliminates electric vehicle tax credits after 2025, with a one-year exception for EVs manufactured by automakers that have sold fewer than 200,000 cars that qualified for the credit. Credits for solar and electric vehicles, which reduce harmful emissions, help to boost demand for the technologies and drive down their cost. House Republicans also tightened tax credit restrictions for projects associated with foreign entities, including China — an added blow to domestic clean energy expansion since China dominates much of the supply chain. The bill slashes a three-year phase-down schedule previously proposed, and instead cuts off projects that don't start construction within 60 days of the bill's passage. Those projects would also have to start operating before 2029. 'This bill threatens the clean energy industry at a time when it's proving to be not only economically beneficial — lowering costs, creating jobs and fueling local economies — but also essential to America's energy future," said Andrew Reagan, president of Clean Energy for America, an industry group. No sale of public lands At the behest of Montana Rep. Ryan Zinke and some other Republicans, lawmakers stripped a provision that would have sold or transferred about 460,000 acres (186,155 hectares) of federal land in Nevada and Utah to local governments or private entities. The proposal exposed sharp divisions between Western Republicans who say the federal government controls too much of their states and others such as Zinke, a former Interior secretary in Trump's first term whose state is protective of access to lands for hunting and recreation. 'Once the land is sold, we will never get it back,' Zinke said after the provision's removal. 'Public access, sportsmanship, grazing tourism — our entire Montanan way of life is connected to our public lands.' The land sales had been inserted in an early version of the bill following a late-night committee vote, despite earlier pledges from Republican leaders that land sales were off the table. Supporters said the sales would generate revenue and ease growth pressures by creating room for more and cheaper housing in booming Western cities such as Las Vegas, Reno, Nevada and St. George, Utah. Those communities are hemmed in by federal property, which makes up 80% of the land in Nevada and 63% in Utah. Some states in the Midwest and East have 1% or less federal land by comparison. A spokesperson for Nevada Republican Rep. Mark Amodei, who sponsored the bid to sell federal lands in his state, said his office was 'exploring all options' to make the transfers happen. Housing advocates had cautioned federal land is not universally suitable for affordable housing, and some of the parcels to be sold were far from developed areas. Tracy Stone-Manning, president of the Wilderness Society and a former director of the Bureau of Land Management Bureau under Biden, said she appreciated Zinke's work to prevent the public lands sale. But she added that the bill was still a 'big giveaway' to the private sector. 'By opening hundreds of millions of acres to drilling, mining and logging to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy, this bill harms the tens of millions of people who like to hike, recreate or find solace in the outdoors,' she said. Trump targets Biden's climate policy At the same time the bill slashes support for clean energy, it paves the way for oil, gas and coal. Through the bill, natural gas pipeline developers can pay a $10 million fee for expedited permitting, and applicants for a potential liquefied natural gas export site can pay a $1 million fee to be deemed in the 'public interest,' circumventing what is usually a regulatory challenge. ___ St. John reported from Detroit and Brown reported from Billings, Montana. ___
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Tax bill passed by House Republicans would gut Biden-era clean energy tax credits
WASHINGTON (AP) — The multitrillion-dollar tax breaks package passed by House Republicans early Thursday would gut clean energy tax credits that Democrats approved three years ago while supporting increased mining, drilling and other traditional energy production. A marathon session that began Wednesday resulted in 1,100-plus page legislation that curbs billions of dollars in spending across food assistance, student loans, Medicaid and action to address climate change. The bill, which now heads to the Senate, repeals or phases out more quickly clean energy tax credits passed in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act during former President Joe Biden's term. Biden's climate law has been considered monumental for the clean energy transition, but the House bill effectively renders moot much of the law's incentives for renewable energy such as wind and solar power. Clean energy advocates said the bill walks back the largest government investment in clean energy in history. 'In a bid to cut taxes for billionaires and provide a grab bag of goodies to Big Oil, the majority in the House took a sledgehammer to clean energy tax credits and to the protection of our public lands," said Christy Goldfuss, executive director of the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'These credits are delivering billions of dollars in new investments in homegrown American energy -- creating jobs, lowering energy costs and addressing the climate crisis that is fueling floods, fires and heat waves,'' Goldfuss said. President Donald Trump celebrated the bill's passage, calling it 'arguably the most significant piece of Legislation that will ever be signed in the History of our Country.' Trump appealed to the Senate to pass the measure as soon as possible and send it to his desk. The Senate hopes to wrap up its version by the Fourth of July holiday. At least four Republican senators, led by Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, have urged continuation of energy tax credits, including support for traditional and renewable energy sources. Republican-led states and Congressional districts have benefited from billions of dollars in clean energy manufacturing investments spurred by the Biden-era subsidies. Full-scale repeal of current credits "could lead to significant disruptions for the American people and weaken our position as a global energy leader,'' the senators said in a letter to Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota. "A wholesale repeal, or the termination of certain individual credits, would create uncertainty, jeopardizing capital allocation, long-term project planning and job creation in the energy sector and across our broader economy,' the senators wrote in the April 9 letter. The letter was also signed by GOP Sens. John Curtis of Utah, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Jerry Moran of Kansas. In a win for House moderates and some Western lawmakers, the House bill strips language that would have allowed the sale of hundreds of thousands acres of public lands in Utah and Nevada. Opponents argued the sales would have opened the door for more oil and gas drilling. What was gutted in the bill The House bill takes an axe to tax credits for rooftop solar installments and eliminates electric vehicle tax credits after 2025, with a one-year exception for EVs manufactured by automakers that have sold fewer than 200,000 cars that qualified for the credit. Credits for solar and electric vehicles, which reduce harmful emissions, help to boost demand for the technologies and drive down their cost. House Republicans also tightened tax credit restrictions for projects associated with foreign entities, including China — an added blow to domestic clean energy expansion since China dominates much of the supply chain. The bill slashes a three-year phase-down schedule previously proposed, and instead cuts off projects that don't start construction within 60 days of the bill's passage. Those projects would also have to start operating before 2029. 'This bill threatens the clean energy industry at a time when it's proving to be not only economically beneficial — lowering costs, creating jobs and fueling local economies — but also essential to America's energy future," said Andrew Reagan, president of Clean Energy for America, an industry group. No sale of public lands At the behest of Montana Rep. Ryan Zinke and some other Republicans, lawmakers stripped a provision that would have sold or transferred about 460,000 acres (186,155 hectares) of federal land in Nevada and Utah to local governments or private entities. The proposal exposed sharp divisions between Western Republicans who say the federal government controls too much of their states and others such as Zinke, a former Interior secretary in Trump's first term whose state is protective of access to lands for hunting and recreation. 'Once the land is sold, we will never get it back,' Zinke said after the provision's removal. 'Public access, sportsmanship, grazing tourism — our entire Montanan way of life is connected to our public lands.' The land sales had been inserted in an early version of the bill following a late-night committee vote, despite earlier pledges from Republican leaders that land sales were off the table. Supporters said the sales would generate revenue and ease growth pressures by creating room for more and cheaper housing in booming Western cities such as Las Vegas, Reno, Nevada and St. George, Utah. Those communities are hemmed in by federal property, which makes up 80% of the land in Nevada and 63% in Utah. Some states in the Midwest and East have 1% or less federal land by comparison. A spokesperson for Nevada Republican Rep. Mark Amodei, who sponsored the bid to sell federal lands in his state, said his office was 'exploring all options' to make the transfers happen. Housing advocates had cautioned federal land is not universally suitable for affordable housing, and some of the parcels to be sold were far from developed areas. Tracy Stone-Manning, president of the Wilderness Society and a former director of the Bureau of Land Management Bureau under Biden, said she appreciated Zinke's work to prevent the public lands sale. But she added that the bill was still a 'big giveaway' to the private sector. 'By opening hundreds of millions of acres to drilling, mining and logging to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy, this bill harms the tens of millions of people who like to hike, recreate or find solace in the outdoors,' she said. Trump targets Biden's climate policy At the same time the bill slashes support for clean energy, it paves the way for oil, gas and coal. Through the bill, natural gas pipeline developers can pay a $10 million fee for expedited permitting, and applicants for a potential liquefied natural gas export site can pay a $1 million fee to be deemed in the 'public interest,' circumventing what is usually a regulatory challenge. ___ St. John reported from Detroit and Brown reported from Billings, Montana. ___ Read more of AP's climate coverage at The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at Matthew Daly, Alexa St. John And Matthew Brown, The Associated Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Associated Press
17-05-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
John Bryson, Former Edison International Chairman and CEO, Dies at 81
ROSEMEAD, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 17, 2025-- The entire Edison International, Southern California Edison and Trio community is deeply saddened to learn of the passing of John Bryson, who served as Edison International's chairman and CEO from 1990 to 2008. John passed away Tuesday, May 13 at age 81. He was a groundbreaking leader whose remarkable career ranged from a founding role in the environmental movement to public service as the U.S. Secretary of Commerce. This press release features multimedia. View the full release here: John Bryson was former Edison International Chairman and CEO, former U.S. Secretary of Commerce and co-founder of the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'Our industry has lost a true legend, and I have lost a mentor,' said Pedro Pizarro, president and CEO of Edison International. 'John's steady leadership during the California electricity crisis and the industry's restructuring two decades ago set a guiding model for me as we navigate a changing utility landscape.' After graduating from Stanford University and Yale Law School, John co-founded the Natural Resources Defense Council in 1970. He was one of the earliest to sound the alarm about the impacts of climate change and was a vocal advocate to advance energy efficiency, renewable energy and electric transportation. He later chaired the California State Water Resources Board (1976-79) and served as president of the California Public Utilities Commission (1979-82). John joined SCE in 1984 as senior vice president for legal and financial affairs. His first major assignment was to analyze whether the company should develop a competitive power business, newly permitted under changes in federal law, which would be independent of the utility. John strongly recommended its development. Subsequently, the company developed a series of successful cogeneration projects in California and the western United States; created a new parent company, Edison International; and formed a new subsidiary that became Edison Mission Energy. As chairman and CEO during the 1990s and early 2000s, John's background as a regulator and environmentalist benefited the company through California's utility deregulation and electricity supply crisis, while prioritizing customer and shareholder interests. John also helped clear a path for Edison's leadership role in today's clean energy transition. Under his direction, Edison Mission Energy grew from a small operation with about 300 people to a major part of Edison International's business — one that employed 1,900 people and contributed more than $500 million to the parent company's earnings. It was the sale of most of EME's international assets that enabled Edison International to return to financial health following the collapse of the independent power producers' market in 2002. SCE soon became one of the nation's leaders in supporting the growth of renewable energy. 'John worked tirelessly with state officials and other stakeholders to achieve legislative and regulatory changes in the public interest that strengthened Edison and California's entire economy,' Pizarro said. After retiring from Edison International, John later served as U.S. Secretary of Commerce under President Barack Obama from 2011 to 2012. Our most heartfelt sympathy goes out to John's wife, Louise, their four daughters and their families. He will be deeply missed. View source version on CONTACT: Media Relations: (626) 302-2255 [email protected] KEYWORD: UNITED STATES NORTH AMERICA CALIFORNIA INDUSTRY KEYWORD: UTILITIES ENERGY SOURCE: Edison International Copyright Business Wire 2025. PUB: 05/17/2025 01:30 AM/DISC: 05/17/2025 01:29 AM
Reuters
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Reuters
US farm agency restores some climate-related webpages after farmer lawsuit
WASHINGTON, May 13 (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Agriculture restored on Tuesday some climate change-related webpages that the agency had deleted since President Donald Trump's inauguration, after being sued by farm and environmental groups, one of the groups said. The Trump administration has frozen and canceled some funding to farmers for climate-friendly agriculture, arguing the work does not align with administration priorities. Agriculture accounts for about 11% of U.S. emissions. A USDA official directed staff on January 30 to take down any webpages focused on climate change, which resulted in the removal of material on some loan and funding opportunities, information about investments through the Inflation Reduction Act, and policy documents, according to the lawsuit filed on February 24 by the Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York, Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Environmental Working Group. The USDA said in a court filing on Monday that it would restore the removed pages and complete the restoration process in approximately two weeks. The USDA did not immediately respond to a request for comment. On Tuesday, some pages detailing IRA-funded clean energy projects in rural America had been restored, said Nydia Gutierrez, a spokesperson for Earthjustice, which represented the plaintiffs. "Farmers depend on USDA's websites to protect their farms from droughts, wildfires, and extreme weather. We stand ready to ensure that USDA follows through on its promise to restore these crucial resources," Jeffrey Stein, associate attorney with Earthjustice, said in a statement.
